suas saeculares apuà nos finire cupientes quando eis necessarij fuerimus sic nos Sanctos Epist. 147. Dei servos appellant ut negotiaterrae suae peragant Aliquando agamus negotium salutis nostrae salutis ipsorum non de auro non de argento non de fundis pecoribus pro quibus rebus quotidiè submisso capite salutamur ut dissensiones hominum terminemus It was almost the businesse of every day to him to judge causes concerning Gold and Silver Cattell and glebe and all appertenances of this life This S. Austin would not have done if it had not been lawfull so we are to suppose in charity but yet this we are sure of S. Austin thought it not deâ—pare Monach cap 29. only lawfull but a part of his duty quibus nos molestijs idem affixit Apostolus and that by the authority not of himselfe but of him that spake within him even the H. Ghost so he Thus also it was usuall for Princes in the Primitive Church to send Bishops their Embassadours Constans the Emperour sent two Bishops chosen out of the Councell of Sardis together with Salianus Tripart hist lib 4. cap. 25. the Great Master of his Army to Constantius * S. Chrysostom was sent Embassadour to Gainas Maruthus the Bishop of Mesopotamia was sent Embassadour lib 10. cap 6. ibid. 11. cap. 8. ibid. from the Emperour to Isdigerdes the King of Persia. S. Ambrose from Valentinian the yonger lib. 5. Epist. Ambros. 33. Euseb lib. 8. cap. 1. to the Tyrant Maximus * Dorotheus was a Bishop and a chamberlaine to the Emperour Many more examples there are of the concurrence of the Episcopall office and a secular dignity or imployment Now then Consider * The Church did not might not challenge any secular honour or imployment by vertue of her Ecclesiasticall dignity precisely 2. The Church might not be ambitious or indagative of such imployment 3. The Churche's interest abstractly considered was not promoted by such imployment but where there was no greater way of compensation was interrupted and depress'd 4. The Church though in some cases shee was allowed to make secession yet might not relinquish her owne charge to intervene in anothers ayd 5. The Church did by no meanes suffer her Clerks to undertake any low secular imployment much more did shee forbid all sordid ends and Covetous designes 6. The Bishop or his Clerks might ever do any action of piety though of secular burden Clerks were never forbidden to reade Grammer or Philosophy to youth to be Masters of Schooles of Hospitalls they might reconcile their Neighbours that were falne out about a personall trespasse or reall action and yet since now adayes a Clergy-man's imployment and capacity is bounded within his Pulpit or reading deske or his study of Divinity at most these that I have reckoned are as verily secular as any thing and yet no law of Christendome ever prohibited any of these or any of the like Nature to the Clergy nor any thing that is ingenuous that is fit for a Scholler that requires either finenesse of parts or great learning or overruling authority or exemplary piety 7. Clergy-men might do any thing that was imposed on them by their Superiours 8. The Bishops and Priests were men of Great ability and surest confidence for determinations of Iustice in which religion was ever the strongest binder And therefore the Princes and People sometimes forc'd the Bishops from their owne interest to serve the Common-wealth in it they serv'd themselves directly and by consequence too the Church had not only a sustentation from the secular arme but an addition of honour and secular advantages and all this warranted by precedent of Scripture and the practice of the Primitive Church and particularly of men whom all succeeding ages have put into the Calender of Saints * So that it would be considered that all this while it is the kings interest and the Peoples that is pleaded when we assert a capacity to the Bishops to undertake charges of publike trust It is no addition to the calling of Bishops It serves the King it assists the republike and in such a plethory and almost a surfet of Clergy-men as this age is supplied with it can be no disservice to the Church whose dayly offices may be plentifully supplyed by Vicars and for the temporary avocation of some few aboundant recompence is made to the Church which is not at all injured by becomming an occasion of indearing the Church to those whose aide shee is * There is an admirable epistle written by Petrus Blesensis in the name of the Arch bishop of Canterbury Epist. 84. to P. Alexander the third in the defence of the Bishop of Ely Winchester Norwich that attended the Court upon service of the King Non est novum saith he quòd Regum Consiliis intersint Episcopi Sicut enim honestate sapientiâ caeteros antecedunt sic expeditiores efficaciores in reip administratione censentur Quia sicut Scriptum est minús salubritèr disponitur regnum quod non regitur consilio sapientum In quo not atur eos consiliis Regum debere assistere qui sciant velint possint patientibus compati paciterrae ac populi saluti prospicere crudire adjustitiam Reges imminentibus occursare periculis vitaeque maturioris exemplis informare subditos quâdam authoritate potestativâ praesumptionem malignantium cohibere It is no new thing for Bishops to be Counsellors to Princes saith he their wisdome and piety that enables them for a Bishoprick proclaimes them fit instruments to promote the publike tranquillity of the Common-wealth They know how to comply with oppressed people to advance designes of peace and publike security It is their office to instruct the King to righteousnesse by their sanctity to be a rule to the Court and to diffuse their exemplary piety over the body of the Kingdome to mixe influences of religion with designes of state to make them have as much of the dove as of the serpent and by the advantage of their religious authority to restraine the malignity of accursed people in whom any image of a God or of religion is remaining * He proceeds in the discourse and brings the examples of Samuel Isaiah Elisha Iojada Zecharias who were Priests and Prophets respectively and yet imployed in Princes Courts and Councells of Kings and addes this Vnum noveritis quia nisi familiares Consiliarii Regis essent Episcopi suprà dorsum Ecclesiae hodiè fabricarent peccatores immanitèr ac intolerabilitèr opprimeret Clerum praesumptio Laicalis That 's most true If the Church had not the advantage of additionall honorary imployments the plowers would plow upon the Churches back make long furrowes * The whole Epistle is worth transcribing But I shall content my selfe with this summary of the advantages which are acquir'd both to policy and Religion by the imployment of Bishops in
this often hapned I think S. Austin is the chiefe Argument and Authority we have for the Assumption of the Virgin Mary the Baptism of Infants is called a Tradition by Origen alone at first and from Salmeron disput 51. in Rom. him by others The procession of the holy Ghost from the Sonne which is an Article the Greek Church disavowes derives from the Tradition Apostolicall as it is pretended and yet before S. Austin we heare nothing of it very cleerly or certainly for as much as that whole mystery concerning the blessed Spirit was so little explicated in Scripture and so little derived to them by Tradition that till the Councell of Nice you shall hardly find any form of worship or personall addresse of devotion to the holy Spirit as Erasmus observes and I think the contrary will very hardly be verified And for this particular in which I instance whatsoever is in Scripture concerning it is against that which the Church of Rome calls Tradition which makes the Greeks so confident as they are of the point and is an Argument of the vanity of some things which for no greater reason are called Traditions but because one man hath said so and that they can be proved by no better Argument to be true Now in this case wherein Tradition descends upon us with unequall certainty it would be very unequall to require of us an absolute beliefe of every thing not written for feare we be accounted to slight Tradition Apostolicall And since no thing can require our supreme assent but that which is truly Catholike and Apostolike and to such a Tradition is requir'd as Irenaeus sayes the consent of all those Churches which the Apostles planted and where they did preside this topick will be of so little use in judging heresies that besides what is deposited in Scripture it cannot be proved in any thing but in the Canon of Scripture it selfe and as it is now received even in that there is some variety And therefore there is wholy a mistake in this businesse for when the Fathers appeal to Tradition and with much earnestnesse Numb 8. and some clamour they call upon Hereticks to conform to or to be tryed by Tradition it is such a Tradition as delivers the fundamentall points of Christianity which were also recorded in Scripture But because the Canon was not yet perfectly consign'd they call'd to that testimony they had which was the testimony of the Churches Apostolicall whose Bishops and Priests being the Antistites religionis did believe and preach Christian Religion and conserve all its great mysteries according as they