of all Schismes in the Church to be quod Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur that the Bishop is not obeyed Nec unus in Ecclesia ad tempus Sacerdos ad tempus Judex vice Christi cogitatur and that 't is not considered that the one Priest i. e. Bishop and Judge is for the time in the Church in Christs stead which is yet more clear by his making Sacerdotum Collegium The Colledge of Priests all one with Coepiscoporum consensus The consent of Fellow-bishops and presently adding that he that sets himselfe above this unus Sacerdos one Priest se non Episcopi sed Dei Judicem faceret makes himself Judge not of the Bishop but of God And therefore 't is a strange proofe of Blondels that Episcopacy and Presbytery is all one from that speech of Pontius Diaconus concerning this Cyprian Quod ad officium Sacerdotii Episcopatus gradum novellus electus est having before said Presbyterium Sacerdotium statim accepisse Whereas the equipollence of the word Sacerdos and Episcopus being observed and the difference of Presbyter from them doth clearly infer the contrary and that is apparent by the very place Multa sunt quae jam Presbyter fecit ad probationem bonorum operum satis est quod ad officium Sacerdotii Episcopatus gradum adhuc novellus electus est He was it seems a Presbyter first and did many things in that state and a proof that he did so was his election to the office of Sacerdos or Bishop when he was a novice then presently or soon after his conversion where the difference of his being a Presbyter and a Bishop is most manifest So when St Hilarius Pictav saith Aarone Sacerdotes significari non ambiguum in Levi ministros ostendi the same Blondel concludes Sacerdotes sive praepositos seniores to be all one not knowing or observing again that that Sacerdos signifies Bishop who is there set parallel to Aaron in lege primus Sacerdos the first Priest in the law Sect. 9 Many other evidences might be produced out of those and after times as in the Councel of Taurinum speaking of Palladius A Triferio sacerdote fuerat mulctatus he was punished by Triferius who that he was a Bishop if it were doubted would appear by the acts of that Councel and particularly by his excommunicating Exuperantius a Presbyter Can. 4. which sure none but a Summus Sacerdos a High Priest or Bishop could doe Sect. 10 But there can be no need of more proofs in this matter and if there were now any more doubt that the Bishops were the confest successors of the Apostles in this Priviledge or Prerogative that one Canon of the Apostles might satisfie it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Let not the Presbyters or Deacons do any thing without the consent of the Bishop for he hath the people of the Lord intrusted to him and shall one day be required an account of their souls which besides that it is evidenced to belong to this power of the Keyes by the usefulnesse of that to the discharging the trust about souls appears further by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the prohibiting of Presbyters to do any thing without him Sect. 11 A saying which whatsoever is thought of it is the voice of the first Antiquity Ignatius must begin the number in Epist ad Trall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is necessary that whatever ye do ye do nothing without the Bishop And if because it follows immediately 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 obey the Presbyters as the Apostles it be conceived that that precept belongs to the people onely and not to the Presbyters it will then be easily replyed that to the whole matter the same Ignatius in Epist ad Magn. hath given it in a latitude which had prevented this scruple 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As the Lord Christ doth nothing without the Father so you also without the Bishop You whether Presbyter or Deacon or Laick Once more in Epist ad Smyrn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let no man without the Bishop do any of those things which belong unto the Church And the Councel of Laodicea hath almost in Ignatius's words commanded the same Can. 56. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Presbyters must do nothing without the consent of the Bishop and many more acts and Canons might be produced to the same purpose And if against all these this exception be made that by the Sect. 12 force of such Rules not only the power of the Keyes but also all other power belonging to the Church is appropriated to Bishops to this the Answer as it will be easie so it will tend much to the clearing and serve for the shutting up of this whole matter That indeed there is great truth in the objection that all power in all matters Ecclesiastical did primarily belong to the Bishop and no others even Presbyters themselves but as it was by the Bishop communicated to them not only by that first act of Ordination in giving them the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or first power but also by a second act necessary to give them that other power to use or exercise that power when they have it This is the plain sense of the Canon of the Councel of Arles Sect. 13 Can. 19. nec Presbyteris civitatis sine Episcopi praecepto amplius aliquid imperare vel sine authoritate literarum ejus in unaquaque Parochia aliquid agere The Presbyters of any City must not command any thing without the precept of the Bishop nor do any thing in any Parish without authority of the Bishops letters licensing them to do it Thus I say it is not only for the power of the Keyes but even for the Ignatius's saying last produced in Epist ad Smyrn is by him thus in larged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let that Eucharist be reputed firm or rightly celebrated which is done by the Bishop or by him to whom he shall give leave and for Baptisme and that together 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is not lawfull without the Bishop i. e. without his leave either to baptize or administer the Sacrament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but when he shall think fit according to Gods pleasure 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that all that you do may be safe and firme It seems the consent of the Bishop was thought necessary to make it safe for any Presbyter to doe any Ecclesiastical act or to give validity to it when 't was done by him So Tertull. de cor mil. Non de aliorum quà m de praesidentium manu Eucharistiam sumimus We receive the Eucharist from none but the Presidents or Governors They are all one with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Just Mart. Apol. 2. to whom that whole businesse is there remitted So again Tertul. de bapt Dandi baptismum jus habet Summus Sacerdos qui est Episcopus dehinc Presbyteri Diaconi non tamen sine Episcopi authoritate propter Ecclesiae
honorem quo salvo salva pax est The Chief Priest who is the Bishop hath the power of giving baptisme after him the Presbyters and Deacons yet not without the authority of the Bishop for the honor of the Church which as long as it is preserved the peace of the Church will be preserved also So when the Scriptor anon quaest in V. Nov. Test which is thought to be Hilary saith In Alexandriâ per totum Aegyptum si desit Episcopus consecrat Presbyter that in Alexandria and Aegypt if there be no Bishop the Presbyter consecrates 't is clear by the mention of that liberty in the Presbyter as of a thing peculiar to Aegypt and that too only when there is no Bishop present that regularly this power belong'd to none but the Bishops and to those Presbyters to whom he gave it Where by the way will appear a great mistake of Blondel and I suppose out of him as his many other Notes in his apparatus against Bishops of Salmasius who in another place of Hilary in Eph. 4. cited by both of them apud Aegyptum Presbyteri consignant si praesens non sit Episcopus In Aegypt the Presbyters consigne if the Bishop be not present interpret consigning either to be confirmation or blessing I suppose absolving of penitents or ordination It being clear by the other place just now cited that consignatio signifies there consecrating of the Sacrament which is peculiarly call'd consecration that of giving orders being ordination not as he calls it ordinandorum consecratio which what it would grammatically signifie I know not unlesse some benediction of them that are after to be ordain'd and it seems Blondel himself p. 61. thinks it possible that consignatio may signifie the