being Traiterous and paying Homage to an Usurper doth annul the Right and Title of the Lawful Prince The Church of England Bishops are guilty of no Schism from the Church of Rome their order is undoubted and their Succession Reform Justify'd p. 29. uninterrupted and so their Title and Authority is as firm and unquestionable as any upon earth and they must be Schismaticks before God and the Catholick Church that do not submit to them and joyn in their Communion in all Lawful things If we look over the ancient Canons of the Church we shall find two things very plain in them 1 That the Notion of a Church was the same with that of a Mischief Separ p. 29. Can. Nic. Can. 6. 15. 16. Constan c. 6. Chalced. 17 20 26. Antioch c. 2. Codex Eccl. Affric c. 53. c. 55. Conc. Gang. c. 6. Conc. Constan c. 6. Conc. Carthag c. 10 11. St. Cypri Ep. 40. 42. Theod. Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 22. 1. 2. c. 24. c. 17. Vincent c. 16. Diocess or such a Number of Christians as were under the Inspection of a Bishop Or 2ly That those Presbyters who rejected the Authority of their Bishop or affected Separate Meetings where no fault could be found with the Doctrine of a Church were condemn'd of Schism So the followers of Eustathius Sebastenus who withdrew from the publick Congregations on pretence of greater Sanctity and Purity in Paphlagonia were condemn'd by the Council at Gangrae So were those who Separated from their Bishops tho' otherwise never so Orthodox by the Council at Constantinople and the Council at Carthage wherein before S. Cyprian had so justly Complain'd of the Schism of Felicissimus and his Brethren who on pretence of some disorders in the Church of Carthage had withdrawn to the Mountains and there laid the foundation of the Novatian Schism But when false Doctrine was imposed on Churches as by the Arian Bishops at Antioch then the people were excused in their Separation So at Rome when Felix was made Bishop and at Sirmium when Photinus publish'd his Heresie but I do not remember one instance in Antiquity wherein Separation from Orthodox Bishops and setting up Meetings without their Authority and against their consent was acquitted from the Sin of Schism The substance of what is contain'd in the Answer to this Query amounts to this viz. 1. That K. Edward's Bishops were True and Canonical Bishops And the Popish Bishops in Q. Mary's days Intruders 2. That those that adhered to K. Edward's Bishops in Queen Mary's days altho' depriv'd were the True Church and Consequently those that forsook their Communion were the Schismaticks Q. Whether a Particular Church suppose the Roman being Schismatical yet keeping possession of all the Churches may be said to Separate A. Yes For Private Meetings in such a case commence Churches Hales and the Churches become Conventicles according to the Definition given of a Conventicle above viz. That a Conventicle is nothing else but a Congregation of Schismaticks If Rome has by the many Additions c. err'd she may be said Ans to Reason and Authority p. 66. to have left and gone from or be separated from that First Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church without making an open Schism or Schismatical Separation So far then as any Church now in being shall depart from the Doctrine of the Ancient Catholick Church and profess great and many errors and broach new Doctrines unknown to the Primitive Churches and lay mighty stresses upon them so as to make them necessary for Communion here and to Salvation hereafter such a Church may be said to Depart or Separate it self from that Ancient One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church It is true That they who first desert and forsake the Communion Bramhal Just Vind. p. 10. of their Christian Brethren are Schismaticks but there is a Moral Defection as well as a Local In a word he that forsakes the Assemblies of Catholick Christians is a Schismatick not he that goes not to a Church for where-ever Christians tho' in a Den or Cave of the Earth worship God in the Unity of the Church there is the Church of God Q. Are the Dissenters Schismaticks A. Yes doubtless For they not only set up separate Meetings in opposition to Bishops but renounce all Episcopal Authority and Usurp the Power of Ordination which did always belong to the Order of Bishops As for the Government of the Church we are assur'd partly Letter concerning the necessity of Regulat the Press p. 18. from Scripture and partly from the Earliest Antiquity That the Order of Bishops and Metropolitans rests upon Apostolical Institution Both Timothy and Titus in the judgment of the most Learned Presbyterians were Superiour to the rest of the Clergy within their Districts at least in Jurisdiction if not Order The Bishop presided over a City and the adjacent Villages Id. p. 19 and Territories where a Temporal Magistrate was likewise plac'd As the Metropolis of every Province had its Proconsul in the State so it had its Archbishop or Metropolitan in the Church And when the Government of Patriarchs prevail'd it was form'd after the same Model either in Imitation of the Vicars or Lieutenants that presided over a Diocess composed of several Provinces or at least in Imitation of the Praetorian Prefects that had several Dioceses under their Jurisdiction All those that set up Altar against Altar and hold Separate Saywel of Vnity p. 318. Congregations contrary to the Law of this Church are to be held as Schismaticks and were condemn'd for such by the ancient General and Particular Councils and all the Catholick Fathers and Martyrs and thought not sit to be receiv'd into Christian Communion or accounted lively members of the Catholick Church As 't is a high crime to Affront a Judge duly Commissionated Id. 395. so it is no less than Rebellion for an able Lawyer without a Commission to assume to himself the Office and Authority of a Judge And why it should be in Temporal Judges and not in Spiritual appointed by God as the Bishops are in the opinion of this Lord Chief Justice Hales I cannot see I am sure 't was ever thought so by all sober Christians till our unhappy Rebellion nurs'd People up in Schism and Disobedience Were it Episcopacy but an Human Ordinance of yesterday Thorndike prim Gov. of Chs. p. 197. establish'd by due course of right let me be bold to say that if Aerius withdrew his Submission to it he must come within Epiphanius's list of Hereticks not understanding an Heretick in St. Augustin's sense to be none but he that will not believe some point of Doctrine necessary as the means of Salvation to be believ'd but according to the latitude of the Word taking all to be Hereticks that make Sects and Assemble themselves a part besides the Church of God Lawfully Settled As for Episcopal Ordination that was accounted as necessary in the primitive Church to
