Apostles for all such are law given to the Church c. But alass who must judge when the Ecclesiastical power abolisheth any of matters c for the Pastors of the Church at the same time affirm and will die for it that neither against the Scriptures neither against Traditions of former Church have the transgressed nor do abolish but establish them and as for the people whom should they rather follow in matters of Divinity their Pastors or their Prince God hath given charge to the Clergy over the flock but where hath he committed the charge of the Clergy to the Prince Perhaps the common sence of Christians shall judge But are the Guides of the Church then only void of it and that in their own faculty Common sence of the Christian Laity what if they differ then in their common sence are we not then to follow the major part of them But so also the Reformed are cast the major part of Lay-Christians entertaining the Roman Tenents Again we have given up this right of the Church to the Prince where now shall we stay If one Prince may do the office of a Council and if need be decide matters of Faith for the Clergy why may not the next if need be Ordain for the Bishop or depose that Order obstinate in error Is this a dream are there not also those who claim this But then again if where the Clergy fails the Prince may take our Saviour's Chair and judge then supposing the Prince also through malice or ignorance c may fail too Is there not some Common-wealth that hath been lately under God's judgments in this condition I would gladly know whether an Ecclesiastical power may not review his Acts and reform his Errors and then why not both reform both at the same time according to their differing judgments But God is the God of order not of such confusion Thus much of the 2d thing proposed before § 1. the independency of the Ministers of Christ on any Secular power Now I shall consider the Third § 73 Next as the Ministry of Christ is secured for the perpetual continuance of their Spiritual power and office against all foreign force of Seculars which shall often rise against it by their Spiritual sword toward those Temporal Governors who fear God and by their fortitude being strengthened by Christ both in doing their duty and in suffering patiently toward Secular Governors Infidel or the Heretical so is it secured for ever for the unity of the Faith and of the Profession of it Eph. 4.5 13. against all intestine divisions amongst the Clergy which divisions often shall happen in it but shall never remain of it For it is as true that no Heresy or Schism within as that no Secular power without being only several Gates of Hell shall ever prevail against it § 74 To clear this point we must know that where ever any division happens in the Church and that one Communion which was at first established in a perfect not co but sub-ordination divides into two and each ordain Successors to their party one is to be counted no lawful succession Else since some Teachers there shall be that will differ from the rest and in all sects we may find some Clergy or other for us to follow the Church will have neither any such property as unity of her faith nor will there be any such crime as Schism from it Therefore the Church may and ought for the preservation of her purity and unity to excommunicate exauthorize and separate her self and her children from such as are false Teachers and walk disorderly that she might not be partaker of nor countenance them in nor encourage more to follow their sin according to the frequent commands of Scriptures forequoted see 2 Jo. 10 11. Matt. 18.17 1 Tim. 6.5 Tit. 3.10 1 Cor. 5.13 2 Tim. 2.19 21. compared with 18. Iniquity i.e. errors Gal. 1.8 9. Rev. 2.6 15 16. texts abused by some to justify a separation from the Church it self therefore also none can lawfully communicate both with the true and with an Heretical or Schismatical Church who tho they hold sufficient truth yet are to be refused and avoided for the breach of unity and that without respect to the numbers of the revolted or to the liability of the Church they desert to some nondestructive errors And this practice the Church hath always observed and the persons so disauthorized by it if afterward using their functions were in the Primitive times esteemed guilty of sin and sacriledge and so those also by them ordained And when returning to the Catholick faith as many Arian Bishops did they might not officiate till by a Declaration and reabilitation of the Church they were restored to the exercise of that authority of which they were by her formerly deprived For we must know that tho according to the common Tenent of die Church see Conc. Nice 8. Can. none that is ordained according to the right form of Ordination by a Heretick or Schismatick may be reordained no more than one baptized by such may be rebaptized or the Eucharist consecrated by such reconsecrated but when he recants his Heresy or Schism he being only relicensed by the Church dischargeth his function by vertue of his formerly received Orders Yet who so by Heresy or Schism is once deprived of the right of exercising his function as any one may be cannot confer this right on others but that all these afterwards stand as much suspended from any execution of their offices as himself doth Tho I cannot say but that the Effects of the Sacraments and other offices of their function as well in other things as in Baptism as in Marriages in Penance and Absolution the Eucharist c. are still valid to the simple Receiver who is guiltless of their faults the wickedness of the Minister if truly ordained not hindering the benefits to mankind which Christ hath annext to that Office and which always himself as the principal Agent by their hands confers § 75 To distinguish then true Succession which we are always to adhere and submit to 1. There is no lawful Succession where is no lawful Ordination Nor 2ly any Ordination lawful from or done by those that are condemned or guilty of Schism For to those that are guilty of this tho their former Ordination and the Character as some call that impressed by it is not annulled and blotted out for which cause as I said when such persons were reconciled and readmitted to their functions they were not reordained yet all the authority and right of discharging their function is taken away by the Church and ceaseth and consequently then ceaseth this power of ordaining others See Canon Apost 67.63 Cons. Nice can 19.8 And the same case I suppose it is of those who are condemned tho not guilty and who are excommunicated and thrust out of the Church never so unjustly for they yet desiring the communion denied them shew their approbation
calls General rather than from Rome to other parts had not a preeminency of Power and not only a precedence of Rank bin acknowledged originally in the Church of Rome CORRIGENDA Page 29. l. 7. else he would Page 55. l. 80. thro five or six Page 115. l. 3. except that of one or two of his Predecessors CONCERNING ANCIENT CHURCH-GOVERNMENT PART I. Of the Authority and Subordinations of Ecclesiastical Governors § 1 FOR the better Governing of the Church of Christ in Truth Unity Uniformity and Peace Subordination of Clergy and for the easier suppressing of all Errors and Divisions and for rendring all the Church of God tho dispers'd thro several Dominions but one visible compacted Society we find anciently these Subordinations of superior Clergy 1. Presbyters 2. Bishops 3. Metropolitans and amongst Metropolitans Primates 4. Patriarchs and amongst these Patriarchs a Primate § 2 Of these Patriarchs in the first General Council of Nice held A. D. 325. there were only Three call'd Three Patriarchs only at the first at the first by the common name of Metropolitants tho with a distinct authority from the rest Then by the name of Primates 2. Gen. Con. Const can 2.5 this name also being common to some others Afterward by the name of Patriarchs Conc. Chalc. Act. 3. 