Corinth of eating Idoll Sacrifices expresly against the Decree at Jerusalem so it were without scandall And yet for all this care and curious discretion a little of the leaven still remain'd All this they thought did so concern the Gentiles that it was totally impertinent to the Iewes still they had a distinction to satisfie the letter of the Apostles Decree and yet to persist in their old opinion and this so continued that fifteene Christian Bishops in succession Euseb. l. 4. Eccles. hist. c. 5. were circumcised even untill the destruction of Jerusalem under Adrian as Eusebius reports First By the way let me observe that never any matter of Numb 4. Question in the Christian Church was determin'd with greater solennity or more full authority of the Church then this Question concerning Circumcision No lesse than the whole Colledge of the Apostles and Elders at Jerusalem and that with a Decree of the highest sanction Visum est spiritui sancto nobis Secondly Either the case of the Hebrewes in particular was omitted and no determination concerning them 2. whether it were necessary or lawfull for them to be circumcised or else it was involv'd in the Decree and intended to oblige the Jewes If it was omitted since the Question was de re necessaria for dico vobis I Paul say unto you If ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing it is very remarkable how the Apostles to gaine the Iewes and to comply with their violent projudice in behalfe of Moses Law did for a time Tolerate their dissent etiam in re aliôquin necessariâ which I doubt not but was intended as a precedent for the Church to imitate for ever after But if it was not omitted either all the multitude of the Iewes which S. James then Act. 21. 20. their Bishop expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thou seest how many myriads of Jewes that believe and yet are zelots for the Law and Eusebius speaking of Justus sayes he was one ex infinit â multitudine L. 3. 32. Eccles. Hist. eorum qui ex circumcisione in Jesum credebant I say all these did perish and their believing in Christ serv'd them to no other ends but in the infinity of their torments to upbraid them with hypocrisie and heresie or if they were sav'd it is apparent how mercifull God was and pitifull to humane infirmities that in a point of so great concernment did pity their weaknesse and pardon their errors and love their good minde since their prejudice was little lesse than insuperable and had faire probabilities at least it was such as might abuse a wise and good man and so it did many they did bono aâ—imâ— carrare And if I mistake not this consideration S. Paul urg'd as a reason why God forgave him who was a Persecutor 1. Tim. 1. of the Saints because he did it ignorantly in unbelief that is he was not convinc'd in his understanding of the truth of the way which he persecuted he in the meane while remaining in that incredulity not out of malice or ill ends but the mistakes of humanity and a pious zeale therefore God had mercy on him And so it was in this great Question of circumcision here only was the difference the invincibility of S. Paul's error and the honesty of his heart caused God so to pardon him as to bring him to the knowledge of Christ which God therefore did because it was necessary necessitate medii no salvation was consistent with the actuall remanency of that error but in the Question of Circumcision although they by consequence did overthrow the end of Christ's comming yet because it was such a consequence which they being hindred by a prejudice not impious did not perceive God tolerated them in their error till time and a continuall dropping of the lessons and dictates Apostolicall did weare it out and then the doctrine put on it's apparell and became cloathed with nenessity they in the meane time so kept to the foundation that is Iesus Christ crucified and risen againe that although this did make a violent concussion of it yet they held fast with their heart what they ignorantly destroyed with their tongue which Saul before his conversion did not that God upon other Titles then an actuall dereliction of their error did bring them to salvation And in the descent of so many years I finde not any one Anathema past by the Apostles or their Successors upon any Numb 5. of the Bishops of Jerusalem or the Believers of the Circumcision and yet it was a point as clearly determined and of as great necessity as any of those Questions that at this day vex and crucifie Christendome Besides this Question and that of the Resurrection commenc'd in the Church of Corinth and promoted with some variety Numb 6. of sense by Hymenaeus and Philetus in Asia who said that the Resurrection was past already I doe not remember any other heresy nam'd in Scripture but such as were errours of impiety seductiones in materiâ practicâ such as was particularly forbidding to marry and the heresy of the Nicolaitans a doctrine that taught the necessity of lust and frequent fornication But in all the Animadversions against errours made by the Apostles in the New Testament no pious person was condemn'd Numb 7. no man that did invincibly erre or bona mente but something that was amisse in genere morum was that which the Apostles did redargue And it is very considerable that even they of the Circumcision who in so great numbers did heartily believe in Christ and yet most violently retaine Circumcision and without Question went to Heaven in great numbers yet of the number of these very men they came deeply under censure when to their errour they added impiety So long as it stood with charity and without humane ends and secular interests so long it was either innocent or conniv'd at but when they grew covetous and for filthy lucres sake taught the same doctrine which others did in the simplicity of their hearts then they turn'd Hereticks then they were term'd Seducers and Titus was commanded to look to them and to silence them For there are many that are intractable and vaine bablers Seducers of minds especially they of the Circumcision who seduce whole houses teaching things that they ought not for filthy lucres sake These indeed were not to be indur'd but to be silenced by the conviction of sound doctrine and to be rebuked sharply and avoided For heresy is not an errour of the understanding but an errour Numb 8. of the will And this is clearly insinuated in Scripture in the stile whereof Faith and a good life are made one duty and vice is called opposite to Faith and heresy opposed to holinesse and sanctity So in S. Paul For saith he the end of 1 Tim. 1. the Commandement is charity out of a pure heart and a good conscience and faith unfained à quibus
