For others I shall be incurious because the number of them that honour you is the same with them that honour Learning and Piety and they are the best Theatre and the best judges amongst which the world must needs take notice of my ambition to be ascribed by my publike pretence to be what I am in all heartinesse of Devotion and for all the reason of the world My Honour'd Lord Your Lordships most faithfull and most affectionate servant J. TAYLOR The Contents of the Sections SECTION I. OF the Nature of Faith and that its duty is compleated in believing the Articles of the Apostles Creed Pag. 5. SECT II. Of Heresy and the nature of it and that it is to be accounted according to the strict capacity of Christian Faith and not in Opinions speculative nor ever to pious persons pag. 18. SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined pag. 59. SECT IV. Of the difficulty of Expounding Scripture pag. 73. SECT V. Of the insufficiency and uncertainty of Tradition to expound Scripture or determine Questions pag. 83. SECT VI. Of the uncertainty and insufficiency of Councels Ecclesiasticall to the same purpose pag. 101. SECT VII Of the fallibility of the Pope and the uncertainty of his Expounding Scripture and resolving Questions pag. 125. SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiasticall to determine our Questions with certainty and Truth pag. 151. SECT IX Of the incompetency of the Church in its diffusive capacity to be Iudge of Controversies and the impertinency of that pretence of the Spirit pag. 161. SECT X. Of the authority of Reason and that it proceeding upon the best grounds is the best judge pag. 165. SECT XI Of some causes of Errour in the exercise of Reason which are inculpate in themselves pag. 171. SECT XII Of the innocency of Errour in opinion in a pious person pag. 184. SECT XIII Of the deportment to be used towards persons disagreeing and the reasons why they are not to be punished with death c. pag. 189. SECT XIIII Of the practice of Christian Churches towards persons disagreeing and when Persecution first came in pag. 203. SECT XV. How farre the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions pag. 210. SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions pag. 213. SECT XVII Of compliance with disagreeing persons or weak Consciences in generall pag. 217. SECT XVIII A particular consideration of the Opinions of the Anabaptists pag. 223 SECT XIX That there may be no Toleration of Doctrines inconsistent with piety or the publique good pag. 246. SECT XX. How farre the Religion of the Church of Rome is Tolerable pag. 249. SECT XXI Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion pag. 262. SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how farre they may doe it pag. 264. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 OF THE LIBERTY OF PROPHESYING THe infinite variety of Opinions in matters of Religion as they have troubled Christendome with interests factions and partialities so have they caused great divisions of the heart and variety of thoughts and designes amongst pious and prudent men For they all seeing the inconveniences which the dis-union of perswasions and Opinions have produced directly or accidentally have thought themselves obliged to stop this inundation of mischiefes and have made attempts accordingly But it hath hapned to most of them as to a mistaken Physitian who gives excellent physick but mis-applies it and so misses of his cure so have these men their attempts have therefore been ineffectuall for they put their help to a wrong part or they have endeavoured to cure the symptomes and have let the disease alone till it seem'd incurable Some have endeavoured to re-unite these fractions by propounding such a Guide which they were all bound to follow hoping that the Unity of a Guide would have perswaded unity of mindes but who this Guide should be at last became such a Question that it was made part of the fire that was to be quenched so farre was it from extinguishing any part of the flame Others thought of a Rule and this must be the meanes of Union or nothing could doe it But supposing all the World had been agreed of this Rule yet the interpretation of it was so full of variety that this also became part of the disease for which the cure was pretended All men resolv'd upon this that though they yet had not hit upon the right yet some way must be thought upon to reconcile differences in Opinion thinking so long as this variety should last Christ's Kingdome was not advanced and the work of the Gospel went on but slowly Few men in the mean time considered that so long as men had such variety of principles such severall constitutions educations tempers and distempers hopes interests and weaknesses degrees of light and degrees of understanding it was impossible all should be of one minde And what is impossible to be done is not necessary it should be done And therefore although variety of Opinions was impossible to be cured and they who attempted it did like him who claps his shoulder to the ground to stop an earth-quake yet the inconveniences arising from it might possibly be cured not by uniting their beliefes that was to be dispaird of but by curing that which caus'd these mischiefes and accidentall inconveniences of their disagreeings For although these inconveniences which every man sees and feeles were consequent to this diversity of perswasions yet it was but accidentally and by chance in as much as wee see that in many things and they of great concernment men alow to themselves and to each other a liberty of disagreeing and no hurt neither And certainely if diversity of Opinions were of it selfe the cause of mischiefes it would be so ever that is regularly and universally but that we see it is not For there are disputes in Christendome concerning matters of greater concernment then most of those Opinions that distinguish Sects and make factions and yet because men are permitted to differ in those great matters such evills are not consequent to such differences as are to the uncharitable managing of smaller and more inconsiderable Questions It is of greater consequence to believe right in the Question of the validity or invalidity of a death-bed repentance then to believe aright in the Question of Purgatory and the consequences of the Doctrine of Predetermination are of deeper and more materiall consideration then the products of the beliefe of the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of private Masses and yet these great concernments where a liberty of Prophecying in these Questions hath been permitted hath made no distinct Communion no sects of Christians and the others have and so have these too in those places where they have peremptorily been determind on either side Since then if men are
us then the Mosaicall precepts of putting Adulterers to death and trying the accused persons by the waters of jealousie And thus in these two Instances I have given account what Numb 20. is to be done in Toleration of diversity of opinions The result of which is principally this Let the Prince and the Secular Power have a care the Common-wealth be safe For whether such or such a Sect of Christians be to be permitted is a question rather Politicall then Religious for as for the concernments of Religion these instances have furnished us with sufficient to determine us in our duties as to that particular and by one of these all particulars may be judged And now it were a strange inhumanity to permit Jewes in Numb 21. a Common-wealth whose interest is served by their inhabitation and yet upon equall grounds of State and Policy not to permit differing Sects of Christians For although possibly there is more danger mens perswasions should be altered in a commixture of divers Sects of Christians yet there is not so much danger when they are changed from Christian to Christian as if they be turn'd from Christian to Iew as many are daily in Spaine and Portugall And this is not to be excused by saying the Church hath no Numb 22. power over them qui foris sunt as Iewes are For it is true the Church in the capacity of Spirituall regiments hath nothing to doe with them because they are not her Diocesse Yet the Prince hath to doe with them when they are subjects of his regiment They may not be Excommunicate any more then a stone may be kild because they are not of the Christian Communion but they are living persons parts of the Common-Wealth infinitely deceived in their Religion and very dangerous if they offer to perswade men to their opinions and are the greatest enemies of Christ whose honour and the interest of whose Service a Christian Prince is bound with all his power to maintaine And when the Question is of punishing disagreeing persons with death the Church hath equally nothing to doe with them both for she hath nothing to doe with the temporall sword but the Prince whose Subjects equally Christians and Iewes are hath equall power over their persons for a Christian is no more a subject then a Iew is The Prince hath upon them both the same power of life and death so that the Iew by being no Christian is not foris or any more an exempt person for his body or his life then the Christian is And yet in all Churches where the secular power hath temporall reason to tolerate the Iewes they are tolerated without any scruple in Religion which thing is of more consideration because the Iewes are direct Blasphemers of the Sonne of God and Blasphemy by their own Law the Law of Moses is made capitall And might with greater reason be inflicted upon them who acknowledge its obligation then urg'd upon Christians as an Authority enabling Princes to put them to death who are accused of accidentall and consequutive Blasphemy and Idolatry respectively which yet they hate and disavow with much zeale and heartinesse of perswasion And I cannot yet learn a reason why we shall not be more complying with them who are of the houshold of Faith for at least they are children though they be but rebellious children and if they were not what hath the Mother to doe with them any more then with the Iewes they are in some relation or habitude of the Family for they are consigned with the same Baptism professe the same Faith delivered by the Apostles are erected in the same hope and look for the same glory to be reaveled to them at the comming of their Common Lord and Saviour to whose Service according to their understanding they have vowed themselves And if the disagreeing persons be to be esteemed as Heathens and Publicans yet not worse Have no company with them that 's the worst that is to be done to such a man in S. Pauls judgement Yet count him not as an enemy but admonish him as a brother SECT XXI Of the duty of particular Churches in allowing Communion FRom these premises we are easily instructed concerning the lawfulnesse or duty respectively of Christian Communion Numb 1. which is differently to bee considered in respect of particular Churches to each other and of particular men to particular Churches For as for particular Churches they are bound to allow Communion to all those that professe the same Faith upon which the Apostles did give Communion For whatsoever preserves us as Members of the Church gives us title to the Communion of Saints and whatsoever Faith or beliefe that is to which God hath promised Heaven that Faith makes us Members of the Catholick Church Since therefore the Iudiciall Acts of the Church are then most prudent and religious when they nearest imitate the example and piety of God To make the way to Heaven straighter then God made it or to deny to communicate with those whom God will vouchsase to be united and to refuse our charity to those who have the same Faith because they have not all our opinions and believe not every thing necessary which we over-value is impious and Schismaticall it inferres Tyranny on one part and perswades and tempts to uncharitablenesse and animosities on both It dissolves Societies and is an enemy to peace it busies men in impertinent wranglings and by names of men and titles of factions it consignes the interessed parties to act their differences to the height and makes them neglect those advantages which piety and a goodlife bring to the reputation of Christian Religion and Societies And therefore Vincentius Lirinensis and indeed the whole Numb 2. Church accounted the Donatists Hereticks upon this very ground Cap. 11. Vid. Pacian Epist. ad Sempron 2. because they did imperiously deny their Communion to all that were not of their perswasion whereas the Authors of that opinion for which they first did separate and make a Sect because they did not break the Churches peace nor magisterially prescib d to others were in that disagrecing and errour accounted Catholicks Divisio enim disunio facit vos haereticos pax unit as L. 2. c. 95. contra liter Petilian faciunt Catholicos said S. Austin and to this sense is that of S. Paul If I had all faith and had not charity I am nothing He who upon confidence of his true beliefe denies a charitable Communion to his brother loses the reward of both And if Pope Victor had been as charitable to the Asiaticks as Pope Anicetus and S. Polycarp were to each other in the same disagreeing concerning Easter Victor had not been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so bitterly reprov'd and condemn'd as he was for the uncharitable managing of his disagreeing by Polycrates and Euseb. l. 5. c. 25 26. Irenaeus Concordia enim quae est charitat is effectus est unio
voluntatum non opinionum True Faith which leads to charity Aquin. 22 ae q 37 a 1. leads on to that which unites wills and affections not opinions Upon these or the like considerations the Emperour Zeno Numb 3. publish'd his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which he made the Nicene Creed to be the medium of Catholick Communion and although he liv'd after the Councell of Chalcedon yet he made not the Decrees of that Councell an instrument of its restraint and limit as preferring the peace of Christendome and the union of charity farre before a forced or pretended unity of perswasion which never was or ever will be reall and substantiall and although it were very convenient if it could be had yet it is therefore not necessary because it is impossible and if men please whatever advantages to the publick would be consequent to it may be supply'd by a charitable complyance and mutuall permission of opinion and the offices of a brotherly affection prescrib'd us by the Lawes of Christianity And we have seen it that all Sects of Christians when they have an end to be serv'd upon a third have permitted that liberty to a second which we now contend for and which they formerly deny'd but now grant that by joyning hands they might be the stronger to destroy the third The Arrians and Meletians joyned against the Catholicks The Catholicks and Novatians joyn'd against the Arrians Now if men would doe that for charity which they doe for interest it were handsomer and more ingenuous For that they doe permit each others disagreeings for their interest 's sake convinces them of the lawfulnesse of the thing or else the unlawnesse of their own proceedings and therefore it were better they would serve the ends of charity then of faction for then that good end would hallow the proceeding and make it both more prudent and more pious while it serves the design of religious purposes SECT XXII That particular men may communicate with Churches of different perswasions and how farre they may doe it AS for the duty of particular men in the Question of communicating with Churches of different perswasions it is Numb 1. to be regulated according to the Lawes of those Churches for if they require no impiety or any thing unlawfull as the condition of their Communion then they communicate with them as they are Servants of Christ as Disciples of his Doctrine and subjects to his Laws and the particular distinguishing Doctrine of their Sect hath no influence or communication with him who from another Sect is willing to communicate with all the Servants of their Common Lord For since no Church of one name is infallible a wise man may have either the misfortune or a reason to believe of every one in particular that she erres in some Article or other either he cannot communicate with any or else he may communicate with all that doe not make a sinne or the profession of an errour to be the condition of their Communion And therefore as every particular Church is bound to Tolerate disagreeing persons in the senses and for the reasons above explicated so every particular person is bound to Tolerate her that is not to refuse her Communion when he may have it upon innocent conditions For what is it to me if the Greek Church denies Procession of the third Person from the second so she will give me the right hand of Fellowship though I affirm it therefore because I professe the Religion of Jesus Christ and retain all matters of Faith and necessity But this thing will scarce be reduced to practise for few Churches that have fram'd bodies of Confession and Articles will endure any person that is not of the same confession which is a plaine demonstration that such bodies of Confession and Articles doe much hurt by becomming instruments of separating and dividing Communions and making unnecessary or uncertain propositions a certaine meanes of Schism and disunion But then men would doe well to consider whether or no such proceedings doe not derive the guilt of Schism upon them who least think it and whether of the two is the Schismatick he that makes unnecessary and supposing the state of things inconvenient impositions or he that disobeyes them because hee cannot without doing violence to his conscience believe them Hee that parts Communion because without sinne hee could not entertain it or they that have made it necessary for him to separate by requiring such conditions which to man are simply necessary and to his particular are either sinfull or impossible The Summe of all is this There is no security in any thing Numb 2. or to any person but in the pious and hearty endeavours of a good life and neither sinne nor error does impede it from producing its proportionate and intended effect because it is a direct deletery to sin and an excuse to errors by making them innocent and therefore harmlesse And indeed this is the intendment and design of Faith For that we may joyn both ends of this Discourse together therefore certain Articles are prescribed to us and propounded to our understanding that so we might be supplyed with instructions with motives and engagements to incline and determine our wills to the obedience of Christ. So that obedience is just so consequent to Faith as the acts of will are to the dictates of the understanding Faith therefore being in order to obedience and so farre excellent as it selfe is a part of obedience or the promoter of it or an engagement to it it is evident that if obedience and a good life be secured upon the most reasonable and proper grounds of Christianity that is upon the Apostles Creed then Faith also is secur'd Since whatsoever is beside the duties the order of a good life cannot be a part of Faith because upon Faith a good life is built all other Articles by not being necessary are no otherwise to be requir'd but as they are to be obtain'd and fourd out that is morally and fallibly and humanely It is fit all truths be promoted fairely and properly and yet but few Articles prescribed Magisterially nor framed into Symbols and bodies of Confession least of all after such composures should men proceed so furiously as to say all disagreeing after such declarations to be damnable for the future and capitall for the present But this very thing is reason enough to make men more limited in their prescriptions because it is more charitable in such suppositions so to doe But in the thing it selfe because few kinds of errours are damnable it is reasonable as few should be capitall And because Numb 3. every thing that is damnable in it selfe and before Gods Judgement Seat is not discernable before men and questions disputable are of this condition it is also very reasonable that fewer be capitall then what are damnable and that such Questions should bee permitted to men to believe because they must be left to
