Defense of Non-Conformity, Part 3 · Section 6
SECT. VI. The Peoples Right of Electing their Pastors.
THe last of these four Pleas, that the Reverend Author ranketh under the first Head, and which he alledgeth, some make use of for separation, is, That the people are deprived of their right in the choice of their own Pastors: This he proceedeth to Sect. 24. I do not make the depriving the people of this power a cause of separation; though I reckon it a notable Grievance, and earnestly desire a redress of it, and pray that the Lord may move the Hearts of Rulers to defend the people in this their Right, against them that take it from them. But our work is now to defend this Right of the Members of the Church, against the Doctor's Assaults. But before I come to this, I shall shew 1. What this Right is that they have in Electing their Pastors. 2. From whom they Derive it. 3. What ground we have to think that they have such a Right.
Sect. 2. To shew what this Right is, I assert, 1. That the people have no Right to bestow the Benefice on their Pastor; nor to elect him to it, unless either it be their own gift, or the giver of it hath transferred that power on them. It is Election to the Office, not to the Benefice, that we debate about; which if the Doctor had considered, he might have spared a great deal of his following Discourse. It is true, the Magistrate ought to provide for the Church, so as the person, regularly chosen, may enjoy the Benefice; but if the Magistrate please to reserve it to his own disposing, there is no Remedy; the people must either chuse the man that may have the maintenance, if he be tollerably qualified, or they must provide for him themselves. And so when a Patron giveth a Maintenance on these terms, That he have the chusing of the person who shall enjoy it, the Church should either reject it, and provide for their Minister another way, or chuse the person that the Patron presenteth. But this Patronage is a sad Grievance to the Church, devised in Satan's Kitchen, saith Beza, confess. fid. c. 35. it is an oppressing of people in their Spiritual Rights, and in that which concerneth their Souls: A greater bondage than if the whole Parish were obliged to eat nothing but what the Patron pleaseth. And it had been less blame-worthy, if these Donors of Church Livings had kept their Gift to themselves, than thus to prelimit the people in that which so nearly concerns their Souls; and to make that but an Accessory (to wit, the charge of Souls) which should be the thing principally minded: As now the Living is. 2. The Magistrate, or Patrons electing of a Minister, may give him a Title to the Living; but it can never make him the Pastor of such a people, nor fix a Relation between him, and them, of Pastor, and Flock: For it is wholly Forreign to the Church as a Church; it is a thing of Worldly concern, and therefore can never found that Relation, which is an Institution of Christ in his Church. 3. We do not deny, but when the people have chosen a Pastor, and the Presbytery hath ordained him also, the Magistrate may Imprison, Banish, or otherwise punish him, so as he is consequentially restrained from the exercise of his Ministry among that people; if the man be guilty of a civil crime (of which the Magistrate is Judge) but we deny that this Act doth dissolve the ministerial relation between that Pastor, and People; that cannot be done but by the Church 4. We do not so put Election into the hand of the multitude, as either to exclude the Eldership that is among them; or to exempt the people from their guidance in this: The Eldership ought to regulate this Action; yet so, as it be not done without the consent of the generality. 5. We are far from saying, That the People by their Election, doth make the Elected person a Minister; that is done by Ordination, which is in the Hands of the Presbytery. 6. We do not say, That this Elective power of the people is Arbitrary, and independent; they are to be bounded in it by the Rules of the Gospel, that set forth the qualifications of Ministers; and if they chuse contrary to these, the Presbytery may reject the person, and refuse to ordain him. 7. We deny not but a part of a Church, or the whole Church, may forfeit this Right, as to the present exercise of it, by Ignorance, Scandal, Irreconcileable Contentions about the matter, and such like; in which case the power of Election devolveth into the hands of the Pastors of the Churches associated; I mean the Presbytery. Yet, the peoples satisfaction should be endeavoured as much as is possible. 8. It is the Right of the people, which they ought not to be deprived of, nor restrain…d from exercising, ordinarily, nor without singularly weighty cause, to chuse their own Pastors, and other Church Officers.
Sect. 3. As to the Author of this Right in the people, I maintain, that it is neither from the Churches Determination, nor from any grant from the Magistrate; neither do I plead any Law of nature for it: For by Divine Institution (which is never contrary to the Law of Nature) it was otherwise in the Jewish Church. And though there be abundant reason for it, it being the priviledge of Free Corporations, and other Societies, to chuse these that are to govern them; and it being rational, that a Corporation, or person, may chuse the Lawyer that they will intrust their Estates to; and the Physician in whose hand they put their life; so men should not be imposed upon to entrust the Conduct of their Souls to a person that they have not confidence in, and whom they cannot chuse for that end. Yet, I say, we do not lay the stress of the matter on Humane Reason, but on Gospel Institution: I affirm then, that this is the Institution of Christ; that it is the order that he hath appointed in the Gospel, that people should have liberty to chuse their own Pastors, and other Church Officers.
Sect. 4. I am next to shew the grounds that we have to think so. I shall prove this by shewing that it was the constant practice in the Church, while the Apostles managed the Affairs of it, that Church Officers were chosen by the suffrages of the people; and I hope it will not be denied, that such practice is declarative of Christ's Institution. The first Argument for it, is from Act. 14. 23. where though Ordination, or appointing, be expressed in our Translation, yet the Greek Word foreign; …ignifieth a chusing by Suffrages; as the manner of the Grecians was, by stretching out or lifting up the hand (for that is the force of the Word) to declare their Votes. I deny not that this Word is sometimes used figuratively, for potestative mission, the effect, or consequent of Election; and that by one person, withot Suffrages, as Act. 10. 14. yet it is very rare that the Word is so used: And it is evident, that the Word is most commonly us…d in this sence; of all the Instances that Scapula in his Lexicon, giveth of the use of this Word, not one of them is to the contrary. And it cannot be Instanced, that ever this word is used for laying on of hands; lifting up (which is the force of the Word) and laying them down, being so opposite, it is not to be imagined that the one should be put for the other. Neither is it fit to seek for the Figurative signification of the Word, when the proper signification may be admitted. It is objected against this use of the Word here, that they ordained foreign not foreign to them, not to themselves, that is, the Apostles to the people ordained Elders. Answ. It cannot be denied, but foreign is used indifferently for them, or themselves; and why it may not here be understood of themselves, I see not; so as that here is denoted the Action of appointing Elders for the people, in which the people had a hand by Election, as the Word here importeth, and the Apostles had a hand by Ordination, as can be proved by other Scriptures? But if we should turn foreign them, the sense may run plainly thus; the Apostles appointed by Ordination, Elders for the people, upon their Electing them by Suffrages. It is no strange thing in Scripture to see divers Actions expressed by the same Word, where one is the consequent of the other, as Is. 38. 17. Thou hast Loved my Soul out of the pit of corruption, i.e. delivered it, because thou loved it: Also Act. 7. 9. The Patriarchs are said to sell Joseph to Egypt; where both their Actions, and the Actions of the Midianites who carried him to Egypt, and there sold him, are included in one Word. Many Instances of this kind of Synthesis may be seen in Gl…ss. Philol. Sacr. lib. 3. tract. 3. p. 229—It is also objected, that these are said to Ordain who commended the people to the Lord; that is, the Apostles, and that the Apostles are spoken of all along in the Nominative Case, and not the people; and therefore they must be the Actors meant by this word. Answ. We deny not the Apostles to be Actors meant in this Word, as the Patriarchs were in the Word, Selling to Egypt, Act. 7. 9. but we say the peoples action is also included, in the force of the Word; to wit, their Voteing by lifting up their hands; which in no reason can be applied to the Apostles, being but two men, the mater needed not such a way of Voteing between them. I conclude, this being done foreign in every Church, the people respective chusing their Pastors, and the Apostles Ordaining them, it is clear to have been generally the practice of these times, and so the Institution of Chirst.
