Municipium Ecclesiasticum OR THE Rights Liberties and Authorities Of The Christian Church Asserted against all Oppressive Doctrines and Constitutions Occasioned by Dr. Wabe's Book concerning the Authority of Christian Princes over Ecclesiastical Synods c. Hilar. in Psal 52. Et plerumque nos tanquam pro debiti ossicii Religione pié adulari Regibus existimamus quia in corpus nostrum sit aliquid Potestatis quibus nihil ultra in nos licet quam febri quam incendio quam naufragio quam ruinae His enim casibus corporum pro summa potestate desaeviunt propter brevem dolorem Libertatem Ecclesiae spei nostrae fiduciam confessionem Dei addicimus Inutilis est humanae gratiae irreligiosa sectatio Cypr. Ep. 40. Sect. 4. Adulterum est impium est sacrilegum est quodcunque humano furore instituitur ut dispositio divina violetur Ep. 63. Sect. 11. Neque hominis consuetudinem sequi oporter sed Dei veritatem Printed and are to be Sold by the Booksellers of London and Westminster 1697. TO THE Reverend Dr. Wake Chaplain in Ordinary To His Majesty THE Irreligious World is not so dull as to need information what ways are most effectual to the suppression of Christianity A popular contempt of the Mysteries and a radical aversion to the Authority of the Church does the business smoothly and without hazard By Ambition and Avarice by Fanaticism and Sedition the latter is wholly extinct and on the sense hereof Infidelity and Heresie have made their insolent advances against the former In condolence whereat the Letter to a Convocation-Man seems to have been offered to the World for the use and freedom of the Convocations against the present Impieties in Religion and rigorous Opinions in matter of Law 'T was natural hereupon to expect the insurrection of the Insidels and Hereticks against the Proposals and Power of a Convocation to prevent their Censure as well as an assertion of the Laws and Judgments herein from the hands of Lawyers But who would have dreamed that any Clergy-Man of Dignity and Value in the Church should lift up his heel against her The wounds of Adversaries how sharp soever are never mortal to the Church The judgement of Lawyers is ambulatory according to the prevalency of Times and Powers they being only Interpreters of what the Kingdom admits or constitutes for Right and Law And therefore when the Princes and the Nation submitted to the Pope the Courts acknowledged and acted upon his Right or Claim of Supremacy and when the Nation could shake it oâ— and the King grasp it then past the Judgments and Rules of Court accordingly Nor can they be blamed herein for so their Office determines them But when the great Laminaries of the Church shall sign the Theta upon her Rights Liberties and Authorities Divine and Humane and this voluntarily and without any Bribe offered or Menace denounced the Concession is taken for sincere and for that cause just so that the Church of England suffers more by your Book herein than by all other Lay or Law Oppositions whatsoever And t is not improbable but that it may animate the Secular Powers not only to lay greater restrictions on the Church but even to abolish all the remainder of her legal Rights and Powers and put us out of all our Interest in the great Charter of the Land For the Lay Powers how strongly soever they desire to settle themselves over all interests yet generally have such a modesty towards what is Divine or Sacred as to attempt nothing noâ—oriously violent without the concession of the Church or her most Eminent Doctors So K. H. VIII of Famous Memory notwithstanding all his Claims at common Law and his interest in his Parliament thro' Power and the Rewards by Abbey and Church-Lands could not have made himself so absolute in Ecclesiasticals had he not procured before the submission of the Clergy nor could he have compassed that but thro' the terror of a Premunire under which they had fallen and upon which he was resolved to follow his blow and so to bend or break them And yet this Act of a Popish Vnreformed and well nigh Outlawed Convocation extorted for fear of ruine and thro' ignorance and non-suspicion of the Acts consequent upon it prejudges more against our Liberties than all Secular constitutions could pessibly have done without it And must we now consecrate all those procedures the results of which we seel in the total ruine of Ecclesiastical Discipline and Christian Piety by our voluntary Pleas and Acclamations and to gratisie the Civil Powers to an Arbitrary utmost violate the most important Truths of Principles and Histories treat the Synods of the Church with spite and contumely and recommend the greatest slavery of her to the appetite of Civil Powers How much more Honourable had it been under a Prince whose peculiar Province has ever been at the perpetual hazard of his Life to relieve the Oppressed to have presented him with such Draughts and Schemes of the Divine Rights Liberties Authorities and Discipline of the Church as might inflame him to a resolution for her rescue and to add this last Divine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at the top of all his Glories as an Eucharistical Duty and Oblation so God for all his wonderful Providences in his Preservation and Atchievements For which cause you have made it absolutely necessary that your Book should be discussed and its dangerous Errors laid open to the end that the Publick may be under no temptation from such a work inscribed to the Metropolitan to proceed to further Resolves against the Powers Hierarchical but may take occasion to review those Laws thro' which the Church is fallen under her present Impotency except you and wiser Heads can shew which way a Spiritual Discipline may be otherwise restored to a freedom of doing her Duty toward God in the cleansing the Church and the renovation of Mens Hearts unto Piety and Devotion I have therefore designed an Examination thereof in three Parts The first concerning the Divine Powers of the Churches of Christ The second concerning Matters of Fact in Ecclesiastical History The third concerning the Exigences for a present Convocation In the mean time I wish you no more hurt than a perpetual increase of Merit Honour and Promotion here and that which is the only valuable Prospect a Blessed Inheritance in the Life to come Municipium Ecclesiasticum OR THE Rights Liberties Authorities OF THE Christian Church Asserted c. CHAP. I. Of the Divine Right of Synods SECT I. THE Letter to a Convocation-man does not only suppose that the Words of the Statute of Submission are interpreted to too great a Restriction of the Convocation but goes much deeper for a much larger Liberty to the Church herein upon the Supposition of a Divine Right to all Churches and Synods for Affairs Christian The Doctor on the contrary denies such Divine Authority of Synods as being but meer prudential Clubs under
Heathen Princes and servile Conventions under Christian ones The Letter Distinguishing all Power into Spiritual and Temporal founds both of them in God which no Christian will deny of the Ecclesiastical Authority That this can be Rightly Exercised among Christians only not as enclosed within any Civil State or Community but as Members of a Spiritual Society of which Christ Jesus is the Head who has also given out Laws and appointed a standing Succession of Officers under himself for the Government of this Society which continued near 300 Years before any Civil Governours embraced Christianity So that the Spiritual Authority is not in its own Nature simply dependent on the Temporal That when supernatural means of Governing the Church were thought by its Founder to be no more necessary to its continuance it was left to the best ordinary means of Conduct and Preservation viz. assembling debating and by Majority of Voices deciding concerning the Rules and Principles of Government That the Law of this Society is made to their hands not to be altered added or diminished but the applying thereof to particular Cases explaining Doubts upon it deducing Consequences from it in things not explicitly determined already by that Law and enforcing Submission and Obedience to their Determinations are the proper Objects of their Power That this Society can better claim an inherent and unalterable Right to the exercise of this Power than any Sect among us it not being Lost by Magna Charta by its Giving the Church a Legal Freedom Thus the Letter p. 17 18 19 20. The Doctor The Case stated on each side Is by no means satisfied that the Church has any Command or Authority from God to assemble Synods he is not aware that either in the Old or New Testament there is so much as one single direction given for its so doing And excepting the singular Instance of Acts XV. he knows of no Example that can with any shew of Reason be offered of such a Meeting And whether that were such a Synod as of which the Question is may justly be doubted The Foundation of Synods in the Church in his Opinion is the same as that of Councils in the State The Necessities of the Churches when they began to be enlarged first brought in the One as those of the Commonwealth did the other And therefore when men are incorporated into Societies as well for the service of God Then it seems the Church is not sociated till incorporated with the civil State to spiritual as well as temporal Ends. and salvation of their souls as for their Civil Peace and Security these Assemblies are to be as much subjost to the Laws of the Society and to be regulated by them as any other Publick Assemblies are Nor has the Church any inherent Divine Right to set it at liberty from being concluded by such Rules as the Governing part of every Society shall prescribe to it as to this matter As for those Realms in which the Civil Power is of another Perswasion Natural Reason will prompt the Members of every Church to consult together the best they can how to manage the Affairs of it and to agree upon such Rules and Methods as shall seem most proper to preserve the Peace and Vnity of it and to give the least Offence that may be to the Government under which they live And what Rules are by the common consent of every such Church agreed to ought to be the Measure of assembling and acting of Synods in such a Countrey Thus the Doctor p. 365 366 c. § 2. The Doctor 's Tergiversation This is what the Doctor replies about the Affairs of Ecclesiastical Synods to the Letter Wherein any Man may plainly see that he shuffles and turns his Back in the vety Fundamental Article in Controversie not daring professedly to refute the Hypothesis of the Letter by any good Proof from Reason or Authority nor yet ingenuously confessing those well-laid Truths which he was not able to oppose but to steal away the Reader from observing this Impotency he is fobb'd off with a poor precarious and not so much as evasive a Scheme of Imaginations for which he can hardly find any Church-Advocate nor any Credentials from any Divine or valuable Humane Writings § 3. Terms explained But before we come to winnow these Elements of Independent or rather Erastian Divinity for there is a mixture of these Contraries in which Erastiaenism much preponderates it is necessary that we six the principal Terms of Matters Fundamental in his Enquiry Authority what And first for Authority in Matters of Government it is known to signifie either a just or rightful or at least lawful Power to rule the Subjects according to Equity and Laws of Justice or else an uncontroulable Freedom and Impunity only of acting which is the priviledge of all Supreme Governors as being above all Legal and Judicial Coercion with their Subjects Right Now all Acts of Authority in the former and proper Sense appear in themselves Good and Right and no Powers or Persons whatsoever can have any opposite Good and Lawful Authority But the mere Exercises of an uncontroulable Domination Uncontroulable Domination tho called by the specious name of Authority cannot vacate any Just and Valid Rights Liberties and Authorities of any Subject Persons or Societies For it must be noted that an Inherent Right and Valid Title cannot be legally extinguished by any External Violations of Breedom or Obstructions of its Fruition or Practice which tho not accountable for at any Domestick Tribunal shall yet fall under the Sentence and Condemnation of God the present Civil Impunity giving no Right to any injurious measures nor Exemption from that divine Bar. Secondly We are to define an Ecclesiastical Council or Synod Synod what wherein I will take the Doctors Definition namely 't is literally a Meeting of Ecclesiastical Persons I mean Ministers upon an Ecclesiastical Affair (a) p. 60. And it is either subordinate The sorts of Synods consisting of one or more Bishops and inferiour Ministers or Co-ordinate consisting only of one equal Order either of Bishops alone or Inferiour Ministers alone For in want of a Bishop * Cyp. Ep. 3 Ep. 18. the Inferiour Clergy are the Council for the vacant Church according to the limits and powers of their Order A Convention of Clergy †Cyp. 26 Sect. 4 Ep. 31. Sect. 5. under their proper Bishop for Ecclesiastical Consultations or Acts we now should call a Diocesan Synod A Convention of a College of Bishops for a Province we may call a Provincial Synod which generally ever was attended with the Service of Inferiour Orders Councils called General are of the fame Nature in themselves tho of a larger extent and not of a Canonical originally but of Imperial Collection Other extraordinary and unusual Conventions of Select Bishops and Ministers not delegated so much by the Church upon her regular Constitutions
as convened by the Will only of Princes may be called Synods tho of themselves they have no Canonicol Authority for their Acts which must either stand or fall by the consequent Reception or Refusal of the Church notwithstanding all the Ratifications that the Temporal Powers give them a mere Ecclesiastical Commission from a Prince Ecclesiastical Commissioners of Princes no Canonical Synod being not of the same sort of Efficacy and Authority as a free Convention of the Powers Ecclesiastical Tho therefore such Commissioners may Grammatically be called a Synod yet Canonically a Synod is a Convention of the State or Powers Ecclesiastical on their own Right and Authority whosoever calls them to the Exercise thereof Thirdly we are to consider the. Attribute of Christian as given either to Princes or private Persons Now * Euseb reekons two lay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly a Christian is a Person baptized into and continuing in the Christian Faith but loosely and improperly Hereticks claim and use the Character which also may improperly be given to such as profess a Belief thereof before ever they are admitted to any Ordinance or Station of the Church for so Constantine the Great Dem. ev l. 2. c. 4. Sect. 38. So Origen con Cels l. 3. Ambr. de Myster initiand c. 4. Aug. in Joh. c. 2.3 Tract 11. and Constantius c. have been reputed Christian Emperors tho not Baptized nor so much as admitted Catechumens or Competents till a little before their Death Which Preliminary Explications will be found of great Use in this present Controversie § 4. Being thus harnessed we will consider the strength of the Doctor 's Hyyothesis first before we come to justisie that of the Letter The Doctor 's Principle worse than the Independents First then he makes a Synod under Heathen Powers to be but an independent huddle of Christians in common contriving their Affairs by no Authority but that of Humane Prudence But then I shall say that if this be a Synod such a Concourse of mere Lay-Christians may be a Synod and determine the common Process of their Conduct For he places this Care simply in the Natural Reason of the Members of every Church not the Governors nor Powers therein constituted for he does not suppose it a regular Society till incorporated with the Civil State Nor will it help to say that he defines a Synod a Meeting of Ecclesiastical Persons upon an Ecclesiastical Affair for all Members of the Church may with Grammatical Propriety be called and accounted Eccle jastica◠Persons in distinction from Aliens or absolutely tho Custom has given this Title as a distinctive of the Clergy from the Laity So that tho I in assuming the Doctors Definition of a Synod do by Ecclesiastical Persons mean the Clergy yet 't is not certain that the Doctor intends so except only of Synods called by Christian Princes but rather these Members of the Church under Heathen Powers must be the Ecclesiastical Persons convened in Synod under them without any Distinction of Orders or Authorities among them And if we will but add one Pastor among them here we have the true form of an Independent Church or Congregation which is its own constant Synod at all Meetings only the Independent Principle claims a Divine Right and relies not alone upon mere humane Inauthoritative Prudence and so is nearer to Truth and Reason than the Doctor 's But if the Doctor 's Principles be true that such Synods are Conventions of Church-Members upon