A Reply to the Defense of Dr Stillingfleet, Preface – Errata
THE PREFACE.
IT hath pleaſed God, that the hearts of moſt men at this preſent juncture (or at leaſt their faces) are ſet upon Union of the Proteſtants; and it is abſolutely neceſſary that ſomewhat be done in order to a firm and laſting one among us. Upon this point on all hands we ſeem to be agreed, We muſt Unite or we muſt be undone: but as for the means of obtaining this end, the differences are many.
Some among the Conformiſts ſeem to propoſe an Execution of the Poenal Laws, as a ſure way of Uniting us: Others (as this Author of Dean Stillingfleets Defence, &c.) inſiſt on a Submiſſion to the Biſhops of the Univerſal Church to be the onelyonly foundation of Unity in the Church. The Diſſenters differ from ſuch as are of theſe Opinions, and in the general aſſert, That if ever an Union be obtained, it muſt be by an Inſiſting onelyonly on a Few, Certain, Neceſſary things as terms of Communion. That the utmoſt ſeverities of the Magiſtrate will rather, fill the minds of the Sufferers with Prejudices, againſt the Dictates of thoſe men whoſe moſt powerful Argument is the Sword, than Inlighten their Judgments, or Diſpoſe their Souls to any ſincere Compliances; and that the Notion of our Author, to wit, the Defender of the Dean of Pauls, is Schiſmatical.
Upon this account it is not a little time is ſpent in a Repreſenting the ſeveral Notions there are about the methods of Uniting us to be Ineffectual, the one Party miſliking the Propoſals made by the Other. But ſurely this is not the way to heal our breaches, or put an end to the Warme and Indecent Conteſts, that have been among us. For which Reaſon, though my principal aime is for Union, yet will not I preſume on any thing propoſed by us. I will onelyonly acquaint the Reader with the Nature of the Ancient Conſtitution of our Government in Relation to Eccleſiaſtical Affairs, and thereby ſhew what will moſt effectually conduce to Unite us in a way the leaſt novel, and moſt conſiſtent with our Civil Eſtabliſhment.
The which I can no ſooner compaſs, but I ſhall be capacitated to demonſtrate to the World, That the Principles of the Diſſenter are very much adapted for concord, not onelyonly among themſelves, but with the moderate Epiſcoparians, and very advantagious to the State in which they live.
The Ancient Conſtitution of our Government about Matters Eccleſiaſtical, is very excellently deſcrib'd in the Neceſſary Doctrine, and Erudition of a Chriſtian man compoſed by ſeveral Biſhops, and other great Doctors, and approved by Authority in the days of Henry the 8th.
In this Judicious Tractate 'tis manifeſt
1. That Church Government is Jure Divino.
2. That to the Conſtituting ſuch a Church Government thoſe Church Officers onelyonly are neceſſary who are mention'd in the New Teſtament.
3. That in the New Teſtament there is mention made of no other Church Officers, but Prieſts, and Deacons. That no other Government is of Divine Right, but what is under the Conduct of Biſhops, or Prieſts, i. e. Elders, is evident, in that the New Teſtament mentioneth no other Governours, as Eccleſiaſtical, but the Biſhops, or Elders; whence, that Government, whoſe Conſtitution is ſuch, as that it becomes a Government on no other account, than that the Governours are of humane make, that Government cannot, formally conſidered, be of Divine Right, 'tis but Humane, though circa Sacra.
4. That Biſhops, or Prieſts, the ſole Governours of the Church are of one, and the ſame Order, their Power the ſame, their work the ſame, which is to preach the Word, Adminiſter Sacraments, and Exerciſe Diſcipline
All this I collect from what is aſſerted in the aforeſaid Neceſſary Erudition about the Sacrament of Orders, where 'tis ſaid, That Biſhops, or Prieſts, and Deacons are the onelyonly Orders mention'd in the New Teſtament. And of theſe two ORDERS onelyonly, that is to ſay, Prieſts, and Deacons, Scripture maketh expreſs mention. That all others were afterward added by the Church. That the Duty, and Office of the Biſhop, Prieſt, [or Elder] conſiſteth in true Preaching and Teaching the word of God unto the People, in Diſpenſing, and Miniſtring the Sacraments of Chriſt; in Loſing, and Aſſoiling from ſin, ſuch perſons as be ſorry and truly Penitent for the ſame, and EXCOMMUNICATING ſuch, as BE GUILTY IN MANIFEST CRIMES, and WILL NOT BE REFORMED OTHERWISE, and finally, in Praying for the Whole Church of Chriſt, and ſpecially for the flock, committed unto 'em.
Thus the Order of a Biſhop, or Prieſt is one and the ſame; whoſe Office is, not onelyonly to Preach, and Adminiſter Sacraments, but moreover to exerciſe Diſcipline, namely in Loſing, and Aſſoiling from ſin, ſuch perſons as be ſorry, and truly Penitent, and in Excommunicating the Obſtinately Vitious, As much as if it had been ſaid, that Church Government, and the Office of a Biſhop, or Elder, is of Divine Right.
The Office of the Deacons in the Primitive Church was partly in Miniſtring Meat, and Drink, and other Neceſſaries to the poor people found of the Church, partly alſo in Miniſtring to the Biſhops, and Prieſts, and in doing their duty in the Church.