had been taught Irenaeus calls this a Tradition Apostolicall Christum accepisse calicem dixisse sanguinem suum esse docuisse novam oblationem novi Testamenti quam Ecclesia per Apostolos accipiens offert per totum mundum And the Fathers in these Ages confute Hereticks by Ecclesiasticall Tradition that is they confront against their impious and blaspemous doctrines that Religion which the Apostles having taught to the Churches where they did preside their Successors did still preach and for a long while together suffered not the enemy to sow tares amongst their wheat And yet these doctrines which they called Traditions were nothing but such fundamentall truths which were in Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Irenaeus in Eusebius observes in the instance of Polycarpus and it is manifest by considering Lib. 5. cap. 20. what heresies they fought against the heresies of Ebion Cerinthus Nicolaitans Valentinians Carpocratians persons that Vid. Irenae l. 3 4. cont haeres denyed the Sonne of God the Unity of the God-head that preached impurity that practised Sorcery and Witch-craft And now that they did rather urge Tradition against them then Scripture was because the publike Doctrine of all the Apostolicall Churches was at first more known and famous then many parts of the Scripture and because some Hereticks denyed S. Lukes Gospel some received none but S. Matthews some rejected all S. Pauls Epistles and it was a long time before the whole Canon was consign'd by universall Testimony some Churches having one part some another Rome her selfe had not all so that in this case the Argument from Tradition was the most famous the most certain and the most prudent And now according to this rule they had more Traditions then we have and Traditions did by degrees lessen as they came to be written and their necessity was lesse as the knowledge of them was ascetained to us by a better Keeper of Divine Truths All that great mysteriousnesse of Christs Priest-hood the unity of his Sacrifice Christs Advocation and Intercession for us in Heaven and many other excellent Doctrines might very well be accounted Traditions before S. Pauls Epistle to the Hebrews was publish'd to all the World but now they are written truths and if they had not possibly we might either have lost them quite or doubted of them as we doe of many other Traditions by reason of the insufficiency of the propounder And therefore it was that S. Peter took order that the Gospel 2 Pet. 1. 13. should be Writ for he had promised that he would doe something which after his decease should have these things in remembrance He knew it was not safe trusting the report of men where the fountain might quickly run dry or be corrupted so insensibly that no cure could be found for it nor any just notice taken of it till it were incurable And indeed there is scarce any thing but what is written in Scripture that can with any confidence of Argument pretend to derive from the Apostles except ritualls and manners of ministration but no doctrines or speculative mysteries are so transmitted to us by so cleer a current that we may see a visible channell and trace it to the Primitive fountaines It is said to be a Tradition Apostolicall that no Priest should baptize without chrism and the command of the Bishop Suppose it were yet we cannot be oblig'd to believe it with much confidence because we have but little proofe for it scarce any thing but the single testimony of S. Hierom. And yet if it were this is but a rituall of which in passing by I shall give that account That Dialog adv Lucifer suppose this and many more ritualls did derive clearly from Tradition Apostolicall which yet but very few doe yet it is hard that any Church should be charged with crime for not observing such ritualls because we see some of them which certainly did derive from the Apostles are expir'd and gone out in a desuetude such as are abstinence from blood and from things strangled the coenobitick life of secular persons the colledge of widowes to worship standing upon the Lords day to give milk and honey to the newly baptized and many more of the like nature now there having been no mark to distinguish the necessity of one from the indifferency of the other they are all
Faith but especially by the insinuation and consequent De Rom. Pont. l 4. c. 2. § secunda sententia acknowledgement of Bellarmine that for 1000 years together the Fathers knew not of the Doctrine of the Popes infallibility for Nilus Gerson Alemain the Divines of Paris Alphonsus de Castro and Pope Adrian VI persons who liv'd 1400 after Christ affirm that infallibility is not seated in the Popes person that he may erre and sometimes actually hath which is a clear demonstration that the Church knew no such Doctrine as this there had been no Decree nor Tradition nor generall opinion of the Fathers or of any age before them and therefore this opinion which Bellarmine would faine blast if he could yet in his Conclusion he sayes it is not propriè haeretica A device and an expression of his own without sense or precedent But if the Fathers had spoken of it and believed it why may not a disagreeing person as well reject their Authority when it is in behalf of Rome as they of Rome without scruple cast them off when they speak against it For as Bellarmine being pressed with the Authority of Nilus Bishop of Thessalonica and other Fathers he sayes that the Pope acknowledges no Fathers but they are all his children and therefore they cannot depose against him and if that be true why shall we take their Testimonies for him for if Sonnes depose in their Fathers behalfe it is twenty to one but the adverse party will be cast and therefore at the best it is but suspectum Testimonium But indeed this discourse signifies nothing but a perpetuall uncertainty in such topicks and that where a violent prejudice or a concerning interest is engag'd men by not regarding what any man sayes proclaim to all the world that nothing is certain but Divine Authority But I will not take advantage of what Bellarmine sayes nor what Stapleton or any one of them all say for that will bee Numb 13. but to presse upon personall perswasions or to urge a generall Question with a particular defaillance and the Question is never the nearer to an end for if Bellarmine sayes any thing that is not to another mans purpose or perswasion that man will be tryed by his own Argument not by anothers And so would every man doe that loves his liberty as all wise men doe and therefore retain it by open violence or private evasions But to return An Authority from Irenaeus in this Question and on behalf of the Popes infallibility or the Authority of the Sea of Rome Numb 14. or of the necessity of communicating with them is very fallible for besides that there are almost a dozen answers to the words of the Allegation as is to be seen in those that trouble themselves in this Question with the Allegation and answering such Authorities yet if they should make for the affirmative of this Question it is protestatio contra factum For Irenaeus had no such great opinion of Pope Victors infallibity that he believed things in the same degree of necessity that the Pope did for therefore he chides him for Excommunicating the Asian Bishops 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all at a blow in the Question concerning Easter day and in a Question of Faith he expresly disagreed from the doctrine of Rome for Irenaeus was of the Millenary opinion and believed it to be a Tradition Apostolicall now if the Church of Rome was of that opinion then why is she not now where is the succession of her doctrine But if she was not of that opinion then and Irenaeus was where was his beliefe of that Churches infallibility The same I urge concerning S. Cyprian who was the head of a Sect in opposition to the Church of Rome in the Question of rebaptization and he and the abettors Firmilian and the other Bishops of Cappadocia and the voisinage spoke harsh words of Stephen and such as become them not to speak to an infallible Doctor and the supreme Head of the Church I will urge none of them to the disadvantage of that Sea but only note the Satyrs of Firmilian against him because it is of good use to shew that it is possible for them in their ill carriage to blast the reputation and efficacy of a great Authority For he sayes that that Church did pretend the Authority of the Apostles cum in multis sacramentis divinae rei à Epist. Firmiliani contr Steph. ad Cyprian Vid. etiam Ep. Cypriani ad Pompeium principio discrepet ab Ecclesia Hierosolymitanâ defamet Petrum Paulum tanquam authores And a little after justè dedignor sayes he apertam manifestam stultitiam Stephani per quam veritas Christianae petrae aboletur which words say plainly that for all the goodly pretence of Apostolicall Authority the Church of Rome did then in many things of Religion disagree from Divine Institution and from the Church of Jerusalem which they had as great esteeme of for Religion sake as of Rome for its principality and that still in pretending to S. Peter and S. Paul they dishonoured those blessed Apostles and destroyed the honour of their pretence by their untoward prevarication