God to judge It concernes all persons to see that they doe their best to finde out truth and if they doe it is certain that let the errour be never so damnable they shall escape the errour or the misery of being damn'd for 't And if God will not be angry at men for being invincibly deceiv'd why should men be angry one at another For he that is most displeased at another mans errour may also be tempted in his own will and as much deceived in his understanding For if he may faile in what he can chuse he may also faile in what he cannot chuse His understanding is no more secur'd then his will nor his Faith more then his obedience It is his own fault if he offends God in either but whatsoever is not to be avoided as errours which are incident oftentimes even to the best and most inquisitive of men are not offences against God and therefore not to be punished or restrained by men but all such opinions in which the publick interests of the Common-wealth and the foundation of Faith and a good life are not concern'd are to be permitted freely Quisque abundet in sensu suo was the Doctrine of S. Paul and that is Argument and Conclusion too and they were excellent words which S. Ambrose said in attestation of this great truth Nec Imperiale est libertatem dicendi negare nec sacerdotale quod sentias non dicere 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 THE END A DISCOURSE CONCERNING PRAYER Ex tempore OR By pretence of the Spirit In justification of Authorized and Set-forms of LITURGIE 1 COR. 14. 32. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And the spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets For God is not the Author of confusion but of peace as in all Churches of the Saints Printed for Richard Royston 1647. A Discourse concerning PRAYER Ex tempore c. I Have read over this Book which the Assembly of Divines is pleased to call The Directory for Prayer I confesse I came to it with much expectation and was in some measure confident I should have found it an exact and unblameable modell of Devotion free from all those objections which men of their own perswasion had obtruded against the publike Liturgy of the Church of England or at least it should have been composed with so much artifice and finenesse that it might have been to all the world an Argument of their learning and excellency of spirit if not of the goodnesse and integrity of their Religion and purposes I shall give no other character of the whole but that the publike disrelish which I finde amongst persons of great piety of all qualities not only of great but even of ordinary understandings is to me some argument that it lies so open to the objections even of common spirits that the Compilers of it did intend more to prevaile by the successe of their Armies then the strength of reason and the proper grounds of perswasion which yet most wise and good men believe to be the more Christian way of the two But Sir you have engaged me to say something in particular to satisfie your conscience In which also I desire I may reserve a leave to my self to conceal much if I may in little doe you satisfaction I shall therefore decline to speak of the Efficient cause of this Directory and not quarrell at it that is was composed against Numb 2. the Lawes both of England and all Christendome If the thing were good and pious I should learn to submit to the imposition and never quarrell at the incompetency of his authority that engaged me to doe pious and holy things And it may be when I am a little more used to it I shall not wonder at a Synod in which not one Bishop sits in the capacity of a Bishop though I am most certain this is the first example in England since it was first Christned But for present it seemes something hard to digest it because I know so well that all Assemblies of the Church have admitted Priests to consultation and dispute but never to authority and decision till the Pope enlarging the phylacteries of the Archimandrites and Abbots did sometimes by way of priviledge and dispensation give to some of them decisive voyces in publike Councels But this was one of the things in which he did innovate and invade against the publike resolutions of Christendome though he durst not doe it often and when he did it it was in very small and inconsiderate numbers I said I would not meddle with the Efficient and I cannot meddle with the Finall cause nor guesse at any other ends and Numb 3. purposes of theirs then at what they publiquely professe which is the abolition and destruction of the Book of Common-Prayer which great change because they are pleased to call Reformation I am content in charity to believe they think it so and that they have Zelum Dei but whether secundum scientiam according to knowledge or no must be judged by them who consider the matter and the forme But because the matter is of so great variety and minute consideration every part whereof would require as much scrutiny Numb 4. as I purpose to bestow upon the whole I have for the present chosen to consider only the form of it and because it pretends against the form of set Lyturgy and that ex tempore forms doe succeed in room of the established and determined services I shall give you my judgement of it without any sharpnesse or bitternesse of spirit for I am resolved not to be angry with any man of another perswasion as knowing that I differ just as much from them as they doe from me And first I consider that the true state of the Question is only this Whether it is better to pray to God with consideration Numb 5. or without whether is the wiser man of the two hee who thinks and deliberates what to say or he that utters his mind as fast as it comes Whether is the better man he who out of reverence to God is most carefull and curious that he offend not in his tongue and therefore he himselfe deliberates and takes the best guides he can or he who out of the confidence of his own abilities or other exteriour assistances speaks what ever comes uppermost And here I have the advice and councell of a very wise man no lesse than Solomon Eccles. 5. 2. Be not rash with thy mouth Numb 6. and let not thy heart be hasty to utter any thing before God for God is in heaven and thou upon earth therefore let thy words be few The consideration of the vast distance between God and us Heaven and Earth should create such apprehensions in us that the very best and choycest of our offertoryes are not acceptable but by Gods gracious vouchsafeing and condescension and therefore since we are so much indebted to God for accepting our best it is not
Adversaries out of doores They shall not come neere their blessed Mount of Gerezim but fastning an Anathema on them let them goe to Ebal and curse there And now I wonder not that these Disciples were very angry at them who had lost the true Religion and neglected the offices of humanity to them that kept it They might goe neere now to make it a cause of Religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Nazianzene speaks might seem to Apologize Orat. 12. for them and so it might if it had not led them to indiscreet and uncharitable zeale But men care not how farre they goe if they doe but once thinke they can make God a party of their Quarrell For when Religion which ought to be the antidote of our malice proves its greatest incentive our uncharitablenesse must needs runne faster to a mischiefe by how much that which stopt it's course before drives it on with the greater violence And therefore as it is ordinary for charity to be called coldnesse in Religion so it is as ordinary for a pretence of Religion to make cold charity The present case of the Disciples and the same spirit which for the same pretended cause is takenup by the persons of the day proves all this true with whom fire and fagot is esteem'd the best argument to convince the understanding and the Inquisitors of hereticall pravity the best Doctors and subtlest Disputants determining all with a Viris ignem fossā Decret Carol. quinti pro Flandris mulieribus For thus wee had like to have suffered it was mistaken Religion that mov'd these Traytors to so damnable a Conspiracy not for any defence of their owne cause but for extirpation of ours For else what grievances did they groan under In quos Orat 2. in Iulian eorum populum exaestuantem sollicitavimus quibus vitae periculum attulimus It was Nazianzen's question to the Apostate Give me leave to consider it as appliable to our present case and try if can make a just discovery of the cause that mov'd these Traytors to so accursed a Conspiracy 1 Then there was no cause at all given them by us none put to death for being a Roman Catholique nor any of them punish'd for his Religion Vid. L. Burleighs booke called Execution for Treason not religion King Iames his declaration to all Christian Kings and Princes and the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury his speech in Starre-chamber in Burtons case This hath beene the constant attestation of our Princes and State since the first Lawes made against Recusants the thing it selfe will bear them record From primo of Elizabeth to undecimo the Papists made no scruple of comming to our Churches Recusancy was not then so much as a Chrysome not an Embrio But when Pius quintus sent forth his Breves of Excommunication and Deposition of the Queen then first they forbore to pray with us or to have any religious communion This although every where knowne yet being a matter of fact and so as likely to be denied by others as affirmed by us without good evidence see it therefore affirmed expresly by an Act of Parliament in Decimo tertio of Elizabeth which specifies this as one inconvenience and ill consequence of the Bull. Whereby hath grown great disobedience and boldnesse in many not only to withdraw and absent themselves from divine service now most Godly set forth and used within this Realme but also have thought themselves discharged of all obedience c. Not only Recusancy but like wise disobedience therefore both Recusancy and disobedience Two yeares therefore after this Bull this Statute was made if it was possible to nullify the effects of it to hinder its execution and if it might be by this meanes to keep them as they had been before in Communion with the Church of England and obedience to her Majesty This was the first Statute that concerned them in speciall but yet their Religion was not medled with For this Statute against execution of the Popes Bulls was no more thē what had been established by Act of Parliament in the 16 th yeare of Richard the second by which it was made praemunire to purchase Bulls from Rome and the delinquents in this kinde with all their abettors fautors procurators and maintainers to be referred to the Kings Councell for farther punishment There was indeed this severity expressed in the Act of 130 of the Queene that the putting them in Execution should be Capitall and yet this severity was no more then what was inflicted upon the Bishop of Ely in Edward the thirds time for publishing of a Bull against the Earle of Chester without the Kings leave and on the Bishop of Carlile in the time of Henry the fourth for the like offence Thus farre our Lawes are innocent But when this Statute did not take the good effect for which it was intended neither keeping them in their ancient Communion not obedience but for all this Mayne Campian and many others came as the Popes Emissaries for execution of the Bull the State proceeded to a farther severity making Lawes against Recusancy against Seditious and Trayterous Bookes and against the residence of Romish Priests in England making the first fineable with a pecuniary mulct the two later Capitall as being made of a Treasonable nature Of these in order 1 The mulct which was imposed for Recusancy was not soul mony or paid for Religion and that for these reasons 1. Because it is plaine Religion did not make them absent themselves from our Churches unlesse they had changed their Religion since the Bull came over For if Religion could consist with their Communion with us before the Bull as it 's plain it did then why not after the Bull unlesse it be part of their Religion to obey the Pope rather then to obey God commanding us to obey our Prince 2. Their Recusancy was an apparent mischiefe to our Kingdome and it was the prevention or diversion of this that was the only or speciall and of these Lawes The mischiefe is apparent these two waies 1. Because by their Recusancy they gave attestation that they held the Bull to be valid for else why should they after the Bull deny their Communion which before they did not Either they must think the Queen for a just cause and by a just power excommunicate or why did they separate from her Communion Now if the Queen by vertue of the Bull was excommunicate why should they stop here She was by the same deposed they absolved from all Allegeance to her and commanded to take arms against her I confesse it is no good argument of it selfe to say The Pope might excommunicate the Queen therefore depose her from her Kingdome But this concludes with them sufficiently with whom excommunication not only drives from Spiritualls but deprives of Temporalls and is not to mend our lives but to take them away I speak how it is in the case of Princes and I shall anon prove
be published though with perill to the delinquents fame life then it will be a farre greater discouragement to the sinne when that it shall by an universall judgement be so detested that its concealement may not be permitted though it be with the hazard of discouraging the Holy duty of confession and when the being guilty of such a sinne shall reduce men into such streights that either they shall want the benefit of absolution or submit themselves to a publike satisfaction and so even in this particular the benefit is farre greater then the imaginary inconvenience The conveniences of the Seale force no more then that it is convenient to be observed not simply and absolutely in all cases necessary And perhaps Suarez the great patron of it perceived it however he laies the burden super communi consensu Ecclesiae In 3. Part. D. Thom. disp 33. sect 1. n. 2 eiusque perpetuâ traditione If then I can shew that there is no such Catholike consent of the present Church nor any universall tradition of the ancient Church for the inviolable Seale but plainly the contrary then our Church in her permission of the Priests to reveale some confessions is as inculpable as those of the present Church who besides her selfe teach and practise it and as the Primitive Church whose example in this as in other things she strictly followes Of the first The Church of England which observes the seale of confession as sacredly as reason or religion it selfe can possibly permit yet forbids not disclosure in case of Murder or Treason but in these particulars leaves us intire in our obedience to Can. 113. A. D. 1604. the common lawes of England and these command it That the Church of England gives leave in some cases to reveale confessions is argument enough to prove that the Seale is not founded upon the consent of the present Catholike Church For it is no more a begging of the Question nor apparently so much to say the Church of England is a part of the Catholike Church and therefore her consent is required to make a thing universall then to say the Church of Rome is the whole Catholike Church therefore her consent is sufficient to make a thing Catholike But I shall not need to proceed this way For 1 It is apparent that of their own side Altisidiorensis largely and professedly proves the iawfulnesse of publication in some cases as is to be seen Lib. 4. Summae tract 6. cap. 3. q. 7. and Garnet himselfe the man who if any had most need to stand in defence of the Seale that the pretence of it might have defended him yet confessed of his own accord Leges quae celare haec prohibent apprimè esse justas salutares He Actio in prodit lat p. 99. addes his reason and that is more then his authority for saith he it is not fitting that the life and safety of a Prince should depend upon the private niceties of any mans conscience If two nay if one dissent it is enough to destroy a consent But see farther There are many cases generally confessed amongst themselves in which the seale of formall and as they love to speak Sacramentall confession may be broken open I instance but in two or three First confession may be reveal'd to clear a doubtfull case of marriage It is the opinion of many great Practic crim Ecclesiast cap. 109. Canonists as you may see them quoted by Suarez de Paz. and Covaruvias and the case of the Venetian Resol de Matrimon who married a Virgin that was both his sister and daughter and that at Rome under Pope Paul the third almost to like purpose were long disputed on both sides whether they were to be revealed or not so that at most it is but a doubtfull matter in such cases whether the tye of secrecy doth oblige Now if for the proofe of marriage the seale may be broken up that man and wife might live contentedly and as they ought strange it should be unlawfull to reveale confessions in case of Treason for the safety of a Prince or State 2 In case of heresy the seale binds not by their own generall confession It is a rule amongst them Haeresis est crimen quod non confessio celat Now I would fain learn why Treason is not as revealeable as Heresy Is heresy dangerous to soules Then surely so is Treason unlesse it be none or a very small crime May heresy infect others So may Treason as it did in the present It may then as well be revealed as heresy Now that it may something rather I have these reasons 1. Because it is not so certaine that such an opinion is heresy as that such a fact is Treason 2. Because although both Treason and reall heresy be damnable and dangerous to soules yet heresy killes no Kings as treason doth I confesse that heresy may and doth teach it but then it degenerates into Treason Now if some heresy may be Treason then that Treason is heresy so a case of Treason may occurre in which from their own confession treason is revealeable 3 By the most generall voice of their own side any man may licence his confessor to reveale his confession It is the doctrine of Scotus Durandus Almain Navarre Medina and generally of all the Thomists I inferre if a private man may licence his Confessor to reveale his confession then the seale of confession is not founded upon any divine commandement for if it were the penitent could not give the Priest license to break it But if the penitent may give his Confessor leave because the tye of secrecy is a bond in which the Priest stands bound to the penitent he giving him leave remits of his own right then much rather may a whole State authorise this publication for what ever personall right a private man hath that the whole State hath much rather L. quod Maior ff ad Municipalem for he is included in it as a part of the whole and in such cases as concerne the whole commonwealth as this of treason doth most especially the rule of the Law holds without exception Refertur ad universos quod publicè fit per maiorem partem the delinquent ff de regut juris ad §. refertur L. 7 §. ult ff de pact gives leave to the publication of confession therefore because the whole state doth whereof he is one member I adde that in the case of Treason this is much rather true for here the delinquent looseth all his right whatsoever praediall personall and of priviledge therefore the Commonwealth can the better license the publication and the breach of the bond of secrecy in which the Confessor stood tyed to the penitent by vertue of implicit stipulation 4 Lastly even in speciall in the very case of Treason confessed many of their owne doe actually practise a publication when either they are loyall of themselves or dare
