A defence of the vindication of the deprived bishops wherein the case of Abiathar is particularly considered, and the invalidity of lay-deprivations is further proved, from the doctrine received under the Old Testament, continued in the first ages of christianity, and from our own fundamental laws, in a reply to Dr. Hody and another author : to which is annexed, the doctrine of the church of England, concerning the independency of the clergy on the lay-power, as to those rights of theirs which are purely spiritual, reconciled with our oath of supremancy, and the lay-deprivations of the popish bishops in the beginning of the reformation / by the author of the Vindication of the deprived bishops.
         Dodwell, Henry, 1641-1711.
      
       
         
           1695
        
      
       Approx. 412 KB of XML-encoded text transcribed from 60 1-bit group-IV TIFF page images.
       
         Text Creation Partnership,
         Ann Arbor, MI ; Oxford (UK) :
         2005-12 (EEBO-TCP Phase 1).
         A36241
         Wing D1805
         ESTC R18161
         11822490
         ocm 11822490
         49601
         
           
            This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Early English Books Online Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of
             Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal
            . The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.
          
        
      
       
         Early English books online.
      
       
         (EEBO-TCP ; phase 1, no. A36241)
         Transcribed from: (Early English Books Online ; image set 49601)
         Images scanned from microfilm: (Early English books, 1641-1700 ; 529:8)
      
       
         
           
             A defence of the vindication of the deprived bishops wherein the case of Abiathar is particularly considered, and the invalidity of lay-deprivations is further proved, from the doctrine received under the Old Testament, continued in the first ages of christianity, and from our own fundamental laws, in a reply to Dr. Hody and another author : to which is annexed, the doctrine of the church of England, concerning the independency of the clergy on the lay-power, as to those rights of theirs which are purely spiritual, reconciled with our oath of supremancy, and the lay-deprivations of the popish bishops in the beginning of the reformation / by the author of the Vindication of the deprived bishops.
             Dodwell, Henry, 1641-1711.
          
           [6], 111 p.
           
             [s.n.],
             London :
             1695.
          
           
             Attributed to Henry Dodwell. Cf. DNB.
             Reproduction of original in Bristol Public Library, Bristol, England.
          
        
      
    
     
       
         Created by converting TCP files to TEI P5 using tcp2tei.xsl, TEI @ Oxford.
         Re-processed by University of Nebraska-Lincoln and Northwestern, with changes to facilitate morpho-syntactic tagging. Gap elements of known extent have been transformed into placeholder characters or elements to simplify the filling in of gaps by user contributors.
      
       
         EEBO-TCP is a partnership between the Universities of Michigan and Oxford and the publisher ProQuest to create accurately transcribed and encoded texts based on the image sets published by ProQuest via their Early English Books Online (EEBO) database (http://eebo.chadwyck.com). The general aim of EEBO-TCP is to encode one copy (usually the first edition) of every monographic English-language title published between 1473 and 1700 available in EEBO.
         EEBO-TCP aimed to produce large quantities of textual data within the usual project restraints of time and funding, and therefore chose to create diplomatic transcriptions (as opposed to critical editions) with light-touch, mainly structural encoding based on the Text Encoding Initiative (http://www.tei-c.org).
         The EEBO-TCP project was divided into two phases. The 25,363 texts created during Phase 1 of the project have been released into the public domain as of 1 January 2015. Anyone can now take and use these texts for their own purposes, but we respectfully request that due credit and attribution is given to their original source.
         Users should be aware of the process of creating the TCP texts, and therefore of any assumptions that can be made about the data.
         Text selection was based on the New Cambridge Bibliography of English Literature (NCBEL). If an author (or for an anonymous work, the title) appears in NCBEL, then their works are eligible for inclusion. Selection was intended to range over a wide variety of subject areas, to reflect the true nature of the print record of the period. In general, first editions of a works in English were prioritized, although there are a number of works in other languages, notably Latin and Welsh, included and sometimes a second or later edition of a work was chosen if there was a compelling reason to do so.
         Image sets were sent to external keying companies for transcription and basic encoding. Quality assurance was then carried out by editorial teams in Oxford and Michigan. 5% (or 5 pages, whichever is the greater) of each text was proofread for accuracy and those which did not meet QA standards were returned to the keyers to be redone. After proofreading, the encoding was enhanced and/or corrected and characters marked as illegible were corrected where possible up to a limit of 100 instances per text. Any remaining illegibles were encoded as <gap>s. Understanding these processes should make clear that, while the overall quality of TCP data is very good, some errors will remain and some readable characters will be marked as illegible. Users should bear in mind that in all likelihood such instances will never have been looked at by a TCP editor.
         The texts were encoded and linked to page images in accordance with level 4 of the TEI in Libraries guidelines.
         Copies of the texts have been issued variously as SGML (TCP schema; ASCII text with mnemonic sdata character entities); displayable XML (TCP schema; characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or text strings within braces); or lossless XML (TEI P5, characters represented either as UTF-8 Unicode or TEI g elements).
         
          Keying and markup guidelines are available at the
           Text Creation Partnership web site
          .
        
      
       
         
         
      
    
     
       
         eng
      
       
         
           Dodwell, Henry, 1641-1711. -- Vindication of the deprived bishops.
           Hody, Humphrey, 1659-1707. -- Letter from Mr. Humphry Hody, to a friend, concerning a collection of canons.
           Hody, Humphrey, 1659-1707. -- Case of sees vacant by an unjust or uncanonical deprivation.
           Welchman, Edward, 1665-1739. -- Defence of the Church of England.
           Church of England -- Bishops -- Early works to 1800.
           Nonjurors -- Early works to 1800.
           Bishops -- England -- Early works to 1800.
           Dissenters, Religious -- Legal status, laws, etc. -- England -- Early works to 1800.
        
      
    
     
        2005-04 TCP
        Assigned for keying and markup
      
        2005-05 Apex CoVantage
        Keyed and coded from ProQuest page images
      
        2005-06 Judith Siefring
        Sampled and proofread
      
        2005-06 Judith Siefring
        Text and markup reviewed and edited
      
        2005-10 pfs
        Batch review (QC) and XML conversion
      
    
  
   
     
       
         
         
           A
           DEFENCE
           OF
           THE
           VINDICATION
           OF
           THE
           
             Deprived
             Bishops
          
           .
           Wherein
           The
           Case
           of
           Abiathar
           is
           particularly
           considered
           ,
           and
           the
           Invaliditly
           of
           Lay-Deprivations
           is
           further
           proved
           ,
           from
           the
           Doctrine
           received
           under
           the
           
             Old
             Testament
          
           ,
           continued
           in
           the
           first
           Ages
           of
           Christianity
           ,
           and
           from
           our
           own
           Fundamental
           Laws
           .
           IN
           A
           
             REPLY
             to
             Dr.
          
           Hody
           
             and
             another
             Author
          
           .
           To
           which
           is
           Annexed
           ,
           The
           Doctrine
           of
           the
           Church
           of
           England
           ,
           concerning
           the
           Independency
           of
           the
           Clergy
           on
           the
           Lay-Power
           ,
           as
           to
           those
           Rights
           of
           theirs
           which
           are
           purely
           Spiritual
           ,
           reconciled
           with
           our
           Oath
           of
           supremacy
           ,
           and
           the
           Lay-Deprivations
           of
           the
           Popish
           Bishops
           in
           the
           beginning
           of
           the
           Reformation
           .
        
         
           By
           the
           Author
           of
           the
           Vindication
           of
           the
           Deprived
           Bishops
           .
        
         
           LONDON
           ,
           Printed
           MDCXCV
           .
        
      
       
         
         
         
           THE
           CONTENTS
           .
        
         
           
             §
             I.
             THE
             Doctor
             's
             late
             Book
             no
             answer
             to
             the
             Vindication
             .
             
               Page
               1
            
          
           
             §
             II.
             The
             
               Baroccian
               M.
               S.
            
             disproved
             by
             the
             Vindicator
             ,
             and
             not
             defended
             by
             the
             Doctor
             
               P.
               2.
            
             
          
           
             §
             III.
             The
             Doctor
             has
             not
             offered
             ,
             at
             any
             Answer
             to
             the
             Argument
             against
             him
             in
             the
             first
             part
             of
             the
             Vindication
             .
             
               P.
               3.
            
             
          
           
             §
             IV.
             He
             grants
             the
             Proposition
             principally
             disputed
             between
             us
             ,
             concerning
             the
             Invalidity
             of
             Lay-deprivations
             ,
             and
             takes
             no
             care
             to
             prevent
             the
             Consequences
             of
             that
             Confession
             
               P.
               4
            
          
           
             §
             V.
             The
             Doctor
             gains
             nothing
             by
             his
             changing
             the
             State
             of
             the
             Question
             ▪
             
               P.
               4.
            
             
          
           
             §
             VI.
             The
             Doctor
             's
             whole
             Proof
             unconclusive
             ,
             admitting
             the
             invalidity
             of
             Lay-deprivations
             .
             
               P.
               5.
            
             
          
           
             §
             VII
             .
             The
             Doctor
             's
             Limitation
             of
             his
             own
             pretended
             self-evident
             maxims
             do
             all
             of
             them
             prove
             our
             Case
             unconcerned
             in
             it
             .
             
               Chap.
               I
               P.
               6.
            
             
          
           
             §
             VIII
             .
             Submission
             of
             Subjects
             to
             the
             Ecclesiastical
             Usurpers
             is
             sinful
             by
             the
             Law
             of
             God.
             
               P.
               7.
            
             
          
           
             §
             IX
             .
             Such
             submissions
             would
             make
             the
             Ecclesiastical
             Subjects
             ,
             Accomplices
             in
             the
             Injustice
             .
             
               P.
               9.
            
             
          
           
             §
             X.
             The
             same
             Submission
             in
             the
             Clergy
             is
             sinful
             ,
             on
             account
             of
             the
             Oaths
             of
             Canonical
             obedience
             they
             have
             taken
             to
             the
             rightful
             Possession
             .
             
               P.
               10.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XI
             .
             Our
             Principles
             afford
             better
             Reasons
             why
             the
             unjust
             Deprivations
             of
             Synods
             may
             be
             received
             without
             the
             Deprived
             Bishops
             consent
             ,
             than
             those
             insisted
             on
             by
             the
             Doctor
             .
             
               P.
               12.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XII
             .
             There
             is
             great
             disparity
             between
             the
             obligations
             of
             a
             competent
             and
             an
             incompetent
             Authority
             .
             
               P.
               13.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XIII
             .
             No
             reason
             to
             reckon
             on
             the
             presumed
             consent
             of
             the
             Injured
             Bishops
             by
             an
             invalid
             deprivation
             ,
             for
             discharging
             their
             Subjects
             Consciences
             ,
             from
             Duty
             to
             them
             .
             
               P.
               14.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XIV
             .
             Our
             Deprived
             Fathers
             gives
             publick
             Significations
             ,
             that
             they
             do
             challenge
             their
             Old
             Rights
             ,
             as
             far
             as
             is
             necessary
             in
             their
             circumstances
             .
             
               P.
               15.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XV.
             The
             Oaths
             of
             canonical
             Obedience
             to
             our
             Fathers
             still
             obliging
             .
             
               P.
               17.
            
             
          
           
             
             §
             XVI
             .
             The
             complyance
             with
             Usurpers
             is
             also
             therefore
             sinful
             ,
             because
             Usurping
             Bishops
             are
             really
             no
             Bishops
             
               at
               all
               .
               P.
               20.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XVII
             .
             The
             evil
             of
             Sin
             and
             Scandal
             in
             complying
             ,
             greater
             than
             that
             of
             Persecution
             which
             is
             avoided
             by
             it
             .
             
               P.
               22.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XVIII
             .
             The
             Evill
             of
             Schism
             not
             avoided
             ,
             but
             incurred
             by
             complying
             with
             the
             Usurper
             
               P.
               24.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XIX
             .
             The
             abuses
             that
             may
             follow
             on
             compliance
             ,
             are
             a
             just
             reason
             to
             refuse
             it
             ,
             
               where
               it
               is
               not
               otherwise
            
             in
             Conscience
             due
             .
             
               P.
               25.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XX.
             No
             security
             that
             have
             compliance
             will
             not
             be
             abused
             .
             
               P.
               26.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXI
             .
             That
             abuse
             is
             a
             greater
             mischief
             ,
             
               than
               ,
               that
               it
               can
               be
               made
               amends
               for
               by
               the
            
             Doctor
             's
             expedients
             .
             
               P.
               29.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXII
             .
             The
             main
             design
             of
             the
             Doctor
             's
             New
             Book
             ,
             in
             arguing
             from
             Facts
             already
             overthrown
             by
             the
             Vindicator
             .
             
               P.
               32.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXIII
             .
             The
             Doctor
             himself
             is
             unwilling
             to
             stand
             by
             the
             consequences
             of
             such
             Facts
             as
             himself
             produces
             .
             
               P.
               33.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXIV
             .
             The
             Doctor
             's
             remarks
             against
             the
             reasoning
             of
             the
             first
             part
             of
             the
             Vindication
             concerning
             the
             possession
             of
             Cornelius
             ,
             turned
             against
             himself
             .
             
               P.
               33.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXV
             .
             The
             Doctor
             's
             Book
             afforded
             no
             Subject
             for
             a
             Reply
             ,
             but
             what
             would
             be
             Personal
             .
             
               P.
               35.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXVI
             .
             The
             Doctor
             's
             turning
             the
             dispute
             ,
             to
             later
             Facts
             draws
             it
             from
             a
             short
             and
             Decisive
             ,
             to
             a
             tedious
             and
             litigious
             Issue
             .
             
               P.
               35.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXVII
             .
             We
             have
             no
             reason
             to
             suffer
             our selves
             to
             be
             overruled
             by
             him
             in
             these
             Arts
             of
             diverting
             us
             .
             
               P.
               36.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXVIII
             .
             We
             decline
             his
             Topick
             of
             Facts
             rather
             because
             it
             is
             undecisive
             ,
             than
             because
             we
             think
             it
             dis
             ,
             advantagious
             to
             us
             .
             
               P.
               36.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXIX
             .
             For
             want
             of
             some
             other
             Subject
             relating
             to
             the
             Vindication
             ,
             we
             pitch
             on
             the
             Case
             of
             
               Abiathar
               .
               P.
               37.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXX
             .
             This
             Fact
             is
             not
             commended
             in
             the
             Scripturs
             as
             a
             Precedent
             .
             
               P.
               37.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXI
             .
             The
             Magistrate
             could
             not
             by
             the
             Doctrine
             of
             that
             Age
             have
             any
             direct
             Power
             over
             the
             Priest-hood
             .
             
               P.
               38.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXII
             .
             The
             Benefits
             of
             the
             Priest-hood
             out
             of
             the
             Power
             ,
             and
             far
             greater
             than
             any
             in
             the
             Power
             ,
             of
             the
             Civil
             Magistrate
             
               P.
               39.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXIII
             .
             The
             Ancient
             Jews
             ,
             of
             the
             Apostle's
             Age
             did
             believe
             their
             Priest-hood
             available
             to
             a
             future
             and
             eternal
             State.
             
               P.
               40.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXIV
             .
             And
             consequently
             did
             expressly
             own
             it
             far
             more
             Honourable
             than
             the
             Magistracy
             its
             self
             .
             
               P.
               42.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXV
             ,
             This
             same
             reasoning
             holds
             on
             account
             of
             the
             Priest-hood
             representing
             God
             tho'
             without
             relation
             to
             a
             future
             State.
             
               P.
               45.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXVI
             .
             And
             that
             also
             according
             to
             the
             opinions
             of
             those
             Times
             .
             
               P.
               46.
            
             
          
           
             
             §
             XXXVII
             .
             Solomon's
             Act
             of
             Abiathar
             was
             only
             of
             force
             ,
             
               P.
               47.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXVIII
             .
             Which
             force
             might
             in
             the
             consequence
             render
             the
             exercise
             of
             his
             Right
             unpracticable
             .
             
               P.
               48.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XXXIX
             .
             Yet
             Solomon
             was
             in
             Conscience
             obliged
             to
             be
             cautious
             in
             exercising
             this
             Force
             against
             the
             Priest-hood
             .
             
               P.
               49
            
          
           
             §
             XL.
             What
             Solomon
             did
             was
             only
             to
             fulfil
             ,
             what
             God
             has
             before
             Threatned
             against
             the
             House
             of
             
               Eli.
               P.
               51.
            
             
          
           
             §
             
               XLI
               .
               Abiathar
            
             was
             not
             then
             the
             High-Priest
             ,
             properly
             so
             called
             ,
             but
             
               Zadoc
               .
               P.
               53.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XLII
             .
             There
             were
             in
             those
             times
             two
             High-Priest
             at
             once
             ;
             the
             chief
             ,
             such
             as
             Zadoc
             was
             ,
             of
             the
             Family
             of
             Eleazar
             ,
             the
             lower
             such
             as
             Abiathar
             ,
             of
             the
             Family
             of
             
               Ithamar
               .
               P.
               54.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XLIII
             .
             No
             Deprivation
             of
             the
             Posterity
             of
             Phineas
             in
             those
             Times
             .
             
               P.
               56.
            
             
          
           
             §
             
               XLIV
               .
               Zadoc
            
             put
             in
             the
             room
             of
             Abiathar
             ,
             as
             to
             the
             Courses
             of
             Ithamar
             ,
             which
             were
             not
             under
             him
             before
             .
             
               P.
               58.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XLV
             .
             The
             Jews
             by
             our
             Principles
             could
             not
             justifie
             a
             Separation
             ,
             on
             account
             of
             Abiathar
             .
             Their
             Case
             not
             like
             ours
             .
             
               P.
               59
            
          
           
             §
             XLVI
             .
             When
             Invasion
             had
             passed
             into
             a
             Prescription
             ,
             as
             in
             our
             Saviours
             time
             ,
             he
             that
             was
             in
             Possession
             had
             really
             the
             best
             Title
             .
             
               P.
               60.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XLVII
             .
             Among
             the
             Jews
             the
             true
             High-Priest
             was
             to
             be
             known
             by
             his
             possessing
             the
             One
             Altar
             :
             Among
             the
             Christians
             the
             true
             Altar
             was
             known
             by
             its
             being
             possessed
             by
             the
             true
             Bishop
             .
             
               P.
               62.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XLVIII
             .
             The
             Reasons
             for
             exemption
             from
             the
             Power
             of
             the
             Prince
             stronger
             in
             our
             deprived
             Fathers
             Case
             ,
             than
             in
             the
             Case
             of
             Abiathar
             .
             Our
             Bishops
             are
             properly
             Priests
             
               P.
               64.
            
             
          
           
             §
             XLIX
             .
             The
             Gospel
             Priest-hood
             more
             noble
             than
             that
             of
             Abiathar
             ,
             &c.
             
             
               P.
               66.
            
             
          
           
             §
             L.
             This
             Reasoning
             admitted
             in
             the
             Apostolical
             Age
             ,
             &c.
             by
             
               Clemens
               Romanus
            
             ,
             &c.
             
             
               P.
               68.
            
             
          
           
             §
             LI.
             He
             does
             it
             by
             the
             same
             Principles
             ,
             as
             agreable
             to
             the
             Constitution
             of
             the
             Gospel
             .
             
               P.
               70.
            
             
          
           
             §
             LII
             .
             He
             draws
             the
             like
             Inferences
             ,
             in
             Practice
             as
             we
             do
             .
             
               P.
               72.
            
             
          
           
             §
             LIII
             .
             The
             Laity
             cannot
             now
             pretend
             to
             any
             indirect
             Right
             of
             depriving
             Bishops
             ,
             as
             the
             Jewish
             Princes
             could
             in
             the
             Case
             of
             the
             Jewish
             Priest-hood
             .
             
               P.
               75.
            
             
          
           
             §
             LIV.
             Our
             Reasoning
             against
             the
             Magistrates
             Rights
             of
             deprivation
             in
             Spirituals
             proceeds
             universally
             ,
             and
             therefore
             in
             the
             Case
             of
             temporal
             Crimes
             ;
             also
             the
             owning
             such
             a
             Power
             would
             have
             been
             pernitious
             to
             the
             Primitive
             Christians
             also
             ,
             whowere
             charg
             de
             with
             Temporal
             Crimes
             .
             
               P.
               77.
            
             
          
           
             §
             LV.
             The
             Spiritual
             Rights
             of
             our
             Fathers
             have
             been
             now
             invaded
             by
             Civil
             Force
             .
             Bare
             Characters
             without
             Districts
             not
             sufficient
             to
             
             
               preserve
               the
               Church
               as
               a
               Body
               .
            
             P.
             79.
             
          
           
             §
             LVI
             .
             Supposing
             the
             Church
             and
             Christian
             State
             had
             made
             one
             Body
             ,
             ret
             more
             had
             been
             required
             to
             make
             that
             Supposition
             applicable
             to
             our
             present
             Case
             ,
             which
             is
             not
             yet
             taken
             notice
             of
             .
             P.
             82.
             
          
           
             §
             LVII
             .
             The
             Prince
             on
             account
             of
             his
             being
             a
             Christian
             ,
             has
             no
             Title
             to
             any
             Spiritual
             Authority
             .
             P.
             83.
             
          
           
             §
             LVIII
             .
             A
             whole
             Nation
             by
             Baptism
             may
             be
             made
             one
             Society
             in
             the
             Church
             ,
             without
             prejudice
             to
             their
             being
             still
             a
             Society
             distinct
             from
             it
             .
             P.
             85.
             
          
           
             §
             LIX
             .
             The
             Churches
             Obligations
             are
             more
             necessary
             for
             the
             subsisting
             of
             the
             State
             ,
             than
             these
             she
             receives
             from
             the
             State
             are
             for
             hers
             .
             P.
             87.
             
          
           
             §
             LX.
             The
             Benefits
             received
             by
             the
             State
             from
             the
             Church
             ,
             are
             also
             greater
             then
             those
             which
             the
             Church
             receives
             from
             the
             State.
             P.
             89.
             
          
           
             §
             LXI
             .
             If
             the
             State
             had
             been
             capable
             of
             conferring
             the
             greater
             Obligations
             ,
             yet
             a
             good
             Pious
             Magistrate
             could
             not
             in
             reason
             ,
             desire
             such
             a
             recompence
             as
             should
             oblige
             the
             Church
             to
             yeild
             any
             of
             her
             ancient
             Rights
             .
             P.
             90.
             
          
           
             §
             LXII
             .
             Princes
             have
             been
             allowed
             by
             the
             Church
             a
             Right
             to
             keep
             persons
             out
             ,
             not
             yet
             Canonically
             possessed
             ,
             but
             not
             to
             turn
             any
             out
             ,
             who
             were
             already
             in
             Possession
             of
             Bishopricks
             .
             And
             that
             without
             any
             proper
             Cession
             of
             Right
             on
             the
             Church's
             part
             .
             P.
             92.
             
          
           
             §
             LXIII
             .
             The
             Power
             of
             turning
             out
             Bishops
             once
             possessed
             too
             great
             to
             be
             granted
             on
             any
             consideration
             whatsoever
             .
             P.
             94.
             
          
           
             §
             LXIV
             .
             In
             this
             Case
             particularly
             no
             Temporal
             Favour
             whatsoever
             can
             make
             amends
             for
             the
             loss
             of
             the
             Benefits
             of
             the
             Spiritual
             Society
             .
             There
             can
             therefore
             be
             no
             implicite
             Contracts
             for
             such
             an
             Exchange
             that
             can
             in
             Equity
             oblige
             the
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
             to
             performance
             ,
             tho'
             it
             had
             been
             in
             their
             Power
             to
             make
             such
             a
             Contract
             .
             P.
             96.
             
          
           
             §
             LXV
             .
             But
             here
             it
             is
             not
             in
             the
             Power
             of
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
             to
             make
             such
             a
             Contract
             .
             P.
             98.
             
          
           
             §
             LXVI
             .
             It
             is
             not
             agreable
             to
             the
             mind
             of
             God
             ;
             that
             the
             Church
             should
             so
             incorporate
             with
             the
             State
             ,
             as
             that
             the
             Bishops
             should
             be
             deprivable
             at
             the
             pleasure
             of
             the
             Civil
             Magistrate
             P.
             100.
             
          
           
             §
             LXVII
             .
             The
             Magistate
             is
             by
             no
             means
             a
             Competent
             Judge
             of
             the
             Church's
             Interests
             .
             P.
             102.
             
          
           
             LXVIII
             .
             The
             Surrender
             of
             the
             Clergy
             in
             Henry
             the
             VIIIths
             .
             time
             ,
             cannot
             oblige
             their
             Posterity
             now
          
           
             LXIX
             .
             No
             reasoning
             from
             the
             rights
             of
             the
             Jewish
             Princes
             to
             the
             Rights
             of
             Christian
             Princes
             now
             .
          
           
             §
             LXX
             .
             Our
             present
             deprivations
             not
             justifiable
             by
             even
             our
             present
             Secular
             Laws
             .
             P.
             107.
             
          
           
             §
             LXXI
             .
             The
             Conclusion
             .
             P.
             110.
             
          
        
      
    
     
       
         
         A
         DEFENCE
         OF
         THE
         VINDICATION
         OF
         THE
         
           Deprived
           Bishops
        
         .
      
       
         
           §
           I.
           The
           
           Doctor
           's
           late
           Book
           ,
           no
           Answer
           to
           the
           Vindication
           .
        
