Church seems wholly Inconsistent with that Interest and Care and Concern for Religion which Christian Kings and Princes are alway supposed to have and the Regulation and Defence of which is one great End and Purpose of all their Authority Till I see farther Reason against it than what has yet been shewn I cannot but believe that the Civil Government in their Way and by a due Exercise of their Power is concerned for the Good of Mens Souls to promote Virtue and true Religion as well as the Bishops and Pastors of Christ's Flock And if they are then to exclude their Jurisdiction in all Ecclesiastical Causes and Matters is to rob them of one great Part of their Sovereignty It is in effect to confine all the Authority of Princes only to the Preservation of Peace and Order and Justice in Human Societies without any Regard to GOD and Religion And I know of no good Reason that can be given for this For altho ' GOD the FATHER for the Honour of our Blessed Redeemer and the more effectual Accomplishing our Redemption has given him a Church and a Kingdom within his own Dominions and allowed Him his Proper Ministers and Governors of this CHURCH under his own Divine Authority Yet I hope these Gentlemen will not say that this carries along with it a Devolution of all Power and Authority in religious Affairs from Princes to Bishops from the Governors of the State to those of the Church And if it does not then the Secular Powers ought not in any such Affairs to have their Authority and Jurisdiction excluded That would be to subvert one of the main Ends of their Institution which was That under them we might live peaceable and quiet Lives in Godliness as 1 Tim. ii 2. well as in common Honesty These Gentlemen I know will allow Kings and Princes to exercise all their Authority in the Defence of the Church and for the Protection of its Powers and the Support of it in the Execution of its Laws altho' nothing to its Disadvantage And is it so then at last that by virtue of Christ's Commission Kings and Princes have no more to do with Religious Matters than only under the Directions of the Church to minister to the Support of the Spiritual Jurisdiction when ever they think sit so to Modify their Power I hope that all Christian Emperors and Kings will be sensible what Honours and Favours such Churchmen intend them in admitting them to so great a Privilege And must they in all other Cases be discharg'd of all Regard and Concern for GOD and RELIGION in the Government of their People Sure I am that it was not so under the Jewish Dispensation when this Separation of the Priesthood from the Secular Powers first began Kings did then intermeddle in Ecclesiastical Causes and regulate the Affairs of Religion and had Jurisdiction in the Government of the Church The Ark of the Covenant which none might look into or so much as touch it but the Priests alone Was yet so far under the 2 Sam. vi Government and Authority of King David 2 Sam. xv that he commanded it to be removed first to this Place and then to that He also distributed the several Courses both of the Priests 2 Chron. xxiii xxiv xxiv and Levites and gave the Levites a new Law for their Offices that they who before began not their Attendance till the Thirtieth Year of their Age should now begin it at the Twentieth He took the Ark from the Tabernacle 2 Chron. i. 3 5. of the Congregation and leaving that behind at Gibeon he built a new Tent for it at Jerusalem How came he to meddle so much with that which was in the Peculiar Custody of the Priests The like was afterwards 2 Chron. xxiv xxiii 4. done by Hezekiah who also by his Royal Decree appointed the Passover to be kept and called all the Ten Tribes of Israel to Jerusalem to the Celebration of it who had been hindred from it for a long time before Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being 1 Kings ii 27 35. Priest unto the Lord. Which let the Adversaries say what they will to evade it was as much a Deprivation as any one of those they now complain of and when he had done this he put Zadock the Priest in the Room of Abiathar The Altar of Bethel was destroy'd by King Josiah Idolatry was frequently punished and suppressed by their Kings and the suffering Religion to be corrupted by introducing Evil and Idolatrous Novelties into the Worship of GOD is often charged as a Crime and a Blemish in the Administration of their Government Now as the Instances mentioned in which they did exert their Power were undeniable Acts of Church Government and Ecclesiastical Authority So the Charge and Imputation of Guilt upon them in their Neglects of this kind plainly shew that they had a just Authority and a rightful Jurisdiction therein And if the Jewish Kings were allowed to have Power and Authority in Ecclesiastical Matters and the Priesthood claimed no Independent Power in Church Government under that Dispensation in which the Administration of Divine Offices was as much separated from the Secular Magistrates as it is now under the Gospel Some very good Reason some strong Proof some very bright and clear Evidence should be produced