Apostates from the Church Catholick for pretending to Vindicate the Constitution of the Church of England as by Law Establish'd this is a Novelty which we know not what to make of a Prodigy becoming a Time and Place of Wonders To lay open the Design of this New-Attempt and which may otherwise in time improve into Another Schism and produce us a Third Church of England composed only of such Persons as will disclaim all Authority of the Civil-Magistrate from having any thing to do in Matters of Religion it may possibly be of some Use to represent to such as have not yet lay'd aside all Regard to Her the plain Sense of our Reformed Church in the Points under Debate and shew them from whom I received the Doctrine which I have asserted in Vindication of the Kings Supremacy And having done this I cannot but hope that some of them will consider what is the true Design of those who are so forward to pull down what our Wise and Pious Ancestors took so much care to Build And whether the Methods we are now running so blindly into must not end either in downright Popery or Fanaticism at the last When the Foundation was first laid for a regular Reformation of Religion among Us One of the first things which those who carry'd on that great Work saw it needful to do was to restore the Crown to that Authority which the Prevalence of the Papal Power had so notoriously deprived it of In order hereunto the Convocation having agreed to submit themselves to the King an Act of Parliament was framed upon that Submission in which among Others these four things were Establish'd 1st That the Convocation should from thenceforth be Assembled only by the Kings Writ 2dly That it should make no Canons or Constitutions but by Virtue of the Kings Licence first given them so to do 3dly That having agreed on any Canons or Constitutions they should yet neither Publish nor Execute them without the Kings Confirmation of them Nor 4thly By his Authority Execute any but with these Limitations That they be neither against the Kings Prerogative nor against any Common or Statute Law nor finally in any other respect contrary to the Customs of the Realm This Act being thus pass'd continued in force all the time of King Henry the VIII and his Son King Edward the VI. Queen Mary succeeding and rescinding whatsoever her Father or Brother had done in prejudice of the Romish Church abolish'd among Others this Act also But her Reign ending within a few Years after One of the first things done by her Sister Queen Elizabeth was to Revive such Laws made by those two Kings as were thought Necessary for the Reformation of the Church and so this Statute was brought again in Force The Title of the Act by which this Statute was revived and the other Authorities therein express'd were again Annex'd to the Crown is this An Act restoring to the Crown the antient Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical and Spiritual c. And that taken from the Words of the Act its self wherein the design of this Statute is declared to be for the Restoring of the Rights Jurisdictions and Preheminencies appertaining to the Imperial Crown of this Realm And in another place To the Imperial Crown of this Realm of Right belonging and appertaining And from which it is I suppose obvious to conclude that in the Opinion of that Parliament such an Authority over our Convocations as is before shewn to have been Establis'd by the 25 H. VIII c. 19. and was hereby again vested in the Crown was not either by that or this Statute first given to our Kings but only Restored to them as a part of their Royal Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical and which did always of right belong and appertain to them The Rights of the Crown being thus once more by Law Restored to it to secure them the better against any New Encroachments for the time to come it seem'd good to this Parliament after the Example of those of King Henry the VIII that an Oath should be framed in Recognition of the Supremacy here declared to belong to our Royal Sovereigns and be enjoyn'd to be taken by all Officers and Ministers Ecclesiastical and Temporal as in the Act may more fully be seen In this Oath we solemnly testify and declare in our Conscience that the King's Highness is the only Supreme Governour of this Realm and of all other his Highness Dominions and Countries as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal And we do promise that to our Power we will assist and defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminences and Authorities granted or belonging to the Kings and Queens of this Kingdom or United and Annex'd to the Imperial Crown of this Realm Now this Oath being design'd as both the Subject of it shews and the Words of the Act it self expressly declare to be for the better Observation and Maintenance of that Statute it must follow that the Supremacy which we there Testify in our Conscience to belong to our Princes must be Interpreted by what that Act has United and Annex'd to the Crown and so comprehend All that Authority of the King over his Convocation which in the 25th H. VIII was expressly Restored to our Princes and which being again by the Repeal of that Act recovered from them was by this present Statute once more Re-setled in the Crown as it had been before How those who now appear so Zealous in Opposition to this Authority and have probably more than Once solemnly taken this Oath will acquit themselves either before God or the World of a manifest Violation of it by their present Behaviour is past my skill to Comprehend Unless because some part of that Oath is now laid aside they should chance to think that therefore the whole Obligation of it is ceased even to those who have taken it in its former Integrity But indeed should we allow that there were some weight in this yet since the Laws made in Defence of the Kings Supremacy are still the same they ever were our Recognition of it must be look'd upon to be the same too And in renouncing all Forreign Jurisdiction in Causes Ecclesiastical which We still do we must be accounted as Effectually to acknowledge the Kings Supremacy according to the legal Notion of it as when we the most fully declared our Assent to it tho' it should be granted that we do not now so expressly Oblige our selves to the Defence of it as we were heretofore wont to do And this I say with particular Respect to the present State of this Oath for otherwise as to what concerns Us of the Clergy it cannot be doubted but that Our Obligation as to the Substance of it is still the same it ever was The Declaratory part of this Oath being what we in Terms subscribe to
of those of the Reign foregoing I have already alledged the Authorities of those two Eminent Archbishops Whitgift and Bancroft To these I have added those of Bilson and Hooker and I thought it but Reasonable to give them a place in the same Period in which their Books were publish'd But yet I must observe that the most of These not only continued to the present time but attain'd to their highest Promotions under this Government The Synod of 1603 was held under the Presidence of Bancroft then Bishop of London Bishop Bilson was a Member of it and no doubt concurr'd heartily to the passing of those Canons which relate to the King's Supremacy in it I shall therefore here add only the Judgment of One Learned Man more who must never be mentioned but with a particular Respect by Us Mr. Mason and that out of a Work which he wrote expresly in Vindication of the Reformed Church and Ministry of England Champanaeus his Adversary had thus far allow'd of the Authority of the Christian Prince in Matters of Religion That He might make Laws in Defence of the true Religion which he was to learn from the Clergy and might nay was bound to see them Put in Execution But that Princes should have a Power of Judging or Defining in Ecclesiastical Matters as the Proper Judges and Hearers of them this he says is a Paradox never heard of in the Christian World before the time of Henry VIII To this Mr. Mason Replies That it is indeed the Business of Pastors to Explain the Doubtful things of the Law But that it belongs to the Prince to Promulge the Truth when known and to command his Subjects to Obey it That he must judge Whether the Priests do Go according to the Law of God And to that End must Search the Scriptures Pray to God Advise with Learned Men and not be led away with the fair Titles or Characters of Any nor have so much Regard to the Number of Votes as to Truth Upon this Foundation he proceeds at large to assert these following Points 1. That it is the Prince 's business to Call Councils and to appoint the Time and Place of their Assembling 2. That he has the Power to propose to the Bishops and Clergy what shall be treated on in their Synod 3. To prescribe the Rule and Measure of Judging 4. To Restrain them from calling in question the Faith already Orthodoxly setled in former Synods 5. To Rescind the Pernicious Decrees of Councils and to Confirm and Ratify such as are Pious and Wholesom by his Authority Lib. iii. c. iv p. 298. To which Points thus put together by Himself let me add from the other parts of his Discourse 6. The Power to Preside in Synods and to Govern their Acts. 7. To Appoint Judges in Ecclesiastical Matters and over Ecclesiastical Persons 8. To Judge between the Bishops if they shall happen to differ even in Matters of Faith And lastly To suspend the Acts of Councils tho' in relation to Points of Doctrine so that during such Suspension they shall not take Effect This is that Authority which this Renowned Defender of our Ministry and Reformation look'd upon as due of Right to the Christian Prince Of what Esteem this Work in those days was may be Gather'd not only from the Great Care and Accuracy with which it was Composed but from that Concern which the Archbishop of Canterbury shew'd for the Publication of it Twice it was solemnly dedicated to King James And being first publish'd in our Own Language it was thought considerable