         
           WHAT
           the
           Vindicator
           thinks
           of
           the
           Answers
           that
           have
           been
           made
           to
           his
           
             Defence
             of
             our
             Deprived
             Fathers
          
           ,
           himself
           best
           knows
           .
           For
           my
           part
           ,
           I
           should
           not
           have
           concerned
           my self
           for
           him
           ,
           if
           I
           had
           not
           been
           over-rul'd
           by
           the
           Judgments
           of
           others
           ,
           for
           whom
           I
           profess
           a
           Veneration
           ,
           rather
           than
           my
           own
           .
           I
           have
           that
           due
           esteem
           for
           his
           Adversaries
           ,
           which
           their
           excellent
           Abilities
           deserve
           ,
           particularly
           for
           Dr.
           Hody
           .
           His
           diligence
           in
           History
           none
           questions
           that
           I
           know
           of
           .
           I
           also
           value
           his
           Skill
           and
           Judgment
           in
           it
           ,
           much
           more
           than
           many
           who
           are
           concern'd
           on
           his
           side
           of
           the
           Question
           here
           debated
           .
           Nor
           do
           I
           deny
           but
           several
           things
           are
           very
           well
           observed
           by
           him
           in
           this
           very
           Work
           I
           am
           now
           considering
           at
           present
           ;
           though
           I
           think
           it
           more
           hastily
           and
           tumultuarily
           laid
           together
           than
           several
           of
           his
           other
           Writings
           .
           The
           
           only
           thing
           that
           made
           me
           think
           a
           Reply
           needless
           ,
           was
           that
           in
           all
           the
           Learning
           he
           has
           shewn
           ,
           I
           could
           find
           nothing
           that
           I
           thought
           any
           indifferent
           Person
           could
           think
           proper
           for
           satisfying
           Conscience
           in
           the
           single
           point
           here
           in
           Question
           ,
           nothing
           that
           could
           give
           me
           the
           least
           reason
           to
           doubt
           of
           the
           Arguments
           principally
           insisted
           on
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           .
           For
           other
           things
           not
           relating
           to
           that
           ,
           I
           thought
           our
           candid
           Adversaries
           themselves
           would
           excuse
           us
           when
           they
           considered
           the
           Disadvantages
           on
           our
           side
           ,
           the
           Difficulties
           of
           the
           Press
           ,
           the
           Displeasure
           of
           our
           
             pretended
             Superiors
          
           ,
           much
           more
           considerable
           than
           any
           Argument
           that
           I
           could
           find
           produced
           either
           by
           him
           or
           any
           other
           Adversary
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           II.
           The
           
             Baroccian
             M
             S
          
           ,
           disproved
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           ,
           and
           not
           defended
           by
           the
           Doctor
           .
        
         
           So
           far
           I
           am
           from
           trusting
           my
           own
           Opinion
           in
           this
           matter
           ,
           that
           I
           would
           gladly
           know
           some
           particular
           of
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           Book
           ,
           that
           even
           our
           Adversaries
           ,
           who
           are
           so
           clamorous
           for
           a
           Reply
           ,
           think
           sufficient
           to
           excuse
           their
           Schism
           against
           the
           Charge
           of
           the
           Vindicator
           .
           His
           
             Baroccain
             M
             S
          
           has
           already
           been
           proved
           impertinent
           to
           our
           present
           Dispute
           .
           The
           Vindicator
           has
           shewn
           that
           the
           occasion
           of
           his
           writing
           did
           not
           oblige
           his
           Author
           to
           defend
           the
           validity
           of
           Lay-deprivations
           ;
           he
           might
           have
           added
           ,
           that
           his
           Author
           himself
           was
           not
           ignorant
           ,
           that
           Synods
           did
           intervene
           in
           several
           of
           his
           Instances
           ,
           which
           must
           have
           made
           so
           many
           of
           them
           perfectly
           impertinent
           to
           his
           design
           ,
           if
           that
           had
           been
           to
           vindicate
           the
           Validity
           of
           
             Lay
             deprivations
          
           .
           That
           is
           not
           all
           :
           The
           Vindicator
           has
           also
           shewn
           from
           the
           Canons
           subjoyned
           at
           the
           end
           ,
           and
           suppressed
           by
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           that
           the
           Author
           
             could
             not
          
           design
           the
           Defence
           of
           
             Lay
             Deprivations
          
           .
           Nor
           has
           the
           Doctor
           offered
           at
           any
           thing
           that
           might
           shew
           such
           a
           Design
           consistent
           with
           those
           Canons
           ,
           or
           the
           Author's
           Subjection
           to
           them
           .
           Yet
           those
           Canons
           alone
           are
           decisive
           to
           our
           purpose
           ,
           both
           as
           to
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Constantinoplitane
           Church
           ,
           and
           of
           that
           Author
           as
           a
           Member
           of
           it
           ,
           whether
           they
           were
           part
           of
           his
           Work
           or
           not
           ;
           concerning
           which
           ,
           the
           Impartial
           Reader
           is
           to
           judge
           whether
           what
           the
           Doctor
           has
           said
           ,
           be
           sufficient
           to
           purge
           his
           wilful
           suppressing
           them
           .
           The
           Vindicator
           has
           also
           shewn
           the
           Author
           not
           only
           remoteness
           from
           ,
           but
           ignorance
           of
           the
           times
           he
           writes
           of
           .
           Nor
           has
           the
           Doctor
           proved
           ,
           or
           pretended
           any
           thing
           to
           the
           contrary
           .
           Nay
           ,
           even
           of
           the
           Facts
           enumerated
           by
           him
           ,
           there
           are
           but
           few
           that
           the
           Doctor
           has
           thought
           fit
           ,
           on
           second
           thoughts
           ,
           to
           assert
           independently
           on
           his
           Authority
           .
           It
           cannot
           therefore
           be
           on
           this
           account
           ,
           
           of
           vindicating
           his
           
             M
             S
          
           ,
           that
           any
           Impartial
           Reader
           can
           judge
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           performance
           to
           be
           a
           just
           Reply
           to
           the
           Vindicatoin
        
      
       
         
           §
           III.
           
             He
             has
             not
          
           offered
           at
           any
           Answer
           
             to
             the
          
           Arguments
           
             against
             him
             in
             the
          
           first
           part
           of
           the
           Vindication
           .
        
         
           But
           whatever
           becomes
           of
           the
           so
           boasted
           
             M.
             S
          
           ,
           a
           Conscientious
           Person
           ,
           who
           was
           only
           sollicitous
           for
           Truth
           ,
           not
           Victory
           ,
           will
           easily
           excuse
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           if
           he
           had
           at
           least
           been
           pleas'd
           to
           clear
           our
           
             present
             Case
          
           ,
           relating
           to
           the
           Lay-deprivation
           of
           our
           
             Holy
             Fathers
          
           ,
           and
           the
           Schism
           that
           necessarily
           follow'd
           upon
           it
           .
           Yet
           even
           here
           I
           could
           find
           nothing
           that
           could
           pass
           for
           Answer
           ,
           with
           an
           indifferent
           Conscientious
           Arbitrator
           .
           Facts
           without
           Right
           ,
           none
           can
           think
           proper
           for
           satisfying
           Conscience
           ;
           yet
           this
           is
           all
           which
           is
           so
           much
           as
           pretended
           in
           this
           Book
           .
           The
           whole
           Question
           of
           the
           *
           Magistrates
           Right
           ,
           for
           doing
           what
           has
           been
           done
           ,
           is
           reserved
           for
           another
           Book
           .
           And
           then
           I
           thought
           it
           seasonable
           enough
           to
           Reply
           ,
           when
           a
           Question
           was
           debated
           ,
           that
           did
           indeed
           concern
           our
           Consciences
           .
           So
           far
           his
           Book
           is
           from
           being
           a
           just
           Answer
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           proving
           what
           himself
           asserts
           .
           But
           for
           that
           also
           ,
           we
           can
           wait
           his
           Leisure
           ,
           if
           the
           Doctor
           had
           been
           pleased
           in
           the
           mean
           time
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           to
           weaken
           what
           had
           been
           produced
           for
           our
           Cause
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           .
           We
           would
           gladly
           have
           been
           excused
           from
           the
           Violence
           we
           have
           offered
           our selves
           ,
           in
           forbearing
           their
           Communion
           ,
           and
           we
           should
           have
           thought
           our selves
           obliged
           to
           him
           for
           it
           ,
           if
           he
           had
           cleared
           what
           was
           objected
           to
           the
           contrary
           in
           that
           very
           Book
           which
           he
           pretends
           to
           Answer
           ;
           if
           he
           had
           shewn
           ,
           that
           notwithstanding
           what
           is
           there
           objected
           ,
           we
           might
           still
           continue
           in
           their
           Communion
           ,
           with
           safety
           to
           our
           Souls
           ,
           and
           consistency
           to
           the
           discharge
           of
           a
           good
           Conscience
           .
           What
           we
           had
           to
           say
           on
           this
           point
           ,
           was
           professedly
           insisted
           on
           in
           the
           
             former
             part
          
           of
           the
           Vindication
           .
           This
           ought
           in
           the
           first
           place
           to
           have
           been
           considered
           by
           him
           ,
           if
           he
           had
           regarded
           our
           Consciences
           ,
           as
           that
           which
           was
           necessary
           to
           dispose
           us
           for
           considering
           his
           other
           Proofs
           or
           Answers
           .
           But
           in
           vain
           we
           have
           expected
           it
           .
           He
           does
           not
           so
           much
           as
           pretend
           to
           consider
           that
           
             first
             Part
          
           in
           his
           whole
           Book
           .
           How
           then
           can
           any
           unprejudiced
           Judge
           take
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           Book
           for
           an
           Answer
           to
           the
           Vindication
           ?
        
      
       
         
         
           He
           also
           grants
           the
           Proposition
           principally
           disputed
           between
           Us
           concerning
           the
           Invalidity
           of
           Lay-deprivations
           ,
           and
           takes
           no
           care
           to
           prevent
           the
           Consequences
           of
           that
           Confession
           .
        
         
           That
           is
           not
           all
           :
           He
           also
           grants
           that
           which
           the
           Vindicator
           designed
           in
           that
           place
           principally
           to
           prove
           ,
           the
           *
           invalidity
           of
           Lay-deprivations
           .
           This
           concession
           the
           Vindicator
           has
           drawn
           into
           its
           just
           Consequences
           ,
           that
           then
           the
           
             deprived
             Bishops
          
           must
           still
           be
           Bishops
           ,
           and
           Bishops
           of
           the
           
             same
             Jurisdictions
          
           ,
           and
           retain
           their
           Right
           to
           their
           Subjects
           Obedience
           in
           their
           several
           respective
           Jurisdictions
           ,
           as
           much
           (
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           )
           as
           if
           such
           depriving
           Sentences
           had
           nevre
           been
           decreed
           .
           None
           can
           doubt
           ,
           who
           knows
           what
           invalidity
           imports
           ,
           but
           that
           invalid
           Censures
           ,
           leave
           Cases
           exactly
           in
           the
           same
           condition
           as
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           in
           which
           they
           find
           them
           :
           That
           therefore
           as
           it
           would
           have
           been
           Schismatical
           to
           have
           set
           up
           Altars
           and
           Anti-Bishops
           in
           the
           same
           districts
           against
           our
           H.
           Fathers
           ,
           in
           case
           the
           depriving
           Act
           had
           never
           passed
           ,
           on
           the
           same
           account
           it
           is
           so
           still
           ,
           in
           case
           the
           deprivation
           proves
           invalid
           .
           That
           ,
           as
           in
           
             that
             Case
          
           ,
           that
           the
           depriving
           Act
           had
           not
           passed
           ,
           communicating
           with
           the
           Schismatical
           Altars
           ,
           had
           involved
           the
           Bishops
           and
           Churches
           that
           had
           been
           guilty
           of
           it
           ,
           in
           the
           same
           Schism
           with
           the
           principal
           and
           
             original
             Schismaticks
          
           ;
           so
           also
           it
           must
           ,
           by
           the
           same
           parity
           of
           Reason
           ,
           do
           so
           now
           ,
           invalid
           Sentences
           not
           being
           capable
           of
           making
           a
           disparity
           .
           Now
           what
           can
           any
           one
           preteud
           ,
           that
           has
           been
           suggested
           by
           the
           Doctor
           for
           securing
           himself
           against
           these
           just
           Inferences
           ,
           from
           so
           unwary
           a
           Concession
           ?
           For
           my
           part
           ,
           I
           can
           find
           no
           place
           where
           he
           does
           so
           much
           as
           offer
           at
           it
           .
           Where
           then
           can
           be
           his
           Answer
           ,
           if
           even
           himself
           grants
           all
           that
           we
           are
           concerned
           to
           assert
           in
           the
           Question
           principally
           disputed
           between
           us
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           V.
           The
           Doctor
           gains
           nothing
           by
           his
           changing
           the
           state
           of
           the
           Qustion
           .
        
         
           This
           being
           so
           ,
           what
           advantage
           can
           the
           Doctor
           propose
           to
           himself
           ,
           by
           changing
           the
           state
           of
           our
           present
           Question
           ,
           from
           a
           Dispute
           concerning
           the
           Magistrates
           †
           Right
           of
           Deprivation
           ,
           to
           another
           concerning
           the
           Lawfulness
           of
           Submission
           in
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Subjests
           ,
           to
           the
           Invaders
           and
           Intruders
           ?
           I
           grant
           indeed
           ,
           that
           these
           Two
           Questions
           are
           not
           directly
           the
           same
           .
           But
           it
           is
           abundantly
           sufficient
           to
           the
           Vindicators
           purpose
           ,
           if
           the
           disproof
           of
           the
           
             Magistrates
             Rights
          
           ,
           do
           by
           necessary
           consequence
           infer
           the
           Unlawfulness
           of
           Submission
           in
           the
           Subjects
           to
           the
           Invaders
           of
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Districts
          
           ,
           not
           otherwise
           vacated
           than
           by
           such
           Lay-deprivations
           .
           And
           this
           it
           does
           by
           the
           inferences
           now
           mentioned
           .
           
             Invalid
             Deprivations
          
           leave
           as
           much
           right
           in
           Conscience
           as
           they
           found
           ,
           and
           therefore
           as
           much
           obligation
           to
           Duty
           in
           the
           Subjects
           .
           The
           Subjects
           therefore
           
           still
           owing
           duty
           to
           the
           
             invalidly
             Deprived
             Bishops
          
           ,
           must
           be
           guilty
           of
           Sin
           ,
           if
           they
           pay
           the
           same
           duty
           to
           their
           Rivals
           :
           And
           for
           committing
           Sin
           ,
           the
           Doctor
           does
           not
           ,
           nay
           ,
           dares
           not
           own
           ,
           even
           an
           
             Irresistible
             force
          
           to
           be
           sufficient
           .
           If
           he
           should
           ,
           I
           know
           none
           of
           his
           mind
           ,
           besides
           the
           old
           Gnostik
           and
           Elcesaite
           Hereticks
           .
           Thus
           pertinent
           it
           is
           to
           disprove
           the
           
             Magistrates
             Right
          
           of
           deprivation
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           the
           disproving
           the
           Lawfulness
           of
           Submission
           in
           the
           Ecclasiastical
           Subjects
           ,
           on
           the
           pretence
           of
           
             Irresistible
             force
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           VI.
           The
           Doctor
           's
           whole
           Proof
           
             unconclusive
             ,
             admitting
             the
          
           Invalidity
           of
           Lay-deprivations
           .
        
         
           But
           the
           Doctor
           pretends
           that
           it
           was
           neither
           the
           design
           of
           the
           Author
           of
           his
           
             Baroccian
             M.
             S.
          
           in
           writing
           it
           ,
           nor
           his
           own
           in
           publishing
           it
           ,
           to
           prove
           the
           Right
           of
           the
           
             Lay
             Magistrate
          
           for
           
             Spiritual
             De
             privations
          
           I
           easily
           agree
           with
           him
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           not
           the
           design
           of
           the
           Author
           of
           this
           
             M.
             S.
          
           And
           I
           shall
           as
           easily
           excuse
           him
           from
           designing
           it
           ,
           if
           it
           be
           consistent
           with
           the
           exigency
           of
           his
           Cause
           which
           engaged
           him
           to
           the
           publication
           .
           But
           can
           he
           deny
           at
           least
           ,
           that
           his
           design
           in
           publishing
           it
           ,
           was
           to
           purge
           his
           party
           from
           the
           guilt
           of
           the
           present
           Schism
           ?
           Can
           he
           deny
           that
           in
           order
           hereunto
           ,
           his
           design
           was
           to
           prove
           the
           Lawfulness
           of
           Submission
           in
           the
           Subjects
           of
           the
           deprived
           destricts
           to
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Intruders
           ?
           His
           own
           words
           in
           these
           particulars
           are
           too
           manifest
           to
           leave
           him
           to
           the
           liberty
           of
           denying
           them
           .
           Let
           him
           then
           try
           his
           skill
           ,
           wether
           he
           can
           from
           this
           
             M.
             S.
          
           or
           from
           any
           thing
           offered
           in
           his
           Book
           ,
           prove
           the
           Lawfulness
           of
           such
           Submission
           in
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Subjects
           on
           the
           Supposal
           now
           mentioned
           ,
           of
           the
           Invalidity
           of
           
             Lay
             deprivations
          
           .
           If
           he
           can
           ,
           he
           may
           then
           indeed
           ,
           but
           not
           till
           then
           ,
           call
           the
           disproof
           of
           the
           
             Magistrates
             Right
          
           for
           
             Spiritual
             deprivation
          
           ,
           and
           the
           consequent
           proof
           of
           the
           Invalidity
           of
           such
           deprivations
           ,
           when
           attempted
           impertinent
           to
           his
           design
           in
           publishing
           his
           
             M
             S.
          
           But
           how
           will
           he
           undertake
           to
           do
           this
           ?
           Does
           he
           think
           the
           Facts
           alone
           ,
           either
           of
           his
           M.
           S.
           or
           his
           Book
           ,
           sufficient
           for
           this
           purpose
           ,
           supposing
           them
           such
           as
           he
           is
           concerned
           they
           should
           be
           ,
           instances
           of
           Submission
           ,
           upon
           Lay
           ,
           or
           otherwise
           
             Invalid
             deprivations
          
           ,
           to
           Usurpers
           of
           the
           vacated
           Thrones
           ?
           Dare
           he
           stand
           by
           the
           consequence
           ,
           that
           a
           like
           enumeration
           of
           as
           many
           Facts
           in
           as
           large
           a
           distance
           of
           the
           
             like
             times
          
           ,
           is
           sufficient
           to
           prove
           the
           
             Practice
             allowable
          
           ,
           nay
           ,
           exemplary
           ,
           to
           succeeding
           Generations
           ?
           If
           he
           dare
           not
           ,
           he
           must
           think
           of
           some
           other
           way
           of
           proving
           them
           well
           done
           ,
           than
           barely
           this
           ,
           that
           they
           
             were
             done
          
           .
           This
           will
           reduce
           him
           ,
           whether
           he
           will
           or
           no
           ,
           to
           the
           merit
           
           of
           the
           cause
           .
           And
           how
           is
           it
           possible
           for
           him
           to
           prove
           Submission
           to
           the
           
             Usurper
             lawful
          
           and
           unsinful
           ,
           till
           the
           Subjects
           be
           first
           fairly
           discharged
           from
           their
           duty
           to
           the
           first
           Incumbent
           ?
           How
           can
           he
           prove
           them
           discharged
           from
           their
           
             first
             duty
          
           ,
           if
           the
           
             Lay
             deprivation
          
           be
           not
           sufficient
           to
           discharge
           them
           ?
           And
           how
           can
           he
           pretend
           it
           sufficient
           for
           that
           purpose
           ,
           if
           it
           was
           from
           the
           beginning
           null
           and
           invalid
           ?
           Thus
           he
           will
           find
           the
           disproof
           of
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Lay-Magistrate
           for
           
             Spiritual
             deprivations
          
           to
           be
           more
           pertinent
           ,
           than
           perhaps
           himself
           could
           wish
           it
           ,
           for
           overthrowing
           his
           pretended
           Lawfulness
           of
           Submission
           in
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Subjects
           to
           Persons
           obtruded
           on
           Sees
           no
           other
           way
           vacated
           ,
           than
           by
           the
           Authority
           of
           a
           Lay-deprivation
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           VII
           .
           The
           
             Doctor
             's
             limitations
          
           of
           his
           own
           pretended
           
             self-evident
             Maxime
          
           ,
           do
           all
           of
           them
           prove
           our
           Case
           unconcerned
           in
           it
           .
           Chap.
           1.
           
        
         
           But
           the
           Doctor
           pretends
           to
           demonstrate
           (
           no
           softer
           word
           it
           seems
           would
           serve
           his
           turn
           )
           the
           Truth
           of
           his
           Proposition
           ;
           and
           God
           forbid
           we
           should
           not
           yield
           to
           Demonstration
           .
           But
           I
           confess
           ,
           I
           very
           rarely
           find
           great
           solidity
           joyned
           with
           great
           confidence
           :
           However
           ,
           we
           must
           not
           prejudge
           it
           ,
           but
           examine
           whether
           it
           will
           answer
           the
           Character
           with
           which
           he
           has
           possessed
           us
           concerning
           it
           .
           His
           demonstration
           therefore
           he
           draws
           First
           ,
           From
           the
           Reasonableness
           of
           it
           .
           Secondly
           ,
           From
           the
           Authority
           and
           Practice
           of
           the
           Autients
           .
           The
           Reasonableness
           of
           it
           ,
           he
           grounds
           on
           this
           certain
           and
           self
           eviden-Maxime
           ,
           
             That
             whatsoever
             is
             necessary
             for
             the
             present
             Peace
             and
             Tranquillity
             of
             the
             Church
             ,
             that
             ought
             to
             be
             made
             use
             of
             ,
             provided
             it
             is
             not
             in
             it self
             sinful
             ;
             and
             the
             ill
             Consequences
             which
             may
             possibly
             attend
             it
             ,
             are
             either
             not
             somischievous
             to
             the
             Church
             ,
             or
             at
             least
             not
             so
             likely
             to
             happen
             as
             the
             Evils
             we
             endeavour
             to
             avoid
             .
          
           But
           upon
           the
           supposed
           Invalidity
           of
           Lay-deprivations
           this
           Submission
           of
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Subjects
           to
           the
           Usurper
           of
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Throne
           ,
           will
           not
           come
           under
           the
           limitations
           proposed
           by
           the
           Dr.
           himself
           ,
           of
           his
           
             self
             evident
             Maxim.
          
           I
           have
           already
           shewn
           that
           ,
           on
           this
           supposal
           ,
           this
           Submission
           to
           the
           Usurper
           will
           be
           in
           it self
           sinful
           .
           And
           the
           same
           Observation
           may
           be
           applied
           to
           his
           other
           limitations
           ,
           if
           the
           Case
           propos'd
           be
           judg'd
           by
           our
           Principles
           .
           The
           Consequences
           which
           we
           think
           will
           follow
           from
           this
           Obligation
           he
           layson
           our
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Superiors
          
           ,
           to
           yield
           their
           Rights
           as
           often
           as
           they
           are
           invaded
           ,
           where
           nothing
           but
           the
           Right
           is
           concerned
           ;
           and
           the
           liberty
           he
           allows
           Ecclesiastical
           Subjects
           to
           desert
           their
           Superiors
           ,
           if
           they
           think
           fit
           to
           assert
           their
           Rights
           ;
           we
           think
           tend
           ,
           by
           inevitable
           Consequence
           ,
           to
           the
           perfect
           subvertion
           of
           the
           Church
           
           as
           a
           Society
           .
           And
           this
           Consequence
           is
           worse
           than
           can
           be
           feared
           from
           the
           Persecutions
           of
           
             erresistible
             force
          
           (
           if
           we
           can
           agree
           ,
           as
           the
           
             Primitive
             Christians
          
           did
           ,
           to
           keep
           our
           stations
           )
           or
           from
           the
           divisions
           of
           them
           who
           will
           not
           agree
           to
           maintain
           Society
           with
           us
           in
           a
           state
           of
           Independance
           on
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           And
           
             natural
             Consequences
          
           from
           Principles
           ,
           are
           
             Evils
             more
             likely
             to
             hapen
          
           ,
           than
           any
           that
           depend
           on
           the
           wills
           of
           
             mutable
             Men.
          
           So
           that
           be
           his
           Maxim
           never
           so
           self-evident
           ,
           yet
           there
           is
           not
           one
           of
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           own
           limitations
           ,
           but
           excludes
           his
           own
           Case
           ,
           as
           judged
           by
           
             our
             Principles
          
           from
           being
           concerned
           in
           it
           .
           This
           perfectly
           discharges
           us
           from
           all
           concern
           in
           the
           Instances
           by
           which
           he
           pretends
           to
           prove
           his
           
             Maxim
             received
          
           by
           the
           Antients
           as
           self-evident
           .
           Yet
           it
           were
           easie
           to
           answer
           them
           ,
           if
           we
           were
           concerned
           to
           do
           so
           .
           They
           are
           generally
           in
           things
           indifferent
           ,
           and
           changeable
           by
           their
           different
           Circumstances
           ;
           and
           the
           Dispensations
           were
           made
           by
           Persons
           in
           Authority
           ,
           without
           prejudice
           to
           any
           Third
           Persons
           Right
           .
           So
           that
           not
           one
           of
           his
           Instances
           reach
           our
           Case
           .
           But
           the
           Subjects
           of
           our
           Dispute
           are
           not
           mutable
           ,
           nor
           depend
           on
           Circumstances
           .
           As
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Society
           was
           designed
           by
           Christ
           not
           temporary
           ,
           but
           perpetual
           ;
           so
           the
           Essenital
           cements
           of
           it
           must
           have
           been
           so
           too
           .
           And
           such
           are
           the
           Rights
           of
           Governours
           ,
           and
           the
           Duties
           of
           Subjects
           .
           These
           if
           they
           be
           taken
           away
           for
           a
           moment
           ,
           dissolve
           the
           Society
           ,
           and
           therefore
           cannot
           be
           left
           to
           the
           Prudence
           of
           Governours
           for
           the
           
             time
             being
          
           ,
           because
           the
           very
           supposal
           of
           the
           Case
           ,
           destroys
           the
           very
           being
           of
           the
           Government
           and
           of
           the
           Society
           ,
           and
           therefore
           leaves
           no
           Governours
           in
           being
           ,
           that
           may
           consider
           such
           Circumstances
           ,
           and
           suit
           their
           Practices
           accordingly
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           VIII
           .
           Submission
           of
           Subjects
           
             to
             the
             Ecclesiastical
          
           Usurpers
           is
           sinful
           
             by
             the
          
           Law
           of
           God.
           
        
         
           But
           though
           the
           Doctor
           answers
           nothing
           produced
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           for
           proving
           such
           submission
           of
           the
           Subjects
           to
           an
           Intruder
           sinful
           ;
           yet
           he
           pretends
           to
           prove
           it
           unsinful
           .
           But
           so
           unhappily
           ,
           that
           not
           one
           of
           his
           proofs
           hold
           for
           the
           purpose
           for
           which
           he
           has
           produced
           them
           .
           First
           ,
           He
           pretends
           the
           
             Scripture
             silent
             in
             our
             Case
          
           ;
           and
           therefore
           that
           such
           Submission
           is
           not
           forbidden
           by
           any
           
             express
             Law
          
           of
           God.
           Yet
           he
           denies
           not
           but
           that
           the
           Law
           of
           God
           commands
           us
           
           to
           be
           Obedient
           to
           our
           Governours
           ,
           to
           them
           also
           who
           are
           over
           us
           
             in
             the
             Lord.
          