consecrating the Elements and by what follows I conceive him to use it in that sense saying quod antiquis per solam Episcoporum absentiam licuit omnibus nunc absolutè licet that which antiently was made lawful to all i. e. to Presbyters onely by the Bishops absence is now absolutely lawfull to all Which I suppose he must mean of consecrating the Sacrament and I am sure could not reasonably believe of ordination But this by the way in passage to confirm that assertion of Ignatius sufficiently that the Church was by the Apostles put into the hands of Bishops that ordinarily the consent of the Bishop was required to enable a Presbyter for any Ecclesiastical act the plenitude of power being by Christ delivered down to the Apostles and through them to their successor-bishops and by them dispenst out to others in that measure and those portions which they should think fit And if it be demanded here What it is which in our Church Sect. 14 is given to Presbyters in their Ordination as the full importance of the form then used Receive the Holy Ghost I answer not all that is at any time contained under that phrase when it is used in the consecration but only the particulars which are after mentioned and so distinctly not the power of ordaining which is not mentioned and which is a particular that never was regular for any Presbyter in the antient Church to assume to himself or to any number of that order without a Bishop over them and it would not be hard to give an account of all that hath been produced of late by Salmasius or any other from the origines Alexandrini or any other record of antiquity to the contrary but that it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and would be too large a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place and if the practice of some few Protestant Churches in this last Century be opposed against it then 1. I shal conceive those very unfit to be confronted against the Vniversal for 1500 years and therefore secondly I shall not doubt to affirm that want is not only a defect but a corruption among them Thirdly it will be observable that even those that want it among them have formerly thought fit to excuse it by the case of necessity and to acknowledge it their infelicity but not their fault their superiors in the State not permitting them to have Bishops to ordain them and to give their judgements freely that where Episcopacy is it is to be preserv'd and where it is not it is to be wisht for which is a sufficient expression of their sense of it And if the improsperousnesse of the cause of late in this Kingdome hath moved some of them to change their style I suppose there is no greater reason to depend on their judgements who are mov'd or wrought on by such extrinsecal arguments then on his who lately made no scruple to confesse in giving his opinion of H. Grotius Ego non probo prudentiam minùs felicem He lik'd not the choice of that side which was not prosperous And then fourthly that this cannot be applicable by way of excuse to those who desire to cast out Bishops where they are on purpose that Presbyters may usurp the power which belongs to them Secondly not al power of binding and loosing retaining or remitting though those words are there added whose sins you do remit c. but so much as the Bishops or Governours are presumed to have thought fit to impart to them and what that is will appear by other acts of our Church especially by the Liturgy as 1. The declaring of absolution in the Church after the Confession of sins 2. The absolving them by way of prayer before the Sacrament in case the Bishop be not present and 3. in Baptismal washing and 4. upon speciall Confession on the sick-bed or any time else which may by analogy or reduction come under these same heads as in the case of private conference and confession at other times In all these the remitting of sins is allowed among us to a bare Presbyter not only by way of pronouncing or declaring of absolution but as a ministerial act actually absolving him by Christs authority committed to the Presbyters from all his sins Sect. 15 All which yet will not extend to the absolving from the band of Excommunication or proportionably to such power of binding any further at most then to confer the first power of it which if it be then given doth yet remain as the other power of Preaching and administring the Sacraments bound and restrained from being exercised till they be further loosed by the donation of a second power as Luke 24.49 when Christ sent them the Promise of his Father which was at the time of his breathing on them Joh. 20.22 and gave them a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a grace or first power of it he yet restrains the exercise of it till the actuall descent of the Holy Ghost but tarry you in Jerusalem till you be indued with power from above and that is not done in this Church as it stands established by Law in this particular of the Keys till he become a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a
elegit the Lord chose Apostles i. e. Bishops and Governors So Judas's Apostolical function is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishoprick Act. 1.29 so Theodoret thinks Epaphroditus was Bishop of the Philipians because he is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apostle and on 1 Tim. 3. saith thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that are now call'd Bishops they then call'd Apostles so Titus saith he and so Apollos and so saith Remig. on 1 Cor. 4. Sosthenes also Thus St Hilary frequently calls St Paul Episcopum Bishop And Hilarius Sardus in Eph. Apostoli Episcopi sunt the Apostles are Bishops So the Scriptor qu. in vet nov Test qu. 27. Nemo ignorat Episcopos Servatorem Ecclesâ—is instituisse ipse enim priusquà m in coelos ascenderet imponens manum Apostolis ordinavit eos Episcopos No man is ignorant that our Saviour instituted Bishops over the Churches For he himself before he ascended to heaven laying his hand on the Apostles ordained them Bishops So saith Rabanus Maur. in 1 Tim. 4.14 of the Apostles times Episcopi provincias integras regebant Apostolorum nomine nun cupati The Bishops were call'd Apostles So doth Blondel himself confesse not only out of Gildas that St Matthew Episcopatum sortitus est was Bishop but acknowledges it of St James the brother of the Lord as the voice of all antiquity that he was Bishop of Jerusalem Jacobum Hierosol Ecclesiae Episcopatum constanter asserunt veteres omnes Apol. pro Sent. Hieron p. 50. And if it be said that he meant by the word Episcopus Bishop no more then a Presbyter one of many I shall only then put him or the Reader in minde what the same Blondel in his censure of the Pontif. Epistles when they say he was not so severe against Bishops hath put together of St James Hierosol Ecclesiam rexisse statuunt veteres à Christo Episcopale munus accepisse ait Hegesippus apud Hieron in Cat. Epiphan haer 78. Hieron in Gal. c. 1. Greg. Turon l. 1. c. 17. Nic. Methon de pane consecr à Christo Apostolis Eus l. f. 7. c. 19. Constit l. 8. c. 35. Ab Apostolis Constit l. 7. c. 48. l. 8. c. ult Clem. Alexand. apud Euseb l. 2. c. 1. Athanas in Synop. Euseb l. 2. c. 2. Hieronymus de Script Eccl. Beda de 6. aetat Martyrl ad Cal. Maii. Chron. Gr. anon Scriptor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledging all that as Bishop he governed that Church as a single person saâ—e in the see or throne all the difference between the Antients being whether by Christ or the Apostles or both or by St Peter only he was ordained Bishop Thus saith S. Chrys did Christ invest the Apostles with this Sect. 6 power of retaining and remitting sins 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. as when a King sends Governors over Provinces he gives them power of imprisoning and releasing intimating the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Rulers of the Church to be the men that are here represented by the Apostles and so in L. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 speaking of the weighty office of Bishops to excuse himself who had fled from it he principally insists on the power which is intrusted to them and in that respect applies to them the style of the faithfull and wise Servant whom God makes Ruler over his household So Theophylact on Matth. