The Difference Between the Power of Magistrates and Church Pastors, Addition
Addition: Of the Power of Kings and Bishops out of Bishop Bilson and Andrews.
LEst you should wrong the sober Episcopal Divines, so as to think that they claim as jure Divino, and as Pastoral, any Coercive forcing power, but only an authoritative perswading power, and that of the Keyes of the Church, I will transcribe some of the words of that Learned, Judicious Bishop Bilson in his Tract. of Christian Subjection; By which you will see, that all forcing power claimed by them, is only Magistratical, as they are the Kings Officers, and not from Christ.
Note also that constantly he distinguisheth the Magistrates power from the Pastors, by the [Sword] as the instrument of execution, which even about Ecclesiastical matters is proper to the Magistrate; As the power of the Word and Sacraments, or Keyes of the Church, is the Pastors: And these are the shortest, plainest, and least ambiguous terms; and more clear than [Internal, Ecclesiastical and Civil] which have all much obscurity and ambiguity.
Pag. 238. Princes only be Governours in things and Causes Ecclesiastical, that is, with the Sword—Bishops be no Governours in those things with the Sword.] Pag. 240. We confess Princes to be Supream Governours,—Supream bearers of the Sword—We give Princes no power to devise or invent new Religions, to alter or change Sacraments, to decide or debate doubts of faith, to disturb or infringe the Canons of the Church.
But of these two last I must tell you, what we Puritans (as they call us) hold 1. That the King may and must decide doubts of faith, in order to execution by the Sword (as, who shall be banished or imprisoned as a Teacher of Heresie) 2. And that Canons circa sacra not takeing the Pastors proper work out of his hand may be made by the Magistrate even if he please without the Prelates▪ And if Pastors make Canons, the… are but in order to their proper way of execution.
Pag. 252. And if Princes shall not bear the Sword, in things and Causes Ecclesiastical, you must tell us who shall— Since by Gods Law the Priest may not meddle with the Sword, the consequent is inevitable, that Princes alone are Gods Ministers, bearing the Sword, to reward and revenge good and evil in all things and causes, be they Temporal, Spiritual or Ecclesiastical: unless you think that disorders and abuses Ecclesiastical should be freely permitted—Page 256. This then is the Supream power of Princes, which we teach—That they be Gods Ministers in their own Dominions, bearing the Sword, freely to permit and publickly defend that which God commandeth—So may they with just force remove whatsoever is erroneous, vicious, and superstitious within their Lands, and with external losses and corporal pains repress the broachers and abetters of Heresies and all impieties—From which subjection to Princes, no man within their Realms, Monk, Priest, Preacher or Prelate is exempted: And without their Realms no mortal man hath any power from Christ judicially to depose them; much less to invade them in open field, least of all to warrant their Subjects to rebell against them. These be the things which we contend for; and not whether Princes be Christs Masters, or the functions to preach, baptize, impose hands, and forgive sins, must be derived from the Princes power and Laws; or the Apostles might enter to convert Countreys, without Caesars delegations; These be jests and shifts of yours.
Page 261. To Bishops speaking the Word of God; Princes as well as others must yield obedience: But if Bishops pass their Commission, and speak besides the Word of God, what they list, both Prince and people may despise them.
Page 258. His Word is Truth: and therefore your Bishops cannot be Judges of the Word of Christ, but they must be Judges of Christ himself that speaketh by his Word, which is no small presumption.—My Sheep hear my voice—They be no Judges of his voice.—
Page 259. If you take judging for discerning,—the People must be discerners and Judges of that which is taught—
Page 271. Ph. If General Councils might err, the Church might err—Th. As though none were of or in the Church, but only Bishops! Or all the Bishops of Christendome without exception, were ever present at any Council? Or the greater part of those that are present might not strike the stroke without the rest—
See pag. 350, 351, 352. Et seq. That only Magistrates may touch body or goods.