           But
           where
           there
           are
           two
           
             Competitors
             ,
             and
             both
             claim
             our
             Obedience
             ,
             to
             which
             of
             these
             two
             our
             Obedience
             ought
             to
             be
             payed
             ,
          
           this
           he
           says
           ,
           
             it
             leaves
             to
             our
             wisdom
             to
             determine
             .
          
           But
           will
           he
           therefore
           pretend
           
           that
           disobedience
           to
           any
           
             particular
             Governour
          
           in
           
             our
             Age
          
           ,
           is
           not
           against
           the
           
             express
             Law
             of
             God
          
           ,
           because
           no
           Law
           of
           God
           is
           express
           in
           determing
           any
           particular
           Person
           
             now
             living
          
           to
           be
           our
           Governour
           ?
           This
           will
           overthrow
           all
           
             Divine
             Obligations
          
           to
           any
           since
           the
           
             Apostles
             Age.
          
           Now
           only
           in
           this
           but
           in
           most
           other
           duties
           relating
           to
           Men
           ,
           the
           
             determining
             Circumstances
          
           are
           settled
           by
           
             Human
             Authority
          
           ;
           Yet
           none
           does
           therefore
           pretend
           ,
           but
           that
           the
           Offence
           against
           the
           
             Duty
             so
             Circumstantiated
          
           ,
           is
           against
           the
           Law
           of
           God.
           The
           Law
           of
           God
           requires
           Duty
           to
           Parents
           .
           But
           who
           are
           to
           be
           taken
           for
           our
           Parents
           ,
           not
           only
           Nature
           ,
           but
           the
           Laws
           of
           Men
           have
           determined
           in
           several
           Cases
           ,
           as
           in
           that
           of
           Adoption
           ,
           which
           is
           ancienter
           then
           Moses
           himself
           ,
           and
           in
           the
           other
           of
           our
           Civil
           and
           
             Spiritual
             Parents
          
           ,
           who
           are
           generally
           concluded
           in
           that
           
             Divine
             Commandment
          
           .
           So
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           Murther
           ,
           it
           is
           certain
           ,
           that
           only
           
             Illegal
             Killing
          
           ,
           by
           a
           Person
           not
           authorized
           ,
           or
           for
           an
           
             unjust
             Cause
          
           ,
           is
           forbidden
           in
           the
           6th
           Commandment
           .
           But
           they
           are
           
             Human
             Laws
          
           which
           pitch
           upon
           the
           Person
           who
           is
           to
           be
           vested
           with
           the
           Authority
           of
           Life
           and
           Death
           ,
           and
           which
           determine
           the
           Cases
           wherein
           Death
           is
           to
           be
           inflicted
           .
           So
           also
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           Adultery
           ,
           it
           cannot
           be
           jugded
           what
           Facts
           are
           chargeable
           with
           that
           Crime
           ,
           but
           by
           the
           Laws
           of
           Matrimony
           ,
           which
           depend
           on
           the
           particular
           Constitutions
           of
           the
           Places
           ,
           and
           are
           accordingly
           various
           .
           But
           in
           no
           Case
           this
           is
           more
           evident
           ,
           than
           in
           that
           of
           the
           8th
           Commandment
           .
           Theft
           is
           all
           that
           is
           there
           forbidden
           ,
           which
           cannot
           be
           applied
           to
           any
           Fact
           ,
           but
           by
           supposing
           the
           determination
           of
           
             Human
             Laws
          
           concerning
           Property
           ,
           which
           are
           again
           very
           various
           .
           For
           some
           Persons
           have
           been
           excluded
           from
           all
           Property
           ,
           as
           Slaves
           ,
           and
           
             unemancipated
             Children
          
           .
           And
           the
           determinations
           of
           Property
           in
           Persons
           capable
           of
           it
           ,
           are
           so
           different
           in
           
             different
             Places
          
           ,
           that
           what
           is
           Property
           and
           the
           violation
           of
           it
           ,
           Theft
           in
           one
           Country
           ,
           is
           not
           so
           in
           another
           .
           Yet
           what
           Casuist
           has
           ever
           doubted
           ,
           but
           that
           Disobedience
           to
           
             Parents
             ,
             Murther
             ,
             Adultery
          
           and
           Theft
           ,
           are
           still
           violations
           of
           the
           Law
           of
           God
           ,
           notwithstanding
           that
           the
           Imputation
           of
           these
           Crimes
           to
           particular
           Facts
           ,
           does
           now
           generally
           depend
           on
           Circumstances
           determined
           by
           
             Human
             Law
          
           ?
           If
           therefore
           by
           
             our
             ,
             Wisdom
          
           ,
           the
           Doctor
           means
           the
           Wisdom
           of
           the
           Subjects
           themselves
           ,
           as
           if
           the
           Scriptures
           had
           left
           the
           determination
           of
           these
           Circumstances
           to
           that
           ,
           his
           Observation
           it
           not
           true
           .
           The
           Subjects
           are
           to
           be
           concluded
           by
           the
           wisdom
           of
           their
           Superiours
           ;
           and
           that
           upon
           account
           of
           the
           
             Divine
             Law
          
           ,
           which
           obliges
           them
           to
           duty
           to
           Superiours
           in
           
           general
           ,
           which
           is
           to
           be
           so
           expounded
           ,
           that
           it
           may
           extend
           to
           all
           our
           Superiors
           for
           the
           time
           being
           ,
           in
           what
           time
           or
           place
           soever
           .
           This
           therefore
           will
           oblige
           us
           to
           take
           all
           the
           ways
           of
           
             conveying
             Power
          
           to
           
             particular
             Persons
          
           by
           the
           constitutions
           of
           
             particular
             Societies
          
           ,
           not
           only
           for
           Human
           ,
           but
           
             Divine
             Establishments
          
           .
           I
           am
           sure
           St.
           Cyprian
           looks
           on
           all
           
             particular
             Bishops
          
           in
           his
           own
           time
           ,
           as
           appointed
           by
           God
           and
           Christ.
           And
           in
           this
           way
           it
           is
           manifest
           ,
           that
           they
           who
           are
           intruded
           into
           places
           vacated
           by
           an
           
             incompetent
             Authority
          
           ,
           cannot
           be
           taken
           for
           the
           Bishops
           to
           whom
           the
           Subjects
           Obedience
           is
           due
           by
           
             Divine
             Law.
          
           This
           also
           is
           as
           certain
           from
           the
           Reasonings
           and
           Principles
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           the
           Sayings
           ,
           of
           St.
           Cyperian
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           IX
           .
           Such
           Submission
           would
           make
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           
             Subjects
             Accomplices
          
           in
           the
           Injustice
           .
        
         
           The
           Doctor
           adds
           Secondly
           ,
           That
           Submission
           to
           the
           Usurpars
           does
           not
           
             make
             us
             Accomplices
             in
             the
             Injustice
             .
          
           But
           why
           ,
           if
           our
           duty
           still
           be
           owing
           to
           the
           
             Rightful
             Claimers
          
           ,
           as
           it
           must
           notwithstanding
           an
           invalid
           deprivation
           ?
           The
           only
           reason
           he
           pretends
           ,
           is
           that
           refusal
           of
           Duty
           to
           the
           Usurpers
           would
           only
           draw
           Ruin
           ;
           upon
           the
           Clergy
           themselves
           who
           should
           refuse
           it
           ,
           and
           cannot
           restore
           the
           Rightful
           Owners
           whom
           the
           state
           has
           deposed
           Thus
           this
           Divine
           takes
           Persecution
           ,
           and
           Deprivation
           of
           Revenues
           ,
           for
           Ruin
           ;
           and
           sufficient
           to
           excuse
           from
           the
           Duty
           which
           may
           still
           remain
           ,
           notwithstanding
           any
           thing
           he
           has
           pleased
           ,
           or
           can
           plead
           ,
           from
           a
           Deprivation
           which
           himself
           has
           granted
           to
           be
           Invaild
           .
           I
           am
           sure
           his
           Texts
           teaches
           us
           otherwise
           ,
           that
           Persecutions
           incurred
           for
           Duty
           ,
           are
           not
           
           Ruin
           ,
           but
           gain
           ,
           a
           
             Hundred
             fold
          
           even
           here
           ,
           besids
           the
           future
           Eternal
           Rewards
           .
           Nor
           can
           any
           one
           believe
           otherwise
           ,
           who
           believes
           our
           Revealed
           Religion
           .
           Nothing
           but
           flesh
           and
           blood
           ,
           and
           a
           carnal
           prospect
           ,
           can
           make
           these
           things
           appear
           as
           the
           Doctor
           has
           represented
           them
           .
           But
           he
           says
           ,
           their
           refusal
           of
           Obedience
           to
           the
           Intrudors
           ,
           cannot
           restore
           the
           true
           owners
           to
           their
           
             Rightful
             Possession
          
           .
           What
           then
           ?
           will
           this
           therefore
           excuse
           them
           for
           joyning
           with
           the
           Usurpers
           ,
           for
           thereby
           maintaining
           their
           
             unjust
             Possession
          
           in
           opposition
           to
           those
           who
           have
           a
           
             better
             Title
          
           ,
           which
           Title
           themselves
           were
           Obliged
           to
           maintain
           ?
           Can
           he
           reconcile
           this
           with
           their
           
             old
             Duty
          
           ,
           or
           excuse
           themselves
           ,
           for
           violating
           that
           Duty
           ,
           from
           being
           Accomplices
           in
           the
           Injustice
           ?
           But
           the
           Suggestion
           is
           not
           true
           which
           he
           insists
           on
           ,
           that
           the
           refusal
           of
           Obedience
           to
           the
           Intruders
           ,
           and
           paying
           it
           to
           the
           
             lawful
             Pastors
          
           ,
           would
           not
           continue
           the
           
             Rightful
             Poslesiors
          
           .
           It
           would
           not
           indeed
           continue
           them
           in
           their
           Possession
           of
           their
           
             Secular
             dues
          
           ,
           or
           of
           any
           thing
           of
           which
           the
           State
           could
           deprive
           them
           .
           But
           it
           would
           continue
           them
           in
           a
           Possession
           of
           those
           things
           for
           which
           our
           Consciences
           are
           concerned
           ,
           I
           mean
           of
           Spiritual
           ;
           in
           such
           a
           Possession
           as
           is
           consistent
           with
           a
           Persecution
           from
           the
           State
           ;
           in
           such
           a
           Possession
           as
           was
           enjoyned
           
           by
           their
           holy
           Ancestors
           in
           the
           first
           and
           purest
           Ages
           .
           This
           we
           might
           continue
           to
           them
           ,
           whether
           the
           State
           would
           or
           no
           ,
           if
           we
           could
           find
           in
           our
           hearts
           to
           agree
           among
           our
           selves
           ,
           as
           the
           
             Primitive
             Christians
          
           did
           ,
           to
           be
           Unanimous
           in
           performing
           our
           Duty
           to
           them
           .
           And
           so
           far
           is
           the
           prospect
           of
           the
           
             Publick
             good
          
           from
           obliging
           us
           ,
           as
           the
           Doctor
           pretends
           ,
           to
           the
           contrary
           ;
           that
           that
           very
           consideration
           of
           the
           
             Publick
             good
          
           ,
           is
           that
           which
           we
           principally
           insist
           on
           for
           our
           purpose
           .
           It
           is
           certainly
           for
           the
           
             Publick
             good
          
           of
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           that
           the
           Rights
           of
           its
           Governours
           ,
           and
           the
           Duties
           of
           its
           Subjects
           ,
           should
           be
           preserved
           inviolable
           .
           And
           it
           is
           for
           the
           
             Publick
             good
          
           also
           ,
           that
           the
           Interest
           of
           less
           valuable
           Societies
           ,
           should
           give
           way
           to
           the
           Interests
           of
           that
           Society
           which
           is
           
             more
             valuable
          
           .
           And
           it
           is
           withal
           ,
           as
           certain
           ,
           that
           the
           Spiritual
           ,
           is
           the
           
             more
             valuable
             Society
          
           .
           I
           cannot
           foresee
           what
           part
           of
           this
           Reasoning
           the
           Doctor
           can
           question
           ,
           if
           he
           will
           be
           true
           to
           the
           Interests
           of
           
             Revealed
             Religion
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           X.
           The
           same
           submission
           in
           the
           Clergy
           is
           sinful
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           the
           Oaths
           they
           have
           taken
           to
           the
           of
           
             Rightful
             Possessors
             Canonical
             Obedience
          
           .
        
         
           He
           proceeds
           ,
           and
           says
           Thirdly
           ,
           That
           such
           compliance
           with
           an
           
             Usurping
             Ecclesiastick
          
           Governour
           ,
           is
           not
           sinful
           on
           account
           of
           the
           Oath
           of
           
             Canonical
             Obedience
          
           to
           the
           
             Lawful
             Possessor
          
           .
           And
           why
           so
           ?
           Because
           the
           Bishop
           so
           
             deprived
             ,
             can
             no
             longer
             govern
             .
          
           But
           GOD
           be
           praised
           ,
           our
           Bishops
           can
           still
           govern
           ,
           if
           their
           Clergy
           and
           Laity
           would
           obey
           .
           And
           that
           the
           Clergy
           will
           
             not
             obey
          
           ,
           the
           Doctor
           ought
           to
           shew
           how
           it
           is
           reconcileable
           with
           their
           Oaths
           of
           Obedience
           ,
           by
           some
           
             other
             Topick
          
           than
           what
           he
           has
           here
           insisted
           on
           .
           
             Our
             Bishops
          
           are
           not
           banished
           ,
           are
           not
           imprisoned
           ,
           are
           not
           confined
           ,
           nor
           any
           way
           disabled
           from
           exercising
           that
           
             actual
             Government
          
           ,
           which
           relates
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           and
           which
           is
           practicable
           in
           a
           Persecution
           .
           Yet
           the
           
             Primitive
             Christians
          
           did
           not
           think
           their
           Bishops
           disabled
           for
           Governing
           ,
           when
           they
           were
           in
           Exile
           ,
           as
           long
           as
           they
           maintained
           a
           correspondence
           with
           their
           Clergy
           .
           So
           St.
           Cyprian
           ,
           even
           in
           his
           Exile
           ,
           exercised
           his
           Authority
           ,
           and
           was
           obeyed
           by
           his
           .
           
             Carthaginian
             Clergy
          
           St.
           Athanasius
           was
           banished
           further
           into
           the
           West
           ,
           which
           perfectly
           disabled
           him
           for
           keeping
           up
           that
           
             Ordinary
             Correspondence
          
           with
           his
           
             Alexandrian
             Clergy
          
           which
           was
           requisite
           for
           actual
           Government
           .
           Yet
           this
           was
           not
           then
           thought
           sufficient
           ,
           either
           to
           give
           them
           leave
           to
           joyn
           with
           any
           of
           those
           who
           were
           substituted
           into
           his
           place
           by
           suspected
           Arian
           Synods
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           by
           the
           
             Imperial
             Authority
          
           ;
           or
           to
           
             set
             up
          
           any
           Person
           ,
           without
           his
           leave
           ,
           of
           as
           
             unsuspected
             Orthodoxy
          
           as
           himself
           .
           While
           he
           was
           living
           ,
           and
           might
           return
           to
           a
           capacity
           of
           governing
           ,
           they
           did
           not
           think
           themselves
           discharged
           from
           their
           duty
           to
           him
           ,
           on
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           pretence
           of
           the
           
             publick
             good
          
           .
           I
           have
           already
           also
           shewn
           ,
           how
           that
           pretence
           in
           this
           Case
           ,
           makes
           against
           him
           ,
           and
           am
           not
           willing
           to
           repeat
           what
           has
           been
           there
           said
           .
           If
           the
           
           Church's
           intention
           be
           regarded
           ,
           as
           the
           Doctor
           
           seems
           to
           regard
           it
           here
           ,
           she
           certainly
           could
           never
           intend
           that
           her
           Governours
           should
           be
           robbed
           of
           their
           
             Spiritual
             Right
          
           ,
           and
           her
           
             Subjects
             discharged
          
           from
           their
           
             Spiritual
             Subjection
          
           ,
           and
           her
           Body
           thereby
           dissolved
           at
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           sacrilegious
           encroaching
           Magistrate
           .
           This
           dependance
           of
           the
           Subjects
           is
           so
           universally
           the
           Interest
           of
           all
           Churches
           and
           Bishops
           in
           general
           ,
           and
           indeed
           of
           all
           Societies
           ,
           as
           that
           I
           know
           not
           any
           shew
           of
           reason
           the
           Doctor
           has
           ,
           to
           make
           it
           the
           
             private
             intention
          
           of
           the
           Bishop
           ,
           in
           opposition
           to
           the
           
             publick
             intention
          
           of
           the
           Church
           .
           It
           is
           an
           invidious
           Interpretation
           ,
           and
           a
           very
           false
           one
           ,
           which
           he
           gives
           of
           the
           Oath
           ,
           when
           he
           makes
           it
           in
           effect
           the
           same
           as
           if
           they
           should
           swear
           ,
           
             That
             they
             will
             for
             the
             Bishop's
             sake
             ,
             oppose
             the
             welfare
             of
             the
             Publick
             ,
             and
             break
             the
             Union
             of
             the
             Church
             ,
             and
             leave
             the
             Communion
             of
             it
             ,
             and
             adhere
             to
             the
             Bishop
             ,
             though
             they
             should
             have
             no
             reason
             to
             do
             so
             ,
             besides
             this
             bare
             Oath
             .
          
           No
           need
           of
           this
           .
           The
           welfare
           of
           the
           Publick
           ,
           and
           the
           Union
           of
           the
           Church
           require
           that
           in
           affairs
           of
           
             Publick
             Spiritual
             Interest
          
           the
           judgment
           of
           the
           Subject
           ought
           to
           be
           concluded
           by
           the
           judgment
           of
           the
           Bishop
           ,
           at
           least
           to
           the
           practice
           ,
           which
           perfectly
           overthrows
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           Interpretation
           ,
           and
           makes
           it
           impossible
           that
           those
           considerations
           should
           ever
           really
           interfere
           ,
           which
           the
           Doctor
           makes
           so
           opposite
           .
           And
           St.
           
           Cyprian's
           definition
           of
           a
           Church
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           a
           
             flock
             united
             with
             the
             Bishop
          
           ,
           makes
           it
           impossible
           that
           the
           true
           
           Church's
           Communion
           can
           ever
           be
           left
           in
           adhering
           to
           the
           Bishop
           .
           But
           this
           perhaps
           the
           Doctor
           will
           call
           a
           Saying
           of
           St.
           Cyprian
           ,
           and
           a
           sort
           of
           
             Theological
             Pedantry
          
           ,
           as
           he
           is
           used
           to
           
           stile
           other
           ,
           the
           like
           Doctrines
           and
           Principales
           of
           the
           Cyprianick
           and
           
             purest
             Ages
          
           ,
           when
           they
           are
           urged
           to
           oblige
           him
           to
           any
           thing
           that
           may
           give
           him
           occasion
           to
           shew
           ,
           what
           he
           calls
           ,
           his
           fortitude
           .
           What
           he
           pretends
           with
           his
           usual
           confidence
           ,
           without
           the
           least
           offer
           of
           
             proof
             ,
             that
             particularly
             here
             in
             the
             Church
             of
          
           England
           ,
           
             the
             Oath
             of
             Canonical
             Obe
          
           
           
             dience
             is
             always
             taken
             with
             this
             supposition
             ,
             That
             the
             Civil
             Power
             as
             well
             as
             the
             Ecclesiastical
             ,
             do
             allow
             the
             Bishop
             to
             govern
             ,
          
           we
           shall
           then
           believe
           ,
           when
           he
           shall
           be
           pleased
           to
           prove
           it
           by
           some
           stronger
           Topick
           than
           his
           own
           Authority
           .
           The
           Oath
           it self
           has
           no
           such
           matter
           expressed
           in
           it
           .
           And
           he
           should
           have
           pitched
           on
           some
           expression
           in
           it
           ,
           if
           there
           had
           been
           any
           ,
           which
           (
           in
           his
           opinion
           )
           might
           seem
           to
           imply
           it
           .
           Our
           
             Civil
             Laws
          
           require
           that
           our
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Causes
          
           should
           be
           determined
           by
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Judges
          
           ,
           which
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           been
           observed
           ,
           had
           left
           no
           room
           for
           the
           Case
           of
           
             Lay
             deprivations
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XI
           .
           Our
           Principles
           
             afford
             better
          
           Reasons
           
             why
             the
          
           unjust
           
             deprivations
             of
          
           Synods
           
             may
             be
             received
             without
             the
             deprivea
             Bishops
          
           consent
           ,
           
             than
             those
             insisted
             on
             by
             the
          
           Doctor
           .
        
         
         
           That
           a
           Synodical
           deprivation
           ,
           though
           unjust
           ,
           discharges
           the
           Subjects
           from
           the
           Obligation
           of
           the
           Oath
           of
           
             Cononical
             Obedience
          
           ,
           is
           usually
           admitted
           .
           But
           not
           for
           that
           reason
           which
           the
           Doctor
           has
           given
           for
           it
           .
           The
           division
           which
           might
           otherwise
           follow
           in
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           the
           
             publick
             disturbance
          
           which
           might
           follow
           thereupon
           ,
           if
           they
           were
           not
           so
           discharged
           ,
           are
           equally
           applicable
           to
           the
           opposite
           Pretenders
           ,
           and
           could
           afford
           the
           Subjects
           no
           directions
           with
           whether
           of
           them
           they
           ought
           to
           joyn
           .
           The
           
             true
             reason
          
           ought
           to
           decide
           the
           Title
           ,
           and
           therefore
           ought
           to
           be
           such
           as
           one
           only
           of
           the
           Rivals
           can
           pretend
           to
           .
           That
           is
           ,
           that
           the
           Synod
           ,
           however
           unjust
           in
           its
           way
           of
           proceeding
           ,
           is
           notwithstanding
           to
           be
           allowed
           as
           a
           
             conpetent
             Judge
          
           ;
           and
           therefore
           that
           ,
           on
           that
           account
           ,
           its
           Sentences
           ought
           to
           hold
           in
           Practice
           ,
           till
           repealed
           by
           a
           
             higher
             Authority
          
           of
           the
           
             same
             kind
          
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           by
           a
           
             greater
             Synod
          
           .
           But
           an
           
             incompetent
             Jude
          
           leaves
           things
           in
           the
           same
           condition
           in
           which
           it
           found
           them
           ,
           and
           ought
           not
           ,
           in
           Conscience
           or
           Equity
           ,
           to
           have
           an
           effect
           at
           all
           .
           Nor
           can
           it
           therefore
           impose
           on
           the
           Consciences
           of
           the
           Subjects
           any
           ,
           the
           least
           ,
           Obligation
           ,
           even
           to
           acquiescence
           .
           Nor
           does
           it
           follow
           ,
           that
           because
           the
           
           Bishop's
           conscent
           may
           not
           be
           necessary
           to
           oblige
           him
           to
           stand
           to
           the
           
             unjust
             Sentence
          
           ,
           that
           therefore
           the
           reason
           of
           his
           obligation
           to
           acquiescences
           is
           not
           grounded
           on
           
             Episcopal
             consent
          
           .
           The
           consent
           of
           his
           Predecessors
           on
           the
           valuable
           consideration
           of
           having
           the
           conveniences
           of
           
             Synodical
             debates
          
           ,
           may
           conclude
           him
           while
           he
           enjoys
           the
           same
           
             valuable
             considerations
          
           .
           And
           the
           consent
           of
           his
           Collegues
           may
           oblige
           him
           also
           ,
           who
           have
           the
           Right
           of
           judging
           with
           whom
           they
           will
           observe
           the
           Commerce
           of
           their
           
             Communicatory
             Letters
          
           .
           Their
           agreement
           in
           denying
           him
           their
           
             Communicatory
             Letters
          
           ,
           is
           ,
           in
           effect
           ,
           a
           Deprivation
           ,
           when
           what
           he
           does
           is
           not
           ratified
           in
           the
           
             Catholick
             Church
          
           .
           This
           will
           go
           far
           to
           hinder
           his
           Cummunion
           from
           being
           Catholick
           ,
           which
           may
           go
           far
           also
           towards
           the
           absolving
           his
           Subjects
           from
           Duty
           to
           him
           ,
           if
           by
           joyning
           with
           any
           other
           ,
           they
           may
           have
           the
           benefit
           of
           
             Catholick
             Communion
          
           .
           But
           this
           following
           the
           judgment
           of
           
             Episcopal
             Predecessors
          
           ,
           or
           of
           the
           
             Episcopal
             Colledge
          
           ,
           will
           by
           no
           means
           ,
           allow
           the
           Subject
           that
           Liberty
           which
           the
           Doctor
           disputes
           for
           ,
           of
           deserting
           their
           Bishops
           on
           their
           own
           
             private
             Judgments
          
           concerning
           the
           
             publick
             good
          
           .
           It
           will
           not
           follow
           ,
           that
           
             that
             Necessity
          
           must
           excuse
           them
           ,
           which
           has
           no
           other
           consideration
           on
           which
           it
           may
           be
           grounded
           ,
           desides
           that
           of
           an
           
             irresistible
             force
          
           .
        
      
       
         
         
           §
           XII
           .
           
             There
             is
             gre●●
          
           disparity
           
             between
             the
          
           Obligations
           
             of
             a
          
           competent
           ,
           
             and
             an
          
           incompetent
           ,
           Authority
           .
        
