Heathen Princes and servile Conventions under Christian ones The Letter Distinguishing all Power into Spiritual and Temporal founds both of them in God which no Christian will deny of the Ecclesiastical Authority That this can be Rightly Exercised among Christians only not as enclosed within any Civil State or Community but as Members of a Spiritual Society of which Christ Jesus is the Head who has also given out Laws and appointed a standing Succession of Officers under himself for the Government of this Society which continued near 300 Years before any Civil Governours embraced Christianity So that the Spiritual Authority is not in its own Nature simply dependent on the Temporal That when supernatural means of Governing the Church were thought by its Founder to be no more necessary to its continuance it was left to the best ordinary means of Conduct and Preservation viz. assembling debating and by Majority of Voices deciding concerning the Rules and Principles of Government That the Law of this Society is made to their hands not to be altered added or diminished but the applying thereof to particular Cases explaining Doubts upon it deducing Consequences from it in things not explicitly determined already by that Law and enforcing Submission and Obedience to their Determinations are the proper Objects of their Power That this Society can better claim an inherent and unalterable Right to the exercise of this Power than any Sect among us it not being Lost by Magna Charta by its Giving the Church a Legal Freedom Thus the Letter p. 17 18 19 20. The Doctor The Case stated on each side Is by no means satisfied that the Church has any Command or Authority from God to assemble Synods he is not aware that either in the Old or New Testament there is so much as one single direction given for its so doing And excepting the singular Instance of Acts XV. he knows of no Example that can with any shew of Reason be offered of such a Meeting And whether that were such a Synod as of which the Question is may justly be doubted The Foundation of Synods in the Church in his Opinion is the same as that of Councils in the State The Necessities of the Churches when they began to be enlarged first brought in the One as those of the Commonwealth did the other And therefore when men are incorporated into Societies as well for the service of God Then it seems the Church is not sociated till incorporated with the civil State to spiritual as well as temporal Ends. and salvation of their souls as for their Civil Peace and Security these Assemblies are to be as much subjost to the Laws of the Society and to be regulated by them as any other Publick Assemblies are Nor has the Church any inherent Divine Right to set it at liberty from being concluded by such Rules as the Governing part of every Society shall prescribe to it as to this matter As for those Realms in which the Civil Power is of another Perswasion Natural Reason will prompt the Members of every Church to consult together the best they can how to manage the Affairs of it and to agree upon such Rules and Methods as shall seem most proper to preserve the Peace and Vnity of it and to give the least Offence that may be to the Government under which they live And what Rules are by the common consent of every such Church agreed to ought to be the Measure of assembling and acting of Synods in such a Countrey Thus the Doctor p. 365 366 c. § 2. The Doctor 's Tergiversation This is what the Doctor replies about the Affairs of Ecclesiastical Synods to the Letter Wherein any Man may plainly see that he shuffles and turns his Back in the vety Fundamental Article in Controversie not daring professedly to refute the Hypothesis of the Letter by any good Proof from Reason or Authority nor yet ingenuously confessing those well-laid Truths which he was not able to oppose but to steal away the Reader from observing this Impotency he is fobb'd off with a poor precarious and not so much as evasive a Scheme of Imaginations for which he can hardly find any Church-Advocate nor any Credentials from any Divine or valuable Humane Writings § 3. Terms explained But before we come to winnow these Elements of Independent or rather Erastian Divinity for there is a mixture of these Contraries in which Erastiaenism much preponderates it is necessary that we six the principal Terms of Matters Fundamental in his Enquiry Authority what And first for Authority in Matters of Government it is known to signifie either a just or rightful or at least lawful Power to rule the Subjects according to Equity and Laws of Justice or else an uncontroulable Freedom and Impunity only of acting which is the priviledge of all Supreme Governors as being above all Legal and Judicial Coercion with their Subjects Right Now all Acts of Authority in the former and proper Sense appear in themselves Good and Right and no Powers or Persons whatsoever can have any opposite Good and Lawful Authority But the mere Exercises of an uncontroulable Domination Uncontroulable Domination tho called by the specious name of Authority cannot vacate any Just and Valid Rights Liberties and Authorities of any Subject Persons or Societies For it must be noted that an Inherent Right and Valid Title cannot be legally extinguished by any External Violations of Breedom or Obstructions of its Fruition or Practice which tho not accountable for at any Domestick Tribunal shall yet fall under the Sentence and Condemnation of God the present Civil Impunity giving no Right to any injurious measures nor Exemption from that divine Bar. Secondly We are to define an Ecclesiastical Council or Synod Synod what wherein I will take the Doctors Definition namely 't is literally a Meeting of Ecclesiastical Persons I mean Ministers upon an Ecclesiastical Affair (a) p. 60. And it is either subordinate The sorts of Synods consisting of one or more Bishops and inferiour Ministers or Co-ordinate consisting only of one equal Order either of Bishops alone or Inferiour Ministers alone For in want of a Bishop * Cyp. Ep. 3 Ep. 18. the Inferiour Clergy are the Council for the vacant Church according to the limits and powers of their Order A Convention of Clergy †Cyp. 26 Sect. 4 Ep. 31. Sect. 5. under their proper Bishop for Ecclesiastical Consultations or Acts we now should call a Diocesan Synod A Convention of a College of Bishops for a Province we may call a Provincial Synod which generally ever was attended with the Service of Inferiour Orders Councils called General are of the fame Nature in themselves tho of a larger extent and not of a Canonical originally but of Imperial Collection Other extraordinary and unusual Conventions of Select Bishops and Ministers not delegated so much by the Church upon her regular Constitutions
as convened by the Will only of Princes may be called Synods tho of themselves they have no Canonicol Authority for their Acts which must either stand or fall by the consequent Reception or Refusal of the Church notwithstanding all the Ratifications that the Temporal Powers give them a mere Ecclesiastical Commission from a Prince Ecclesiastical Commissioners of Princes no Canonical Synod being not of the same sort of Efficacy and Authority as a free Convention of the Powers Ecclesiastical Tho therefore such Commissioners may Grammatically be called a Synod yet Canonically a Synod is a Convention of the State or Powers Ecclesiastical on their own Right and Authority whosoever calls them to the Exercise thereof Thirdly we are to consider the. Attribute of Christian as given either to Princes or private Persons Now * Euseb reekons two lay 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly a Christian is a Person baptized into and continuing in the Christian Faith but loosely and improperly Hereticks claim and use the Character which also may improperly be given to such as profess a Belief thereof before ever they are admitted to any Ordinance or Station of the Church for so Constantine the Great Dem. ev l. 2. c. 4. Sect. 38. So Origen con Cels l. 3. Ambr. de Myster initiand c. 4. Aug. in Joh. c. 2.3 Tract 11. and Constantius c. have been reputed Christian Emperors tho not Baptized nor so much as admitted Catechumens or Competents till a little before their Death Which Preliminary Explications will be found of great Use in this present Controversie § 4. Being thus harnessed we will consider the strength of the Doctor 's Hyyothesis first before we come to justisie that of the Letter The Doctor 's Principle worse than the Independents First then he makes a Synod under Heathen Powers to be but an independent huddle of Christians in common contriving their Affairs by no Authority but that of Humane Prudence But then I shall say that if this be a Synod such a Concourse of mere Lay-Christians may be a Synod and determine the common Process of their Conduct For he places this Care simply in the Natural Reason of the Members of every Church not the Governors nor Powers therein constituted for he does not suppose it a regular Society till incorporated with the Civil State Nor will it help to say that he defines a Synod a Meeting of Ecclesiastical Persons upon an Ecclesiastical Affair for all Members of the Church may with Grammatical Propriety be called and accounted Eccle jastica◠Persons in distinction from Aliens or absolutely tho Custom has given this Title as a distinctive of the Clergy from the Laity So that tho I in assuming the Doctors Definition of a Synod do by Ecclesiastical Persons mean the Clergy yet 't is not certain that the Doctor intends so except only of Synods called by Christian Princes but rather these Members of the Church under Heathen Powers must be the Ecclesiastical Persons convened in Synod under them without any Distinction of Orders or Authorities among them And if we will but add one Pastor among them here we have the true form of an Independent Church or Congregation which is its own constant Synod at all Meetings only the Independent Principle claims a Divine Right and relies not alone upon mere humane Inauthoritative Prudence and so is nearer to Truth and Reason than the Doctor 's But if the Doctor 's Principles be true that such Synods are Conventions of Church-Members upon Prudence only without any inherent Right or Authority wherein they are to give the Insidel Powers the least Offence that may be I doubt that Prudence will oblige them not to convene at all For certainly we are not in Prudence to give Insidel Powers or any Persons whatsoever any needless Offence at all But certainly Subjects having no Authority to convene yet convening against the Laws of Civil Powers do incur their great Offence which natural Reason cannot prompt Men to For if Christians should be called by such Infidel Powers to account for such prohibited Conventions by what Authority they do such things if they should set forth a good Divine Authority this would be a good though not perhaps a successul Plea but if they should say we have no Authority for it but only natural Reason and Prudence how can that direct a Man to disobey Laws which destroy no Man's Authority or Right Nor can it be shifted here that they have Right but not Authority for tho even a mere Right to synodize is enough to the jus divinum asserted by the Letter yet a Right to synodize is a Right to a publick Conduct by Rules and Methods to preserve the Peace and Unity of the Church and that is Authority tho never so democratical And if they have natural Reason for this Conduct that Nature that has given them just Reason has given them just Right to it for in such Matters Right and Reason is the same doing