these times have been called the last times for 1600 years together our expectation of the Great revelation is very neer accomplishing what a Grand innovation of Ecclesiasticall government contrary to the faith practice of Christendome may portend now in these times when we all expect Antichrist to be revealed is worthy of a jealous mans inquiry Secondly Episcopacy 2. if we consider the finall cause was instituted as an obstructive to the diffusion of Schisme and Heresy So in 1. ad Titū S. Hierome In toto orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur coeteris VT SCHISMATVM SEMINA TOLLERENTUR And therefore if Vnity and division be destructive of each other then Episcopacy is the best deletery in the world for Schisme and so much the rather because they are in eâdem materiâ for Schisme is a division for things either personall or accidentall which are matters most properly the subject of government and there to be tryed there to receive their first and last breath except where they are starv'd to death by a desuetude and Episcopacy is an Unity of person governing and ordering persons and things accidentall and substantiall and therefore a direct confronting of Schisme not only in the intention of the author of it but in the nature of the institution Now then although Schismes alwaies will be and this by divine prediction which clearly showes the necessity of perpetuall Episcopacy and the intention of its perpetuity either by Christ himselfe ordaining it who made the prophecy or by the Apostles and Apostolick men at least who knew the prophecy yet to be sure these divisions and dangers shall be greater about and at the time of the Great Apostacy for then were not the houres turned into minutes an universall ruine should seize all Christendome No flesh should be saved if those daies were not shortned is it not next to an evidence of fact that this multiplication of Schismes must be removendo prohibens and therefore that must be by invalidating Episcopacy ordayn'd as the remedy and obex of Schisme either tying their hands behind them by taking away their coercion or by putting out their eyes by denying them cognisance of causes spirituall or by cutting off their heads and so destroying their order How farre these will lead us I leave to be considered This only Percute pastores atque oves despergentur and I believe it will be verified at the comming of that wicked one I saw all Israel scattered upon the Mountaines as sheep having no sheapheard I am not new in this conception I learn't it of S. Cyprian Christi adversarius Ecclesiae ejus inimicus Epist. 55. ad hoc ECCLESIae PRAEPOSITVM suâ infestatione persequitur ut Gubernatore sublato atrociùs atque violentiùs circà Ecclesiae naufragin grassetur The adversary of Christ and enemy of his Spouse therefore persecutes the Bishop that having taken him away he may without check pride himselfe in the ruines of the Church and a little after speaking of them that are enemies to Bishops he sayes that Antichristi jam propinquantis adventum imitantur their deportment is just after the guise of Antichrist who is shortly to be revealed But be this conjecture vaine or not the thing of it selfe is of deep consideration and the Catholick practise of Christendome for 1500 years is so insupportable a prejudice against the enemies of Episcopacy that they must bring admirable evidence of Scripture or a cleare revelation proved by Miracles or a contrary undoubted tradition Apostolicall for themselves or else hope for no beliefe against the prescribed possession of so many ages But before I begin mee thinks in this contestation ubi potior est conditio possidentis it is a considerable Question what will the Adversaries stake against it For if Episcopacy cannot make its title good they loose the benefit of their prescribed possession If it can I feare they will scarce gain so much as the obedience of the adverse party by it which yet already is their due It is very unequall but so it is ever when Authority is the matter of the Question Authority never gaines by it for although the cause goe on its side yet it looses costs and dammages for it must either by faire condescention to gain the adversaries loose something of it selfe or if it asserts it selfe to the utmost it is but where it was but that seldome or never happens for the very questioning of any authority hoc ipso makes a great intrenchment even to the very skirts of its cloathing But hûc deventumest Now we are in we must goe over FIrst then that wee may build upon a Rock §. 1. Christ did institute a governement in his Church Christ did institute a government to order and rule his Church by his authority according to his lawes and by the assistance of the B. Spirit 1. If this were not true how shall the Church be governed For I hope the adversaries of Episcopacy that are so punctuall to pitch all upon Scripture ground will be sure to produce cleare Scripture for so maine a part of Christianity as is the forme of the Government of Christs Church And if for our private actions and duties Oeconomicall they will pretend a text I suppose it will not be thought possible Scripture should make default in assignation of the publick Government insomuch as all lawes intend the publick and the generall directly the private and the particular by consequence only and comprehension within the generall 2. If Christ himselfe did not take order for a government then we must derive it from humane prudence and emergency of conveniences and concurse of new circumstances and then the Government must often be changed or else time must stand still and things be ever in the same state and possibility Both the consequents are extreamely full of inconvenience For if it be left to humane prudence then either the government of the Church is not in immediate order to the good and benison of soules or if it be that such an institution in such immediate order to eternity should be dependant upon humane prudence it were to trust such a rich commodity in a cock-boat that no wise Pilot will be supposed to doe But if there be often changes in government Ecclesiasticall which was the other consequent in the publike frame I meane and constitution of it either the certain infinity of Schismes will arise or the dangerous issues of publick inconsistence and innovation which in matters of religion is good for nothing but to make men distrust all and come the best that can come there will be so many Church governments as there are humane Prudences For so if I be not mis-informed it is abroad in some townes that have discharged Simler de rep Helvet fol. 148. 172. Episcopacy At S t Galles in Switzerland there the Ministers and Lay-men rule in Common but a Lay-man is president But the
Christianity and the encrease of interest and the abatements of Christian simplicity when the Churches fortune grew better and her Sonnes grew worse and some of her Fathers worst of all For in the first three hundred years there was no sign of persecuting any man for his opinion though at that time there were very horrid opinions commenced and such which were exemplary and parallel enough to determine this Question for they then were assaulted by new Sects which destroyed the common principles of nature of Christianity of innocence and publike society and they who used all the meanes Christian and Spirituall for their disimprovement and conviction thought not of using corporall force otherwise then by blaming such proceedings And therefore I doe not only urge their not doing it as an Argument of the unlawfulnesse of such proceeding but their defying it and speaking against such practises as unreasonable and destructive of Christianity For so Tertullian is expresse Humani Ad Scapulat juris naturalis potestatis unicuique quod putaverit colere sed nec religionis est cogere religionem quae suscipi debet sponte non vi The same is the Doctrine of S. Cyprian Lactantius S. Hilary Minutius Felix Sulpitius Severus S. Chrysostome S. Hierom S. Austin Damascen Theophylact Socrates Scholasticus and S. Bernard as they are severally referr'd to and urg'd upon occasion in the following Discourse To which I adde that all wise Princes till they were overborn with faction or sollicited by peevish persons gave Toleration to differing Sects whose opinions did not disturb the publike interest But at first there were some hereticall persons that were also impatient of an Adversary and they were the men who at first entreated the Emperours to persecute the Catholicks but till foure hundred yeares after Christ no Catholick persons or very few did provoke the secular arme or implore its aide against the Hereticks save only that Arrius behav'd himselfe so seditiously and tumultuarily that the Nicene Fathers procur'd a temporary Decree for his relegation but it was soon taken off and God left to be his Judge who indeed did it to some purpose when he was trusted with it and the matter wholly left to him But as the Ages grew worse so men grew more cruell and unchristian and in the Greek Church Atticus and Nestorius of Constantinople Theodosius of Synada and some few others who had forgotten the mercies of their great Master and their own duty grew implacable and furious and impatient of contradiction It was a bold and an arrogant speech which Nestorius made in his Sermon before Theodosius the younger Da mihi O Imperator terram ab haereticis repurgatam ego tibi vicissim coelum dabo Disperde mecum haereticos ego tecum disperdam Persas It was as groundlesse and unwarrantable as it was bloody and inhumane And we see the contrary events prove truer then this groundlesse and unlearned promise for Theodosius and Valentinian were prosperous Princes and have to all Ages a precious memory and the reputation of a great piety but they were so farre from doing what Nestorius had suggested that they restrained him from his violence and immanity and Theodosius did highly commend the good Bishop Proclus for his sweetnesse of deportment towards erring persons far above the cruelty of his Predecessor Atticus And the experience which Christendom hath had in this last Age is Argument enough that Toleration of differing opinions is so farre from disturbing the publick peace or destroying the interest of Princes and Common-Wealths that it does advantage to the publick it secures peace because there is not so much as the pretence of Religion left to such persons to contend for it being already indulged to them When France fought against the Huguenots the spilling of her own blood was argument enough of the imprudence of that way of promoting Religion but since she hath given permission to them the world is witnesse how prosperous she hath been ever since But the great instance is in the differing temper Government and successe which Margaret of Parma and the Duke of Alva had The clemency of the first had almost extinguished the flame but when she was removed D' Alva succeeded and managed the matter of Religion with fire and sword he made the flame so great that his Religion and his Prince too hath both been almost quite turned out of the Countrey Pelli è medio sapientiam quoties vi res agitur said Ennius and therefore the best of men and the most glorious of Princes were alwayes ready to give Toleration but never to make executions for matters disputable Eusebius in his second Book of the life of Constantine reports these words of the Emperour Parem cum fidelibus ii qui errant pacis quietis fruitionem gaudentes accipiant Ipsa siquidem communicationis societatis restitutio ad rectam etiam veritatis viam perducere potest Nemo cui quam molestus sit quisque quod animo destinat hoc etiam faciat And indeed there is great reason for Princes to give Toleration to disagreeing persons whose opinions by faire meanes cannot be altered for if the persons be confident they will serve God according to their perswasions and if they be publikely prohibited they will privately convene and then all those inconveniences and mischiefes which are Arguments against the permission of Conventicles are Arguments for the publick permissions of differing Religions because the denying of the publick worship will certainly produce private Conventicles against which all wise Princes and Common-Wealths have upon great reasons made Edicts and severe Sanctions Quic quid enim agitur absente rege in caput ejus plerunque redundat say the Politicks For the face of a man is as the face of a Lion and scatters all base machinations which breath not but in the dark It is a proverbiall saying quod nimia familiaritas servorum est conspiratio adversus Dominum and they who for their security runne into grots and cellars and retirements think that they being upon the defensive those Princes and those Lawes that drive them to it are their Enemies and therefore they cannot be secure unlesse the power of the one and the obligation of the other be lessened and rescinded and then the being restrained and made miserable endeares the discontented persons mutually and makes more hearty and dangerous Confederations King Iames of blessed memory in his Letters to the States of the United Provinces dated 6 March 1613. Thus wrote .... Magis autem è re fore si sopiantur authoritate publicâ ita ut prohibeatis Ministros vestros ne eas disputationes in suggestum aut ad plebem ferant ac districtè imperetis ut pacem colant se invicem Tolerando in istâ opinionum ac sententiarum discrepantiâ ..... Eoque justiùs videmur vobis hoc ipsum suadere debere quòd neutram comperimus adeò deviam ut non possint cum fidei
integrity of Christian Faith or salvation of our souls Christ declared all the will of his Father and the Apostles were Stewards and Dispensers of the same Mysteries and were faithfull in all the house and therefore conceald nothing but taught the whole Doctrine of Christ so they said themselves And indeed if they did not teach all the Doctrine of Faith an Angel or a man might have taught us other things then what they taught without deserving an Anathema but not without deserving a blessing for making up that Faith intire which the Apostles left imperfect Now if they taught all the whole body of Faith either the Church in the following Ages lost part of the Faith and then where was their infallibility and the effect of those glorious promises to which she pretends and hath certain Title for she may as well introduce a falshood as loose a truth it being as much promised to her that the Holy Ghost shall lead her into all truth as that she shall be preserved from all errors as appears Ioh. 16. 13. Or if she retaind all the Faith which Christ and his Apostles consign'd and taught then no Age can by declaring any point make that be an Article of Faith which was not so in all Ages of Christianity before such declaration And indeed if the * Vide Iacob Almain in 3. Sent. d 25. Q. Vnic Dub. 3 Patet ergo quod nulla veritas est Catholica ex approbatione Ecclesiae vei Papae Gabr. Biel. in 3. Sent. Dist 25. q. Unic art 3. Dub. 3. ad finem Church by declaring an Article can make that to be necessary which before was not necessary I doe not see how it can stand with the charity of the Church so to doe especially after so long experience shee hath had that all men will not believe every such decision or explication for by so doing she makes the narrow way to heaven narrower and chalks out one path more to the Devill then he had before and yet the way was broad enough when it was at the narrowest For before differing persons might be saved in diversity of perswasions and now afterthis declaration if they cannot there is no other alteration made but that some shall be damned who before even in the same dispositions and beliefe should have been beatified persons For therefore it is well for the Fathers of the Primitive Church that their errors were not discovered for if they had been contested for that would have been cald discovery enough vel errores emendassent vel ab Ecclesiâ Bellar. de laici◠l. 3. c. 20. §. ad primam confirmationem ejecti fuissent But it is better as it was they went to heaven by that good fortune whereas otherwise they might have gone to the Devill And yet there were some errors particularly that of S. Cyprian that was discovered and he went to heaven 't is thought possibly they might so too for all this pretence But suppose it true yet whether that declaration of an Article of which with safety we either might have doubted or beene ignorant does more good then the damning of those many soules occasionally but yet certainely and fore-knowingly does hurt I leave it to all wise and good men to determine And yet besides this it cannot enter into my thoughts that it can possibly consist with Gods goodnesse to put it into the power of man so palpably and openly to alter the paths and in-lets to heaven and to streighten his mercies unlesse he had furnished these men with an infallible judgement and an infallible prudence and a never failing charity that they should never doe it but with great necessity and with great truth and without ends and humane designes of which I think no Arguments can make us certaine what the Primitive Church hath done in this case I shall afterwards consider and give an account of it but for the present there is no insecurity in ending there where the Apostles ended in building where they built in resting where they left us unlesse the same infallibility which they had had still continued which I think I shall hereafter make evident it did not And therefore those extensions of Creed which were made in the first Ages of the Church although for the matter they were most true yet because it was not certain that they should be so and they might have been otherwise therefore they could not be in the same order of Faith nor in the same degrees of necessity to be believ'd with the Articles Apostolicall and therefore whether they did well or no in laying the same weight upon them or whether they did lay the same weight or no we will afterwards consider But to return I consider that a foundation of Faith cannot alter unlesse a new building be to be made the foundation is Numb 13. the same still and this foundation is no other but that which Christ and his Apostles laid which Doctrine is like himselfe yesterday and to day and the same for ever So that the Articles of necessary beliefe to all which are the only foundation they cannot be severall in severall Ages and to severall persons Nay the sentence declaration of the Church cannot lay this foundation or make any thing of the foundation because the Church cannot lay her own foundation we must suppose her to be a building and that she relies upon the foundation which is therefore supposed to be laid before because she is built upon it or to make it more explicate because a cloud may arise from the Allegory of building and foundation it is plainly thus The Church being a company of men obliged to the duties of Faith and obedience the duty and obligation being of the faculties of will and understanding to adhere to such an object must pre-suppose the object made ready for them for as the object is before the act in order of nature and therefore not to be produc'd or encreased by the faculty which is receptive cannot be active upon its proper object So the object of the Churches Faith is in order of nature before the Church or before the act and habite of Faith and therefore cannot be enlarged by the Church any more then the act of the visive faculty can adde visibility to the object So that if we have found out what foundation Christ and his Apostles did lay that is what body and systeme of Articles simply necessary they taught and requir'd of us to believe we need not we cannot goe any further for foundation we cannot enlarge that systeme or collection Now then although all that they said is true and nothing of it to be doubted or dis-believed yet as all that they said is neither written nor delivered because all was not necessary so we know that of those things which are written some things are as farre off from the foundation as those things which were omitted and therefore although now accidentally they must be beliv'd
