A DISCOURSE OF THE FORBEARANCE OR THE PENALTIES Which a Due REFORMATION REQUIRES.  
BY H. THORNDIKE, One of the prebend's of Westminster Church.  
LONDON, Printed by J. M. for James Collins, at the Kings-Head in Westminster-Hall, 1670.   

THE PREFACE.  
ARistotle and Experience teacheth us, that no Positive Law can provide for all the Cases, that may arise upon the Terms of it. Religion indeed, in General, is a Moral Virtue; But the true Religion, that bringeth Salvation, is a Positive Constitution of God's Grace, requiring the Condition of Christianity, to qualify for the Promise of life everlasting. But upon several Terms, heretofore, under the Law of Nature and Moses, and now, under the Christian Faith. The Church of Christ, in all Ages, hath been constrained, to provide new Decrees, and seek new Laws, for the quenching of new Heresies and Schisms. They that ever hoped to do that, by an Act of Comprehension, which the Act of Uniformity hath not done, would have proved themselves deceitful Workers; They would have made many Breaches, by stopping of One. That which I am able to propound, I confess, is rather possible than probable. For, were it so far advanced, as to be enacted for a Law of the Kingdom; I should never believe, that it would take effect; unless the Faith and the Laws of the Catholic Church might be received, to give Bounds to all emergent Disputes. No more than I can believe, that the Reformation will ever prevail, after one Breach in Germany, after another since in the United Provinces, and these last here amongst us; unless we unite ourselves upon the same Principle. Whether I have said enough to prove it well grounded, or not, I must refer that to Judgement. But he that excuses me not, in such an innocent Proposition as this; How would he have Almighty God to excuse me, if, having attained this Resolution, I should not declare the Consequence of it, in our present Case? Especially, considering the Duty, which the Law of the Land, justly and necessarily imposes upon all of my Order; to Reduce Recusants to Church. For, there are now two sorts of Recusants: And those that are bound to reduce them, must do it upon such Reasons, that by reducing the one sort, they drive not the other sort from Church. Let them that have more skill than I show, how it can be done, without employing my Principle. I, that am resolved, it can by no other means be done, must declare my Resolution, though I were to suffer for it; Which, from a Christian Kingdom, I cannot do. One thing I have adventured, upon my own Head; Granting, that the Government of the Church was Regular, till after the sixth General Council: And so, that the the Acts of the Church before that time, are effects of it. But that is not to say, that the Corruption of the Church, which we Protest against, and Reform, began not till that time. Religion began to be corrupted earlier in some, and later in other Points. But this Corruption had not the force of Law, till after that time: And especially, till the Usurpation of the See of Rome. It is enough, that there is difference Visible, in any Point, between that which was from the beginning, according to the Scriptures, and that which was, when the Reformation was attempted. That which can be made out hereof, will serve to cramp both sorts of Recusants: That which cannot, should be no cause of difference. He that reduces the sense of the Scripture, within the Faith and the Laws of the whole Church, warrants the Penalties of Recusants. Let the Laws do their Office, and make it a Disgrace, to be out of the Church; And then we may expect, to see the Blessing of God, upon his own Ordinance. But without restoring Discipline, without Canons and Laws to restore it, without the Office of the Synods, in providing those Canons, let no man think, that temporal Penalties will serve to do the business. For, though there can be no reason sufficient, for violating the Unity of the Church; yet, if the dissatisfaction that hath caused it, resolve into a defect of the Laws, it can no more be ended, without redressing the Laws, than a Disease can be cured, without taking away the Cause of it.   

Errata.  
PAg. 10. lin. 13. r. Prophecies sent, since the Ground o Salvation was declared, is— p. 17. l. 5. the Church, read this Church, p. 20. l. 27. the Article of this Church, r. the Law of this Kingdom, p. 22. l. 3. Christians, r. Christian, p. 25. l. 27. decay, r. decays, p. 36. l. 1. or to be believed to, r. to be believed or to, p. 42. l. 29. Laws, r. Law. p. 63. l. 20. the best, r. their best, p. 99 l. 28. Churches, r. Church, p. 109. l. 28. making, r. and making, p. 113. l. 5. Christ's, r. Christ, p. 121. l. 12. which, r. of whom, p. 125. l. 21. to come to, r. come to, p. 151. l. 17. Idolaters, r. Idolatry, p, 153. l. 18. Invocations, r. Invocation, p. 263. l. 16. these, r. those.   

OF THE FORBEARANCE OR PENALTIES Which a due Reformation requires.  

CHAP. I. The Case, in which forbearance is pretended for weak Consciences.  
IT is a long time, that the forbearance due to tender Consciences hath been alleged, for the means to restore Unity in this Church. And certainly, were the Case stated, in which S. Paul prescribed it to the Church of Rome, that so it might be drawn into Consequence in our Case; the Scripture must needs produce that which would be of advantage for Peace, without prejudice to Truth. But, when the bare Phrase of Scripture is tossed up and down, in the discourse of them that care not to understand, either the Reason upon which it is grounded, or the Effect to which it sorteth; no marvel to see the decay of Religion proceed from the abuse of the Scripture. We need not the Heresies of the Primitive Times; even the abominable Villainies of the Gnostics; to tell us, what irreligious pretences may be set forth in Scripture Phrase. Our own fanatics would furnish sport enough, with the fooleries which they pretend, as from God's Spirit, because they can deliver their nonsense in the Phrase of Scripture; could such irreligious madness move any thing, but the compassion and lamentation of Christians. It is enough for my purpose, that, unless the Precept of the Apostle be limited to that consequence, which the reason of the Case will produce; the two-edged Sword of the holy Scripture may prove an edge tool, to cut their shins with, who take upon them, and have not the skill to handle it. For the state of the Case, to which S. Paul speaks, I will say no more at present, but this; That he prescribeth only to the Church of Rome, at that time, when the care was, not to lose the Jews, by winning the Gentiles to be Christians. There could then be no question, of establishing a National Church, by the Law of a Kingdom; which Church, and which Kingdom shall; by that Law, reform that which it protesteth to have been decayed, and depraved, in the Faith and Laws of the then present Church. We have a Reformation established by certain Laws of the Kingdom; which, all men know, how great a part of the Kingdom declineth, because the See of Rome disclaimeth it. And therefore the question is, what that Law should be, that may oblige Recusants, to the Reformation which we profess. For, division in Religion can never so deprave men's senses, as to punish them for refusing that, which they are not obliged to embrace. And yet, who would have the Kingdom to establish that Reformation, which they would not have it enact by competent Penalties? Now, such is our Case, that, since the afflictions, which this Nation hath been visited with, have revived the humour of departing into Conventicles, Independents and fanatics decline Communion with this Church, as much as Recusants; And, if we will speak properly, to be understood according to the Laws, we must distinguish them, by the addition of Popish or Fanatic Recusants. Whereupon the question arises, what Penalties are competent to the one & to the other; whether the same or divers. For, as there can be no Law, if there can be no Penalties to enact it with; So, there can be no Penalty, unless the Legislative Power be Judge of the Cause, why the Parties decline the Law; and may secure them in Conscience, that they ought not to decline it. Can any Christian Power punish the disobeying of that Law, concerning which, it cannot secure the Consciences of them that obey? But there is a further difficulty in our Case, in regard of the Presbyterians; Who, whatsoever they may do, or may have done, since the time of disorder, have always pretended to the service of the Church; so far from disclaiming Communion with it. For, grant they do usurp the liberty of Conventicles, to hold their People at the more distance, from being reduced to Law; their pretence is not, to be obnoxious to the Law, for violating it, but to make the Law obnoxious to themselves, by reforming it. Suppose we them then, comprehended with the Clergy, (whose Authority is included in the present Laws) in the same Privilege, of ministering in and to the Church; Our Case is not stated, till we consider that, which all Pulpits ring of, that no Religion stands to be the Religion of the Kingdom. The Case was like to come to this, when Cromwell first usurped. For than it began to appear, that this would be the fruit of his Course, in maintaining all Parties in the Religions, which the licentiousness of the War had allowed them to exercise. The Laws having recovered possession, and the dispute remaining, by what Penalties to be exercised, whether any or none, whether those that are, or what others; I need not say, that there is any Profession of Atheism; (which could never be professed among the very Gentiles) This I say, that, whosoever favours it, will necessarily shelter himself under the Law, professing that which it maintaineth. And therefore, that it is to come into the state of our Case, in which, Forbearance is demanded for tender Consciences; how it is to be limited; That those who have No Religion, if any such should be, may not have the Benefit of it. So, the question now in hand is of the same consequence, as if it were demanded, upon what terms the Reformation of the Church is to be stated. For whatsoever comes to debate, the question will always be, how far we ought to departed from the Church of Rome. The other part of the question; What Penalties the Reformation, duly stated, may or is to be enacted with; will depend upon this, for the greater part of it. For, what can render the subject of this Kingdom liable to Penalty, for not obeying the Law which our Reformation is established with; but, that he is first bound in conscience to embrace the Reformation, and to do the duty of a Christian according to it? Only what Penalties, and how great, or or how grievous, it is to be, or may be enacted with; This will further require the reason, which makes it the duty of Christian States, to join in Reforming the Church.   

CHAP. II. That a private Person may be obliged to declare in it.  
THis is that which obliges a private person, as I am, to declare his Opinion, when so great a concernment of his Conscience is at stake. For, who could ever think the Reformation could stand, were not the Clergy obliged, as the Law obliges them, every one in his place, to reduce Recusants to the Church? Or, how should they either do this, or stand obliged to do it, if the Reason, upon which the Reformation, and the Law by which it is stated proceeds, enable them not to convince them, that they are bound in Conscience to embrace it? These hundred years hath the dispute been on foot. Very nigh so long it is, since the Bull of Pius V acquitted the Subjects of the Kingdom, of their Allegiance to Q. Elizabeth. The Government being then jealous of that Party; those that had appeared before in the Troubles of Francford, to challenge a share in the Government of the Church, thought this the time to set their pretensions on foot. It is to be seen, by Camden's Annals, that, when the Recusants first forbore coming to Church, about that time, did this Party begin to be known, by the name of Puritans. Ever since that time, did these embers lie raked up in deceitful ashes, still most appearing, when the State was most solicitous; till at length the Party appeared in Arms against the late King; and, prevailing in those Arms, became divided into those several Parties, which remain united in the Plea for tender Consciences. For, the Laws recovering by His Majesty's return, the same embers, which it was then thought fit to rake up again, in the same deceitful ashes, upon the first rub, have flamed out again, to demand Law, to justify that which they usurp, by way of Fact, against Law; Both pleading, that their Consciences cannot be subject to any Law in the Case; and that Christianity hath not wherewith to clear up those doubts, against which if they proceed, they are damned. It must therefore needs be said, that the present Laws have been justified, beyond all contradiction, that may pretend, any thing to be commanded by the Laws, which Gods Law forbids; So that, the demand of new Laws seems to be a demand, that the Conclusion be contradictory to that which is inferred by the Premises. And, what should Weakness demand of Reason, that is to give Law, but inconsequence? Only, let not inconsequence in Reason draw mischief upon us in effect. We have hitherto answered the demand; Where was your Church before Luther? That it was where it is; The same Church Reform, which was decayed and depraved afore. Neither can we ever answer otherwise, till we renounce our Creed, and deny that One Holy Catholic Church, which, we must be saved by believing, and by continuing in the Unity of it. Depart we once from these terms of our Reformation, what shall we plead, with a good Conscience, to bring Recusants to Church? It will be said, that the Pope is Antichrist, and the Church of Rome all I Idolaters: that there can be no question, of abandoning Idolatry and Antichrist. But is there no question of holding the true Faith, of continuing a true Church, parting with Idolatry and Antichrist? Were Papists Idolaters, and the Pope Antichrist a thousand times, the Reason, and the Rule of Reforming the Church would be where it is; and will require, that it be so Reform, as to continue a Member of one Catholic Church, as it was unreformed; saving the Unity, which cannot be held, without the consent of those that will not be reform. Not that I grant the pretence of Idolatry and Antichrist; Or, that I intent to dispute against it at present, being a question too large to be voided, by so short a Discourse as this. But that, to ground our Reformation, and Salvation, upon the interpretation of Prophecies, is a thing without the compass of Reason to do; And also a departure from that Plea, upon which our Reformation is hitherto stated. Having therefore placed my business, and spent my time, in considering the Controversies, which the Reformation hath occasioned; Because the Disputes we have among ourselves concern nothing, but how far we are to departed from the Church of Rome; I thought myself tied in Conscience, to publish the Resolution I had attained, both under the danger, that might be expected, from the late Usurpation, and at His Majesty's happy return. So that, the publishing of my Opinion in the Case at this time in dispute, is but a declaration of the consequences, that have ensued, because a palliative cure hath not served the turn. If they that break Unity in the Church, have liberty to plead for their their Conventicles, which they Usurp against Law; why should not my Opinion expect a favourable Audience? Protesting before God, that, how advantageous soever I think it, to the Salvation of Souls, yet I do not desire that it should take place, but by the free Act of this Church and Kingdom.   

CHAP. III. That the Rule of Reformation is the Catholic Church.  
IN the first place, therefore, I hold myself bound in Conscience, upon this occasion, freely to declare to my Superiors; That there is no Power in this Church and Kingdom, to reform itself in matter of Religion, but only by that Form, and to that Form, which may appear to have been held by the whole Primitive Church, before the Corruption came in, which we pretend to Reform. And the reason hereof is unanswerable; being immediately grounded upon the Article of our Creed, whereby we profess to believe one Catholic and Apostolic Church. For, if there be such a thing in the world, then must there be one Catholic Faith, the Profession whereof is the condition of Communion with it; And one and the same Laws, the violating whereof is the forfeiture of the same. And here I crave leave, to call all Canons, all Customs of the Church, whether concerning the Rites of God's Service, or other Observations; whether delivered in writing, or received by silent Use and Practice; by one and the same general name, of Laws of the Church; Only, that I may be the better understood. Being therefore well assured, that the Church cannot be Catholic, but it needs must be Visible; Because it cannot be Catholic, till it may be Visibly distinguished, from Heretic and Schismatic both; I must also infer, that it can never be Visible, till it become Catholic. That is the only way, to justify that which hath been always pretended; that this Church is the same, that it was before Luther's time. For, as the Church had never been Catholic, had it been confined to one Nation, as the Synagogue was; So I do believe, that it had never been called Catholic, had there not been Heresies and Schisms, before it was so called. It had been One Church of all Nations, by virtue of the Conversion of the Gentiles. When Heresies sprung up, as Tares among the Corn, than was it called Catholic, for distinctions sake. It was visible, that the true Faith was spread all over; Heresies and Schisms prevailed but here and there, where they were raised. So, if an Heretic or Schismatic were asked the way to the Catholic Church, he durst not have showed the way to his own, saith S. Austin. Nor is it a question to be asked a Christian, why the true Church should be Catholic; The answer being so obvious, that it was Aposiolick. Say why the Faith preached by the Apostles prevailed, why the Communion settled by their Authority; (whereas Heresies and Schisms were known but here and there) and you have said, why the True Church was Catholic. We that profess the Reformation are agreed, that this provision of God's goodness is no Promise of God, against man's malice; That corruption may become Catholic, for the present Age, though not from the Apostles. This is the common ground of Reforming the Church; If the measure and bounds which it limiteth were also common, all our divisions were at an end. Nor can any private Spirit, expounding the Scripture without these bounds, derogate from it. It is a sufficient prejudice, against any Interpretation of Scripture, that it standeth not with the Faith, and with the Laws of the Primitive Church. S. Paul challengeth the prophets at Corinth, to show themselves Spiritual men, by submitting to his Orders; Having said, that the Spirits of the Prophets are subject to the Prophets: and inferring, that all their Spirits are to be subject to his, being an Apostle, 1 Cor. XIV. 32, 36, 37. The same is the Case to the World's end; the promise of our Lord, Behold, I am with you to the world's end; being made to the Apostles, and to all that should be Christ's Disciples, and learn of the Apostles, to do all that he hath commanded, Mat. XXVIII. 19, 20. For, who can think he continueth in the Doctrine of the Apostles, departing from their Authority, in any thing subject to their Authority? Or what is not subject to their Authority, excepting that which our Lord had commanded, before he gave them their Authority? His own Commands being the condition of Salvation; Their Authority, the means provided, to enable us to attain it, by observing and learning his Commands. So, as it is Heresy, to departed from the Faith which they preached; so is it Schism, to departed from the Authority which they left in the Church, till the World's end. Were not the Catholic Church a Warrant to particular Churches, they could not Reform themselves, without the consent of the Whole. But, seeing abuses are and were Visible at the Reformation, it is necessary to grant, that particular Churches (and secular Powers, by whose Laws they subsist) may restore that which may appear to have been decayed; But it is also necessary to say, that Reformation is the Restoring of that which was, not the introducing of that which was not.   

CHAP. IU. That the Church is no further Visible, than it is Catholic.  
ANd thus shall the Church become Visible, according to the Will and Ordinance of God; which, being in decay by the malice of man, though not Invisible, yet must needs become hard to be seen, at least to the purpose of God's goodness. For, by the discourse premised it appears, why it pleased God to provide, that the true Church should be Catholic. That is to say, that when it was so easy to discern the True Church, from all that pretended, being indeed Heretics or Schismatics; the simplest were left without excuse, if they made a wrong choice. Which if it be true, how can it be in the Power of any Church, or of the secular Powers that maintain it, being bound to continue a Member of the whole Church, to introduce that for Reformation, which cannot appear to be restored, but may seem to be innovated? Which, how should it be done, without owning that ground of Reformation, which I have delivered; and by consequence, those bounds, which the said ground inferreth? And I do very well believe, that none of those, who decline Conformity with the Church, would have the Face to deny this, had they to do with the now Missionaries of the Church of Rome. For it would not serve their turn, in answer to them, to plead, that the Pope is Antichrist, and the Papists Idolaters; having Reason to challenge, that God hath founded a Visible Church. It would be absolutely necessary to plead; though the goodness of God hath instituted a Visible Church, yet, that, by the malice of man, it might be, and is become Invisible, for the difficulty of finding Salvation by it; though absolutely Visible, because Salvation might always be had in it. It is easy for him, that would answer them with a good Conscience, for Truth and not for Victory, to maintain the Church to be Visible, so far as the Faith and the Laws thereof continue Visible. But that, so far as the Faith and Laws thereof may be disguised, from that which was from the beginning, so far it may and is to be said, that the Church, which by God's Ordinance is and aught to be Visible, by humane disorder is become Invisible. Which being said, it follows immediately, that, as all estates in the Church are obliged, in their several qualities, to do their utmost, that the Church may be Visible; (the Salvation of all Christians requiring them to Resort to the Communion of the Church, which they believe to be Catholic) so, there is no other way to make it Visible, but to restore the Faith and the Laws of the Church, that from the beginning made it Visible. And therefore, no Christian Church or State can have Power, to Reform the Church any otherwise, then, by restoring that Faith, and those Laws, which the Church may appear to have had from the beginning. It would be Sacrilege, and Usurpation upon the Faith, which God hath built his Church upon; and upon the Laws, which either the Apostles have delivered to the Church, or enabled the Church to deliver to posterity; to introduce any thing else for the Reformation of the Church. Which seeing it must needs bind over the Church and Kingdom, to the wrath of God; as either destructive, or at least prejudicial to the Salvation of the People; must needs bind over him that hath this opinion, to the same, if, upon so just an occasion, he should forbear to publish and to plead it as he may, without offence. And therefore, I take leave to blame all those, who declare, in behalf of this Church, that it departeth, and separateth itself from the Church of Rome. For, seeing it hath been granted, in and by this Church, ever since the Reformation, that there is and always was Salvation to be had in the Church of Rome, as a true Church, though corrupted; I am very confident, that no Church can separate from the Church of Rome, but they must make themselves thereby Schismatics before God; though, before the Church, they cannot be condemned for such, because the Church of Rome, (the Authority whereof must needs be ingredient into the Sentence) cannot oblige any Body, to stand to the Authority, which it so abuseth. For, if God have tied all Churches to Communion with all Churches, how should it not be Schism, to profess Separation from a true Church? And it is every whit as easy to say, that we intent only to Reform ourselves: and that the Separation hath come to pass, by the rigour of the Church of Rome, Excommunicating those that Reform themselves without her leave.   

