one another in such cases The one is not to set a stumbling-block or an occasion to fall in another man's way that is not to use our liberty in such instances or on such occasions as may draw other men to act in imitation of us against their own Consciences This is the true notion of giving scandal or the laying a trap in the way of another by which he may fall or be catched And this every man is to avoid when it is free for him to act or not as he pleases for in that case only he is under this obligation and caution since otherwise if he is determined by any Law Divine or Humane he must go on and do his duty without considering what consequences may happen upon it for which he is not accountable since he is not at liberty to dispose of himself but is concluded by a higher Authority The other Rule is That we ought as much as may be to avoid doing any thing that may grieve other Christians which is said to be walking uncharitably since we ought to have such regard even to the tenderness and weakness of our Brethren as not to do such things as may wound or trouble them still under the former supposition that we are fully at our own liberty and under no law nor obligation to the contrary These are the Rules laid down by St. Paul which when well considered and rightly understood will give a great light into this whole Controversy By these it will appear that even the Apostles themselves who might have assumed a higher strain of Authority yet had great regards to the frailties of those they governed And although most of these Positions and Rules do suppose men to be in a state of an unrestrained liberty so that they do not belong to our case in which Laws and Constitutions have already determined us yet they ought still to have great weight with those that are not concluded by Laws and all such as may have the making or reviewing of Laws under their care and deliberation But I have opened this matter more fully than was perhaps necessary to my present purpose which only required that I should clear some Passages in St. Paul's Epistles that are applied to the Points now under examination though they do not at all belong to them since all that is in St. Paul relates only to such things as were entirely left to mens own liberty and in which it was free to them to act which way soever they pleased which are not at all applicable to established rules setled by Law and recommended by Ancient practice It is true that no Age of the Church since the Apostles days can make Laws for succeeding Ages since the Pastors of every Age have the same Authority that the Pastors of any precedent Age had after the times of Inspiration Whatever was done in a former Age may be altered in a subsequent one And therefore all those Rules of the subordination of Churches one to another being taken from the disposition of the Roman Empire Europe being now totally moulded into another frame are now at the discretion of Princes to cotinue or change them at their pleasure And all the Rituals of the Church are in the power of every Age to alter or continue them as they shall see cause but till they are altered they bind not by reason of any Authority that former Ages had over the present but because the present Age by not repealing former Rules and Canons does tacitly and interpretatively confirm and renew them For if the Pastors of the present Age in concurrence with and a due subordination to the Civil Powers have an Authority to make Laws or Canons in such matters they have likewise a power to continue such as were made in any former Age and they are presumed and in Law taken to do that till they repeal them I have now gone through the general Plea that is brought against our Constitutions from general Topicks and have I hope shewed that there is no force in any part of it I come next to consider such things as are objected more specially to several particulars in our Constitution They except to the Government of the Church because of the different Ranks of Bishop Priest and Deacon whereas the Scriptures use Bishop and Priest so promiscuously that from thence it seems reasonable to infer that they are one and the same Function and that there ought to be but two Ranks Bishop and Diacon in the Church But those who object this have really among them but one Function and Order since they have no Diacons in the sense of St. Paul's Epistles who are a Degree of Men dedicated to the Service of God out of which as any served well in it they were advanced to a superior Degree and were ever esteemed a Sacred Order of Men. There are none such among those who urge this Matter against us The Promiscuous use of Names does not prove the Offices the same The Apostles are called sometimes Deacons or Ministers and so are their Companions in Labour for the term Diacon signifying any one that Ministred It was not then appropriated to the lowest Order no more than Presbyter was to the second for the Apostles call themselves sometimes Deacons so that from hence an Argument might be drawn as well to prove that Deacons are equal in Rank to the highest Order of Bishops We plainly see That God setled three Orders of Officers in the Iewish Temple We see also in their Synagogues that there were three different Ranks taken probably from the Model of the Temple We see our Saviour chose twelve Apostles and afterwards Seventy Disciples having in that no doubt a regard both to the numbers of their Tribes and of their Sanhedrin We plainly see that during the Apostles lives the governing and ordering of the Church was in them yet they constituted some in their Name to govern a large extent of Churches and by their Epistles to these it is plain That the Power of governing those Churches and of ordaining new Officers in them belonged to them they being the Persons to whom that trust was committed with solemn Charges given them for it by the Apostles We plainly see two distinct Orders of Bishop and Deacon as two Sacred Functions that were to labour in the work of the Gospel and we find by the short Epistles in the beginnings of the Revelation that there was one Man who had the Immediate Charge of those Churches to whom every thing relating to them is addressed as to a Person that was accountable for the rest and that by consequence must be suppos'd to have an Authority over them We see immediately after the days of the Apostles that all the Churches were cast into one Mould of Bishop Priest and Diacon This taking place every where and that at a time when no Meetings of the Clergy could be held to establish any such Form and that no