the making a Bishop Priest or Deacon as Baptism to make a Christian And unless the Dissenters can produce a better that is a more ancient Charter than the Bishops have which I am sure they can never do the sole power of Ordination must be still in them and those that pretend to it must be Vsurpers and Consequently Schismaticks Dr. Sherlock says but by what Authority I know not That the Vind. of some Prot. Princ. p. 108. Church of England does not deny but that in case of Necessity the Ordinations of Presbyters may be Valid But he says with respect to the Dissenters that the case of Schism is a different thing and I believe says he Our Author himself will not say that Schismatical Presbyters may take this power or that their Ordinations are valid if they do And this is the Case between us and the Dissenters They ordain in a Schism and tho' necessity may make an irregular Act valid yet Schism will not The Novatians were Episcopal and so were the Donatists says Mr. Vindic. of the Prim. Ch. p. 330. Baxter and yet how have they been judged of for their Schism I need not tell They are very much to blame that say the Presbyterians or Independents troubled the Primitive Church It was impossible for them to be troublesome before they were at all It seems all the Sects and Schisms of that time thought they had no right to pretend to be a Church unless they had Bishops But these Anti-Episcopal Separatists were reserv'd it seems for the last times as the severest Curse and Judgment that could befall the Church Those Episcopal Schismaticks indeed divided the Church but These quite Dissolve it It has been the Tradition and Doctrine of the Christian Saywel of Vnity p. 324. Church in all Ages even from the Apostles time to this very day that no Ordinations are valid or ought to be made but by Bishops to whom the greatest Authority of governing the Church is committed I admire this Episcopal Government and Institution because Faith and Practice of a Church of Eng. man Cap. 1. under it I am in no doubt of the Validity of the Ordinations of our Ministers Or of the Validity of the Sacraments by them Administred For we have our Orders by a continu'd Succession from the Ancients and so from the Apostles which is the only ordinary way that I know of for a Man to be Commissionated to act in Christ's Name I suppose no man will deny that all Ordinations in Schism Thorndike's Rts. of the Ch. p. 147. Review of Mr. M. Hs. Notion of Schism p. 50. are Meer Nullities tho' made by persons rightly Ordain'd because against the Unity of the Church We believe with St. Jerom that the power of Ordaining belongs only to the Bishop and your Dissenters Ordinations made by Presbyters are all Void and Null and till you can prove the Contrary we take you for no more but a parcel of Lay-intruders into those holy Functions to which you have no right those of you only excepted who have been Episcopally Ordain'd In the first place I must put him in mind That as no Man Id. p. 51. Mat. 28. 18. Jo. 2. 21. is to meddle with the Sacred Offices Except he be called of God no Man to preach except he be sent So no Man is to call or send as from God but he that is authoriz'd by him for that purpose Neither can I see any Reason why a Man may not as well be a Minister of Jesus Christ without any Mission at all as by the Mission of those persons who never were sent themselves I believe there never was any case of Absolute Necessity for Lay-Ordinations Id. p. 53. but if possibly such should happen as the Gentleman mentions of a Company of Lay-men being cast upon an Island or remaining in some Country when their Pastors are all kill'd or turn'd Hereticks I am apt to believe that Bishops and Ministers duly ordain'd might be had from other Countries and if not methinks it would be reasonable and fit that we should first see what God would do in such Cases before we presume to do any thing of our selves for which we have no Scripture warrant Basil is so resolute upon his prerogative that he will not endure Vindic. of the Prim. Ch. p. 550. they Chorepiscopi should ordain as much as the Inferiour Clergy as Deacons Sub-deacons Readers and several others which the Church of that time reckon'd among the Clergy without his consent and if they do let them know says he That whosoever is admitted without our Consent shall be reputed but a Lay-man What would he have said if they had pretended to ordain Presbyters or Bishops in opposition to them The Bishops of the Church of England desire no more than St. Basil assum'd That none should be reputed Priests or Deacons that were ordain'd in their Dioceses without their Consent and that by simple Presbyters who were never Chorepiscopi or had any Character to distinguish them from other Presbyters Therefore the Case ought not to be reckon'd so hard as it is Commonly represented by the more moderate Nonconformists who pretend this point of Re-ordination the only Bar that keeps them out of the Church since there was never any other Church not any in Ancient times would have received them upon any other terms And they must have remain'd Nonconformists under Basil Athanasius and all the Ancient Bishops whose names are and always have been had in Veneration with all Christians not one of these would have ever been perswaded to own a Pastor that his Presbyters had ordain'd in opposition to him nay hardly could they have been prevail'd with to admit such as any other Bishop should ordain within their Diocess So extream punctilious they were in this matter and there is hardly any one thing that caus'd so frequent and dangerous contentions between them as the point of Ordination Q. May Orders given in a Schism be made afterwards valid A. Tho as was said above all Ordinations in Schism are Thorndike's Right of the Ch. p. 148. meer Nullities and tho made by persons rightly Ordain'd yet we find such Ordinations made valid by the meer decree of the Church without Ordaining a new as the Meletians in Egypt by the Council of Nice in Epiphanius and the Church Histories and as Pope Melchiades much commended for it by St. Austin offer'd to receive all the Donatists in their own ranks besides divers others that might be produc'd The only reason why some things tho they be ill done yet Id. ibid. are to stand good is because the power that doth them extends to them but is ill us'd So when the power is Usurp'd as in all Schism or when that is done which the Law makes void it can be to no effect Therefore when the Act of Schism is made valid it is manifest that the Order of Bishop and Presbyter is conferr'd in point