Sect. 5. Argument 2. The Apostles were so careful; yea, rather the Lord was so careful, to preserve this right in Election or ordinary Officers; that when Men for extraordinary Work were to be sent forth, the Peoples choice was not neglected. Hence two were chosen by the Multitude, and presented to the Lord; that by Lot the Lord might chuse one of them to be an Apostle Successor to Judas, Act. 1. 23. and Matthias being chosen by Lot, it is said of him, ver. 26, foreign he was reckoned by Votes, among the Apostles, and Act. 13. 1, 2. the Lord chused Barnabus, and Paul for a special Service; but he would have the Votes of the Church for it. If the Lord thus condescended to take the present consent in such a matter; is it fit for Bishops or Patrons to neglect them, and obtrude Men upon them, whether they will or not? Argument 3d. When ever any extraordinary piece of work (I mean such as was not daily exercise) was to be put into the Hands of Ministers, without a special Revelation; they were chosen to it by the Suffrages of the People, as appeareth by. Act. 15. 22. where Judas, and Silas are sent to Antiech, about carrying the Decrees of the Synod at Jerusalem, and backing them with their Doctrine. So 2 Cor. 8. 19. 23. Some are chosen by the Churches to accompany Paul in carrying a Collection to the Jews in Judea; and are called the Messengers of the Churches. Argument 4th. The Deacons were appointed to be chosen by the People, foreign, also the other Church Officers see, Act. 6. 2, 3. It is a frivolous Answer; that it doth not follow, that they should chuse their Pastors, because they may chuse the Distributers of their Benevolence. For, 1. both are Church Officers, instituted by Christ: In this then they are alike. 2. It were a less matter, that people were imposed on in this lesser concern; than in that of greater consequence; and if the Lord have taken care, that they should be satisfied about the one, much more that they should be satis…ied about the other.
Sect. 6. Our 5th. Argument, is from the concurrent Testimony of the purer primitive times; which we the rather use, because our Brethren lay so much weight on this for the Power of Bishops, it should not be neglected by them in the matter of Election; and that of other Church Officers. Also, because nothing of Church-Ord…r is more clearly, and frequently, and unanimously in the Writings of the Ancients; nor did longer continue untaken away, even in the degenerate Ages of the Church; so that we may reckon Patronages, and ob…ruding Ministers on the People, among the Novelties of Popery. I shall in the first place bring some Canons of Council for this: Theoderet mentioneth an Epistle from the Famous Council of Nice, to a Church in Egypt; in which are these words, Dignum est vos potestatem habere & eligendi quem libet & eorum nomine dandi quem clero St. Digni. And after, si quum vero con…igerit requiescere in Ecclesia, tunc pro vehim honorem defuncti eos quem nuper Assumpti St. solummodi si videantur digni, & populus eos Elegerit. The Synod Constantinopolit. in an Ep. to Damasus, and others, shew that they had ordained Nectarius—cuncta decernente pariter civetate, and that they had ordained Flavianus, omni Ecclesia parriter decernente. Hist. inpert. lib. 9. c. 14. Also, 4. Carthagin. cau. 1. It is required that a Bishop be Ordained, cum omni consensu Clericorum, & Laicorum, & Concil. 3. Carthag. can. 22. Nullus ordin…tur Clericus sine Episcopi examinatione & populi Testimonio. Also the Tenth Canon of Council. Cabilonens; (which was in the midle of the Seventh Century) hath these words, as they are in Caranz. Summa Concil. Signis Ep…scopus de quacunque Civitate fuerit defunctus, non ab aliis nisi a com. provinicialibus, clero, & civibus suis, alterius habeatur electio sin autem aliter fiet, ejus Ordinatio irrita habeatur. Here the want of Popular Election is held to make void Ordination.
Sect. 7. Another sort of Testimonies out of Antiquity, are the Decrees of Popes; it was of old the Canon Law, that the People should have a Hand in El…ction of Ministers, Bishops, and others. Anacletus, who lived very near the Apostles time, hath these words in one of his Epistles, cum ejectionem summorum sacerdotum sibi Pominus reservaverit, eorum electionem tamen benis sacerdotibus & spiritualibus populis concessit; Caelestinus primus; who lived in the beginning of the Fifth Century, hath these words, nullus invitis detur Episcopus cleri plebis, & ordinis consensus requiratur. Galasius about the 500 year decreed, Electionem Episcopi esse totius Ecclesiae. Also, Stephanus, Pecretat. dist. 63. saith, Electionem non solum ad spiritual…s, sed etiam ad Paicos pertinere. And L…o Magnus, Anno 440. dist. 63. is plain, and full to this purpose. So Gregorius Magnus, about 590. frequently writeth to this purpose. I instance only his Letter to Scholast…us; H…rtanum Magnitud…nem vestr…m, ut cer…ocantes p…iores vel pl…bem civitatis, de electione alterius Sacerdotis cogites, and when in case they found not one, he desireth they may send three to Rome, to consult about it, adding quorum & judicio pl…bs tota consentiat. Hadriarus, who lived near the end of the Eighth Century, in an Ep. to Charlemain, commendeth Can…nes Olitanos, and saith, at elect…ones he caused to proclaim the consuetudo Olitana; to wit, Plebs & clerus Ecclesiae illius simul consistens, elegerunt sibi Episcopum.