Faculties since these passages and that which necessarily relates to them will lead a man into the understanding of the hardest parts of the whole New Testament If this method is let go they must prove the Infallibility of the Church by Arguments drawn from some other Visible Characters by which a man is to be convinc'd that God has made her Infallible If there were such eminent ones as the gift of Tongues Miracles or Prophecies that did visibly attest this here were a proof that were solid indeed It were the same with that by which we prove the Truth of the Christian Religion But then these Miracles must be as uncontestedly and evidently proved they must also belong to this point that is they must be Miracles publickly done to prove the truth of this Assertion But to this Appeal they will not stand what use soever they may make of it to amuse the weaker and the more credulous The Character of an uninterrupted Succession from the days of the Apostles is neither an easier nor a surer one since other Churches whom they condemn have it likewise nor can it be search'd into by a private man unless he would go into that Sea of examining the History the Records and Succession of Churches This is an Enquiry that has in it Difficulties vastly greater and more insuperable than all those that they can object to us If they will appeal to the vast Extent of a Church that so many Nations and Societies agree in the same Doctrine and are of one Communion this will prove to be a dangerous point for in the state in which we see Mankind Numbers make a very bad Argument It were to risque the Christian Religion too much to venture on a Poll with the Mahometans In some Ages the Semi-Arrians had the better at numbers and it is a question if at this day those that are within or without the Roman Communion make the greatest body Nor must a man be put to chuse his Religion by such a laborious and uncertain way of Calculation To plead a continuance in the same Doctrine that was at first deliver'd to the Church by the Apostles is to put the matter upon a more desperate issue For as no man can hope to see to the end of this so it lets a man in into all Controversies when he is to compare the present Doctrine with that which was deliver'd by the Apostles Let then any Character be assign'd that shall oblige a man to believe the Church Infallible and it will soon appear very evidently that the searching into that must put the world on more difficult Enquiries than any of those that we are pressed with and that in the issue of the whole the determination must be resolv'd into a private Judgment Another Difficulty follows close upon this which is In what Church this Infallibility is to be found Suppose a man was born in the Greek Church at any time since the IX Century how shall he know that he must seek the Infallibility in the Roman Communion and that he cannot find it in his own He plainly sees that the Christian Religion began in the Eastern parts and by every step that he makes into History he clearly discerns that it flourished for many Ages most eminently there but now that there is a breach between them and the Latins he cannot judge to which Communion he is to adhere without he examines the Doctrine for both have the outward Characters of a Succession of Martyrs and Bishops of Numbers and an appearance of continuing in the same Doctrine only with this difference that the Greeks have the advantage in every one of these they have more Apostolical Churches I mean founded by the Apostles than the Latins and they have stuck more firmly with fewer Additions and Innovations to their Ancient Rituals than the Latins have done How can he then decide this matter without examining the grounds of their difference and making a private Judgment upon a private Examination of the Scriptures or other Authorities If it be said that the present depress'd and ignorant state of those Churches makes it now very sensible that there can be no Infallibility among the Easterns To this it is to be answer'd that I have put the case all-along from the 9th Century downward In many of those Ages the Greeks were under as good Circumstances and had as fair an appearance as the Latins had if not better for the outward appearances of the Roman Communion in the next Centuries the 10th and 11th are not very favourable even by the Representation that their own Writers have made of them and if we must judge of the Infallibility of a Church by outward Characters it may be urg'd with great shews of Reason that a Church which under all its Poverty and Persecutions does still adhere to the Christian Religion has so peculiar a Character of bearing the Cross and of living in a constant state of Sufferings that if Infallibility be in the Church as a favour and priviledge from God and not as the effect of human Learning and other Advantages I should sooner believe the Greek Church Infallible than any other now in the World But when these difficulties are all got over there remain yet