         
           But
           the
           Doctor
           (
           it
           seems
           )
           can
           see
           no
           difference
           ,
           as
           to
           Acquiescence
           in
           a
           Case
           of
           Necessity
           ,
           between
           what
           is
           done
           by
           a
           competent
           ,
           and
           what
           by
           an
           
             incompetent
             ,
             Authority
          
           .
           It
           is
           strange
           that
           a
           Person
           so
           able
           to
           judge
           in
           other
           Cases
           ,
           where
           Interest
           permits
           him
           to
           judge
           impertially
           ,
           should
           not
           see
           it
           .
           The
           obvious
           difference
           now
           mentioned
           is
           ,
           that
           the
           Deprivation
           by
           an
           
             incompetent
             Authority
          
           leaves
           Subjects
           under
           obligation
           to
           Duty
           ,
           from
           which
           they
           are
           discharged
           ,
           when
           the
           Authority
           ,
           though
           acting
           unjustly
           ,
           is
           notwithstanding
           competent
           .
           Thence
           it
           plainly
           follows
           that
           ,
           where
           the
           obligation
           to
           Duty
           is
           taken
           away
           ,
           there
           compliance
           is
           not
           sinful
           .
           And
           where
           it
           is
           not
           sinful
           ,
           it
           may
           be
           born
           with
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           that
           Necessity
           ,
           which
           is
           the
           result
           of
           an
           
             irresistible
             Force
          
           .
           But
           where
           the
           Obligation
           to
           Duty
           remains
           ,
           and
           the
           compliance
           is
           therefore
           sinful
           ;
           I
           know
           no
           tolerable
           Casuisty
           that
           allows
           it
           upon
           such
           Necessity
           .
           The
           Doctor
           himself
           ,
           as
           we
           have
           seen
           already
           ,
           excepts
           it
           in
           his
           own
           stating
           of
           the
           Case
           .
           Tenants
           do
           not
           usually
           hold
           their
           Tenures
           by
           Oaths
           :
           But
           where
           they
           do
           ;
           I
           am
           sure
           all
           creditable
           Antiquity
           thought
           them
           under
           
             stricter
             Obligations
          
           to
           performance
           than
           (
           it
           seems
           )
           the
           Doctor
           does
           .
           The
           Peace
           and
           Tranquillity
           of
           the
           Publick
           are
           ,
           no
           doubt
           ,
           useful
           considerations
           for
           understanding
           the
           sense
           of
           Oaths
           ,
           in
           which
           they
           oblige
           to
           performance
           .
           But
           the
           Doctor
           might
           have
           been
           pleased
           to
           consider
           that
           here
           are
           two
           publick
           ,
           oftentimes
           
             incompareble
             ,
             Interests
          
           concerned
           in
           the
           Obligation
           of
           Oaths
           .
           There
           is
           the
           
             publick
             Interest
          
           of
           those
           to
           whom
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           of
           those
           by
           whom
           ,
           the
           Faith
           is
           given
           .
           And
           all
           fair
           and
           equal
           dealing
           Casuists
           prefer
           the
           former
           before
           the
           later
           in
           Oaths
           given
           for
           the
           Security
           of
           others
           .
           How
           than
           can
           the
           Doctor
           make
           the
           good
           of
           Sworn
           Tenants
           in
           general
           to
           put
           restrictions
           on
           Oaths
           given
           for
           the
           Security
           not
           of
           the
           Sworn
           Tenants
           ,
           but
           of
           the
           
             liege
             Lords
          
           in
           general
           ,
           for
           whose
           Security
           the
           Obligations
           are
           undertaken
           ?
           He
           ought
           to
           prove
           that
           a
           Conqueror
           can
           daprive
           a
           Bishop
           of
           his
           
             Spiritual
             Power
          
           if
           he
           be
           pleased
           to
           reason
           upon
           it
           .
           That
           the
           Church
           of
           Jerusalem
           supplyed
           the
           place
           of
           Narcissus
           ,
           when
           they
           thought
           him
           dead
           ,
           does
           not
           prove
           that
           they
           had
           thought
           themselves
           at
           liberty
           to
           have
           done
           so
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           known
           him
           to
           have
           been
           living
           .
           Whatever
           present
           incapacity
           he
           might
           have
           been
           under
           for
           the
           administration
           of
           his
           Office
           ,
           they
           might
           have
           thought
           themselves
           obliged
           to
           Stay
           for
           him
           ,
           as
           the
           Alexandrians
           did
           for
           St.
           Athanisius
           .
           St.
           Chrysostomes
           Case
           is
           less
           for
           his
           purpose
           .
           He
           only
           desired
           his
           People
           to
           Submit
           to
           the
           Bishop
           
           that
           should
           be
           substituted
           after
           his
           decease
           .
           Yet
           even
           in
           that
           he
           prevailed
           not
           with
           them
           ,
           the
           Schism
           of
           the
           Joannites
           being
           continued
           many
           years
           after
           ,
           till
           an
           honourable
           amends
           was
           made
           to
           his
           memory
           .
           During
           his
           own
           life
           time
           he
           was
           so
           far
           from
           it
           that
           he
           challenged
           
           their
           duty
           to
           himself
           ,
           and
           dissuaded
           their
           complying
           with
           the
           Schismaticks
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XIII
           
             No
             reason
             to
             reckon
             on
             the
             persumed
          
           consent
           
             of
             the
          
           Bishops
           injured
           
             by
             an
          
           Invalid
           deprivation
           ,
           for
           discharging
           their
           Subjects
           
             Consciences
             from
          
           Duty
           
             to
             them
          
           .
        
         
           The
           Doctor
           here
           foresees
           an
           answer
           ,
           that
           I
           do
           not
           find
           was
           ever
           admitted
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           ,
           and
           therefore
           will
           only
           concern
           them
           on
           whose
           Principles
           it
           is
           made
           .
           That
           is
           ,
           that
           in
           such
           difficult
           Cases
           ,
           it
           is
           presumed
           that
           the
           
             deprived
             Bishop
          
           gives
           his
           consent
           ,
           and
           that
           this
           presumption
           must
           be
           reckoned
           on
           to
           discharge
           the
           Subjects
           from
           their
           Duty
           to
           him
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           .
           It
           is
           a
           most
           
             extravagant
             remissness
          
           thus
           to
           permit
           the
           interpretation
           of
           the
           Oaths
           to
           the
           desires
           and
           interests
           of
           those
           who
           are
           to
           be
           obliged
           by
           them
           ,
           That
           whenever
           the
           observing
           them
           puts
           them
           upon
           any
           Straights
           ,
           they
           shall
           then
           be
           at
           liberty
           to
           betray
           their
           own
           Faith
           ,
           and
           his
           Security
           for
           whose
           sake
           they
           had
           undertaken
           them
           ;
           and
           that
           by
           so
           unreasonable
           a
           persumtion
           of
           his
           consent
           whose
           Security
           was
           thus
           provided
           for
           .
           It
           utterly
           ruines
           the
           whole
           design
           of
           giving
           this
           Security
           by
           the
           way
           of
           Oaths
           .
           That
           is
           ,
           to
           oblige
           them
           in
           such
           Cases
           wherein
           no
           considerations
           can
           oblige
           them
           ,
           but
           those
           of
           Conscience
           ,
           where
           their
           corrupt
           affections
           ,
           should
           incline
           them
           to
           the
           contrary
           ,
           and
           where
           there
           is
           no
           visible
           force
           appearing
           that
           may
           make
           the
           inconveniences
           of
           breaking
           their
           Faith
           greater
           than
           those
           of
           keeping
           it
           .
           That
           is
           ,
           perfectly
           to
           disoblige
           them
           in
           that
           very
           Case
           wherein
           the
           Psalmist
           does
           most
           commend
           the
           Observation
           of
           Oaths
           ,
           
           That
           is
           ,
           when
           they
           are
           to
           the
           hindrance
           of
           those
           who
           must
           observe
           them
           :
           Nor
           does
           it
           follow
           that
           because
           the
           consent
           of
           an
           
             injured
             Governour
          
           may
           indeed
           be
           presumed
           in
           Acts
           of
           Government
           ,
           for
           a
           time
           ,
           which
           do
           not
           by
           any
           consequence
           affect
           his
           Title
           ;
           therefore
           it
           may
           be
           presumed
           also
           in
           Acts
           wherein
           his
           consent
           would
           be
           inconsistent
           with
           his
           design
           of
           continuing
           his
           Claim
           ,
           when
           he
           neither
           has
           ,
           nor
           intends
           to
           relinquish
           it
           .
           Nor
           does
           it
           follow
           that
           ,
           because
           in
           some
           Cases
           ,
           wherein
           
             publick
             considerations
          
           may
           prevail
           with
           them
           ,
           
             good
             men
          
           may
           patiently
           submit
           to
           the
           prejudice
           of
           their
           own
           Right
           ;
           therefore
           they
           cannot
           be
           
             good
             men
          
           ,
           who
           do
           not
           submit
           in
           Cases
           ,
           wherein
           the
           same
           considerations
           of
           the
           Publick
           (
           of
           which
           they
           only
           have
           a
           Right
           to
           judg
           who
           have
           a
           Right
           to
           Authority
           )
           do
           ,
           in
           their
           Judgments
           ,
           make
           the
           insisting
           of
           their
           Rights
           more
           necessary
           and
           becoming
           them
           .
           If
           Rights
           must
           always
           be
           surrendred
           by
           
             good
             men
          
           as
           often
           as
           
             ill
             men
          
           are
           pleased
           to
           invade
           them
           ;
           In
           vain
           are
           Laws
           for
           determining
           or
           defending
           them
           .
           In
           vain
           at
           least
           must
           
             good
             men
          
           (
           who
           ought
           to
           be
           the
           favourites
           of
           wise
           and
           just
           Lawmakers
           )
           expect
           the
           benifit
           of
           Laws
           ,
           if
           they
           must
           never
           plead
           their
           Rights
           .
           In
           vain
           are
           
             good
             men
          
           trusted
           with
           such
           Rights
           as
           are
           the
           
             Publick
             Interests
          
           of
           their
           Societyes
           ,
           if
           they
           ,
           who
           are
           otherwise
           
           the
           more
           trusty
           for
           being
           good
           ,
           must
           here
           upon
           that
           same
           consideration
           of
           their
           being
           good
           men
           ,
           be
           obnoxious
           to
           those
           impressions
           of
           Conscience
           which
           must
           make
           them
           think
           themselves
           obliged
           to
           betray
           them
           ;
           if
           that
           very
           consideration
           that
           the
           publick
           and
           their
           own
           
             private
             Interests
          
           are
           coincident
           ,
           must
           make
           them
           as
           prodigal
           of
           the
           
             publick
             Interests
          
           as
           they
           would
           be
           of
           their
           own
           .
           Nor
           has
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           nor
           any
           other
           that
           I
           know
           of
           ,
           insisted
           on
           any
           considerations
           particular
           to
           our
           present
           Case
           ,
           but
           only
           on
           such
           general
           ones
           ,
           as
           (
           if
           they
           proved
           any
           thing
           )
           would
           prove
           in
           general
           ,
           that
           all
           good
           men
           are
           obliged
           to
           surrender
           their
           Rights
           whenever
           
             Wicked
             men
          
           are
           pleased
           to
           invade
           them
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XIV
           .
           Our
           deprived
           Fathers
           give
           publick
           Significations
           
             that
             they
             do
          
           challenge
           
             their
             old
          
           Rights
           ,
           
             as
             far
             as
             is
             necessary
             in
             their
          
           Circumstances
           .
        
         
           Upon
           these
           terms
           the
           Doctor
           is
           pleased
           to
           tell
           us
           ,
           that
           he
           is
           
             fully
             persuaded
             that
             our
             ejected
             Fathers
             are
             very
             worthy
             and
             good
             men
             .
          
           But
           not
           without
           a
           manifest
           design
           .
           They
           must
           ,
           if
           they
           will
           maintain
           the
           place
           he
           has
           admitted
           them
           to
           in
           his
           good
           opinion
           ,
           be
           true
           to
           that
           Idea
           of
           
             good
             men
          
           by
           which
           he
           is
           resolved
           to
           try
           them
           ;
           
             give
             up
          
           those
           Rights
           whose
           maintenance
           may
           oblige
           him
           and
           his
           Brethren
           to
           any
           temporal
           loss
           .
           And
           is
           not
           this
           a
           very
           obliging
           reason
           to
           induce
           them
           to
           it
           ,
           that
           they
           must
           give
           up
           the
           trust
           committed
           to
           them
           of
           the
           publick
           Interests
           of
           God
           and
           of
           Religion
           ,
           rather
           than
           he
           and
           his
           Brethren
           should
           hazard
           their
           Temporal
           and
           private
           Interests
           in
           maintaining
           those
           Rights
           ,
           by
           contributing
           no
           more
           on
           their
           own
           parts
           than
           what
           is
           otherwise
           their
           duty
           to
           them
           ?
           They
           must
           have
           agreat
           stock
           indeed
           of
           that
           which
           he
           is
           pleased
           to
           call
           goodness
           ,
           if
           this
           way
           of
           Reasoning
           can
           make
           them
           think
           themselves
           obliged
           to
           him
           .
           Much
           more
           ,
           if
           ,
           upon
           this
           pretence
           of
           kindness
           ,
           he
           may
           be
           allowed
           to
           beg
           ,
           what
           he
           can
           never
           be
           able
           to
           prove
           ,
           that
           they
           are
           obliged
           in
           Conscience
           rather
           to
           surrender
           their
           Rights
           ,
           than
           that
           he
           and
           his
           
             obliged
             Brethren
          
           should
           be
           obliged
           to
           any
           hazard
           in
           maintaining
           them
           .
           This
           one
           would
           think
           too
           much
           for
           him
           to
           persume
           till
           he
           were
           better
           able
           to
           prove
           it
           .
           But
           the
           greater
           easiness
           of
           presuming
           ,
           than
           proving
           ,
           makes
           him
           very
           hold
           indeed
           ,
           when
           he
           prosumes
           that
           our
           
             H.
             Fathers
          
           themselves
           give
           their
           
             consent
             that
             their
             Successors
             should
             be
             acknowledged
             .
          
           Yet
           he
           pretends
           reason
           why
           we
           
             ought
             to
             presume
             it
          
           .
           And
           what
           may
           that
           be
           ?
           
           That
           they
           
             have
             never
             by
             any
             pablick
             Signification
             of
             their
             wills
             ,
             lay'd
             claim
             to
             the
             Obedience
             of
             their
             People
             ;
             and
             do
             not
             now
             exercise
             their
             Episcopal
             power
             as
             before
             .
          
           But
           truly
           Conscienticus
           Observers
           of
           Oaths
           would
           rather
           persume
           on
           the
           Oaths
           side
           than
           against
           ,
           it
           ,
           least
           otherwise
           if
           God
           should
           
             help
             them
          
           no
           otherwise
           than
           they
           perform
           what
           they
           have
           Sworn
           by
           him
           ,
           the
           from
           of
           the
           Oath
           it
           self
           should
           prove
           a
           dreadful
           imprecation
           .
           
           This
           was
           ,
           I
           am
           sure
           ,
           regarded
           in
           the
           Cases
           of
           Edward
           the
           II.
           and
           Richard
           the
           II.
           The
           Subjects
           did
           not
           content
           themselves
           with
           a
           
             presumed
             consent
          
           to
           what
           was
           done
           in
           deposing
           them
           ,
           gathered
           only
           from
           their
           silence
           ;
           but
           they
           desired
           and
           procured
           an
           express
           renonciation
           of
           their
           Rights
           ,
           and
           an
           express
           releastment
           from
           the
           Oaths
           which
           they
           had
           taken
           to
           them
           formerly
           .
           This
           reason
           therefore
           alone
           would
           hinder
           such
           Persons
           from
           undertaking
           second
           inconsistent
           engagements
           ,
           that
           they
           had
           not
           yet
           been
           expresly
           discharged
           from
           the
           first
           .
           So
           far
           they
           would
           be
           from
           reckoning
           on
           their
           silence
           alone
           as
           sufficient
           to
           discharge
           them
           .
           For
           there
           are
           besides
           ,
           especially
           in
           such
           Circumstances
           as
           ours
           ,
           obvious
           reasons
           why
           silence
           only
           should
           not
           be
           taken
           for
           an
           Argument
           of
           a
           presumed
           consent
           .
           The
           fear
           of
           those
           under
           whose
           violence
           they
           suffer
           may
           hinder
           them
           from
           
             publick
             Signification
          
           of
           their
           dissent
           ,
           and
           yet
           ,
           (
           it
           seems
           )
           nothing
           under
           a
           
             publick
             Signification
          
           will
           satisfy
           the
           Doctor
           .
           If
           this
           fear
           should
           less
           influence
           so
           worthy
           and
           
             good
             Men
          
           ,
           yet
           the
           fear
           of
           miscarrying
           might
           ,
           in
           Prudence
           ,
           discourage
           them
           from
           attempting
           what
           they
           might
           easily
           foresee
           that
           they
           should
           never
           be
           able
           to
           go
           thorough
           with
           .
           And
           how
           could
           our
           
             H.
             Fathert
          
           hope
           to
           succeed
           under
           so
           manifest
           and
           general
           a
           desertion
           of
           those
           who
           owe
           Duty
           to
           them
           ,
           and
           know
           they
           do
           so
           ?
           But
           it
           is
           not
           very
           Human
           in
           our
           Adversaries
           by
           their
           notorious
           undutifulness
           to
           oblige
           our
           Fathers
           to
           this
           silence
           ,
           and
           than
           Ironically
           to
           turn
           their
           silence
           into
           an
           Argument
           of
           a
           presumed
           consent
           .
           In
           the
           mean
           time
           these
           considerations
           make
           it
           plain
           that
           it
           is
           very
           possible
           for
           them
           to
           continue
           their
           Claim
           ,
           though
           they
           should
           give
           no
           
             publick
             Significations
          
           of
           doing
           so
           .
           And
           their
           cnotinuing
           it
           ,
           though
           without
           any
           
             publick
             Signification
          
           ,
           is
           Sufficient
           to
           our
           obligation
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           till
           they
           give
           a
           
             publick
             Signification
          
           that
           they
           will
           discharge
           us
           .
           For
           that
           is
           sufficient
           to
           continue
           their
           old
           notorious
           Claim
           they
           had
           to
           our
           Duty
           before
           the
           
             pretended
             deprivation
          
           .
           I
           know
           no
           other
           Case
           wherein
           our
           Advarsaries
           where
           concerned
           ,
           in
           which
           they
           would
           think
           it
           just
           to
           presume
           that
           Persons
           living
           under
           a
           notorious
           force
           do
           therefore
           surrender
           their
           Rights
           because
           they
           do
           not
           further
           provoke
           their
           Oppressors
           by
           an
           open
           Signification
           of
           their
           Claim
           .
           But
           if
           nothing
           less
           than
           a
           
             publick
             Signification
          
           of
           their
           Claim
           will
           content
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           methinks
           he
           should
           have
           acquainted
           us
           what
           Acts
           they
           are
           of
           
             Episcopal
             Power
          
           which
           he
           expects
           from
           our
           
             H.
             Fathers
          
           as
           
             publick
             Significations
          
           of
           it
           .
           Does
           he
           expect
           that
           they
           must
           signify
           their
           minds
           herein
           Juridically
           ,
           as
           they
           did
           formerly
           ,
           from
           their
           Courts
           and
           their
           Cathedrals
           ?
           But
           he
           knows
           these
           are
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           those
           who
           have
           pretended
           to
           deprive
           them
           .
           He
           knows
           their
           Officers
           and
           
             Subordinate
             Governours
          
           will
           not
           now
           obey
           them
           .
           Must
           
           they
           publickly
           warn
           those
           who
           are
           in
           possession
           of
           their
           Cures
           and
           Parishes
           ?
           But
           how
           can
           they
           expect
           more
           Duty
           from
           them
           who
           follow
           the
           revenues
           into
           the
           Schism
           ,
           and
           who
           are
           in
           
             actual
             Communion
          
           with
           ,
           and
           under
           the
           pretended
           Obligation
           of
           Oaths
           of
           
             Canonical
             Obedience
          
           to
           ,
           their
           Rival
           Schismaticks
           ?
           What
           could
           they
           expect
           from
           such
           a
           publication
           of
           their
           dissent
           ,
           (
           besides
           their
           gratifying
           the
           Doctor
           )
           but
           to
           expose
           their
           own
           Authority
           ,
           without
           any
           prospect
           of
           
             publick
             benefit
          
           that
           might
           countervail
           it
           ?
           What
           but
           a
           fruitless
           exasperation
           of
           their
           Persecutors
           ?
           Would
           he
           have
           them
           fix
           publick
           Protestations
           against
           what
           has
           been
           done
           ,
           in
           publick
           places
           ?
           But
           the
           worthy
           Dean
           of
           Worcester's
           Case
           is
           a
           notorious
           Instance
           how
           such
           a
           publication
           would
           be
           resented
           .
           I
           hope
           he
           will
           not
           own
           any
           design
           of
           urging
           them
           to
           such
           difficulties
           only
           to
           gratify
           him
           ,
           if
           he
           has
           really
           that
           veneration
           for
           them
           which
           he
           Professes
           to
           have
           .
           By
           all
           the
           
             Episcopal
             Acts
          
           that
           are
           necessary
           ,
           and
           of
           which
           their
           Circumstances
           are
           capable
           ,
           they
           do
           already
           
             publickly
             signify
          
           their
           insisting
           on
           their
           
             old
             Title
          
           .
           I
           know
           no
           
             Episcopal
             Acts
          
           ,
           necessary
           for
           
             our
             present
          
           condition
           ,
           but
           what
           they
           readily
           exercise
           as
           they
           see
           occasion
           for
           them
           .
           They
           exercise
           them
           in
           Dioceses
           not
           otherwise
           vacated
           than
           by
           the
           Schism
           ,
           without
           the
           Ordinaries
           leave
           ,
           and
           to
           Persons
           not
           owning
           the
           
             Ordinaries
             Communion
          
           ,
           which
           also
           our
           H.
           Fathers
           themselves
           abstain
           from
           .
           These
           are
           
             publick
             Significations
          
           that
           they
           do
           disown
           the
           
             state
             communion
          
           as
           Schismatical
           (
           not
           only
           as
           using
           
             unlawful
             Offices
          
           )
           which
           cannot
           be
           justified
           on
           any
           other
           terms
           but
           their
           challenging
           their
           
             old
             Rights
          
           ,
           and
           condemning
           their
           Schismatical
           Rivals
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XV.
           The
           Oaths
           of
           canonical
           Obedience
           to
           our
           Fathers
           still
           obliging
           .
        
         
           So
           ,
           unreasonable
           are
           the
           gratifications
           expected
           by
           the
           Doctor
           from
           their
           Lordships
           ,
           whereas
           ,
           all
           things
           considered
           ,
           there
           is
           no
           reason
           why
           he
           should
           expect
           any
           gratification
           at
           all
           .
           For
           if
           they
           will
           not
           discharge
           him
           from
           his
           Duty
           ,
           he
           is
           however
           resolved
           not
           to
           pay
           them
           any
           .
           For
           he
           puts
           the
           Case
           of
           a
           Bishop
           forbidding
           his
           People
           ,
           on
           their
           Oaths
           ,
           to
           accept
           of
           any
           other
           Bishop
           ,
           and
           then
           asks
           ,
           
             what
             must
             be
             done
             in
             such
             Cases
             ?
             Is
             the
             Church
             perjured
             if
             she
             accept
             of
             another
             ?
             will
             our
             Adversaries
             say
             that
             she
             is
             ?
          
           He
           knows
           our
           mind
           very
           well
           that
           we
           know
           not
           how
           to
           excuse
           her
           .
           And
           what
           has
           he
           to
           prove
           the
           contrary
           ?
           Nothing
           but
           the
           voice
           of
           flesh
           and
           
             bloud
             ;
             A
             hard
             saying
             !
             who
             can
             bear
             it
             ?
          
           But
           this
           learned
           divine
           knows
           very
           well
           that
           the
           hardness
           of
           a
           saying
           (
           especially
           if
           it
           be
           only
           so
           to
           flesh
           and
           bloud
           )
           is
           no
           Argument
           to
           prove
           it
           false
           .
           He
           knows
           it
           
             was
             not
             so
          
           in
           that
           very
           passage
           whence
           he
           borrows
           the
           Expressions
           .
           He
           knows
           it
           
             is
             not
          
           so
           in
           all
           Cases
           of
           Persecution
           ,
           and
           of
           Doctrins
           that
           may
           deserve
           to
           be
           maintained
           by
           suffering
           .
           And
           he
           urges
           nothing
           peculiar
           in
           our
           present
           Case
           .
           But
           he
           
             cannot
             imagine
             
             that
             the
             welfare
             and
             prosperity
             of
             mankind
             does
             depend
             upon
             so
             ticklish
             and
             uncertain
             a
             point
             as
             that
             of
             an
             ejected
             Governors
             consent
             .
             That
             ,
             if
             he
             refuses
             to
             give
             his
             Consent
             ,
             all
             the
             Church
             ,
             or
             the
             Nation
             ,
             must
             be
             made
             a
             Sacrifice
             to
             him
             .
          
           So
           he
           represents
           the
           Case
           very
           Invidiously
           .
           As
           if
           the
           Competition
           were
           between
           the
           
             private
             Interests
          
           of
           the
           Governour
           and
           the
           Good
           of
           the
           Community
           .
           He
           therefore
           fancies
           that
           the
           
             false
             Principles
          
           on
           which
           
             this
             Nation
          
           is
           built
           is
           this
           ,
           
             That
             the
             Oath
             that
             is
             taken
             to
             the
             Governour
             ,
             is
             taken
             only
             for
             his
             sake
             .
          