Men Right being properly called doing Men Reason If then they have natural Reason they have natural Right and if natural Right natural Authority to convene for their publick Conduct and that is a good Plea against the Laws of Infidel Powers But on the contrary if they have no Authority so to do they have no Right and if no Right no Reason and if no Reason how can this be done without Offence against the Civil Powers that forbid it and have just Right indeed to forbid all Assemblies which have no Authority Right or Reason But to conclude the Dr. has given these Synods a more fundamental Authority than he was aware of when he tells us that the necessities of the Church when it began to be enlarged Common-wealth did brought them into the Church as the necessities of the Councils of State Very well and a good Parallel but are not Councils of State endued with Authority founded on that popular Necessity The Doctor dares not say No to the State because the Leviathan is not safely to be angred but why then should not the Councils of the Church be authoritative for its Conduct and Preservation upon the same bottom of equal Necessity and that under the Heathen Powers For it appears that on this Necessity Synods were held in the Church in full Vigour and Spiritual Authority before there were any Christian States for heir Incorporation And therefore the necessity was the greater and by these the Doctor 's Rules the Authority should be so too tho yet he allows them no Authority because no Society till their Civil Incorporation which is tho the Doctor sees not the necessary Consequence to deny the Unity of the Catholic Church and its Constitution under Spiritual Governors of its own for the three first Centuries of Christianity § 5. But he further tells us Incorp that the Incorporation of the Church into the State being an Association for the saving of their Souls as well as Secularities subjects them
as much to the Laws and Regulations of Civil Societies as any other Public Assemblies This is a bold stroke indeed for it will put the Constitution of the Hierarchy and all its Functions into what Hands under what Conduct Times and Places c. the Civil Powers please They shall enable a Layman to ordain and Minister Sacraments to Preach Excommunicate Absolve Consecrate and degrade and do all things by an Arbitrary Legislation and Government thereupon and well then may this Incorporation into Society promote the Seâ—â—â—â— of God and Salvation of Men with all Secular Heavens upon Earth 〈◊〉 But I pray what is this Incorporation Is it making the Church one of the National Estates to concurr in the Acts of Legislature and all her Ratified Canons not only Canon but Law too and of Civil Consequences upon the Subject Or is it only the Protection of the Law from Injuries or Oppressions or the addition of several Priviledges Honours and Encouragements If the first of these only then was the Church never incorporated into the State under the Roman Empire for it was no part of the Legislature and consequently not thereupon subject to the Laws of the Empire in Matters of Ecclesiastical Conduct If the second Favour be an Incorporation then the incorporating Powers have a Right to govern the Religion of all other Societies which they tolerate all Schisms and Heresies whatsoever exempt by Law from Violences and Oppressions so that an Orthodox Christian Emperor tolerating Novatians Meletians Arians Macedonians Nestorians Eutychians and all other Clans of Heresies had full Right and good Authority to govern all their several respective Counsels and Discipline and to ratisie all their Synodical Acts Canons and Sentences O Sanctas Gentes What a mighty Supremacy would this be indeed wherein every Prince so indulgent would be another Solomon and reside not only over God's Church at Jerusalem but over those of Chomesh Milchom Ashtoreth c. a Supremacy I must needs confess more than divine And yet I doubt it would not be casily admitted either in Holland or the emulous England where tho the publick Indulgence is to save their Souls as well as their Temporals yet will not the Sectaries part with their Souls to these Indulgent Saviours nor endure the Thoughts of their Presidency and Conduct in their little Religious Politics but demand an Exemption as entire as the Chappels of foreign Factories or Embassadors Nor can in the third place an Accumulation of all Encouragements Priviledges and Honours prevail upon them hereunto most of them being against a National Church all of them against a National Religion i. e. confined to the Laws of a Civil State And commend me to Scotland who have acquired all Secular Priviledges and Franchises they desired and yet scorn that a King shall so much as be a Door keeper to their Holy of Holies notwithstanding all these their Incorporations and if the Dr. should preach up his Maximes but on the other side of the Tweed they world quickly bring him to the stool of Repentance for teaching their People or their Sovereign that Right of Supremacy over Holy Kirk which they are so far from owning in all Princes that 't is with them the most Funda nental Heresie to allow them any at all as appears by their perpetual Remonstrances upon all Occasions in their Synods § 6. Wheve tho Prince is of a different Religion But t is nor impossible that a Sovereign may contract a Religion contrary and destructive to that which is recieved and câ—â—blished among his People and which it is not in his Power by Force or Legislative Authority presently to Abolish As Izates King of the Adiabenes turning Jew and to omit others King James the Second Roman-Catholick How graceful in such a Case would it be to see a King of England of Jewish Popish Socinian Presbyterian Anabaptist Independent Quaker or Mâ—ggletonian Principles or Profession convening a Church of England Convocation presiding in it in Person or a Vicar-General of his own perswasions upon Matters of alteration in the Liturgy and Canons or any other Expedients for the good of the Church of England and always twitting the Synods with Caveats of that Holy Statute of Praemunire not to speak one wold nor syllable to any purpose whatsoever till such Prince pleases to allow you of his meer grace and motion as being only of Counsel to this Head of the Church of England who is however to be presumed wiser to know all times and matters expedient for the Church which yet by his Religion he is in Conscience bound to abhor and destroy than whole Convocations and to prescribe to these his Counsellors herein as being fitter to be of Counsel unto them whose Resolves after all he has Wisdom enough as well as Authority to ratifie alter rescind or aunull so that not what they but what he shall bind or loose on Earth shall be bound or loosed in Heaven and reason good upon such an Heavenly Authority and Design By this Ecclesiastical Supremacy which K. James himself abjured did he most advantageously for the Church of England erect his Ecclesiastical Commission for the saving of this Church from the Encroachments of the Papal Supremacy So that by our Incorporation alone we are all safe Soul and Body with Lawyers and Court-Flatterers let our Supream Head be of what Religion he pleases But Lawyers indeed cannot be blamed for any inconvenienties which may happen from 2 positive Law and they are obliged to interpret and judge according to the Letter but for Clergy-Min to attribute Divinity to Humane Laws whatsoever the results of them be this this But will not here the same Right of Natural Reason come in which the Dr. asserts to the Chuach where the Civil Power is of another Perswasion to Consult together the best they can and to that end Aslemble in Synods Ecclesiastical This Reason this Right and Rule by the wording of it in general terms of quother perswasion will reach the Case of Churches not only under Heathen Powers but Christian Powers of different Communion and Principles from the pure Church that is in subjection And it seem'd Calculated for the Case of the French Protestants or the Vandoise for Comprehension sake Now tho' I know this to be no Rule of Common or Statute-Law here in such Cases yet will the Dr. allow a Natural Right and Reason for such Liberty even in opposition to our Laws when our King shall be of another perswasion shall the Church lean upon her own Authority and Wisdom not His This his own determination says as much in Generals and yet I believe his Design will not permit him to say so for us no not in our Case under the late K. James And if he shall make any Reply upon this Book I do desire him to speak home like a Man to this Supposition and the Case and Demand raised on it § 7. Supposing then according to the Dr's Concession that under
Princes of another Perswasion the Church has Right and Reason to hold Synods and Consults who must of Office appoint such Conventions in the Church Are they all Equals and so must run higly-pigly on Occasions as People do to quench an House on fire Or are there any Superiours or Hierarchical Rulers in it in whom the Conduct is chiefly lodged for all Ecclesiastical Concernments If this latter be the Constitution of a Church simply in it self then will I ask whether the Superiours are to Assemble themselves alone or others with them by virtue of their Superiority or are the Inferiours to give Rule to their Superiours I am not willing to believe that for the sake of a feeble Hypothesis the Dr. will overturn the Order of things especially in the Church that subsists as all other Bodies Politick do by Order but we 'll presume that the right of Convention is lodged in such a State in the Supream Order But then by that Authority whence they derived that Order have they Power to Convene Synods over that Church which by the Constitution of an Hierarchy becomes of it self a Divine and Sahred Society and is therefore called the Kingdom of God and needs no Incorporation with Civil States for the Service of God or Salvation of Souls And this I think will reduce the Dr. to a necessity of granting the Church to be a Divine Society under Orders who have a Divine Authority to hold Synods to the preservation thereof where the Prince is of another Perswasion CHAP. II. Of the Rights Liberties and Authorities of Several as well Secular as Sacred Societies under the Supremacy of Civil Powers § 1. HAving thus Discussed the Virtue of the Dr's own positive Sense of the Churches State and Powers we will in the next place proceed to examine what he has seemed willing to deny as to the Hypothesis of Divine Right asserted in the Letter And in order hereunto we will be at the pains to descend into the bottoms of Ecclesiastical and Civil Powers to try whether these were intended by their Providential Author entirely to swallow up the former as the Dr. teaches us in all particulars not excepted in God's word by a special reserve § 2. All Society then is either Subordinate between Superiours and Subjects Societies distinguished or Co-ordinate betwen Persons or Communities free and independent of each other And each of these is either Natural only from the meer obligations of Nature or Positive by voluntary Contract or Constitution Now of all these the first and most Fundamental Society is the Natural Society between God and Man Natural Society with God maintained by the Offices of Natural Religion on our part Tul. de leg l. 1. Positive Society with God and the Acts of God's Paternal Providence on his Next hereunto and immediately hereupon succeeded a positive and Faederal Society between them Apud Cyp. Ep. 30. Sect. 2. Qui a Deo cui sociari quaerit discrepat privilegium societatis amittat by the Law and Communications of the Divine Presence given in Paradise which Communications and Presence tho' the Law of Paradise determined by Man's ejection out of Paradise still continued and were designed for continuance to Posterities Ripening into an Ecclesiastical form admitting the Mystical Worship of Sacrifices as well as the Duties of Natural Piety to maintain this double Consociation And herein was laid the first foundation of Ecclesiastical Society and Communion with God which more formally ripened into publick and Canonical form In the days of Enosh when the Generations of Men increasing under this double Union in the days of Enosh Men began to call on the Name of the Lord Gen. 4.26 in publick Assemblies For then those whom under this preccedent course of Divine Communion God had Educated by his own immediate institution Vnder Prophetick Patriarchs he after constituted Prophets and Preachers of Righteousness to the Families so Ecclesiastically consociated under God and of these Ministers he founded an Order and Succession Of which Noah the Eighth from Enosh in which Noah was the Eighth from Enosh Gen. 5. 