Prudence only without any inherent Right or Authority wherein they are to give the Insidel Powers the least Offence that may be I doubt that Prudence will oblige them not to convene at all For certainly we are not in Prudence to give Insidel Powers or any Persons whatsoever any needless Offence at all But certainly Subjects having no Authority to convene yet convening against the Laws of Civil Powers do incur their great Offence which natural Reason cannot prompt Men to For if Christians should be called by such Infidel Powers to account for such prohibited Conventions by what Authority they do such things if they should set forth a good Divine Authority this would be a good though not perhaps a successul Plea but if they should say we have no Authority for it but only natural Reason and Prudence how can that direct a Man to disobey Laws which destroy no Man's Authority or Right Nor can it be shifted here that they have Right but not Authority for tho even a mere Right to synodize is enough to the jus divinum asserted by the Letter yet a Right to synodize is a Right to a publick Conduct by Rules and Methods to preserve the Peace and Unity of the Church and that is Authority tho never so democratical And if they have natural Reason for this Conduct that Nature that has given them just Reason has given them just Right to it for in such Matters Right and Reason is the same doing Men Right being properly called doing Men Reason If then they have natural Reason they have natural Right and if natural Right natural Authority to convene for their publick Conduct and that is a good Plea against the Laws of Infidel Powers But on the contrary if they have no Authority so to do they have no Right and if no Right no Reason and if no Reason how can this be done without Offence against the Civil Powers that forbid it and have just Right indeed to forbid all Assemblies which have no Authority Right or Reason But to conclude the Dr. has given these Synods a more fundamental Authority than he was aware of when he tells us that the necessities of the Church when it began to be enlarged Common-wealth did brought them into the Church as the necessities of the Councils of State Very well and a good Parallel but are not Councils of State endued with Authority founded on that popular Necessity The Doctor dares not say No to the State because the Leviathan is not safely to be angred but why then should not the Councils of the Church be authoritative for its Conduct and Preservation upon the same bottom of equal Necessity and that under the Heathen Powers For it appears that on this Necessity Synods were held in the Church in full Vigour and Spiritual Authority before there were any Christian States for heir Incorporation And therefore the necessity was the greater and by these the Doctor 's Rules the Authority should be so too tho yet he allows them no Authority because no Society till their Civil Incorporation which is tho the Doctor sees not the necessary Consequence to deny the Unity of the Catholic Church and its Constitution under Spiritual Governors of its own for the three first Centuries of Christianity § 5. But he further tells us Incorp that the Incorporation of the Church into the State being an Association for the saving of their Souls as well as Secularities subjects them
as much to the Laws and Regulations of Civil Societies as any other Public Assemblies This is a bold stroke indeed for it will put the Constitution of the Hierarchy and all its Functions into what Hands under what Conduct Times and Places c. the Civil Powers please They shall enable a Layman to ordain and Minister Sacraments to Preach Excommunicate Absolve Consecrate and degrade and do all things by an Arbitrary Legislation and Government thereupon and well then may this Incorporation into Society promote the Seâ—â—â—â— of God and Salvation of Men with all Secular Heavens upon Earth 〈◊〉 But I pray what is this Incorporation Is it making the Church one of the National Estates to concurr in the Acts of Legislature and all her Ratified Canons not only Canon but Law too and of Civil Consequences upon the Subject Or is it only the Protection of the Law from Injuries or Oppressions or the addition of several Priviledges Honours and Encouragements If the first of these only then was the Church never incorporated into the State under the Roman Empire for it was no part of the Legislature and consequently not thereupon subject to the Laws of the Empire in Matters of Ecclesiastical Conduct If the second Favour be an Incorporation then the incorporating Powers have a Right to govern the Religion of all other Societies which they tolerate all Schisms and Heresies whatsoever exempt by Law from Violences and Oppressions so that an Orthodox Christian Emperor tolerating Novatians Meletians Arians Macedonians Nestorians Eutychians and all other Clans of Heresies had full Right and good Authority to govern all their several respective Counsels and Discipline and to ratisie all their Synodical Acts Canons and Sentences O Sanctas Gentes What a mighty Supremacy would this be indeed wherein every Prince so indulgent would be another Solomon and reside not only over God's Church at Jerusalem but over those of Chomesh Milchom Ashtoreth c. a Supremacy I must needs confess more than divine And yet I doubt it would not be casily admitted either in Holland or the emulous England where tho the publick Indulgence is to save their Souls as well as their Temporals yet will not the Sectaries part with their Souls to these Indulgent Saviours nor endure the Thoughts of their Presidency and Conduct in their little Religious Politics but demand an Exemption as entire as the Chappels of foreign Factories or Embassadors Nor can in the third place an Accumulation of all Encouragements Priviledges and Honours prevail upon them hereunto most of them being against a National Church all of them against a National Religion i. e. confined to the Laws of a Civil State And commend me to Scotland who have acquired all Secular Priviledges and Franchises they desired and yet scorn that a King shall so much as be a Door keeper to their Holy of Holies notwithstanding all these their Incorporations and if the Dr. should preach up his Maximes but on the other side of the Tweed they world quickly bring him to the stool of Repentance for teaching their People or their Sovereign that Right of Supremacy over Holy Kirk which they are so far from owning in all Princes that 't is with them the most Funda nental Heresie to allow them any at all as appears by their perpetual Remonstrances upon all Occasions in their Synods § 6. Wheve tho Prince is of a different Religion But t is nor impossible that a Sovereign may contract a Religion contrary and destructive to that which is recieved and câ—â—blished among his People and which it is not in his Power by Force or Legislative Authority presently to Abolish As Izates King of the Adiabenes turning Jew and to omit others King James the Second Roman-Catholick How graceful in such a Case would it be to see a King of England of Jewish Popish Socinian Presbyterian Anabaptist Independent Quaker or Mâ—ggletonian Principles or Profession convening a Church of England Convocation presiding in it in Person or a Vicar-General of his own perswasions upon Matters of alteration in the Liturgy and Canons or any other Expedients for the good of the Church of England and always twitting the Synods with Caveats of that Holy Statute of Praemunire not to speak one wold nor syllable to any purpose whatsoever till such Prince pleases to allow you of his meer grace and motion as being only of Counsel to this Head of the Church of England who is however to be presumed wiser to know all times and matters expedient for the Church which yet by his Religion he is in Conscience bound to abhor and destroy than whole Convocations and to prescribe to these his Counsellors herein as being fitter to be of Counsel unto them whose Resolves after all he has Wisdom enough as well as Authority to ratifie alter rescind or aunull so that not what they but what he shall bind or loose on Earth shall be bound or loosed in Heaven and reason good upon such an Heavenly Authority and Design By this Ecclesiastical Supremacy which K. James himself abjured did he most advantageously for the Church of England erect his Ecclesiastical Commission for the saving of this Church from the Encroachments of the Papal Supremacy So that by our Incorporation alone we are all safe Soul and Body with Lawyers and Court-Flatterers let our Supream Head be of what Religion he pleases But Lawyers indeed cannot be blamed for any inconvenienties which may happen from 2 positive Law and they are obliged to interpret and judge according to the Letter but for Clergy-Min to attribute Divinity to Humane Laws whatsoever the results of them be this this But will not here the same Right of Natural Reason come in which the Dr. asserts to the Chuach where the Civil Power is of another Perswasion to Consult together the best they can and to that end Aslemble in Synods Ecclesiastical This Reason this Right and Rule by the wording of it in general terms of quother perswasion will reach the Case of Churches not only under Heathen Powers but Christian Powers of different Communion and Principles from the pure Church that is in subjection And it seem'd Calculated for the Case of the French Protestants or the Vandoise for Comprehension sake Now tho' I know this to be no Rule of Common or Statute-Law here in such Cases yet will the Dr. allow a Natural Right and Reason for such Liberty even in opposition to our Laws when our King shall be of another perswasion shall the Church lean upon her own Authority and Wisdom not His This his own determination says as much in Generals and yet I believe his Design will not permit him to say so for us no not in our Case under the late K. James And if he shall make any Reply upon this Book I do desire him to speak home like a Man to this Supposition and the Case and Demand raised on it § 7. Supposing then according to the Dr's Concession that under
Princes of another Perswasion the Church has Right and Reason to hold Synods and Consults who must of Office appoint such Conventions in the Church Are they all Equals and so must run higly-pigly on Occasions as People do to quench an House on fire Or are there any Superiours or Hierarchical Rulers in it in whom the Conduct is chiefly lodged for all Ecclesiastical Concernments If this latter be the Constitution of a Church simply in it self then will I ask whether the Superiours are to Assemble themselves alone or others with them by virtue of their Superiority or are the Inferiours to give Rule to their Superiours I am not willing to believe that for the sake of a feeble Hypothesis the Dr. will overturn the Order of things especially in the Church that subsists as all other Bodies Politick do by Order but we 'll presume that the right of Convention is lodged in such a State in the Supream Order But then by that Authority whence they derived that Order have they Power to Convene Synods over that Church which by the Constitution of an Hierarchy becomes of it self a Divine and Sahred Society and is therefore called the Kingdom of God and needs no Incorporation with Civil States for the Service of God or Salvation of Souls And this I think will reduce the Dr. to a necessity of granting the Church to be a Divine Society under Orders who have a Divine Authority to hold Synods to the preservation thereof where the Prince is of another Perswasion CHAP. II. Of the Rights Liberties and Authorities of Several as well Secular as Sacred Societies under the Supremacy of Civil Powers § 1. HAving thus Discussed the Virtue of the Dr's own positive Sense of the Churches State and Powers we will in the next place proceed to examine what he has seemed willing to deny as to the Hypothesis of Divine Right asserted in the Letter And in order hereunto we will be at the pains to descend into the bottoms of Ecclesiastical and Civil Powers to try whether these were intended by their Providential Author entirely to swallow up the former as the Dr. teaches us in all particulars not excepted in God's word by a special reserve § 2. All Society then is either Subordinate between Superiours and Subjects Societies distinguished or Co-ordinate betwen Persons or Communities free and independent of each other And each of these is either Natural only from the meer obligations of Nature or Positive by voluntary Contract or Constitution Now of all these the first and most Fundamental Society is the Natural Society between God and Man Natural Society with God maintained by the Offices of Natural Religion on our part Tul. de leg l. 1. Positive Society with God and the Acts of God's Paternal Providence on his Next hereunto and immediately hereupon succeeded a positive and Faederal Society between them Apud Cyp. Ep. 30. Sect. 2. Qui a Deo cui sociari quaerit discrepat privilegium societatis amittat by the Law and Communications of the Divine Presence given in Paradise which Communications and Presence tho' the Law of Paradise determined by Man's ejection out of Paradise still continued and were designed for continuance to Posterities Ripening into an Ecclesiastical form admitting the Mystical Worship of Sacrifices as well as the Duties of Natural Piety to maintain this double Consociation And herein was laid the first foundation of Ecclesiastical Society and Communion with God which more formally ripened into publick and Canonical form In the days of Enosh when the Generations of Men increasing under this double Union in the days of Enosh Men began to call on the Name of the Lord Gen. 4.26 in publick Assemblies For then those whom under this preccedent course of Divine Communion God had Educated by his own immediate institution Vnder Prophetick Patriarchs he after constituted Prophets and Preachers of Righteousness to the Families so Ecclesiastically consociated under God and of these Ministers he founded an Order and Succession Of which Noah the Eighth from Enosh in which Noah was the Eighth from Enosh Gen. 5. 2 Pet. 2.5 Where these Families and Generations so consociated under God and the Sacred Authority and Conduct of these Prophetick Patriarchs were a formal Church or Ecclesiastical Society and were called under a Sacred Character Sons of God the Sons of God Gen 6 2. Now this Society Ecclesiastical founded not only in Nature Continuance of this state to the Flood but God's positive Constitution also contioned thro' all that vast tract of time between the Creation from its Originals and from the days of Euosh and the Flood as far as appears or is probable without the support of the Civil Sword or Magistracy according to the concurrent Traditions of the very Heathens herein that in the Golden Age Men lived uprightly of their own accord without need of Judges and without fear or apprehensions of Bonds and Punishment § 3. Matrimonial Society The second sort of subordinate Society is the Matrimonial Aug. in Gen. Quaest 143. Est enim ordo naturalis in hominibus ut serviant saeminae viris c filii parentibus quia est illic justicia est haec ut infirmior ratio serviat fortiori founded in the Structure of the Sexes and difference in the inward Vigours and Powers of the Soul and so constituted by a positive determination and Ordination of God first in the State of Paradise in a less and after the Fall into Sin in a greater degree of Subordination Gen. 2. Gen. 3. And herein God laid a Corporal Foundation and Original of all other Societies to come for all the Ends and Reasons of the Creation and Providence And hereupon as the Right of this Ordinance is Universal and Perpetual in God's intention and establishment so has it continued tho' not without abuses as the acknowledged Foundation and Rule of Lawful Succession thro' all Nations § 4. Oeconomical Society The Third Sort of Subordinate Societies succeeding the former is the Oeconomical and is either Natural between Parents and Children or positive as between Tutors and Pupils Masters and Servants § 5. Civil Society The last General Sort of Subordinate Societies fundamentally designed by God's Providence for the conservation of Mankind is the Civil entrusted with the Power of the Swórd in defence against all Violences and Oppressions Domestick or Foreign for the preservation of those Rights and Liberties which are necessary to the good order and well being of Mankind in all its forms of Society which God himself hath founded by Nature Constitution or Providence for a regular and undisturbed Lâ—se For thus St. Paul saith God's Ordinance for the good of Mankind tho' not always actually fulsilling Gods design they are God's Ordinance and as such his Ministers bearing the Sword for our good to the punishment of Evil Doers and to the praise of them that do well Rom. 13.1