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They that after the manner of St Peter are vouchsafed the honor of being Bishops have the power of binding and loosing So again appears by the forecited Testimonies of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Presidents in St Chrys and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praefects of the Church in Theophylact. And so in the name and sense of the Greek Church Gabriel of Philadelphia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his second difference betwixt the Greek and the Roman Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The chief Priests i. e. Bishops are the successors of the Apostles and in plain words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that 't is manifest that the Apostles were Bishops and applies to them that of the Psalmist Psal 45.16 of Gods constituting them rulers over all the earth and names the severall Churches wherein the several Apostles ordain'd Bishops St John in Asia St Andrew in Achaia St Thomas in India c. Thus also among the Latines St Jerome who was not very Sect. 7 favourable to Bishops saith expresly that they were the Apostles successors Episcopi omnes Apostolorum successores sunt Ep. 83. ad Evagrium So St Ambrose Claves illas regni coelorum in beato Petro Apostolo cuncti suscepimus sacerdotes All we that are stiled Sacerdotes in the blessed Apostle St Peter received the Keyes of the Kingdome of Heaven And what Sacerdos signifies among the Writers of that time and particularly in St Ambrose the observation of any diligent Reader will instruct him viz. that which the suscepimus applyed to St Ambrose's person will inforce he being Bishop of Millain at that time and this is agreeable even to the heathens acception of the phrase who use Sacerdos and Pontifex promiscuously witnesse Servius in Aen. 3. So de dignitate Sacerd. c. 2. he shews out of Scripture that the sheep are delivered Sacerdotibus I shall render it to Bishops because it follows and so must be subject to those Rulers So in St Chrys in the fore-cited 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 2. The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which together with Pastor in Latine is ordinarily the Bishops Title in order to the Shepherds office of ruling and governing as well as feeding the flock and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacerdos are promiscuously taken and the latter by the Interpreter there rendred Episcopus Bishop And to the same purpose most clearly St Cyprian Ep. 12. Sect. 8 speaking of the Lapsi those who having fallen were under the censures of the Church and how the Presbyters had presumed to reconcile or absolve them he concludes that they did not Reservare Episcopo honorem Sacerdotii sui Cathedrae reserve to the Bishop the honour of his Priesthood and chaire shewing the indifferent use of those words Episcopus and Sacerdos at that time and that in opposition to Presbytery appropriating to the one the Power of the Keyes exclusively to the other This he had set down more plainly before Epist 10. shewing and aggravating the greatnesse of the fault of those Presbyters that had taken upon them to use the Keyes in that case Praepositum sibi Episcopum non cogitantes not thinking that there was a Bishop set over them quod nunquam omnino sub antecessoribus factum est resolving that it was a fact without any precedent in the Church and again L. 1. Epist 3. having proved the Episcopal power to be immediately from God he expresseth it in these words Sacerdotalis authoritas potestas divinâ dignatione firmatur The Sacerdotall power is setled by divine dignation and addes the occasion
send the promise of my Father upon you so as they may be parallel with this place Joh. 20.23 receive the Holy Ghost No doubt that promise of the Father was the Holy Ghost Joh. 15.26 and the I send upon you both as a verbum â—olenne I send i. e. I instate on you and that in the present I send not in the future I will send all one with the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 receive him and so the power from on high in the end of the verse clearly signifies that visible mission of the Holy Ghost which they were to expect as the means of compleating this donation and so 't is clear by comparing it with Act. 1.4 8. where the same phrase are used And therefore Joh. 20.21 immediately before the Receive the Holy Ghost he saith As my Father sent me so send I you intimating that as at his mission to his office he was anointed with the Holy Ghost Act. 10.38 viz. upon his Baptisme Luk. 3.23 whereupon 't is said that he by the Spirit cast out devils Mat. 12.18 which is clearly symbolical and parallel to his loosing or remission of sinnes so the Apostles at their mission or entrance on their power should be anointed also CAP. II. HAving proceeded thus far by way of generall precognition Sect. 1 that which is behind will I conceive be most intelligible if it be reduced to these few heads 1. On whom this power was bestowed 2. In what it consists 3. To what use 't is designed and to what sort of men it belongs objectivè or who are to be bound and loosed 4. What is the reall effect of it or what conjunction it hath with binding and loosing in Heaven For the first though to him that considereth the place of Sect. 2 Matth. 18. alone by it selfe which is an obscure place the matter be not so cleare to whom this power was given by Christ and though thereupon some mistakes have arisen and occasion of conceiting this power of binding c. to be instated by Christ on the whole aggregate of any particular Church yet surely the matter will be sufficiently clear if as it is most reasonable we first allow that obscure place leave to borrow light from the two other most evident ones and not obscure the more evident by that and secondly after we have brought that light to it observe what glimmerings of light we shall be able to discern by that help even in that obscure place it selfe which will as the weak light of the Moon with that treasure of light borrowed from the Sun added to it become by this meanes exceeding lightsome For although these three places are not parallel one to the other in respect of the times and occasions of delivering them and other circumstances yet there is no doubt but they belong all to the same generall matter the power of binding c. And that being as it is apparent even by that of Matth. 18.18 instated not on the whole world or community of men but determinated to some peculiar subject there is all reason to resolve that that subject though diversly exprest is yet the same in all those places unlesse some evidence of Scripture or authentick testimony of antient Church or practise shall demonstrate the contrary which that it doth not will as far as concerns the Scripture which deserves our first search be thus cleared by considering the severall places And first Matth. 16.19 which was occasioned thus Christ Sect. 3 examining his disciples what opinion they had of him is answered by Simon that he was the Christ the Messias the Sonne of the living God vers 16. upon which Christ pronounceth him a blessed person as having received the supernatural gift of faith from God himselfe which no humane means could have helpt him to and upon this changes his name from Simon Bar-Jona the only name he had vers 17. to Cephas in Syriack that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greek or as Homer and other good Authors and which beares most affinitie with the dialect of this book the Author of the second book of Mac. cap. 4.31 used it in the masculine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying a rock or stone to Intimate that he should be as a foundation or strong rocky stone in a building is a principall ingredient in the building and a meanes of the future stability of it Matth. 