2 Pet. 2.5 Where these Families and Generations so consociated under God and the Sacred Authority and Conduct of these Prophetick Patriarchs were a formal Church or Ecclesiastical Society and were called under a Sacred Character Sons of God the Sons of God Gen 6 2. Now this Society Ecclesiastical founded not only in Nature Continuance of this state to the Flood but God's positive Constitution also contioned thro' all that vast tract of time between the Creation from its Originals and from the days of Euosh and the Flood as far as appears or is probable without the support of the Civil Sword or Magistracy according to the concurrent Traditions of the very Heathens herein that in the Golden Age Men lived uprightly of their own accord without need of Judges and without fear or apprehensions of Bonds and Punishment § 3. Matrimonial Society The second sort of subordinate Society is the Matrimonial Aug. in Gen. Quaest 143. Est enim ordo naturalis in hominibus ut serviant saeminae viris c filii parentibus quia est illic justicia est haec ut infirmior ratio serviat fortiori founded in the Structure of the Sexes and difference in the inward Vigours and Powers of the Soul and so constituted by a positive determination and Ordination of God first in the State of Paradise in a less and after the Fall into Sin in a greater degree of Subordination Gen. 2. Gen. 3. And herein God laid a Corporal Foundation and Original of all other Societies to come for all the Ends and Reasons of the Creation and Providence And hereupon as the Right of this Ordinance is Universal and Perpetual in God's intention and establishment so has it continued tho' not without abuses as the acknowledged Foundation and Rule of Lawful Succession thro' all Nations § 4. Oeconomical Society The Third Sort of Subordinate Societies succeeding the former is the Oeconomical and is either Natural between Parents and Children or positive as between Tutors and Pupils Masters and Servants § 5. Civil Society The last General Sort of Subordinate Societies fundamentally designed by God's Providence for the conservation of Mankind is the Civil entrusted with the Power of the Swórd in defence against all Violences and Oppressions Domestick or Foreign for the preservation of those Rights and Liberties which are necessary to the good order and well being of Mankind in all its forms of Society which God himself hath founded by Nature Constitution or Providence for a regular and undisturbed Lâ—se For thus St. Paul saith God's Ordinance for the good of Mankind tho' not always actually fulsilling Gods design they are God's Ordinance and as such his Ministers bearing the Sword for our good to the punishment of Evil Doers and to the praise of them that do well Rom. 13.1
of Imposture in Religions inlaid with the Power of the Sword the Merchandize the Hypocrites would make of it Athan. ad Orthodox Tom. 1. P. 944. D. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to set up Bishops by Kingly force 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before its Divine Credit could be throughly established in the Hearts of Mankind and the Reproaches consequent against it there upon did not think sit to call many Mighty or many Noble Wise or great at first to the Profession of Christianity nor permit any Princes by his Providence to exercise any formal Authority in the least over the Church for 300 years tho' Abgarus Mamaea and Philip Gordius are said to have been Christian that the propagation of the Christian Church and Faith might not be attributed nor attributable to the Power of Man but of God only Else it had been as easie and as miraculous for our Lord to have made Princes his first Converts and Apostles and founded this Supremacy in them and their Successors beyond all Question for ever But that it might never in time to come fall under the reproachful Imputation and Character of a State Engine he lodged the Spiritual Powers elsewhere for three Centuries entirely that hereupon the Church might be emboldened as upon sure grounds to assert her proper Powers unalienated and pure against all Atheistical Calumnies whatsoever thro' all Ages that so tho' they were to be subject to Civil Powers to the enforcement of their Duties and for repression of Enormities yet not to the Omission of their Duties and Cares to which God hath called them which is the general Rule and Standard of Subjection in all Countries Ages and Nations Universally and forever § 11. The Christian Character of the first Princes in the Prescription But there is one thing more to be considered in the two first Emperors instanced by the Doctor for this universal Domination of Princes over Synods and that is their Christian Character to qualifie them for this Omnipotency For tho' the Doctor in his few interspersed Reasons for it gives no distinctive grounds for an higher and interiour Supremacy in Christian than in Heathen Princes yet for a good Grace Praef. p. 5. he tells us That whatever Privileges do belong herein to the Christian Magistrate p. 94 96. they belong to him as such which must I suppose be the Rule of Interpreting other Places where he more loosly omits the Christian Qualification But here I would fain know what 't is shall denominate a Prince Christian and that in order to this Authority Internal Authority in Societies grounded upon an Internal Right of Communion For all Internal Authority in all Powers presupposes a right to Communion more or less as the ground of Authority in all Societies whatsoever And therefore the Authorities asserted by the Doctor to all Christian Princes must suppose a right to Communion in all the matters subject to that Internal Authority For he that has no right to receive Sacraments has no Internal Right of Authority to make Laws about them he who is not within the Communion has no Right to pass Sentence for the Ejection or the Restitution of others He may presume to do it upon an uncontroulable Force and Tyranny and the reasons pretended for it may be in themselves good and necessary and so be admitted and observed by the Church at the Command of an Usurping Power not in Conscience of his just Authority but for the reason of the thing and for the avoiding unnecessary Persecution But a Right Internal there is none to them that are without Now tho' Constantine and Constantius so much concerned themselves about Church Synods yet were they not yet Baptised into the plenary Communion of Saints in the Christian Church nor so much as made Competents or Catechumens by Imposition of Hands and consequently what they did about Ecclesiasticals was not of an Office or Nature Internal to Ecclesiastical Polity or Communion but common only to the Prerogative of Princes in General or if it was of Internal importance 't was Usurpation and a Nullity in it self Had they been Catechumens or Competents a pretence might have thereupon been formed that they alone might make Ordinances for those preliminary Statious but not surely for Baptism Consirmation Lords Supper Holy Orders Anathemas Absolutions c. Had they been Baptized and so qualified for Confirmation and the Eucharist it might not have looked so odd in them to have set Rules for such Sacraments and the common Laity in their Celebration but for Ordinations and Hierarchical Powers of the Spirit over the Souls of the Laity and Clergy how incongtuous must it have been in any Emperour to assume the whole Legislature and Ordinance In these therefore the Laws of Princes may well follow Ecclesiastical Constitutions by the Sanction of Secular Penalties but the Constitutions of Sacred Canons ought not to be taken sway from the Hierarchy and lodged only in a Lay-hand that holds a long Sword and for no other Reason but this that the Sword is in it least they that use it Sacrilegiously perish by it Eternally Constantius his want of Right over Synods For as to Constantius whom most accuse to be aresolute Heretick and they that speak most sostly of him represent him as Patron of Heresie through simple Ignorance he thereby became not a Guardian of the Church or the publick Peace thereupon hereby to sound his Right of Supremacy but a very great Persecutor and Embroiler of the Catholick Church even by managing Synods which no doubt in an Unbaptized state of Heresie he had no true Right nor proper Authority to do for whatsoever Right a mere Alien Prince may have while he professes no Enmity no doubt a Professed Enemy has no Lawful Authority to manage that Divine Society and its Principles which he designeth to destroy by that very management And so I resolve that Constantius having declared himself against the Homoonsion had no Authority to call or manage any Synod at all and that no Obedience or Conformity to his Calls were due in Conscience to his Power tho' it might be in Duty â—to God and Care for his Soul as well as the Souls in general of the whole Church the whole Authority of meeting being in the Catholick Bishops but none at all in him or his Arians I might here add that the Fathers might Convene upon his Call for fear of Persecution not in Conscience of Duty to it but I think this did not so far enslave them as to obey but the hopes they had of doing him and the whole Church the useful Services of true Faith and Piety And hence it was that when upon their Petition he would not in answer concede their Dissolution at Ariminuns Right of Dissolution they dissolved themselves not thinking themselves guilty of any sin of Disobedience for who could imagine so of the Conscience of 400 Catholick Bishops suffering for the Faith under Constantius his Tyranny