CHAP. V How far this Rule is owned by this Church.  
HEre, it will perhaps be demanded, whether or no, the Law of this Land make this the Rule of the Reformation which we Profess. And my Answer is, that in effect, and by consequence it doth. For, by maintaining the three Creeds to be part of the Service, wherewith we glorify God, by Professing the Catholic Faith; and by maintaining the four Councils, whereby, both the Faith, and the then Canons of the whole Church are established; it doth in effect maintain the Primitive Church, not only till that time, but beyond it. For, seeing it is evident, that the fifth and sixth Councils are but appendances of the Fourth; (tending only to maintain and enforce the decree of it) how can it be doubted, that the Article of this Church; receiving all Councils, that have decreed according to the Word of God; receiveth and inacteth those, which tend only to enforce the Fourth; which it owneth, for decreeing that Faith which the Word of God teacheth? Besides the prayers for the prosperity of the Catholic Church; whereby we prove ourselves no Schismatics, to the See of Rome, when we repay the Curses of it with our prayers. Besides that Injunction of Edward the VI, which obligeth all Preachers, to expound the Scripture, according to the Consent of the Ancient Fathers. Which, as no man can say, why it should not be in force; So, had it been in force, we need not have come to the question now on foot. And indeed, it is, in effect, that which I demand. For it will be found, that the Consent of the Fathers is not to be had, but in the common Faith, and in those Laws, which the whole Church either enjoined, or allowed particular Churches. So that, to expound the Scriptures according to the Consent of the Fathers, is to expound them within those bounds; and to trouble the heads of Christian people with nothing, that is without the same; As if their Salvation could be concerned, all being safe within those bounds. Here I must take notice, that the reason, why the Church Catholic, is to be held, may be miskenned; if it be extended to all that is called Christians, and not limited to that, which, maintaining the Faith, violateth not the Unity of the Primitive Church. If the profession of Christ and Christianity were enough, to make men members of the Catholic Church, why should not Socinians and Anabaptists belong to the Church dispersed over the face of the whole earth? Again, the Eastern Christians, that are thought to come from Nestorius; the Southern Christians under Prester John, that maintain the memory of Dioscorus, and condemn the fourth Council of Chalcedon, cannot be admitted to be Catholics, by any man that owneth the four Councils. But, in regard it appeareth not, that they own the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches, though they own the memory of their persons; and in regard there is cause enough to presume, that they would, with all their hearts, be reunited to the Church, did not the See of Rome refuse all terms of Reunion, that include not the infinite power which it challengeth; they cannot be included within the Catholic Church without reserving a liberty to exclude them, whensoever, in point of Faith, it shall appear, that they own the Heresies of Nestorius and Eutyches. As for the Canons of the Church, it was never neceslary, to the maintenance of Communion, that the same Customs should be held in all parts of the Church; It was only necessary, that several Customs should be held by the same Authority. Which is to say; That the same Authority instituted several Customs, which they thought to be for the best, in several times, and in several places. For so, they might be changed by the same Authority, and yet Unity remain. Whereas, questioning the Authority; by questioning whether the Acts of it be agreeable to God's Law or not; how should Unity be maintained? This is the Reason of that which I said even now; that the Fathers do not agree in any thing, but in the Faith and the Laws of the Church. For it is manifest, that they could not have agreed in the Laws of the Church, if any had excepted against any thing, used in any part of the Church, as if God's Law had been infringed by it. Seeing therefore it is manifest, that there are certain Canons and Customs, known to have been the Canons and Customs of the Primitive Church, owned by this Church; it followeth of necessity, that nothing can be disowned by this Church, as contrary to God's Law, which holdeth by the Primitive Church. So, it is not my intent to say, that the Canons and Customs of the Primitive Church ought to be in force: And, that there is no other means to restore Unity in the Church. But, that nothing can cause a Breach in the Church, that hath Authority from the Primitive Church. And that nothing can have Authority in the present Church, that infringeth the Authority of the Primitive Church; as if God's Law were destroyed by any Act of it. Further, there are two points in the Title and Cause of the late War; Episcopacy and Sacrilege; wherein, the Cause of the Crown hath been so united to the Cause, both of this and of the Catholic Church, that I may well say, that, to disowne the same Cause in other points, alike Primitive and Catholic, would be to deny the Conclusion admitting the Premises; Or to keep divers weights and measures in the same Budget. The Plea for Episcopacy, and for Consecrate Goods, hath made out so much evidence for itself, that it hath helped to recover the Laws of the Kingdom. And shall not the Laws of the Kingdom, so recovered, maintain the same Plea, in all other things? For, the Visible Unity of the Catholic Church, as it never subsisted, but in the consent of Bishops, so was it never maintained, but out of Consecrate Goods.   

CHAP. VI What Errors have followed, because it is not so expressly.  
BUt I do freely acknowledge, that, though this Church hath many Obligations, to own this Principle, for their Rule; yet, it is not formally and expressly enacted, by those Laws of the Land, whereby Religion, and the Rights of the Church are established. For I do further claim, that the want of enacting and enforcing it, and driving it home to the true Consequence, in every point, is the Cause and Source, not only of the disorders, which divers pitiful plasters have been tendered to cure; But of all disorders, imperfections, and decays of Religion, which have succeeded upon the Reformation; having been made without limiting those bounds. And, that the present disorders in Religion are the Symptoms of a common disease, which all men are offended with, but cannot be cured, without recourse to the Unity of the Catholic Church, and the terms of it; wherein that health of Christianity consisteth, which all division impeacheth. I do therefore freely acknowledge, that I find two positions, to be the source of all those Excentrical Opinions in Religion, which caused that Confusion, upon the issue of the War, that helped to make way for his Majesty's happy Return. The first is, that there is no Condition for the Covenant of Grace; That there is no Contract in it, but a mere Promise. The second is, that there is no such thing as a Visible Church, instituted by God; But, that men are first Children of God by Faith, than members of a Church, of free choice. Of these Positions, the one necessarily dependeth upon the other. For, the Faith of the whole Church from the beginning requires Baptism to Salvation. And therefore, includeth it in that Faith, which alone justifieth. And by consequence requires, that justifying Faith cannot be understood, without that Profession of Faith, which a man maketh at his Baptism. And this will necessarily infer a Church, therefore Visible, because Catholic. For it is agreed upon by the whole Church, that Baptism in Heresy or Schism, (That is, when a man gives up himself to the Communion of Heretics or Schismatics, by receiving Baptism from them) though it may be true Baptism, and not to be repeated, being given in the form of the Church; yet is not available to Salvation; making him accessary to Heresy or Schism, that is so Baptised. Now, it is not my intent to say, that these two Positions were expressly and formally professed, by Companies distinguishing themselves from others, by Ecclesiastical Communion in the Profession; Which is the true signification of an Heresy, in the eye of the Church. But the Positions I maintain to be Heresies, in so much that, if there were such Companies, they must of necessity be taken for Heresies, in the account of the Church. And my Reason is clear. For it is acknowledged by the whole Church, clearly delivered by our Lord in the Gospel, that the taking up of his Cross is a necessary condition to Salvation. Now, since our Lord gave Commission to his Apostles, to Baptise all Nations in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost; it is evident, that ever since, we take up Christ's Cross, when we undertake at our Baptism, to lay down our lives, rather than deny the Faith of Christ, or transgress his Commandments.; And since this Promise is not available, unless it be deposited with the true Church; it cannot be available, to him that continueth not in the true Church, that may exact the Promise deposited with it. If any man ask, whom I can charge with these Positions, which, I cannot show to have been Professed by Visible Bodies; I discharge myself upon a number of Pamphlets, of the time of that Confusion, which was called the Blessed Reformation; wherein free Grace was made to be the pardon of sin before it is done; Justification to be the Revelation of predestination to Glory, and no sin to be seen in Gods Elect. One particularly; which I have cause to believe was printed by Cromwell's own Appointment; because it answered a Petition of Welsh fanatics, which charged him to departed from his Principles; answers expressly, that the Principle of Salvation is neither Faith nor good Works, but Christ living in the heart, and abiding there, whatever Principles the Godly may change. And for the Church, have we not seen our Independent Congregations, or, do we not see them in New-England, refuse Baptism to all, that will not take the Covenant, which they appoint themselves to take; and own no other Churches, but such Congregations? I suppose, no man in his right senses will imagine, that there can be a Catholic Church, consisting in the Communion of all such Congregations: Or, that there can be any Faith, to give Law to their Communion; who have the Law in their own hand, to be to morrow Socinians if they please; Or any other Sect, that allows Independent Congregations. For, the Socinians may seem to have the Eldership of New-England, for Independent Congregations. On the other side, do we not see the Leviathan, that Monster of a Christian, openly Profess, that he is bound to renounce Christ with his mouth, if his Sovereign command; Though still bound to believe in him at the heart? So utterly persuaded, that there is no such thing as a Church, of God's Ordinance; But only by the Act of Sovereign Powers, within the respective Dominions of each of them; That he had rather renounce his Baptism, (and so the Benefit of it) than own any Creed, or any Catholic Church.   

CHAP. VII. That it is for the Interest of the Reformation, as much as of the See of Rome.  
HAving therefore observed (upon due consideration, as I hope) that all the Errors, which have had Vogue during our late Confusions, are reducible to these two Positions, destructive to two Articles of our Creed, that Profess one Catholic Church, and one Baptism for remission of Sins; I am still led by the same Consideration, to think myself tied in Conscience, freely to Profess; that, where these two Positions clearly renounced, and the sense of those two Articles duly established, and received by all Parties, that own the same Creed, the Reunion of the whole Church, must needs follow. For, the Power of the whole Church being so stated, as to presuppose the whole condition of our Salvation: and to extend only, to the determining of those things, which may promote edification in it, without endangering the Unity of the Church; why should not I think, that there is found, by the consent of the whole Church from the beginning, so clear a resolution of all that is disputed, to maintain Separation, concerning the Condition of the Covenant of Grace, that it cannot be refused by the Parties, owning the common Faith? There is great cause to fear, that, notwithstanding the mischiefs we feel by our own Divisions, some would think it still a greater mischief, that the Whole Church should be reunited; Though upon just Terms, and such, as must needs reunite ourselves. But, if the Christian Religion oblige us to do men good against their will; He that demands nothing, but the Right Understanding of two Articles in the Creed, to the reuniting of Christendom, intends the greatest Charity, that those who love Division can receive. Whether his demand be sufficient to do his Work or no; he must leave it to the World to judge. For, it is to be acknowledged, that, when the Condition of our Salvation is settled, and all that causes Division upon the Account of it; there remains, besides, very many Disputes, concerning Public Orders, as well in the Offices of the Church, as in the public Government of it; and the Interest, as well of the State as of the Church, in the same. But, let not therefore those that love not Unity pretend Difficulty. For, they shall find such Principles laid, to the determining of them all, in the Visible Laws of that one Church, which cannot continue One, but by owning the same; that the due bounds of Reformation cannot escape them, that will not decline the thread and the grain of these grounds. And yet, in all this, no man declines the Scripture for the only Rule of Faith. But, he that refuses the See of Rome for Judge in the Sense of it; which is all that remains in question; may well crave leave to decline the Judgement of any private Spirit, not confined within the bounds, which the Visible consent of the Church determineth. Not as if the sense of the Scripture were not more and more to be discovered; which is indeed discovered every day more and more. But, because the true sense of it will always fall within the compass of that, which the Church hath always received. I am very well persuaded, that the See of Rome will never hear of any Terms of Reconcilement, so long as they see our Divisions increase. But I am very well assured, that the Divisions of the Reformation can never be Reunited, so as to prevent the like for the future; but upon that Ground, which, being received, will serve to reunite the Whole Church. There can never be One Visible Faith, One Visible Church, upon any other terms. There can be no such sin as Heresy to violate Faith, as Schism to violate Charity, upon other terms. And therefore, it is out of Love to the Reformation, that I insist upon such a Principle, as may serve to reunite us with the Church of Rome; Being well assured, that we can never be well reunited with ourselves otherwise, That, not only the Reformation, but the Common Christianity must needs be lost, in the Divisions, which will never have an end otherwise. And he that can take measure, how much of it is lost in thirty years' time, since these Troubles began; even among them that enclose the Name of Saints, and the Godly to themselves; will easily believe, that it hath not long to live, unless Division be put to death. And yet the vain hopes of the Parties, ever since the Division, may make it appear, that both have Reason enough to be reconciled. They of the See of Rome have long expected; a hundred and fifty years or thereabouts; that those Christian Princes, that have looked upon the Reformation as dangerous to the Peace of their Dominions, should give them assistance, to reduce all that Protest against the abuses thereof, by force of Arms, to submit to their Will. Which would be, to make that Will the Law of Religion, as well to themselves, as to those that should be so reduced. But the experience of so much time evidences, that the Powers of Christendom have something else to do, then to employ the forces of their Dominions to that purpose: And that, if it prove for the Interest of some of them, at some times, it will prove not to be for the Interest of others, at the same or other times. Of which Interest, as they are indeed, and in Conscience, to give account to God, and not to the See of Rome; so, that they will ever make the See of Rome the Judge of them, what appearance can there be? So, it is time of the day for them to hearken to Reason, whether they regard God, and Religion, or Interest, and themselves. But is not our Case the same? Or, are not we transported as far, with the conceit that they are limbs of Antichrist and Idolaters, as they are, with the conceit, that we are Heretics and Schismatics? Have we not as long expected, when the Kings would join to strip the Whore of Babylon naked, as they, when they would join to reduce the Heretics by force? And is it not yet time of the day for us; whatsoever opinion, those that employ their time, in searching the meaning of a Prophecy, may have; at least to make it no Principle of our Profession, nor to maintain Separation upon the Account of it? Knowing, that were the Pope twenty times Antichrist, and the Papists Idolaters, he can never be Antichrist, nor they Idolaters, for any thing, that the consent of the Catholic Church either alloweth, or enjoineth. So, that, whatever become of any Prophecy in God's Word, and the sense of it, the bounds of Reformation will be the very same; And he will be no less an Heretic or a Schismatic, that makes the Pope Antichrist, or the Papists Idolaters, for doing or believing any thing, which the Church from the beginning hath enjoined or allowed, to be believed or to be done, then if he pretended no Prophecy to prove it. If ever any people had cause to reflect upon the sad consequences of this conceit, we are they, that shall find no probable reason, to impute the mischiefs of the late Usurpation to, but the hope of fulfilling this sense of this Prophecy. It is a vain thing to think, that a man, who believed no God, could Act a counterfeited Religion throughout, as we have seen the Usurper do. He that could hope to be saved, either without Faith, or without good Works, by having Christ alive at the Heart, why should not he think, that all the foul way he went through was the Service of God, having intended to strip the Whore of Babylon by his means? Neither Manichaeus, nor Mahomet, nor any Enthusiast can be barred, of the like aim with this, if once he make his private Spirit parallel to the Scripture. For, that which the same Authority last dictates, as in Wills and Testaments, must take place. I say not that this is the Case of those, that interpret this Prophecy of the See of Rome. I believe they follow their Reason, in expounding Scripture by Scripture. But if their Reason be not the Reason of Religion, the Reason of that Christianity which we all have Interest in, the private Spirit that follows it may take all for God's Service, though never so wicked, that is done in prosecution of it. In the mean time, Division increasing among us as it does, I think, I gratify ourselves, and not the See of Rome, in proposing that truth, which reconciles the Interest of Reformation, to the Interest of Unity in the Church. For in Civil War; as Schism is nothing but a Civil War in the Church; that Party that divides is the likely to Ruin. And though the first hopes of the See of Rome have proved addle, yet if our Divisions prevail, they must needs have fresh hopes to prevail, by our Divisions.   

CHAP. VIII. That it is the Duty of this Kingdom, and of all Christian Sovereignty's.  
ANd therefore, I must freely profess my opinion, without any manner of hope, that ever the See of Rome will abate any thing of their rigour; Though the Reformation should content themselves with these terms. For, I find, by the proceeding of former times, that it is their Maxim, to stand to that which they have once done: And to mark those Popes to posterity, that have abated any thing, from the rigour of their Predecessors. For, being arrived at this Greatness, by this Rigour and obstinacy in all Pretences, right or wrong, they will always think themselves obliged, in Reason of State, not to yield so much as the Cup in the Eucharist; Though the Council of Trent leave it in the Pope's Power to grant it. Because, granting, that any thing is and hath been amiss; who shall secure them, that nothing more shall be questioned, then is indeed amiss; when we see no point in Religion remain unquestioned, some time or some where? Not considering, all the While, that this Rigour is the cause of Division, and Division the cause of these Questions: And that, the Reason of Reformation being owned on both sides, there is a Ground restored, for Confidence, that they who accept of it will stand to those Bounds which it settleth. But, if the See of Rome can have no Power against the Whole Church; Much less can any other Church, or any part of the Church, or any Secular Power that protecteth it, make that to be Reformation, which the Whole Church alloweth not; Or secure their Subjects Consciences of the Salvation they seek, in exercising their Christianity according to their Laws, but by confining the Reformation which they maintain, within those Bounds, which the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church either require or allow. Now, how can the Interest of the Nation be secured, without due ground, for hope of God's blessing upon that which shall be done? How can there be ground to expect God's blessing, till it appear, how all Subjects of this Kingdom shall stand discharged at the day of Judgement, following that form which the Kingdom inacteth, rather than that which the See of Rome requireth? For, there are other Christian Princes and Sovereignty's, that command their Subjects to obey the See of Rome; whose Subjects must as well stand discharged to God, upon the same Plea, as the Subjects of Reformed Princes and States. And how shall the Consciences of them that make Laws be secured, if they cannot secure the Consciences of them for whom they are made? Or how can God's blessing be expected, if this security cannot be evidenced? It is not yet time to ask, how, those that allow not the Reformation, upon these Terms, should be punished; Because there are that pretend, that no punishment can be inflicted, for disobeying any Law of the Kingdom, by which Religion is settled. But it is time to say, that they make it a very ridiculous thing, for the Legislative Power to make Laws for the Kingdom, which they can enact by no Penalty. And how shall this difficulty be voided, but by demanding nothing, but that which Christianity will require of all Christians? That no Christian Kingdom can have Power, to introduce any thing, for Reformation in the Church, but that which the Consent of the Whole Church either enjoineth, or alloweth. Not as if the least Tittle of Scripture were not enough, to warrant, that which it enjoineth to be the Reformation of the Church. But, whereas the sense of the Scripture is that which remains questionable, not the Authority of it; that nothing can be the true sense of the Scripture, which the Consent of the Whole Church contradicteth. And therefore, that, though there be an appearance of truth in such a sense, yet, it is not for a Christian Kingdom to enact it for Law, till it be duly debated. And, that being done, it will infallibly appear in all, which in most things appeareth already; that the Consent of the Whole Church cannot contradict the true sense of the Scripture; And that it is nothing else, but not knowing the one or the other, that makes it seem otherwise. If the Scripture itself is not, nor can be owned for God's Word, but by the Consent of God's people, from the beginning, attesting, the Motives of Faith related in the Scripture to have been infallibly done, by submitting to the Faith which they enforce; Then must the same Consent be of force, to assure common reason, that the Faith, and the Laws, wherein the whole Church agrees, came from the Authority settled by God, not by any Consent of all Christians, to fall from that which they Profess. And therefore, though a Kingdom may force the Subjects thereof, to call that Reformation, which they enact; yet they can never make it Reformation, in that sense, which the Salvation of Christians requires, if it be not within these bounds. It may be called Reformation, to signify a New form, but it can never be Reformation, to signify that form which should be, unless it signify the form that hath been in God's Church. For, that being One and the same, from the first to the second Coming of Christ, can authorise no other form, then that which it may appear to have had from the beginning.   