which words I confesse passe my skill to reconcile them to an opinion of infallibility and although they were spoken by an angry person yet they declare that in Africa they were not then perswaded as now they were at Rome Nam Cyprian Epist ad Quintum 〈◊〉 nec Petrus quem primum Dominus clegit vendicavit sibi aliquid insolentèr aut arrogantèr assumpsit ut diceret se primatum tenere That was their belief then and how the contrary hath grown up to that heigth where now it is all the world is witnesse And now I shall not need to note concerning S. Hierome that he gave a complement to Damasus that he would not have given to Liberius Qui tecum non colligit spargit For it might be true enough of Damasus who was a good Bishop and a right believer but if Liberius's name had been put instead of Damasus the case had been altered with the name for S. Hierom did believe and write it so that Liberius had subscrib'd to Arrianism And if either he or any of the rest had believ'd the De Script Eccles. in Fortunatiano Pope could not be a Heretick nor his Faith faile but be so good and of so competent Authority as to be a Rule to Christendome Why did they not appeale to the Pope in the Arrian Controversy why was the Bishop of Rome made a Party and a concurrent as other good Bishops were and not a Judge and an Arbitrator in the Question Why did the Fathers prescribe so many Rules and cautions and provisoes for the discovery of heresy Why were the Emperours at so much charge and the Church at so much trouble as to call and convene in Councels respectively to dispute so frequently to write so sedulously to observe all advantages
However things are now It was §. 49. And trusted with affayres of Secular interest otherwise in the Old Religion for no honour was thought too great for them whom God had honourd with so great degrees of approximation to himselfe in power and authority But then also they went further For they thought whom God had intrusted with their soules they might with an equall confidence trust with their personall actions and imployments of greatest trust For it was Great Consideration that they who were Antistites religionis the Doctors and great Dictators of Faith and conscience should be the composers of those affayres in whose determination a Divine wisdome and interests of conscience and the authority of religion were the best ingredients But it is worth observing how the Church and the Common-wealth did actions contrary to each other in pursuance of their severall interests The Common-wealth still enabled Bishops to take cognisance of causes and the confidence of their owne people would be sure to carry them thither where they hop'd for faire issue upon such good grounds as they might fairely expect from the Bishops abilityes authority and religion But on the other side the Church did as much decline them as shee could and made sanctions against it so farre as shee might without taking from themselves all opportunities both of doing good to their people and ingaging the secular arme to their owne assistance But this we shall see by consideration of particulars 1. It was not in Naturâ rei unlawfull for Bishops to receive an office of secular imployment S. Paul's tent-making was as much against the calling of an Apostle as sitting in a secular tribunall is against the office of a Bishop And it is hard if we will not allow that to the conveniences of a Republike which must be indulged to a private personall necessity But we have not S. Paul's example onely but his rule too according to Primitive exposition Dare any of you having a matter before another goe to law 1. Cor. 6. before the Vnjust and not before the Saints If then ye have judgements of things pertaining to this life set them to judge who are least esteemed in the Church who are they The Clergy I am sure now adayes But S. Ambrose also thought that to In hunc locum be his meaning seriously Let the Ministers of the Church be the Iudges For by least esteemed he could not meane the most ignorant of the Laity they would most certainly have done very strange justice especially in such causes which they Understand not No but set them to judge who by their office are Servants and Ministers of all and those are the Clergy who as S. Paul's expression is Preach not themselves but Iesus to be the Lord and themselves your servants for Iesus sake Meliùs dicit apud Dei Ministros agere causam Yea but S. Paul's expression seemes to exclude the Governours of the Church from intermedling Is there not one wise man among you that is able to Iudge betweene his Brethren Why Brethren if Bishops and Priests were to be the Iudges they are Fathers The objection is not worth the noting but onely for S. Ambrose his answer to it Ideò autem Fratrem Iudicem eligendum dicit quià adhuc Rector Ecclesiae illorum non erat ordinatus S. Paul us'd the word Brethren for as yet a Bishop was not ordained amongst them of that Church intimating that the Bishop was Vide etiam August de opere Monach ca. 29. to be the man though till then in subsidium any prudent Christian man might be imployed 2. The Church did alwaies forbid to Clergy-men A VOLUNTARY ASSUMPTION of ingagements in REBUS SAECULI So the sixth Canon of the Apostles Can. 7. Latin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Bishop and a Vide Zonarin Can. Apostol Priest and a Deacon must not assume or take on himselfe worldly cares If he does let him be depos'd Here the Prohibition is generall No worldly cares Not domestick But how if they come on him by Divine imposition or accident That 's nothing if he does not assume them that is by his voluntary act acquire his owne trouble So that if his secular imployment be an act of obedience indeed it is trouble to him but no sinne But if he seekes it for it selfe it is ambition In this sense also must the following Canon be understood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A Clerk must not be a Tutor or Guardian viz of secular trust that is must not seeke a diversion from his imployment by voluntary Tutorship 3. The Church also forbad all secular negotiation for base ends not precisely the imployment it selfe but the illnesse of the intention and this indeed shee expressely forbids in her Canons * Pervenit ad Sanctam Synodum quòd quidam qui in Clero sunt allecti PROPTER LUCRA TURPIA conductores alienarum Concil Chalced Act. 15. can 3. possessionum fiant saecularia negotia sub curâ suâ suscipiant Dei quidem Ministerium parvipendentes Saecularium verò discurrentes domos PROPTER AVARITIAM patrimoniorum sollicitudinem sumentes Clergy men farmers of lands and did take upon them secular imployment FOR COVETOUS DESIGNES and with neglect of the Church These are the things the Councell complain'd of and therefore according to this exigence the following Sanction is to be understood Decrevit itaque hoc Sanctum magnumque Concilium nullum deinceps non Episcopum non Clericum vel Monachum aut possessiones conducere aut negotijs saecularibus se immiscere No Bishop No Clergy man No Monke must farme grounds nor ingage himselfe in secular businesse What in none No none praeter pupillorum si fortè leges imponant inexcusabilem curam aut civitatis Episcopus Ecclesiasticarum rerum sollicitudinem habere praecipiat aut Orphanorum viduarum earum quae sine ullâ defensione sunt ac personarum quae maximè Ecclesiastico indigent adjutorio propter timorem Domini causa deposcat This Canon will doe right to the Question All secular affaires and bargaines either for covetousnesse or with considerable disturbance of Church offices are to be avoided For a Clergy man must not be covetous much lesse for covetise must he neglect his cure To this purpose is that of the second Councell of Arles Clericus turpis lucri Can. 14. gratiâ aliquod genus negotiationis non exerceat But nor here nor at Chalcedon is the prohibition absolute nor declaratory of an inconsistence and incapacity for for all this the Bishop or Clerk may doe any office that is in piâ curâ He may undertake the supravision of Widdowes and Orphans And though he be forbid by the Canon of the Apostles to be a guardian of pupills yet it is expounded here by this Canon of Chalcedon for a voluntary seeking it is forbidden by the Apostles but here it is permitted only with si fortè leges imponant if the Law or