Prince out of those Hands and that Society in which it was vested in a matter quite different from the Secular Polity I do desire a proof hereof as weighty and important as the Matter and Consequences hereof are What then is it liable to a Despotick Occupation This again is what a Borough will not yield upon a Quo Warranto but will be ready to make a Counter demand of Quo Warranto from their Prince In vain would he plead for it on the Right of Protection while he strikes at all their Municipal Rights and Liberties Be sure except the English Church here But we we only are the Poor Tame Dispirited Drowsie Body that are in Love with our own Fetters and this is the only scandalous part of our Passive Obedience to be not only silent but content with an Oc n of our P rs which are not forfeited nor forfeitable to any Worldly Powers whatsoever And as to any Contract 't is neither pretensible nor pretended by the Doctor tho' too much in truth in latter Ages has been exchanged by the Church for Worldly Interests wherein mainly lies the great Ruine of Christianity § 11. But now we descend to the second Cause in which this unlimited Supremacy of Princes is by the Doctor founded namely Civil Interests as of Peace and the Princes Prerogative To both which I for my own part am willing to surrender all if it be necessary But before this however I would fain know how do the Laws of Peace require a Violation of those Rights which God hath lodged in the Hierarchy as a means to reconcile all in one Body unto a common Peace with God and each other If the Clergy use their Powers to that End who has Right to hinder them Who to break the Peace with them But if they do not there are other just ways of securing them from doing wrong than by disabling them from doing Good that very Good which God hath set them apart and sanctified them to do And these ways are in the Power and Sovereignty of an Heathen Prince Chap. 8. as is above manifested and therefore are sufficient to the same ends in the Authority of a Christian Prince from whose Coercion in matters of Crime the Priesthood how much soever to be revered by Princes ought not to be made a Shelter or Protection Under these Powers of Heathen Princes the Christian Synods made no Rupture on the Peace or Prerogative of the Empire Church Ordinances innocent in all States tho' as undeservedly accused for this by the Heathens as we are suspected of it now Why should the same Spiritual Liberties within a Christian Kingdom be thought more dangerous than they were to Heathens I will not speak out how the Churches of Christendom have been crushed between the Upper and the Nether Milstones but sure I am hence are all the Confusions both under the Papacy and the Reformation Be sure here by all means to except England Nor is it possible to make any true and signal Conversions to the better as long as there is a common Slavery upon the Hierarchical Powers for as we hate the Bondage of Rome so they hate the Bondage of the Church under Secular Domination and so hereby is maintained a perpetual and irreconcileable aversion which no illustrious Piety can extinguish while the Powers thereof are Chained down to mere Politick Ends and Services § 12. So that as there is no necessity No Expediency in the Slavery of the Church so neither is there any expediency to recommend any such unlimited Domination For as Things and Persons Consecrated to God are to be treated with a Respect and Reverence suitable to that Sanctity and Relation to God so a Prostitution of them under Secular Contempt is no small Impiety towards God and no small Guilt Blemish and Indecency in thern that cause it Now of all things under the Sun nothing is so hated feared and despised as Servitude and no Servitude more reproachful than that of Priests which were from the beginning a most Noble Free and Honourable Order in all Nations not excepting the very Barbarous Nor yet of all sorts of Slavery is there any so Indecorous and Grieving as that which oppresseth the Sanctity Authority and Operation of their very Functions for maintenance of which the Bishops of the Primitive Church were chiefly sought out unto Martyrdom And yet as hateful as such Vassallage is in it self 't is less Odious under an Heathen than a Christian Prince For from an open Enemy 't is natural enough and no new thing to expect Oppressions but when a Prince hath been Consecrated by God's Priests into the Communion of the Catholick Church he is thereby federally engaged to assert all the Rights and Authorities of that Divine Communion vested by our Lord in the Christian Hierarchy as much as every common Christian or Priest himself our Salvation in common being promoted by the Conduct of them Can then a claim of an Oppressive Supremacy be deemed a Glorious Jewel in a Christian Crown which if exercised must of necessity forfeit the Kings Salvation And is it not a dangerous Complaisance it Priests to fan such an Ambition as must end in the Ruine of the Church the Priesthood and the Soul of the Prince which the Liberties and Powers Hierarchical were designed to Convert Direct and Preserve It is not perhaps without an especial Providence that Eusebius has preserved the Memory of this Artificial kind of Persecution practised upon the Church by the Emperor Licinius Lecinius his crasty Persecution Who prohibited the Bishops from Visiting the Neighbour Churches or to hold Synods Consultations and Advices concerning matters profitable that so either by disobeying his Law they might be subjected to Punishment or by obeying his Order dissolve the Laws of the Church For that 't is no otherwise possible to set great Concerns at Right but by Synods by which he attempted to break that Concordant Harmony in the Church A place well worth every Princes and Doctors deep and most affective Consideration that under pretence Peace there may be no Licinius set up over the Hierarchy within the Communion of the Christian Church For besides the Domestick Cares and Exigencies of every Church requiring a constant Watch and frequent Consultations the concerns of the whole Catholick Church under Heaven ought to affect every Province and Bishopâ—ick thereof to a frequent course of Communications in order to a general Union and Vniformity in all the principal matters of Christianity a duty never to be performed but by a liberty of Synods in order thereunto in which the Rights of the Catholick Church run a parallel with those of Civil Powers 'T is true indeed this Communication is actually broken off but the Right and Duty thereof is mâ—â—aâ—colled and eternal obliging all Churches to reâ—tore it and I believe all Princes to pâ—rmit and assist the restitution Let therefore the Church be bound in all humility
by an express Law to acquaint the Sovereign Prince with her Desires Reasons Places Seasons and Necessaries of Convening to Petition his Leave and Favour his Inspection Assistance and Succour to the Piety of their Designs and to secure him her Fidelity to all his proper Honours and Interests to keep within Ecclesiastical concerns and do all things openly to the Glory of God and the Good of Souls in the Unity Order and Purity of the Church preserved by the Rules of Catholick and Canonical Communion and this under the Guard and Watch of Temporal Powers this surely will be so far from endangering Mutinies in States that there is no way so like to preserve the Peace of all Christian Nations Ecclesiastical Liberty the best means to the Peace of the World as that which will maintain the common Peace and Unity of their Churches for that all Princes truly Christian will be very tender of breaking the Civil Peace whereby the Sacred Communion so necessary to the preservation of Christianity must be obstructed if not utterly violated And as such a Communion founded on such a Liberty would prevent most National Wars so would it also most Intestine Seditions For the Authority of a Priesthood shining in its due and proper Lustre supported by the Secular Powers would over-awe most popular Insolencies or however the Influence of Christian Communication from Churches abroad reduced to their Primitive Union must in all Humane probability sooner quench the Calamity than can be expected in a state of general Division and the insignificancy of an Oppressed and Despised Clergy But the fatal Envy Jealousie and Hatred against the Priesthood occasioned by the accursed Frauds and Tyrannies of the Church of Rome Still except England and Omnia bene is such an extreme in most parts of the Reformation as obstructs their Piety and thereupon Gods Blessing and their own Happiness it being intolerable for such People that are so zealous for their Civil Liberties to be so averse to the just Rights and Immunities of a Priesthood that is clean and pure from all corrupt or abusive Principles whatsoever and therefore no wonder if the Reformation makes no greater Progress nor Figure in the World but goes backward apace both in its Esteem and Interest For a mere mistrust from instances of corrupt and unreformed Churches is not warrantable against those that are Reformed even in those Principles which gave the past Offences and continue the present Jealousies And whether we will or no we do trust our Souls with these Men to whom God hath committed their Trust and Care and it is strange that we should not allow them liberty well to discharge that Trust in Jealousie that they will abuse us in the freedom necessary to the performance thereof while yet we have a full Temporal Right and Power to suppress and punish all Injurious Exorbitances of the powers Hierarchical CHAP. X. Of the Authority of Christian Princes over Synods from Exemplary Practices § 1. The Drs. three sorts of precedent Examples HAving thus discussed the Importance of the Drs. Reasons in the Protection of the Church and Civil Interests we proceed to his Arguments drawn from Examples which are indeed the only sort he professedly insists upon and layes the whole stress of his cause These Examples he ranges into three Orders First Those of the Jewish Kings in Scripture Secondly Those of the Roman Empire And Thirdly Those of the Princes who upon the Inundations of the Barbarous Nations over Europe succeeded in the several Kingdoms and Principalities thereof and particularly those of our own Country from the first Conversion of the Saxons § 2. Now before we come to Traverse the Matters of Fact it will be necessary before hand to try the force and legal Concludency of such Argumentations unto Right The use of Examples in Legal Pleas for Right In all Legal therefore and Judicial Enquiries Examples are alledged for one of these two Purposes either to Aver or Explain the Sense of an Extant Act as Law Contract or Constitution or to prescribe a presumption for such Act c. where it appears not For first Where the Originals of a Legal Practice are Extant they mutually assert each others certainty of Sense and Right which might otherwise have been dubious if no Customary Practice had followed on that First Foundation the Sense and Knowledge of Words Altering and Growing Obsolete in themselves many times in long Tracts of Years or Ages On the other side it being so easily possible in Nature and frequent in Fact that Records are buried in the Ruines of Time on which the Rights and Duties of Persons and Societies have been long and of old Founded therefore upon the Non-appearance of such Originals Customary Judgments Recorded and Prescriptions Immemorial well Arrested do generally pass for good Presumptions of a valid Constitution Things inquirable in prescriptions now lost or disappearing But upon Matter Arrested the Court Enquires into two Qualifications First If the Matter in Prescription be consistent with Common Justice in its own Nature and Design for otherwise the Court will presume there was no such Constitution Injustice too notorious Novity vacate Prescription or however Naught and Null in its self and so condemn it Secondly The Court will consider whether the Immemorial Practice could however have been as Antient as it s supposed or pretended Original must have been and so was in Fact i. e. whether they of that Age to whom the Prescription refers its Presumptions could have had such a Concern before them For if Inventions notoriously new and late because they have continued longer than any Mans Memory or Life shall hereupon pretend themselves Founded in an Ordinance of Ages fore-past in which it is certain no such Inventions or Matters yet were this will discover such Imposture and vacate such Presumption as if a Man would prove Tobacco to have been in Use here before the Saxon Times because it has been used for time now Immemorial Whereupon the Dr. by alledging Instances must by them intend either to explain or affirm the Sense of an Extant Law or Act for all these his Rights and Powers of the Regal Supremacy in all Christian Princes as such which Law or Act must then be previously set forth and produced as the most especial Matter in Evidence to be affirmed by the constant succeeding Practice thereupon grounded and vouched or else he must by his Instances prescribe for a Supposition and valid Presumption of such Law or Act as their Legal Original and defend it against all charges of Intrinsecal Injury or of a Novity notoriously much later than the supposed Original could be besides what ought to be added the proof of a perpetual uninterrupted Uniformity in the practice beyond all Epochas or Memory § 3. * Prescriptions from the practices of an uncontroulable force no Arguments of Right in the Court of Conscience But here is one thing more to