7.25 the storme and flouds and winds came upon it and it fell not because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was founded on such a firme rocky stone a principal part call it foundation or rocke or pillar of that Church of Christians which partly by this confession of his here recorded to all posterity and partly by his future teaching he should be a meanes to erect for Christs service and then being so glorious an Instument of converting so many Christ is pleased to give him the Keyes of this Kingdome 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theophyl in Mat. 16. authoritatively he gave him the keyes as his Father had done the Revelation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. as he goes on a power of binding and loosing c. so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the pardoning and punishing of sinnes in a word is spirituall grace or power or jurisdiction over these future Converts of his as generally in the Apostles times and after he that converted any Country or chiefe City in his Apostleship was setled as their Bishop or Governour in spirituall matters and so continued all his life unlesse having setled them he thought good to commit that office and power to some body else that so he might be the more free to go and preach and convert more though not as yet because they were not by him as yet converted yet by way of promise in diem to be performed when time should serve I will give thee the keyes and whatsoever thou shalt bind c. the summe is Peter was to be an Apostle and to do wonders in converting whole Nations to Christ and among those whom he thus converted Christ promises that he should have a Jurisdiction a power to govern and discipline and censure as there should be occasion in those Churches This being thus promised to Peter as a chiefe Apostle and Sect. 4 Confessour of Christs not exclusivè by way of exclusion that none should have this power but he but honorificè by way of honour mentioned first to him by the priviledge of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of being as I conceive he was the first that was call'd but more peculiarly as a reward of his notable confession v. 16. is by Christ a little before his parting from the world after his resurrection Joh. 20.23 actually instated both on him and the rest of the Apostles who were to ioyne in the same office with him of begetting unto Christ and educating those which were so begotten of converting and preserving or governing and in order to that end were to have their severall Provinces assigned
not spare he addeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the power that Christ hath given me which sure was not peculiar to him but common to the rest of the Apostles which had it before him and in a more ordinary way and ver 3. he distinctly calls it Christ speaking in him a high expression making every such act of judicature in him an act of Christ CAP. III. Sect. 1 THe only difficulty remaining in the point will be who are the Apostles successors in that power and when the question is asked of that power I must be understood of the power of governing the Church peculiarly of which the power of the Keyes was and is a principal branch for it must again be remembred that the Apostles are to be considered under a double notion 1. As Planters then as Governors of the Church The title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in its literall notation of Missus sent Embassadour or Messenger belongs peculiarly to the former of these and so though it have some extraordinary privileges annext to it necessary to the work of planting as the gift of tongues the power of working miracles which ennobles it beyond the order of Governours in the Churches since their plantation yet in the persons of the Apostles it was but a precedaneous power preparatory to that other of ruling or governing which no doubt is the reason that Chrysost calls Ignatius the martyr both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Apostle and Bishop and perhaps is the meaning of that saying of an Anonymus writer in Photius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Apostle Timothy was by St Paul ordained and enthronized or seated Bishop of the Metropolis of the Ephesians i. e. that he that had helped to plant Churches and so was an Apostle sent out to that purpose was at length ordained Bishop to govern that of Ephesus being planted Which distinction being premised ' the question will now more easily be satisfied being proposed in these terms Who were the Apostles successors in that power which concerned the governing these Churches which they had planted And 1. I answer that it being a matter of fact or story later then that the Scripture can universally reach to it cannot be fully satisfied or answered from thence any further then the persons of Timothy or Titus c. and the severall Angels of the Churches in the Apocalypse who are acknowledged by all the Antients to be single persons that had power over all others in those Churches but will in the full latitude through the universal Church in those times be made clear from the next evidences that we have viz. from the consent of the Greek and Latine Fathers who generally resolve that Bishops are those successors This I shall not be so unreasonable as to attempt to prove at large through the writings of those Fathers but content my self with one or two of the first of them Of this number I conceive the testimony of Clemens Romanus Sect. 2 in his Epistle to the Corinth which hath been so often of late produced might to any disinteressed person be allowed to have some force in it where speaking of the Apostles he saith that they foreseeing that there would be contention and emulation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about the name or as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may denote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dignity of Bishops or Episcopacy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for I doubt not but that is the reading and the sense there they set down a list or continuation of successors as when Hesychius and out of him Varinus renders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 perhaps it may be a false print as there be many in the edition of that book for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but howsoever the Analogy from thence will extend to this also that as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 will signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inheritance or succession that when any dyed such a certain person should succeed him To which affirmation of Clemens when I have added that which all Ecclesiasticall Stories have made familiar to us that there were preserved in several Churches such rols and catalogues of Bishops beginning from the Apostles in each See I shall conceive that that of Clemens was a pertinent testimony to this purpose especially when the voice of antiquity is so clear that Clemens himself was one of those Bishops an Adjutor of the Apostles in their life time and after the departure of Linus and Cletus the onely one that retained the name of Bishop in Rome all others being stiled Presbyters only that Vedelius at Geneva hath at large acknowledged it Exercit. in Ignat. Ignat. Epist ad Mar. Cassabol c. 3. Sect. 3 After Clemens an assertor at once and example of this truth I must next appeal to the Martyr Ignatius himself also Bishop of Antioch that lived in the Apostles age and is by the enemies of Episcopacy discerned to be so full a treasure of this truth and of others in this kind in so many notable passages that there hath been no way imaginable by those who resolve to have it otherwise to resist the plainnesse of his authorities but first by scoffes and defamations Secondly by confident rejecting of our whole volume of his Epistles as spurious and of a latter birth and thirdly by some very slender shewes of proof that they are so One special of this sort which I see lately made use of by Salmasius and for which it now appears he was beholding to a sight of Blundels book not then printed I shall mention to remove prejudices and it is this that in the Epistle to the Magnesians he distinctly calls Episcopacy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which saith that learned Grammarian signifies it to be a new Order and he attempts to prove it because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith he cannot be referred to the age and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 agreeable whereunto he interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Tim. 2.22 to be novae or novarum rerum cupiditates new desires or of new things The dealing of this learned Grammarian in this businesse will Sect. 4 be sufficiently strange to him that considers the whole matter I shall only in passing give some few hints of judging it by telling you first that the generality of Copies read not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the youth of the Bishop and no one of the Greek editions hath so much as mention'd any various lection in that place till now the Florentine or Laurentian copy hath given us that variety Secondly that the whole context of the Epistle drives to this of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as even this Author confesses by saying that he perswades them to receive their Bishop and give him honour quamvis aetate juniori though he were younger then they and