Sect. 8. Also particular Fathers have frequently given their Vote for this priviledge of the People. Cyprian Ep. 3. often mentioneth his being chosen by the Suffrage of the whole Church of Carthage, and in his Ep. de Martial. & Basilid; he saith, Plebs in sua potestate hab…t eligendi dignos sacerdotes. And he saith, Idemvidemus de divina Authoritate descendere. And he excuseth himself very carefully, that in a case of necessity, he had chosen Aurelius to be Reader in the Church, without the Knowledge, and Consent of the People. Tertul. apol. cap. 39. saith of the Seniores that preside in their Assemblies, that is, the Ministers, Approbantur Suffragiis eorum quos reger…debent. Greg. Nazianzen; in a Funeral Sermon made on his Fathers Death; discourseth much of this priviledge of the People, Chrysostom. lib. 4. de Sacerdotio, is of the same mind. Also, Augustine naming Eracius, his Successor addeth this express caution, si Ecclesia Consentiat, and declareth, hoc esse receptum provatumque jus & consuetudine, ut tota Ecclesia sibi elegat Episcopum, aut in ipsum consentiat. Hierom Ep. ad rustic. Monachum, Foll. (292.) cum ad perfectam ae…atem veneris si tamen vita comes fuerit, & …e vel populis vel pontif…x Civitate Elegerint agito quae Clerici St. He supposeth it as the received practice; that the People should elect. Ambros. Ep. 82. Electio & vocatio quae sit a tota Ecclesia, vere & certo est divina vocatio ad munus Episcopi: Many more Citations might be added; but these may suffice, and abundance more may be seen append. ad Catalog. Test. veritat. where this right of the People is deduced from the Days of the Apostles, to the Eigth Century, by Testimonies out of all sorts of Authors. That Author taketh notice of this, as an ordinary Clause in many of the Epistles, which Tinemeras, Archbishop of Rhemes, in the Reign of Charlemain ab omnibus debet eligi, cui debet ab omnibus obediri.
Sect. 9. I shall now attend to what the Learned Dr. hath to say in the contrary of this right of the People, so divinely appointed, so anciently, universally, and long approved. He discourseth these three things to this purpose, 1. What inherent Power the People had▪ 2. How they came to be devested of it. 3. Whether there be suffic…ent Ground to resume it. One would think, that if this Power be from Christ; his other two parts of his discourse migh… have been spared: For who then could take it from them? And they always had a Right to resume it, being unjustly deprived of it. As to the first of these, his debate with Dr. O. about the Peoples Church-Power, and the Government of the Church being Democri…al, I medle not with; we plead for this power in them, not all Church-power. But he cometh, Sect. 25. to this power of Election; for disproving of which, he undertaketh to make out six things: I shall examine them in order. But I think it had been more to the purpose to have answered the Scriptures, and Testimonies out of Antiquity alledged by the opposites, which he hath not done. The First of these is, That the main ground of the Peoples Interest was founded on the Apostles Canon; that a Bishop must be blameless, and of good report, 1 Tim. 3. 2, 7. Ans. I have produced other grounds, and not made this either the main, or any ground of this Right of the People; for indeed that passage of Scripture doth direct the Electors; but doth not determine who should Elect. I deny not but some of the Ancients made use of that Scripture to this purpose, but they made use of others also; and having established the Truth on other Grounds, they might well apply this place as spoken to the People, to direct them how to manage that power of El…ction, that the Lord had given them. This is a sorry Shift to shun the Dint of Arguments, to pitch on that which is either no Argument, or a weak one, and to set up that as the only Argument; and so by beating it down, to Triumph.
Sect. 10. He bringeth a passage out of Clem. on which he taketh a great deal of pains, to make it speak for him contrary to the manifest design of it. The passage is, The Apostles, Preaching through Cities, and Countries, did appoint the first Fruites; having made a Spiritual Tryal of them, to be Bishops, and Deacons.—The Apostles foresaw the Contentions that would be about the Name of Episcopacy (i. e. saith the Dr. about the choice of Bishops) therefore they appointed the Persons mentioned, and left the Distribution of their Office with this Instruction; that as some dyed, other approved Men should be chosen into their Office: These therefore who were appointed by them, or other eminent Men; the Church being therewith all pleased, discharging their Office with Humility—cannot be justly put out of their Office. A Man of less learning than the Dr. might easily draw the quite contrary Conclusion, from these words of Clement; but it will require all his Skill, and more too; to conclude from them against popular Election. But thus he argueth; They were to be appointed by the Apostles; therefore not of the Peoples choice. Ans. Non sequitur: The Deacons were appointed by the Apostles, Act 6. 3. yet the People are to look out from among them, i. e. to chuse; and the Apostles to appoint them, i. e. set them apart for their work. Many other Instances may be given; yet this Argumentation the Dr. useth again, pag. 315. as if it were a mighty Argument. He saith, it seems some of the People were Contentious, and endeavoured to throw out some of their Officers, which occasioned this Ep. Ans. This Ep. is clear, that the People may not cast out their Officers, doing their Work in Humility—but not a Word in it against their Electing of them, but clearly to the contrary; in these words, the whole Church being therewith well pleased, implyeth, that it is not to be done without them; and what Hand they can have in placing their Officers, that doth not amount to Election, I know not. He saith, they took this course of Purpose to avoid Contentions. What course doth he mean? It cannot be meant of Obtruding Officers on the Church; for he saith, they must be well pleased. Therefore the Course must be appointing Officers Authoritatively by Ordination; who being so appointed, could not be ejected again, quemdiu se bene gesserunt, as appeareth by Clem. instancing the Blossoming of Arons Rod, to put an end to the Emulation among the Tribes; which was a Strife not about Election, but about changing of the setled Officers of the Church. He saith, all that the People had to do, was to give their Testimony. Clem. saith, they must be well pleased. And it is clear, that that excludeth obtruding …astors on people, either by Patrons, or the Magistrate, or Bishop. He saith, it seems probable to him, that the reason of the Faction among them was, that some represented it as a Grievance, that those Officers were appointed by others, not chosen by them. Why this should seem to him, I know not; except that prejudice representeth things otherwise than they are; as coloured Spectacles do. It seemeth to me there could be no such thought among the People, because Clement supposeth the Officers to have been chosen by themselves; the whole Church being well pleased. That these Factious Men had no Objection against the Presbyters themselves; the Dr. Asserts, but he doth not prove: It is true, Clem. supposeth there was no Ground for Objection; and therefore they could not be cast out, while they were humble, quiet, ready, and blamless; but for all that, Factious Men will find fault, and pick quarrels, with the most innocent men.