CHAP. IX. That it cannot be done without the Synods of this Church.  
ANd therefore, it being granted on both sides, that the Sovereign Power of Christian Kingdoms and States, proceeding duly, obligeth the Subjects, to submit to the Reformation of the Church; and cannot exact Legal Penalties of them which refuse, upon any other Terms; I do except, in the second place, that it ought to proceed in all Reformation, by and upon the Authority of this Church; That is, of the Synods. For what doth the whole Church agree in so Visibly, as in this; That the Authority which God hath instituted in his Church should give Laws to his Church? And how can a Christian Kingdom promise themselves God's blessing, upon such Acts, as they have no Power nor Right from God to do? For, granting there is such a thing as a Catholic Church; it is not possible, that any Christian Kingdom, which must be a part of it, should have Power to enact any thing Prejudicial, much less destructive to the Whole; to the Visible Being, which is, the Visible Communion of it. And therefore, the Faith and the Laws of the whole being the Condition, under which the parts are to communicate; no Christian Kingdom can have Power from God, to give New Laws in Religion, to the Subjects thereof, which the Church of the Kingdom warranteth not, to be according to the Laws of the whole Church. If any thing may appear to have been in force, in the Primitive Church, and, by the abuse of succeeding times, to have become void; I do not deny, that the Secular Power may Reform the Church, by restoring it, though the Church should refuse their Consent to it. The reason is, because the Church would be without help, if there were no Lawful way to restore the decays of it; Which, we agree, have come to pass; without the consent of them that are chargeable for the decay of it. Now, the Faith and the Laws of the Catholic Church are the Birthright of all Christians; Purchased, by undertaking to Profess one Catholic Church, at their Baptism: And Christian Powers are to protect their Christian Subjects in their Birthright. And, the Authority of the present Church is not seen, in the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church. For, it is mere matter of Fact, what they are; The evidence whereof (preaexistent to the Authority of the present Church) cannot be understood to require, or to presuppose it. And therefore, the Authority of the Church cannot be violated, by reducing the Faith and the Laws of the Primitive Church into force. Nevertheless, in regard, that which is decayed can seldom be restored, without determining new Bounds, which the present state of the Church requires; It is manifestly the Office of the Church, to determine the same: Nor can it be done by Christian Powers of this World, without assuming to themselves that Authority, in which they are to maintain the Church. For, though Sovereign Power hath Sovereign Right, in all Causes and over all Persons Ecclesiastical, yet is it capable of no Ecclesiastical Power, or Right; But is to maintain those that have it, by the Laws of the Church, in the use of it. If any thing were done at the Reformation, setting aside the Synods of this Church; which, I am here neither to deny, nor to acknowledge; it must be justified upon this Account, that they refused the Authority of the Whole Church, in authorising the Reformation of this Church. If any thing now may appear to be demanded upon the same Account; let the Authority of the Synods be passed by, for their punishment, if they hinder the Reformation of the Church, by refusing it. But that cannot appear, till it may appear; First, that the matter demanded aught to have the force of Law in the Church; having been of force, and since decayed, by the injury of time, or corruption of men: Secondly, that it is of such weight, that Religion is like to have more advantage, by restoring it, than the Unity of the Church shall suffer, by violating the Regular Authority of the Church. What thanks I shall have of my LL. the Bishops for this, I know not; For I deny, that they themselves can have any Authority in the Case, that shall not be confined within the same bounds. But it is not possible, for him that is the most jealous of the Rights of the Crown, in Church-matters, to say, what danger there can be to this Crown, in securing the Conscience of the Kingdom, by the Authority of the Church. For, the acknowledging of those Bounds, which the Authority of the Church is confined to, as well in respect of Sovereign Power, in the Dominions whereof it subsisteth, as of the rest of the Church; leaveth no Plea for it to Usurp, either upon the Crown, or upon the Christian Subjects of it. And all this I claim by S. Paul, where he commandeth all Christians, to abide in that state in which they are called to be Christians. Which cannot otherwise oblige all Clergymen, to be Subjects, upon the same terms, as they should be, if their Sovereigns were not Christians; but, that it must oblige all Public Powers, to maintain the Clergy in the same Rights, which they had, and must have had over Christian People, did not the Public Powers profess the Faith. And therefore, though I do claim, that the Synods of the two Provinces, and their Decrees, aught to be confined within the bounds so oft said; yet I do demand of All, (especially of those that may have made the Oath of Canonical Obedience, to their Bishops) how they can profess to own Episcopacy; especially according to their Oath; that pass over this Right of the Synods. For, that which is done without, or against their Consent, shall make them no Bishops; That must receive Law from their Clergy, if the Secular Power make their sense of the Scripture Law to the Kingdom. Whereas I, that take the liberty to prove all this, without their Authority, can clearly Profess, that I think it a point not subject to Canonical Authority, which I plead for; And that otherwise, I should think it inconsistent with the Oath of Canonical Obedience which I have made.   

CHAP. X. The Case in which S. Paul forbears the Weak.  
COme we now to that Scripture of S. Paul to the Romans, upon which, the whole Plea for tender Consciences is grounded, and to state the Case, in which he prescribeth. And see, what forbearance it will enforce in our Case. S. Paul, having showed the Romans; who, before they were converted to be Christians, had been, some Jews, some Gentiles; that Righteousness and Salvation comes only by Faith, or by Christianity, and not by the Law, or by Judaisme also; proceedeth in the fourteenth Chapter of that Epistle, to Order them, to forbear one another; The Jews not to censure the Gentiles, for not observing the Law; The Gentiles not to scorn the Jews; if, not understanding the freedom of Christians, they lived as Jews, in all or in some things. It is manifest, who are the strong and who are the weak, with S. Paul, in that he is one of the strong, where he says, XV. 1. We that are strong aught to bear the infirmities of the weak. They that understand, how Righteousness and Salvation comes only by Faith; notwithstanding that it was to be had under the Law, as well as afore the Law; these are the strong. One man believes he may eat any thing; though forbidden by the Law; but he that is weak, and sees nothing else on the Table but that which the Law forbids, eats herbs. One man makes difference of a day above a day, according to the Law, another esteems every day alike, XIV. 2, 5. These two instances are put for all indifferent things, prescribed or forbidden by the Law. He that understood the purpose of God in giving the Law, which he intended to make void, or rather to fulfil, in due time; So that Salvation came not by it, when it was to be had under it; He is the strong with S. Paul. He that understood it not, and yet continued a Christian, that he might come to understand it, the weak. Let no man marvel, that the Romans, who took S. Paul for an Apostle, should not understand that which S. Paul had proved, by this whole Epistle. For he proveth it by the Mystical sense of the Old Testament; Which, they who had submitted to the Faith could not own, nevertheless, until they understood the reason, why God gave the Law, with an intent to bring in the Gospel by it. Let no man think, that they were not fit to be baptised, (for such were they all to whom S. Paul writes) that understood not this, belonging to the Foundation of Faith. Baptism maketh all Disciples of Christ, and therefore findeth them not so. It is necessary, that he who is baptised should undertake all that, which, he shall come to learn, that Christ hath taught. It is not necessary that he should know what it is; knowing that Salvation is not to be had, without doing all that, whatsoever it is, which, it shall appear, that Christ hath taught.   

CHAP. XI. Compared with his Orders at Corinth, and elsewhere.  
BUt, seeing S. Paul forbiddeth the Corinthians to scandalise the weak, in eating meats that had been sacrificed to Idols; we must not state the Case of the Romans, without considering, how the Case of the Corinthians may concern it. Here S. Paul distinguishes scholastically; that such meats might be eaten, either as God's Creatures, materially, or formally, as meats sacrificed to Idols; which Idolaters feasted upon, after their Sacrifices, in honour of their Idols; as we see by his words, 1 Cor. X. 7. Nor be ye Idolaters, as some of them were; As it is written; The people sat down to eat and drink, and risen up to play. And Dan. V. 4. They drunk wine, and praised the Gods of gold and silver, of brass, of iron, of wood and of stone. S. Paul then resolveth, that Christians may eat meats sacrificed to Idols, as God's creatures; and that they cannot be polluted, by being sacrificed to Idols, which are nothing. But that, when there may be occasion for Christians to think, that a Christian eats them as Idolaters did; (as eating them in an Idol-Temple, or, being invited home by an Idolater) in such Cases, it was necessary to forbear, for Christian Charities sake; lest a weak Christian, seeing a strong Christian eat them, should think he eat them as Idolaters did; and, doing so himself, should fall into misprision of Idolatry, 1 Cor. VIII. 7, 10. X. 27, 28. And by this example we may gather, by the way, what S. Paul means, Rom. XIV. 15, 20. Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. For meat destroy not the work of God. He means, that the danger was no less, (if the Gentiles should not forbear the Jews, but despise their weakness, that could not see themselves free of the Law) then, that they should fall into dislike with the Faith, and return to the Jews Religion again. So, the danger at Corinth was Idolatry; at Rome Apostasy. S. Paul then, forbids the Corinthians, to make inquiry for conscience sake, 1 Cor. X. 25. whether that which is sold in the shambles had been sacrificed to an Idol or not. But Daniel did make inquiry for conscience sake, when he resolved, not to be polluted with the King's meat, Dan. I. 5, 8. taking all of it to be dedicated to Idols, in the first-fruits of it. For this, being the custom of the Heathen, made all their meats suspicious, as dedicated to their Idols. Tobit is not Canonical Scripture; But it is as Old as the Old Testament in Greek. The Author of it relates, for his commendation, that he kept himself from eating the bread of the Gentiles, when his Brethren and kindred did eat of it. Tobit I. 10, 11, 12. because he remembered God with all his heart. This signifies, that the more Religious did observe it, though not commanded by the Law. It seems they were only forbidden by the Law to go to the feasts which they, the Gentiles, made of their Sacrifices; lest they should worship their Gods, as they that invited them did, Exod. XXXIII. 15. and as they did with the Madianites, Numb. XXV. 2. The forbearing of Idolaters meat, was a hedge to the Law, that they might be the further off from transgressing it; But brought in under the Prophets, and observed by the more Religious. And the Jews have reason, when they tell us, that, Nehemiah was dispensed with, for drinking the wine of the Gentiles, because he was Cupbearer to the King. Whereby it appears, that S. Paul leaves it to the Charity of every Christian, to use his freedom so sparingly, as not to offend a weak Christian. But, under the Law, it became a Rule, that all the strong should forbear that, which might possibly offend the weak. And therefore, when the Apostles at Jerusalem enjoin those that were converted of Gentiles, to abstain from meats sacrificed to Idols; they do forbid them to eat such meats, even materially: And command them to make inquiry for conscience sake, as the Jews used to do, and as converted Gentiles did in the Land of Promise. For the Ordinance of Acts XV. 23. addresseth only to the Churches of Judaea, and to those, which Paul and Barnabas, being sent from Antiochia, had founded in Cilicia, and the parts adjacent, Acts XIII. 2, 3, 14— XIV. 26. XV. XIV. 4. The reason of this difference is manifest, by the words of S. Paul, 1 Cor. XII. 2. Ye know ye were Gentiles, carried after these dumb Idols, as ye were led. Whereas Paul and Barnabas addressed first to the Jews, and founded Churches of them, for the greatest part. So that, the hopes of winning the Jews remaining, the dispensation was to take place. But the Church of Rome consisted of Gentiles, as well as of Jews; whereas, in the Church of Corinth, there is no account at all had of the Jews. And therefore, the forbearance required at Corinth is out of fear of Idolatry; at Rome, of Apostasy.   

CHAP. XII. The present Case of this time stated.  
HAving thus stated the Case, in which S. Paul ordereth this forbearance, let us state our Case, in which it is demanded, by consequence. But that cannot be done, but out of the premises. We must suppose, the Church of England, a member of the whole Church, desires to Reform itself, because the rest of the Church will not join in the same work; But desires to continue a member of the whole Church, and not to give any cause of interrupting Unity, by improving Christianity. I know, some of them that demand Toleration do not allow any such thing, as a Church of England, when they are understood. For, how should they own any Right of Sovereign Powers, to give Law to the Church of their Dominions, that allow them no Right, to punish the transgression of such Laws? But the Case must be stated upon the Terms proposed, nevertheless, as to those that acknowledge National Churches; Excepting for those that make this Plea, when we see time. This only, I think, would be said, that the Church of England is not now to be Reform; but, having been Reform, is now questioned, as if the Reformation of it were not yet perfect; And therefore the boldness is taken, by a private person of my condition, to give an Opinion, what is most wanting in the Reformation of it. Because it cannot be said, what is unduly demanded, until it may be said, what is due to be done. But it must be remembered, that the demand is made in behalf of those, that had made a Schism in the Church of England, by Ordaining or being Ordained Presbyters by Presbyters, without and against the will of their Bishops. In behalf of those it hath been demanded, that their Ordinations may stand valid and good, and the persons enabled, by the Law of the Land, to minister the Offices of their Orders, and to be trusted with the Cure of Souls, by their Bishops. And not only so, but it hath been further demanded, that some of those Laws, by which Religion is settled in the Kingdom, be repealed, for their sakes; That they may have no pretence to scruple the Office of the Ministry. Not that it is now said, (as for this hundred years it hath been said) that the Laws which they would have repealed are against God's Law; And that therefore they cannot yield them obedience. But that the Ministers, or People that will follow them, have a doubt in Conscience, which they cannot be cleared of, that it is not Lawful for them to yield them obedience; and that they cannot do it without sinning, and incurring damnation, by doing against their Consciences. And this is also the Case, in which, those that acknowledge no Church of England, no Right in Christian Powers, to give Law to the Church within their own Dominions, do demand liberty to separate from the Church, into their private Conventicles. Protesting, that they cannot hold Communion with the Church settled by the Laws of the Land; No not though Reform to the content of those hitherto mentioned. And pretending the same reason from S. Paul, that they should incur sin and damnation, doing it in that doubt, which they cannot be cleared of.   

CHAP. XIII. The Mistake which causeth Weakness in our Case.  
THe Case thus stated, I must, in the first place, ask both Parties, whether they do think in their Consciences, that S. Paul had not showed the Jews at Rome, that were become Christians, sufficient reason, to clear them of the doubts they had, concerning their obligation to the Law of Moses; that they were indeed free of it, and aught to be free of those doubts. I suppose they will think it fit to say, that, though S. Paul enjoin them to forbear one another, so long as they did not understand their freedom; yet, that they might understand it, and were bound to understand it. For, is there any man so little a Christian; now that the time of forbearance is past, that there is no more hope to gain the Jews, by compliance, without making ourselves Jews; as to make a question of offending a Jew, by not abating the Profession of his Christianity? The consequence whereof is all that I demand. If S. Paul would have the Jews forborn, that the provocation, which they might meet with, might not move them to dislike their Christianity; certainly he held them to be under a light, which obliged them not to dislike it. Otherwise he should not have done the work which he pretends to do by this Epistle; to show the Law to be void, because Salvation comes only by Faith. And certainly, there can be nothing more opprobrious to Christianity, then that which is pleaded, for abatement in the present Laws; That the weak are not under a light, enabling them to see those things to be lawful, which indeed, and to the strong, may be lawful, and appear such. For how could this doubt be cleared, if a weak Conscience should be pretended, when the question is, whether to turn Christian or not? Is it possible, that there should be such a doubt in that point, that a man, to whom the Reason why he ought to be a Christian is sufficiently proposed, can be said to be under a light, that convinceth him not? Which if it be true, then is there nothing in Christianity, which there is not a sufficient light, to convict that man of, to whose Office it belongs. Otherwise, it could not being to his Office; not being able to discern the Obligation of it. It is therefore a horrible reproach to Christianity, to say, that any doubting Conscience is not under a light, sufficient to resolve it. Scruples of Conscience there may be, which may eternally have recourse; and that no disparagement to the Faith; Because the Faith provides a Resolution, that they who have scruples in Conscience, are bound in Conscience to lay them aside; Nay to act positively against them. But he that says, that, being a Christian, he is not under a light sufficient to clear him, in any doubt of Conscience, says, that the Faith obligeth him to sin; Whereas it is not the Faith, but the want of it, which, obligeth not the erring Conscience to sin, but entangleth him so, that he must sin, if the obligation of acting fall out before the error be removed. Suppose the Jews convict by the Epistle to the Romans, that Salvation comes only by Faith, and not by the Law also; And you suppose them under a light, that, neither the Law, nor any Ordinance, then standing by virtue of the Law, could oblige. But, suppose them in love with themselves, and with their Ancestors, and to have such an Opinion of Salvation entailed upon them and their issue, by the Law, as to think, that they could not have it by God that gave the Law, if the Gentiles might have it as well as themselves; and they might (very well, for consequence of Reason, though very ill, for their own account) oversee the light they were under. Suppose we now, those that make this Plea, not to believe one Catholic Church, and one Baptism for the remission of sins; But had rather gratify the Socinians, and deny that any Christian can be obliged, to any thing that appears not to his own Reason, out of Canonical Scripture; Then imagine he should gratify the Papist, if he should grant, that Catholic Communion always made the Catholic Church; Suppose them not to believe, that the Faith which only saveth includeth Baptism in the Catholic Church; And that this Church is not Reform, unless it be restored to the same form; I say supposing them possessed with such prejudices as these, and marvel not, to see them eternally doubting, whether or no, it be lawful for them, to obey the Laws, which this Church and Kingdom is able to make. Nay, to see them break out into Schism, as all Parties now seem to do, rather than obey them, when they shall be out of hope, to give their own Law to the Kingdom; Never forecasting, how it may appear to continue a Church, when they have given such Laws to it.   