of its managing or its effect be a sinne in it selfe or becomes a sinne to the person then as he is to doe towards other sinnes so to that opinion or man so opining But to beleeve so or not so when there is no more but meere beleeving is not in his power to enjoyne therefore not to punish And it is not onely lawfull to tollerate disagreeing perswasions but the authority of God onely is competent to take notice of it and infallible to determine it and fit to judge and therefore no humane authority is sufficient to doe all those things which can justifie the inflicting temporall punishments upon such as doe not conforme in their perswasions to a rule or authority which is not only fallible but supposed by the disagreeing person to be actually deceived But I consider that in the toleration of a different opinion Numb 4. Religion is not properly and immediately concerned so as in any degree to be endangered For it may be safe in diversity of perswasions and it also a part of Christian * Humani iuris naturalis peteslatis unicuique quod putaverit colere Sed nec religionis est cogere religionem quae suscipi sponte debet non vi Tertul. ad Scapulam Religion that the liberty of mens Consciences should be preserved in all things where God hath not set a limit and made a restraint that the soule of man should be free and acknowledge no master but Jesus Christ that matters spirituall should not be restrain'd by purishments corporall that the same meekenesse and charity should be preserved in the promotion of Christianity that gave it foundation and increment firmness in its first publication that conclusions should not be more dogmaticall then the vertuall resolution and efficacy of the premises And that the persons should not more certainly be condemned then their opinions confuted and lastly that the infirmities of men and difficulties of things should be both put in ballance to make abatement in the definitive sentence against mens persons But then because tolleration of opinions is not properly a question of Religion it may be a question of policy And although a man may be a good Christian though he beleeve an errour not fundamentall and not directly or evidently impious yet his opinion may accidentally disturbe the publick peace through the over-activenesse of the person and the confidence of their beliefe and the opinion of its appendant necessity and therefore tolleration of differing perswasions in these cases is to be considered upon politicall grounds and is just so to be admitted or denyed as the opinions or tolleration of them may consist with the publicke and necessary ends of Government Onely this As Christian Princes must looke to the interest of their Government so especially must they consider the interests of Christianity not call every redargution or modest discovery of an established errour by the name of disturbance of the peace For it is very likely that the peevishness and impatience of contradiction in the Governours may break the peace Let them remem-but the gentlenesse of Christianity the Liberty of Consciences which ought to be preserved and let them doe justice to the persons whoever they are that are peevish provided no mans person be over-born with prejudice For if it be necessary for all men to subscribe to the present established Religion by the same reason at another time a man may be bound to subscribe to the contradictory and so to all Religions in the world And they only who by their too much confidence intitle God to all their fancies and make them to be questions of Religion and evidences for Heaven or consignations to Hell they onely think this doctrine unreasonable and they are the men that first disturb the Churches peace and then thinke there is no appeasing the tumult but by getting the victory But they that consider things wisely understand that since salvation and damnation depend not upon impertinencies and yet that publick peace and tranquillity may the Prince is in this case to seeke how to secure Government and the issues and intentions of that while there is in these cases directly no insecurity to Religion unlesse by the accidentall uncharitablenesse of them that dispute Which uncharitablenesse is also much prevented when the publike peace is secured and no person is on either side ingaged upon * Dextera praecipuè capit indulgentia mentes Aâ—peritas oditi saevaque bella parit revenge or troubled with disgrace or vexed with punishments by any decretory sentence against him It was the saying of a wise states-man I meane Thuanus Haeretici qui pace data factionibus scinduntur persecutione uniuntur contra Remp. If you persecute heretickes or discrepants they unite themselves as to a common defence If you permit them they divide themselves upon private interest and the rather if this interest was an ingredient of the opinion The Summe is this it concernes the duty of a Prince because it concernes the Honour of God that all vices