which shall be necessary to preserve the Unity of the Church it must needs be necessary for those that are trusted with the Power of the Church not only to Disobey the Commands of the Sovereign but to use that Power which their Quality in the Society of the Church gives them to provide for the Subsistance thereof without the Assistance of Secular Powers A thing manifestly suppos'd by all the Bishops of the Ancient Church in all those actions wherein they refus'd to obey their Emperours seduc'd by Hereticks and to suffer their Churches to be regulated by them to the prejudice of Christianity Particularly in that memorable refusal of Athanasius of Alexandria and Alexander of Constantinople to admit the Heretick Arius to Communion at the instant command of Constantine the Great Which most Christian action whosoever justifies not besides the appearance of favour to such an Heresy he will lay the Church open to the same ruin whensoever the Sovereign power is seduc'd by the like And such a difference falling out so that to particular persons it cannot be clear who is in the Right it will be requisit for Christians in a doubtful Case at their utmost perils to adhere to the Guides of the Church against their Lawful Sovereign tho to â—o other Effect than to suffer for the exercise of Christianity and the maintenance of the Society of the Church in Unity If it be here objected that this seems to strike at the Kings Ob. Supremacy c. It may be answer'd that Min. Tho Kings and Princes are not properly Officers and Governors An. A plain and fam Disc conc the Cath. Ch. p. 6. a distinct Church as a Church it being not a Civil or Secular but of Christ's Spiritual Society yet to them is to be given the external management of this Society a power to settle its outward Policy and to be the Moderators and Governors of it Upon this account the Great Constantine stil'd himself a Civil Bishop as being chiefly concern'd in the guidance and direction of the outward affairs of the Church The Bishops and Pastors of the Church have their Ordination and decree their Commission from an higher Power even Christ but they Act and Exercise it under the Protection of the Supream Magistrate Our Writers divide Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction into Internal the Reflect on Hist pt of Ch. Gov. pt 5. p. 21. inward Government which is in the Court of Conscience or External that which is practis'd in Exteriour Courts That proceeds by Spiritual Censures This by force and Corporal punishments That is appropriated to the Clergy and incommunicable to the Secular power This is Originally inherent in the Civil Supream and from him deriv'd to Ecclesiastical Governors Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction when said to be annex'd to the Crown ought to be understood in the latter sense We of this Church depend upon the King and Parliament for Ans to several Capt. Queries p. 26. Id. p. 32. the Legal Establishment of our Religion but not for the Truth of it the former is changeable because men are so but the latter is not so because God changeth not To destroy the Legal Establishment of a Religion is one thing and to destroy the Religion is another for all the Sacredness that humane Law can give to a Religion is a Legal Sacredness and no more or if you please a Legal Establishment The Church of England thinks no Acts which are Purely Spiritual Reflect on the Hist pt of Ch. Gov. p. 18. want the Kings Concurrence her Sacraments and her Censures she esteems valid Independently on all humane Authority Her Charter she derives immediately from Christ c. The King is our Supreme Governor under God but we know Answ to several Capt. Qu. p. 37. Mason of no Supreme Governor that is to be obey'd absolutely without any limitation whatsoever but God himself The Kings supremacy in Ecclesiastical matters doth not imply the power of the Keys which the King has not By the Supremacy we do not attribute to the King the power Andrews of the Keys or Ecclesiastical Censures We never gave our Kings the power of the Keys or any part Bramhal of either the Key of Order or the Key of Jurisdiction purely Spiritual Tho the Church is not endow'd with any Coactive Power by Thorndike Rt. of the Ch. p. 4. Divine Right yet by Divine Right and by Patent from God it is endow'd with a power of holding Assemblies for the Common service of God before any Grant of the Powers of the World and against any Interdict of them if so it fall out The State is indow'd with no Ecclesiastical Right tho it hath Id. p. 41. great Right in Ecclesiastical Matters As no State stands by the Gospel so no Right settled by the Id. p. 42. Gospel can belong to any State or Person as a Member of any State The Church subsisted 300 years before any State profess'd Id. p. 43. Christianity whatsoever Rights it used during that time manifestly it ought therefore still to use and enjoy The whole Right of Secular Powers in Ecclesiastical Matters is Id. 168. Vid. Letter about Regulating the Press p. 12 20 22 24 29. Reflections on Hist pt of Ch. Gov. p. 24. not Destructive but Cumulative that is That it is not able to defeat or Abolish any part of that Power which by the Constitution of the Church is settl'd upon Ecclesiastical Persons but stands oblig'd to the Maintenance and Protection of it The Power by which the King Visits and Reforms is not Spiritual but Political That a Power is not given him to Declare Errors but to Repress them That the Determination of Heresie is by Act of Parliament limited to the Authority of Scriptures four first General Councils and Assent of the Clergy iâ— Convocation That the King hath not all the Power given him which by any manner of Spiritual Authority may be Lawfully exercised for he has not the Power of the Keys but a Power given him to reform all Heresies by Civil Authority which the Church can do by her Spiritual That it is impossible it should be prov'd that this Power of visiting and Reforming is a necessary Invasion of the Office of Spiritual Pastors because when the Prince doth it by them Commanding them to do the work and exacting of them a discharge of their Duty he doth this without Usurping their Office and yet doth it by a Power distinct from and Independent on their's And Lastly that the See Letter about Regulating the Press p. 12. Prince is oblig'd to take care that all Acts of Reforming be Executed by their Proper Ministers because else he transgresses the Power prescrib'd in this Statute 25. Hen. 8. So to reform Errors as may be most to the pleasure of Almighty God The Clergy did indeed in Hen. 8 time bind themselves not Id. p. 18. to Promulge and Execute any Canons without the Kings leave but