to convince one that the Jurisdiction which Kings exercised under one Dispensation is quite taken away by the other ESPECIALLY too when this claimed Authority is not to be limitted to Articles of Faith and Matters of Divine Revelation only but is extended to a Judicial Cognizance in all our moral Actions as well as in those that are purely religious And for the Kings and Potentates of the World not to submit to the Sanctions and Determinations of such Men in all Cases of Morality is arrogantly called Disobedience to their spiritual Superiors Vindic. Prop. 21. and Rehellion against the Legates and Vicegerents of Christ And to restrain ecclesiastical Persons in any extravagant Proceedings of this Kind is represented by some Men as downright Persecution WHAT an Original Piece of spiritual Pride is this I would desire any Reader seriously to consider that if such Doctrines as these had been preached by the Apostles and Primitive Christians Whether it would not have been the greatest Disadvantage imaginable to the Propagation of the Gospel And whether it would not have given all the Secular Potentates of the World a great and invincible Prejudice against it What Heathen Emperor or King would have embraced this Religion or given any Countenance at all to the Profession of it who should have been told That in the very Minute that this Religion was professed by him and became established in his Dominions he was to lose one half of his Authority over his People That he was no longer to have that Fullness of Jurisdiction and Power which he had before and which other Kings and Emperors enjoy'd round about him but was
AN ESSAY ON Ecclesiastical Authority In which the Pretence of an Independent Power in the CHURCH to a Divine Right in the Election of Bishops To the Invalidity of Lay Deprivations To the Inseparable Relation of a BISHOP to his See To an Obligation of continuing Communion with the Deprived Bishops And several other Things relating to the Nonjurors Separation from our CHURCH are particularly and impartially Examined By JOHN TURNER D. D. Vicar of Greenwich and Chaplain to His Royal Highness the PRINCE LONDON Printed for JOHN WYAT at the Rose in St. Paul's Church-yard 1617. AN ESSAY ON Ecclesiastical Authority THE many irregular and dangerous Practices of the Romish Clergy under the Pretence of an exempt Jurisdiction and an Authority Independent on the Civil Power caused the Governors of our CHURCH to take that Doctrine into their serious Consideration at the Beginning of our REFORMATION and in our XXXVIIth Article they have determined and settled it thus That the Queen's Majesty for this was done in Queen Elizabeth's Time hath the chief Power in this Realm of England and all other her Dominions unto whom the chief Government of all Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all Causes doth appertain And then to avoid Offence and prevent Misconstructions as the Queen had declared in her Injunctions so the said Article thus explains the forementioned Doctrine We give not hereby to our Princes the ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments but only that Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in Holy Scripture by God Himself that they should rule all Estates and Degrees of Men committed to their Charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal And this was so confirmed by the Canons in the Beginning of King James I's Reign that if the Authority of our CHURCH might be admitted to be decisive in this Matter we see plainly what that was and is But the giving so much Jurisdiction to Princes over Ecclesiastical Persons in Ecclesiastical Causes and Affairs is complained of by some among us as an Encroachment and a dangerous Compliance an enslaving Principle which controuls the Powers of the CHURCH that as they say ought to be exempt and Independent THIS Point then not being successfully enough determined by the declared Judgment of our CHURCH in Her Articles and Canons must it seems be brought under a farther Examination And it must be considered not only as a Subject of Debate and Speculation but at this Time it is become a Matter of the greatest Moment and Importance to our Peace both in CHURCH and STATE All the Enemies of the late happy REVOLUTION are gone into the Defence of that Independent Authority to say no more And all those other Notions and Opinions whereby the Non-jurors would vindicate their Separation from the Communion of our CHURCH are built upon this Foundation And it will not be easy to make them sensible that this their Separation is Unjustifiable and Wrong if this Claim be allowed good On the other Hand if it can be proved That the CHURCH has no such exempt and independent Authority as is pretended we shall strike at the very Root of their untoward Principles and Proceedings In our Inquiry into this Matter 1. THE first Thing that occurs to our Observation is That the STATE is found in the actual and full Possession of Authority over all their Subjects and in all Affairs whatsoever antecedently to the CHURCH'S Claim We are not born Priests