CHAP. XIV. That it is not Forbearance to allow their Orders.  
I Suppose, they who make this Plea, will not grant, that they are in any error so near the Foundation, as these which I name. Nor do I think, that those Christian Jews at Rome, that doubted of transgressing the Law, when they knew that Salvation comes only by Faith, did deny the Foundation of Faith. For, as long as they lived in the Church, they were in the way to learn, and understand, how both were true. Neither will I say, that any of those, who desire Forbearance for the weak, are in any error destructive to the Foundation of Faith, and the hope of Salvation, till they break out into Conventicles. When that is done, I am thenceforth bound to charge them with all the Error, which the Title of their Schism can signify. And therefore I charge them with Hypocrisy, when they pretend to Forbearance because they are weak, and yet break out into Conventieles. when they do so, than they can be counted no more the weak among Christians, than those Jews which S. Paul will have to be forborn, as the weak among Christians; supposing them to have renounced the Faith afterwards, rather than continue in the Church. And therefore, the Plea of weak Consciences cannot be allowed those that engage in Conventicles. They have cut themselves off from it, by leaving the Church; Let them return, and then make the best of it. As to them, the Church is under a new Precept of S. Paul, which says; A man that is an Heretic, after the first and second admonition avoid. Knowing that such a one is out of the way, and sinneth, being condemned by himself, Titus III. 10, 11. Because, saith S. Hierom, after S. Cyprian; Whereas other sinners are put out of the Church, by those that manage the Keys of the Church; Heretics and Schismatics put themselves out of the Church. Therefore Titus; that is, all Titus his flock; are to avoid them for Excommunicate persons, who do Excommunicate themselves. As for those that continue in the Church; though with a pretence of giving such Laws to the Church, as no man knows how soon they may unchurch it; let them make their best of it. But being grounded, at least upon a pretence of weakness, there can be no question made, but some error must be granted, for the ground of this weakness. Let themselves, at their leisure, assign what error they will acknowledge, if they like not that which I have assigned. Only let them show the world; that is, the Legislative Power of this Kingdom; what error it is, that they have hitherto had, which being avoided for the future, all those difficulties will cease, which, this Discourse pretendeth, cannot be met with, but by bounding the Reformation within the Faith and the Laws of the Catholic Church. In the mean time, let me go on to show, that those who were Ordained in and for the late Schism, (composed by the Laws, at his Majesty's Return) by Presbyters against their Bishops, cannot claim by virtue of it, to be owned for Presbyters; Or, in the terms of the Ancient Church, to be received in their own Orders. A thing which there can no question be made in, by any body that understands, what the Church, or what a Schism signifies. And it is marvel, how, they that would be thought to allow Episcopacy should question it. To acknowledge the Authority of giving Orders in the Bishops, according to the Laws, by which we both maintain this Church to be Reform; and yet to allow those that are made Presbyters by those Bishops, (not to Ordain others, but to Minister the Office of their Order, according to the Reformation settled in this Church) I say, to allow them to Ordain others, to Minister their Office by other Laws, not only without, but against the consent of the Bishops, from whom they have their Orders, is nothing else but to imagine, that God hath given Power to divide (that is, to destroy) his Church. For what is setting up Altar against Altar, but to Usurp Power to Consecrate the Eucharist, and give the Communion of it, in despite of them, whom they allow to have Power to do the same; because they do it by Authority received from themselves? In all the Records of the Church, there is but one Case expressly remembered, in which it can be said to have been done. That fell out in Egypt, at the time when the Church was divided, between the Arians and the Catholics. But before that trouble, there was another division on foot, about receiving back into the Church, those that had fellen from the Faith, in the persecution of Diocletian. For Meletius, Bishop of Lycopolis, had proceeded to Ordain Bishops, in as many Cities as he could, in opposition to those Bishops, that stuck to the See of Alexandria. In these distractions, Coluthus, one of the XII Presbyters of Alexandria, became the Head of a Party by himself; and to propagate his Party, took upon him to make Ordinations of Presbyters, to Minister to those of his Sect. Aerius is the man, that maintained the Authority of Bishops and Presbyters to be all one. Yet do I not remember, that it is any where said, that Aerius took upon him to Ordain Presbyters, being himself one. Much less, that he was able to hold up a Sect, by such Ordinations. Audius was a Presbyter, that became the Father of one of those Sects, that Epiphanius writes against. But Epiphanius says expressly, that he had Bishops that embraced his Opinion, and propagated his Sect by Ordination. Tertullian became the Father of a Sect, which continued at Carthage, till S. Austin's time; by whom they were reduced to the Church. And truly it is to be presumed, that the Father of the Sect did propagate it, by Ordinations made of his own Head. For what should he stick at, that takes upon him to divide the Church, and to set up Altar against Altar? But I have not found it said, that he did do it. Nor have I found, that any Presbyter did ever undertake to do it, but Coluthus. At the Council of Nicaea, to unite the Meletians to the Church, the Bishops Ordained by him were allowed to succeed, when the present Bishops should die; yet so, as to be then lawfully Ordained, though they had been Schismatically Ordained afore. But when the Coluthians pretended the same privilege, Athanasius pleads for himself, that all Coluthus his Ordinations were made void. Which is thought to have been done, by that Synod at Alexandria, which Hosius was present at, with Commission from Constantine. This is the only Example of Presbyters Ordained by a Presbyter, without and against his Bishop. All the rest are mere conjectures, which cannot stand, unless we suppose, the Canons of the Church were not observed, because it is not recorded how they were observed. Whereas all reason requires us to suppose, that they were observed, because they might be observed; and because there followed no dissension, upon their not being observed. Such Ordinations then, being mere nullities, as presumed to be done by them, that never received Authority from the Church to Ordain; do further induce Irregularity, by the Canons of the Church. And who can deny, that all reason and Conscience requires it? For, who can believe his Creed, professing one Catholic Church, and not think the Church more disobliged by Schism, then by any other Crime, that renders a man uncapable to be promoted to Orders? Certainly, if Rebellion be the Crime, that is hardest to be reconciled to Civil trust, then is Schism hardest to be reconciled to trust in the Church. Nevertheless, because Unity is to be preferred before Discipline; and because experience shows, that, when men are taken off from an engagement in division, they prove the more trusty, the more weary they were of their engagement; it hath been often practised by the Church, to receive, not only Schismatics, but even Heretics also, (That is, such as had received Orders of those, that parted from the Church, upon an error in Faith) in their respective Orders. But always upon condition of renouncing the cause of their division; Whereupon they were to receive the Blessing of the Church, by Prayer with Imposition of Hands. The reason was, because neither is Baptism in Schism effectual to Salvation, nor Ordination in Schism effectual to Grace, by the Ministry of any Office in Schism. But, being renounced, there remains no Cause, why their Ministry should not be effectual to their people; Their Baptism and their Ministry to their own Salvation; supposing it sincerely renounced. Therefore the Reason, why they who are Ordained by Presbyters cannot be received in their respective Orders, is peremptory; Because, the Schism, consisting in Ordaining against Authority, cannot be renounced, unless the Ordination be voided. For, so long as the Ministry may be usurped, upon such Ordination, so long is the Schism on foot. I do very well know, that the Ordinations of Arians were allowed by S. Athanasius, in a Synod at Alexandria; who had made the Ordination of Ischyras by Coluthus void. And I remember the high acclamation, which S. Hierom applauds his Act with; That thereby, the world was snatched out of Satan's jaws. But I read, that the Tertulliniasts were received into the Church; not that they were received in their Orders. I find difficulty made by Foreign Churches, of receiving the Donatists in their Orders; Notwithstanding the complaints of the African Bishops, that, without them, they had not Clergy enough to serve the Church. Hereby it is to be judged, how severe this Church was, with them that had received Ordination by Presbyters. The Canon of the whole Church makes all Irregular; Ordainers and Ordained. Because they had concurred to bring back his Majesty; (Which was the restoring of the Laws, and so of the Church) the forfeiture was wholly passed by, and nothing required of Ordainers, more than of the Clergy; Which is an utter Oblivion of the attempt made by those Ordinations. And is not that a very great degree of Forbearance in our Case? S. Paul, when he enjoins Forbearance, doth he enjoin, that those who did not understand, how men were saved by Faith alone, that were saved under the Law, should be promoted to Orders, indifferently with those that did profess it? That were indeed something like that which hath been demanded, that Weakness should entitle to the Clergy; which orderly supposes strength. But does he enjoin farther, that they should Minister without Orders? That, continuing Laymen, they should commit the Sacrilege of Usurping to Celebrate the Eucharist? That, if their Ordination be void, by the Law of the Land, there should be a new Law made, to make their Ordination good and valid, which was void when it was made? Then must he enjoin, that it be lawful for every Layman to celebrate the Eucharist; Forasmuch as every Layman hath as much to do, to celebrate the Eucharist, as he whose Ordination is void. Surely S. Paul, that commands Christians to be without offence to the Jews and Gentiles, as well as to the Church, commands them also to be without offence to Papists. And will not we have those, that would be enabled to consecrate the Eucharist, by such a Law, to show us how to satisfy the Papists, that such Orders are good? At least those, that by their sufferings have preserved Ordination by Bishops; Let them at least be satisfied of the Validity of Ordination without Bishops. At least, let no man impose upon them, that they cannot yield the Forbearance, which S. Paul requires for tender Consciences, unless they receive the Sacrament consecrated by Laymen; That is, by those, whose Ordination they believe to be utterly void.   

CHAP. XV. That the Orders of the Reformed Churches are not void, because these are.  
NOw I am to look an Objection in the face, which, at a distance seems to admit of no Answer; but, if it be a little considered, will appear, to have neither Reason nor Religion at the bottom of it. It is said, that hereby, we shall make void the Ordinations of the Reformed Churches of France, and others Reform according to Calvin; And so, make them no Churches. Here we agree, that it was necessary for the French, as well as for ourselves, to Reform themselves; That it was necessary for all to Reform themselves, unto the Form of the Primitive Catholic Church, I say not we do agree; I say, that, till we do agree, there remains no hope of Unity, because no Rule for Reformation, in the Church. But to the Objection; Who hath the Conscience to think, or the Face to say, that if Ordinations made by Presbyters against their Bishops be void; Then, Ordinations made by Presbyters, where they could not be had by Bishops, are void? For, that is the difference of the Cases. It is manifest, that the Bishops of this Church, when they Ordain Presbyters, Ordain them to Minister their Office, according to the Laws; That is, under their Bishops. And can any man imagine, that hereby, they give them Power to Ordain others to Minister their Office, by what Laws they please themselves? And, had the French demanded of their Bishops, to Ordain them Presbyters, that should Minister their Office, according to the Reformation, does any man think they would have done it? So, the necessity of Reforming, which we all agree in, made the Ordinations of the Reformed Churches; The Pride and Presumption, which causeth all Heresy and Schism, usurping Authority never received, made the Ordinations of our Presbyters. And shall they be as valid as those? All that can be questioned is, how it may appear, that it was not of choice, but of necessity, that they embraced that way, of settling and propagating their Reformation, which they embraced. And for that, we have sufficient Presumption, from the Albigenses; Who secretly Reforming themselves, under the See of Rome, did certainly do it, by the Authority of Bishops, who propagated their Order by Ordinations. This may be proved by other testimonies, if need be; But it is sufficient, that the Case of the Bohemians is so well known. They, having resolved, exactly to Reform themselves; and having chosen the Persons, whom they would have for their Bishops; were at a stand, how to compass their succession from the Apostles, by having them Ordained by Bishops. In this nonplus, they understood, that there were in Austria, of the Albigenses, that kept secret Communion among themselves, under their Bishops; notwithstanding that publicly, to avoid the Laws, they went to Mass. To them they sent their Bishops elect, protesting against their dissembling; but desiring Ordination for their Bishops, which thus were propagated. And this may well seem to be the Reason, why, they that Reform in the Empire, according to Luther, (in the name of whom Melancthon hath offered, to be subject to their own Bishops, admitting the Reformation) set up such a Form of Episcopacy, as they could, of themselves. For, they had cause to think, that the Bohemians had not advantaged themselves enough, by that Ordination, which they had been able to procure. For, it is to be noted, that they, the Bohemians, had sent all over the World, to learn, how to get such Ordination, as might authorise their Ministry, according to the Reformation which they pretended. And are not we, hereupon, to presume, that the French, by these degrees, finding a necessity of balking the Authority of the Episcopacy, which they were under, did think themselves, thereupon, free, to cast themselves into that Form, which they use? For, if it be said; That, by this time, they had profited beyond their Predecessors, in discovering the Whore of Babylon; that they found Episcopacy to be the Body of Antichrist, and therefore renounced it; It will appear, by many Reasons, that this cannot serve the turn. First, how can the common sense of men endure to believe, that the Pope is Antichrist, by reason of that Greatness, which, it is certain and evident, that he hath attained, by Usurping the Rights of his inferior Bishops? And yet, those inferior Bishops be the Body of Antichrist; by suffering those Usurpations, which they cannot help? Secondly, it is manifest, that they who should hold this Plea could not pretend, by virtue of their Orders, received from the Bishops of this Church, to Ordain Presbyters; Unless they would say, that they may have their Authority from Antichrist. This Plea, therefore, must remain for the Independents; to authorise them, (that think themselves in the State of Grace, before they are members of the Church) to make their their Congregations Churches, and Usurp the Authority of Apostles, in Ordaining their own Ministers. Lastly, it appeareth sufficiently, that very many learned and religious persons, of those Churches, have not only approved the Episcopacy here settled; But have wished the benefit of it, to themselves. Whereby it is manifest, that those Churches cannot own this Reason; when another, so far from it, is owned by their principal Members. I have another Reason to allege, which weighs as much with me as all these; And, that is, the Communion, which hath always been used, between this Church, and the Reformed Churches. For, should they hold Communion with us, and yet think our Ordinations authorized by Antichrist, how could they expect to be believed, so grossly contradicting themselves? And therefore, though I must not take upon me, either to justify, or to condemn their Ordinations; Averring on one side, that they are not according to Rule; Seeing on the other side, that they are owned by my Superiors; yet I must acknowledge, that there are very great Reasons to hope, and to presume, that God accepteth of their Ordinations, though not made according to Rule; In consideration of the necessity that drove them to it, and of the Reformation, which they were used to propagate. Whereas, those that Usurp the Power of the Keys, and the Consecrating of the Eucharist, by virtue of Ordinations made in despite of those Bishops, from whom they have all the Authority, which they can challenge by their Orders; what pretence is there to imagine, that there can be any such Crime as Schism, if this be not it? That God should bless that, which is done by such gross Usurpation, as this is? And when all this is said, it remains free for me to say, That there is no other way to restore, and to preserve Unity within the Reformation, but by establishing and maintaining Episcopacy, in that Authority, which it hath always had, for the determining of differences; Nor maintain that Authority, but by confining it, within the Bounds, which the Faith and the Laws of the whole Church do limit. As for the fanatics, which make our Orders void, because the Pope is Antichrist, and the Mass Idolatry, whence our Bishops received, and where they exercised their Orders; I will only consider the Case of the Donatists, forejudged by the whole Church. They pleaded, in point of fact, that Caecilianus was Ordained by Apostates. A thing which the Church was so clear in, that the African Bishops offered to give up their Sees, if it were proved. But besides, in point of Right, had it been proved, and Caecilianus owned by the Church, because it did not appear, or because they thought the Canons ought to be dispensed with, for Unities sake; those that Ordained Caecilianus having repent of their Apostasy; shall we imagine, that the Church was lost, by owning those that had been Apostates, and their Ordinations? The Donatists are branded for Heretics and Schismatics, maintaining all the Laws of the Church, but that of Unity. And shall Lay-Christians, presuming to authorise Lay-Christians, to consecrate the Eucharist, and set up Churches, be esteemed less than Heretics and Schismatics? Let those that pretend to Unity find that Forbearance, which a favourable construction of their actions signifies. But Charity to the sound obligeth, to take the profession of Schismatics in the worst sense, which if we do, the making of Independent Congregations Churches will be the denying of One Catholic Church; and the making of them Heretics that do it.   

CHAP. XVI. That changing the Laws for the Weak is not Forbearance.  
BUt if it be a thing absurd in common sense, to allow them their Orders, much more absurd will it be, to change the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Land for their sakes; Which is nothing else, but to purchase their Ministry, at the price of our Religion; which the Ecclesiastical Laws contain. Here, we must distinguish two questions; For it may be lawful for Christian people, to live by those Laws, which it was not lawful for Superiors, in Church and State, to make. A thing evident to all that believe, that it was possible for our Ancestors, before the Reformation, to be saved, under the abuses of the Church of Rome. But our question is, whether or no, the Laws of Superiors enjoin that, which Gods Law forbids Inferiors to do. Otherwise, it is pernicious to all Government, that Inferiors should take upon them, to judge the Acts of Superiors. But if the matter of the Law be within the Power that makes it, to require an Exception for tender Consciences is to say, that there is no Power in the World to give any Law to those tender Consciences. Was there ever any Heresy, any Schism, any Religion pretending Christianity, that did not allege Scripture for themselves? Did ever any man allege it, that would not be thought, to be touched at the heart with it? What is there for a Christian to doubt at, where the Exception of tender Consciences lies not? Or how shall we, that agree against the See of Rome, but agree not in the terms and grounds of Reformation, be tried, in the sense of the Scripture? Can any man imagine, that S. Paul intended to destroy his own Authority, of giving Law to the Church, which he exercised, when he ordered the Jews and Gentiles at Rome, to forbear one another? Or is this Authority dead with the Apostles? What Church then can there be alive, if there be no Authority deriyed from the Apostles, to give Law to it? But the Authority is not questioned, so it provide for weak Consciences. Episcopacy will be owned, if the Secular Power will force it, to take them for their Presbyters, whose Ministry they cannot give account to God of; Being both authorized and exercised by Laws made, without and against their Authority. This, no Christianity can justify. Christianity maintains the Estates of the World, in all the Right they had, when they became Christians; And cannot justify itself to the World otherwise. How should the World receive it upon other terms? But if the World stand upon the same terms, having received Christianity, as afore; then must Christianity, and the Church, continue in the same Rights, which it had before the World received it. No exception to be allowed, but as afore; If it appear, that the Faith and Laws of the Primitive Church be decayed. Not if it seem to private Spirits, that the Scripture is not fulfilled. In the mean time, is it for the honour of the Religion we profess, that Weakness, (which at the best is negative ignorance, in truth, perhaps, wilful ignorance) should give Law to it? Is it reason, that they, who have failed to destroy both Church and Kingdom, should give Law to both? As if a Child should govern the House, because he will be framfold, and disquieted, otherwise. Surely it is that, which the Emperor said to his Niece; Put as tibi injuriam fieri nisi imperas? But is that the way to have Peace in Religion? When Inferiors shall be made to tread upon the necks of their Superiors, they will be so modest for the future, as to stay there. They will be content, to have their Doctrine regulated by them, as the Law of the Kingdom requires. Or, they will think fit, that the Bishops be content with their Revenues, and leave them to Preach what they please. Surely, they that can carry the dispute of a hundred years; wherein the Bishops had so visibly the better, that Club-law was found requisite to get the advantage; will not lay down the Cudgels here. So, they that agree, in conforming to the Laws, differing every day, in that which the Law determines not, the Recusants on both sides may make hay in the heat of our Contentions; and profit more by such a Law, then by the War which destroyed this Church. But especially the Atheists, who have profited so well under these Contentions, as to make that visible, which was but foreseen under the Usurper; That no Religion would in time stand to be the Religion of the Kingdom; They, having the Privilege of the Laws, and not liable to any Infamy, when the differences maintained make Religion contemptible, shall have cause to thank all that shall have done their work, by soliciting such Laws.   

CHAP. XVII. Of the Opinion of Regeneration by Baptism.  
ONe point I must not pass over in silence, which hath been named for a point to be changed; That all passages, seeming to determine the Opinion of Baptismal Regeneration, be altered in the Liturgy and Rubrics of it. For, this point is an instance, how easily, the substance of Faith, necessary to Salvation, may be questioned, or abated, or renounced, by a Clause of such an Act. I grant it is clearly S. Paul's Opinion, S. Peter's Opinion, our Lord Christ's Opinion, the Opinion of God's whole Church. Be it the Opinion of those, whose Opinion is our Faith. But he that would have it no more than Opinion, must teach us a new Faith. No Remission of Sins but by Baptism; Entering us into the Covenant of Grace, which the Vow of Baptism inacteth. Entering us into the Church, into which the Sacrament of Baptism introduceth. Abate the Covenant, which the Sacrament of Baptism inacteth, and how shall a Christian be regenerate? Abate the mention of it in the Service, and where will be the Faith, which this Church, with the Whole Church, hitherto professeth? Show me any Christian, that ever questioned it, till it was questioned, what was to be Reform in the Church, and let it be abated. Can Pelagius have questioned it, his Heresy had not so easily been quelled. He that traveled all the Church, from Britain to Jerusalem, had he found any Church, any received Doctor of any Church, that durst maintain Salvation due by the Covenant of Grace, to any man that dies unbaptised, he had made the Church more work than he did. No Baptism, no Original sin; no Cure for Original sin but Baptism; no Salvation without the Cure. They that think to confute Anabaptists, abating this point of Faith, no marvel if they make Anabaptists; when they make men think, that the Church hath no better Reason to confute them with, than they will use. Some perhaps, that are not so well taught as they should be, may think it unagreeable with Christianity, that Salvation should depend upon a Bodily act, as the washing of Baptism; and that in the Power, not of him that is Baptised, but of the Church, or of him that is to minister in behalf of the Church. But S. Peter hath answered this Objection, by distinguishing two things in Baptism, 1 Pet. III. 21. the one, the washing of the Body, which saves not; The other, the Answer that is made out of a good Conscience, to the Examination tendered him that is Baptised; whether he will undertake Christianity or not; And this saves, if S. Peter say true. And what account can any Christian give himself, to ground the hope of his Salvation upon, but 〈◊〉 Christianity; which the Gospel tendereth, which Baptism inacteth? Or what can be necessary to Salvation, if the ground of the hope thereof be not? This is that one ground, which overthroweth both those Heresies, in which, I said, all the erroneous Doctrines, of that Confusion which we have seen, do resolve. The Profession, which we make at our Baptism, is the Condition on our part, upon which, the Promise of the Covenant of Grace becomes due on God's part. The Profession so made, nothing can defeat the hope of a Christian, but the transgressing of it; Being transgressed, nothing can repair this hope, but the restoring of it. All Arts to disguise this Faith, all over the Scripture, signify nothing, but the hope of Salvation, without living the life of Christians. I will hope, whatsoever fanatics or Atheists would have, that there was never any intent to demand, so great an Apostasy from the Faith to be enacted, by a Law of the Kingdom. I will hope much more, that, had it been demanded, it would have been rejected, with that indignation, which so great Apostasy deserveth. But I am glad, and give God hearty thanks, that I have lived to the day, when I may and do testify to my Country, and to the Church of God in it, that he who should demand of them, to renounce this point, must demand of them to unchurch themselves, and to be, for the future, that which the See of Rome would have us to be.   