Hereby 'tis apparent that Deacons, as they were not by Office Preachers, nor Diſpenſers of the Sacraments, neither were they Governours of the Church. The Government of the Church being committed unto the Biſhops, or Presbyters onelyonly. The which being ſo, 'twill as I humbly apprehend, follow, That Church Government, according to Chriſts Inſtitution, was ſeated in thoſe Particular Societies, which were under the care, and conduct of Biſhops, or Elders, every ſuch ſociety, call it Parochial; or Congregational, being a Compleat Goſpel Church, (i.e.) a Church whoſe Elders, or Biſhops have as Entire a power for the Exerciſe of Diſcipline in their Congregations, as for the Diſpenſing the word or Adminiſtring the Sacraments. This is not onelyonly to be found in the Neceſſary Erudition, but moreover there are Intimations enough in other Diſcourſes publiſhed in Henry the Eights time, to incline a Judicious mind to conclude, That the Office of a Prieſt, and Biſhop is One, and the ſame; and conſequently that Particular Parochial, or Congregational Churches are of Divine Inſtitution.
I have obſerved in the Sum of Chriſtianity, compos'd by Francis Lambert of Avynyon, a Treatiſe Publiſhed An. 1536. That the Notion of the Sameneſs of the Order of a Biſhop, or Elder appeared in the world with ſome kind of boldneſs. For although this Lambert in his Epiſtle to Sebaſtian, Prince of Lauſane, doth aſſert, That there be MANY Biſhops of ONE City, for (ſaith he) every City hath ſo many Biſhops, as it hath true Evangeliſts, or Preachers, For every Preacher of the Truth, &c. is a true Biſhop, although he be not call'd ſo of many; Biſhops be only Prophets of Truth, and there ſhould be ſo many Biſhops, as the multitude of People requireth, Verily Every Pariſh ought to have its proper Biſhop. And in the Treatiſe it ſelf, chap. 5. In every City, Town, and Village there ought to be many Biſhops (i. e.) Evangeliſts, or Preachers, after the quantity of places, and multitude of people. If many Pariſhes be ſo great, that one Biſhop is not ſufficient for them, let them be divided, and to every part a Biſhop aſſigned. This and much more in Lambert. Notwithſtanding which, this Treatiſe is publiſhed by Triſtram Rewell, and dedicated to Queen Anne, wife of Henry the 8th. A thing that would not have been done but that this Opinion was very common at that time, and within ſeven years after declar'd to be the ſenſe of the Church of England as I have evinc'd out of the Neceſſary Erudition. But
5. That the Superiority of one Biſhop over another, or of a Biſhop over a Presbyter is of Humane, not of Divine Right.
Dioceſan Biſhops, Metropolitane, or Patriarchal are not found in Sacred writings, and concerning this, the neceſſary Erudition is moſt expreſs, in theſe words, And whereas we have thus ſummarily declar'd what is the Office, and miniſtration, which in Holy Scripture hath been committed to Biſhops, and Prieſts, and in what things it conſiſteth as is before rehearſed, leſt peradventure it might be thought to ſome perſons, That ſuch Authorities, Powers, and Juriſdictions as Patriarchs, Primates, Archbiſhops, and Metropolitanes now have, or heretofore at any time have had Juſtly, and Lawfully over other Biſhops, were given them by God in holy Scripture. We think it expedient, and neceſſary, That all men ſhould be advertis'd, and taught, That all ſuch lawful Powers, and Authorities of ANY one Biſhop over another, were, and be given to them, by the Conſent, Ordinance, and Poſitive Laws of men ONELYONLY, AND NOT BY ANY ORDINANCE OF GOD IN HOLY SCRIPTURE. And all other Power, and Authority, which and Biſhop hath uſed, or exerciſed over another, which hath not been given to him by ſuch conſent, and Ordinance of Men,, (as is aforeſaid) is in very deed no LAWFULL POWER, but PLAIN USURPATION AND TYRANNY. So far the Chriſtian Erudition. From whence 'tis manifeſt, That according unto them, Dioceſan Epiſcopacy is of Humane Right onelyonly (i. e.) Any one Biſhops Ruling over another Biſhop, or Presbyter, is what the Scriptures do not direct unto, and conſequently 'tis not of Divine Right, neither is it any further Lawful, than according unto the Laws of the Land in which 'tis Exercis'd.
Though the Power of Dioceſane Biſhops, as 'tis Circa Sacra, may be called Eccleſiaſtical, yet if we conſider its Origine, and Source, we ſhall find it to be but Civil, ſeated primarily in the Civil Magiſtrate, that 'tis of an humane make, and ſo far, but no farther Lawful, than as Sanction'd by the Laws of the Land. Dioceſane Biſhops as ſuch are not immediately owing unto God, but unto our Civil Governours for their Being, 'tis on them their ſole dependance is, and on them they relie for the Continuance of their Power. The King, Lords, and Commons aſſembled in Parliament can, as they ſee cauſe, make what Alterations they pleaſe in the Epiſcopal, or Dioceſan Government, Though they cannot alter any Divine Law, yet they can change any Law that receives its Being from themſelves. Though they cannot alter the Office of a Presbyter, or Biſhop, which receives its Being from the Inſtitution, or Ordinance of Jeſus Chriſt, yet they may correct, or amend any thing in the Humane, viz. The Dioceſane Conſtitution. They can enlarge, or narrow, any Dioceſs, yea pull down one, and Erect another. They can add unto, or take from the Epiſcopal Juriſdiction, as they judge Expedient.
That this was the ſenſe of the Church of England in Henry the 8ths. time, yea and in moſt ages ſince an Epiſcopal Government has been eſtabliſhed in this Kingdome, and conſequently the Antient Conſtitution of our Government, is not only manifeſt, from what hath been already taken out of the Neceſſary Erudition, but from other paſſages, that are in that excellent treatiſe, and ſome other Conſiderations that I will inſiſt on. As
Firſt, The Power, that hath ever been acknowledged to be ſeated in the Kings of this Realm, concerning the exempting any particular Churches from an Epiſcopal Juriſdiction evinces it.