as we are born Subjects but are made such upon a sufficient Maturity of Age and are therefore to consider what Share of Authority the Prince loses over any of his Subjects upon their Admission into Holy Orders and what is the Foundation of the pretended Change And as to this we shall soon be sensible 2. THAT there is Nothing in natural Religion to be pleaded as the Ground of such an Exemption or Independency For according to that Kings had a Right to the Priesthood also and were the undoubted supreme Judges and Determiners of all Affairs Melchisedech and Jethro we all know were such Nor does it appear that there ever was any Separation of the Ecclesiastical Authority from the Temporal before the Mosaic Dispensation which was a Type of the Evangelical and consequently no Room for any Debates or Disputes of this Nature in the first Natural State of Mankind It must therefore all be laid in Divine Revelation and Institution From whence I think it plainly follows 3. Thirdly THAT if the CHURCH has any Right to such an exempt and independent Authority as is now pleaded for it must be founded on that Divine Commission which CHRIST gave to his Apostles and their Successors and by them to his CHURCH to the End of the World The Way then to know what there is to be said for such a Claim is to consider well the Contents of that Commission which must be looked on as the great Charter of the Gospel upon which all Her appropriated Rights and Privileges Her Authority and Powers Her Immunities and Franchises are built The Substance then of CHRIST'S Commission to his Apostles was That they should make Proselytes of all Nations Matth. xxviii 19 20. Joh. xx 21 c. by Preaching God's Word that they should Baptize them and by that Sacrament admit them into Christ's Church that they should afterwards instruct and train them up in the Pure Christian Worship and Holiness and in that Worship commemorate CHRIST'S Death in the Eucharist according to his Institution bind Offenders loose Penitents and by Ordaining Ministers make an effectual Provision for the perpetual Continuance of this Ministry which CHRIST has thus committed to 'em to the End of the World according to his Appointment So that Preaching and Performing Divine Service in the Worship of GOD Administring the Sacraments inflicting Censures and passing Sentence upon enormous Sinners Absolving the Penitent from such Sentences and Ordaining Ministers These and whatever other Particulars of Ministration in the Divine Offices of Religion are by the special Commission of CHRIST in any Part of it appropriated to the Spiritual Governors of the CHURCH become thereby the Peculiar sacred Powers of the Christian Priesthood Concerning all which it is allow'd and granted 1. That the CHURCH does not derive Her Authority to the Execution of them from any Temporal Powers or Potentates but from JESUS CHRIST alone by the forementioned Divine Commission 2. That as they were not originally derived from so neither can they be taken away or made to cease by any secular Authorities whatsoever 3. That neither can any secular Powers of themselves execute these Divine and Holy Offices The very End and Reason of taking these Holy Offices out of the Hands of the secular Powers who before had executed them and of vesting them in a distinct Set or Order of Men still requires that they should continue so separated And consequently all the Powers specify'd in
CHRIST'S Commission are the limitted and appropriated Powers which belong to the Spiritual Governours of the CHURCH alone and which no Temporal Potentates can take upon them to execute without breaking in upon CHRIST'S Institution and subverting the very Ends and Reasons of their original Separation And therefore if no more had been intended by the Independent Authority of CHRIST'S Church in the Execution of their Priestly Office than this That they who derived not this Authority from the State could not have it taken away by them and that the secular Powers are by CHRIST'S Commission excluded from the Performance of all the Divine Offices specify'd in it The Church of England has declared Her Judgment in Favour of such a Claim and we should have entred into no Disputes against it BUT then he who himself has no Authority to baptize may yet be a competent Judge of the Care and Fidelity of those who do And he who has no Power to administer the Sacrament of the Lord's-Supper or to ordain Ministers may yet be capable of taking Cognizance of the Neglects and of the Miscarriages committed in those Performances So that it is one Thing to minister in the Holy Offices and Service of the Church and another to have Rule and Government and a judicial Cognizance of the Care Fidelity and good or evil Conduct of those who do This leads me to consider 2. THAT besides the Ministration in Holy Offices the Power of the Keys and Ordination there are other Powers and Authorities claimed by the Church Such are all the General Powers of Government of Assembling in Synods of Consulting one another on important Occasions of making Laws or Canons of appointing to particular