and to obey him and to encourage us in both and this is compleated in the Apostles Creed And since contraries are of the same extent heresy is to be judg'd by its proportion and analogy to faith and that is heresy only which is against Faith Now because Faith is not only a precept of Doctrines but of manners and holy life whatsoever is either opposite to an Article of Creed or teaches ill life that 's heresy but all those propositions which are extrinsecall to these two considerations be they true or be they false make not heresy nor the man an Heretick and therefore however hee may be an erring person yet he is to be used accordingly pittied and instructed not condemned or Excommunicated And this is the result of the first ground the consideration of the nature of Faith and heresy SECT III. Of the difficulty and uncertainty of Arguments from Scripture in Questions not simply necessary not literally determined GOd who disposes of all things sweetly and according to the nature and capacity of things and persons had made those Numb 1. only necessary which he had taken care should be sufficiently propounded to all persons of whom he required the explicite beliefe And therefore all the Articles of Faith are cleerely and plainly set down in Scripture and the Gospel is not hid nisi pereuntibus saith S. Paul 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith Damascen and that Orthod fidei lib. 4. c. 18. so manifestly that no man can be ignorant of the foundation of Faith without his own apparent fault And this is acknowledged by all wise and good men and is evident besides the reasonablenesse of the thing in the testimonies of Saints a Super Psal. 88. de util cred c. 6. Austin b Super Isa. c. 19 in Psal. 86. Hierome c Homil. 3. in Thess. Ep. 2. Chrysostome d Serm de confess Fulgentius e Miseel 2. l. 1. tit 46. Hugo de Sancto Victore f In Gen. ap Struch p. 87. Theodoret g C. 6. c. 21. Lactantius h Ad Antioch l. 2. p. 918. Theophilus Antiochenus i Par. 1. q. 1. art 9 Numb 2. Aquinas and the latter Schoole men And God hath done more for many things which are only profitable are also set down so plainly that as S. Austin sayes nemo inde haurire non possit si modò ad hauriendum devotè ac piè accedat ubi supra de util cred c. 6. but of such things there is no Question commenc'd in Christendome and if there were it cannot but be a crime and humane interest that are the Authors of such disputes and therefore these cannot be simple errours but alwayes heresies because the principle of them is a personall sinne But besides these things which are so plainly set down some for doctrine as S. Paul sayes that is for Articles and foundation of Faith some for instruction some for reproofe some for comfort that is in matters practicall and speculative of severall tempers and constitutions there are innumerable places containing in them great mysteries but yet either so enwrapped with a cloud or so darkned with umbrages or heigthened with expressions or so covered with allegories and garments of Rhetorick so profound in the matter or so altered or made intricate in the manner in the clothing and in the dressing that God may seeme to have left them as tryalls of our industry and Arguments of our imperfections and incentives to the longings after heaven and the clearest revelations of eternity and as occasions and opportunities of our mutuall charity and toleration to each other and humility in our selves rather then the repositories of Faith and furniture of Creeds and Articles of beliefe For wherever the word of God is kept whether in Scripture Numb 3. alone or also in Tradition he that considers that the meaning of the one and the truth or certainty of the other are things of great Question will see a necessity in these things which are the subject matter of most of the Questions of Christendome that men should hope to be excused by an implicite faith in God Almighty For when there are in the Explications of Scripture so many Commentaries so many senses and Interpretations so many Volumnes in all Ages and all like mens faces exactly none like another either this difference and inconvenience is absolutely no fault at all or if it be it is excusable by a minde prepar'd to consent in that truth which God intended And this I call an implicite Faith in God which is certainly of as great excellency as an implicite Faith in any man or company of men Because they who doe require an implicite Faith in the Church for Articles lesse necessary and excuse the want of explicite Faith by the implicite doe require an implicite Faith in the Church because they believe that God hath required of them to have a minde prepared to believe whatever the Church sayes which because it is a proposition of no absolute certainty whosoever does in readinesse of minde believe all that God spake does also believe that sufficiently if it be fitting to be believ'd that is if it be true and if God hath said so for he hath the same obedience of understanding in this as in the other But because it is not so certain God hath tyed him in all things to believe that which is called the Church and that it is certain we must believe God in all things and yet neither know all that either God hath revealed or the Church taught it is better to take the certain then the uncertain to believe God rather then men especially since if God hath bound us to believe men our absolute submission to God does involve that and there is no inconvenience in the world this way but that we implicitely believe one Article more viz. the Churches Authority or infallibility which may well be pardoned because it secures our beliefe of all the rest and we are sure if we believe all that God said explicitely or implicitely we also believe the Church implicitely in case we are bound to it but we are not certain that if we believe any company of men whom we call the Church that we therefore obey God and believe what he hath said But however if this will not help us there is no help for us but good fortune or absolute predestination for by choyce and industry no man can secure himselfe that in all the mysteries of Religion taught in Scripture he shall certainly understand and explicitely believe that sense that God intended For to this purpose there are many considerations 1. There are so many thousands of Copies that were writ by persons of severall interests and perswasions such different Numb 4. understandings and tempers such distinct abilities and weaknesses that it is no wonder there is so great variety of readings both in the Old Testament and in the New In the Old
Saint Gregory The lot was throwne and God made to be Judge so as he was tempted to a miracle to answer a question which themselves might have ended without much trouble The two Missals were laid upon the Altar the Church door shut and sealed By the morrow Mattins they found S. Gregories Missall torne in pieces saith the story and thrown about the Church but S. Ambrose's open'd and laid upon the Altar in a posture of being read If I had been to judge of the meaning of this Miracle I should have made no scruple to have said it had been the will of God that the Missall of S. Ambrose which had been anciently used and publickly tryed and approved of should still be read in the Church and that of Gregory let alone it being torn by an Angelicall hand as an argument of its imperfection or of the inconvenience of innovation But yet they judg'd it otherwise for by the tearing and scattering about they thought it was meant it should be used over all the world and that of S. Ambrose read onely in the Church of Millaine I am more satisfied that the former was the true meaning then I am of the truth of the story But we must suppose that And now there might have been eternal disputings about the meaning of the miracle and nothing left to determine when two fancies are the litigants and the contestations about probabilities hinc inde And I doubt not this was one cause of so great variety of opinions in the Primitive Church when they proved their severall opinions which were mysterious questions of Christian Theologie by testimonies out of the obscurer Prophets out of the Psalmes and Canticles as who please to observe their arguments of discourse and actions of Councel shall perceive they very much used to doe Now although mens understandings be not equall and that it is fit the best understandings should prevaile yet that will not satisfie the weaker understandings because all men will not think that another understanding is better then his own at least not in such a particular in which with fancy he hath pleased himself But commonly they that are least able are most bold and the more ignorant is the more confident therefore it is but reason if he would have another beare with him he also should beare with another and if he will not be prescribed to neither let him prescribe to others And there is the more reason in this because such modesty is commonly to be desired of the more imperfect for wise men know the ground of their perswasion and have their confidence proportionable to their evidence others have not but over-act their trifles and therefore I said it is but a reasonable demand that they that have the least reason should not be most imperious and for others it being reasonable enough for all their great advantages upon other men they will be soone perswaded to it for although wise men might be bolder in respect of the persons of others less discerning yet they know there are but few things so certaine as to create much boldness and confidence of assertion If they doe not they are not the men I take them for 2. When an action or opinion is commenc'd with zeale and piety against a knowne vice or a vitious person commonly all the Numb 2. mistakes of it's proceeding are made sacred by the holiness of the principle and so abuses the perswasions of good people that they make it as a Characteristick note to distinguish good persons from bad and then whatever error is consecrated by this means is therefore made the more lasting because it is accounted holy and the