been extremely arrogant and obstinate and zealous beyond knowledg and tho they had suffered for a good Cause yet suffering for it on good or reasonable grounds as neither themselves being any way learned nor pretending the Authority of any Church nor relying on any present Teachers but on the certainty of their own private Judgment interpreting Scripture as you may see And here some Instances are given but if this Period will close it self it may for our Author who seldom takes care of such small matters leaves it in this unfinished condition I will not examine the truth of this Maxim but will only take notice that since all Protestants agree in this that the Ground of our Faith is that which appears to us to be the Sense of the Scripture our Author hath by this Limitation of his former gentleness towards us delivered us all over to the Secular Arm and so God have Mercy on our Souls for it is plain he will have none upon our Bodies XI He quarrels with the Privy-Council for imprisoning of Bonner because he said he would observe the Injunctions that were sent him if they were not contrary and repugnant to Gods Law and to the Statute and Ordinance of the Church the fault imputed here to him I suppose being that he refused to obey any Injunctions of the King when repugnant to the Statute and Ordinance of the Church But since he had a mind to blacken that time he might have as well said that they found fault with him because he promised to obey the Injunctions if they were not contrary to Gods Law and that thereby it appeared that they preferred their Injunctions to the Laws of God as well as to the Laws of the Church and by our Author 's taking no notice of the first Branch of Bonner's Exception it may be inferred That all his Concern is about the Laws of the Church and so they be secured he troubles himself little what becomes of the Law of God But if he had weighed this matter as he ought to do he would have found that this Exception is very ill grounded When a Form of a Subscription is demanded there is no Government in the World that will accept of one that indeed signifies nothing at all for it is visible that a Subscription made with those Reserves signifies nothing therefore if Bonner had acted as became his Character he should have directly refused the Subscription of such Injunctions as he found to be contrary to the Laws of God or to such Laws of the Church as he thought bound his Conscience But the Protestation he made gave a very just ground to the Government to proceed against him according to Law. XII Our Author intending to aggravate the Proceedings against Gardiner shews his great Judgment in setting down the Article relating to the Kings Supremacy at full length whereas he had only named the others for he could have invented nothing that must needs render all his Exceptions to the King's Supremacy more visibly unjust than this doth which is in these Words That his Majesty as Supreme Head of the Church of England hath full Power and Authority to make and set forth Laws Injunctions and Ordinances concerning Religion and Orders in the said Church for repressing all Errors and Heresies and other Enormities and Abuses so that the same Alteration be not contrary or repugnant to the Scriptures or Law of God. This was no other than what Gardiner had over and over again both by his Oaths and his Writings advanced and the restriction set on it was so just that one would think there lay no possible Exception to it Here there is no claim to the declaring what were Errors and Heresies but only to the repressing them and this is done by the Secular Arm even where men are burnt for Heresie Besides the Power that according to our Author belongs to the Pastors of the Church is either founded on the Scriptures or it is not if it is not founded on the Scriptures there is no great regard to be had to it but if it is founded on it then it it clearly excepted by the words of this Article so it is hard to see of what use this is to our Author unless it be to shew him his Injustice XIII He tells us That all that which had been done under King Henry and King Edward was Annulled by an equal Authority under Queen Mary But tho I acknowledg he was both the Soveraign and the Parliament yet there was neither Justice nor Moderation in the Charge now made equal to what had been done before A great deal might be said concerning the Election of the Members of Parliament and the Practices upon them and of the turning out a Multitude of the Clergy before the Laws were changed The Disorders and Irregularities in the Disputes had nothing of that fair Dealing in them that had appeared in King Edward's time and whereas all the Severity of King Edward's days was the Imprisoning of three or four Bishops and the turning out some of the other Clergy he knows well how matters went under Queen Mary So that we cannot be denied this Glory that a Spirit of Justice and Moderation appear'd at every time that the Reformation prevail'd Whereas things went much otherwise in this sad Revolution in which our Author Glories so much So that if the good or ill Behaviours of the several Parties as they had their turns in the Administration of Affairs furnishes a just Prejudice even in favour of the Cause it self we have this on our side as fully as we can wish for XIV He tells us That the Bishoprick of Durham was first kept void in King Edward's days and last of all it was by Act of Parliament dissolved to increase the Kings Revenue If our Author had examined the Records of Parliament he would have found that the Act that related to the Bishoprick of Durham did not at all propose the Increase of the Kings Revenue but the dividing of one Bishoprick into two and the raising and endowing of a new Cathedral Church all which must have risen to about Four thousand Marks of old Rents which considering how long Lands were let near the Borders did certainly very near exhaust the whole Revenue of that See. This is indeed of no great Importance to the main Cause For if sacrilegious Men went into the Reformation hoping to enrich themselves by it this is nothing but what falls out in all great Revolutions And it is plain our Author took up general Reports very easily that so he might make a Clamour with them against our Church But if some that gave an outward compliance to the Doctrine of our Church were really a Reproach to it he of all Men for a certain Reason ought not to insist on it Since we are no more accountable for the Duke of Northumberland's Actions than we are for his own XV. He tells us That the Bishops turned out