Churches or Districts their proper Pastors of determining religious Debates and Disputes of prescribing Rules of Order and Discipline c. All which as not being expressly mentioned in or appropriated by CHRIST'S Commission as the other divine Offices of Religion are can belong to the Church only of Common-Right as it is a Society and as such Acts of Government are the constant and common Rights of every Established Community A SOCIETY cannot subsist without Government as therefore the Christian Church is by CHRIST'S Commission constituted a spiritual Society there is no Doubt but that it thereby obtains a certain Right to the Exercise of all such Authority in Government as other Established Communities are usually possess'd of THE Question then is not whether the Church has a Right to the Exercise of such Authority for it is undeniably evident that she has But what is the Foundation of that Authority and how far it will hold good to the Exclusion of the secular Powers Now unless it could be made appear that these Powers of Government are by CHRIST'S Commission specify'd and appropriated to the Priesthood as the divine Offices of its Holy Ministration are There can be no other Reason or Ground of this Claim than that of common Right and Necessity to the Support of this spiritual Community and to the Attainment of the great End for which it was ordained WE see therefore that in this Controversy a great regard is to be had to the Distinction here made between the divine Offices of the Christian Priesthood and the more General Powers of Government The former are allow'd to be appropriated to the Orders of the Bishops and Clergy only The latter are those Powers and Authorities which our present Controversies and Dissentions are about And if I am right in Stating the CHURCH'S Claim and Title thereto I shall certainly be Right in the Determination of this dispute So far as they are Necessary to the due Execution of CHRIST'S Commission the CHURCH has undoubted Right thereto And if Dr. Hickes and his Friends had gone no farther in claiming a Right to the Exercise of Ecclesiastical Authority Independently on the secular than as that shall be found necessary to the Propagation and Establishment of Christianity I am apt to think that all Christians would have come into it I for my Part can make no Scruple to affirm that by Virtue of Christs Commission to his Apostles and their Successors to Preach and Propagate the Gospel and to gather Him a Church thereby They have an undoubted Right and Authority to do every Thing in the Exercise of their Spiritual Offices which shall be found necessary to the Support of the Christian Faith and CHURCH But if Men will not content themselves with this without going farther if they will claim an Universal Inherent Authority of doing every Thing in Matters of Religion if they please by themselves and to be the sole Proper and Rightful Judges of all Ecclesiastical Causes and Matters with a divine Right to exclude the Secular Authority at their Pleasure and to make Null and Invalid every Thing that is done by the Temporal Powers in these Affairs without the Clergy's Approbation and Consent This I think a most Unreasonable and Unrighteous Demand and I have these six Things to plead against it I. SUCH a Claim seems contrary to the very Nature of the Powers that we are now reasoning about They are not the peculiar appropriated Offices of the Priesthood such as Ministring in the Divine Service administring Sacraments c. which we have already owned Kings and Princes to be excluded from But they are the CHURCH'S common Powers of Government which belong to Her only of common Right and to the General Exercise of which other Societies are entitled as well as the CHURCH Now these general Powers of Government are no otherwise to be exercis'd exclusive of and Independently on the Secular Authority than the Necessity of Affairs requires them so to be And that Authority which has no other Reason or Foundation then its Usefulness or Necessity as a Means to the attaining to such an End certainly loses a great deal of its Force and Obligation in all those Instances in which it ceases to be useful or necessary and where the End may be as effectually obtained without it And this is the true Reason of all that Difference which is observable in History in the Practice of the Bishops and Governours of the Christian Church in the Exercise of these very Powers under Heathen and under Christian Emperors and Governours When their Heathen Governours cast them off and left them to themselves they then manag'd all Things by themselves the Necessity of their Affairs requiring that they should so do But when the Christian Emperors took the Affairs of Christians into their Cognizance and made Laws and passed Sentences and executed Judgment therein The Christian Bishops and Clergy unanimously gave Way and very readily submitted thereto IT may possibly have some weight with some of my Readers to observe that even Dr. Hickes in the Collection of Papers lately Published by his Friends and which were Written and Published on purpose to carry up the Powers of the Priesthood and an Independent Authority as high as possibly he could Yet comes in