CHAP. XVIII. Conference for Satisfaction is Forbearance.  
BUt is there then no effect of S. Paul's precept, in our Case? Can we break the Unity of the Church, without breading the Charity of Christians? Or can particular Christians be tied to forbear one another, and Christian Powers not be tied, to cause both to do the same? Here is indeed the Hinge, upon which the truth turns; and resolves all questions, and clears all difficulties, which must and will entangle the World in confusion, upon the account of Christianity, till it be owned. Christian Powers may constrain their Subjects, that profess Christianity, to be Christians; and punish them if they be not. But they must protect them for their Subjects, though they be not. The reason of this hath not been declared, by the Reformation; though they have just cause to complain, and do, as they have cause, complain of the See of Rome, for authorising capital Penalties upon Heretics. Under that name they comprise also Schismatics; And Schismatics, in their language, (as also in the language of all that claim the Authority of the Church) signifies all that maintain Communion apart; though the Cause make the Crime before God. But if S. Paul have Reason, when he commands every Christian to continue in the Estate in which he was called to be a Christian, then can no man's Life or Estate become forfeit, for not being a Christian; And much less, for not being Orthodox, but an Heretic. If the Life or Estates of Subjects should Eschete to the Sovereign, for not being Christians, that temporal Dominion of Sovereigns must be founded upon the Grace they have to be Christians. All such Right S. Paul disclaims, and discharges. But shall Sovereign Power, that is Christian, be therefore disabled, to give Law to Subjects professing Christianity? That is our Case; the whole Kingdom professing Christianity, though the Whole cannot so properly be said to profess the Reformation. For, the Reformation settled by Law, we see, is refused, as well by those that separate from it, for a Reformation of their own, as by those that adhere to the See of Rome. Shall the Sovereign then lose the Right, that all Christian Sovereigns have, of giving Law to their Subjects, in point of Religion, because he is a Christian? Or shall the Subject, by being a Christian, stand obliged to the Laws of his Sovereign, commanding him to stand to the Christianity which he professeth? Suppose the Christianity commanded to be Visible, before Christian Powers command it, and you enable their Laws to oblige their Subjects. Not supposing it, you cannot say, how the Laws of Sovereign Powers should oblige Christian Subjects; seeing the Papacy, as well as the Reformation, maintained by Christian Sovereigns. For, by the same Reason, for which, the Subjects of those Powers that maintain the Reformation are tied to their Laws; by the same Reason, should the Subjects of those that maintain the Papacy be obliged to obey the Laws, by which they maintain it. There can be no Reason for a difference, if that which they maintain be not Visible, before the Law maintain it. I suppose it will not be though a good Plea, at the day of Judgement, for a Subject to say; that he was either Protestant or Papist, because his Sovereign was so. Now, Christianity can be Visible, by no other means, but, because it is the Visible Profession of the Visible Church. If it become Invisible, by differences betwixt Parties, it must be in Sovereign Powers, to bring the Parties to trial; Provided, that there be no trial, but by the Visible Church. This is the Forbearance that may be extended by Pastors, and may be required by the Sovereign, in our Case. For, the present dissension shows, that the Reformation was well begun, indeed, but not perfected. Does not the World know, that there was an Act in force, for nominating Commissaries, to Reform the Ecclesiastical Laws of the Kingdom? I am not to say, why this Act took no effect. I think I have said it, when I have observed the rise of the Puritan Party, and the seeds of the late War, sowed in the beginning of Recusancy. But I am to say, it could not have taken good effect, without taking in the Principle which I maintain. What could be more just, and discreet, then to appoint Commissaries, in equal number, of Bishops, Divines, Civil and Common Lawyers? But what could have had force, but that which had been done, to restore and maintain the Faith, and Laws of the Primitive Church? There are very great Reasons, why, those that desire to serve the Church should be satisfied, in all that this Exception will allow. There can be no Reason, why more should be allowed. To bring them into dispute with their Pastors, is to put the Authority of the Church to compromise. To compromise any Law of the Kingdom, to dispute of Divines, upon this Principle, is no more, then to oblige, either Popish or Fanatic Recusants, either to stand to the Result, or to suffer Penalties competent to their disobedience; and the hazard which the Public Peace runneth, when the Peace of Religion is disturbed. If that which hath been pretended be all that is intended; That some small things are scrupled; Let the Legislative Power be satisfied, that the preservation of Religion, and of the Authority of the Church; in which the preservation of Religion consisteth; is only sought. The Interest of the Parties, to give and to receive mutual satisfaction, is so great, that if there can be ever hope of Peace, by dispute, this is the time, and ours the Case, wherein to hope for it.   

CHAP. XIX. Probability of recovering the Presbyterians.  
FOr, I cannot have so hard an opinion of men, whose zeal, for the advancement of Discipline in the Church, I have always esteemed; as to think them resolved, to ruin the Common Christianity, without hope of doing their own business; seeing this to be the unavoidable consequence, of holding up the difference on foot; rather then taking up, with so much of their own Pretensions, as the State of the Catholic Church will allow. Let them consider, in the first place, the Recusancy of the fanatics as well as those of the Church of Rome; What hope their Principles can give them, either to make their Recusancy punishable by the Law of the Land, or to reduce them, by convicting them of that sense of the Scripture, which they only allow themselves to convict them with? I set aside, for the present, those Prophecies of Daniel and the Revelation, by which, they pretend the Pope to be Antichrist, and the Papists Idolaters. For, I must argue in due place, that the Recusancy of the Papist cannot be punishable by Law, upon this Account. But how will they, either reduce the Recusancy of the Papist, by those punishments, which the Recusancy of the fanatics must suffer; or give the Kingdom, God, and the World, a Reason for the why not? which the best of them is here challenged to undertake. Then, let them consider the wantonness of these times, and the wits of them, that think it good sport, to call in question the foundation of Christianity, upon the belief of Original sin, by introducing the praeexistence of Souls; That think it but sport, to make ready their studies in Divinity, for the Pulpit, by Episcopius his Works; denying Original sin both name and thing, and making the Faith of the Holy Trinity unnecessary to Salvation. Or rather by the Works of the Socinians, collected and united together in Holland, on purpose to prepare us, for the same Apostasy to Socinianism, which they are in so much danger of there. Let them consider, what hope they have, to make the Universities good Presbyterians, that have sowed the seeds of this danger in them, by the dissatisfaction they had of their Doctrine, when they were in Possession there. Then let them tell me, what we shall say to the Papists, to persuade them, to come to Church; when as they shall say, that they cannot be secured, that their Curate is no Socinian, or Origenist. For, the Arminian Congregations in Holland having admitted the Socinians into their Communion; and the Canon of the Church making all Socinians, in the eye of the Church, that Communicate with Socinians; how shall they be secured against those, that take their Doctrine from the Socinians; Or from them, who communicate with Socinians? Besides, let them but remember the time, when they had the Ball at their Foot; an Ordinance of Parliament for setting up their Presbyteries; And how much they gained upon the People, (whom they had disordered out of all Ecclesiastical Government) when they came to be at what they would be at. I think they will be at so great despair, of reducing the World to their intent, (having nothing in the Law of the Land to favour it) that they will think, that they have cause to thank God, of a good opportunity, to bring them off from an engagement, in which they are like to gain so little, by hazarding the common Christianity. As for the Clergy of this Church, I suppose there is none of them so little a Christian, as to repute it a loss to the Party, to see their Adversaries capable of that trust in the Church, and those rewards of it, which they have suffered for themselves. For, if the necessity of the Kingdom hath required an Act of Oblivion, much more must the necessity of Religion; which cannot be attained, without a cordial conspiring, of those that are to manage it; enforce a mixture of Interest. And that being considered, let any man tell me, how that can be made, but by a Third, in which all are alike Interessed; That is, by owning the Faith and the Laws of the Catholic Church, whereby the Papist is either reduced, or left punishable as the Fanatic.   

CHAP. XX. The Cure, by repairing the Revenue of the Church.  
BUt all this is but a Cure for the Symptom. Should such a Conference take effect, the Cause of the disease would remain entire. For, the Cause of our Divisions is not these differences; which are too inconsiderable, to produce so incomparable a mischief, as that of Schism. It rises, and is fomented, by those Interests, which the imperfection of two Laws of Henry VIII. hath created. So that, the Reformation is no way obliged to answer for them; Only, if it refuse not to mend them, now that time hath discovered the mischiefs which they have produced. I call them two Laws, not as if they were comprised in two Acts of Parliament; but because they concern, one of them the endowment, the other, the Rights of the Church. We all know, that, when the Monasteries were given to the Crown, the endowment of those Churches, which had been impropriated to those Monasteries, was transferred, by the Crown, into those hands, that could not Officiate the Cure of Parishes; as the Monasteries, by some of their Members, or by their Vicars, had done. And, though the Right of the Crown (which could be no more than the Monasteries had) could not abate the Original Right of the Bishop, in settling a reasonable portion upon the Vicarages; yet, in the hands of those that claim under the Crown, it hath appeared so strong, that such Vicarages are generally impoverished; But where the Cure lay upon the Covent, there, there now remains no endowment, no Provision for the Cure of Souls; Which falls out most in Cities, and places that were most frequented with Monasteries, as well as with People. What the consequence hereof hath been, it is plain enough; Even a sort of Mongrel Clergy of Lecturers; Who, being Authorized by the Bishop's Orders and Licence, but paid by the People, to supply the Office of Preaching, which the Benefices of the Church were not able to maintain; Like a Pack of Dogs, that are ruled by the Huntsman that seeds them, and sets them a work, not by the Master that provides for them; No marvel that they own not the Bishops, for Judge of their Preaching, whether according to the Law or not. He that sees not, that this was the source of the late War, of him is the Proverb, that says; No man so blind as he that will not see. And the worst is, that so great a part of the Gentry, as have shared with the Crown, in the spoils of the Monasteries, think it their Interest, to hold up that Party, which, they think, would justify their Title in point of Conscience; Whereas it is found by experience, that those very Preachers, that would Reform the Church by force of the People, would question their Tenure, as soon as they saw themselves in condition to do it. Now, I intent not here to dispute, that, foundations to intents of false Religion; as for redeeming Souls out of Purgatory; are ipso facto forfeit to the true. God himself hath recommended this Course to the Church, in the Case of the Censers of Core, Dathan, and Abiram; which he challenges for his own, to the use of the Altar, though consecrated to the use of their Schism. But the Christian Emperors of the Primitive Churches, enacting those Penalties upon the Conventicles of Heretics and Schismatics, which we read, in the last Book of Theodosius his Code, the fifth Title de Haereticis; have confiscated the places where they met in nine Laws, and forfeited them to the Church, in five. Whereby it appears, that the Primitive Church, living under those Laws, did not think, that goods, so consecrated, do, of necessity, escheat to the Church. My present purpose obliges me only to suppose, that the Tithes; which, all the world saw, that they had been consecrated to God, for maintaining the Cures of the Parishes; These, if there be any such thing as a Church, could not be alienated from it, without Sacrilege. But I say not, therefore, that they can never be held bona side; Which is that which makes the jealousy incurable, in those that find their Estates consist much of them. And, yet, I undertake not to warrant, generally, the holding of them; Only think, that, in some particulars, it may be warrantable. For, when they are come into such hands, that the support of Estates depends necessarily upon them; and that, by mean contracts, and originally such, as had in them no ill Faith; I say not I can warrant them, I think they may be warrantable. Now, I know there may be an Act of Oblivion done by the Church, as well as by the Kingdom. And the Church of Rome knew it well enough, when they reconciled this Kingdom, under Q. Mary, without restoring these Possessions. By the same Reason, for which Heretics and Schismatics were always dispensed with for Canonical Penalties; (leaving the Pardon to God, that the Unity of the Church might be recovered) By the same, may the Church leave all to their own Consciences; not warranting their pardon from God, neither yet refusing them the Communion, as unpardonable. But alas, what would this Act do in our Case, did the whole Clergy understand themselves tied in Conscience, by it, not so much as to mention, much less to reproach any such Tenure? So long as the mischief once done remains unprovided for, by the Law, which gives the Title and Possession; the contradiction between the Canonical and Popular Interests can never cease. But if the Kingdom consider, that it was an Act of Parliament that did the wrong, they must necessarily find, that nothing but an Act of Parliament can repair it. And if the People consider, that a Parliament may transgress the trust which they repose in them; (which of necessity may come to pass, unless we make the Parliament infallible, and the Pope not) they will easily find, that a Parliament cannot repair the wrong that a former Parliament hath done, but upon the Charge of the people. For church-good, under Christianity, cease not to be the Goods of the People, though the Church be trusted with managing them, being founded by God for that purpose. And he that admits of the necessity of all this, will find it no considerable Charge for the whole Kingdom, to furnish contribution, necessary for the founding and indowing of Churches, requisite for the Resort and Cures of all Assemblies, requisite for a Reformation regulated by the Primitive Church. And if this be one Cause of our Divisions, and that the Kingdom cannot be counted a Christian Kingdom, till it take a course in it; let no man marvel to see the Judgements of God, in our Divisions, when he sees the Sin of the Kingdom continue. And if this were considered, the discourses that walk up and down in all Assemblies, of relieving the Public Charge, by seizing the pitiful remainder of the Church-Revenue, would appear to be, as they are, the productions of Atheism, not of pity to the people's purses.   

CHAP. XXI. By limiting and restoring Ecclesiastical Discipline.  
THe other Law, concerning the Right of the Church, in the Supremacy of the Crown, over all Persons, and in all Causes, as well Fcclesiastical as Civil, may seem to extinguish the Right of the Church, over the same Persons, and in the same Causes: Which could not be called Ecclesiastical, if there were no such thing as a Church, (as one of the Articles of our Creed professes) endowed by God, with a Right in and over the same. And therefore, I do not attribute the cause of our divisions to it, as unjust, but as indefinite, and unlimited. And I instance in the Tenure of our Ecclesiastical Courts; Which, by a branch of this Law, are declared to be the King's Courts, and the Judges of them the King's Judges. A thing necessarily following, upon the Resumption of the Rights of the Crown, usurped by the See of Rome, into the Crown. But which hath turned so great dissatisfaction, in the establishment of Religion by the Law of this Land; because the Right of the Church, in that part of their Jurisdiction, which necessarily ariseth from the Founding of the Church, by our Lord Christ, hath not been reserved to the Church, by express Provision of Law. Thereupon followed another Law, which gave the Judges of these Courts the Privilege of being Married: At such time, as the Law of the Land allowed not the Clergy to Marry. And by consequence, made them no Clergymen, whom the Law owned for the King's Judges of these Courts; Exempting them thereby, from the Canonical Obedience, which they of Clergy own their Bishops; And leaving their Ministering of the Laws, in their respective Jurisdiction, to their own discretion, as well against, as without the consent of their Bishops. It is true, they subsist by Patents granted by their Bishops, and other Ecclesiastical Dignities, endowed with Jurisdictions. But, the Law having declared them the King's Judges, I refer it to Judgement, whether it were any marvel, that the Bishops, and other Dignities with Jurisdiction, should discharge themselves of their Jurisdiction, upon such Judges, as the Law had qualified, rather than cross the Law, in taking them upon their own charge; Part whereof, in ministering the Power of the Keys, and in correcting the inferior Clergy, is essential, and necessary to the Office, which Ordination makes the Clergy (Bishops, and Presbyters) capable of. For it is resolved upon, by the Sages of our Laws, that, such a Patent being granted for term of life, the Patentee is enabled to exercise the whole Jurisdiction, without and against the consent of him that grants it; and shall be maintained against him, in so doing, by the Law of the Land. I am neither to blame, nor to excuse them, that have not done their utmost, to redeem the Office, which we are consecrated to a capacity of managing, out of that Possession, which the Law of the Land thus engageth. For, it is granted, and it is to be granted, that the Church cannot pardon sin; As if it could pardon him that is not qualified for pardon: Or keep him from pardon that is. But the Church pardons sin, by bringing him to be qualified for pardon that is not: And declaring him pardoned that is. If we were fanatics, and believed no Condition of pardon, but only, to imagine that we are pardoned; There would be no Church, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Keys of the Church to manage. If we believed, as some understand the Council of Trent; That sin is pardoned, by submitting it to the Keys of the Church: And that the mortification of the flesh serves only to redeem the temporal Penalty, remaining due when the sin is pardoned; A Lay Judge, having knowledge, might manage the Keys of the Church, as well as a Priest. But, because a notorious sinner becomes qualified for pardon, when the Concupiscence is mortified, which his sin gratifies: And, because he undergoes his Mortification, because he cannot have the Communion otherwise; Therefore are they only, that consecrate the Eucharist, to judge, whether he be qualified or not, and to give or refuse him that which they consecrate. And, Commutation of Penance, when it supposes not, the inward contrition of the heart performed, by outward mortification of the flesh, is but the betraying of that Soul to damnation, whom it admits to Communion, not being qualified for it. True it is, nothing hinders him, that is discharged of Excommunication, to become qualified by his own private endeavours. But, God would never have founded his Church, upon the Power of the Keys, if the Office thereof were only, not to hinder, and not also to procure, notorious sinners, to be fit for Communion with the Church. And, that to procure, must be the Office of those, who, by the Foundation of the Church, are to judge, who is fit and who not. If therefore the Law of the Land provide not, that that Office of the Church may be in force, to that effect, for which the Power of the Keys is given them that consecrate the Eucharist; Is it any marvel, that the Judgement and Vengeance of God should lie so heavy upon the Land, professing Reformation, and not enabling that which it professeth to take place? My present business therefore is now to say; That the Interests which cause our Divisions are so far imputable to these Laws, as, without the Reforming of the Laws, they cannot be cured. Two of these Interests I name, contradictory the one to the other, in their Pretences. For, what doth the World complain of, but of the abuse of Excommunication; daily employed, to enforce the contentious Jurisdiction of these Courts; Never employed, to the correction of sin, and recalling of sinners; Which, being the Office of those that receove the Power of the Keys by Ordination, cannot be exercised by the Laity, without Sacrilege. Now, granting, that the Usurpation of the See of Rome, or the Indulgence of Christian Princes and States have procured, or granted to the Clergy, a larger Jurisdiction than their Office required; It would have been no Inconvenience, that the whole Jurisdiction should be enforced, by Excommunication, signifying imprisonment by the Law of the Land; If a difference had been made, between the proper Jurisdiction of the Church, and the Accessary. For, in this part of it, it is an oppression to Christian Subjects, that they should be barred the Communion, for maintaining themselves and their Right, by Law, in matters of any Right of this World; Though the Clergy were Judges, by the Law of the Land. But it would be no oppression to them, that the Jurisdiction of the King's Courts should be enforced by imprisonment; which Excommunication might signify, by the Law of the Land, without signifying a Bar to the Communion of the Eucharist; if these were duly distinguished. In the mean time, the whole endowment of the Church, in a manner, being irrecoverable by these Courts, without Excommunication; the scandal of these Jurisdictions becomes a Popular Plea, to strip the Clergy of their maintenance; Tyths being no farther paid, than it please Frantic fanatics, or contentious neighbours, to do right of good will; Knowing that, Excommunication being odious, Imprisonment is not like easily to follow upon it. I said, that there is another Interest on foot, upon a Pretence contradictory to this. And I mean that, which vulgar Professors of the Laws of the Land set up to themselves, out of these scandals; To reduce the whole Jurisdiction of Ecclesiastical Courts under the Jurisdiction of the Laws of the Land, and those Courts that minister the same. This Interest espouseth the Opinion, which voids the Article of our Creed that professes One Catholic Church; making Excommunication, and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction, founded by our Lord Christ, a mere Imposture; declareth it uncapable of any Sacrilege, to be committed in the using of it. In the mean time, the Clergy, whose Interest is no ways concerned, in the Scandals, which the Ecclesiastical Courts may give; Further, then as they are hindered, by the said Courts, to cure their Scandals, by the due Use of their own Office; do suffer, not only the Scandals which are done under colour of their Patents; But even the affronts of the Ecclesiastical Courts themselves; Receiving Appeals, from the Censure of their Bishops upon the Clergy. For, a few examples, serving the Bishops, not to employ that Jurisdiction, which is so easily affronted, it must be acknowledged, that the debauches of the Clergy are come to that height, that, till they be Reform, Reformation is not duly pretended against the See of Rome.   