new and great ones Suppose one is satisfi'd that it is in the Roman Church he must know where to find it without this it is of no more use to him than if one should tell a hungry man that there is food enough for him without directing him where to seek for it he must starve after all that general Information if he has not a more particular direction And therefore it seems very absurd to affirm that the believing of Infallibility is an Article of Faith but that the proper Subject in whom it rests is not likewise an Article of Faith This is the general Tenet of the whole Roman Communion who that they may maintain their Union notwithstanding their difference in this do all agree in saying that the subject of this Infallibility is not a matter of Faith This destroys the whole pretension for all the Absurdities of no end of Controversies of private Judgment and every man's expounding the Scriptures do return here and the whole design of Infallibility is defeated For how can a man be bound to submit to this in any one Instance or to receive any proposition as coming from an Infailible Authority if he does not know who has it Thus according to that Maxim of Natural Logick that a Conclusion can have no certainty beyond that which was in both the Premises if it is not certain with whom the Infallibility dwells as well as that there is an Infallibility in the Church all the noise about it will be quite defeated and of no use If a man had many Medecines of which one was an Infallible Cure of such or such Diseases can it be suppos'd that he would communicate these to the World and tell that one of them
Authority which had put the Church in a stated line of Subordination according to the division of the Provinces of the Empire They acted only by an Imperial Authority so that though they were Bishops they acted by the Emperor's Commission Such Authorities as these drawn from the practices of the Iewish and the Primitive Church are at least strong Inducements to believe this to be true But the Argument that seems to determine it is That Men cannot be obliged to obey two different Authorities that may happen to contradict one another this were a strange distraction in Mens Thoughts and Consciences and therefore it cannot be supposed that God has put them under such a divided Authority for all Temporals will easily be fetched within an in ordine ad spiritualia Since then every Soul is bound under the hazard of damnation to obey the Supreme Powers we must be bound to obey their Laws in every thing that is not contrary to the Law of God which seems to be the only Limitation that this can admit of That settles this whole matter which otherwise must be ravelled out into vast Intricacies and yet it must be supposed for certain that the Rule for Mens obedience must be distinct and fixed To conclude this whole matter The best and surest way for preserving the Order and Authority of the Church as well as its Peace and Prosperity is for the Clergy to live and labour so to be so humble and modest so self-denied and heavenly-minded that from thence the Laity may be brought to see that whatsoever Power they have will be employed for the Publick good of the whole This will make them to be less jealous and more submissive and this will secure to them most commonly the protection and encouragement which they may expect from the Civil Powers who will be apt to have regard to their Clergy according to the esteem which they observe their other Subjects have for them DISCOURSE IV. Concerning the OBLIGATIONS To continue in the COMMUNION of the CHURCH THERE is nothing that concerns the Peace and Order of Churches and indeed the quiet and good Government of Mankind more than rightly to understand our Obligations to continue in the Communion of that Church in which we were born or which is the main Body of that Society of Christians among whom we live The extreams in this matter are dangerous on both hands A lazy Compliance with every thing that is uppermost because of the Law and Advantages that may be on its side and an implicite believing and receiving of every thing that happens to be proposed to us does on the one hand depress our Faculties render us so easy to every Form in Religion that we become at last indifferent to all and concerned in none it makes way for tyranny in those that govern and sinks those that are governed into a sottish stupidity On the other hand a wanton cavilling at every thing thebreaking of an Established Order the making Divisions and the drawing of Parties the quarrelling about nicer points of speculation or some lesser matters in Rituals do occasion much passion and animosity they take men much off from the great ends of Religion they divide Christians from one another and sharpen them against one another all which are Evils of so high a nature in themselves and in their Consequences that it will be of great advantage to find so true a mean in this matter that in it we may avoid the mischiefs of both extreams The foundation then to be laid here is first to consider the natural obligation that all men who are united by any common Bond come under to maintain a cordial affection and a mutual good understanding among themselves both as it is an instrument to preserve and strengthen their Body and as it makes such a Body of men easy and happy But this that is a consideration common to all joint Bodies of men becomes much stronger in the Christian Religion one of its main designs being to knit mens hearts to one another by a tenderness of brotherly kindness and charity our Saviour having made this the distinction by which all the world might know who were his disciples and who were not so And all his Apostles have in every one of their Epistles not excepting the shortest prest this in such a variety