semper quotidie fallunt How many things have alwayes deceived and daily do deceive men that are not suspicious nor upon their guard And if all the Fathers of the Church beginning from those that were nearest Ignatius's time must be involved in the number of these incautious cheatable men I shall be afraid to mention the consequences that will too readily be deducible from hence I shal only say May not this liberty or licence rather be soon extended very inordinately to the invasion of the sacred Canon of Scripture Nay when the same current and consent of Fathers which delivers down all the books which make up our Canon of Scripture for Canonicall and Theopneust shall be found at the same time to deliver down and make use of these Epistles of Ignatius onely with the distinction of Apocryphal and mean by that not supposititious books or books which are under suspition that they are not their off-spring whom they call Father but only books of inferior authority as Apocryphal is opposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the books of divine Scripture legi Domini to the Law or word of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to those that are put in the Canon and in a word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you may see in the end of Nicephorus's Chronography and in others inter scripta novi Testamenti novi apocrypha numbred among the apocryphal books not of Ignatius but of the New Testament and appointed to be read by pious men though not allowed that same authority and dignity in which the books of Sacred Scripture have been justly estated when I say the same hands of the antient Church shall deliver both the Epistles of St Peter for Divine Scripture and these Epistles of Ignatius for the Epistles of Ignatius though not for Divine Scripture who can say that Salmasius when he had thus confidently thrown off these Epistles from being written by Ignatius did not consequently and agreeably to his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in throwing off one of St Peters Epistles also And who can think it reasonable that our warinesse and censoriousnes shall enable us at 1500 years distance to judge more truly of a matter of fact which none but they that are near be they never so wary and suspicious can discern any thing of then they that lived in those times which were nearest to the scene of action Nay how much more rational is that of the same Salmasius who in the controversie about the parts of the Crosse i. e. when he conceiv'd antiquity to be favourable to that opinion which he defended hath made this argumentative against his adversaries An credibile est Gregorium qui vixit tanto tempore postquam crucis supplicio nemo amplius afficebatur certiorem esse testem de habitu crucis totius c. quà m eos authores qui scripsere cùm adhuc passim in usu esset communissimo nocentum crucifixio Is it credible that he that lived so long after the use of that kind of death was left off should be a surer witnesse of any thing that belongs to it then those Authors that wrote when it was in use De Cruce p. 255. And again if Blondel may say without proof that the Fathers were incautious in general and thence conclude that they were actually deceived in this particular Why may not I as reasonably affirm having given my reasons when he hath not that Blondel is too censorious and partial and willing to bring all to the cause he hath espoused and thence conclude knowing how contrary these Epistles are to his interests that he hath actually exprest his passion and injustice in this causlesse censure of these Epistles I have done with this learned mans observations in this matter and when I shall hear of any other argument which can seem of force against these Epistles I shall be glad to consider it professing my self to conceive that as long as that one Author stands in the Church in his just value the cause of Prelacy and Hierarchy cannot want supports every page almost of those Epistles being sufficient which the adversaries acknowledge in saying he doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in season and out of season at all turns assert Episcopacy to interpret the obscurer vestigia in the New Testament and to assure us what was the practise and doctrine of the Apostles and Primitive Churches in that point and that is the reason I have insisted so long on a thing which may seem so extrinsecall to my first undertaking and shall not think my self out of my way if I be content to return to this controversie again as having such an immediate influence on the cause in hand whensoever I shall be call'd to it In the mean I shall content my self with this view of that matter and for the present as I cannot but conceive it rashnesse to cast an Epistle of St Peter upon a bare affirmation in a Parenthesis quae sola planè genuina est so will it be in a lower degree but in like manner to deal with a most antient Apostolical-spirited volume upon such unproved censures as these and it is observable that the first writer that ever undertook to be thus severe against that whole volume of Epistles did with as much confidence and as little pretention to argument cast off one of the books of Canonical Scripture This I thought not amisse here to insert to vindicate the writings of that antient Martyr though it may be taken for a parergon in this place Supposing then this writer to stand in the same repute in Sect. 5 the Church of God in which he did before he was observed to be unreconcileable with the designs of the new Reformers I shall proceed to make use of his testimony He commands obedience to be paid to Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as to the Apostles to the Presbyters as to the Seventy to the Deacons as to the Deacons in the Acts. The passage is known and although in another place he makes the Presbyters parallel to the Apostles and the Bishops to Christ yet these places are easily reconciled it being clear that that latter place considers the Apostles at the time when Christ was here on earth at which time they were indeed but a second rank and in that respect it is that Origen saith Tr. in Mat. 24. Propriè Episcopus Dominus Jesus est Presbyteri Apostoli Christ is properly the Bishop and the Apostles Presbyters but the former place considering that after Christs departure is that which more properly belongs to this matter this power though promised before being not yet instated on them till after his resurrection immediately before his leaving of this world or indeed till the coming of the Holy Ghost at which time they were left the Governors of the Church as Christ had been before and the Bishops their successors ever since To which purpose St Cyprian Ep. 65. Apostolos i. e. Episcopos Praepositos Dominus
ruling Elder whether by being made Bishop or otherwise by having Jurisdiction vested on him and thus much will serve turn for the first enquiry on whom the power of the Keyes was bestowed CAP. IV. I Come now to the second general enquiry in what this power Sect. 1 consists and shews it self which I shall make no stay or scruple to define in this proposition That the power of binding and loosing in these places of the Gospels is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a spiritual gift or grace and belongs to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Theoph. in Mat. 16. the pardoning or punishing of faults the former to the Censures of the Church the Ecclesiastical punishments of Excommunication and the later the power of loosing to that of absolving from them This position I must vindicate from the contrary interpretations or objections which are thought to keep these Texts from concluding or countenaning any such Censures And of these though they are not all to one sense yet one interpretation I have chosen rather to insist on because it hath not yet been considered by others and because it seems to pretend to more antient grounds then the rest formerly have done I mean that which proceeds by interpreting the Phrases out of the writings of the Talmudists and from them concludes I shall Sect. 2 give it you in the learned writers own words that the power of binding and loosing is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 facultas decernendi explicandi