8 Gen. Conc. can 10 Neither was this name tho most frequently always applied only to the Patriarchs of the first Sees But we find in the East the Primates of Asia minor Pontus Thrace and many others to the number of nine or ten call'd by Socrates who writ in the fifth Age Eccl. Hist l. 5. c. 8. Patriarchs call'd so as well as by the name of Primates in respect of some other Bishops or also Metropolitans subject to them yet which Patriarchs had also a subordination and subjection to some of these prime or major Patriarchs of whom we here speak as appears in the Church-History and especially in Conc. Chalced. Act. and Act. 16. And we find also in the West after A. D. 500. several Primates in France Italy Spain call'd Patriarchs as the Primate of Aquileia Gradus Lions see Conc. Matiscon 2. in praefat Priscus Episcopus Patriarcha dixit c. See Greg. Turon 5. hist 10. Paul Diacon l. 2. c. 12. Greg. Epist l. 11. ep 54. yet over whom the Roman Bishop the major Patriarch of the West exercis'd a superiority and Patriarchal jurisdiction both before and after that we read this name given to them as will appear hereafter in this discourse and more particularly in the matter of the Letters of Leo and Gregory and other Popes written upon several occasions to divers of them This I note to you that the commonness of the name may not seem to infer an equality of the authority Now to go forward § 3. n. 1. The first of these the Bishop of Rome The first and chief of these was the Bishop of Rome whose Patriarchship the Bishop of Derry Vind. Ch. Eng. c. 5. p. 62. and Dr. Hammond of schism c. 3. p. 51 52. following Ruffinus Eccl. Hist l. 1. c. 6. one less to be credited in this matter because by the Bishop of Rome formerly excommunicated see Anstasius 1. ad Johan Hierosol make very narrow and much inferior to that of the two other Patriarchs whereof one had subjected unto him all Egypt Lybia and Pentapolis and the other all Syria and the Oriental Churches allowing to the Bishop of Rome only regiones suburbicarias in the Eastern parts of Italy and the Islands of Sicily Sardinia The extent of his Patriarchate and Corsica near adjoining to it But over these Churches that Bishop might have some more immediate superintendency and Metropolitan or Primat-ship contradistinct to other Metropolitans as to that of Millan c. So the Primat of all England hath yet a particular superintendency over one Diocess more than over the rest of which more particular superintendency over the regiones suburbicariae as he was their Primate or Metropolitan Ruffinus seems to speak and perhaps the 6th canon of Nice Mos antiquus perduret in Aegypto vel Lybia Pentapoli ut Alexandrinus Episcopus horum omnium habet potestatem quoniam quidem Episcopo Romano parilis mos est Similiter autem apud Antiochiam caeterasque Provincias honor suus unicuique servetur Ecclesiae may be thought partly to intend it for which consider those words in that 6th Canon caeterasque Provincias compared with Concilium Constantinopolitan 2. Can. and Conc. Ephes 8. can Yet do not these Canons therefore abrogate and superior rights of any Bishop quae prius atque ab initio sub illius seu antecessorum suorum fuerit potestate to use the phrase of the forementioned 8th Canon of Ephesus but confirm them not only the Metropolitan but also whatever Patriarchal Rights they held formerly as appears in those first words of the 6th Nicene Canon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which see more below § 19. from which the Roman Primacy was both urged by Paschasius a Legat of the See Apostolick in the 4th General Council and also acknowledged by the Council in their Epistle to Leo. See below § 25 n. 2. And again on the other side as Bellarmin de Rom. Pontif. 2. l. 18. c. observes the Pope's being Caput Ecclesiae universae supposing him to be so in some general way of superintendency or for some particular acts and offices as suppose for receiving appeals deciding controversies between the chief Governors of the Churches admitting them to and deposing them from their places obliging them pro tempore with his decrees hinders not but that he may be also a Patriarch a Metropolitan a Bishop in respect of some other more immediate super-intendencies and offices divers from the former which he doth actually exercise over some particular Church or Churches but doth not so over others or which also he cannot exercise over the whole as he doth over those particular Churches as suppose for ordaining the inferior Bishops and Presbyters and hearing their causes personally officiating in the Word and Sacraments receiving and distributing the Ecclesiastical revenue thereof c. Nor again e converso as Cardinal Perron in answer to K. James observes doth his governing only the Roman Province as their Metropolitan or only Italy as their Primate hinder that he should govern the West also as their Patriarch Nor again doth his governing the West as their Patriarch because he was Bishop of Rome the chiefest city of the West hinder that he may not also as S. Peter and S. Paul's Successor there to one of whom the Jew and to the other the Gentiles were committed Gal. 2.7 9. have some special superintendency over all the Church Jew and Gentile I know § 3. n. 2. it is earnestly pleaded by Bishop Bramhal Vind. 8. c. p. 251. and Rep. to S.W. 10. s. p. 69. That to have an universal Headship over the Church and to have a
under several other Laws besides that of Nature written in every man's Conscience Rom. 2. 14 15. Laws and Rules of Worship reveal'd and deliver'd by God to Adam himself at first or to other Holy men even of the first times and many of these Laws the same with those after ward recorded by Moses So for the Church we find righteous Abel serving God in a way well pleasing to him and offering acceptable Sacrifice and an early type of our Saviour slain and martyr'd by the Nead of the Race of the Church's Persecutors out of envy to his sanctity Heb. 11.4 1 Joh. 3.12 Upon his death Seth raised in his stead a Father of the Holy Race Gen. 5.1 2 3. His Son Enos the first more eminent publick Preacher of Righteousness see 2 Pet. 2.5 In whose time it is said that people now began more publickly to call on the name of the Lord Gen. 4.26 Enoch the fifth from him a Prophet Jude 14. and in a most singular manner pious Gen. 5.24 Heb. 11.5 6. the eighth from Enos Noah again a famous Preacher of Righteousness 1 Pet. 3.19 2 Pet. 2.5 In whose times the Members of the Church are by a special name call'd the Sons of God Gen. 5.2 From him again we find the Church continued to Abraham a Prophet Gen. 20.7 Psal 105.15 In whose time also was Melchisedech the Priest of the most high God Gen. 14.18 And to Abraham we find a Promise made by God of the never-failing of his Seed i. e. of the Children of his Faith and Holy Religion i. e. of the Church So soon as this Spiritual Seed began to cease among the Jews then it being continued to him still among the Gentiles See Rom. 4.12 16.17 Gal. 3.7 c. Gal. 4. Joh. 8. 39.44 Luk. 19.9 § 5 This for the old Church Next for the old Laws Rules and Government under which it liv'd we find early mention of several of these long before Moses his committing them to record Of Holy Persons Priests Prophets Intercessors Gen. 14 18.-20.7 17. Exod. 19.22 24.5 Of Holy Times Gen. 2.3 Exod. 16.23 Of Holy Places Gen. 4.12 14 16 -28.17-35.1 12 6.-26.25 Ex. 3.5 Of Altars Gen. 8.20 which the Patriarchs built in such places where God appear'd to them Gen. 12 6.-26.25 Or where they made a longer abode Gen. 12 8.-13.4 18. Of Sacrifice Sacrifice of the firstlings and of the far Gen. 4.3 4. Burnt Offerings and Peace Offerings Gen. 8.20 Exod. 5 1.-10.25 The Birds in Sacrifice not divided Gen. 15.10 as it was afterward commanded in Lev. 1.17 Of clean and unclean Beasts Gen. 7.2 and of not eating the Blood Gen. 9.4 Of Purifyings Cleansings changing their Garments c. Gen. 2. Of Tythes paid to the Priest Gen. 14.20 Of making Vows Gen. 28.20 Of not matching with Unbelievers Gen. 6.2 comp 1. Of the Brother's raising of Seed to his Brother Gen. 38 8.comp Deut. 25.5 Thus then from the beginning God had a Church had Preachers and Priests and certain Rules of his due Worship 2. In these times it seems that the People for matter of Religion and God's Worship were cast wholly upon the Instructions and Doctrines Traditions and Dictates of their Guides for knowing their duty without any Written Records or Law of Natural Reason which these things transcended to examine these by and supposing that there should have happen'd to have been concerning any particular two contrary Traditions amongst these Teachers in all reason they ought to have follow'd the former and more universal Here also we may presume that these Fathers of the Church were then sufficiently assisted by God to deliver always to the People all truths necessary to their Salvation since they had no other Director to repair to § 6 2. To let these obscurer times pass and to come to those under the Law Written which was in all things a more express type of the Gospel Tho this Law seems much more punctually and methodically committed to Writing as to the Rule thereof than the Gospel is yet there was a Judg and certain Courts appointed for the Exposition thereof in difficult matters Which Office at first we find Moses who also had continual recourse to God in his Doubts to have executed for some time both for Religious and for Civil causes alone To whom saith the Text Exod. 18.16 the people when they had a matter came and he made them know the Statutes of God and his Laws Afterward to ease him of this great burthen especially as to ordinary Civil matters we find by Jethro's advice but also God's approbation other able men chosen out of the people and set over Tens Fifties Hundreds and Thousands to decide the easier matters but to bring the harder still to Moses Exod. 18.13 c. And he still alone to be for the People to God ward to bring the causes unto God teach them Ordinances and shew them the Work that they must do Exod. 18.19 20. Afterward yet more to ease him in these more difficult matters we find by God's appointment Seventy Elders chosen out of the former Officers and Judges more immediately to assist him which Seventy Elders to enable them for this higher employment had part of Moses his Spirit taken and put upon them which Spirit at the first shew'd wonderful effects in them and magnified them before the People as Christ the Prophet whom Moses resembled Deut. 18.15 his Spirit also did at first when it was deriv'd on the chief Evangelical Judges and Magistrates Act. 2. See Numb 11.14 16 c. § 7 Thus it was order'd in the Wilderness Again when the People should come to the Land of Rest here we find besides the Inferior Judges distributed in the Country Deut. 16.18 by God's command a standing Court established in that City where God setled his Sanctuary and Presence that they also might there consult him in their difficulties established I say for the Exposition of the Law in all matters too hard for the other and we find all persons oblig'd under pain of Death to stand to their Decisions See for this Deut. 17 8 c. If there arise a matter too hard for thee i. e. the inferior Country-Judges Deuter. 16.18 in judgment between Blood and Blood between Plea and Plea or between stroke and stroke or Leper and Leper what in these was permitted or prohibited excusable or punishable or in what manner punishable according to the Letter of the Law being matters of Controversie within thy Gates or as the Vulgar Judicum intra portas tuas videris verba variari thou shalt then arise and get thee up unto the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse And thou shalt come unto the Priests the Levites and unto the Judg that chief Secular Magistrate or his Substitute because the matters brought before this Court were sometimes relating to God's sometimes to the King's Laws Causes some Ecclesiastical some Civi that shall be in those days and they shall shew thee the sentence