For others I shall be incurious because the number of them that honour you is the same with them that honour Learning and Piety and they are the best Theatre and the best judges amongst which the world must needs take notice of my ambition to be ascribed by my publike pretence to be what I am in all heartinesse of Devotion and for all the reason of the world My Honour'd Lord Your Lordships most faithfull and most affectionate servant J. TAYLOR The Contents of the Sections SECTION I. OF the Nature of Faith and that its duty is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed Pag. 5. SECT II. Of Heresy and the nature of it and that it is to be accounted according to the strict capacity of Christian Faith and not in Opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons pag. 18. SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined pag. 59. SECT IV. Of the difficulty of Expounding Scripture pag. 73. SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine Questions pag. 83. SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councels Ecclesiasticall to the same purpose pag. 101. SECT VII Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his Expounding Scripture and resolving Questions pag. 125. SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiasticall to determine our Questions with certainty and Truth pag. 151. SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be Iudge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit pag. 161. SECT X. Of the authority of Reason and that it proceeding upon the best grounds is the best judge pag. 165. SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves pag. 171. SECT XII Of the innocency of Errour in opinion in a pious person pag. 184. SECT XIII Of the deportment to be used towards persons disagreeing and the reasons why they are not to be punished with death c. pag. 189. SECT XIIII Of the practice of Christian Churches towards persons disagreeing and when Persecution first came in pag. 203. SECT XV. How farre the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions pag. 210. SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions pag. 213. SECT XVII Of compliance with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in generall pag. 217. SECT XVIII A particular consideration of the Opinions of the Anabaptists pag. 223 SECT XIX That there may be no Toleration of Doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publique good pag. 246. SECT XX. How farre the Religion of the Church of Rome is Tolerable pag. 249. SECT XXI Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion pag. 262. SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how farre they may doe it pag. 264. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OF THE LIBERTY OF PROPHESYING THe infinite variety of Opinions in matters of Religion as they have troubled Christendome with interests factions and partialities so have they caused great divisions of the heart and variety of thoughts and designes amongst pious and prudent men For they all seeing the inconveniences which the dis-union of perswasions and Opinions have produced directly or accidentally have thought themselves obliged to stop this inundation of mischiefes and have made attempts accordingly But it hath hapned to most of them as to a mistaken Physitian who gives excellent physick but mis-applies it and so misses of his cure so have these men their attempts have therefore been ineffectuall for they put their help to a wrong part or they have endeavoured to cure the symptomes and have let the disease alone till it seem'd incurable Some have endeavoured to re-unite these fractions by propounding such a Guide which they were all bound to follow hoping that the Unity of a Guide would have perswaded unity of mindes but who this Guide should be at last became such a Question that it was made part of the fire that was to be quenched so farre was it from extinguishing any part of the flame Others thought of a Rule and this must be the meanes of Union or nothing could doe it But supposing all the World had been agreed of this Rule yet the interpretation of it was so full of variety that this also became part of the disease for which the cure was pretended All men resolv'd upon this that though they yet had not hit upon the right yet some way must be thought upon to reconcile differences in Opinion thinking so long as this variety should last Christ's Kingdome was not advanced and the work of the Gospel went on but slowly Few men in the mean time considered that so long as men had such variety of principles such severall constitutions educations tempers and distempers hopes interests and weaknesses degrees of light and degrees of understanding it was impossible all should be of one minde And what is impossible to be done is not necessary it should be done And therefore although variety of Opinions was impossible to be cured and they who attempted it did like him who claps his shoulder to the ground to stop an earth-quake yet the inconveniences arising from it might possibly be cured not by uniting their beliefes that was to be dispaird of but by curing that which caus'd these mischiefes and accidentall inconveniences of their disagreeings For although these inconveniences which every man sees and feeles were consequent to this diversity of perswasions yet it was but accidentally and by chance in as much as wee see that in many things and they of great concernment men alow to themselves and to each other a liberty of disagreeing and no hurt neither And certainely if diversity of Opinions were of it selfe the cause of mischiefes it would be so ever that is regularly and universally but that we see it is not For there are disputes in Christendome concerning matters of greater concernment then most of those Opinions that distinguish Sects and make factions and yet because men are permitted to differ in those great matters such evills are not consequent to such differences as are to the uncharitable managing of smaller and more inconsiderable Questions It is of greater consequence to believe right in the Question of the validity or invalidity of a death-bed repentance then to believe aright in the Question of Purgatory and the consequences of the Doctrine of Predetermination are of deeper and more materiall consideration then the products of the beliefe of the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of private Masses and yet these great concernments where a liberty of Prophecying in these Questions hath been permitted hath made no distinct Communion no sects of Christians and the others have and so have these too in those places where they have peremptorily been determind on either side Since then if men are
by all that know them yet it is not necessary all should know them and that all should know them in the same sense and interpretation is neither probable nor obligatory but therefore since these things are to be distinguished by some differences of necessary and not necessary whether or no is not the declaration of Christs and his Apostles affixing salvation to the beliefe of some great comprehensive Articles and the act of the Apostles rendring them as explicite as they thought convenient and consigning that Creed made so explicite as a tessera of a Christian as a comprehension of the Articles of his beliefe as a sufficient disposition and an expresse of the Faith of a Catechumen in order to Baptism whether or no I say all this be not sufficient probation that these only are of absolute necessity that this is sufficient for meer beliefe in order to heaven and that therefore whosoever believes these Articles heartily and explicitely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as S. John's expression is God dwelleth in him I leave it to be consider'd and judg'd of from the premises Only this if the old Doctors had been made Judges in these Questions they would have passed their affirmative for to instance in one for all of this it was said by Tertullian Regula quidem fidei una omnino est Lib. de veland Virg sola immobilis irreformabilis c. Hâc lege fidei manente caetera jam disciplinae conversationis admittunt novitatem correctionis operante scil proficiente usque in finem gratia Dei This Symbol is the one sufficient immoveable unalterable and unchangeable rule of Faith that admits no increment or decrement but if the integrity and unity of this be preserv'd in all other things men may take a liberty of enlarging their knowledges and prophesyings according as they are assisted by the grace of God SECT II. Of Heresy and the nature of it and that it is to be accounted according to the strict capacity of Christian Faith and not in Opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons ANd thus I have represented a short draught of the Object Numb 1. of Faith and its foundation the next consideration in order to our maine design is to consider what was and what ought to be the judgement of the Apostles concerning Heresy For although there are more kinds of vices than there are of vertues yet the number of them is to be taken by accounting the transgressions of their vertues and by the limits of Faith we may also reckon the Analogy and proportions of Heresy that as we have seen who was called faithfull by the Apostolicall men wee may also perceive who were listed by them in the Catalogue of Hereticks that we in our judgements may proceed accordingly And first the word Heresy is used in Scripture indifferently in a good sense for a Sect or Division of Opinion and men Numb 2. following it or sometimes in a bad sense for a false Opinion signally condemned but these kinde of people were then cald Anti-christs and false Prophets more frequently then Hereticks and then there were many of them in the world But it is observeable that no Heresies are noted signantèr in Scripture but such as are great errors practicall in materâ pietatis such whose doctrines taught impiety or such who denyed the comming of Christ directly or by consequence not remote or wiredrawn but prime and immediate And therefore in the Code de S. Trinitate fide Catholica heresy is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a wicked Opinion and an ungodly doctrine The first false doctrine we finde condemned by the Apostles was the opinion of Simon Magus who thought the Holy Ghost Numb 3. was to be bought with money he thought very dishonourably to the blessed Spirit but yet his followers are rather noted of a vice neither resting in the understanding nor derived from it but wholy practicall T is simony not heresy though in Simon it was a false opinion proceeding from a low account of God and promoted by his own ends of pride and covetousnesse The great heresy that troubled them was the doctrine of the necessity of keeping the Law of Moses the necessity of Circumcision against which doctrine they were therfore zealous because it was a direct overthrow to the very end and excellency of Christs comming And this was an opinion most petinaciously and obstinately maintain'd by the Jewes and had made a Sect among the Galathians and this was indeed wholy in opinion and against it the Apostles opposed two Articles of the Creed which serv'd at severall times according as the Jewes chang'd their opinion and left some degrees of their error I believe in Jesus Christ and I believe the holy Catholike Church For they therefore press'd the necessity of Moses Law because they were unwilling to forgoe the glorious appellative of being Gods own peculiar people and that salvation was of the Jewes and that the rest of the world were capable of that grace no otherwise but by adoption into their Religion and becomming Proselytes But this was so ill a doctrine as that it overthrew the great benefits of Christ's comming for if they were circumcis'd Christ profited them nothing meaning this that Christ will not be a Saviour to them who doe not acknowledge him for their Law-Giver and they neither confesse him their Law-Giver nor their Saviour that look to be justified by the Law of Moses and observation of legall rites so that this doctrine was a direct enemy to the foundation and therefore the Apostles were so zealous against it Now then that other opinion which the Apostles met at Jerusalem to resolve was but a piece of that opinion for the Iewes and Proselytes were drawn off from their lees and sediment by degrees step by step At first they would not endure any should be saved but themselves and their Profelytes Being wrought off from this heigth by Miracles and preaching of the Apostles they admitted the Gentiles to a possibility of salvation but yet so as to hope for it by Moses Law From which foolery when they were with much adoe disswaded and told that salvation was by Faith in Christ not by works of the Law yet they resolv'd to plow with an Oxe and an Asse still and joyne Moses with Christ not as shadow and substance but in an equall confederation Christ should save the Gentiles if he was helpt by Moses but alone Christianity could not doe it Against this the Apostles assembled at Jerusalem and made a decision of the Question tying some of the Gentiles such only who were blended by the Iewes in communi patria to observation of such Rites which the Iewes had derived by tradition from Noah intending by this to satisfie the Iewes as farre as might be with a reasonable compliance and condescension the other Gentiles who were unmixt in the meane while remaining free as appeares in the liberty S. Paul gave the Church of
to impose it upon others but with confidence to declare his own beliefe and that it was prescrib'd to others as a Creed was the act of the Bishops of Rome so he said nay possibly it was none of his So said the Patriarch of C. P. Meletius about one hundred and thirty years since in his Epistle to John Douza Athanasio falsò adscriptum Symbolum cum Pontificum Rom. appendice illâ adulteratum luce lucidiùs contestamur And it is more then probable that he said true because this Creed was written originally in Latine which in all reason Athanasius did not and it was translated into Greek it being apparent that the Latine Copy is but one but the Greek is various there being three Editions or Translations rather expressed by Genebrard lib. 3. de Trinit But in this particular who list may better satisfie himselfe in a disputation de Symbolo Athanasii printed at Wertzburg 1590 supposed to be written by Serrarius or Cleneherus And yet I must observe that this Symbol of Athanasius and Numb 37. that other of Nice offer not at any new Articles they only pretend to a further Explication of the Articles Apostolicall which is a certain confirmation that they did not believe more Articles to be of belief necessary to salvation if they intended these further Explications to be as necessary as the dogmaticall Articles of the Apostles Creed I know not how to answer all that may be objected against that but the advantage that I shall gather from their not proceeding to new matters is laid out ready for me in the words of Athanasius saying of this Creed this is the Catholike Faith and if his authority bee good or his saying true or he the Authour then no man can say of any other Article that it is a part of the Catholike Faith or that the Catholike Faith can be enlarged beyond the contents of that Symbol and therefore it is a strange boldnesse in the Church of Rome first to adde twelve new Articles Bulla Pii quarti supra forma juramenti professionis fidei in fin Conc. Trident. and then to adde the Appendix of Athanasius to the end of them This is the Catholike Faith without which no man can be saved But so great an example of so excellent a man hath been either mistaken or followed with too much greedinesse all Numb 38. the world in factions all damning one another each party damnd by all the rest and there is no disagreeing in opinion from any man that is in love with his own opinion but damnation presently to all that disagree A Ceremony and a Rite hath caused severall Churches to Excommunicate each other as in the matter of the Saturday Fast and keeping Easter But what the spirits of men are when they are exasperated in a Question and difference of Religion as they call it though the thing it selfe may be most inconsiderable is very evident in that request of Pope Innocent the Third desiring of the Greeks but reasonably a man would think that they would not so much hate the Roman manner of consecrating in unleavened bread as to wash and scrape and pare the Altars after a Roman Priest had consecrated Nothing more furious than a mistaken zeal and the actions of a scrupulous and abused conscience When men think every thing to be their Faith and their Religion commonly they are so busie in trifles and such impertinencies in which the scene of their mistake lies that they neglect the greater things of the Law charity and compliances and the gentlenesse of Christian Communion for this is the great principle of mischiefe and yet is not more pernicious then unreasonable For I demand Can any man say and justifie that the Apostles did deny Communion to any man that believed the Apostles Numb 39. Creed and liv'd a good life And dare any man taxe that proceeding of remissenesse and indifferency in Religion And since our blessed Saviour promised salvation to him that believeth and the Apostles when they gave this word the greatest extent enlarged it not beyond the borders of the Creed how can any man warrant the condemning of any man to the flames of Hell that is ready to die in attestation of this Faith so expounded and made explicite by the Apostles and lives accordingly And to this purpose it was excellently said by a wise and a pious Prelate S. Hilary Non per difficiles nos L. 10. de Trin. ad finem Deus ad bâ—atam vitam quaestiones vocat c. In absoluto nobis facili est aeternitas Jesum suscitatum à mortuis per Deum credere ipsum esse Dominum confiteri c. These are the Articles which we must believe which are the sufficient and adequate object of that Faith which is required of us in order to Salvation And therefore it was that when the Bishops of Istria Concil tom 4. Edit Paris p. 473. deserted the Communion of Pope Pelagius in causâ trium Capitulorum he gives them an account of his Faith by recitation of the Creed and by attesting the four Generall Councels and is confident upon this that de fidei firmitate nulla poterit esse quaestio vel suspicio generari let the Apostles Creed especially so explicated be but secured and all Faith is secured and yet that explication too was lesse necessary then the Articles themselves for the explication was but accidentall but the Articles even before the Explication were accounted a sufficient inlet to the Kingdome of heaven And that there was security enough in the simple believing Numb 40. the first Articles is very certain amongst them and by their Principles who allow of an implicite faith to serve most persons to the greatest purposes for if the Creed did contain in it the whole Faith and that other Articles were in it implicitely for such is the doctrine of the Schoole and particularly of Aquinas then he that explicirely believes all the Creed does implicitely believe all the Articles contain'd in it and then it 22 ae q. 1. a. 10. cap. is better the implication should still continue then that by any explication which is simply unnecessary the Church should be troubled with questions and uncertain determinations and factions enkindled and animosities set on foot and mens soules endanger'd who before were secur'd by the explicite beliefe of all that the Apostles requir'd as necessary which beliefe also did secure them for all the rest because it implied the belief of whatsoever was virtually in the first Articles if such beliefe should by chance be necessary The summe of this discourse is this if we take an estimate of the nature of Faith from the dictates and promises Evangelicall Numb 41. and from the practice Apostolicall the nature of Faith and its integrity consists in such propositions which make the foundation of hope and charity that which is sufficient to make us to doe honour to Christ