Subordination or Equality Q. Wherein consists the Vnity of Subordination A. The Unity of those Members that are Subordinate one to Id. the other consists in the constant due subjection and Obedience of all Inferiors to their Lawful Superiors and in due exercise of Authority in the Superiors towards all committed to their Charge Heb. 13. 17. 1 Pet. 5. 2. Q. Wherein consists the Vnity of Equality or fellow Members A. Unity of fellow Brethren consists in the preformance of all Id. ibid. Mutual duties of Justice and Charity towards one another Q. What is meant by Communion A. Communion superadds nothing to Unity but the Relation Id. ibid. of external Association whether by Assembling for the worship of God in the same place where the matter is capable of it or whether by Letters Communicatory by which we maintain external Communion with those who are far distant from us Or Communion with a Church is joyning with a Church as a Stil Vnreason of Sep. p. 107. member of that Church Q. What destroys the Unity of the Church A. Schism Q. What is Schism A. Schism is a Division in or from a Church Doct. of Sch. p. 40. Or Schism is a Voluntary dividing or a Separating or receding Ham. of Schism of any Member from the Unity of the Body i. e. the Church of Christ Or Schism is a Causeless Separation from a true Church Doct. of Sch. p. 58. Q. What is meant by Schism from the Church of England Doct. of Schism p. 45. A. Schism from the Church of England is a sinful dividing from or dissolving our Union and Communion with her in her Governours Members Worship or Assemblies This is the least we can mean by Schism from the Church of England and is called Separation Negative which is made Positive and more formally such when those that have separated set up their Altars against Hers and erect other Congregations in Opposition to Hers. Q. What is meant by Negative Separation or Schism A. Negative Schism is when men do peaceably and quietly withdraw their Communion from the Church in part or in whole to enjoy their Consciences in a private way Q. What is meant by Positive Separation A. Positive Separation is when persons thus withdrawn do Id. p. 60. gather into a Distinct and Opposite Body setting up a Church against a Church to worship God in a separated way themselves which St. Austin calls setting up Altar against Altar Q. What is a Schismatick A. A Schismatick is he that divides himself from the Church Ham. of Schism of God he that goes out or withdraws or recedes of his own accord Q. What is an Excommunicate person A. An Excommunicate person is one that is cut off or separated Ham. of Schism p. 508. and cast out of the Church by the Governours of the Church From the Definitions I think these Conclusions or Propositions will naturally follow viz. 1. That the Christian Church is a Society 2. That the Church is but one Body ' tho it consists of many particular Churches and Diocesses as Members of it 3. That the Church is govern'd by one Supreme Head 4. That the Supreme Head of the Church is Christ 5. That under this Supreme Head there have been always subordinate Governors 6. That those Subordinate Governors were first the Apostles constituted immediately by Christ himself over the whole Church and after them the Bishops as Successors to them in particular Churches or Diocesses 7. That all Bishops in their several Districts or Diocesses have full power as to Spirituals over the whole Flock 8. That all the Members of the Church within such Districts owe subjection to their Lawful Bishops as to those Commission'd by Christ 9. That as Christ did ordain the Apostles and the Apostles Bishops for the Government of the Church so the Bishops have ever since ordain'd Priests and Deacons to take care of and instruct the Church in subordination to them 10. That all Christians are oblig'd to become Members of some particular Church where the Sacraments are administred and Communion enjoy'd under the Authority of some Canonical Bishop or in Communion with some Priest owning and submitting to some Bishop of the Catholick Church 11. That all those who break the Vnity of the Church by actual Separation from the Communion of their Lawful Bishop and fellow Christians are Schismaticks 12. That all those that are united to and in Communion with Canonical Bishops and adhere to the Doctrin and worship establisht in the Church of England as contain'd in the 39 Articles Homilies Liturgy Canons and Laws are the true Church of England and their Assemblies are true Churches 13. That all those who separate themselves as Schismaticks and all those that are Separated as Excommunicate persons by the Governors of the Church are out of the Communion of the Church Q. Is all Separation Schismatical Still unreas of separ p. 209. A. Tho' Schism be always a Sin yet there may be such Circumstances which may make a Separation not to be a Schism That you may know when Separation is Schismatical and when Vindic. of the Ch. of Eng. from Schism p. 16. not you must understand that there are three great Bonds of Communion viz. Faith Worship and Government and whosoever shall separate from any Church whereof he is a member in any of these he or they so doing cannot be acquitted from the guilt of Schism unless the Corruption in some one or more of these be so great as to render the Communion sinful to him who knows it Q. What is meant by the first Bond Faith A. If a Church hold the Catholick Faith tho' her Members Id. may differ in some controverted Points pure and undefil'd and impose no new Articles of Faith as terms of her Communion 't is Schism to break Communion with that Church but if she does impose new Articles of Faith a Separation from such a Church is not only justifiable but a Duty Q. What is meant by the second Bond Worship A. If a Church have a pure Worship as to its substance tho' Id. cloath'd with some accidental Modes Rites and Ceremonies to Separate from such a Church is downright Schism and the reason is because all Ceremonies and Modes of Worship being in their own nature Indifferent cannot by being impos'd become sinful and if not sinful can never justify a Separation But if on the other side the Worship be polluted by Idolatry or profane and immoral mixtures or any other way be made such as that the Members of the Church cannot Communicate without sin Separation from such a Church is not only warrantable but absolutely necessary and the Schism must lie at the door of the Imposers Q. What is meant by the third Bond Government A. If the Church of which we are Members be governed by Lawful and Canonical Bishops and they act according to the Rules of the Catholick Church then to