Truth 's perpetual presence with and assistance of them as I shall now shew you § 41 After therefore those taken away who sate in Moses his chair to guide the people in matters of the law that there are others placed in Christ's Chair to guide God's people in all matters of the Gospel whose judgment and sentence in all their decisions the subjects of the Church ought to follow and obey appeareth 1. from many texts of Scripture See first that text in the Gospel Matt. 18.15 c. answering to that other formerly urged in the law Deut. c. 17. v. 8. c. If thy brother shall trespass against thee i.e. either by way of personal offence or by way of scandal of which our Saviour had bin speaking before v. 6 7. whereby any great offence of our brother against God against his neighbour or himself becomes matter of our cognisance as fellow-members of the same Body and who should be always so charitably affected to him as not to suffer sin upon him Lev. 19.17 go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone c. If he will not hear thee then take with thee two or three more c convent and arraign him as it were before some neighbours If he shall neglect to hear them tell it his fault and neglect unto the Church but if he neglect to hear the Church let him be unto thee as an Heathen and a Publican as a person excommunicated and not to be a companied with Luk. 15.2 Verily I say unto you whatsoever ye before whom such matters are brought shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever ye shall upon such offenders penitence loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven Again I say unto you that if two of you any small assembly shall agree together on earth as touching any thing that they shall resolve on and ask to have it ratified it shall be done for them of my Father For where any such assembly tho but two or three are gathered together in my Name and by my authority delegated to them see 1 Cor. 5.4 2 Cor. 2.10 there am I whom the Father heareth always in the midst of them § 42 In which Scriptures 1. That by Church Tell it unto the Church v. 17. is to be understood Clergy is clear from what follows v. 18. whatsoever ye shall bind c. comp with Mat. 16.19 Jo. 20.23 and from what follows v. 20 comp with Mat. 28.19 20. And 2. That here is meant the Clergy not only that were then in being the Apostles but that should succeed them through all following Ages is clear both from the same occasions of repairing to the Churches Tribunal v. 15. occurring in all ages and from the power of binding and loosing as necessary in one age as another and unquestionably exercised by the Apostles Successors concerning which matter I refer you to what is said before § 36. n. 1 2. and below and Church-Government part 2. § 27. c. 3ly That the Order for telling and the Precept of hearing this Clergy the Church of all Ages is to be understood not only concerning some injuries or wrongs done to us by our brother but concerning other faults and evil manners whereby our brother offends God and the Christian Society whereof he is a member appears from that expression v. 15. If he shall hear thee thou hast gained thy brother not gained thy loss in receiving satisfaction but gained thy Brother in procuring his reformation Again that is to be understood not only concerning trespass of Manners neither but also of Doctrines and Opinions much more as it seems deduceable from the context v. 6 7. mentioning scandals of which false doctrines and opinions are the chiefest and as it seems clear a minori ad majus if others our Brothers trespasses be matter of complaint and of the Churches cognisance much more these any corruption in a matter of faith being generally far more dangerous and pernicious than a corruption in manners See Jo. ◠11 Gal. 5.20 evil deeds heresies c. and Rom. 2.8 the contentious not obeying the truth 2 Pet. 3.16 Wresting Scriptures to their own destruction Tit. 1.11 Rom. 16.17 Act. 15. Subverting mens souls and deceiving the hearts of the simple Jud. 1. perishing in gainsaying And our zeal to God's truth and honour being much to be preferred before that to our own wealth honour or security So is it evident and put out of doubt by many other Scriptures which may be brought in illustration of this 1. In which Scriptures both the members of the Church are warned to mark and avoid such false teachers and doctrines And 2ly The Church-governours are authorized to judge controversies and proceed in their censures against such teachers and such tenents as are contrary to the Doctrines formerly delivered by our Lord and his Apostles And 3ly in which Scriptures also are contained several instances of such judgments and proceedings § 33 See for the first Rom. 16.17 2 Thes 3.14 2 Jo. 10. where we are bidden to mark to note those that obey not those that cause divisions contrary to the Doctrines received from the Apostles to avoid not to have company with not to salute them i. e. to carry our selves toward them as Heathens and Publicans here Matt. 18.18 and to avoid such in like manner as the Corinthians the incestuous person 1 Cor. 5.11 compared with 7.13 that is by Excommunication and Church-censures Whence also was the custom in the Primitive Church of Christians that travelled to carry with them Letters commendatory from the Bishop of the place that so they might be admitted to the prayers and communion in those Churches whither they went scrupulous of joining with any Hereticks See for the 2d Eph. 4.4 5 11 c. There is one Body and one Spirit One Lord one Faith When he ascended up on high he gave gifts unto men And he gave some Apostles c. some Pastors and Teachers for the perfecting of the Saints for the work of the Ministery for the edifying of the Body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith unto a perfect man That we henceforth be no more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the slight of men c. This then is one office of the Churchmen to edify the Church in the unity of the faith and to keep them steddy in its Doctrines that they be not carried about now one way now another and that they be not thus carried about not only before the Gospel or other Books of the N. Testament were written but also after nay also that they be not carried about with several false glosses and misintepretations of these Writings of which very Writings S. Peter saith 2 Pet. 3.16 that some wrested them to their own destruction therefore the members of the Church to submit to their Doctrines and to conform to their Faith that there may be a
unity therein One Lord one Faith one Body one Spirit an unity of the Spirit kept in the bond of peace v. 3. see Heb. 13.7 9 17. The like obedience commanded to be given to these Church-rulers in respect of Doctrine and Faith Remember them who have the rule over you and who have spoken unto you the Word of God whose faith follow Jesus Christ the same for ever Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines Obey them c. for they watch for your souls as they that must give account Account for the Precepts they give you and for the Doctrines they teach you Add to these those Texts of the Apostle charging Christians to be all of one judgment to speak the same thing not to be wise in their own conceits 1 Cor. 1.10 Rom. 12.16 15.5 6. Phil. 1.27 3.16 where the Apostle seemeth not to mean their condescendence for opinion one to another for which rather who shall so yeild will still be in debate but their union in the doctrine of their Spiritual Superiors in which he would have them all to acquiesce See 1 Cor. 4.16 17. 