disliked repealed 2. That tho Metropolitan Synods in some times were not unfrequent yet Patriarchal Synods were never nor never well could be so nor find we any set times appointed for calling them as for calling the other so that as t is plain by many former instances that the Patriarch ordinarily did so t is all reason that he should decide some appeals without them tho in some cases extraordinary and of great consequence such Councils also were assembled 3. Since where they speak of the Metropolitans judging matters alone to have bin a practice only of latter times yet they allow this to be done upon very rational grounds observe that there were the same rational grounds of doing it anciently and again that the practice they justify for Metropolitans in latter times they have much more reason to allow to Patriarchs in all times because the greater the Councils are with the more trouble are they conven'd and lastly that the reformed Metropolitans themselves who blame the Bishop of Rome's managing Ecclesiastical affairs by himself alone i. e. without a Patriarchal Synod yet themselves think it reasonable to do the same thing themselves alone i. e. without their Provincial Synod authorizing their High-commission Court and blaming his Consistory Now what is allowed to Patriarchal proceedings without Councils in respect of appeals from their several Provinces the same it is that in the differences and contests of Patriarchs themselves and of other greater Bishops since it is meet for preserving the Church's peace and unity that some person or assembly should have the authority to decide these and since it is unreasonable and for the great trouble thereof not feisible that a General Council or also Patriarchal in all such differences should be assembled the same I say it is that by ancient custom and Ecclesiastical canons hath bin conferred on the Bishop of Rome with his Council tho granted liable to error He being more eminently honourable than the rest by reason of the larger extent of his Patriarchy of the great power and ancient renown of that City which in Spiritual matters he governed but especially of the two greatest Apostles Peter and Paul there ending their days in the government of that See and leaving him there the Successor of their power Yet is this office of supreme judicature so committed unto him that his judgments only stand in force till such a meeting and may be reviewed and where contrary to former canons reversed by it concerning which see the saying of S. Austin quoted before § 22. Restabat adhuc plenarium Ecclesie universae Concilium c. and the saying of Zosimus quoted § 22. n. 2. and the Epistle of Gelasius quoted § 25. n. 3. and what is said § 22. Now all Metropolitan and Patriarchal authority in the intervals of Councils being limited to the execution of Conciliary Laws and Canons or at least to the acting nothing against them if the question be asked who shall judge whether so they do I answer none but a superior Council till which their judgment stands good For as I have largely shewed elsewhere if Litigants once may judge of this when their Judges judge rightly and not against the laws and accordingly may yeild or substract their obedience such obedience is arbitrary In civil Courts Princes or their Ministers are obliged to judge according to or not against the laws of the Kingdom may the litigant therefore reject their judgment when it seems to him contrary to these laws I believe not § 38. That it is schism to deny obedience to any Ecclesiastical power established by Ecclesiastical Canon and that no such power can be lawfully dissolved by the power Secular Thus much having bin said of the authority and jurisdiction given by Ecclesiastical constitutions and ancient customs and practice to some Ecclesiastical persons above others and amongst them supereminently above all the rest to the Roman Bishop and given to these persons not only as joined with Councils but as single Magistrates in the vacancy thereof in the next place these Propositions also I think must necessarily be granted First That whatever authority is thus setled upon any persons by the canons and customs of the Church concerning the managing of affairs not civil but meerly Spiritual and Ecclesiastical cannot be annulled and dissolved nor cannot be conferred contrary to the Church's constitutions on any other person by any Secular power neither by Heathen and unbelieving Princes who were enemies to the Church nor by Christian much less because these are in Spiritual matters Sons and Subjects of the Church and now obliged to obey her laws neither by the one who so might easily hinder the propagation of Christianity nor by the other who if happening at any time to be Heretical or Schismatical might easily hinder the profession of the Orthodox faith or disturb the Church's peace Thus Grotius a great Lawyer in Rivet Apol. discuss p. 70. Imperatorum Regum aliquod esse officium etiam circa res Ecclesiae in confesso est At non tale quale in saeculi negotiis Ad tutandos non ad violandos Canones jus hoc comparatum est Nam cum Principes filii sint Ecclesiae non debent vi in matrem uti Omne corpus sociale jus habet quaedam constituendi quibus membra obligentur hoc jus etiam Ecclesiae competere apparet Act. 15.28 Heb. 13.17 where he quotes Facundus saying of Martianus Cognovit ille quibus in causis uteretur Principis potestate in quibus exhiberet obedientiam Christiani And Obedite Praepositis etiam Regibus dictum See this discoursed more largely in Success Clerg § 64 65. 2. And further That it is Schism to deny obedience to any Ecclesiastical power so established and never since by the same Ecclesiastical laws reversed I say here concerning matters Ecclesiastical not Civil therefore let that Proposition of Dr. Hammond schism 6. c. p. 129. for me stand good That a Law tho made by a General Council and with the consent of all Christian Princes i. e. of that time yet if it have respect to a civil right may in this or that Nation be repealed i. e. by that Prince's Successors provided only That the ordaining or confirming of inferior Governors and Officers of the Church the assembling of Synods and decision of controversies of Religion the ordering Church-service and discipline the Ecclesiastical censures upon delinquents and the like for preventing or suppressing of Heresie Schism and Faction and for preserving the Church in unity of doctrine and practice Provided I say that such things be not reckoned amongst civil rights as they may not be because all these were things used by the Church under the heathen Emperors even against their frequent Edicts yet could they not have bin lawfully so used if any of these had encroached on civil rights in any of which civil rights the heathen Prince might claime as much lawful power to prohibit them as the Christian
under several other Laws besides that of Nature written in every man's Conscience Rom. 2. 14 15. Laws and Rules of Worship reveal'd and deliver'd by God to Adam himself at first or to other Holy men even of the first times and many of these Laws the same with those after ward recorded by Moses So for the Church we find righteous Abel serving God in a way well pleasing to him and offering acceptable Sacrifice and an early type of our Saviour slain and martyr'd by the Nead of the Race of the Church's Persecutors out of envy to his sanctity Heb. 11.4 1 Joh. 3.12 Upon his death Seth raised in his stead a Father of the Holy Race Gen. 5.1 2 3. His Son Enos the first more eminent publick Preacher of Righteousness see 2 Pet. 2.5 In whose time it is said that people now began more publickly to call on the name of the Lord Gen. 4.26 Enoch the fifth from him a Prophet Jude 14. and in a most singular manner pious Gen. 5.24 Heb. 11.5 6. the eighth from Enos Noah again a famous Preacher of Righteousness 1 Pet. 3.19 2 Pet. 2.5 In whose times the Members of the Church are by a special name call'd the Sons of God Gen. 5.2 From him again we find the Church continued to Abraham a Prophet Gen. 20.7 Psal 105.15 In whose time also was Melchisedech the Priest of the most high God Gen. 14.18 And to Abraham we find a Promise made by God of the never-failing of his Seed i. e. of the Children of his Faith and Holy Religion i. e. of the Church So soon as this Spiritual Seed began to cease among the Jews then it being continued to him still among the Gentiles See Rom. 4.12 16.17 Gal. 3.7 c. Gal. 4. Joh. 8. 39.44 Luk. 19.9 § 5 This for the old Church Next for the old Laws Rules and Government under which it liv'd we find early mention of several of these long before Moses his committing them to record Of Holy Persons Priests Prophets Intercessors Gen. 14 18.-20.7 17. Exod. 19.22 24.5 Of Holy Times Gen. 2.3 Exod. 16.23 Of Holy Places Gen. 4.12 14 16 -28.17-35.1 12 6.-26.25 Ex. 3.5 Of Altars Gen. 8.20 which the Patriarchs built in such places where God appear'd to them Gen. 12 6.-26.25 Or where they made a longer abode Gen. 12 8.-13.4 18. Of Sacrifice Sacrifice of the firstlings and of the far Gen. 4.3 4. Burnt Offerings and Peace Offerings Gen. 8.20 Exod. 5 1.