Judgment of all these positions which are laid down as the Foundation of this Work. The First is That the two principal Offices which the Clergy have received from Christ are 1. To determine Controversies in pure matters of Religion and to judg what is Truth and what are Errors in Faith and Worship 2. To teach and promulgate this Truth and to execute Church-censures on those who receive it not All this is true but since our Author doth not prove that the Clergy are infallible in their Decisions which is not so much as pretended by any with relation to National Churches this only proves that it is the duty of the Clergy to declare and publish the truth but as the Body of a National Clergy may err so in case it should actually err can it be supposed that the People and the Prince are bound to err with it Synods are of great use for the Unity of the Church and a vast respect is due to their Decisions but since our Author names the Synods of the Arrians the many Synods that they had which were very numerous and were gathered from all parts gave them all the advantages from this Authority that could be desired so that if the Council of Nice had not had truth of its side I do not see why the Visible Authority should not rather be thought to lye on the Arrian side The Princes Authorizing a Synod or his Opposing it is to be justified or condemned from the Decisions that are made by it if they are good he ought to support them and if they are bad he ought to oppose them and in this he must judg for himself as every other man must do the best he can as knowing that he must be judged by God. The Second is That the Clergy cannot make over this Authority to the Secular Governour being charged by Christ to execute it to the end of the World. Upon which he arraigns Two things 1. The Clergies binding themselves never to make any Decisions in matters of Faith or Worship till they had first obtained the consent of the Secular Governour 2. The Clergies Authorizing the Secular Governour or those whom he should nominate to determine those matters in their stead It is certain no Clergy in the World can make any such Deputation and if any have done it it was a Personal Act of theirs which was null of it self and did not indeed bind those who made it it being of its own nature unlawful but much less can it bind their Successors but if the Church of England never did neither the one nor the other what a Prevaricator and False Accuser is he who as he lied long to God and Man when he pretended to be of this Church so resolves now to lye concerning this Church as much as ever he did to it The submission of the Clergy related only to New Canons and Constitutions as the other Act empowering a select number to be nominated by the King to form a Body of a canon-Canon-Law related only to the matters of the Government of the Church the Religion and Worship had no relation to it so a compromise as to matters of Government is very unjustly stretched when this is made a surrender of the Authority of determining and declaring matters relating to Doctrine and Worship which no Church-man without breach of the most sacred of all Trusts can deliver up but in the matters of Ecclesiastical Policy all States in the World have felt enough from the Yoke of the Papacy to give them just reason to assure themselves against any more of such Ecclesiastical Tyranny besides that in all the engagements tho made in Terms that are general such as are all Oaths of Obedience and in particular those that are made by Prelates to the Popes exceptions are still understood even when they are not expressed As long then as the Church enjoys a Protection from the Civil Authority she is bound to make returns of all engagements not only of Submission but of Obedience But tho the one is perpetual the other has its limits and when the Church finds its oppressions from the Civil Power really to over-ballance the Protection that she receives from it in that case she must resolve to fall into a state of Persecution and all the engagements that any body of the Clergy have made relating only to the maintaining a peacable Correspondence with the Civil Powers they do not at all bind up Church-men from doing their Duty in case the Civil Authority sets it self to overthrow Religion Besides when both Religion and the Worship and the Constitution of a Church is once established the adding new Canons may perhaps be of great use to a Church but yet it cannot be supposed to be so indispensably necessary but that rather than give any distaste to the Soveraign they may content themselves with what they have without asking new Canons and a Church under a Body of Canons may likewise resign up the compiling of these into a new System and the leaving out such as are found inconsistent with the Publick Peace to such persons as shall be nominated by the Prince but all this how general soever the words may be hath still a tacit exception in it which all that know the Principles of Law will grant The Third Thesis is That the Prince cannot depose any of his Clergy without the consent of the major part of the Clergy or their Ecclesiastical Superiors and in particular of the Patriarch In this the matter must still be reduced to the former Point Either the Grounds of such a Deposition are in themselves just or not if they are just the Prince may as lawfully hinder any Church-man from corrupting his Subjects while he is supported by a Publick Authority or a setled Revenue as he may hinder a man that hath the Plague on him from going about to infect his People for his deposing such a one is only the taking the Civil Encouragement from him but when this is done unjustly it is without doubt an act of high Oppression in the Prince and as for the Person Deposed and those over whom he was set they are to consider according to the Rules of Prudence whether the present Case is of such importance that it will ballance the inconveniences of their throwing themselves into a state of Persecution for it is to be confessed that Church-men have by their office an indefinite Authority of feeding the Flock which cannot be dissolved by any act of the Princes but the appropriating this to such a Precinct and the supporting it by Civil Encouragements is a humane thing and is therefore subject to the Soveraign Power The Princes of Iudah notwithstanding an express Law of God which appropriated the Priesthood and the High-Priesthood to such a Family and Race of men did turn them oft out and Iehosaphat sent to his Princes to teach in the cities of Iudah and with them he sent about also Priests and Levites