inculpably both on their own and their Parents part they misse of baptism for that is the doctrine of the Church of Rome which they learnt from S. Austin and others also doe from hence baptize Infants though with a lesse opinion of its absolute necessity And yet the same manner of precept in the same forme of words in the same manner of threatning by an exclusive negative shall not enjoyn us to communicate Infants though damnation at least in forme of words be exactly and per omnia alike appendant to the neglect of holy Baptism and the venerable Eucharist If nisi quis renatus shall conclude against the Anabaptist for necessity of baptizing Infants as sure enough we say it does why shall not an equall nisi comederitis bring Infants to the holy Communion The Primitive Church for some two whole Ages did follow their own principles where ever they lead them and seeing that upon the same ground equall results must follow they did Communicate Infants as soon as they had baptized them And why the Church of Rome should not doe so too being she expounds nisi comederitis of orall manducation I cannot yet learn a reason And for others that expound it of a spirituall manducation why they shall not allow the disagreeing part the same liberty of expounding nisi quis renatus too I by no meanes can understand And in these cases no externall determiner can bee pretended in answer For whatsoever is extrinsecall to the words as Councels Tradition Church Authority and Fathers either have said nothing at all or have concluded by their practise contrary to the present opinion as is plaine in their communicating Infants by vertue of nisi comederitis 5. I shall not need to urge the mysteriousnesse of some points in Scripture which ex natura rei are hard to be understood Numb 8. though very plainly represented For there are some secreta Theologiae which are only to be understood by persons very holy and spirituall which are rather to be felt then discoursed of and therefore if peradventure they be offered to publike consideration they will therefore be opposed because they runne the same fortune with many other Questions that is not to be understood and so much the rather because their understanding that is the feeling such secrets of the Kingdome are not the results of Logick and Philosophy nor yet of publike revelation but of the publike spirit privately working and in no man is a duty but in all that have it is a reward and is not necessary for all but given to some producing its operations not regularly but upon occasions personall necessities and new emergencies Of this nature are the spirit of obsignation beliefe of particular salvation speciall influences and comforts comming from a sense of the spirit of adoption actuall fervours and great complacencies in devotion spirituall joyes which are little drawings aside of the curtaines of peace and eternity and antepasts of immortality But the not understanding the perfect constitution and temper of these mysteries and it is hard for any man so to understand as to make others doe so too that feele them not is cause that in many Questions of secret Theology by being very apt and easy to be mistaken there is a necessity in forbearing one another and this consideration would have been of good use in the Question between Soto and Catharinus both for the preservation of their charity and explication of the mystery 6. But here it will not be unseasonable to consider that Numb 9. all systems and principles of science are expressed so that either by reason of the Universality of the termes and subject matter or the infinite variety of humane understandings and these peradventure swayed by interest or determin'd by things accidentall and extrinsecall they seem to divers men nay to the same men upon divers occasions to speak things extremly disparate and sometimes contrary but very often of great variety And this very thing happens also in Scripture that if it were not in re sacrâ seria it were excellent sport to observe how the same place of Scripture serves severall turns upon occasion and they at that time believe the words sound nothing else whereas in the liberty of their judgement and abstracting from that occasion their Commentaries understand them wholy to a differing sense It is a wonder of what excellent use to the Church of Rome is tibi dabo claves It was spoken to Peter and none else sometimes and therefore it concerns him and his Successors only the rest are to derive from him And yet if you Question them for their Sacrament of Penance and Priestly Absolution then tibi dabo claves comes in and that was spoken to S. Peter and in him to the whole Colledge of the Apostles and in them to the whole Hierarchy If you question why the Pope pretends to free soules from Purgatory tibi dabo claves is his warrant but if you tell him the Keyes are only for binding and loosing on Earth directly and in Heaven consequently and that Purgatory is a part of Hell or rather neither Earth nor Heaven nor Hell and so the Keyes seem to have nothing to doe with it then his Commission is to be enlarged by a suppletory of reason and consequences and his Keyes shall unlock this difficulty for it is clavis scientiae as well as authoritatis And these Keyes shall enable him to expound Scriptures infallibly to determine Questions to preside in Councels to dictate to all the World Magisterially to rule the Church to dispence with Oaths to abrogate Lawes And if his Key of knowledge will not the Key of Authority shall and tibi dabo claves shall answer for all We have an instance in the single fancy of one man what rare variety of matter is afforded from those plain words of Oravi pro te Petre Luk. 22. for that place sayes Bellarmine is otherwise to be understood of Peter otherwise of the Popes and otherwise of the Church of Rome And pro te Bellar. lib. 1. de Pontif. c. 3. § respondeo primò signifies that Christ prayed that Peter might neither erre personally nor judicially and that Peters Successors if they did erre personally might not erre judicially and that the Roman Church might not erre personally All this variety of sense is pretended by the fancy of one man to be in a few words which are as plain and simple as are any words in Scripture And what then in those thousands that are intricate So is done with pasce oves which a man would think were a commission as innocent and guiltlesse of designs as the sheep in the folds are But if it be asked why the Bishop of Rome calls himselfe Universall Bishop pasce oves is his warrant Why he pretends to a power of deposing Princes Pasce oves said Christ to Peter the second time If it be demanded why also he pretends to a power of authorizing his
of any side shall finde as many instances of this vanity almost as he finds Arguments from Scripture this fault was of old noted by S. Austin for then they had got the trick and he is angry at it neque enim putare debemus De doctri Christian. lib. 3. esse praescriptum ut quod in aliquo loco res aliqua per similitudinem significaverit hoc etiam semper significare credamus 3. Oftentimes Scriptures are pretended to be expounded by Numb 3. a proportion and Analogy of reason And this is as the other if it be well it s well But unlesse there were some intellectus universalis furnished with infallible propositions by referring to which every man might argue infallibly this Logick may deceive as well as any of the rest For it is with reason as with mens tastes although there are some generall principles which are reasonable to all men yet every man is not able to draw out all its consequences nor to understand them when they are drawn forth nor to believe when he does understand them There is a precept of S. Paul directed to the Thessalonians before they were gather'd into a body of a Church 2 Thes. 3. 6. To withdraw from every brother that walketh disorderly But if this precept were now observed I would faine know whether we should not fall into that inconvenience which S. Paul sought to avoyd in giving the same commandement to the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 5. 9. I wrote to you that yee should not company with fornicators And yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world for then yee must goe out of the world And therefore he restrains it to a quitting the society of Christians living ill lives But now that all the world hath been Christians if we should sin in keeping company with vitious Christians must we not also goe out of this world Is not the precept made null because the reason is altered and things are come about and that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are the brethren 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called brethren as S. Pauls phrase is And yet either this never was considered or not yet believed for it is generally taken to be obligatory though I think seldome practised But when we come to expound Scriptures to a certaine sense by Arguments drawn from prudentiall motives then we are in a vast plain without any sufficient guide and we shall have so many senses as there are humane prudences But that which goes further then this is a parity of reason from a plain place of Scripture to an obscure from that which is plainly set down in a Text to another that is more remote from it And thus is that place in S. Matthew forced If thy brother refuse to be amended Dic ecclesiae Hence some of the Roman Doctors argue If Christ commands to tell the Church in case of adultery or private injury then much more in case of heresy Well suppose this to be a good Interpretation Why must I stay here Why may not I also adde by a parity of reason If the Church must be told of heresy much more of treason And why may not I reduce all sinnes to the cognizance of a Church tribunall as some men doe indirectly and Snecanus does heartily and plainly If a mans principles be good and his deductions certain he need not care whether they carry him But when an Authority is intrusted to a person and the extent of his power expressed in his commission it will not be safety to meddle beyond his commission upon confidence of a parity of reason To instance once more When Christ in pasce oves tu es Petrus gave power to the Pope to govern the Church for to that sense the Church of Rome expounds those Authorities by a certain consequence of reason say they he gave all things necessary for exercise of this jurisdiction and therefore in pasce oves he gave him an indirect power over temporalls for that is necessary that he may doe his duty Well having gone thus farre we will goe further upon the parity of reason therefore he hath given the Pope the gift of tongues and he hath given him power to give it for how else shall Xavier convert the Indians He hath given him also power to command the Seas and the winds that they should obey him for this also is very necessary in some cases And so pasce oves is accipe donum linguarum and Impera ventis dispone regum diademata laicorum praedia and influentias caeli too and whatsoever the parity of reason will judge equally necessary in order to pasce ovts when a man does speak reason it is but reason he should be heard but though he may have the good fortune or the great abilities to doe it yet he hath not a certainty no regular infallible assistance no inspiration of Arguments and deductions and if he had yet because it must be reason that must judge of reason unlesse other mens understandings were of the same ayre the same constitution and ability they cannot be prescrib'd unto by another mans reason especially because such reasonings as usually are in explication of particular places of Scripture depend upon minute circumstances and particularities in which it is so easy to be deceived and so hard to speak reason regularly and alwayes that it is the greater wonder if we be not deceived 4. Others pretend to expound Scripture by the analogy of Numb 4. Faith and that is the most sure and infallible way as it is thought But upon stricter survey it is but a Chimera a thing in nubibus which varies like the right hand and left hand of a Pillar and at the best is but like the Coast of a Country to a Traveller out of his way It may bring him to his journeyes end though twenty mile about it may keep him from running into the Sea and from mistaking a river for dry land but whether this little path or the other be the right way it tells not So is the analogy of Faith that is if I understand it right the rule of Faith that is the Creed Now were it not a fine device to goe to expound all the Scripture by the Creed there being in it so many thousand places which have no more relation to any Article in the Creed then they have to Tityre tu patula Indeed if a man resolves to keep the analogy of Faith that is to expound Scripture so as not to doe any violence to any fundamentall Article he shall be sure however he erres yet not to destroy Faith he shall not perish in his Exposition And that was the precept given by S. Paul that all Prophesyings should be estimated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 6. 12. and to this very purpose S. Austin in his Exposition of Genesis by way of Preface sets down the Articles of Faith with this design and protestation of it that if he
and promises and authority of Generall Councels For if any one man can hope to be guided by Gods Spirit in the search the pious and impartiall and unprejudicate search of truth then much more may a Generall Councell If no private man can hope for it then truth is not necessary to be found nor we are not oblig'd to search for it or else we are sav'd by chance But if private men can by vertue of a promise upon certain conditions be assured of finding out sufficient truth much more shall a Generall Councell So that I consider thus There are many promises pretended to belong to Generall Assemblies in the Church But I know not any ground nor any pretence that they shall be absolutely assisted without any condition on their own parts and whether they will or no Faith is a vertue as well as charity and therefore consists in liberty and choyce and hath nothing in it of necessity There is no Question but that they are obliged to proceed according to some rule for they expect no assistance by way of Enthusiasme if they should I know no warrant for that neither did any Generall Councell ever offer a Decree which they did not think sufficiently prov'd by Scripture Reason or Tradition as appears in the Acts of the Councels now then if they be tyed to conditions it is their duty to observe them but whether it be certaine that they will observe them that they will doe all their duty that they will not sin even in this particular in the neglect of their duty that 's the consideration So that if any man questions the Title and Authority of Generall Councels and whether or no great promises appertain to them I suppose him to be much mistaken but he also that thinks all of them have proceeded according to rule and reason and that none of them were deceived because possibly they might have been truly directed is a stranger to the History of the Church and to the perpetuall instances and experiments of the faults and failings of humanity It is a famous saying of S. Gregory that he had the foure first Councels in esteem and veneration next to the foure Evangelists I suppose it was because he did believe them to have proceeded according to Rule and to have judged righteous judgement but why had not he the same opinion of other Councels too which were celebrated before his death for he lived after the fifth Generall not because they had not the same Authority for that which is warrant for one is warrant for all but because he was not so confident that they did their duty nor proceeded so without interest as the first foure had done and the following Councels did never get that reputation which all the Catholike Church acknowledged due to the first foure And in the next Order were the three following generalls for the Greeks and Latines did never joyntly acknowledge but seven generalls to have been authentick in any sense because they were in no sense agreed that any more then seven had proceeded regularly and done their duty So that now the Question is not whether Generall Councels have a promise that the holy Ghost will assist them For every private man hath that promise that if he does his duty he shall be assisted sufficiently in order to that end to which he needs assistance and therefore much more shall Generall Councels in order to that end for which they convene and to which they need assistance that is in order to the conservation of the Faith for the doctrinall rules of good life and all that concerns the essentiall duty of a Christian but not in deciding Questions to satisfie contentious or curious or presumptuous spirits But now can the Bishops so conven'd be factious can they be abused with prejudice or transported with interests can they resist the holy Ghost can they extinguish the Spirit can they stop their eares and serve themselves upon the holy Spirit and the pretence of his assistances and cease to serve him upon themselves by captivating their understandings to his dictates and their wills to his precepts Is it necessary they should perform any condition is there any one duty for them to perform in these Assemblies a duty which they have power to doe or not doe If so then they may faile of it and not doe their duty And if the assistance of the holy Spirit be conditionall then we have no more assurance that they are assisted then that they doe their duty and doe not sinne Now let us suppose what this duty is Certainly if the Gospel Numb 2. be hid it is hid to them that are lost and all that come to the knowledge of the truth must come to it by such meanes which are spirituall and holy dispositions in order to a holy and spirituall end They must be shod with the preparation of the Gospel of peace that is they must have peaceable and docible dispositions nothing with them that is violent and resolute to encounter those gentle and sweet assistances and the Rule they are to follow is the Rule which the holy Spirit hath consign'd to the Catholike Church that is the holy Scripture either * Vid. Optat. Milev l. 5. adv Parm. Baldvin in eundem S. August in Psa. 21. Expos. 2. intirely or at least for the greater part of the Rule So that now if the Bishops bee factious and prepossest with perswasions depending upon interest it is certain they may judge amisse and if they recede from the Rule it is certain they doe judge amisse And this I say upon their grounds who most advance the authority of Generall Councels For if a Generall Councell may erre if a Pope confirm it not then most certainly if in any thing it recede from Scripture it does also erre because that they are to expect the Popes confirmation they offer to prove from Scripture now if the Popes confirmation be required by authority of Scripture and that therefore the defaillance of it does evacuate the Authority of the Councell then also are the Councels Decrees invalid if they recede from any other part of Scripture So that Scripture is the Rule they are to follow and a man would have thought it had been needlesse to have proved it but that we are fallen into Ages in which no truth is certaine no reason concluding nor is there any thing that can convince some men For Stapleton with extreme boldnesse against the piety of Christendome against the publike sense of the ancient Relect. centrov 4. q. 1. a. 3 Church and the practise of all pious Assemblies of Bishops affirmes the Decrees of a Councell to be binding etiamsi non confirmetur ne probabili testimonio Scripturarum nay though it be quite extra Scripturam but all wise and good men have ever said that sense which S. Hilary expressed in these words Quae extra Evangelium sunt non defendam This was it which the good Emperour
