publick Service the Severity of the Ancient Canons is with Reason abated and a person is supposed to undertake the Cure with those Measures which the Law and Canons allow But every Man who regards the doing his Duty out of Conscience will consider how much lies upon himself and that the original Intention of the Church and Laws was That no Man should undertake more than he was willing and ready to discharge as far as one Man's Abilities could go For in great Cities one great Parish requires more than several Churches in the Countrey and in such Cases an equitable Construction must be put upon such Canons which require personal performance of these Duties OF THE MAINTENANCE OF THE PAROCHIAL CLERGY BY LAW THE Subject I intend now to consider is the Incouragement which the Parochial Clergy have by Law for the doing their Duties Which are the Manse the Oblations and the Tithes I. The Manse or House and Glebe In the Canons of Egbert it is said Can. 25. That an entire Manse ought to belong to every Church without any other than Ecclesiastical Service By a Manse Mr. Selden saith in the old Charters the same is meant as a Casat or Hyde of Land Bignonius and Sirmondus say So much Glebe as was an Imployment for an Husbandman and two Servants Spelman saith It takes in the House too Lyndwood saith As much Land as would Imploy a Yoke of Oxen and so the Gloss on the Canon Law But in another place the Gloss saith The Manse is the original Endowment of the Church without which it cannot be supplied and without which it could not be consecrated For the Endowment was first to be produced before the Building Collatâ primitùs donatione solemni are the Words of the Canon Law And the same appears by Concil Valent. 3. c. 9. Concil Bracar 2. c. 5. Vit. Udalrici c. 7. Regino l. 1. c. 23 24. which is there explained to be a substantial Sustenance for those who were to attend the Service of that Church And in the Acts of Consecration of a parochial Church in Baluzius the Bishop in the first place declares himself satisfied with the Endowment unde dignè domus Dei sustentaretur And upon this the Original Right of Patronage was founded not upon the Soil which gave no Title where there was not a Church built and endowed with a competent Subsistence So that all Advowsons or Rights of Presentation in private Patrons were at first Appendant to Manors and not in Gross because the Right came from the Endowment out of the Manor And the Name of Patron in the Sense of the Feudal Law is the same with Lord of the Fee and so Beneficium is a Feudal Term and till the Feudal Law prevailed the Name of Patrom is rarely used in this Sense And when it came to be used the Patrons in France would have brought those who had their Benefices to a kind of Feudal Service and to have received Investiture from them This Mr. Selden drives at as though the Patrons had the Right of Investiture belonging to them because some such Practice is often complained of in the French Canons and as often condemned not meerly by Ecclesiastical Canons but by as good Laws as any were then made It cannot be denied that bad Practices are the Occasion of making good Laws but doth it follow that those Practices which were against Law were the Law of that time Yet this is Mr. Selden's way of Arguing he grants That there were Laws made but they were little obeyed Must we therefore conclude those illegal Practices to have been the standing Law and the Laws themselves to be illegal There were two things aimed at by those Patrons 1. To keep the Clergy in a sole Dependance on themselves witout Regard to the Bishop's Authority 2. To make such Bargains with them as they thought fit Both these were thought necessary to be redressed by Laws since the Canons were slighted by them And if the Practice be good against Law in one case why not in the other also Why is not Simony justified as well as the Patron 's absolute Power over the Incumbents but the Laws were severe against both For in the time of Lud. Pius A. D. 816. there was a solemn Assembly of the Estates of the Empire where several Ecclesiastical Laws were passed and among the rest these two 1. That no Presbyters should be put in or put out of Churches without the Authority and Consent of the Bishops and that the Bishops should not refuse those who were presented if they were probabilis Vitae Doctrinae i.e. such as the Bishops could not object against either for Life or Learning 2. That every Church should have an entire Manse belonging to it free from any Feudal Service but if they had other Estates of their own for them they were to answer to the Lords of the Manor as others did And from hence this came into the Collections of Ivo Regino Burchardus and Gratian and passed for a Law generally received As to the former a new Sanction was added to it in another Assembly at Worms A. D. 829. c. 1. and repeated in the Capitulars l. 5. c. 98. Addit 4. c. 95. and the like as to the latter l. 5. c. 