Sect. 11. He next bringeth Cyprian to plead against popular Election; that is, to plead against himself. For he saith, p. 316. That he requireth no more but their Testimony, that it be done, sub populi. Assistentis conscientia; that by their presence, either their Faults might be published, or their good Acts commended, that so it might appear to be a just, and lawful Ordination, which hath been examined by the Suffrages of all: And after Cyprian saith, It came down from Divine Tradition, and Apostolick practice that a Bishop should be chosen, plebe presente (not by the Votes of the people, (says the Doctor.) One would think all this time, the Doctor is secretly undermining his own cause; and yet will out-face plain light to defend it. Doth not Cyprian mention the Suffrages of all, and yet the Doctor maketh him deny them Votes; if their presence, their Testimony, commending or publishing the faults of the Candidate, their knowledge, and assistance, can consist with Patronage, and obtruding of Ministers on the people, as a Master of a Flock setteth a Sheepherd over his Sheep (it is one of Bellarmin's Arguments for the Doctor's Conclusion.) If these do not import the peoples consent to be required; and so amount to Election; let any indifferent Reader judge. It is plain that Cyprian not only alloweth the people this power, but maketh it a Divine Right; and maketh Ordination without it to be unjust, and unlawful: Wherefore if we should adhere to Cyprian's judgment, there would be few Ministers in the Church of England; and so more cause for separation than he is aware of; but I do not improve his Testimony to that end. The Doctor, p. 317. bringeth Cyprians Testimony, That it belongeth chiefly to the people to refuse the bad, and chuse the good; and yet hath the Brow to say, That this is no more then their Testimony; but if Testimony be chusing, we require no more but Testimony; It is nothing to the purpose that Lampridius says Severus, proposed the Names of Governors of Provinces to the people, to see what they had to say against them; and that this will not infer popular Election of these Governors. For 1. This was never declared to be necessary, and appointing Governours unjust or unlawful without it, as it is in our case. 2. We have proved, that the people have power of Suffrage, and of chusing: which was not granted by Severus. That Origen saith a Bishop must be Ordained Astante populo, is such an Argument against us, as sheweth a very weak cause, especially when so Learned a Man thought better to use it then say nothing. For it is Election we speak of, not Ordination; in which we confess, the people have no hand, neither doth Origen say, That this Ordination could proceed without the peoples being more concerned about the person, than standing by while he was Ordained; and yet even this favour is not granted to the people in England, the Bishop will not be at the pains to come to the several Parishes to ordain the Ministers before the people.
Sect. 12. The 2. thing that the Dr. insisteth on is, p. 318. That the people upon this, Assuming the power of Elections, caused great Disturbance, and disorders in the Church. To this I answer in general, 1. I desire to know on what the people assumed the power of Election, whether on Christ's Institution, or any subsequent ground; if the latter let him shew it, if the former, it is improper to say they assumed, what was ever their due: The Doctor seemeth to speak of it as an act of the people, after that priviledge had been out of their hand for some time. 2. There is no Institution of Christ, but inconveniences may follow on it, as long as sinful men have the managing of it: Hath none followed on Church Power in the hands of Bishops, and Presbyters? Yea, of civil power in the hands of Magistrates; yea, of power of Election, in the hands of Patrons. It were easie to fill a Volume with Histories to this purpose: Will the Doctor thence conclude, that all these should be abolished? 3. As few inconveniences can be instanced, as following on the peoples Election of their Pastors, as of most other things. The Doctor instanceth but four in the space of 1000 years, that this power of the people lasted unviolated; and that through all the Christian Churches. I do not deny but more there might be; but when so few occurr as observable to a man of so great reading, it saith more against the Doctors design, than all these Instances say for it. 4. Most of these disturbances fell out by the Ambition of Bishops influencing the people, and leading them into Factions; and were occasioned by the worldly advantage of Episcopacy, in the degenerate State of the Church; and were not to be seen where Bishops kept within due bounds, and were in a mean condition; so that indeed this Consideration is more against Episcopal grandeur, and imparity, than against popular Elections. As is evident from Ammian. Marcellin▪ whom the Doctor citeth, as the Author of that Story of a Bloody Election at Rome, when the Contest was about Damasus, where he sheweth, That they aspired to that Bishoprick with all their might, considering how the Bishop was enriched, Oblationibus Matronarum, rode in Chariots, were Gorgeously attired, fared sumptuously; and saith, They might have shuned these inconveniences, had they despised this grandeur, and imitated the Bishops in the Provinces, whose humble carriage, poor fare, and mean habit, commended them to God and good men. 5. It is worth our Observation, that not one of these Disorders fell out for 300 years after Christ, when the Church was in her Integrity, and had not degenerated, as she did afterward. 6. There is a better means of preventing these disturbances, to wit, the Magistrate ought to suppress them; and the Rulers of the Church ought to regulate Elections, and take away the exercise of that power from the unruly, as they take the Sacraments, though peoples priviledge, from them that walk unworthy of them. When inconveniences fall in, we must take God's way not our own, to set things right again.
Sect. 13. This might suffice for Answer to all, the Doctors Alledgeances on this head; but further there is not so fair a representation made of matters of fact as need were. For the …st. Instance, the Disorder at Antioch, it was not as he representeth it, about the chusing of a new Bishop to a vacant place; but about putting an Arian Bishop (at least supposed to be so) into the place of Eustathius, who had long been peaceably in that place, and regularly chosen; but was injuriously deposed by the Arians. Neither was Eustathius chosen at last (as the Doctor saith) but rid out the Storm; and kept his place against the violent attempts of these Hereticks. And therefore this Instance is wide from the purpose. The next Instance is at Caesarea: The person that carried the Election was Basil, the Magistrates, and the worst of the people opposing him. Of this Nazianzen justly complaineth; and it cannot be justified; but cannot infer, that popular Elections should be taken away. Gregorius Nazianzenus's wish to that purpose, is unduly represented; it was, That the Election might be in the hands of the Clergy, and the more holy part of the people, and that not only, but foreign Chiefly. This doth evince that he looketh on the right of Election to be in them; and only wished, that bad men might be deprived of the use of that priviledge; and so do we, when they abuse it: So it be taken from them orderly. The 3d. Instance is at Alexandria, where Dioseurus was chosen, and Proterius killed. This is a gross mistake, or misrepresentation. It was not at the Election; but long after, yea, Proterius's Murder was 5 or 6 years after; beside, it was done, and the Sedition raised by Hereticks: Shall not the Church chuse her Pastors now, because Papists would oppose it, if they be not curbed? Of the 4th Instance I have already spoken; to wit, that at Rome about Damasus. What he saith of Chrysostom, Jerom, and others, complaining of peoples unfitness to Judge, doth not prove his point: For all these Men were for popular Election, as I have shewed above. Beside, that the Pastor's fitness is to be judged by the Ordainers, after the Electors have done their part.