to this Distinction of the CHURCH'S Communicable and Uncommunicable Authority Whatever indirect Ends he might have to serve in his Endeavours to Support the Spiritual Authority of the Nonjuring Deprived Bishops Yet he was too well acquainted with Primitive Church History to think that all the Christian Churches Authorities are alike exclusive of the Secular Powers And accordingly as I find him quoted p. 27. he allows that the Church on valuable Considerations may in some Cases modify the Exercise of Her Just Power and make Grants and Concessions to the State Pray mind that for if Princes and States may on any Considerations be admitted to a share of the Churches Just Power Then it is plain and evident that in such Cases it is not JESUS CHRIST that by his Divine Laws excludes them but these Church-Men themselves But let us see what Instances of this kind he mentions and they are such as these That the CHURCH shall consent not to call Synods without acquainting the King and obtaining his Leave if Possible not to make Foreigners or Clerks of a Foreign Allegiance Bishops to make no Bishops but what shall be supposed worthy of the Kings Nomination to give the Builders and Endowers of Churches the Honour and Privelege of presenting worthy Clerks to supply the Cure of them and Noblemen to Erect Chapels and to choose Chaplains for their Families There are then it seems Cases and Considerations in and upon which notwithstanding all the sacred Powers of the CHURCH Kings may have Authority in calling Synods in Nominating Bishops and in the Presentation of Clerks to the Cure of Souls Here I would ask in what Cases and upon what Considerations any of these Kings or Nobles may be allowed to administer Sacraments and Ordain Ministers I know that this will not be allow'd at all by any Means or on any Considerations whatever It seems then that in Dr. Hickes's own Opinion altho' some of the Powers of the CHURCH are Exclusive and Uncommunicable to Lay Hands Yet others they may be admitted to a share of if the Consideration be but good and the Authority not abused Now I would willingly know what is the true Foundation of this Difference which Dr. Hickes himself admits of I would have it openly declared whether CHRIST'S Commission has Appropriated these Powers to the CHURCH which may be so modified and has Excluded Secular Potentates from them or on what foot that Modifications stands And at the same time let them add why the Influence of the Civil Magistrates Authority to preserve the Peace and Safety and good Order of a Kingdom may not be allowed as just a Consideration and as good a Reason of his Exercising Authority in such affairs as any munificent act of Beneficence or Protection BUT to bring this Debate with Dr. Hickes and his Friends to a Short Issue Either JESUS CHRIST by his Gospel and his Divine Commission to his Apostles has Appropriated all Ecclesiastical Authoritty to the Clergy only and Excluded the Secular Power from it or he has not If he has and the Certainty of that be made appear then they ought on no Consideration whatsoever to be allowed any Share therein because that is acting contrary to CHRIST'S Commission and Laws But if he has not then the CHURCH has no Divine Right at all of Excluding their Authority and acting Independently The Consequence of this is plain and undeniable For to Exclude the Jurisdiction of the Secular Powers where CHRIST by his Divine Commission has not Excluded them is to do it without Reason and contrary to Justice But that which Dr. Hickes and his Friends lay the greatest Stress upon is 1. The Nature of the Society and 2. The Powers by which it Subsisted in the Beginning 1. As to the Nature of the Society they tell us that it is CHRIST'S Spiritual Kingdom or Vindication Non-Juring Church prop. I. II. Incorporation which had a Being Independent on the Secular Power for above three hundred years before the Government of it was interwoven with the secular Government and Laws I grant all this to be true but because there seems to be great Stress laid on this Independency so much talked of I desire that it may be considered what it means For in a Christian Country the CHURCH and STATE are not two Distinct Societies like the Kingdoms of France and Spain made up of different People and Subjects inhabiting different Territories but are One and the same Body of Men considered in two different Relations and Capacities The same Persons are at once Members of the Church and Subjects of the State and so constitute but One Society of Men under two capacities of Government AND Even in this twofold Capacity their Affairs their Duties and Obligations are so mixt and interwoven that in a Christian State it is scarce Practicable for the Church to Govern and Manage her spiritual Affairs without influencing and affecting the State Nay in the Extent of spiritual Power now claimed it is absolutely impossible so to do So that this Contest for an Independent Authority