enough to Carry both the Doctrine and Defence of our Church to those Abroad in a Latin Translation And I have never yet heard that any of its Adversaries could charge it with any false Representation of our Church's Sense how little soever they pretended to be satisfied with His Vindication of it KING CHARLES I. But I shall not tarry any longer in this Reign but proceed to pursue the History of the Supremacy in the Sense of our most Eminent Bishops and Divines during the Unfortunate Reign of that Excellent Prince and true Friend of our Church King Charles the First And here one would have thought that the Account I took care on purpose to give with a more than ordinary particularity of the Convocation of 1640 might have sufficiently convinced all Unprejudic'd Persons what the Judgment of those Times was in the present Case But since it is insinuated by some who cannot deny but that that Prince did in Fact both Claim and Exercise all that Power over the Convocation for which I am pleading as if All this were done meerly in compliance with the Iniquity of our Laws and not as what Either the King or his Archbishop in their Own Consciences approved of I will proceed to clear this matter a little farther and shew that we have all the Reason in the World to believe that in the Management of that Convocation they Both of them acted not more agreeably to the Laws of the Realm than to the Real Sense of their Own Judgment It was but about Twelve Years before the Meeting of that Synod that upon the breaking out of some Disturbances upon the Account of the Arminian Tenets the King was induced to publish anew the Articles of Religion and to prefix his Royal Declaration to them suitable to that Occasion The Words of this Declaration are these Being by God's Ordinance according to our just Title Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church within these our Dominions We hold it most agreeable to this our Kingly Office and our Own Religious Zeal to Conserve and Maintain the Church committed to our Charge in Unity of true Religion and in the Bond of Peace and not to suffer unnecessary Disputations Altercations or Questions to be Raised which may nourish Faction both in the Church and Commonweal We have therefore upon Mature Deliberation and with the Advice of so many of our Bishops as might conveniently be called together thought fit to make this Declaration following That the Articles of the Church of England which have been allow'd and authorised heretofore and which our Clergy generally have subscribed unto do contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to God's Word Which we do therefore Ratify and Confirm Requiring all our Loving Subjects to continue in the Vniform Profession thereof and prohibiting the least difference from the said Articles which to that End we command to be New-printed and this Our Declaration to be publish'd therewith Such is the beginning of this Declaration and in which we may already observe several notable Instances of that Supremacy we are enquiring into For 1st It is plain this King thought himself Authoriz'd as Supreme Governour of the Church within his Dominions to take care of the Vnity of it and to put an End to those Disputes which Some
them p. 154 155. Nay and even the Persons that should come to them p. 207. And have Voices in them p. 208. 3. That they directed what should be handled in them p. 135. Managed their Debates p. 134. And forbad them to call in Question the Faith that had by former Synods been Establish'd p. 155 208. 4. That they judged of their Proceedings p. 135. And that in Matters of Doctrine p. 261. By the Common Rule of All Christians the Word of God p. 264 266 276. 5. That they Confirm'd the Councils Decrees See p. 242. And this not at all adventures but chose such of their Canons as they approv'd and passed them into Laws p. 139. 6. That as to their Sentences they Received Appeals from Councils p. 135 151 152. Suspended p. 154. And if they thought them too severe Released the Rigour of their Censures and Determinations p. 136. These are some of the Points which this Learned Man not only allows of but defends from the Examples of the Jewish Princes and Christian Emperors And I will be bold to say either his Treatise is altogether False and Scandalous contrary to the Rights of the Church and the Sense of the Antient Fathers or my Discourse after all that has been said against it must be Confessed to be True and Orthodox and agreeable to the Doctrine of the Church of England But because Bishops may be look'd upon as Suspicious Men let us see what those of an Inferior Order have written in this Case And for these I will take but One of a Kind Dean Nowell for the Dignitaries and the Venerable Mr. Hooker for the Rest of the Lower House As for Mr. Hooker the latter of these He was much too Young to have had any part in that Convocation in which our Articles of Religion were settled But Dr. Nowell was not only one of the most considerable Members of the Lower House at that time by his Own Dignity but chosen by the Clergy for their Prolocutor and so had the Chief Management of All that was done in it It was but Three Years after this that Mr. Dorman one of our Fugitive English Papists attacking the Queen's Supremacy as by Law Establish'd and then newly approv'd of by the Convocation this Learned Dean thought himself concern'd to undertake the Defence of it And indeed he has so well discharged his Part in it that I believe it will be very hard for our Modern Transcribers of their Arguments and Authorities to alledge any thing upon this Occasion that will not be found to have been fully answer'd before-hand in that Book His Treatise is expresly Referr'd to and approved of by Archbishop Whitgift in his Discourse upon this Subject and so may be look'd upon to deliver the Sense of that Great Archbishop as well as the Dean's Nor can it be reasonably doubted by Any but that it does deliver the Sense of the Whole Convocation and Clergy of the Church of England in this particular Let us see then how he States the Point between Us and his Adversary as to this matter and by what kind of Proofs he undertakes to Vindicate the One against the Other The matter in debate he thus accurately determines For. 23. We expresly divide the Offices of Christian and Godly Princes from the Offices of Bishops and Other Ministers of the Church under Them as distinct and divers Offices And we do teach that the Offices of Preaching of God's Word of the Pronouncing of Publick Prayer in the Church of Christ the Power of the Keys or of Binding and Loosing and of Ministring the Holy Sacraments are by the Word of God appointed to be the Peculiar Offices of Bishops and of other Ecclesiastical Ministers And we Teach and Preach even in Presence of Princes that neither Princes nor Any Other Persons saving only Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Ministers under them may intermeddle with the said Offices and Ministries Ecclesiastical so peculiarly and only appertaining to the said Bishops and Other Ministers of the Church P. 24. When we do speak of Causes Ecclesiastical wherein Christian Princes are the Chief Governors we mean not that Princes should Execute these Peculiar Offices of Priests as is also in the Queen's Majesty's Injunctions notified to all the Subjects of the Realm that will be disposed to understand the Truth without Cavillation But now touching the Authority of Princes to Oversee that the Bishops and Clergy do these their Offices diligently and truly according to the Rule of God's Word to Command them to do their Duty to Admonish them being therein slack to Reprehend them Offending Depose or Deprive them being Incorrigible This we say is the Office of a Chief Governor over the the said Persons Ecclesiastical which doth appertain to Christian Princes every One in their own Dominions Further besides the Office of Preaching and Ministring the Sacraments there are many other Orders Matters and Causes Ecclesiastical touching Ceremonies and the outward Regiment of the Church which may be term'd the Ecclesiastical Policy Page 25. There is also the Authority to Receive Appellations and finally to Determine Controversies arising amongst Persons Ecclesiastical To Summon and Call Bishops and other Ecclesiastical Persons as Men exercised in the Study of the Scriptures to Synods Convocations and Councils in Necessary Cases To Order Govern and Protect the said Bishops and Clergy being so call'd together and to Approve and Authorize things for the Outward Order Ecclesiastical and Policy determined in such Synods These be those Causes Ecclesiastical that we do speak of which do not pertain to Bishops and Priests only In these Cases and Causes Ecclesiastical the Authority of a Christian Prince is not only not excluded from intermedling with the Bishops and Clergy but the Prince's Authority is Chief therein Which Authority the Christian Prince exercising doth not Intermeddle with any Office belonging to Bishops and Priests only as the Adversaries of the Truth do falsly bear Men in hand but with their Own Offices by the Examples and Practice of all Antient Godly Princes as well in the Old Law as in Christian Religion proved of Right to them to Appertain And to Our Prince also by the Antient Laws and Statutes of the Realm as to the Learned in the said Laws is not Unknown of Right appertaining This is the Account which he gives of the Doctrin of the Church of England concerning the Authority of Christian Princes in Matters of Religion The Proofs he alledges are full and conclusive From the Examples of Constantine p. 208 to 223. Theodosius p. 227 to 238. The Council of Chalcedons p. 239 to 246. The Third Council of Constantinople p. 250 to 253. Justinian the Emperor p. 276 c. To Omit many other Particulars in the Vindication of which I am not so immediately concern'd And I will be bold to say there is nothing by me advanced in this Argument which has not been both more highly carried and more particularly explain'd