-10.25 The Birds in Sacrifice not divided Gen. 15.10 as it was afterward commanded in Lev. 1.17 Of clean and unclean Beasts Gen. 7.2 and of not eating the Blood Gen. 9.4 Of Purifyings Cleansings changing their Garments c. Gen. 2. Of Tythes paid to the Priest Gen. 14.20 Of making Vows Gen. 28.20 Of not matching with Unbelievers Gen. 6.2 comp 1. Of the Brother's raising of Seed to his Brother Gen. 38 8.comp Deut. 25.5 Thus then from the beginning God had a Church had Preachers and Priests and certain Rules of his due Worship 2. In these times it seems that the People for matter of Religion and God's Worship were cast wholly upon the Instructions and Doctrines Traditions and Dictates of their Guides for knowing their duty without any Written Records or Law of Natural Reason which these things transcended to examine these by and supposing that there should have happen'd to have been concerning any particular two contrary Traditions amongst these Teachers in all reason they ought to have follow'd the former and more universal Here also we may presume that these Fathers of the Church were then sufficiently assisted by God to deliver always to the People all truths necessary to their Salvation since they had no other Director to repair to § 6 2. To let these obscurer times pass and to come to those under the Law Written which was in all things a more express type of the Gospel Tho this Law seems much more punctually and methodically committed to Writing as to the Rule thereof than the Gospel is yet there was a Judg and certain Courts appointed for the Exposition thereof in difficult matters Which Office at first we find Moses who also had continual recourse to God in his Doubts to have executed for some time both for Religious and for Civil causes alone To whom saith the Text Exod. 18.16 the people when they had a matter came and he made them know the Statutes of God and his Laws Afterward to ease him of this great burthen especially as to ordinary Civil matters we find by Jethro's advice but also God's approbation other able men chosen out of the people and set over Tens Fifties Hundreds and Thousands to decide the easier matters but to bring the harder still to Moses Exod. 18.13 c. And he still alone to be for the People to God ward to bring the causes unto God teach them Ordinances and shew them the Work that they must do Exod. 18.19 20. Afterward yet more to ease him in these more difficult matters we find by God's appointment Seventy Elders chosen out of the former Officers and Judges more immediately to assist him which Seventy Elders to enable them for this higher employment had part of Moses his Spirit taken and put upon them which Spirit at the first shew'd wonderful effects in them and magnified them before the People as Christ the Prophet whom Moses resembled Deut. 18.15 his Spirit also did at first when it was deriv'd on the chief Evangelical Judges and Magistrates Act. 2. See Numb 11.14 16 c. § 7 Thus it was order'd in the Wilderness Again when the People should come to the Land of Rest here we find besides the Inferior Judges distributed in the Country Deut. 16.18 by God's command a standing Court established in that City where God setled his Sanctuary and Presence that they also might there consult him in their difficulties established I say for the Exposition of the Law in all matters too hard for the other and we find all persons oblig'd under pain of Death to stand to their Decisions See for this Deut. 17 8 c. If there arise a matter too hard for thee i. e. the inferior Country-Judges Deuter. 16.18 in judgment between Blood and Blood between Plea and Plea or between stroke and stroke or Leper and Leper what in these was permitted or prohibited excusable or punishable or in what manner punishable according to the Letter of the Law being matters of Controversie within thy Gates or as the Vulgar Judicum intra portas tuas videris verba variari thou shalt then arise and get thee up unto the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse And thou shalt come unto the Priests the Levites and unto the Judg that chief Secular Magistrate or his Substitute because the matters brought before this Court were sometimes relating to God's sometimes to the King's Laws Causes some Ecclesiastical some Civi that shall be in those days and they shall shew thee the sentence
THE SECOND and THIRD TREATISES Of the First Part of Ancient CHURCH-GOVERNMENT THE SECOND TREATISE Containing a Discourse of the SUCCESSION OF CLERGY OXFORD Printed in the Year MDCLXXXVIII TO THE READER IN the First Treatise of the First Part of Church-Government Printed A. D. 1662 and Reprinted 1685 is contain'd the Succession of the Apostles to our Lord in his Pastoral Office and the Primacy of St. Peter then the Succession of Bishops to the Apostles their Authority and the Subordination to them of Presbyters In this Second Treatise is discoursed the Indeficiency of the Clergy and of the Evangelical Doctrine deliver'd to them by our Lord. In the Third is contain'd the Subordination of Bishops their several Jurisdictions and tho Primacy and Supreme Authority of the Bishop of Rome CORRIGENDA Page 6. l. 7. ought not to do the page should be 14. P. 24. l. 28. Mat. 23.2 3. P. 42. l. 30. Bishop Andrews in answer SUCCESSION OF CLERGY § 1 THese two things having been as I suppose sufficiently prov'd in a Treatise of Ancient Church-Government already published First Our Lord 's deriving his Authority and Pastoral Office here on Earth upon his Apostles and this not with an equal parity Secondly And again the Apostles transferring the same Office to others And this also for preventing Schisms and preserving Order and Peace in the Church done as before not with an exact equality amongst all the Clergy but with a certain preeminence and superiority of some above the rest the Bishops above the Presbyters and this a superiority too not only of precedence or honour which would not have cured Schisms but of Office and Authority I now proceed to shew more at large That Christ hath left the same his Ministers 1. The infallible Preservers of all necessary Faith and the supreme Judges to be submitted-to in all spiritual doubts and controversies 2. These in this their Government independent-on and not dissolvable by any external secular power 3. Firmly united among themselves in one external Profession and Communion not ruinable by any intestine Division § 2 For the first of these I shall shew you 1. That considering men's ordinary frailties and passions there is a clear necessity of such a Judg to decide Controversies resolve Doubts suppress false Doctrines c. And 2. That there hath always been appointed in the Church of God besides the Rule such a Judg both under the Law and under the Gospel and men never left to their own Conduct in Religion § 3 1. A necessity of such a Judg sufficiently appears from this 1. That never any Body of Laws hath been so punctually set down but that many doubts and questions do arise in the practice of it a thing which experience hath verified in as many such Bodies as have been made But 2. Could such a Law be yet that the Canon of Scripture is far from being such as to every part thereof is evident from the many Controversies of Religion that are on foot amongst those who all acknowledg the same Canon and who must be said at least some of them on all sides to be both of quick capacity and sober judgmemt and sufficient integrity seeing that almost whole Nations have thus opposed one another all whose capacities or integrities it were too much uncharitableness and pride to question Here therefore whereas frequently both the contrary parties use to say the Scripture is plain on their own side they both shew that it is difficult and whereas both also could wish an Arbiter of Controversies at least to silence their Adversary they mutually confess One necessary for them both And so long as sober Judgments contradict in their expositions of Scripture tho both should say that the Scripture is clear yet neither can say that in respect of all men it is so And so long there is necessary another Judg besides Scripture especially when none in Religious matters will confess that they contest about a Controtroversie which is not necessary to be decided Indeed this happens ordinarily that some sentences of Scripture seem plain on one side and other sentences thereof plain on another but since all parts of Divine truth must cohere and accord the more plainness in this manner makes it the more difficult And therefore we commonly see that in their not well-comparing of several Scriptures but fastning their thoughts only on some parcel thereof to which their fancy or interest specially guides them the more ignorant are the more confident and lest doubting and they who have least compar'd things soonest decide them And thus those who have the Scriptures the more common and open to each man's comment without dependance on any other Judg than themselves run into great varieties of Opinions and Sects 2 St. Pet. 3.16 takes notice concerning a chief part of the Scriptures and that written purposely for instruction St. Paul's Epistles but not only concerning these but the other Scriptures too see the end of v. 16. that in them there were some things hard to be understood which they that were unlearned and unstable did wrest to their own destruction These things then of consequence the mistaking of which tended to the Mistaker's destruction which yet men even in his days mistook by being unlearned i. e. not well taught in Christianity which teaching they must have from their Pastors and unstable which must be by departing from the Doctrines receiv'd from their