in the Government of the Church is nothing else but a Struggle to take the Management of Religion and all religious Affairs out of the Hands of Kings and Princes And if they once do this the STATE must be brought to depend upon the CHURCH because the CHURCH will be independent on the STATE and so it would be in a very fine Condition In short while such a Power is contended for the CHURCH and STATE must inevitably clash and disagree and there is no Way to consult and secure the publick Peace without a Subordination of the one to the other in their Administration of Government AND as to the CHURCH'S having a Being independent on the secular Power for the first three hundred Years it proceeded only from the Necessity of her Circumstances and Affairs at that Time that She acted independently on the secular Potentates It was when Christianity was in a State of Persecution and the secular Powers refused to intermeddle in Her Government Then it is very true that She subsisted of Herself and this proves undeniably that the CHURCH has a Capacity so to do when Need requires But it does not prove that it is a desirable Thing for Her to be in such a Case or that She has a Divine Right and Power to exclude the secular Potentates if they think fit to interpose their Authority But I shall speak more particularly to this hereafter I am now only shewing what weak and insufficient Reasons Men allege for an Independent Authority in the Church of which I think this is a very great Instance that because She did once so subsist out of Necessity therefore She must always do so out of Choice or has a Divine Right so to do when ever She pleases 2. BUT they tell us That this Spiritual Kingdom of CHRIST is also a Royal Priesthood a Kingdom of Priests the chief Priests of which are Regal Priests or
CHRIST to oppose and lord it over the Ministers of GOD the FATHER is to invert the sacred Order of Things and to forget the Subordination of the SON to the FATHER GOD for the Honour of the ever blessed Redeemer was pleased to grant Him a Kingdom within his own Dominions with Rule and Power over all Mankind in order to our Salvation and to the effectual Establishment of it to appoint Him Powers and Ministers of his own and to take away from temporal Governours the Ministration of those divine and sacred Offices which they before performed But as it does not appear by CHRIST'S Commission that He has appropriated all the Powers of Government in his CHURCH to the Bishops and Clergy only together with the Authority of those sacred Ministrations it is certainly very wrong in them to assume a Power of excluding universally the Authority of the FATHER'S Ministry The Dispensation of the SON however Excellent and Glorious as blessed be GOD it is ought yet certainly to be administred in Subordination to that of the FATHER And to pretend the contrary must needs be very absutd and displeasing to Them both AND yet this Absurdity as great as it is is carry'd still farther and the Abettors of it not content with the Claim of an independent Power only plead for a superior Authority in the Church because that is spiritual and extends to the Souls of Men. This is not only in Effect to deny the Civil Magistrates Concern in Matters of Religion and where the Souls of Men are affected But moreover it is to set up the SON above the FATHER by making the Ministry of the SON superior to that of the FATHER This is what I cannot but think unreasonable and contrary to the Design and Intention of Them both It is under the Favour and Protection of the SON to reject the Authority and Supremacy of the FATHER than which scarce any thing can be more offensive to him To this let me add III. THAT the true Kingdom of GOD and the Religion of JESUS CHRIST established therein do not appear to be at all more strong and safe and secure from Corruptions by such an Independent Authority than they would be otherwise REMEMBER we are here disputing only about an independent Power in the Government of the Church and the Management of its Affairs for the Success of Religion It would therefore methinks be much in Favour of such a Pretension if it could be made appear by long Experience throughout all Ages that the Purity of this Holy Religion had always been better secured that Way than the other And that it had as constantly suffered when ever it was brought under the Direction and Jurisdiction of the STATE But alas this was true only in the first Ages of Christianity when the Governors of the Church had more extraordinary and miraculous Assistances from the Holy Ghost Then indeed the Purity of Religion was effectually preserved and the Word of GOD mightily grew and prevailed But when the essential Principles and Laws of Christianity were committed to Writing and the Clergy were to gain spiritual Knowledge by Reading them when the extraordinary Powers of the Holy Ghost began to be removed and Men were asisted as they are now only by the ordinary Influences thereof and in Consequence of this the spiritual Governors of the Church were subject to the same Passions and Infirmities and