call for Divine Vengeance as in the Tyranny of Agamemnon on old Chryses the Priest of Apollo Hence the Priest of On or Heliopolis his Daughter was thought the greatest and sittest Match for Joseph Joseph's Wife 4 Priests Daughter that next unto Pharaoh sate Lord over all the Land of Egypt Priests Lands Sacred and inalienable nor were the Priests Lands touched by Joseph or Pharoah under the Exigences of that Famine while all the Land else was sold unto him for Bread but they were all fed on the Royal Stores at free Cost And as Philo and Josephus magnify the Jewish High-Priesthood above rather than under Royalty Priests Prior to Kings in point of sanctity posterior in point of power so do the Profane Histories of the Heathens in point of Sanctity give Priesthood the Priority tho in point of Power they give it to the Regale And it is the more to be wondred this in Heathens who being altogether Carnalized one should have thought would have given all to the armed Prince and no more than his Grace had pleased to the Sacrisicing Hierophant Nay tho Humility be one of the dictinctives of Christianity and so ought most signally to appear in its Priests against all even the slightest arrogances or self Reflections yet we find when the assertion of the Sanctity has been necessary to take off Imperial insolence several the best of Catholick Fathers have imitated St. Paul Christian Priests magnifying their Office against Kingly Vsurpations in magnifying their Office to the vindication of their Liberty for instances of which there will be occasion in due place § 4. To assert therefore the inviolable Right and Authority of a Divine Ordinance or Commission against the Powers and Designs of Kings I could here well alledge Elias his dealing with Baal's Prophets at Mount Carmel before Abab's eyes and against his will the assembling of the Elders of Judah and Israel under the first Babylonish Captivity before Ezekiel to consult their common Affairs against the interests of the King of Babylon and all the opposition of Prophets made against wicked Princes But letting these pass Jeroboam's Case the singular and extraordinary Case of Jeroboam will not be content to be omitted By the Constitution of the Law Exod. 23.14 15 16 17. and 34 23 24. all the Men Children of the twelve Tribes were to appear before God three times in the year at the place of his Residence which in Jeroboams time was in Solomons Temple at Jerusalem Now Jeroboam by particular Prophecy and Providence became King of the Ten Tribes that revolted from Rehoboam the Son of Solomon But Jerusalem was the very Metropolis of Rehoboams Kingdom so that fearing that by this observation of the Law in all his Males appearing three times a year to Worship at Jerusalem his People would return to the House of David he turned them away from that form of Religion and Society with God at Jerusalem to the Calves he had set up as the Symbols of God's presence at Dan and at Bethel And because the Tribe of Levi would not be with him he himself became a Priest and made such as he could get every one that would of the meanest People And now if Worldly Policy and Civil Counsels will excuse a deflexion from Divine Ordinances here were all imaginable Pleas for excuse or justification herein But God that gave this Law for such appearances at the place of his presence had back'd it with a promise to prevent all fears of a Surprize No Man saith God shall desire thy Land when thou shalt go up to appear before the Lord thy God thrice in the year But because Jeroboam might perhaps take this Promise only to respect or intend a security against Aliens not their fellow Tribes therefore God sent him a Prophet to Bethel with a miraculous Power to reclaim him from his diffidences to the observation of the Law which not working upon the King this thing became a Sin and Snare to him his House and his People to their utter excision a Document for ever to all Earthly Powers not to entail upon themselves Jeroboam's Case exemplary to all Kings their Posterities and their People the Curse of the Almighty in the violation of his Ordinances But to conclude all with some general Considerations on Christianity I do not at all doubt but that the Dr. will assert to us Christians a Right and Liberty Right of frequent Christian Worship on Holy Day and oâ— her frequent days and houâ—â— with other Usâ—gâ—â— both Natural and Divine to Assemble often in Publick Worship and Holy Services of the Church not only on the Lords Day and at our Festivals Fasts and Vigils but every day two three or more times a Day if we can have leisure tho' our Princes should forbid us these Times and Frequences I may well add that we may do these Devotions in Consecrated Places and several Catholick Appendages of Devotion tho' for these there be no express Command in Scripture and for most of them no Instances The Antient Church owned several Usages in the Church for Canons Apostolical Canons Apostolical and not a few of that Collection which we have under that Character descended from the Apostolical Age and Practice as the Traditions of the most Antient Fathers evince and the Substrate Reasons of them will still be of very great Use and Eternal Convenience And must we be bound to quit all these even not Mystick Institutions at the Arbitrary pleasure of Civil Powers while yet Constantine * Constant Mag. ad Synod Tyr. ap Ensch de vit Coâ—d l. 4. c. 42. l. 3 c. 57. beyond whom I thought no Clergy man would prescribe or claim Prerogative for all Christian Princes thought himself obliged to Revere and Submit to such Traditional Canons which were by the Catholick Church received as of Apostolical Age or Original CHAP. IV. Of the Divine Right of Christian Synods § 1. NOW if we have a Divine Right of Convening for Worship in popular Assemblies with an unalienable Authority of using many unscriptural Usages and convenient Appendages in this Service why should not our Spiritual Governours have Authority to Assemble in Consultation for the good Conduct of the Common Assemblies or what Prerogative is violated by this Liberty But because a positive Constitution of God is what Time-servers and Anti-Hierarchists do so particularly demand from us tho' very unwilling that you should so squeeze and torment their pretences to a Divine Title I will however to gratify even the peevish endeavour to do the Church and them too Reason in this Point § 2. As then our Faith is a Mysterious Doctrine Our Faith and Sacraments Mysterious discovered originally to certain Christian Patriarchs and Preachers of Righteousness whose Doctoral Office and Order has descended by Ecclesiastical Ordinations to the whole Church so our Sacramental Ordinances are Priestly and Hallowing Mysteries committed also by Divine Ordinance
the Question of Rebaptization from Heresie was Conciliarly determined different ways in several Churches Firmil ad Cyp. § 6 17. Dionys Aleâ— ad Xyst Pap. ap Eus E. H. l. 7. c. 5. c. 7. Cyp. cum coll ad Fid. Ep. 59. § 1. c. without any breach of Catholick Communion till Pope Stephen began the Rupture with the African Phrygian Galatian Cilician and Cappadocian Churches which yet other Churches would by no means consent to each Church determining according to its best Judgment Rules and Customs but the most moderate taking care in the midst of this diversity Cyp. Ep. 62. §◠c. Cyp. ad Cald. Ep. 38. § 2. Ep. 42. § 5. to keep the Unity of Spirit in the Bond of Peace So a Council of 66 African Bishops determine the questions made them by Fidus concerning the reconciliation of one Victor a lapsed Presbyter by Therapius a Bishop before Canonical Examination and Season as also of the liberty of Baptizing Infants as soon as born before they were Eight Days old as also of the Offenceless way of living to be practised by the Virgins And as they did Conciliarly provide to prevent so did they to correct Evils particularly the Vices Violences and Immoralities of all Orders as in the Presbyter Felicissimus not only for his Schism but for his Lusts especially concerning the Penances and Indulgences to the Lapsed for which in times of Persecution and the dispersions of the Episcopal College the Criminals were required to stay Cyp. Ep. 12. § 2. Ep. 14. § 2. Ep. 26. § 4. Ep. 28. § 2. Ep. 31. § 5. Ep. 32. Ep. 40. § 3 7. Ep. 52. § 2 3 6. Ep. 53. § 2. Ep. 54. Ep. 55. § 13. and wait for peace to the Church before it was decent for them or allowed to them to claim their own which was to be determined in Councils of their Bishops Clergy and standing Laity All which whosoever looks into the quoted places will find to be thought not only expedient but necessary for the good of the Church and the persons concerned and for the Authority of their Acts which was universally and uncontestedly taken for Divine upon grounds taken out of Scripture Cyp. Ep. 55. § 13. Firm. in t Cyp. Ep. 75. which therefore they held frequently and in some places annually from which they sent Synodical Letters and Messages with authentick Deputations and Powers not only by the Sub-Clerical Orders Ep. Cyp. 41. § 1. Ep. 42. § 1. Ep. 45. § 1. § 2. but by Deacons Priests nay and by Bishops also according as the nature of the affair did require and Junctures of Time and Season would permit being herein as much concerned for a general Negotiation in Spirituals not only each Church within it self but abroad with all others and for all Christian Uses as the Civil States and Sovereignties are for Domestick Conduct and foreign Embassies and Treaties with more remote or more nearly adjacent Countries and with as fair to say no fairer ground of Authority from God and Nature Upon all which I make these concluding Remarks that if such Synods had not been thought of Divine Right and Duty too those that were Convened and Censured by them would have denied the Authority the Lapsed Penitents would have disclaimed their Necessity the Apostates would have proclaimed the Imposture of a pretended Divine Authority and the Churches would never have been at that vast Fatigue and Charge of Synodical procedures especially against the Edicts of Secular Powers had they not judged these to be Acts of an Ecclesiastical Duty to and Authority from God But here being none the least Exception from the offended nor any possible Inducement upon the Church to quit the claim and practice of such Authority I think here is an undeniable presumption hereupon that it was as uncontestable as it was actually uncontested CHAP. VIII Of the Authority of Civil Powers and Laws in general against the Liberty of Ecclesiastical Synods § 1. AFter the Knowledge of all this which I am sure the Dr. well knew before ever he dreamed of Writing upon this Subject 't is a matter of astonishment to me that he should look upon Synods under Alien Powers to have been and still to be but prudential Clubs without any Authority from God or Man And yet upon this confidence 't is strange that he should not wholly deliver them up to the full Authority of all Heathen or Alien Powers against which where there is no right no Human Reason or Prudence can warrant any popular Frequences or Councils So that by his granting them Reason he seems to grant them Right and by gâ—aâ—ting them Right to grant them Authority to hold Synods under Alien Powers And yet he is unwilling even to allow what he grants and floats up and down in his Doubts hereupon and casts an unlucky glance upon the Primitive Synods as scarce capable of Excuse and more hardly of Justisication It has been saith he ever look'd upon as one great part of the Princes Prerogative p. 13. that no Societies should be Incorporated nor any Companies be allowed to meet together without his Knowledge and Permission The Roman Law was especially very severe as to this Matter And tho' after the Conversion of the Emperors to the Faith of Christ a Provision was made for the Publick Assemblies of the Church for Divine Service yet Tertullian who understood these Matters as well as any one of his Time tho' he excused their Meetings upon all other Accounts could not deny but that they fell under the Censure of the Law and that having not the Princes Leave to meet together they were in the Construction of the Law guilty of Meeting against it § 2. This brings one therefore to an Enquiry Conventions Necessary Innocent Hurtful What Meetings are of right obnoxious to the prohibitions and penalties of Humane Laws The Conventions therefore of Men are of three sorts either Necessary or Innocent or Hurtful And first such as are Necessary no Man whatsoever can have a rightful Authority to restrain for Necessity being a Law from God cannot be vacated by any positive Law of Man Nor Secondly can Innocent Meetings be rightfully denyed in themselves but under the apprehensions of hurt or danger upon Time Place and Circumstances But Hurtful Meetings in the Third Place may not only but ought of Right to be restrained by the Magistracy Yet what Princes have no Rightful Authority to do that they may irresistibly do upon an uncountroulable Domination and Impunity Upon which when they presume to Repress our Rights and Liberties if it be in Matters Necessary they are to be disobeyed in Fact and submitted to as to their Legal Processes without resistance if in Matters barely Innocent there Prudence will direct but no bare Conscience of Duty to the Tyrannical Law alone will oblige to observation tho' it will to Patience under Legal Sufferings For an Innocent Liberty is an Vnalienable Franchise
are therefore of two sorts one relating to the welf are of the Church the other to that of the Civil State § 6. And first with relation to the Church the Christian Prince is the Guardian of it ‖ P. 44. and consequently Supream Governonr in order to that Protection which the Church expects or enjoys from him * p. 79. and that such Synods hereby may become Legal Assemblies †p. 18. Secondly In reference to the Civil State such a plenitude of Regal Power over Ecclesiastical Synods is necessary to the ends of Civil Government ¶ p. 42 57 70 73 ◠p. 81. and Peace particularly to prevent in them Proceedings prejudicial to the Regal Power Now if from these Reasons there be a necessity that the Divine Rights and Authorities of the Catholick Church in the Convention Freedom and Acts of Synods should thist their former Sebjects and Depositaries and pass over into the hands of Christian Princes then is the Argumentation hence hereunto suggested by the Dr. good but if all these Reasons Ends and Purposes may consist with the Permanency of these Liberties and Powers in the Church as they stood Authorized by God for the three first Centuries then whatsoever others may be brought these will not I doubt appear to the Author of the Letter to be valid necessary or cogent Reasons for the alienation of these Powers from the Hierarchy § 7. Protection from Heathen Powers We begin then with those Reasons that are drawn from the Benesit of the Church under the Guardianship of Princes the Protection of the Faith and the Legalizing our Synods Now here it is to be noted That Heathen Princes may do all this for the Christian Church as well as Christian Princes For tho' they do not believe Christianity themselves either in whole or in part yet they may give the Church a Legal Toleration to all its Offices and Assemblies and this Legalizes them He may also add other Immunities and Charters to his Christian Subjects and so not only protect but promote them And this was in great measure done by all Non-persecuting Emperors and the Persecutors too when ceasing to persecute by the Revocation of the cruel Edicis and Laws and giving new Edicts for their Security But will the Dr. thereupon conclude that those Heathen Emperors have or had Night to all those Church Powers which he hereupon arrogates to the Christian Sovereigns in the above-named Aphorisms If so I must needs say that he must condemn all the Synods held during times of Peace which were perhaps the only times in the three first Centuries as Violations of the Imperial Authorities without whose License they Convened Sate Deliberated Debated Promulged and Executed Decrees Canons Seatences on their own Divine Right and in the Name of the Lord. No ground for such Authority over Synods And such an Inference as would follow upon this supposed Ground of Legal Protection from Heathen Powers I need not expose by upbraiding the ridiculous Guise of an Heathen Prince actually ordering and directing all the Synodical Consults and Polity of the Christian Church and Ratifying Annulling and Altering their Decrees Acts and Sentences as he Judges best for the good of the Pupil Church of which he not the Synod is to be Judge But I think a meer Edict to this purpose would be very Pretty and Congruous as for Diversion and Example T. V. Caes Aug. c. To all Christian Churches within our Empire Greeting Know ye that of our especial Grace and Compassion we have taken upon us to be your Guardian to protecs you in the Freedom of your Religion and to Legalize your Synods Vpon which Consideration you have no Right nor Liberty of your selves to Convene in Synods nor to Sit Deliberate Act Decrce or Resolve any Matters of your Faith Doctrine or Discipline by Canon or Sentence without the Authority of our General or