and every part of Numb 5. ill life be discountenanced and restrain'd And therefore in relation to that opinions are to be dealt with For the understanding being to direct the will and opinions to guide our practices they are considerable onely as they teach impiety and vice as they either dishonour God or disobey him Now all such doctrines are to be condemned but for the persons preaching such Doctrines if they neither justifie nor approve the pretended Consequences which are certainly impious they are to be separated from that consideration But if they know such consequences and allow them or if they doe not stay till the doctrines produce impiety but take sinne before hand and mannage them impiously in any sense or if either themselves or their doctrine doe really and without colour or fained pretext disturb the publique peace * Extat prudens monitum Mecaenatis apud Dionem Cassium ad Augustum in haec verba Eos vero qui in Divinis aliquid innovant adio habe coerce non Deorum solùm causâ sed quia nova numina hi tales introducentes mulios impellunt ad mutationem rerum Unde conjurationes seditiones Conciliabula existunt res profectò minime conducibiles principatui Et legib us quoque expressum est quod in religionem committitur in omnium fertur injuriam and just interests they are not to be suffered In all other cases it is not onely lawfull to permit them but it is also necessary that Princes and all in authority should not persecute discrepant opinions And in such cases wherein persons not otherwise incompetent are bound to reprove an error as they are in many in all these if the Prince makes restraint he hinders men from doing their duty and from obeying the Lawes of JESUS CHRIST SECT XVII Of complyance with disagreeing persons or weake constiences in generall VPon these grounds it remaines that we reduce this doctrine
Numb 1. to practicall Conclusions and consider among the differing sects and opinions which trouble these parts of Christendome and come into our concernment which sects of Christians are to be tolerated and how farre and which are to be restrained and punished in their severall proportions The first consideration is that since diversity of opinions does Numb 2. more concerne publike peace then religion what is to be done to persons who disobey a publike sanction upon a true allegation that they cannot believe it to be lawfull to obey such constitutions although they dis-believe them upon insufficient grounds that is whether in constituta lege disagreeing persons or weake consciences are to be complyed withall and their disobeying and disagreeing tolerated 1. In this question there is no distinction can be made between Numb 3. persons truely weake and but pretending so For all that pretend to it are to be allowed the same liberty whatsoever it be for no mans spirit is knowne to any but to God and himselfe and therefore pretences and realityes in this case are both alike in order to the publike toleration And this very thing is one argument to perswade a Negative For the chiefe thing in this case is the concernment of publique government which is then most of all violated when what may prudently be permitted to some purposes may be demanded to many more and the piety of the Lawes abused to the impiety of other mens ends And if laws be made so malleable as to comply with weak consciences he that hath a mind to disobey is made impregnable against the coercitive power of the Law by this pretence For a weak conscience signifyes nothing in this case but a dislike of the Law upon a contrary perswasion For if some weak consciences doe obey the law and others doe not it is not their weaknesse indefinitely that is the cause of it but a definite and particular perswasion to the contrary So that if such a pretence be excuse sufficient from obeying then the law is a sanction obliging every one to obey that hath a mind to it and he that hath not may choose that is it is no Law at all for he that hath a mind to it may doe it if there be no Law and he that hath no mind to it need not for all the Law And therefore the wit of man cannot prudently frame a law Numb 4. of that temper and expedient but either he must lose the formality of a law and neither have power coercitive nor obligatory but ad arbitrium inferiorum or else it cannot antecedently to the particular case give leave to any sort of men to disagree or disobey 2. Suppose that a Law be made with great reason so as to satisfie divers persons pious prudent that it complyes with the necessity Numb 5. of government and promotes the interest of Gods service and publike order it may easily be imagined that these persons which are obedient sons of the Church may be as zealous for the publike order and discipline of the Church as others for their opinion against it and may be as much scandalized if disobedience be tolerated as others are if the Law be exacted and what shall be done in this case Both sorts of men cannot be complyed withall because as these pretend to be offended at the Law and by consequence if they understand the consequents of their owne opinion at them that obey the Law so the others are justly offended at them that unjustly disobey it If therefore there be any on the right side as confident and zealous as they who are on the wrong side then the disagreeing persons are not to be complyed with to avoid giving offence for if they be offence is given to better persons and so the mischiefe which such complying seeks to prevent is made greater and more unjust obedience is discouraged and disobedience is legally canonized for the result of a holy and a tender conscience 3. Such complying with the disagreeings of a sort of men is Numb 6. the totall overthrow of all Discipline and it is better to make no Lawes of publique worship then to rescind them in