100. Capit. A. 829. c. 4. But it seems there were some still continued obstinate in their former Practices and therefore these Laws were reinforced in another Assembly A. D. 869. in the time of Carolus Calvus who mentions the Laws of his Father and Grandfather to the same purpose c. 9. and there takes notice of the Contrivances made use of to defeat the Intention of those Laws and the bottom of all is there said to be abominable Simony Which shews what it was which these Patrons aimed at by claiming Investiture without the Bishop And it was then judged necessary that the Bishop's Consent was required to prevent this Mischief But still some Patrons required Feudal Service for the Glebe they had given to the Church but the Law commands them to restore it free from such Service Capit l. 5. c. 100. Addit l. 4. c. 98 163. And after much struggling Hinomarus who lived at that time saith That these Laws were observed The Patron 's Right by Virtue of the Endowment was not disputed but an Arbitrary Power as to the Incumbents was utterly denied them and they were put under the Bishop's Care who was to receive Complaints against them and to proceed according to the Churches Canons But I am apt to think that all this stir in France did not arise from the pretence of Original Donation and Endowment of Churches but from the Infeodation of Church Lands and Titles by Charles Martel as an old MS. in Filesacus saith and others in France whose Custom it was to give them in Recompence to their Souldiers who then looked on them as their
considered and practised by the Clergy of this Diocese For since it hath pleased God by his wise and over-ruling Providence without my seeking to bring me into this Station in his Church I shall esteem it the best Circumstance of my present Condition if he please to make me an Instrument of doing good among you To this end I thought it necessary in the first place most humbly to implore his Divine Assistance that I might both rightly understand and conscientiously perform that great Duty which is incumbent upon me for without his help all our Thoughts are vain and our best Purposes will be ineffectual But God is not wanting to those who sincerely endeavour to know and to do their Duty and therefore in the next place I set my self as far as my Health and other Occasions would permit to consider the Nature and Extent of my Duty with a Resolution not to be discouraged altho I met with Difficulties in the Performance of it For such is the State and Condition of the World That no Man can design to to do good in it but when that crosses the particular Interests and Inclinations of others he must expect to meet with as much Trouble as their unquiet Passions can give him If we therefore consulted nothing but our own Ease the only way were to let People follow their Humours and Inclinations and to be as little concerned as might be at what they either say or do For if we go about to rowze and awaken them and much more to reprove and reform them we shall soon find them uneasie and impatient for few love to hear of their Faults and fewer to amend them But it is the peculiar Honour of the Christian Religion to have an Order of Men set apart not meerly as Priests to offer Sacrifices for that all Religions have had but as Preachers of Righteousness to set Good and Evil before the People committed to their Charge to inform them of their Duties to reprove them for their Miscarriages and that not in order to their Shame but their Reformation Which requires not only Zeal but Discretion and a great Mixture of Courage and Prudence that we may neither fail in doing our Duty nor in the best means of attaining the end of it If we could reasonably suppose that all those who are bound to tell others their Duties would certainly do their own there would be less need of any such Office in the Church as that of Bishops who are to inspect and govern and visit and reform those who are to watch over others But since there may be too great failings even in these too great neglect in some and disorder in others too great proneness to Faction and Schism and impatience of Contradiction from mere Equals therefore St. Ierom himself grants That to avoid these Mischiefs there was a necessity of a Superiour Order to Presbyters in the Church of God ad quem omnis Ecclesiae cura pertineret Schismatum semina tollerentur as he speaks even where he seems most to lessen the Authority of Bishops But whatever some Expressions of his may be when the Bishop of Ierusalem and the Roman Deacons came into his head his Reasons are very much for the Advantage of Episcopal Government For can any Man say more in point of Reason for it than that nothing but Faction and Disorder followed the Government of Presbyters and therefore the whole Christian Church agreed in the necessity of a higher Order and that the Peace and Safety of the Church depends upon it that if it be taken away nothing but Schisms and Confusions