fidem etiam dictum unius privati esset dicto Pape aut totius Concilii praeferendum si ille moveretur melioribus Argumentis I end this Discourse with representing the words of Gregory Nazianzen in his Epistle to Procopius Ego si vera scribere Numb 11. oportet ita animo affectus sum ut omnia Episcoporum Concilia Athanas. lib. de Synod Frusta igitur circumcursitantes praetexunt ob fidem se Synodos postulare cum sit Divina Scriptura omnibus potentior fugiam quoniam nullius Concilii finem laetum faustumque vidi nec quod depulsionem malorum potius quam accessionem incrementum habuerit But I will not be so severe and dogmaticall against them For I believe many Councels to have been cald with sufficient Authority to have been managed with singular piety and prudence and to have been finished with admirable successe and truth And where we find such Councels he that will not with all veneration believe their Decrees and receive their sanctions understands not that great duty he owes to them who have the care of our soules whose faith we are bound to follow saith S. Paul that is so long as they follow Christ and certainly many Councels have done so But Heb. 13. 7. this was then when the publike interest of Christendome was better conserv'd in determining a true Article then in finding a discreet temper or a wise expedient to satisfie disagreeing persons As the Fathers at Trent did and the Lutherans and Calvinists did at Sendomir in Polonia and the Sublapsarians and Supralapsarians did at Dort It was in Ages when the summe of Religion did not consist in maintaining the Grandezza of the Papacy where there was no order of men with a fourth Vow upon them to advance S. Peters Chaire when there was no man nor any company of men that esteem'd themselves infallible and therefore they searched for truth as if they meant to find it and would believe it if they could see it prov'd not resolv'd to prove it because they had upon chance or interest believ'd it then they had rather have spoken a truth then upheld their reputation but only in order to truth This was done sometimes and when it was done God's Spirit never fail'd them but gave them such assistances as were sufficient to that good end for which they were Assembled and did implore his aid And therefore it is that the foure generall Councels so called by way of eminency have gained so great a reputation above all others not because they had a better promise or more speciall assistances but because they proceeded better according to the Rule with lesse faction without ambition and temporall ends And yet those very Assemblies of Bishops had no Authority by their Decrees to make a Divine Faith or to constitute Numb 12. new objects of necessary Credence they made nothing true that was not so before and therefore they are to be apprehended in the nature of excellent Guides and whose Decrees are most certainly to determine all those who have no Argument to the contrary of greater force and efficacy then the Authority or reasons of the Councell And there is a duty owing to every Parish Priest and to every Dioecesan Bishop these are appointed over us and to answer for our soules and are therefore morally to guide us as reasonable Creatures are to be guided that is by reason and discourse For in things of judgement and understanding they are but in forme next above Beasts that are to be ruled by the imperiousnesse and absolutenesse of Authority unlesse the Authority be Divine that is infallible Now then in a juster height but still in its true proportion Assemblies of Bishops are to guide us with a higher Authority because in reason it is supposed they will doe it better with more Argument and certainty and with Decrees which have the advantage by being the results of many discourses of very wise and good men But that the Authority of generall Councels was never esteem'd absolute infallible and unlimited appears in this that before they were obliging it was necessary that each particular Church respectively should accept them Concurrente universali totius Ecclesiae consensu c. Vid. S. August 1. l. c. 18. de bapt contr Donat. in declaratione veritatum quae credendae sunt c. That 's the way of making the Deerees of Councels become authentik and be turn'd into a Law as Gerson observes and till they did their Decrees were but a dead letter and therefore it is that these later Popes have so labour'd that the Councell of Trent should be received in France and Carolus Molineus a great Lawyer and of the Roman Communion disputed * So did the third Estate of France in the Convention of the three Estates under Lewis the 13th earnestly contend against it against the reception and this is a known condition in the Canon Law but it proves plainly that the Decrees of Councels have their Authority from the voluntary submission of the particular Churches not from the prime sanction and constitution of the Councell And there is great reason it should for as the representative body of the Church derives all power from the diffusive body which is represented so it resolves into it and though it may have all the legall power yet it hath not all the naturall for more able men may be unsent then sent and they who are sent may be wrought upon by stratagem which cannot happen to the whole diffusive Church it is therefore most fit that since the legall power that is the externall was passed over to the body representative yet the efficacy of it and the internall should so still remaine in the diffusive as to have power to consider whether their representatives did their duty yea or no and so to proceed accordingly For unlesse it be in matters of justice in which the interest of a third person is concern'd no man will or can be supposed to passe away all power from himselfe of doing himselfe right in matters personall proper and of so high concernment It is most unnaturall and unreasonable But besides that they are excellent instruments of peace the best humane Judicatories in the world rare Sermons for the determining a point in Controversy and the greatest probability from humane Authority besides these advantages I say I know nothing greater that generall Councels can pretend to with reason and Argument sufficient to satisfie any wise man And as there was never any Councell so generall but it might have been more generall for in respect of the whole Church even Nice it selfe was but a small Assembly so there is no Decree so well constituted but it may be prov'd by an Argument higher then the Authority of the Councell And therefore generall Councels and Nationall and Provinciall and Dioecesan in their severall degrees are excellent Guides for the Prophets and directions and instructions for their Prophesyings but
cannot doe this when they list but when they are mov'd to it by the Spirit then we are never the nearer for so may the Bishop of Angolesme write infallible Commentaries when the holy Ghost moves him to it for I suppose his motions are not ineffectuall but hee will sufficiently assist us in performing of what he actually moves us to But among so many hundred Decrees which the Popes of Rome have made or confirmed and attested which is all one I would faine know in how many of them did the holy Ghost assist them If they know it let them declare it that it may be certain which of their Decretals are de fide for as yet none of his own Church knowes If they doe not know then neither can we know it from them and then we are as uncertaine as ever and besides the holy Ghost may possibly move him and he by his ignorance of it may neglect so profitable a motion and then his promise of infallible assistance will be to very little purpose because it is with very much fallibility applicable to practise And therefore it is absolutely uselesse to any man or any Church because suppose it settled in Thesi that the Pope is infallible yet whether he will doe his duty and perform those conditions of being assisted which are required of him or whether he be a secret Simoniack for if he be he is ipso facto no Pope or whether he be a Bishop or Priest or a Christian being all uncertain every one of these depending upon the intention and power of the Baptizer or Ordainer which also are fallible because they depend upon the honesty and power of other men we cannot be infallibly certain of any Pope that he is infallible and therefore when our Questions are dermin'd we are never the nearer but may hugge our selves in an imaginary truth the certainty of finding truth out depending upon so many fallible and contingent circumstances And therefore the thing if it were true being so to no purpose it is to be presum'd that God never gave a power so impertinently and from whence no benefit can accrue to the Christian Church for whose use and benefit if at all it must needs have been appointed But I am too long in this impertinency If I were bound Numb 18. to call any man Master upon earth and to believe him upon his own affirmative and authority I would of all men least follow him that pretends he is infallible and cannot prove it For that he cannot prove it makes me as uncertaine as ever and that he pretends to infallibility makes him carelesse of using such meanes which will morally secure those wise persons who knowing their own aptnesse to be deceiv'd use what endeavours they can to secure themselves from errour and so become the better and more probable guides Well! Thus farre we are come Although we are secured in fundamentall points from involuntary errour by the plaine Numb 19. expresse and dogmaticall places of Scripture yet in other things we are not but may be invincibly mistaken because of the obscurity and difficulty in the controverted parts of Scripture by reason of the incertainty of the meanes of its Interpretation since Tradition is of an uncertain reputation and sometimes evidently false Councels are contradictory to each other and therefore certainly are equally deceiv'd many of them and therefore all may and then the Popes of Rome are very likely to mislead us but cannot ascertain us of truth in matter of Question and in this world we believe in part and prophecy in part and this imperfection shall never be done away till we be translated to a more glorious state either we must throw our chances and get truth by accident or predestination or else we must lie safe in a mutuall toleration and private liberty of perswasion unlesse some other Anchor can bee thought upon where wee may fasten our floating Vessels and ride safely SECT VIII Of the disability of Fathers or Writers Ecclesiasticall to determine our Questions with certainty and Truth THere are some that think they can determine all Questions Numb 1. in the world by two or three sayings of the Fathers or by the consent of so many as they will please to call a concurrent Testimony But this consideration will soon be at an end for if the Fathers when they are witnesses of Tradition doe not alwayes speak truth as it hapned in the case of Papias and his numerous Followers for almost three Ages together then is their Testimony more improbable when they dispute or write Commentaries 2. The Fathers of the first Ages spake unitedly concerning Numb 2. divers Questions of secret Theology and yet were afterwards contradicted by one personage of great repution whose credit had so much influence upon the world as to make the contrary opinion become popular why then may not we have the same liberty when so plain an uncertainty is in their perswasions and so great contrariety in their Doctrines But this is evident in the case of absolute predestination which till S. Austine's time no man preached but all taught the contrary and yet the reputation of this one excellent man altered the scene But if he might dissent from so Generall a Doctrine why may not we doe so too it being pretended that he is so excellent a precedent to be followed if we have the same reason he had no more Authority nor dispensation to dissent then any Bishop hath now And therefore S. Austin hath dealt ingeniously and as he took this liberty to himself so he denies it not to others but indeed forces them to preserve their own liberty And Sess. ult therefore when S. Hierom had a great mind to follow the Fathers in a point that he fancyed and the best security he had was Patiaris me cum talibus errare S. Austin would not endure it but answered his reason and neglected the Authority And therefore it had been most unreasonable that we should doe that now though in his behalfe which he towards greater personages for so they were then at that time judg'd to be unreasonable It is a plaine recession from Antiquity which was determin'd by the Councell of Florence piorum animas purgatas c. mox in Caelum recipi intueri clarè ipsum Deum trinum unum sicuti est As who please to try may see it dogmatically resolved to the contrary by a Q. 60. ad Christian. Justin Martyr b Lib. 5. Irenaeus by c Hom. 7. in Levit. Origen d Hom. 39 in 1 Cor. S. Chrysostome e In c. 11. ad Heb. Theodoret f In c. 6. ad Apoc. Arethas Caesariensis g In 16. c. Luc. Euthymius who may answer for the Greek Church and it is plaine that it was the opinion of the Greek Church by that great difficulty the Romans had of bringing the Greeks to subscribe to the Florentine Councell where the
the Inquisition and restraining Prophesying who yet when they had shaked off the Spanish yoke began to persecute their Brethren It was unjust in them in all men unreasonable and uncharitable and often increases the error but never lessens the danger But yet although the Church I mean in her distinct Clericall capacity was against destroying or punishing difference in opinion Numb 12. till the Popes of Rome did super-seminate and perswade the contrary yet the Bishops did perswade the Emperours to make Lawes against Heretiques and to punish disobedient persons with fines with imprisonment with death and banishment respectively This indeed calls us to a new account For the Church-men might not proceed to bloud nor corporall inflictions but might they not deliver over to the Secular arme and perswade Temporall Princes to doe it For this I am to say that since it is notorious that the doctrine of the Clergie was against punishing Heretiques the Lawes which were made by the Emperours against them might be for restraint of differing Religion in order to the preservation of the publique peace which is too frequently violated by the division of opinions But I am not certaine whether that was alwayes the reason or whether or no some Bishops of the Court did not also serve their owne ends in giving their Princes such untoward counsell but we find the Lawes made severally to severall purposes in divers cases and with different severity Constantine the Emperour made a Sanction Ut parem cum fidelibus Apud Euseb. de vita Constant ii qui errant pacis quietis fruitionem gaudentes accipiant The Emperour Gratian decreed Ut quam quisque vellet religionem sequeretur conventus Ecclesiasticos semoto metu omnes agerent But he excepted the Manichees the Photinians and Eunomians Theodosius the elder made a law of death against the Anabaptists of his time and banish'd Eunomius and against other erring persons vide Socrat. l 7. c. 12. appointed a pecuniary mulct but he did no executions so severe as his sanctions to shew they were made in terrorem onely Vid. Cod. de heretic L. manichees leg Arriani l. Quicunque So were the Lawes of Valentinian and Martian decreeing contra omnes qui prava docere tenent that they should be put to death so did * Apud Paulum Diac. l. 16. l. 24. Michael the Emperour but Iustinian onely decreed banishment But what ever whispers some Politiques might make to their Princes as the wisest holiest did not think it lawful for Church-men alone to doe executions so neither did they transmit such Numb 11. persons to the Secular Judicature And therefore when the Edict of Macedonius the President was so ambiguous that it seemed to threaten death to Heretiques unlesse they recanted S. Austin admonished him carefully to provide that no Heretique should be put to death alledging it also not onely to be unchristian but illegall also and not warranted by imperiall constitutions for before his time no Lawes were made for their being put to death but however he prevailed that Macedonius published another Edict more explicite and lesse seemingly severe But in his Epistle to Donatus the African Proconsul he is more confident and determinate Necessitate nobis impactâ indictâ ut potiùs occidi ab eis eligamus quam eos occidendos vestris judiciis ingeramus But afterwards many got a trick of giving them over to the Secular power which at the best is no better then hypocrisie removing Numb 12. envie from themselves and laying it upon others a refusing to doe that in externall act which they doe in councell and approbation which is a transmitting the act to another and retaining a proportion of guilt unto themselves even their own and the others too I end this with the saying of Chrysostome Dogmuta Serw. de Anathemate impia quae ab haereticis profecta sunt arguere anathematizare oportet hominibus autem parcendum pro salute eorum candum SECT XV. How farre the Church or Governours may act to the restraining false or differing opinions BUt although Hereticall persons are not to be destroyed yet heresy being a work of the flesh and all hereticks criminall persons whose acts and doctrine have influence upon Communities of men whether Ecclesiasticall or civill the governours of the Republique or Church respectively are to do their duties in restraining those mischiefes which may happen to their severall charges for whose indemnity they are answerable And therefore according to the effect or malice of the doctrine or the person so the cognisance of them belongs to severall judicatures If it be false doctrine in any capacity and doth mischiefe in any sense or teaches ill life in any instance or incourages evill in any particular 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 these men must be silenced they must be convinced by sound doctrine and put to silence by spirituall evidence and restrained by authority Ecclesiasticall that is by spirituall censures according as it seemes necessary to him who is most concern'd in the regiment of the Church For all this we have precept and precedent Apostolicall and much reason For by thus doing the governour of the Church uses all that authority that is competent and all the meanes that is reasonable and that proceeding which is regular that he may discharge his cure and secure his flock And that he possibly may be deceived in judging a doctrine to be hereticall and by consequence the person excommunicate suffers injury is no argument against the reasonablenesse of the proceeding For all the injury that is is visible and in appearance and so is his crime Iudges must judge according to their best reason guided by law of God as their rule and by evidence and appearance as their best instrument and they can judge no better If the Judges be good and prudent the error of proceeding will not be great nor ordinary and there can be no better establishment of humane judicature then is a fallible proceeding upon an infallible ground And if the judgement of heresie be made by estimate and proportion of the opinion to a good or a bad life respectively supposing an error in the deduction there will be no malice in the conclusion and that he endeavours to secure piety according to the best of his understanding and yet did mistake in his proceeding is onely an argument that he did his duty after the manner of men possibly with the piety of a Saint though not with the understanding of an Angel And the little inconvenience that happens to the person injuriously judged is abundantly made up in the excellency of the Discipline the goodnesse of the example the care of the publike and all those great influences into the manners of men which derive from such an act so publiquely consign'd But such publique judgement in matters of opinion must be seldome and curious and never but to secure piety and a holy