such a value for the Synagogue as to think its Constitutions Fundamental to the Church or such an Imperial Authority over it much less when the Scriptures give the Polity of the Synagogue none the least mention much less Recommendation and Authority to prescribe Law to the Christian Church for ever but by its Absolute and Total Silence herein seem to intend that that Polity should instead of such prescriptive Power together with the Law be nailed to our Saviours Cross and be afterward decently buried in an Eternal Oblivion And hence tho' Men of Rabbinic Learning are very fond to derive our Forms from their Patterns yet we find no such Conceptions hereof among the Antients as no shades of it in the Scriptures nor Authority for it any where § 7. But supposing the Jewish Princes had managed the Synods of the Synagogue according to the Drs. Aphorisms and pretended a rightful Authority so to do does it follow that they really had that Right which they pretended to If bare Pretences of Princes will create a Right the dispute is over but then I must tell the Dr. he had never had any opportunity or inducement to have written his Book for this sort of Supremacy But if bare pretences alone create no Right and the Christian Emperours exactly followed them herein then Christian Princes have hereupon only pretence for this their Authority So that the Drs. Cause required stronger Assertions of Right in the Jewish Kings Assigned in the Laws and Constitutions of God Mishpat Hammelech by which they were very particularly constituted But herein there is the profoundest Silence I Sam. 8.11 to 19. and that little that is said of the Mishpat Hammelech the manner of the King which they wickedly craved instead of God tho' it imports a Domination Cyp. Ep. 65. § 1. Et ut hoc ulcisceretur excitavit eis Saul Regem qui eos injuriis gravibus afligeret per omnes contumelias paenas superbum populum calcaret et premeret ut contemptus Sacerdos de superbo populo divinâ ultione vindicaretur yet does not so much assert a Right as denounce it an uncontroulable oppression in punishment to their contempt of God and Samuel But yet God that was resolved so to deliver them up upon their own desires yet limits the oppressions to Matters Secular only not permitting the insolence to rage also over their Sacred and Religious Liberties that there might from hence be no ground for any such barbarous and impious Prescription for any Princes Arbitrary lusts herein whatsoever § 8. But to be as Concessive to the Dr. as 't is possible suppose this Domination to have extended to their Religious Polity and Liberties also will he hence prescribe from the malice of Jewish Kings permitted by God in punishment to a Rebellious People for the Right of such Practices in Princes upon the Christian Church and the same Christian Princes too And yet excepting this he has nothing in the Bible that looks like any Ordinance for the suppression of the Popular Liberties and none at all for the Hierarchical § 9. Since then there is no Law nor Praecedent in the Old Testament for this sort of Ecclesiastical Power or Authority in either Jewish or Christian Princes let us consider what other Law or Constitution can be sound out or supposed for its legal Original And first we must consider the State of the Question in the first Christian Emperors who are said to Claim Use The Original of Censtantiaes Supremacy and to be rightly Invested with this Authority and particularly in Constantine the Great Now he being supposed to claim all these Prerogatives as his Right antecedent to the actual Exercise thereof must sound it in one or other of those Originals above summed up § 4. and yet I believe none of these will quadrate with the Hypothesis For first if it be founded in the Natural Law of Sovereignty simply then all Sovereigns Heathens Turks Jews would simply have it and all Acts of Synods otherwise managed would not only be Nullities but Rebellious Seditions which yet I presume no Doctor will allow Not in any express Revelation of God for there is none such in either Testament not in any Gâ—â—â—ral Laws of Nations as being antecedent to and more general than Christianity and in Interests Temporal only not in any Common Charter of Christian Nations as such for such Charter and such Nations there were none before Constantine not in any Canons Ecclesiastical for all those before Constantine's time had no respect to any Temporal Powers not in any Contract of his with the Church for such is no where mentioned in his History which yet had been the most signal thing in it nor at last in any Law of his own making for no man can make a right or valid Law but by some antecedent Authority vested in him so to do and of this the Question properly lies Now since here are none of the Originals extant in History or Nature or Revelation the only remaining Plea must be prescription from immemorial precedents that might warrant a legal presumption for some of these Originals But Constantine had not one instance before him for this his Synodical Supremacy for the three first Centuries after Christ and the Plantation of the Powers Ecclesiastical but all the prescription throughout those Ages was for the Hierarchy in whose hands Constantine at his Conversion found it lodged in full Vigour and Authority and is known and recorded to have owned it for Divine as will appear in the second part So that the Right that is attributed by our Laws to our Kings The Legal Original of our Kings Supremacy belonged not to Constantine the Great and therefore must be lodged in some other Constitution viz. the same as that of all our Common Laws and Original Contract between the King and the Estates of this Realm and that upon a Civil Incorporation of the Church and its Powers and Ordinances into the Civil State and Secular Authority But if any man shall think that the Churches Authorities were given by God in order to Church Duties and that the Church can no more part with one than the other as being inseparable and conservient to Divine ends and so make an invidious objection about our Frame I hope no man will expect that 〈◊〉 should be such a Fool to expose my self to a Middlesex Jury and so leaving this matter to God and the Sense of all that love his Church I am their Humble Servant but as to Constantine the Great I dare swear he never dream'd of the business § 10. Nay there was in his time a very obvious prejudice against such an Opinion viz. that God whose Ways are not as ours Why Kings were not made the first Apostles nor his Thoughts like those of the Sons of Men seeing the ineptitude of the Emperors immersed in Secular Cares to engross all Holy Authorities to themselves and the Suspicion
c. Tho' therefore they may not always in fact execute the design of God their Founder upon a just Authority lodged in them by the design of Providence yet they are the intentional Ordinance of God hereunto and hereunto only against which God's bare Negative i. e. Nonrestrictive permissions in the course of his Providence of those disorders into which many times their Eminency and Lusts consequent upon it do too fatally hurry them is no valid Argument because tho' not reducible to any account here they are obnoxious to God's Judgements hereafter § 6. Co-ordinate Society Natural or Positive The second Sort of Society is the Co-ordinate and that either by the tics of Nature alone unto all the natural Offices of Justice and Charity or by Contract as in Friendships Factories Artificial Fraternities and Commerces between either Men or Nations Cities Villages c. And the general Nature of these Societies is by the intention of God The Originals of Civil Society of a precedent design before Civil Powers as being also in the Fundamental Reasons of the Civil Superstructure For Families multiplying Co-ordinately Sociated themselves first into Vicinities and Villages Families multiplying into Villages and thence into Cities Corporated at last under Princes as Trustees to preserve their Rights in Peace from smaller to greater for the benefit of mutual succours beneficences and intercourse and from these Rudiments increasing continually they grew up into Cities and so Incorporated into forms Political and falling either into the affectation or under the Calamity of War from without or the common and usual Discords among multitudes within they were led by Providence to admit the Civil and Military Sovereignty as necessary to their peaceable cohabitation and security in which the common Felicity was reposed as an inviolable Trust and tho' we in this Age and part of the World do think it the greatest madness to repose such a considence in single Sovereigns as was generally done in the first collections into Cities yet the natural Equity and Humanity of Men was not so far then vitiated as to render the Integrity of the Prince suspicious from whence there appears such a Recorded Unanimity of those Kings and their People that now to us doth almost seem impossible I know indeed the late Celebrated Oracle of all Political Villany has taught Men out of their very Senses Admission of Sovereigns do not import a quitting the Rights of the Community that in the admission of Sovereigns they surrender up to them all their former Rights but the voice of nature and the Oracles of God have taught us far otherwise and by these I think all wise and good Men will and must abide § 7. Civil Society not to devour its Originals Civil Power was therefore superinduced at last upon all the other substrate forms of Society not to destroy and devour but to defend them to the common felicity except we shall think it the most unnatural Monster made to devour its own Parents and Originals And as to the Laws and Rights Mankind universally has in Matrinonial Oeconomical Fraternal Amicable and Factoral Communications and Societies no Man does or will doubt but that they are exempt from all right of extinction by Civil Society which cannot stand or exist but upon those Fundamentals And can it be then imaginable that it hath a greater right of Dominion over the Ecclesiastical Society with God which being the Immediate Unitive in this Life between God and us and so a medium to an Everlasting Happiness in another was the great End on this side Heaven for which we were first Created and for which the other Societies next consequent upon it were designed Matrimonial Society being for the propagation of Issues Oeconomical for the Government of there and other Minors and Servants in it the Co-ordinate for common Beneficences