by more than one Obligation engaged so to do to appear in defence of the Royal Supremacy It is indeed very strange to consider after what manner a certain Writer has of late deliver'd his Sense as to both these and such as will hardly be Credited except I repeat it in his own Words 'T was Natural says He to expect the Insurrection of Infidels and Hereticks against the Proposals and Power of a Convocation But who would have dreamed that any Clergy Man of the Church should lift up his Heel against Her When the great Luminaries of the Church shall sign the Theta upon Her Rights Liberties and Authorities Divine and Humane and this Voluntarily and without any Bribe offer'd or Menace denounced the Concession is taken for Sincere and for that Cause Just. King Henry the VIII of famous Memory notwithstanding all his Claims at Common-law and his Interest in his Parliament thro' Power and the Rewards by Abby and Church-lands could not have made himself so absolute in Eccesiasticals had he not procured before the Submission of the Clergy Nor could he have compassed That but by the Terrour of a Praemunire under which they had fallen and upon which he was resolved to follow his Blow and so to bend or break them And yet this Act of a Popish Vnreform'd and will nigh Outlaw'd Convocation Extorted for fear of Ruin and thro' Ignorance and Non-suspicion of the Acts consequent upon it prejudges more against our Liberties than all Secular Constitutions could possibly have done without it And must we Now consecrate all these Procedures the Results of which we feel in the total Ruin of Ecclesiastical Discipline and Christian Piety by Our voluntary Pleas and Acclamations And to gratifie the Civil Powers to an Arbitrary Vtmost violate the most Important Truths of Principles and Histories treat the Synods of the Church with Spite and Contumely and Recommend the greatest Slavery of her to the Appetite of Civil Powers This is a severe Charge and a Man had need have a very Good Cause or a very Impregnable Face who treats Kings and Parliaments Convocations and Clergymen after such a Rate For when all is done it cannot be denied but that what that Convocation did and that King and Parliament Enacted was after two intermediate Reigns again Repeated in the First of Queen Elizabeth is at this day Approv'd of by the Canons of King James the First and allow'd of in the Nine and thirty Articles of Religion to which this Author himself has more than once Subscribed And methinks the consideration of that if nothing else might have induced him to have been more temperate in his Charge against me who have defended no Other Authority in the Prince than what both He and I and every Other Clergy-man of the Church of England have solemnly declared our Assent to and are obliged to our Power to maintain But our Author does not intend to leave this Point so easily his Zeal carries him yet farther in Opposition to the King's Supremacy To say nothing of his fresh Invectives against that King and that Convocation which first began to assert the Royal Authority against the Invasions which had so notoriously been made upon it Pag. 110. He affirms the Authority of the Church in the Convention Freedom and Acts of Synods to be of Divine Right This he again insists upon pag. 115. and in the next Page calls them Divine Privileges given by God and granted to Priests for the Conduct and Conservation of the Church And in the same Page speaking of the Prince's breaking in upon these supposed Rights he says Not only the Romish Church but all Other Sectaries and the Scotch Kirk illustriously scorn to admit any Servitude notwithstanding not only National Protection but Promotion being sensible that a Liberty of Religion Government and Church-Discipline is more valuable than all worldly Wealth or Interest and without which they cannot apprehend any Protection to Religion or the Societies that Profess it From which last Words I suppose I shall not injure his Sense if I infer that then according to his Notion the Church of England is really at present in a Persecuted State and has been so ever since the Reformation And cannot be look'd upon so much as a Protected Church till this Act of the Submission of the Clergy shall be Repealed A strange Reflection certainly and very Unbecoming those manifold Blessings our Church has enjoy'd under its Reformed Princes and does at this time Enjoy under her Glorious Preserver Whose greatest Crime I am afraid it is in some Mens Opinion that he has delivered us from that Slavery into which we were running tho' such as our new Disciplinarians seem to think the only way to a Canonical Liberty I must transcribe a great part of his Book should I here Repeat all that this Author has said in the most spiteful manner that he knew how to Express it against all that plead for or speak well of this part of the King's Supremacy See how he Harangues his Brethren of the Clergy upon this Occasion P. 119. We we only says he are the Poor Tame Dis-spirited Drowsie Body that are in love with our Own Fetters And this is the only Scandalous Part of our Passive Obedience to be not only Silent but Content with an Oc n of our P rs which are not forfeited nor forfeitable to any Worldly Powers whatsoever It might perhaps be here no Improper Question to ask what this Gentleman means by so Warm an Application to the Whole Body of the Clergy Whether he would have them take Heart upon the Matter and having so Redoubted a Champion to lead them on like true Missionaries see what they can do to raise up a Croisade against these wicked Magistrates who so unwarrantably Usurp upon the Churches neither forfeited nor forfeitable Powers At least thus far 't is plain he has gone towards it that as he has before shewn the Church to be out of the Protection of the Prince so he will by and by declare the Prince to be out of the Bosom of the Church and by Both authentically qualified for a Holy War to be made upon Him For thus he goes on p. 122. Can a Claim of an Oppressive Supremacy be deem'd a Glorious Jewel in a Christian Crown which if exercised must of necessity forfeit the King's Salvation And is it not a dangerous complaisance in Priests to fan such an Ambition as must End in the Ruin of the Church the Priesthood and the Soul of the Prince which the Liberties and Powers Hierarchical were design'd to Convert Direct and Preserve But still it may be doubted how far he accounts the King's Supremacy to be Oppressive That the whole Act of the Submission of the Clergy to King Henry the VIIIth falls under this Censure we have already seen In short all that he thinks fit to be allow'd to the Christian Prince is this That the Church be
in the first Article of the 39th Canon and the Promissory no other than what is tied upon Us in the 1st Canon by an Authority which Our Adversaries I conceive will not presume to except against But not to insist upon the present Obligation of this Oath thus much at least must be confess'd and that is enough for my Purpose that All those who heretofore took the Oath of Supremacy as it was first drawn up in the Statute of Queen Elizabeth did thereby without Question both declare their Approbation of the Kings Supremacy as by that Act Establish'd and promise to their Power to Assist and Defend it But now this All our Clergy and almost all Others who were admitted to any Employ whether Civil or Ecclesiastical did do And therefore it must be allow'd that till within these last ten Years the Authority by me ascribed to the King was not only agreeable to the Sense of the Laity but to that of the Clergy too since every Clergy Man in the Realm till then did upon his Oath both declare his Approbation of it and Engage himself to his Power to Defend it And how that Authority which was so Universally received and acknowledged by us for so long a time should now become so Detestable in it self and so Destructive of the Rights and Liberties of the Church I would desire these Gentlemen if they can to Inform Me. It was about four Years after the Session of this Parliament and the Passing of this Act that the Nine and Thirty Articles of Religion were agreed upon in Convocation and Publish'd by the Queen's Authority Of these the 37th relates to the Civil Magistrate and is drawn up so exactly according to the Words as well as Sense of the Oath of Supremacy that we cannot doubt but that the Convocation had a particular Respect thereunto in the Framing of it The Queen's Majesty hath the Chief Power in this Realm of England and Other her Dominions unto whom the * Chief Government of All Estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in All Causes doth appertain So this Article determines And what we are to Undestand by Supreme Power and Supreme Government of all Estates and in all Causes Our Laws tell us and from which we may be sure neither the Queen nor the Convocation had any Intention to depart But the Article goes on Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the Chief Government by which Title We understand the Minds of some dangerous Folks to be Offended We give not our Princes the Ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments the which thing the Injunctions also set forth by Elizabeth our Queen do most plainly testifie But that only Prerogative which we see to have been given always to all Godly Princes in Holy Scripture by God himself that they should Rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their Charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal And if you would know what Ruling of the Ecclesiastical Estate is hereby intended the Injunctions to which the Article Referrs us will fully clear it Where having first denied as the Article also does that by the Words of the Oath of Supremacy before-mention'd the Kings or Queens of this Realm possessors of the Crown may challenge Authority and Power of Ministry of Divine Service in the Church they declare That Her Majesty neither doth nor ever will challenge any Authority than what