and to obey him and to encourage us in both and this is compleated in the Apostles Creed And since contraries are of the same extent heresy is to be judg'd by its proportion and analogy to faith and that is heresy only which is against Faith Now because Faith is not only a precept of Doctrines but of manners and holy life whatsoever is either opposite to an Article of Creed or teaches ill life that 's heresy but all those propositions which are extrinsecall to these two considerations be they true or be they false make not heresy nor the man an Heretick and therefore however hee may be an erring person yet he is to be used accordingly pittied and instructed not condemned or Excommunicated And this is the result of the first ground the consideration of the nature of Faith and heresy SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined GOd who disposes of all things sweetly and according to the nature and capacity of things and persons had made those Numb 1. only necessary which he had taken care should be sufficiently propounded to all persons of whom he required the explicite beliefe And therefore all the Articles of Faith are cleerely and plainly set down in Scripture and the Gospel is not hid nisi pereuntibus saith S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Damascen and that Orthod fidei lib. 4. c. 18. so manifestly that no man can be ignorant of the foundation of Faith without his own apparent fault And this is acknowledged by all wise and good men and is evident besides the reasonablenesse of the thing in the testimonies of Saints a Super Psal. 88. de util cred c. 6. Austin b Super Isa. c. 19 in Psal. 86. Hierome c Homil. 3. in Thess. Ep. 2. Chrysostome d Serm de confess Fulgentius e Miseel 2. l. 1. tit 46. Hugo de Sancto Victore f In Gen. ap Struch p. 87. Theodoret g C. 6. c. 21. Lactantius h Ad Antioch l. 2. p. 918. Theophilus Antiochenus i Par. 1. q. 1. art 9 Numb 2. Aquinas and the latter Schoole men And God hath done more for many things which are only profitable are also set down so plainly that as S. Austin sayes nemo inde haurire non possit si modò ad hauriendum devotè ac piè accedat ubi supra de util cred c. 6. but of such things there is no Question commenc'd in Christendome and if there were it cannot but be a crime and humane interest that are the Authors of such disputes and therefore these cannot be simple errours but alwayes heresies because the principle of them is a personall sinne But besides these things which are so plainly set down some for doctrine as S. Paul sayes that is for Articles and foundation of Faith some for instruction some for reproofe some for comfort that is in matters practicall and speculative of severall tempers and constitutions there are innumerable places containing in them great mysteries but yet either so enwrapped with a cloud or so darkned with umbrages or heigthened with expressions or so covered with allegories and garments of Rhetorick so profound in the matter or so altered or made intricate in the manner in the clothing and in the dressing that God may seeme to have left them as tryalls of our industry and Arguments of our imperfections and incentives to the longings after heaven and the clearest revelations of eternity and as occasions and opportunities of our mutuall charity and toleration to each other and humility in our selves rather then the repositories of Faith and furniture of Creeds and Articles of beliefe For wherever the word of God is kept whether in Scripture Numb 3. alone or also in Tradition he that considers that the meaning of the one and the truth or certainty of the other are things of great Question will see a necessity in these things which are the subject matter of most of the Questions of Christendome that men should hope to be excused by an implicite faith in God Almighty For when there are in the Explications of Scripture so many Commentaries so many senses and Interpretations so many Volumnes in all Ages and all like mens faces exactly none like another either this difference and inconvenience is absolutely no fault at all or if it be it is excusable by a minde prepar'd to consent in that truth which God intended And this I call an implicite Faith in God which is certainly of as great excellency as an implicite Faith in any man or company of men Because they who doe require an implicite Faith in the Church for Articles lesse necessary and excuse the want of explicite Faith by the implicite doe require an implicite Faith in the Church because they believe that God hath required of them to have a minde prepared to believe whatever the Church sayes which because it is a proposition of no absolute certainty whosoever does in readinesse of minde believe all that God spake does also believe that sufficiently if it be fitting to be believ'd that is if it be true and if God hath said so for he hath the same obedience of understanding in this as in the other But because it is not so certain God hath tyed him in all things to believe that which is called the Church and that it is certain we must believe God in all things and yet neither know all that either God hath revealed or the Church taught it is better to take the certain then the uncertain to believe God rather then men especially since if God hath bound us to believe men our absolute submission to God does involve that and there is no inconvenience in the world this way but that we implicitely believe one Article more viz. the Churches Authority or infallibility which may well be pardoned because it secures our beliefe of all the rest and we are sure if we believe all that God said explicitely or implicitely we also believe the Church implicitely in case we are bound to it but we are not certain that if we believe any company of men whom we call the Church that we therefore obey God and believe what he hath said But however if this will not help us there is no help for us but good fortune or absolute predestination for by choyce and industry no man can secure himselfe that in all the mysteries of Religion taught in Scripture he shall certainly understand and explicitely believe that sense that God intended For to this purpose there are many considerations 1. There are so many thousands of Copies that were writ by persons of severall interests and perswasions such different Numb 4. understandings and tempers such distinct abilities and weaknesses that it is no wonder there is so great variety of readings both in the Old Testament and in the New In the Old
this often hapned I think S. Austin is the chiefe Argument and Authority we have for the Assumption of the Virgin Mary the Baptism of Infants is called a Tradition by Origen alone at first and from Salmeron disput 51. in Rom. him by others The procession of the holy Ghost from the Sonne which is an Article the Greek Church disavowes derives from the Tradition Apostolicall as it is pretended and yet before S. Austin we heare nothing of it very cleerly or certainly for as much as that whole mystery concerning the blessed Spirit was so little explicated in Scripture and so little derived to them by Tradition that till the Councell of Nice you shall hardly find any form of worship or personall addresse of devotion to the holy Spirit as Erasmus observes and I think the contrary will very hardly be verified And for this particular in which I instance whatsoever is in Scripture concerning it is against that which the Church of Rome calls Tradition which makes the Greeks so confident as they are of the point and is an Argument of the vanity of some things which for no greater reason are called Traditions but because one man hath said so and that they can be proved by no better Argument to be true Now in this case wherein Tradition descends upon us with unequall certainty it would be very unequall to require of us an absolute beliefe of every thing not written for feare we be accounted to slight Tradition Apostolicall And since no thing can require our supreme assent but that which is truly Catholike and Apostolike and to such a Tradition is requir'd as Irenaeus sayes the consent of all those Churches which the Apostles planted and where they did preside this topick will be of so little use in judging heresies that besides what is deposited in Scripture it cannot be proved in any thing but in the Canon of Scripture it selfe and as it is now received even in that there is some variety And therefore there is wholy a mistake in this businesse for when the Fathers appeal to Tradition and with much earnestnesse Numb 8. and some clamour they call upon Hereticks to conform to or to be tryed by Tradition it is such a Tradition as delivers the fundamentall points of Christianity which were also recorded in Scripture But because the Canon was not yet perfectly consign'd they call'd to that testimony they had which was the testimony of the Churches Apostolicall whose Bishops and Priests being the Antistites religionis did believe and preach Christian Religion and conserve all its great mysteries according as they had been taught Irenaeus calls this a Tradition Apostolicall Christum accepisse calicem dixisse sanguinem suum esse docuisse novam oblationem novi Testamenti quam Ecclesia per Apostolos accipiens offert per totum mundum And the Fathers in these Ages confute Hereticks by Ecclesiasticall Tradition that is they confront against their impious and blaspemous doctrines that Religion which the Apostles having taught to the Churches where they did preside their Successors did still preach and for a long while together suffered not the enemy to sow tares amongst their wheat And yet these doctrines which they called Traditions were nothing but such fundamentall truths which were in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Irenaeus in Eusebius observes in the instance of Polycarpus and it is manifest by considering Lib. 5. cap. 20. what heresies they fought against the heresies of Ebion Cerinthus Nicolaitans Valentinians Carpocratians persons that Vid. Irenae l. 3 4. cont haeres denyed the Sonne of God the Unity of the God-head that preached impurity that practised Sorcery and Witch-craft And now that they did rather urge Tradition against them then Scripture was because the publike Doctrine of all the Apostolicall Churches was at first more known and famous then many parts of the Scripture and because some Hereticks denyed S. Lukes Gospel some received none but S. Matthews some rejected all S. Pauls Epistles and it was a long time before the whole Canon was consign'd by universall Testimony some Churches having one part some another Rome her selfe had not all so that in this case the Argument from Tradition was the most famous the most certain and the most prudent And now according to this rule they had more Traditions then we have and Traditions did by degrees lessen as they came to be written and their necessity was lesse as the knowledge of them was ascetained to us by a better Keeper of Divine Truths All that great mysteriousnesse of Christs Priest-hood the unity of his Sacrifice Christs Advocation and Intercession for us in Heaven and many other excellent Doctrines might very well be accounted Traditions before S. Pauls Epistle to the Hebrews was publish'd to all the World but now they are written truths and if they had not possibly we might either have lost them quite or doubted of them as we doe of many other Traditions by reason of the insufficiency of the propounder And therefore it was that S. Peter took order that the Gospel 2 Pet. 1. 13. should be Writ for he had promised that he would doe something which after his decease should have these things in remembrance He knew it was not safe trusting the report of men where the fountain might quickly run dry or be corrupted so insensibly that no cure could be found for it nor any just notice taken of it till it were incurable And indeed there is scarce any thing but what is written in Scripture that can with any confidence of Argument pretend to derive from the Apostles except ritualls and manners of ministration but no doctrines or speculative mysteries are so transmitted to us by so cleer a current that we may see a visible channell and trace it to the Primitive fountaines It is said to be a Tradition Apostolicall that no Priest should baptize without chrism and the command of the Bishop Suppose it were yet we cannot be oblig'd to believe it with much confidence because we have but little proofe for it scarce any thing but the single testimony of S. Hierom. And yet if it were this is but a rituall of which in passing by I shall give that account That Dialog adv Lucifer suppose this and many more ritualls did derive clearly from Tradition Apostolicall which yet but very few doe yet it is hard that any Church should be charged with crime for not observing such ritualls because we see some of them which certainly did derive from the Apostles are expir'd and gone out in a desuetude such as are abstinence from blood and from things strangled the coenobitick life of secular persons the colledge of widowes to worship standing upon the Lords day to give milk and honey to the newly baptized and many more of the like nature now there having been no mark to distinguish the necessity of one from the indifferency of the other they are all
have suspended or cassated the Decree in case the Pope had then disavowed it For besides the condemnation of Pope Honorius for heresy the 13 th and 55 th Canons of that Councell are expressely against the custome of the Church of Rome But this particular is involved in that new Question whether the Pope be above a Councell Now since the Contestation of this Question there was never any free or lawfull Councell * Vid. postea de Concil Sinvessane §. 6. N. 9. that determined for the Pope it is not likely any should and is it likely that any Pope will confirm a Councell that does not For the Councell of Basil is therefore condemn'd by the last Lateran which was an Assembly in the Popes own Palace and the Councell of Constance is of no value in this Question and slighted in a just proportion as that Article is disbelieved But I will not much trouble the Question with a long consideration of this particular the pretence is senselesse and illiterate against reason and experience and already determin'd by S. Austin sufficiently as to this particular Epist. 162. ad Glorium Ecce putemus illos Episcopos qui Romae judicaverunt non bonos judices fuisse Restabat adhuc plenarium Ecclesiae universae Concilium ubi etiam cum ipsis judicibus causa possit agitari ut si male judicasse convicti essent eorum sententiae solverentur For since Popes may be parties may be Simoniacks Schismaticks Hereticks it is against reason that in their own causes they should be judges or that in any causes they should be superior to their judges And as it is against reason so is it against all experience too for the Councell Sinvessanum as it said was conven'd to take Cognisance of Pope Marcellinus and divers Councels were held at Rome to give judgement in the causes of Damasus Sixtus the III Symmachus and Leo III and IV as is to be seen in Platina and the Tomes of the Councels And it is no answer to this and the like allegations to say in matters of fact and humane constitution the Pope may be judg'd by a Councell but in matters of Faith all the world must stand to the Popes determination and authoritative decision For if the Pope can by any colour pretend to any thing it is to a suprem Judicature in matters Ecclesiasticall positive and of fact and if he failes in this pretence he will hardly hold up his head for any thing else for the ancient Bishops deriv'd their Faith from the fountaine and held that in the highest tenure even from Christ their Head but by reason of the Imperiall * Vide Concil Chalced act 15. City it became the principall Seat and he surpriz'd the highest Judicature partly by the concession of others partly by his own accidentall advantages and yet even in these things although he was major singulis yet he was minor universis And this is no more then what was decreed of the eighth Generall Act. ult can 21. Synod which if it be sense is pertinent to this Question for Generall Councels are appointed to take Cognizance of Questions and differences about the Bishop of Rome non tamen audacter in eum ferre sententiam By audactèr as is supposed is meant praecipitanter hastily and unreasonably but if to give sentence against him bee wholy forbidden it is non-sense for to what purpose is an Authority of taking Cognizance if they have no power of giving sentence unlesse it were to deserre it to a superiour Judge which in this case cannot be supposed for either the Pope himselfe is to judge his own cause after their examination of him or the Generall Councell is to judge him So that although the Councell is by that Decree enjoyn'd to proceed modestly and warily yet they may proceed to sentence or else the Decree is ridiculous and impertinent But to cleare all I will instance in matters of Question and opinion For not only some Councels have made their Decrees Numb 5. without or against the Pope but some Councels have had the Popes confirmation and yet have not been the more legitimate or obligatory but are known to be hereticall For the Canons of the sixth Synod although some of them were made against the Popes and the custome of the Church of Rome a Pope a while after did confirm the Councell and yet the Canons are impious and hereticall and so esteem'd by the Church of Rome her selfe I instance in the second Canon which approves of that Synod of Carthage under Cyprian for rebaptization of Hereticks and the 72 Canon that dissolves marriage between persons of differing perswasion in matters of Christian Religion and yet these Canons were approved by Pope Adrian I. who in his Epistle to Tharasius which is in the second action of the seventh Synod calls them Canones divinè legalitèr praedicatos And these Canons were used by Pope Nicholas I. in his Epistle ad Michaclem and by Innocent III. c. à multis extra de aetat ordinandorum So that now that wee may apply this there are seven Generall Councels which by the Church of Rome are condemn'd of errour The * Vid. Socra l. z. c. 5. Sozom. l. 3. c. 5. Councell of Antioch A. D. 345. in which S. Athanasius was condemn'd The Councell of Millaine A. D. 354. of above 300 Bishops The Councell of Ariminum consisting of 600 Bishops The second Councell of Ephesus A. D. 449. in which the Eutychian heresy was confirmed Gregor in Regist li. 3. caus 7. ait Concilium Numidiae errasse Concilium Aquisgrani erravit De ra ptore raptâdist 20. can de libellis in glossâ and the Patriarch Flavianus kild by the faction of Dioscorus The Councell of Constantinople under Leo Isaurus A. D. 730 And another at Constantinople 35 years after And lastly the Councel at Pisa 134 years since Now that these Generall Councels are condemn'd is a sufficient Argument that Councels may erre and it is no answer to say they were not confirm'd by the Pope for the Popes confirmation I have shewn not to be necessary or if it were yet even that also is an Argument that Generall Councels may become invalid either by their own fault or by some extrinsecall supervening accident either of which evacuates their Authority and whether all that is required to the legitimation of a Councell was actually observ'd in any Councell is so hard to determine that no man can be infallibly sure that such a Councell is authentick and sufficient probation 2. And that is the second thing I shall observe There are so many Questions concerning the efficient the forme the Numb 6. matter of Generall Councells and their manner of proceeding and their finall sanction that after a Question is determin'd by a Conciliary Assembly there are perhaps twenty more Questions to be disputed before we can with confidence either believe the Councell upon its meere Authority or obtrude