interpretandi declarandi de ligato soluto quod planè millies in Talmudicis ex vetustissimae Ecclesiae illius usu denotat quid vetitum ex lege sacrâ quid permissum quemadmodum Graecis scimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod ligare est etiam interdicere sonare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod est solvere etiam permittere seu obligationem sive auferre sive nondum inductam monstrare aut asserere adeóque ad docendi seu interpretandi seu Theologiae Praeceptivae munus solum ibi attinuit c. making it no more then the faculty of explicating or interpreting what is lawful what not c. in a word no more then the power of deciding cases of conscience seu sic de jure publicè respondendi illúdque dicendi c. The truth of which I shall with all due respect for a while take boldnesse to examine First by yeelding or for the present not denying that there was or might be an office or power among the Jews intrusted to some select Elders of the people of teaching and giving publique responses by way of deciding cases of Conscience though not by way of Judicature what was to be accounted lawful what not both by the Law of God and the Tradition of the Antients which yet being supposed and granted I must secondly interpose that it is not thereby proved that this is called in the Talmud or by any of those writers the power of binding and loosing or that the power of binding and loosing is by them so described but which is quite another thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a power of teaching or instructing c. what is lawful what forbidden Nor will it be a proof of any force to conclude that which we have no reason to believe without a proof or some kinde of affinity in the phrases viz. that this power of binding is that power of teaching and no more only because there was such a power of teaching among the Jews For if we will judge à pari experience proves the contrary in this Church of ours where though there be a power of binding and a munus docendi an office of teaching c. yet no man is bound from thence to acknowledge these two to be all one but we have long believed them to be two faculties or offices the one given the Apostles in the donation of the Keys the other in the mission to preach and though it were granted that we were mistaken in affirming them to be two such distinct faculties yet would not that hinder the truth of this assertion that in our books they are so distinguished the question being now of the fact not of the right and it being clear that in our practice our Preaching is one thing and our Excommunicating is another and secondly because 't is clear there were two distinct powers among the Jews one of declaring in foro as well as the other extra forum one judicial as well as the other doctrinal and sure it would be but a poore supersedeas or prohibition to keep the Sanhedrin among them from judging and punishing any offender brought before them by telling them that there was among the Jews a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a licence or faculty of declaring what was lawful without any power of punishing For they would be soon able to say that 't was by some other power and not by that of declaring that they undertook thus to judge and punish and let me add that although the power among the Jews were acknowledged only to be a civil power yet might Christ in his Church set up an Ecclesiastical power proportionable to that and imitate that in the sacred which they used onely in civil judicatures as anon we shall have occasion to demonstrate And thirdly the phrase of the Gospel from whence we pretend is not the facultas faculty or power of binding but the donation of Keyes and with that Christs Promise that whatsoever they shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and therefore I conceive this will not be a convincing way of inferring this conclusion We must therefore in the next place proceed to examine the Sect. 3 reasons or arguments produced to perswade us that the power of binding and loosing is no more then the power of declaring c. what is prohibited what is permitted the office of the Casuist only And these reasons I can finde to be but two 1. That ligatum solutum planè millies in Talmudicis ex vetustissimo Sect. 4 Ecclesiae illius usu denotat quid vetitum quid permissum 2. That in some places of Greek Authors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to bind and loose are used also For the first of these I shall first say that if it were true that Sect. 5 the Idiom of the Talmudists were ex vetustissimo Ecclesiae illius usu out of the most antient use of that Church the Law of Moses and the Scriptures of the Old Testament being the Records of the most antient Church some footsteps of it might be expected there but I shall suppose there are no such to be found not onely because I have there sought them in vain but because I presume the Author would have conceived any Testimony from thence to be more Authentick then the Talmud and so would certainly have produced them if there had been any Secondly for the Talmudists acception of the phrases first I might say that we are no
is exclusio à societate communione fidelium an exclusion from the society of beleevers A second mistake besides that which is consequent to the former a new definition of it by only Sacramentorum interdictio Interdiction of or exclusion from the Sacraments which should more unlimitedly have been Sacrorum from holy things that Sacramentorum is put in the plurall number which must needs be either not like a Divine or not like a Protestant for if it note Baptisme as well as the Lords Supper then 't is not like a Divine for no Divine would say that Excommunication is an Interdiction of Baptisme for till they are once baptized they are out of the Church are not capable of Excommunication and when they are once baptized though they were not excommunicate they should be baptized no more But if by that plurall he mean any other Sacraments besides these two that is not like a Protestant for such acknowledge no more Having mention'd these two mistakes I shall not add a third that in this interdiction the persons to whom this cognizance belongs are not rightly named because though it be true that they are not yet the men against whom he wrote were of that opinion and I am a little perswaded that if it had been an Episcopall audience that should have had this cognizance he had never written this book nor been put upon those arts to evacuate the Church-censures One thing only I may have leasure to commend in that Thesis that he defines Excommunication by publica solennis interdictio a publick solemne Interdiction praeeunte cognitione I suppose he means legitimâ with a legall cognizance preceding it and shall add that they quite deform the Primitive Institution who deny the Sacrament to whole Congregations at once without any charge laid to all or any part of them save only that they are a mixt Congregation wherein there are some evil men which yet is not legally proved neither and they also who deny it to particular men sufficiently catechised without any publick cognizance of their crime or processe of admonition first and second or that design that exclusion to any other end then ut peccantes resipiscant the reducing sinners to repentance and therefore no small petty trifle is a sufficient matter for this but contumacious continuing in some scandalous sin after admonitions from which when they return again by a sincere aâ—proved repentance they are to be absolved Sect. 46 Th. 9. is the proposing of the question in the termes wherein it is to be handled wherein I shal only interpose for perspicuity sake that the phrase an removendus sit may have a little ambiguity in it for perhaps it may though lesse properly be set to signifie this Whether it be lawfull to remove such an one for if it be but so then he that pretends to write against excommunication and to pretend it unlawfull will be sufficiently concluded and then I answer that for any but for the Governor of the Church to whom the cognizance of his ill life belongs and who hath had a legal cognizance of it and proceeded legally by the severall degrees of Ecclesiastical processe against him it is not lawfull but for the Bishop or Praefect or lawfull Governour succeeding to that power which Christ gave his Apostles with the Keyes of the Kingdome of heaven it is lawfull and by the commission of Ego dabo and afterwards ego mitto they are