11.1 2. Phil. 3.17 Rom. 16.17 2 Thes 3.14 the succeeding Ecclesiastical Superiors being commanded still to retain and continue the doctrine of their Predecessors 1 Tim. 1.3 2 Tim. 1.13 2.2 After the forenamed mission Eph. 4.11 see 1 Cor. 14.29.32 where the Apostle amongst other things submits also the doctrines of the Prophets to the judgment of the Prophets let the other judge and 1 Tim. 4.11 6.3.5 and Titus 1.11 and 3.10 11. where he gives order to the Church-governours Tim. and Titus that touching error and heresy in matter of faith such persons if any discovered after due admonishment should be withdrawn from should be excommunicated and silenced by him their persons rejected c. 3. their mouths stopt c. 1. § 44 See for the 3d. Act. 15.2 c. where a controversy riseing in the Church of Antioch by reason of some teaching there that the Gentiles were to be circumcised and to keep the Mosaical Law without any such commandment from their Superiors Act. 15.44 who were opposed by Paul and Barnabas the Antiochians tho many amongst them having eminent gifts of the Spirit do repair for a final decision thereof to the judgment of the Apostles at Jerusalem where after an Assembly called v. 6. we find a consulting and disputing on this matter from the believing Pharisees still zealous of their law and then a giving of their several votes and a deciding of it not from pretence of immediate inspiration or revelation but from arguments 1. Of Gods converting the Gentiles shewed in several instances and giving them the Holy Ghost as to the Jews without any previous using such Jewish ceremonies And 2ly from the Predictions of the Prophets concerning the calling of the Gentiles in the latter days as a distinct people not to be translated by circumcision c into the Jewish Religion but to be transplanted and counited together with the sews into the Christian v. 7 12 13 19. After this the sending of their Constitutions to the particular Churches under this stile It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you c. v. 28. See again 1 Tim. 1.20 compared with 2 Tim. 2.17 18. and 4.14 15. the Apostle excommunicating Hymeneas Alexander and others for their false doctrines and see Rev. 2 2 14 15 20. the Lord Jesus commending the Angel i.e. Bishop of the Church of Ephesus for trying and not tolerating or bearing with the false Apostles and reprehending the Angels of the Churches of Thyatira and Pergamas for the contrary for their suffering the false Prophetess Jezabel to teach and seduce his servants and for their tolerating the Nicolaitans who indulged the Christians more liberty 2 Pet. 2.18 19. in complying with Heathen Religions and held it lawful to eat of their sacrifices and to commit fornications like them some unnatural ones also which usually accompanied Idolatry See 1 Kings 14.24 15.12 2 K. 23.7 § 45 Thus have I shew'd you 1. That by the Church Mat. 18.17 which is to be complain'd and repair'd to in matters of trespasses unreform'd and to be heard and obey'd upon pain of being reckon'd as an Heathen and Publican of Excommunication and being bound both in Earth and Heaven Mat. 18.18 that by this Church I say is meant the Clergy 2. The Clergy of one Age as well as another 3. This Clergy to be heard and obey'd as well in matters of Theological Controversies and of Doctrines as in any other matters as well in these if not more Now 4ly That this Hearing and Obedience due to them is not only an obligation of non-contradicting but of assenting to such their Doctrines and Decisions of Controversies so far as they require assent appears likewise from the aforenam'd Texts as likewise those following Because these Church-Officers are call'd Teachers and Guides which have reference to Truth as well as Judges and Rulers which have reference to Peace and we charg'd to hear them as Christ who also have receiv'd from Christ a Spirit leading them into all Truth and a promise that the Gates of Hell shall never prevail against them c. Of which more anon Again Because they are said to be set over the Church that there may be in it an unity of faith Eph. 4.13 and one faith ver 5. and not only a bond of peace but an unity of the spirit and of judgment and speaking the same thing c. Eph. 4.13 3. 1 Cor. 1.10 That their Subjects may not be carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men not carried about with them i.e. not believe them Now he who by these Superiors may be restrain'd from believing them is hereby enjoin'd to believe the contradictories of them namely the Positions of the Church and if the people are enjoin'd to believe this then also their Seducers But were the people oblig'd only to the obedience of non-contradiction and not of assent toward such Superiors then whereas some Tenents are exclusive of Salvation and many more having dangerous effects upon the lives and manners of Christians see Act. 15.24 2 Pet. 3.16 and wherefore are the Teachers prohibited if the Doctrines were not pernicious and to be renounc'd Yet is there no Church-authority which can afford any remedy to this great evil It can indeed provide for its own peace but not its subjects safety whilst it must tolerate the liberty of all tho destructive opinions and may exact no more than a non-gainsaying Again Because it is clear that these Church-Guides may not only reject and excommunicate false Teachers and Seducers but the Heretical also when any way they come to be discover'd guilty thereof consider Tit. 3.10 11. where observe ver 11. that their autocatacrisie or being condemn'd by their own Conscience tho there be no endeavour by divulging their Heresie of infecting other men's Consciences therewith is render'd a
sufficient ground of their rejection nor may such Heretical person be restor'd again to the Church's Communion upon his engaging to conceal his Heresie but upon his quitting and renouncing it Since then these Church-Guides have power to excommunicate Hereticks i. e. men for holding false Opinions in matters of Faith i. e. men for their dissent at least after some previous admonitions and reasons sufficient to convince or men for their obstinacy in dissent which obstinacy is not delible but by yeilding assent This I say infers that there is due to these Church-Guides an Obedience of Assent or else these Guides may excommunicate one for not-performing an Obedience which is not due See this more largely prosecuted in Oblig of Judgm § 4. And again consider 1 Tim. 4.11 6.3 5. where the Apostle writes thus to Timothy These things command and teach and if any man do teach otherwise and consenteth not to wholesome words c. from such withdraw thy self Lastly Because at least in Agendis in all those things which by these Ecclesiastical Judges are requir'd to be done we must either yeild the obedience of Assent or we can yeild none at all save that call'd Passive Obedience which is a submitting to the punishment appointed for disobedience for who can oblige to do a thing doth oblige us also to think it lawful to be done else we may never do it If then this Church-Authority may so far in Agendis determine to us what is lawful or unlawful as herein to exact assent from us to her Judgment why may it not in the like manner in Credendis determine to us what is true and false Or what reason can there be that this should be more unerring or more creditable in truths practical than speculative where both equally necessary § 46 These Scriptures already produc'd from § 41. do sufficiently shew an Authority in the Clergy under the Gospel to Judg Controversies and the Obedience due to their Sentence from the people But so also in a second place do all those Scriptures wherein we find the promises made to these Guides of a perpetual assistance to them by the Lord Jesus and by the Holy Ghost and of their never erring or failing in their Judgments Whereby we are render'd secure of their sufficient ability always in Judging and of our own safety in following it See Mat. 28.19 20. 18.20 compar'd with 17.18 Rev. 1.13 16. the perpetual assistance of our Saviour Joh. 14. 16 26. 16. 13. 1 Joh. 2.20 27. 1 Cor. 12.7 8. the perpetual assistance of the Holy Ghost Mat. 16.18 19. Luk. 1.16 1 Tim. 3.15 2 Tim. 2.19 compar'd with 16 17 20 Eph. 4.13 compar'd with 11. their indefectibility The particular contents of which Scriptures set down in the former Treatise § 31. I forbear here to repeat you may be pleased there to review them Upon the expressions of which Scriptures it is there noted 1. That these promises of not failing in Truth are made to the Church or to Christians not hypothetically only as some would have it if they shall not fail to do their duty but absolutely that there shall always continue a Church or a Christianity in being that shall not fail to hold the Truth and do their duty 2. That these promises are made absolutely not only to Christians taken in general some or other of them Sheep or Shepherds Laity or Clergy as some would have it but particularly to the Clergy the Pastors of these Sheep and the Guides of this Church 3. To these not of some of one Age those of the First or Third or Fourth or Second as some would limit but those of all Ages usque ad consummationem saculi § 47 4. To these i. e. not to some or other of them still whom we please to adhere to to some small number of inferior Clergy in some part or other of the world either dispers'd through several or united in one particular Church either departing from or ejected by all the rest of the Clergy of the same or of other Churches in which a few straglers would fain verifie our Saviour's promises when they pronounce all the rest erroneous but to that Clergy which the Church ought to take for her Guide Which Guide when as this Spiritual