Particular License to every your Particular Act and Method of Acting nor Enact Promulge or Execute any Thing or Ordinance without our Ratisication who can of Right Annul Rescind Vacate or Alter all or any Thing you shall do in Synod which only is of Council to us in the Conduct of the Church which we protect being wholly dependent on us and in our hands its Conciliar Acts being wholly ours and all their Validity from our Imperial Authority To this we require your Synodical Submission on fear of a Praemunire otherwise incurred that thereupon we may put out an Edict of Praemunire upon all the Clergy that shall attempt any the least Violation of this our Ecclesiastical Headship or Supremasy Yet as odd as this sounds in all Christian Ears it is as justifiable as in any Christian Prince if such Protections as are aforesaid are the alone true Reason for this Supremacy for there is no differencing Cause assigned in the Reasons 'T is true indeed a Christian Prince looks more likely to protect us than an Alien and has one peculiar actually Federal Obligation by his Baptism to support the Communion of the Church by all his powers but so is every private Christian too and 't is possible for a Christian Prince to ornit this Care or to be disabled in it while elsewhere the Humanity of an Heathen Prince may do more for it voluntarily without any Federal Tyes of Christianity and consequently if the Ecclesiastical Supremacy be Founded on such Protection and Squared in its Measure by the proportion thereof I believe many Heathen Princes had more ' tho' unknown Right in the Ecclesiastical Supremacy than many Modern Princes professing Christianity it being possible that Princes may freely protect Subject Societies which they are not federally or otherwise bound to as Jewish Synagogues now are in their States of Pilgrimage which they that are especially bound to may oppress under the very colour of that Supremacy that is thus Founded on the Right of Protection Tho' speaking generally upon the Law of Nature all rinces are thereby equally bound to protect all the Fundamental Rights of the Innocent and consequently those of the Christian Church so that the Right and Reason of our protection under Princes is not Founded in their Christianity but the Churches Innocency and the Right She has to the Royal Protection in doing good by any Acts or Operations Synodical or other Toleration not founded on the Right of all Rehgioas tolerated but upon other exterior Reasons Nor will this assert a Right of Protection to all pretended Religions for tho' the Ignorance of a Prince in the distinction of true Religion from bad may occasion him in mistake actually to persecute the Right and cherish the Wrong to avoid which under that Ignorance he ought to tolerate that wherein he can see no hurt yet really nothing but real Truth has a real Right to any Protection or Countenance and the Connivances or Encouragements given to false Religions must be excused or justified not on the Right of the Errors which
by an express Law to acquaint the Sovereign Prince with her Desires Reasons Places Seasons and Necessaries of Convening to Petition his Leave and Favour his Inspection Assistance and Succour to the Piety of their Designs and to secure him her Fidelity to all his proper Honours and Interests to keep within Ecclesiastical concerns and do all things openly to the Glory of God and the Good of Souls in the Unity Order and Purity of the Church preserved by the Rules of Catholick and Canonical Communion and this under the Guard and Watch of Temporal Powers this surely will be so far from endangering Mutinies in States that there is no way so like to preserve the Peace of all Christian Nations Ecclesiastical Liberty the best means to the Peace of the World as that which will maintain the common Peace and Unity of their Churches for that all Princes truly Christian will be very tender of breaking the Civil Peace whereby the Sacred Communion so necessary to the preservation of Christianity must be obstructed if not utterly violated And as such a Communion founded on such a Liberty would prevent most National Wars so would it also most Intestine Seditions For the Authority of a Priesthood shining in its due and proper Lustre supported by the Secular Powers would over-awe most popular Insolencies or however the Influence of Christian Communication from Churches abroad reduced to their Primitive Union must in all Humane probability sooner quench the Calamity than can be expected in a state of general Division and the insignificancy of an Oppressed and Despised Clergy But the fatal Envy Jealousie and Hatred against the Priesthood occasioned by the accursed Frauds and Tyrannies of the Church of Rome Still except England and Omnia bene is such an extreme in most parts of the Reformation as obstructs their Piety and thereupon Gods Blessing and their own Happiness it being intolerable for such People that are so zealous for their Civil Liberties to be so averse to the just Rights and Immunities of a Priesthood that is clean and pure from all corrupt or abusive Principles whatsoever and therefore no wonder if the Reformation makes no greater Progress nor Figure in the World but goes backward apace both in its Esteem and Interest For a mere mistrust from instances of corrupt and unreformed Churches is not warrantable against those that are Reformed even in those Principles which gave the past Offences and continue the present Jealousies And whether we will or no we do trust our Souls with these Men to whom God hath committed their Trust and Care and it is strange that we should not allow them liberty well to discharge that Trust in Jealousie that they will abuse us in the freedom necessary to the performance thereof while yet we have a full Temporal Right and Power to suppress and punish all Injurious Exorbitances of the powers Hierarchical CHAP. X. Of the Authority of Christian Princes over Synods from Exemplary Practices § 1. The Drs. three sorts of precedent Examples HAving thus discussed the Importance of the Drs. Reasons in the Protection of the Church and Civil Interests we proceed to his Arguments drawn from Examples which are indeed the only sort he professedly insists upon and layes the whole stress of his cause These Examples he ranges into three Orders First Those of the Jewish Kings in Scripture Secondly Those of the Roman Empire And Thirdly Those of the Princes who upon the Inundations of the Barbarous Nations over Europe succeeded in the several Kingdoms and Principalities thereof and particularly those of our own Country from the first Conversion of the Saxons § 2. Now before we come to Traverse the Matters of Fact it will be necessary before hand to try the force and legal Concludency of such Argumentations unto Right The use of Examples in Legal Pleas for Right In all Legal therefore and Judicial Enquiries Examples are alledged for one of these two Purposes either to Aver or Explain the Sense of an Extant Act as Law Contract or Constitution or to prescribe a presumption for such Act c. where it appears not For first Where the Originals of a Legal Practice are Extant they mutually assert each others certainty of Sense and Right which might otherwise have been dubious if no Customary Practice had followed on that First Foundation the Sense and Knowledge of Words Altering and Growing Obsolete in themselves many times in long Tracts of Years or Ages On the other side it being so easily possible in Nature and frequent in Fact that Records are buried in the Ruines of Time on which the Rights and Duties of Persons and Societies have been long and of old Founded therefore upon the Non-appearance of such Originals Customary Judgments Recorded and Prescriptions Immemorial well Arrested do generally pass for good Presumptions of a valid Constitution Things inquirable in prescriptions now lost or disappearing But upon Matter Arrested the Court Enquires into two Qualifications First If the Matter in Prescription be consistent with Common Justice in its own Nature and Design for otherwise the Court will presume there was no such Constitution Injustice too notorious Novity vacate Prescription or however Naught and Null in its self and so condemn it Secondly The Court will consider whether the Immemorial Practice could however have been as Antient as it s supposed or pretended Original must have been and so was in Fact i. e. whether they of that Age to whom the Prescription refers its Presumptions could have had such a Concern before them For if Inventions notoriously new and late because they have continued longer than any Mans Memory or Life shall hereupon pretend themselves Founded in an Ordinance of Ages fore-past in which it is certain no such Inventions or Matters yet were this will discover such Imposture and vacate such Presumption as if a Man would prove Tobacco to have been in Use here before the Saxon Times because it has been used for time now Immemorial Whereupon the Dr. by alledging Instances must by them intend either to explain or affirm the Sense of an Extant Law or Act for all these his Rights and Powers of the Regal Supremacy in all Christian Princes as such which Law or Act must then be previously set forth and produced as the most especial Matter in Evidence to be affirmed by the constant succeeding Practice thereupon grounded and vouched or else he must by his Instances prescribe for a Supposition and valid Presumption of such Law or Act as their Legal Original and defend it against all charges of Intrinsecal Injury or of a Novity notoriously much later than the supposed Original could be besides what ought to be added the proof of a perpetual uninterrupted Uniformity in the practice beyond all Epochas or Memory § 3. * Prescriptions from the practices of an uncontroulable force no Arguments of Right in the Court of Conscience But here is one thing more to
of Imposture in Religions inlaid with the Power of the Sword the Merchandize the Hypocrites would make of it Athan. ad Orthodox Tom. 1. P. 944. D. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to set up Bishops by Kingly force 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before its Divine Credit could be throughly established in the Hearts of Mankind and the Reproaches consequent against it there upon did not think sit to call many Mighty or many Noble Wise or great at first to the Profession of Christianity nor permit any Princes by his Providence to exercise any formal Authority in the least over the Church for 300 years tho' Abgarus Mamaea and Philip Gordius are said to have been Christian that the propagation of the Christian Church and Faith might not be attributed nor attributable to the Power of Man but of God only Else it had been as easie and as miraculous for our Lord to have made Princes his first Converts and Apostles and founded this Supremacy in them and their Successors beyond all Question for ever But that it might never in time to come fall under the reproachful Imputation and Character of a State Engine he lodged the Spiritual Powers elsewhere for three Centuries entirely that hereupon the Church might be emboldened as upon sure grounds to assert her proper Powers unalienated and pure against all Atheistical Calumnies whatsoever thro' all Ages that so tho' they were to be subject to Civil Powers to the enforcement of their Duties and for repression of Enormities yet not to the Omission of their Duties and Cares to which God hath called them which is the general Rule and Standard of Subjection in all Countries Ages and Nations Universally and forever § 11. The Christian Character of the first Princes in the Prescription But there is one thing more to be considered in the two first Emperors instanced by the Doctor for this universal Domination of Princes over Synods and that is their Christian Character to qualifie them for this Omnipotency For tho' the Doctor in his few interspersed Reasons for it gives no distinctive grounds for an higher and interiour Supremacy in Christian than in Heathen Princes yet for a good Grace Praef. p. 5. he tells us That whatever Privileges do belong herein to the Christian Magistrate p. 94 96. they belong to him as such which must I suppose be the Rule of Interpreting other Places where he more loosly omits the Christian Qualification But here I would fain know what 't is shall denominate a Prince Christian and that in order to this Authority Internal Authority in Societies grounded upon an Internal Right of Communion For all Internal Authority in all Powers presupposes a right to Communion more or less as the ground of Authority in all Societies whatsoever And therefore the Authorities asserted by the Doctor to all Christian Princes must suppose a right to Communion in all the matters subject to that Internal Authority For he that has no right to receive Sacraments has no Internal Right of Authority to make Laws about them he who is not within the Communion has no Right to pass Sentence for the Ejection or the Restitution of others He may presume to do it upon an uncontroulable Force and Tyranny and the reasons pretended for it may be in themselves good and necessary and so be admitted and observed by the Church at the Command of an Usurping Power not in Conscience of his just Authority but for the reason of the thing and for the avoiding unnecessary Persecution But a Right Internal there is none to them that are without Now tho' Constantine and Constantius so much concerned themselves about Church Synods yet were they not yet Baptised into the plenary Communion of Saints in the Christian Church nor so much as made Competents or Catechumens by Imposition of Hands and consequently what they did about Ecclesiasticals was not of an Office or Nature Internal to Ecclesiastical Polity or Communion but common only to the Prerogative of Princes in General or if it was of Internal importance 't was Usurpation and a Nullity in it self Had they been Catechumens or Competents a pretence might have thereupon been formed that they alone might make Ordinances for those preliminary Statious but not surely for Baptism Consirmation Lords Supper Holy Orders Anathemas Absolutions c. Had they been Baptized and so qualified for Confirmation and the Eucharist it might not have looked so odd in them to have set Rules for such Sacraments and the common Laity in their Celebration but for Ordinations and Hierarchical Powers of the Spirit over the Souls of the Laity and Clergy how incongtuous must it have been in any Emperour to assume the whole Legislature and Ordinance In these therefore the Laws of Princes may well follow Ecclesiastical Constitutions by the Sanction of Secular Penalties but the Constitutions of Sacred Canons ought not to be taken sway from the Hierarchy and lodged only in a Lay-hand that holds a long Sword and for no other Reason but this that the Sword is in it least they that use it Sacrilegiously perish by it Eternally Constantius his want of Right over Synods For as to Constantius whom most accuse to be aresolute Heretick and they that speak most sostly of him represent him as Patron of Heresie through simple Ignorance he thereby became not a Guardian of the Church or the publick Peace thereupon hereby to sound his Right of Supremacy but a very great Persecutor and Embroiler of the Catholick Church even by managing Synods which no doubt in an Unbaptized state of Heresie he had no true Right nor proper Authority to do for whatsoever Right a mere Alien Prince may have while he professes no Enmity no doubt a Professed Enemy has no Lawful Authority to manage that Divine Society and its Principles which he designeth to destroy by that very management And so I resolve that Constantius having declared himself against the Homoonsion had no Authority to call or manage any Synod at all and that no Obedience or Conformity to his Calls were due in Conscience to his Power tho' it might be in Duty â—to God and Care for his Soul as well as the Souls in general of the whole Church the whole Authority of meeting being in the Catholick Bishops but none at all in him or his Arians I might here add that the Fathers might Convene upon his Call for fear of Persecution not in Conscience of Duty to it but I think this did not so far enslave them as to obey but the hopes they had of doing him and the whole Church the useful Services of true Faith and Piety And hence it was that when upon their Petition he would not in answer concede their Dissolution at Ariminuns Right of Dissolution they dissolved themselves not thinking themselves guilty of any sin of Disobedience for who could imagine so of the Conscience of 400 Catholick Bishops suffering for the Faith under Constantius his Tyranny