sufficiently authorized to do this and upon this issue if this be it we will joyn most willingly But then secondly the An sit removendus may perhaps and to that the words more incline denote a necessity of doing it and then the question will be whether he must be removed To which I then answer that there lies not any such necessity on this as arises from any pollution that will accrue to others that communicate with him if he be not prohibited any further then the example of his sin and the impunity may extend and this the Fathers maintained against the Novaâ—ians Nor thirdly any necessity lying on the Minister that administers for he having admonished according to our Church Orders in our Liturgy every such sinner to go home and repent and not to approach to that table is in charity to believe being not able to search the heart that he that after that so comes is a true penitent Only if in prudence he think it unlikely and therefore out of care to a poor mans soul and for the preventing of the sin of unworthy receiving he think fit to admonish him more privately or particularly to that end or to do any thing else which in prudence may contribute to it this is but his duty to an erring brother and when that is done any farther emergent guilt lies upon the receiver and he is not in case of the mans unworthy receiving partaker of that sin All the necessity then that is in this matter lies first upon the Sect. 47 receiver himself that he be wary that he come not till he be prepared and that belongs not to our present consideraton and upon the Bishops or Governours of the Church that when charity to souls requires it of them they fail not thus to proceed that when mercy and friendly admonitions prevail not they then take in severity the Apostles rod in the season for a rod in stead of his Spirit of mercy and meeknesse and to that end be watchfull over the flock that they fall not into such dangers and infections by their neglect or mercifulnesse Sect. 48 As for the qualifying of the persons of whom this question is ask'd I shall not differ with the Proposer but resolve as anon we shall shew that he that is thus may and ought in the sense that I mention be thus dealt with and we shall joyn issue with him for the precept and examples of Scripture commanding and teaching us to do so Sect. 49 And having now as I conceive so easie a task before me and such an army of seconds on my side the consent and practise of the whole Christian world for 1500 years against one single combetant walking in a melancholy posture by himself till after so many years the concurrence of some accidentall conceived conveniences have at last helpt him to some company And him again not very much used to the weapon I mean Divinity which he hath undertaken to trust to and beside having an advantage against him which he did not foresee we of this Church being not the men against whom his reasons were framed and so not so like to be prest by them the arguments designed against Beza and his Presbyterians being utterly unconcludent against us I must confesse my self to be under a temptation to make use of the present advantage and to prosecute this triall to the uttermost but I must in justice consider what a chasme and rent it would make in this discourse what an unweildy bulk it would
sole power of disposing it and indow'd them with power from on high particularly for the exercise of it As for the second argument 't is certainly a mistake if it be thought to conclude that the Apostle did but pronounce the judgement of the Church in that matter of the incestuous or that the judgement of the civil state was preparative to his For sure the Apostle had before the using of those words of Do not you judge them that are within in the end of that Chapt. past his sentence definitive on that incestuous in the beginning of it ver 3. For I have already not ego autem but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as absent in body but present in spirit judg'd him that hath thus done this thing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have judg'd this evil doer Judg'd I say and what is the sentence Why In the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ you and my spirit being met together the Apostle and his Presbytery or he in the face of the Church with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ to deliver such an one to Satan c. And this at a time when 't is clear the Church had not pass'd sentence on him for v. 2. They were puft up as he complains and through an opinion of their own deeper wisdome a leaven v. 6. i. e. a doctrine either of the heathen philosophers or of the Gnosticks among them took it for an indifferent thing and did not mourn for him that had done it The ceremony used by the Church when any was to be excommunicate and notes that they should have so joyn'd together in mourning in complaining to the Apostle and prayer to Christ that this censure might passe on such an one but that they did not do it nay it seems proceeded not so far as to fraternal correption which was infallibly their duty toward him As for the words cited Nonne vos judicatis they come in no another incidental occasion not directly to this first matter to make the distinction betwixt the dealing with the Christian and heathen fornicators the Apostle restraining his prescription of not conversing with fornicators v. 9. to the Christian fornicator whom saith he being within the Church 't is reasonable to conclude within the Churches censures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Do you not judge them that are within not you emphatically or in opposition to the Apostle but you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as a general title of Christians who use not to judge any but Christians all other being left to Gods judgement the Church having nothing to do with them It is clear enough that the context looketh wholly that wâ—y and consequently there will be little reason to extend these words any farther then this that the Church judgeth Christian not heathens and the Church in the notion only wherein 't is opposed to God not in which 't is opposed to St Paul but in which in any reason it includes the Apostle or Governor of it For sure he may judge them that are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 within the Church for so he doth v. 3. and no part of the context of that Ch. seems to say any thing to the contrary though them that are without he cannot which is the only thing the Apostle had in hand to say at that time Having briefly answered the reasons I shall by way of compounding the Controversie with this Gentleman most willingly acknowledge that somewhat the Church in his notion or more clearly the supreme Magistrate being supposed Christian may have to do in this businesse of Censures praecedaneous to the judgement of the Apostle or before the Pastor or Ecclesiastical Governor proceed to them As 1. in the choosing or nominating him to that office 2. In the setting of rules or laws by which he ought to proceed in hearing or judging No question this may and in Christian Common-wealths very reasonably ought to belong to the Civil Magistrate and truly this discouse doth not pretend to or desire any unlimited or arbitrary power in the Bishop but only that the rules being prudently set by those to whom the power of making laws belongs in every Common-wealth he should have the cognizance in such causes as regularly belong to his audience and according to that rule not otherwise give sentence on the offender and that only thus far that he shall be turn'd out of Christian society or received into it again which beside that this is and hath alwayes been taken for an institution of Christs which 't is reasonable we should obey and not dispute is also in it self simply considered far from any degree of unreasonable no man in ordinary reason being more fit to judge who is fit to enjoy the privileges of the Church who likely to be reformed by being deprived of them then he that hath studied that great skill of winning souls and is intrusted by Christ with the charge of them Again 3. it will be granted that the Church in the ordinary notion as it signifies the whole diffusive Christian Society in any place may so far be interessed in this matter as that these only shall be liable to these Censures who have offended others by their notorious sins and are by the Proxyes as it were of those others I mean by their chosen officers or by the