and mutual support here but all that those Sons of Men may hereby subsist to the Communion with God here as a pledge of a nearer fruition of him in a State of Eternity And this general Consideration that all these forms of Society are God's Ordinances and of these the Religious Society with God the first in Nature Diguity and Time it cannot be imagined that God should be divided against himself in setting up Ordinance against Ordinance and the meaner and the latter against the first and highest Gods Ordimances not destructive of each other especiully since the Nature of the Society by God ordained imports a perpetual necessity and therefore a design of perpetnity in them all And hereupon it is that Religion in general though corrupted and disguised has yet continued among all Nations as perpetual and universal as the other Societies and carried the most publick preeminence as being the presumed means of a Divine Society and this not by the bare policy of Secular Powers since perhaps in Princes Courts it has ever had the least estimation and true Religion is what the Lust of Men especially great Men are most averse to and false Religion too gross to impose a credulity upon their acute apprehensions but an internal disposition of the Mind universally promoting Men to the culture of Religion against all the prejudices and aversions of Sesuality is an Argument of a Divine Foundation thereof which as no Hypocrisie could advance so no Artifices nor Oppositions can suppress but it will continue whether Civil Powers will or no since these are not able to extirpate a Zeal of Superstition much less then those Fundamental Principles of Religion upon which not only a frame of true Religion but even Superstition it self must be built and which Principles will in all Men have some Productions towards either a true or false Worship of and Society with a Deity § 8. Now tho' all these are Truths so very clear and Fundamental to the welfare of Mankind I desire the Dr. to say out whether he finds them all express in Scripture or no. For if he does then he must grant an Ecclesiastical Society antecedent to and the Rights thereof maintainable by Civil Powers which he does not allow in his Hypothesis or if he will allow it the Divine Right of an Ecclesiastical and Canonical Society this will import an Authority of Consulting and Assembling to Consult independently on the Superinduced Civil Powers as shall be made out in due place but if he finds not these Maxims in express terms of Scripture by a reserve from the Occupations of Civil Power will he abdicate therefore all these Rights to it to dissolve all the Laws and Liberties and Authorities of the Matrimonial Oeconomical and Co-â—dinâ—te Societies Or if he be not so unmerciful toward these Carnal Societies can he with Conscience or so much as a pretence of Reason give up all the Powers of the Divine Society to the Civil Dominion and Pleasure 'T is therefore only necessary to prove a Society Divinely founded by a full and fair Evidence The proof of
Committed by God to set Orders to proper Priests and lastly the Mystick Powers of the Hierarchy of the Keys Hierarchial Powers of binding and loosing of remitting and retaining of sins in Earth to be ratified above by Christ in Heaven was deposited in the Apostles the first Fundamental Bishops under Christ and derived down to all their Successours with whom he promised his presence even to the end of the World that so the Gates of Hell might not prevail over the Church committed to their Charge Consecration by Mystical Imposition of Haâ—d to which end among others they are by a Mystical Imposition of Hands blessed and consecrated unto such Measures of the Holy Spirit as are suitable to so high and holy a Function and such Mystick Offices Now if this in Fact be so then our Rule holds good that none can attempt these Powers but by Divine Commission either Original or Successive the Divine Maxim of the Author to the Hebrews c. 5.4 holding true of these Priesthoods as well as those in the House of Aaron Priesthood not assumable but by Divine Commistion That no Man taketh this honour unto himself but he that is called of God as was Aaron Now to secure this Truth and Matter of Fact we have St. Pauls Testimonies to the full in several places namely That Christ hath placed in the Church Pastors Powers Ilicrâ—rchiâ—â—l instincted by Christ Teachers Governments in which they that Rule are to Rule well and with diligence and to be therefore accounted worthy of or assigned double Honour and to be obeyed and submitted to as they that watch for our Souls for which they must give Account as Stewards of God Mysteries 1 Cor. 12.28 Rom. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 Heb. 13.17 1 Cor. 4.1 from whence 't is as clear as Noon day that the Christian Laity are by Divine Ordinance under Governors Hierarchical And being so are in a Subordinate state of Ecclesiastical Society with God under their Spiritual Rulers and being antecedently so before are therefore independently so consociated as to Civil Societies according to the Doctrine of the Letter § 3. But this is not all that deserves observation in this matter But beside the different Orders of Governours the Vnity of the Catholick Church is to be much considered under these several Governours either as one Divine School of Christian Piety under many Doctors The Catholick Unity of the Church a◠〈◊〉 â—â—chool Aâ—â—â—y or â—olity under several Principal Governours The Twelve and the Seventy or of one Army in many Partitions under their respective Head Officers or Lieutenants General under Christ the great Captain of our Salvation or as one Polity under many Optimates For first our Saviour came as a Doctor sent from God and gathered under him Disciples of these he ordained twelve chief Doctors and seventy Inferiors to collect more unto and instruct them in this School when collected Now a collection of Disciples into one Society is but one School how large soever it grows and how many Teachers soever the Enlargements do required So many Tutors there are in one Colledge and many Colledges in one University Since then also the whole Catholick Church of Christ is but one general School of his Foundation tho' the Doctors that teach it have their several Rooms and Mansions for their particular Shares these Partitions for Convenience do not divide the general Society into Independent Separations No Independencies in Christs Church The same sort of Unity is to be maintained in the Notion of an Army or Church Militant by Sacramental Vow under Christs Banner under the conduct of its general Officers And lastly if we consider it as the one City or Kingdom of God committed by its Prince during his abscence to several Viceroys assigned their respective Districts and Jurisdictions these are the Bishops succeeding in this Authority to the Apostles So that this One School One Army One City tho' distributively to be governed by the several Rulers as to particular and local Offices yet as to the Interests of the common Vnity and Preservation it must be governed Aristocratically by common Council and Unanimous Authority Conciliar Assemblies necessary to an Aristocracy And as no Monarch can well Govern without a set of Counsellors to Advise such as the Clergy or Chapter of a Diocess ought to be to a Bishop in his District So the Optimates of an Aristocracy cannot not only not Wisely but not Authoritatively act without Conciliar Forms and Methods and they are therefore themselves one standing fundamental Council for the whole Subject Body And hence is the Right of Provincial Synods The Catholick Right and Primitive use of Provincial Synods to be held all over the Catholick Church fundamentally necessary to the Catholick Uniformity of Conduct and Vnity depending thereupon to the end that what each Council resolves may be transmitted to the rest and so mutually treated of if need be by the intervention of Legates or ratified if there be no doubt or need of discussions which was the original form of Catholick Government and Communion in the Christian Church before the Empire set up Christs Banner and was received as of Apostolical Canon So that if the Visible Unity of the Catholick Church as one common Society and Community No need of Scriptural Record for requiring such forms of Government be of Divine Structure the very Truth and Faith hereof immediately imports an Aristocracy and that a Right of Conciliar Assemblies and Legations So that there needed no Scriptural Record requiring this while the Frame and Order hereof was before laid in the first Structure of the Church and Universally known as Established in it before any Scriptures of the New Testament were conceived or lodged in the Archives of the Church as is confessed by the instances of this Conciliar form of Government extant in these Scriptures to be by and by alledged For it is further to be considered that the Convention of these Synods is not universally of constant and indispensably necessary frequency Synods mostly upon emergencies to be fixed to stated times but upon emergencies mostly which yet are frequent enough and in the days of Persecution 't is as inconvenient many times to the Spiritual as dangerous to the Temporal Interests of Christians 't was therefore fitter to leave the exercise of that Authority free to the publick Ecclesiastick Prudence Not to be held constantly in times of danger as to the actual exercise and menage thereof than to confine it to particular Rules Times and Limits Cyp. Ep. 56. § 3. Nec quisquam cum populunmostrum fugari conspexerit metu persecutionis spargi conâ—urbetur quod collection fraternitatem non videat nec tractantes Episcopos andiat c. by Express and Canonical Precept without reserve to a necessary Liberty Nor need this be thought strange since the Assemblies for Doctrine and Worship tho' apparently of Divine Right as to daily use