the very constitution and there can be no end in making the sanction but to make the Law ridiculous and the authority contemptible For to say that complying with weake consciences in the very framing of a Law of Discipline is the way to preserve unity were all one as to say To take away all Lawes is the best way to prevent disobedience In such matters of indifferencie the best way of cementing the fraction is to unite the parts in the authority for then the question is but one viz. Whether the authority must be obeyed or not But if a permission be given of disputing the particulars the questions become next to infinite A Mirrour when it is broken represents the object multiplyed and divided but if it be entire and through one centre transmits the species to the eye the Vision is one and naturall Lawes are the Mirrour in which men are to dresse and compose their actions and therefore must not be broken with such clauses of exception which may without remedy be abused to the prejudice of authority and peace and all humane sanctions And I have knowne in some Churches that this pretence hath been nothing but a designe to discredit the Law to dismantle the authority that made it to raise their owne credit and a trophey of their zeale to make it a characteristick note of a sect and the cognisance of holy persons and yet the men that claim'd exemption from the Lawes upon pretence of having weake consciences if in hearty expression you had told them so to their heads they would have spit in your face and were so farre from confessing themselves weake that they thought themselves able to give Lawes to Christendome to instruct the greatest Clerks and to Catechize the Church her selfe And which is the worst of all they who were perpetually clamorous that the severity of the Lawes should slacken as to their particular and in matter adiaphorous in which if the Church hath any authority she hath power to make Lawes to indulge a leave to them to doe as they list yet were the most imperious amongst men most decretory in their sentences and most impatient of any disagreeing from them though in the least minute and particular whereas by all the justice of the world they who perswade such a complyance in matters of fact and of so little question should not deny to tolerate persons that differ in questions of great difficulty and contestation 4. But yet since all things almost in the world have beene Numb 7. made matters of dispute and the will of some men and the malice of others and the infinite industry and pertinacie of contesting and resolution to conquer hath abused some persons innocently into a perswasion that even the Lawes themselves though never so
or not free in both as it may happen But the restraint is this that every one is not left to his liberty Numb 46. to pray how he list with premeditation or without it makes not much matter but that he is prescribed unto by the spirit of another But if it be a fault thus to restraine the spirit I would faine know is not the spirit restrained when the whole Congregation shall be confined to the form of this one mans composing or it shall be unlawfull or at least a disgrace and disparagement to use any set forms especially of the Churches composition More plainly thus 2. Doth not the Minister confine and restraine the spirit of the Lords People when they are tyed to his form It would Numb 47. sound of more liberty to their spirits that every one might make a prayer of his own and all pray together and not be forced or confined to the Ministers single dictate and private spirit It is true it would breed confusions and therefore they might pray silently till the Sermon began and not for the avoiding one inconvenience runne into a greater and to avoid the disorder of a popular noyse restraine the blessed Spirit for even in this case as well as in the other Where the spirit of God is there must be liberty 3. If the spirit must be at liberty who shall assure us this liberty must be in forms of prayer And if so whether also it Numb 48. must be in publike prayer and will it not suffice that it be in private And if in publike prayers is not the liberty of the spirit sufficiently preserved in that the publike spirit is free That is the Church hath power upon occasion to alter and encrease her Litanyes By what Argument shall any man make it so much as probable that the holy Ghost is injured if every private Ministers private spirit shall be guided and therefore by necessary consequence limited by the Authority of the Churches publick spirit 4. Does not the Directory that thing which is here called restraining Numb 49. of the spirit Does it not appoint every thing but the words And after this is it not a goodly Palladium that is contended for and a princely liberty that they leave unto the Spirit to be free only in the supplying the place of a Vocabulary and a Copia Verborum For as for the matter it is all there described and appointed and to those determined senses the spirit must assist or not at all only for the words he shall take his choyce Now I desire it may be considered sadly and seriously Is it not as much injury to the spirit to restraine his matter as to appoint his words Which is the more considerable of the two sense or Language Matter or Words I meane when they are taken singly and separately For so they may very well be for as if men prescribe the matter only the spirit may cover it with severall words and expressions so if the spirit prescribe the words I may still abound in variety of sense and preserve the liberty of my meaning we see that true in the various interpretations of the same words of Scripture So that in the greater of the two the Spirit is restrained when his matter is appointed and to make him amends for not trusting him with the matter without our directions