a subordinate Society and if it be a School of Divinity t is a Society with God to be Celebrated with Prayers and Devotions Doctrines and Precepts and the Rules of Discipline and Rectoral Conduct But besides particular Schools Vicinities to be pâ—eserved by Religion thus of Right erigible in all Vicinities so foederally and equally sociated the conscience of God being the only tie to that mutual Justice and Benevolence which they have contracted to observe the Law of Nature does require the solemn acknowledgement of that God as a fundamental Principle of their Union and consequently if not require as I believe it will where there is no other superiour and better provision yet extreamly recommend our common Worship and Adoration of God for his blessing upon that Society contracted upon Conscience toward God together with those Instructions and Remembrances of the Principles of Piety as may oblige their Consciehcâ—s to its more effectual and avowed observation This is the more to be râ—â—â—ed on because as all good ought to be open and diffusive so the Majesty of God All God to be public and diffusive as well as the Duty and Inteâ—e of Mankind require true Religion to be the most public and unconsined as being the most noble excellent and superlative Good resembling its Divine and Infinite Object and Author in its Purity and why not â—â—en in its Universal and Public Appearance and Authority in all publicâ— Societies whatsoever From hence I am sure Nature will justifieâ— Right unto all such Societies to procurâ— for themselves a public Worship of God in a meer Statâ— of Natucal Religion which simple no Civiâ— Powers supervening have any Right or Reason to deny But thâ—n such public Worship in public Assemblies muâ—â— bâ— under grave and â—oâ—y Conduct Public Worship to be under Conduct and Authority and this requires Authority which originally will lodge in the Heads of every Family Heads of Families the Common Conucil for mere natural Religion in villages till they surren 〈◊〉 it up to other Powers under which they retain a Right to frequency of worshipping the true God as a standing Council to convene and consult in Syâ—od for the Conduct of such public Worship till theâ— yield up this natural priviledge to any other Power under which however they have a Right to some public Religious Local Society with God and themselves and to frequency of public Devotions in ir which if theiâ— Superâ—ors will neglect or obstruct their former Right and Liberty reverts to them again to agree for and in God's public worship whether their Superiors will or no it being still to be remembred that public Society with God is a fundamental Right and Duty far greater than all others So that from the days of Bel or Nimrod whose very Names denotes his Rebellion and Usurpation of God's Dominion tho Princes set up theldolatrous Worship of Creatures and magical Priesthoods for the Conduct thereof prohibiting the true Worship of the true God vet any Men Families Villages and Cities might have federally maintainted an Uniformity in Offices of Natural Religion publicly in the Face of those Idolatrous Powers their Powers being indeed the Ordinance of God but not to any lawful â—rection of Superstitions not to the Extinct on of his own public Worship which all Societies whatsoever are obliged to advance Time Places Conveniences of Worship claimable under all Powers § II. In virtue of these Rights if the Sovereignâ— under which they are will â—ot assign thâ—m just Timâ—s sit Places and Conveniences fâ—r such Solemn and Sacred Service of God and Offices of Religion the subject People may out of their own Propâ—â—ties provide â—hem for themselves and â—â—â—er them unto God's Sâ—rvice And since every Subject has Right unto Time the Ground and Houses c. which he by any right forms acquires be â—ay devote what he can spare of it to his God and natural Religion requires some Tribute of all we have as in Tenancy under the areat Lord of all So that whatsoever is thus from a good Secular Tiâ—e devoted unto God becomes his * Ambros Valentine Jun. Imp. Ep. ad Marcelliuam seror and cannot be taken away without the Sin of Sacriledge since a Subject's private House or Vineyard is not liable to any Arbitrary Domum privati nullo potes jure temerare Domum Dei existimas auserendam Seizure as in the Case of Naboth By this natural Right the Jews built Synagogues Schools and Houses of Prayer without any positive Precept from God or order from their supream Rulers that we read of Upon on the same Originals of Nature they did the like in all their Colonies Dispersions Right of Jewish Synagogues c. without any Ordinance that we know of from the Heathen Powers And if we will presume leave asked and granted for which presumption there is no great or probable Reason yet such Petition and grant of leave does not import a want of antecedent Right in the Petitioners to be given by the Petitioned Reasons of asking leave but only a care for their security in using their Right by obtaining a permission and impunity in so doing from those Powers who before the Crucisixion of Christ and the determiuation of the Mosaick Covenant thereupon had indeed no right to deny them Synagogues c. for the teaching the true Law and the proper Devotions in them lawfully used but only an uncontroulable force to have oppressed them in these Rights as well as others So that Caution Decency and Peace might incline them in Prudence to petition a liberty in what they had an antecedent Right to without Petition or Concession And to make this clear the Mâ—rtyrs or Caemeteries the Basilicae and the Schools of the Christian Church crected and used under Heathen Powers were voluntarily set up and employ'd in the Christian Worship upon this Natural Right without any derived from the Enemy-Powers * Buseb Eccl. Hist 1.8 c. 28. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who did indeed of meer necessity sometimes connive at these unpetitioned usages but would never have endured the affront of a Petition to erect Houses of that Worship which was designed to the extinction of all the then established and received Superstitions so that t is to be presumed that had they depended upon Petitions they would never have had one Chappel in those Ages in the whole World § 12. So much then for the Natural Right and Liberties of Publick Society with God in the Offices of Natural Devotion Religious Service and Society with God which I think are made appear valid and unalienable tho there be no express reservations of them for the uses of Natural Religion apparent in the word of God CHAP. III. Of the Authorities Rights and Liberties of Mystick Religion § 1. Mystick Religioniâ—s foundations Ministers Rights c. FROM the meer Naturally Rational Body of Religion considered abstractly from all supposed positive Revelation
Prince out of those Hands and that Society in which it was vested in a matter quite different from the Secular Polity I do desire a proof hereof as weighty and important as the Matter and Consequences hereof are What then is it liable to a Despotick Occupation This again is what a Borough will not yield upon a Quo Warranto but will be ready to make a Counter demand of Quo Warranto from their Prince In vain would he plead for it on the Right of Protection while he strikes at all their Municipal Rights and Liberties Be sure except the English Church here But we we only are the Poor Tame Dispirited Drowsie Body that are in Love with our own 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 Powers whatsoever And as to any Contract 't is neither pretensible nor pretended by the Doctor tho' too much in truth in latter Ages has been exchanged by the Church for Worldly Interests wherein mainly lies the great Ruine of Christianity § 11. But now we descend to the second Cause in which this unlimited Supremacy of Princes is by the Doctor founded namely Civil Interests as of Peace and the Princes Prerogative To both which I for my own part am willing to surrender all if it be necessary But before this however I would fain know how do the Laws of Peace require a Violation of those Rights which God hath lodged in the Hierarchy as a means to reconcile all in one Body unto a common Peace with God and each other If the Clergy use their Powers to that End who has Right to hinder them Who to break the Peace with them But if they do not there are other just ways of securing them from doing wrong than by disabling them from doing Good that very Good which God hath set them apart and sanctified them to do And these ways are in the Power and Sovereignty of an Heathen Prince Chap. 8. as is above manifested and therefore are sufficient to the same ends in the Authority of a Christian Prince from whose Coercion in matters of Crime the Priesthood how much soever to be revered by Princes ought not to be made a Shelter or Protection Under these Powers of Heathen Princes the Christian Synods made no Rupture on the Peace or Prerogative of the Empire Church Ordinances innocent in all States tho' as undeservedly accused for this by the Heathens as we are suspected of it now Why should the same Spiritual Liberties within a Christian Kingdom be thought more dangerous than they were to Heathens I will not speak out how the Churches of Christendom have been crushed between the Upper and the Nether Milstones but sure I am hence are all the Confusions both under the Papacy and the Reformation Be sure here by all means to except England Nor is it possible to make any true and signal Conversions to the better as long as there is a common Slavery upon the Hierarchical Powers for as we hate the Bondage of Rome so they hate the Bondage of the Church under Secular Domination and so hereby is maintained a perpetual and irreconcileable aversion which no illustrious Piety can extinguish while the Powers thereof are Chained down to mere Politick Ends and Services § 12. So that as there is no necessity No Expediency in the Slavery of the Church so neither is there any expediency to recommend any such unlimited Domination For as Things and Persons Consecrated to God are to be treated with a Respect and Reverence suitable to that Sanctity and Relation to God so a Prostitution of them under Secular Contempt is no small Impiety towards God and no small Guilt Blemish and Indecency in thern that cause it Now of all things under the Sun nothing is so hated feared and despised as Servitude and no Servitude more reproachful than that of Priests which were from the beginning a most Noble Free and Honourable Order in all Nations not excepting the very Barbarous Nor yet of all sorts of Slavery is there any so Indecorous and Grieving as that which oppresseth the Sanctity Authority and Operation of their very Functions for maintenance of which the Bishops of the Primitive Church were chiefly sought out unto Martyrdom And yet as hateful as such Vassallage is in it self 't is less Odious under an Heathen than a Christian Prince For from an open Enemy 't is natural enough and no new thing to expect Oppressions but when a Prince hath been Consecrated by God's Priests into the Communion of the Catholick Church he is thereby federally engaged to assert all the Rights and Authorities of that Divine Communion vested by our Lord in the Christian Hierarchy as much as every common Christian or Priest himself our Salvation in common being promoted by the Conduct of them Can then a claim of an Oppressive Supremacy be deemed a Glorious Jewel in a Christian Crown which if exercised must of necessity forfeit the Kings Salvation And is it not a dangerous Complaisance it Priests to fan such an Ambition as must end in the Ruine of the Church the Priesthood and the Soul of the Prince which the Liberties and Powers Hierarchical were designed to Convert Direct and Preserve It is not perhaps without an especial Providence that Eusebius has preserved the Memory of this Artificial kind of Persecution practised upon the Church by the Emperor Licinius Lecinius his crasty Persecution Who prohibited the Bishops from Visiting the Neighbour Churches or to hold Synods Consultations and Advices concerning matters profitable that so either by disobeying his Law they might be subjected to Punishment or by obeying his Order dissolve the Laws of the Church For that 't is no otherwise possible to set great Concerns at Right but by Synods by which he attempted to break that Concordant Harmony in the Church A place well worth every Princes and Doctors deep and most affective Consideration that under pretence Peace there may be no Licinius set up over the Hierarchy within the Communion of the Christian Church For besides the Domestick Cares and Exigencies of every Church requiring a constant Watch and frequent Consultations the concerns of the whole Catholick Church under Heaven ought to affect every Province and Bishopâ—ick thereof to a frequent course of Communications in order to a general Union and Vniformity in all the principal matters of Christianity a duty never to be performed but by a liberty of Synods in order thereunto in which the Rights of the Catholick Church run a parallel with those of Civil Powers 'T is true indeed this Communication is actually broken off but the Right and Duty thereof is mâ—â—aâ—colled and eternal obliging all Churches to reâ—tore it and I believe all Princes to pâ—rmit and assist the restitution Let therefore the Church be bound in all humility
Committed by God to set Orders to proper Priests and lastly the Mystick Powers of the Hierarchy of the Keys Hierarchial Powers of binding and loosing of remitting and retaining of sins in Earth to be ratified above by Christ in Heaven was deposited in the Apostles the first Fundamental Bishops under Christ and derived down to all their Successours with whom he promised his presence even to the end of the World that so the Gates of Hell might not prevail over the Church committed to their Charge Consecration by Mystical Imposition of Haâ—d to which end among others they are by a Mystical Imposition of Hands blessed and consecrated unto such Measures of the Holy Spirit as are suitable to so high and holy a Function and such Mystick Offices Now if this in Fact be so then our Rule holds good that none can attempt these Powers but by Divine Commission either Original or Successive the Divine Maxim of the Author to the Hebrews c. 5.4 holding true of these Priesthoods as well as those in the House of Aaron Priesthood not assumable but by Divine Commistion That no Man taketh this honour unto himself but he that is called of God as was Aaron Now to secure this Truth and Matter of Fact we have St. Pauls Testimonies to the full in several places namely That Christ hath placed in the Church Pastors Powers Ilicrâ—rchiâ—â—l instincted by Christ Teachers Governments in which they that Rule are to Rule well and with diligence and to be therefore accounted worthy of or assigned double Honour and to be obeyed and submitted to as they that watch for our Souls for which they must give Account as Stewards of God Mysteries 1 Cor. 12.28 Rom. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 Heb. 13.17 1 Cor. 4.1 from whence 't is as clear as Noon day that the Christian Laity are by Divine Ordinance under Governors Hierarchical And being so are in a Subordinate state of Ecclesiastical Society with God under their Spiritual Rulers and being antecedently so before are therefore independently so consociated as to Civil Societies according to the Doctrine of the Letter § 3. But this is not all that deserves observation in this matter But beside the different Orders of Governours the Vnity of the Catholick Church is to be much considered under these several Governours either as one Divine School of Christian Piety under many Doctors The Catholick Unity of the Church a◠〈◊〉 â—â—chool Aâ—â—â—y or â—olity under several Principal Governours The Twelve and the Seventy or of one Army in many Partitions under their respective Head Officers or Lieutenants General under Christ the great Captain of our Salvation or as one Polity under many Optimates For first our Saviour came as a Doctor sent from God and gathered under him Disciples of these he ordained twelve chief Doctors and seventy Inferiors to collect more unto and instruct them in this School when collected Now a collection of Disciples into one Society is but one School how large soever it grows and how many Teachers soever the Enlargements do required So many Tutors there are in one Colledge and many Colledges in one University Since then also the whole Catholick Church of Christ is but one general School of his Foundation tho' the Doctors that teach it have their several Rooms and Mansions for their particular Shares these Partitions for Convenience do not divide the general Society into Independent Separations No Independencies in Christs Church The same sort of Unity is to be maintained in the Notion of an Army or Church Militant by Sacramental Vow under Christs Banner under the conduct of its general Officers And lastly if we consider it as the one City or Kingdom of God committed by its Prince during his abscence to several Viceroys assigned their respective Districts and Jurisdictions these are the Bishops succeeding in this Authority to the Apostles So that this One School One Army One City tho' distributively to be governed by the several Rulers as to particular and local Offices yet as to the Interests of the common Vnity and Preservation it must be governed Aristocratically by common Council and Unanimous Authority Conciliar Assemblies necessary to an Aristocracy And as no Monarch can well Govern without a set of Counsellors to Advise such as the Clergy or Chapter of a Diocess ought to be to a Bishop in his District So the Optimates of an Aristocracy cannot not only not Wisely but not Authoritatively act without Conciliar Forms and Methods and they are therefore themselves one standing fundamental Council for the whole Subject Body And hence is the Right of Provincial Synods The Catholick Right and Primitive use of Provincial Synods to be held all over the Catholick Church fundamentally necessary to the Catholick Uniformity of Conduct and Vnity depending thereupon to the end that what each Council resolves may be transmitted to the rest and so mutually treated of if need be by the intervention of Legates or ratified if there be no doubt or need of discussions which was the original form of Catholick Government and Communion in the Christian Church before the Empire set up Christs Banner and was received as of Apostolical Canon So that if the Visible Unity of the Catholick Church as one common Society and Community No need of Scriptural Record for requiring such forms of Government be of Divine Structure the very Truth and Faith hereof immediately imports an Aristocracy and that a Right of Conciliar Assemblies and Legations So that there needed no Scriptural Record requiring this while the Frame and Order hereof was before laid in the first Structure of the Church and Universally known as Established in it before any Scriptures of the New Testament were conceived or lodged in the Archives of the Church as is confessed by the instances of this Conciliar form of Government extant in these Scriptures to be by and by alledged For it is further to be considered that the Convention of these Synods is not universally of constant and indispensably necessary frequency Synods mostly upon emergencies to be fixed to stated times but upon emergencies mostly which yet are frequent enough and in the days of Persecution 't is as inconvenient many times to the Spiritual as dangerous to the Temporal Interests of Christians 't was therefore fitter to leave the exercise of that Authority free to the publick Ecclesiastick Prudence Not to be held constantly in times of danger as to the actual exercise and menage thereof than to confine it to particular Rules Times and Limits Cyp. Ep. 56. § 3. Nec quisquam cum populunmostrum fugari conspexerit metu persecutionis spargi conâ—urbetur quod collection fraternitatem non videat nec tractantes Episcopos andiat c. by Express and Canonical Precept without reserve to a necessary Liberty Nor need this be thought strange since the Assemblies for Doctrine and Worship tho' apparently of Divine Right as to daily use
these little Occasional Transports but fixed Senses in the Holy Martyr Ep. ad Trall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 V. G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vid. Ep. ad Smyr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vide plura ap V. G. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. ad Philad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. ad Polycarp 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Vide plura ejusmodi in Psendepig Ign. Inscriptionem Epist Polycarp ad Philippens Cypr. Ed. 34. § 4. Presbyterii honorem c. sessuri nobiscum c. ita Ep. 35 42. § 2 3. as appears by their frequent repetitions requiring an Obedience still to the Presbyteries as to the Apostles which had been extravagant to a Miracle had not Presbyteries been of Divine Institution on Faith of which he calls it the Council of God without which whosoever Acts any thing Ecclesiastical is not of a pure Conscience as being Concorporated for the Unity of the Church there being but one Lords Supper and one Altar of God as there is but one Bishop together with his Presbytery to unity with which all penitent Schismaticks must return in order to the remission of their Sins So that such a System of Presbyteries in every Bishoprick appears by this Disciple of the Apostles and Bishop of their Consecration to be of Divine Ordinance for a Council to the Bishop and the Bishoprick in all its occasions So that so many places attesting such a Systematick Consociation of Presbyteries in every See will bid a fair Interpretation for all those other places which require observance to Elders plurally only named See in the mean time Ep. 6. § 5. Solus rescribere nibil potui nibil sine consilio vsstro c. Ep. 18. 24. but collectively understood as an Ecclesiastick Council and so of the Deacons the same is most probable because they are generally set with the Bishop and the Presbytery in these Rules of Hierarchical Discipline and Vnion according to the forms of those Synods of St. Cyprians which generally contained the Deacons as well as Presbyters gathered together in the face of the whole Church in affairs that did concern all the Orders thereof of which more will be spoken when we come to particulars § 5. In the vacancy the Clergy of Council for the Bishop rick Nor were they only of Counsel and Sub Society to the Bishop while the See was full but they were a Council for the Vacant Bishoprick during the Interval to inspect and conduct the publick state thereof and to give and receive Letters of Communion between other Churches For tho' in the Vacancies Presbyters were not able to do all Episcopal Offices in their own Right as Ordination Anathematizing Absolution c. yet all things preparatory hereunto were in their power as Examination Regulation Suspension Injunctions of Penance c. in which the vacant Bishoprick was to be Canonically Subject and Obedient reserving higher Procedures to the higher Authorities of either the neighbouring Bishops at the present or their proper Bishop next to succeed Ign. ad Rom. For tho' Ignatius tells the Romans 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ep. ad Antiochen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that his Church in Syria at Antioch had now in his steed Christ and Christ only for her Pastor and Bishop yet in that ascribed to him sent to his own Antiochians he charges the Presbyters to feed the Flock till God should give them a Governour and the People in the mean time to be subject to the Presbyters and Deacons And tho' this is indeed an Apocriphal Epistle yet it is an unexceptionable Canon specisied in it and far from an Imposture that the Clergy should Govern the Laity in the Vacancy So Polycarp in his Epistle to the Church at Philippi then as it seems Polycarps ad Philippens charges the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is the Laity 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vide Cypr. Ep. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. without a Bishop for otherwise the Canon required him to have mentioned him in the first place directs the Presbyters to be Merciful Visiters of the Needy Converters of them that Err forbearing Wrath Partiality Unjust Judgment Severity c. the Laity to be subject to them And when it shall be considered that in these days the several Presbyters had not several Congregations apart to themselves but were all one common Colledge over one People in every See and the Rule of the Government and Obedience setin this Epistle is to the Elders in common without any distributive appropriation it will then be as clear that they were a Council for the Church in the Vacancy as a Council to the Bishop in the Plenarty To which the express Testimonies of the Epistles reciprocated between Bishops and Vacant Sees under the Conciliar Conduct of the Clergy are full and convincing Cler. Rom. Clero Carthag in t Epist Cypr. Ep. 3. § 1. cum incumbat whis qui videmur praepositi esse vice pastor is custodire gregem c. spoken of the Clergy of both Sees Thus the Clergy at Rome writing under their Vacancy to the Clergy at Carthage under the absence of St. Cyprian looked upon it as a duty incumbent upon them in the absence or want of the Bishops to supply their places in what their Order would admit in the custody of the Flock And they therefore having received Letters from the Clergy of Carthage of the Recess of St. Cyprian the Bishop by Clement the Carthaginian Sub-Deacon and Messenger send back this their Epistle by their Agent Bassianus to the Clergy of Carthage Ibid. Harum literarum exemplum ad quoscunque poteritis transmittere per idoneas occasiones c. vid. Cyp. ad Cler. Ep. 6. § 2. and desired them to communicate it by all means and opportunities possible to other Churches Which were plainly acts of Form and Nature Conciliar and such as they looked on as matter of Duty and not Prudence only 'T is true where Bishops were only absent it may be presumed that the Presbyteries did act by the direction of the Absent Bishop but then it is as certain Cyp. ad Cler. Ep. 6. Vice meâ fungamini cirea gerendaca quae administratio religiosa deposcit vid. Ep. 5. § 1. that the Absent Bishop was Canonically obliged so to Authorize or concede that vicarious administration which they upon their own Right before such actual Commission might assume for it was the disobedience of some proud Consessors to the Authority and Conduct of the Deacons and Presbyters Cyp. ibid. § 4. Quando audio quosdam nec à Diaconis aut presbyteris regi posse that occasioned St. Cyprians sixth Epistle to Authorize the Clergy that could safely stay at Carthage under the then persecution in his Stead Name and conceded Authority to carry on the Ecclesiastical Administrations Which was not the first Original of the Clergies Authority in the absence of the Bishop
but a valid and doubling Confirmation Cyp. Ep. 15. ad Cler. Rom. § 2. Presbyteris Diaconibus non defuit Sacerdotis vigor Ep. 37. ad Cler. § 1. officium meum vestra diligentia repraesentet or express ratification of that Antecedent Authority of the Clergy which the exorbitant took upon them for want of the Bishops Presence to despise there being the same reason tho' not the same degree of Want in the Absence as the Death of a Bishop and the proper vacancy of the See thereupon And therefore tho' in the denying Communion to Gaius Diddensis a Presbyter and his Deacon without his antecedent Sentence only on the Counsel of some of St. Cyprians fellow Bishops Cyp. Ep. 28. ad Cler. Integre cum disciplinâ fecislis quod consilio collegarum meorum qui praesentes erant Gaio Diddensi presbytero Diacono ejus censutstis non communicandum they acted on their own Authority yet are they commended by St. Cyprian as having acted with great Integrity and according to the Rules of Ecclesiastick Discipline It appears then that by a Primitive and Catholick Polity founded at least upon Divine Right if not Precept where-ever Episcopal Sees were fully sixed there was also a Council of Presbyters with Deacons and Officers under them for the Conduct of the Bishoprick and upon absence or Death of the Bishop for Synodical Communications with other Churches § 6. Which being pre-established it may not be amiss to consider some of those procedures in which the Primitive Bishops were wont to convene their Clergy in which I mean them alone in one Diocess without the aggregation of other Bishops for the Government of affairs And first if any Person under his Bishop promoted new or false Doctrines in Religion this became matter for the Care of the Bishop and the Counsel of his Clergy and many times the presence of the Laity infected or in danger of infection Dionys Alex. ap Euseh Eccl. Hist l. 7. c. 25. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nepotis dicbum Elenchium Allegoristarum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and after a moderate discussion of the matter had by all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Thus in the Arsinoire Region under the Primacy of Alexandria one Coracion had disseminated the Doctrine of Nepos an Egyptian Bishop concerning a Carnal Millennium which had spread far and wide to the subversion of much people Whither therefore Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria coming called together the Village Presbyters and Teachers in the presence of all the Laity that had a mind to be there and to have a publick Discussion of that Doctrine of Nepos And after three days publick Canvas of Nepos his Book made with much moderation by all persons the affair ended successfully in the Conversion of Coracion the Ringleaders of the Millenaries If then Authority to Convert Men from Errors be Divine and Convocations of Clergy-Men by their Bishop be necessary or Expedient thereto as 't was in this case it follows that such Synods under a Bishop are of Divine Right and 't is as much the Bishops Divine Authority as Duty to convene them § 7. Cypr. ad Cler. Ep. 10. § 2. Nam cum in minoribus pece at is agant peccatores prenitentiam justo tempore secundum disciplinae or dinem ad exomolegesin veniant per imposstionem manus Episcopi Cleri jus communicationis accipiunt nunc crudo tempore Offertur nomen corum nondum pruitentiâ actâ nondum exâ—mologesi factâ nondum manu eis ab Episcopo Clero impositâ Euch iristia illis datur vid. Ep. 11. § 1. Ep. 12. § 1. Another Instance of Convening the Clergy by their Bishops in these Ages was for reconciling publick Penitents by Imposition of Hands of the Bishop and Clergy upon Consession first made publickly before in order to a recovery of the right of Communication Ecclesiastical and Eucharistical as also for the Censure of such as should presumptuously violate the Laws Order Union and Discipline of their Church and for Ordinations of the Clergy or less Orders All which are Acts Synodical Ibid. § 4. Acturi apud Nos the Bishop and Clergy apud confessores Causam suam c. Ep. 24. quos jam pridem communi consilio Clero proximos feceramus quando cum Presbyteris doclioribus lectores diligenter probaremus and grounded upon the Authority of the Bishop and the Reason of the Causes both which herein most certainly were as Divine as for such they were then received If a Man would be here accurate in traversing such intimations as may be picked up herein among the Antients one might swell this chapter to a greater largeness than is necessary but taking for granted that these are uncontestable and apposite evidence I leave these Presbyteries and their Divine Powers on their own Divine Foundations and proceed to the second sort of Episcopal or Provincial Synods CHAP. VII Of Episcopal and Provincial Synods in the three first Centuries and their Authority § 1. THAT there were Synodical Conventions and Provincial Councils of Bishops and such Presbyters under them as the Bishops brought with them or called to them in the First Centuries will not I suppose be denied by any owner of Episcopacy and the Volumes of the Antient Fathers So that our present enquiry is not into or concerning their actual being but their Frequency Right Authority and Uses for which they were wont so often so vigorously to assemble § 2. Tertull. De Jejun Aguntur praecepta per Graecias illus certis in locis Concilia ex universis Ecelesijs per quae altiora quaeque incommune tractantur ipsa repraesentatio totiùs nominis Christiani magnâ veneratione celebratur Et hoe quam dignum side auspicanti undique congregari ad Christum Conventus autem isti stat ionibus prius jejunationibus operati dolere cum dolentibus ita demum congaudere gaudentibus norunt vid. Alexand. Alexandrin Episc Epist ad Cath. Eccl. Epis ap Socr. Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 5. And first as to their general frequency Tertullian the most antient of all our Latin Authors tells us that thro' all the Greek Countries where Christianity had so universally spread it self Councils were by command or precept convened out of all Churches thro' or in which Councils all arduous matters were publickly treated of and in them the Reverence of the Christian Character solemnly celebrated it being the highest dignity thus every where to be convened unto Christ and that with severe Stations and Fastings for the sanctification of them Where we see he asserts the practice and devotion to be of the very highest and divinest Dignity imaginable and consequently of the like Authority equal to that Dignity in which 't is either fundamentally lodged or to which 't is inseparably concomitant Nor does the Dignity only but the necessities of affairs also recommend or enforce the exercise as well as Institution of