life for in matters speculative as all determinations are fallible so scarce any of them are to purpose nor ever able to make compensation of either side either for the publike fraction or the particular injustice if it should so happen in the censure But then as the Church may proceed thus far yet no Christian man or Community of men may proceed farther For if they Numb 2. be deceived in their judgement and censure and yet have passed onely spirituall censures they are totally ineffectuall and come to nothing there is no effect remaining upon the soule and such censures are not to meddle with the body so much as indirectly But if any other judgement passe upon persons erring such judgements whose effects remaine if the person be unjustly censured nothing will answer and make compensation for such injuries If a person be excommunicate unjustly it will doe him no hurt but if he be killed or dismembred unjustly that censure and infliction is not made ineffectuall by his innocence he is certainly kill'd and dismembred So that as the Churches authority in such cases so restrained and made prudent cautelous and orderly is just and competent so the proceeding is reasonable it is provident for the publike and the inconveniences that may fall upon particulars so little as that the publique benefit makes ample compensation so long as the proceeding is but spirituall This discourse is in the case of such opinions which by the former rules are formall heresies and upon practicall inconveniences Numb 3. But for matters of question which have not in them an enmity to the publique tranquillity as the Republique hath nothing to doe upon the ground of all the former discourses so if the Church meddles with them where they doe not derive into ill life either in the person or in the consequent or else are destructions of the foundation of Religion which is all one for that those fundamentall articles are of greatest necessity in order to a vertuous and godly life which is wholly built upon them and therefore are principally necessary If she meddles further otherwise then by preaching and conferring and exhortation she becomes tyrannicall in her government makes her selfe an immediate judge of consciences and perswasions lords it over their faith destroyes unity and charity and as if he that dogmatizes the opinion becomes criminall if he troubles the Church with an immodest peevish and pertinacious proposall of his article not simply necessary so the Church does not doe her duty if she so condemnes it pro tribunali as to enjoyne him and all her subjects to beleeve the contrary And as there may be pertinacy in doctrine so there may be pertinacy in judging and both are faults The peace of the Church and the unity of her doctrine is best conserved when it is judged by the proportion it hath to that rule of unity which the Apostles gave that is the Creed for Articles of meer beliefe and the precepts of Jesus Christ and the practicall rules of piety which are most plaine and easie and without controversie set downe in the Gospels and Writings of the Apostles But to multiply articles and adopt them into the family of the faith and to require assent to such articles which as S. Pauls phrase is are of doubtfull disputation equall to that assent wee give to matters of faith is to build a Tower upon the top of a Bulrush and the further the effect of such proceedings does extend the worse they are the very making such a Law is unreasonable the inflicting spirituall censures upon them that cannot doe so much violence to their understanding as to obey it is unjust and ineffectuall but to punish the person with death or with corporall infliction indeed it is effectuall but it is therefore tyrannicall We have seen what the Church may doe towards restraining false or differing opinions next I shall consider by way of Corollarie what the Prince may doe as for his interest and onely in securing his people and serving the ends of true Religion SECT XVI Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions FOr upon these very grounds we may easily give account of Numb 1. that great question Whether it be lawfull for a Prince to give toleration to severall Religions For first it is a great fault that men will call the severall sects of Christians by the names of severall Religions The Religion of JESUS CHRIST is the forme of sound doctrine and wholsome words which is set downe in Scripture indefinitely actually conveyed to us by plaine places and separated as for the question of necessary or not necessary by the Symbol of the Apostles Those impertinencies which the wantonness and vanity of men hath commenced which their interests have promoted which serve not truth so much as their own ends are farre from being distinct Religions for matters of opinion are no parts of the worship of God nor in order to it but as they promote obedience to his Commandments and when they contribute towards it are in that proportion as they contribute parts and actions and minute particulars of that Religion to whose end they doe or pretend to serve And such are all the sects and all the pretences of Christians but pieces and minutes of Christianity if they doe serve the great end as every man for his owne sect and interest beleeves for his share it does 2. Tolleration hath a double sense or purpose for sometimes by it men understand a publick licence and exercise of a sect Sometimes it is onely an indemnity of the persons privately to convene and to opine as they see cause and as they meane to answer to God Both these are very much to the same purpose unlesse some persons whom we are bound to satisfie be scandaliz'd and then the Prince is bound to doe as he is bound to satisfie To God it is all one For abstracting from the offence of persons which is to be considered just as our obligation is to content the persons it is all one whether we indulge to them to meet publikely or privately to do actions of Religion concerning which we are not perswaded that they are truely holy To God it is just one to be in the dark and in the light the thing is the same onely the Circumstance of publick and private is different which cannot be concerned in any thing nor can it concerne any thing but the matter of Scandall and relation to the minds and fantasies of certaine persons 3. So that to tolerate is not to persecute And the question Numb 3. whether the Prince may tollerate divers perswasions is no more then whether he may lawfully persecute any man for not being of his opinion Now in this case he is just so to tollerate diversity of perswasions as he is to tolerate publike actions for no opinion is judicable nor no person punishable but for a sin and if his opinion by reason
to Infants is so secret and undeclar'd and unconsign'd that wee want much of that mercy and outward Testimony which gave them comfort and assurance And in proportion to these Precepts and Revelations was the practise Apostolicall For they to whom Christ gave in Numb 11. Precept to make Disciples all Nations baptizing them and knew that Nations without Children never were and that therefore they were passively concern'd in that commission baptized whole Families particularly that of Stephanus and divers others in which it is more then probable there were some Minors if not sucking Babes And this practise did descend upon the Church in after Ages by Tradition Apostolicall Of this we have sufficient Testimony from Origen Pro hoc Ecclesia In Rom. 6. tom 2. pag. 543. ab Apostolis traditionem accepit etiam parvulis baptismum dare And S. Austin Hoc Ecclesia à majorum fide percepit And Serm. 10. de verb. Apost c. 2. generally all Writers as Calvin sayes affirm the same thing For nullus est Scriptor tam vetustus qui non ejus originem ad Apostolorum saeculum pro certo referat From hence the Conclusion 4. Instir. cap. 16. §. 8. is that Infants ought to be baptiz'd that it is simply necessary that they who deny it are Hereticks and such are not to be endured because they deny to Infants hopes and take away the possibility of their salvation which is revealed to us on no other condition of which they are capable but Baptism For by the insinuation of the Type by the action of Christ by the title Infants have to Heaven by the precept of the Gospel by the Energy of the Promise by the reasonablenesse of the thing by the infinite necessity on the Infants part by the practise Apostolcall by their Tradition and the universall practise of the Church by all these God and good people proclaime the lawfulnesse the conveniency and the necessity of Infants Baptism To all this the Anabaptist gives a soft and gentle Answer that it is a goodly harangue which upon strict examination will Numb 12. come to nothing that it pretends fairely and signifies little That some of these Allegations are false some impertinent and all the rest insufficient For the Argument from Circumcision is invalid upon infinite Numb 13. considerations Figures and Types prove nothing unlesse a Commandement goe along with them or some expresse to signifie such to be their purpose For the Deluge of Waters and the Ark of Noah were a figure of Baptism said Peter and if therefore the circumstances of one should be drawn to the other we should make Baptism a prodigy rather then a Rite The Paschall Lamb was a Type of the Eucharist which succeeds the other as Baptism does to Circumcision but because there was in the manducation of the Paschall Lamb no prescription of Sacramentall drink shall we thence conclude that the Eucharist is to be ministred but in one kind And even in the very instance of this Argument supposing a correspondence of analogy between Circumcision and Baptism yet there is no correspondence of identity For although it were granted that both of them did consign the Covenant of Faith yet there is nothing in the circumstance of childrens being circumcised that so concernes that Mystery but that it might very well be given to Children and yet Baptism only to men of reason because Circumcision left a Character in the flesh which being imprinted upon Infants did its work to them when they came to age and such a Character was necessary because there was no word added to the sign but Baptism imprints nothing that remaines on the body and if it leaves a Character at all it is upon the soule to which also the word is added which is as much a part of the Sacrament as the signe it selfe is for both which reasons it is requisite that the persons baptized should be capable of reason that they may be capable both of the word of the Sacrament and the impresse made upon the Spirit Since therefore the reason of this parity does wholly faile there is no thing left to inferre a necessity of complying in this circumstance of age any more then in the other annexes of the Type And the case is cleare in the Bishop's Question to Cyprian for why shall not Infants be baptized just upon the L. 3. Epist. 8. ad Fidum eighth day as well as circumcised If the correspondence of the Rites be an Argument to inferre one circumstance which is impertinent and accidentall to the mysteriousnesse of the Rite why shall it not inferre all And then also Femals must not be baptiezd because they were not circumcised But it were more proper if we would understand it right to prosecute the analogy from the Type to the Anti-type by way of letter and spirit and signification and as Circumcision figures Baptism so also the adjuncts of the Circumcision shall signifie something spirituall in the adherencies of Baptism And therefore as Infants were circumcised so spirituall Infants shall be baptized which is spirituall Circumcision for therfore Babes had the ministry of the Type to signifie that we must when we give our names to Christ become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 children in malice for unlesse you become like one of these little ones you cannot enter into the Kingdome of heaven said our blessed Saviour and then the Type is made compleat And this seemes to have been the sense of the Primitive Church for in the Age next to the Apostles they gave to all baptized persons milk and honey to represent to them their duty that though in age and understanding they were men yet they were Babes in Christ and children in malice But to inferre the sense of the Paedo-baptists is so weak a manner of arguing that Austin whose device it was and men use to bee in love with their own fancies at the most pretended it but as probable and a meare conjecture And as ill successe will they have with the other Arguments as with this For from the action of Christs blessing Infants Numb 14. to inferre that they are to be baptized proves nothing so much as that there is great want of better Arguments The Conclusion would be with more probability derived thus Christ blessed children and so dismissed them but baptized them not therefore Insants are not to be baptized But let this be as weak as its enemy yet that Christ did not baptize them is an Argument sufficient that Christ hath other wayes of bringing them to heaven then by baptism he passed his act of grace upon them by benediction and imposition of hands And therefore although neither Infants nor any man in puris naturalibus can attain to a supernaturall end without the addition Numb 15. of some instrument or meanes of Gods appointing ordinarily and regularly yet where God hath not appointed a Rule nor an Order as in the case of Infants we
hearty perswasion to the weaknesse of humanity and the difficulty of things for God hath not left those truths which are necessary for conservation of publike societies of men so intricate and obscure but that every one that is honest and desirous to understand his duty will certainly know that no Christian truth destroyes a mans being sociable and a member of the body Politick co-operating to the conservation of the whole as well as of it selfe However if it might happen that men should sincerely erre in such plaine matters of fact for there are fooles enough in the world yet if he hold his peace no man is to persecute or punish him for then it is meare opinion which comes not under Politicall Cognisance that is that Cognisance which onely can punish corporally but if he preaches it he is actually a Traytor or Seditious or Author of Perjury or a destroyer of humane Society respectively to the nature of the Doctrine and the preaching such Doctrines cannot claime the priviledge and immunity of a meare opinion because it is as much matter of fact as any the actions of his disciples and confidents and therefore in such cases is not to be permitted but judg'd according to the nature of the effect it hath or may have upon the actions of men Fifthly But lastly In matters mearly speculative the case is wholly altered because the body Politick which only may lawfully Numb 8. use the sword is not a competent Judge of such matters which have not direct influence upon the body Politick or upon the lives and manners of men as they are parts of a Community not but that Princes or Judges Temporall may have as much ability as others but by reason of the incompetency of the Authority And Gallio spoke wisely when he discoursed thus to the Jewes If it were a matter of wrong or Act. 18. 14. wicked lewdnesse ô ye Jewes reason would that I should hear you But if it be a question of words and names and of your Law look ye to it for I will be no Judge of such matters The man spoke excellent reason for the Cognisnance of these things did appertain to men of the other robe but the Ecclesiasticall power which only is competent to take notice of such questions is not of capacity to use the Temporall sword or corporall inflictions The meare doctrines and opinions of men are things Spirituall and therefore not Cognoscible by a temporall Authority and the Ecclesiasticall Authority which is to take Cognisance is it selfe so Spirituall that it cannot inflict any punishment corporall And it is not enough to say that when the Magistrate restraines Numb 9. the preaching such opinions if any man preaches them he may be punished and then it is not for his opinion but his disobedience that he is punish'd for the temporall power ought not to restraine Prophecyings where the publick peace and interest is not certainly concern'd And therefore it is not sufficient to excuse him whose Law in that case being by an incompetent power made a scruple where there was no sinne And under this consideration come very many Articles of the Church of Rome which are wholly speculative which doe Numb 10. not derive upon practise which begin in the understanding and rest there and have no influence upon life and government but very accidentally and by a great many removes and therefore are to be considered only so farre as to guide men in their perswasions but have no effect upon the persons of men their bodies or their temporall condition I instance in two Prayer for the dead and the Doctrine of Transubstantion these two to be instead of all the rest For the first This Discourse is to suppose it false and we are Numb 11. to direct our proceedings accordingly And therefore I shall not need to urge with how many faire words and gay pretences this Doctrine is set off apt either to conzen or instruct the conscience of the wisest according as it is true or false respectively But we finde sayes the Romanist in the History of the Maccabees that the Jewes did pray and make offerings for the dead which also appeares by other Testimonies and by their forme of prayers still extant which they used in the Captivity it is very considerable that since our blessed Saviour did reprove all the evill Doctrines and Traditions of the Scribes and Pharisees and did argue concerning the dead and the Resurrection against the Sadduces yet he spake no word against this publick practise but left it as he found it which he who came to declare to us all the will of his Father would not have done if it had not been innocent pious and full of charity To which by way of consociation if we adde that S. Paul did pray for Onesiphorus That God would shew him a mercy in that day 2 Tim. 1. 18. that is according to the stile of the New Testament the day of Judgement The result will be that although it be probable that Onesiphorus at that time was dead because in his salutations he salutes his houshold without naming him who was the Major domo against his custome of salutitions in other places Yet besides this the prayer was for such a blessing to him whose demonstration and reception could not be but after death which implies clearly that then there is a need of mercy and by consequence the dead people even to the day of Judgement inclusively are the subject of a misery the object of Gods mercy and therefore fit to be commemorated in the duties of our piety and charity and that we are to recommend their condition to God not only to give them more glory in the reunion but to pitty them to such purposes in which they need which because they are not revealed to us in particular it hinders us not in recommending the persons in particular to Gods mercy but should rather excite our charity and devotion For it being certaine that they have a need of mercy and it being uncertain how great their need is it may concern the prudence of charity to be the more earnest as not knowing the greatnesse of their necessity And if there should be any uncertainty in these Arguments Numb 12. yet its having been the universall practise of the Church of God in all places and in all Ages till within these hundred yeares is a very great inducement for any member of the Church to believe that in the first Traditions of Christianity and the Institutions Apostolicall there was nothing delivered against this practise but very much to insinuate or enjoyn it because the practise of it was at the first and was universall And if any man shall doubt of this he shewes nothing but De corona milit c. 3. de monogam c. 10. that hee is ignorant of the Records of the Church it being plaine in Tertullian and S. * Ep. 66. Cyprian who were the