will follow I wish those who magnifie S. Ierom's Authority in this matter would submit to his Reason and Authority both as to the Necessity and Usefulness of the Order of Bishops in the Church But beyond this in several places he makes the Bishops to be Successors of the Apostles as well as the rest of the most Eminent Fathers of the Church have done If the Apostolical Office as far as it concerns the Care and Government of Churches were not to continue after their Decease how came the best the most learned the nearest to the Apostolical Times to be so wonderfully deceiv'd For if the Bishops did not succeed by the Apostles own Appointment they must be Intruders and Usurpers of the Apostolical Function and can we imagine the Church of God would have so universally consented to it Besides the Apostles did not die all at once but there were Successors in several of the Apostolical Churches while some of the Apostles were living Can we again imagine those would not have vindicated the Right of their own Order and declared to the Church That this Office was peculiar to themselves The Change of the Name from Apostles to Bishops would not have been sufficient Excuse for them for the Presumption had been as great in the Exercise of the Power without the Name So that I can see no Medium but that either the Primitive Bishops did succeed the Apostles by their own Appointment and Approbation which Irenaeus expresly affirms Qui ab Apostolis ipsis instituti sunt Episcopi in Ecclesiis or else those who governed the Apostolical Churches after them out-went Diotrephes himself for he only rejected those whom the Apostles sent but these assumed to themselves the Exercise of an Apostolical Authority over the Churches planted and setled by them But to let us see how far the Apostles were from thinking that this Part of their Office was peculiar to themselves we find them in their own time as they saw occasion to appoint others to take care of the Government of the Churches within such bounds as they thought fit Thus Timothy was appointed by St. Paul at Ephesus to examine the Qualifications of such as were to be Ordained and not to lay hands suddenly on any to receive Accusations if there were cause even against Elders to proceed judicially before two or three Witnesses and if there were Reason to give them a publick Rebuke And that this ought not to be thought a slight matter he presently adds I charge thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ and the elect Angels that thou observe these things without preferring one before another doing nothing by partiality Here is a very strict and severe Charge for the Impartial Exercise of Discipline in the Church upon Offenders And although in the Epistle to Titus he be only in general required to set in order the things that are wanting and to ordain Elders in every City as he had appointed him yet we are not to suppose that this Power extended not to a Iurisdiction over them when he had Ordained them For if any of those whom he Ordained as believing them qualified according to the Apostles Rules should afterwards demean themselves otherwise and be self-willed froward given to Wine Brawlers Covetous or any way
to their Brethren and answer to the Accusations brought against them But suppose they will not and others of the Brethren say they ought not and so fall into Heats and Disputes among themselves about it and make new Parties and Divisions Is not this an admirable Way of preserving Peace and Order and Discipline in a Church And I am as certain this is not the Way of Christ's appointing as I am that God is the God of Order and not of Confusion and that when Christ left the Legacy of Peace to his Church he left a Power in some to see his Will performed But these things can never be objected against us for all are Members of the same Body and are governed by certain and known Rules and if any be guilty of open Violation of it the Way is open to accuse and prosecute them and if they be found guilty the Censures of the Church will render them uncapable of doing it in such a Station or at least to bring them to Confession of their Fault and Promise of future Amendment And now I leave any one to judge whether the Parochial Clergy are not under greater and better Discipline than the Teachers of the separate Congregations II. But the great Complaint of such Men is That we want Parochial and Congregational Discipline so that Faults should be examined and punished where they have been committed but instead of that all Matters are drawn into the Ecclesiastical Court and there Causes are managed so as looks rather like a Design to punish Men in their Purses than for their Faults and the Delays are so great that the Court it self seems to be designed for Penance and grows very uneasie even to those who are the Members of our Church And some think that the proceeding against Men upon Articles of Enquiry not so agreeable to the Rights and Liberties of Mankind In answer to this I shall consider 1. The Proceedings upon Enquiry at Visitations 2. The Method of Proceeding in the Ecclesiastical Courts 3. The Inconveniencies of parochial Discipline 1. As to Enquiries at Visitations They were grounded upon one of the main Pillars of our Law viz. an ancient immemorial Custom founded upon good Reason In the first Canons that ever were made in this Church under Theodore Archbishop of Canterbury the second is That every Bishop is to look after the Government of his own Diocess and not to invade anothers And that in so doing they went about their Diocesses in order to an Enquiry and Correction of Miscarriages is evident from the Council under Cuthbert Archbishop of Canterbury Can. 3. 