and limitations we trust him to say what he pleases so it be to our sense to our purposes A goodly compensation surely 5. Did not Christ restrain the spirit of his Apostles when he Numb 50. taught them to pray the Lords Prayer whether his precept to his Disciples concerning it was Pray this or Pray thus Pray these words or pray after this manner or though it had been lesse then either and been only a Directory for the matter still it is a thing which our Brethren in all other cases of the same nature are resolved perpetually to call a restraint Certainly then this pretended restraint is no such formidable thing These men themselves doe it by directing all the matter and much of the manner and Christ himselfe did it by prescribing both the matter and the words too 6. These restraints as they are called or determinations of the Spirit are made by the Spirit himselfe For I demand when Numb 51. any Assembly of Divines appointed the matter of Prayers to all particular Ministers as this hath done is that appointment by the Spirit or no If no then for ought appears this Directory not being made by Gods Spirit may be an enemy to it But if this appointment be by the Spirit then the determination and limitation of the Spirit is by the Spirit himself and such indeed is every pious and prudent constitution of the Church in matters spirituall Such as was that of S. Paul to the Corinthians when he prescribed orders for publike prophecying and interpretation and speaking with tongues The spirit of some he so restrained that he bound them to hold their peace he permitted but two or three to speak at one meeting the rest were to keep silence though possibly six or seven might at that time have the Spirit 7. Is it not a restraint of the Spirit to sing a Psalm in meeter by appointment Cleerely as much as appointing formes of Numb 52. prayer or Eucharist And yet that we see done daily and no scruple made Is not this to be partiall in judgement and inconsiderate of what wee doe 8. And now after all this strife what harm is there in restraining the spirit in the present sense What prohibition what law Numb 53. what reason or revelation is against it What inconvenience in the nature of the thing For can any man be so weak as to imagine a despite is done to the spirit of grace when those gifts to his Church are used regularly and by order As if prudence were no gift of Gods spirit as if helps in Government and the ordering spirituall matters were none of those graces which Christ when he ascended up on high gave unto Men. But this whole matter is wholly a stranger to reason and never seen in Scripture For Divinity never knew any other vitious restraining of the Spirit but either suppressing those holy incitements to virtue and Numb 54. good life which Gods Spirit ministers to us externally or internally or else a forbidding by publick Authority the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments to speak such truths as God hath commended and so taking away the liberty of Prophecying The first is directly vitious In materia speciale the second is tyrannicall and Antichristian And to it persecution of true Religion is to be reduced But as for this pretended limiting or restraining the spirit viz. by appointing a regular form of prayer it is so very a Chimera that it hath no footing or foundation upon any ground where a wise man may build his confidence 9. But lastly how if the spirit
let it rest upon * Apologiae pro Ignatio Vedelius a man who is no waies to be suspected as a party for Episcopacy or rather upon the credit of a Lib. 3. hist. c. 30. Eusebius b De Script Eccles. S. Hierome and c Apud Eusebquem Latine reddidit Ruffinus who reckon the first seven out of which I have taken these excerpta for naturall and genuine And now I will make this use of it Those men that call for reduction of Episcopacy to the Primitive state should doe well to stand close to their principles and count that the best Episcopacy which is first and then consider but what S. Ignatius hath told us for direction in this affaire and see what is gotten in the bargaine For my part since they that call for such a reduction hope to gaine by it and then would most certainly have abidden by it I think it not reasonable to abate any thing of Ignatius his height but expect such subordination and conformity to the Bishop as he then knew to be a law of Christianity But let this be remembred all along in the specification of the parts of their Iurisdiction But as yet I am in the generall demonstration of obedience The Councell of Laodicea having specified some Can. 56. particular instances of subordination and dependance to the Bishop summes them up thus * Idem videre est apud Damasum Epist. de Chorepiscopis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So likewise the Presbyters let them doe nothing without the precept and counsell of the Bishop so is the translation of Isidore ad verbum This Councell is ancient enough for it was before the first Nicene So also was that of Arles commanding the same thing exactly * Vt Presbyteri sine conscientiâ Episcoporum Can. 19. nihil faciant Sed nec Presbyteris civitatis sine Episcopi praecepto amplius aliquid imperare vel sine authoritate literarum ejus in Vnaquaque parochiâ aliquid agere saies the thirteenth Canon of the Ancyran Councell according to the Latine of Isidore The same thing is in the first Councell of Toledo the very Can. 20. same words for which I cited the first Councell of Arles viz. That Presbyters doe nothing without the knowledge or permission of the Bishop * Esto SUBIECTUS Epist. ad Nepotian PONTIFICI Tuo quasi animae parentemsuscipe It is the counsell of S. Hierome Be subject to thy Bishop and receive him as the Father of thy soule I shall not need to derive hither any more particular instances of