persons are not easily accounted hereticks because they erred upon a pious principle There is a memorable instance in one of the greatest questions of Christendome viz. concerning Images For when Philippicus had espyed the images of the six first Synods upon the front of a Church he caused them to be pulled down now he did it in hatred of the sixth Synod for he being a Monothelite stood condemn'd by that Synod The Catholiques that were zealous for the sixth Synod caused the images and representments to be put up againe and then sprung the question concerning the lawfullness of images in Churches Philippicus and his party strived by suppressing images to do disparagement to the sixth Synod the Catholiques to preserve the honour Vid. Paulum Diaconum of the sixth Synod would uphold images And then the question came to be changed and they who were easie enough to be perswaded to pull downe images were over-awed by a prejudice against the Monothelites and the Monothelites striv'd to maintain the advantage they had got by a just and pious pretence against images The Monothelites would have secur'd their error by the advantage and consociation of a truth the other would rather defend a dubious and disputable error than lose and let goe a certain truth And thus the case stood and the successors of both parts were led invincibly For when the Heresie of the Monothelites disbanded which it did in a while after yet the opinion of the Iconoclasts the question of Images grew stronger Yet since the Iconoclasts at the first were Heretiques not for their breaking Images but for denying the two wils of Christ his Divine and his Humane that they were called Iconoclasts was to distinguish their opinion in the question concerning the Images but that then Iconoclasts so easily had the reputation of Hereticks was because of the other opinion which was conjunct in their persons which opinion men afterwards did not easily distinguish in them but took them for Hereticks in gross and whatsoever they held to be hereticall And thus upon this prejudice grew great advantages to the veneration of Images and the persons at first were much to be excused because they were misguided by that which might have abused the best men And if Epiphanius who was as zealous against Images in Churches as Philippicus or Leo Isaurus had but begun a publike contestation and engaged Emperours to have made Decrees against them Christendom would have had other apprehensions of it then they had when the Monothelites began it For few men will endure a truth from the mouth of the Devill and if the person be suspected so are his wayes too And it is a great subtlety of the Devill so to temper truth and falshood in the same person that truth may lose much of its reputation by its mixture with error and the error may become more plausible by reason of its conjunction with truth And this we see by too much experience for we see many truths are blasted in their reputation because persons whom we think we hate upon just grounds of Religion have taught them And it was plain enough in the case of Maldonat that said of an explication of a place of Scripture that it was In cap 6. Iohan most agreeable to Antiquity but because Calvin
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
of its managing or its effect be a sinne in it selfe or becomes a sinne to the person then as he is to doe towards other sinnes so to that opinion or man so opining But to beleeve so or not so when there is no more but meere beleeving is not in his power to enjoyne therefore not to punish And it is not onely lawfull to tollerate disagreeing perswasions but the authority of God onely is competent to take notice of it and infallible to determine it and fit to judge and therefore no humane authority is sufficient to doe all those things which can justifie the inflicting temporall punishments upon such as doe not conforme in their perswasions to a rule or authority which is not only fallible but supposed by the disagreeing person to be actually deceived But I consider that in the toleration of a different opinion Numb 4. Religion is not properly and immediately concerned so as in any degree to be endangered For it may be safe in diversity of perswasions and it also a part of Christian * Humani iuris naturalis peteslatis unicuique quod putaverit colere Sed nec religionis est cogere religionem quae suscipi sponte debet non vi Tertul. ad Scapulam Religion that the liberty of mens Consciences should be preserved in all things where God hath not set a limit and made a restraint that the soule of man should be free and acknowledge no master but Jesus Christ that matters spirituall should not be restrain'd by purishments corporall that the same meekenesse and charity should be preserved in the promotion of Christianity that gave it foundation and increment firmness in its first publication that conclusions should not be more dogmaticall then the vertuall resolution and efficacy of the premises And that the persons should not more certainly be condemned then their opinions confuted and lastly that the infirmities of men and difficulties of things should be both put in ballance to make abatement in the definitive sentence against mens persons But then because tolleration of opinions is not properly a question of Religion it may be a question of policy And although a man may be a good Christian though he beleeve an errour not fundamentall and not directly or evidently impious yet his opinion may accidentally disturbe the publick peace through the over-activenesse of the person and the confidence of their beliefe and the opinion of its appendant necessity and therefore tolleration of differing perswasions in these cases is to be considered upon politicall grounds and is just so to be admitted or denyed as the opinions or tolleration of them may consist with the publicke and necessary ends of Government Onely this As Christian Princes must looke to the interest of their Government so especially must they consider the interests of Christianity not call every redargution or modest discovery of an established errour by the name of disturbance of the peace For it is very likely that the peevishness and impatience of contradiction in the Governours may break the peace Let them remem-but the gentlenesse of Christianity the Liberty of Consciences which ought to be preserved and let them doe justice to the persons whoever they are that are peevish provided no mans person be over-born with prejudice For if it be necessary for all men to subscribe to the present established Religion by the same reason at another time a man may be bound to subscribe to the contradictory and so to all Religions in the world And they only who by their too much confidence intitle God to all their fancies and make them to be questions of Religion and evidences for Heaven or consignations to Hell they onely think this doctrine unreasonable and they are the men that first disturb the Churches peace and then thinke there is no appeasing the tumult but by getting the victory But they that consider things wisely understand that since salvation and damnation depend not upon impertinencies and yet that publick peace and tranquillity may the Prince is in this case to seeke how to secure Government and the issues and intentions of that while there is in these cases directly no insecurity to Religion unlesse by the accidentall uncharitablenesse of them that dispute Which uncharitablenesse is also much prevented when the publike peace is secured and no person is on either side ingaged upon * Dextera praecipuè capit indulgentia mentes Aâ—peritas oditi saevaque bella parit revenge or troubled with disgrace or vexed with punishments by any decretory sentence against him It was the saying of a wise states-man I meane Thuanus Haeretici qui pace data factionibus scinduntur persecutione uniuntur contra Remp. If you persecute heretickes or discrepants they unite themselves as to a common defence If you permit them they divide themselves upon private interest and the rather if this interest was an ingredient of the opinion The Summe is this it concernes the duty of a Prince because it concernes the Honour of God that all vices and every part of Numb 5. ill life be discountenanced and restrain'd And therefore in relation to that opinions are to be dealt with For the understanding being to direct the will and opinions to guide our practices they are considerable onely as they teach impiety and vice as they either dishonour God or disobey him Now all such doctrines are to be condemned but for the persons preaching such Doctrines if they neither justifie nor approve the pretended Consequences which are certainly impious they are to be separated from that consideration But if they know such consequences and allow them or if they doe not stay till the doctrines produce impiety but take sinne before hand and mannage them impiously in any sense or if either themselves or their doctrine doe really and without colour or fained pretext disturb the publique peace * Extat prudens monitum Mecaenatis apud Dionem Cassium ad Augustum in haec verba Eos vero qui in Divinis aliquid innovant adio habe coerce non Deorum solùm causâ sed quia nova numina hi tales introducentes mulios impellunt ad mutationem rerum Unde conjurationes seditiones Conciliabula existunt res profectò minime conducibiles principatui Et legib us quoque expressum est quod in religionem committitur in omnium fertur injuriam and just interests they are not to be suffered In all other cases it is not onely lawfull to permit them but it is also necessary that Princes and all in authority should not persecute discrepant opinions And in such cases wherein persons not otherwise incompetent are bound to reprove an error as they are in many in all these if the Prince makes restraint he hinders men from doing their duty and from obeying the Lawes of JESUS CHRIST SECT XVII Of complyance with disagreeing persons or weake constiences in generall VPon these grounds it remaines that we reduce this doctrine