to a former 2ly For erecting new places for the dividing party to meet in publickly He Mr. Hales says truly that all Meetings upon unnecessary Id. p. 180. occasions of Separation are to be stil'd Conventicles so that in this sense a Conventicle is nothing else but a Congregation of Schismaticks and he had before determin'd them to be Schismaticks that do choose a Bishop in Opposition to the former and that do erect a New Church and Oratory for the dividing party to meet in publickly The Laws and Customs of all Churches do condemn it for Saywel of Vn 193. Schismatical for a man to come into another Ministers charge c. The summ of what is cited on this Query is this that there ought to be but one Bishop in a Diocess or City that they that set up a Bishop in opposition to the Rightful Bishop and make separate Meetings setting up Altar against Altar are Schismaticks and therefore those that would avoid the guilt of Schism must constantly Communicate with the First and Rightful Bishop but never with the Intruder or his Adherents Q. Are the People that Communicate with Schismatical Bishops and Presbyters guilty of Schism A. A Schismatick is an impious Son which having contemn'd Ham. of Schism out of Ignatius the Bishops and forsaken the Priests of God dares constitute another Altar The Schismaticks are they that having left their Bishop set Doctr. of Schism p. 45. up for themselves abroad another false Bishop and all their Adherents are involv'd in the same guilt who joyn with the Schismaticks against their Bishops An essential part of our Communion with our Bishop Def. of Dr. St. p. 471. is to live in Communion only of those Presbyters who live in Communion of their Bishop that is who officiate by his Authority and are subject to his Directions and Orders This was a standing rule in Ignatius his time as is evident from his Epistles that Presbyters must do nothing in the Church but by the Bishop's consent or order and those who do are Schismaticks and those people who adhere to them in it partake in the guilt of their Schism c. 'T is notorious in all the Histories and Canons of the Church Saywel of Vnity p. 393. that never any more than One Bishop at a time was allowed in any of those great Cities Jerusalem Alexandria c. And if a Schismatick did sometimes creep in as the Novatians and Donatists did in troublesome times they were always condemn'd by the Church which did constantly maintain There ought to be but One Bishop in a City or Diocess and all Priests and Lay Persons ought to be govern'd by him To assemble and celebrate the Eucharist besides the Bishop's Thornd Prim. Gov. Ch. p. 117. appointment was then in St. Ignatius his time the due mark of a Schismatick If the Church unites upon Schismatical Principles whatever Sherl Ans to Anonym the Bishop does in pursuance of such Principles is the Act of the Church and if the Bishops be Schismaticks the Church is so too The Church is by St. Cyprian defin'd to be a People united to St. Cyprian their own Bishop and a Flock adhering to their own Pastor whence you may know the Bishop always to be in the Church and the Church to go along with the Bishop if therefore the Bishop be a Schismatick so must all the Flock that Communicate with him If any Presbyter contemning his own Bishop shall make a Long 's Ch. Sep. p. 85. Separate Congregation and erect another Altar his own Bishop not being condemn'd of any Irreligion or Injustice let him be depos'd as one that is Ambitious and a Tyrannical person and in like manner all that Adhere to him and let the Lay People be Excommunicated after the Bishops third Admonition He who submits to or complies with the manager of a Schism Falkner's Christian Loyalty p. 272. in his prosecution thereof doth involve himself in the same crime Q. If a Bishop or other Clergy man be guilty of any Offence by whom is he to be Try'd and Punish'd A. Touching the Depriving or Degrading of Bishops Presbyters Field of the Ch. p. 512. and Deacons the ancient Canon requires the Concurrence and consent of 3 Bishops for the Censuring and Depriving of a Deacon of 6 for the Depriving of a Presbyter and of 12 for the Censuring Judging and Deposing of a Bishop If a Bishop be Convicted of Heresy or Schism or some great Vind. of Def. p. 128. Wickedness and Injustice his Colleagues that is Bishops may Depose him and forbid his People to Communicate with him and Ordain another in his stead For one particular Primate or Metropolitan to censure any Hills Cath. Balance p. 86. Bishop by himself or to be uncapable of censure in his own Provincial Synods hath no Precedent in the primest and purest Antiquity The Canon Apostolical 33 directing That every Bishop of every Nation give deference to him that is Chief among them and to esteem him as their Head and to do nothing extraordinary without his Cognisance but every one only to do those things which are expedient to his own Diocess and to the Country under him And so neither must the Capital Bishop do any thing without the consent of them all for thus there will be an Vnanimity and God will be glorify'd thro' the Lord in the Holy Spirit Bishops had over their Presbyters and People Supreme Power Faith and Pract. Ch. Eng. m. cap. 1. under Christ as to Church affairs and Accountable only to Christ and to a Council of their fellow Bishops often Meeting and Consulting together for the good of the whole A Bishop of the Church of England by all the Law in the Christian Bishop of Lond. Tryal p. 6. Church in all ages and by the particular Law of this Land in case of offence is to be Try'd by his Metropolitan and Suffragans The Bishop of London's Council urged in behalf of the Bishop Id. for not suspending Dr. S. without a Legal process That absolute Suspension supposes a proof of the Crime c. Id. and That where there is an absolute Suspension there ought to be Citation Form of Proceeding Judgment and Decree and that to Act otherwise is contrary to the Laws of God of Nature of all Nations in all Ages and was never known in the World My Lord I Always have and shall count it my duty to obey the K. in whatever Id. Bp. of London's Letter to my Lord Sanderland he Commands me c. But in this I humbly conceive I am oblig'd to proceed according to Law and therefore 't is impossible for me to comply because tho' His Majesty Commands me only to Execute His Pleasure yet in the capacity I am to do it I must Act as a Judge and your Lordship knows no Judge Condemns any Man before he have knowledge of his Cause and have cited