If Epiſcopal Juriſdiction be of Divine Right, it lies not in the power of any Prince to alter it, If every Pariſh Presbyter is, according to the Scriptures, an Officer inferiour to ſome Dioceſane Biſhop, the exempting ſuch a Presbyter from Epiſcopal Juriſdiction is out of the power of any man. 'Twas a known Rule in our Land even in the days of Popery; That no Law of man can alter, or diſanul any Law of God, If then our Princes ever thought themſelves to have been inveſted with a Power of exempting any Presbyter from Epiſcopal Juriſdiction, 'tis evident that they look not on that Juriſdiction to be of Divine Right.
But that our Princes judg'd themſelves to have ſuch a Power, is notorious, from the many Inſtances that can be given of their exerciſing it, Whoſoever conſults the Learned Dr. Burnets Hiſtory of the Refor. part. 1. lib. 3. will find, That Ethelbert exempted a Monaſtry at Canterbury with ſome Churches belonging unto it from the Juriſdiction of the Archbiſhop, and his Succeſſors. King Ina's Charter to the Abbey of Glaſſenbury exemps them from the Biſhops Juriſdiction. The like did King Offa concerning the Monaſtry of St. Albans An. 793. Kenulph King of Mercia that at Abington Anno 821. and Knut, that at St. Edmvndbury An. 1020. Yea and there are ſeveral places at this very time exempt from Epiſcopal Juriſdiction.
Whatever our Princes in after Ages might loſe as to the Exerciſe of their juſt Power, 'tis certain, that Henry 8th. reaſſumed it, as appears by his diſmembring ſome Dioceſſes, and by his removing ſome Churches from one Juriſdiction to another. For this Conſult Dr. Burnets Hiſtory of Reformation, part 1. lib. 3. page 301. where you'l find the Complaint of the Roman party beyond the Sea concerning the Kings encroaching on the Juriſdiction of the Church, &c.— to which 'twas anſwered, That the Diviſion of the Eccleſiaſtical Juriſdiction whether of Patriarchs, Primates, Metropolitanes, or Biſhops was according to the Roman Law Regulated by the Emperours, Of which the Antient Councils always approv'd. And in England when the Biſhoprick of Lincoln, being judg'd of too great an extent, the Biſhoprick of Ely was taken out of it, it was done only by the King, with the conſent of his Clergy, and Nobles.
'Tis alſo evident out of Dr. Burnets Hiſt. of the Ref. part 1. l. 3 p. 267. That this great Prince gave cut ſuch a Commiſſion to Bonner, and it may be to others alſo, as makes it moſt manifeſt, that Dioceſan Biſhops were not of God's, but only of the Magiſtrate's Inſtitution. Hence Bonner in his Commiſſion from the King moſt gratefully acknowledges that he received it only from the King's bounty, and muſt deliver it up again when it ſhould pleaſe his Majeſty to call for it, even as Juſtices of the Peace, &c. whoſe Commiſſion is ad Pacitum. Moreover Lay-men had Eccleſiaſtical Dignities. The E. of Hartford ſix Prebends promiſſed him, as the Lord Cromwal in H. 8. was made Dean of Wells. A thing very ordinary at that time; Dr. Burnets Hiſt. of the Refor. part 2.
Thus a Dioceſane Epiſcopacy at beſt was judg'd but an humane Creature, owing to the Magiſtrate alone for it's Riſe, and Conſervation.
Secondly, This ſeems to be the ſenſe of the Reformers in Edward the 6th. time who were under the Influence of that great Divine, and Bleſſed Martyr Archbiſhop Cranmer. In Henry 8th. days Cranmer did his Utmoſt for the promoting a Reformation, the which, he did withal the Speed and Prudence the Ilneſs of the times would permit, further attempt to carry on under King Edward, and what he did, was ſo highly approv'd of by all, who were hearty for a Reformation, that whoever conſiders how Unanimous the truly Proteſtans Biſhops were, in Concurring with this great Prelate Cranmer, cannot but encline to think, That their Principles in moſt things about Church Diſcipline were the ſame, (i. e.) they were for the Divine Right of Biſhops or Presbyters, even when they judg'd the Superiority of a Biſhop to a Presbyter to be but Humane.
That this may appear to be the ſenſe of Cranmer, I will only beſeech my Reader to compare what was done under King Edw. 6th. by this great Prelate, with his Judgment concerning a Dioceſan Epiſcopacy under Henry the 8th.
In Henry 8ths. time Cranmer in anſwer to that Queſtion, Whether Biſhops, or Prieſts were firſt? did aſſert, That the Biſhops, and Prieſt, were at one time, and were no two things, but both One Office in the beginning of Chriſts Religion, That in the New Teſtament, he that is appointed to be a BISHOP or PRIEST, needeth no Couſecration by the Scripture, for ELECTION, or APPOINTING thereto is ſufficient. This was then Cranmers Judgment and I cannot underſtand that he did at any time in the leaſt vary from it, for in the Neceſſary Erudition, which he ſubſcribed, there is nothing aſſerted, but what is either Conſiſtent with, or an approbation of what was the Archbiſhops: Opinion about theſe points.