the duty and obedience owing from the Laity to the Bishop For this account will certainly be admitted by all considering men God hath intrusted the soules of the Laity to the care of the Ecclesiasticall orders they therefore are to submit to the government of the Clergy in matters Spirituall with which they are intrusted For either there is no Government at all or the Laity must governe the Church or else the Clergy must To say there is no Government is to leave the Church in worse condition then a tyranny To say that the Laity should governe the Church when all Ecclesiasticall Ministeries are committed to the Clergy is to say Scripture means not what it saies for it is to say that the Clergy must be Praepositi and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and praelati and yet the prelation and presidency and rule is in them who are not ever by Gods spirit called Presidents or Prelates and that it is not in them who are called so * In the mean time if the Laity in matters Spirituall are inferior to the Clergy and must in things pertaining to the Soule be rul'd by them with whom their Soules are intrusted then also much rather they must obey those of the Clergy to whom all the other Clergy themselves are bound to be obedient Now since by the frequent precept of so many Councells and Fathers the Deacons and Presbyters must submit in all things to the Bishop much more must the Laity and since the Bishop must rule in chiefe and the Presbyters at the most can but rule in conjunction and assistance but ever in subordination to the Bishop the Laity must obey de integro For that is to keep them in that state in which God hath placed them But for the maine S. Clement in his Epistle to S. Iames translated by Ruffinus saith it was the doctrine of Peter according to the institution of Christ that Presbyters should be obedient to their Bishop in all things and in his third Epistle that Presbyters and Deacons and others of the Clergy must take heed that they doe nothing without the license of the Bishop * And to make this businesse up compleat all these authorities of great antiquity were not the prime constitutions in those severall Churches respectively but meere derivations from tradition Apostolicall for not only the thing but the words so often mentioned are in the 40 th Canon of the Apostles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same is repeated in the twenty fourth Canon of the Councell of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presbyters and Deacons must doe nothing without leave of the Bishop for to him the Lords people is committed and he must give an account for their soules * And if a Presbyter shall contemne his owne Bishop making conventions apart and erecting another altar he is to be deposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith the 32. Canon as a lover of Principality intimating that he arrogates Episcopall dignity and so is ambitious of a Principality The issue then is this * The Presbyters and Clergy and Laity must obey therefore the Bishop must governe and give them lawes It was particularly instanc'd in the case of S. Chrysostome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Theodoret He adorned and instructed Pontus with these Lawes so he reckoning up the extent Lib. 5. cap. 28. of his jurisdiction * But now descend we to a specification of the power and jurisdiction * of Bishops § 36. Appointing them to be Iudges of the Clergy and spirituall causes of the Laity THe Bishops were Ecclesiasticall Iudges over the Presbyters the inferiour Clergy and the Laity What they were in Scripture who were constituted in presidency over causes spirituall I have already twice explicated and from hence it descended by a close succession that they who watched for soules they had the rule over them and because no regiment can be without coërcion therefore there was inherent in them a power of cognition of causes and coërcion of persons * The Canons of the Apostles appointing censures to be inflicted on delinquent person's makes the Bishop's hand to doe it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 33. If any Presbyter or Deacon be excommunicated BY THE BISHOP he must not be received by any else but by him that did so censure him vnlesse the BISHOP THAT CENSUR'D HIM be dead The same is repeated in the Nicene Councell only
Princes Courts I st is me diantibus mansuescit circa simplices judiciarius rigor admittitur clamor pauperum Ecclesiarum dignitas erigitur relevatur pauperum indigentia firmatur in clero libertas pax in populis in Monasteriis quies justitia liberè exercetur superbia opprimitur augetur Laicorum devotio religio fovetur diriguntur judicia c. When pious Bishops are imployed in Princes Councells then the rigor of Lawes is abated equity introduced the cry of the poore is heard their necessities are made known the liberties of the Church are conserved the peace of Kingdomes labour'd for pride is depressed religion increaseth the devotion of the Laity multiplies and tribunalls are made just and incorrupt and mercifull Thus farre Petrus Blesensis * These are the effects which though perhaps they doe not alwaies fall out yet these things may in expectation of reason be look'd for from the Clergy their principles and calling promises all this quia in Ecclesiâ magis lex est ubi Dominus legis timetur meliùs dicit apud Dei Ministros agere causam Faciliùs enim Dei timore sententiam legis veram promunt saith S. Ambrose In 1. Corinth 6. and therefore certainly the fairest reason in the world that they be imployed But if personall defaillance be thought reasonable to disimploy the whole calling then neither Clergy nor Laity should ever serve a Prince And now we are easily driven into an understanding of that saying of S. Paul No man that 2. Timoth. 2. 