CHAP. XXII. The ground of the proper Interest of the Church.  
BUt perhaps there be those, that are persuaded by the Leviathan, that a Church is nothing else but a Christian Commonwealth. And that the Civil Power thereof, which is Sovereign, hath full Right to enjoin whatsoever it please, for the Christian Religion; exacting what Penalties it please of Recusants. There be others besides the Leviathan, that have maintained some branches of the same Opinion; but he is the only man, that hath looked the whole Question in the Face, with this Answer. I will but relate the Issue, which his own Resolution hath driven him to, and leave him to Judgement. For, having objected to himself, in his Latin Book de Cive, that which is obvious to all Understandings; That then, a Christian may be justly punished, for his Christianity; He answers, that it is no inconvenience, that he should; Because, by suffering, he purchases an abundant reward. I know not whether any man told him, or whether himself took notice, that this was the answer of Julian the Apostate, making himself sport with the complaints of the Christians; That they were beholding to him for the Kingdom of Heaven, which they gained by suffering his Persecutions; But, that it was not for the credit of his doctrine, to bring Christian Princes into the predicament of Julian the Apostate. And therefore, upon second thoughts, his Leviathan answers; That a Subject is bound to obey all that his Sovereign commands in Religion, whether he be Christian or not: Insomuch that, if he command him to renounce Christ, he is bound to do it with his mouth, and shall be saved, believing in him with his heart, nevertheless. This answer shows the necessary issue of this Opinion; That he who holds it, if he be as bad as his word, is as necessarily an Apostate, as Julian the Apostate. The hope of Salvation, and the Right of Communion with the Church, lies not only in the heart, which believes to righteousness, but in the mouth, which professeth to Salvation. The Profession, which is made at our Baptism, is a Condition, without which it cannot be had. It is the taking up of Christ's Cross, which the Gospel requireth. He that declares himself free, in any Case whatsoever, to renounce Christ's, though he hath not done it, hath declared himself free of the Bond, which he entered into at his Baptism; And as he is no more a Christian to God, no more should he be to the Church. If further he say; As the Propositions first maintained, and afterwards recanted, by his late Disciple at Cambridge, do import; That there is no difference between good and bad, before Civil Power that is Sovereign enact it; Then must it be said further, that he is properly an Atheist. For, if God govern not the World, if he reward not the good, if he punish not the bad, though man do not, (pardon me God and all good Christians, if I repeat Blasphemy, that it may never more be repeated) then is he not God. Particularly, if Civil Power can oblige a man to say or swear, that which he means not, there remains not that Ground for Civil Society, which the Heathen themselves (whom nevertheless S. Paul truly calls Atheists) maintained. For, what Ground for Civil trust, if there be no Law, before Civil trust, to punish the falsifying of it? Let him that considers this Consequence, (necessary upon all Opinions, that distinguish not the matter of Ecclesiastical Law, consequent to the State and Constitution of the Church, from the Force it hath, to be a Law of the Kingdom, by the Act of the Kingdom) I say, let him answer in Conscience, whether those Laws, by which the Rights of the Crown, Usurped by the See of Rome, are Resumed into it, did proceed upon this Opinion or not. For my part, I remember very well a solemn Protestation, which one of them makes, that the intent was not, to innovate any thing in Religion, by vindicating the Rights of the Crown. And therefore do infer, that none of them can be understood, to extinguish the Rights of Religion, concurrent with the Rights of the Crown, in Church-matters, which it doth not distinguish; Knowing how difficult it is, to distinguish between them; As not knowing, that ever the ground, upon which they are to be distinguished, was delivered till now. But there is an Act of the V of Q. Elizabeth, by which, that abatement in the sense of the Supremacy of the Crown in Church-matters, which had been declared by her Injunctions, from the beginning of her Reign, to prevent misconstructions, was made a Law of the Land. This Act, because it undertaketh not to limit the Supremacy, by distinguishing the Interest of the Crown from the Interest of the Church, (for the difficulty of satisfying all Consciences) gives the Subject leave, to declare the sense, in which he takes that Oath; reserving to himself, that which Religion requires a Christian to reserve, for the Church. Which was not the sense of them that believed no Catholic Church, no Visible Right of it. And, by virtue of this Declaration, it is, that myself have undertaken to declare that limitation, which the Catholic Church requireth. For, how many Prelates and Divines of this Church, (King James of excellent Memory in particular) have done the same? But it is no other, then that which the Canons of K. James declare; when they describe this Supremacy to be the same, which the Godly Kings of God's Ancient People, which the Roman Emperors of the Primitive times (before that corruption came in, which we Protest against) did exercise. Here have you the due bounds of this Supremacy, settled by Law, upon the true ground of it. For it is manifest, that it cannot be derived from the Rights of the Kings of God's Ancient People alone; Because there could be no Catholic Church, before the calling of the Gentiles. But, the Empire, embracing the Faith, when the Church was settled upon that Faith, and those Laws, that are now as Visible, as the Laws of England, from which present Titles are derived, can be Visible; must needs have that Right, from which the Right of all present Sovereignty's must be derived; Because the Church, (whose Interest concurreth with the Interest of them all, in the same matters) is always One and the same, and aught so to be, from the first to the second Coming of Christ. And that answers any difficulty, that may be objected, when any Law of any Roman Emperor, or other Christian Prince or State, seems to infringe the Canons of the Church. For, the Protection of the Crown being of such advantage as it is, both for the enlarging, and maintaining of Christianity; It is enough, that the Church can continue One and the same Visible Church, by one and the same Visible Laws; Though the force and effect of them be hindered now and then, here and there, by some Acts of Secular Power, which, in some regards, may advance the Church as much, as they hinder it in others. It was necessary for the Crown, under Henry the VIII, to vindicate the Supremacy from the pretence of the Pope's Secular Power; which had been on foot divers Ages afore. And therefore, not to have to do with him, that pretended to assoil the Subjects of Princes, whom he should excommunicate, of their Allegiance, till they might own him, upon terms, consistent with the Protection they own their People. And it was still more necessary, under Edward the VI when the Reformation was enacted; which, they knew well enough, that the Pope would not endure. But, when the Right of the Crown in Church-matters is declared by Law, to be the same, which the Kings of God's Ancient People, and the first Christian Emperors did exercise, the ground of that Interest, and the bounds of that Interest, which the Church must challenge, if it will continue a Church, are declared to be the same, which the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church from the beginning do allow.   

CHAP. XXIII. Of restoring and reforming the Jurisdictions of the Crown, and of the Church, in Ecclesiastical Causes.  
ANd this makes the Reformation of our Ecclesiastical Laws as easy, as it is visibly the cure of all distempers in Religion among us. It is in brief this; That the Jurisdiction, which may by this means appear to the Kingdom, to be invested in the Church by God's Law, be, by a Law of the Kingdom, restored to the Clergy; To the Bishops in chief, then, to the Chapters of their Cathedrals, and to their Archdeacon's; (And to these, not without the Assistance of the Principal Clergy, of their Respective Jurisdictions) the Judges of the Ecclesiastical Courts continuing the King's Judges, as they are now by Law; to manage the Interest of the Crown, (in all the Rights thereof, resumed into the Crown, by the Acts of Supremacy) according to the Roman Laws, in those Ages of Christendom, which passed before the Usurpation of the See of Rome had taken place. If it be said; That it is not Visible, when those Usurpations took place; I shall allow all the time, which that Code of the Canons contains, that Pope Adrian sent to Charles the Great; In whose time, there can be no pretence of Usurpation, upon the Temporalties of Princes, by the See of Rome. This Code is yet read, under the Name of Codex Canonum Ecclesiae Romanae. I have commended the Justice and Wisdom of that Commission, which was designed under Henry the VIII, and Edward the VI, for the qualities of Persons limited by it. But I do not think it possible for any Commission, to Reform the Alterations introduced by the Pope's Canon Law, after that time, in one King's Reign, with that circumspection which is requisite. The Jurisdiction which the Church challenges, by God's Law, can not be distinctly stated, with more satisfaction to all Interests, preserving that of Religion, then by a Commission so qualified. The Interest of the Kingdom, in preserving the study of the Roman Laws, hath always been thought considerable. But how shall the study of them be maintained, if the Authority of them be not maintained? Or how shall that Authority be maintained, but by adopting them into the Law of the Kingdom, in matters necessary to be provided for by Law, but not provided for, by the native Law of the Kingdom? Or what provision can there he, by the native Law of the Kingdom, for those Causes, which, for so many hundred years before the Reformation, the Pope's Canon Law had sentenced, by the Authority of the Kingdom? There is an Interest of Religion in Matrimonial Causes, in Testamentary Causes, in Causes arising upon Elections of Corporate Clergy, in Causes of Dispensation in Canons, in Causes of Tithes, in divers sorts of Causes, besides those which the Power of the Keys, in the Discipline of the People, and the Correction of Inferior Clergy occasioneth. Let me not say, that it were Barbarous, for a flourishing Kingdom, in a flourishing Age, for all other Learning, to reduce the Trial of them, to the Arbitrary Verdicts of Juries; (Who can never understand the Grounds, upon which the matter of Fact is to be stated) when I can so clearly say, that there can be nothing more like to mere Tyranny, then Arbitrary Justice; nor Justice more Arbitrary, then, where it is manifest, that there can have been no other Law provided, because the Canon Law hath been hitherto used. As for those Causes, which are proper to the Church, as rising from the Constitution of it; how can it stand with Religion, and Reformation in Religion, which we pretend, to try them otherwise, then by those, which, the Kingdom shall be satisfied, by such a Commission, that they are by God's Law capable of Authority to do it? And the Interest of the Crown, and of the Subjects, which it is bound to protect, shall be secured, when provision is made, by adopting the Roman Laws, for managing the Rights of the Crown, resumed by the Act of Supremacy, within those Bounds, which the Roman Laws maintained, before the Usurpation of the See of Rome. It cannot be denied, that the Pope's Canon Law (which the Law of the Land hath already adopted, so far as it contradicteth not the Law of the Land) provideth for many things, not provided for by the Primitive Canons, within the Compass of the Roman Laws. And it would be too much rashness, to recall that Adoption, and to leave so much matter to arbitrary Justice, rather than retain a Provision, which the Law and Religion professed by the Kingdom owns not the Original of, though it own the matter it hath adopted. For, whatsoever shall prove, by time and trial, to hinder the Reformation, which we pretend thus to ground, and thus to bound, the faults that shall be found by experience must open the way of mending it, because the Cure must be as particular, as the disease is. And upon these Terms, it can be no dishonour to the Kingdom, and to the Reformation which it professeth, to use the Canon Law which it adopteth, till time show the way of amending those particulars, which, time shall show, that the Reformation pretended requires to be changed. For instance, we know, that since Henry VIII. it is not the custom to take any degree in Canon Law; Notwithstanding the Law of the Land adopteth the Canon Law. And, accordingly we all know, that Graduates in the Civil Law of the Romans are privileged, by the Ecclesiastical Law of the Kingdom. I would fain have any of them, that would wear the Face, and the Conscience of a good Christian, and a good English man both; Give me a reasonable Account of these their Tenors, waving that which I here set forth for them; whom they will think too bold with their Freehold for it. For my part, who am no man's foe, but my own, in publishing my Opinion thus freely, upon this Exigent; I think I do good service to them, with my Country, to set forth this Account, why and how the Roman Laws deserve to be adopted into the Laws of the Kingdom; Namely, that the Pope's Canon Law, which is already adopted, may be limited within those Bounds, with the Roman Laws; (And by consequence, the Primitive Canons of the Church, which the Roman Laws acknowledge and enforce) do either prescribe or allow. I would make a further Offer, of introducing the Roman Laws, both into the Study of the Law of the Land, and into Authority in our Courts of Equity; And of reconciling, thereby, the Cross-Interests of the Professions, upon competence of Jurisdictions. But, though I must needs have that Opinion myself, which, I can see nothing against, seeing much for it; yet I will trouble no man with an Opinion, which neither my Profession obliges me, nor my skill inables me to make out. It shall be enough for me to observe, that they shall deserve to be counted Professors of the Roman Laws, that are trusted to minister the Canon Laws, by those Bounds, which the Roman Laws allow. As for the Concurrence of that Jurisdiction which is proper to the Clergy, by God's Law, and that which is resumed by the Crown, to be ministered by the Professors of the Roman Laws; I do acknowledge it cannot be ended, but by Appeals; The issue whereof, whither it ought to resort, when it is time to say, it will be then time to say also, how these Interests are reconcileable. In the mean time, Episcopacy being owned by the Law of the Kingdom, and the Law of God both, to be that which the whole Church, from the beginning acknowledgeth; I think I do my Country, and the Church of God in it no disservice, to propose a plaster large enough for the Sore of it, that shall come within the bounds which I have proposed. For, the Chapters of Cathedral Churches are, by their Birthright, Counsellors to the Bishops, and Assistants, in his whole Office; The Archdeacon his Minister, and principal Commissary. Those, by the Rule first set on foot by the Apostles, and observed always by the Church, of planting Cathedral Churches in Cities, and making the Churches planted in City's Cathedral Churches, for the Government of all Christendom within the Territories of those Cities. This being, by his Order, Ministerial to them, as well as to the Bishop, when both have part in the same Office. And here I place the hinge, upon which I hang the Reconcilement of the presumed Interest of the Presbyterians, with the true Interest of the Clergy; Supposing the Conference proposed to have taken effect, and produced a Request of both Parties, to the Legislative Power of the Kingdom, to make a Law of those particulars, upon which they are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 come to agreement, to be received, and to exercise their Ministry. For, the Office of the Clergy being separated from the Interest of the Crown, by an Act of the Kingdom; And the Professors of the Roman Laws trusted to manage this Interest, in behalf of the Subject; (Only assisting the Clergy, in that part of the Jurisdiction proper to the Church, which will concern the Interest of Subjects, as Members of the Church, as well as the Office of the Clergy) What shall hinder them, the Presbyterians, as well as the rest of the Clergy, to exercise the Zeal, which they have always professed, towards the Reforming of the conversation of the People, in assisting that Discipline, as well over the Inserior Clergy as the People, which the Chapters of Cathedral Churches, and the Archdeacon's shall, by the Bishop and under the Bishop, be trusted with? For what need all this hinder the Prerogative of the Bishop's Negative Vote; when as there will be more to do under him, than hands will be found for, reserving to him those causes, which he would choose to reserve? For, that will be found no more than requisite, to preserve his Prerogative, that nothing be done without him; when nothing is done without him, but that which he shall choose to be eased in. He that knows what the Hierarchy signifies, must needs understand, that the same means, which preserved the Whole Church in Unity, so far and wide for place, so long for time, as Unity prevailed in the Church, and Christianity with it and by it, knows that the same must be used, to preserve Unity in the Church of this Kingom; The Question being, how to Reform it so, that it may continue a Member of the Whole.   

CHAP. XXIV. Some Principal Canons to be restored, in our present State.  
FOr, let no man think, that any Law can be effectual to this purpose, till the Case be stated, which the Law is provided for. We are in the State of Schism, in spite of our teeth: Though we are to clear ourselves of the crime of Schism, upon the Terms settled; which cannot clear us, if it be possible, that any other should clear us. King Henry the VIII. had reason to declare, that he and his Kingdom should have nothing to do with the Pope, that Excommunicated him for his Divorce; So many Pope's having discharged the Subjects of Princes Excommunicate, of their Allegiance. But, to make good the Protestation, that he intended no further change in Religion; I need not say what he did, to give succeeding Popes occasion to recall the folly of that Pope, which Excommunicated him, by a timely Reconcilement. In the mean time, the way to preserve the Kingdom in Peace was, to have nothing to do with the See of Rome. But, had he been so well advised, as to have maintained his Divorce upon the terms which I plead for; What could the Pope have said to that Code of Canons, which Pope Adrian the I. sent to Charles the Great; which I would have this Church to own? For it concludes, with a Synod of the Province of Rome, under Pope Gregory the II. which pronounces Anathema, to whosoever shall marry his deceased Brother's Wife. Let Julius II. Pope, that dispensed with Henry the VIII. and his Marriage with the Lady Katherine of Spain, have bethought himself, how to come clear of this Anathema; the Authority of the See of Rome being entire. For K. Henry the VIII. or at least for his Kingdom, it was and is enough, that, so long as he owned the Authority of that See, he must needs be troubled in conscience at that Marriage, by which he must needs incur it, preferring the former Act of a Council under Gregory the II. Pope, before a Bull of Julius the II. Pope, dispensing in an Anathema of the said Council. For, as the Primitive Canons are to be preferred, in Church-Law, before the looseness of succeeding Ages, being still further from the Apostles; So the Act of the Council, under the Regular Power of the Pope, is to be preferred before a Bull; which now passeth without the Consistory, as the Pope's personal Act, after the unlimited absolute Power of the Pope hath taken place. As for King Edward the VI professing the Reformation, and protesting it as he did; so that the See of Rome could have no pretence of correspendence, without owning it themselves; there succeeds the necessity of a State of Schism, upon the Excommunication following; The Crime of Schism remaining on that side that Excommunicates, for vindicating and restoring the Faith and the Laws of the Whole Church. This being the state of our Case: and the Laws of the Whole Church, and the Faith thereof, necessary to the Title, that must justify Reformation without the Consent of the Whole; Is it not manifest, to all Understandings, that the Law, by which this State is to be Governed, must be such a Provision, as the Laws of the Whole Church enable a part of it to make for itself, in the Case? And therefore, we must affirm, as many of us as would have no share in the Schism, as to God; being thus secured, that, to the Church, we are not chargeable with it; That there is nothing to hinder such a Provision, but the misunderstanding of them: And that we see not, what the Consequence of our own Profession requires. A reason that presses me so hard, that I do willingly expose myself to the displeasure of all, that shall find themselves disgusted, with this freedom; Only to give myself the satisfaction of publishing it, whatsoever displeasure it procure me; As being satisfied, that there is no other cure for our present distempers. For in the first place, it must be said, that it is in vain to talk of Regular Government, by the Canons of the Church, without restoring the liberty of Synods, to the respective Provinces. Not as if the Church needed any abatement, in the Act of Henry the VIII., which forbiddeth making, and perhaps advising of Canons to be made, without the Assent of the Crown. But because the World knows, it was the Usurped Legatine Power, that had brought Synods to nothing, by Usurping upon the Ordinary. And therefore, it is but Justice in the Crown, finding the Right of Synods, the Subjects thereof, Usurped by the See of Rome; to restore it to the Subjects, upon whom the Usurpation had been made; The Supremacy of the Crown being sufficiently provided for, by the said Act: And, the force of all Acts of Synods depending upon the Legislative Power of the Kingdom. In the next place, it is to no purpose, to talk of Reformation in the Church, unto Regular Government, without restoring the Liberty of choosing Bishops, and the Privilege of enjoying them, to the Synods, Clergy and People of each Diocese. I say not, depriving the Crown of the due Interest of a Negative, to any Person to be promoted a Bishop, in any instance of his Promotion. God forbidden it should come into my thought. But, the Supremacy being so provided for, so evident is the Right of the Synods, Clergy and People, in the making of those, of whom they consist, and by whom they are to be governed, that I need mark no other Reason, for the neglect of Episcopacy, but the neglect of it; For the neglect of Cathedral Churches, but the neglect, & alienation of their Office, under and with their Bishops. This for certain, had not the See of Rome introduced so much disorder, in the creating of Bishops, that we have not yet cured it, we should have heard of it with both ears, from their Advocates. And, if I may credit a person of unquestionable credit, his late Majesty was so convinced hereof, when he was at Oxford, that he offered to part with it, if a way were showed how to do it. As for the translating of Bishops; which done, as it is, of course, must needs render the Office unfruitful to their People; As no man can deny, that there ought to be a course, for dispensing in the Canon, for public good; So cannot this pretence of public good come to effect, unless it be maintained by the Office of Synods, to whom the State of the Church vindicates the Right of it. That which I said afore, of Appeals, belongs to this place. For, what Law can provide, that, in Causes reserved to the Bishop, parties shall rest content always with his sentence? Or whether can Ecclesiastical Causes resort, from him, but to the Synod of the Province? Again, what Christian Kingdom could ever prevent a mixture of Causes; That is, a concurrence of Interest, between the Sovereign Power, and the Office of the Church? Or what danger can be imaginable, to this Crown, in doing Right to the Church; Having only its own Subjects to deal with? Or what can be more ready, to receive Appeals of this Nature, than a Commission of Judges, delegate, as well by the Synods as by the Crown, for the expedition of such Causes, in which, the pretence of the Subject, as well as the Interest of Religion, may be concerned? As for matter of Faith; Having admitted all that hath been decreed within the time of the six truly General Councils; I dare say, that there is nothing, that the See of Rome can charge upon the Socinians, or Anabaptists, or any Sect of our fanatics, that is not condemned, in the Arians, Pelagians, or other Sects, which the Whole Church hath condemned, during that time. So that there can be no cause, why Christianity should not be maintained, by the Reformation, during this State of Schism, but neglecting the true consequence of that which we ourselves profess.   