Sect. 14. His third thing is, p. 320. That to prevent these inconveniences many Bishops were appointed without the choice of the people, and Canons were made for regulation of Elections. For proof of this, he telleth us, that at Alexandria the Bishop was not only to be chosen out of the twelve Presbyters, but by them, and citeth for this Jerome, Ep. ad Enagrium, Severus, and Almacintus, and Hilarius the Deacon. Answ. 1. It is no wo…der the Bishop was chosen out of the Presbyters, and by them; for he was their Moderator, and had no power over the people, more than the rest had; as hath been shewed above: If he can prove that he was chosen to be Pastor of his particular Flock without their consent, that were to the purpose. 2. This can make nothing for Patronages, or the Magistrate obtruding a pastor on the people, or a single Bishop doing it. 3. Jerom…'s words are, Presbyteri unum ex selectum in excelciori gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant; he saith, not unum a selectum: Severus speaketh not a word of the Presbyters …lecting alone: What is said by Hilarius of the altering of the custom, is not who should Elect; but that he might be Elected either from among the Presbyters, or from any place else. What is all this against popular Elections? We find (saith he) Bishops Consecrating others (in the room of the deceased) in several Church…s, without mention of choice made by the people: and mentioneth several instances. A. A negative Testimony in this case signifieth nothing. The Election being the constant practise, might well be supposed, but needed not be mentioned. That Severus of Milevis, and Augustine named, their Successors is no proof, unless he prove that they were obtruded on the People without their consent: No doubt any man, more the Great Augustine, may name a Minister to the People; but this taketh not away the Peoples free consent or choice; which the Dr. doth not deny to have been had in both these Cases. Yea, Augustine himself took it ill, that Severus named his Successor, without acquainting the People, and ther…fore in his own case did acquaintthem.
Sect. 15. What he alledgeth out of the Greek Canonists (whom he doth not name, and so cannot be examined) that the Council of Nice took away the power of Election from the people; is inconsistant with the Epistle of that same Synod above mentioned; and therefore these Canonists are not to be believed: He citeth Concil. Anti…ch; to shew that Bishops were sometimes consecrated without the consent of the People; which that Council doth not approve; but rather alloweth the people to reject such a one; yet they will have him to retain the Honour, and Office. The words are, Si Episcopus ordinatus, ad paraeciam minime cui est electus, accesserit, non suo vitio, sed aut axuia cum populus volet—hic & honoris sic & Ministerii particeps.—This seemeth to shew the Election of the people to be necessary to a Mans officiating as their Past…r; whether it go before Ordination, or follow after it: The same Council, Can. 17. mentioneth the case of a Bishop, consecrated, and neglecting to go to his charge; which the Dr. improve…h to shew, that a Bishop was not always consecrated in his Church. I deny not, that such abuses were committed: The Council doth not approve of such a thing; nor doth it hence follow, that it was ordinary, but rather the contrary; it is pitty to see the Dr. put to such shifts, as to instance Gregorius, being made Bishop of Alexandria before he went thither; seeing this was done by the Arians, and he took possession by military Force, and it was disliked by the rest of the eminent Persons of the Churches. But the main thing that maketh this instance to be inimitable, is, that Anastasius was in the place, and by this means expelled. The next Instance of Basil ordaining Euphronius before the peoples consent, was irregular; but that he behoved to have the peoples consent before he setled there, maketh it wholly impertinent to the thing in hand. Nothing can be less to the purpose, than what followeth, of the peoples pititioning the Metropolitan to Ordain their Bishop; for this supposeth their Election of him; and that the Metropolitan had power to refuse him, is no more then we allow to the Presbytery, who may reject an unqualified person, tho' chos…n by the people. The Dr. is not yet weary of Writing beside the purpose, wh…n he telleth us of a Canon of the Council of Laodicea, that a Bishop chosen by the people, taking possession without the Provincial Synod, was to be turned out: We say the same; because the people may Elect; but the Pastors must Ordain. This doth not shew (as he alledgeth) that the business of Election was in the East, brought into the Bishops power, but only that the peoples Election was not sufficient without the Bishops, and other Pastors Ordination.
Sect. 16. He next citeth Justinians Law; that the Clergy, and better sort of Citizens name three to the Metropolitan; whence the Dr. inferreth, that the common People were excluded from the Election. Ans. 1. Justinians Law cannot make void the Law of God and they that have not given their Names to Erastus, do think that Christ's Laws, which are to be declared by his Church, and not Justinians Laws should take place in the Church of God. 2. It is not said they must present Three; but they might do it; but they might also present two, or but one. 3. It is not said, that the Clergy and better Citizens were to Elect; but they were foreign, that is, to draw up the Decrees, as they were then called, wherein the Election was contained. 4. In another Law of Justini…n, it is appointed that the Election be made by the Inhabitants of the City. And I hope he will not impute Contradictions to Justinian's Laws. He next objecteth Concil. Laodic. can. 13. He doth not cite the Words, and I meet only with the Title in these Words, Deo quod non sit populis concedendum electionent facere eorum quam altaris Ministerio sit applicandi. Ans. If this be meant of excluding the People wholly, it is inconsistent with other Canons above cited, and therefore not to be minded. Therefore the meaning must rather be, that the Election is not to be left to the Rable; but they are to be assisted, and directed in that Action by the Presbyters, and bettersort of the People. The Second Council of Nice, is next cited; but much amiss; for it is Ordination, not Election that is restrained to Bishops, i. e. not to be done without them; and Election is only taken out of the Hand of the Magistrate. That Second Council citeth for Conformation of their Decree, the Fourth Can. of Concil. Nice. 1. Where there is not a Word of Election by Bishops, but only of Ordination. He concludeth with Concil. Constantinop. 2. Can. 28. Carazanze hath it, 22. Whereas the Greek Church owned but Fourteen of these Canons; and the rest are look'd on as a Forgery. Beside, That Council was in the end of the Ninth Century; when the Bishop of Rome had got very high; and therefore less to be regarded.
