Five Disputations of Church Government, Chapter 10 – Chapter 11
CHAP. X. Prop. 10. If it be not our Lawfull Governours that command us, but usurpers, we are not formally bound to obey them, though the things be lawfull which they command.
§. 1. WE may be bound by some other Obligation perhaps, to do the thing which they command us, but we are not formally (though sometime Materially) bound to obey them: For it is not formally obedience unless it be done eo nomine because commanded, or for the Authority of the Commander. If the Pope or any usurper should command me to pray or to give alms, I will do it, but not because he commandeth me, but because God commandeth me: and therefore I will not obey him but God: But if a Parent or Magistrate or Pastor command it me, I will do it both because it is commanded me, by God and them, and so I will obey both God and them. If an usurper command me to do a thing in it self indifferent, I will not do it because he commandeth it: but yet if accidentally it become my duty, by conducing to anothers good, or avoiding their offence or hurt, or any other accident, I will use it for these ends, though not for his command.
§. 2. The Pope 1. As the Vice-christ or universall Head, is an usurper; and therefore hath no authority to command me or any man (in that relation) the smallest Ceremony. 2. The Pope as Patriarch of the West, is an humane creature, and not of Divine institution, and was indeed a sinfull institution from the first of his creation; but if it had been otherwise, yet since is that Patriarchship become unwarrantable, since he hath forfeited it, and the world hath found the mischiefs of it. So that no man is therefore bound to use one lawfull Ceremony because the Pope as Patriarch of the West commandeth it. 3. If this were not so, yet Brittain and Ireland were from the beginning none of his Patriarchate, nor did at Nice consent to it: and therefore have the less appearance of any obligation.
§. 3. The Authority of General Councils cannot be pretended as obliging men in Conscience to the English Ceremonies. 1. Because indeed General Councils are not a superiour Power for proper Government of the Church having authority to command particular Bishops, or Synods, as their subjects; but they are only necessary for Union and Communion of Churches and mutual assistance thereby: and so their Canons bind but by virtue of the General commands that require us to maintain the Unity and Communion of the Churches.
§. 4. And 2. If it were otherwise, there is few, if any of these Ceremonies that are commanded by any true General Council. They that can prove any such thing, let them do it: but till we see it, we will not be forward to believe it. Yea 3. Some of them, General Councils have made Canons against; as I before shewed in the Case of Kneeling at the Sacrament on the Lords dayes. And therefore the neglecters of our Ceremonies sin not against a General Council.
§. 5. The Common plea is, that we are bound to use these Ceremonies in obedience to the Church of England; and that we are not true sons of this Church if we refuse it. But what is it that is called by them [The Church of England] In a Political sense, I know no such thing as a Church of England, or of any Nation on earth; that is, There is no one Society united in any one Ecclesiastical Soveraign, that can truly be called [the Church of England] or of any other Nation. The whole Catholick Church is One, as united in Christ the Head: And every particular Chu…ch, associated for personal Communion in Gods Worsh…p, is one; being a part of the Catholick Church, and united in, and individuated by their relation to their several Pastors. But a National Church under one chief Ecclesiastick Government, I find no mention of in Scripture; but contrarily, [the Churches of Judaea, Galatia, &c.] or any other Countrey where there were many, are alway mentioned in the Plural number; and never called one Church.