CHAP. XXV. Two Laws more, necessary to the Reformation of the Church.  
THese are the principal points, in the Canons of the Whole Church, which the Profession of Reforming the Church obliges us to restore. There are two points more, the one concerning the People, the other the Inferior Clergy; which, till they be restored, our Reformation cannot be that which it pretendeth. That all, who shall be convicted in Law, of capital or infamous Crimes, stand Excommunicate ipso facto, and if Execution pass, be deprived of Christian Burial, unless they reconcile themselves to the Church; Unless the Law make this good, how should the Kingdom be counted a Christian Kingdom? For, if scandalous Crimes, that are notorious, be allowed Communion with the Church, how can it be a Church? Conviction, which is the Act of the Law, making the Crime notorious, how can Christianity be protected, and the Church not able to renounce them that renounce it by their deeds? The increase of sin so flagrant in this Nation, since the War began, makes the necessity of this Law flagrant. I was speaking of the Leviathan, that Monster of a Christian, that with one Book, (allowed by the Act of Oblivion, because the Doctrine was not damned, when the Person was pardoned) hath introduced that Deluge of Atheism and Profaneness, which we are ready to be drowned with. Let Public Justice have the convicting of the Blasphemies which he hath taught, if the Church be not in Case to bear the envy of such a trust. But to account for such a crime, by a pecuniary mulct, is to sell our Christianity, at the price, at which it is defied. Unless Infamy follow, and Excommunication, to bring it on, farewell Christianity, which compoundeth with Apostasy. The Father of the Sect thinks, I believe, that he hath as good Right to the Communion, as the rest of His Majesty's Subjects; Who, though he should profess Penitence for his crime, could not be believed; having given the World warning, that he may be bound to say, and to swear, that which he doth not believe. What course but this, to suppress the Vanity of committing Murder, under the name of a Duel? For, in all Commonwealths, where men's memory is not liable to Infamy, sin is not out of countenance. In that which is Christian, what can be infamous, if to forfeit Communion with the Church be not? As for Adultery, what punishment hath this Kingdom left for it? Or how shall it be counted a Christian Kingdom, having none? Be the trial of it, as Civil Interest shall require. If it pass without Excommunication, though the Law of the Land lay no hold on it, what can clear the Kingdom of the expectation of God's vengeance? By consequence hereof, they that are convicted of Simony in Civil Justice, must remain Irregular, to the Church; That is, though their Ordination can never be void, yet their persons must remain incapable of any trust, which their Clergy should make them capable of. And why should not the Privilege of their Clergy cease, and they remain Excommunicate for such a Crime? The other Law, concerning the Clergy, is the confining of every one to one Diocese; Which is but the Restoring of that Order, which the See of Rome had disordered, on purpose to engage in the disorders of it, all that they obliged by such Privileges. For, the Privileges reserved to the Crown, Nobility, and Bishops, whereby the abuse is but displaced, will not be considerable, in comparison with the Reformation which it hindereth. It seems strange to those, that find themselves Interested, that two Benefices with Cure should be allowed in one Diocese, not in several Dioceses, though at less distance. But the Law cannot be understood to allow all that it forbids not; Because there may be Reason, why the Public good will not allow the forbidding of that, which is left to the Conscience of particular persons. Were all Benefices restored to that Provision, which the Cures might require, perhaps Privileges of Pluralities might be extinguished. In the mean time, is it not enough, that, whatsoever the Quality be, the Office of Priest and Deacon is relative to their Respective Bishops? that no man can be answerable to one Bishop for a Charge, in which he is answerable to another for the same? Which if it hold not in one and the same Diocese, the Reason of the difference is both sufficient and evident. Always, the Ground being laid, that the Reformation of the Church is to be Ruled by the Canons of the Primitive Church; there can be no more question in this, then is in any thing, where the Primitive Institution, is as Visible, as the decay and abuse. But this will principally concern Archdeacon's, and the Dignified Clergy, which are to bear a part in the Bishops Office. For how should they be charged with that, which they are not charged to execute?   

CHAP. XXVI. Of Forbearance, due or not due, in two Instances.  
I Have proposed a Conference, I have determined, that all is to be tried by the agreement of the Catholic Church; But if we stay till the Parties agree to that, there must be no Conference. What have we to overcome this difficulty with? Considering, how the necessity of losing all Religion presses all Parties, and considering how slight the pretences of dissatisfaction at the Act of Uniformity are; though I cannot departed from my claim, that the Reformation cannot duly be made, but by and to that Pattern; yet I see it may be laid aside in the Trial, not supposing that the Will of God is declared by it. But, if the advantage be not allowed, which the consent of Christendom from the beginning hath, in the judgement of common Reason, above any Opinion of this time, or any Party pretending Reformation; what course can they hold, that have not reasonable Creatures to deal with? For how can they be counted reasonable, that prefer their own Reason, before the Reason of Christendom? Or how shall they distinguish their private Spirits, from the Enthusiasms of fanatics, that insist upon those Interpretations, and Consequences of Scripture, which, had any man seen before them, the Church had never been as it hath been? In fine, the Case being stated, I see no cause, to apprehend any obstinacy in the Parties, to prefer any faction, or partiality, before Reason so manifested, and so concerning the common Christianity. I will insist upon two Instances. All the World knows, that one of the abuses, which made the necessity of Reformation most appear, was that of private Masses; where the Eucharist was celebrated, and the people did not communicate. It is as well known, that the Reformation according to Calvin contents itself with four Communions a year; but no Assembly without Preaching. The Church of England hath aimed at the Communion every Lordsday and Holiday; at Sermons, as frequent as can be had, so as to maintain the reverence due to Religion, to Preaching, and to the Church. What question can there be in Religion, that the Eucharist is the principal Office of Religious Assemblies? What pretence of Reformation, in restoring Preaching, by silencing the Eucharist? It will be said, that there is fear of profaning so Religious an Office. But where is Reformation, if it make not the people fit for it? The Papists say; Private Masses are not commanded; they would have the people communicate, and encourage them to it. But what do they do to bring them to it? Surely more than they do, that silence the Eucharist for the Sermon; That are not contented, till so much Preaching be commanded, that they know the Eucharist must be silenced. Let them think what abilities are requisite, to maintain so frequent Preaching, that there shall be no time for the Eucharist; Let them think of the Scandals, that must needs fall out, for want of due abilities; and they will find cause, I doubt not, to prefer the Whole Church, before a late Party: and abate the Sermon, to restore the Eucharist. Especially, seeing the Law of this Land must be changed, to bear out what others have done; though it is manifest, they never gave any reason for it. They will see cause to think, that the best Preaching is that which may fit the people for the Eucharist; by understanding the Covenant of Baptism, and the importance of daily renewing and restoring it, by Communion in the Eucharist. The other Instance shall be the Psalms; that are sung in Cathedral Churches, but allowed to be read where there is not company to sing them. For it is plain enough, what excuses are made, and what endeavours used, to silence this part of God's Service: and to turn the Psalms; which this Church, with the Whole Church, appointeth for devotion; into Lessons of Instruction only. Hence all the Plea against the Old Translation with points; all the endeavours to crowd in the Psalms in Rhyme, instead of the Psalter, and all use which the Church hath always made of it. But, did not partiality and faction prevail over that Reason, which all Christendom before the Reformation hath always owned, there could be no question of using the Psalter of David, for an Instrument to tune the devotion of Christian people, by; transforming the expressions of David unto our Lord Christ, in the first place; and, according to the Figure of Christ, to the Whole Church first, and then to every particular member of it. He that hath learned this from the Whole Church, will never think it reason, to put this part of God's Service to silence, whosoever they be, that desire or desing it. He will rather endeavour, to reduce the singing of them into Parish Churches; being evidently so much easier, than the singing of the Psalms in Rhyme. But howsoever, retain the reading of them by Antiphones, and not quench the Spirit of God, which breatheth forth that transformation whereof I spoke. Having thus instanced, I will not propose the Ground, upon which I maintain, that all Reformation is to proceed, for the condition of the Conference which I propose. I will think it a point of that Forbearance, which S. Paul commandeth the Romans, not to insist upon those terms, which the Authority of the Apostles doth enforce. Because I see him, not insist upon the Authority of an Apostle, with them; but, having infallibly proved his ground, of Justification by Faith alone, forbear the consequence of it; charging the Romans, to hold that indifferent, whatsoever his Authority, so grounded, declareth such; yet charging them to forbear those, that, for all his Authority and Reasons, understood it not. For, I believe verily, that his reason and mine is the very same; Namely, to keep both Parties in the Unity of one Church, a Member of the Whole; Hoping that, by God's blessing, upon the advantages, which the communication of the Faithful one with another, and with their Clergy affordeth, those that are now most keenly set against these little things, that are excepted at in the Act of Uniformity, may, by that condescension, which the Interest of Christianity obliges all Parties to, come to understand the only Principle of Reformation and Unity both; The Authority of the Catholic Church, in all things not determined by God's Law, which is only the Gospel under this time of Christianity. And I set before them, to that purpose, the example of the Jews; Who, for all the Forbearance commanded by S. Paul, having stopped their ears, at all his charms; with the Unity of the Church, have forfeited the Faith, hitherto irrecoverably. For, being fully persuaded, that without this Principle, it is not possible, either for this Church, or for any part of the Reformation, long to subsist; Can I fear any less, than the utter loss of Religion, for my dearest Country, and for the dearer Church of God in it?   

CHAP. XXVII. How Recusants may, or may not be punished as Idolaters.  
IT remains that I say, what Penalties this Position makes competent to those, that refuse the Reformation thus limited. A thing easy for me to do, having declared the Ground, upon which the refusing of Christianity is punishable; Which the Reformation, hitherto, hath not been able to do. The Position of punishing Heretics capitally is generally decried by them; And yet we see Servetus and Gentilis put to death, at Geneva and Bern; and others elsewhere. If, because sentenced for Heretics by them that put them to death; Why should not the Powers that adhere to the Church of Rome execute the Sentence thereof, upon those whom they pronounce Heretics? If, because so sentenced by the Primitive Church, in which we both agree; Why own we not the Primitive Church in the rest, as well as in that? If, because they that gave the Sentence are competent Judges in Religion; What remains, but that contrary Sentences be executed by the Sword, and Religion be not otherwise judged? But, supposing Religion, and the Church, and the sense of the Scripture Visible, so far as the preserving of Unity requires; Christian Powers must both protect Subjects in their Civil, as well as natural being, though not true Christians; and yet punish them for not being true Christians. Only, if they pretend freedom from Allegiance, by Christianity, (and we know it is false Christianity that so pretends) there will be also fit time to declare, why they may be capitally punished. But those who declare the Pope Antichrist, and the Papists Idolaters in the exercise of their Religion, have not declared, what Penalty is competent to their Idolatry. And yet, till that be cleared, we are in the clouds. This difficulty, I find myself able to look in the face, without ever disputing, whether the Papists, by their Religion, are bound to commit Idolatry, or not. The Law of Moses, indeed, seems to show, that, by the Law of Nature, Idolaters may be put to death, for their Idolatry. For, there is no appearance, that the Law of God would have enjoined that, which the Law of Nature allows not. But the Case is otherwise under Christianity, then under the Law of Moses. The people of Israel held the Land of Promise, upon Condition, not to suffer any other God to be worshipped within the Bounds of it, but the true God, that gave it them upon those terms. Therefore they committed a forfeit, whensoever they suffered Idolatry in it. But the Gospel was preached to the Roman Empire, consisting of two Religions, of Jews and Gentiles; Maintaining the State of the World upon the same terms which it found; saving that, which, if they embraced the Faith, they must voluntarily change. When therefore the Sovereign Power of the Empire came to profess the Faith; (and thereupon, an obligation to maintain and propagate it, by all means, which the Right of Sovereign Power furnishes) they could not answer God, for the right use of their Power, using any other means, than the Interest of Christianity allows. They might have confiscated Estates, where they might have taken away lives; But that would have made the meekness, which Christianity pretendeth, to appear that Hypocrisy of our Sects; Who are always humble, always for Toleration, till they get the Power into their own hands. To shut up the Temples of Idols, and to forbid Sacrifices, was no more than to suppress that Sacrilege, which the light and Law of Nature discovereth. If any of the Imperial Laws make it death to sacrifice; it is to be understood, upon presumption, that those Sacrifices were Inquiries into the life of the Prince, or of their enemies. To constrain them to be Christians by Penalties, had been to make them counterfeit Christians. Besides, the Nations that bordered upon the Empire were all Idolaters; And Christianity pretended to convert them, as well as the Empire. If the Emperors had punished their Subjects, being Gentiles, for being Idolaters, must not the Neighbour Nations have persecuted the Christians, their Subjects, for being Christians? The reason of the difference between the Law and the Gospel, in this behalf, is that which S. Austin giveth, why the Law of Moses voids the Marriages of Jews with Gentiles; Whereas S. Paul advises those that ●…ned Christians, being married to Idolaters, to continue in Wedlock with them, desiring it. S. Augustine's reason is this; That the Law, tendering only temporal promises expressly, (which Gentiles as well as Jews, might & did enjoy in this world) thought it too hard a temptation, to trust a Jew in Wedlock with a Gentile; by wh●…, he might be in danger to be seduced, to prosperous Idolatry. Whereas Christianity, upon the advantage of the world to come, assured by the Preaching of our Lord and his Apostles, challengeth all other Religions, as unable to resist it, when it is performed as well as professed. So that to suffer Idolaters, in conversing with Christians, was but the allowing of opportunity, for the converting of Idolaters. I think I have cause to make this an argument ad hominem, that our Sectaries themselves cannot, nor do require the Penalty of Idolatry, by Moses Law, upon Papists. They that remember the time, when the late Q. Mother of Royal memory came over, do know, what infusions the Pulpits then made, into the minds of the people, of the curse of God hanging upon the Nation, for His Majesty's Marriage. The pretence was wholly, upon the Law of Moses; Which, as I have showed, is not to the purpose among Christians. But indeed, those prognostications were no other, than the Prophecies of the Devils Oracles, among the Gentiles; Foretelling the mischiefs, which they intended or desired to do themselves. This being a sufficient reason, why the same pretence is not now on foot, because it cannot be plausible, after so dear experience of the mischief it tends to; I think I am to take advantage of it, in behalf of Truth and Justice; That no Party can pretend, the Penalty of Moses Law to lie, in our Case; Supposing, not granting the Papists to be Idolaters, according to Moses Law. And is not the Case the same, between the Reformation and the See of Rome? At least it is so, if the Reformation be that which it pretendeth. For then, the advantage must needs be so Visible, that to allow conversation between the Professions that are at such distance, is but to allow the means of bringing all Popish Recusants to Church; when the Reformation is that, which it pretendeth. I grant that it falls out to be otherwise, in our experience. For, they that are converted to the See of Rome, at this time, are converted by this miscarriage, that they venture themselves into dispute with those, which they are not able to deal with. But the miscarriage is accidental; Because of the Divisions within ourselves; arising from hence, that our Reformation owneth not the Bounds which it requireth. For, by this means, the Clergy of this Church is in contempt with their Flock; and private Christians venture themselves into dispute with Recusants, (that is, with their Priests) without trusting their Pastors, or acquainting them with what they do. Which if they did do, in due time, such occasions would be opportunities of reducing Recusants to Church. Besides, to pursue the Idolatry of the See of Rome, (supposing, not granting that so it is) what would it be, but to draw the Sword on both sides, to try the quarrel of Religion with? And therefore Sovereign Powers cannot give God account, that they use the Right he gives them over Papists their Subjects, pursuing them to the Penalty of Moses Law, as Idolaters. There is another reason for the same, that appears now and then, in the disputes of them, that maintain the Religion of the See of Rome to be Idolaters. For, they have many times found themselves obliged to grant, that their Idolatry is another kind of Idolatry, then that which is prohibited, and punished with death, by the Law of Moses. And if so, it must be another kind of Penalty, that belongs to it. Now I suppose S. Paul says true, that Covetousness is Idolatry, and that, there be those that make their Belly their God. And whosoever understands the difference between the Old and the New Testament, will allow, that S. Hierom understood it; Who, in his Commentaries upon the Prophets, makes all that they, the Prophets say, against the Idolatry of the ten Tribes, to belong to the Heresies and Schisms of Christians; and, all Heretics and Schismatics to be Idolaters, in the mystical sense of the Old Testament, under the New. Which is no more, than our Lord says of the Samaritans; That they worshipped they knew not what; At such time when it was well enough known, that the Samaritans were no Idolaters; worshipping the only true God of Israel. For certainly, though all Superstition be not Idolatry, yet all Idolatry is Superstition; Because the chief of Superstitions is Idolatry. All Superstitions stand upon the same ground as Idolatry, and aim at the same mark. Man is sensible, by that Conscience, which the light of Nature creates, that one true God is to be worshipped; And that as himself shall require, not as his Creature is willing to allow. And being therefore sensible, that Concupiscence allows him not that Service, which Conscience requires, they are willing to pay him in Coin of their own stamping; Usurping the Prerogative of his Sovereignty, even in that, whereby they pretend to pay their Allegiance. Is there any other source of Idolatry but this? For, is it not reasonable to think, that men can satisfy themselves, and put off the Gods they have made themselves, with that, which the jealous God, the true God will not be served with? And therefore, Religion teaches, that Idolatry is the Worship of the Devil. Not only, because he teaches it; But because he holds the Opinion of a God, by corresponding with Idolaters in their Idolatries. And what is all Superstition, but redeeming the Service of God in Spirit and Truth, by the service of our Bodies or Estates; which may be done, when the inward man is not subject to God? Such are the Invocations of Saints, the Worshipping of their Relics and Images, the Pilgrimages and Indulgences commended or commanded by the See of Rome; And such they may be owned to be, by him that dare not undertake them to be that Idolatry, that was punishable with death by the Law of Moses. And being such, it will be punishable in all, who, for an undue respect to the See of Rome, will not have their fellow-subjects freed from superstitious customs; Nor obey the Laws of their Country, that give them this freedom. But if this be the due Reason, for which it is punishable; the same Reason will render them punishable, who think they serve God, by running into Conventicles, in despite of the Laws of God and their Country. For, what is that, but a pretence of paying the debt of Religion, which Christianity makes due to God, by worshipping an Idol of their own setting up? That is, as I said afore, by worshipping God according to an Imagination of their own erecting; and not according to that, which the common Christianity requires. And thus I am come to the Conclusion, which I intended, without disputing, whether or no, the Papists, by their Religion, do exercise that Idolatry, which is punishable by death in Moses Law. For if capital Penalty lie not in our Case; If it be agreed upon, that they are punishable upon the same Ground, for which the other sort of Recusants are punishable; then is the way clear before me, to proceed to declare, what Penalties, both sorts of Recusants are to be, or may be punished with: Supposing our Reformation confined within those Bounds, which the Faith and the Laws of the Catholic Church either determine or allow.   

CHAP. XXVIII. All that take Arms against the Sovereign, to Reform Religion, may be liable to Capital Punishment.  
BUt if the Papists cannot be liable to capital punishment, as Idolaters, neither can they be liable to it, as limbs of Antichrist. The name of Antichrist is a challenge of Sovereign Power; Because the name of Christ is so; Signifying a Prince and a Prophet, raised and settled by God's immediate Word, which is the Sovereign Title. For Antichrist can signify nothing, but a counterfeit Christ; One that pretends to be Christ, and is not; Our Lord Christ being the Messiah, which the Fathers and Prophets from the beginning expected. But the Sovereignty of Christ is declared by himself, to be a mere Spiritual Sovereignty; which all the Jews, even the Apostles before our Lord's death, expected to be a temporal Kingdom. And therefore, whososoever it is, that groundeth Sovereignty upon Christianity, though he be not Antichrist for that, yet is he the enemy of all Christian States, for it. And so are the Subjects of all Christian States, that think themselves free of their Allegiance to Princes, or States, Excommunicated by the Pope. And upon this account, I deny not, that Papists may become liable to capital punishment, or to banishment with confiscation; Which seems to be, of the two, the greater punishment. But this, neither common to all Papists, nor proper to Papists alone. For, that this is not the Faith of all Papists, I need no more, than the distance between the Secular Priests and the Jesuits here, to prove. And that it is not proper to Papists alone, I need no more, than the Scottish Covenant, and the troubles of the three Kingdoms upon it, to prove. And therefore, it is a thing absolutely necessary, to make those Penalties just, which the Laws inflict upon the Papists; that they distinguish between the Cause of Religion, common to all, and the Cause of them, that make it a point of Religion, to violate their Allegiance to a Sovereign deposed by the Pope. Nay it will be necessary, in point of Justice, to impose the same Penalties, upon all of all Religions, that may think themselves discharged of their Allegiance, upon any account of Religion whatsoever. It is manifest, that they who take Arms against their Sovereign, to reform Religion, do ground themselves upon the Title of Religion, and think themselves tied by their Christianity to do it; As they who take Arms against their Prince, deposed by the Pope, think themselves tied in Christianity, to execute his Sentence. Those whom the people follow, in reforming Religion against the will of their Sovereign; Those they make as much Judges, in reforming Religion, as the other do the Pope. And all that refuse to secure their Sovereign by Oath, that they will neither lead nor follow any man, in reforming Religion, without his Authority, deserve to be out of the protection of that Sword, which he weareth not in vain. They fall into the Case of the Jews, expecting the Messiah; For, when they imagine, that he is come, they will think themselves dispensed with, by their Religion, for any Bond of Allegiance. But Christian Princes and States are not wont, so far as I know, to think themselves secured by the Oath of Jews. Let this be a difference, which they make between Jews and Christians, to take the Oath of their Christian Subjects, for security of their Allegiance; Because true Christianity obliges all good Christians, to bear Allegiance to their Sovereigns, not to be dispensed with, upon any account of Christianity; Notwithstanding we see, that there are those, that count themselves the best Christians, that do think themselves dispensed with in their Allegiance, upon divers and several accounts of their Christianity. But let this Kingdom, having had trial of contrary pretences, think itself bound, to declare the same Penalties, against the same Crimes; And able to impose the utmost Penalties, upon all that shall refuse, to secure their Sovereign by Oath, of their Allegiance. And since the allowance, which the Law makes, in understanding the Oath of Supremacy, evidences, that it may be understood, in a sense offensive, in point of Religion; let it be thought time, to antiquate the old, and to enact a new form, that may tie all Subjects as Subjects, without pretence of offending any Religion; by condemning all Religions, that make difficulty to undertake it, for irreligious.   