the Question of Rebaptization from Heresie was Conciliarly determined different ways in several Churches Firmil ad Cyp. § 6 17. Dionys Aleâ— ad Xyst Pap. ap Eus E. H. l. 7. c. 5. c. 7. Cyp. cum coll ad Fid. Ep. 59. § 1. c. without any breach of Catholick Communion till Pope Stephen began the Rupture with the African Phrygian Galatian Cilician and Cappadocian Churches which yet other Churches would by no means consent to each Church determining according to its best Judgment Rules and Customs but the most moderate taking care in the midst of this diversity Cyp. Ep. 62. §◠c. Cyp. ad Cald. Ep. 38. § 2. Ep. 42. § 5. to keep the Unity of Spirit in the Bond of Peace So a Council of 66 African Bishops determine the questions made them by Fidus concerning the reconciliation of one Victor a lapsed Presbyter by Therapius a Bishop before Canonical Examination and Season as also of the liberty of Baptizing Infants as soon as born before they were Eight Days old as also of the Offenceless way of living to be practised by the Virgins And as they did Conciliarly provide to prevent so did they to correct Evils particularly the Vices Violences and Immoralities of all Orders as in the Presbyter Felicissimus not only for his Schism but for his Lusts especially concerning the Penances and Indulgences to the Lapsed for which in times of Persecution and the dispersions of the Episcopal College the Criminals were required to stay Cyp. Ep. 12. § 2. Ep. 14. § 2. Ep. 26. § 4. Ep. 28. § 2. Ep. 31. § 5. Ep. 32. Ep. 40. § 3 7. Ep. 52. § 2 3 6. Ep. 53. § 2. Ep. 54. Ep. 55. § 13. and wait for peace to the Church before it was decent for them or allowed to them to claim their own which was to be determined in Councils of their Bishops Clergy and standing Laity All which whosoever looks into the quoted places will find to be thought not only expedient but necessary for the good of the Church and the persons concerned and for the Authority of their Acts which was universally and uncontestedly taken for Divine upon grounds taken out of Scripture Cyp. Ep. 55. § 13. Firm. in t Cyp. Ep. 75. which therefore they held frequently and in some places annually from which they sent Synodical Letters and Messages with authentick Deputations and Powers not only by the Sub-Clerical Orders Ep. Cyp. 41. § 1. Ep. 42. § 1. Ep. 45. § 1. § 2. but by Deacons Priests nay and by Bishops also according as the nature of the affair did require and Junctures of Time and Season would permit being herein as much concerned for a general Negotiation in Spirituals not only each Church within it self but abroad with all others and for all Christian Uses as the Civil States and Sovereignties are for Domestick Conduct and foreign Embassies and Treaties with more remote or more nearly adjacent Countries and with as fair to say no fairer ground of Authority from God and Nature Upon all which I make these concluding Remarks that if such Synods had not been thought of Divine Right and Duty too those that were Convened and Censured by them would have denied the Authority the Lapsed Penitents would have disclaimed their Necessity the Apostates would have proclaimed the Imposture of a pretended Divine Authority and the Churches would never have been at that vast Fatigue and Charge of Synodical procedures especially against the Edicts of Secular Powers had they not judged these to be Acts of an Ecclesiastical Duty to and Authority from God But here being none the least Exception from the offended nor any possible Inducement upon the Church to quit the claim and practice of such Authority I think here is an undeniable presumption hereupon that it was as uncontestable as it was actually uncontested CHAP. VIII Of the Authority of Civil Powers and Laws in general against the Liberty of Ecclesiastical Synods § 1. AFter the Knowledge of all this which I am sure the Dr. well knew before ever he dreamed of Writing upon this Subject 't is a matter of astonishment to me that he should look upon Synods under Alien Powers to have been and still to be but prudential Clubs without any Authority from God or Man And yet upon this confidence 't is strange that he should not wholly deliver them up to the full Authority of all Heathen or Alien Powers against which where there is no right no Human Reason or Prudence can warrant any popular Frequences or Councils So that by his granting them Reason he seems to grant them Right and by gâ—aâ—ting them Right to grant them Authority to hold Synods under Alien Powers And yet he is unwilling even to allow what he grants and floats up and down in his Doubts hereupon and casts an unlucky glance upon the Primitive Synods as scarce capable of Excuse and more hardly of Justisication It has been saith he ever look'd upon as one great part of the Princes Prerogative p. 13. that no Societies should be Incorporated nor any Companies be allowed to meet together without his Knowledge and Permission The Roman Law was especially very severe as to this Matter And tho' after the Conversion of the Emperors to the Faith of Christ a Provision was made for the Publick Assemblies of the Church for Divine Service yet Tertullian who understood these Matters as well as any one of his Time tho' he excused their Meetings upon all other Accounts could not deny but that they fell under the Censure of the Law and that having not the Princes Leave to meet together they were in the Construction of the Law guilty of Meeting against it § 2. This brings one therefore to an Enquiry Conventions Necessary Innocent Hurtful What Meetings are of right obnoxious to the prohibitions and penalties of Humane Laws The Conventions therefore of Men are of three sorts either Necessary or Innocent or Hurtful And first such as are Necessary no Man whatsoever can have a rightful Authority to restrain for Necessity being a Law from God cannot be vacated by any positive Law of Man Nor Secondly can Innocent Meetings be rightfully denyed in themselves but under the apprehensions of hurt or danger upon Time Place and Circumstances But Hurtful Meetings in the Third Place may not only but ought of Right to be restrained by the Magistracy Yet what Princes have no Rightful Authority to do that they may irresistibly do upon an uncountroulable Domination and Impunity Upon which when they presume to Repress our Rights and Liberties if it be in Matters Necessary they are to be disobeyed in Fact and submitted to as to their Legal Processes without resistance if in Matters barely Innocent there Prudence will direct but no bare Conscience of Duty to the Tyrannical Law alone will oblige to observation tho' it will to Patience under Legal Sufferings For an Innocent Liberty is an Vnalienable Franchise
of our Nature and all prohibitions of it as such simply are meer Nullities as to the Rule of practical Conscience And if so how extreamly wide of Truth is it at large to say That it has ever been looked upon as one principal part of the Princes Prerogative that no Companies be allowed to meet together without his knowledge and permission Where I must take Permission to be Voluntary and such as the Prince may rightly deny or else 't is nothing to the purpose For if a Prince only permit because he has no right to deny a priviledge the enjoyed priviledge depends not on the Right of his Princely Permission The Dr. I suppose will be loath to extend this Rule to the Restriction of Gossipings among the Good Wives of our Parishes or of Gentlemen to their Innocent Sports Hospitalities and Entertainments the Concourse of People to Fairs and Markets or places of Commerce or to Coffee Houses to hear what News comes or flies Abroad concerning the Affairs of the World while in these there are no Apprehensions of Danger But if it be said that the Apprehensions of Danger are the presumed Cause of such restraining Laws Necessary Meetings liable to no Restriction upon false Fears I Reply That if in truth the Powers have such Apprehensions of Meetings barely Innocent they have just Right upon such fears to restrain them because apprehended not as Innocent but at least dangerous and the Subject Knowing or presuming this to be the Reason of the prohibition ought in Duty to obey it Tertul. Apologet Cum probi own boni coeunt cuâ—t pii cum casti congregantur non est factio dicenda sed curia But this Rule will not hold in Meetings necessary whatever the Publick Apprehensions of them be For a necessary Duty cannot give place to false and unnecessary Fears But now in all Meetings not prohibited nor prohibitable by the Prince if the Prince must have always actual Knowledge of such Meetings to discharge them from Guile not only Majesty would hereby be rendred Ridiculous but the Wearers of is be oppressed with inrodes of People for giving in such Informations and Petitions for Leave But if the Dr. had set it thus That such Meetings as the Prince shall by Law require Notice of to be given to himself or his Vicegerents in that behalf in any or every place in order to leave hereupon to be given or denyed Leave not necessary to be asked without a Law requiring such Petition according to Right or Pleasure he had spoken much more correctly For in such Case 't is fit application should be made not to obtain a Right but to secure the Peace and Honour of the Prince who tho' he has no right to deny the Meeting yet has to be secured from all dangers thereof Now the Christians having no such command as this from the Heathen Powers to ask leave for their Assemblies but instead thereof being absolutely prohibited were under no Obligation of Law or Conscience to give Knowledge of their Meetings which would not have been a means to procure leave but persecution nor yet to obey the irreligious Law of Prohibition Had Heathen Princes set them such a Rule of Leave and License there is no doubt but the Christians would have gratefully accepted and as constantly have observed it and have given all manner of security for their Innocency From whence it follows That the Roman Laws as designed and pointed against Christians Assembling on Necessary Causes and a Divine Right were Nullities as to the Precept and Tyrannies as to the Sanctious and that Severity which the Dr. adduces as a Weight of Authority Cyp. Ep. 25. § 2. Humanis by sacrilegis â—e ibus c. vid. inter omnes Prudentium Peristephanôn does in truth nothing else but reproach their Cruelty What was it then that Tertullion so sagaciously knew Was it that the Christians deserved the Censure of those Laws which he as well as all other Primitive Advocates do Arraign of Inhismanity and Impiety Or was it that they actually fell under the Censure of those Laws at the Roman Tribunals This did not require so great a sagacity to discern since all the Heathen Mob that had been trained up to cry out Christianos ad Leonem knew this as well as he Now then why was this Instance against the Liberty of Christian Assemblies brought Was it to justifie the Roman Laws and to condemn the practices of Christians as Illegal If not 't is Impertinent if it be Lord what an Advocate for Christianity is here or would he have been in these Holy Ages Or was it to deny the Christian Church to be then Tertul. Apologet. Corpus sumus de Conscientiâ Religionis disciplinae veritate spei faedere Coimus in caetum Congregationem disciplinam praeceptorum inculcationibus densamus ibidem etiam Castigationes censura Divina Nam judicatur magno cum pondere ut apud certos de Dei conspectu Summuâ—â—que futuri judicii praejudicium est siquis ita deliquerit ut à communicatione orationis conventûs onmis sancti commerciirelegetur Praesident probatiquoque Seniores c. either in Right or Fact Incorporated Not so surely since the very self same Tertullian asserts such a Corporation in Fact and Divine Right even in Apology to these very Heathen Powers whom he did not hereby design to enrage but mollifie and so might have taught the Dr. to have laid by this invidious way of pleading and to have looked upon the Church * The Church a Society of it self as a Society of Divine Constitution and Authority without any Civil Incorporation into Secular States and when the Dr. shall reflect upon this Insinuation he will find it drives the point beyond his intention to the denying not only the Conciliar Synods but even the Assemblies of Christian Worship to be of a Divine Right and Authority for the Roman Laws were as much against one as the other And therefore I hope this was none of those Matters in Argument that challenge the precedent approbation of my Lord of Canterbury Ep. Dedic who if the Dr. could persuade him from caring for Convocations yet can never admit an Hipothesis or an Argument that will oppress the Right of daily Worship also § 3. It will hereupon be seasonable to examine what Authority Princes Supremacy of Heathen Princes meerly Secular or Heathen have over Christian Assemblies of what Kind or Nature soever that thereby we may prepare a way for discovering the Supremacy of Princes espousing Christianity § 4. First then To require Fidelity all Princes may require fidelity to all their Civil Duties from all Christian Persons Assemblies or Synods and consequently to offer at nothing in prejudice to any Civil Prerogatives or Rights whatsoever and for this they may if they doubt demand such reasonable Security as can be had or as is usually given in like Cases § 5.