of copious and most earnest Directions that whosoever reads the New Testament carefully must see that this is enlarged on beyond all the other Duties of our Religion and prest in the most comprehensive words and with the most enforcing considerations possible the chief of all being the love which our Saviour himself bare to us in imitation of which he has required us to love one another to love enemies to pass by and to forgive injuries doing good for evil to relieve the necessitous and have bowels of compassion for all men This is a main part of the glory as well as of the duties of our Religon To advance this and to endear us to one another we are obliged to pray with and for one another we are bound to assemble our selves together that by our seeing of one another and meeting in the same Acts and Duties of Religion our love and union may become stronger and more firmly cemented Sacraments are sacred Rites instituted not only to maintain our Devotion towards God as Acts of Homage and Solemn Vows made to him but likewise as Bonds to knit us together as well as to unite us to our Head And it is no small confirmation of all this that our Saviour in his last and longest Prayer to the Father when he was interceding for his Church has repeated this Prayer so often no less than five times in no very long Prayer that they might be one and be kept and made perfect in one and the Unity prayed for is so sublime that it is compared to that unconceivable Unity or Union that was between the Father and the Son and by this the world was to be convinced of the truth of his Religion That the world might believe that the Father had sent him More needs not be said upon this Head to make it evident that it is of the greatest importance to the Christian Religion to maintain an entire union among its Members and that the chief mean of doing this is their uniting themselves in the same Acts of Worship Now the only Question that will remain will be How far must this go and the only Answer that can be made to it is That it must go till the Body in which we happen to be engaged imposes unlawful terms of Communion on its Members In that case we must remember that it is better to obey God than man and that we must seek peace and truth since an Union on unlawful terms is a combination against God and his Truth and is no piece of Christian Charity This will be agreed to on all hands in the general So I will go
Churches By another he designed to expose them to Scandal and Scorn He forbade Men and Women to meet together to worship God or Bishops to visit Women or Women to come to be instructed in their Schools and appointed that Women only should instruct Women He also forbade their holding Assemblies within Cities and ordered them to meet in the open Fields Some Churches were pulled down by his Orders and others were shut up and his first Successes made him resolve on a general Persecution For not only Eusebius but both Socrates Sozemen and several other Writers do all affirm That there was no general Persecution begun but that there were visible steps made towards it When all this was represented to Constantine he was much affected with it and resolved to help the oppressed and thought it was a pious and holy Action to save a mulitude by the destroying of one Person For he saw no other way was left to relieve the Oppressed and his engaging in a War with Licinius was by the Bishops of the East that is Licinius's own Subjects ascribed to an immediate Conduct and Providence of God It is true Eutropius puts this upon Constantine's Ambition and his aspiring to be the single Monarch of the World This is also insinuated by Aurelius Victor and more fully set out by Zosimus whose hatred both of Constantine and of the Christian Religion breaks out into so many Partialities unbecoming an Historian and engages him into so many Stories that are evidently false that little regard is due to any thing he says I will not enlarge upon the War that followed only I must observe that tho Constantine as the Senior Emperour had the precedence of Licinius yet he had no sort of Authority over him So here two Princes both equally Sovereigns of the Roman Empire Colleagues and Brothers-in-Law for Licinius had maried Constantine's Sister were engaged in a War the quarrel was not a general persecution but such steps made as did plainly discover there was one intended A Peace soon after followed The Cement of it was The declaring Licinius's Son Licinian Caesar who was then 21 years of Age this put him in the Succession But a second Rupture followed quickly after that Licinius's hatred to the Christians being rather encreased than abated since he observed that they all loved Constantine This proved fatal to Licinius for he was totally defeated at Andrianople the 3d of July 324. and after some fruitless Attempts he was forced to put himself in Constantines hand on the 18th of September following Whereupon he was sent to live a private man at Thessalonica but Constantine understanding that he could not rest ordered him to be put to death in the beginning of the Year 325. Now we are in the next place to see what was the sense of the whole Church of this Transaction I confess we ought not to take it singly from Eusebius for he is rather a perpetual Encomiast of Constantine than his Historian but we have a much more certain and Authentical Authority for this Constantine in the same year in which he had put Licinius to death and had taken no notice of Lucinian tho but a year before made Caesar by his own Act called the first General Council to meet at Nice For in his Speech to them he tells them that he had given Orders to call them together as soon as he had overcome the Tyranny The Council made no Exceptions to Constantine as an Invader they did