Page 358. The Watchmen and Shepheards that serve Christ in his Church, have their kind of Regiments distinct from the temporal Power and State: But that Regiment of theirs is by Counsel and perswasion, not by terror or Compulsion; and reacheth neither to the goods, nor to the bodies of any men—
Page 366. As for your Episcopal Power over Princes, if that be it you seek for, and not to take their Kingdoms from them, I told you, If they break the Law of God, you may reprove them: If they hear you not, you may leave them in their sins, and shut Heaven against them. If they fall to open Heresie or wilful impiety, you may refuse to communicate with them in prayers and other divine duties; yea, you must rather yield your lives with submission into their hands, than deliver them the Word and Sacraments, otherwise than God hath appointed.]
(Say you so; I promise you Sir, if Kings must be dealt so strictly with, though it cost you your lives, I will be a Non-conformist a little longer, though it cost me my livelihood, rather than give Baptism, the Lords Supper, Absolution, and the justifying assertions at Burials, as commonly as I must do, if I conform.)
P. 525. Pastors have their kind of Correction even over Princes: but such as by Gods Law, may stand with the Pastors Vocation; and tend to the Princes salvation: and that exceedeth not the Word and Sacraments: Other Correction over any private man Pastors have none; much less over Princes—Princes may force their Subjects by the Temporal Sword.—Bishops may not force their flock with any corporal or external violence. Pag. 526. Chrysostom saith—For of all men Christian (Bishops) may least correct the faults of men by force: Judges that are without the Church—may compell—But here (in the Church) we may not offer any violence, but only perswade. We have not so great authority given us by the Laws as to repress offenders: And if it were lawful for us so to do, we have no use of any such violent power; for that Christ crowneth them which abstain from sin, not of a forced, but of a willing mind—Hilary teacheth the same Lesson; If this violence were used for the true faith, the doctrine of Bishops would be against it. God needeth no forced service: He requireth no constrained confession: I cannot receive any man but him that is willing ☜ I cannot give ear, but to him that intreateth. I cannot sign, (that is, baptize any but him that (gladly) professeth.—So Origen—For all the crimes which God would have revenged, he would have them revenged not by the Bishops and Rulers of the Church, but by the Judges of the world—Bishops by vertue of their Callings cannot command others, or authorize violence or arms.—
Pag. 541. Parliaments have been kept by the King and his Barons, the Clergy wholly excluded; and yet their Acts and Statutes good. And when the Bishops were present, their Voices from the Conquest to this day, were never Negative. By Gods Law you have nothing to do with making Laws for Kingdoms and Commonwealths: You may teach, you may not command. Perswasion is your part: Compulsion is the Princes.
Page 245. Far better St. Ambrose saith [If the Emperour ask for Tribute, we deny it not: The Lands of the Church pay Tribute: If he affect the Lands themselves, he hath power to take them: no man among us is any let to him. The alms of the people is enough for the poor. Let them never procure us envy for our Lands: let them take them if they please: I do not give them to the Emperour, but I do not deny them.
So far Bilson.
All this we allow: And if all this be the concurrent judgement of all sorts of sober Protestants, called Episcopal or Presbyterians, what reason hath any Erastian upon the account of the Magistrates interest to quarrel with them. If any practise not according to these principles, let them hear of it.
Indeed in point of convenience we greatly differ from some men: That is, 1. Whether it be convenient for the King to make Church-men Magistrates, or not? 2. And whether it be convenient immediately to back their Excommunications, with the Sword; And for the Magistrate to be the Clergies Executioner, or to imprison men eo nomine, because excommunicate and not repenting. 3. And whether it be convenient to make the same Court called Ecclesiastical, so mixt of Pastoral and Secular Power united, in one Chancellor (who is no Pastor, but a Lay man) or in a Bishop, as that in and by it, the Magistrates, and the Spiritual Government shall be either confounded, or so twisted as to be undiscernable, or become one tertium.