'Tis true Cranmer was ſo Zealous an Aſſerter to the Kings Supremacy, that he ſeem'd to be of that Opinion, which doth now appear by the name of Eraſtianiſme, for he held, That a Biſhop, or Prieſt by the Scripture is neither commanded, nor forbidden to Excommunicate, but, where the Laws of any Region give him Authority to Excommunicate, there he ought to uſe the ſame, &c. But from this he muſt be conſidered to have received, becauſe he ſubſcribed the Neceſſary Erudition, where 'tis expreſt, That a part of the Prieſts or Biſhops Office is according to the Scriptures to Excommunicate, &c. as well as Teach, and Adminiſter the Sacraments.
To all this add the Progreſs Cranmer made under Edw. 6. in the Reformation, how far he went, and how much farther he would have gone, had not the Iniquity of thoſe times been ſo exceeding great, and the Reign of this worthy Prince ſo very ſhort. 'Tis well known that he went ſo far as to tempt Dr. Heylin to conclude King Edwards death no Infelicity to the Church of England, and to provoke Queen Elizabeth to ſay, That they had ſtript the Church too much of its external Splendour and Magnificence, That twas requiſite to make ſome alteration in the Articles to the end a Compliance of the Roman Catholicks might be more eaſie. What I have inſiſted on in this place about Cranmer is taken out of Dr. Burnets Hiſtory, and a Record in him ex M.SS. D. Stillingfleet.
3. Such is the preſent Prerogative of his Majeſty in Eccleſiaſtical as well as Civil Affairs, that the aſſerting the Divine Right of a Dioceſane Epiſcopacy is inconſiſtent with it.
The King is the Supream Head of the Church, as well as of the State; for which Reaſon, he hath Power to appoint Officers to look after the management of Affairs in the One, as in the Other: But if the Dioceſan Biſhops depend not ſo much on the Prince for their Superiority and Power in making an Authoritative Inſpection into Eccleſiaſticalal Affairs, as the Civil Magiſtrate; who is it that is his Majeſties Commiſſionated Officer about Eccleſiaſtical affairs? Tis either the Dioceſane or None. But if the Dioceſane as ſuch receives his Commiſſion from Jeſus Chriſt, even as the Apoſtles did, then they are Gods Officers, and not the Kings. And if ſo, ſeeing the King doth nothing but by his Officers, that is, by ſuch as act by a Commiſſion received from him, the King hath in this reſpect loſt at leaſt the Ezerciſe of his Prerogative. But if they are the Kings Officers, and depend as much on the King as the Civil, then their Dioceſan Epiſcopacy is not of Divine, 'tis but of Humane Right.
We acknowledge that 'tis the ſenſe of the Church of England, that Princes are Ordain'd of God to Govern Eccleſiaſtical, as well as other Perſons: and that therefore, if we conſider ſuch as are appointed by the King to govern under him Circa Sacra, as the Officers of God Fundamentally, and not Formally, it may be granted. But when we ſpeak of the Officers of Chriſt in Contradiſtinction to the Officers of the King, we mean ſuch, whoſe Authority is from God, and remains good, though the Prince ſhould oppoſe it, as in the caſe of the Primitive Officers of Divine Inſtitution, who being forbidden to Preach in Chriſts name, could reply, Whether we ſhall obey God or Man Judge ye. The Office of a Presbyter, or Congregational Biſhop is ſo much of God, that what right ſoever the Magiſtrate may have concerning Nomination, Election, or Preſentation, or Appointing of any ſuch Eccleſiaſtical Miniſters, his Prohibition cannot make void that Commiſſion he hath received from Jeſus Chriſt. But ſuch as are Officers of the King, whether about the matters of the Lord, or about the King (i. e.) whether Circa ſacra, or about Civil Affairs, 'tis in the Power of the Supream Magiſtrate to give or take his Commiſſion, as it pleaſeth him, yea to direct to the Number of ſuch Officers, appointing them their peculiar work, and to alter and change as the neceſſity of Affairs, and State of the National Conſtitution ſhall require.
There muſt be a regard had unto the preſent temper, and ſtate of the Kingdom, in which the Church is, and a ſuiting the Eccleſiaſtical Affairs ſo far as they may have an influence on the State after ſuch a manner, as is moſt conducive to the more firm eſtabliſhment of the Fundamental Conſtitution, and conſequently Peace of the State, to which end the Civil Magiſtrate muſt ſtill firmly adhere to that known Rule by which King Henry profeſſed to walk, which is expreſſed in the neceſſary Erudition, viz. The Scripture doth teach, That all Chriſtian People, as well as Prieſts and Biſhops, as all other ſhould be obedient unto Princes, and Poteſtates of the World; For the Truth is, that God Conſtituted and Ordained the Authority of Chriſtian Kings and Princes to be the moſt High, and Supream above all other Powers, and Officers in this World, in the Regiment and Government of their People, and committed to them as unto the chief leads of their Commonwealths, the Cure and Overſight of all the People which be in their Realms, and Dominions, without any exception: and to them of Right, and by Gods Commandment, belongeth not only to prohibit Unlawfull Violence, to correct Offenders by Corporal Death, or other puniſhment, to Cenſure Moral Honeſty among their Subjects, according to the Laws of their Realms, to defend Juſtice, and to procure the Publick Weal, and Common Peace and Tranquility in Outward and Earthly things: But Eſpecially and Principally, to Defend the Faith of Chriſt, and his Religion, to conſerve and maintain the true Doctrine of Chriſt, and all ſuch as be true Preachers and Setters forth thereof, and to aboliſh all Abuſes, Hereſies and Idolatries, and to puniſh with Corporal Pain, ſuch as of malice be the occaſion of the ſame. And Finally, to Overſee, and cauſe that the ſaid Biſhops and Prieſts, do execute their Paſtoral Office truly and faithfully, and eſpecially in thoſe points, which by Chriſt and his Apoſtles were given and committed unto them; and in caſe they ſhall be negligent in any part thereof, or would not diligently execute the ſame, to cauſe them to redouble and ſupply their lack. And if they obſtinately withſtand their Princes kind monition, and will not mend their Faults: then and in ſuch caſe to put others in their rooms and places. And God hath alſo commanded the ſaid Biſhops and Prieſts to obey with all humbleneſs and Reverence both Kings, and Princes, and Governours, and all their Laws, not being contrary to the Laws of God, whatſoever they be, and that not only propter iram, but alſo propter Conſcientiam, that is to ſay, not only for fear of puniſhment, but alſo for diſcharge of Conſcience.