Faith but especially by the insinuation and consequent De Rom. Pont. l 4. c. 2. § secunda sententia acknowledgement of Bellarmine that for 1000 years together the Fathers knew not of the Doctrine of the Popes infallibility for Nilus Gerson Alemain the Divines of Paris Alphonsus de Castro and Pope Adrian VI persons who liv'd 1400 after Christ affirm that infallibility is not seated in the Popes person that he may erre and sometimes actually hath which is a clear demonstration that the Church knew no such Doctrine as this there had been no Decree nor Tradition nor generall opinion of the Fathers or of any age before them and therefore this opinion which Bellarmine would faine blast if he could yet in his Conclusion he sayes it is not propriè haeretica A device and an expression of his own without sense or precedent But if the Fathers had spoken of it and believed it why may not a disagreeing person as well reject their Authority when it is in behalf of Rome as they of Rome without scruple cast them off when they speak against it For as Bellarmine being pressed with the Authority of Nilus Bishop of Thessalonica and other Fathers he sayes that the Pope acknowledges no Fathers but they are all his children and therefore they cannot depose against him and if that be true why shall we take their Testimonies for him for if Sonnes depose in their Fathers behalfe it is twenty to one but the adverse party will be cast and therefore at the best it is but suspectum Testimonium But indeed this discourse signifies nothing but a perpetuall uncertainty in such topicks and that where a violent prejudice or a concerning interest is engag'd men by not regarding what any man sayes proclaim to all the world that nothing is certain but Divine Authority But I will not take advantage of what Bellarmine sayes nor what Stapleton or any one of them all say for that will bee Numb 13. but to presse upon personall perswasions or to urge a generall Question with a particular defaillance and the Question is never the nearer to an end for if Bellarmine sayes any thing that is not to another mans purpose or perswasion that man will be tryed by his own Argument not by anothers And so would every man doe that loves his liberty as all wise men doe and therefore retain it by open violence or private evasions But to return An Authority from Irenaeus in this Question and on behalf of the Popes infallibility or the Authority of the Sea of Rome Numb 14. or of the necessity of communicating with them is very fallible for besides that there are almost a dozen answers to the words of the Allegation as is to be seen in those that trouble themselves in this Question with the Allegation and answering such Authorities yet if they should make for the affirmative of this Question it is protestatio contra factum For Irenaeus had no such great opinion of Pope Victors infallibity that he believed things in the same degree of necessity that the Pope did for therefore he chides him for Excommunicating the Asian Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all at a blow in the Question concerning Easter day and in a Question of Faith he expresly disagreed from the doctrine of Rome for Irenaeus was of the Millenary opinion and believed it to be a Tradition Apostolicall now if the Church of Rome was of that opinion then why is she not now where is the succession of her doctrine But if she was not of that opinion then and Irenaeus was where was his beliefe of that Churches infallibility The same I urge concerning S. Cyprian who was the head of a Sect in opposition to the Church of Rome in the Question of rebaptization and he and the abettors Firmilian and the other Bishops of Cappadocia and the voisinage spoke harsh words of Stephen and such as become them not to speak to an infallible Doctor and the supreme Head of the Church I will urge none of them to the disadvantage of that Sea but only note the Satyrs of Firmilian against him because it is of good use to shew that it is possible for them in their ill carriage to blast the reputation and efficacy of a great Authority For he sayes that that Church did pretend the Authority of the Apostles cum in multis sacramentis divinae rei à Epist. Firmiliani contr Steph. ad Cyprian Vid. etiam Ep. Cypriani ad Pompeium principio discrepet ab Ecclesia Hierosolymitanâ defamet Petrum Paulum tanquam authores And a little after justè dedignor sayes he apertam manifestam stultitiam Stephani per quam veritas Christianae petrae aboletur which words say plainly that for all the goodly pretence of Apostolicall Authority the Church of Rome did then in many things of Religion disagree from Divine Institution and from the Church of Jerusalem which they had as great esteeme of for Religion sake as of Rome for its principality and that still in pretending to S. Peter and S. Paul they dishonoured those blessed Apostles and destroyed the honour of their pretence by their untoward prevarication which words I confesse passe my skill to reconcile them to an opinion of infallibility and although they were spoken by an angry person yet they declare that in Africa they were not then perswaded as now they were at Rome Nam Cyprian Epist ad Quintum 〈◊〉 nec Petrus quem primum Dominus clegit vendicavit sibi aliquid insolentèr aut arrogantèr assumpsit ut diceret se primatum tenere That was their belief then and how the contrary hath grown up to that heigth where now it is all the world is witnesse And now I shall not need to note concerning S. Hierome that he gave a complement to Damasus that he would not have given to Liberius Qui tecum non colligit spargit For it might be true enough of Damasus who was a good Bishop and a right believer but if Liberius's name had been put instead of Damasus the case had been altered with the name for S. Hierom did believe and write it so that Liberius had subscrib'd to Arrianism And if either he or any of the rest had believ'd the De Script Eccles. in Fortunatiano Pope could not be a Heretick nor his Faith faile but be so good and of so competent Authority as to be a Rule to Christendome Why did they not appeale to the Pope in the Arrian Controversy why was the Bishop of Rome made a Party and a concurrent as other good Bishops were and not a Judge and an Arbitrator in the Question Why did the Fathers prescribe so many Rules and cautions and provisoes for the discovery of heresy Why were the Emperours at so much charge and the Church at so much trouble as to call and convene in Councels respectively to dispute so frequently to write so sedulously to observe all advantages
lose the comfort of truth because he beleeves it upon indirect insufficient and incompetent arguments and as his desire it should be so is his best argument that it is so so the pleasing of men is his best reward and his not being condemned and contradicted all the possession of a truth SECT XIIII Of the practice of Christian Churches towards persons disagreeing and when persecution first came in ANd thus this truth hath been practiced in all times of Christian Religion when there were no collaterall designes on foot nor interests to be served nor passions to be satisfied In S. Pauls time though the censure of heresie were not so loose and forward as afterwards and all that were called Heretiques were cleerly such and highly criminall yet as their crime was so was their censure that is spirituall They were first admonished once at least for so a l. 3. cap. 3. Irenaeus b de prescript Tertullian c lib. ad Quirinum Cyprian d in hunc locum Ambrose and e ibidem Hierome read that place of Titus 3. But since that time all men and at that time some read it Post unam alteram admonitionem reject a Heretique Rejection from the communion of Saints after two warnings that 's the penalty Saint John expresses it by not eating with them not bidding them God speed but the persons against whom he decrees so severely are such as denyed Christ to become in the flesh direct Antichrists and let the sentence be as high as it lists in this case all that I observe is that since in so damnable doctrines nothing but spirituall censure separation from the communion of the faithfull was enjoyned and prescribed we cannot pretend to an Apostolicall precedent if in matters of dispute and innocent question and of great uncertainty and no malignity we should proceed to sentence of death For it is but an absurd and illiterate arguing to say that excommunication is a greater punishment and killing a lesse and therefore Numb 2. whoever may be excommunicated may also be put to death which indeed is the reasoning that Bellarmine uses for first excommunication is not directly and of it self a greater punishment then corporall death Because it is indefinite and incompleat and in order to a further punishment which if it happens then the excommunication was the inlet to it if it does not the excommunication did not signifie halfe so much as the losse of a member much lesse death For it may be totally ineffectuall either by the iniquity of the proceeding or repentance of the person and in all times and cases it is a medicine if the man please if he will not but perseveres in his impiety then it is himselfe that brings the Censure to effect that actuates the judgement and gives a sting and an energy upon that which otherwise would be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly but when it is at worst it does not kill the Soule it onely consignes it to that death which it had deserved and should have received independently from that sentence of the Church Thirdly and yet excommunication is to admirable purpose for whether it referres to the person censured or to others it is prudentiall in it selfe it is exemplary to others it is medicinall to all For the person censured is by this meanes threatned into piety and the threatning made the more energeticall upon him because by fiction of Law or as it were by a Sacramentall representment the paines of hell are made presentiall to him and so becomes an act of prudent judicature and excellent discipline and the best instrument of spirituall Government Because the neerer the threatning is reduced to matter the more present and circumstantionable it is made the more operative it is upon our spirits while they are immerged in matter And this is the full sense and power of excommunication in its direct intention consequently and accidentally other evills might follow it as in the times of the Apostles the censured persons were buffeted by Satan and even at this day there is lesse security even to the temporall condition of such a person whom his spirituall parents have Anathematiz'd But besides this I know no warrant to affirme any thing of excommunication for the sentence of the Church does but declare not effect the finall sentence of damnation Whoever deserves excommunication deserves damnation and he that repents shall be saved though he dye out of the Churches externall Communion and if he does not repent he shall be damn'd though he was not excommunicate But suppose it greater then the sentence of corporall death yet Numb 3. it followes not because hereticks may be excommunicate therefore kill'd for from a greater to a lesse in a severall kind of things the argument concludes not It is a greater thing to make an excellent discourse then to make a shooe yet he that can doe the greater cannot doe this lesse An Angell cannot beget a man yet he can doe a greater matter in that kind of operations which we terme spirituall and Angelicall And if this were concluding that whoever may be excommunicate may be kill'd then because of excommunications the Church is confessed the sole and intire Judge she is also an absolute disposer of the lives of persons I beleeve this will be but ill doctrine in Spaine for in Bullâ Coenae Domini the King of Spaine is every year excommunicated on Maunday Thursday but if by the same power he might also be put to death as upon this ground he may the Pope might with more ease be invested in that part of S. Peters patrimony which that King hath invaded and surpriz'd But besides this it were extreme harsh Doctrine in a Roman Consistory from whence excommunications issue for trifles for fees for not suffering themselves infinitely to be oppressed for any thing if this be greater then death how great a tyrannie is that which does more then kill men for less then trifles or else how inconsequent is that argument which concludes its purpose upon so false pretence supposition Well however zealous the Apostles were against hereticks yet none were by them or their dictates put to death The death of Numb 4. Ananias and Saphira and the blindnesse of Elymas the Sorcerer amount not to this for they were miraculous inflictions and the first was a punishment to Vow-breach and Sacriledge the second of Sorcery and open contestation against the Religion of Jesus Christ neither of them concerned the case of this present question or if the case were the same yet the authority is not the same For he that inflicted these punishments was infallible and of a power competent But no man at this day is so But as yet people were converted by Miracles Preaching and Disputing and Hereticks by the same meanes were redargued and all men instructed none tortured for their opinion And this continued till Christian people were vexed by disagreeing
life for in matters speculative as all determinations are fallible so scarce any of them are to purpose nor ever able to make compensation of either side either for the publike fraction or the particular injustice if it should so happen in the censure But then as the Church may proceed thus far yet no Christian man or Community of men may proceed farther For if they Numb 2. be deceived in their judgement and censure and yet have passed onely spirituall censures they are totally ineffectuall and come to nothing there is no effect remaining upon the soule and such censures are not to meddle with the body so much as indirectly But if any other judgement passe upon persons erring such judgements whose effects remaine if the person be unjustly censured nothing will answer and make compensation for such injuries If a person be excommunicate unjustly it will doe him no hurt but if he be killed or dismembred unjustly that censure and infliction is not made ineffectuall by his innocence he is certainly kill'd and dismembred So that as the Churches authority in such cases so restrained and made prudent cautelous and orderly is just and competent so the proceeding is reasonable it is provident for the publike and the inconveniences that may fall upon particulars so little as that the publique benefit makes ample compensation so long as the proceeding is but spirituall This discourse is in the case of such opinions which by the former rules are formall heresies and upon practicall inconveniences Numb 3. But for matters of question which have not in them an enmity to the publique tranquillity as the Republique hath nothing to doe upon the ground of all the former discourses so if the Church meddles with them where they doe not derive into ill life either in the person or in the consequent or else are destructions of the foundation of Religion which is all one for that those fundamentall articles are of greatest necessity in order to a vertuous and godly life which is wholly built upon them and therefore are principally necessary If she meddles further otherwise then by preaching and conferring and exhortation she becomes tyrannicall in her government makes her selfe an immediate judge of consciences and perswasions lords it over their faith destroyes unity and charity and as if he that dogmatizes the opinion becomes criminall if he troubles the Church with an immodest peevish and pertinacious proposall of his article not simply necessary so the Church does not doe her duty if she so condemnes it pro tribunali as to enjoyne him and all her subjects to beleeve the contrary And as there may be pertinacy in doctrine so there may be pertinacy in judging and both are faults The peace of the Church and the unity of her doctrine is best conserved when it is judged by the proportion it hath to that rule of unity which the Apostles gave that is the Creed for Articles of meer beliefe and the precepts of Jesus Christ and the practicall rules of piety which are most plaine and easie and without controversie set downe in the Gospels and Writings of the Apostles But to multiply articles and adopt them into the family of the faith and to require assent to such articles which as S. Pauls phrase is are of doubtfull disputation equall to that assent wee give to matters of faith is to build a Tower upon the top of a Bulrush and the further the effect of such proceedings does extend the worse they are the very making such a Law is unreasonable the inflicting spirituall censures upon them that cannot doe so much violence to their understanding as to obey it is unjust and ineffectuall but to punish the person with death or with corporall infliction indeed it is effectuall but it is therefore tyrannicall We have seen what the Church may doe towards restraining false or differing opinions next I shall consider by way of Corollarie what the Prince may doe as for his interest and onely in securing his people and serving the ends of true Religion SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions FOr upon these very grounds we may easily give account of Numb 1. that great question Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions For first it is a great fault that men will call the severall sects of Christians by the names of severall Religions The Religion of JESUS CHRIST is the forme of sound doctrine and wholsome words which is set downe in Scripture indefinitely actually conveyed to us by plaine places and separated as for the question of necessary or not necessary by the Symbol of the Apostles Those impertinencies which the wantonness and vanity of men hath commenced which their interests have promoted which serve not truth so much as their own ends are farre from being distinct Religions for matters of opinion are no parts of the worship of God nor in order to it but as they promote obedience to his Commandments and when they contribute towards it are in that proportion as they contribute parts and actions and minute particulars of that Religion to whose end they doe or pretend to serve And such are all the sects and all the pretences of Christians but pieces and minutes of Christianity if they doe serve the great end as every man for his owne sect and interest beleeves for his share it does 2. Tolleration hath a double sense or purpose for sometimes by it men understand a publick licence and exercise of a sect Sometimes it is onely an indemnity of the persons privately to convene and to opine as they see cause and as they meane to answer to God Both these are very much to the same purpose unlesse some persons whom we are bound to satisfie be scandaliz'd and then the Prince is bound to doe as he is bound to satisfie To God it is all one For abstracting from the offence of persons which is to be considered just as our obligation is to content the persons it is all one whether we indulge to them to meet publikely or privately to do actions of Religion concerning which we are not perswaded that they are truely holy To God it is just one to be in the dark and in the light the thing is the same onely the Circumstance of publick and private is different which cannot be concerned in any thing nor can it concerne any thing but the matter of Scandall and relation to the minds and fantasies of certaine persons 3. So that to tolerate is not to persecute And the question Numb 3. whether the Prince may tollerate divers perswasions is no more then whether he may lawfully persecute any man for not being of his opinion Now in this case he is just so to tollerate diversity of perswasions as he is to tolerate publike actions for no opinion is judicable nor no person punishable but for a sin and if his opinion by reason
the greatest vanity in the world For when God hath made a Promise pertaining also to our Children for so our Adversaries contend and we also acknowledge in its true sense shall not this Promise this word of God be of sufficient truth certainty and efficacy to cause comfort unlesse we tempt God and require a sign of him May not Christ say to these men as sometime to the Jewes a wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign but no sign shall be given unto it But the truth on 't is this Argument is nothing but a direct quarrelling with God Almighty Now since there is no strength in the Doctrinall part the Numb 23. practise and precedents Apostolicall and Ecclesiasticall will be of lesse concernment if they were true as is pretended because actions Apostolicall are not alwayes Rules for ever it might be fit for them to doe it pro loco tempore as divers others of their Institutions but yet no engagement past thence upon following Ages for it might be convenient at that time in the new spring of Christianity and till they had engag'd a considerable party by that meanes to make them parties against the Gentiles Superstition and by way of pre-occupation to ascertain them to their own sect when they came to be men or for some other reason not trasmitted to us because the Question of fact it selfe is not sufficiently determin'd For the insinuation of that precept of baptizing all Nations of which Children certainly are a part does as little advantage as any of the rest because other parallel expressions of Scripture doe determine and expound themselves to a sence that includes not all persons absolutely but of a capable condition as adorate eum omnes gentes psallite Deo omnes nationes terrae and divers more As for the conjecture concerning the Family of Stephanus Numb 24. at the best it is but a conjecture and besides that it is not prov'd that there were Children in the Family yet if that were granted it followes not that they were baptized because by whole Families in Scripture is meant all persons of reason and age within the Family for it is said of the Ruler at Capernaum Ioh. 4. that he believed and all his house Now you may also suppose that in his house were little Babes that is likely enough and you may suppose that they did believe too before they could understand but that 's not so likely and then the Argument from baptizing of Stephen's houshold may bee allowed just as probable But this is unman-like to build upon such slight aery conjectures But Tradition by all meanes must supply the place of Scripture Numb 25. and there is pretended a Tradition Apostolicall that Infants were baptized But at this we are not much moved For we who rely upon the written Word of God as sufficient to establish all true Religion doe not value the Allegation of Tradions And however the world goes none of the Reformed Churches can pretend this Argument against this opinion because they who reject Tradition when t is against them must not pretend it at all for them But if wee should allow the Topick to be good yet how will it be verified for so farre as it can yet appeare it relies wholly upon the Testimony of Origen for from him Austin had it Now a Tradition Apostolicall if it be not consign'd with a fuller Testimony then of one person whom all after-Ages have condemn'd of many errors will obtain so little reputation amongst those who know that things have upon greater Authority pretended to derive from the Apostles and yet falsly that it will be a great Argument that he is credulons and weak that shall be determin'd by so weak probation in matters of so great concernment And the truth of the businesse is as there was no command of Scripture to oblige Children to the susception of it so the necessity of Paedobaptism was not determin'd in the Church till in the eighth Age after Christ but in the yeare 418 in the Milevitan Councell a Provinciall of Africa there was a Canon made for Paedo-baptism never till then I grant it was practiz'd in Africa before that time and they or some of them thought well of it and though that be no Argument for us to think so yet none of them did ever before pretend it to be necessary none to have been a precept of the Gospel S. Austin was the first that ever preach'd it to be absolutely necessary and it was in his heat and anger against Pelagius who had warm'd and chafed him so in that Question that it made him innovate in other doctrines possibly of more concernment then this And that although this was practised anciently in Africa yet that it was without an opinion of necessity and not often there nor at all in other places we have the Testimony of a learned Paedo-baptist Ludovicus Vives who in his Annotations upon S. Austin De Civit. Dei l. 1. c. 27. affirms Neminem nisi adultum antiquitùs solere baptizari But besides that the Tradition cannot be proved to be Apostolicall we have very good evidence from Antiquity that it Numb 26. was the opinion of the Primitive Church that Infants ought not to be baptiz'd and this is clear in the sixth Canon of the Councell of Neocaesarea The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sence is this A woman with child may be baptized when she please For her Baptism concernes not the child The reason of the connexion of the parts of that Canon is in the following words because every one in that Confession is to give a demonstration of his own choyce and election Meaning plainly that if the Baptism of the Mother did also passe upon the child it were not fit for a pregnant woman to receive Baptism because in that Sacrament there being a Confession of Faith which Confession supposes understanding and free choyce it is not reasonable the child should be consign'd with such a mystery since it cannot doe any act of choyce or understanding The Canon speaks reason and it intimates a practise which was absolutely universall in the Church of interrogating the Catechumens concerning the Articles of Creed Which is one Argument that either they did not admit Infants to Baptism or that they did prevaricate egregiously in asking Questions of them who themselves knew were not capable of giving answer And to supply their incapacity by the Answer of a Godfather Numb 27. Quid ni necesse est sie legit Franc. Iunius in notis ad Tertul. sponsores eti am periculo ingeri qui ipsi per mortalitatem destituere promissiones suas possint proventu malae indolis falli Tertul lib. de baptis cap. 18. is but the same unreasonablenesse acted with a worse circumstance And there is no sensible account can be given of it for that which some imperfectly murmure concerning stipulations civill perform'd by Tutors in