or not free in both as it may happen But the restraint is this that every one is not left to his liberty Numb 46. to pray how he list with premeditation or without it makes not much matter but that he is prescribed unto by the spirit of another But if it be a fault thus to restraine the spirit I would faine know is not the spirit restrained when the whole Congregation shall be confined to the form of this one mans composing or it shall be unlawfull or at least a disgrace and disparagement to use any set forms especially of the Churches composition More plainly thus 2. Doth not the Minister confine and restraine the spirit of the Lords People when they are tyed to his form It would Numb 47. sound of more liberty to their spirits that every one might make a prayer of his own and all pray together and not be forced or confined to the Ministers single dictate and private spirit It is true it would breed confusions and therefore they might pray silently till the Sermon began and not for the avoiding one inconvenience runne into a greater and to avoid the disorder of a popular noyse restraine the blessed Spirit for even in this case as well as in the other Where the spirit of God is there must be liberty 3. If the spirit must be at liberty who shall assure us this liberty must be in forms of prayer And if so whether also it Numb 48. must be in publike prayer and will it not suffice that it be in private And if in publike prayers is not the liberty of the spirit sufficiently preserved in that the publike spirit is free That is the Church hath power upon occasion to alter and encrease her Litanyes By what Argument shall any man make it so much as probable that the holy Ghost is injured if every private Ministers private spirit shall be guided and therefore by necessary consequence limited by the Authority of the Churches publick spirit 4. Does not the Directory that thing which is here called restraining Numb 49. of the spirit Does it not appoint every thing but the words And after this is it not a goodly Palladium that is contended for and a princely liberty that they leave unto the Spirit to be free only in the supplying the place of a Vocabulary and a Copia Verborum For as for the matter it is all there described and appointed and to those determined senses the spirit must assist or not at all only for the words he shall take his choyce Now I desire it may be considered sadly and seriously Is it not as much injury to the spirit to restraine his matter as to appoint his words Which is the more considerable of the two sense or Language Matter or Words I meane when they are taken singly and separately For so they may very well be for as if men prescribe the matter only the spirit may cover it with severall words and expressions so if the spirit prescribe the words I may still abound in variety of sense and preserve the liberty of my meaning we see that true in the various interpretations of the same words of Scripture So that in the greater of the two the Spirit is restrained when his matter is appointed and to make him amends for not trusting him with the matter without our directions and limitations we trust him to say what he pleases so it be to our sense to our purposes A goodly compensation surely 5. Did not Christ restrain the spirit of his Apostles when he Numb 50. taught them to pray the Lords Prayer whether his precept to his Disciples concerning it was Pray this or Pray thus Pray these words or pray after this manner or though it had been lesse then either and been only a Directory for the matter still it is a thing which our Brethren in all other cases of the same nature are resolved perpetually to call a restraint Certainly then this pretended restraint is no such formidable thing These men themselves doe it by directing all the matter and much of the manner and Christ himselfe did it by prescribing both the matter and the words too 6. These restraints as they are called or determinations of the Spirit are made by the Spirit himselfe For I demand when Numb 51. any Assembly of Divines appointed the matter of Prayers to all particular Ministers as this hath done is that appointment by the Spirit or no If no then for ought appears this Directory not being made by Gods Spirit may be an enemy to it But if this appointment be by the Spirit then the determination and limitation of the Spirit is by the Spirit himself and such indeed is every pious and prudent constitution of the Church in matters spirituall Such as was that of S. Paul to the Corinthians when he prescribed orders for publike prophecying and interpretation and speaking with tongues The spirit of some he so restrained that he bound them to hold their peace he permitted but two or three to speak at one meeting the rest were to keep silence though possibly six or seven might at that time have the Spirit 7. Is it not a restraint of the Spirit to sing a Psalm in meeter by appointment Cleerely as much as appointing formes of Numb 52. prayer or Eucharist And yet that we see done daily and no scruple made Is not this to be partiall in judgement and inconsiderate of what wee doe 8. And now after all this strife what harm is there in restraining the spirit in the present sense What prohibition what law Numb 53. what reason or revelation is against it What inconvenience in the nature of the thing For can any man be so weak as to imagine a despite is done to the spirit of grace when those gifts to his Church are used regularly and by order As if prudence were no gift of Gods spirit as if helps in Government and the ordering spirituall matters were none of those graces which Christ when he ascended up on high gave unto Men. But this whole matter is wholly a stranger to reason and never seen in Scripture For Divinity never knew any other vitious restraining of the Spirit but either suppressing those holy incitements to virtue and Numb 54. good life which Gods Spirit ministers to us externally or internally or else a forbidding by publick Authority the Ministers of the Word and Sacraments to speak such truths as God hath commended and so taking away the liberty of Prophecying The first is directly vitious In materia speciale the second is tyrannicall and Antichristian And to it persecution of true Religion is to be reduced But as for this pretended limiting or restraining the spirit viz. by appointing a regular form of prayer it is so very a Chimera that it hath no footing or foundation upon any ground where a wise man may build his confidence 9. But lastly how if the spirit
the Primitive Church against the example of all famous Churches in all Christendome in the whole descent of 15. Ages without all command and warrant of Scripture that it is unreasonable in the nature of the thing against prudence and the best wisedome of humanity because it is without deliberation that it is innovation in a high degree without that Authority which is truly and by inherent and ancient right to command and prescribe to us in externall forms of worship that it is much to the disgrace of the first reformers of our Religion that it gives encouragement to the Papists to quarrell with some reason and more pretence against our Reformation as being by the Directory confessed to have been done in much blindnesse and therefore might erre in the excesse as well as in the defect in the throwing out too much as casting off too little which is the more likely because they wanted zeale to carry it farre enough He that considers the universall deformity of publike worship and the no meanes of union no Symbol of publike communion being publikely consigned that all Heresies may with the same Authority bee brought into our prayers and offered to God in behalfe of the people with the same Authority that any truth may all the matter of our prayers being left to the choyce of all men of all perswasions and then observes that actually there are in many places heresie and blasphemy and impertinency and illiterate rudenesses put into the devotions of the most Solemne dayes and the most publike meetings and then lastly that there are divers parts of Lyturgy for which no provisions at all is made in the Directory and the very administration of the Sacraments left so loosely that if there be any thing essentiall in the forms of Sacraments the Sacrament may come ineffectuall by want of due words and due ministration I say he that considers all these things and many more he may consider will finde that particular men are not fit to be intrusted to offer in publike with their private spirit to God for the people in such solemnities in matters of so great concernment where the honour of God the benefit of the people the interest of Kingdomes the being of a Church the unity of minds the conformity of practice the truth of perswasions and the salvation of soules are so very much concerned as they are in the publike prayers of a whole Nationall Church An unlearned man is not to be trusted and a wise man dare not trust himselfe hee that is ignorant cannot he that is knowing will not The End OF THE SACRED ORDER AND OFFICES OF EPISCOPACIE By Divine Jnstitution Apostolicall Tradition and Catholique Practice TOGETHER WITH Their Titles of Honour Secular Employment Manner of Election Delegation of their Power and other appendant questions asserted against the Aerians and Acephali new and old By IER TAYLOR D. D. Chaplaine in Ordinarie to His MAJESTIE Published by His MAJESTIES Command ROM 13. 