Secondly To punish Christians for not living by their own Rules They may require them to live by their own Rules and punish them Temporally if they break them a Falsity in a Religious Profession being Criminal at any Bar whatsoever § 6. Thirdly To call Assemblies upon Protection They may require any Christian Assemblies or Synods to inform and instruct the Prince or any of his People in Matters Christian on the engagement of Publick Protection § 7. Fourthly Of being present except in matter of Communion Every Prince has a Right of Presence in any Christian Assemblies except in Matters of Christian Communion peculiar only to the Initiated For all Religion Mystical requires a peculiar Society of its Votaries and admits no Aliens whatsoever but in all things without that Communion even a Secular Prince may appear in peaceable and friendly manner § 8. Fifthly Of Inspection and Caution over Assemblies c Every Prince may appoint all ways of Inspection and Caution to preserve the Peace against all disorders that may be suspected or occasioned in such Synods upon Pretences or Transactions of Religion as being the publick Guardian of all Secular Justice and Peace by Virtue of Civil Laws Sanctions and all Processes of Legal Government But if a Prince breaks in upon Authorities elsewhere lodged by God this may be done indeed with impunity but not with Right and may oblige to patience under Legal Sufferings but not to any practical Obedience or Observation CHAP. IX Of the Authority of Christian Princes over Ecclesiastical Synods in point of Reason § 1. VVE have above prescribed for a Divine Right in the Catholick Church to hold Ecclesiastical Synods by the Authority of her Spiritual Governours and in them freely to Deliberate Consult Act Determine and Decree in Matters of Doctrine and Discipline and Communion to a Spiritual Obligation unto Canonical Obedience in all the Subject Members The Foundations hereof we have laid in the Scriptures and deduced an Universal Succession of this Practice upon a Continued and Catholick Uncontested Claim of a Divine Authority in the Church for the three first Centuries We have also adjusted the True Bounds of Supremacy in meer Heathen or Infidel Princes over such Christian Assemblies We are now to go on and consider the Ecclesiastical Sovereignty of Christian Princes over Ecclesiastical Synods how far it reaches and on what grounds it stands § 2. And first it must be granted Prince to lose 〈◊〉 Authority by being Christian that the Authority of a Christian Sovereign must comprehend that of all others in it self there being no Reason that Princes should lose any Prerogatives of their Crowns by becoming Christian it being for the benefit of Mankind that their Princes should be all Christian and therefore not sit that they should suffer any Diminution by that whereby the World receives so vast a Benefit But because this alone is not like to give content we will sum you up the Prerogatives of Dr. Wake taken from our Crown here and ascribed equally to all other Sovereign Princes professing Christianity what where and whensoever § 3. By the Submission of that most Holy The 〈◊〉 of the Submission of the 〈…〉 VIII Undefiled Humbled and Orthodox Convocation under K. I had almost said St. Henry VIII and the Statute thereupon it is fixed that our Convocations are not to convene without the Kings Writ nor attempt to Make Enact Promulge or Execute any Canon c. without Royal License c this being but an Affirmance of an Antecedent Right at Common Law which the Dr. deduces down by Historical Accounts from the first Christian King of the English Saxons and not content therewith he extends the Supremacy beyond the Letter of the Law and Lodges it in the very formal Right and Reason of the Christian Magistracy precluding hereby all possible hopes of any the least relief from our present Tyes notwithstanding all our old Franchises our present Merits and our future Dangers For the ill Consequences of a Local and Positive Law might have had remedy but the Fundamental and General Laws of Sovereignty admit not the least Correction or Alteration § 4. Now the Doctrine of the Dr. briefly consists in these Aphorisms 1. That under the Dominion of the Christian Magistrate 1. p. 14 41 48 76. the Church has no inherent Right or Authority to convene in Synods but what it derives from the express Concession of the Christian Prince 2. For that all Synods are but of Counsel to the Prince 2 p. 84 85 136 to 139 289 38 286. and entirely in his Hands and so 3. Not any to be sent to the Synod 3. p. 28 39 40 103 104 105. but such as he shall allow nor 4. When convened to Sit 4. p. 79 to 83 106 107 110 112 c. 132. Debate Propose Deliberate Conclude or Decree any Matter of Doctrine or Discipline whatsoever 5. Nor in any Method Form 5. p. 44 53 54 71. or Manner whatsoever save what the Prince admits and that 6. The Prince may Ratify 6. p. 81 to 86 133. Annihilate or Alter all their Acts and Procedures or as many of them as he pleases and 7. Suspend the Execution of all 7. p. 85 to 89 125 126. and any of their Canons and Sentences 8. The Authority of their Acts being entirely and only his 8. p. 288. and Lastly 9. That no Synod hath Right to dissolve its self 9. p. 77 to 79. without the Kings License VVhere we may Note that all these are Articles Negative of all those Liberties and Authorities of the Church under the Christian Princes which she claimed of Divine and Vncontested Right under Heathen Powers for the three first Centuries of Christanity immediately lost and to be swallowed up of every Prince as soon as he commences Christian Wherefore it is necessary to look to the bottom of this Matter upon which the Dr. builds this overthrow of all the Churches Authorities under Christian Powers Now his Arguments are of two Classes the first seated in the Substrate Reasons and Equity hereof the second derived from the General and Uniform Claim and Practice of all Christian Princes § 5. The Des Arguments from Reason As for the former sort of Arguments which would have been the chiesest most convincing and most satisfactory the Dr. has not collected them into any proper Order or Sections in order to a set illustration of his Principles as it had been to have been wish'd but only by light touches and glances here and there seldom and consusedly Interspersed given us little hints and intimations of them Now herein perhaps he has bespoken our excuse 〈◊〉 7. for that his hast and interfering Avocations would not allow him to be exact But hereupon to set things off in the clearest light and view I can I will corrade those Reasons on which he Bottoms the Right of Christian Princes to these Anthorities These
is none but on other Reasons exteriour either of State Peace or other insuperable dissiculties nor can such mistaken or enforced Protections give the Protector an Ecclesiastical Headship over all those Systems of different Religions to act them all as Dr. Wake allows them to Act the Church because there is no Right bottomed upon Error See Chap 1. Sect. 5. and because many times they are exempt from his Jurisdiction as in the Chappels of Embassadors and Foreign Factories whose Protection is not Founded upon a supposed possibility of Truth but upon the Reasons of Commerce and Negotiation § 8. Incorpon on dissers from Protection But if the Dr. shall here make Protection only to consist in an Incorporation of the Church into the State and her Canons into the Laws as this is quire another thing from bare Protection and thought to be of a more transcendent Elevation so it will then appear that none of the Christion Roman Emperors did so instate the Church which consequesitly must then be out of Protection and so free from their Supremacy the Exercise whereof therefore must have been an Usurpation and a Nullity § 9. But we shall by and by discern a little better the Form and Nature of a Protection of the Church For if the Catholick Church had a Divine Right in the Liberties and Authorities Synodical continued universally inviolate and unquestioned for 300 Years downward from the Apostles how can this Body be protected by any Magistrate or Powers that shall claim off in point of Title and take it away thereupon in point of Fact any or all of these Divine Priviledges Protection inconsistent with violation of Right given by God and granted to her Priests for her Conduct and Conservation and this under a pretence of Protection while the Churches Constitution is apparently ruined and her Synods heretofore free declared now for Criminal if not held in Villenage This is so contrary to the very Dictates of Nature in the Reason and Form of Protection that all Systems and Factions of Religion disclaim such Bondage and challenge a liberty as presubstrate and praevious to Protection which is otherwise inconceivable and the pretence thereof a meer sham upon humane Understanding The Iews therefore as busie as they are to be enfranchised in their several Dispersions yet would never endure the Civil Powers thereupon so to prescribe all the Politie of the Synagogue and to Null Cancel Ratify or Alter their Methods and an attempt of this Nature upon them would appear as dreadful a persecution as Caius his erecting his Image in their Synagogues Jews Papists Sectaries all for Ecclesiastical Liberty Not only the Romish Church but all other Sectaries and the Scotch Kirk illustriously scorns to admit any servitude notwithstanding not only the National Protection but Promotion being all sensible that a Liberty of Religious Government and Church Discipline is more valuable than all worldly Wealth or Interests and without which they cannot apprehend any Protection to Religion or the Societies that profess it And to close up all since in all Ecclesiastical History those Synods have been most injurious or injuriously dealt with that were least free and their Authority thereby vacated with all Churches for ever I wonder what reputation the Dr. will secure to a Provincial or National Synod with Neighbour Churches Liberty necessary to validity and reputation whether Popish or Reformed or with future Generations should it be in Fact so managed by a Prince as the Dr. avers it may rightly be in all its Motions and Issues Or how can we blame the Popes Management of the Council of Trent and such others if we will justify ten tiems a greater Bondage in the Councils called by Princes What security is there for Uniformity in Doctrine Regularity of Discipline and Authority with the Christian Church if all be to be done only ad nutum P pis The Dr. tells us of Bp. p. 115. King Charles the first and A. B. Land Lands Concurrence with K. Charles the First his Writ for and License to the Convocation Very well and that King and that Prelate too might do so in observing the Forms which could not be altered without Act or Rupture of Parliament but does it follow that they were either of them of the Drs. Enslaving Principles under Sovereignty in General When that Great Primate declares against Fisher a free General Council to be the supremest Judicatory in the Catholick Church and would he not then think the same of a Provincial Council for a Provincial Church tho' both convened and permitted to sit by the Will and Order of Princes Men may Act under the Forms of those Laws when not actually Executed to our injury which they do not simply approve of in themselves and against such a Prosecution of which Laws they would openly and avowedly Complain as did the Council at Ariminum c. And I take it that it must pass for an eternal Rule Truth and Piety free Principles that as Truth and Piety are free-born Principles so are the Depositaries or Trustees of them also to be free in the Culture and Propagation of them And they that withdraw the Necessary freedom of these Trustees withdraw their Protection from the Principles themselves Not to be committed to Slaves they being too noble and glorious to be committed to the Care and Conduct of Slaves or Vassals § 10. Having thus enquired into the first reason for this Alienation of Synodical Powers from the Mitre to the Crown The forms of alienation improper let us in the next place examine the Form of it hereupon which must consist in a Devolution Occupation or Contract with the Spiritual Powers If by Devolution this must be founded either in the Original Ordinance and Constitution of God or from the Natural Right of Sovereigns over all Persons of the same Religion The first ground hereof I want and can I doubt be no where found and we shall have occasion hereafter to make Experiment whether it can or no. And as to the second I shall readily yield it if it can be made our that in all Religion Natural and Revealed the Prince that is of it shall have the entire Conduct of it For then indeed it must rest in the Hierarchy only till they get a King of their Faith to whom then they must turn over all their Powers But why should this Divine Charter Devolve over to Princes any more than that of a little Borough This of the Borough was granted by Kings Be it so tho' 't is not necessarily so for that popular States may so six themselves and after admit a King to protect them but without any Devolution But be it so Can then our King be denied a Devolution of a Charter in a Town which he Protects because a former King founded it tho' in a mere Secular Interest and Government and must a Charter founded by the King of Kings Devolve to a Temporal
noted in prejudice to the Rectitude of Prescriptions taken from the practice of Sovereign and Uncontroulable Powers that by Virtue or what else you will call it of that unaccountable Eminency they may and many times do go beyond the Lines and Measures of Right appertaining to them and who is there that shall say to any such Prince What doest thou So that prescription though it will actually carry it in such a Kings Courts where the Judges are at his own choice and pleasure yet is not a safe nor certain Criterton of real Right before free and equal Judgments as would appear in other Courts or by the Resolution of Foreign Lawyers where their Judgments are not subjected And therefore that Prescription for Kings which will and must pass with Lawyers in foro for Prerogative must not presently be taken for infallible Right by all Men and particularly by Divines till the whole Nature of the Matter and the Reasons of the Royal Interest appear equal For the verification hereof I need not go back so far as the Licentiousness of the Cesars nor so far off as to the Mahometans Kingdoms let us but look over the Southern Lake and see how Prerogative prescribes over the miserable Subjects there and every where else where the Sword is Arbitrary and think the Observation will appear very well bottomed So that when the Dr. would argue for all his Exorbitant Powers of Princes over Synods from their customary Claims and Practices to the convincing of Mens Minds of the Rectitude of them he ought all along or by a general Set of Reason once for all to have set forth the unexceptionable Equity as well as Custom of such Practices for otherwise the customary Practices of a Boundless Power will not ipso facto prove their own Equity nor be fair presumptions for it alone with free and unsubjected Judgments § 4. To shew the reasonableness of these Cautions and Exceptions let us but consider how great and large a Prescription Mahometism has in those Infidel Countries and Popery in great part of Christendom and Heathen Idolatry once had from almost the Tower of Babel till Constantine's Days over the General World under the support of the Princes Prerogatives and yet we see all those were and are meer Nullities because there is no equal bottom for them but the certain iniquity vacates all that Right of Prescription which yet did and still does pass in Law thro' all the abused Countries so that prescription is rather a Rule of Right among Subjects than in Sovereigns § 5. The Dr. heeded not to any good Originals for his prescriptions Now the Dr. is so far from pretending to any Express Law or Constitution for the general Right of all Princes in those Powers which he has so liberally assigned them that he does not so much as suggest nor seem to consider the presupposition of any such as the Original of these Prescriptions Only in Fact such things have been done pretended and claimed by Christian Princes and never by others without their Concession and so concludes therefore it was and is their Right as Christian Magistrates without any reference to or supposition expressed of any Legal Original no not so much as indefinitely and generally whereas it was to have been expected that he should have definitely Specified some Law or Act as the supposable Original or Foundation of them either the Law of Nature or Providence or some Divinely Revealed Law Grant or Prophecy or the Law of Nations or Common Charter of Christian Nations as such or Canons Ecclesiastical or Contract between the Ecclesiastical and Civil Powers or at least and at last some Original Imperial Law over the Roman World whence all the lesser Princes of the divided Empire retain the Right so Founded An exact Lawyer would have laid some or other of these Foundations for the prescribed practice but the Dr. was sensible it was a dangerous adventure to assign Originals and so let it pass but by thus slipping it over he shews it impossible to be done and so fixes a fatal prejudice against the Truth and Credit of his Reasonings since he shews no Original Cause Reason or Equity presumable for the Right of such a Prescription And therefore since he so fatally fails at the bottom we cannot expect