Sect. 17. The Fourth thing the Dr. considereth, is, p. 323. That the Magistrate, when Christian, did interpose in this, as he judged expedient. Ans. We are not against the Magistrates interposing; to repress Tumults, assist the Oppressed, oppose unpeaceable Persons, &c. But the question is, Whether the Magistrate did take away the Election from the People, and did interpose generally; and when there was no special necessity for his interposing. 2. We deny not but some Mag…strates did interpose against Right, and Reason; but quo jure did they do so. But let us hear his Instances; the first is, Constantine recommended to the Synod, two Men to chuse either of them, or whom they should judge fit, without taking notice of the Interest of the People. Ans. 1. This is far from taking away the Peoples right, to deprive them of the present use of it, on occasion of their dissension. 2. How doth he prove, that no notice was taken of the Peoples Interest: That it is not mentioned, is no proof; it was so universally owned in those days, that it might well be supposed without mention. 3, Yea, the Emperour in his Ep. to the People of Antioch, doth mention it several times, as Eus…bius relateth, for he willeth them not to desire the Bishop of Anti…ch; but to chuse one according to the Custom of the Church, as our Saviour had d…rected them. His next instance is, in a Dissension at Constantinople, about Paulus, and Macedonius. The Emperour Constantius put them both by; and put in Eusebius of Nicomedia. And after his Death, when the Oxthodox party chused Paulus, the Emperour put him out by force, and put in Macedonius. Ans. Such Instances will be little to the Credit of his cause; for all this was done by a persecuting Emperour Constantius, for r…oting out the sound Faith, and planting Arianism; and was complained of by all the Orthodox, as an Encroachment on the Liberties of the Church. What followeth is far short of the point; to wit, the Emperours restoring Athenasius, and several other Bishops, who had been duly Elected and Ordained, and by him thrust from their plac…s. Next, Theodosius would have Nectarius made Bishop of Constantinople, when many of the Bishops opposed it. Ans. This maketh more against Episcopal Ordination, than against Popular Election. But that t…e peoples Election was not here Impedited, is clear from the Synod at Ep. cited above, Sect. 6. where the consent of the whole City is mentioned. Next, Chrysostom was app…inted by the Emperour to Constantinople, without the People, for Palladius doth not mention any consent, but what was subservient to the Emperours determination. Ans. Whether the c…nsent was Antecedent or Subsequent, if it was, it destroyeth his design. Beside, both Socrates and Sozomen do expresly m…ntion the peoples Votes; and Palladius, whom the Dr. in this leaneth to, doth not deny them. Next, he saith, the Emperour would have none of the Clergy of Constantinople chosen to succeed Sinsinnius; therefore Nestorius was brought from Antioch. Ans. It doth not follow that he was not chos…n by the People; and the Emperour laying this restraint on the People, is only, if at all, exc…sable, because he feared disturbance: Such pretences have often given occasion to Oppression. His last instance is, Proctus was made Bishop by the Emperours order, before the Burial of his Successor. Ans. It is not proved that the People did not chuse him, yea, the People had chosen him before Maximanus his predecessor got the place, and he being now dead, he might enter in without the Formality of a new choice. Let the Reader now judge, whether any Orthodox Emperour did ever disown this priviledge of the People, either by declaring that the power was not in them, but in himself, or by interposing ordinarily, or without hazard of the Civil Peace, in the Elections of the Pastors of the Church; wherefore the Dr. in all this hath said nothing, that can conclude against this power of the people.
Sect. 18. His fifth Consideration, p. 325. is, That upon the alteration of the Government of Christendom, there was greater reason for the Magistrates interposing th…n before. I suppose by the alteration of the Government of Christendom; the reverend Author meaneth the breaking of the Roman Empire, and the setting up of many Kingdoms out of it; which fell out in the latter, and very corrupt times of the Church: Himself dateth it from the endowment of Churches, by the liberality of the Northern Princes. Against this I argue, 1. This practice being so long after the Churches purity began to decay; and when Christian Religion was almost destroy'd by the encrease of Apostacies, and when Princes, and Prelates had, as it were divided the spoiles of the Church between them; and robbed the People both of their Rights, and many of the Ordinances of God, as to the purity of them; it hath no weight to conclude against the Peoples right of Election, which they had from Christ, and enjoyed in the purer Ages of the Church, for many Centuries of years. If this reasoning have any force, it will make as much for the Mass, Imagi…s, denying the Cup in the Lords Supper to the People; and many such things, which I hope the Dr. will not argue for; tho' he unwarily sa…th more for them, than w…ld have been expected. 2. He acknowledgeth, p. 325. That this was obtained by Princes by degrees, and indeed it was very late before it became common; and the Power was wholly wrested out of the peoples Hands. He confesseth that this way was not always observed in the days of Clo…harius in France (which of them he mea…e…h, I know not; there were three of that Name; the first of them was about the Year 560. the last a hundred years after) now if the Infancy of this usage was so late, and it grew by degrees; the adult State of it must be (as indeed it is) a very Novel device of men to subject Religion to their Lusts.
Sect. 19. 3. I deny that on that alteration of Government in the State, there was either greater reason than before, or any reason, for Princes to interpose so in the Election of the Pastors of the Church, as to take it out of the peoples Hand. That there was no greater reason then before I prove, both because he cannot shew us such reason; and also because before this, there were Tumults, and Confusions, which might require the Magistrates interposition; and also because the Christian Emperours had as much power over the Church in their large Dominions, as Christian Kings could pretend to in their lesser Kingdoms. No difference in this can be assigned, either from any grant of Christ to the one, more then to the other; nor from sound reason. That which the Dr. bringeth for a Reason, is none at all; to wit, The Northern Princes endowing Churches liberally: For, 1. Did not the Emperours so too. Co…stantin's liberality was exce…ding great, which occasioned that saying, hodie veninum infusum est in Ecclesiam, and yet he laid not out that Treasure to purchase the Rights that Christ had given to his People. 2. The Liberality was no sufficient price to purchase Gospel Priviledges, from them that Christ had granted them to, more than Jacobs Pottages was for Es…us's Birth-right. It is a Conceit unworthy of a Divine, and only fit for Simon Magus; that the Liberality of Princes, or others, to the Church, can entitle them to be Masters of her priviledges. As there is no more reason now then before, so there neither was, nor is any reason at all, why Magistra…es should m…dle with the Election of Church Officers; because it is the peoples right, by Christ's Institution, and hath been owned by the Church, and the Magistrate for many Ages, as hath been shewed above.