Thus the Power of the Magiſtrate over all Perſons, to wit, Eccleſiaſtical and Civil, is according to the Ordinance of God; and that 'tis a Part of the Magiſtrates Office to Defend the Faith of Chriſt, to maintain the true Doctrine and the Preachers thereof, and to Aboliſh all Abuſes, &c. the which muſt be done, not only by keeping to the Rule of the Goſpel, but in conjunction therewith, by taking a ſpecial care, that no unneceſſary thing be ſuffered, that in its Tendency is deſtructive of the Peace of the State. If the preſent conſtitution of the Government of the Church, as it is National, and of humane Right onelyonly be in any Reſpects Inconſiſtent with the Publick Weal of the Kingdom, tis neceſſary, that it be alter'd; eſpecially when an Alteration in ſome little things, may abundantly contribute: unto the Laſting Peace, both of Church and State.
But if the Church Government as Dioceſane or National be of Divine Right, there can be no Alteration of it, and conſequently, ſeeing the ſetting up any of the Kings Officers to Inſpect Eccleſiaſtical Affairs, is an Altering the Dioceſan Conſtitution, the Prince durſt not, though encouraged by an Act of Parliament, enter on it. What is of Divine Right is Sacred, and muſt not be touch'd, 'tis dangerous to come too near that Mount. For which Reaſon, how miſcheivous ſoever the Eccleſiaſtical-National-Government, may in Proceſs of time be unto the Civil; the Civil, not the Eccleſiaſtical muſt be Altered. That there may be an Adjuſting matters in debate between the Dioceſane, and the State, the State muſt ſubmit unto the Dioceſane. For the King according to this Hypotheſis hath nothing to do with Church Affairs, which are wholly by the word of God confined to Churchmen, among whoſe number the King cannot be juſtly mention'd, neither may the King take any Cognizance of what is done among them, nor may they hold their Courts in his, but only in their own Name, or rather in Jeſus Chriſts. A Notion ſo inconſiſtent with his Majeſties juſt Prerogative, and the Powers of Parliaments, that as it doth deſtroy the Former, in like manner it doth ſo very much limit the Latter, as to Alter the Fundamental Conſtitution of our Government.
By this time I preſume it may appear with ſome Conviction to the Reader.
1. That a Parochial, or Congregational Church Government is, according to the Church of England, Jure Divino.
2. That the Dioceſane, or National Government as ſuch is Jure Humano, and for its particular Form, muſt be ſuch in all ages, as our Civil Governours Judge moſt meet, as a Means for the Preſervation of Parochial Diſcipline, and the great Ends of the Civil Conſtitution.
Theſe things being ſo, A Declaring this true Church of England Principle to be ſtill according to the Sentiments of our Governours, will Relieve tender Conſciences among Diſſenters, and ſufficiently gratifie any moderate Conformiſt to the Ending all our Diviſions, without an Embaſing his Majeſties Prerogative.
1. The Eſtabliſhing a Parochial, or Congregational-Church-Diſcipline by Law, is the great thing the Diſſenters deſire, and what may be done conſiſtently with the Antient Conſtitution of the Government of this Realm, to the fixing the deſired Firm and laſting Union among all ſorts of ſound Proteſtants.
Theſe Aſſemblies once eſtabliſhed, as ſo many Compleat Particular Churches, whoſe Paſtors have full Power for the Adminiſtring all Ordinances, and the exerciſing Diſcipline over thoſe who do freely and of choice ſubmit thereunto, may notwithſtanding leſſer Differences, be conſidered as United unto one another, in that they Profeſs the ſame Faith, Preach the ſame Word, and Adminiſter the ſame Sacraments. For the Proof hereof conſult the Neceſſary Erudition, where tis ſaid, That the Unity of the Holy Church of Christ is not divided by Diſtance of Place, nor by Diverſity of Traditions and Ceremonies, diverſeſly obſerved in divers Churches, for good Order of the ſame: And though in Traditions, Opinions, and Policies, there was ſome Diverſity among them [(i.e.) the Churches of Corinth of Epheſe, &c.] likewiſe as the Church of England, Spain, Italy, Pole, be not ſeparate from the Unity, but be one Church in God, notwithſtanding that among them, there is great diſtance of Place, Diverſity of Traditions, not in all things Unity of Opinions, Alteration in Rites, Ceremonies and Ordinances, or Eſtimation of the ſame—ſuch Diverſity in Opinions, and other outward Manners and Cuſtomes of Policy, doth not diſſolve and break the Unity which is in One God, One Faith, One Doctrine of Chriſt and his Sacraments preſerv'd and kept in theſe ſeveral Churches without any Superiority or Preheminence, that one Church by Gods Law may, or ought to Challenge over another.