restrained from preaching such Doctrine if they mean to preserve their Government and the necessity of the thing will justifie the lawfulnesse of the thing If they think it to themselves that cannot be helped so long it is innocent as much as concernes the Publick but if they preach it they may be accounted Authors of all the consequent inconveniences and punisht accordingly No Doctrine that destroyes Government is to be endured For although those Doctrines are not alwayes good that serve the private ends of Princes or the secret designes of State which by reason of some accidents or imperfections of men may be promoted by that which is false and pretending yet no Doctrine can be good that does not comply with the formality of Government it selfe and the well being of bodies Politick Augur cum esset Cato dicere ausus est optimis auspiciis ea geri Cicero de senectute quae pro Reipub. salute gererentur quae contra Rempub. fierent contra auspicia fieri Religion is to meliorate the condition of a people not to doe it disadvantange and therefore those Doctrines that inconvenience the Publick are no parts of good Religion ut Respub salva fit is a necessary consideration in the permission of Prophecyings for according to the true solid and prudent ends of the Republick so is the Doctrine to be permitted or restrained and the men that preach it according as they are good Subjects and right Common-wealths men For Religion is a thing superinduced to temporall Government and the Church is an addition of a capacity to a Common-wealth and therefore is in no sense to disserve the necessity and just interests of that to which it is super-added for its advantage and conservation And thus by a proportion to the Rules of these instances all Numb 2. their other Doctrines are to have their judgement as concerning Toleration or restraint for all are either speculative or practicall they are consistent with the Publick ends or inconsistent they teach impiety or they are innocent and they are to be permitted or rejected accordingly For in the Question of Toleration the foundation of Faith good life and Government is to be secured in all others cases the former considerations are effectuall SECT XX. How farre the Religion of the Church of Rome is Tolerable But now concerning the Religion of the Church of Rome which was the other instance I promised to consider we Numb 1. will proceed another way and not consider the truth or falsity of the Doctrines for that is not the best way to determine this Question concerning permitting their Religion or Assemblies because that a thing is not true is not Argument sufficient to conclude that he that believes it true is not to bee endured but we are to consider what inducements there are that possesse the understanding of those men whether they be reasonable and innocent sufficient to abuse or perswade wise and good men or whether the Doctrines be commenc'd upon designe and manag'd with impiety and then have effects not to be endured And here first I consider that those Doctrines that have Numb 2. had long continuance and possession in the Church cannot easily be supposed in the present Professors to be a design since they have received it from so many Ages and it is not likely that all Ages should have the same purposes or that the same Doctrine should serve the severall ends of divers Ages But however long prescription is a prejudice oftentimes so insupportable that it cannot with many Arguments be retrench'd as relying upon these grounds that truth is more ancient then falshood that God would not for so many Ages forsake his Church and leave her in an errour that whatsoever is new is not only suspicious but false which are suppositions pious and plausible enough And if the Church of Rome had communicated Infants so long as she hath prayed to Saints or baptized Infants the communicationg would have been believed with as much confidence as the other Articles are and the dissentients with as much impatience rejected But this consideration is to be enlarg'd upon all those particulars which as they are apt to abuse the persons of the men and amuse their understandings so they are instruments of their excuse and by making their errours to be invincible and their opinions though false yet not criminall make it also to be an effect of reason and charity to permit the men a liberty of their Conscience and let them answer to God for themselves and their own opinions Such as are the beauty and splendor of their Church their pompous Service the statelinesse and solennity of the Hierarchy their name of Catholick which they suppose their own due and to concern no other Sect of Christians the Antiquity of many of their Doctrines the continuall Succession of their Bishops their immediate derivation from the Apostles their Title to succeed S. Peter the supposall and pretence of his personall Prerogatives the advantages which the conjunction of the Imperiall Seat with their Episcopall hath brought to that Sea the flattering expressions of minor Bishops which by being old Records have obtain'd credibility the multitude and variety of people which are of their perswasion apparent consent with Antiquity in many Ceremonialls which other Churches have rejected and a pretended and sometimes an apparent consent with some elder Ages in many matters doctrinall the advantage which is derived to them by entertaining some personall opinions of the Fathers which they with infinite clamours see to bee cryed up to be a Doctrine of the Church of that time The great consent of one part with another in that which most of them affim to be de fide the great differences which are commenc'd amongst their Adversaries abusing the Liberty of Prophecying unto a very great licentiousnesse their happinesse of being instruments in converting divers Nations the advantages of Monarchicall Government the benefit of which as well as the inconveniences which though they feele they consider not they daily doe enjoy the piety and the austerity of their Religious Orders of men and women the single life of their Priests and Bishops the riches of their Church the severity of their Fasts and their exteriour observances the great reputation of their first Bishops for Faith and sanctity the known holinesse of some of those persons whose Institutes the Religious Persons pretend to imitate their Miracles false or true substantiall or imaginary the casualties and accidents that have hapned to their Adversaries which being chances of humanity are attributed to severall causes according as the fancies of men and their Interests are pleased or satisfied the temporall selicity of their Professors the oblique arts indirect proceedings of some of those who departed from them and amongst many other things the names of Heretick and Schismatick which they with infinite pretinacy fasten upon all that disagree from them These things and divers others may very easily perswade
us then the Mosaicall precepts of putting Adulterers to death and trying the accused persons by the waters of jealousie And thus in these two Instances I have given account what Numb 20. is to be done in Toleration of diversity of opinions The result of which is principally this Let the Prince and the Secular Power have a care the Common-wealth be safe For whether such or such a Sect of Christians be to be permitted is a question rather Politicall then Religious for as for the concernments of Religion these instances have furnished us with sufficient to determine us in our duties as to that particular and by one of these all particulars may be judged And now it were a strange inhumanity to permit Jewes in Numb 21. a Common-wealth whose interest is served by their inhabitation and yet upon equall grounds of State and Policy not to permit differing Sects of Christians For although possibly there is more danger mens perswasions should be altered in a commixture of divers Sects of Christians yet there is not so much danger when they are changed from Christian to Christian as if they be turn'd from Christian to Iew as many are daily in Spaine and Portugall And this is not to be excused by saying the Church hath no Numb 22. power over them qui foris sunt as Iewes are For it is true the Church in the capacity of Spirituall regiments hath nothing to doe with them because they are not her Diocesse Yet the Prince hath to doe with them when they are subjects of his regiment They may not be Excommunicate any more then a stone may be kild because they are not of the Christian Communion but they are living persons parts of the Common-Wealth infinitely deceived in their Religion and very dangerous if they offer to perswade men to their opinions and are the greatest enemies of Christ whose honour and the interest of whose Service a Christian Prince is bound with all his power to maintaine And when the Question is of punishing disagreeing persons with death the Church hath equally nothing to doe with them both for she hath nothing to doe with the temporall sword but the Prince whose Subjects equally Christians and Iewes are hath equall power over their persons for a Christian is no more a subject then a Iew is The Prince hath upon them both the same power of life and death so that the Iew by being no Christian is not foris or any more an exempt person for his body or his life then the Christian is And yet in all Churches where the secular power hath temporall reason to tolerate the Iewes they are tolerated without any scruple in Religion which thing is of more consideration because the Iewes are direct Blasphemers of the Sonne of God and Blasphemy by their own Law the Law of Moses is made capitall And might with greater reason be inflicted upon them who acknowledge its obligation then urg'd upon Christians as an Authority enabling Princes to put them to death who are accused of accidentall and consequutive Blasphemy and Idolatry respectively which yet they hate and disavow with much zeale and heartinesse of perswasion And I cannot yet learn a reason why we shall not be more complying with them who are of the houshold of Faith for at least they are children though they be but rebellious children and if they were not what hath the Mother to doe with them any more then with the Iewes they are in some relation or habitude of the Family for they are consigned with the same Baptism professe the same Faith delivered by the Apostles are erected in the same hope and look for the same glory to be reaveled to them at the comming of their Common Lord and Saviour to whose Service according to their understanding they have vowed themselves And if the disagreeing persons be to be esteemed as Heathens and Publicans yet not worse Have no company with them that 's the worst that is to be done to such a man in S. Pauls judgement Yet count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother SECT XXI Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion FRom these premises we are easily instructed concerning the lawfulnesse or duty respectively of Christian Communion Numb 1. which is differently to bee considered in respect of particular Churches to each other and of particular men to particular Churches For as for particular Churches they are bound to allow Communion to all those that professe the same Faith upon which the Apostles did give Communion For whatsoever preserves us as Members of the Church gives us title to the Communion of Saints and whatsoever Faith or beliefe that is to which God hath promised Heaven that Faith makes us Members of the Catholick Church Since therefore the Iudiciall Acts of the Church are then most prudent and religious when they nearest imitate the example and piety of God To make the way to Heaven straighter then God made it or to deny to communicate with those whom God will vouchsase to be united and to refuse our charity to those who have the same Faith because they have not all our opinions and believe not every thing necessary which we over-value is impious and Schismaticall it inferres Tyranny on one part and perswades and tempts to uncharitablenesse and animosities on both It dissolves Societies and is an enemy to peace it busies men in impertinent wranglings and by names of men and titles of factions it consignes the interessed parties to act their differences to the height and makes them neglect those advantages which piety and a goodlife bring to the reputation of Christian Religion and Societies And therefore Vincentius Lirinensis and indeed the whole Numb 2. Church accounted the Donatists Hereticks upon this very ground Cap. 11. Vid. Pacian Epist. ad Sempron 2. because they did imperiously deny their Communion to all that were not of their perswasion whereas the Authors of that opinion for which they first did separate and make a Sect because they did not break the Churches peace nor magisterially prescib d to others were in that disagrecing and errour accounted Catholicks Divisio enim disunio facit vos haereticos pax unit as L. 2. c. 95. contra liter Petilian faciunt Catholicos said S. Austin and to this sense is that of S. Paul If I had all faith and had not charity I am nothing He who upon confidence of his true beliefe denies a charitable Communion to his brother loses the reward of both And if Pope Victor had been as charitable to the Asiaticks as Pope Anicetus and S. Polycarp were to each other in the same disagreeing concerning Easter Victor had not been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so bitterly reprov'd and condemn'd as he was for the uncharitable managing of his disagreeing by Polycrates and Euseb. l. 5. c. 25 26. Irenaeus Concordia enim quae est charitat is effectus est unio
voluntatum non opinionum True Faith which leads to charity Aquin. 22 ae q 37 a 1. leads on to that which unites wills and affections not opinions Upon these or the like considerations the Emperour Zeno Numb 3. publish'd his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which he made the Nicene Creed to be the medium of Catholick Communion and although he liv'd after the Councell of Chalcedon yet he made not the Decrees of that Councell an instrument of its restraint and limit as preferring the peace of Christendome and the union of charity farre before a forced or pretended unity of perswasion which never was or ever will be reall and substantiall and although it were very convenient if it could be had yet it is therefore not necessary because it is impossible and if men please whatever advantages to the publick would be consequent to it may be supply'd by a charitable complyance and mutuall permission of opinion and the offices of a brotherly affection prescrib'd us by the Lawes of Christianity And we have seen it that all Sects of Christians when they have an end to be serv'd upon a third have permitted that liberty to a second which we now contend for and which they formerly deny'd but now grant that by joyning hands they might be the stronger to destroy the third The Arrians and Meletians joyned against the Catholicks The Catholicks and Novatians joyn'd against the Arrians Now if men would doe that for charity which they doe for interest it were handsomer and more ingenuous For that they doe permit each others disagreeings for their interest 's sake convinces them of the lawfulnesse of the thing or else the unlawnesse of their own proceedings and therefore it were better they would serve the ends of charity then of faction for then that good end would hallow the proceeding and make it both more prudent and more pious while it serves the design of religious purposes SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how farre they may doe it AS for the duty of particular men in the Question of communicating with Churches of different perswasions it is Numb 1. to be regulated according to the Lawes of those Churches for if they require no impiety or any thing unlawfull as the condition of their Communion then they communicate with them as they are Servants of Christ as Disciples of his Doctrine and subjects to his Laws and the particular distinguishing Doctrine of their Sect hath no influence or communication with him who from another Sect is willing to communicate with all the Servants of their Common Lord For since no Church of one name is infallible a wise man may have either the misfortune or a reason to believe of every one in particular that she erres in some Article or other either he cannot communicate with any or else he may communicate with all that doe not make a sinne or the profession of an errour to be the condition of their Communion And therefore as every particular Church is bound to Tolerate disagreeing persons in the senses and for the reasons above explicated so every particular person is bound to Tolerate her that is not to refuse her Communion when he may have it upon innocent conditions For what is it to me if the Greek Church denies Procession of the third Person from the second so she will give me the right hand of Fellowship though I affirm it therefore because I professe the Religion of Jesus Christ and retain all matters of Faith and necessity But this thing will scarce be reduced to practise for few Churches that have fram'd bodies of Confession and Articles will endure any person that is not of the same confession which is a plaine demonstration that such bodies of Confession and Articles doe much hurt by becomming instruments of separating and dividing Communions and making unnecessary or uncertain propositions a certaine meanes of Schism and disunion But then men would doe well to consider whether or no such proceedings doe not derive the guilt of Schism upon them who least think it and whether of the two is the Schismatick he that makes unnecessary and supposing the state of things inconvenient impositions or he that disobeyes them because hee cannot without doing violence to his conscience believe them Hee that parts Communion because without sinne hee could not entertain it or they that have made it necessary for him to separate by requiring such conditions which to man are simply necessary and to his particular are either sinfull or impossible The Summe of all is this There is no security in any thing Numb 2. or to any person but in the pious and hearty endeavours of a good life and neither sinne nor error does impede it from producing its proportionate and intended effect because it is a direct deletery to sin and an excuse to errors by making them innocent and therefore harmlesse And indeed this is the intendment and design of Faith For that we may joyn both ends of this Discourse together therefore certain Articles are prescribed to us and propounded to our understanding that so we might be supplyed with instructions with motives and engagements to incline and determine our wills to the obedience of Christ. So that obedience is just so consequent to Faith as the acts of will are to the dictates of the understanding Faith therefore being in order to obedience and so farre excellent as it selfe is a part of obedience or the promoter of it or an engagement to it it is evident that if obedience and a good life be secured upon the most reasonable and proper grounds of Christianity that is upon the Apostles Creed then Faith also is secur'd Since whatsoever is beside the duties the order of a good life cannot be a part of Faith because upon Faith a good life is built all other Articles by not being necessary are no otherwise to be requir'd but as they are to be obtain'd and fourd out that is morally and fallibly and humanely It is fit all truths be promoted fairely and properly and yet but few Articles prescribed Magisterially nor framed into Symbols and bodies of Confession least of all after such composures should men proceed so furiously as to say all disagreeing after such declarations to be damnable for the future and capitall for the present But this very thing is reason enough to make men more limited in their prescriptions because it is more charitable in such suppositions so to doe But in the thing it selfe because few kinds of errours are damnable it is reasonable as few should be capitall And because Numb 3. every thing that is damnable in it selfe and before Gods Judgement Seat is not discernable before men and questions disputable are of this condition it is also very reasonable that fewer be capitall then what are damnable and that such Questions should bee permitted to men to believe because they must be left to