Pastors as the words following v. 17. also imply Now I see not why the same accident concerning the same Scriptures should not happen still to the illiterate and unstable disclaiming any other Judg save these Scriptures and conceiting that God's Written Word hath render'd his Ministers useless This is said for the necessity of a Judg in matters of Religion where Scriptures indeed as St. Peter saith of them have some difficulty But 3. Since Controversies may be raised and maintain'd by the peevishness and perversness and passion of a Party even where Scriptures are clear enough here also no less necessary is a Judg juridically to suppress and silence those who irrationally and many times with autocatacrisie thus offend But 4. It is possible also that some very material Controversies there may be in Religion wherein the Scriptures have either been silent or have not spoken to them so expresly and openly but that they must be drawn out from thence by several deductions Here then also some other Judg is necessary § 4 Such a Judg therefore is necessary to be And therefore such a Judg there always hath been appointed by God to be consulted and submitted-to by his people both before the Law Written and under the Law Written and under the Gospel First In the times before the Law Written even from the very infancy of-the World God ever had a Church contradistinct after Adam's Fall of whose Sons as some were good so others were impious to the rest of the world serving God in a publick external Communion and
Josh 8.1 Jud. 18.31 1 Sam. 1.3 By others of the times of Jeroboam But here Israel falling away God had still his true Church in Judah § 33 To ◠This sin of Aaron was before his being installed High Priest In this his and the peoples defection both Moses then the supreme Governour in Ecclesiastical affairs and all the Tribe of Levi remained not only constant but valiant and zealous Professors of the true Religion for which God afterward chose his Tribe for the sacred Ministery See Exod. 32.27 Deut. 33.8 9. Malach. 2.5 6. Lastly Aaron's Guilt tho great was rather in his being for fear instead of a corrector a complier with than a Founder of the peoples Idolatry § 34 To δ. The fact of Vrijah was but of one person uncertain whether one of the chief Priests or of some meaner ranke but such an one as was the King's favorite at least none such is found named in the roll of the High Priests 1 Chron. 6.4 His act not consented to that we find by any other of the Clergy Besides the fault seemeth not great the King's command having some shew of piety who pretended the former Altar not large enough for the Sacrifices and to reserve it for more special occasions mean while continuing the daily Oblations of the usual morning and evening Sacrifice upon this new Altar as was formerly on the other see 2 Kings 16.15 Add to this that the Prophet Esaiah selecting him for a witness to his Prophecy Esa 8. 2. together with Zechariah one of the Reformers in Hezechiah's time 2 Chron 29.13 argues him to have bin no person unfound in his Religion § 35 To ◠God's true worship flourished in Judah still after the revolt of Israel when also the Priests and Levites revolted not with the people but leaving their Cities and possessions went over to Judah and so did all the more devout among the people see 2 Chro. 11.13 14. 15.9 which indeed rendred Judah and Benjamin much what equal to all the other Tribes Again in Israel in Jezebel's persecution were Elijah and Michaih and probably many more Prophets of the Lord tho concealed and unknown to Elijah In the 1 King 18.3 13. there is mention made of an hundred of these Prophets who and many more might be included in the 7000 mentioned by the Lord. 1 Kin. 19.18 And these Prophets had their Colledges and had their followers among the people who resorted to them on new Moons and Sabbaths to hear the law of God For they were not called Prophets only for predidiction of things future see 1 Chro. 15. and 25. ch and 1 Cor. 14. ch but for their sequestring themselves for the studying of Divinity and celebrating the praises of God many times with raptures and sudden inspirations and with Musick at the times of sacrificing and other solemn meetings and therefore their Colledges were commonly at some High place and for this teaching and instructing the people in the ways of God Now we find such Schools or Colledges of these Prophets in Israel as in Samuel's time one at Na oth in Ramah governed and perhaps also first erected by Samuel to which Colledge David retired when he first fled from Saul see 1 Sam. 19.18 19 20. another in the Hill of God probably Gibeon where was the great High Place see 1 Sam. 10.5 comp with 13.3 So also in the days of Jezebel tho probably in her great persecution these were dispers'd one at Bethel and another at Jericho and another at Gilgal govern'd by Elisha see 2 King 2.3 5. 6. 1. 4.38 One of which Sons of the Prophets see sent with a Message to Ahab himself 1 King 20.31 and another with a Message to Jehn who afterward slew Jezebel 2 King 9.1 both of them discernable who they were by their Habits see 1 King 20.41 2 King 9.11 Pardon this digression to shew you That God's Worship in Israel was not utterly extinct in the Reigns of those wicked Kings § 36 To ζ. It is not affirm'd That God's true Clergy and the Church's Guides shall err in nothing but not in necessaries For the Sacrificing in several High places where God's Tabernacle was not pitch'd tho at first it was very strictly forbidden upon pain of death the more to preserve God's people in the Church's infancy from all Idolatry and the setting up and serving in their necessities consulting several Gods or in several places varying the Rites in Worshipping the true God Yet as it was done by the Holy Patriarchs in several places before God had erected any Symbol of his presence amongst them so after that the Ark and Tabernacle of Moses was remov'd from place to place and these also sever'd from one another from the time that the Ark was taken by the Philistines and the Temple not yet built it seems not so unexcusable a fault as some would make it being a thing done in those days most-what especally for Peace-Offerings by the Holiest of men as Samuel and David accepted by God and sometimes commanded by him See Judg. 6.26 13. 19. 1 Sam. 7.9 9.12 1 Sam. 16.2 20.6 and in some manner excused 1 King 3.3 and 2 Chron. 33.17 Indeed after the Temple erected a far more hainous fault it was in the Priests of Judah but the better sort of this Clergy was not guilty of it as may be seen in the forecited Text 2 King 23.7 9. by the punishment that Josiah inflicted on such former Offenders Yet in those times we find it done in Israel in cases extraordinary by the Prophet Elijah 1 King 18.33 and accepted by God ver 38. and some such thing seems to be conceded to Naaman the Syrian 2 King 5.17 19. § 37 To. η It is granted that God's publick Worship for Sacrifice c. in that place where only he appointed it which Worship might not be perform'd elsewhere was under the Law several times by wicked Kings prohibited and so several times intermitted by the Priests But notwithstanding this the Legal Clergy still subsisted under those oppressing Kings as the Evangelical did under the persecuting Emperors and continued all those parts of God's Worship in more secret Assemblies which might lawfully be exercised elsewhere as well as in the Temple § 38 To θ. The Kings of Judah 1. Are no where said to have reform'd all the Priests or the High Priest or not to have found him as Orthodox as themselves 2. Are not said to have reform'd the People against the Priests 3. Are not said to have reform'd the People without the Priests 4. Are every where said to have been assisted in their Reformation by the Priest See more of this hereafter and before § 24 c. The most that Bishop Andrews saith in answer to Bellarmin Tort. Tort. p. 365. saith in behalf of these Kings is this That these Kings reform'd citra or ante doclarationem Ecclesiae but he saith not contra declarationem and to make good his citra or ante hath only the strength