Temptations as other Men now a-days are Religion soon felt the Fruits of this and its genuine Purity soon began to decay and declined apace Till by Degrees it grew so corrupt that to use St. Paul's Words on a like Occasion The whole Creation groaned and travailed Rom. viii 21 22. in Pain together waiting to be delivered from this Bondage of Corruption into the glorious Liberty of the Children of God So that whatever Advantages Christianity received by the pure Faith and constant Patience by the great Integrity and Piety of the Primitive Christians in the three first Centuries it suffered at least as much in after-Ages by the evil Conduct of those who were in Possession of those Spiritual Powers To give one notorious Instance of this I would desire these learned Gentlemen to read the History and Acts of the second Council of Nice and there to consider by whose Over-bearing Authority the Idolatry of Image-worship was first brought into the Church of CHRIST Such Instances shew too plainly that the true Advancement of CHRIST'S Spiritual Kingdom depends more upon the Fidelity and Piety of its Ministers than upon the regal independent Authority IF therefore the Non-jurors in Vindication of their Schism had not contracted an Habit of Writing Paradoxes One would wonder mightily to hear them impute the Atheism Deism Heresy Schisms Infidelity Profaneness Dr. Hick Collect. pag. 29. and Immorality that are found in this Land to the taking away of this supreme independent Power of the Church Let any Man look Abroad into Italy Spain or Portugal there he will find the Government of the Church in the Hands of those very Men whose Right to it Dr. Hickes contends for and that too with greater Immunities and Exemptions than he has pleaded for And yet in all these Kingdoms he will find as much Infidelity and Irreligion as scandalous Vice and Immorality and Profaneness as in any Part of Christendom Only perhaps with a little more Reserve for Fear of an Inquisition IN short That our Discipline is too much lost we all complain as well as the Non-jurors But that the Matter would certainly be mended by putting it wholly into the Hands of the Clergy with an independent and unrestrained Authority is what cannot be allowed Because where the Church has that Power Religion is more infamously corrupted than in any other Places of the Christian World LET us but reflect what Opposition the Reformation of it met with here at Home from those very Men whose independent Power is now pleaded for And with how much Difficulty it was rescued out of their Hands that it might be restored to its original Purity The Church of England with all its great Excellencies and valuable Constitutions was thus Reformed the Spiritual Powers being ruled and governed by the Secular in the Exercise of their Ecclesiastical Authority And has the CHURCH yet a Divine Right to take the Judicial Cognizance of Religion wholly out of the Hands of those Men by whom it has been preserved from Destruction What Reason or Necessity can there be for that If by these Means the Government of the CHURCH should once again fall into ill Hands as it has done in former Times it may in the unhappy Event be found setting up for Authority to corrupt Religion instead of preserving it And that too without leaving the Secular Potentates a sufficient Authority to retrieve and reform it a second time And this also is a just Exception to the Reasonableness and Righteousness of such a Claim IV. SUCH an Exempt Independent Authority in the
such a Divine Relation between a Bishop and the People of his District as no Secular Powers can take away II. THAT the Authority in spiritual Affairs here allowed to Kings and Princes is contrary to the Practice and Principles of the first three Hundred Years III. THAT this is bringing the Church and its Clergy into Slavery I. As to the Divine Relation pretended to be between a Bishop and the People of his See or District Pray how comes that about It is compared I know by some Reg. Pont. p. 3. Men to Marriage But who made that Match or gave the divine Sanction to the Contract Or if that were true how comes there to be so many common Causes of Divorce In short this is the Notion of those only who make every Thing that has been occasionally done by the Governors of the Church to have been done by a divine and unchangeable Authority But the only Way to judge rightly of this Matter is to consider what is the original Ground of that Relation and by whose Designation and Authority it has been made Now as to this 1. I BELIEVE that every Body will grant That in promoting Bishops to such and such Sees and Clergymen to their Districts or Parishes a Regard ought and will be had to the Sentiments and the Judgment of the Spiritual Governors of the Church who as I said above in Consequence of their Commission from CHRIST to plant and govern it must be supposed Invested with a Trust as to the spiritual Qualifications of the Persons to be employed in Holy Offices And this Care and Trust and just Authority they are supposed to discharge in their Admission of Persons into