§. 6. Yet will we quarrel with no men about meer names or words. If by [a National Church … be meant any of these following, we acknowledge that there is such a thing. 1. If all the particular Churches in a Nation do Associate, for Communion and mutuall assistance, and so use to meet by their officers in one National Assembly; I confess the Association usefull, if not necessary, and the Assemblies to be maintained, and for unity sake obeyed in things lawfull: And though Scripture call not such National Associations by the name of [a Church] in the singular number, yet we shall leave men to their Liberty in such names. If all the Schoolmasters in England should hold General Assemblies, to agree what Books to read in their Schools, &c. if any man would therefore call all the Schools in England in the singular number, by the name of [the School of England,] I would not differ with him for a word. 2. Or … the Churches are all called One that are under one Christian Magistrate, I will confess the thing to be true that is pretended to be the reason of the name: All the Churches do owe obedience to the Magistrate. But he is no Essential part or Ecclesiastical Head of the Church: and therefore it is very improperly denominated from him; or called [One] on that account: No more then all the Schools are one because he is their Soveraign. It is the Common-wealth that is specified and individuated by the Magistrate as the Soveraign Power; and not the Churches. But yet it is but an improper word, to call all the Churches one Church on that account, which we contend not about.
§. 7. But it is the Thing that we stick more at then the name. A General Head doth properly specifie and individuate the Body. Prove either, 1. That the Archbishop of Canterbury or any other. 2. Or an Assembly of Bishops or Presbyters, is properly an Ecclesiastical Head, having Authority from Jesus Christ to be the chief Ruler of all the Churches in the Land and then I will confess that we have properly and strictly a National Church. But no such thing can be proved.
§. 8 As for an Assembly, I have already shewed (which Bishop Vsher asserted to me) that they are not superior Governors, nor instituted gra…ia Regiminis, but gratia unitatis; having no more Rule over particular Bishops, then a Convention of Schoolmasters over a particular Schoolmaster. If they say that Kings and Parliaments give Power to Convocations, I answer, that can be but such as they have themselves: which we shall speak of anon, and is nothing to this place.
§. 9. And as for a Primate or Archbishop (of Canterbury, e. g.) 1. It will be a hard task to prove Archbishops, as such, to be of Divine Institution. 2. And it will be harder, even Impossible, to prove Archbishops of the English species, as such, to be of Divine institution. 3. And certainly Christ hath nowhere told us, that every Nation shall have such a Head, nor every Province, nor every County: nor told us whether there shall be one over ten Nations, or ten over one: Their limits are not to be found in Scripture (supposing there were such an office there known.) 4. Nor is it anywhere determined, that such a City shall have the preheminence, and Canterbury, v. g. be Ruler of all the rest. All these are of meer humane institution: And therefore that which the imposers of Ceremonies call [the Church of England] is a meer humane thing, which therefore can bind us no further then the Magistrate can authorize them to do.
§. 10. But the stronger pretence will be, that the particular Bishops of England were severally officers of Christ, authorized to Govern their several flocks, and therefore a Conv…cation of these Bishops binds us in conscience gratia unitatis. The People they oblige as their Rulers: and the several Presbyters also as their Rulers, and the several Bishops, gratia unitatis, for avoiding of schism.
§. 11. Answ. This also is an insufficient evidence to prove our Consciences obliged to their Ceremonies, eo nomine, because of their Canons or commands. For though we acknowledge a sort of Episcopacy to be warrantable, yet that this sort that made the Canons in question, is not warrantable, I have proved at large in the former Disputation on that question. Such Pastors of a Diocess as our Bishops were, have no word of God to shew for their office (further then as they are Presbyters,) but we have shewed already, that their office is unlawfull. And therefore though their actions as Presbyters may be valid, yet their actions are Null which were done by pretence of this unlawfull sort of office, (they being no other way enabled thereto.) On this ground therefore we are not bound.
§. 12. If it could be pretended that at least as Presbyters the Convocation represented the Presbyters of England, and therefore thus their Canons binds us to the use of ceremonies, Common prayer, &c. I should answer, that 1. Even Synods of Presbyters or the Lawfullest sort of Bishops, oblige but gratia unitatis. 2. That the late Synod at Westminster was as truly a Representative of the Presbyters of England, as the Convcaotion; where such consent, if any were given, was retracted. 3. By actuall dislike signified by disuse, the Presbyters of England, for the most part, have retracted their Consent. 4. Yea most that are now Ministers never gave such Consent. 5. Even …ll particular Pastors and Churches are free, and may on just reason deny consent to such impositions.