the Primitive Church against the example of all famous Churches in all Christendome in the whole descent of 15. Ages without all command and warrant of Scripture that it is unreasonable in the nature of the thing against prudence and the best wisedome of humanity because it is without deliberation that it is innovation in a high degree without that Authority which is truly and by inherent and ancient right to command and prescribe to us in externall forms of worship that it is much to the disgrace of the first reformers of our Religion that it gives encouragement to the Papists to quarrell with some reason and more pretence against our Reformation as being by the Directory confessed to have been done in much blindnesse and therefore might erre in the excesse as well as in the defect in the throwing out too much as casting off too little which is the more likely because they wanted zeale to carry it farre enough He that considers the universall deformity of publike worship and the no meanes of union no Symbol of publike communion being publikely consigned that all Heresies may with the same Authority bee brought into our prayers and offered to God in behalfe of the people with the same Authority that any truth may all the matter of our prayers being left to the choyce of all men of all perswasions and then observes that actually there are in many places heresie and blasphemy and impertinency and illiterate rudenesses put into the devotions of the most Solemne dayes and the most publike meetings and then lastly that there are divers parts of Lyturgy for which no provisions at all is made in the Directory and the very administration of the Sacraments left so loosely that if there be any thing essentiall in the forms of Sacraments the Sacrament may come ineffectuall by want of due words and due ministration I say he that considers all these things and many more he may consider will finde that particular men are not fit to be intrusted to offer in publike with their private spirit to God for the people in such solemnities in matters of so great concernment where the honour of God the benefit of the people the interest of Kingdomes the being of a Church the unity of minds the conformity of practice the truth of perswasions and the salvation of soules are so very much concerned as they are in the publike prayers of a whole Nationall Church An unlearned man is not to be trusted and a wise man dare not trust himselfe hee that is ignorant cannot he that is knowing will not The End OF THE SACRED ORDER AND OFFICES OF EPISCOPACIE By Divine Jnstitution Apostolicall Tradition and Catholique Practice TOGETHER WITH Their Titles of Honour Secular Employment Manner of Election Delegation of their Power and other appendant questions asserted against the Aerians and Acephali new and old By IER TAYLOR D. D. Chaplaine in Ordinarie to His MAJESTIE Published by His MAJESTIES Command ROM 13. 1. There is no power but of God The Powers that be are ordained of God CONCIL CHALCED 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 LONDON Printed for RICHARD ROYSTON at the Angel in Ivie-lane 1647. TO THE TRVLY VVORTHY AND MOST ACCOMPLISHT S r CHRISTOPHER HATTON Knight of the Honourable Order of the BATH SIR I AM ingag'd in the defence of a Great Truth and J would willingly finde a shrowd to cover my selfe from danger and calumny and although the cause both is ought to be defended by Kings yet my person must not goe thither to Sanctuary unlesse it be to pay my devotion and I have now no other left for my defence I am robd of that which once did blesse me and indeed still does but in another manner and I hope will doe more but those distillations of coelestiall dewes are conveyed in Channels not pervious to an eye of sense and now adayes we seldome look with other be the object never so beauteous or alluring You may then think Sir I am forc'd upon You may that beg my pardon and excuse but I should do an injury to Your Noblenesse if I should onely make You a refuge for my need pardon this truth you are also of the fairest choice not only for Your love of Learning for although that be eminent in You yet it is not Your eminence but for Your duty to H. Church for Your loyaltie to His sacred Majestie These did prompt me with the greatest confidence to hope for Your faire incouragement and assistance in my pleadings for Episcopacy in which cause Religion and Majesty the King and the Church are interested as parties of mutuall concernment There was an odde observation made long agoe and registred in the Law to make it authentick Laici sunt infensi Clericis Now the Clergy pray but fight not and therefore if not specially protected by the King contra Ecclesiam Malignantium they are made obnoxious to all the contumelies and injuries which an envious multitude will inflict upon them It was observ'd enough in King Edgars time Quamvis decreta In Chartē Edgar Regis A. D. 485. apud Hen. Spelman Pontificum verba Sacerdotum in convulsis ligaminibus velut fundamenta montium fixa sunt tamen plerumque tempestatibus turbinibus saecularium rerum Religio S. Matris Ecclesiae maculis reproborum dissipatur acrumpitur Idcirco Decrevimus Nos c. There was a sad example of it in K. Iohn's time For when he threw the Clergy from his Protection it is incredible what injuries what affronts what robberies yea what murders were committed upon the Bishops and Priests of H. Church whom neither the Sacrednesse of their persons nor the Lawes of God nor the terrors of Conscience nor feares of Hell nor Church-censures nor the Lawes of Hospitality could protect from Scorne from blowes from slaughter Now there being so neer a tye as the necessity of their own preservation in the midst of so apparent danger it will tye the Bishops hearts and hands to the King faster then all the tyes of Lay-Allegiance all the Politicall tyes I mean all that are not precisely religious and obligations in the Court of Conscience 2. But the interest of the Bishops is conjunct with the prosperity of the King besides the interest of their own securitie by the obligation of secular advantages For they who have their livelyhood from the King and are in expectance of their fortune from him are more likely to pay a tribute of exacter duty then others whose fortunes are not in such immediate dependancy on His Majesty Aeneas Sylvius once gave a merry reason why Clerks advanced the Pope above a Councell viz. because the Pope gave spirituall promotions but the Councels gave none It is but the Common expectation of gratitude that a Patron Paramount shall be more assisted by his Beneficiaries in cases of necessity then by those who receive nothing from him but the common influences of Goverment 3. But the Bishops duty to the King derives it selfe
office of power and great authority p. 102 21 Not lessened by the assistance and Councell of Presbyters p. 104 22 And all this hath been the faith and practice of Christendome p. 125 23 Who first distinguished names used before in common p. 128 24 Appropriating the word Episcopus or Bishop to the supream Church Officer p. 139 25 Calling the Bishop and him onely the Pastor of the Church p. 145 26 And Doctor p. 149 27 And Pontifex And Sacerdos p. 150 28 And these were a distinct order from the rest p. 156 29 To which the Presbyterate was but a degree p. 160 30 There being a peculiar manner of Ordination to a Bishoprick p. 161 31 To which Presbyters never did assist by imposing hands p. 164 32 Bishops had a power distinct and superiour to that of Presbyters p. 175 33 Power of Confirmation p. 198 34 Power of Iurisdiction p. 209 Which they expressed in attributes of authority and great power 35 Vniversall obedience given to Bishops by Clergy and Laity p. 214 36 Bishops were appointed Iudges of the Clergy and spirituall causes of the Laity p. 220 37 Presbyters forbidden to officiate without Episcopall license p. 251 38 Church-goods reserved to Episcopal dispensatiō 264 39 Presbyters forbidden to leave their own Dioces or to travell without leave of the Bishop p. 266 40 The Bishop had power to prefer which of his Clerks he pleased p. 267 41 Bishops onely did vote in Councels and neither Presbyters nor People p. 282 42 The Bishop had a propriety in the persons of his Clerks p. 292 43 The Bishops Iurisdiction was over many Congregations or Parishes p. 295 44 Their Iurisdiction was ayded by Presbyters but not impayred p. 311 45 The government of the Church by Bishops was believed necessary p. 323 46 They are Schismaticks that separate from their Bishop p. 327 47 And Hereticks p. 329 48 Bishops were alwaies in the Church men of great honour p. 335 49 And trusted with affaires of Secular interest p. 351 50 And therefore were inforced to delegate their power and put others in substitution p. 371 51 But they were ever Clergy-men for there never was any lay-Elders in any Church-office heard of in the Church p. 375 ERRATA PAg. 21. line 8. insert except S. John Pag. 141. l. 15. Presbyters read Bishops Pag. 243. line 14. after Episcopacy insert c. l. 15. after Bishops insert Clerk Pag. 354. l. 11. read were Farmers OF THE Sacred Order and Offices of EPISCOPACY BY DIVINE INSTITUTION APOSTOLICALL TRADITION Catholick practise c. IN all those accursed machinations which the device and artifice of Hell hath invented for the supplanting of the Church Inimicus homo that old superseminator of heresies and crude mischiefes hath indeavoured to be curiously compendious and with Tarquin's device put are summ a papaverum And therefore in the three ages of Martyrs it was a rul'd case in that Burgundian forge Qui prior erat dignitate prior trahebatur ad Martyrium The Priests but to be sure the Bishops must pay for all Tolleimpios Polycarpus requiratur Away with these pedling persecutions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lay the axe at the root of the tree Insomuch that in Rome from S. Peter and S. Paul to S. Sylvester thirty three Bishops of Rome in immediate succession suffered an Honourable and glorious Martyrdome unlesse * Maximini jussu Martyrio coronatur Saith Platina but that is wholly uncertaine Meltiades be perhaps excepted whom Eusebius and Optatus report to have lived till the time of the third Consulship of Constantine and Licinius Conteret caput ejus was the glorious promise Christ should break the Divell's head and though the Divell 's active part of the Duell was farre lesse yet he would venture at that too even to strike at the heads of the Church capita vicaria for the head of all was past his striking now And this I say he offered to doe by Martyrdome but that insteed of breaking crown'd them His next onset was by Iulian and occidere Presbyterium that was his Province To shut up publick Schooles to force Christians to ignorance to impoverish and disgrace the Clergy to make them vile and dishonourable these were his arts and he did the Divell more service in this finenesse of undermining then all the open battery of the ten great Rammes of persecution But this would not take For that which is without cannot defile a man So it is in the Church too Cedunt in bonum all violences ab extrà But therefore besides these he attempted by heresies to rent the Churches bowels all in pieces but the good Bishops gathered up the scattered pieces reunited them at Nice at Constantinople at Ephesus at Chalcedon at Carthage at Rome and in every famous place of Christendome and by God's goodnesse and the Bishops industry Catholick religion was conserved in Vnity and integrity Well! however it is Antichrist must come at last and the great Apostacy foretold must be and this not without means proportionable to the production of so great declensions of Christianity When ye heare of warres and rumors of warres be not afraid said our B. Saviour the end is not yet It is not warre that will doe this great work of destruction for then it might have been done long ' ere now What then will doe it We shall know when we see it In the meane time when we shall find a new device of which indeed the platforme was laid in Aërius and the Acephali brought to a good possibility of compleating a thing that whosoever shall heare his ears shall tingle an abhomination of desolation standing where it ought not in sacris in holy persons and places and offices it is too probable that this is the praeparatory for the Antichrist and grand Apostacy For if Antichrist shall exalt himselfe above all that is called God and in Scripture none but Kings and Priests are such Dii vocati Dii facti I think we have great reason to be suspitious that he that devests both of their power and they are if the King be Christian in very neer conjunction does the work of Antichrist for him especially if the men whom it most concernes will but call to mind that the discipline or Government which Christ hath instituted is that Kingdome by which he governes all Christendome so themselves have taught us so that in case it be proved that Episcopacy is that government then they to use their own expressions throw Christ out of his Kingdome and then either they leave the Church without a head or else put Antichrist in substitution We all wish that our feares in this and all things else may be vaine that what we feare may not come upon us but yet that the abolition of Episcopacy is the fore-runner and praeparatory to the great Apostacy I have these reasons to shew at least the probability First Because here is a concurse of 1. times for now after that
Consistories of Zurick and Basil are wholly consistent of Lay-men and Ministers are joyned as assistants only and Counsellors but at Schaffhausen the Ministers are not admitted to so much but in the Huguenot Churches of France the Ministers doe all 3. In such cases where there is no power of the sword for a compulsory and confessedly of all sides there can be none in causes Courts Ecclesiasticall if there be no opinion of Religion no derivation from a divine authority there will be sure to be no obedience and indeed nothing but a certain publick calamitous irregularity For why should they obay Not for Conscience for there is no derivation from divine authority Not for feare for they have not the power of the sword 4. If there be such a thing as the power of the keyes by Christ concredited to his Church for the binding and loosing delinquents and penitents respectively on earth then there is clearely a Court erected by Christ in his Church for here is the delegation of Iudges Tu Petrus vos Apostoli whatsoever ye shall bind Here is a compulsory ligaveritis Here are the causes of which they take cognisance Quodcunque viz. in materiâ scandali For so it is limited Matth. 18. but it is indefinite Matth. 16. and Vniversall Iohn 20. which yet is to be understood secundùm materiam subjectam in causes which are emergent from Christianity ut sic that secular jurisdictions may not be intrenched upon But of this hereafter That Christ did in this place erect a Iurisdiction and establish a government besides the evidence of fact is generally asserted by primitive exposition of the Fathers affirming that to S. Peter the Keyes were given that to the Church of all ages a power of binding and loosing might be communicated Has igitur claves dedit Ecclesiae ut quae solveret interrâ soluta essent in coelo scil ut quisquis in Ecclesiâ ejus dimitti sibi peccata crederet seque ab iis correctus averteret in ejusdem Ecclesiae gremio constitutus eâdem fide atque correctione sanaretur So * De doctr Christ. lib. 1. 6. 18. tract 118. in Iohan. vide etiam tract 124. tract 50. in Ioh. de Agon Christ. cap. 30 de bapt contr Donatist lib. 3. c. 17. S. Austin And againe Omnibus igitur sanctis ad Christi corpus inseparabilitèr pertinentibus propter hujus vitae procellosissima gubernaculum ad liganda solvenda peccata claves regni coelorum primus Apostolorum Petrus accepit Quoniam nec ille solus sed universa Ecclesia ligat solvitque peccata S. Peter first received the government in the power of binding and loosing But not he alone but all the Church to wit all succession and ages of the Church Vniversa Ecclesia viz. in Pastoribus solis as * De Sacerd. lib. 3. S. Chrysostom In Episcopis Presbyteris as †In 16. Matt. S. Ierome The whole Church as it is represented in the Bishops and Presbyters The same is affirmed by a Lib. de pudicit Tertullian b Epist. 27. S. Cyprian c Lib. qd Christus est Deus S. Chrysostome d Lib. 6. de Trinit S. Hilary e Lib. 3. in Apocal. Luke 12. 42. Primasius and generally by the Fathers of the elder and Divines of the middle ages 5. When our blessed Saviour had spoken a parable of the sudden coming of the sonne of Man commanded them therefore with diligence to stand upon their watch the Disciples asked him speakest thou this parable to us or even to all And the Lord said who then is that faithfull and wise steward whom his Lord shall make ruler over his houshold to give them their portion of meat in due season As if he had said I speak to You for to whom else should I speak and give caution for the looking to the house in the Masters absence You are by office and designation my stewards to feed my servants to governe my house 6. In Scripture and other writers to Feed and to Governe is all one when the office is either Politicall or Oeconomicall or Ecclesiasticall So he Psal 78. FED them with a faithfull and true heart and RULED them prudently with all his power And S. Peter joynes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 together 1. Pet. 5. 2. Acts. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So does S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rulers or overseers in a flock Pastors It is ordinary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Homer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euripides calls the Governors and guides of Chariots 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And our blessed Saviour himselfe is called the Great sheapheard of our soules and that we may know the intentum of that compellation it is in conjunction also with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He is therefore our sheapheard for he is our Bishop our Ruler and Overseer Since then Christ hath left Pastors or Feeders in his Church it is also as certain he hath left Rulers they being both one in name in person in office But this is of a known truth to all that understand either lawes or languages 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith * in lib de eo quod deterior potiori insidiatur Philo they that feed have the power of Princes and rulers the thing is an undoubted truth to most men but because all are not of a mind something was necessary for confirmation of it THis government was by immediate substitution § 2. This government was first committed to the Apostles by Christ delegated to the Apostles by Christ himselfe in traditione clavium in spiratione Spiritûs in missione in Pentecoste When Christ promised them the Keyes he promised them power to bind and loose when he breathed on them the holy Ghost he gave them that actually to which by the former promise they were intitled and in the octaves of the Passion he gave them the same authority which he had received from his Father and they were the faithfull and wise stewards whom the Lord made RULERS over his Houshold * vide Hilarium in hunc locum pp. communitèr But I shall not labour much upon this Their founding all the Churches from East to West and so by being Fathers derived their authority from the nature of the thing their appointing rulers in every Church their Synodall decrees de Suffocato Sanguine and letters missive to the Churches of Syria and Cilicia their excommunications of Hymeneus Alexander and the incestuous Corinthian their commanding and requiring obedience of their people in all things as S. Paul did of his subjects of Corinth and the Hebrews by precept Apostolicall their threatning the Pastorall rod their calling Synods and publick assemblies their ordering rites and ceremonies composing a Symbole as the tessera of Christianity their publick reprehension of delinquents and indeed the whole execution of their Apostolate is one continued argument of their