Court consists not of one but many persons when ever there is any disagreement therein must be the major part and when as there is also an established subordination of these persons and courts must be the superior rather than the inferior persons and the more universal and comprehensive Synods rather than those Synods which are of a less circuit and smaller company otherwise any Heretick if a Clergy-man may be entertained for a guide and whenas our Saviour has enjoined the people to obey their guides yet hath this people no means to know who these are unless when all the Clergy of the Universe are of one opinion Now he that appoints us to follow a Guide in what he shall enjoin us and then leaves us no way when our Guide consists not of one but many persons and two parties of them contradict one another to know which of them is to be our Guide it is all one as if he left us no Guide And he that ties us beside the use of our own judgment to obey and follow some Ecclesiastical person or other only not obliging to the most or major part to a superior more than inferior person or Court revolves our obedience only to our own judgment i.e. to chuse that side which we judge the rightest as we follow the counsel of that friend who we do think speaketh most reason without acknowledging any obedience to his authority and then left to this choice what opinion can we take up so absurd in which we cannot find some Clergy-man or other for a Leader Of these four Observations see what is more largely discoursed in Church-government Par. 2. from § 26. to 29. 5ly From the same texts another thing is clear § 48 That this Guiding Clergy shall for ever be unfailable or infallible either in all truths whatever I mean Theological and Spiritual any way respecting mens salvation which truths they shall think meet to be determined or at least in all such truths as are absolutely necessary to salvation else this Pillar of Truth is cracked and shivered the Keys of Heaven Gates are lost and the gates and power of Hell prevail the assistance of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit ineffectual lastly the Church Name and Thing and Salvation it self perished I mean as to this Clergy if Truth necessary to Salvation be not to be found with them and if the skirts of the Promise of the Holy Spirit teaching them all things cannot be spread so far as to secure them of being taught so much Truth as is but absolutely necessary § 49 But then 6ly These Church-guides to avoid such ill consequences being made the unfailing Repository of all Truth absolutely necessary to Salvation will it
Catholick is of which declared Hereticks are no part And thus the Church shall still be to the end of the world a City upon a Hill and united within it self even in its greatest persecutions conspicuous to those who sincerely bend their course to it Again it seems that near the time of the worlds dissolution from this total Apostacy through great persecutions from the faith in some and from the sound doctrines of the Orthodox faith in others because both false Religions and such Heretical doctrines as the Apostles speak do all tend some way or other to vitiousness of life to libertinism and inducements of the flesh See 2 Pet. 2.3 10 18 19. Phil. 3.18 19. 1 Tim. 6.5 2 Tim. 3.2 7. c. see Trial of Doctrines § 32. there shall abound very great wickedness and much security amongst the then heavy oppressors of God's Church much what like to the days of Noah and of Lot when God shall come upon them unexpectedly to judgment But this is no failing of the Church which shall then remain an Holy City at unity in it self see Rev. 20.9 And if also within the Church it self the vitious shall out-number the pious neither is this any prejudice to the truth of the Churches doctrines since the same thing happens less or more in all ages that the wicked here-in are more than the good as St. Austin hath taken notice and much pains to prove to the Donatists urging some of the former texts De unitate Ecclesiae 12. 13. c. § 64 Thus much of the first head proposed before § 1. viz. The Clergies being delegated by our Lord departing hence the infallible preservers of all Truth and Necessary faith and supreme Judges in all controversies arising therein Now to proceed to the 2d Next this Authority to secure it for ever from any decay or interruption thereof is given them to the end of the world without dependance on any save the Lord Jesus they being Embassadors of salvation from the King of Kings to all Nations and so to be every where free from all violation For which there is the greatest reason since their constitutions are such as cannot do the least wrong or hurt to any secular dominion nay brings great security to it and since this their Ministery because without a Sword can be no Government or Discipline comes armed only with a Spiritual sword and not a Temporal and lastly since Christianity the Doctrine they plant gives no man any priviledge interest or advantage by it in this world or for Secular matters but maintains every Kingdom and State in the same condition wherein it finds it and only obligeth men to pray always for such State 1 Tim. 2.2 and to yeild all strict obedience to it Rom. 13.1 1 Pet. 2.13 and upon no pretence of maintaining Religion to use or to advise to use the material Sword or any otherwise to defend the truth than 1. by confessing it 1. in practising its Precepts at all times among which yet one necessary-one is publick assembling together to worship God c. Ecclesiacticos coetus humanis legibus interdictos ob divinum praeceptum Christiani intermittere non possunt Grot. sum Imp. circa sacra and 2ly by suffering for it The Christian profession therefore never troubles the Civil peace which cannot be broken but by Arms and therefore whatsoever disturbs the civil peace may be lawfully punished on any person whatsoever by the temporal Sovereign power for it is not the Christian profession I say lawfully purished unless in respect of some persons such temporal Magistrate make over this power to another which thing doubtless may be lawfully done if for example the Prince shall not think it so decent c that he should sit in Judgment and inflict corporal punishment upon a Bishop his Spiritual Father by whom he is to be guided and corrected and if need be censured and Spiritually punished concerning greater matters see 1 Cor. 6.3 Or That the Priest one day should summon the Civil Magistrate to his Tribunal the next the Magistrate Him or upon other reasons And perhaps This remitting of the Trial of Clergy-men even in Civil matters to their Spiritual Superiors so that the Secular power only useth the Temporal sword upon them when the other deliver them up to it as it may preserve more reverence in the people toward the Ministry so may it conduce to a more severe animadversion from such Judges supposing the Fathers of the Church to be of that sanctity and integrity which they do profess upon such Malefactors than any other way could And whether it was upon these or some other motives t is plain that such Concessions by several Emperors and Princes have bin made to the Church § 65 And the Judgment also when such disturbance is shall belong to his not to the Ecclesiastical Tribunal So Solomon confin'd Ahiathar the High-Priest 1 Kin. 2.26 27 compar'd with ch 4 v. 4. whom had he pleas'd he might also have put to death see 1 King 2.26 27. not for Error but for Rebellion not that the King may meddle or hath any power or Jurisdiction in Ecclesiastical affairs over or in opposition to the Priest to do any thing save the assisting the Spiritual Sword with his Temporal and the using his Civil power for the service of the Church See Calv. Instit l. 4. c. 11. s 15. For the Priest having lawful power to excommunicate the Civil Magistrate for Heretical Opinions How can again the Civil Magistrate have a lawful power for the same cause to depose the Priest But over Ecclesiastical persons medling without his leave and beyond their Lord's Commission in affairs Temporal But then if the Secular power in his taking care of the Commonwealth's safety is pleas'd to Decree the Church's Religious Assemblies either for worshipping God or composing Laws for the Church to be Conspiracy or make their Preaching or coming within his Territories Treason only because they possibly may for how can any be sent by Christ to whom this may not be objected not because it is proved that they do any hurt to it or provoked by some particular persons who transgressing their Commission from Christ do some acts or hold some opinions prejudicial to the safety thereof should therefore condemn and execute all others of the same Order against whom the same fault cannot be prov'd and who abjure such horrid Tenents should he interpret any their medling with his Subjects whom our Saviour sends unarm'd like Lambs among Wolves to be subverting of his State and their Spiritual Sword inconsistent with or frustrating his Temporal he now usurps upon our Saviour's Authority and they must go on through all his Torments by way of the Cross which shall certainly conquer at last not of the Sword with which those Ministers shall perish that take it up Mat. 26.52 against those powers to which only it is committed Rom 13.14 to do their Office with that answer to him Act.