the Party From him that will never be Vnfaithful to the K. c. To suspend is a Judicial Act which cannot be done without Bp. Londons Council hearing the Cause When the King commands a Judge he commands him to Act as a Judge The Ecclesiastical Commissioners would not declare the Bishop of London suspended till he had been fully heard The Prince of Orange in his Declaration represents the proceedings P. O. Declaration against the Bishop of London as one of the great Grievances he came to redress The Commissioners says he suspended the Bishop of London only because he refus'd to obey an Order that was sent to him to suspend a worthy Divine without so much as Citing him before him to make his own Defence or observing the Common forms of Process The substance of what is said in answer to this Query is 1. That a Clergyman cannot be regularly depriv'd but by Bishops 2. That a Clergyman cannot be suspended but by a Legal Process 3. That a Bishop cannot be try'd or depriv'd but by his Collegues that is Bishops 4. That those that are depriv'd without a Hearing or by Incompetent Judges cannot be so properly said to be Depriv'd as violently Thrust from their Places and therefore it will follow 5. That a Bishop being not Regularly Depriv'd is to all intents and purposes the Canonical Bishop of his See and a Priest the True and Lawful Pastor of his Flock and the people consequently owe obedience to Them and cannot forsake their Communion without incurring the guilt of Schism Q. Were not the Protestants in Q. Mary's days guilty of Schism in making Separate Meetings under the then Depriv'd Bishops A. I willingly grant that in times of manifest Corruptions and Long 's An. to Hales of Schism p. 147. Reform justify'd p. 6. Persecutions such as the Roman and Marian were Private Meetings are Lawful and Necessary Duties because if men do forbid what God has Commanded it is better to obey God than Man 'T is plain that the Schism is on the side of the Papists who upon pretence of Papal Authority did withdraw themselves from the Communion of their own Bishops after an Universal agreement and concurrence in the Communion of the Church of England for ten or eleven years together and make a formal division in the Church which was before united in Peace and Truth The Popish Bishops that were set aside in Q. Elizabeth's Reign Id. p. 14. did possess the places of Lawful Bishops yet living or United themselves to such as did possess them therefore they were Schismatical and no Lawful Bishops of the Church of England For as soon as these Lawful Bishops were turn'd out others were put into their places and not only so but contrary to all rule and orderly Government in the Church For the most certain fundamental Constitution of the Church in all Ages and the constant Order of all Societies which is always tacitly suppos'd tho' not formally observ'd is That while Particular Churches keep to the Faith and Vnity of the Catholick Church as ours had done all things ought to be managed by the Arch-Bishop and Bishops of the Province and so by the Chief Governors and main Body of the Society or else things cannot regularly be done 'T is confess'd that 14 or 15 Bishops were turn'd out or went Id. p. 17. away in Q. Elizabeth's days but according to our Author 's own Argument they were Schismaticks and no Lawful Bishops because they came into the places of Lawful Bishops while they were alive or else were Ordain'd by and Communicated with such Schismaticks I add they Vsurp'd their places by turning out the Metropolitans and Major part of the Bishops of each Province and so could have no Lawful Authority or Jurisdiction The true Right and Authority of the Church was in those Id. p. 18. Lawful Bishops that were made in K. Edward's days and that was the True Church of England which did adhere to their Constitutions They Q. Mary's Bps. were no Lawful Bishops because they Id. p. 20. either did Schismatically invade the places of the Lawful Bishops or else were willingly Consecrated and did joyn in Communion with those Schismatical Bishops When the Queen Eliz. therefore did set them aside she did but dispossess men who had no just Right and remove those by her Civil Authority who had no Power but what they had by Force and the Secular Constitution All else but Thirlby were ordain'd by or Communicated with Id. p. 25. them during their Schism and Usurpation and therefore neither the Ordainers nor Ordained had any Right or Jurisdiction in the Church of England That which is Essential and the Authority and Power to execute Id. p. 27. the sacred office of a Bishop or Priest in their respective Charges is deriv'd from the Bishops of the Province and after great violence and disorder from as many or the major part of them which survive Every Bishop and Priest orderly constituted in his place do's Id. ibid. act by the Power and appointment of the Catholick Church and they contemn the Catholick Church that desert and disturb them in the performance of their Office Hence we may understand our Saviours meaning when he says If he neglects to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen man and a Publican which in the first place do's require us to hear our own particular Parish Priest and Bishop whilst they are constituted and live in the Unity of the Church but principally it does oblige us to hearken to the Catholick Church So that if our own Pastors turn Hereticks or set themselves up by undue means and not according to the Order of the Church they are not to be hearkned to but we must according to our Saviour's Command Hear the Church and not those Pastors that will not themselves Hear and Obey the Church The Popes Usurp'd Authority and his Prohibition of joyning Saywel of Vnity p. 307. with our English Bishops made the first Schism and is the hindrance to keep them from now joyning in Communion with us For the first 10 years of Q. Elizabeth the Papists did Communicate Faith and Pract. Ch. of Eng. man c. 1. with us till the Bull of Pope Pius IV. An. 1569 70. tho' our Reformation was then fully setled So that they are bound to answer it why they joyn not still in Communion with us We can say the Pope never had any setled and quiet Possession Faith and Pract Ch. Eng. man Chap. 1. and exercise of Power here at least for any considerable time together as is at large evident from what Mr. Prynn and others have Collected and all our Statutes of Provisors and Premunire's do show how little hold here the Pope was by our Government allow'd or own'd to have And tho' many did Appeal to Rome it was against Law and therefore that gives the Pope no more Right here than many Peoples