the Bishop was Iudge of his Clergy and of the Lay-people of his Diocesse that he had power to inflict censures upon them in case of delinquency that his censures were firme and valid and as yet we find no Presbyters joyning either in commission or fact in power or exercise but excommunication and censures to be appropriated to Bishops and to be only dispatch't by them either in full Councell if it was a Bishops cause or in his own Consistory if it was the cause of a Priest or the inferior Clergy or a Laick unlesse in cases of appeale and then it was in pleno Concilio Episcoporum in a Synod of Bishops And all this was confirmed by secular authority as appears in the Imperiall Constitutions Novel constit 123. c. 11. For the making up this Paragraph complete I must insert two considerations First concerning universality of causes within the Bishops cognisance And secondly of Persons The Ancient Canons asserting the Bishops power in Cognitione causarum speake in most large and comprehensive termes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They have power to doe what they list Their power is as large as their will So the Councell of Chalcedon before cited It was no larger though then S. Pauls expression for to this end also did I write that I might know the proofe of you whether ye be obedient 2. Corinth 2. 9. IN ALL THINGS A large extent of power when the Apostles expected an Universall obedience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so the stile of the Church runne in descention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so Ignatius ye must doe NOTHING without your BISHOP 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to contradict him in NOTHING Vbi suprà The expression is frequent in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to comprehend all things in his judgement or cognisance so the Councell of Antioch Ca. 9. * But these Universall expressions must be understood secundùm Materiam subjectam so S. Ignatius expresses himselfe Ye must without your Bishop doe nothing nothing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of things pertaining to the Church So also the Councell of Antioch 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The things of the Church are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 committed to the Bishop to whom all the people is intrusted They are Ecclesiasticall persons it is an Ecclesiasticall power they are indowed with it is for a spirituall end viz. the regiment of the Church and the good of soules and therefore only those things which are in this order are of Episcopall cognisance And what things are those 1. Then it is certaine that since Christ hath professed his Kingdome is not of this world that government which he hath constituted de novo does no way in the world make any intrenchment upon the Royalty Host is Herodes impie Christum venire quid times Non eripit mortalia Qui regna dat Coelestia So the Church us'd to sing Whatsoever therefore the secular tribunall did take cognisance of before it was Christian the same it takes notice of after it is Christ'ned And these are all actions civill all publike violations of justice all breach of Municipall lawes These the Church hath nothing to doe with unlesse by the favour of Princes and common-wealths it be indulged to them in honorem Dei S. Matris Ecclesiae but then when it is once indulged that act which does annull such pious vowes is just contrary to that religion which first gave them and then unlesse there was sinne in the donative the ablation of it is contra honorem Dei S. Matris Ecclesiae But this it may be is impertinent 2. The Bishops ALL comes in after this And he is judge of all those causes which Christianity hath brought in upon a new stock by it's new distinctive Principles I say by it's new Principles for there where it extends justice and pursues the lawes of nature there the secular tribunall is also extended if it be Christian The Bishop gets nothing of that But those things which Christianity as it prescinds from the interest of the republike hath introduc'd all them and all the causes emergent from them the Bishop is judge of Such are causes of faith Ministration of Sacraments and Sacramentals subordination of inferiour Clergy to their Superiour censures irregularities Orders hierarchicall rites and ceremonies liturgyes and publike formes of prayer as is famous in the Ancient story of Ignatius teaching his Church the first use of Antiphona's and Doxologyes tripart hist. lib. 10. cap. 9. and thence was deriv'd to all Churches of Christendome and all such things as are in immediate dependance of these as dispensation of Church Vessels and Ornaments and Goods receiving and disposing the Patrimony of the Church and whatsoever is of the same consideration according to the 41 Canon of the Apostles Praecipimus ut in potestate suâ Episcopus Ecclesiae res habeat Let the Bishop have the disposing the goods of the Church adding this reason Si enim animae hominum pretiosae illi sint creditae multò magis eum oportet curam pecuniarum gerere He that is intrusted with our pretious soules may much more be intrusted with the offertoryes of faithfull people 3. There are somethings of a mixt nature and something of the secular interest and something of the Ecclesiasticall concurre to their constitution and these are of double cognisance the secular power and the Ecclesiasticall doe both in their severall capacities take knowledge of them Such are the delinquencyes of Clergy-men who are both Clergy and subjects too Clerus Domini and Regis subditi and for their delinquencyes which are in materiâ justitiae the secular tribunall punishes as being a violation of that right which the State must defend but because done by a person who is a member of the sacred hierarchy and hath also an obligation of speciall duty to his Bishop therefore the Bishop also may punish him And when the commonwealth hath inflected a penalty the Bishop also may impose a censure for every sinne of a Clergy-man is two But of this nature also are the convening of Synods the power whereof is in the King and in the Bishop severally insomuch as both the Church and the commonwealth in their severall respects have peculiar interest The commonwealth for preservation of peace and charity in which religion hath the deepest interest and the Church for the maintenance of faith And therefore both Prince and Bishop have indicted Synods in severall ages upon the exigence of severall occasions and have severall powers for the engagement of Clericall obedience and attendance upon such solemnities 4. Because Christianity is after the common-wealth and is a capacity superadded to it therefore those things which are of mixt cognisance are chiefly in the King The Supremacy here is his and so it is in all things of this nature which are called Ecclesiasticall because they are in materiâ Ecclesiae ad finem religionis but they are of a different nature and use from things
and the Bishops of the Province and the Clergy of the Church and the people of the Citty were assembled at the choosing of another the Emperour makes a speech to the Theodor. lib. 4. c. 5. Bishops only that they should be carefull in their choyce So that although the people were present quibus pro fide religione etiam honor deferendus est as S. Cyprians phrase is to whom respect is to be had and faire complyings to be used so long as they are pious catholick and obedient yet both the right of electing and solemnity of ordaining was in the Bishops the peoples interest did not arrive to one halfe of this 6. There are in Antiquity diverse precedents of Bishops who chose their own successors it will not be imagined the people will choose a Bishop over his head and proclaime that they were weary of him In those daies they had more piety * Agelius did so he chose Sisinnius and that it may appeare it was without the people they came about him and intreated him to choose Marcian to whom they had been beholding in the time of Valens the Emperour he complyed with them and appointed Marcian to be his successor and Sisinnius Socrat. lib. 5. c. 21. whom he had first chosen to succeed Marcian * Thus did Valerius choose his successor S. Austin for though the people nam'd him for their Priest and carried him to Valerius to take Orders yet Valerius chose him Bishop And this was usuall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Epiphanius expresses this case it was ordinary to doe so in many Churches 7. The manner of election in many Churches was various for although indeed the Church had commanded it and given power to the Bishops to make the election yet in some times and in some Churches the Presbyters or the Chapter chose one out of themselves S. Hierome saies they alwaies did so in Alexandria from S. Markes time to Heraclas and Dionysius * S. Ambrose saies that at the first In Ephes. 4. the Bishop was not by a formall new election promoted but recedente uno sequens ei succedebat As one dyed so the next senior did succeed him In both these cases no mixture of the peoples votes 8. In the Church of England the people were never admitted to the choyce of a Bishop from its first becoming Christian to this very day and therefore to take it from the Clergy in whom it alwaies was by permission of Princes and to interest the people in it is to recede à traditionibus Majorum from the religion of our forefathers and to INNOVATE in a high proportion 9. In those Churches where the peoples suffrage by way of testimony I meane and approbation did concurre with the Synod of Bishops in the choyce of a Bishop the people at last according to their usuall guise grew hot angry and tumultuous and then were ingaged by divisions in religion to Name a Bishop of their own sect and to disgrace one another by publike scandall and contestation and often grew up to Sedition and Murder and therefore although they were never admitted unlesse where themselves usurped farther then I have declared yet even this was taken from them especially since in tumultuary assemblies they were apt to carry all before them they knew not how to distinguish between power and right they had not well learn'd to take deniall but began to obtrude whom they listed to swell higher like a torrent when they were check'd and the soleship of election which by the Ancient Canons was in the Bishops they would have asserted wholly to themselves both in right and execution * I end this with the annotation of Zonaras upon the twelfth Canon of the Laodicean Councell Populi suffragiis olim Episcopi eligebantur understand him in the senses above explicated Sed cùm multae inde seditiones existerent hinc factum est ut Episcoporum Vnius cujusque provinciae authoritate eligi Episcopum quemque oportere decreverint Patres of old time Bishops were chosen not without the suffrage of the people for they concurred by way of testimony and acclamation but when this occasion'd many seditions and tumults the Fathers decreed that a Bishop should be chosen by the authority of the Bishops of the Province And he addes that in the election of Damasus 137 men were slaine and that sixe hundred examples more of that nature were producible Truth is the Nomination of Bishops in Scripture was in the Apostles alone and though the Kindred of our Blessed Saviour were admitted to the choyce of Simeon Cleophae the Successor of S. Iames to the Bishoprick of Ierusalem as Eusebius witnesses it was lib. 3. hist. cap. 11. propter singularem honorem an honorary and extraordinary priviledge indulged to them for their vicinity and relation to our Blessed Lord the fountaine of all benison to us and for that very reason Simeon himselfe was chosen Bishop too Yet this was praeter regulam Apostolicam The rule of the Apostles and their precedents were for the sole right of the Bishops to choose their Colleagues in that Sacred order * And then in descent even before the Nicene Councell the people were forbidden to meddle in election for they had no authority by Scripture to choose by the necessity oftimes and for the reasons before asserted they were admitted to such a share of the choyce as is now folded up in a peice of paper even to a testimoniall and yet I deny not but they did often take more as in the case of Nilammon quem cives elegerunt saith the story out of Sozomen they chose him alone Tripart hist. lib. 10. c. 14. though God took away his life before himselfe would accept of their choyce and then they behav'd themselves oftentimes with so much insolency partiality faction sedition cruelty and Pagan basenesse that they were quite interdicted it above 1200 yeares agone * So that they had their little in possession but a little while and never had any due and therefore now their request for it is no petition of right but a popular ambition and a snatching at a sword to hew the Church in peices vide dist 63. per tot Gratian. But I thinke I need not have troubled my selfe halfe so farre for they that strive to introduce a popular election would as faine have Episcopacy out as popularity of election let in So that all this of popular election of Bishops may seeme superfluous For I consider that if the peoples power of choosing Bishops be founded upon Gods law as some men pretend from S. Cyprian not proving the thing from Gods law but Gods law from S. Cyprian then Bishops themselves must be by Gods law For surely God never gave them power to choose any man into that office which himselfe hath no way instituted And therefore I suppose these men will desist from their pretence of Divine right of popular election if the Church will recede from her divine
and AUTHORITY He was to be obey'd in ALL THINGS and contradicted in NOTHING The Bishops judgement was to sway and nothing must seeme Ad Trallian Ad Magnes pleasing to the Presbyters that was crosse to the Bishops sentence this and a great deale more which I have formerly made use of is in Ignatius And now let their assistance and Counsell extend as farre as it will the Bishops authority is invulnerable But I have already enough discussed this instance of S. Hierome's § thither I referre the Reader 2. But S. Cyprian must doe this businesse for us if any man for of all the Bishops he did acts of the greatest condescension and seeming declination of Episcopall authority But let us see the worst Ad id verò quod scripserunt mihi compresbyteri nostri Epist. 6. .... solus rescribere nihil potui quando à primordio Episcopatûs mei statuerim nihil sine consilio vestro sine consensu plebis meae privatâ sententiâ gerere And againe quamvis mihi videantur debere Epist. 19. pacem accipere tamen ad consultum vestrum eos dimisi ne videar aliquid temerè praesumere And a third time Quae res cùm omnium nostrum consilium Epist. 18. sententiam spectet praejudicare ego soli mihi rem communem vindicare non audeo These are the greatest steps of Episcopall humility that I find in materiâ juridicâ The summe whereof is this that S. Cyprian did consult his Presbyters and Clergy in matters of consequence and resolved to doe nothing without their advice But then consider also it was statui apud me I have resolved with my selfe to doe nothing without your Counsell It was no necessity ab extrà no duty no Sanction of holy Church that bound him to such a modesty it was his owne voluntary act 2. It was as well Diaconorum as Presbyterorum consilium that he would have in conjunction as appeares by the titles of the sixth and eighteenth Epistles Cyprianus Presbyter is ac DIACONIS fratribus salutem So that here the Presbyters can no more challenge a power of regiment in common then the Deacons by any Divine law or Catholike practice 3. S. Cyprian also would actually have the consent of the people too and that will as well disturbe the Ius Divinum of an independant Presbytery as of an independant Episcopacy But indeed neither of them both need to be much troubled for all this was voluntary in S. Cyprian like Moses qui cùm in potestate suâ habuit vt solus possit praeesse populo seniores elegit to use S. Hierome's expression who when it was in his power alone to rule the people yet chose seaventy Elders for in 1. ad Titum assistants For as for S. Cyprian this very Epistle cleares it that no part of his Episcopall authority was impayred For he shewes what himselfe alone could doe Fretus igitur dilectione vestrâ religione quam satis novi his literis hortor mando c. I intreat and COMMAND you .... vice meâ fungamini circa gerenda ea quae administratio religiosa deposcit Be my substitutes in the administration of Church affayres He intreates them pro dilectione because they lov'd him he COMMANDS THEM PRO RELIGIONE by their religion for it was a peice of their religion to obey him and in him was the governement of his Church else how could he have put the Presbyters and Deacons in substitution * Adde to this It was the custome of the Church that although the Bishop did onely impose hands in the ordination of Clerks yet the Clergy did approve examine the persons to be ordain'd and it being a thing of publike interest it was then not thought fit to be a personall action both in preparation and ministration too and for this S. Chrysostome was accus'd in Concilio nefario as the title of the edition of it expresses it that he made ordinations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet when S. Ius Graecc Rom. pag. 556. Cyprian saw occasion for it he did ordaine without the consent of the Clergy of his Church for so he ordained Celerinus so he ordain'd Optatus and Saturus when himselfe was from his Church and in great want of Clergy-men to assist in the ministration of the daily offices *** He did as much in jurisdiction too and censures for HIMSELFE did excommunicate Felicissimus and Augendus and Repostus and Irene and Paula as appeares in his 38 and 39 epistles and tells * Epist. 65. Rogatianus that he might have done as much to the petulant Deacon that abus'd him by vertue of his Episcopall authority And the same power singly and solely he exercis'd in his acts of favour and absolution Vnus atque alius Epist. 55. OBNITENTE PLEBE ET CONTRADICENTE MEA tamen FACILITATE suscepti sunt Indeed here is no contradiction of the Clergy expressed but yet the absolution said to be his owneact against the people and without the Clergy For he alone was the IUDGE insomuch that he declared that it was the cause of Schisme and heresie that the Bishop was not obey'd nec UNUs in Ecclesiâ ad tempus Sacerdos ad tempus IUDEX VICE CHRISTI COGITATUR ibidem and that ONE high Priest in a Church and IUDGE INSTEED OF CHRIST is not admitted So that the Bishop must be ONE and that ONE must be IUDGE and to acknowledge more in S. Cyprians Lexicon is called schisme and heresie Farther yet this Iudicatory of the Bishop is independant and responsive to none but Christ. Actum suum disponit dirigit Vnusquisque Episcopus rationem propositi sui Domino Epist. 52. redditurus and againe habetin Ecclesiae administratione Epist. 72. voluntatis suae arbitrium liberum unusquisque Praepositus rationem actûs sui Domino redditurus The Bishop is Lord of his owne actions and may doe what seemes good in his owne eyes and for his actions he is to account to Christ. This generall account is sufficient to satisfie the allegations out of the 6 th and 18 th epistles and indeed the whole Question But for the 18 th epistle there is something of peculiar answer For first It was a case of publike concernement and therefore he would so comply with the publike interest as to doe it by publike counsell 2 ly It was a necessity of times that made this case peculiar NECESSITAS TEMPORUM facit ut non temerè pacem demus they are the first words of the next epistle which is of the same matter for if the lapsi had been easily and without a publike and solemne triall reconcil'd it would have made Gentile Sacrifices frequent and Martyrdome but seldome 3 ly The common counsell which S. Cyprian here said he would expect was the Councell of the Confessors to whom for a peculiar honour it was indulged that they should be interested in the publike assoyling of such penitents who were