4. warreth entangleth himselfe with the affaires of this life For although this be spoken of all Christian people and concernes the Laity in their proportion as much as the Clergy yet nor one nor the other is interdicted any thing that is not a direct hinderance to their owne precise duty of Christianity And such things must be par'd away from the fringes of the Laity as well as the long robe of the Clergy But if we should consider how little we have now left for the imployment of a Bishop I am afraid a Bishop would scarce seem to be a necessary function so farre would it be from being hindered by the collaterall intervening of a Lay-judicature I need not instance in any particulars for if the judging matters and questions of religion be not left alone to them they may well be put into atemporall imployment to preserve them from suspition of doing nothing I have now done with this only intreating this to be considered Is not the King fons utriusque jurisdictionis In all the senses of Common-law and externall compulsory he is But if so then why may not the King as well make Clergy-Iudges as Lay-Delegates For to be sure if there be an incapacity in the Clergy of medling with secular affaires there is the same at least in the Laity of medling with Church affaires For if the Clergy be above the affaires of the World then the Laity are under the affaires of the Church or else if the Clergy beincapable of Lay-businesse because it is of a different and disparate nature from the Church does not the same argument exclude the Laity from intervening in Church affaires For the Church differs no more from the common-wealth then the common-wealth differs from the Church And now after all this suppose a King should command a Bishop to goe on Embassy to a forraine Prince to be a Commissioner in a treaty of pacification if the Bishop refuse did he doe the duty of a Subject If yea I wonder what subjection that is which a Bishop owes to his Prince when hee shall not be bound to obey him in any thing but the saying and doing of his office to which he is obliged whether the Prince commands him yea or no. But if no then the Bishop was tyed to goe and then the calling makes him no way incapable of such imployment for no man can be bound to doe a sinne BUt then did not this imployment when the occasions §. 50. And therefore were inforced to delegate their power and put others in substitution were great and extraordinary force the Bishops to a temporary absence And what remedy was there for that For the Church is not to be left destitute that 's agreed on by all the Canons They must not be like the Sicilian Bishops whom Petrus Blesensis complains of that attended the Court and never visited their Churches or took care either of the cure of soules or of the Church possessions What then must be done The Bishops in such cases may give delegation of their power and offices to others though now adaies they are complain'd of for their care I say for their care For if they may intervene in secular affaires they may sometimes be absent and then they must delegate their power or leave the Church without a Curate *** But for this matter the account need not be long For since I have proved that the whole Diocesse is in curâ Episcopali and for all of it he is responsive to God Almighty and yet that instant necessity and the publike act of Christendome hath ratified it that Bishops have delegated to Presbyters so many parts of the Bishops charge as there are parishes in his Diocesse the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is pretended for delegation of Episcopall charge is no lesse then the act of all Christendome For it is evident at first Presbyters had no distinct cure at all but were in common assistant to the Bishop and were his emissaries for the gaining soules in Citty or Suburbs But when the Bishops divided parishes and fixt the Presbyters upon a cure so many Parishes as they distinguished so many delegations they made And these we all believe to be good both in law and conscience For the Bishop per omnes divinos ordines propriae hierarchiae exercet mysteria saith S. Denis Eccles. hierar c. 5. he does not doe the offices of his order by himselfe onely but by others also for all the inferior orders doe so operate as by them he does his proper offices * But besides this grand act of the Bishops first and then of all Christendome in consent we have faire precedent in S. Paul for he made delegation of a power to the Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous person It was a plain delegation for he commanded them to doe it and gave them his own spirit that is his own authority and indeed without it I scarce find how the delinquent should have been delivered over to Satan in the sense of the Apostolick Church that is to be buffeted for that was a miraculous appendix of power Apostolick * When S. Paul sent for Timothy from Ephesus he sent Tychicus to be his Vicar Doethy diligence 2. Timoth. 4. v. 9. 12. to come unto me shortly for Demas hath forsaken me c. And Tychicus have I sent to Ephesus Here was an expresse delegation of the power of jurisdiction to Tychicus who for