25. the first Council at Calechyth Can. 3. the Constitutions of Odo Archbishop of Canterbury Can. 3. and the Canon of Edgar Can. 3. But in these Saxon times the Visitations were annual which were found inconvenient and therefore in the Norman times the Archdeacons were taken into a part of the Jurisdiction under the Bishop and visited those years the Bishop did not But we meet with no Archdeacons with any kind of Jurisdiction in the Saxon times we read indeed sometimes of the Name of Archdeacons but they had nothing to do in the Diocess but only attended the Bishop at Ordinations and other publick Services in the Cathedral Lanfranc was the first who made an Archdeacon with Jurisdiction in his See And Thomas first Archbishop of York after the Conquest was the first who divided his Diocess into Archdeaconries and so did Remigius Bishop of Lincoln his large Diocess into Seven Archdeaconries saith H. of Huntingdon And so it was with the rest of which there were two Occasions 1. The laying aside the Corepiscopi in the Western Parts as assuming too much to themselves 2. The publick Services which the Bishops were more strictly tied to as the King's Barons in the Norman times Which was the Reason not only of taking in Archdeacons but likewise of Archpresbyters or Rural-Deans who had some Inspection into the several Deanaries and assisted the Bishop in such things as they were appointed to do and then came in the other Ecclesiastical Officers as Vicars General Chancellors Commissaries c. for we read not of them here at all in the Saxon times but about the time of Hen. II. the Bishops took them for their Assistance in Dispatch of Causes when the King required their strict Attendance on the publick Affairs in the Supreme Court of Parliament 2. As to the Method of Proceeding in the Ecclesiastical Courts it is no other than hath been continued here without Interruption till of late years ever since the Conquest For the Consistory-Court and the Rules of Proceeding there were established by a Law in the time of William the First As far as I can find by King Edward's Laws c. 4. the Bishops did then proceed by the Ecclesiastical Laws although they then sat in the County-Court but this caused so much Confusion that William by a general Consent and a Charter directed to all the People of England doth separate the Ecclesiastical from the Temporal Courts which was enrolled as good Law 2 R. 2. upon occasion of a Suit of the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln and therefore the Charter of Remigius Bishop of Lincoln is more mentioned than others but the same was to all the Bishops and Counties of England as appears by other Copies of it Thus the Consistory-Court was first established as a distinct Court from the County-Court which it was not in the Saxon times for then the Bishop sate with the Civil Magistrate in the same Court and Ecclesiastical Causes were first heard and decided there It seems the People wer very unwilling to go to a new Place and therefore the Law is inforced with severe Penalties for Contempt And those who object against the Reasonableness of the Method of Proceeding in those Courts must reflect upon some of the wisest Nations in the World who have gone upon the same Grounds in all that have received the Civil Law and upon some of the greatest Courts at this time in the Kingdom as the Chancery and Admiralty which go by the same Fundamental Rules As to any Objections which arise from the personal Faults of those who are imployed in them that reaches I am afraid to all Courts and it ought to be the Work and Business of those who look after them to do what in them lies to reform them that others Faults may not be laid at their Doors 3. But for those who would have a Parochial or Congregational Discipline set up as much better and more effectual I shall desire them to consider that since Matters of Discipline are such as that in them the Reputation and Interest of Persons is very much concerned they ought not to be left to Arbitrary Proceedings of any Persons but they ought to be managed by the certain and common Rules of Justice since every Man hath a Right to defend himself when he is accused And unless there be known and