of a Negative Argument Tortus loca aliquot apponere debuit ubi Ecclesiae declaratio praecessit Which argument is this There is set down no such Declaration therefore there was no such An Argument of little strength always less here where so succinct a relation is made of so many hundred years and chiefly of the actions of the Kings not of the Church or Clergy But yet of whom may we think did Hezekiah and Josiah the Sons of such wicked Parents learn the Religion to which they reform'd the people but from some of the Clergy And is not this enough suppose it for a declaratio praecessit The King's power is more effective for a Reformation than the Priests because his Civil Sword awes men more than the Spiritual and therefore there King's part in it is more spoken of especially in a story written chiefly of the Kings except Jehoiada the Priest's Reformation when the King was a Child 2 Chron. 23. But the Kings without Priests in Church-matters may reform nothing because he is to learn from the Priests God's Law and what concerning it he is to reform The King may command also the Priest to do his duty according to this Law but then he must first learn from the Priest what is the Priest's duty according to that Law i. e. he may constrain in Spiritual matters any Priest to do what the Body of the Clergy and the Councils of the Church inform him that the Priest ought to do And he may not constrain in Spiritual matters any Priest to do what the said Clergy and Councils declare against The King may reestablish the Priests in their Office and exhort them to a faithful Administration thereof and yet it follows not that these formerly deserted or neglected this Office but only that they were formerly ejected from it and might for the future possibly neglect it and much less doth it follow that the King gave them any right to it or could justly deprive them of it § 39 This to the former Arguments and instances concerning the failing of the Church-Guides And so I have done with the Oeconomy of God's Church under the Law where to look back a little before I proceed farther to the times of the Gospel 1. I do not say That no Written Law can be plain enough for men to learn out of it without any authoriz'd Expositor thereof all Faith and Duty necessary to Salvation or for men to incur just Damnation in not yeilding Obedience to its Rules And therefore I do not say That an Expositor or Judg is absolutely necessary besides any such Law in this respect tho for many other respects he is as hath been shew'd before Neither do I affirm that if God giveth us not together with his Laws some external infallible Expositor of them he would be unjust or deficient in his Providence For the contrary of this appears in Heathenism where men having no external but fallible Guides yet having the Law of Nature and an internal Judg and Expositor thereof their own Conscience which in many of those Laws erreth not except in the most desperate and obdurate sinners and which whether they will or no within gives a right sentence against them are for offending against this Law justly condemn'd see Rom. 2.14 15. comp 12.2 Neither do I say that where God hath not appointed any one to seek the meaning of his Laws from anothers mouth there he may not caeteris paribus that is where he thinks his own abilities as great as other mens judg for himself and we ought to presume that where God hath set no such Directors over us there his Laws are delivered with clearness enough to be understood by our selves But 3ly This only I say That those to whom God in his overflowing goodness hath besides his Laws left also Guides and commanded them to obey these such cannot innocently withdraw their obedience from these Guides ought not to use their private judgment against these are safe if these Guides err in following them tho not the Guides safe in no better conducting them and that tho in some times these Guides to whom God referreth us for knowing his will may be much more corrupt than in others yet that these by God's care over his people can never so grosly erre as that their followers shall not receive from their doctrines all necessary knowledge for salvation and that this is sufficient to tie us always to their obedence 1. Because we cannot promise our selves this security in following our own private judgments which we have in following theirs for private men are not secure upon their own judgment from falling into fundamental errors as perhaps the Sadduces did in relinquishing the Moses-chair-men of their times 2ly Because if any mortal error should be supposed to have seazed upon these Supreme Governours on whom by his appointment all others depend it is to be hoped that God will never suffer it long but either change their opinions or the persons For in all extremities God sends speedy relief § 40 This being said from p. 4. of unfailing Guides and Judges for Spiritual matters in the times of the Law now we come to the times of the Gospel Where 1. Observe that if in these we prove an unfailing Church-authority to whose judgment and sentence we ought always to submit tho under the Law it were much otherwise and tho all that is said hitherto be cancelled yet this sufficiently serveth the intent of our Discourse namely to procure due obedience to the present Church-governours And indeed there want not many motives to perswade us that tho the law never had any such highly-priviledged Guides yet the Gospel hath and therefore that no arguments taken from the one can conclude any thing concerning the other Because the Gospel advanceth to a much higher perfection than the Law nay to the highest and is to have no further Testaments or Manifestations of God's will to succeed it as the Law and Old Testament was Deut. 18.15 18 19. Heb. 9.8 9 10. Because the Minister of this is not a Servant but the Master of the House himself the last Legislator the last Reformer and Consummator of all the my steries of Religion who came out of his Fathers bosom to reveal to men all his will and after him to come none other Heb. 1.2.9 10. 1 Jo. 17 18. Jo. 4.25 Because the Church under the Gospel hath a much nobler Priesthood founded in a Succession to this Son of God hath a far nobler Sacrifice a far nobler Unction of the Holy Ghost in the much more copious effusions thereof called Spiritus veritatis Jo. 14.17 and promised to lead them into all truth as well as holiness Jo. 16.13 A far more extended and stronger Tradition in the Gospel spread over all Nations and a far more numerous Sanedrim if I may so call the Churches Councils than the Law had and higher and clearer promises made to these of the Son of God the
unity therein One Lord one Faith one Body one Spirit an unity of the Spirit kept in the bond of peace v. 3. see Heb. 13.7 9 17. The like obedience commanded to be given to these Church-rulers in respect of Doctrine and Faith Remember them who have the rule over you and who have spoken unto you the Word of God whose faith follow Jesus Christ the same for ever Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines Obey them c. for they watch for your souls as they that must give account Account for the Precepts they give you and for the Doctrines they teach you Add to these those Texts of the Apostle charging Christians to be all of one judgment to speak the same thing not to be wise in their own conceits 1 Cor. 1.10 Rom. 12.16 15.5 6. Phil. 1.27 3.16 where the Apostle seemeth not to mean their condescendence for opinion one to another for which rather who shall so yeild will still be in debate but their union in the doctrine of their Spiritual Superiors in which he would have them all to acquiesce See 1 Cor. 4.16 17. 11.1 2. Phil. 3.17 Rom. 16.17 2 Thes 3.14 the succeeding Ecclesiastical Superiors being commanded still to retain and continue the doctrine of their Predecessors 1 Tim. 1.3 2 Tim. 1.13 2.2 After the forenamed mission Eph. 4.11 see 1 Cor. 14.29.32 where the Apostle amongst other things submits also the doctrines of the Prophets to the judgment of the Prophets let the other judge and 1 Tim. 4.11 6.3.5 and Titus 1.11 and 3.10 11. where he gives order to the Church-governours Tim. and Titus that touching error and heresy in matter of faith such persons if any discovered after due admonishment should be withdrawn from should be excommunicated and silenced by him their persons rejected c. 3. their mouths stopt c. 1. § 44 See for the 3d. Act. 15.2 c. where a controversy riseing in the Church of Antioch by reason of some teaching there that the Gentiles were to be circumcised and to keep the Mosaical Law without any such commandment from their Superiors Act. 15.44 who were opposed by Paul and Barnabas the Antiochians tho many amongst them having eminent gifts of the Spirit do repair for a final decision thereof to the judgment of the Apostles at Jerusalem where after an Assembly called v. 6. we find a consulting and disputing on this matter from the believing Pharisees still zealous of their law and then a giving of their several votes and a deciding of it not from pretence of immediate inspiration or revelation but from arguments 1. Of Gods converting the Gentiles shewed in several instances and giving them the Holy Ghost as to the Jews without any previous using such Jewish ceremonies And 2ly from the Predictions of the Prophets concerning the calling of the Gentiles in the latter days as a distinct people not to be translated by circumcision c into the Jewish Religion but to be transplanted and counited together with the sews into the Christian v. 7 12 13 19. After this the sending of their Constitutions to the particular Churches under this stile It seemed good unto the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you c. v. 28. See again 1 Tim. 1.20 compared with 2 Tim. 2.17 18. and 4.14 15. the Apostle excommunicating Hymeneas Alexander and others for their false doctrines and see Rev. 2 2 14 15 20. the Lord Jesus commending the Angel i.e. Bishop of the Church of Ephesus for trying and not tolerating or bearing with the false Apostles and reprehending the Angels of the Churches of Thyatira and Pergamas for the contrary for their suffering the false Prophetess Jezabel to teach and seduce his servants and for their tolerating the Nicolaitans who indulged the Christians more liberty 2 Pet. 2.18 19. in complying with Heathen Religions and held it lawful to eat of their sacrifices and to commit fornications like them some unnatural ones also which usually accompanied Idolatry See 1 Kings 14.24 15.12 2 K. 23.7 § 45 Thus have I shew'd you 1. That by the Church Mat. 18.17 which is to be complain'd and repair'd to in matters of trespasses unreform'd and to be heard and obey'd upon pain of being reckon'd as an Heathen and Publican of Excommunication and being bound both in Earth and Heaven Mat. 18.18 that by this Church I say is meant the Clergy 2. The Clergy of one Age as well as another 3. This Clergy to be heard and obey'd as well in matters of Theological Controversies and of Doctrines as in any other matters as well in these if not more Now 4ly That this Hearing and Obedience due to them is not only an obligation of non-contradicting but of assenting to such their Doctrines and Decisions of Controversies so far as they require assent appears likewise from the aforenam'd Texts as likewise those following Because these Church-Officers are call'd Teachers and Guides which have reference to Truth as well as Judges and Rulers which have reference to Peace and we charg'd to hear them as Christ who also have receiv'd from Christ a Spirit leading them into all Truth and a promise that the Gates of Hell shall never prevail against them c. Of which more anon Again Because they are said to be set over the Church that there may be in it an unity of faith Eph. 4.13 and one faith ver 5. and not only a bond of peace but an unity of the spirit and of judgment and speaking the same thing c. Eph. 4.13 3. 