           But
           though
           that
           Principle
           which
           he
           calls
           folse
           be
           really
           in
           the
           Constitution
           of
           some
           particular
           Gouernments
           ,
           and
           therefore
           is
           not
           
             universally
             false
          
           ;
           yet
           neither
           ,
           on
           the
           contrary
           ,
           is
           it
           
             universally
             true
          
           .
           Particularly
           ,
           it
           is
           not
           true
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Government
          
           .
           This
           Government
           is
           not
           a
           Property
           of
           the
           Governours
           ,
           but
           a
           Trust
           committed
           to
           their
           management
           for
           the
           Good
           of
           others
           ,
           rather
           than
           of
           themselves
           .
           Yet
           though
           this
           be
           the
           Case
           ,
           it
           is
           the
           
             publick
             Interest
          
           of
           the
           whole
           Society
           ,
           that
           all
           the
           Members
           of
           it
           be
           unanimous
           in
           defending
           the
           particular
           Persons
           in
           whom
           the
           Government
           is
           vested
           ,
           against
           a
           forcible
           Dispossession
           .
           It
           is
           the
           
             publick
             Interest
          
           ,
           that
           no
           Rights
           whatsoever
           be
           overpower'd
           ,
           because
           if
           they
           be
           ,
           no
           Rights
           whatsoever
           neither
           private
           nor
           publick
           ,
           can
           be
           secure
           ;
           but
           may
           be
           also
           overpower'd
           by
           the
           same
           Precedent
           .
           It
           is
           yet
           more
           particularly
           the
           
             Publick
             Interest
          
           ,
           that
           those
           Rights
           be
           secured
           against
           all
           force
           ,
           upon
           which
           the
           Security
           of
           all
           the
           
             Particular
             Rights
          
           of
           the
           whole
           Society
           depend
           .
           Such
           are
           those
           of
           the
           
             Supream
             Governours
          
           who
           if
           they
           be
           not
           enabled
           to
           defend
           themselves
           ,
           can
           never
           be
           able
           to
           protect
           either
           the
           
             whole
             Body
          
           ,
           or
           any
           
             particular
             Members
          
           of
           it
           ,
           in
           Possession
           of
           the
           Rights
           to
           which
           they
           were
           Intitled
           by
           the
           Constitution
           .
           Upon
           this
           account
           it
           has
           been
           accounted
           the
           Interest
           of
           Societies
           in
           general
           ,
           that
           they
           be
           unanimous
           in
           defending
           it
           .
           For
           this
           will
           make
           the
           Government
           better
           able
           to
           defend
           it
           self
           ,
           and
           protect
           its
           Subjects
           in
           their
           Rights
           ,
           if
           it
           have
           the
           
             united
             assistance
          
           of
           the
           
             whole
             Society
          
           ,
           not
           subdivided
           into
           several
           little
           Interests
           .
           It
           has
           also
           been
           thought
           the
           
             publick
             Interest
          
           of
           Societies
           rather
           to
           be
           concluded
           by
           their
           Governours
           ,
           as
           to
           their
           Practice
           ,
           in
           their
           Judgment
           concerning
           the
           
             publick
             good
          
           ,
           than
           to
           be
           permited
           to
           embroyl
           their
           whole
           Bodies
           by
           forming
           subdivided
           Factions
           and
           intestine
           animosities
           ,
           which
           is
           the
           natural
           consequence
           of
           being
           allowed
           the
           use
           of
           their
           
             private
             Judgements
          
           ,
           even
           concerning
           the
           
             publick
             good
          
           in
           a
           Society
           already
           constituted
           .
           Thus
           the
           Doctor
           may
           see
           how
           even
           the
           regard
           of
           the
           
             publick
             good
          
           may
           oblige
           him
           to
           hazard
           all
           that
           he
           calls
           Ruin
           ,
           in
           asserting
           the
           Rights
           of
           
             Suprem
             Governours
          
           ,
           by
           reasons
           anticedent
           to
           the
           Oath
           it self
           ,
           and
           independent
           on
           his
           
             pretended
             false
             Principle
          
           ,
           that
           Oaths
           are
           taken
           only
           for
           the
           sake
           of
           Governours
           .
           These
           
           Reasons
           proceed
           ,
           though
           the
           Government
           of
           the
           Churches
           had
           been
           like
           many
           
             Humane
             Governments
          
           ,
           founded
           on
           
             Humane
             Institution
          
           ,
           and
           the
           agreeing
           consent
           of
           its
           respective
           Members
           .
           But
           the
           reason
           of
           hazarding
           all
           for
           the
           Rights
           of
           our
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Superiors
          
           holds
           more
           strongly
           .
           For
           God
           himself
           has
           so
           constituted
           his
           own
           Church
           as
           to
           oblige
           us
           ,
           in
           regard
           of
           
             all
             Interests
          
           ,
           to
           the
           strict
           dependence
           on
           our
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           .
           As
           Schism
           is
           the
           greatest
           mischief
           that
           can
           befall
           any
           Society
           ;
           so
           a
           Society
           ,
           such
           as
           the
           Church
           is
           ,
           that
           must
           subsist
           over
           all
           the
           World
           ,
           independent
           on
           the
           
             Secular
             arm
          
           ,
           nay
           under
           Pesecution
           from
           it
           ,
           must
           be
           in
           the
           greatest
           danger
           of
           Schism
           .
           And
           God
           has
           accordingly
           most
           wisely
           contrived
           his
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           so
           as
           to
           secure
           it
           from
           that
           danger
           ,
           by
           making
           it
           the
           greatest
           Interest
           of
           the
           Church
           in
           general
           ,
           and
           of
           all
           its
           Members
           considered
           severally
           ,
           to
           adhere
           to
           their
           
             Spiritual
             Monarch
          
           .
           It
           is
           certainly
           their
           greatest
           Interest
           to
           keep
           their
           
             Mystical
             Communion
          
           with
           God
           the
           head
           of
           Christ
           ,
           and
           with
           Christ
           the
           head
           of
           his
           
             Mystical
             Body
          
           the
           Church
           .
           But
           this
           ,
           God
           has
           made
           no
           otherwise
           attainable
           but
           by
           maintaining
           a
           Communion
           with
           his
           
             visible
             Body
          
           by
           
             visible
             Sacraments
          
           ,
           obliging
           himself
           to
           ratify
           in
           Heaven
           what
           is
           transacted
           by
           the
           
             visible
             Governours
          
           of
           the
           Church
           on
           Earth
           .
           Thus
           he
           admits
           to
           his
           
             Mystical
             Union
          
           those
           who
           are
           admitted
           by
           the
           
             visible
             Governours
          
           of
           his
           Church
           into
           his
           
             visible
             Body
          
           ,
           and
           excludes
           from
           the
           
             Mystical
             Union
          
           those
           who
           are
           by
           the
           
             Church
             Governours
             excluded
          
           from
           the
           Union
           that
           is
           visible
           .
           So
           the
           Apostle
           St.
           John
           reasons
           that
           whosoever
           would
           have
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           
             Communion
             with
             the
             Father
             and
             the
             Son
             ,
          
           must
           not
           expect
           it
           otherwise
           than
           by
           the
           Communion
           with
           that
           
             visible
             Body
          
           of
           which
           the
           Apostle
           himself
           was
           a
           Member
           1
           St.
           Joh.
           I.
           3.
           
           So
           our
           Saviour
           himself
           makes
           the
           despising
           of
           those
           who
           are
           Authorized
           by
           him
           to
           be
           the
           despising
           of
           himself
           ,
           and
           not
           only
           so
           ,
           but
           of
           him
           also
           
             who
             sent
             him
          
           .
           And
           in
           St.
           Joh.
           XVII
           .
           he
           makes
           his
           
             Mystical
             Union
          
           to
           be
           of
           Christians
           among
           themselves
           as
           well
           as
           with
           himself
           and
           the
           Father
           .
           And
           upon
           this
           dependend
           the
           dreadfulness
           of
           Excommunication
           ,
           and
           indeed
           all
           obligation
           to
           Discipline
           ,
           and
           the
           Penances
           imposed
           by
           it
           in
           the
           
             Primitive
             Church
          
           But
           there
           was
           none
           in
           the
           
             visible
             constitution
          
           of
           the
           Church
           that
           represented
           God
           and
           Christ
           under
           the
           Notion
           of
           a
           Head
           but
           the
           Biship
           .
           And
           therefore
           he
           was
           taken
           for
           the
           principle
           of
           Unity
           ,
           without
           Union
           to
           whom
           there
           could
           be
           no
           pretensions
           to
           Union
           with
           God
           and
           Christ.
           This
           was
           the
           Doctrine
           of
           St.
           Cyprians
           Age
           ,
           and
           not
           his
           only
           ,
           but
           of
           that
           of
           Ignatius
           ,
           and
           not
           only
           of
           Ignatius
           ,
           but
           of
           that
           which
           was
           Apostolical
           ,
           grounded
           on
           the
           Notions
           then
           received
           among
           the
           Jews
           concerning
           their
           Union
           with
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           as
           the
           Archetypal
           
             High
             Priest
          
           ,
           by
           their
           Union
           with
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           who
           was
           visible
           .
           How
           then
           can
           
           the
           Doctor
           make
           any
           Interests
           either
           publick
           or
           private
           ,
           separable
           from
           those
           of
           adhering
           to
           our
           Bishops
           ,
           and
           thereby
           avoiding
           Schism
           by
           discountenancing
           Usurpers
           of
           their
           lawful
           Thrones
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           XVI
           .
           The
           complyance
           with
           Usurpers
           
             is
             also
             therefore
          
           sinful
           ,
           because
           Usurping
           Bishops
           
             are
             really
          
           no
           Bishops
           
             at
             all
          
           .
        
         
           The
           Doctor
           now
           proceeds
           in
           the
           4th
           and
           last
           place
           ,
           to
           shew
           that
           this
           complyance
           with
           the
           new
           Intruders
           is
           not
           sinful
           on
           account
           of
           the
           Objection
           insisted
           on
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           ,
           that
           the
           Usurpers
           are
           
             in
             reality
             no
             Bishops
          
           at
           all
           .
           This
           matter
           were
           indeed
           very
           easy
           if
           all
           the
           Vindicator
           had
           produced
           for
           his
           purpose
           had
           been
           only
           a
           
             saying
             of
          
           St.
           Cyprian
           ,
           and
           a
           
             saying
             nothing
             to
             his
             purpose
          
           .
           He
           might
           then
           indeed
           wonder
           that
           the
           Vindicator
           should
           pretend
           to
           
             raise
             so
             great
             a
             structure
             on
             so
             weak
             a
             foundation
             .
          
           But
           considering
           what
           the
           Vindicator
           had
           said
           to
           prove
           the
           
             saying
             true
          
           ,
           one
           might
           rather
           wonder
           at
           the
           
             Doctors
             confidence
          
           in
           slighting
           and
           overlooking
           what
           one
           would
           therefore
           think
           him
           conscious
           that
           his
           Cause
           would
           not
           afford
           an
           Answer
           to
           .
           The
           Vindicator
           had
           proved
           it
           more
           than
           a
           saying
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           the
           Sense
           ,
           not
           only
           of
           St.
           Cyprian
           ,
           but
           of
           all
           the
           Bishops
           of
           that
           Age
           ,
           who
           all
           of
           them
           denyed
           their
           
             Communicatory
             Letters
          
           to
           such
           an
           Intruder
           into
           a
           Throne
           not
           validly
           vacated
           ,
           thereby
           implying
           ,
           that
           they
           did
           not
           own
           him
           of
           their
           
             Episcopal
             Colledge
          
           ,
           and
           therefore
           took
           him
           for
           
             no
             Bishop
          
           at
           all
           .
           The
           Vindicator
           shewed
           withal
           that
           it
           was
           agreable
           to
           the
           Principles
           and
           Traditions
           of
           that
           Age
           ,
           derived
           by
           Tradition
           from
           the
           Apostles
           ,
           and
           therefore
           that
           they
           had
           reason
           to
           say
           and
           think
           so
           too
           .
           The
           Vindicator
           farther
           proved
           it
           independently
           on
           their
           saying
           or
           thoughts
           (
           however
           otherwise
           creditable
           in
           an
           affair
           of
           this
           kind
           )
           from
           the
           nature
           of
           the
           thing
           it self
           ,
           that
           where
           there
           could
           be
           but
           one
           of
           a
           kind
           ,
           and
           two
           Pretenders
           could
           not
           therefore
           be
           both
           genuine
           ,
           the
           validity
           of
           
             one
             Title
          
           is
           to
           be
           gathered
           from
           the
           invalidity
           of
           the
           other
           .
           But
           to
           what
           purpose
           is
           it
           to
           produce
           proofs
           if
           the
           Doctor
           will
           take
           no
           notice
           of
           them
           ?
           But
           Cornelious
           (
           with
           relation
           to
           whose
           Case
           St.
           Cyprian
           uses
           this
           Expression
           ,
           that
           the
           
             latr
             Bishop
          
           is
           not
           second
           ,
           but
           none
           )
           the
           Doctor
           says
           ,
           
             had
             never
             been
             deposed
          
           ,
           but
           
             was
             still
             the
             possessor
          
           ,
           which
           he
           takes
           for
           a
           disparity
           
           from
           our
           deprived
           Fathers
           Case
           .
           He
           was
           deposed
           as
           much
           as
           it
           lay
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Pagan
             Emperour
          
           to
           do
           so
           .
           He
           was
           set
           up
           ,
           not
           only
           as
           the
           
             Christian
             Bishops
          
           then
           generally
           were
           ,
           without
           his
           consent
           ,
           but
           notoriously
           against
           it
           .
           He
           was
           as
           much
           grieved
           at
           it
           as
           if
           a
           Rival
           had
           been
           set
           up
           against
           him
           for
           the
           Empire
           .
           And
           he
           had
           kept
           the
           See
           vacant
           for
           a
           considerable
           time
           after
           the
           Martyrdom
           of
           Fabianus
           ,
           doing
           all
           that
           he
           could
           do
           to
           hinder
           the
           Clergy
           from
           meeting
           in
           such
           a
           
           way
           as
           was
           requisite
           for
           supplying
           the
           vacancy
           .
           Let
           the
           Doctor
           himself
           Judge
           what
           Decius
           could
           have
           done
           more
           for
           deposing
           him
           .
           However
           
           the
           Doctor
           tells
           us
           that
           Cornelius
           was
           the
           Possessor
           .
           Very
           true
           .
           But
           not
           in
           regard
           of
           any
           Possession
           of
           which
           the
           Emperour
           could
           deprive
           him
           .
           And
           indeed
           in
           no
           higher
           sense
           than
           ours
           are
           ,
           as
           shall
           appear
           hereafter
           .
           Cornelius
           was
           possessed
           of
           no
           more
           Temporals
           of
           which
           the
           State
           could
           deprive
           him
           .
           And
           our
           H.
           Fathers
           are
           still
           ,
           notwithstanding
           the
           
             invaled
             deprivation
          
           ,
           in
           as
           firm
           and
           indisputable
           a
           Possession
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           as
           Cornelius
           .
           So
           unhappy
           the
           Doctor
           is
           in
           proving
           the
           Doctrine
           ,
           which
           he
           calls
           the
           Saying
           of
           St.
           Cyprian
           ,
           nothing
           to
           to
           the
           
             Vindicators
             purpose
          
           .
           What
           the
           Doctor
           adds
           that
           he
           cannot
           believe
           so
           
             great
             and
             wise
             a
             Man
          
           as
           St.
           Cyprian
           could
           have
           been
           of
           
           another
           opinion
           from
           himself
           ,
           we
           are
           not
           much
           concerned
           for
           till
           he
           shall
           be
           pleased
           to
           produce
           some
           better
           Arguments
           why
           he
           should
           not
           be
           so
           .
           One
           would
           think
           he
           wanted
           better
           Arguments
           when
           he
           insists
           upon
           the
           fairness
           of
           the
           Elections
           of
           the
           Usurpers
           for
           legitimating
           their
           Call.
           He
           knows
           very
           well
           the
           liberty
           our
           Laws
           allow
           the
           
             Canonical
             Electors
          
           ,
           that
           they
           must
           choose
           the
           Person
           proposed
           ,
           or
           a
           Premunire
           ,
           But
           he
           must
           never
           expect
           to
           be
           restored
           to
           the
           Rights
           of
           his
           function
           if
           he
           ,
           and
           such
           as
           he
           ,
           will
           not
           only
           betray
           their
           
             own
             Rights
          
           ,
           but
           plead
           for
           their
           Adversaries
           Invasion
           of
           them
           .
           The
           
             Doctor
             Enthymeme
          
           the
           Vindicator
           will
           then
           be
           concerned
           to
           take
           notice
           of
           when
           the
           Doctor
           can
           shew
           it
           in
           his
           Book
           .
           But
           the
           Doctor
           thinks
           he
           has
           got
           an
           Argument
           to
           prove
           that
           an
           
             unjust
             Synod
          
           can
           deprive
           no
           more
           than
           an
           
             incompetent
             Authority
          
           .
           And
           why
           ?
           Because
           a
           Synod
           proceeding
           unjustly
           cannot
           deprive
           of
           the
           Right
           .
           For
           to
           him
           ,
           he
           says
           ,
           
             it
             is
             absurd
             that
          
           any
           
           
             unjust
             sentence
             should
             take
             away
             the
             Right
             .
          
           Hence
           he
           iners
           that
           a
           
             Bishop
             substituted
          
           in
           the
           place
           of
           another
           
             unjustly
             deprived
          
           by
           a
           Synod
           ,
           must
           also
           be
           
             no
             Bishop
          
           ,
           if
           a
           
             Bishop
             substituted
          
           into
           a
           place
           vacated
           by
           a
           
             Lay
             deprivation
          
           be
           also
           none
           .
           This
           would
           indeed
           hold
           if
           a
           Bishop
           deprived
           wrongfully
           by
           a
           
             competent
             Authority
          
           retained
           as
           much
           Right
           as
           he
           who
           had
           been
           deprived
           no
           otherwise
           than
           by
           an
           Authority
           that
           were
           incompetent
           .
           But
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           methinks
           ,
           might
           easily
           have
           discerned
           the
           difference
           if
           he
           would
           have
           been
           pleased
           to
           Judge
           impartially
           .
           All
           the
           Right
           that
           he
           has
           who
           is
           deprived
           unjustly
           ,
           is
           only
           a
           Right
           to
           a
           
             juster
             sentence
          
           ,
           either
           by
           an
           Appeal
           to
           a
           
             Superior
             Authority
          
           ,
           if
           the
           Authority
           which
           has
           deprived
           him
           be
           subordinate
           ;
           or
           in
           the
           Conscience
           of
           that
           
             same
             Authority
          
           which
           had
           deprived
           him
           ,
           if
           it
           be
           it self
           Supreme
           .
           But
           till
           the
           
             competent
             Authority
          
           put
           him
           into
           Possession
           ,
           he
           has
           no
           Right
           to
           the
           consequences
           of
           Possession
           ,
           the
           duties
           of
           the
           Subjects
           ,
           and
           the
           
             actual
             benefits
             ▪
          
           of
           his
           Office.
           Nor
           has
           he
           any
           Right
           to
           Possess
           himself
           of
           the
           place
           by
           violence
           ,
           but
           must
           use
           
             Legal
             means
          
           of
           recovering
           what
           is
           already
           his
           due
           in
           Conscience
           .
           This
           he
           knows
           
           is
           the
           sense
           of
           our
           
             Legal
             Courts
          
           concerning
           Sentences
           pronunced
           by
           competent
           ,
           though
           corrupt
           ,
           Judges
           .
           But
           where
           the
           dispossession
           is
           by
           a
           Judge
           not
           competent
           ,
           the
           injured
           Person
           may
           make
           use
           of
           force
           for
           regaining
           his
           Possession
           ,
           and
           in
           the
           mean
           time
           he
           retains
           an
           
             actual
             Right
          
           to
           all
           the
           duties
           and
           benefits
           of
           his
           Office
           during
           his
           dispossession
           .
           This
           our
           Laws
           would
           allow
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           if
           the
           King
           of
           France
           ,
           or
           any
           other
           force
           not
           seconded
           with
           a
           
             Legal
             Right
          
           to
           use
           that
           force
           ,
           should
           dispossess
           him
           of
           his
           Fellowship
           of
           Wadham
           Colledge
           ,
           and
           substitute
           a
           Successor
           into
           his
           Place
           .
           Our
           Laws
           would
           notwithstanding
           own
           him
           as
           the
           true
           Fellow
           ,
           Entitled
           to
           all
           the
           Duties
           and
           Priviledges
           of
           the
           Fellowship
           ,
           and
           would
           not
           allow
           his
           Rival
           as
           a
           Fellow
           ,
           nor
           indemnify
           any
           that
           should
           pay
           him
           the
           Dues
           belonging
           to
           the
           Place
           ,
           not
           allow
           him
           the
           Plea
           of
           a
           
             forcible
             entry
          
           ,
           if
           the
           Doctor
           should
           recover
           his
           Possession
           by
           force
           .
           But
           none
           of
           these
           things
           would
           be
           allowed
           him
           ,
           if
           himself
           had
           been
           ajected
           ,
           and
           his
           
             Rival
             substituted
          
           by
           the
           
             unjust
             Sentence
          
           of
           a
           
             corrupt
             Judge
          
           ,
           but
           in
           a
           
             Legal
             Court.
          
           Thus
           he
           may
           see
           a
           
             better
             Reason
          
           than
           what
           is
           given
           by
           him
           for
           our
           Submission
           to
           an
           
             unjust
             Deprivation
          
           of
           a
           Synod
           .
           The
           
             actual
             Right
          
           of
           the
           Bishop
           so
           deprived
           to
           the
           Duty
           of
           his
           
             Ecclesiastick
             Subjects
          
           ,
           and
           the
           Priviledges
           of
           his
           Place
           ,
           are
           really
           
             taken
             from
          
           him
           ,
           till
           he
           be
           again
           possessed
           by
           the
           Acts
           of
           those
           who
           are
           empowered
           by
           the
           Laws
           of
           the
           Society
           to
           give
           Possession
           .
           And
           all
           the
           Right
           he
           has
           ,
           is
           only
           in
           the
           Consciences
           of
           those
           who
           are
           empowered
           by
           the
           Laws
           for
           it
           ,
           first
           to
           be
           put
           into
           the
           possession
           ,
           and
           than
           to
           all
           the
           other
           Benefits
           and
           Privildges
           annexed
           by
           the
           Law
           to
           be
           
             Legal
             Possession
          
           .
           This
           is
           very
           consistent
           with
           a
           paying
           the
           
             Rights
             consequent
          
           to
           Possession
           ,
           to
           another
           ,
           till
           the
           Possession
           be
           Legally
           restored
           .
           But
           even
           the
           
             Legal
             Possession
          
           by
           the
           Laws
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           cannot
           be
           affected
           by
           an
           
             invalid
             deprivation
          
           of
           an
           
             incompetent
             Judge
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XVII
           .
           The
           Evil
           of
           Sin
           ,
           and
           Scandal
           in
           complying
           ,
           greater
           than
           that
           of
           Persecution
           which
           is
           avoided
           by
           it
           .
        
         
           Having
           thus
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           he
           could
           ,
           proved
           this
           compliance
           with
           the
           Usurper's
           unsinful
           ,
           the
           Doctor
           now
           proceeds
           to
           the
           other
           limitations
           of
           his
           
             self
             evident
             Maxim.
          
           He
           therefore
           endeavours
           to
           prove
           that
           the
           Evils
           following
           upon
           disowning
           the
           Intruders
           are
           greater
           and
           
             more
             like
             to
             fall
             out
          
           than
           those
           which
           are
           likely
           to
           follow
           upon
           complying
           with
           them
           .
           I
           have
           already
           proved
           the
           contrary
           .
           What
           now
           remains
           ,
           is
           only
           to
           answer
           what
           he
           produces
           to
           prove
           his
           own
           Assertion
           .
           The
           
             Evils
             they
          
           pretend
           to
           avoid
           by
           complying
           ,
           are
           a
           SCHISM
           and
           a
           PERSECUTION
           .
           These
           he
           says
           are
           
             two
             Evils
             as
             great
             as
             can
             possiably
             befal
             thè
             Church
             .
          
           I
           
           easily
           agree
           with
           him
           concerning
           the
           former
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           an
           Evil
           of
           the
           first
           Magnitude
           .
           But
           the
           latter
           was
           never
           counted
           so
           by
           truly
           Christian
           
           Spirits
           in
           the
           flourishing
           times
           of
           our
           Religion
           ,
           Then
           Martyrdoms
           were
           courted
           with
           as
           much
           ardency
           and
           ambition
           as
           Preferments
           have
           been
           since
           ,
           as
           
             Sulpitius
             Severus
          
           has
           long
           since
           observed
           .
           Then
           the
           
           Apologists
           tell
           their
           Persecutors
           that
           it
           was
           rather
           for
           their
           sakes
           than
           their
           own
           that
           they
           vouchsafed
           to
           write
           Apologies
           .
           Then
           they
           always
           gave
           thanks
           when
           they
           received
           the
           sentance
           of
           death
           for
           so
           glorious
           a
           Cause
           .
           Then
           they
           bemoaned
           the
           unhappiness
           of
           their
           
             own
             times
          
           if
           they
           had
           no
           Persecutions
           ,
           as
           Origen
           expresly
           :
           Then
           nothing
           troubled
           them
           more
           
           than
           that
           they
           lost
           their
           lives
           cheaply
           upon
           their
           beds
           ,
           as
           appears
           in
           St.
           
             Cyprian
             de
             Mortalitate
          
           .
           The
           Doctor
           is
           no
           doubt
           well
           acquainted
           with
           
           Ignatiu's
           Epistle
           to
           the
           Romans
           ,
           full
           of
           an
           ardent
           zeal
           of
           losing
           his
           Life
           for
           Christ
           ,
           and
           earnest
           expostolations
           with
           the
           Romans
           that
           they
           might
           not
           so
           much
           as
           use
           their
           interest
           with
           God
           in
           Prayers
           for
           his
           deliverance
           ,
           telling
           them
           that
           he
           would
           take
           it
           for
           an
           Argument
           of
           their
           
             good
             will
          
           to
           him
           if
           they
           would
           not
           be
           so
           desirous
           of
           saving
           his
           Flesh
           ,
           and
           of
           their
           
             ill
             will
          
           if
           they
           should
           prevail
           with
           God
           for
           his
           safety
           ,
           even
           by
           an
           interposition
           of
           an
           extraordinary
           and
           miraculous
           Providence
           .
           And
           when
           Blondel
           takes
           upon
           him
           to
           judge
           of
           the
           Heroical
           ardor
           of
           
             that
             Age
          
           by
           the
           cold
           and
           degenerous
           Notions
           of
           his
           own
           ;
           our
           most
           learned
           Bishop
           Pearson
           has
           proved
           his
           Actions
           far
           from
           beīng
           singular
           by
           many
           
           more
           very
           express
           Testimonies
           of
           those
           most
           glorious
           times
           of
           our
           Christian
           Religion
           .
           Nor
           are
           the
           Canons
           against
           the
           provoking
           Persecutors
           ,
           which
           the
           Doctor
           takes
           notice
           of
           ,
           near
           so
           old
           as
           these
           great
           examples
           of
           desiring
           and
           meeting
           Persecution
           ,
           nor
           indeed
           till
           the
           abatement
           of
           the
           first
           zeal
           appeared
           in
           the
           scandalous
           lapses
           of
           warm
           pretenders
           .
           None
           such
           were
           made
           whilst
           they
           were
           true
           to
           their
           profession
           ,
           so
           that
           the
           consenting
           Practice
           of
           the
           
             best
             times
          
           was
           far
           from
           the
           Doctors
           mind
           in
           reckoning
           Persecution
           among
           the
           
             greatest
             Evils
             that
             can
             possibly
             befal
             the
             Church
             .
          