was challenged and lately used by the noble Kings of famous Memory King Henry the VIII and King Edward the VI. which is and was of Antient time due to the Imperial Crown of this Realm that is under God to have the Sovereignty and Rule over all manner of Persons born within these her Realms Dominions and Countries of what Estate either Ecclesiastical or Temporal soever they be These are the Words of the Queens Injunction and agreeably whereunto it is manifest the Convocation design'd to frame this part of their Article as they took the Oath of Supremacy for their Pattern in the foregoing And in consequence whereof as well as in conformity to the Laws of the Realm then Establish'd we must conclude That this Power of calling and directing the Convocation being one main part of that Jurisdiction which was declared by Act of Parliament to belong to the Crown and was accordingly Restored and Annex'd to it thereby And having as such been challenged and used both by King Henry the VIII and King Edward the VI. is also a part of that Supremacy which the Convocation here intended to attribute to the Queen as we are sure the Queen must have understood it to have been hereby ascribed to her And of this I shall give a more particular Proof when I come to consider the Notions which this Queen and her Clergy had of her Authority as to this Matter In the mean time I cannot but desire this Late Writer and All Others of the same Judgment with him who have in like manner Subscribed these Articles seriously to bethink themselves with what Conscience they did it if they had in Good earnest so ill an Opinion as they now pretend of that Power which those Articles most certainly allow of and profess to be due to the Civil Magistrate That the Author of the late Treatise not so much againt my Book as against our Laws and Government must have several times Subscribed these Articles the Character of a Minister which he takes to himself sufficiently assures Us. No Man can be Ordained a Deacon or Priest without doing of it Nor being in Orders can be admitted to any Cure of Souls or to any Other Ecclesiastical Administration whatsoever but he must again Repeat it The Method taken for performing of this Subscription is full and positive For first the Substance of what we are to Subscribe to is drawn up into three Articles whereof the first and third are these 1. That the King's Majesty under God is the only Supreme Governor of this Realm and of all other his Highness's Dominions and Countries as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Things or Causes as Temporal c. Which being the very Words of the Oath of Supremacy must be taken in the same Sense that I have before shewn that Oath was to be Understood in And 3. That we allow the Book of Articles of Religion and acknowledge All and Every the Articles therein contain'd to be agreeable to the Word of God And then to these Articles we subscribe in these very Words I S. H. do willingly and ex animo subscribe to these three Articles above mentioned and to All things contained in them He therefore who does this either must subscribe to them against his Conscience or he must thereby be concluded to profess this belief That the Authority given to the King by Our Laws and approved of in these Articles is agreeable to the Word of God The Danger of Impugning any
of these Articles is Great and Unavoidable To affirm them in any part to be Superstitious or Erroneous whether he who does it be found out or no is by the Canons of our Church Excommunication ipso facto And if the Offender be discover'd and fortunes to be a Clergy-Man he is by the Statute Law of the Realm to be convented before his Bishop for it and if he does not presently Revoke his Error is in the First Instance to be Deprived of All his Ecclesiastical Promotions and in the Second loses them without more ado This is the Law both of the Church and of the State in the present Case And with what Conscience any Clergy-Man beneficed in such a Church can excuse himself for flying with so much Virulence in the Face both of these Laws and of these Canons I shall leave it to any One who has any Conscience himself though never so much prejudiced against the King's Supremacy to consider To the Articles of Religion set forth by Queen Elizabeth let us add the next authentick Evidence of our Church's Sense in this particular the Canons and Constitutions made by the Convocation in the first Year of King James I. Of these the very first is design'd to assert the Supreme Authority of the King's Majesty over the Church of England In order whereunto it ordains That All Persons Ecclesiastical shall faithfully keep and observe and as much as in them lieth shall cause to be observed and kept of Others All and Singular Laws and Statutes made for Restoring to the Crown of this Kingdom the antient Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical Which last words being the very Title of the Act of the First of Queen Elizabeth we must conclude the meaning of the Canon to be this That they shall faithfully Observe the Laws referred to in that Statute and do what in them lies to cause All Others to Observe the same Seeing then that Act of the 25 H. 8. c. 19. is One of those which is there expresly Revived it will follow that it expresly comes within the Words of this Canon and that the Powers therein annexed to the Crown over the Convocation are hereby approv'd and allow'd of as part of that Antient Jurisdiction which always of Right belong'd to our Kings over the Estate Ecclesiastical But the next Canon is more express and will come more fully up to our present purpose It s design is to Restrain the Impugners of the King's Supremacy over the Church of England And thus it runs in our English Version of it Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that the King's Majesty hath not the same Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical that the Godly Kings had amongst the Jews and Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church Or impeach any part of the Regal Supremacy in the said Causes Restored to the Crown and by the Laws of this Realm therein Established let him be Excommunicated ipso facto and not Restored but only by the Archbishop after his Repentance and Publick Revocation of those his Wicked Errors It is plain by comparing of these two Canons together that the design of the Convocation was in the First to Declare and Assert the King's Supremacy and to oblige the Clergy to a strict and diligent Observance of it By the Second to Restrain all sorts of Persons from denying or otherwise endeavouring to hurt or extenuate the Legal Notion of it And two things there are which will deserve to be taken notice of in this Second Canon First What that Supremacy is which our Convocation was so careful to Assert and Defend And Secondly What it is to Impugn this Supremacy within the meaning of this Canon First As for the former of these the Supremacy here meant two Rules there are delivered by this Canon whereby we may come to a Right Understanding of it First It is that Authority over the Estate Ecclesiastical which by the Statutes of King Henry the Eighth and King Edward the Sixth was Restored and by the Act of Queen Elizabeth Confirm'd as of Right belonging to the Imperial Crown of this Realm And Secondly It is such a Power in matters of Religion as the Godly Kings had amongst the Jews and Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church And from which by the way it may be Observed what good Reason I had to enquire into the Authority of the Christian Emperors in these Cases and to argue from thence in behalf of that Power which our Church ascribes to our Own Princes on the like Occasions How much soever some Men may slight such Proofs as being sensible that they are not to be Answer'd Secondly To impugn this Supremacy within the meaning of this Canon is either first to deny Altogether this Authority and affirm that the King either has not or ought not to have any such Power Or it is secondly By any other means to Impeach or as the Latin Canon has it more plainly to Extenuate or Hurt this Supremacy Which I conceive is then done when Men Write and Argue against it when they Censure the Laws for Establishing of it and Damn the Prince so long as he shall continue to Exercise it according to those Laws But these are not the only Canons which justify what I have written in Defence of the King's Supremacy and Condemn those who appear against it The Twelfth is yet more express to my particular Case and will shew what the Sense of our Church is concerning those who Abet the now so much magnified Opinion on the other side Whosoever shall affirm that it is lawful Cuivis Ministrorum aut Laicorum Ordini vel Eorum alterutris simul Congregatis for any Sort Rank or Degree of Ministers or Laics or for either of them Gathered together to make Canons Decrees or Constitutions concerning Ecclesiastical things without the King's Authority and shall submit themselves to be Ruled and Govern'd by them let them be Excommunicated ipso facto and not be Restored until they Repent and publickly Revoke those their Wicked and Anabaptistical Errors For if in the Opinion of our Church it be necessary for the Clergy to have Authority from the King to meet on such Occasions If to say that any Persons of what Order soever they be may without his Licence make any Canons Decrees or Constitutions Ecclesiastical nay or but even submit themselves to be govern'd by such as shall be so made be a Wicked Anabaptistical Errour and for which a Man deserves to be cast out of the Communion of our Church then it must without all Question be allow'd that according to the Doctrine Establish'd among Us the Clergy can neither Meet nor Act but with the King's Permission Nor ought we to account those Constitutions of any Authority which any Persons shall make without his leave or as such submit to them how much soever they may please to cry up their Divine Powers and Vnalienable Rights to justify their Irregular and Anabaptistical Proceedings