neither enquire after Lucinian nor complain of Licinius's Fate On the contrary When Constantine came in and harangned them Eustathius of Antioch did entertain him with a Panegyrick full of high Commendations and another seems to have been made by Eusebius blessing Almighty God upon his account which Speeches pronounced in full Council are at least a strong Presumption that they all approved of the War and rejoiced in iâ— the deliverance This is yet more evident from the 11th Canon of the Council in which they reflect upon the late Tyranny of Licinius which shews that tho his death and the ruin of his Family must have naturally given some Compassion for one that was then scarce cold and that had so lately been their Prince for almost that whole Council consisted of those who had been the Bishops in his share of the Empire yet they considered the danger they and their Religion had been in under him and their deliverance by Constantine as vastly superiour to their Ties to him so that there was an Universal Ioy over the whole East upon the Successes of Constantine The having adhered to Licinius and taking part with him in the War tho he was then actually their Prince was a matter of such Scandal and Infamy that Constantine in a Letter which he writ to the Nicomedians against Ensebius their Bishop reproaches him with this That he had been always in Licinius's Councils and Secrets that he had all along stuck to him and had treated himself with Reproach that he had imployed Spies to procure Intelligence to Licinius and that he had given him all sort of Assistance except the bearing of Armes for him all which Constantine affirms he is ready to prove by some Priest and Deacons who had adher'd to Eusebius and whom he had taken Prisoners And thus we see what the sense of the whole Church in one of its best Ages and of the first General Council was of a Deliverance procured by one Sovereign Prince's attacking dethroning and possessing himself of the Empire of another who had not yet set on foot a General Persecution but had only violated the Laws which the Christians had for the security of their Religion had committed many Acts of Injustice and violence against them and had declared his Intentions so visibly that there was all possible reason to conclude that a General Persecution was coming on Not a Bishop nor a Priest stood out against Constantine not so much as a private Christian was of Licinius's Party All went into the Revolution and rejoiced in their Deliverance I will not go on to shâ—w how parallel that Case was to ours the attempt were as needless as it might seem invidious Only I may well conclude That it is not easy to imagine how we can be better assured of the sense of the whole Church in any point then we are of the sense of the Christians of that Age in this particular I have not said any thing to justify my putting Constantine's prevailâ—ing over Licinius in the Year immediately before the Council of Nice tho Baronius puts it six before it But it is visible that he has disordered the whole History of Constantine on design to maintain his being baptized at Rome with other unjustifiable things besides that Eusebius's Chronology in this particular as it is of authority of it self without any other support so it is fully confirmed by the dates of some Laws in the Code and several
by their Princes as the fittest to serve their ends Now if the Divine Grant be to the whole Body it will not be easy to shew that even the most numerous of those Meetings that pass for General Councils were truly such Or if it is said that those few of remote Provinces come in the name of the rest and so represent them it must first appear whether such a thing as Infallibility can be deputed indeed where a Controversy is already known Churches may send men fully instructed in their Doctrine who may be thereby well impower'd to declare how the Doctrine and Tradition has been setled among them But if a Judgment is to be made upon the hearing of Parties and the discussing their Reasons on both sides which must be the case otherwise here is no Infallible Judge then in that case men at a distance who never heard the matter but very generally and partially cannot do this therefore such as come to a Council must have the full power of Judging We know that in Fact such Powers or Instructions are seldom given and in these latter Ages they will not at all be allow'd for the Bishops so instructed must be consider'd as the Proxies of their Principals and vote in their name which is contrary to the practice of all Councils exept that of Basile and can never be endured at Rome where every Italian Bishop tho his See is in some places but a small Parish is reckon'd in the Vote equal with any of those few that come from great Provinces Now these are all Difficulties of such weight that it will not be easy to settle them with any Divine Warrants the Scripture being silent as to all such matters Nor is it clear whether the whole Council must agree in the same Sentence or if a major number tho exceeding by one single voice is sufficient If the Council at Ierusalem is insisted on as the Precedent to other Councils we see that All agreed there And if this Infallibility is a power that Christ has left in his Church as necessary for her Peace and Preservation it may be reasonable enough to suppose that for giving their decisions the more Authority he should so order this matter by his Providence that they should all agree in their Judgments For after all when a thing is carri'd but by One vote tho according to the Rules of all Human Courts it must be good in Law yet it is not easy to think that God would lodge such an Authority and suffer it to turn upon so small and so despicable an Inequality In conclusion It does not appear from