1. There is no power but of God The Powers that be are ordained of God CONCIL CHALCED 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 LONDON Printed for RICHARD ROYSTON at the Angel in Ivie-lane 1647. TO THE TRVLY VVORTHY AND MOST ACCOMPLISHT S r CHRISTOPHER HATTON Knight of the Honourable Order of the BATH SIR I AM ingag'd in the defence of a Great Truth and J would willingly finde a shrowd to cover my selfe from danger and calumny and although the cause both is ought to be defended by Kings yet my person must not goe thither to Sanctuary unlesse it be to pay my devotion and I have now no other left for my defence I am robd of that which once did blesse me and indeed still does but in another manner and I hope will doe more but those distillations of coelestiall dewes are conveyed in Channels not pervious to an eye of sense and now adayes we seldome look with other be the object never so beauteous or alluring You may then think Sir I am forc'd upon You may that beg my pardon and excuse but I should do an injury to Your Noblenesse if I should onely make You a refuge for my need pardon this truth you are also of the fairest choice not only for Your love of Learning for although that be eminent in You yet it is not Your eminence but for Your duty to H. Church for Your loyaltie to His sacred Majestie These did prompt me with the greatest confidence to hope for Your faire incouragement and assistance in my pleadings for Episcopacy in which cause Religion and Majesty the King and the Church are interested as parties of mutuall concernment There was an odde observation made long agoe and registred in the Law to make it authentick Laici sunt infensi Clericis Now the Clergy pray but fight not and therefore if not specially protected by the King contra Ecclesiam Malignantium they are made obnoxious to all the contumelies and injuries which an envious multitude will inflict upon them It was observ'd enough in King Edgars time Quamvis decreta In Chartē Edgar Regis A. D. 485. apud Hen. Spelman Pontificum verba Sacerdotum in convulsis ligaminibus velut fundamenta montium fixa sunt tamen plerumque tempestatibus turbinibus saecularium rerum Religio S. Matris Ecclesiae maculis reproborum dissipatur acrumpitur Idcirco Decrevimus Nos c. There was a sad example of it in K. Iohn's time For when he threw the Clergy from his Protection it is incredible what injuries what affronts what robberies yea what murders were committed upon the Bishops and Priests of H. Church whom neither the Sacrednesse of their persons nor the Lawes of God nor the terrors of Conscience nor feares of Hell nor Church-censures nor the Lawes of Hospitality could protect from Scorne from blowes from slaughter Now there being so neer a tye as the necessity of their own preservation in the midst of so apparent danger it will tye the Bishops hearts and hands to the King faster then all the tyes of Lay-Allegiance all the Politicall tyes I mean all that are not precisely religious and obligations in the Court of Conscience 2. But the interest of the Bishops is conjunct with the prosperity of the King besides the interest of their own securitie by the obligation of secular advantages For they who have their livelyhood from the King and are in expectance of their fortune from him are more likely to pay a tribute of exacter duty then others whose fortunes are not in such immediate dependancy on His Majesty Aeneas Sylvius once gave a merry reason why Clerks advanced the Pope above a Councell viz. because the Pope gave spirituall promotions but the Councels gave none It is but the Common expectation of gratitude that a Patron Paramount shall be more assisted by his Beneficiaries in cases of necessity then by those who receive nothing from him but the common influences of Goverment 3. But the Bishops duty to the King derives it selfe
the same reason of the honour And if so then the Question will prove but an odde one even this whether Christ be to be honour'd or no or depressed to the common estimate of Vulgar people for if the Bishops be then he is This is the condition of the Question 2. Consider wee that all Religions and particularly all Christianity did give titles of honour to their High-Priests and Bishops respectively * I shall not need to instance in the great honour of the Priestly tribe among the Iewes and how highly Honourable Aaron was in proportion Prophets were called Lords in holy Scripture Art not thou MY LORD Elijah said Obed Edom to the Prophet Knowest thou not that God will take THY LORD from thy head this day said the children in the Prophets Schooles So it was then And in the New Testament we find a Prophet HONOURD every where but in his own Country And to the Apostles and Presidents of Churches greater titles of honour given then was ever given to man by secular complacence and insinuation ANGELS and Apocal. 1. 1. Corinth 9. GOVERNOURS and FATHERS OF OUR FAITH and STARRS LIGHT OF THE WORLD the CROWNE OF THE CHURCH APOSTLES OF Iohn 10. IESUS CHRIST nay GODS viz. to whom the word of God came and of the compellation of Apostles particularly S. Hierom saith that when S. Paul called himselfe the Apostle of Iesus Christ it was as Magnifically spoken as if he had said Praefectus In Titum praetorio Augusti Caesaris Magister exercitûs Tiberii Imperatoris And yet Bishops are Apostles and so called in Scripture I have prooved that already Indeed our blessed Saviour in the case of the two sonnes of Zebedee forbad them to expect by vertue of their Apostolate any Princely titles in order to a Kingdome and an earthly Principality For that was it which the ambitious woman sought for her sonnes viz. faire honour and dignity in an earthly Kingdome for such a Kingdome they expected with their Messias To this their expectation our Saviours answer is a direct antithesis And that made the Apostles to be angry at the two Petitioners as if they had meant to supplant the rest and yet the best preferment from them to wit in a temporall Kingdome No saith our blessed Saviour ye are all deceived The Kings of the Nations indeed doe exercise authority and are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Benefactors Matth. 20. Mark 10. so the word signifies Gracious Lords so we read it But it shall not be so with you what shall not be so with them shall not they exercise authority Luke 22. Who then is that faithfull and wise steward whom his Lord made ruler over his Houshold Surely the Apostles or no body Had Christ authority Most certainly Then so had the Apostles for Christ gave them his with a sicut misit me Pater c. Well! the Apostles might and we know they did exercise authority What then shall not be so with them shall not they be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Indeed if S. Marke had taken that title upon him in Alexandria the Ptolomies whose Honourary appellative that was would have question'd him Highly for it But if we goe to the sense of the word the Apostles might be Benefactors and therefore might be called so But what then Might they not be called Gratious Lords The word would have done no hurt if it had not been an ensigne of a secular Principality For as for the word Lord I know no more prohibition for that then for being called RABBI or MASTER or DOCTOR or FATHER What shall we think now May we not be called DOCTORS Matth. 23. 8 9. 10. Ephes. 