Sect. 20. The Dr. saith, that after the solemn Assemblies of the people came to be much used, these priviledges (in Election of Church-men) of Princes came not only to be Confirmed by the consent of the people; but to be enlarged. This he insisteth much upon af…erward; alledging that the people of England, by their representatives in Parliament, have given away their power of Elec…ion, and put it into the Hand of the Magistrates, Bishops, and other Patrons. A s. 1. I deny that the people could give away this right; it was Christ's Legacy to them, and not alienable by them. It doth concern their Souls, not their temporal Estates, and such concerns are not at Mens disposal. 2. I deny that this was done; people never gave away this Right; it was partly by violence, and partly by Fraud, wrested out of their Hands; what he saith of the Parliaments giving it away, wherein the People are represented; is a mistake; for the people are represented in Parliament, as they are Members of the Body Politick; and they instrust all their worldly Interests, and Lives, and Estates, to them whom they chuse; and they may dispose of these, by making Laws to secure them; and also to take them away when the publick good doth so require; but they are not there represented, as they are Members of the Church; neither do they, or can they, entrust the Parliament with the concerns of their Souls, or the Church Rights, and Priviledges: These Christ hath made Laws about, and no Man can make Laws about them; all that men can do in reference to these is Ministerial, not Magisterial, as Acts of Parliament are; it is to declare Christ's Laws, and to put them in Execution; and Christ hath not entrusted Kings, nor Parliaments with these Affairs, but only his Ministers; and the people can entrust no other with them. The foreign in this discourse of the Dr's, on which all of it is built, is his confounding of Church, and State, with Erastus; which is to mingle Heaven and Earth.
Sect. 21. He saith, The Princes obtained by degrees, not only the Con…irmation of the Election, b…t the Liberty of Nomination, with a shadow of Election by the Cl…rgy, and others of the Court, as appears by the formula of Marculphus. Answ. Here is plain dealing, both to let us see what fra…dulent ways were used to cheat the people of their Right, by leaving a Shadow of Election, when the substance was taken away; and also that Princes were not in ancient possession of this Priviledge, that they behoved by such Policies, to wind themselves into: And further, that it is so grosly evil, that Princes are ashamed openly to own such a Power over the Church; but must thus hide the shame of this practice; if they have a good Title, why leave they a shadow of Election? If not, why do they assume the substance of it? He ci…eth on the Margin, in Confirmation of this grant made to Kings; several Acts of Cou…cils, as Concil. Aurelian. An. 549. but this destroyeth his cause, for Can. 3. (which I suppose is that he aimeth at) d…th barely name the King (whose interest in all Church matters no man denyeth, so far as the peace of the State is concerned in t…em,) but expresly requireth the Election of the Clergy, and People; and again their consent, and moreover maketh this Election a clero & plebe, to be as it is written in the Antient Canons, Concil. Aurelan. 2. Can. 7. doth also expresly mention popular E…ection, and Concil Aurel…an. 3. Can. 2. doth require their consent. And Concil. Aurelian. 4. Can. 4. requireth a Bishop to be ord…ined in his Church, to which he was Elected decreto: that was the ordinary Term for the Writing, wherein the peoples Election was con…ained. And in all these Canons, there is not one word of the Magistrate, except in the first, as abovesaid. His Concil. Tarraco…. I cannot find, Concil. Tolet. 12. that he citeth, was in the end of the seventh Century; when Corruptions were come to a great height, and it was but provincial, it saith indeed, quoscunque p…testas regia …l…gerit; but the peoples Election is not exluded, tho not mentioned; and there is an express salvo (it is the 6th. Can.) for the liberty of the Provinces, which cannot well be understood, but of the priviledge of the people of the Province.
Sect. 22. He telleth us of great Contests, between the Papal, and Regal power; and how the latter prevailed in England, and citeth several Acts of Parliament; as of Edward 6th. and others. A…sw. What doth all this prove? If two contend about a Third Persons Estate, and the one prevail against the other, do…h that give him a Title? We deny that either Pope or Prince had a right to that they strove about; and neither possession, …or Acts of Parliament can take that right that Christ hath given to h…s people, and b…stow it on another. His Allegation that the peoples consent is swallowed up in the Parliaments Act, is answered above. That this right hath been owned in the King from the first planting of Christianity in England, is said with more confidence, than any semblance of Truth, or shadow of Reason: That Edward 3d asserted it in an Ep. to Clement will not prove it; men use big words, sometimes instead of strong Arguments; and I believe that his Ass…rtion was so far true, that from the beginning of Christianity he…e, the Pope had not that power which he had claimed, and which the King was debating with him.
Sect. 23. He saith, p. 326. That the right of inferior Patronage is justly thought to bear equal da…e with the first settlement of Christianity in peace, and quietness. A bold Assertion: It must then have begun in the days of Constantine the Great. His proof of this is, Presbyters were setled in Country Cures, what then? In the First Council of Orange, express mention is made of Patronage, and it is reserved to the first Founders of the Churches: If a Bishop (saith the Dr.) built a Church on his own Land, in another Bishop's Diocess, yet the right of presenting the Clerk was reserved. When first I read this, I could think of no other Answer, but that this was far from what was to be proved. Christianity was setled in peace long bef…re this time; for I doubted not of the Truth of a Citation, made by a Man of so much Learning, Reading, and Integrity; but I now find it is fit we should see with our own Eyes; for in that Cano… (it is the 9th. the Dr▪ calleth it the 10th.) there is no mention, expresly, nor implicite, of Patronage, nor presenting of a Clerk; only this Favour is reserved to the Builder of the Church, ut quos desiderat in re sua videre, ipsos ordinetis, in cujus civitatis terri orio est, vel si ordinati jam sint, ipsos habere acquiescat. It is evident that no contest between the People and the Bishop is here determined, who should chuse the Clerk; but between the Bishop that builded the Church, and him in whose Di…cess it is built. The Builder of the Church is to have his desire, as to the Officers of the Church; and not the Bishop in whose Diocess it is; but it may be rationally thought that the Bishop's desire was not to cross Christ's Institution, nor t…e ancient Canons, in depriving the people of the Election. Such a desire this Counc…l could not grant him; nor is it rational to suppose, that they granted it. But it might be supposed, that t…e Builder of the Church might more influence the People (they being his own Vassals, or Tena…ts (as we now speak) then the other Bishop, in whose Diocess the Church was; and therefore the one is here decreed to have his desire, rather than the other. He saith this was confirmed by Concil. Arelat. 2. c. 36. it is (mihi) Can. 35. Now let any judge, whether this Canon doth affirm any such th…ng, or rather doth not speak plainly for popu…ar Election: The words of it are, placuit, in ord…natione Episcopi hunc ordinem custodiri; ut primo loco, ven…litate, vel ambitione, su…inata, ad Episcopis nec nominentur; de quibus Clerici vel Lai…i Cives erga unum eligendi haebe…nt potestate. The Relative de quibus, is not Diacritick, as if some might be named by the Bishops (which is the only ground on which this Canon could be drawn into the Dr's design) for here Bishops, (not a Bishop) are m…n…ioned; and the choice is of a Bish…p; not a Presbyter, of whom a Bishop might be a Pa…ron; the Relative is then to be understood, Vnivers…lit…r, that the Clergy and L…ity have the power of chu…ing their Bishop, and theref…re the rest of the Bishops must not name him.