publick fame the voyce again and interpreter of their sense delated or complain'd of to the Governours of the Church as those that have wrong'd the Church and defamed that Christian Profession to which they had given up their names and this is a kind of judging in large or loose speaking as to be infamous offenders signifies to be conceiv'd and judg'd such by the community among whom they live for otherwise they are not infamous but yet in strict propriety is only a preparative to the sentence of the Judge and an accusing or impleading rather and is not I suppose the thing for which this Author doth pretend or if it were would not to us be matter of contention with him The truth is the power of binding c. which we contend for as the office more then privilege of Bishops in the careful exercise of which they minister most charitably to the good of the souls intrusted to them is another manner of thing then what this Gentleman seems to have conceived it both here and especially when of it he concludes Vnusquisque si mentis compos sit obediat in omnibus simpliciter ei cujus arbitrio credit se salvandum aut damnandum esse God knows they pretend to no such arbitrium in the saving or damning of any man It is only an engine of Christs invention to make a battery and an impression on the obdurate sinner to win him to himself to blesse not to triumph over him which very thing he hath in one place excellently exprest The end of this discipline saith he is by depriving men for a time of the favour and spiritual privileges
latter ages have been more favourable to the guiltiest sons of the Church then the most mercifull of the first ages had learned to be even those very Councils that condemn'd the severity of Novatus and the Cathari are able to testifie I will give you but an hint or two out of the Canons of the Council of Nice before quoted against Novatus Can. 11. the Council speaking of them that fell in the time of Licinius his Tyranny 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any violence or plundring or danger of either the censure is upon true and unfained repentance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three years shall they continue among the Audients i. e. saith Zonaras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stand without the Church in the Porch so long and onely partake in hearing the holy Scriptures Then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. saith Zonaras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. for the space of seven years more they have leave to be admitted within the Church but to be behind a pillar near the doore and go out with the Catechumeni Ten years already you see and yet farther 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Two years shall they joyn in prayer with the people but without the oblation i. e. saith Zonaras they shall not yet be vouchsafed the participation of the holy things till these two years be over This approbation of their repentance cost them it seems no lesse then 12. years But then the same Council speaking of others that having Sect. 21 made some profession of Christian valour like dogs returned to their vomit again Can 12. resolves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Afâ—er the three years in the porch among the audients they must be ten years at the pillar the seven years it seems are improved into ten and t is probable the two years of communicating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 still behinde and so the probation fifteen years long Oneâ—y the Bishop had power left him of the remitting of this Sect. 22 severity if he saw them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by humility and tears and patience and almsdeeâ—s demonstrate their conversion to be sincere not fained And so Alcimus to Victorius the Bishop Authoritatis vestrae est errantium compunctione perspectâ severitatis ordinem temporare 'T is the part of your authority when you perceive the compunction of those that have sinned to temper the order of severity i. e. to receive him earlier into the Church Epist 16. That which might be added in this point out of the ancient Sect. 23 Canons would be endlesse to relate he that would see a particular description of the several degrees of these penitents may have it very clearly set down in Zozomens History l. 7. c. 17. and I shall not so much as enquire what grounds our latter ages have had to remit so much of the ancient discipline till at length it be crumbled and moultred away into a nothing or a meer formality what is amisse in it I beseech God may be reform'd I shall only add to this Chapter that there have beeen in the Sect. 24 practice of the Church I say not grounded in those Texts of the Gospel two sorts of binding One temporary or penitential when the person confesses himself penitent and desires the Absolution of the Church at least when there is hope of repentance in which case the custome hath been to impose for some set time the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such works as are agreeable to that repentance and proportioned to the former sin not to absolve til what is imposed be performed This the Nicene Fathers expresse by this style 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for whose penance the time is defined and the season set Zonaras by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the space determined for the penance of those that had faln And Alcimus by propositis observationibus interim ab Ecclesiâ sequestrari to be appointed some observances and in the mean time to be sequestred from the Church notae excommunicationis indictio donec publicâ poenitentiae professione desuescant setting a mark answerable to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Saint Paul of excommunication upon him till by publique profession of repentance he disuse his former course a kinde of Niddui or temporary remotion The second absolute sine praefinito tempore without any certain definition of time When men are refractory and give no hope of amendment and that is a kind of Alcimus's irrevocable anathema the binding over for ever perennis excommunicatio Turon Concil 2. c. 20. Paris Conc. 3. can 5. or usque ad reformationem for ever if they reform not The former of these is sometimes but not alwayes an exclusion or abscission from the Church but somtimes on the other side a command to frequent the prayers of the Church or the Sacrament every Lords day for such a space hath been the penance or discipline nor consequently is it a binding that man so that his sin is not yet pardoned on earth but t is designed for other uses for satisfaction to the Churches edification c. But they of the second sort are truly under that band and cut off from the communion of the Church and by no means admitted to the services of it CAP. VI. THere is but one enquiry now behind i. e. what is the real Sect. 1 effect of binding and loosing or what conjunction it hath with binding and loosing in heaven Which though it be the weightiest consideration of all the four yet shall I have occasion to say least to it and indeed only this That a censure of the Church is a venerable thing not only casting a Christian out of the Church wherein he is appointed to seek salvation and of which as long as he is thought unworthy he is uncapable of heaven but withall a superaddition to the band in heaven by which that sin is made indissoluble before God tilâ— it be absolved on earth or that absolution duly sought from the Church Christ having affirmed of him that in this case his sins shall not be pardoned there as on the other side that being by repentance return'd to that capacity heaven shall return again to be his portion and that pardon by the promise of Christ become due to him The plain reason of it is The denunciation is irreversible and Sect. 2 indispensably universal Except you repent you shall all perish and the promise as infallible and immutable He that confesseth and forsaketh shall have mercy Now the binding if it be as it should be clave non errante supposeth the man impenitent and refractory and so to continue till he use means to return to the peace of the Church again and then without controversie whosoever is so bound on earth cast out of the Church for an impenitent and refractorie and continuing so is bound in heaven cast out from all title to that by God also To which purpose is that known ancient passage in Tertullians Apol. speaking of these censures Judicatur cum