Holy Orders In which they have Authority to provide that no Persons unqualified should be admitted into the Service of GOD. But then when the Church has effectually taken this Care it must certainly be granted also in the 2. Second Place THAT Christian Princes and States have both an Interest in this Affair and a Trust also committed to Them in providing proper Spiritual Guides and Pastors for their People And where they have both an Interest and a Trust it will be very hard to say that they have no Authority Suppose that the Governors of the CHURCH should incline to appoint such Persons as the STATE can have no Confidence in or no Security from must they be allowed no Authority even where their Peace and Safety appear to be very deeply concern'd Sure this is too unreasonable and absurd to be believed Or again Suppose that the Governors of the CHURCH should be careless and neglect providing for their Sees would not the Temporal Powers be bound to supply that Defect and to take Gare that the People should not want proper Guides and Pastors It is absurd then to think that they have no Authority in a Matter which they are bound in Conscience to take Care of Now as all this seems very agreeable to common Reason let us go on and consider 3. WHAT has been the Practice of the CHURCH in this Particular And here we shall find that generally speaking every One who appeared to have an Interest in the Management of Ecclesiastical Affairs were allowed to have an Influence and some Power in the Designation of the Person to be employed in such a Place or District THE CHURCH commits a Catholick Power or Authority in Consecration or Ordination which Authority is to be exercised so far as lawfully it may thro' the whole CHURCH of CHRIST without any Assignment of this or that particular Jurisdiction So the Form of Consecration runs with us Receive ye the Holy Ghost for the Office and Work of a Bishop in the Church of GOD. And that such was the Manner of Primitive Ordinations the Reverend and very Learned Dr. Potter Ch. Gov. p. 452. now Lord Bishop of Oxford proves from hence That Ministers were then sometimes ordained without any Designation at all to particular Districts And indeed without this general Commission in Ordination I do not see how they could be said to be invested with a Spiritual Power or Authority thro' the Whole Christian Church This Power then being thus convey'd by the Church the Designation of the Persons to this or that particular District was made several Ways In the Apostles Time such and such Persons were sent by them to such and such Cities and great Towns to minister therein and govern the CHURCH according to the Directions given But afterwards the Clergy of the vacant Diocese sometimes chose their own Bishop and sometimes the eldest Presbyter succeeded in Course But then to shew that every Thing which the Bishops and Clergy at that Time did was not done by a Divine Authority What was sometimes done in this Affair by the Clergy was sometimes done by the People also when the Bishops of another Province advanced any new Bishop to a vacant See it was always done with the Consent and Approbation of the People Usually this Approbation and Consent of the People was had as to the Person before his Consecration The forementioned Right Reverend Bishop has cited a Passage out of the VIIIth Book of the Apostolical Constitutions c. 4. in which it is decreed That such a Bishop must be ordained as was elected by the People for his eminent Merit and their Consent was to be a third Time asked And to the same Purpose there are several Passages in St. Cyprian whereby it plainly appears that the People had so much Authority that they were usually consulted and their Vote and Consent asked in the Designation of the Bishop that was to preside over them Which shews most plainly that such a Designation was not made by the divine appropriated Powers of the Bishops and Clergy only And it is very well known that what the People had at the Beginning came by Degrees into the Hands of Kings and Princes They had the Nomination of Bishops to their several Sees and I would therefore have a very good Reason given why those Rulers who had Authority in Promoting them should not be allowed the same in Removing them Or how such a Removal can be called an Invasion of the sacred Rights of the Priesthood when they were promoted by the Election or Nomination of the Laity as well as of the Bishops I KNOW it will be said That all this was only a prudent Condescention and Compliance with the People of their Flock without any Authority But to this I answer Does not Voting and Electing and an almost constant and establish'd Usage of Consigning Persons to such and such Districts by Voting and Electing look like a good Degree of Authority in the Matter And would the Fathers of the Church have suffered all this if they had had the same Notions with some in our Days Would they have condescended so far if they had known it to be an Invasion of the CHURCH'S Independent Powers No certainly their Practice in this Case is a sufficient Demonstration