But for this, as we love not to be too forward in teaching Magistrates what is convenient, (though many of the ancient Fathers have done it plainly, and spoken against the Magistracy of Priests; and Cy…il of Alexandria is branded by Socrates and others with some infamy, as the first Bishop that used Coercive power); so you have more cause to say what you have to say in this, to the Magistrate himself, than to the Bishops or Presbyteries: For if the Magistrate will needs-make Priests his Officers, and put his Sword into such hands, as have enough to do in their proper work, Or if he will punish men with the Sword, because they are punished already by excommunication, or because they repent not, lest excommunication alone should prove uneffectual; quarrel not for his actions with other men: It is his own doing; and it is himself that you blame, when you blame these things: Say not that Prelates or Presbyteries take the Magistrates power from him; but say the truth, that the Magistrate giveth it them, and will have it so to be. (Though I excuse none that urge him to it, or voluntarily assume his Power.)
Bishop Andrews also saith Tortur Torti p. 383. [Cohibeat Regem Diaconus, si cum indignus sit, id que palam constet, accedat tamen ad Sacramentum: Cohibeat & medicus, si ad noxium quid vel insalubre manum admoveat: Cohibeat & Equiso, si inter equitandum adigat Equum per l… cum praeruptum, vel salebrosum, cui subsit periculum. Etiamre medico? Etiamne Equisoni suo subjectus Rex? Sed de Majori potestate loquitur: sed ea ad rem noxiam procul arcendam: qua in re Charitatis semper Potestas est maxima.
Here you see what Church Government is in Bishop Andrews sense, and how far the Bishops hold the King himself to be restrainable even by a Deacon; And yet but (I think) according to your own sense, I pray you judge then whether the Bishops and you differ as far as you imagine; and whether the Courts and Church power which offendeth you, be not set up by Kings themselves, who make the Bishops their Officers therein. To which add what Bilson proveth that Patriarchs, Metropolitans and Archbishops Dignities are the gift of Princes, and not the institution of Christ, and then you will see more, that it is the Princes own doing.
I add to the like purpose more out of Bilson pag. 313. [We grant, they must rather hazard their lives, than baptize Princes which believe not, or distribute the Lords mysteries to them that repent not, but give wilful and open signification of iniquity, &c.] This is Church Government, which none can contradict.
This is it that Chrysostom so often professeth also, as that he would rather let his own blood be shed, than give the blood of Christ to the unworthy.
And Beda Hist. Eccles. l. 2. cap. 5. telleth us, that Melitus Bishop of London (with Justus) was banished by the heirs of King Sabareth, because he would not give them the Sacrament of the Lords Supper, which they would needs have before they were baptized.
(And by the way, if Bishops say that Kings must be used thus, the Non-conformists are not such intolerable Schismaticks, as some now represent them, for desiring, that every Presbyter may not be compelled against his Conscience to give the Sacrament to the basest of the people that are ignorant what Christ or Christianity is, and to them that are not willing to receive it, but are forced to take it against their wills for fear of a Prison; nor to baptize the Children of such Parents as know not what baptism is, or as are professed Infidels, having not so much as Christian Adopters, but only Ceremonious persons called God-fathers and God-mothers.)
Papirius Massonus in vita Leonis 1. reciteth his words of the Magistrates banishing the Manichees, and addeth [Ex hac rei gestae narratione perspicuum est Romanos Episcopas relegare tunc non potuisse, nec in exilium reos mittere, utì hodie faciunt; sed eos tantum censura coercere, & poen… ecclesiastica mulctar….
I add no more, supposing that almost all sober Episcopal, Presbyterians, Independents and Erastians are agreed in all the first ninety four Propositions, (if not all) that are here asserted; and that all those may suffice to signifie their Concord, and promote their Reconciliation, if Interest (mistaken) and Passion (mis-guided) did not much more than difference of judgement in these matters, to cause their alienation.
And as I have written this to vindicate both the Power of Kings, and the Office of Pastors from any mens unjust suspicions or accusations, who look only on one side; and to shew that these Offices are no more contrary than Head and Heart, than Light and Heat: so I do require the Reader to put no sense upon any thing here written, which is injurious to the Government of Magistrates or Pastors, or contrary to the Laws: For all such senses I do hereby disclaim.
FINIS.
End of the text · Richard Baxter, The Difference Between the Power of Magistrates and Church Pastors (1671)