the Scriptures whether in such decisions the Bishops should expect a Divine Inspiration such as that which setled the Judgment in the Council of Ierusalem or not The meaning of those words It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to Vs seems to be this That as they of themselves were resolv'd on making that decision so an immediate Inspiration which was own'd by them all did finally determine them in their Resolution Or it may be suppos'd to relate to that Effusion of the Holy Ghost upon Cornelius and his Friends that being a solemn Declaration that men might be accepted of God while they were yet uncircumcised and that by consequence the Gentiles were not bound to the observance of those Precepts which did not oblige any but such as were circumcised So that what they then decreed was only a general Inference which they drew from that particular case And so they made a decision in favour of all the Gentiles from that which had happened to Cornelius This is the clearest account that can be given of these words which understood otherwise look as if they had added their decision as the giving a further weight to that made by the Holy Ghost or as a Vehicle to convey it which is too absurd to suppose Now if any build upon that Council they must make the parallel just and shew that the Holy Ghost interposes in their Conclusions To all these Considerations we must add this That the first Councils are to be supposed to have understood their own Authority or at least the sense of the Church at that time concerning it They considered the several Passages of Scripture and framed their Decisions out of them which were afterwards defended by some who had been of their Body not as if their Authority or Decision had put an end to the Controversy They urge indeed the great numbers of the Bishops that made those Decisions but use that rather as a strong Inducement to beget a prejudice in their favour than as an Authority that could not be contradicted In this strain does Athanasius defend the Council of Nice For indeed even that of Numbers was to be sparingly urged after the Council at Arimini where Numbers were on the other side The chief Writers of those times make their Appeals to the Scriptures they bring many Passages out of them and are very short and defective in making out the Doctrine of the Church from Tradition or Fathers Athanasius names not above four and these had lived very near that time two of them Origen and Dionysius were claimed by the other Side There are but few and very late Authorities alledged in the Council of Ephesus and those at Chalcedon made their definition chiefly upon the Authority and reguard to Pope Leo's Letter in which there are indeed very many Allegations from Scripture but not so much as one from any Father Thus it is plain both from the Practice of those Councils and the Disputes of those who writ in defence of their Decisions that it was not then believed that they had any Infallible Authority since that is never so much as once claimed by any of that time that I know of a great deal being said to the contrary by many of them It is true there are some high Expressions both in some of the Councils and in some of the Fathers of that time which import that they believed they were directed by God But this is no other than what may be said concerning any Body of Good and Learned men who use a great deal of pious caution in forming their Decisions Therefore great difference is to be made between a plain assuming an Infallible Authority and Rhetorical Hints of their being guided by the Holy Ghost the former does not appear and the latter shews that such as used those ways of speaking did not think them infallible but they believing that they had made good Decisions did upon that presume that they were guided by the Holy Ghost And thus it appears in a great variety of Considerations that we have no reason to believe that there is an Infallibility in a General Council and that we do not so much as know what is necessary to make one And to sum up all that belongs to this Head The Decisions of those Councils must have an Infallible Expounder as well as it
All the greater Bodies of those who divide from our Constitutions have some Rituals of their own so the Dispute in this must only be concerning the degrees and extent of this Power For if any Authority is allowed it will not be easy to fix any other Bounds to it but this that it must not invade the Divine Authority nor do any thing beyond the Rules and Limits set in the Scriptures for if there is the least degree of Authority in the Church the grounds upon which it is founded must carry it to every thing that cannot be proved to be unlawful Bare unfitness though it ought to be a Consideration of great weight when such things are deliberated about yet when they are once concluded can be no reason for disobeying them since the fitness of Order and the decency of Unity and Obedience is certainly of much more value than any special unfitness that can be supposed to be in any particular Instance So that one of these two must be admitted either that the Pastors of the Church have no sort of Authority even in the smallest Circumstances but are limited by the Rules of the Scripture and can only execute them strictly and not go beyond them in a title or this Authority must go to every thing that is lawful On that I will dwell no longer here the fuller discussion of this matter belonging to another Discourse It is a natural Consequence of the Authority given to the Pastors of the Church That they having declared and fixed their Doctrine and having setled Rules for their Rituals may excommunicate such as either do not live according to the Rules of their Religion which are a main part of their Doctrine or do not obey