a confronting of a Divine institution * BUt is it not also heresie Aerius was condemned §. 47. And Hereticks for heresie by the Catholike Church The heresie from whence the Aërians were denominated was sermo furiosus magis quà m humanae conditionis dicebat Quid est Episcopus ad Presbyterum nihil differt hic ab illo A mad and an unmanly heresie to say that a Bishop and a Priest are all one So Epiphanius Assumpsit autem Ecclesia IN TOTO haeres 75. MUNDO ASSENSUS FACTUS EST antequam esset Aërius qui ab ipso appellantur Aëriani And the good Catholike Father is so angry at the heretick Aërius that he thinks his name was given him by Providence and he is call'd Aërius ab aërijs spiritibus pravitatis for he was possessed with an uncleane spirit he could never else been the inventer of such hereticall pravity S. Austin also reckons him in the accursed roll of hereticks and adds at the conclusion of his Catalogue that he is NO CATHOLIKE CHRISTIAN that assents to any of the foregoing Doctrines amongst which this is one of the principall Philastrius does as much for him But against this it will be objected first That heresies in the Primitive Catalogues are of a large extent and every dissent from a publike opinion was esteemed heresie 2 ly Aërius was called heretick for denying prayer for the dead And why may he not be as blamelesse in equalling a Bishop and a Presbyter as in that other for which he also is condemn'd by Epiphanius and S. Austin 3 ly He was never condemn'd by any Councell and how then can he be called heretick I answer that dissent from a publike or a received opinion was never called heresie unlesse the contrary truth was indeed a part of Catholike doctrine For the Fathers many of them did so as S. Austin from the Millenary opinion yet none ever reckon'd them in the Catalogues of hereticks but such things only set them downe there which were either directly opposite to Catholike beliefe though in minoribus articulis or to a holy life 2 ly It is true that Epiphanius and S. Austin reckon his denying prayer for the dead to be one of his owne opinions and hereticall But I cannot help it if they did let him and them agree it they are able to answer for themselves But yet they accused him also of Arianisme and shall we therefore say that Arianisme was no heresie because the Fathers call'd him heretick in one particular upon a wrong principall We may as well say this as deny the other 3 ly He was not condemned by any Councell No. For his heresie was ridiculous and a scorne to all wise men as Epiphanius observes and it made no long continuance neither had it any considerable party * But yet this is certaine that Epiphanius Philastrius S. Austin call'd this opinion of Aërius a heresie and against the Catholike beliefe And themselves affirme that the Church did so and then it would be considered that it is but a sad imployment to revive old heresies and make them a peice of the New religion And yet after all this if I mistake not although Aërius himselfe was so inconsiderable as not to be worthy noting in a Councell yet certainly the one halfe of his error is condemn'd for heresie in one of the foure Generall Councells viz. the first Councell of Constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Can. 6. We call all them hereticks whom the Ancient Church hath condemn'd and whom we shall anathematize Will not Aërius come under one of these titles for a condemn'd heretick Then see forward 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here is enough for Aërius and all his hyperaspists new and old for the holy Councell condemnes them for hereticks who doe indeed confesse the true faith but separate from their Bishops and make conventicles apart from his Communion Now this I the rather urge because an Act of Parliament made I o of Elizabeth does make this Councell and the other three of Nice Ephesus and Chalcedon the rule of judging heresyes I end this particular with the saying of the Councell of Paris against the Acephali who were the branch of a Crabstock and something like Aërius cited by Burchard Nullâ ratione Clerici aut Sacerdotes lib. 2. decret cap. 226. habendi sunt qui sub nullius Episcopi disciplina providentiâ gubernantur Tales enim Acephalos id est sine capite Priscae Ecclesiae consuetudo nuncupavit They are by no meanes to be accounted Clergy-men or Priests that will not be governed by a Bishop For such men the Primitive Church call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is headlesse wittlesse people This onely Acephali was the title of a Sect a formall heresy and condemn'd by the Ancient Church say the Fathers of the Councell of Paris Now if we can learn exactly what they were it may perhaps be another conviction for the necessity of Episcopall regiment Nicephorus can best informe us lib. 18. ca. 45 Eccles. hist. Eodem tempore Acephali quorum dux Severus Antiochenus fuit c Severus of Antioch was the first broacher of this heresy But why were they called Acephali id est sine capite quem sequuntur haeretici Nullus enim eorum reperitur author à quo exorti sunt saith Isidore But this cannot be for their lib. 8. cap. 5. Etymol head is knowne Severus was the heresiarch But then why are they called Acephali Nicephorus gives this reason and withall a very particular account of their heresy Acephali autem ob eam causam dicti sunt quòd sub Episcopis non fuerint They refused to live under Bishops Thence they had their Name what was their heresie They denied the distinction of Natures in Christ. That was one of their heresies but they had more for they were trium capitulorum in Chalcedone impugnatores saith Isidore they opposed three Canons of the Councell of Chalcedon One we have heard what their other vbi suprà heresies were we doe not so well know but by the Canon of the Councell of Paris and the intimation of their name we are guided to the knowledge of a second They refused to live under the government of a Bishop And this also was impugnatio unius articuli in Chalcedone for the eighth Canon of the Councell of Chalcedon commands that the Clergy should be under Episcopall government But these Acephali would not they were antiepiscopall men and therefore they were condemn'd hereticks condemn'd In the Councell of Paris of Sevill and of Chalcedon But the more particular account that Nicephorus gives of them I will now insert because it is of great use Proinde Episcopis Sacerdotibus apud eos defunctis neque baptismus juxtà solennem atque receptum Ecclesiae morem apud eos administratur neque oblatio autres aliqua divina facta ministeriumvé Ecclesiasticum sicuti mos est celebratum est
suas saeculares apuà nos finire cupientes quando eis necessarij fuerimus sic nos Sanctos Epist. 147. Dei servos appellant ut negotiaterrae suae peragant Aliquando agamus negotium salutis nostrae salutis ipsorum non de auro non de argento non de fundis pecoribus pro quibus rebus quotidiè submisso capite salutamur ut dissensiones hominum terminemus It was almost the businesse of every day to him to judge causes concerning Gold and Silver Cattell and glebe and all appertenances of this life This S. Austin would not have done if it had not been lawfull so we are to suppose in charity but yet this we are sure of S. Austin thought it not deâ—pare Monach cap 29. only lawfull but a part of his duty quibus nos molestijs idem affixit Apostolus and that by the authority not of himselfe but of him that spake within him even the H. Ghost so he Thus also it was usuall for Princes in the Primitive Church to send Bishops their Embassadours Constans the Emperour sent two Bishops chosen out of the Councell of Sardis together with Salianus Tripart hist lib 4. cap. 25. the Great Master of his Army to Constantius * S. Chrysostom was sent Embassadour to Gainas Maruthus the Bishop of Mesopotamia was sent Embassadour lib 10. cap 6. ibid. 11. cap. 8. ibid. from the Emperour to Isdigerdes the King of Persia. S. Ambrose from Valentinian the yonger lib. 5. Epist. Ambros. 33. Euseb lib. 8. cap. 1. to the Tyrant Maximus * Dorotheus was a Bishop and a chamberlaine to the Emperour Many more examples there are of the concurrence of the Episcopall office and a secular dignity or imployment Now then Consider * The Church did not might not challenge any secular honour or imployment by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall dignity precisely 2. The Church might not be ambitious or indagative of such imployment 3. The Churche's interest abstractly considered was not promoted by such imployment but where there was no greater way of compensation was interrupted and depress'd 4. The Church though in some cases shee was allowed to make secession yet might not relinquish her owne charge to intervene in anothers ayd 5. The Church did by no meanes suffer her Clerks to undertake any low secular imployment much more did shee forbid all sordid ends and Covetous designes 6. The Bishop or his Clerks might ever do any action of piety though of secular burden Clerks were never forbidden to reade Grammer or Philosophy to youth to be Masters of Schooles of Hospitalls they might reconcile their Neighbours that were falne out about a personall trespasse or reall action and yet since now adayes a Clergy-man's imployment and capacity is bounded within his Pulpit or reading deske or his study of Divinity at most these that I have reckoned are as verily secular as any thing and yet no law of Christendome ever prohibited any of these or any of the like Nature to the Clergy nor any thing that is ingenuous that is fit for a Scholler that requires either finenesse of parts or great learning or overruling authority or exemplary piety 7. Clergy-men might do any thing that was imposed on them by their Superiours 8. The Bishops and Priests were men of Great ability and surest confidence for determinations of Iustice in which religion was ever the strongest binder And therefore the Princes and People sometimes forc'd the Bishops from their owne interest to serve the Common-wealth in it they serv'd themselves directly and by consequence too the Church had not only a sustentation from the secular arme but an addition of honour and secular advantages and all this warranted by precedent of Scripture and the practice of the Primitive Church and particularly of men whom all succeeding ages have put into the Calender of Saints * So that it would be considered that all this while it is the kings interest and the Peoples that is pleaded when we assert a capacity to the Bishops to undertake charges of publike trust It is no addition to the calling of Bishops It serves the King it assists the republike and in such a plethory and almost a surfet of Clergy-men as this age is supplied with it can be no disservice to the Church whose dayly offices may be plentifully supplyed by Vicars and for the temporary avocation of some few aboundant recompence is made to the Church which is not at all injured by becomming an occasion of indearing the Church to those whose aide shee is * There is an admirable epistle written by Petrus Blesensis in the name of the Arch bishop of Canterbury Epist. 84. to P. Alexander the third in the defence of the Bishop of Ely Winchester Norwich that attended the Court upon service of the King Non est novum saith he quòd Regum Consiliis intersint Episcopi Sicut enim honestate sapientiâ caeteros antecedunt sic expeditiores efficaciores in reip administratione censentur Quia sicut Scriptum est minús salubritèr disponitur regnum quod non regitur consilio sapientum In quo not atur eos consiliis Regum debere assistere qui sciant velint possint patientibus compati paciterrae ac populi saluti prospicere crudire adjustitiam Reges imminentibus occursare periculis vitaeque maturioris exemplis informare subditos quâdam authoritate potestativâ praesumptionem malignantium cohibere It is no new thing for Bishops to be Counsellors to Princes saith he their wisdome and piety that enables them for a Bishoprick proclaimes them fit instruments to promote the publike tranquillity of the Common-wealth They know how to comply with oppressed people to advance designes of peace and publike security It is their office to instruct the King to righteousnesse by their sanctity to be a rule to the Court and to diffuse their exemplary piety over the body of the Kingdome to mixe influences of religion with designes of state to make them have as much of the dove as of the serpent and by the advantage of their religious authority to restraine the malignity of accursed people in whom any image of a God or of religion is remaining * He proceeds in the discourse and brings the examples of Samuel Isaiah Elisha Iojada Zecharias who were Priests and Prophets respectively and yet imployed in Princes Courts and Councells of Kings and addes this Vnum noveritis quia nisi familiares Consiliarii Regis essent Episcopi suprà dorsum Ecclesiae hodiè fabricarent peccatores immanitèr ac intolerabilitèr opprimeret Clerum praesumptio Laicalis That 's most true If the Church had not the advantage of additionall honorary imployments the plowers would plow upon the Churches back make long furrowes * The whole Epistle is worth transcribing But I shall content my selfe with this summary of the advantages which are acquir'd both to policy and Religion by the imployment of Bishops in
Princes Courts I st is me diantibus mansuescit circa simplices judiciarius rigor admittitur clamor pauperum Ecclesiarum dignitas erigitur relevatur pauperum indigentia firmatur in clero libertas pax in populis in Monasteriis quies justitia liberè exercetur superbia opprimitur augetur Laicorum devotio religio fovetur diriguntur judicia c. When pious Bishops are imployed in Princes Councells then the rigor of Lawes is abated equity introduced the cry of the poore is heard their necessities are made known the liberties of the Church are conserved the peace of Kingdomes labour'd for pride is depressed religion increaseth the devotion of the Laity multiplies and tribunalls are made just and incorrupt and mercifull Thus farre Petrus Blesensis * These are the effects which though perhaps they doe not alwaies fall out yet these things may in expectation of reason be look'd for from the Clergy their principles and calling promises all this quia in Ecclesiâ magis lex est ubi Dominus legis timetur meliùs dicit apud Dei Ministros agere causam Faciliùs enim Dei timore sententiam legis veram promunt saith S. Ambrose In 1. Corinth 6. and therefore certainly the fairest reason in the world that they be imployed But if personall defaillance be thought reasonable to disimploy the whole calling then neither Clergy nor Laity should ever serve a Prince And now we are easily driven into an understanding of that saying of S. Paul No man that 2. Timoth. 2. 4. warreth entangleth himselfe with the affaires of this life For although this be spoken of all Christian people and concernes the Laity in their proportion as much as the Clergy yet nor one nor the other is interdicted any thing that is not a direct hinderance to their owne precise duty of Christianity And such things must be par'd away from the fringes of the Laity as well as the long robe of the Clergy But if we should consider how little we have now left for the imployment of a Bishop I am afraid a Bishop would scarce seem to be a necessary function so farre would it be from being hindered by the collaterall intervening of a Lay-judicature I need not instance in any particulars for if the judging matters and questions of religion be not left alone to them they may well be put into atemporall imployment to preserve them from suspition of doing nothing I have now done with this only intreating this to be considered Is not the King fons utriusque jurisdictionis In all the senses of Common-law and externall compulsory he is But if so then why may not the King as well make Clergy-Iudges as Lay-Delegates For to be sure if there be an incapacity in the Clergy of medling with secular affaires there is the same at least in the Laity of medling with Church affaires For if the Clergy be above the affaires of the World then the Laity are under the affaires of the Church or else if the Clergy beincapable of Lay-businesse because it is of a different and disparate nature from the Church does not the same argument exclude the Laity from intervening in Church affaires For the Church differs no more from the common-wealth then the common-wealth differs from the Church And now after all this suppose a King should command a Bishop to goe on Embassy to a forraine Prince to be a Commissioner in a treaty of pacification if the Bishop refuse did he doe the duty of a Subject If yea I wonder what subjection that is which a Bishop owes to his Prince when hee shall not be bound to obey him in any thing but the saying and doing of his office to which he is obliged whether the Prince commands him yea or no. But if no then the Bishop was tyed to goe and then the calling makes him no way incapable of such imployment for no man can be bound to doe a sinne BUt then did not this imployment when the occasions §. 50. And therefore were inforced to delegate their power and put others in substitution were great and extraordinary force the Bishops to a temporary absence And what remedy was there for that For the Church is not to be left destitute that 's agreed on by all the Canons They must not be like the Sicilian Bishops whom Petrus Blesensis complains of that attended the Court and never visited their Churches or took care either of the cure of soules or of the Church possessions What then must be done The Bishops in such cases may give delegation of their power and offices to others though now adaies they are complain'd of for their care I say for their care For if they may intervene in secular affaires they may sometimes be absent and then they must delegate their power or leave the Church without a Curate *** But for this matter the account need not be long For since I have proved that the whole Diocesse is in curâ Episcopali and for all of it he is responsive to God Almighty and yet that instant necessity and the publike act of Christendome hath ratified it that Bishops have delegated to Presbyters so many parts of the Bishops charge as there are parishes in his Diocesse the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is pretended for delegation of Episcopall charge is no lesse then the act of all Christendome For it is evident at first Presbyters had no distinct cure at all but were in common assistant to the Bishop and were his emissaries for the gaining soules in Citty or Suburbs But when the Bishops divided parishes and fixt the Presbyters upon a cure so many Parishes as they distinguished so many delegations they made And these we all believe to be good both in law and conscience For the Bishop per omnes divinos ordines propriae hierarchiae exercet mysteria saith S. Denis Eccles. hierar c. 5. he does not doe the offices of his order by himselfe onely but by others also for all the inferior orders doe so operate as by them he does his proper offices * But besides this grand act of the Bishops first and then of all Christendome in consent we have faire precedent in S. Paul for he made delegation of a power to the Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous person It was a plain delegation for he commanded them to doe it and gave them his own spirit that is his own authority and indeed without it I scarce find how the delinquent should have been delivered over to Satan in the sense of the Apostolick Church that is to be buffeted for that was a miraculous appendix of power Apostolick * When S. Paul sent for Timothy from Ephesus he sent Tychicus to be his Vicar Doethy diligence 2. Timoth. 4. v. 9. 12. to come unto me shortly for Demas hath forsaken me c. And Tychicus have I sent to Ephesus Here was an expresse delegation of the power of jurisdiction to Tychicus who for