Thus Particular Parochial, or Congregational Churches may be United in One God, One Faith, One Doctrine of Chriſt and his Sacraments, even where there is ſome difference between them in leſſer matters. What though in one Pariſh there is a Liturgy, in another a Directory, ſhall this hinder Union? Don't even the Papiſts themſelves acknowledge, that the Church of England was very cloſely United, even among themſelves, notwithſtanding the ſeveral different Offices there were in uſe among us in the times of Popery? One Office after the uſe of Sarum, another after the uſe of York, of Bangor, &c. and yet all United. Moreover what more common than to obſerve many little differences in Civil Corporations, even where they are all United in one head. A conſideration ſufficient to evince the Union of Parochial Churches to be Poſſible, notwithstanding ſome Remaining Differences in Customs, &c.
In theſe Kingdoms there are a multitude of Particular Corporations, and little Policies, whoſe Customs and modes of Government within themſelves, are very Different. The particular Laws by which they are govern'd as a Particular Body Corporate are of as many different kinds as there are Cities, Towns, or Pariſhes; but yet All United, in that they ſwear Alleigance to his Majeſty, and ſubmit themſelves to the General Laws of the Land. The different Cuſtoms of different places do not in the leaſt break the Union of the Nation. And why may it not be ſo in the Church? What Reaſon can there be given, why the Union of many a Civil Society or Aſſociation may be, notwithſtanding the different Customes are among them, but the Union of many Particular-Parochial-Churches cannot be, unleſs they all agree in every little thing.
Methinks it is as Reaſonable to plead for a destroying the Particular Cuſtomes, and Charters of Burroughs, Corporations, and Cities as the only way to Union in the Civil Government, as 'tis to aſſert, That nothing but an Uniformity among every Parochial or Congregational Church can Unite us in the Eccleſiastical. What though there are ſome differences among Parochial Churches as to their Cuſtomes and modes of Worſhip, ſo long as they agree in One Faith, One Lord, One Baptiſm: So long as they all Profeſs the ſame Faith, Preach the ſame Word, Administer the ſame Sacraments, and ſubmit unto the ſame Civil Government: So long as they all Swear Allegiance to to their Prince, and Subſcribe any Teſt to aſſure the World they are ſound Protestants, the which being ſo, what hinders a firm and lasting Union?
Certainly, This is enough to ſhew, that their Union, if no more, is as much as that between One City and another, One Corporation and another, and that their differences are no greater, (if ſo great) than thoſe between one City and another. The which being ſo, An Altering the Preſent Laws about Conformity, and an Establiſhing ſuch New ones, as ſhall be Judged neceſſary by our Governours for the defence and ſafety of a Parochial or Congregational Church-Diſcipline, as well as for the Regulating his Majesties Officers Circa Sacra, will Unite us, and put an end to that Horrid ſin of Schiſm, that hath theſe many years abounded in the midst of us. Let the Diſſenters be permitted to Embrace the Laws and Customes of their Fore-fathers in the Apoſtles days about Church-Diſcipline, and the Mode of Worſhip, and they are Relieved, the which may be done without any Injury to the Conſcience of any ſound Proteſtant of the Epiſcopal Perſwaſion. I ſay,
2. This cannot but ſatisfie any moderate Epiſcoparian, who may, if he pleaſe, firmly abide by thoſe Ceremonies he now doth. He may ſtill Read the ſame Prayers among ſuch as are of his own Opinion. He may wear the ſame Vestments, and addreſs himſelf to his Majeſties Officer the Lord Biſhop, as unto his Ordinary for Councel and Advice. And if his Ordinary or Dioceſan be an Elder (for that is left to the Supream Magistrate to appoint) he may look on him [though in truth as ſuch, he being only the Kings Officer Circa Sacra] as a Biſhop who is of an Order Superiour to that of a Presbyter, and ſo exerciſe Diſciplene as he Receives Encouragement from him.
If there be any entring on the Miniſtry, who think a Dioceſane Epiſcopacy to be Jure Divino, and is called unto a Pariſh or Congregation of the ſame Judgment. This Candidate may (if the Kings Officer be an Elder, and of the ſame mind with him) apply himſelf unto him, as unto his Dioceſane, and receive Orders from him, and do all things as now, unleſs our Governours Judge meet to make any Alteration as to the uſe of ſome Ceremonies, Only let none be by Law compelled to do ſo.
Let thoſe that are ſo weak, as to think a Dioceſane Epiſcopacy to be of Divine Right enjoy the Liberty of their Conſciences, the which being attended but with the vouchſafing the like Liberty unto others, I know not why they may not be ſatisfied. We are not for the Pulling down Lord Biſhops, nor for an Alienating Church Lands. If it ſeem good to our Governours to continue them, we only deſire, that the Nature of their Office be declared to be no other than what it was Antiently in this Kingdom, which is, That they are meerly the Kings Creatures, That all they do muſt be in the Kings Name, and by vertue of a Commiſſion receiv'd from him: That as ſuch they are only the Kings Magiſtrates, that act Circa Sacra, That their work is only to ſee that the Biſhops or Presbyters within their allotted Precincts diſcharge their Duty not only in leading Godly Lives, but in Preaching the word, adminiſtring the Sacraments, and exerciſing Diſcipline according to the Rule of the Goſpel.
We are far from pulling down ſuch Biſhops, for we rather wiſh that whereas there is now one, there might be five, nor are we for the alienating Church Land any more than we are for the taking from his Majeſties other Civil Officers, thoſe Penſions are allowed them for their great ſervices. A thing we eſteem as neceſſary, and highly expedient as what doth not only conduce very much to the Encouragement of all ſorts of Learning: the equal Administration of Juſtice, but as what advanceth the Honour and Grandeur of the State. But,
3. This doth no way Embaſe his Majeſties Prerogative in matters Eccleſiastical, It doth rather make it the more Grand and Auguſt. His Majesty is hereby acknowledged to be the Supream Head of the Church. All Officers Circa Sacra depend as much on his Majeſties Pleaſure for their Places as any other Civil Officers. 'Tis in the Kings Name they must act, by vertue of a Commiſſion received from him, whereby the King is Recognized as the ſole Governour of the Kingdom, and hath no Competitors with him, nor is he in danger of Forreign Uſurpations.