for a false Religion we find this done in wicked Jeroboam and consequently we read of his making for his new Religion also new Priests § 69 Thus I say the Temporal authority may much advance and further the Spiritual but no Secular power hath the least authority in Spiritual matters to act contrary to those who are Ministers of Christ's power and unreasonable it is to think that he may do more against them who is part of their flock than the Heathen Princes might do who had no relation and if Christianity entring into any country changeth not any laws thereof but confirms all obedience thereto then neither may the civil Government admitted into Christianity abridge any of its priviledges which priviledges may as well subsist with a Christian Sovereignty as they have done with a Heathen But if they offer any violence unto it the Church to whom not to them God hath committed his flock may and ought as it also often hath with the weapons Christ hath given her to oppose them and tho not to fight yet to speak to profess to suffer and die for the cause See the opposition the Priests made to Vzziah generally a good Prince 2 Chron. 26.18 and that of Athanasius and Alexander Bishops of Alexandria and Constantinople to Constantine requiring the restoring of Arius Excommunicated and that of Ambrose to Theodosius Neither can the Bishops at any time excuse their not governing and defending and patronizing the flock of Christ under pretence either of the care that Christian Princes their Sovereigns have of it or enmity they have to it For either these Princes second their authority and then they have all encouragement to exercise it or else they oppose and persecute it and then they are to do no less than their Predecessors did in the Primitive bloody times taking up their Cross and following Christ and their Leaders which had they not done Christianity had not descended so far as us and if these do not the same it cannot be propagated to posterity See more of this subject in Church-government part 1. § 70 Obj. But what if all or the much greater part of the Clergy run into error may not the Temporal Magistrate then Reform it I answer 1. That concerning points or truths necessary to salvation the Supposition is impossible until our Saviour shall cancel his promise of their indefectibility in such necessaries 2ly That for any other Spiritual matters wherein perhaps they may err yet the Temporal Magistrate may not reform because he that in Spiritual things is to learn of them what is truth and what error can never judge when they err unless they first tell him so What you will say cannot judge when as he hath the Holy Scriptures left to demonstrate to him truth and error I ask were they left to him alone or hath he any evidence therefrom which the Clergy hath not Or doth the Secular man study them more than they who make this their employment and trade Yes but their eyes are blinded in many things with self-interest namely in those which some way concern their own priviledges c. 1. Then in all Doctrines no way advancing the priviledges of the Church the Prince may not swerve from its judgment Well it were if but so much were observed But 2ly For these matters of interest it were something that were said if where the Ecclesiastical power were interested on the one side of the controversy the Secular power which claims right to judge were not as much on the other and whatever priviledges were taken from the one were not devolved upon the other For example If Henry 8th and his Lords had took the Supremacy in Church-affairs from the Pope and not transferred on themselves it were something tho not sufficient that were said but in such concernments men being equal judge in which we have reason to expect the more integrity that they will not claim more than their due But 3ly Suppose that our Saviour had granted his Church some great priviledges as such a thing is possible either these priviledges by them must not be maintained or such a cavil cannot be prevented But methinks this is enough to preserve truth in their sentence who are most accounted men of conscience tho in matters concerning themselves That by a false judgment a greater interest hereafter is lost than is for the present gained § 71 But here observe of those who upon many such-like pretences rob the Church of her Legislative power for Spiritual matters that they cannot place it else where tho they try several ways nor yet deny any such power at all but with great absurdities and mischief sometime or other to truth and the Christian profession Some of them bestow it on the Civil Magistrate without limitation so as to oblige all men without disputing to obey whatever in these things he determines as a Country-man of ours But this is so gross a tenent I need spend no labour to shew the many horrible consequences thereof Some again bestow it upon the same supreme Magistrate so as to oblige men only to obey him I mean actively in what they think not contrary to the Divine Laws and for other things which they think contrary not to resist any punishment inflicted on them for not obeying actively i. e. in believing and practising as that Magistrate appoints Thus G. Vossius H. Grotius Jus Imp. circa Sacra and ordinarily Protestants Vossius represents the matter briefly thus in an Epistle inserted in Praestantium Virorum Ep. p. 167. Synodi falli possunt Magistratus non debet iis credere propter se sed quia consentiunt cum Scripturis Canonibus antiquis Et haec Synodus et ille errori est obnoxius sed hoc non impedit quo minus Synodi Officium sit dirigere intellectum in cognitionem veri tum magistratus imperare quod rectum est salutare Quodsi illa dirigit male non ideo hic imperabit male si hic imperet malum non ideo subditi parere debent in malo Sed Magistraetus subditus unusquisque aget quod sui esse officii Scriptura Ecclesiae Catholicae consensus recta ratio persuaserit i. e. what Scripture Church or Reason seems to him to perswade But may the Magistrate then punish here those that disobey his commands Yes saith he Rex illud imperare debet quod in verbo jussit Deus paenarum comminatione obstringere ad illud subditor potest nec in his imperium detrectare cuiquam licet In his if he means which both Prince and Subject are agreed to be God's Word this is certain But mean-while if the Subject apprehends that contrary to God's Word which the Magistrate saith is not and commands as his Word here the Subject may and ought to disobey him And upon this the question still proceeds How the Magistrate may justly punish the Subject for not doing a thing where the Subject
also may lawfully disobey and not do it One would think either the Magistrate ought to be certain that what he commands is right before he may punish any for disobeying his command or the Subject ought to be certain that what he commands is not right before he may disobey it But yet neither is the one or the other held any certain Judg in these matters we speak of Nor yet do these men leave any third person that being so may guide and regulate them But the one lawfully commands and punishes him for that which the other lawfully disobeys Where in effect every one in things Spiritual is finally committed to his own Judgment whilst they leave none at all above others that may so decide what is contrary to God's Law what not as to constrain submission thereto further than their private judgment concurs And the only absolute obligation we have to any of their commands is to non-resistance of the punishment But then suppose one thinks this also namely that we should be bound in all cases even where we are innocent or also truly religious to non-resistance c. to be a thing contrary to Scripture as there want not many of late who have been so perswaded then their commands will oblige such an one in no sense at all and so indeed will be no commands as to such a person for effectus imperii est obligatio Lastly the authority these men do give to the Church is except that which she derives from the Civil power only regimen suasorium or declarativum and so sine obligandi jure But this is making our obedience to her if it may be so call'd at all no more than that we give to any other private man administring as we think good Counsel to us which is sufficiently confuted before Only in all this you may observe That whilst these wary Factors for Truth are afraid to acknowledg such an obedience enjoin'd to the Church as to believe that to be the meaning of the Divine Law or not to be truth or error that she tells them to be so then much less can allow such an obedience to Secular power they in avoiding these two yeild this judgment of what is truth what is not in these matters of highest concernment to be left by God to every one which exposeth the Christian world to far more and grosser errors as daily experience thereof sheweth than would in probability either of the other But yet this pleaseth because thus the staters of the question make themselves also Judges See more of this subject in Ancient Church-Government c. § 72 Christ therefore to avoid such confusion hath establish'd his Church for guiding the World for ever in his truths upon such firm Laws and Canonical Orders that no Civil Authority may be admitted at any time to meddle in stating any Church-affairs against the major part of the Clergy and its Governors And if secular Princes anciently in a Council even when they generally agreed in opinion with the Bishops had in Ecclesiastical affairs no defining but only a consenting suffrage how come they enabled to define any thing in these when they are against the Bishops See St. Ambrose his words l. 2. ep 13. quoted by Dr. Field l. 5. c. 53. when he was cited to be judg'd in a matter of Faith by Valentinian the Emperor which conclude it cannot be without usurpation of that which no way pertaineth to them that Princes should at all meddle with the judging of matters of Faith neither had it been heard of but on the contrary that Bishops might and had judg'd Emperors in matters of Faith Quando saith he speaking to Valentinian audisti clementissime Imperator in causa fidei Laicos de Episcopo judicasse Ita ergo quadam adulatione curvamur ut sacerdotalis juris simus immemores quod Deus donavit mihi hoc ipse aliis putem esse credendum Si docendus est Episcopus a Laicis quid sequetur Laicus ergo disputet Episcopus audiat Episcopus discat a Laico At certe si vel Scripturarum seriem divinarum vel vetera tempora a tractemus Quis est qui abnuat in causa sidei in causa inquam fidei Episcopos solere de Imperatoribus Christianis non Imperatores de Episcopis judicare Pater tuus Valen. sen Imp. vir maturioris aevi dicebat non est meum judicare inter Episcopos See the like in Athanasius Epist ad solitariam vitam agentes Quando unquam judicium Ecclesiae ab Imperatore authoritatem habuit See many more like testimonies collected by Champney De Vocatione Minist c 15. And see the Concessions of Bishop Andrews Resp ad Apol. p. 29 332. And of Calvin no zealous Vindicator of the Church's Authority Inst