q. 3. themselves guilty of the intended machination For by all Law Ecclesiasticall and Civill hee that conceales an intended Murder or Treason makes himselfe b l. 1. occisorum ad I. c. Syllanian l 1. §. 1. ad l. Cornel. de falsis l. quisquis ad l lul Maiest as much a party for concealing as is the Principall for contriving Ob. But these Fathers Confessors could not be accused by vertue of these generall Lawes as being exempt by vertue of speciall case for they received notice of these things only in confession the seale of which is so sacred and inviolable that he is sacrilegious who in any case doth breake it open though it be to avoid the greatest evill that can happen so Bellarmine to save the lives of all the Kings in Christendome Apol. adv R. Angl. Casaub. ad Front Duc. In 3. part D. Thom. disp 33. Sect. 1. n. 2. so Binet though to save a whole common wealth from dammage temporall or spirituall of body or soule so Suarez A considerable matter On the one side wee are threatned by sacriledge on the other by danger of Princes and common-wealths for the case may happen that either the Prince and whole State may be suffered to perish bodily and ghostly or else the Priest must certainly damne himselfe by the sacrilegious breach of the holy Seale of confession Give me leave briefly to consider it and both for the acquittance of our state in its proceedings against these Traytors and for the regulating of the case it selfe to say these two things 1 This present Treason was not revealed to these Fathers Confessors in formall confession 2. If it had it did not bind to secresy in the present case Of the first only a word 1 It was only propounded to them in way of Question or consultation like this in the text as appeared Vide Casaub. ep ad Front D. p. 133. by their owne confessions and the attestation of then S r Henry Mountague Recorder of London to Garnet himselfe It could not therefore be a formall D. Soto in 4. l. Sent. d. 18. q. 4 art 5. concl 5. Navar. c. 8. n. 18. Suarez disp 33 Sect 2. Coninck desâ—gil conf dub 1. n. 7. confession therefore not bind to the seale It is the common opinion of their owne Doctors Non enim inducitur obligatio sigilli in confessione quam quis facit sine ullo animo accipiendi absolutionem sed solum consilij petendi causâ 2 It was propounded to these Fathers Confessors as a thing not subjicible to their penitentiall judicature because it was a fact not repented of but then in agitation and resolved upon for the future How then could this be a confession whose institution must certainly be in order to absolution and how could this be in any such order when it was a businesse of which they could not expect to be absolved unlesse they hop'd to sinne with a pardon about their necks and on condition God would be mercifull to them in its remission would come and professe that they were resolved to anger him In reason this could be no act of repentance neither could it by confession of their own side It is the doctrine of Hostiensis and b Cap Sacerdos 3. q. n. 116. Navarre and c In lucubrat ad Bartolum in L. ut vim n. 22 ff de iustitia iure Cardinall Alban confesse it to be most commonly received 3 It was not only not repented of but by them reputed to be a good action and so could not be a matter of confession I appeal to any of their own Manuals and penitentiary bookes It is culpable say they I am sure it is ridiculous in any man to confesse and shrive himselfe of a good action and that this was such in their opinion it 's plaine by that impious answer of Garnet affirming it a businesse See proceed against late Traitors greatly meritorious if any good might thence accrue to the Catholique cause 4 By this their pretended confession they endeavoured to acquire new complices as is evident in the proceedings against the Traitors They were therefore bound to reveale it for it neither was nor could be a proper and formall confession That this is the common opinion of their own Schooles see it affirmed by Aegidius Coninck Vbisuprà The first particular then is plain Here neither was the forme of confession nor yet could this thing be a matter of confession therefore supposing the seale of confession to be sacredly inviolable in all cases yet they were highly blameable for their concealement in the present 2 But the truth of the second particular is more to be inquired of That is that though these things had been only revealed in confession and this confession had been formall and direct yet they were bound in the present case to reveale it because the seale of confession is not so inviolable as that in no case it is to be broken up and if in any especially it may be opened in the case of treason I never knew any thing cryed up with so generall a voyce upon so little ground as is the Over-hallowed seale of confession True it is that an ordinary secret committed to a friend in civill commerce is not to be revealed upon every cause nor upon many but upon some it may as they all confesse If thus then much rather is this to be observed in the revelation of the secrets of our consciences not only from the ordinary tye to secrecy but likewise least sinnes should grow more frequent if so great a remedy of them be made so odious as to expose us to a publike infamy or danger of the law The Councell therefore that first introduc'd this obligation was very prudent and reasonable pleads a thousand yeares prescription and relies upon good conveniences This is all that ever could be prov'd of it as may appeare anon but these are too weak a base to build so great a structure on it as to make it sacriledge or any sinne at all to reveale confessions in some cases 1 For first if because it is delivered as a secret and such a secret it is the more closely and religiously to be kept it is true but concludes no more but that it must be a greater cause that must authorize a publication of this then of the secrets of ordinary commerce between friend and friend 2 If the licensing of publicatioÌ„ of confession be a way to make confession odious and therefore that it may not be publish'd I say if this concludes then on the contrary it concludes farre more strongly that therefore in some cases it may be published because nothing can make a thing more odious and intolerable then if it be made a cover for grand impieties so as to engage a true subject quietly Knowingly to see his Prince murdred 3 If it be discouragement to the practise of confession that some sinnes revealed in it must