any great success or assurances from his meer Historical Allegations § 5. We will therefore go on with him and make Experiment of his most Antient and most Divine Instance in the Jewish Kings Jewish Princes p. 10. There is saith he no one so great a Stranger to the Holy Scriptures as not to know what Authority the Jewish Princes under the Law pretended to as to this Matter What that Matter is he just before declares in generals A Right not only to Exercise Authority over Ecclesiastical Persons but to Interpose in the ordering of Ecclesiastical Affairs too And then adds How far the first Christian Emperors followed their Examples were other Authors silent yet that one Assertion of Socrates would not suffer us to be ignorant where he Affirms that ever since they became Christians H. H. Praf l. v. p. 259. C. the Affairs of the Church have depended on them and the greatest Synods have been Assembled by their Order and still says he continue to be so Assembled § 6. We are not now to examine in this Part the History and Facts of Christian Emperours in managing the Synods save only by the by 't is Observable that the Dr. has cited Socrates against himself For the Dr. asserts Content p. X. Ch. 1. § 6. That all Synods whatsoever were Assembled by Princes but Socrates says only the greatest as well knowing that most of the lesser Synods Convened and Acted all without the Imperial Knowledge or Concurrence But to return to the proper Matter of the present Enquiry it seems to the Dr. that the Emperours herein followed and copied after the Platforms of the Jewish Princes herein manifest to every one that Reads their History in Scripture Synagogue Forms not extant in Scripture as if the Scriptures had given us a Draught and Model of the Synodical Polity and Forms under Jewish Kings This had been a fine thing indeed an happy Scheme for Church-Government but there is none so great a Stranger to the Scriptures as not to know that they mention nothing hereof nor of any Pretensions their Princes made to it Here are no Frames of the Great Sanhedrim no Tables of their City-Councils no Platforms of their Synagogues nor their Synodical Conduct under their Princes exhibited to us So that 't was so far impossible in Fact that the Christian Emperors herein exactly followed the Jewish Patterns that there were no Jewish Patterns in Gods Word to be followed at all much less with exactness nor is it probable that the Christian Emperours did so much as think of these Jewish Kings in their Synodical Councils or had the Forms been certain that they could have had
such a value for the Synagogue as to think its Constitutions Fundamental to the Church or such an Imperial Authority over it much less when the Scriptures give the Polity of the Synagogue none the least mention much less Recommendation and Authority to prescribe Law to the Christian Church for ever but by its Absolute and Total Silence herein seem to intend that that Polity should instead of such prescriptive Power together with the Law be nailed to our Saviours Cross and be afterward decently buried in an Eternal Oblivion And hence tho' Men of Rabbinic Learning are very fond to derive our Forms from their Patterns yet we find no such Conceptions hereof among the Antients as no shades of it in the Scriptures nor Authority for it any where § 7. But supposing the Jewish Princes had managed the Synods of the Synagogue according to the Drs. Aphorisms and pretended a rightful Authority so to do does it follow that they really had that Right which they pretended to If bare Pretences of Princes will create a Right the dispute is over but then I must tell the Dr. he had never had any opportunity or inducement to have written his Book for this sort of Supremacy But if bare pretences alone create no Right and the Christian Emperours exactly followed them herein then Christian Princes have hereupon only pretence for this their Authority So that the Drs. Cause required stronger Assertions of Right in the Jewish Kings Assigned in the Laws and Constitutions of God Mishpat Hammelech by which they were very particularly constituted But herein there is the profoundest Silence I Sam. 8.11 to 19. and that little that is said of the Mishpat Hammelech the manner of the King which they wickedly craved instead of God tho' it imports a Domination Cyp. Ep. 65. § 1. Et ut hoc ulcisceretur excitavit eis Saul Regem qui eos injuriis gravibus afligeret per omnes contumelias paenas superbum populum calcaret et premeret ut contemptus Sacerdos de superbo populo divinâ ultione vindicaretur yet does not so much assert a Right as denounce it an uncontroulable oppression in punishment to their contempt of God and Samuel But yet God that was resolved so to deliver them up upon their own desires yet limits the oppressions to Matters Secular only not permitting the insolence to rage also over their Sacred and Religious Liberties that there might from hence be no ground for any such barbarous and impious Prescription for any Princes Arbitrary lusts herein whatsoever § 8. But to be as Concessive to the Dr. as 't is possible suppose this Domination to have extended to their Religious Polity and Liberties also will he hence prescribe from the malice of Jewish Kings permitted by God in punishment to a Rebellious People for the Right of such Practices in Princes upon the Christian Church and the same Christian Princes too And yet excepting this he has nothing in the Bible that looks like any Ordinance for the suppression of the Popular Liberties and none at all for the Hierarchical § 9. Since then there is no Law nor Praecedent in the Old Testament for this sort of Ecclesiastical Power or Authority in either Jewish or Christian Princes let us consider what other Law or Constitution can be sound out or supposed for its legal Original And first we must consider the State of the Question in the first Christian Emperors who are said to Claim Use The Original of Censtantiaes Supremacy and to be rightly Invested with this Authority and particularly in Constantine the Great Now he being supposed to claim all these Prerogatives as his Right antecedent to the actual Exercise thereof must sound it in one or other of those Originals above summed up § 4. and yet I believe none of these will quadrate with the Hypothesis For first if it be founded in the Natural Law of Sovereignty simply then all Sovereigns Heathens Turks Jews would simply have it and all Acts of Synods otherwise managed would not only be Nullities but Rebellious Seditions which yet I presume no Doctor will allow Not in any express Revelation of God for there is none such in either Testament not in any Gâ—â—â—ral Laws of Nations as being antecedent to and more general than Christianity and in Interests Temporal only not in any Common Charter of Christian Nations as such for such Charter and such Nations there were none before Constantine not in any Canons Ecclesiastical for all those before Constantine's time had no respect to any Temporal Powers not in any Contract of his with the Church for such is no where mentioned in his History which yet had been the most signal thing in it nor at last in any Law of his own making for no man can make a right or valid Law but by some antecedent Authority vested in him so to do and of this the Question properly lies Now since here are none of the Originals extant in History or Nature or Revelation the only remaining Plea must be prescription from immemorial precedents that might warrant a legal presumption for some of these Originals But Constantine had not one instance before him for this his Synodical Supremacy for the three first Centuries after Christ and the Plantation of the Powers Ecclesiastical but all the prescription throughout those Ages was for the Hierarchy in whose hands Constantine at his Conversion found it lodged in full Vigour and Authority and is known and recorded to have owned it for Divine as will appear in the second part So that the Right that is attributed by our Laws to our Kings The Legal Original of our Kings Supremacy belonged not to Constantine the Great and therefore must be lodged in some other Constitution viz. the same as that of all our Common Laws and Original Contract between the King and the Estates of this Realm and that upon a Civil Incorporation of the Church and its Powers and Ordinances into the Civil State and Secular Authority But if any man shall think that the Churches Authorities were given by God in order to Church Duties and that the Church can no more part with one than the other as being inseparable and conservient to Divine ends and so make an invidious objection about our Frame I hope no man will expect that 〈◊〉 should be such a Fool to expose my self to a Middlesex Jury and so leaving this matter to God and the Sense of all that love his Church I am their Humble Servant but as to Constantine the Great I dare swear he never dream'd of the business § 10. Nay there was in his time a very obvious prejudice against such an Opinion viz. that God whose Ways are not as ours Why Kings were not made the first Apostles nor his Thoughts like those of the Sons of Men seeing the ineptitude of the Emperors immersed in Secular Cares to engross all Holy Authorities to themselves and the Suspicion
for departing from this Rule and that is much the same thing with not having departed from it But not so good Sir for in a confessed Right there is no need of a Justification but it is sufficient in such and so very many Synods held without any reference to Emperours that there was no Rule or Law against them nor ever any Censure of Irregularity past upon them If the Prince was angry at it he might call another to review the matters but he never could condemn the Provincial Conventions merely for being made without his License Of the Total Authority This in all Acts Synodical he avowedly attributes to the Prince yet unhappily falls sometimes into contrary instances and concessions unawares as for example chap. 2. § 24. p. 55. He says That in the sixth Council of Toledo we find the very Constitutions themselves in some measure drawn by up the Order of Cinthilus their King and only Confirmed by the Synod Now where the Right of Confirmation was there was the chief Internal Synodical Authority Again ch 2. § 36. p. 87. He says of the first Council at Ephesus That they appointed the Emperors Order for suspending the Sentence of Celestine and Cyrils to Provincial Synods to be inserted into their Acts and thereby gave a kind of Conciliary Authority to it But if Councils in themselves have all their Authority Conciliary from the Prince how could that Council give any to his Order Or how was it pertinent to the Doctors Principle ch 2. § 25. p. 56. to alledge Receswinthus magno precatu deliberationis exhortantem exhorting the eighth Council of Toledo with great entreaty to consider the matters he laid before them Of the Princes Ability to Judge matters Theological ch 2. § 31. p. 71 72. The Arguments given for this are very languid and repugnant to common experience and may as well be applied to the Reputation of a Beggars Judgment in Matters Divine But yet it must be allowed that before a Prince gives the Definitions of a Synod a Legal Sanction or his own recommendatory Suffrage 't is fit he should understand them but the Spiritual Authority lies not in the Prince but in the Spiritual Truth in matter of Faith enforced by the Canonical Order of Ecclesiastick Ministries tho' the Doctor ascribes the Authority of imposing belief on the Subjects to the Confirmations of the Kings lb. p. 75. I hope saith he they will think it to be their Duty in order to his consirming their Decrees with a good Conscience to convince him of the Truth of them and not expect that he should not only believe himself but should oblige others to BELIEVE what neither he nor they see any reason to believe The Fathers that scouted the second Sirmian Creed that dated it self in the Presence of Constantius and under the Consulship of Flavius Ensebius and Hypatius in the tenth of the Calends of â—nne for ascribing so late a beginning in but the Presence of a Prince how would they have blessed themselves had they heard any man ascribe to Princes an Anthority of making Subjects believe or had they read any such paslage as this ch 2. § â—3 p. 79. It is I conceive allowed on all bends that their Definions are no further obligatory than as they are rulified and confirmed by the Civil Authority For tho' the Faith of Christ neither depends upon the Authority of Man nor is subject to the Power either of Synods or Princes as to what concerns the truth of it Yet what that Faith is which shall be allowed to be professed in every Community by the Laws of it and receive not only Protection but Encouragement from the Civil Power must be left to the Prince to determine So far 't is tolerable well And the Definitions of Synods in favour of it will signifie very little till what they have determined to be the Right Faith be also allowed by the Civil Magistrate to the publickly Professed and Taught and be received into his Favour and under his Patronage as such Sute the Doctor forgot the three first Centuries and all other times of Princely Persecutions under which the Synodical assertions of the Faith signisied more to the convincing Men to Faith Ten Thousand times than all the Encouragement of Christian Princes ever could did or will And therefore whatsoever liking any other Arch-Bishop might have had to this Doctrine of the Doctors I hope this is none for which the Doctor will challenge his present Graces approbation Of Ecclesiastical Censures These the Dr. makes all annihilable by the Will of Princes But how then shall what they bind on Earth be bound in Heaven and their sins be retained which they retain if they are Repealable by an Earthly Prince Has this Earthly Potentate a Commission to bind and loose remit and retain in Earth and Heaven too as the Church had and has still except he can take it away The Doctor should have considered here that Kings are only concerned in Church Censures as by the Laws they are to have a Civil effect not as to their Spiritual validity before God in Heaven Of the Right of Summons Ch. 3. § 5. p. 107. They have Right to nothing but a Summons and it were no great matter whether they had a Right to that or no. Ch. 3. § 25. p. 141. Yet I humbly conceive that so antient and settled a Custom ought to be held to What! tho' 't is no matter whether they had this Right or no Of the Bottom of the Regal Supremacy This he solemnly and universally places in the Sovereignty of all Christian Princes as such but ch 3. § 25. p. 144. he lodges it in the Trust reposed and granted by the People The Government has intrusted him our King with the Power of giving them leave to sit and act when he pleases and when he pleases he may deny them to do either This is indeed the Truth and only Truth in this matter 't is a concession and trust of the Estates to our Princes established by Common and Statute Law which whether God approves or no must be left to his Judgment at last when Men shall be called to account for what they have done herein or hereupon But in the mean time this Truth is a prejudice against that universal Right of all Christian Sovereigns herein by mere vertue of their Sovereignty Of the Parallel of Counsellor and Jury Chap. 5. § 15. p. 289. Will not their Resolutions be their own because the King declared to them the general Matter upon which they were to consult Is a Counsellor at Law of no Vse or has he no freedom of Opinion because his Client puts his Case to him Or does our Law unfitly call the answer of a Petit-Jury its Verdict because the Judge summed up the Evidence to them and directed them not only upon what points but from what proof they were to raise it What strange Notions must c. But what strange Notions must that Man have that thinks a Synod to have only a freedom of Opinion like a Counsellor without any Decisive Authority and yet compare that very freedom of Opinion to the Verdict of a Jury which is Authoritatively Decisive To compare the King to a Client and a Synod to his Counsellor and in the same breath to make the King a Judge and so of Counsel to the Jury Whatsoever esteem the rest of this Book may acquire among the learned of the Law I do not pretend to Divine but I believe this will raise no extraordinary Transports and so let it pass And now I have done with my Remarks upon the Doctors Incongruities which tho' necessary to shew the weakness of the Work that a false Reputation may not recommend the ill Principles I had never offered to publick notice had he not used his Generous Adversary not only with extreme Spight but undeserved Contempt insulting over him as a Man of no Honesly Logick Law or History c. I could have added a great many more such absurdities but the employ is uneasie and so I quit it and shall only wish that the Doctor may humble himself to God for the wrongs he has done to the Church and when he has done so he will quickly endeavour to make her Reparation FINIS