Sect. 26. He bringeth next the Constitutions of the Emperours Zeno, and Jusiinian. I have above answered to this; they were out of their Line, when they medled in these matters. The Citati…ns t…emselves I cannot examine; not having the Books; but if they be like what goeth before, it is little matter. He sai…h, this was setl…d also in the West…rn Church, as appeareth by the 9th. Council of …oledo. Ans. 1. This Council was held, An. 650. saith the Dr. 656. saith Alstedius; this was in a time, when Corruptions in the Church were come to a great height. 2. In this Provincial Council were bu… …xteen Bishops: With what face then can it be said, that what they did was brought into the Western Church? This it is to speak big words, instead of using strong Arguments. 3. The 1st. …anon impowere…h the Heirs of Founders of Churches to prevent Dilapidations in those Churches. The Second impowereth the Founder himself (quum diu in h…c vita supe…stes extiterit) during Life, to have a care of these places, and to offer fit Rectors to …erve in them. Where it is to be noted, 1. That the Founder might be p…esumed to be a good Man, by his liberality; and theremore trust might be reposed in him, as to this matter, but his Heirs who m…ght be profane, Hereticks, or Atheists, are not intrusted with a con…ern of that nature, as it is with us: Where Papists must chuse a Minister for Protestants, or an Atheist or Drunkard, &c. 2. It is not said, that the people shall not chuse, nor must consent, but he was to offer a Pastor, which might well consist with the Peoples Election. All that followeth is nothing but a raking into the Dunghil of the latter Corruptions of the Church, to confirm this right of patronage, I therefore wave it.
Sect. 27. He is now arrived at his last consideration, p. 328. Things being thus setled by general consent, and established by Laws, there is no ground for the people to resum the liberty of Elections. I hope the weight of this is already taken of in the judgment of the unbyassed Reader; that there never was such general consent, nor Laws, till the Church was quite corrupted, and that these, if they had been, could not take away the peoples right of Election; and therefore they are to own i… still. He giveth three reasons for this Assertion. 1. It was not unalterable. That is deny'd. 2. No inconvenience can be alledged against the setled way of disposing of Livings, but may be remedied by L…w, easier than those which will follow on popular El… ctions in a divided Nation. Ans. 1. It is not only inconveniences that we object, but crossing of Christ's Institution. 2. The Doctor hath nothing in his eye but Livi…gs; it is the Pastoral Relation that we mind, and the con…ern of Souls in it: we desire to know who put the power of disposing of these into the hand… of Pa…rons. 3. We deny his Asser…ion; for though the Law will restrain a Popish Patron from presenting a Popish Priest that is ope…ly so, yet he may present a Protestant in Masquerade, or one of the meanest of men for parts, and other qualities of a Minister, which it is known they often do; when yet the Law of the Land can ha…dly re…ch the Man. And a Debauched Patron may present one who will not reprove him too severely, who yet may have qualifications to satisfie the Law. But the dissen…ions that arise among a divided people, may be remedied by Church D…scipline; or if they break out into external disorders by the Magistrate. 3. B…cause (saith he) other reformed Churches have thought this an unreasonable prete…ce. Answ. Mens Authority must not preponderate with us, against that of Christ. He proveth what he saith, 1. By Beza declaiming against popular Election. see this in B…z. Ep. 83. Answ. Beza speaketh only against Election by the people, without their Church-guides to manage them in that action. The Lutheran Churches that he next addeth, are no Examples to us. Their way is much applauded by the Church of England men, much more then the way of Engl…nd is by them: For as Pezel. mel…fic. …ist. part 3. p. 345. observeth, none did more fiercely persecute the Exiles in Qu. Mary's days, than they did in Denmark, Lubeck, Rostoch, and especially at Hamburgh. The Salvo of the Synod of Dort shew…th, that they did not allow Patronages, but must proceed warily in removing them; which hath been the case of other Churches, but maketh against the Doct…r's opinion, not fo… it. That the Ministers in France, or the Council of State at Gen…va, chuse Ministers and obtrude them on the people without their consent, we deny.
Sect. 28. I have by what is said, preoccupied most of the Doctor's Reasons against Mr. B. contained Sect. 26. I shall only take notice of a few things. We make void no Laws about Patronage, but so far as they respect the peoples right of chusing a pastor for their Souls; and thus far they are cassate by the Laws of …hrist: As to Temple and Tythes (as he speaks we medle not with Laws about them; only we wish the removing of them, as a Gri…vance; and that Rulers would provide for the Church in a way that the peoples right of El…ction might not be hindered, nor restrained in its Exercise. Mr. B. objecteth. p. 330. That the Patron by giving a right to Temple and Tythes, doth not make the man a Minister to that people… Souls, and the Parliament cannot dispose of peoples Souls. The Doctor instead of an Answer, giveth the meaning of this, that if the people be humersome and factious, they may run after whom they please in opposition to Laws. This is ad populum f…l…ras, but no fair way of Arguing. The true meaning is, that though the Pa…non by Law, may give a man a title to the Temple and Tythes, and the people can neither keep him out of the Church, nor deny to pay his dues; yet the Law cannot make him their Pastor without their consent. I do not say, they should run after another; it is fit they should consent to a tolerable person, so imposed on them, for peace sake; yet it is not the Law, but their consent that maketh him their Minister: That Anabaptists, Quak…rs, and Papists will put in for a share in this priviledge, is but a m…an objection; for Christ hath given people power to chuse sound Pastors, not whom they will. The Doctor asketh, Whether all must have equal Votes? then the worst, who are the most part will chuse one like themselves. Answ. This is to be regulated by the Guides of the Church, the worst are to be instructed; yea, and censured, if need be, and if they chuse a bad man, the Pastors are not to ordain him. He alledgeth, few are competent Judges. Answ. Many can judge tolerably, and they who cannot, are to be guided by others: but the matter is not wholly left to their judgment, the Elected man being to be tryed by the Eldership. He enlargeth on the tumul…s, and strifs in popular Elections: This hath been abundantly answered above. That the matter is devolved, on a few, doth not take away the right of others, who are willing to be advised by these few. The Doctor is as certain that Christ never gave people such an unalterable right, as he is, that he designed Peace and Unity in the Church. This certainty is built on no good grounds, and therefore amounteth to no more but fancy. I have shewed ground for a contrary perswasion, and a way that Christ hath laid down for peace consistent with this right.