1 Cor. 1.10 That their Subjects may not be carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight of men not carried about with them i.e. not believe them Now he who by these Superiors may be restrain'd from believing them is hereby enjoin'd to believe the contradictories of them namely the Positions of the Church and if the people are enjoin'd to believe this then also their Seducers But were the people oblig'd only to the obedience of non-contradiction and not of assent toward such Superiors then whereas some Tenents are exclusive of Salvation and many more having dangerous effects upon the lives and manners of Christians see Act. 15.24 2 Pet. 3.16 and wherefore are the Teachers prohibited if the Doctrines were not pernicious and to be renounc'd Yet is there no Church-authority which can afford any remedy to this great evil It can indeed provide for its own peace but not its subjects safety whilst it must tolerate the liberty of all tho destructive opinions and may exact no more than a non-gainsaying Again Because it is clear that these Church-Guides may not only reject and excommunicate false Teachers and Seducers but the Heretical also when any way they come to be discover'd guilty thereof consider Tit. 3.10 11. where observe ver 11. that their autocatacrisie or being condemn'd by their own Conscience tho there be no endeavour by divulging their Heresie of infecting other men's Consciences therewith is render'd a
Catholick is of which declared Hereticks are no part And thus the Church shall still be to the end of the world a City upon a Hill and united within it self even in its greatest persecutions conspicuous to those who sincerely bend their course to it Again it seems that near the time of the worlds dissolution from this total Apostacy through great persecutions from the faith in some and from the sound doctrines of the Orthodox faith in others because both false Religions and such Heretical doctrines as the Apostles speak do all tend some way or other to vitiousness of life to libertinism and inducements of the flesh See 2 Pet. 2.3 10 18 19. Phil. 3.18 19. 1 Tim. 6.5 2 Tim. 3.2 7. c. see Trial of Doctrines § 32. there shall abound very great wickedness and much security amongst the then heavy oppressors of God's Church much what like to the days of Noah and of Lot when God shall come upon them unexpectedly to judgment But this is no failing of the Church which shall then remain an Holy City at unity in it self see Rev. 20.9 And if also within the Church it self the vitious shall out-number the pious neither is this any prejudice to the truth of the Churches doctrines since the same thing happens less or more in all ages that the wicked here-in are more than the good as St. Austin hath taken notice and much pains to prove to the Donatists urging some of the former texts De unitate Ecclesiae 12. 13. c. § 64 Thus much of the first head proposed before § 1. viz. The Clergies being delegated by our Lord departing hence the infallible preservers of all Truth and Necessary faith and supreme Judges in all controversies arising therein Now to proceed to the 2d Next this Authority to secure it for ever from any decay or interruption thereof is given them to the end of the world without dependance on any save the Lord Jesus they being Embassadors of salvation from the King of Kings to all Nations and so to be every where free from all violation For which there is the greatest reason since their constitutions are such as cannot do the least wrong or hurt to any secular dominion nay brings great security to it and since this their Ministery because without a Sword can be no Government or Discipline comes armed only with a Spiritual sword and not a Temporal and lastly since Christianity the Doctrine they plant gives no man any priviledge interest or advantage by it in this world or for Secular matters but maintains every Kingdom and State in the same condition wherein it finds it and only obligeth men to pray always for such State 1 Tim. 2.2 and to yeild all strict obedience to it Rom. 13.1 1 Pet. 2.13 and upon no pretence of maintaining Religion to use or to advise to use the material Sword or any otherwise to defend the truth than 1. by confessing it 1. in practising its Precepts at all times among which yet one necessary-one is publick assembling together to worship God c. Ecclesiacticos coetus humanis legibus interdictos ob divinum praeceptum Christiani intermittere non possunt Grot. sum Imp. circa sacra and 2ly by suffering for it The Christian profession therefore never troubles the Civil peace which cannot be broken but by Arms and therefore whatsoever disturbs the civil peace may be lawfully punished on any person whatsoever by the temporal Sovereign power for it is not the Christian profession I say lawfully purished unless in respect of some persons such temporal Magistrate make over this power to another which thing doubtless may be lawfully done if for example the Prince shall not think it so decent c that he should sit in Judgment and inflict corporal punishment upon a Bishop his Spiritual Father by whom he is to be guided and corrected and if need be censured and Spiritually punished concerning greater matters see 1 Cor. 6.3 Or That the Priest one day should summon the Civil Magistrate to his Tribunal the next the Magistrate Him or upon other reasons And perhaps This remitting of the Trial of Clergy-men even in Civil matters to their Spiritual Superiors so that the Secular power only useth the Temporal sword upon them when the other deliver them up to it as it may preserve more reverence in the people toward the Ministry so may it conduce to a more severe animadversion from such Judges supposing the Fathers of the Church to be of that sanctity and integrity which they do profess upon such Malefactors than any other way could And whether it was upon these or some other motives t is plain that such Concessions by several Emperors and Princes have bin made to the Church § 65 And the Judgment also when such disturbance is shall belong to his not to the Ecclesiastical Tribunal So Solomon confin'd Ahiathar the High-Priest 1 Kin. 2.26 27 compar'd with ch 4 v. 4. whom had he pleas'd he might also have put to death see 1 King 2.26 27. not for Error but for Rebellion not that the King may meddle or hath any power or Jurisdiction in Ecclesiastical affairs over or in opposition to the Priest to do any thing save the assisting the Spiritual Sword with his Temporal and the using his Civil power for the service of the Church See Calv. Instit l. 4. c. 11. s 15. For the Priest having lawful power to excommunicate the Civil Magistrate for Heretical Opinions How can again the Civil Magistrate have a lawful power for the same cause to depose the Priest But over Ecclesiastical persons medling without his leave and beyond their Lord's Commission in affairs Temporal But then if the Secular power in his taking care of the Commonwealth's safety is pleas'd to Decree the Church's Religious Assemblies either for worshipping God or composing Laws for the Church to be Conspiracy or make their Preaching or coming within his Territories Treason only because they possibly may for how can any be sent by Christ to whom this may not be objected not because it is proved that they do any hurt to it or provoked by some particular persons who transgressing their Commission from Christ do some acts or hold some opinions prejudicial to the safety thereof should therefore condemn and execute all others of the same Order against whom the same fault cannot be prov'd and who abjure such horrid Tenents should he interpret any their medling with his Subjects whom our Saviour sends unarm'd like Lambs among Wolves to be subverting of his State and their Spiritual Sword inconsistent with or frustrating his Temporal he now usurps upon our Saviour's Authority and they must go on through all his Torments by way of the Cross which shall certainly conquer at last not of the Sword with which those Ministers shall perish that take it up Mat. 26.52 against those powers to which only it is committed Rom 13.14 to do their Office with that answer to him Act.