mentioned by our Author is laid open beyond all possibility of replying XXIX He tells us that the Veneration of Images was defined in a General Council the Second Nicene which Council also justifies it by Antiquity That Council hath been lately sufficiently exposed by a Learned and Judicious Pen. It was neither a General Council nor did it justify what it defined by Antiquity The falshood of some of their Allegations and the Impertinences of the rest and the Inferences drawn from those pretended Authorities are all such extravagant Things that they give a just prejudice against every thing that was defined by Men that were equally void of sincerity and of common sense XXX There follows from this to the end of the Chapter a long and laborious Vindication of the Clergy in King Edward's Time in which our Author endeavours by many Instances of which some were mentioned in the First Part to make it appear that the Clergy at that time gave only an outward compliance that they acted against their Consciences that the Severity of that Time tho it went no further than to the ejecting them out of their Benefices who refused to comply and to the imprisoning of a very few yet wrought so much upon their weakness and their love of Mony that against their Perswasions they complied both in Subscribing Swearing and Officiating in the Divine Service This shews our Author's sound and good Judgment that leads him to fancy that he hath by this Plea done any thing but blackned them in the most infamous manner that can be imagined It had been much less scandalous upon them to have owned that many of them were weak and easy Men ignorant and tractable and so were apt to be seduced but that in Q. Mary's Time they return'd again to their old Persuasions But this would not have served our Author's turn who wanted somewhat to excuse his own treacherous Compliance against his Conscience for so many Years even after he had all that Conviction which he owns in his Book But if he hopes to excuse his Crimes by shewing that his own Church hath produced in former Times Men as black and as criminal as himself we do not envy him this Apology He might perhaps have another design in it but of the same size of Sincerity and good Judgment with the other He no doubt fancied as many more perhaps did that the Church of England had many more such false Brethren as Himself in her Bosom who wanted only good Colours and a fair Occasion to declare themselves and so as he had been preparing many Books with which he hoped to overthrow us when ever the time of publishing them should come he fancied this Representation that he gives of the Complyance of the Popish Party might offer to others like himself some excuse for their dissembling so long with God and Man only that they might enjoy the Profits of a Benefice since it cannot be so much as pretended that there was any other Temptation in the case But God be thanked he hath had few Companions in his Apostacy or Treachery let him choose which he will. XXXI Our Author cites a Passage out of a Letter of Q. Mary's written in her Brother's time to the Privy-Council in which there is a Period that overthrows a great many of his Assertions She says that she was well assured that the King her Fathers Laws were all allowed and consented to without compulsion by the whole Realm both Spiritual and Temporal Now if the former part of the Citation he produces makes a little against the Changes in King Edward's time the latter part is as strong in the Justification of that which was done under K. Henry I cannot leave this without taking notice of our Author's way of citing which gives the justest cause of Suspicion that can be The words he cites are I have offended no Law unless it be a late Law of your own making for the altering Matters of Religion which is not worthy to have the Name of a Law both for c. and for the partiality used in the same Now did ever Man before our Author put an c. in such a place I have not Fox by me from whom this is cited but I am sure this way of cutting a Sentence doth not look fair XXXII I pass over many Particulars which are Repetitions of things that have been already considered relating to the Instances in which the King's Supremacy was exercised Only where he complains of the restoring the Cup to the Laity as contrary to the Injunction of the Council of Constance I must acknowledg his Sincerity in not pretending to carry the Violation of our Saviour's Institution of the Sacrament higher than the 15th Century We are not ashamed to own that our Reformers thought it better to follow the first 14 Centuries especially since our Lord's Institution was at the Head of them then so late and so treacherous an Assembly that had overthrown all the Confidence that can be among Men as well as it had sacrilegiously robbed the People of a Right that was derived to them by our Saviour's express Words XXXIII He quarrels the Form of Ordination set out in Edward the Sixth's Time because in contradiction to all Antiquity that part was cast out by which a Bishop gives to Priests a Power to offer up Sacrifices and to say Masses for the Dead and the Living It seems our Author knows Antiquity as well as he doth the History of our Reformation otherwise he had never pretended that a Form that is no elder than the 8th Century was the Practice of all Antiquity This is so clear to all who have examined this matter that it is needless to urge it farther The Silence of all ancient Authors the Form mentioned by the 4th Council of Carthage by the Apostolical Constitutions and by Denis the Areopagite and the ancient Rituals printed by Morinus are such clear Proofs in this matter that I may well save my self a farther Labour XXXIV He gives another Exception against our Book of Ordinations that instead of the Oath of Submission to the Patriarch there was another Oath prescribed to the Temporal Prince Our Author must needs know that the Oath which was formerly sworn to the Pope was a plain Oath of Homage such as Subjects swear to their Princes by which all Bishops were bound to the Popes and to the Regalities of St. Peter as to their Leige Lord in the same form of Words in which Vassals swore Homage to their Superiour Lords and it was no wonder to see our Legislators change that into an Oath of Supremacy to our Temporal Prince In the Primitive Times there was no such thing as either Oath or Promise of Obedience to Superiours in Ordinations and it was not before the End of the 7th Century that a Promise of Obedience was requir'd yet Charles the Great found ill Effects of this and so got it to be condemned