eo praesente nisi illo jubente Sacramentum corporis Sanguinis Christi conficere nec eo corà m posito populum docere vel benedicere c. It is not lawfull for the Presbyters to enter into the baptistery nor to baptize any Catechumens nor to consecrate the Sacrament of Christs body and bloud in the presence of the Bishop without his command From this place of S. Leo if it be set in conjunction with the precedent we have faire evidence of this whole particular It is not lawfull to doe any offices without the Bishops leave So S. Ignatius so the Canons of the Apostles so Tertullian so the Councells of Antioch and Chalcedon It is not lawfull to doe any offices in the Bishops presence without leave so S. Leo. The Councell of Carthage joynes them both together neither in his presence nor without his leave in any place Now against this practice of the Church if any man should discourse as S. Hierome is pretended to doe by Gratian Qui non vult Presbyteros facere quae jubentur à Deo dicat quis major est Christo. He dist 95. cap. Ecce ego that will not let Presbyters doe what they are commanded to doe by God let him tell us if any man be greater then Christ viz whose command it is that Presbyters should preach Why then did the Church require the Bishop's leave might not Presbyters doe their duty without a license This is it which the practice of the Church is abundantly sufficient to answer * For to the Bishop is committed the care of the whole diocesse he it is that must give the highest account for the whole charge he it is who is appointed by peculiar designation to feede the flock so the Canon of the 1 Can. 40. Apostles so 2 Epist. ad Ephes. Ignatius so the Councell of 3 Cap. 24. Antioch so every where The Presbyters are admitted in partem sollicitudinis but still the jurisdiction of the whole Diocesse is in the Bishop and without the Bishop's admission to a part of it per traditionem subditorum although the Presbyter by his ordination have a capacity of preaching and administring Sacraments yet he cannot exercise this without designation of a particular charge either temporary or fixt And therefore it is that a Presbyter may not doe these acts without the Bishops leave because they are actions of relation and suppose a congregation to whom they must be administred or some particular person for a Priest must not preach to the stones as some say Venerable Bede did nor communicate alone the word is destructive of the thing nor baptize unlesse he have a Chrysome Child or a Catechumen So that all of the Diocesse being the Bishop's charge the Bishop must either authorize the Priest or the Priest must not meddle least he be what S. Peter blam'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Bishop in anothers Diocesse Not that the Bishop did license the acts precisely of baptizing of consecrating c. For these he had by his ordination but that in giving license he did give him a subject to whom he might apply these relative actions and did quoad hoc take him in partem sollicitudinis and concredit some part of his diocesse to his administration cum curâ animarum But then on the other side because the whole cure of the Diocesse is in the Bishop he cannot exonerate himselfe of it for it is a burden of Christs imposing or it is not imposed at all therefore this taking of Presbyters into part of the regiment and care does not devest him of his own power or any part of it nor yet ease him of his care but that as he must still 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 visit and see to his Diocesse so he hath authority still in all parts of his Diocesse and this appears in these places now quoted insomuch as when the Bishop came to any place there the Vicaria of the Presbyters did cease In praesentiâ Majoris cessat potest as minoris And though because the Bishop could not doe all the Minor and daily offices of the Priesthood in every congregation of his Diocesse therefore he appointed Priests severally to officiate himselfe looking to the Metropolis and the daughter Churches by a generall supravision yet when the Bishop came into any place of his Diocesse there he being present might doe any office because it was in his own charge which he might concredit to another but not exonerate himselfe of it And therefore praesente Episcopo saith the Councell of Carthage and S. Leo if the Bishop be present the Presbyter without leave might not officiate For he had no subjects of his owne but by trust and delegation and this delegation was given him to supply the Bishops absence who could not simul omnibus interesse but then where he was present the cause of delegation ceasing the jurisdiction also ceased or was at least absorpt in the greater and so without leave might not be exercised like the starres which in the noon day have their own naturall light as much as in the night but appeare not shine not in the presence of the Sunne This perhaps will seem uncouth to those Presbyters who as the Councell of Carthage's expression is are contrarii honori Episcopali but yet if we keep our selves in our own forme where God hath placed us and where wee were in the Primitive Church wee shall find all this to be sooth and full of order For Consider The elder the prohibition was the more absolute indefinite it runs Without the Bishop it is not lawfull to baptize to consecrate c. So Ignatius The prohibition is without limit But in descent of the Church it runnes praesente Episcopo the Bishop being present they must not without leave The thing is all one and a derivation from the same originall to wit the Vniversality of the Bishops Iurisdiction but the reason of the difference of expression is this At first Presbyters were in Citties with the Bishop and no parishes at all concredited to them The Bishops lived in Citties the Presbyters preach'd and offer'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from house to house according as the Bishop directed them Here they had no ordinary charge and therefore the first prohibitions runne indefinitely they must not doe any Clericall offices sine Episcopo unlesse the Bishop sends them But then afterwards when the Parishes were distinct and the Presbyters fix't upon ordinary charges then it was only praesente Episcopo if the Bishop was present they might not officiate without leave For in his absence they might doe it I doe not say without leave but I say they had leave given them when the Bishop sent them to officiate in a Village with ordinary or temporary residence as it is to this day when the Bishop institutes to a particular charge he also gives power hoc ipso of officiating in that place So that at first when they did officiate in places
32. conditores basilicarum in rebus quas eisdem Ecclesiis conferunt nullam se potestatem habere SED IUXTA CANONUM INSTITUTA sicut Ecclesiam ita dotem ejus ad ordinationem Episcopi pertinere These Councells I produce not as Iudges but as witnesses in the businesse for they give concurrent testimony that as the Church it selfe so the dowry of it too did belong to the Bishops disposition by the Ancient Canons For so the third Councell of Toledo calls it antiquam Constitutionem and it selfe is almost 1100. years old so that still I am precisely within the bounds of the Primitive Church though it be taken in a narrow sense For so it was determin'd Can. 26. vide Zonaram in hunc Canonem in the great Councell of Chalcedon commanding that the goods of the Church should be dispensed by a Clergy steward 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Videatur Concil Carthag Graec. can 36. 38. 41. Balsam ibid. apologia 2. Iustini Martyris according to the pleasure or sentence of the Bishop ADde to this that without the Bishop's dimissory letters Presbyters might not goe to another Diocesse So it is decreed in the fifteenth Canon of the Apostles under paine of suspension or deposition § 39. Forbidding Presbyters to leave their own Diocesse or to travell without leave of the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the censure and that especially 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if he would not returne when his Bishop calls him The same is renewed in the Councell of Antioch cap. 3. and in the Councell of Constantinople in Trullo cap. 17. the censure there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him be deposed that shall without dimissory letters from his Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fixe himselfe in the Diocesse of another Bishop But with license of his Bishop he may Sacerdotes vel alii Clerici concessione suorum Episcoporum possunt ad alias Ecclesias transmigrare But this is frequently renewed Vide Concil Epaun. c. 5. venet c. 10. in many other Synodall decrees these may suffice for this instance * But this not leaving the Diocesse is not only meant of promotion in another Church but Clergy men might not travaile from Citty to Citty without the Bishops license which is not only an argument of his regiment in genere politico but extends it almost to a despotick But so strict was the Primitive Church in preserving the strict tye of duty and Clericall subordination to their Bishop The Councell of Laodicea commands a Priest or Clergy Can. 41. man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to travail without Canonicall or dimissory letters And who are to grant these letters is expressed in the next Canon which repeats the same prohibition Can. 42. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Priest or a Clerke must not travaile without the command of his Bishop and this prohibition is inserted into the body of the Law de consecrat dist 5. can non oportet which puts in the clause of Neque etiam Laicum but this was beyond the Councell The same is in the Councell of a Can. 38. Agatho The Councell of b Can. 5. Venice adds a cēsure that those Clerks should be like persons excommunicate in all those places whither they went without letters of license from their Bishop The same penalty is inflicted by the Councell of Epaunum Presbytero vel Diacono Can. 6. sine Antistitis sui Epistolis ambulanti communionem nullus impendat The first Councell of Tourayne in France and the third Councell of Orleans attest the selfe same power in the Bishop and duty in all his Clergy BUT a Coërcitive authority makes not a complete § 40. And the Bishop had power to preferre which of his Clerks he pleased jurisdiction unlesse it be also remunerative the Princes of the Nations are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Benefactors for it is but halfe a tye to indeare obedience when the Subject only fears quod prodesse non poterit that which cannot profit And therefore the primitive Church to make the Episcopall jurisdiction up intire gave power to the Bishop to present the Clerks of his Diocesse to the higher Orders and neerer degrees of approximation to himselfe and the Clerks might not refuse to be so promoted Item placuit ut quicunque Clerici vel Diaconi pro necessitatibus Ecclesiarnm non obtemperaverint EPISCOPIS SUIS VOLENTIBUS EOS AD HONOREM AMPLIOREM IN SUA ECCLESIA PROMOVERE nec illic ministrent in gradu suo unde recedere noluerunt So it is decreed in the African Code They that will not by their Bishop be promoted to a Greater honour Can. 31. in the Church must not enjoy what they have already But it is a question of great consideration and worth a strict inquiry in whom the right and power of electing Clerks was resident in the Primitive Church for the right and the power did not alwaies goe together and also severall Orders had severall manner of election Presbyters and inferior Clergy were chosen by the Bishop alone the Bishop by a Synod of Bishops or by their Chapter And lastly because of late strong outcries are made upon severall pretensions amongst which the people make the biggest noise though of all their title to election of Clerks be most empty therefore let us consider it upon all its grounds 1. In the Acts of the Apostles which are most certainely the best precedents for all acts of holy Church we find that Paul and Barnabas ordain'd Elders in every Church and they passed thorough Lystra Iconium Antioch and Derbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appointing them Elders * S. Paul chose Timothy Bishop of Ephesus and he saies of himselfe and Titus For this cause I SENT thee to Crete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that thou shouldest oppoint Presbyters or Bishops be they which they will in every City The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies that the whole action was his For that he ordain'd them no man questions but he also APPOINTED THEM and that was saith S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Titus V 5. as I commanded thee It was therefore an Apostolicall ordinance that the BISHOP SHOULD APPOINT PRESBYTERS Let there be halfe so much showne for the people and I will also indeavour to promote their interest **** There is onely one pretence of a popular election in Scripture It is of the seven that were set over the widdowes * But first this was no part of the hierarchy This was no cure of soules This was no divine institution It was in the dispensation of monyes it was by command of the Apostles the election was made and they might recede from their owne right it was to satisfye the multitude it was to avoid scandall which in the dispensation of moneyes might easily arise it was in a temporary office it was with such limitations and conditions as the Apostles prescrib'd them it was out of the number
then yet they were such Bishops as had Presbyters and Deacons in subordination to them in all the particular advantages of the former instances 2. If the Bishops had the Parishes what cure had the Priests so that this will debase the Priests as much as the Bishops and if it will confine a Bishop to a Parish it will make that no Presbyter can be so much as a Parish-Priest If it brings a Bishop lower then a Diocesse it will bring the Priest lower then a Parish For set a Bishop where you will either in a Diocesse or a Parish a Presbyter shall still keep the same duty and subordination the same distance still So that this objection upon supposition of the former discourse will no way mend the matter for any side but make it farre worse it will not advance the Presbytery but it will depresse the whole hierarchy and all the orders of H. Church * But because this trifle is so much used amongst the enimies of Episcopacy I will consider it in little and besides that it does no body any good advantage I will represent it in it's fucus and show the falsehood of it 1. Then It is evident that there were Bishops before there were any distinct Parishes For the first division of Parishes in the West was by Evaristus who lived almost 100 years after Christ and divided Rome into seven parishes assigning to every one a Presbyter So Damasus reports of him in the Pontificall book Hic titulos in urbe Româ divisit Presbyteris septem Diaconos ordinavit qui custodirent Episcopum praedicantem propter stylum veritatis He divided the Parishes or titles in the City of Rome to Presbyters The same also is by Damasus reported of Dionysius in his life hic Presbyteris Ecclesias divisit caemiteria parochiasque dioeceses constituit Marcellus increased the number in the yeare 305. Hic fecit caemiterium viâ Salariâ 25 Titulos in urbe Roma constituit quasi dioeceses propter baptismum poenitentiam multorum qui convertebantur ex Paganis propter sepulturas Martyrum He made a Sepulture or caemitery for the buriall of Martyrs and appointed 25. Titles or Parishes but he addes quasi Dioeceses as it had been diocesses that is distinct and limited to Presbyters as diocesses were to Bishops and the use of parishes which he subjoynes cleares the businesse for he appointed them onely propter baptismum poenitentiam multorum sepulturas for baptisme and penance and buriall for as yet there was no preaching in Parishes but in the Mother-Church Thus it was in the West * But in Aegypt we find Parishes divided something sooner then the earliest of these for Eusebius reports out of Philo that the Christians in S. Markes Lib. 2. hist. cap. 17. time had severall Churches in Alexandria Etià m DE ECCLESIIS quae apud eos sunt it a dicit Est autem in singulis locis consecrata orationi domus c But even before this there were Bishops For in Rome there were fowre Bishops before any division of Parishes though S. Peter be reckon'd for none And before Parishes were divided in Alexandria S. Marke himselfe who did it was the Bishop and before that time S. Iames was Bishop of Ierusalem and in diverse other places where Bishops were there were no distinct Parishes of a while after Evaristus time for when Dionysius had assign'd Presbyters to severall Parishes he writes of it to Severus Bishop of Corduba desires him to doe so too in his Diocesse as appeares in his Epistle to him * For indeed necessity requir'd it when the * Euseb. lib. 6. cap. 43. Apolog. c. 37. Christians multiplyed and grew to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as apud Binium tom 1. Concil Cornelius call'd the Roman Christians a great and innumerable people and did implere omnia as Tertullians phrase is fill'd all places and publike and great assemblies drew danger upon themselves and increased jealousies in others and their publike offices could not be perform'd with so diffused and particular advantage then they were forc'd to divide congregations and assigne severall Presbyters to their cure in subordination to the Bishop and so we see the elder Christianity grew the more Parishes there were At first in Rome there were none Evaristus made seven Dionysius made some more and Marcellus added 15 and in Optatus lib. 2. contr Parmenian time there were 40. Well then The case is thus Parishes were not divided at first therefore to be sure they were not of Divine institution Therefore it is no divine institution that a Presbyter should be fixt upon a Parish therefore also a Parish is not by Christs ordinance an independant body for by Christs ordinance there was no such thing at all neither absolute nor in dependance neither and then for the maine issue since Bishops were before Parishes in the present sense the Bishops in that sense could not be Parochiall * But which was first a private congregation or a Diocesse If a private congregation then a Bishop was at first fix't in a private congregation and so was a Parochiall Bishop If a Diocesse was first then the Question will be how a Diocesse could be without Parishes for what is a Diocesse but a jurisdiction over many Parishes * I answer it is true that DIOCESSE and PARISH are words us'd now in contradistinction And now a Diocesse is nothing but the multiplication of of many Parishes Sed non fuit sic ab initio For at first a Diocesse was the Citie and the Regio suburbicaria the neighbouring townes in which there was no distinction of Parishes That which was a Diocesse in the secular sense that is a particular Province or division of secular prefecture that was the assignation of a Bishops charge * Ephesus Smyrna Pergamus Laodicea were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 heads of the Diocesses saith Pliny meaning in respect of secular lib. 5. cap. 29. 30. Vide Baron A. D. 39. n. 10. B. Rhenan in notit provinc Imperial in descript Illyrici jurisdiction and so they were in Ecclesiasticall regiment And it was so upon great reason for when the regiment of the Church was extended just so as the regiment of the Common-wealth it was of lesse suspition to the secular power while the Church regiment was just fixt together with the politicall as if of purpose to shew their mutuall consistence and it 's owne subordination ** And besides this there was in it a necessity for the subjects of another Province or Diocesse could not either safely or conveniently meete where the duty of the Common-wealth did not ingage them but being all of one prefecture and Diocesse the necessity of publike meetings in order to the Common-wealth would be faire opportunity for the advancement of their Christendome And this which at first was a necessity in this case grew to be a law in all by the sanction of the Councell of *