l. 4. c. 11. § 15. And of many others cited in Church-Government Par. 5. And see more of this matter in Church-Government Par. 1. And if the Church to use some of Mr. Thorndikes words subsisted before any secular power was Christian extended beyond the bounds of any one's Dominion in one visible Society with equal interest in the parts of it through several Dominions endow'd with such power in Spiritual matters as is set down before what Title but Force can any State have whilst this Body continues to exercise its power not only without but against it Dr. Field in Answer saith That such power belongs to the Clergy regularly but may be devolv'd to Princes in cases of necessity In what case i.e. If the Clergy through malice or ignorance fail c. That the Prince having charge over Gods people c. may condemn them falling into gross errors contrary to the common sense of Christians or into Heresie formerly condemn'd l. 5. c. 53. formerly condemn'd For saith he we do not attribute power to a Prince or Civil state to judge of things already resolved on in a general Council no not if they err manifestly and intolerably but only to judge in those matters of faith that are resolved on and that according to former resolutions From which I gather That Princes can define nothing against the Clergy i. e. the more considerable part thereof else there was never any thing so absurd a Prince can propose but that he may find or make some of the Clergy to join with him but protect what is already first defined by the Clergy in a former General Council But if so then his power with hardly extend to the points of Reformation since how few are those Heresies amongst the many points of the Roman Church from which the Reformed have departed which are solemnly condemned some of them they say are defined by General Councils I suppose therefore we must found the Princes Ecclesiastical authority on the other member if the Clergy err against the common sence of Christians or as Mr. Thorndike expresseth it when the Ecclesiastical power abolisheth any of matters already determined by our Lord and his
Church of England seems obliged in as much observance to the Rome See as the former instances have shewed the Orientals to have yeilded to it § 51. That the Church of England seems obliged to yeild the same observance to the Roman See as other Western Provinces upon the 6th Nicene Canon § 52. That this Nation owes its Conversion chiefly if not only to the Roman See § 53. And hath in ancient Councils together with other Churches subjected it self to that See before the Saxon conversion § 55. The Britains observation of Easter different from Rome not agreeing with the Orientals and no argument that they received Christianity from thence § 57. That the English Nation is sufficiently tyed to such subjection by the Decrees of latter Councils wherein her Prelats have yeilded their consents § 59. Thus the Principle upon which some set the English Clergy and Nation free from such former obligations hath bin shewed to be unsound § 60. That some Rights once resigned and parted with cannot afterward be justly resumed § 61. Dr. Field of the Church Ep. Dedicat SEing the controversies of Religion in our times are grown in number so many and in matters so intricate that few have time and leisure fewer strength of understanding to examin them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which amongst all the Societies in the world is that blessed company of Holy ones that Houshold of faith that Spouse of Christ and Church of the Living God which is this pillar and ground of Truth that so he may embrace her Communion follow her Directions and rest in her Judgment Grot. Animadv cont Rivet ad Art 7. Rogo eos qui. verum amant ut cum legent Dav. Blondelli viri diligentissimi Librum de Primatu non inpsius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed ipsas historias quarum veritatem Blondellus agnoscit animo a factionibus remoto expendant spondeo si id faciant inventuros in quo acquieescant S. Austin de util credendi 16. c. Authoritate decipi miserum est miserius non moveri si Dei providentia non praesidet rebus humanis nihil est de religione satagendum Non est desperandum ab eodem iposo Deo authoritatem aliquam constitutam qua velut gradu incerto innitentes attollamur in Deum Haec autem authoritas seposita ratione qua sincerum intelligere ut diximus difficillimum stultis est dupliciter nos movet partim miraculis partim sequentium multitudine 10. c. Sed inquis Nonne erat melius rationem mihi reddere ut quacunque ea me duceret sine ulla sequerer temeritate Erat fortasse sed cum res tanta sit ut Deus tibi ratione cognoseendus sit omnesque putas idonâ—os esse percipiendis rationibus quibus ad divinam intelligentiam mens ducitur humana an plures an paucos paucos ais existimo Quid caeteris ergo hominibus qui ingenio tam sereno praediti non sunt negandam religionem putas who therefore must receive this not from Reason but Authority 12. c. Quis mediocriter intelligens non plane viderit stultis utilius ac salubrius esse praeceptis obtemperare sapientum quam suo judicio vitam degere 13. c. Recte igitur Catholicae disciplinae majestate institutum est ut accedentibus ad religionem fides i.e. adhibenda authoritati Ecclesiae persuadeatur ante omnia 8. c. Si jam satis jactatus videris sequere viam Catholicae disciplinae quae ab ipso Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit abhinc ad posteros manaturaest 12. Quum de religione id est quum de colendo atque intelligendo Deo agitur ii minus sequendi sunt qui nos credere vetant rationem promptissime pollicentes Rivet Apol. Discussio p. 255. Nunc plane ita sentit Grotius multi cum ipso non posse Protestantes inter se jungi nisi simul jungantur cum iis qui Sedi Romanae cohaerent sine qua nullum sperari potest in Ecclesia commune regimen Ideo optat ut ea divulsio quae evenit cause divulsionis tollantur Inter eas causas non est Primatus Episcopi Romani secundum Canones fatente Melancthone qui eum primatum etiam necessarium put at ad retinendam unitatem Neque enim hoc est Ecclesiam subjicere Pontificis libidini sed reponere ordinem sapienter insticutum Bishop Bilson in perpet governm of Christ's Church 16. c. Not Antichrist but ancient Councils and Christian Emperors perceiving the mighty trouble and intolerable charges that the Bishops of every Province were put-to by staying at Synods for the hearing and determining of all private matters and quarrels and seeing no cause to imploy the Bishops of the whole world twice every year to sit in judgment about petit and particular strifes and brabbles as well the Prince as the Bishops not to increase the pride of Arcbishops but to settle an indifferent course both for the parties and the Judges referred not the making of Laws and Canons but the execution of them already made to the credit and conscience of the Archbishop To the Fathers leave an Appeal either to the Councils or the Primate of every Nation Mr. Thorndike Epilogue 3. l. 20. c. p. 179. Of the Councils he meaneth those first Councils held in the East how many can be counted General by number of present votes The authority of them then must arise from the admitting of them by the Western Churches and this admission of them what can it be ascribed to but the authority of the Church of Rome eminently involved above all the Churches of the West in the summoning and holding of them and by consequence in their Decrees And indeed in the troubles that passed between the East and the West from the Council of Nice tho the Western Churches have acted by their Representatives upon eminent occasions in great Councils yet in other occasions they may justly seem to refer themselves to that Church as resolving to regulate themselves by the Acts of it and then he produceth several instances Whereby saith he it may appear how the Western Churches went always along with that of Rome Which necessarily argueth a singular preeminence in it in regard whereof He the Roman Bishop is stiled the Patriarch of the West during the regular government of the Church and being so acknowledged by K. James of Excellent memory to the Card. Perron may justly charge them to be the cause of dividing the Church who had rather stand divided than own him in that quality Afterward he saith p. 180. That it is unquestionable that all causes that concern the whole Church are to resort to the Church of Rome And p. 181. asks what pretence there could be to settle Appeals from other parts to Rome as such Appeals were setled in the Council of Sardica which Council he there allows and
can And because all these were continued to be used by the Church also under Christian Emperors without asking their leave to decree such things or subjecting them to their authority or depending on their consent only with humbly desiring their assistance yet so as without it resolv'd to proceed in the execution thereof as under Heathen as clearly appeared under the the Arian Emperors yet which thing she could not lawfully have done were any of these entrenching upon anothers right For example the 6th Canon of Nice and 5. Can. of Constant Council would have bin an usurpation of an unjust authority if the subordination of Episcopal Sees and erecting of Patriarchs had belonged to the Prince Upon the same grounds let also those instances collected by Bishop Bramhal Vindic. 7. c. of several Princes and States on many occasions opposing the Pope's authority stand good and be justified so far as he doth not shew these Secular powers to have opposed him in any right belonging to him by Church-canons in Ecclesiastical matters But if in any of those examples they are also found to oppose him in these the proving of such facts to have bin done justifies not their lawfulness to be done Tho also he confesseth that this fact of Hen. 8. in abolishing the usurped as he calls it jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome within his Dominions he cannot fellow abroad See what he saith Vindic. 