of Right by the meer consent of the Church which by the precedent Ordination was Conferr'd only in point of Fact being a meer Nullity in point of Right It hath been often practis'd by the Church to receive Id. of Forb p. 69. not only Schismaticks but even Hereticks also that is Such as had receiv'd orders of those that parted from the Church upon an Error of Faith in their respective Orders But always upon Condition of Renouncing the Cause of their Division whereupon they were to receive the Blessing of the Church by prayer with Imposition of hands The reason was because neither is Baptism in Schism effectual to Salvation nor Ordination in Schism effectual to Grace by Ministry of any Office in Schism But being Renounc'd there remains no cause why their Ministry should not be effectual to their People Their Baptism and their Ministry to their own Salvation supposing it sincerely renounc'd Therefore the reason why they who are Ordain'd by Presbyters cannot be receiv'd in their respective Orders is peremptory Because the Schism Consisting in ordaining against Authority cannot be renounc'd unless the Ordination be voided For so long as the Ministry may be Rev. of Mr. M. Hs. New Notion of Schism p. 47. Usurp'd upon such Ordination so long is the Schism on foot I can see no reason why the line of Ordination may not pass thro a Schismatical Church for altho by Schism people are out of the Church and while they Continue so cannot enjoy the benefit either of Ordination or Sacraments yet to say that both are absolutely destroy'd and Nullifi'd so that a Schismatick loses the Chracters and can neither be a Christian nor a Bishop i e not the subject of Apostolical power till he be again Baptiz'd and Ordain'd is an Assertion beyond all that I could ever yet meet with The Meletians were Schismaticks and yet those ordain'd by Meletius were receiv'd into places where others dyed c. I think that Orders and Regularity of Episcopal Succession Ans to Sev. capt Queries p. 19. will suffice to make them Lawful Bishops who for corrupting the Doctrin of the Church shall not be allow'd to be Good ones Q. Whether Toleration will excuse from Schism A. An Act of Parliament would deliver the Dissenters from Vind. Def. of Dr. St. p. 457. Temporal Punishments and might deliver them from the Sin of Disobedience to Civil Governours But the guilt of Schism will remain still unless he Mr. H. thinks the Donatists were not Schismaticks when Julian the Apostate with an uniting design granted a General Toleration So that this project may secure the Estates but cannot secure the Souls of Dissenters Schism will damn men tho they should get it establisht by Act of Parliament There is nothing more or less in a Toleration than a Suspensiou Norris Charge of Sch. p. 26. of the Penal part of the Law This is all that it Can do and perhaps more than it ought For I believe there ought to be no such thing as a Toleration and that 't is more than either the Church or State can Rightfully grant We do not derive the Grounds of Obligation to Ecclesiastick Id. p. 80. Communion from the Authority of the Civil Law tho' that must be allow'd to add a considerable weight to the Obligation but also and chiefly from that of the Divine Law which I conceive to be as positive and express in requiring Unity and Conformity of Worship as in requiring any Religious Worship at all No License given no Toleration granted no Exemption from Blackhalls Serm. on Jo. 6. 66. p. 14. Temporal Penalties in case of Separation allow'd by men is sufficient to excuse from the guilt of Schism those that Separate from the True Christian Church whereof they were Members or to render their Schism no sin Human Lawgivers may give leave to their Subjects to be of any Id. p. 15. Religion or to be of no Religion but if they do they can't make it Lawful in it self either to be Atheists or to profess a false Religion or to forsake the Communion of the True Church for to believe a God and to worship publickly and to worship him in the Assemblies of the Faithful are Duties that are laid upon us by a higher than any humane Authority and therefore no humane Authority can discharge us from them The Law can take away and discharge us from no Obligation but that which its self laid on us so that all the meaning of the largest and most unlimited Toleration that the Law can grant is no more than this viz a Declaration that Men shall not be liable to any Temporal Mulcts or Penalties or be any ways punish'd by the Civil Power upon the account of any Differences in Religion or for being of no Religion at all but if antecedently to the establishment of any Church by the Civil Power and if antecedently to the enacting any Penal Laws to oblige men to hold its Communion it was Schism to separate without cause from that Christian Church whereof we were Members and such Schismatical Separation was a Sin before God then so it will be still notwithstanding any License or Toleration that can be granted by the Secular Power Toleration is not only a means to encourage those that are already Saywel of Vnity p. 137. engag'd in Schism to continue so but by experience is found the most effectual way to multiply new Swarms of Schismaticks c. When a particular Church enjoys a Civil Establishment it receives Letter about Regulating the Press p. 22. as it were a new Authority in as much as it becomes a Civil Right or Property So that unless its Constitution is Materially vicious and sinful it s a high piece of Injustice to destroy or infringe any of its Establish'd Rights or Immunities But yet since the Magistrate is only the Guardian not the Founder of a National Church its Original Authority resting on certain positive Laws and Sanctions enjoyn'd by a Power Superior to that of the Magistrate even that of God Himself wherever a Church in any Province or Nation professeth the True Religion by an Orthodox Faith and a pure worship under Lawful Church Governours and Pastors that is the True National Church in opposition to all Dissenting Sects and Parties tho' it wants the Authority of a Civil Establishment It is indisputably evident that the Christian Church is one Society Id. p. 16. or Body of Men united to CHRIST and each other in certain External as well as Internal and Spiritual Bonds of Union It s certain one great design of Christianity is Vnity or to range Id. p. 23. all the Parts and Members of the Church of CHRIST into an Holy Building and therefore if the Magistrate is Constituted a Guardian of the True Religion all his offices of Succour and Protection must be directed to this end I mean the Bonds of Catholick Vnity throughout his whole Dominions