overcome with those feares which the Confessors had overcome So that this is evidently an act of positive and temporary discipline and as it is no disadvantage to the power of the Bishop so to be sure no advantage to the Presbyter * But the clause of objection from the 19 th epistle is yet unanswer'd and that runs something higher .... tamen ad consultum vestrum eos dimisi ne videar aliquid temerè praesumere It is called presumption to reconcile the penitents without the advice of those to whom he writ But from this we are fairely deliver'd by the title Cypriano Compresbyteris Carthagini consistentibus Caldonius salutem It was not the epistle of Cyprian to his Presbyters but of Caldonius one of the suffragan Bishops of Numidia to his Metropolitan and now what wonder if he call it presumption to doe an act of so publike consequence without the advise of his Metropolitan He was bound to consult him by the Canons Apostolicall and so he did and no harme done to the present Question of the Bishops sole and independant power and unmixt with the conjunct interest of the Presbytery who had nothing to doe beyond ministery counsell and assistance 3. In all Churches where a Bishops seat was there were not alwayes a Colledge of Presbyters but only in the greatest Churches for sometimes in the lesser Cities there were but two Esse oportet aliquantos Presbyteros ut bini sint per Ecclesias unus incivitate Episcopus So S. Ambrose sometimes there was but one in a Church Posthumianus in In 1. Timoth. 3. the third Councell of Carthage put the case Deinde qui unum Presbyterum habuerit numquid debet illi ipse unus Presbyter auferri The Church of Hippo had but one Valerius was the Bishop and Austin was the Priest and after him Austin was the Bishop Eradius the Priest Sometimes not one as in the case Aurelius put in the same Councell I now cited of a Church that had never a Presbyter to be consecrated Bishop in the place of him that dyed once at Hippo they had none even then when the people snatch'd S. Austin and carried him to Valerius to be ordain'd In these cases I hope it will not be denied but the Bishop was Iudge alone I am sure he had but little company sometimes none at all 4. But suppose it had been alwaies done that Presbyters were consulted in matters of great difficulty and possibility of Scandall for so S. Ambrose intimates Ecclesia seniores habuit sine quorum Consilio nihil gerebatur in Ecclesiâ understand in these 1. Tim. 1. Churches where Presbyteries were fixt yet this might be necessary and was so indeed in some degree at first which in succession as it prov'd troublesome to the Presbyters so unnecessary and impertinent to the Bishops At first I say it might be necessary For they were times of persecution and temptation and if both the Clergy and people too were not comply'd withall in such exigence of time and agonies of spirit it was the way to make them relapse to Gentilisme for a discontented spirit will hide it selfe and take sanctuary in the reedes and mud of Nilus rather then not take complacence in an imaginary security and revenge 2. As yet there had been scarse any Synods to determine cases of publike difficulty and what they could not receive from publike decision it was fitting they should supply by the maturity of a Consiliary assistance and deliberation For although by the Canons of the Apostles Bishops were bound twise a yeare to celebrate Synods yet persecution intervening they were rather twice a yeare a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a dispersion then a Synod 3. Although Synods had been as frequently conven'd as was intended by the Apostles yet it must be length of time and a successive experience that must give opportunity and ability to give generall rules for the emergency of all particulars and therefore till the Church grew of some considerable age a fixt standing Colledge of Presbyters was more requisite then since it hath been when the frequency of Generall Councells and Provinciall Synods and the peace of the Church and the innumerable volumes of the Fathers and Decretalls of Bishops and a digest of Ecclesiasticall Constitutions hath made the personall assistance of Presbyters unnecessary 4. When necessity requir'd not their presence and Counsell their own necessity requir'd that they should attend their severall cures For let it be considered they that would now have a Colledge of Presbyters assist the Bishop whether they think of what followes For either they must have Presbyters ordain'd without a title which I am sure they have complain'd of these threescore years or else they must be forc'd to Non-residence For how else can they assist the Bishop in the ordinary and daily occurrences of the Church unlesse either they have no cure of their own or else neglect it And as for the extraordinary either the Bishop is to consult his Metropolitan or he may be assisted by a Synod if the Canons already constitute doe not aide him but in all these cases the Presbytery is impertinent 5. As this assistance of Presbyters was at first for necessity and after by Custome it grew a Law so now retrò first the necessity fail'd and then the desuetude abrogated the Law which before custome had established quod quâ negligentiâ obsolever Vbi suprà it nescio saith S. Ambrose he knew not how it came to be obsolete but so it was it had expired before his time Not but that Presbyters were still in Mother-Churches I meane in Great ones In Ecclesiâ enim habemus Senatum nostrum actum Presbyterorum In Isaiae c. 3. we have still saith S. Hierome in the Church our Senate a Colledge or Chapter of Presbyters he was then at Rome or Ierusalem but they were not consulted in Church affaires matter of jurisdiction that was it that S. Ambrose wondred how it came to passe And thus it is to this day In our Mother Churches we have a Chapter too but the Bishop consults them not in matters of ordinary jurisdiction just so it was in S. Ambrose his time and therefore our Bishops have altered no custome in this particular the alteration was pregnant even before the end of the fowre generall Councells and therefore is no violation of a divine right for then most certainly a contrary provision would have been made in those conventions wherein so much sanctity and authority and Catholicisme and severe discipline were conjunct and then besides it is no innovation in practice which pretends so faire antiquity but however it was never otherwise then voluntary in the Bishops and positive discipline in the Church and conveniency in the thing for that present and Councell in the Presbyters and a trouble to the Presbyters persons and a disturbance of their duties when they came to be fixt upon a
Authority commands him then he may undertake it That is if either the Emperor commands him or if the Bishop permits him then it is lawfull But without such command or license it was against the Canon of the Apostles And therefore S. Cyprian did himselfe severely punish Geminius Faustinus one of the Priests of Carthage for undertaking the executorship of the Testament of Geminius Victor he Epist. 66. had no leave of his Bishop so to doe and for him of his own head to undertake that which would be an avocation of him from his office did in S. Cyprians Consistory deserve a censure 3. By this Canon of Chalcedon any Clerk may be the Oeconomus or steward of a Church and dispense her revenue if the Bishop command him 4. He may undertake the patronage or assistance of any distressed person that needs the Churches ayde * From hence it is evident that all secular imployment did not hoc ipso avocate a Clergy-man from his necessary office and duty for some secular imployments are permitted him all causes of piety of charity all occurrences concerning the revenues of the Church and nothing for covetousnesse but any thing in obedience any thing Vide Synod Roman sub Sylvestr c. 4. Concil Chalced c. 26. Zonar ibid. I meane of the fore-named instances Nay the affaires of Church revenues and dispensation of Ecclesiasticall Patrimony was imposed on the Bishop by the Canons Apostolicall and then considering how many possessions were deposited first at the Apostles feet and afterwards in the Bishops hands we may quickly perceive that a case may occurre in which something else may be done by the Bishop and his Clergy besides prayer and preaching 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Ignatius to S. Polycarpe of Smyrna Let not the Widdowes be neglected after God doe thou take care of them * Qui locupletes sunt volunt pro arbitrio Justin. Martyr Apolog. 2. quisque suo quod libitum est contribuit quod collectum est apud Praesidem deponitur atque is inde opitulatur Orphanis viduis iisque qui vel morbo vel aliâ de causâ egent tum iis qui vincti sunt peregrè advenientibus hospitibus ut uno verbo dicam omnium indigentium Curator est All the Collects and Offerings of faithfull people are deposited with the Bishop and thence he dispenses for the reliefe of the widdowes and Orphans thence he provides for travellers and in one word he takes care of all indigent and necessitous people So it was in Iustin Martyrs time and all this a man would think requir'd a considerable portion of his time besides his studies and prayer and preaching This was also done even in the Apostles times for first they had the provision of all the Goods and persons of the coenobium of the Church at Ierusalem This they themselves administred till a complaint arose which might have prov'd a Scandall then they chose seven men men full of the holy Ghost men that were Priests for they were of the 70 Disciples saith Epiphanius and such men as Preached and Baptized so S. Stephen and S. Philip therefore to be sure they were Clergy-men and yet they left their preaching for a time at least abated of the height of the imployment for therefore the Apostles appointed them that themselves might not leave the word of God and serve Tables plainly implying that such men who were to serve these Tables must leave the Ministery of the word in some sense or degree and yet they chose Presbyters and no harme neither and for a while themselves had the imployment I say there was no harme done by this temporary office to their Priestly function and imployment For to me it is considerable If the calling of a Presbyter does not take up the whole man then what inconvenience though his imployment be mixt with secular allay But if it does take up the whole man then it is not safe for any Presbyter ever to become a Bishop which is a dignity of a farre greater burden and requires more then a Man 's all if all was requir'd to the function of a Presbyter But I proceed 4. The Church prohibiting secular imployment to Bishops and Clerks doe prohibite it onely in gradu impedimenti officii Clericalis and therefore when the offices are supplyed by any of the Order it is never prohibited but that the personall abilities of any man may be imployed for the fairest advantages either of Church or Common-wealth And therefore it is observeable that the Canons provide that the Church be not destitute not that such a particular Clerke should there officiate Thus the Councell of Arles decreed ut Presbyteri SICUT HACTENUS FACTUM EST INDISCRETE per diver Apud Burchard lib. 2. decret cap. 99. sa non mittantur loca .... ne fortè propter eorum absentiam animarum pericula Ecclesiarum in quibus constituti sunt negligantur officia So that here we see 1. That it had been usuall to send Priests on Embassyes sicut hactenus factum est 2. The Canon forbids the indiscreet or promiscuous doing of it not that men of great ability choyce be not imployed but that there be discretion or discerning in the choyce of the men viz. that such men be chosen whose particular worth did by advancing the legation make compensation for absence from their Churches and then I am sure there was no indiscretion in the Embassy quoad hoc at least for the ordinary offices of the Church might be dispensed by men of even abilities but the extraordinary affaires of both states require men of an heightned apprehension 3. The Canon only took care that the cùre of the soules of a Parish be not relinquished for so is the title of the Canon Ne Presbyteri causâ legationis per diversa mittantur loca curâ animarum relictâ But then if the cure be supplied by delegation the feares of the Canon are prevented * In pursuance of this consideration the Church forbad Clergy-men to receive honour or secular preferment and so it is expressed where the prohibition is made It is in the Councell of Chalcedon Qui semel in clero deputati sunt aut Monachorum Part. 2. Act. 15. Can. 7. vitam expetiverunt statuimus neque ad militiam neque ad dignitatem aliquam venire mundanam That 's the inhibition But the Canon subjoynes a temper aut hoc tentantes non agentes poenitentiam quo minùs redeant ad hoc quod propter Deum primitùs elegerunt anathematizari they must not turne Souldiers or enter upon any worldy dignity to make them leave their function which for the honour of God they have first chosen for then it seemes he that tooke on him military honours or secular prefectures or consular dignity could not officiate in holy Orders but must renounce them to assume the other It was in obstruction of this abuse that the Canon directed its prohibition
Princes Courts I st is me diantibus mansuescit circa simplices judiciarius rigor admittitur clamor pauperum Ecclesiarum dignitas erigitur relevatur pauperum indigentia firmatur in clero libertas pax in populis in Monasteriis quies justitia liberè exercetur superbia opprimitur augetur Laicorum devotio religio fovetur diriguntur judicia c. When pious Bishops are imployed in Princes Councells then the rigor of Lawes is abated equity introduced the cry of the poore is heard their necessities are made known the liberties of the Church are conserved the peace of Kingdomes labour'd for pride is depressed religion increaseth the devotion of the Laity multiplies and tribunalls are made just and incorrupt and mercifull Thus farre Petrus Blesensis * These are the effects which though perhaps they doe not alwaies fall out yet these things may in expectation of reason be look'd for from the Clergy their principles and calling promises all this quia in Ecclesiâ magis lex est ubi Dominus legis timetur meliùs dicit apud Dei Ministros agere causam Faciliùs enim Dei timore sententiam legis veram promunt saith S. Ambrose In 1. Corinth 6. and therefore certainly the fairest reason in the world that they be imployed But if personall defaillance be thought reasonable to disimploy the whole calling then neither Clergy nor Laity should ever serve a Prince And now we are easily driven into an understanding of that saying of S. Paul No man that 2. Timoth. 2. 4. warreth entangleth himselfe with the affaires of this life For although this be spoken of all Christian people and concernes the Laity in their proportion as much as the Clergy yet nor one nor the other is interdicted any thing that is not a direct hinderance to their owne precise duty of Christianity And such things must be par'd away from the fringes of the Laity as well as the long robe of the Clergy But if we should consider how little we have now left for the imployment of a Bishop I am afraid a Bishop would scarce seem to be a necessary function so farre would it be from being hindered by the collaterall intervening of a Lay-judicature I need not instance in any particulars for if the judging matters and questions of religion be not left alone to them they may well be put into atemporall imployment to preserve them from suspition of doing nothing I have now done with this only intreating this to be considered Is not the King fons utriusque jurisdictionis In all the senses of Common-law and externall compulsory he is But if so then why may not the King as well make Clergy-Iudges as Lay-Delegates For to be sure if there be an incapacity in the Clergy of medling with secular affaires there is the same at least in the Laity of medling with Church affaires For if the Clergy be above the affaires of the World then the Laity are under the affaires of the Church or else if the Clergy beincapable of Lay-businesse because it is of a different and disparate nature from the Church does not the same argument exclude the Laity from intervening in Church affaires For the Church differs no more from the common-wealth then the common-wealth differs from the Church And now after all this suppose a King should command a Bishop to goe on Embassy to a forraine Prince to be a Commissioner in a treaty of pacification if the Bishop refuse did he doe the duty of a Subject If yea I wonder what subjection that is which a Bishop owes to his Prince when hee shall not be bound to obey him in any thing but the saying and doing of his office to which he is obliged whether the Prince commands him yea or no. But if no then the Bishop was tyed to goe and then the calling makes him no way incapable of such imployment for no man can be bound to doe a sinne BUt then did not this imployment when the occasions §. 50. And therefore were inforced to delegate their power and put others in substitution were great and extraordinary force the Bishops to a temporary absence And what remedy was there for that For the Church is not to be left destitute that 's agreed on by all the Canons They must not be like the Sicilian Bishops whom Petrus Blesensis complains of that attended the Court and never visited their Churches or took care either of the cure of soules or of the Church possessions What then must be done The Bishops in such cases may give delegation of their power and offices to others though now adaies they are complain'd of for their care I say for their care For if they may intervene in secular affaires they may sometimes be absent and then they must delegate their power or leave the Church without a Curate *** But for this matter the account need not be long For since I have proved that the whole Diocesse is in curâ Episcopali and for all of it he is responsive to God Almighty and yet that instant necessity and the publike act of Christendome hath ratified it that Bishops have delegated to Presbyters so many parts of the Bishops charge as there are parishes in his Diocesse the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is pretended for delegation of Episcopall charge is no lesse then the act of all Christendome For it is evident at first Presbyters had no distinct cure at all but were in common assistant to the Bishop and were his emissaries for the gaining soules in Citty or Suburbs But when the Bishops divided parishes and fixt the Presbyters upon a cure so many Parishes as they distinguished so many delegations they made And these we all believe to be good both in law and conscience For the Bishop per omnes divinos ordines propriae hierarchiae exercet mysteria saith S. Denis Eccles. hierar c. 5. he does not doe the offices of his order by himselfe onely but by others also for all the inferior orders doe so operate as by them he does his proper offices * But besides this grand act of the Bishops first and then of all Christendome in consent we have faire precedent in S. Paul for he made delegation of a power to the Church of Corinth to excommunicate the incestuous person It was a plain delegation for he commanded them to doe it and gave them his own spirit that is his own authority and indeed without it I scarce find how the delinquent should have been delivered over to Satan in the sense of the Apostolick Church that is to be buffeted for that was a miraculous appendix of power Apostolick * When S. Paul sent for Timothy from Ephesus he sent Tychicus to be his Vicar Doethy diligence 2. Timoth. 4. v. 9. 12. to come unto me shortly for Demas hath forsaken me c. And Tychicus have I sent to Ephesus Here was an expresse delegation of the power of jurisdiction to Tychicus who for