To ſumme up all, Let all ſuch Particular Congregational, or Parochial Churches, that are of Divine Inſtitution according to the ſenſe of the Old, and most true Church of England, be by Act of Patliament declar'd to be ſo, and taken under the Protection of the Laws, and the Diſſenters are ſatisfied: The which (as hath been prov'd) may be done without any wrong to the conſciences of the Conformiſt.
This is the utmost I ſhall propoſe leaving it to the Wiſdom of the Nation to Regulate, and Order the Conſtitution ſo far as it is National and of Humane Make, as they Judge most Expedient. The States-men know beſt, how to alter, correct, or amend any thing in the preſent Frame, for which reaſon, Modeſty doth best become Divines, whonever ſucceed in any undertakements beyond their Sphere. If no encroachments be made on what is of Divine Institution no wrong can be done us.
I deſire the Dean, and his Substitute to conſider this Propoſal, which is but a Revival of what was on our first leaving Rome, strenuouſly aſſerted, as the OnelyOnly way to break all the Deſigns of the Papists about Church Diſcipline; From the corruptions of which did proceed all the Popes Tyranous Uſurpations. Certainly the Eſtabliſhing this Notion cannot but be of extraordinary uſe, as it Erects a Partition Wall between the Reformation, and the Corruptions of the Roman Church, as it is adjuſted for the ſilencing all Differences among our ſelves, the healing our Breaches, and the fixing a firm and lasting Union among all ſound Protestants, whether Epiſcopal, Presbyterian, Congregational, or meer Anabaptiſt.
I humbly apprehend this to be enough to evince, That the Diſſenters are not ſuch Enemies to Union as ſome have Aſſerted, nor are they for the destroying a National Church Government. They are onelyonly against Unaccountable Innovations, even ſuch as tend to the Ruine of the Old Proteſtant National Church, which as ſuch is but of Humane Inſtitution, and in all ages muſt be of ſuch a Peculiar Form, as is best ſuited to thoſe great Ends, viz. Gods Glory in the Flouriſhing of particular Parochial, or Congregational Churches and the Peace of the State.
The Diſſenters do know, that as One Particular Church is not to depend on another, as to be Accountable thereunto, when at any time ſhe may abuſe her Power, yet All are accountable unto the Magiſtrate of that Land in which they Live, and that ſuch is the ſtate of things with us, that what perſon ſoever is griev'd, either by a Presbyter or Biſhop, or by any Inferiour Officer Circa Sacra, he may make his Appeal to the Supream Magiſtrate, with whom all Appeals on Earth are finally Lodg'd. Whatever the Deans Subſtitute may aſſert, 'tis most undoubtedly true, that no Appeal can be juſtly made from our King unto the Pope, or any Colledge of Catholick Biſhops whatſoever. That herein as our Author diſſents from the Church of England, we do heartily agree with her.
That the ſound Proteſtant Party among the Sons of the Church of England do accord with the Diſſenters about this great Point, is not only evident from what a Conformiſt hath written in the following Treatiſe, but from what is aſſerted by the Judicious Dr. Burnet in the Hiſtory of the Reformation. The which I do the more chearfully inſist on, that the world may ſee, How the Diſſenters have been miſrepreſented, and How clear they are from any Seditious or Factious Principles concerning Church Diſcipline.
In Dr. Burnets Preface to the Hiſtory of the Reformation, p. 1. for which the whole Kingdom have given the Dr. thanks: 'tis aſſerted, That in Henry the 8ths time, 'twas an Eſtabliſh'd Principle, That every National Church is a compleat Body within it ſelf, ſo that the Church of England with the Authority and Concurrence of their Head and King, might examine or Reform all Errors or Corruptions, whether in Doctrine or Worſhip. Moreover in the Preamble of that Act by which this Principle was fix'd, 'tis declared, That the Crown of England was Imperial, and that the Nation was a Compleat Body within it ſelf, with a full Power to give Juſtice in all Caſes, Spiritual, as well as Temporal. And that in the Spiritualty, as there had been at all times, ſo there were then men of that Sufficiency and Integrity, that they might Declare and Determine all Doubts within the Kingdom, And that ſeveral Kings as Ed. 1. Edw. 3. Ric. 2. and Hen. 4. had by ſeveral Laws Preſerv'd the Liberties of the Realm both Spiritual and Temporal from the Annoyance of the See of Rome, and other Forreign Potentates, Hiſt. Ref. p. 1. p. 127.
Furthermore, the ſame Judicious Author, by an Extract out of the Neceſſary Erudition, and out of the Kings Book de Differentia Regiae & Eccleſiaſticae Poteſtatis, out of Gardiners de vera Obedientia, and Bonners Prefix'd Epiſtle, and out of a Letter written by Stokesly Biſhop of London, and Tonſtall Biſhop of Dureſm, hath made it evident that the Church in Henry 8. did not only aſſert the Kings Supremacy, but as a Truth in Conjunction therewith, held, That in the Primitive Church, the Biſhops in their Councels made Rules for Ordering their Dioceſſes which they only called CANONS or RULES, nor had they any Compulſive Authority, but what was deriv'd from the Civil Sanction.