           They
           did
           not
           take
           it
           for
           an
           evil
           ,
           but
           rather
           for
           a
           favour
           and
           a
           benefit
           .
           And
           though
           it
           were
           allowed
           to
           be
           an
           evil
           ,
           yet
           the
           utmost
           that
           can
           be
           made
           of
           it
           is
           that
           it
           is
           an
           evil
           only
           of
           Calamity
           ,
           the
           greatest
           of
           which
           kind
           
             Conscientious
             Casuists
          
           have
           never
           thought
           comparable
           with
           the
           
             least
             evil
             of
             Sin.
          
           I
           might
           add
           also
           ,
           that
           Scandal
           also
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           a
           cause
           of
           Sin
           ,
           is
           a
           
             greater
             Evil
          
           than
           Persecution
           .
           Our
           Saviour
           himself
           pronounces
           
             wo
             to
             him
             by
             whom
             the
             Scandel
             cometh
             ,
          
           and
           the
           Fire
           of
           Hell
           which
           never
           shall
           he
           quenched
           .
           And
           these
           are
           Evils
           which
           the
           Doctor
           himself
           must
           own
           to
           be
           worse
           than
           that
           of
           Persecution
           .
           The
           Doctor
           therefore
           must
           not
           insist
           on
           the
           Persecution
           avoided
           by
           this
           complyance
           with
           the
           Intruders
           ,
           till
           he
           has
           cleared
           the
           condition
           of
           avoiding
           it
           ,
           from
           not
           only
           Sin
           ,
           but
           Scandal
           also
           .
           If
           he
           thinks
           
             deposing
             all
             Bishops
          
           in
           general
           ,
           to
           be
           in
           earnest
           a
           
             just
             cause
          
           for
           him
           to
           shew
           his
           fortitude
           ,
           let
           him
           bethink
           himself
           how
           the
           matter
           is
           now
           in
           Scotland
           .
           It
           were
           easie
           by
           
           just
           consequences
           from
           the
           Grounds
           and
           Principles
           of
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Commerce
          
           ,
           to
           shew
           how
           that
           Case
           would
           concern
           him
           in
           England
           ,
           if
           it
           were
           convenient
           .
           If
           Christ
           were
           equally
           to
           be
           enjoyed
           in
           the
           Communion
           of
           the
           
             true
             Bishops
          
           and
           their
           Schismatical
           Rivals
           ,
           we
           should
           be
           as
           willing
           as
           
             he
             to
             keep
             off
             the
             Evil
             day
             as
             long
             as
             we
             could
             .
             Flesh
          
           and
           Blood
           would
           easily
           perswade
           us
           to
           it
           ,
           if
           it
           were
           safe
           .
           But
           he
           knows
           very
           well
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Catholick
             Church
          
           in
           the
           
             purest
             Ages
          
           ,
           never
           believed
           our
           mordern
           Latitudinarian
           Fancies
           ,
           that
           Schismaticks
           have
           any
           Union
           with
           Christ
           ,
           whilst
           they
           are
           divided
           from
           his
           
             Mystical
             Body
          
           the
           Church
           .
           If
           this
           were
           true
           ,
           or
           if
           he
           thought
           it
           himself
           true
           ;
           I
           do
           not
           understand
           how
           he
           could
           reckon
           Schism
           among
           the
           
             greatest
             Evils
             that
             can
             befal
             the
             Church
             ,
          
           if
           even
           Schismaticks
           may
           
             enjoy
             Christ
          
           ,
           though
           they
           be
           in
           open
           Hostility
           with
           his
           
             Authorized
             Representative
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §.
           XVIII
           .
           The
           Evil
           of
           Schism
           not
           avoided
           ,
           but
           incurred
           ,
           by
           complying
           
             with
             the
          
           Usurpers
           .
        
         
           As
           for
           the
           Case
           of
           Schism
           which
           he
           pretends
           to
           be
           avoided
           by
           them
           by
           their
           compliance
           with
           the
           Usurpers
           ,
           this
           Evil
           is
           so
           far
           from
           being
           avoided
           ,
           as
           that
           it
           has
           been
           occasioned
           by
           it
           .
           The
           Doctor
           cannot
           deny
           but
           that
           their
           communicating
           with
           the
           Intruders
           ,
           has
           occasioned
           a
           notorious
           breach
           of
           Communion
           ,
           which
           on
           one
           side
           or
           the
           other
           ,
           must
           needs
           be
           Schismatical
           .
           All
           therefore
           that
           he
           can
           pretend
           ,
           is
           ,
           that
           they
           ,
           by
           complying
           ,
           are
           not
           chargable
           with
           the
           crime
           of
           the
           Schism
           that
           has
           been
           occasion'd
           by
           it
           .
           How
           so
           ?
           it
           is
           because
           if
           we
           had
           also
           done
           as
           they
           have
           done
           ,
           there
           had
           been
           no
           Schism
           .
           Very
           true
           .
           But
           it
           had
           been
           full
           as
           true
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           done
           as
           we
           have
           done
           .
           This
           pretence
           therefore
           leaves
           the
           Criminalness
           of
           the
           breach
           as
           uncertain
           as
           before
           ,
           and
           necessarily
           puts
           them
           (
           for
           tryal
           of
           that
           )
           on
           the
           merit
           of
           the
           Cause
           .
           And
           if
           that
           be
           enquired
           into
           ,
           all
           the
           Presumptions
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           the
           particular
           Proofs
           ,
           are
           in
           favour
           of
           us
           ,
           and
           
             against
             them
          
           .
           We
           were
           plainly
           one
           before
           this
           breach
           .
           As
           therefore
           the
           branch
           it self
           is
           new
           ,
           so
           the
           guilt
           of
           it
           must
           be
           resolved
           into
           the
           Innovations
           that
           occasion'd
           it
           ,
           which
           will
           ,
           by
           unavoidable
           consequence
           ,
           make
           them
           chargeable
           with
           the
           breach
           who
           were
           guilty
           of
           the
           Innovations
           .
           The
           Innovations
           that
           have
           caused
           the
           breach
           ,
           are
           the
           disowning
           our
           
             old
             Bishops
          
           ,
           and
           substituting
           others
           in
           their
           Places
           ,
           whilst
           themselves
           are
           living
           ,
           and
           continue
           their
           Claim
           ,
           and
           are
           not
           deprived
           by
           any
           Authority
           that
           had
           really
           a
           Power
           to
           
             deprive
             them
          
           .
           But
           in
           these
           instances
           ,
           they
           ,
           not
           we
           ,
           have
           been
           the
           Aggressors
           and
           Innovators
           .
           Do
           we
           own
           the
           
             Old
             Bishops
          
           for
           the
           
             true
             Bishops
          
           of
           these
           Sees
           ,
           of
           which
           they
           have
           pretended
           to
           deprive
           them
           ?
           And
           did
           not
           they
           do
           so
           too
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           we
           ,
           before
           the
           Deprivation
           ?
           And
           what
           had
           they
           to
           pretend
           for
           themselves
           ,
           why
           they
           do
           not
           so
           still
           .
           Besides
           this
           very
           Sentence
           of
           Deprivation
           ,
           which
           the
           Doctor
           owns
           
           to
           be
           invalid
           ?
           And
           how
           can
           they
           justify
           their
           disowning
           them
           upon
           a
           Sentence
           confessedly
           invalid
           ?
           This
           new
           behaviour
           of
           theirs
           ,
           they
           must
           wholly
           own
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           new
           ,
           to
           be
           their
           own
           .
           We
           only
           continue
           to
           own
           our
           Holy
           Fathers
           ,
           as
           Dr.
           Hody
           himself
           and
           his
           Brethren
           did
           formerly
           .
           As
           for
           the
           Second
           Act
           ,
           the
           setting
           up
           
             new
             Bishops
          
           in
           opposition
           to
           our
           Fathers
           ,
           they
           cannot
           excuse
           themselves
           from
           being
           the
           Innovators
           ,
           and
           concerning
           
             us
             ,
             they
          
           cannot
           pretend
           it
           .
           They
           have
           made
           the
           
             new
             Bishops
          
           who
           consecrated
           them
           ,
           and
           they
           also
           who
           own
           them
           by
           communicating
           with
           them
           ,
           or
           their
           Consecrators
           ,
           These
           have
           intirely
           been
           the
           Acts
           of
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           .
           Yet
           without
           these
           ,
           all
           that
           the
           Lay-Power
           could
           have
           done
           ,
           could
           never
           have
           formed
           a
           Schism
           ,
           nor
           divided
           our
           Communion
           .
           And
           as
           to
           what
           has
           been
           done
           on
           both
           sides
           ,
           we
           can
           better
           excuse
           our
           selves
           ,
           than
           they
           can
           .
           Could
           they
           and
           we
           have
           consented
           to
           have
           acted
           Uniformly
           ,
           there
           could
           have
           been
           no
           Schism
           :
           But
           we
           can
           better
           account
           for
           our
           not
           complying
           with
           them
           ,
           than
           they
           can
           for
           not
           complying
           with
           us
           .
           On
           their
           side
           ,
           they
           have
           nothing
           to
           plead
           but
           worldly
           Considerations
           .
           They
           could
           not
           doubt
           of
           the
           Lawfulness
           with
           regard
           to
           conscience
           ,
           of
           doing
           that
           on
           their
           side
           ,
           which
           ,
           if
           done
           ,
           had
           prevented
           the
           
             Schism
             .
             They
          
           can
           pretend
           no
           obligation
           in
           Conscience
           ,
           for
           setting
           up
           
             other
             Bishops
          
           ,
           as
           we
           can
           ,
           for
           
             not
             owning
          
           them
           ;
           till
           they
           can
           
             prove
             us
          
           fairly
           discharged
           in
           Conscience
           ,
           which
           they
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           we
           ,
           were
           obliged
           in
           ,
           in
           regard
           of
           the
           old
           
             true
             Proprietors
          
           .
           They
           could
           pretend
           no
           
             cementing
             Principles
          
           essential
           to
           the
           subsistence
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           as
           a
           Society
           ,
           and
           a
           Communion
           independent
           on
           the
           State
           ,
           obliging
           them
           to
           comply
           with
           these
           encroachments
           of
           the
           Politicions
           ,
           for
           making
           Spiritual
           considerations
           to
           give
           way
           to
           
             Temporals
             .
             They
          
           could
           pretend
           no
           
             Catholick
             Authority
          
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           in
           any
           Age
           ,
           approving
           what
           was
           done
           by
           them
           ,
           as
           we
           can
           of
           the
           best
           and
           purest
           Ages
           ,
           for
           what
           has
           been
           done
           by
           
             Us.
             They
          
           could
           not
           pretend
           any
           such
           
             united
             Authority
          
           ,
           of
           even
           the
           Church
           of
           England
           ,
           before
           this
           change
           ,
           for
           many
           things
           wherein
           we
           differ
           now
           ,
           as
           we
           can
           .
           So
           far
           thay
           have
           been
           from
           
             avoiding
             Schism
          
           by
           these
           compliances
           ,
           or
           from
           purging
           themselves
           from
           the
           guilt
           of
           the
           Schism
           which
           has
           followed
           thereupon
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXI
           .
           The
           abuses
           that
           may
           follow
           on
           Compliance
           ,
           are
           a
           just
           reason
           to
           refuse
           it
           ,
           where
           it
           is
           not
           otherwise
           ,
           in
           Conscience
           ,
           due
        
         
           One
           Inconvenience
           the
           Doctor
           himself
           foresees
           ,
           which
           he
           seems
           to
           own
           as
           justly
           chargeable
           on
           their
           Principle
           :
           
             That
             by
             a
             submission
             to
             the
             Possessor
             ,
             the
             Civil
             Governour
             is
             like
             to
             be
             encouraged
             to
             tyrannize
             over
             the
             Church
             ,
             and
             to
             turn
             out
             such
             Bishops
             as
             he
             does
             not
             like
             ,
             whensoever
             he
             pleases
             ,
             though
             never
             so
             unjustly
             .
          
           This
           must
           necessarily
           be
           the
           Consequence
           of
           defending
           such
           Practices
           in
           such
           
             a
             way
          
           as
           the
           Doctor
           has
           done
           ,
           not
           by
           conside
           rations
           particular
           to
           the
           present
           Case
           ,
           but
           by
           such
           Topicks
           as
           the
           Doctor
           
           has
           insisted
           on
           ,
           which
           (
           if
           they
           prove
           any
           thing
           )
           proceed
           in
           general
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           prove
           
             Bishops
             obliged
          
           in
           general
           ,
           to
           yield
           their
           Rights
           as
           often
           as
           they
           are
           invaded
           ,
           and
           Subjects
           as
           generally
           absolved
           from
           their
           Duty
           to
           such
           Bishops
           though
           the
           Bishop
           should
           think
           fit
           to
           assert
           their
           Rights
           .
           Both
           of
           these
           are
           asserted
           by
           him
           on
           account
           of
           the
           irresistibleness
           of
           the
           force
           which
           brings
           on
           the
           violence
           ,
           which
           is
           an
           Argument
           that
           must
           always
           hold
           on
           the
           side
           of
           the
           State
           ,
           in
           all
           Disputes
           that
           she
           has
           with
           the
           Church
           .
           These
           things
           asserted
           by
           Ecclesiasticks
           ,
           such
           as
           the
           Doctor
           is
           ,
           must
           for
           ever
           encourage
           the
           Laity
           ,
           who
           are
           not
           acted
           by
           great
           skill
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           
             good
             inclinations
          
           to
           Religion
           ,
           to
           believe
           they
           do
           well
           in
           what
           they
           do
           of
           this
           kind
           ,
           and
           therefore
           to
           repeat
           it
           without
           any
           scruple
           .
           But
           how
           does
           the
           Doctor
           pretend
           to
           avoid
           this
           Consequence
           ?
           He
           first
           pretends
           that
           
             the
             same
             Inconvenience
             is
             in
             all
             manner
             of
             Government
             .
          
           Particularly
           ,
           that
           a
           Synod
           may
           also
           be
           encouraged
           to
           
           unjust
           Sentences
           by
           our
           acknowledging
           an
           Obligation
           to
           submit
           to
           such
           Sentences
           ,
           if
           passed
           Synodically
           .
           But
           we
           are
           far
           from
           making
           Abuses
           Arguments
           for
           denying
           just
           Rights
           :
           Nor
           does
           our
           Cause
           require
           it
           .
           We
           are
           only
           for
           denying
           Obedience
           to
           an
           
             incompetent
             Authority
          
           ,
           that
           invades
           Rights
           which
           do
           not
           belong
           to
           it
           .
           And
           for
           this
           it
           is
           certainly
           a
           very
           just
           reason
           for
           denying
           them
           what
           they
           have
           
             no
             Right
          
           to
           ,
           if
           yielding
           will
           encourage
           them
           to
           the
           like
           Injuries
           and
           Usurpations
           frequently
           ,
           which
           it
           must
           needs
           do
           ,
           if
           they
           must
           never
           expect
           opposition
           ,
           how
           frequently
           soever
           they
           are
           pleased
           to
           renew
           the
           Injuries
           ;
           nay
           ,
           if
           Persons
           concerned
           against
           them
           ,
           shall
           encourage
           them
           in
           the
           belief
           that
           they
           are
           
             no
             Injuries
          
           at
           all
           .
           However
           if
           the
           Injustice
           had
           been
           equal
           in
           the
           encroachments
           of
           
             incompetent
             Judges
          
           and
           Synods
           ;
           yet
           the
           danger
           is
           not
           .
           In
           Synods
           nothing
           can
           be
           transacted
           but
           by
           a
           majority
           of
           the
           
             Episcopal
             Order
          
           .
           So
           the
           Episcopacy
           it self
           is
           secured
           by
           a
           majority
           of
           Suffrages
           against
           any
           mischief
           that
           can
           be
           acted
           against
           it
           Synodically
           .
           But
           in
           a
           
             Lay
             Judicatory
          
           ,
           the
           
             whole
             Authority
          
           may
           combine
           against
           them
           ,
           and
           (
           God
           knows
           )
           is
           too
           likely
           to
           do
           so
           in
           these
           days
           of
           Irreligion
           ,
           when
           their
           Revenues
           are
           more
           regarded
           than
           their
           Function
           .
           This
           Authority
           therefore
           is
           not
           to
           be
           trusted
           to
           dearest
           Friends
           ,
           who
           are
           in
           any
           disposition
           to
           be
           otherwise
           .
           Much
           less
           to
           those
           who
           are
           under
           present
           jealousies
           and
           disaffections
           to
           their
           whole
           Order
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XX.
           No
           security
           
             ●ere
             that
          
           compliance
           
             will
             not
             be
          
           abused
           .
        
         
           The
           Doctor
           adds
           Secondly
           ,
           that
           
             here
             in
          
           England
           
             it
             is
             not
             the
             will
             of
             the
             Prince
             that
             can
             turn
             out
             a
             Bishop
             .
             And
             that
             King
             and
             Parliament
             may
             by
             compliance
             be
             encouraged
             to
             depose
             Bishops
             at
             pleasure
             ,
             that
             Supposition
             ,
          
           he
           says
           ,
           
             is
             wild
             and
             extravagant
          
           .
           As
           if
           he
           had
           never
           heard
           of
           a
           Parliament
           ,
           even
           in
           England
           ,
           that
           did
           not
           only
           deprive
           Bishops
           at
           pleasure
           ,
           
           but
           Episcopacy
           it self
           .
           As
           if
           he
           knew
           not
           that
           Men
           of
           the
           
             same
             principles
          
           are
           notwithstanding
           qualified
           to
           serve
           in
           our
           Parliaments
           As
           if
           he
           were
           perfectly
           ignorant
           of
           the
           Case
           of
           Scotland
           ,
           where
           notwithstanding
           the
           interest
           the
           Bishop
           have
           by
           the
           Fundamentals
           of
           the
           Government
           ,
           as
           on
           of
           the
           
             Three
             States
          
           in
           which
           the
           
             Legistative
             Power
          
           is
           seated
           ;
           Yet
           not
           Bishops
           only
           ,
           but
           Episcopacy
           has
           been
           extirpated
           ,
           as
           far
           as
           the
           Votes
           of
           the
           Laity
           can
           contribute
           to
           the
           extirpation
           of
           it
           .
           There
           the
           Doctor
           may
           see
           ,
           what
           he
           seys
           he
           cannot
           imagine
           ,
           that
           what
           he
           calls
           King
           and
           Parliament
           can
           concur
           for
           the
           deprivation
           ,
           not
           of
           a
           Bishop
           only
           ,
           but
           of
           Episcopacy
           .
           And
           we
           have
           little
           security
           that
           it
           shall
           not
           be
           put
           in
           Practice
           ,
           if
           we
           must
           by
           Principles
           ,
           as
           he
           does
           ,
           allow
           them
           to
           do
           it
           here
           ,
           upon
           an
           occasion
           that
           they
           shall
           judge
           Extraordinary
           .
           That
           
             Extraordinary
             occasion
          
           is
           not
           very
           difficult
           to
           be
           found
           by
           them
           ,
           who
           make
           Spiritual
           considerations
           give
           way
           to
           Temporal
           .
           The
           use
           of
           the
           
             Cathedral
             Revenues
          
           for
           carrying
           on
           the
           present
           expensive
           War
           ,
           is
           likely
           enough
           to
           be
           judged
           so
           .
           And
           the
           Psalmist
           ,
           who
           was
           himself
           a
           King
           ,
           has
           warned
           us
           not
           
             to
             put
             confidence
             in
             Princes
          
           .
           The
           Doctor
           indeed
           tells
           us
           ,
           that
           the
           Bishops
           here
           have
           
             the
             same
             Security
          
           that
           other
           Subjects
           have
           .
           I
           am
           sure
           they
           ought
           to
           have
           it
           ,
           not
           only
           for
           the
           reason
           of
           the
           things
           ,
           but
           by
           our
           Constitution
           .
           Their
           Rights
           ought
           to
           be
           accounted
           
             more
             sacred
          
           than
           any
           
             other
             Rights
          
           or
           Liberties
           of
           the
           Subjects
           and
           therefore
           
             more
             inviolable
          
           .
           All
           the
           Sacredness
           that
           has
           been
           made
           use
           of
           by
           our
           Legislators
           for
           securing
           them
           ,
           has
           been
           derived
           from
           the
           interposition
           of
           the
           Clergy
           ,
           who
           ,
           if
           they
           be
           not
           treated
           as
           sacred
           themselves
           ,
           can
           never
           secure
           
             other
             Rights
          
           which
           have
           no
           other
           sacredness
           than
           what
           they
           derive
           from
           the
           intervention
           of
           the
           Clergy
           .
           But
           if
           he
           considers
           how
           little
           Laws
           often
           signify
           considering
           those
           who
           are
           allowed
           the
           Authority
           of
           
             Authentically
             Interpreting
          
           and
           Executing
           them
           ,
           and
           what
           Principles
           are
           now
           allowed
           in
           those
           who
           are
           thought
           qualified
           for
           that
           
             Authentical
             Interpretation
          
           and
           Execution
           ;
           I
           know
           no
           sort
           of
           Subject
           that
           he
           could
           pitch
           on
           that
           either
           have
           been
           ,
           or
           are
           likely
           to
           be
           ,
           treated
           so
           arbitrarily
           by
           our
           Legislators
           .
           The
           Laity
           in
           Henry
           the
           VIII
           ths
           time
           ,
           dissolved
           whole
           Bodies
           of
           the
           Clergy
           ,
           and
           alienated
           their
           revenues
           ,
           without
           any
           consent
           of
           those
           Bodies
           ,
           or
           of
           any
           Authorized
           to
           
             represent
             them
          
           ,
           without
           any
           
             Legal
             trial
          
           or
           eviction
           in
           any
           form
           of
           Law.
           When
           has
           any
           such
           thing
           been
           ever
           attempted
           against
           any
           
             Lay
             Bodies
          
           by
           their
           Representatives
           in
           Parliament
           ,
           who
           were
           chosen
           to
           preserve
           ,
           not
           to
           oppress
           ,
           the
           Liberties
           of
           those
           who
           chose
           them
           .
           The
           
             other
             States
          
           have
           presumed
           to
           eject
           the
           
             Spiritual
             State
          
           ,
           who
           as
           a
           State
           ,
           have
           as
           sacred
           a
           Right
           in
           the
           
             Fundamental
             Constitution
          
           of
           the
           
             Legislative
             Power
          
           as
           themselves
           .
           And
           the
           Commons
           have
           turned
           that
           President
           against
           
           the
           
             Temporal
             Lords
          
           .
           What
           if
           the
           
             Lords
             Spiritual
          
           and
           Temporal
           should
           turn
           it
           upon
           the
           Commons
           also
           ?
           Could
           they
           think
           this
           agreeable
           to
           the
           design
           of
           the
           Constitution
           ?
           The
           Law
           certainly
           never
           intended
           such
           violences
           between
           those
           who
           are
           equally
           fundamental
           to
           the
           
             Legislative
             Power
          
           ,
           and
           who
           have
           no
           
             Legal
             Judges
          
           or
           Tribunals
           appointed
           by
           the
           Law
           for
           determining
           differences
           between
           them
           by
           way
           of
           
             Judicial
             process
          
           and
           Authority
           .
           Thus
           the
           Doctor
           may
           plainly
           see
           ,
           that
           in
           the
           Opinion
           of
           those
           who
           justify
           these
           proceedings
           ,
           and
           who
           are
           therefore
           likely
           to
           plead
           them
           as
           
             Precedents
             ,
             Clergy-men
          
           have
           not
           the
           same
           Securities
           that
           othe
           Subjects
           have
           ,
           if
           Persons
           so
           Principled
           ,
           make
           a
           Majority
           in
           our
           
             Legislative
             Assemblies
          
           .
           I
           say
           no
           more
           at
           present
           for
           making
           Application
           ,
           how
           probable
           it
           is
           for
           such
           Principles
           to
           gain
           acceptance
           with
           the
           majority
           .
           I
           should
           be
           as
           willing
           as
           any
           to
           presume
           better
           things
           ,
           if
           I
           could
           see
           reason
           to
           believe
           them
           .
           But
           our
           best
           security
           is
           certainly
           to
           assert
           Principles
           that
           my
           not
           put
           it
           in
           the
           power
           of
           any
           to
           ruin
           our
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           and
           to
           be
           true
           to
           them
           .
           He
           adds
           ,
           
             There
             is
             nothing
             more
             manifest
             than
             that
             this
             Inconvenience
             is
             not
             so
             likely
             to
             happen
          
           
           
             as
             those
             Evils
             we
             endeavour
             to
             avoid
             .
          
           Why
           so
           ?
           These
           ,
           he
           says
           ,
           
             are
             certain
             and
             present
             ,
             That
             only
             possible
             .
          
           If
           they
           be
           certain
           and
           present
           how
           can
           they
           pretend
           that
           ,
           by
           their
           compliance
           ,
           they
           have
           avoided
           them
           ?
           If
           they
           have
           not
           avoided
           them
           by
           complying
           ;
           how
           can
           they
           pretend
           that
           the
           benefits
           of
           their
           compliance
           can
           have
           made
           amends
           for
           all
           the
           further
           Injuries
           they
           may
           expose
           the
           Church
           to
           for
           the
           future
           ,
           by
           suffering
           such
           ill
           practices
           to
           pass
           into
           Precedents
           for
           want
           of
           a
           timely
           opposition
           ?
           Methinks
           he
           should
           have
           made
           the
           avoidal
           of
           the
           feared
           
             evils
             certain
          
           and
           present
           ,
           not
           the
           Evils
           themselves
           ,
           if
           he
           would
           have
           spoken
           consequently
           to
           the
           exigence
           of
           his
           Case
           .
           But
           it
           is
           too
           true
           ,
           that
           the
           Evils
           themselves
           are
           present
           ,
           and
           that
           their
           Compliance
           has
           
             not
             avoided
          
           them
           :
           The
           Schism
           is
           so
           notoriously
           .
           And
           so
           is
           the
           Persecution
           also
           to
           all
           that
           will
           be
           true
           to
           their
           
             old
             Principles
          
           ,
           and
           to
           their
           
             old
             Communion
          
           .
           For
           ,
           what
           favour
           has
           been
           shewn
           on
           condition
           of
           deserting
           old
           Principles
           ,
           can
           by
           no
           fair
           Interpretation
           be
           extended
           to
           that
           Church
           ,
           whose
           Principles
           they
           were
           .
           So
           far
           as
           they
           hold
           firm
           to
           their
           
             old
             Principles
          
           ,
           they
           are
           still
           liable
           to
           the
           Persecution
           ;
           and
           so
           far
           as
           they
           desert
           them
           ,
           so
           far
           they
           also
           cease
           to
           be
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           whose
           Principles
           they
           have
           deserted
           .
           Few
           Persecutions
           have
           been
           so
           severe
           ,
           but
           that
           they
           might
           have
           been
           avoided
           by
           desertion
           .
           But
           the
           further
           Inconvenience
           likely
           to
           follw
           on
           this
           compliance
           ,
           is
           more
           than
           possible
           .
           It
           is
           
             as
             probable
          
           as
           most
           events
           are
           that
           depend
           on
           
             Humane
             Wills.
          