4.19 And he must give account to the same King of Kings for killing his Subjects in their obeying their Lords commands who sent them to all Nations without asking any man's leave as they could not in doing their duty possibly wrong any man's right § 66 And if any here argue That a Spiritual Supremacy thus describ'd cannot consist with another Temporal but that one will ruine the other and probably the Ecclesiastical denouncing eternal torments the Civil threatning death temporal experience is enough to confute him which hath long shew'd the contrary Those Kingdoms where these two Scepters are set up having flourish'd I mean for any occasion of disturbance or war arising from the opposition of these two powers in long peace and prosperity whilst others where one of them hath been beaten down have either ever since been miserably afflicted with Civil Wars I mean about Religion unsetled or quite over-turned 1. Partly by reason that every one gives not the spoils of the Church's ruin'd power I mean the judging and deciding spiritual matters to another the Civil Magistrate but takes them to himself And secondly partly because one main doctrine of the Spiritual power which hath most command over men's consciences Namely this that resistance in any things by Arms to the Temporal power is unlawfu is faln together with that power And thirdly perhaps partly I may add because that where the Church-Authority is crush'd Religion and Goodness in general withers and decays and consequently with these Allegiance and Fidelity That which makes good men making good Subjects 4ly And again because That where any takes away another's right both Divine Justice sentences him to loose his own and his Example teaches others to invade it § 67 Hence it is That these Substitutes of Christ as himself being under Herod's jurisdiction yet was hindred by no threats for exercising the commission of his Father in his Dominions Luke 13.31 32. did exercise their Authority as much as ever and that for some hundreds of years even when all the temporal Magistrates and their Sovereigns opposed it for then they were sustained unarmed against all force by the power of the King of Kings JESUS and so shall be till his second coming in which time we find they had their Publick Assemblies for God's Worship revenged by Excommunications and Penance all disobedience called Councils for enacting Ecclesiastical Canons and Laws which therefore it is not absolutely necessary very convenient I grant that the Secular power should either call or assist neither may he annull them or any part thereof if purely concerning Ecclesiastical affairs but as a member also himself of the Church ought to become subject unto them and as a Prince to maintain them And hence it seems to follow That no Prince can lawfully abrogate the Authority of Patriarchs supposing it only founded on Ecclesiastical Constitutions over those who are the Churches as well as His Subjects no more then he can any other Ecclesiastical Decrees Again in which times we also find that as fast as any suffer'd by persecutions in their places they ordained others multiplied by their slaughters and ordained them without any order or nomination from the civil power who for ever neither can himself neither can cause them to lay hands on any but whom they approve nor to be partakers by this of other mens sins or errors 1 Tim. 5.22 § 68 And all this they did without the Emperour's leave nay contrary many times to their Edicts Now what Authority they had before amidst the oppositions of Secular power they cannot lose it nor any part of it since by this Powers submitting it self unto Christ's Scepter and to the Church Greater then this Church-authority might be made many ways by Princes by granting the Church now some temporal priviledges by making the Acts of the Church their Law also and by enforcing it on all their Subjects as well Clergy as Laiety with corporal punishments and the temporal sword further than the other could singly with his Spiritual which yet experience shews was able alone both to preserve order and discipline amongst its Subjects With the temporal sword I say which tho the Clergy may not use in the behalf of Religion yet He that hath it committed to him Rom. 13.4 the Civil Magistrate as a Son of the Church and the Servant of Christ upon his own subjects may and ought to use that weapon in maintaining of Christ's Laws which he may in defence of his own as who also may make Christ's Laws his own Hence Calvin Instit 4 l. 11. c. 16. sect speaking of the Primitive Governours of the Church Non improbabant saith he si quando suam authoritatem interponerent Principes in rebus Ecclesiasticis modo conservando Ecclesiae ordini non turbando disciplinae stabiliendae non dissolvendae of which I suppose the Spiritual Governors not the Princes were to judge hoc fieret Nam cum Ecclesia cogendi non habet potestatem c Principum partes sunt legibus edictis judiciis religionem sustinere But these Princes may do only according to the Priests directions Therefore all the establishing and restoring of Religion by the Kings of Judah from whose having power in advancing Religion t is strange to see how some argue their having the sole power were only by and in assistance of the Priest never against him and they commanded often the Priests to perform what the Priests together with them consented to be their duty See 2 Chr. 29.4 11. c. 17.6 8. 24.6 26.17 19.8 10. 13.9 34.5 9 14. Ezra 1.5 3.2 1 Chr. 25.1 compared with 24.31 see Deodat 2 King 23.5 2 Chr. 35.10 18. And see Deut. 17.18 19. the end of the Kings having a copy of the Law allowed him but another end of the Priests having the custody of it Deut. 17.9 and 2 Chr. 19.8 But no where can we find that they decided controversies against the Priests or that the succession of Priests maintaining a false Religion the King against them vindicated the true or in their stead because erroneous appointed and made new Priests because indeed the Succession of Priests never apostatized from the whole body of true Religion nor ever shall but should they yet why not the Prince rather and whom then finally is it fit to rely on for Religion But for those parts of true Religion wherein the Clergy was defective as it happened under the later Kings of Judah and in the times of our Saviour they were reformeable only by extraordinary Prophets sent from God whom in all times the people lawfully consulted and repaired to for judgment as they did to the Priests fee before but neither people nor Princes reformed Priests upon this pretence and therefore those Texts wherein the Prophets blame the errors of the Priests do no way warrant the Laities reforming them lest so the errors of the second be worse than that of the first See this spoken of more at large before But
Church of England seems obliged in as much observance to the Rome See as the former instances have shewed the Orientals to have yeilded to it § 51. That the Church of England seems obliged to yeild the same observance to the Roman See as other Western Provinces upon the 6th Nicene Canon § 52. That this Nation owes its Conversion chiefly if not only to the Roman See § 53. And hath in ancient Councils together with other Churches subjected it self to that See before the Saxon conversion § 55. The Britains observation of Easter different from Rome not agreeing with the Orientals and no argument that they received Christianity from thence § 57. That the English Nation is sufficiently tyed to such subjection by the Decrees of latter Councils wherein her Prelats have yeilded their consents § 59. Thus the Principle upon which some set the English Clergy and Nation free from such former obligations hath bin shewed to be unsound § 60. That some Rights once resigned and parted with cannot afterward be justly resumed § 61. Dr. Field of the Church Ep. Dedicat SEing the controversies of Religion in our times are grown in number so many and in matters so intricate that few have time and leisure fewer strength of understanding to examin them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which amongst all the Societies in the world is that blessed company of Holy ones that Houshold of faith that Spouse of Christ and Church of the Living God which is this pillar and ground of Truth that so he may embrace her Communion follow her Directions and rest in her Judgment Grot. Animadv cont Rivet ad Art 7. Rogo eos qui. verum amant ut cum legent Dav. Blondelli viri diligentissimi Librum de Primatu non inpsius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sed ipsas historias quarum veritatem Blondellus agnoscit animo a factionibus remoto expendant spondeo si id faciant inventuros in quo acquieescant S. Austin de util credendi 16. c. Authoritate decipi miserum est miserius non moveri si Dei providentia non praesidet rebus humanis nihil est de religione satagendum Non est desperandum ab eodem iposo Deo authoritatem aliquam constitutam qua velut gradu incerto