§. 13. There remains nothing then, that with any shew of strength can be pretended, as continuing our obligation to Ceremonies, from Authority, but that of the Civil Power that commanded them. But to that I say, 1. So much as was lawfull, we confess that we were bound to use, while we had the command of the Civil power: But nothing unlawfull could be made our duty by them. 2. the Civil Power hath repealed those laws that bound us to these ceremonies. The Parliament repealed them: the late King consented, at least, for the ease of tender Consciences (as he spoke) that men should have liberty to forbear them. And the present Rulers are against them▪ whom we see even the ceremoniou… obey in other matters.
§. 14. Let those then that would subjugate our Consciences to their ceremonies, make good their foundation, even the Authority by which they suppose us to be obliged, or they do nothing: If all their impositions were proved things indifferent and lawfull, thats nothing to prove that we must use them, till they prove that lawfull authority commandeth them. The Civil Powers do not command them: And the Ecclesiasticks that command them, prove not their authority over us. In the matters of God, we will yield to any man that bids us do that which God hath bidden us do already: But if they will exercise their power by commanding us more then God commands us, and that unnecessarily, we must crave a sight of their commission.
§. 15. And if men that have no Authority over us, shall pretend Authority from God, and go about to exercise it by Ceremonious impositions, we have the more reason to scruple obeying them, even in things indifferent, lest we be guilty of establishing their usurpation, and pretended office in the Church, and so draw on more evils then we foresee, or can remove.
CHAP. XI. Prop. 11. The Commands of Lawfull Governors about Lawfull Ceremonies, must be understood and obeyed with such exceptions as do secure the End; and not to the subverting of it.
§. 1. THE proof of this is obvious. These humane Ceremonies are appointed but as means to a further end. But that which would cross and overthrow the end, doth cease to be a Means; and cannot be used sub ratione medii.
§. 2. Order, and Decency are the pretended ends of the Imposed Ceremonies; and the right worshiping of God, and the good of mens souls are said to be the greater and remoter ends, …nd the glory of God the ultimate end. If then I have good assurance that I cannot use such or such a ceremony but it will prove the subversion of Order, or Edification, (though it should be by accident, through the infirmity of men,) I know no reason I have to use them, when such a mischief would follow, unless they can shew me some greater good that also will follow, which may recompence it.
§. 3. Therefore the commanding of unnecessary ceremonies, on such Penalty, as was done in England, and Scotland, to the silencing of the Preac…rs, and dissipating of the flocks, and casting out that worship, or hindring that Edification that was pretended to be their end, was preposterous both in the commanders and obeyers; and proved not convenient means to the ends pretended.
§. 4. If I be enjoyned by the Magistrates (whom I mention as of more undoubted authority then our Bishops,) to read such and such chapters, and preach on such and such texts through the year; I am in reason to interpret their commands with this exception [when it doth not apparently cross the main end.] So that if in my course I should be commanded to read and preach of an aliene subject, when my hearers are running into schism, sedition, heresie, &c. I will suppose that if the Magistrate were present, he would allow me to read or preach according to the matter of present necessity. And if I were commanded to read the Common prayer in a Surplice and other formalities, I hope if the Church were all in an uproar, and the stools flying about my ears, as the women at Edinburgh used the Bishop, I might think it would not tend in that Congregation to order or Edification, to use such Ceremonies. Were they things of Gods institution, they would not edifie the people till they were prepared to receive them; and therefore that preparation should go first.
§. 5. Indeed it is the Pastors office to be the guide of his flock in the worship of God, and therefore to judge pro re nata, what subject to speak on to them, and what circumstances to choose, that may be most suitable to time, and place, and persons, to promote his ends, even the good of souls: And therefore no Magistrates should take the work or power of Pastors from them; though they may oversee them in the use of it.