are therefore of two sorts one relating to the welf are of the Church the other to that of the Civil State § 6. And first with relation to the Church the Christian Prince is the Guardian of it ‖ P. 44. and consequently Supream Governonr in order to that Protection which the Church expects or enjoys from him * p. 79. and that such Synods hereby may become Legal Assemblies †p. 18. Secondly In reference to the Civil State such a plenitude of Regal Power over Ecclesiastical Synods is necessary to the ends of Civil Government ¶ p. 42 57 70 73 ◠p. 81. and Peace particularly to prevent in them Proceedings prejudicial to the Regal Power Now if from these Reasons there be a necessity that the Divine Rights and Authorities of the Catholick Church in the Convention Freedom and Acts of Synods should thist their former Sebjects and Depositaries and pass over into the hands of Christian Princes then is the Argumentation hence hereunto suggested by the Dr. good but if all these Reasons Ends and Purposes may consist with the Permanency of these Liberties and Powers in the Church as they stood Authorized by God for the three first Centuries then whatsoever others may be brought these will not I doubt appear to the Author of the Letter to be valid necessary or cogent Reasons for the alienation of these Powers from the Hierarchy § 7. Protection from Heathen Powers We begin then with those Reasons that are drawn from the Benesit of the Church under the Guardianship of Princes the Protection of the Faith and the Legalizing our Synods Now here it is to be noted That Heathen Princes may do all this for the Christian Church as well as Christian Princes For tho' they do not believe Christianity themselves either in whole or in part yet they may give the Church a Legal Toleration to all its Offices and Assemblies and this Legalizes them He may also add other Immunities and Charters to his Christian Subjects and so not only protect but promote them And this was in great measure done by all Non-persecuting Emperors and the Persecutors too when ceasing to persecute by the Revocation of the cruel Edicis and Laws and giving new Edicts for their Security But will the Dr. thereupon conclude that those Heathen Emperors have or had Night to all those Church Powers which he hereupon arrogates to the Christian Sovereigns in the above-named Aphorisms If so I must needs say that he must condemn all the Synods held during times of Peace which were perhaps the only times in the three first Centuries as Violations of the Imperial Authorities without whose License they Convened Sate Deliberated Debated Promulged and Executed Decrees Canons Seatences on their own Divine Right and in the Name of the Lord. No ground for such Authority over Synods And such an Inference as would follow upon this supposed Ground of Legal Protection from Heathen Powers I need not expose by upbraiding the ridiculous Guise of an Heathen Prince actually ordering and directing all the Synodical Consults and Polity of the Christian Church and Ratifying Annulling and Altering their Decrees Acts and Sentences as he Judges best for the good of the Pupil Church of which he not the Synod is to be Judge But I think a meer Edict to this purpose would be very Pretty and Congruous as for Diversion and Example T. V. Caes Aug. c. To all Christian Churches within our Empire Greeting Know ye that of our especial Grace and Compassion we have taken upon us to be your Guardian to protecs you in the Freedom of your Religion and to Legalize your Synods Vpon which Consideration you have no Right nor Liberty of your selves to Convene in Synods nor to Sit Deliberate Act Decrce or Resolve any Matters of your Faith Doctrine or Discipline by Canon or Sentence without the Authority of our General or Particular License to every your Particular Act and Method of Acting nor Enact Promulge or Execute any Thing or Ordinance without our Ratisication who can of Right Annul Rescind Vacate or Alter all or any Thing you shall do in Synod which only is of Council to us in the Conduct of the Church which we protect being wholly dependent on us and in our hands its Conciliar Acts being wholly ours and all their Validity from our Imperial Authority To this we require your Synodical Submission on fear of a Praemunire otherwise incurred that thereupon we may put out an Edict of Praemunire upon all the Clergy that shall attempt any the least Violation of this our Ecclesiastical Headship or Supremasy Yet as odd as this sounds in all Christian Ears it is as justifiable as in any Christian Prince if such Protections as are aforesaid are the alone true Reason for this Supremacy for there is no differencing Cause assigned in the Reasons 'T is true indeed a Christian Prince looks more likely to protect us than an Alien and has one peculiar actually Federal Obligation by his Baptism to support the Communion of the Church by all his powers but so is every private Christian too and 't is possible for a Christian Prince to ornit this Care or to be disabled in it while elsewhere the Humanity of an Heathen Prince may do more for it voluntarily without any Federal Tyes of Christianity and consequently if the Ecclesiastical Supremacy be Founded on such Protection and Squared in its Measure by the proportion thereof I believe many Heathen Princes had more ' tho' unknown Right in the Ecclesiastical Supremacy than many Modern Princes professing Christianity it being possible that Princes may freely protect Subject Societies which they are not federally or otherwise bound to as Jewish Synagogues now are in their States of Pilgrimage which they that are especially bound to may oppress under the very colour of that Supremacy that is thus Founded on the Right of Protection Tho' speaking generally upon the Law of Nature all rinces are thereby equally bound to protect all the Fundamental Rights of the Innocent and consequently those of the Christian Church so that the Right and Reason of our protection under Princes is not Founded in their Christianity but the Churches Innocency and the Right She has to the Royal Protection in doing good by any Acts or Operations Synodical or other Toleration not founded on the Right of all Rehgioas tolerated but upon other exterior Reasons Nor will this assert a Right of Protection to all pretended Religions for tho' the Ignorance of a Prince in the distinction of true Religion from bad may occasion him in mistake actually to persecute the Right and cherish the Wrong to avoid which under that Ignorance he ought to tolerate that wherein he can see no hurt yet really nothing but real Truth has a real Right to any Protection or Countenance and the Connivances or Encouragements given to false Religions must be excused or justified not on the Right of the Errors which
is none but on other Reasons exteriour either of State Peace or other insuperable dissiculties nor can such mistaken or enforced Protections give the Protector an Ecclesiastical Headship over all those Systems of different Religions to act them all as Dr. Wake allows them to Act the Church because there is no Right bottomed upon Error See Chap 1. Sect. 5. and because many times they are exempt from his Jurisdiction as in the Chappels of Embassadors and Foreign Factories whose Protection is not Founded upon a supposed possibility of Truth but upon the Reasons of Commerce and Negotiation § 8. Incorpon on dissers from Protection But if the Dr. shall here make Protection only to consist in an Incorporation of the Church into the State and her Canons into the Laws as this is quire another thing from bare Protection and thought to be of a more transcendent Elevation so it will then appear that none of the Christion Roman Emperors did so instate the Church which consequesitly must then be out of Protection and so free from their Supremacy the Exercise whereof therefore must have been an Usurpation and a Nullity § 9. But we shall by and by discern a little better the Form and Nature of a Protection of the Church For if the Catholick Church had a Divine Right in the Liberties and Authorities Synodical continued universally inviolate and unquestioned for 300 Years downward from the Apostles how can this Body be protected by any Magistrate or Powers that shall claim off in point of Title and take it away thereupon in point of Fact any or all of these Divine Priviledges Protection inconsistent with violation of Right given by God and granted to her Priests for her Conduct and Conservation and this under a pretence of Protection while the Churches Constitution is apparently ruined and her Synods heretofore free declared now for Criminal if not held in Villenage This is so contrary to the very Dictates of Nature in the Reason and Form of Protection that all Systems and Factions of Religion disclaim such Bondage and challenge a liberty as presubstrate and praevious to Protection which is otherwise inconceivable and the pretence thereof a meer sham upon humane Understanding The Iews therefore as busie as they are to be enfranchised in their several Dispersions yet would never endure the Civil Powers thereupon so to prescribe all the Politie of the Synagogue and to Null Cancel Ratify or Alter their Methods and an attempt of this Nature upon them would appear as dreadful a persecution as Caius his erecting his Image in their Synagogues Jews Papists Sectaries all for Ecclesiastical Liberty Not only the Romish Church but all other Sectaries and the Scotch Kirk illustriously scorns to admit any servitude notwithstanding not only the National Protection but Promotion being all sensible that a Liberty of Religious Government and Church Discipline is more valuable than all worldly Wealth or Interests and without which they cannot apprehend any Protection to Religion or the Societies that profess it And to close up all since in all Ecclesiastical History those Synods have been most injurious or injuriously dealt with that were least free and their Authority thereby vacated with all Churches for ever I wonder what reputation the Dr. will secure to a Provincial or National Synod with Neighbour Churches Liberty necessary to validity and reputation whether Popish or Reformed or with future Generations should it be in Fact so managed by a Prince as the Dr. avers it may rightly be in all its Motions and Issues Or how can we blame the Popes Management of the Council of Trent and such others if we will justify ten tiems a greater Bondage in the Councils called by Princes What security is there for Uniformity in Doctrine Regularity of Discipline and Authority with the Christian Church if all be to be done only ad nutum P pis The Dr. tells us of Bp. p. 115. King Charles the first and A. B. Land Lands Concurrence with K. Charles the First his Writ for and License to the Convocation Very well and that King and that Prelate too might do so in observing the Forms which could not be altered without Act or Rupture of Parliament but does it follow that they were either of them of the Drs. Enslaving Principles under Sovereignty in General When that Great Primate declares against Fisher a free General Council to be the supremest Judicatory in the Catholick Church and would he not then think the same of a Provincial Council for a Provincial Church tho' both convened and permitted to sit by the Will and Order of Princes Men may Act under the Forms of those Laws when not actually Executed to our injury which they do not simply approve of in themselves and against such a Prosecution of which Laws they would openly and avowedly Complain as did the Council at Ariminum c. And I take it that it must pass for an eternal Rule Truth and Piety free Principles that as Truth and Piety are free-born Principles so are the Depositaries or Trustees of them also to be free in the Culture and Propagation of them And they that withdraw the Necessary freedom of these Trustees withdraw their Protection from the Principles themselves Not to be committed to Slaves they being too noble and glorious to be committed to the Care and Conduct of Slaves or Vassals § 10. Having thus enquired into the first reason for this Alienation of Synodical Powers from the Mitre to the Crown The forms of alienation improper let us in the next place examine the Form of it hereupon which must consist in a Devolution Occupation or Contract with the Spiritual Powers If by Devolution this must be founded either in the Original Ordinance and Constitution of God or from the Natural Right of Sovereigns over all Persons of the same Religion The first ground hereof I want and can I doubt be no where found and we shall have occasion hereafter to make Experiment whether it can or no. And as to the second I shall readily yield it if it can be made our that in all Religion Natural and Revealed the Prince that is of it shall have the entire Conduct of it For then indeed it must rest in the Hierarchy only till they get a King of their Faith to whom then they must turn over all their Powers But why should this Divine Charter Devolve over to Princes any more than that of a little Borough This of the Borough was granted by Kings Be it so tho' 't is not necessarily so for that popular States may so six themselves and after admit a King to protect them but without any Devolution But be it so Can then our King be denied a Devolution of a Charter in a Town which he Protects because a former King founded it tho' in a mere Secular Interest and Government and must a Charter founded by the King of Kings Devolve to a Temporal