the Constitutions of their Society Excommunication in the Strictness of things is only the Churches refusing to receive a person into her Communion now as every Private man is the Master of his own Actions it is clear that every Body of Men must also be the Masters of theirs And thus though Excommunication in some respects is declaratory it being a solemn denunciation of the Judgments of God according to the tenor of the Gospel against persons who live in an open violation of some one or more of its Laws so it is also an authoritative Act by which a Church refuses to communicate with such a Person In this it is true Churches ought to make the terms of Communion with them as large and extensive as may consist with the Rules of Religion and of Order but after all they having a Power over themselves and their own Actions must be supposed to be likewise cloathed with a Power to communicate with other Persons or not to do it as they shall see cause in which great difference is to be made between this Power in it self and the use and management of it for any Abuses whether true or only pretended though they may well be urged to procure a proper Reformation of them yet cannot be alledged against the Power it self which is both just and necessary It is not so very clear to state the Subordination in which the Church is to be put under the Civil Power and how far all Acts of Church Power are subject to the Laws and Policies of those States to which the several Churches do belong It is certain that the Magistrate's being a Christian or not does not at all alter the Case that has only a relation to his own salvation for his Authority is the same whatever his Belief may be in matters of Religion His design to protect or to destroy Religion alters the Case more sensibly for the regards to that Protection and to the Peace and Order that follow upon it together with the Breaches and Disorders that might follow upon an ill understanding between Church and State are matters of Such Consequence that it is not only meer Prudence which may give perhaps too strong a Bias to carnal Fears and Policies but the Rules of Religion which oblige the Church to study to preserve that Order and Protection which is one of the chief Blessings of the Society and a main Instrument of doing much good Great difference is to be made between an Authority that acts with a visible design to destroy Religion and another that intends to protect it but that errs in its conduct and does often restrain the Rules of Order and impose hard and uneasy things Certainly in the latter much is to be born with that may be otherwise uneasy because the main is stil safe and private slips when endured and submitted to can never be compared to those publick disorders that a rigid maintaining of that which is perhaps in it self good must occasion But when the design is plain and that the Conduct of the Civil Powers goes against the Truth of Religion either in whole or in any main Article of it then the Body of the Christians of that State ought to fortify themselves by maintaining their Order and their other Rules in so far as they are necessary to their preservation Upon the whole matter it does not appear that the Church has any Authority to act in opposition to the State but meerly in those things in which the Religion that she professes is plain and positive so that the Question comes to be really this Whether is it better to obey God than Man There the Rule is clear and the Decision is soon made So when the Church acts meerly in obedience to Rules and Laws laid down in Scripture such as in declaring the Doctrine in administring the Sacraments and maintaining the setled Officers of the Church she is upon a sure Bottom and must cast her self upon the Providence of God whatever may happen and still obey God but in all things that have arisen out of ancient Customs and Canons in every thing where she has not a Law of God to support her I do not see any Power she has to act in opposition to Law and to the Supreme Civil Authority In this the constant practice of the Iews is no small Argument whos 's Sanhedrin that was a Civil Court and the Head of their State did give Rules and Orders which their Priests were bound to obey when not contrary to the Law of God We are sure this was the Rule in our Saviour's time and it was never censured nor reproved by him nor by the Apostles The Argument is also strong that is drawn from the constant practice of the Church from the time that she first had the protection of the Civil Authority till the times of the Papal Domination in which we find the Emperours all along making Laws concerning all the Administrations of the Church we find them receiving Appeals in all Church matters which they appointed such Bishops as hapned to be about their Courts to examine This was like our Court of Delegates for the Bishops who judged those matters did not act according to Canon or by the Ecclesiastical