innitentes attollamur in Deum Haec autem authoritas seposita ratione qua sincerum intelligere ut diximus difficillimum stultis est dupliciter nos movet partim miraculis partim sequentium multitudine 10. c. Sed inquis Nonne erat melius rationem mihi reddere ut quacunque ea me duceret sine ulla sequerer temeritate Erat fortasse sed cum res tanta sit ut Deus tibi ratione cognoseendus sit omnesque putas idonâ—os esse percipiendis rationibus quibus ad divinam intelligentiam mens ducitur humana an plures an paucos paucos ais existimo Quid caeteris ergo hominibus qui ingenio tam sereno praediti non sunt negandam religionem putas who therefore must receive this not from Reason but Authority 12. c. Quis mediocriter intelligens non plane viderit stultis utilius ac salubrius esse praeceptis obtemperare sapientum quam suo judicio vitam degere 13. c. Recte igitur Catholicae disciplinae majestate institutum est ut accedentibus ad religionem fides i.e. adhibenda authoritati Ecclesiae persuadeatur ante omnia 8. c. Si jam satis jactatus videris sequere viam Catholicae disciplinae quae ab ipso Christo per Apostolos ad nos usque manavit abhinc ad posteros manaturaest 12. Quum de religione id est quum de colendo atque intelligendo Deo agitur ii minus sequendi sunt qui nos credere vetant rationem promptissime pollicentes Rivet Apol. Discussio p. 255. Nunc plane ita sentit Grotius multi cum ipso non posse Protestantes inter se jungi nisi simul jungantur cum iis qui Sedi Romanae cohaerent sine qua nullum sperari potest in Ecclesia commune regimen Ideo optat ut ea divulsio quae evenit cause divulsionis tollantur Inter eas causas non est Primatus Episcopi Romani secundum Canones fatente Melancthone qui eum primatum etiam necessarium put at ad retinendam unitatem Neque enim hoc est Ecclesiam subjicere Pontificis libidini sed reponere ordinem sapienter insticutum Bishop Bilson in perpet governm of Christ's Church 16. c. Not Antichrist but ancient Councils and Christian Emperors perceiving the mighty trouble and intolerable charges that the Bishops of every Province were put-to by staying at Synods for the hearing and determining of all private matters and quarrels and seeing no cause to imploy the Bishops of the whole world twice every year to sit in judgment about petit and particular strifes and brabbles as well the Prince as the Bishops not to increase the pride of Arcbishops but to settle an indifferent course both for the parties and the Judges referred not the making of Laws and Canons but the execution of them already made to the credit and conscience of the Archbishop To the Fathers leave an Appeal either to the Councils or the Primate of every Nation Mr. Thorndike Epilogue 3. l. 20. c. p. 179. Of the Councils he meaneth those first Councils held in the East how many can be counted General by number of present votes The authority of them then must arise from the admitting of them by the Western Churches and this admission of them what can it be ascribed to but the authority of the Church of Rome eminently involved above all the Churches of the West in the summoning and holding of them and by consequence in their Decrees And indeed in the troubles that passed between the East and the West from the Council of Nice tho the Western Churches have acted by their Representatives upon eminent occasions in great Councils yet in other occasions they may justly seem to refer themselves to that Church as resolving to regulate themselves by the Acts of it and then he produceth several instances Whereby saith he it may appear how the Western Churches went always along with that of Rome Which necessarily argueth a singular preeminence in it in regard whereof He the Roman Bishop is stiled the Patriarch of the West during the regular government of the Church and being so acknowledged by K. James of Excellent memory to the Card. Perron may justly charge them to be the cause of dividing the Church who had rather stand divided than own him in that quality Afterward he saith p. 180. That it is unquestionable that all causes that concern the whole Church are to resort to the Church of Rome And p. 181. asks what pretence there could be to settle Appeals from other parts to Rome as such Appeals were setled in the Council of Sardica which Council he there allows and
Nations who having made resistance to their Patriareh in some injunctions conceived by them not Canonical yet continue still their obedience in the rest Consider the late contest of the State of Venice and the present opposals both of France and Spain in some matters See Vind. 7. c. How can the Bishop then reasonably make use of those examples wherein Vindic. 7. c. he hath copiously shewed other Princes casting off the Pope's usurpations and oppressions to have retained still submission to his Supremacy to prove or countenance that Hen. 8. might lawfully cast off both those and also his Supremacy Especially since it cannot be shewed but that it is absolutely in his power who hath the sword to cast off only so much as he pleaseth and retain the rest Unless the sword in England cannot divide usurpations and lawful rights as beyond the Seas now it doth and did here before Hen. 8. but must necessarily cut off both at once As this p. 253 When a Steward chosen in trust by his fellow-servants violates his trust and usurps a dominion c it is not want of duty but fidelity for such servants to substract their obedience from him But what when most of the servants say he doth no such thing in those matters wherein the rest accuse him and therefore continue their obedience to him and also the Master of the house for the peace of his family hath ordered that the rest in all differences shall be swayed with the votes of the major part shall not this small part in departing from the whole and rejecting their governour and setting up another Steward of their own or every one assuming to be his own Master be held guilty of making a division in the family So p. 129. and p. 134. Many extortions and rapines and violations of rights both Civil and Ecclesiastical committed by such Patriarchs are urged But will these things done contrary to the Canon make a rejection of Canonical obedience to such authority lawful Is it a good argument against a King He hath bin tyrannous or done many things against law therefore depose him and his succession or hereafter yeild him no obedience where due by the laws Or against Bishops They have usurped some unjust power or otherways much violated their function therefore root out Episcopacy and yeild no more tho never so Canonical obedience unto them Thus as we have measured to others it hath bin meted to us again But if it be meant That obedience such as is Canonical to Patriarchs infers the violation of any civil rights the contrary I think is shewed elsewhere in Authority of Clergy derived from Christ more at large whither I remit you tho perhaps this may be enough to answer it That General Councils who made the Canons were of the contrary opinion to him Nay if it should be said that such preeminences as not the Canon but only some of the Roman writers more obsequious to the Papacy give to the Bishop of Rome are injurious to Civil rights yet the Bishop himself after some vehemency against them seems to wipe off this aspersion in saying thus Vindic. 8. c. p. 243. The best is that they who give these exorbitant priviledges to Popes do it with so many cautions and reservations that they such priviledges as they give him signify nothing and may be taken away with as much ease as they are given Which afterward he shews in the particulars of his Infallibility and his temporal power Did Popes practise therefore only what these write much wrong could not be done Again in his Replication to Bishop of Chalced. p. 230. t is urged That to whom a Kingdom is granted all necessary Power is granted without which a Kingdom cannot be governed and p. 238. that had the Britannick Churches bin subjected to the Bishop of Rome by General Councils yet it had bin lawful for the King and Church of England to substract their obedience from the Bishop of Rome and to have erected a new Primate at home amongst themselves upon the great mutation of the state of the Empire and great variation of affairs since those times For to persist saith he p. 241. in an old observation when the grounds of it are quite changed and the end for which the observation was made calleth upon us for an alteration is not obedience but obstinacy And p. 243. We pursue the same ends with them i. e. General Councils that is the conforming of the one regiment i. e. the Ecclesiastical to the other i. e. the Civil Thus he for Princes taking away the Bish of Rome's authority supposing General Councils had conferred any upon him Yet p. 293. speaking of that clause in the oath of Supremacy that no foreign Prelates ought to have any jurisdiction within this realm he saith A General Council is neither included here nor intended To which t is easily answered