The Sentence of both these last Canons is That they who Offend against them are to be ipso facto Excommunicated And concerning which I shall only observe thus much first that in such a Case there is no need of any Admonition as where the Judge is to give Sentence but every One is to take notice of the Law at his Peril and see that he be not overtaken by it And Secondly That there is no need of any Sentence to be pronounced Which the Canon it self has pass'd and which is by that Means already Promulged upon every One as soon as he comes within the Obligation of it In other Cases a Man may do things worthy of Censure and yet behave himself so warily in Them as to escape the Punishment of the Church for want of a legal Evidence to convict him But Excommunicatio Canonis Ligat etiam Occulta delicta Where the Canon gives Sentence there is no escaping but the Conscience of every Man becomes Obliged by it as soon as ever he is Sensible that he has done that which was forbidden under the Pain of such an Excommunication To these Canons relating to the Kings Supremacy I might add those which speak of the Authority of our Synods and there again Expressly provide for the Princes Rights Thus Can. 139. the Church affirms the Assembling of Synods to be by the Kings Authority In the 140th she acknowledges the Necessity of his Licence both for the Making and Ratifying of her Decrees in Causes Ecclesiastical And Can. 141. Censures such as shall upon this Account undervalue the Acts of our Synods in these Words Whosoever shall affirm that their Proceedings in making of Canons and Constitutions in Causes Ecclesiastical by the Kings Authority as aforesaid ought to be Despised and Contemned the same being Ratified and Enjoyn'd by the said regal Power Supremacy and Authority let them be Excommunicated and not Restored untill they Repent and publickly Revoke that their wicked Errour But in a Case so plain I shall not need to insist on any more Proofs and therefore shall content my self to observe that the Title given by publick Authority to these Canons is this Constitutions or Canons Ecclesiastical by the Bishop of London President of the Synod for the Province of Canterbury and the rest of the Bishops and Clergy of the same Province by the Kings Authority Treated and Concluded upon In their Synod c. Afterwards by the same Royal Majesty Approved Ratified and Confirm'd and by the Authority of the same under the Great Seal of England Promulged to be diligently observed thro' both Provinces as well of Canterbury as York This is the true Title given to these Canons And was fit to be thus particularly taken notice of because in our English Book of Canons which is of most common Use this Inscription as well as many of the Canons themselves is very imperfectly rendred and may be apt to lead Men into some mistakes concerning these as well as other Matters It were easie to make several Observations to our present Purpose upon the several Parts of this truly Accurate and Legal Title But I shall chuse rather to express the process of this Convocation in the Words of an Author who may perhaps be less liable to Exception and whose account of it is this That the Clergy being met in their Convocation according to the Tenour and Effect of his Majesties Writ his Majesty was pleased by Vertue of his Prerogative Royal and Supreme Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical to give and grant unto Them by his Letters Patents dated April 12. and June 25. full free and lawful Liberty Licence Power and Authority to Convene Treat Debate Consider Consult and Agree upon such Canons Orders Ordinances and Constitutions as they should think necessary fit and convenient for the Honour and Service of Alimighty God the good and quiet of the Church and the better Government thereof from time to time c. Which being Agreed on by the Clergy and by them presented to the King humbly requiring him to give his Royal Assent unto them according to the Statute made in the 25 of King Henry VIII and by his Majesties Prerogative and Supreme Authority in Ecclesiastical Causes to Ratifie and Confirm the same His Majesty was graciously pleased to Confirm and Ratifie them by his Letters Patents straightly commanding and requiring all his loving Subjects diligently to observe execute and keep the same c. And here I shall put an end to my first kind of Proofs in Defence of that Authority which I have ascribed to our Kings over the Convocations of the Clergy of the Church and Realm of England I proceed in the next place more fully to confirm this Authority to be agreeable to the Doctrine of our Church from the Testimony 's of our most learned Divines who have written upon this Subject from the beginning of the Reformation to our Own times II. It has been the Endeavour of some of late who would be thought still to retain a good Affection to the Reform'd Religion nevertheless to cast the worst Aspersions they are able upon those who were the chief Instruments of God's Providence in the Reformation of it What their design in this their Procedure is or how upon the Principles now set on Foot to justifie what was heretofore done among us as to this Matter or indeed without a Miracle ever to have had any thing at all done in it I cannot tell It being certain that such a Convocation as they now seem alone to allow of as Canonical would never have departed from the Way that they were in or have endured any Proposals tending to such a Change as was otherwise happily made among Us. But however since such is their Prejudice both against the Opinions and Actions of our first Reformers I will so far comply with their unreasonable Humours as to pass lightly over those Times of Church Servitude as well as Church Reformation and come to such Authorities as I suppose they will not have the Confidence to except against To pass by then the Opinion of the Convocation which about 3 Years after the Submission made to King Henry the VIII set out the first Doctrinal Treatise that led the Way to the Discovery and Renuntiation of the Popish Errors What shall we say to the Publick Declaration made by King Henry himself against the Council of Mantua and in which He cannot be supposed to have Spoken any thing but what he thought carry'd its Own Evidence along with it In times past says He All Councils were appointed by the Authority Consent and Commandment of the Emperours Kings and Princes Why now taketh the Bishop of Rome this upon him Wherefore we think it best that every Prince call a Council Provincial and every Prince to Redress his Own Realm And this he Spake not of his own Head but with the Advice of his Bishops and
Clergy of the former of which all but two subscribed to the Instrument which was presented to him upon this Occasion And when notwithstanding this he was again Sollicited by the Emperour and some other Princes the Year after either himself to come or to send his Ambassadors to it He again renew'd his former Protestation and made again the same Exceptions against it Nor in this did he do any more than some even of his Popish Bishops had before approved and that on such Occasions wherein it cannot be pretended that any Force was laid upon them I shall in proof of this alledge only the Letter of Tonstal and Stokesly to Cardinal Poole in which the Authority of the Christian Prince over the Convocations of his Clergy is fully asserted and proved from the like Instances of the Antient Kings and Emperours that I have made use of to the same purpose And tho' Queen Mary in her Zeal to the Papal Interest repealed whatever Acts had been pass'd by her Father and Brother against it and this of the Submission of the Clergy among the Rest yet she did not therefore give up the Power over her Synods but still continued it according to the Substance of that Statute As is evident from her Calling and Dissolving not only the first Convocation of her Reign but of that which was held two Years after and to Assemble which Cardinal Pool himself had her Licence as he also had to make such Canons as should be thought needful in it QVEEN ELIZABETH But I will not tarry any longer in these Times but pass forward to that of the next Reign in which the Reformation was both more regularly carry'd on and at last brought to the State in which it continues at this Day Queen Mary having as I observed abolish'd whatever Laws had been made in the two preceding Reigns in Derogation to the Papal Vsurpations the first Thing done by Queen Elizabeth was to set the Crown again upon its antient Foundation and to Restore it to that Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical which of right belong'd to it This was the Work of the very first Act that pass'd in her Reign and by Vertue whereof the Statute made 25th Henry the VIII c. 19. to Ratifie the Submission of the Clergy was brought again in Force I have before observed what care was taken by this Parliament to secure these Rights of the Crown by an Oath then Establish'd under the Title of the Oath of Supremacy I must now add that the more to oblige the Clergy to a due Observance of them the Queen her self this same Year set out her Injunctions and in the very first Place took care of her Supremacy in them For thus the Injunctions begin That all Deans Archdeacons Parsons Vicars and all other Ecclesiastical Persons shall faithfully keep and observe and as far as in Them may lie shall cause to be observed and kept of Other all and singular Laws and Statutes made for the Restoring of the Crown the Antient Jurisdiction over the State Ecclesiastical And that this Power over the Convocation was one Branch of it the Revival of the Law of King Henry the VIII relating to it which was made the same Year and in that very Act whose Title the Injunction transcribes is a Proof not to be gain-said It is evident then that this Queen as well as her Parliament looked upon this Power to be not only no Vsurpation upon the Churches Priviledges but to be a part of