of a stranger nor will they follow him and therefore those sheapheards whom the Church hath followed in all ages are no strangers but Sheapheards or Pastors of Christs appointing or else Christ hath had no sheep for if he hath then Bishops are the sheapheards for them they have ever followed I end with that golden rule of Vincentius Lirinensis Magnopere Cap. 3. adv haereses curandum est ut id teneamus quod ubique quod semper quod ab omnibus creditum est Hoc est enim verè proprieque Catholicum For certainly the Catholick belief of the Church against Arius Eunomius Macedonius Apollinaris and the worst of hereticks the Cataphrygians was never more truly received of all and alwaies and every where then is the government of the Church by Bishops Annunciare ergo Christianis Catholicis praeter id quod Cap. 14. acceperunt nunquam licuit nunquam licet nunquam licebit It never was is nor ever shall be lawfull to teach Christian people any new thing then what they have received from a primitive fountain and is descended in the stream of Catholick uninterrupted succession * I onely adde that the Church hath insinuated it to be the duty of all good Catholike Christians to pray for Bishops and as the case now stands for Episcopacy it selfe for there was never any Church-Liturgy but said Letanyes for their KING and for their BISHOP 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A SERMON PREACHED IN SAINT MARIES Church in OXFORD Vpon the Anniversary of the GUNPOWDER-TREASON By IEREMY TAYLOR Fellow of Allsoules Colledge in OXFORD Nolite tangere Christos meos OXFORD Printed by LEONARD LICHFIELD Printer to the Vniversity M. DC XXXVIII TO THE MOST REVEREND FATHER IN GOD WILLIAM by Divine providence LORD ARCH-BISHOP OF CANTERBURY His Grace Primate of all England and Metropolitane CHANCELLOUR of the University of OXFORD and one of his MAIESTIES most Honourable Privy Councell My most Honourable good LORD May it please your GRACE IT was obedience to my Superiour that ingaged me upon this last Anniversary commemoration of the great Goodnesse of God Almighty to our King and Country in the discouery of the most damnable Powder-Treason It was a blessing which no tongue could expresse much lesse mine which had scarce learn'd to speake at least was most unfit to speake in the Schooles of the Prophets Delicata autem est illao bedientia quae causas quaerit It had beene no good argument of my obedience to have disputed the inconvenience of my person and the unaptnesse of my parts for such an imployment I knew God out of the mouth of Infants could acquire his praise and if my heart were actually as Uotive as my tongue should have beene it might bee one of Gods Magnalia to perfect his owne praise out of the weaknesse and imperfection of the Organ So as I was able I endeavour'd to performe it having my obedience ever ready for my excuse to men and my willingnesse to performe my duty for the assoylment of my selfe before God part of which I hope was accepted and I have no reason to thinke that the other was not pardoned When I first thought of the Barbarisme of this Treason I wondred not so much at the thing it selfe as by what meanes it was possible for the Divell to gaine so strong a party in mens resolutions as to move them to undertake a businesse so abhorring from Christianity so evidently full of extreame danger to their lives and so certainly to incurre the highest wrath of God Almighty My thoughts were thus rude at first but after a strict inquisition I fond it was apprehended as a businesse perhaps full of danger to their bodies but advantagious to their soules consonant to the obligation of all Christians and meritorious of an exceeding weight of Glory for now it was come to passe which our dear Master foretold men should kill us and thinke they did God good service in it I could not thinke this to be a part of any mans religion nor doe I yet believe it For it is so apparently destructive of our deare Master his Royall lawes of Charity Obedience that I must not be so uncharitable as to thinke they speake their owne minde truly when they professe their beliefe of the lawfullnesse and necessity in some cases of rebelling against their lawfull Prince and using all meanes to throw him from his kingdome though it be by taking of his life But it is but iust that they who breake the bonds of duty to their Prince should likewise forfeit the lawes of charity to themselves and if they say not true yet to bee more uncharitable to their owne persons then I durst be though I had their own warrant Briefly Most R. Father I found amongst them of the Roman party such prevailing opinions as could not consist with loyalty to their Prince in case hee were not the Popes subiect and these so generally believed and somewhere obtruded under perill of their soules that I could not but point at these dangerous rocks at which I doubt not but the loyalty of many hath suffered shipwrack and of thousands more might if a higher Starre had not guided them better then their owne Pilots I could not therefore but thinke it very likely that this Treason might spring from the same Fountaine and I had concluded so in my first meditations but that I was willing to consider whether or no it might not bee that these men were rather exasperated then perswaded and whether it were not that the severity of our lawes against them might rather provoke their intemperate zeal then religion thus move their setled conscience It was a materiall consideration because they ever did and still doe fill the world with outcries against our lawes for making a rape upon their consciences have printed Catalogues of their English Martyrs drawn Schemes of most strange tortures imposed on their Priests such as were unimaginable by Nero or Dioclesian or any of the worst and cruellest enemies of Christianity endeavouring thus to make us partly guilty of our owne ruine and so washing their hands in token of their owne innocency even then when they were dipping them in the blood Royall and would have emptyed the best veynes in the whole Kingdome to fill their Lavatory But I found all these to be but Calumnies strong accusations upon weake presumptions and that the cause did rest where I had begun I meane upon the pretence of the Catholique cause and that the imagin'd iniquity of the Lawes of England could not be made a vaile to cover the deformity of their intentions for our Lawes were just Honourable and Religious Concerning these and some other appendices to the businesse of the day I expressed some part of my thoughts which because happily they were but a just truth and this truth not unseasonable for these last times in which as S. Paul prophecyed men would be fierce Traytors heady and high minded creeping into houses leading
be published though with perill to the delinquents fame life then it will be a farre greater discouragement to the sinne when that it shall by an universall judgement be so detested that its concealement may not be permitted though it be with the hazard of discouraging the Holy duty of confession and when the being guilty of such a sinne shall reduce men into such streights that either they shall want the benefit of absolution or submit themselves to a publike satisfaction and so even in this particular the benefit is farre greater then the imaginary inconvenience The conveniences of the Seale force no more then that it is convenient to be observed not simply and absolutely in all cases necessary And perhaps Suarez the great patron of it perceived it however he laies the burden super communi consensu Ecclesiae In 3. Part. D. Thom. disp 33. sect 1. n. 2 eiusque perpetuâ traditione If then I can shew that there is no such Catholike consent of the present Church nor any universall tradition of the ancient Church for the inviolable Seale but plainly the contrary then our Church in her permission of the Priests to reveale some confessions is as inculpable as those of the present Church who besides her selfe teach and practise it and as the Primitive Church whose example in this as in other things she strictly followes Of the first The Church of England which observes the seale of confession as sacredly as reason or religion it selfe can possibly permit yet forbids not disclosure in case of Murder or Treason but in these particulars leaves us intire in our obedience to Can. 113. A. D. 1604. the common lawes of England and these command it That the Church of England gives leave in some cases to reveale confessions is argument enough to prove that the Seale is not founded upon the consent of the present Catholike Church For it is no more a begging of the Question nor apparently so much to say the Church of England is a part of the Catholike Church and therefore her consent is required to make a thing universall then to say the Church of Rome is the whole Catholike Church therefore her consent is sufficient to make a thing Catholike But I shall not need to proceed this way For 1 It is apparent that of their own side Altisidiorensis largely and professedly proves the iawfulnesse of publication in some cases as is to be seen Lib. 4. Summae tract 6. cap. 3. q. 7. and Garnet himselfe the man who if any had most need to stand in defence of the Seale that the pretence of it might have defended him yet confessed of his own accord Leges quae celare haec prohibent apprimè esse justas salutares He Actio in prodit lat p. 99. addes his reason and that is more then his authority for saith he it is not fitting that the life and safety of a Prince should depend upon the private niceties of any mans conscience If two nay if one dissent it is enough to destroy a consent But see farther There are many cases generally confessed amongst themselves in which the seale of formall and as they love to speak Sacramentall confession may be broken open I instance but in two or three First confession may be reveal'd to clear a doubtfull case of marriage It is the opinion of many great Practic crim Ecclesiast cap. 109. Canonists as you may see them quoted by Suarez de Paz. and Covaruvias and the case of the Venetian Resol de Matrimon who married a Virgin that was both his sister and daughter and that at Rome under Pope Paul the third almost to like purpose were long disputed on both sides whether they were to be revealed or not so that at most it is but a doubtfull matter in such cases whether the tye of secrecy doth oblige Now if for the proofe of marriage the seale may be broken up that man and wife might live contentedly and as they ought strange it should be unlawfull to reveale confessions in case of Treason for the safety of a Prince or State 2 In case of heresy the seale binds not by their own generall confession It is a rule amongst them Haeresis est crimen quod non confessio celat Now I would fain learn why Treason is not as revealeable as Heresy Is heresy dangerous to soules Then surely so is Treason unlesse it be none or a very small crime May heresy infect others So may Treason as it did in the present It may then as well be revealed as heresy Now that it may something rather I have these reasons 1. Because it is not so certaine that such an opinion is heresy as that such a fact is Treason 2. Because although both Treason and reall heresy be damnable and dangerous to soules yet heresy killes no Kings as treason doth I confesse that heresy may and doth teach it but then it degenerates into Treason Now if some heresy may be Treason then that Treason is heresy so a case of Treason may occurre in which from their own confession treason is revealeable 3 By the most generall voice of their own side any man may licence his confessor to reveale his confession It is the doctrine of Scotus Durandus Almain Navarre Medina and generally of all the Thomists I inferre if a private man may licence his Confessor to reveale his confession then the seale of confession is not founded upon any divine commandement for if it were the penitent could not give the Priest license to break it But if the penitent may give his Confessor leave because the tye of secrecy is a bond in which the Priest stands bound to the penitent he giving him leave remits of his own right then much rather may a whole State authorise this publication for what ever personall right a private man hath that the whole State hath much rather L. quod Maior ff ad Municipalem for he is included in it as a part of the whole and in such cases as concerne the whole commonwealth as this of treason doth most especially the rule of the Law holds without exception Refertur ad universos quod publicè fit per maiorem partem the delinquent ff de regut juris ad §. refertur L. 7 §. ult ff de pact gives leave to the publication of confession therefore because the whole state doth whereof he is one member I adde that in the case of Treason this is much rather true for here the delinquent looseth all his right whatsoever praediall personall and of priviledge therefore the Commonwealth can the better license the publication and the breach of the bond of secrecy in which the Confessor stood tyed to the penitent by vertue of implicit stipulation 4 Lastly even in speciall in the very case of Treason confessed many of their owne doe actually practise a publication when either they are loyall of themselves or dare
particular charge * One thing more before I leave I find a Canon of the Councell of Hispalis objected Episcopus Presbyteris solus honorem dare potest solus autem auferre Can. 6. non potest A Bishop may alone ordaine a Priest a Bishop may not alone depose a Priest Therefore in censures there was in the Primitive Church a necessity of conjunction of Presbyters with the Bishop in imposition of censures * To this I answer first it is evident that hee that can give an honour can also take it away if any body can for there is in the nature of the thing no greater difficulty in pulling downe then in raising up It was wont alwaies to be accounted easier therefore this Canon requiring a conjunct power in deposing Presbyters is a positive constitution of the Church founded indeed upon good institution but built upon no deeper foundation neither of nature or higher institution then its own present authority But that 's enough for we are not now in question of divine right but of Catholick and Primitive practice To it therefore I answer that the conjunct hand required to pull downe a Presbyter was not the Chapter or Colledge of Presbyters but a company of Bishops a Synodall sentence and determination for so the Canon runnes qui profecto nec ab uno damnari nec uno judicante poterunt honoris sui privilegiis exui sed praesentati SYNODALI IUDICIO quod canon de illis praeceperit definiri And the same thing was determin'd in the Greekes Councell of Carthage If a Presbyter or a Deacon be accused Can. 20. their owne Bishop shall judge them not alone but with the assistance of sixe Bishops more in the case of a Presbyter three of a Deacon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the causes of the other Clergy the Bishop of the place must ALONE heare and determine them So that by this Canon in some things the Bishop might not be alone but then his assistants were Bishops not Presbyters in other things he alone was judge without either and yet his sentences must not be clancular but in open Court in the full Chapter for his Presbyters must be present and so it is determin'd for Africa in the fourth Councell of Carthage Vt Episcopus nullius causam audiat absque praesentiâ Can. 23. Clericorum suorum alioquin irrita erit sententia Episcopi nisi praesentiâ Clericorum confirmetur Here is indeed a necessity of the presence of the Clergy of his Church where his Consistory was kept least the sentence should be clandestine and so illegall but it is nothing but praesentia Clericorum for it is sententia Episcopi the Bishops sentence and the Clerks presence only for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishop ALONE might give sentence in the causes of the inferior Clergy even by this Canon it selfe which is used for objection against the Bishops sole jurisdiction *** I know nothing now to hinder our processe for the Bishops jurisdiction is clearely left in his own hand and the Presbyters had no share in it but by delegation and voluntary assumption Now I proceed in the maine question VVEE have seen what Episcopacy is in it selfe § 45. So that the government of the Church by Bishops was believed necessary now from the same principles let us see what it is to us And first Antiquity taught us it was simply necessary even to the being and constitution of a Church That runs high but we must follow our leaders * S. Ignatius is expresse in this question Qui intra altare est mundus est quare obtemperat Episcopo Sacerdotibus Qui verò foris Epist. ad Tral est hic is est qui sine Episcopo Sacerdote Diacono quicquam agit ejusmodi inquinatam habet conscientiam infideli deterior est He that is within the Altar that is within the Communion of the Church he is pure for he obeyes the Bishop and the Priests But he that is without that is does any thing without his Bishop and the Clergy he hath a filthy conscience and is worse then an infidell NECESSE itaque est quicquid facitis ut SINE EPISCOPO NIHIL faciatis It is NECESSARY that what euer ye doe ye be sure to doe nothing without the Bishop Quid enim aliud est Episcopus c. For what else is a Bishop but he that is greater then all power So that the obeying the Bishop is the necessary condition of a Christian and Catholick communion he that does not is worse then an infidell The same also he affirmes againe Quotquot enim Christi sunt partium Episcopi Epist. ad Philadelph qui verò ab illo declinant cum maledict is communionem amplectuntur hi cum illis excidentur All them that are on Christs side are on the Bishops side but they that communicate with accursed Schismaticks shall be cutt off with them * If then we will be Christ's servants we must be obedient and subordinate to the Bishop It is the condition of Christianity We are not Christians else So is the intimation of S. Ignatius * As full and pertinent is the peremptory resolution of S. Cyprian in that admirable epistle of his ad Lapsos where after he had Epist. 27. alibi spoken how Christ instituted the honour of Episcopacy in concrediting the Keyes to Peter and the other Apostles Inde saith he per temporum successionum vices Episcoporum ordinatio ECCLESIAE RATIO decurrit VT ECCLESIA SUPER EPISCOPOS CONSTITUATUR omnis actus Ecclesiae per EOSDEM PRAEPOSITOS gubernetur Hence is it that by severall succcession of Bishops the Church is continued so that the CHURCH HATH IT'S BEING OR CONSTITUTION BY BISHOPS and every act of Ecclesiasticall regiment is to be disposed by them Cùm hoc itaque divinâ lege fundatum sit miror c. Since therefore this is so ESTABLISHED BY THE LAW OF GOD I wonder any man should question it c. And therefore as in all buildings the foundation being gone the fabrick falls so IF YE TAKE AWAY BISHOPS the Church must aske a writing of divorce from God for it can no longer bee called a Church This account we have from S. Cyprian and he reenforces againe upon the same charge in his * Epist. 69. Epistle ad Florentium Pupianum where he makes a Bishop to be ingredient into the DEFINITION of a Church Ecclesia est plebs sacerdoti adunata Pastori suo Grex adhaerens The Church is a flock adhering to it's Pastor and a people united to their Bishop for that so he means by Sacerdos appears in the words subjoyn'd Vnde scire debes Episcopum in Ecclesiâ esse Ecclesiam in Episcopo si qui Cum EPISCOPO NON SIT IN ECCLESIA NON ESSE frustrà sibi blandiri eos qui pacem cum Sacerdotibus Dei non habentes obrepunt latentèr apud quosà am communicarese