A ſufficient evincement that they did not believe General Councils to be by Jeſus Christ made the Regent part of the Catholick Church, neither did they believe their Determinations, or Decrees, to lay any Obligation on the Conſcience, unleſs Sanction'd by the Magiſtrates command.
To this Dr. Burnet ſpeaks excellently well in his Preface to the Second Part of the Hiſt. Refor. The Juriſdiction of Synods or Councils is founded either on the Rules of Expediency or Brotherly Correſpondence, or on the force of Civil Laws; For when the Christian Belief had not the ſupport of Law, Every Biſhop taught his own Flock the best he could, and gave his Neighbours ſuch an account of his Faith at, or ſoon after his Conſecration, as ſatisfied them, and ſo maintain'd the Unity of the Church. The Formality of Synods grew up in the Church from the Diviſion of the Roman Empire, and the Dignity of the ſeveral Cities, which is a thing ſo well known, and ſo plainly acknowledged by the Writers of all ſides, that it were a needleſs Impoſing on the Readers Patience to ſpend time to prove it. Such as would underſtand it more perfectly, will find it in de Marca, the late Archbiſhop of Paris's Books de Concordia Imperii & Sacerdotii, and in Blondels works de La Primaute de l'Engliſe, None can Imagine there is a Divine Authority in that, which ſprang from ſuch a Beginning. The Major part of Synods cannot be ſuppoſed to be in matters of Faith, ſo aſſiſted from Heaven, that the leſſer part muſt neceſſarily Acquieſce in their Decrees, or that the Civil powers must always meaſure their Laws by their Votes, eſpecially where intrest doth viſibly turn the Scales, ſo far Dr. Burnet. The contrary unto which being aſſerted by the Deans Subſtitute, 'tis Apparent, that he doth abundantly recede from the true Church of England, not only to the Reproach of his Profeſſion, but of the firſt Reformation, and grief of the ſober and moderate Conformist.
This I thought neceſſary to ſuggeſt, that I might engage the Reader to conſider with what Injuſtice this Author treats, not only thoſe who diſſent from the Church in ſome things, but the Sober Conformiſt alſo, who is a through Church man, by Reprſenting us all as Enemies both to Church and State, as if the adhereing unto Old Protestant Principles about Church Diſcipline had been the Overt Act of a Spirit Seditious and Phanatical.
Having thus ſo fully ſhewn, How eaſy tis to put an end to the miſchevous Diviſions, which have, for ſome years paſt, prov'd very dangerous to this Kingdome. I will not inlarge on every little thing that our Authour may think deſerves our Animadverſions.
The Rude, and ſlovenly methods he hath taken to aſperſe his Adverſaries are ſuch as do rather evince the Feebleneſs of his cauſe, than deſerve the the Regard of any ſober Perſon.
His talk about the Impoſſibility of Union between the Church of England, and the Diſſenter, becauſe of the many Important Differences there are among our ſelves, is confuted by the Preſent Union of the Authours of the Enſuing Treatices, who, though they differ in little things as much as any, the One being a Confor. the other a Nonconformiſt; the third of a Uniting Spirit in the middle between us both, yet are we all heartily agreed in the things that would Unite us. Moreover it were eaſy to make it appear that the differences among the Diſſenters in General about Worſhip and Diſcipline are rather Nominal than Real, and that their Union is in a manner already accompliſh'd.
The Notions we inſiſt on in oppoſing the Deans Subſtitute are truly Proteſtant, ſuch as are owned and embraced by the Famous Hooker, Dr. Feild. Mr. Chilliggworth and Dr. Burnet, and after a Signal manner by the Country Conformiſt, who hath expreſt himſelf in theſe Sheets with Gravity and Candor. He is aware of the deſign of this Author as well as we, as its Tendencie is towards Rome, and is ſenſible, that the methods taken in the oppoſition ſome of the Clergy make againſt the Peaceable Diſſenter, do Juſtifie the French in their Rigorous and moſt cruel Perſecutions.
There is to the letter of Mr. Humfrey to me at the end, his late Paper added Entitled Materials for Union, which together with this Preface if we offer'd no more will prove the things I have ſaid to be Feaſible, and alone ſerve to that Firm and Laſting Union, which is chiefly aim'd at in theſe our joint endeavours.
To conclude, The peace of the Church of England, and the Greatneſs of the King who is head of it, being things moſt deſireable to every good Proteſtant and true Subject, we have in theſe Papers ſhewn our good will to doe ſomething towards the advance thereof: Which being ſubmitted to the Superiour thoughts of ſome one who is in a higher Sphere of Ability for the cultivation of it, and of place for the repreſenting it without prejudice to our Sovereign, we do hope it may both be well accepted by him, and take with every body elſe, who do truly honour the King, ſeek Concord, and love good men.
Sep. 16. 1681. Stephen Lobb.
The Author not being able to attend the Preſs deſires the Candid Reader before be peruſes the enſuing Diſcourſe to Correct theſe momentous Errata.
Pag. 11. l. 9. r. is to have a Right. p, 17. l. 14. dele them. p. 29. l. 38. for chain r. chair. p. 36. l. 37. for Catholick Colledge, r. Supream Governing Heads p. 74. before l. 18. r. I'le now conſider the Deans third Argument, which is p. 76. before l. 4. r. The Deans fourth Argument, which at this time only deſerves Animadverſions is, our Diviſions give great Advantage to the Papiſts, and the Diſſenters by their Separation have cauſed the Deviſion. Rep. p. ib. l. 5. for the 2. r. 2d. the l. 7. r. not. p. 78. l. 28. for Form r. Term.