CHAP. XXIX. What Penalties the Protection of Religion requires.  
NOw I am to say, how far Christian Powers are to punish Heretics and Schismatics. For, it is too late for me to say, that they may punish their Conventicles, having declared the reason, why they may do it; And being now only to draw the consequence of that reason, how far they are to do, or may do it. Here, I must first marvel at our Independents; some of whom have disputed, in very good earnest, that it is not lawful, for Civil Powers, to impose Penalties upon Religion. Whereas the World knows, that there never was any such Religion in the World, as that of Independents, before the planting of New England. And that since, those that framed Independent Congregations there, upon a Covenant, whereby they renounce One Catholic Church, and One Baptism for Remission of Sins; have not only banished Antinomians, and put Quakers to death; But have imposed a Penalty of five shillings a Lordsday, upon all that come not to hear their Sermons. For, though this Penalty is not strictly exacted at present, yet it lies at present. Whereby, the greater part of His Majesty's Subjects in that Plantation, are not only hindered, from exercising the Religion enjoined by the Laws of this Kingdom; But also their Children die unbaptised, themselves live and die without the Communion of the Eucharist, and, in fine, their Souls are murdered, by this Tyranny of their misbelieving fellow-Subjects. Whether all this by their Fatent, or by Usurpation, I leave to those that may redress it, to judge. But, if the Protection of Religion, and of the Church lie, in maintaining those Rights, which the Sovereign Power finds the Church possessed of, when it undertakes the Profession of Christianity; And all the Right of the Church, (which it hath, by the mere consent of those that voluntarily undertake Christianity) resolves into Excommunication; Then is not the Church protected in the Rights of it, by Christian Powers, unless their Laws enable the Excommunication of the Church to lay hold on all their Subjects. Nor can any inconvenience follow hereupon; Because the Excommunication of the Church, when it is protected by the Civil Power, can never proceed, but upon Causes which the Law allows. Now, there are two sorts of Excommunicate persons, according to the Premises; One are they that Excommunicate themselves; the other, they that are Excommunicated by the Church. For, though they Excommunicate themselves, yet, because they are to be avoided by the Flock, from whence they depart, when they Excommunicate themselves, they are to be held, as if they were Excommunicate by the Church. Now, if they who thus Excommunicate themselves should be under no Penalty of Civil Power, for so doing, I would fain know, what that Protection, which Christian Powers must needs own, to the Christianity which themselves profess, can avail it. For, if the Church Excommunicate those that perform not the Christianity which they profess, and the Excommunicate be free to run into the Conventicles of those that Excommunicate themselves, whowill care for performing the Christianity which he professeth? Or how shall the Church and Religion subsist, when no man need to care for performing the Christianity which he professeth? This is the danger which is come so near, to bring this Church to nothing, at this time. On the one side, all Papists Excommunicate themselves, on the other side, all that run into Conventicles. The Papists, we all know, are under Penalties grievous enough; If we speak of that part, which doth not decline their Allegiance. As for those that do, I have already set the consideration of them aside. And yet there is this Apology, for the severity of those Laws; That they do take off the Penalty of perpetual imprisonment, which by the Ancient Laws of the Kingdom, introduced under the Papacy, lies against all that are Excommunicate; And therefore is to lie, against all that Excommunicate themselves. If there be a reason, why such severe Laws should be in force against them, can any, that wears the face of a man, say, why the other sort of Recusants should be free from all Penalties? I think the World is sensible hereof, in the suspension of the Penal Laws against the Recusants; Which, under his late Majesty, was charged with such violent jealousies: and now passes without discontent, because there is neither conscience nor shame, to levy those Penalties upon them, and none upon the Conventicles. In the mean time, Atheism, Profaneness, Blasphemy, Apostasy, Heresy shelter themselves under the Communion of the Church, which the Laws protect; and will needs be of that Religion, which they may profess, and need not perform. And, how long this Church can continue this Church, upon those terms, let those judge, whom it concerns. My business is only this; That, if those that Excommunicate themselves be under no Penalty, those that are Excommunicate by the Church need not care, that they are Excommunicate. And so the Church is not protected, because the Excommunication of the Church is not in force; That is, it is no Penalty to be Excommunicate, to all that can think it is none. And therefore, unless it draw a Penalty of this World after it; that all may have occasion to avoid the Penalty of the World to come, by avoiding the Penalty of this World; the Church is not protected. It may be thought, that the Church is protected nevertheless, by the Privilege of receiving the Tyths, of those that decline it, and of the Trust it manages, of dispensing church-good. And this is, indeed, part of the Penalty, by which they redeem their Recusancy; In as much, as they are put to maintain the Religion which they invent; church-good, though they be Public goods, yet, being originally affected to the maintenance of that Church, which the Law protecteth. But that, being a Penalty of their own choice, satisfies not the Protection of the Religion which the Kingdom professeth; until the Law make it a disgrace, and a degree of Infamy, to stand Excommunicate, whether by themselves, or by the Church. And, seeing all Discipline, even that of the Clergy, ends in Excommunication; To maintain the Revenue, and let go Discipline, would be, to sell Religion for the Revenue of the Church. For what would this be, but a tempting of the debauched, into the Service of the Church, when there is no Discipline, to restrain their debauches? The complaints of this time show this to be a Persecution, which the Sects of the time bring upon the Church. For, Discipline is released, for fear to stir, and for hope to gain Sectaries; and the fault is laid upon the Clergy, that suffer in the releasing of Discipline. But Christian Powers are bound, not only not to persecute the Church themselves, but not to suffer Sects to persecute it. And to avoid trouble, by releasing Discipline, may be the way to find it, in the means of avoiding it. Certainly, till Excommunication (which is the utmost resort of all Discipline) be in force, we cannot say we have a Church; but only, because we have Laws, by which it ought to be in force; And because we hope to have Laws, by which it will be in force. Men may amuse themselves, with the instance of the United Provinces; which, they say, flourish in trade and riches, by maintaining all Religions. But the question is of Religion, not of Trade, nor Riches. If it could be said, that their Religion is improved, with their Trade, the example were considerable. But, they that would restore and improve the Religion, that flourished in England thirty years ago, must not take up with the base Alloy of that which is seen in the United Provinces. Nor is this a reproach to them, but a truth of God's Word; that Religion and Trade cannot be both at once at the height. Besides, there is a Religion of the State in the United Provinces: and other Religions are tolerated there, because they were in being before the State was settled, or contributed to the settling of it, upon expectation of being tolerated in their Religions, when it should be settled. But when the United Provinces were in danger to break in pieces, upon a Dispute in Religion, in the year 1618. and when the point of Religion was decided by the point of that Sword, which decided by the point of that Sword, which enabled the State's General to give Law to the States of Holland; Let him, that now may see more Aprons than Cloaks come from their Arminian Gongregations, tell me, whether the point were decided by a Penalty, or not. But let him tell me also, whether it had not been better, to have decided it no further, than the Catholic Church had decided it; then to endanger the Reformation, (as now it is in danger, by admitting the Socinians into Communion with the Arminians) in case the Penalty should prove insufficient. As for the Discourses, that threaten the transporting of Estates, upon Penalties for Religion; and, that would encourage strangers to plant and improve Trade here; Who knows not, that the Conventicles now Usurped were first erected by the late War? And therefore must be presumed to cherish the pretence of it. And how easy is it, for those that enact Penalties for Religion, to provide, that it be for no man's ease, to declare himself an enemy to his Country? Nor let any man think, that strangers are affected in Religion, as those at home are; who pretend, by Religion, to give Law to their Country. The dissensions on foot among us may well discourage them from planting among us, to improve Trade with us. The improving of the Reformation, and the settling of it, would be but an encouragement to them, to pass by those frivolous pretences, which carry us to these frantic distances. In the mean time, be it considered, that Independency, which was not in rerum natura at the planting of New England, being once settled there, by the pretence which their Patent or Patents gave, became so fruitful, that within twenty years, they were able to cut off their Prince. For., all that love truth must acknowledge, that they were Independents that did that horrible Act. And then consider, how you would hope to have it restrained, if S. Paul's precept of avoiding Sectaries that Excommunicate themselves be not in force, by Canonical Penalties, upon them that are to avoid; And by temporal Penalties, upon them that are to be avoided. For, conversing together, otherwise then for Trade and Commerce, experience shows, that infection is unavoidable. And therefore the Protection, which the Kingdom owes the Religion which it professeth, necessarily requires, not only, that it be maintained, at the Charge of the Schismatics in it. For, as that is the proper Penalty, for them to redeem their Recusancy with; So is it the Justice, which they own their fellow-Subjects, whom they have hitherto kept in that Egyptian Bondage. And this Reason will extend the same obligation, to all other Plantations and Residences of English; To wit, that, if they be suffered to live in another Religion there, account may be taken of them here, that they be not admitted to Communion here, without renouncing that which they lived in there. That they be not suffered there, without maintaining the Religion professed here. It extends also to French and Dutch, and all Foreign Churches, that, for Trade, or otherwise, may be allowed to plant here. For, either they hold Communion with this Church, or not. If not, it must be Penal, both for those of this Church, to Communicate with them, and for them, to admit those of this Church. If so, yet, so long as there is cause of jealousy, there must be provision, that neither Church be declined, upon any pretence of such jealousy. I will here add one thing, before I make an end; Because it may be demanded, how the Law of the Land may make Excommunication turn to disgrace, and to some degree of Infamy. The answer is; Let the Law of the Land provide, that no man may have Christian Burial, (that is, be buried in Consecrate ground, and with the Office of the Church) but he whom his Curate knows to have received the Communion within the year; And, I believe, the most part of them that Excommunicate themselves will return of themselves. But than it must be provided, and the Bishop must be enabled by Law, to discharge that Curate of Office and Benefice, that shall falsify his trust in that point. Now give me leave to demand, whether the Church be under Protection, or under Persecution; If the Curate be not enabled by Law, to refuse Christian Burial to those, of whose Salvation he can give no account, because they withdraw themselves from his Cure.   

CHAP. XXX. The Condition of reconciling Recusants.  
BUt this not all; There is one point yet behind. For, whensoever the Church Excommunicates for notorious and scandalous sin, to restore him that is so Excommunicate to Communion would be to murder his Soul, and Christianity both at once; not supposing some proportionable presumption of amendment, in him that is restored. This therefore must hold, as the Reason of it holds, in those that Excommunicate themselves; In the reconciling of Heretics and Schismatics to the Church. And this, the practice of the Whole Church of God from the beginning shows them, that are willing to understand the reason of it, before they tread that Authority under foot, which the common Christianity obliges all to follow. Show me any Heresy or Schism ever restored to the Church, without renouncing the same, and I will confess, that the Church itself turned Heretic or Schismatic from the same date. Only there is a difference to be put, between Heresy and Schism, and other Personal Crimes. For, I see no reason, why we should not call other Crimes Personal, in opposition to Heresy and Schism; Because we call it not Heresy or Schism, till Scparation be made. A false Belief in Fundamentals is Heresy before God, a Resolution to divide the Church is Schism before God, both destructive to Salvation, before Separation be made. But Separation is the disease we pretend to cure, without prejudicing the health of God's Church. And therefore, should Separation be made to maintain a Profession, that Simony, for example, or Sacrilege, or any other deadly Crime is no sin, the Party so form would be, ipso facto, an Heresy. Personal Crimes, then, must be restored to Communion, upon presumption of Personal Conversion from the same. But Heresies and Schisms becoming Bodies, by professing an Engagement, may be reunited to the Church in Body, renouncing the Separation in which they stood engaged. For, there is reasonable presumption, that the Leaders would not renounce, if they did not repent them of it. As for the People, that only follows and leads not, it is most true and just to maintain, that Heresy and Schism is a Bar to Salvation; though we allow hope of Salvation to the simple, that follow malicious Leaders, out of invincible ignorance. It is therefore no blemish to the Church, to receive them, as they departed, in company of their Leaders. For their Salvation is provided for, when the Bar is removed. The experience of our Case makes this considerable. At His Majesty's Return, it was enacted, that such Usurpers, as were possessed of dead Places, should hold, without enquiring, whether Ordained or not. Whereby it might seem to them, that found no fault with their own Title, that the Law of the Kingdom owned their Ordinations to be good. But without cause. For, the Kingdom being then under that Force, which was not as yet removed, (a thing manifest enough; The Church not being yet restored) the retaining of them, (which I am neither to justify nor to blame) was nothing but the enduring of that Force upon Part, rather than call in question the Whole. But hereupon, they that had got this colour for their Possession, were not like to disowne that Ordination, which the Law of the Land had seemed thus far to own. So, the way was paved for the Schism on foot, by refusing the Act of Uniformity, when they were employed, without reconciling themselves to the Church, by foregoing their Schism. Some may think, that I abate more than this, for their sakes, when I allow them Satisfaction by Conference; yea and Laws to be changed for their satisfaction, if just cause may appear. But it is no more than I would allow Popish Recusants, to justify the Penalties, that will be always necessary, because they prefer the Authority of the See of Rome, (forbidding all Treaty of Religion without it) before the common Christianity, requiring Reformation in the Christianity of the Kingdom. For, do not they deserve those Penalties, who refuse to assist their Country, in a work so concerning the common Salvation, upon just terms? This I am sure, supposing satisfaction, there can be no difficulty in departing from Usurped Ordinations, and from the Schism grounded upon the same. And therefore, it is only the solemnity of Renouncing that is abated, and the Irregularity that is pardoned; And that, by the example of the first Great Council, in the Case of the Meletians. And that, because they renounce not the Catholic Church, but acknowledge a National Church; Which they cannot acknowledge, upon due grounds, but they must acknowledge the Catholic Church. And therefore, I say not the same of the Independents; Who are Banded into a Profession destructive to it, upon a Covenant. For that Covenant is it, that must be expressly and formally renounced, before they can be capable of Communion with the Church; And much more of Orders. To grant them Communion otherwise, is to make the Church guilty of their Schism, which it alloweth. And so, to give Popish Recusants a just cause to refuse Communion with it. As for other Sects of Antinomians, Anabaptists, and the like; When any man knows, upon what Grounds they Excommunicate themselves, and how far they are Banded into Sects, it will then be no difficult thing to say, how they are to be Reconciled, so as their Schisms and Heresies may be duly Renounced. A thing which must be considered, in those that were Presbyterians, before they broke into Conventicles. For, since that came to pass, who shall warrant, that they have been guided by none but such, as have Presbyterian Orders? Or that they stand now to that Religion, which the Rebellion once made Law to the Kingdom? Which if they do not, who shall warrant, or how shall the Church be satisfied, that they do departed from their Schisms, with their Leaders? And indeed, the Independents, though they be Banded into a Sect, by a Covenant; yet, if once they be disbanded, who shall answer for them, that they will follow their Leaders? And all this by virtue of the Sacrilege, whereby they all betray the Authority of the Church, and with it the Christian Faith, to the Will of their People, to debauch them into the same Schism with themselves. Which if it be considered, perhaps it will appear, that the Forbearance which I have granted, can, for this reason, extend no further, then to the Persons of those that deserted their Churches, rather than submit to the Act of Uniformity. Nor shall it trouble me, if my Opinion be found to come to no more. For the Opinions of private persons are to content themselves, with declaring what may be; Leaving them that are concerned, to judge what is. But, as for the way of Reconciling those which shall be converted, to the Church; in that, the Apostolical Wisdom of the Primitive Catholic Church is of necessity to take place. For, Schism or Heresy being the Bar to the effect of Baptism, which is the Gift of the Holy Ghost; And the renouncing of it being the removing of that Bar; It follows, that all that shall return are to be reconciled by Confirmation, as always they were reconciled to the Primitive Catholic Church. This were easier done, could it be presumed, that all would follow their Leaders. But if that cannot be presumed, if they must be reconciled one by one, yet is that no more, than the work of an Episcopal Visitation, from Parish to Parish: A thing practised and usual in the Church, after the building of Parish-Churches, in the worst of those times, in which, the Canons which I have commended took place. But now, as for Quakers, we are no more to reckon them among Christians, than the Gnostics and Manichees of Old, than the Mahometans at present. For they do openly own, the Dictate of their own Spirits to be as much the Word of God as the Scriptures. And that is as much, as serves to create all such new Sects, as, acknowledging the Scriptures so far as they please, introduce the pretences of their own Revelations, where they think fit. For, when the private Spirit is equalled with God's Word, the last Dictate, as in men's last Wills, must of necessity take place. Only this difference; That, whereas Gnostics, Manichees, Mahumetans, followed, or do follow their Leaders Spirit, Quakers follow every one their own. And therefore are the more contemptible, and the more reducible, whensoever a course shall be established. Certainly, did they see, that they cannot be reconciled but as so many Renegades, they would bethink themselves, before they went on in their madness. Especially, did the Law set before them, that this their Position is not reconcileable to Civil Trust: Always obliging them, to the most desperate Acts of Treason, and violence to their Country, that they can imagine their own Spirit to dictate. Upon which account, it cannot be beyond the merit of their madness, that they are made servi poenae by Law, as the Roman Laws call it; That is, that they are transported to work in the Plantations. For, they that take upon them to impose upon their Country, that the Offices of common Civility are Acts of Idolatry; What is not to be expected from their madness, who, as the Case is, dare pretend, that it ought to be Law to all Christians? But, since the Law is to provide for such People, it is manifest, that it is to provide, that they may not fail of the trust which the Church and Kingdom enters into, with those whom they receive to Communion, but that they must fail of the Civil Trust of Subjects; That is, that their Testimonies be not receivable in Law, that they be disabled to sue at Law, that they be disabled to make Wills, or to get by Wills, or any thing else within the effect of Civil Trust. And this must also be the Penalty of the Leviathan, and all that have or may follow him, either into Apostasy or Atheism. For, they who declare themselves at freedom, to forswear the Christian Faith, can never be held by any bond of Civil Trust. It must also be the Penalty of all Sects, that may relapse, after they may have been reconciled; At least in that Proportion, which, that part of the Faith, which their respective Sect denieth, holds, to the whole Profession of Christianity; which Apostasy and Atheism destroy at once. For, it may be a Question, why the Kingdom should be counted a Christian Kingdom, if the Laws of it set not some mark of Infamy or Disgrace upon the enemies of Christianity, according to the Rate of their Enmity; Which, only the enforcing of Excommunication, by the Laws, can do.   
FINIS.   

Books Printed for and Sold by James Collins at the Kings-Head in Westminster-Hall.  

A Blow at Modern Sadducism, in some Philosophical Considerations about Witchcraft. To which is added, The Relation of the Famed Disturbance by the Drummer, in the House of M. Mompesson. With some Reflections on Drollery and Atheism.  
Plus ultra; or the Progress and Advancement of Knowledge since the days of Aristotle. Octavo.  
A Loyal Tear dropped on the Vault of our late Martyred Sovereign, in an Anniversary Sermon on the day of his Murder. Quarto.  
All three by Jos. Glanvill, A. M. and Rector of Bath.  
The Triumphs of Rome over Despised Protestancy: Written by Bishop Hall. Octavo.  
A Sermon preached before the Peers, Octob. 10. 1666. being the Fastday for the late Fire: By Seth Lord Bishop of Oxon. Quarto.  
The Practice of Serious Godliness: Affectionately recommended and directed in some Religious Counsels of a Pious Mother to her dear Daughters. 12ᵒ  
A Discourse of Subterranean Treasure: By a Member of the Royal Society. 12ᵒ  
The General Assembly: A Sermon by Francis Fullwood. D. D. Quarto.  
Forty Sermons by Anthony Farindon. B. B. Fol.  
Rea's Flora, Ceres & Pomona. Fol.  
Episcopacy Apostolical; or a Consent of the Foreign Churches to the Discipline of the Church of England: Written by Bishop Moreton, and published with a long Preface, by Henry Yeluerton Baronet. Octavo.  
A Discourse of the Use of Reason in the Affairs of Religion against the present Opinions of the Sects of this Age. Quarto.  
A Private Conference between a RICH ALDERMAN and a poor Country Vicar, made public, wherein is discoursed the Obligation of Oaths which have been imposed on the Subjects of England, with other matters relating to the present State of Affairs.