That there is no Church-canon detracting from Princes any of that power without which a Kingdom is not governable that the division of one Empire into many Dominions doth not necessarily require any alteration of the Oeconomy of the Church as appears in those States which conforming to these Canons still subsist and flourish without any disturbance of the civil peace But Quaere whether the throwing-off these Canons hath not bin the destruction of a Kingdom whose ruin took its beginning from divisions in Religion That the Church's end in constituting I say not of Metropolitans or Primats but of superior Patriarchs above them and of an Ecclesiastical Supreme to whom from several countreys might be the last appeal of greater controversies in Religion was not the conforming of the Ecclesiastical government to the Civil which end the Bishop pleads but the conserving of the Church tho sojourning under never so many temporal Scepters still as one body and government united in it self free from being divided and cantonized Which end is frustrated if so many Princes as there are there become so many independent Ecclesiastical Supremes Nay but rather the more the Civil Governments are multiplied the more need there is in the Church of but one or a few Supremes That there may not be so many modes or sects in Christianity as there are Princes So Vindic. p 145. Many inconveniences by foreign jurisdiction are urged That as the Bishops of Rome exercised it it was destructive to the right ends of Ecclesiastical discipline which discipline in part is to preserve publick peace and tranquillity to retain subjects in due obedience and to oblige people to do their duties more conscientiously See likewise p. 146. To the actual exercise of the foreign jurisdiction of Patriarchs I have nothing to say as one Patriarch may use it culpably so the next may use it justly But the foreignness of the jurisdiction is no way guilty of the things here objected Nay where are these ends of discipline more failed than where this Patriarchal jurisdiction hath bin banished Do not we see in other Kingdoms
Emperor after 1080 what is establish'd by such a Synod not General is too weak to overthrow any former rights of the Church Neither is Balsamon's a later Greek Writer's authority much to be stood upon in this controversie Neither speaks he home in this point whether the Patriarch is to admit what the Emperor doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after he hath represented to the Emperor that it is against the Canons Thus much of the 12th Canon In the 17th Canon and the 38th in Trullo Here is only upon the Emperor's building a new City or perhaps upon his transferring the Civil right and priviledges of having the seats of Judicature c. from one City in a Province unto another and upon this subjecting some other inferior Cities or Towns call'd Parochia's when being the jurisdiction of an ordinary Bishop see Hammond Schism p. 57. unto it the subjecting also of the Bishops of those Parochiae under that City to the Bishop of that City Where note First that these Canons speak only of the subjecting of Parochial Bishops to new Metropolitans where new Cities are builded and not of altering any thing in the jurisdiction of old which the 12th Canon of the same Council so expresly opposeth Secondly Only of subjecting Parochial Bishops to new Metropolitans not of subjecting Metropolitans to new Patriarchs nor yet to new Primates For 't is most clear that this very Council that made this Canon never dreamt of any power the Emperor had to erect a new Patriarch as I have shew'd before § 43. and much less Leo the Bishop of Rome who confirm'd these Canons yet vehemently opposed the Council seeking to erect Constantinople into a Patriarchy much more would he have opposed the Emperor Thirdly Whatever priviledge the Emperor here receives methinks their ordering that such a thing should be done subsequatur is far from sounding that they yeilded such a thing to belong to the Emperor by right as Dr. Hammond expounds it Schis p. 119. But then if the Emperor hold such priviledge from the Church the Church when they please may resume this power for so himself argues concerning any priviledges which Secular Princes have formerly conceded to the Bishop of Rome and then hear what the 21th Canon of the 8th General Council saith if we will trust later Councils not far distant in time better to understand the concessions of former Definimus neminem prorsus mundi potentium quenquam eorum qui Patriarchalibus sedibus praesunt inhonorare aut movere a proprio throno tentare Sed omni reverentia honore dignos judicare praecipue quidem sanctissimum Papam senioris Romae c. § 45 As for the things mention'd afterward by the Doctor p. 120 c. the power of changing the seat of a Bishop or dividing one Province into many as likewise the presenting of particular persons to several Dignities in the Church which also private Patrons do without claiming any superiority in Church-matters some of which seem of small consequence as to Ecclesiastical affairs Yet are not these things justly transacted by the Prince's sole Authority without the approbation first of Church-Governors But the same things may be acted by the Church alone the Prince gain-saying if he be either Heathen or Heretick which also shews his power when orthodox in the regiment of the Church to be only executive and dependent on the Ecclesiastical Magistrate's No persons are or at least ought to be put into any Church-dignities without the authoritative consent and concurrence of the Clergy who if they reject such persons tho presented by Princes as unorthodox or otherwise unfit they cannot be invested in such Offices Hear what the 8th General Council saith of this matter Can. 22. Sancta universalis Synodus definit neminem Laicorum principum vel potentum semet inserere electioni vel promotioni Patriarchae vel Metropolitae aut cujuslibet Episcopi ne videlicet c. Praesertim cum nullam in talibus potestatem quenquam potestativorum vel caeterorum Laicorum habere conveniat Quisquis autem saecularium principum potentum vel alterius dignitatis Laicae adversus communionem ac consentaneam atque Canonicam electionem Ecclesiastici ordinis agere tentaverit Anathema sit The transplanting of Bishopricks and division of Provinces probably was never order'd by Princes but either first propos'd or assented-to by the Clergy see that instance of Anselm Hammond of Schis p. 122. or upon some more general grant indulgently made to some pious Princes from the chief powers of the Church Tho Historians commonly in relation of such facts mention only the King's power as by whose more apparent and effectual authority such things are put in execution in which things negative arguments that such persons as are not mention'd did not concur especially when they are mention'd to concur in some other acts of the same nature are very fallacious But imagine we once the power of erecting Patriarchies and Primacies and by consequence of the bestowing and transferring the several priviledges thereof solely cast into the hands of a Secular Prince and then this Prince not orthodox a supposition possible and what confusion and mischief must it needs produce in such a body as the Church strictly tyed in Canonical obedidience to such Superiors and submitting to their judgment and decisions in spiritual matters by which the King may sway the controversies in Religion within his own Dominions what way he pleaseth unless we will imagine there shall be no Ecclesiasticks at all of his own perswasions whom he may surrogate into the places of those who gainsay Such were the times of Constantius And by such violent and uncanonical expulsion and intrusion of Prelates the face of Religion was seen changed and re-changed so often here in England within a few years according to the fancies of the present Prince as if there were in her no certain form of truth And the same thing we have seen done before our eyes in our own days The removing inducting deposing promoting Ecclesiastical persons as the Secular power pleaseth being also a changing of the Church's Doctrine as it pleaseth Thus much to what Dr. Hammond hath said Schis p. 120 c. § 46 Lastly Schis p. 125. he makes three instances in the fact of the Kings of Judah in the fact of St. Paul and in the fact of the Christian Emperors tending to this purpose that their authority is supreme in Ecclesiastical causes as well as Civil and therefore may erect Patriarchies His words there are The authority of Kings is supreme in all sorts of causes even those of the Church as well as Civil as appears among the Jewish Kings in Scripture David ordering the courses of the Priests Solomon consecrating the Temple Hezekiah 2 Chron. 29. 2 King 18. and Josiah 2 King 22. ordering many things belonging to it And so St. Paul appeal'd from the judgment of the chief Priests to the Tribunal of Caesar So in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