           It
           is
           a
           
             natural
             Consequence
          
           ,
           and
           a
           Consequence
           likely
           to
           be
           drawn
           by
           Persons
           so
           Principled
           ;
           and
           there
           are
           but
           too
           many
           that
           are
           so
           ,
           and
           too
           
           tempting
           occasions
           to
           put
           them
           in
           mind
           of
           ,
           and
           to
           engage
           them
           on
           ,
           such
           Inferences
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXI
           .
           That
           abuse
           it
           a
           greater
           mischief
           than
           that
           it
           can
           be
           made
           
             a
             mends
          
           for
           by
           the
           
             Doctors
             Expedients
          
           .
        
         
           Yet
           3ly
           ,
           should
           this
           Inconveniences
           follow
           ;
           the
           Doctor
           thinks
           himself
           provided
           against
           it
           .
           
             Though
             the
             Government
             should
             be
             so
             very
             dissolute
             as
             to
             turn
             out
             frequently
             the
             Bishops
             of
             the
             Church
             without
             any
             just
             Cause
             ;
             yet
             who
          
           (
           says
           he
           )
           
             can
             look
             upon
             that
             mischief
             to
             be
             comparable
             to
             that
             of
             a
             Schism
             and
             a
             Persecution
             ?
          
           If
           he
           could
           find
           in
           his
           heart
           to
           be
           as
           much
           concerned
           for
           a
           
             more
             noble
             Society
          
           ,
           when
           it
           can
           intitle
           him
           to
           nothing
           but
           sufferings
           ,
           as
           he
           is
           for
           a
           
             less
             noble
          
           one
           ,
           that
           can
           give
           him
           revenues
           ;
           I
           cannot
           think
           he
           could
           be
           so
           indifferent
           for
           bearing
           
             frequent
             Injuries
          
           by
           
             invalid
             Deprivations
          
           of
           its
           Governours
           ,
           which
           cannot
           discharge
           Subjects
           from
           their
           Duty
           in
           Conscience
           to
           those
           which
           are
           so
           deprived
           ,
           He
           would
           be
           sensible
           ,
           how
           this
           would
           tend
           to
           the
           dissolving
           such
           a
           Socièty
           that
           must
           have
           its
           
             Governours
             removable
          
           at
           the
           pleasure
           of
           a
           
             hostile
             Society
          
           ,
           whensoever
           but
           pleased
           to
           invade
           Rights
           not
           belonging
           to
           it
           ,
           without
           any
           remedy
           or
           relief
           by
           insisting
           on
           their
           own
           Rights
           ,
           which
           the
           Doctors
           Principles
           make
           unpracticable
           .
           And
           what
           Schisms
           or
           Persecutions
           can
           be
           worse
           to
           a
           Society
           than
           dissolution
           ?
           He
           would
           be
           sensible
           ,
           there
           is
           now
           a
           Schism
           ,
           and
           a
           Persecution
           .
           That
           our
           late
           common
           Body
           is
           now
           divided
           ,
           that
           his
           late
           Brethren
           upon
           Principles
           of
           Conscience
           are
           now
           Persecuted
           ;
           if
           he
           could
           not
           otherwise
           believe
           ,
           he
           would
           feel
           ,
           if
           he
           had
           the
           compassion
           of
           a
           
             living
             Member
          
           :
           If
           he
           had
           the
           Zeal
           of
           the
           Apostle
           ,
           when
           he
           used
           that
           passionate
           Expression
           ,
           
             Who
             is
             offended
             ,
             and
             I
             burn
             not
             ?
          
           If
           he
           had
           any
           sense
           of
           the
           
             afflictions
             of
             Joseph
          
           .
           He
           would
           be
           sensible
           of
           the
           many
           
             future
             Schisms
          
           that
           must
           follow
           upon
           the
           frequency
           of
           these
           Encroachments
           ,
           upon
           his
           own
           loose
           Principles
           ,
           that
           neither
           
             allow
             Bishops
          
           to
           assert
           their
           own
           just
           Rights
           ,
           nor
           
             oblige
             Subjects
          
           to
           stand
           by
           them
           when
           they
           do
           so
           ,
           as
           long
           as
           there
           shall
           be
           any
           Bishops
           that
           shall
           think
           themselves
           obliged
           to
           assert
           them
           ,
           and
           Subjects
           that
           think
           their
           doing
           so
           will
           not
           discharge
           themselves
           from
           Duty
           to
           them
           ;
           that
           is
           ,
           as
           long
           as
           there
           are
           any
           that
           are
           true
           to
           the
           
             concenting
             Principles
          
           of
           the
           Church
           as
           it
           is
           a
           Society
           and
           a
           Communion
           .
           He
           would
           be
           sensible
           ,
           that
           upon
           such
           Brethren
           as
           these
           ,
           such
           
             frequent
             encroachments
          
           would
           draw
           
             frequent
             Persecutions
          
           .
           So
           far
           his
           Principles
           and
           Practices
           are
           from
           securing
           our
           common
           Body
           from
           Schisms
           and
           Persecutions
           .
           But
           it
           seems
           he
           has
           forgot
           all
           concern
           for
           his
           
             old
             Brethren
          
           upon
           the
           surest
           most
           
             uniting
             Principles
          
           of
           Brotherhood
           ;
           nay
           for
           our
           
             common
             Body
          
           ,
           and
           of
           the
           terms
           upon
           which
           it
           was
           common
           to
           us
           formerly
           .
           If
           he
           had
           not
           ,
           he
           would
           not
           think
           our
           
             Common
             Body
          
           so
           unconcern'd
           in
           
             our
             Divisions
          
           ,
           and
           our
           Persecutions
           .
           But
           what
           ,
           says
           the
           
             Doctor
             ,
             can
             the
             suffering
             of
             a
             few
          
           
           
           
             particular
             men
             be
             ,
             when
             compared
             with
             the
             Peace
             and
             Tranquillity
             of
             the
             whole
             Church
             besides
             ?
          
           Not
           so
           much
           undoubtedly
           ,
           if
           the
           few
           had
           been
           Men
           of
           
             singular
             Opinions
          
           ,
           of
           no
           consequence
           for
           the
           good
           of
           the
           whole
           ;
           if
           they
           had
           not
           been
           such
           as
           all
           ought
           to
           have
           been
           ,
           if
           they
           would
           cement
           into
           a
           Body
           by
           any
           solid
           uniting
           Principles
           .
           The
           suffering
           of
           such
           ,
           how
           few
           soever
           ,
           would
           have
           involved
           the
           
             whole
             Church
          
           ,
           if
           all
           its
           Members
           had
           been
           such
           as
           they
           should
           have
           been
           .
           It
           is
           therefore
           the
           unhappiness
           of
           a
           Church
           that
           
             such
             Members
          
           are
           but
           few
           .
           So
           far
           it
           is
           from
           being
           a
           Consideration
           to
           be
           boasted
           of
           that
           the
           Majority
           avoids
           sufferings
           by
           doing
           otherwise
           than
           becomes
           them
           .
           If
           the
           Doctors
           regard
           to
           Multitude
           alone
           had
           been
           true
           ;
           then
           whenever
           there
           was
           an
           Apostaoy
           ,
           the
           Church
           would
           be
           ,
           by
           so
           much
           ,
           the
           more
           happy
           ,
           by
           how
           much
           ,
           the
           more
           had
           been
           engaged
           in
           the
           Apostacy
           .
           These
           Multitudes
           would
           call
           themselves
           the
           Church
           as
           confidently
           as
           the
           Doctor
           and
           his
           Party
           do
           now
           ,
           and
           would
           as
           little
           regard
           the
           sufferings
           of
           a
           
             few
             particular
             Men
          
           as
           our
           late
           Brethren
           do
           .
           I
           am
           sure
           the
           antient
           Catholicks
           did
           not
           so
           little
           regard
           the
           sufferings
           of
           a
           
             few
             particular
             Men
          
           ,
           in
           a
           
             common
             Cause
          
           .
           In
           the
           
             Eastern
             Empire
          
           there
           were
           very
           few
           that
           incurred
           the
           displeasure
           of
           Constantius
           besides
           Athanasius
           and
           Paulus
           .
           In
           the
           West
           no
           more
           than
           
             five
             Bishops
          
           are
           reckoned
           that
           suffered
           for
           their
           constancy
           .
           The
           rest
           might
           have
           pretended
           generally
           to
           as
           much
           Peace
           and
           Tranquillity
           as
           our
           Adversaries
           do
           now
           .
           Yet
           he
           was
           not
           than
           taken
           for
           a
           true
           Catholick
           ,
           who
           was
           as
           unconcerned
           as
           the
           Doctor
           is
           ,
           for
           the
           
             few
             particular
             Men
          
           that
           suffered
           .
           Nor
           do
           I
           see
           but
           that
           the
           Cause
           of
           
             Episcopal
             Authority
          
           ,
           and
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Subjection
          
           ,
           is
           of
           as
           great
           and
           common
           importance
           to
           the
           Church
           in
           general
           as
           any
           one
           Article
           of
           the
           Faith
           can
           be
           .
           This
           the
           Vindicator
           has
           proved
           ,
           nor
           has
           the
           Doctor
           vouchsafed
           any
           Answer
           to
           what
           he
           has
           produced
           for
           it
           .
           Indeed
           the
           whole
           Expedient
           insisted
           on
           by
           the
           Doctor
           seems
           very
           strange
           to
           me
           ,
           that
           he
           should
           think
           to
           secure
           the
           Church
           from
           Schism
           by
           allowing
           Subjects
           to
           desert
           their
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Superiours
          
           on
           pretence
           of
           
             irresistible
             force
          
           ,
           and
           by
           by
           renouncing
           all
           Principles
           that
           may
           
             oblige
             Ecclesiastical
             Subjects
          
           to
           adhere
           to
           their
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           ,
           whensoever
           the
           State
           shall
           be
           pleased
           to
           refuse
           to
           pretect
           them
           ,
           and
           thereby
           renouncing
           all
           Principles
           that
           may
           oblige
           them
           in
           Conscience
           to
           continue
           a
           Society
           independent
           on
           the
           State.
           These
           Principles
           and
           Practices
           leave
           them
           at
           liberty
           to
           form
           and
           maintain
           as
           many
           Schisms
           as
           they
           please
           ,
           when
           the
           Decrees
           as
           the
           Church
           are
           not
           seconded
           by
           the
           
             Civil
             Power
          
           .
           How
           then
           can
           the
           maintaining
           so
           
             licentious
             Principles
          
           be
           taken
           for
           an
           Expedient
           for
           
             preventing
             Schism
          
           ?
           The
           Doctor
           withal
           would
           have
           us
           consider
           ,
           That
           it
           was
           not
           
             for
             the
             Bishops
             that
          
           
           
           
             the
             Church
             was
             established
             ;
             but
             the
             Bishops
             were
             appointed
             for
             the
             sake
             of
             the
             Church
             .
          
           Hence
           he
           concludes
           ,
           that
           
             it
             is
             not
             the
             welfare
             of
             the
             Bishops
             as
             the
             Bishops
             are
             these
             or
             or
             those
             Men
             ,
             much
             lese
             of
             some
             few
             particular
             Bishops
             but
             the
             welfare
             of
             the
             whole
             Church
             in
             general
             that
             is
             chiefly
             to
             be
             regarded
             .
          
           This
           is
           a
           pretence
           for
           all
           Rebellions
           and
           Innovations
           whatsoever
           ,
           to
           make
           the
           Persons
           invested
           with
           Authority
           ,
           to
           be
           regarded
           only
           as
           
             private
             Persons
          
           ,
           whose
           Interests
           are
           different
           from
           those
           of
           the
           Publick
           ,
           which
           the
           Innovators
           pretend
           to
           promote
           by
           removing
           their
           
             private
             Persons
          
           ,
           and
           substituting
           others
           in
           their
           stead
           .
           Nor
           indeed
           need
           any
           Rebel
           desire
           any
           more
           .
           Let
           the
           Head
           of
           the
           Rebellion
           be
           the
           
             particular
             Person
          
           ,
           and
           the
           controversy
           is
           soon
           determined
           .
           He
           will
           pretend
           no
           quarrel
           with
           the
           Publick
           ,
           but
           only
           whether
           he
           or
           the
           present
           Possessor
           shall
           be
           the
           
             particular
             Person
          
           that
           is
           to
           be
           intrusted
           with
           the
           Publick
           ;
           and
           to
           be
           sure
           ,
           will
           pretend
           it
           to
           be
           for
           the
           
             Publick
             Interest
          
           ,
           that
           of
           the
           two
           ,
           himself
           should
           rather
           be
           the
           Man
           ,
           if
           for
           no
           other
           reasons
           ,
           at
           least
           for
           those
           of
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           viz.
           
             Irresistible
             force
          
           ,
           and
           the
           Peace
           and
           Tranquillity
           of
           the
           whole
           ,
           which
           he
           is
           otherwise
           resolved
           to
           disturb
           .
           And
           the
           same
           pretence
           is
           applicable
           to
           any
           
             other
             from
          
           of
           Government
           as
           well
           as
           that
           which
           is
           Monarchical
           .
           The
           Administration
           of
           it
           cannot
           be
           managed
           but
           by
           some
           few
           chosen
           out
           of
           the
           
             whole
             Body
          
           ,
           and
           then
           those
           few
           are
           only
           so
           many
           
             particular
             Persons
          
           ,
           against
           whom
           the
           
             Publick
             Good
          
           may
           still
           be
           pretended
           ,
           if
           others
           may
           judge
           of
           it
           .
           But
           this
           is
           so
           general
           a
           Principle
           of
           Rebellions
           and
           
             intestine
             discords
          
           ,
           that
           all
           
             well
             constituted
             Societies
          
           have
           used
           all
           means
           they
           could
           think
           of
           ,
           to
           secure
           themselves
           against
           it
           .
           How
           private
           soever
           the
           Interest
           might
           seem
           to
           
             particular
             Persons
          
           to
           have
           the
           Government
           committed
           to
           them
           ,
           or
           to
           be
           invested
           in
           a
           Right
           to
           it
           ,
           yet
           when
           once
           they
           were
           possessed
           ,
           or
           had
           a
           Right
           ,
           the
           Publick
           has
           thought
           it self
           concerned
           to
           oppose
           ,
           and
           to
           provide
           against
           ,
           a
           violent
           dispossession
           ,
           and
           has
           allowed
           no
           pretences
           of
           
             Publick
             Good
          
           ,
           where
           the
           dispossession
           could
           not
           be
           compassed
           by
           any
           other
           means
           than
           by
           force
           .
           Hence
           these
           very
           severe
           Laws
           against
           any
           thing
           that
           might
           look
           like
           force
           to
           the
           Persons
           of
           Governours
           ,
           especially
           those
           that
           were
           Supreme
           ,
           Hence
           their
           Arts
           of
           making
           their
           
             Persons
             Sacred
          
           ,
           to
           secure
           them
           from
           those
           violences
           against
           which
           the
           force
           even
           of
           the
           Community
           it self
           was
           not
           able
           to
           Secure
           them
           .
           What
           need
           of
           all
           this
           care
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           thought
           it
           fit
           still
           to
           have
           regarded
           them
           only
           as
           
             particular
             Persons
          
           ?
           The
           Book
           of
           Judith
           ,
           when
           it
           would
           express
           how
           the
           Nations
           
             despised
             King
             Nabuchodonosor
          
           ,
           does
           it
           thus
           :
           
             He
             was
             before
             them
             as
             one
             Man
          
           Jud.
           I.
           11.
           
           What
           difference
           is
           there
           between
           this
           language
           ,
           and
           that
           of
           the
           Doctor
           ?
           The
           same
           Societies
           ,
           have
           also
           taken
           security
           that
           no
           pretence
           
           of
           
             publick
             good
          
           should
           ever
           be
           made
           use
           of
           against
           the
           Persons
           of
           Governours
           ,
           by
           allowing
           none
           others
           for
           Judges
           of
           the
           
             publick
             good
          
           besides
           the
           Persons
           invested
           with
           the
           Government
           ,
           and
           allowing
           them
           so
           to
           Judge
           as
           to
           conclude
           all
           
             Private
             Persons
          
           .
           And
           there
           was
           reason
           why
           Societies
           should
           be
           so
           concerned
           against
           
             violent
             removals
          
           of
           their
           Governours
           ,
           because
           they
           cannot
           be
           
             violently
             removed
          
           whithout
           violence
           to
           the
           
             whole
             Societies
          
           which
           are
           obliged
           to
           defend
           them
           .
           If
           therefore
           they
           do
           their
           duties
           ,
           the
           
             whole
             Societies
          
           must
           suffer
           violence
           ,
           and
           he
           over-powered
           in
           the
           removal
           ,
           which
           must
           consequently
           subject
           them
           to
           the
           arbitrary
           pleasure
           of
           the
           
             forcible
             Usurper
          
           .
           And
           to
           take
           the
           Doctors
           way
           is
           yet
           worse
           ,
           to
           desert
           their
           Governours
           .
           This
           perfectly
           dissolves
           the
           Government
           and
           disables
           the
           Governour
           to
           do
           any
           thing
           of
           his
           Duty
           to
           the
           Publick
           .
           Thus
           it
           appears
           how
           destructive
           it
           is
           to
           his
           whole
           Cause
           to
           own
           the
           deprivations
           of
           our
           
             H.
             Fathers
             invalid
          
           .
           Where
           then
           can
           be
           his
           Answer
           ,
           if
           even
           himself
           grants
           all
           that
           we
           are
           concerned
           to
           assert
           in
           the
           Question
           principally
           disputed
           between
           us
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXII
           .
           The
           main
           dedsign
           of
           the
           Doctors
           new
           Book
           in
           arguing
           from
           Facts
           already
           overthrown
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           ,
           yet
           no
           notice
           taken
           of
           what
           was
           there
           said
           .
        
         
           But
           far
           be
           it
           from
           me
           that
           I
           should
           oblige
           him
           to
           any
           
             unwary
             Concessions
          
           ,
           if
           at
           the
           same
           time
           he
           has
           produced
           any
           thing
           solid
           in
           his
           Book
           to
           prove
           them
           unwary
           .
           I
           am
           therefore
           willing
           to
           consider
           the
           main
           design
           of
           his
           Book
           ,
           if
           I
           can
           even
           there
           find
           any
           thing
           that
           can
           deserve
           the
           name
           of
           an
           Answer
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           That
           is
           not
           either
           acknowledged
           to
           be
           unsufficient
           by
           himself
           ,
           or
           that
           had
           not
           before
           been
           prevented
           by
           his
           Adversary
           .
           And
           what
           is
           ,
           upon
           these
           accounts
           ,
           made
           unserviceable
           ,
           cannot
           certainly
           ,
           in
           the
           sense
           of
           any
           just
           Judge
           ,
           be
           taken
           for
           a
           solid
           and
           satisfactory
           Answer
           .
           The
           main
           design
           of
           his
           Answer
           to
           the
           Vindication
           is
           still
           to
           carry
           on
           the
           Argument
           by
           him
           imputed
           to
           his
           
             Baroccian
             M.
             S.
          
           to
           prove
           by
           an
           enumeration
           of
           Facts
           (
           which
           the
           Doctor
           will
           needs
           have
           pass
           for
           Precedents
           )
           that
           Deprivations
           by
           the
           Lay-Power
           have
           been
           Submitted
           ,
           to
           ,
           and
           the
           Intruders
           own'd
           by
           the
           Subjects
           of
           the
           Dioceses
           out
           of
           which
           the
           
             Lawful
             Possessiors
          
           had
           been
           Uncanonically
           ejected
           .
           Now
           this
           being
           nothing
           but
           the
           
             old
             Argument
          
           ,
           I
           cannot
           ,
           for
           my
           part
           ,
           see
           any
           reason
           the
           Doctor
           can
           pretend
           ,
           why
           the
           
             old
             Answer
          
           of
           the
           
             former
             part
          
           of
           the
           Vindication
           may
           not
           still
           be
           insisted
           on
           as
           sufficient
           ,
           till
           at
           least
           ,
           he
           offer
           at
           something
           to
           the
           contray
           ,
           which
           he
           has
           not
           as
           yet
           so
           much
           as
           attempted
           .
           The
           Vindicator
           has
           there
           shewn
           the
           Unconclusiveness
           of
           that
           whole
           Topick
           from
           naked
           Facts
           ,
           without
           something
           more
           particularly
           insisted
           on
           for
           proving
           them
           Justifiable
           by
           true
           and
           defensible
           Principles
           .
           Especially
           in
           those
           
             lower
             Ages
          
           in
           which
           the
           Author
           of
           the
           
             Baroccian
             M.
             S.
          
           deals
           ,
           and
           to
           which
           the
           
             Doctors
             new
             Examples
          
           are
           reducible
           ,
           the
           Vindicator
           has
           shewn
           ,
           that
           
           nothing
           is
           to
           be
           presumed
           to
           be
           well
           done
           ,
           which
           has
           no
           other
           Evidence
           of
           its
           being
           so
           than
           that
           it
           was
           actually
           practiced
           in
           those
           degenerous
           Ages
           .
           And
           what
           has
           the
           
             Doctor
             attempted
          
           to
           the
           contrary
           ?
           Nothing
           ,
           but
           that
           he
           has
           added
           some
           
             New
             Facts
          
           to
           those
           enumerated
           by
           his
           Baroccian
           Author
           ,
           and
           that
           he
           has
           endeavoured
           to
           defend
           some
           of
           the
           
             old
             Facts
          
           that
           they
           were
           such
           as
           he
           pretended
           them
           .
           But
           neither
           of
           these
           things
           can
           pass
           for
           Answers
           ,
           whilst
           that
           Part
           of
           the
           Vindication
           remains
           unanswer'd
           .
           For
           how
           can
           he
           secure
           his
           
             New
             Facts
          
           when
           all
           of
           their
           kind
           have
           been
           prov'd
           unconclusive
           ?
           And
           to
           what
           purpose
           does
           he
           endeavour
           to
           prove
           those
           few
           ,
           he
           has
           meddled
           with
           ,
           of
           his
           
             Authors
             Facts
          
           ,
           to
           have
           been
           for
           his
           purpose
           ,
           when
           the
           
             former
             Part
          
           of
           the
           Vindication
           has
           already
           evidenced
           that
           tho'
           they
           were
           so
           ,
           that
           would
           not
           be
           sufficient
           for
           carrying
           his
           Cause
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXIII
           .
           The
           
             Doctor
             himself
          
           is
           unwilling
           to
           stand
           by
           the
           Consequences
           of
           
             such
             like
             Facts
          
           as
           himself
           produces
           .
        
         
           So
           far
           he
           has
           been
           from
           Answering
           ,
           that
           himself
           confirms
           the
           
           Vindicator's
           sence
           upon
           this
           Argument
           .
           *
           He
           professes
           beforehand
           his
           own
           unwillingness
           to
           be
           concluded
           by
           such
           Instances
           as
           himself
           has
           produced
           ,
           though
           they
           should
           appear
           to
           be
           against
           him
           .
           Why
           so
           ,
           if
           there
           had
           been
           any
           reason
           that
           he
           should
           have
           been
           concluded
           by
           them
           ?
           Why
           so
           ,
           if
           he
           did
           not
           thereby
           own
           that
           the
           Reasons
           given
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           against
           the
           Argumentativeness
           of
           such
           Facts
           were
           Solid
           and
           concluding
           ?
           And
           how
           then
           can
           he
           find
           in
           his
           heart
           to
           insist
           principally
           in
           his
           following
           Book
           on
           that
           very
           kind
           of
           Facts
           ,
           which
           he
           has
           acknowledged
           so
           unsafe
           to
           be
           relyed
           on
           in
           his
           Preface
           ?
           He
           cannot
           pretend
           to
           argue
           
             ad
             Hominem
          
           ,
           when
           the
           Vindicator
           had
           so
           expresly
           enter'd
           his
           Exceptions
           against
           that
           
             whole
             Argument
          
           .
           He
           cannot
           do
           it
           in
           his
           
             own
             Person
          
           ,
           when
           he
           professes
           himself
           unwilling
           to
           stand
           by
           the
           
             consequen
             ces
          
           of
           it
           .
           And
           how
           can
           he
           have
           the
           confidence
           to
           obtrude
           that
           upon
           Us
           ,
           which
           he
           does
           not
           believe
           himself
           ?
           In
           what
           sense
           can
           he
           take
           this
           whole
           reasoning
           for
           Argumentative
           when
           it
           does
           not
           proceed
           
             ex
             concessis
          
           ;
           when
           it
           proceeds
           on
           
             one
             Premiss
          
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           not
           granted
           by
           either
           of
           the
           Parties
           cancern'd
           in
           the
           Dispute
           ,
           neither
           by
           Us
           ,
           nor
           even
           by
           himself
           ?
           How
           can
           he
           possibly
           mistake
           a
           Book
           ,
           which
           proceeds
           principally
           on
           such
           Reasoning
           as
           this
           ,
           for
           a
           Solid
           and
           satisfying
           Answer
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXIV
           .
           The
           Doctors
           remark
           against
           the
           Reasoning
           of
           the
           
             First
             Parts
          
           of
           the
           Vindication
           concerning
           the
           Possession
           of
           Cornelius
           turned
           against
           himself
           .
        