Laws of Princes were made to Enact it and no Men of Authority could so early and so universally have brought such a change into the Order of the Church when there was nothing to tempt any to affect Preheminence Labour and Sufferings being all that then follow'd this Superiour Rank and yet within less than one Century after the days of the Apostles we do plainly see that this was the Constitution even of those Churches that had been gathered and setled by the Apostles themselves Among whom so visible a thing as the Order in which they had put the Church could not possibly be soon forgotten and this was not complain'd of by the Sects of those days particularly the Montanists that had so fair an appearance by their praying and fasting so much that not only Tertullian was drawn away by it but even the Church seems to have taken a Tincture from some of their Methods whether in imitation of them or on design to out-do them is not so easy to determine yet nothing of this kind was ever objected as if the Church had by the Authority given to Bishops departed from the Apostolical Customs Now I will acknowledge that a bare practice tho very Ancient such as the giving the Eucharist to Infants without a colour for it in Scripture ought not to conclude us but when there is a great deal in Scripture that looks favourably to a thing tho the proof from the words alone should not seem full and positive and when the first Writings and clearest Practices of the Ages that immediately follow'd confirms such an Exposition then we have all that is possible for us to pretend to for giving a fixed and determinate sense to such passages From all this then it is clear that we are now upon the same Constitution as to the main on which the Apostles setled the Churches and that we have all the reason that a thing of this nature is capable of to conclude That the distinction of Bishop Priest and Deacon was setled by the Apostles themselves and is related to by many places in the New Testament The division of the World into Diocesses larger or narrower as well as of Parishes some being excessively large and others as unreasonably small does not a whit alter the nature of the thing in it self since tho' it were to be desir'd that Parishes were nearer an equality in point of Labour and Cure yet this is an Inconvenience that we must bear and not disturb the Church by seeking undue Remedies for it So such Disorders as a length of time a corruption of Manners a change of Governments and Civil Policies has brought into a Constitution may put it out of our Power to procure the Redress of many things that yet will as little warrant a renting the Body or dividing the Church upon any such account as it would justify the lazy Sloth of such as may bring things to a better State and yet do not set about it nor do heartily endeavour it Another head of Objections is to set-forms of Prayer in general as a stinting of the Spirit of Prayer of which mention is often made in the New Testament and which ought to have scope given to it since it is a mean to rouze up and quicken heavy minds which become flat when accustom'd to a constant form of Words that render both the Clergy lazy and the People Dead But when it is consider'd that every Man's words become a form to which all the rest of the Assembly is limited the question then lies naturally between the sudden conceptions of one Man who is often young rash without Judgment and who always speaks on the sudden and between a form well digested and prepared by a Body of wise and good Men Since then the People must be under a Form it may seem much more reasonable that they should be under such a form than under the other and that the rather since we see Moses David and the Prophets of old gave the Jewish Church so many forms both for Prayers and Praises We know that in our Saviour's time the Iews had a stated Liturgy of their own which our Saviour was so far from blaming that he himself prescribed his Disciples a Form and compos'd it out of theirs laying together so many Petitions drawn out of their Prayers as answer'd his end in appointing his own And Praises seeming to be the sublimest Acts of Worship in which the Soul ought to arise to its highest Elevation it is not easily accountable why so much excitation should be required in Prayer while Men are left to be still flat and formal in their Praises It is not to be deni'd but that among the extraordinary Gifts that follow'd the wonderful Effusion of the Holy Ghost one was That Men were Inspir'd to offer up such Prayers to God as comprehended the necessities of whole Congregations it appearing in those Prayers that the Spirit in him that pray'd searched all their Hearts and so did prompt him with groanings that were unutterable and it thus appearing that the Spirit or Inspiration which moved any to pray in this sort searched all things every Man finding the sense of his own Heart thus open'd together with suitable Intercessions it was from thence evident that this was the Spirit of God making Intercession for the Saints in the mouth and words of the Inspir'd Person This being a plain account of those words of Praying in or by the Spirit and well agreeing with every thing said concerning it in the New Testament it is a great mistake if we in these days should expect any such Assistances from God So that now a readiness of new or tender Expressions in Prayer is an effect of a quickness of Thought a liveliness of Imagination together with a good Memory much conversant in Scripture-Phrases and long practised in that way All things by a long use grow flat to minds that are not seriously awaken'd but extemporary Prayers do rather kill than feed true Devotion since they must be hearkened to as Discourses which is a distraction to him that Prays after them whereas those accustom'd to set-forms have only the things themselves that their Devotion relate to in their view so they are certainly less tempted to distraction than they must be who follow the other way Those sudden starts that are given to the mind by soft Words and melting Images of things may be according to the different Compositions of Men more or less useful to them in their secret Exercises but they ought not to be let in upon publick Assemblies which being made up of a great variety of Tempers must be entertain'd only with such Devotions that suit with all their Conditions and do equally quadrate to all their necessities and thus it is not only natural but necessary for all Men who will maintain Order in their Worship and will frame it in so diffus'd an extent as to take all equally within it that they have