7. c. p. 184. Neither do such facts as he urgeth to be done abroad hinder such Princes for living still in the external communion with the Church of Rome which facts he urgeth as a defence of the Reformed's necessary relinquishing this communion Again I said That no such Spiritual authority can he conferred or translated to others contrary to such Church Canons c. Else whenever it is not contrary to these Canons I grant that Inferior Councils or Church-governors or also Secular powers with their consent may change and alter many things both in respect of Ecclesiastical persons and affairs therefore many cases concerning the Kings of England with such consent of inferior Councils or Church-governors erecting or translating Bishopricks c. instanc'd in by D. Hammond or Bishop Bramhall are justifiable where any wore not contrary to the Laws of the Church i. e. of superior Councils but in any other examples where such Laws are transgressed either by the Prince or also by their particular Clergy the proving such facts to have bin done justifies not their lawfulness to be done tho such acts were done without any express or present controul Things being thus explain'd I say to give a particular instance of the former proposition No Prince or Emperor Heathen or Christian c. can for his own Dominions dissolve or abrogate the authority concerning Ecclesiastical affairs of those Patriarchs or Primates constituted or confirm'd in the 6th Canon of the Council of Nice the Church not commanding obedience to Patriarchs at random or to such as the Secular Prince should set over us but also nominating and constituting from time to time the Sees which had or should have such preeminence if these be since by no other General Council revers'd nor can any who by that Canon is subjected for instance to the Patriarch of Alexandria deny obedience in such Ecclesiastical matters to him without Schism tho his Secular Prince should command the contrary or subject him to another And if these things here said be true then also so far as the Bishop of Rome's Authority is found to be confirm'd in matters Spiritual by the Church's Canons and ancient custom over any Churches Provincial or National it will be Schism for any such Christian Prince or People to oppose it so long till the like Council reverseth it Hence to those three pretended rights of the Roman Bishop over the Church of England whereby Schism is said to be incurr'd mention'd by Dr. Hammond see Schism p. 138. namely his right 1. As St Peter's Successor or 2. By conversion of the Nation to Christianity or 3. By the voluntary concession of Kings I suppose I may add a 4th with his good leave namely his right by ancient Constitutions and Canons of the Church and may rightly affirm that if any such right could be prov'd the English Clergy must be Schismaticks in opposing it tho all the other pretences be overthrown For such a sort of Schism Dr. Hammond mentions p. 66. It may be observ'd indeed in our writers That they freely determine 1. That the Secular Prince hath a just external authority in Ecclesiastical affairs committed to him by God to enforce the execution of the Church's Canons upon all as well Clergy as Laity within his Dominions a thing denied by none 2. Again That the Secular Prince hath no internal Ecclesiastical authority delegated to him by God as to Administer the Sacraments to Absolve Excommunicate c. 3. Again That the Secular Prince hath no just authority to determine any thing concerning Divine Truths or perhaps other Ecclesiastical affairs without the Clergy's help and assistances But whether such Ecclesiastical Determinations or Laws are obligatory when the Prince makes these being assisted only with some small portion of the Clergy and oppos'd by the rest or also by a superior Council or Court Ecclesiastical Or whether the Prince against these provided that he have some lesser number of Clergy on his side may reverse former Canons or enact new to oblige the Clergy and Laity under his Dominion This they seem to me not freely to speak to most what to pass over and some of our later Writers when they are forc'd upon it rather to deny it And indeed neither is there any thing in the Oath of the King's Supremacy except it be in that general clause I will defend all Jurisdictions c. granted nor in the 37 Article of the Church of England which treats of the King's power in Ecclesiasticals that may seem to affirm or determine it For whereas the Oath in general makes the King only supreme Governor in Ecclesiasticals he may be so for some thing and yet not for every thing not therefore the supreme decider of all Divinity controversies And whereas the 34th Article expounds the Supremacy thus That he is to rule all estates and degrees committed to his charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastical or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the stubborn and evil-doers All this he may do and yet be ty'd in all things to the Laws of the Church and to leave to the Church's sole judgment who are evil-doers or Heretical persons c. when any controversie ariseth in Divine matters about the lawfulness of some Practice or truth of some Tenet § 39 Now let us search therefore how far the concessions of Bishop Bramhall and Dr. Hammond may extend to the confirmation of the foresaid assertions The Concessions of B. Bramhall und of Dr. Hammond in this matter The Bishop Vindic. c. 8. p. 232. hath this proposition
of a Negative Argument Tortus loca aliquot apponere debuit ubi Ecclesiae declaratio praecessit Which argument is this There is set down no such Declaration therefore there was no such An Argument of little strength always less here where so succinct a relation is made of so many hundred years and chiefly of the actions of the Kings not of the Church or Clergy But yet of whom may we think did Hezekiah and Josiah the Sons of such wicked Parents learn the Religion to which they reform'd the people but from some of the Clergy And is not this enough suppose it for a declaratio praecessit The King's power is more effective for a Reformation than the Priests because his Civil Sword awes men more than the Spiritual and therefore there King's part in it is more spoken of especially in a story written chiefly of the Kings except Jehoiada the Priest's Reformation when the King was a Child 2 Chron. 23. But the Kings without Priests in Church-matters may reform nothing because he is to learn from the Priests God's Law and what concerning it he is to reform The King may command also the Priest to do his duty according to this Law but then he must first learn from the Priest what is the Priest's duty according to that Law i. e. he may constrain in Spiritual matters any Priest to do what the Body of the Clergy and the Councils of the Church inform him that the Priest ought to do And he may not constrain in Spiritual matters any Priest to do what the said Clergy and Councils declare against The King may reestablish the Priests in their Office and exhort them to a faithful Administration thereof and yet it follows not that these formerly deserted or neglected this Office but only that they were formerly ejected from it and might for the future possibly neglect it and much less doth it follow that the King gave them any right to it or could justly deprive them of it § 39 This to the former Arguments and instances concerning the failing of the Church-Guides And so I have done with the Oeconomy of God's Church under the Law where to look back a little before I proceed farther to the times of the Gospel 1. I do not say That no Written Law can be plain enough for men to learn out of it without any authoriz'd Expositor thereof all Faith and Duty necessary to Salvation or for men to incur just Damnation in not yeilding Obedience to its Rules And therefore I do not say That an Expositor or Judg is absolutely necessary besides any such Law in this respect tho for many other respects he is as hath been shew'd before Neither do I affirm that if God giveth us not together with his Laws some external infallible Expositor of them he would be unjust or deficient in his Providence For the contrary of this appears in Heathenism where men having no external but fallible Guides yet having the Law of Nature and an internal Judg and Expositor thereof their own Conscience which in many of those Laws erreth not except in the most desperate and obdurate sinners and which whether they will or no within gives a right sentence against them are for offending against this Law justly condemn'd see Rom. 2.14 15. comp 12.2 Neither do I say that where God hath not appointed any one to seek the meaning of his Laws from anothers mouth there he may not caeteris paribus that is where he thinks his own abilities as great as other mens judg for himself and we ought to presume that where God hath set no such Directors over us there his Laws are delivered with clearness enough to be understood by our selves But 3ly This only I say That those to whom God in his overflowing goodness hath besides his Laws left also Guides and commanded them to obey these such cannot innocently withdraw their obedience from these Guides ought not to use their private judgment against these are safe if these Guides err in following them tho not the Guides safe in no better conducting them and that tho in some times these Guides to whom God referreth us for knowing his will may be much more corrupt than in others yet that these by God's care over his people can never so grosly erre as that their followers shall not receive from their doctrines all necessary knowledge for salvation and that this is sufficient to tie us always to their obedence 1. Because we cannot promise our selves this security in following our own private judgments which we have in following theirs for private men are not secure upon their own judgment from falling into fundamental errors as perhaps the Sadduces did in relinquishing the Moses-chair-men of their times 2ly Because if any mortal error should be supposed to have seazed upon these Supreme Governours on whom by his appointment all others depend it is to be hoped that God will never suffer it long but either change their opinions or the persons For in all extremities God sends speedy relief § 40 This being said from p. 4. of unfailing Guides and Judges for Spiritual matters in the times of the Law now we come to the times of the Gospel Where 1. Observe that if in these we prove an unfailing Church-authority to whose judgment and sentence we ought always to submit tho under the Law it were much otherwise and tho all that is said hitherto be cancelled yet this sufficiently serveth the intent of our Discourse namely to procure due obedience to the present Church-governours And indeed there want not many motives to perswade us that tho the law never had any such highly-priviledged Guides yet the Gospel hath and therefore that no arguments taken from the one can conclude any thing concerning the other Because the Gospel advanceth to a much higher perfection than the Law nay to the highest and is to have no further Testaments or Manifestations of God's will to succeed it as the Law and Old Testament was Deut. 18.15 18 19. Heb. 9.8 9 10. Because the Minister of this is not a Servant but the Master of the House himself the last Legislator the last Reformer and Consummator of all the my steries of Religion who came out of his Fathers bosom to reveal to men all his will and after him to come none other Heb. 1.2.9 10. 1 Jo. 17 18. Jo. 4.25 Because the Church under the Gospel hath a much nobler Priesthood founded in a Succession to this Son of God hath a far nobler Sacrifice a far nobler Unction of the Holy Ghost in the much more copious effusions thereof called Spiritus veritatis Jo. 14.17 and promised to lead them into all truth as well as holiness Jo. 16.13 A far more extended and stronger Tradition in the Gospel spread over all Nations and a far more numerous Sanedrim if I may so call the Churches Councils than the Law had and higher and clearer promises made to these of the Son of God the