that Jurisdiction which had always of Right belong'd to the Crown and was Vsurp'd from it in the Times of Popery And so in the next place did her Bishops too For however being not yet assembled in Convocation they could not so Authoritatively settle the Articles of Religion as shortly after they did yet being met together they agreed upon certain Articles to be sent to their Clergy and by them publish'd to the People in the mean time till a Convocation should be call'd to consider farther of this Matter In the 7th of these their Articles they treat of the Power of the Civil Magistrate And therein require their Clergy to acknowledge the Queens Majesties Prerogative and Superiority of Government of all Estates as well Ecclesiastical as Temperal to be Agreeable to God's Word and of Right to appertain to her Highness in such sort as in the late Act of Parliament is express'd and Sithence by her Majesties Injunctions Declared and Expounded It would be needless to observe that the Act of Parliament here referr'd to is that of the same Year made for the Restoring the Crown to its Jurisdiction over the Estate Ecclesiastical and by which the so often mention'd Act of King Henry the VIII was expresly Revived As for the Queen's Injunctions I have already shewn that where they Treat of this Matter the most Favourably they nevertheless assert the same Power to the Queen that King Henry the VIII and King Edward the VI. challenged and used And what that was in the particular under Debate is not doubted of or deny'd by those who the most oppose Us in the present Vindication of it So that here then we have in our first Entry upon this Reign the Queen the Parliament and the Bishops All approving of and confirming this Authority And so they continued all her Time to do There being hardly any Controversy either more largely Debated or more accurately Handled than this of the Royal Supremacy against which our Adversaries on both sides appear'd with all their Skill and were as effectually Answer'd by the Greatest and most Learned of our Church Among these as there was no one higher in Dignity so neither was there any more Eminent both for his Abilities and good Affections to the Church of England than Arch-Bishop Whitgift And whose Controversy with the Puritans is one of the most learned and judicious Works of those Days In this the xx th Tract is wholly spent in the defence of the Princes Right in Ecclesiastical Matters Wherein having charged his Adversaries with holding the Popish Opinions and even using their very Arguments He tells them Pag. 698 699. That the continual Practice of the Christian Churches in the time of Christian Magistrates before the Vsurpation of the Bishop of Rome was to give Christian Princes Supreme Authority in making Ecclesiastical Orders and Laws yea and which is more in Deciding of Matters of Religion even in the Chief and Principle Points This he proves by several Instances and then concludes in these very Words whereby it appeareth that the chief Authority in Councils was given to the Emperour and that He was esteem'd as the chief Judge In his next Division he shews that the learned and antient Fathers have committed the Matters of Controversy to Emperours And then adds The Practice therefore of the Authority of Princes in Ecclesiastical Matters even in Determining and
Judging Controversies in Religion you might have learnt by these Examples in Ambrose time Against this T. C. then objected as some others from their Pattern do now the disability of Princes to Decree of what pertains to the Church The Archbishop replies That the Debâ—ting and Deciding of Matters in Religion by Bishops doth not derogate from the Prince's Authority No Godly Princes having Godly Bishops and Ministers of the Church will alter or change determine or appoint any thing in Matters of Religion without their Advice and Counsel But how if there be Dissention among them Shall not the Prince determine the Controversie as Constantinus Theodosius and other Godly Emperours did In short to T. C. 's Endeavour to clear the Puritans from running in with the Papists in this Particular the Archbishop thus replies Concerning the Determination of Matters in Religion I know not wherein you differ from them For tho' the Prince mislikes your Determination yet can he not Himself conclude any thing only he may compel you to go to it again and take better Rold But if it shall please you to Go forward in your Determination or if you cannot Agree among your selves I see not what Authority you have given the Civil Magistrate to Determine the matter but for ought I can espy if you and your Seniors be disposed to be peevish either must the Prince have no Religion or such as you shall appoint unto Him For potestatem Facti you have given Him that is you make him your Executioner but Potestatem Juris you do as fully Remove from him as the Papists do For he hath not as you say any Authority to make Orders or Laws in Ecclesiastical Matters Thus this great Assertor both of the Prince's and of the Church's Power To him let me add his Successor both in the See of Canterbury and in this Controversy Archbishop Bancroft Who in his Survey of the Pretended Holy Discipline thus marks out those Parts of it which he look'd upon to be prejudicial to the Regal Authority No Civil Magistrate hath Pre-eminence by Ordinary Authority to determine Church Causes No Chief Magistrate in Councils or Assemblies for Church Matters can either be Chief Moderator Over-Ruler Judge or Determiner No Civil Magistrate hath such Authority that without his Consent it should not be Lawful for Ecclesiastical Persons to make any Church-Order or Ceremony The Judgment of Church Matters pertaineth to God The Principality or Direction of the Judgment of them is by God's Ordinance pertaining to the Ministers of the Church As they meddle not with the making of Civil Laws and Laws for the Commonwealth so the Civil Magistrate hath not to Ordain Ceremonies pertaining to the Church These he calls Puritane-Popish Assertions and says that they do much derogate from the Lawful Authority of Christian Princes There is but this only Difference betwixt them and the Rankest Jesuits in Europe that what the One sort ascribe to the Pope and his Shavelings the Others challenge to Themselves and their Aldermen For the better clearing of which he compares their Principles together And thus He sets down the Puritane Hypothesis from their Own Stating of it The Prince may call a Council of the Ministry and appoint both the Time and Hours for the same He may be assistant there and have his Voice but he may not be either Moderator Determiner or Judge Neither may the Orders or Decrees there made be said to have been done by the Prince's Authority They are to Defend Councils being Assembled If any One behave themselves there Tumultuously or otherwise Disorderly the Prince may Punish him Lastly He not only may but Ought to Confirm the Decrees of such Councils and see them Executed and punish the Contemners of them Thus far Mr. Cartwright And in the next Page the Archbishop shews that the Papists say the very same things and of both He affirms in his following Chapter that Hereby they Exclude Christian Princes from their Lawful Authority in Causes Ecclesiastical Having thus seen what these Masters of the Consistory allow to Christian Princes in Ecclesiastical Matters it might not perhaps be improper for me to ask of our New Disciplinarians wherein they differ from them in the Point before us But indeed it is clear that if there be any Difference at all between them it consists in this That those Men as bad as they were yet really allow'd more Authority to the Civil Magistrate over their Church Assemblies than our Modern Disputers are willing to afford him over Our Convocations And then I shall leave it to any one to judge what those Great Prelates would have said of these who Wrote so severely as we have seen against Those From these Archbishops of the See of Canterbury let us descend to two of their Suffragan Bishops and engaged against Another Party tho' still in Defence of the same Authority viz. Jewell Bishop of Salisbury and Bilson Bishop of Winchester As for the former of these our Learn'd Jewell he thus declares to us the Right of the Prince in the Defence of his Apology against Harding Page 582. The Christian Emperors in the Old time appointed the Councils of Bishops Continually for the space of 500 Tears the Emperor alone appointed the Ecclesiastical Assemblies and call'd the Councils of the Bishops together As for Right of Place and Voice in Council it pertaineth no less to the Prince than to the Pope The Emperor Theodosius as saith Socrates did not only Sit among the Bishops but also order'd the whole Arguing of the Cause and tare in pieces the Hereticks Books and allow'd for Good the Judgment of the Catholicks But ye say they Sate as Assessors only not as Judges That is to say they Sate by the Bishops and held their Peace and told the Clock and said nothing The Lay Prince hath had Authority in Council not only to Consent and Agree unto Others but also to define and determine and that in Cases of Religion as by many Evident Examples it may appear In all Cases as well Ecclesiastical as Temporal the Emperor was Judge over All. Whatsoever the Council had determined without the Emperors Consent it had no force Theodosius at the desire of the Bishops Confirm'd the Council of Ephesus So high an Erastian was this Good Old Bishop and so freely has he Sacrificed all the Rights of the Church to the Will of the Prince Nor has Bishop Bilson come at all behind him The Second Part of whose Book Entituled The true Difference between Christian Subjection and Vnchristian Rebellion 4 o. Oxford 1585. is but One continued Discourse in Defence of the Supremacy and of which it shall suffice to point out some Brief Heads on this Occasion 1. That the Emperors heretofore call'd Councils This he proves pag. 134 153 159 227 c. 2. That they appointed the Time and Place of