the Execution of which they abridge themselves is such as has Influence on the Civil Rights of the Subject and therefore necessarily requir'd the Concurrence of the Supreme Civil Power It is confest that the extream of Raising the Ecclesiastical Id. p. 31. Power too high in the times of Popery had now produc'd another of Depressing it too much But this was the Infelicity of the Clergy not their Crime It is certain that before the Empire was Christian the Church Burscough Episc p. 12. Saywel of Vnity p. 138. was govern'd by its proper officers as a Society distinct from the State and Independent on it Who ever did account it Schism in the Gospel sense and as the word is now used amongst Christians to disobey the unjust Commands of the Civil Magistrate Were Christ and his Apostles Schismaticks Were all the Primitive Christians Schismaticks till Constantine's time Nay were there not Schismaticks all that while the Church was a Society that had Laws and Government contrary to the Laws of the Secular Princes For does not St. Paul tell the Corinthians that there were Schisms among them and do we not find the Novatians accounted Schismaticks and many others long before Constantine's time Nay moreover were not the Arians Schismaticks under the Reign of Constantius and Valens tho they had the Edicts of the Emperour to favour them which were then of as good Authority as our Acts of Parliament are now with us Or if we should ever have a Popish Parliament that should command us to go to Mass and abolish our present Constitutions should we be Schismaticks for not obeying them I hope not there 's no such matter Christ has Pastors and Teachers in his Church and has promis'd to be with them to the end of the World and commanded all good Christians to obey them The Church did subsist before the Magistrates favour'd it and may continue again tho Kings and Parliaments should leave of to protect it We only are the Poor Tame Dispirited Drowsy Body that Municip Eccles p. 119. are in love with our Fetters and this is the only Scandalous part of our Passive Obedience to be not only Silent but Content with an Oc n of our P rs which are not Forfeited nor forfeitable to any Worldly Power whatsoever The Sovereign Power of the Church consisting in the Sword Thornd Rt. of the Ch. p. 40. of Excommunication upon which the Society thereof is founded it is Necessarily manifest that this power is not lost to the Church nor Forfeit to the State that Professeth Christianity and undertakes the Protection of the Church For the Church and Civil Societies must needs remain Distinct Bodies when the Church is ingrafted into the State and the same Christian Members of both in regard of the Relations Rights and Obligations which is the same Persons remain Distinct according to the Distinct Societies and Qualities of several Persons in the same Therefore as no Christian as a Christian can challenge any Temporal Right by his Christianity which the State wherein he is call'd to be a Christian gives him not So on the other side no Man by his Rank in any State is invested with any Power proceeding from the foundation of the Church as it is the Church So far as Excommunication concerns barely the Society of the Id. p. 237. Vid. Falkner's Chr. Loyal p. 319. Church any Person Capable of Sovereign Power is liable to it upon the same terms as other Christians are because coming into the Communion of the Church upon the same Condition as other Christians the failing of this Condition must needs render the Effect void But if we consider either the Temporal force by which it Vid. Cath. Bal. p. 110 c. comes to Effect or the Temporal Penalties which attend on it to These which cannot proceed but by the will of the Sovereign it is not possible that he should be liable Princes as well as any other Persons must Submit themselves to Falkner's Chr. Loyal p. 321. the Power of the Keys in the Undertaking the Rules of Repentance so far as they are needful for procuring the favour of God and obtaining the benefit of the Keys by Absolution The Pastoral Office of the Guides of the Church doth extend Id. 225. Vid. Cath. Bal. p. 118. it self even to Kings with respect to the conduct of their Souls but yet this doth not exempt them from being under the Regal Sovereignty The Habitual Jurisdiction of Bishops flows we confess from Animadv on 8 Thes p. 41. their Ordination but the Actual Exercise thereof in publick Courts after a Coercive manner is from the gracious Concessions of Sovereign Princes As for Causes purely Ecclesiastical the Bishop being Supreme in Vind. of some Prot. prin p. 88. and Vind. Def. p. 183. his own Diocess there can be no Original Right of appeal from him for there is no appeal from the Supreme He has a free power in the Government of his own Diocess and must render an account of his Actions to Christ who is the supreme Lord of the Church as St. Cyprian tells us While the Clergy Faithfully discharge their office the Prince Animadv on 8 Thes p. 52. ought to Protect them and if for this they suffer no doubt but they are Martyrs When the Civil Power will not own the Church The Ecclesiastical Falkner Chr. Loyal p. 45. Governors by their own Authority may establish necessary Rules for Order as in the Primitive times Bishop Taylor tells us from Fulgentius that when Frazamund King of Bisac in Africa had made an Edict under pain of Death that no more Bishops should be Consecrated designing by that device to have the Catholick Faith rooted out of his Dominions the Bishops of the Province no way affrighted at the Edict met together and Consecrated as many as were wanting considering that those who were worthy of a Mitre need not fear to do their Duty when by so doing they are sure to receive a Crown of Martyrdom If any such Heretical or Infidel Prince should design to dissolve Hill's Cath Ballance p. 127. our Succession we have a Canonical right to preserve our Orders and can but suffer Penalties which may Oppress but not Null or Vacate the Validity of our Ordination No Temporal Christian Powers have any Authority in themselves Id. p. 121. to Vsurp Extinguish Pervert Alter or Retard but only to Inspect and Assist the regular operations of the Powers Hierarchical within its own bounds So that whatsoever Offices thereof are Fundamental to the Catholick Faith Charity Union and Government of the Universal and each particular Church and were receiv'd and practised for such in all Ages before the Empire became Christian are not to be violated by any Acts of State For if such violations were accounted Persecutions in Heathen Emperours and Princes what can they be accounted in Christian ones Of these Fundamental Rights therefore I shall subjoyn some