4. God hath constituted in his Church Pastors and Doctors saith S. Paul Therefore we may be called so But what of the other the prohibition runs alike for all as is evident in the severall places of the Gospells and may no man be called MASTER or FATHER let an answer be thought upon for these and the same will serve for the other also without any sensible error It is not the word it is the ambitious seeking of a temporall principality as the issue of Christianity and an affixe of the Apostolate that Christ interdicted his Apostles * And if we marke it our B. Saviour points it out himselfe The Princes of the Nations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 exercise authority over them and are called Benefactors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It shall not be so with you Not so how Not as the Princes of the Gentiles for theirs is a temporall regiment your Apostolate must be Spirituall They rule as Kings you as fellow servants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that will be first amongst you let him be your Minister or servant It seems then among Christs Disciples there may be a Superiority when there is a Minister or servant But it must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that this greatnesse doth consist it must be in doing the greatest service and ministration that the superiority consists in But more particularly it must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It must not be as the Princes of the Gentiles but it must be as the sonne of man so Luke 22. Christ saies expressely And how was that why he came to Minister and to serve and yet in the lowest John 13. act of his humility the washing his Disciples feet he told them ye call me Lord and Master and ye say well for so I am It may be so with you Nay it must be as the sonne of Man But then the being called Rabbi or Lord nay the being Lord in spirituali Magisterio regimine in a spirituall superintendency and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may stand with the humility of the Gospell and office of Ministration So that now I shall not need to take advantage of the word * In locis ubi suprà 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies to rule with more then a politicall regiment even with an absolute and despotick and is so used in holy Scripture viz. in sequiorem partem God gave authority to Man over the creatures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the word in the septuagint and we know the power that man Gen. 1. hath over beasts is to kill and to keep alive And thus to our blessed Saviour the power that God gave him over his enemies is expressed by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 110. And this wee know how it must be exercised 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a rod of iron 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He shall Psal. 2. break them in pieces like a potters vessell That 's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But it shall not be so with you But let this be as true as it will The answer needs no way to rely upon a Criticisme It is cleare that the forme of Regiment only is distinguished not all Regiment and authority taken away 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not as
viz. in this sence clearely that a Clerk must not so take on him secular offices as to make him redire in saeculum having put his hand to the plow to look back to change his profession or to relinquish the Church and make her become a Widdow The case of S. Matthew and S. Peter distinguish and cleare this businesse Ecce reliquimus omnia was the profession of their Clericall office S. Matthew could not returne to his trade of Publican at all for that would have taken him from his Apostolate But S. Peter might and did returne to his nets for all his reliqui omnia Plainly telling us that a SECULAR CALLING a CONTINUED FIX'D ATTENDANCE on a businesse of the world is an impediment to the Clericall office and ministration but not a temporary imployment or secession 5. The Canons of the Church doe as much for bid the cares of houshold as the cares of publike imployment to Bishops So the fourth Councell of Carthage decrees Vt Episcopus nullam rei familiaris curam adserevocet sed lectioni orationi Can. 20. verbi Dei praedicationi tantummodò vacet Now if this Canon be confronted with that saying of S. Paul He that provides not for them of his own houshold is worse then an infidell it will easily informe us of the Churches intention For they must provide saith S. Paul But yet so provide as not to hinder their imployment or else they transgresse the Canon of the Councell but this caveat may be as well entred and observed in things Politicall as Oeconomicall Thus farre we have seene what the Church hath done in pursuance of her owne interest and that was that she might with sanctity and without distraction tend her Grand imployment but yet many cases did occurre in which she did canonically permitt an alienation of imployment and revocation of some persons from an assiduity of Ecclesiasticall attendance as in the case of the seven set over the widdowes and of S. Peter and S. Paul and all the Apostles and the Canon of Chalcedon Now let us see how the Common-wealth also pursued her interest and because shee found Bishops men of Religion and great trust and confident abilities there was no reason that the Common-wealth should be disserv'd in the promotion of able men to a Bishops throne * Who would have made recompence to the Emperour for depriving him of Ambrose his prefect if Episcopall promotion had made him incapable of serving his Prince in any great Negotiation It was a remarkeable passage in Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epist. ad Ephes. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As our Lord is to be observ'd so also must we observe the BISHOP because he assists and serves the Lord. And wisemen and of great vnderstanding must SERVE KINGS for he must not be serv'd with men of small parts Here either Ignatius commends Bishops to the service of Kings or else propounds them as the fittest men in the world to doe them service For if onely men of great abilities are fit to serve Kings surely as great abilities are required to inable a man for the service of God in so peculiar manner of approximation He then that is fit to be a Bishop is most certainly fit for the service of his King This is the sence of Ignatius his discourse For consider Christianity might be suspected for a designe and if the Church should choose the best and most pregnant Understandings for her imployment and then these men become incapable of ayding the Republike the promotion of these men would be an injury to those Princes whose affayres would need support * The interest of the Subjects also is considerable For we find by experience that no authority is so full of regiment and will so finely force obedience as that which is seated in the Conscience And therefore Numa Pompilius made his lawes and imposed them with a face of religious solemnity For the people are stronger then any one Governour and were they not awed by Religion would quickly miscere Sacra prophanis jumble heaven and earth into a miscellany and therefore not onely in the Sanction of lawes but in the execution of them the Antistites religionis are the most competent instruments and this was not onely in all religions that ever were and in ours ever till now but even now we should quickly find it were but our Bishops in that Veneration and esteeme that by the law of God they ought and that actually they were in the Calenture of primitive devotion and that the Doctors of Religion were ever even amongst the most barbarous and untaught Pagans Upon the confidence of these advantages both the Emperours themselves when they first became Christian allowed appeales from secular tribunalls to the * Bishops Consistory even in causes of secular Sozom. lib. cap. 9. interest and the people would choose to have their difficulties there ended whence they expected the issues of justice and religion * I say this was done as soone as ever the Emperours were Christian Before this time Bishops and Priests to be sure could not be imployed in state affayres they were odious for their Christianity and then no wonder if the Church forbad secular imployment in meaner offices the attendance on which could by no meanes make recompense for the least avocation of them from their Church imployment So that it was not onely the avocation but the sordidnesse of the imployment that was prohibited the Clergy in the Constitutions of holy Church But as soone as ever their imployment might be such as to make compensation for a temporary secession neither Church nor State did then prohibite it And that was as soone as ever the Princes were Christian for then immediately the Bishops were imployed in honorary negotiations It was evident in the case of S. Ambrose For the Church of Millaine had him for their Bishop and the Emperour had him one of his prefects and the people their judge in causes of secular cognisance For when he was chosen Bishop the Emperour who was present at the election cryed out Gratias tibi ago Domine ... quoniam huic viro ego quidem commisi corpora tu autem animas Tripart hist. lib. 7. cap. 8. meam electionem ostendisti tuae justitiae convenire So that he was Bishop and Governour of Millaine at the same time And therefore by reason of both these offices S. Austin was forc'd to attend a good while before he could find him at leisure Non enim S. August lib. 6. Confess cap. 4. quaerere ab eo poteram quod volebam sicut volebam secludentibus me ab ejus aure atque ore catervis negotiosorum hominum quorum infirmitatibus serviebat And it was his owne condition too when he came to sit in the chayre of Hippo Non permittor Epist. 110. ad quod volo vacare ante meridiem post meridiem occupationibus hominum teneor And againe homines quidam causas