chiefest and choicest Men for Holiness Learning Vertue and Valour that the Christian Religion ever had before or since Did any of them refuse to come being called by Him Constantine as not called aright Or coming was there any One of them that did Protest against it or pleaded the Churches Interest to meet of Themselves Verily the Council of Nice which is and ever hath been so much admired by All Christians cannot be excused before God or Men if they thus conspired All to betray the Churches Right and suffered it contrary to all Equity to be carried away leaving a dangerous Precedent therein for all Councils ever after to the Worlds End There is no Man of Reason but will think it reasonable if this were the Churches own peculiar if Appropriate unto it and so known to them to be there ought to have been plain dealing now at the very first Council of All that if Constantine would embrace Religion he must forbear to meddle with their Assemblies 4thly But it may be General Councils have a Fashion by Themselves Those Congregations may be called thus but National or Provincial such as Ours How Even so too and no otherwise Yea I add this which is a Point to be consider'd that even then when the Emperours were profess'd Arians even then did the Bishops acknowledge their Power to call Councils Come to them being called Sued to them that they might be called And sometimes They sped and sometimes not And yet when they sped not they held themselves Quiet and never presumed to Draw together of their Own Heads But it may be this was some Imperial Power and that the Emperours had in this Point more Jurisdiction than Kings Not that neither For about 500 Years after Christ when the Empire fell in Pieces and these Western Parts came into the Hands of Kings those Kings had held and enjoy'd and practised the same Power If it be excepted that there are of these Provincial and National Councils which carry in their Acts no mention how they were called For them we are to understand that after the Decrees of the first Nicene Council were by Constantine's Edict confirm'd wherein as likewise in the Council of Chalcedon it was order'd that each Province should Yearly hold their Synods twice We are to conceive the Emperour's Authority was in All afterwards habitually at least 5thly But what say you to the 300 Years before Constantine How went Assemblies then Truly even as the Jews did before in Egypt They were then a Church under Persecution till Moses was raised up by God a lawful Magistrate over them No Magistrate did Assemble them in Egypt And good Reason They had none then to do it True it is therefore that before Constantine's Time they met together as they durst and took such Order as they could But when Constantine came in Moses Place it was lawful for him to do as Moses did And so he did And they never said to him Look how we have done hitherto we will do so even still Meet no otherwise now than in former Times we have by Our Own Agreement No but they went to him as to Moses for their Meetings At his Hands they sought them Without his Leave or Liking they would not Attempt them Yea I dare say they blessed God from their Hearts that they had lived to see the Day that they might now Assemble by the Sound of the Trumphet To conclude this Point then These two Times or Estates of the Church are not to be Confounded There is a plain difference between them and a diverse Respect to be had of Each If the Succession of Magistrates be interrupted in such Case of Necessity the Church of her self maketh supply because then God's Order Ceaseth But God granting a Constantine to them again God's former Positive Order returneth and the Case is to proceed and go on as before In a Word None can seek to have the Congregation so called as before Constantine but they must secretly and by Implication confess they are a Persecuted Church as that then was without a Moses without a Constantine 6thly Hitherto we have seen the Opinion of this Learned Prelate in the Case before us let us now see what Application he made of what he had offer'd on this Subject You may please to Remember says he there was not long since a Clergy in place that was wholly ad Oppositum and would never have yeilded to Reform ought Nothing they would do and in Eye of the Law without them Nothing could be done They had encroached the Power of Assembling into their Own Hands How then How shall we do for an Assembly Then the Prince had this Power and to him of Right it belonged This was then God Divinity And what Writer is there extant of those Times but it may be turn'd to in him And was it Good Divinity then and is it now no longer so Was the King but Licensed for a while to hold this Power till another Clergy were in and must he then be deprived of it again Was it then Usurped from Princes and are now Princes Usurpers of it Themselves Nay I trust we will be better Advised and not thus go against our selves and let Truth be no longer Truth than it will serve our turns I shall conclude all I have to draw out of this Discourse with the same Words that the Learned Preacher concludes his Sermon It remaineth that as God by his Law hath taken this Order and his People in former Ages have kept this Order that we do so too That we say as God saith This Power pertaineth unto Moses And that neither with Core we say We will not come Nor with Demetrius run together of our selves and think to carry it away with crying Great is Diana But as we see the Power is of God so truly to acknowledge it and dutifully to yeild to it That so they whose it is may quietly hold it and laudably use it to his Glory that gave it and to their Good for whom it was given It will not I hope be thought much of that I have so long insisted upon the Judgment of this Great Prelate in the present Case No Man there was in that Time or perhaps in any Other Age of the Church that was either fitter to deliver the Sense of our Clergy or better qualified to maintain it I might add that this Discourse being Preached first and then Publish'd by the express Command of the King carries with it somewhat more than a Private Authority And when it shall be consider'd how little a while it was before this that that Convocation met which took such care both to explain its Sense of the Royal Supremacy and to give the utmost Cononical Enforcement that could be given to it we may well conclude this to have been the Vniversal Judgment of our Church Divines in that Reign as we are sure it was
Chief unto Kings For otherwise One Man would be Commended for Anothers Care and Taxed for Anothers Negligence which is not God's way The Power to Call and Dissolve Councils both National and Provincial is the true Right of all Christian Kings within their Own Realms and Territories And when in the first Times of Christ's Church Prelates used this Power 't was therefore only because in those days they had no Christian Kings And again in the VIIIth Canon they oblige all Preachers positively and plainly to Preach and Instruct the People in their Publick Sermons twice in the Year at least That they ought Willingly to Submit themselves unto the Authority and Government of the Church as it is now Establish'd under the King's Majesty It is therefore as plain as any thing can well be that this Convocation undoubtedly approved of ALL the Laws even this of the Submission of the Clergy made for the Security of the King's Authority over the State Ecclesiastical that they look'd upon the Government of the Church to belong in Chief unto Kings That they accounted the Power of Calling and Dissolving Synods to be the true Right of All Christian Princes and that the Bishops have only then a Power to do this when the Church is in a State of Persecution and the Necessities of it enforce them thereunto And by Consequence that they themselves not only met and acted under the Powers I have formerly shewn because they were forced so to do but Approved of the Vse which the King made of them and were satisfied that in Meeting and Acting according thereunto they behaved themselves so as became Christian Bishops and Clergy-Men to do under the Favour and Authority of a Christian King I shall observe only this one thing farther to prevent any new Cavils in this particular that we are assured by Him who best knew it Archbishop Laud himself that these Canons were pass'd with the greatest Freedom and Vnanimity that ever any Canons were So that upon that account also we may the more undoubtedly look upon them as delivering the Real Sense of the Church of England in those days To the Judgment of this Archbishop and the Convocation held by him let me subjoin that of an Eminent Bishop in our Neighbour Country the Learned Bramhall afterwards Archbishop of Ardmagh and Primate of All Ireland In his Survey of the Scotch Discipline among other Exceptions which he takes at it we have these to our purpose particularly insisted upon by him That they Affirm 1st That Ecclesiastical Persons have the sole Power of Convening and Convocating Synods 2dly That no Persons Magistrates or Others have Power to Vote in their Synods but only Ecclesiastical 3dly That Synods have the Judgment of True and False Religion of Doctrine Heresy c. That they have Legis-lative Power to make Rules and Constitutions for keeping Good Order in the Kirk And all this without any Reclamation or Appellation to any Judge Civil or Ecclesiastical 4thly That they have these Privileges not from the Magistrate or People or Particular Laws of the Country but Immediately from God c. Lastly That they have all this Power not only without the Magistrate but against him that is tho' he Dissents c. So different a Notion had this great Writer of these Powers of the Kirk for which our Late Author so highly Applauds them and sets up their Discipline above our Own slavish Constitution But the Archbishop proceeds and against these Vsurpations of the Kirk lays down Chap. ii these Orthodox Church of England Principles That All Princes and States invested with Sovereign Power do justly challenge to themselves the Right of Convocating National Synods of their own Subjects and of Ratifying their Constitutions And that he is a Magistate of Straw that will suffer the Church to Convene Whensoever or Wheresoever they list To Convocate before them Whomsoever they please To change the Ecclesiastical Policy of a Common-Wealth To alter the Doctrine and Religion Establish'd and all this of their Own Heads by a Pretended Power given them from Heaven Synods ought to be Called by the Supreme Magistrate if he be a Christian And either by Himself or by such as he shall please to chuse for that purpose he ought to Preside over them This Power the Emperors of Old did challenge over General Councils Christian Monarchs in the Blindness of Popery over National Synods The Kings of England over their Great Councils of Old and their Convocations of latter Times But say they we give the Magistrate a Political Power to Convocate Synods to Preside in Synods to Ratify the Acts of Synods to Reform the Church Here are Good Words but they signify Nothing For in plain English what is this Political Power to call Synods c. It is a Duty which the Magistrate Owes to the Kirk when they think Necessary to have a Synod Convocated to strengthen their Summons by a Civil Sanction To secure them in Coming to the Synod and Returning from the Synod To compel obstinate Persons by Civil Laws and Punishments to submit to their Censures and Decrees What Gets the Magistrate by All this For they declare expresly that neither All the Power nor any Part of the Power which Synods have to Deliberate of or to define Ecclesiastical things doth flow from the Magistrate But can the Magistrate call the Synod to Account for any thing they do Can he Remedy the Errors of a Synod either in Doctrine or Discipline No This is one main branch of Popery and a Gross Encroachment upon the Right of the Magistrate And accordingly we find him charging the Papists with it in his Writings against them He maintains that All Ecclesiastical Coercive Jurisdiction did Originally flow from the Civil Magistrate He bids them Weigh all the Parts of Ecclesiastical Discipline and consider what One there is which Christian Emperours of Old did not either Exercise by themselves or by their Delegates Or did not Regulate by their Laws or Both. And then particularly Instances in the Points of Calling Councils Presiding in Councils Dissolving of Councils and Confirming Councils And Pag. 93. He insists upon it as One just Ground of our Separation from the Court of Rome that they endeavour'd to Rob the King of the fairest Flowers of his Crown namely of his Right to Convocate Synods and to Confirm Synods within his Own Dominions of his Legis-lative and judiciary Power in Ecclesiastical Causes c. To the Opinion of this learned Prelate were conformable the Sentiments of all the Other Bishops and Clergy of these Kingdoms as to these Matters Christian Emperours says Bishop Davenant heretofore Called Councils As in Civil Causes Princes advise with their Learned in the Law so in Theological Matters they ought to Consult with their Divines Yet are they not so tied up to the Opinions of their Clergy but that if They go contrary to the
Guide the Consciences of such as should make Use of it I shall from him descend but to One more Whom I fitly place the last of his Order And to whose Judgment tho' I pay no more than it deserves yet I cannot but think it may have some weight with those whom I am now concern'd especially to Convince In his Discourse of Ecclesiastical Polity Chap. 1. he affirms The Affairs of Religion to be Subject to the Supreme Civil Power and to no Other p. 2. That as in the first Ages of the World the Kingly Power and Priestly Function were alway Vested in the same Persons So when they were separated in the Jewish State the Supremacy was annexed to the Civil Power and so continued until and after our Saviour's Death Ibid. This he more largely delivers p. 32. Tho' in the Jewish Commonwealth the Priestly Office was separated by a divine positive Command from the Kingly Power yet the Power and Jurisdiction of the Priest remain'd still subject to the Sovereign Prince Their King always Exercising a Supremacy Over All Persons and in All Causes Ecclesiastical The Power wherewith Christ invested the Governors of his Church in the Apostolical Age was purely Spiritual They had no Authority to inflict Temporal Punishments or to force Men to submit to their Canons Laws and Paenalties They only declared the Laws of God and denounced the Threatnings annexed to Them But when Christianity was become the Imperial Religion then began its Government to Re-settle where Nature had placed it and the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction was annex'd to the Civil Power So that tho' the Exercise of the Ministerial Function still continued in the Persons that were thereunto Originally Commissioned by Our Saviour the Exercise of its Authority and Jurisdiction was Restored to the Imperial Diadem Constantine was no sooner settled in his Imperial Throne but he took the Settlement of All Ecclesiastical Matters into his Own Cognizance He Called Synods and Councils in Order to the Peace and Government of the Church He Ratified their Canons into Laws c. In the Exercise of which Jurisdiction he was carefully follow'd by all his Successors Nay he doubts not to affirm That had it not been for the Care of Christian Princes Christianity had in all humane Probability been utterly destroy'd by its Own Tumults and Seditions He adds That this Supremacy of the Civil Power in Religious Matters is expresly Asserted by Our Church which is not content barely to Affirm it but denounces the Sentence of Excommunication against All that deny it Thus stood this Author ' s Judgment in this Case about the Year 1669 It is true that being engaged against another sort of Adversaries and which led him to somewhat different Reflections we find him a little gone off from this Hypothesis in the Year 1681. Yet even there he is much more for the Supremacy than those we have now to do with He affirms indeed p. 105. That from the Precedent of the Apostles in the First Council of Jerusalem the Governours of the Church in all Ages enjoy'd a Power of making Canons and Constitutions for Discipline and Good Order But withal he adds that By the Example of the Primitive Church our Bishops submitted the Exercise thereof to the King 's Sovereign Authority as we see in that famous Act called The Submission of the Clergy Whereby says he p. 106. they do not pass away their Power of making Ecclesiastical Canons but only give Security to the Government that under that Pretence they would not attempt any thing tending to the Disturbance of the Kingdom or Injurious to the Prerogative of the Crown Which in truth is such a Submission as all the Clergy in the World ought in duty to make to their Sovereign at least in Gratitude for his Protection and that without any Abatement or Diminution of their Own Authority viz. The standing Laws of Christianity being secured to submit All Other Matters to his Sovereign Will and Pleasure And p. 108. He approves King James Reply to Cardinal Perron where he lets him know That tho' Christian Kings and Emperors never arrogated to themselves a Power of being Sovereign Judges in Matters and Controversies of Faith yet for Moderation of Synods for Determinations and Orders Establish'd in Councils and for the Discipline of the Church they have made a full and Good Vse of their Imperial Authority Such was the last Sense if I mistake not of this Writer and that when he was in his highest Exaltation of the Churches Authority And all the Difference I can find between his Own last and first Opinion is but this that what He before gave the Christian Prince as his Own due He now grants him by the Concession of the Clergy yet so as to declare the Clergy bound to yeild it to Him and to affirm the Churches Rights to be in no wise injured or impeach'd by it But I shall not insist any longer on this Authority but pass on to consider the Judgment of an Author or Two of a Lower Rank but whose Learning and Steddiness will much more recommend Them to all Sober and Indifferent Persons Of these the first I shall mention shall be our Excellent Dr. Falkner who in his Discourse of Christian Loyalty fully examines and determines the Case before Us. Concerning the Christian Doctrine and Profession says he tho' no Authority has any Right to Oppose any part of the Christian Truth yet Princes may and ought to take Care of the True Profession thereof in their Dominions and to Suppress such dangerous Errours as are manifestly contrary thereunto But in Cases of Difficulty for the deciding or ending of Controversies about Matters of Faith the Disquisition and Resolution of the Spiritual Guides ought to take Place and be Embraced In such Cases the Catholick Christian Emperours did by their Authority Establish the Decisions of the Oecumenical Councils But in Matters of Truth which are plain and manifest from the Holy Scriptures themselves or the Declarations of approved Councils agreeing therewith the Saecular Governour so far as is Necessary may proceed upon the Evidence thereof to his Own Understanding In establishing Rules and Constitutions for Order Decency and Peace it belongeth to the Ecclesiastical Officers to consult advise and take Care thereof But yet this with such Dependance upon the Royal Power as King Charles has declared that is That they first obtain the Kings leave to do it and execute nothing but with his Approbation See above § 28. In such an extraordinary Case as that in the Primitive Times was when the Civil Power will not own the Church the Ecclesiastical Governours by their Own Authority may establish necessary Rules of Order as was then done But since the External Sanction of such things doth flow from the general Nature of Power and Authority wheresoever the Temporal Power will take that Care of the Church which it ought it hath