         
           Thus
           it
           appears
           that
           the
           
             Principal
             Answer
          
           of
           the
           Vindicator
           to
           the
           
             Doctors
             Book
          
           remains
           still
           in
           its
           full
           strength
           untouched
           and
           unconcerned
           in
           all
           the
           Doctor
           has
           said
           in
           his
           new
           Book
           .
           What
           is
           it
           therefore
           that
           he
           can
           pretend
           to
           have
           Answer'd
           in
           
           it
           ?
           What
           is
           it
           that
           either
           makes
           his
           Book
           need
           ,
           or
           his
           Brethren
           so
           clamorous
           for
           ,
           a
           Reply
           ?
           Has
           he
           Answer'd
           the
           Vindicators
           Argument
           for
           Us
           ,
           from
           Facts
           more
           justifiable
           ,
           more
           agreeable
           to
           Principles
           ,
           and
           to
           Principles
           more
           certain
           and
           indisputable
           in
           the
           times
           of
           greatest
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Authority
          
           ,
           in
           the
           earliest
           ,
           and
           purest
           ,
           and
           unanimous
           Ages
           ?
           On
           this
           he
           has
           bestowed
           one
           single
           Paragraph
           ,
           in
           which
           he
           has
           offered
           nothing
           that
           can
           affect
           the
           principal
           Lines
           of
           the
           
             Vindicators
             Reasoning
          
           and
           Hypothesis
           .
           *
           All
           that
           he
           pretends
           is
           to
           observe
           one
           single
           disparity
           between
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           Primative
           Christian
           Bishops
           and
           OURS
           .
           Yet
           so
           unhappily
           ,
           that
           even
           that
           disparity
           ,
           upon
           a
           closer
           examination
           is
           likely
           to
           prove
           none
           at
           all
           .
           He
           tells
           Us
           that
           Cornelious
           was
           in
           Poffession
           when
           Novatian
           was
           set
           up
           against
           him
           .
           Very
           true
           .
           But
           how
           can
           he
           deny
           that
           
             our
             Fathers
          
           were
           in
           as
           true
           a
           Possession
           ,
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           when
           their
           Rivals
           Usurp'd
           their
           Thrones
           ,
           as
           Cornelius
           was
           ?
           He
           can
           pretend
           no
           Possession
           of
           which
           our
           Fathers
           were
           deprived
           but
           such
           as
           depended
           on
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           pretended
           Secular
           Magistrate
           .
           The
           
             Secular
             Act
          
           could
           not
           pretend
           to
           deprive
           them
           of
           any
           thing
           but
           what
           was
           Secular
           ,
           their
           Baronies
           ,
           their
           Revenues
           ,
           the
           Priviledges
           annext
           to
           their
           Function
           by
           the
           fovour
           of
           the
           
             Secular
             Powers
          
           .
           And
           can
           he
           pretend
           that
           Cornelius
           was
           possessed
           of
           any
           thing
           of
           which
           the
           Magistrate
           could
           deprive
           him
           ?
           As
           for
           
             Spiritual
             Rights
          
           ,
           I
           cannot
           see
           the
           
             least
             disparity
          
           but
           that
           
             OUR
             Fathers
          
           were
           as
           properly
           possessed
           of
           
             them
             as
             HE
          
           was
           ;
           as
           properly
           as
           any
           can
           be
           in
           a
           State
           of
           Persecution
           and
           independence
           on
           the
           
             Civil
             Magestrate
             .
             OUR
          
           Bishops
           were
           Consecrated
           and
           Installed
           with
           all
           the
           Solemnities
           requisite
           for
           a
           
             compleat
             Possession
          
           ,
           before
           the
           contrary
           encroachments
           were
           thought
           of
           .
           That
           Possession
           was
           acknowledged
           and
           ratified
           by
           all
           the
           Acts
           of
           intercourse
           and
           
             Spiritual
             Correspondence
          
           ,
           by
           which
           any
           
             Spiritual
             possession
          
           can
           be
           acknowledged
           by
           our
           
             Natinal
             Church
          
           of
           England
           .
           This
           Possession
           of
           Spirituals
           has
           not
           been
           touched
           by
           any
           
             Spiritual
             Authority
          
           ,
           that
           can
           be
           pretended
           a
           proper
           Judge
           of
           Spirituals
           ,
           that
           might
           discontinue
           this
           Possession
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           and
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           .
           All
           this
           OUR
           H.
           Fathers
           can
           truly
           plead
           ,
           for
           their
           Possession
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           at
           the
           time
           of
           the
           
             Schismatical
             Consecrations
          
           .
           And
           what
           can
           the
           Doctor
           say
           more
           for
           the
           Possession
           of
           Cornelius
           against
           Novation
           ?
           His
           District
           and
           Jurisdiction
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           were
           manifestly
           not
           own'd
           by
           Cornelius
           for
           favours
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           .
           This
           being
           so
           ,
           we
           need
           not
           depend
           on
           a
           SAYING
           (
           the
           Vindicator
           prov'd
           it
           independently
           on
           St.
           
           Cyprian's
           saying
           it
           )
           that
           
             SECOND
             BISHOPS
          
           are
           
             NO
             BISHOPS
          
           for
           proving
           his
           Intruders
           to
           be
           NONE
           .
           The
           Doctor
           
           himself
           confesses
           ,
           
             that
             a
             Second
             ,
             that
             is
             ,
             a
             Schismatical
             Bishop
             ,
             an
             Intruder
             
             into
             a
             See
             already
             filled
             and
             possessed
             ,
             is
             no
             Bishop
             ,
             is
             confessed
             to
             be
             St.
          
           Cyprian
           '
           
             s
             Doctrine
          
           .
           And
           this
           has
           now
           appeared
           to
           be
           their
           Case
           for
           whom
           he
           is
           here
           concerned
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXV
           .
           The
           
           Doctor
           's
           Book
           offorded
           no
           Subject
           for
           a
           Reply
           ,
           but
           what
           would
           be
           Personal
           .
        
         
           Besides
           ;
           these
           great
           neglects
           and
           omissions
           of
           the
           Doctor
           were
           so
           separable
           from
           an
           accurate
           management
           of
           the
           Cause
           and
           so
           peculiar
           to
           his
           Person
           ,
           that
           I
           knew
           not
           how
           to
           secure
           my
           Answer
           from
           meddling
           with
           his
           Person
           ,
           with
           whom
           I
           had
           no
           mind
           to
           deal
           in
           any
           other
           way
           than
           that
           of
           Civility
           and
           Respect
           .
           In
           reference
           to
           the
           Principal
           Argument
           relating
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           he
           has
           brought
           so
           little
           New
           ,
           as
           would
           hardly
           afford
           Subject
           for
           a
           useful
           Answer
           .
           Yet
           the
           shewing
           that
           he
           did
           so
           ,
           which
           was
           requisite
           to
           be
           done
           ,
           if
           an
           Answer
           were
           made
           at
           all
           ,
           methought
           looked
           like
           a
           design
           of
           exposing
           his
           Person
           ,
           which
           I
           was
           willing
           to
           be
           excused
           from
           .
           I
           have
           always
           liked
           those
           Defences
           best
           ,
           which
           had
           the
           least
           mixture
           of
           Personal
           considerations
           ,
           not
           only
           as
           more
           Christian
           ,
           but
           also
           as
           more
           useful
           to
           those
           who
           are
           disengaged
           .
           This
           made
           me
           think
           it
           more
           advisable
           to
           wait
           till
           either
           the
           Doctor
           himself
           ,
           or
           some
           other
           able
           Author
           would
           be
           pleas'd
           to
           attacque
           the
           principal
           strength
           of
           the
           Vindication
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXVI
           .
           The
           
           Doctor
           's
           turning
           the
           Dispute
           to
           
             later
             Facts
          
           draws
           it
           from
           a
           short
           and
           decisive
           ,
           to
           a
           tedious
           and
           litigious
           ,
           Issue
           .
        
         
           But
           the
           principal
           discouragement
           of
           all
           from
           Answering
           was
           ,
           that
           the
           Doctor
           seemed
           to
           me
           to
           draw
           the
           whole
           management
           of
           this
           Cause
           from
           a
           shorter
           and
           decisive
           ,
           to
           a
           tedious
           and
           unconclusive
           ,
           Issue
           .
           The
           
           Doctor
           's
           Talent
           lies
           in
           History
           ,
           and
           therefore
           he
           is
           willing
           to
           bring
           this
           Question
           also
           to
           an
           Argument
           that
           may
           give
           him
           an
           occasion
           to
           shew
           his
           skill
           in
           History
           .
           Had
           not
           this
           been
           his
           Case
           ,
           why
           could
           he
           not
           be
           prevailed
           on
           ,
           to
           say
           something
           to
           the
           reason
           of
           the
           thing
           ?
           Especially
           having
           in
           the
           Title
           of
           his
           Book
           ,
           promised
           a
           stating
           of
           the
           Question
           .
           But
           where
           he
           pretends
           to
           have
           performed
           his
           Promise
           ,
           I
           cannot
           guess
           .
           I
           can
           find
           nothing
           in
           his
           Book
           ,
           but
           what
           concerns
           bare
           matter
           of
           Fact.
           Had
           he
           offered
           at
           any
           stating
           of
           the
           Question
           ,
           why
           would
           be
           not
           at
           least
           take
           notice
           of
           the
           distinction
           of
           Facts
           observed
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           ,
           of
           the
           Facts
           excepted
           against
           ,
           and
           the
           
             Facts
             allowed
          
           by
           him
           ,
           for
           Argumentative
           ?
           Had
           he
           not
           allowed
           the
           Distinction
           ,
           at
           least
           he
           ought
           not
           to
           have
           produced
           
             more
             Facts
          
           of
           the
           Exceptionable
           kind
           ,
           till
           he
           had
           either
           answer'd
           the
           
             Vindicator's
             Exceptions
          
           against
           them
           ,
           or
           at
           least
           produced
           
             stronger
             Arguments
          
           of
           his
           own
           ,
           to
           prove
           his
           
             own
             Facts
          
           also
           Argumentative
           .
           If
           he
           did
           not
           think
           fit
           ,
           either
           to
           Answer
           the
           
           Vindicator's
           Reasons
           ,
           or
           to
           produce
           his
           own
           ,
           why
           did
           he
           not
           confine
           himself
           to
           the
           Practice
           of
           the
           
             first
             Ages
          
           proceding
           on
           Pinciples
           than
           received
           by
           the
           whole
           
             Catholick
             Church
          
           ,
           and
           Fundamental
           to
           all
           the
           Discipline
           then
           practised
           ?
           
           Had
           he
           done
           so
           ,
           the
           Vindicator
           professing
           himself
           ready
           to
           joyn
           issue
           with
           him
           on
           those
           Terms
           ,
           had
           been
           indeed
           obliged
           to
           Answer
           him
           But
           how
           can
           he
           expect
           an
           Answer
           ,
           when
           the
           
             Vindicator's
             Exceptions
          
           against
           the
           whold
           kind
           of
           Facts
           he
           deals
           in
           ,
           remain
           ,
           I
           do
           not
           say
           unanswer'd
           only
           ,
           but
           ,
           not
           so
           much
           as
           attempted
           by
           him
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXVII
           .
           We
           have
           
             no
             reason
          
           to
           suffer
           our selves
           to
           be
           overruled
           by
           him
           in
           these
           Arts
           of
           diverting
           Us.
           
        
         
           What
           himself
           designed
           in
           so
           unreasonable
           ways
           of
           proceeding
           ,
           I
           will
           not
           pretend
           my self
           so
           privy
           to
           his
           thoughts
           ,
           as
           to
           be
           able
           to
           determine
           .
           But
           it
           is
           easie
           to
           observe
           the
           interest
           of
           his
           Cause
           in
           it
           .
           It
           shews
           indeed
           a
           greater
           variety
           of
           his
           Reading
           ,
           than
           if
           he
           had
           confined
           himself
           to
           the
           Precedents
           of
           more
           decisive
           times
           But
           withal
           ,
           it
           obliges
           Us
           ,
           if
           we
           follow
           him
           in
           all
           his
           Instances
           ,
           to
           write
           
             larger
             Books
          
           than
           we
           can
           ever
           hope
           to
           get
           printed
           in
           the
           Difficulties
           of
           the
           Press
           on
           
             our
             side
          
           .
           We
           cannot
           hope
           to
           satisfy
           him
           ,
           by
           answering
           some
           of
           his
           Instances
           ,
           if
           we
           do
           not
           all
           .
           And
           why
           must
           we
           be
           obliged
           to
           follow
           a
           way
           of
           his
           prescribing
           ,
           which
           we
           cannot
           hope
           to
           go
           through
           ,
           when
           we
           can
           reduce
           the
           whole
           Dispute
           to
           narrower
           ,
           and
           yet
           more
           
             conclusive
             bounds
          
           ?
           He
           gives
           us
           small
           encouragement
           to
           gratify
           him
           in
           this
           Case
           ,
           when
           he
           tells
           us
           that
           he
           will
           not
           be
           concluded
           by
           what
           we
           
           can
           say
           upon
           it
           ,
           though
           we
           should
           prove
           the
           Practice
           of
           these
           
             later
             Ages
          
           ,
           from
           which
           he
           will
           not
           be
           restrained
           ,
           otherwise
           than
           he
           pretends
           it
           was
           .
           And
           why
           must
           we
           take
           so
           much
           pains
           to
           no
           purpose
           ?
           Why
           should
           he
           desi●e
           it
           of
           us
           ,
           it
           his
           design
           had
           been
           to
           satisfy
           Conscience
           ,
           either
           his
           own
           ,
           or
           ours
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXVIII
           .
           We
           decline
           his
           
             Topick
             of
             Facts
          
           ,
           rather
           because
           it
           is
           undecisive
           than
           because
           we
           think
           it
           disadvantageous
           to
           Us.
           
        
         
           Considering
           the
           difficulties
           of
           our
           Case
           ,
           how
           hard
           it
           is
           even
           to
           get
           small
           Discourses
           printed
           ,
           it
           concerns
           Us
           to
           endeavor
           all
           prudent
           Arts
           of
           contracting
           the
           Question
           into
           as
           narrow
           a
           compass
           as
           we
           can
           ,
           and
           by
           no
           means
           to
           suffer
           our selves
           to
           be
           distracted
           to
           impertinent
           Arguments
           ,
           till
           what
           we
           have
           to
           say
           on
           pertinent
           ones
           be
           first
           satisfied
           .
           This
           will
           be
           sufficient
           ,
           perhaps
           more
           than
           so
           ,
           to
           fill
           up
           what
           can
           be
           allowed
           ,
           whilst
           the
           Intruders
           have
           the
           power
           of
           the
           Press
           .
           We
           shall
           not
           envy
           the
           Doctor
           the
           pleasure
           of
           seeing
           his
           Challenges
           and
           Gantlets
           refus'd
           ,
           if
           he
           will
           not
           be
           pleas'd
           to
           confine
           them
           to
           more
           useful
           Subjects
           .
           He
           has
           already
           seen
           a
           Specimen
           of
           what
           might
           have
           been
           answer'd
           to
           all
           the
           Facts
           he
           has
           or
           can
           produce
           ,
           in
           what
           the
           Vindicator
           has
           said
           to
           the
           Facts
           insisted
           on
           in
           his
           
             Baroccian
             M.
             S.
          
           The
           Ages
           he
           deals
           in
           ,
           were
           very
           degenerous
           from
           the
           Piety
           and
           Skill
           of
           their
           Primitive
           Ancestors
           ,
           to
           whose
           Judgments
           we
           appeal
           .
           Yet
           I
           do
           not
           think
           any
           of
           them
           so
           far
           debased
           ,
           as
           that
           they
           either
           did
           ,
           or
           would
           have
           insisted
           on
           the
           
             Doctor
             's
             Plea
          
           ,
           that
           
             Lay
             Deprivations
          
           were
           sufficient
           to
           
           discharge
           them
           from
           their
           Duty
           to
           their
           
             Spiritual
             Superiors
          
           .
           He
           that
           is
           so
           forward
           to
           make
           Challenges
           ,
           would
           do
           well
           to
           shew
           us
           
             one
             single
             Instance
          
           wherein
           this
           Doctrine
           was
           directly
           defended
           ,
           I
           do
           not
           say
           by
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           only
           ,
           whom
           I
           take
           for
           the
           most
           competent
           Judges
           of
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Doctrines
          
           ,
           but
           even
           by
           the
           Parasites
           of
           the
           
             Lay
             Power
          
           .
           For
           my
           part
           ,
           I
           remember
           not
           
             one
             single
          
           one
           .
           The
           Emperors
           themselves
           who
           acted
           so
           precipitantly
           as
           to
           deprive
           without
           Synods
           ,
           did
           however
           after
           use
           their
           uttermost
           endeavours
           to
           get
           a
           Synodical
           ratification
           of
           what
           they
           had
           done
           before
           by
           violence
           and
           indirect
           artifices
           .
           So
           far
           even
           they
           were
           sensible
           how
           little
           what
           they
           did
           of
           that
           kind
           ,
           would
           be
           regarded
           in
           relation
           to
           Conscience
           .
           This
           is
           sufficient
           to
           let
           the
           Doctor
           see
           that
           our
           declining
           this
           Topick
           ,
           is
           not
           for
           want
           of
           sufficient
           advantage
           against
           him
           in
           it
           ,
           if
           the
           Press
           had
           been
           as
           free
           for
           Us
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           for
           him
           ;
           but
           because
           it
           is
           impertinent
           and
           unsatisfactory
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXIX
           .
           For
           want
           of
           some
           other
           Subject
           relating
           to
           the
           Vindication
           ,
           we
           here
           pitch
           on
           the
           Case
           of
           Abiathar
           .
        
         
           This
           I
           thought
           sufficient
           to
           shew
           how
           little
           the
           Vindicator
           is
           obliged
           to
           return
           any
           Reply
           to
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           pretended
           Answer
           ,
           till
           the
           Doctor
           can
           be
           prevailed
           on
           to
           try
           his
           skill
           on
           the
           former
           and
           principal
           part
           of
           the
           Vindication
           .
           But
           this
           is
           so
           particular
           to
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           Personal
           management
           of
           the
           Cause
           ,
           that
           I
           could
           not
           think
           this
           alone
           worthy
           the
           
           Reader
           's
           trouble
           in
           perusal
           of
           it
           ,
           without
           
             some
             other
             Subject
          
           of
           more
           importance
           to
           the
           Cause
           it self
           .
           This
           therefore
           made
           me
           think
           of
           selecting
           something
           of
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           Book
           ,
           which
           (
           though
           it
           cannot
           be
           taken
           for
           an
           Answer
           to
           the
           Vindication
           ,
           which
           had
           said
           nothing
           concerning
           it
           )
           yet
           might
           give
           an
           occasion
           for
           clearing
           a
           particular
           Prejudice
           against
           us
           ,
           insisted
           on
           by
           many
           more
           besides
           him
           ,
           abstracting
           from
           the
           Principal
           Topick
           of
           
             his
             Book
          
           concerning
           Facts
           in
           general
           .
           Of
           his
           kind
           ,
           I
           take
           the
           Case
           to
           be
           of
           
           Solomon's
           deposing
           Abiathar
           ,
           which
           may
           ,
           even
           on
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           account
           ,
           deserve
           a
           more
           particular
           consideration
           ,
           because
           he
           seems
           to
           have
           taken
           the
           greatest
           pains
           ,
           in
           amassing
           the
           several
           Hypotheses
           relating
           to
           it
           ,
           of
           any
           one
           particular
           in
           his
           Book
           .
           Here
           they
           find
           a
           
             High
             Priest
          
           *
           removed
           from
           his
           Office
           by
           Solomon
           ,
           and
           another
           ,
           that
           is
           Zadoc
           ,
           †
           put
           in
           his
           room
           ,
           yet
           without
           the
           least
           scruple
           concerning
           the
           Validity
           and
           Acceptableness
           of
           
           Zadok's
           Ministry
           ,
           with
           relation
           to
           God
           and
           Conscience
           .
           This
           they
           think
           exactly
           parallel
           to
           our
           present
           Case
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXX
           .
           This
           Fact
           is
           not
           commended
           in
           the
           Scripture
           as
           a
           Precedent
           .
        
         
           But
           Fist
           ,
           This
           Fact
           is
           barely
           related
           in
           the
           Scripture
           ,
           without
           any
           Censure
           on
           it
           ,
           whether
           it
           was
           well
           ,
           or
           ill
           done
           .
           And
           it
           is
           not
           indeed
           condemned
           ,
           so
           neither
           is
           it
           excused
           or
           justified
           from
           any
           Right
           asserted
           in
           Solomon
           to
           do
           it
           .
           Yet
           the
           whole
           force
           of
           Reasoning
           from
           it
           as
           a
           
             Pre
             
             sedent
          
           ,
           must
           suppose
           it
           well
           done
           ,
           for
           which
           they
           have
           not
           the
           least
           intimation
           in
           the
           
             Holy
             Writers
          
           .
           The
           whole
           Enquiry
           ,
           whether
           it
           was
           well
           ,
           or
           ill
           done
           ,
           must
           therefore
           be
           derived
           from
           
             other
             Reasonings
          
           from
           the
           sense
           of
           that
           Age
           ,
           by
           which
           it
           may
           appear
           whether
           Solomon
           had
           any
           Right
           in
           Offices
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           ,
           by
           which
           he
           might
           be
           enabled
           to
           grant
           ,
           or
           hinder
           ,
           the
           Practice
           of
           it
           ,
           so
           as
           to
           oblige
           God
           to
           ratifie
           what
           he
           did
           concerning
           it
           .
           And
           for
           this
           it
           is
           much
           more
           certain
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXXI
           .
           The
           Magistrate
           could
           not
           by
           the
           Doctrine
           of
           that
           Age
           ,
           have
           any
           direct
           Power
           over
           the
           Priest-hood
           .
        
         
           2dly
           ,
           That
           the
           Magistrate
           had
           no
           direct
           Power
           of
           intermedding
           in
           the
           Offices
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           ,
           according
           to
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           
             Sacred
             Writers
          
           .
           This
           appears
           not
           only
           from
           Facts
           much
           more
           Argumentative
           than
           this
           is
           ,
           but
           also
           from
           Principals
           professedly
           asserted
           in
           those
           times
           The
           Facts
           are
           ,
           
           Saul's
           being
           deprived
           of
           his
           Kingdom
           ,
           for
           presuming
           to
           sacrifice
           in
           the
           Absence
           of
           Samuel
           ,
           though
           he
           pretended
           a
           *
           force
           that
           obliged
           him
           to
           do
           so
           .
           Then
           also
           the
           Fact
           relating
           to
           Uzzah
           ,
           †
           who
           was
           
             struck
             dead
          
           upon
           the
           Place
           ,
           for
           presuming
           out
           of
           good
           will
           ,
           to
           stay
           the
           Ark
           ,
           in
           danger
           (
           ashe
           thought
           )
           of
           being
           overturn'd
           ,
           only
           because
           he
           was
           not
           one
           of
           the
           Priests
           by
           Office
           ,
           who
           were
           alone
           allowed
           by
           GOD
           even
           to
           touch
           it
           .
           A
           Third
           is
           that
           of
           King
           Uzziah
           ,
           *
           who
           likewise
           ,
           for
           presuming
           to
           Sacrifice
           ,
           was
           punished
           by
           GOD
           with
           Leprosy
           ,
           (
           which
           in
           those
           times
           was
           taken
           for
           a
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           and
           plainly
           supposed
           as
           such
           in
           all
           the
           Discipline
           of
           Moses
           relating
           to
           it
           )
           and
           by
           being
           so
           ,
           removed
           from
           the
           Administration
           of
           the
           Government
           ,
           of
           which
           he
           was
           thereby
           rendred
           incapable
           .
           Here
           are
           Facts
           attested
           by
           the
           same
           Authority
           as
           the
           other
           of
           Abiathar
           was
           ;
           but
           not
           so
           nakedly
           related
           .
           The
           Facts
           themselves
           discover
           not
           only
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Writers
           ,
           but
           of
           GOD
           himself
           .
           His
           interposing
           his
           own
           Authority
           in
           the
           Cases
           ,
           shews
           plainly
           that
           those
           Facts
           were
           highly
           displeasing
           to
           him
           ,
           and
           piacular
           ;
           than
           which
           ,
           what
           can
           be
           more
           decisive
           for
           our
           purpose
           ?
           Nay
           GOD
           took
           particular
           care
           ,
           through
           that
           whole
           dispensation
           ,
           to
           assert
           the
           Rights
           of
           the
           
             Prie
             sthood
          
           ,
           as
           immediately
           depending
           on
           himself
           ,
           more
           than
           he
           did
           ,
           even
           for
           the
           Magistracy
           .
           In
           the
           †
           Rebellion
           of
           
             Corah
             ,
             Dathan
          
           ,
           and
           Abiram
           ,
           he
           asserted
           the
           Priest-hood
           ,
           not
           only
           against
           the
           Reubenties
           ,
           but
           the
           Levités
           also
           .
           And
           *
           
           Aaron's
           Rod
           that
           blossomed
           ,
           was
           laid
           up
           for
           a
           Monument
           against
           such
           Mutiniers
           for
           all
           suceding
           Generations
           .
           Plainly
           to
           exclude
           the
           whole
           Body
           of
           the
           Laity
           ,
           from
           ever
           more
           presuming
           to
           pretend
           to
           it
           ,
           †
           
             that
             no
             Stranger
             that
             was
             not
             of
             the
             seed
             of
          
           Aaron
           ,
           
             come
             near
             to
             offer
             Incense
             before
             the
             LORD
             ;
             that
             he
             be
             not
             as
          
           Corah
           ,
           
             and
             as
             his
             Company
          
           .
           So
           the
           Holy
           Writer
           expresly
           .
           And
           that
           even
           Kings
           were
           not
           excepted
           ,
           appeared
           manifestly
           in
           the
           Examples
           now
           mentioned
           of
           Saul
           and
           Uzziah
           .
           
           And
           before
           the
           Institution
           of
           Kings
           ,
           the
           Cause
           was
           carried
           against
           the
           
             whole
             Body
          
           of
           the
           People
           ,
           in
           the
           Cases
           of
           Corah
           and
           
           Aaron's
           Rod.
           Nay
           to
           cut
           off
           all
           pretensions
           of
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           being
           virtually
           at
           least
           ,
           and
           eminently
           included
           in
           the
           
             Regal
             Office
          
           ,
           the
           Holy
           Writers
           do
           still
           suppose
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           to
           be
           the
           Nobler
           Office
           of
           the
           Two.
           As
           it
           advanced
           the
           Dignity
           of
           the
           
             Peculiar
             People
          
           that
           GOD
           had
           
             separated
             them
          
           to
           himself
           from
           all
           
             other
             Nations
          
           ,
           so
           in
           the
           same
           way
           of
           Reasoning
           ,
           it
           is
           a
           preference
           of
           the
           Tribe
           of
           Levi
           above
           all
           other
           Tribes
           ,
           that
           GOD
           had
           *
           
             separated
             them
             from
             the
             Congregation
             of
          
           Israel
           .
           Accordingly
           ,
           when
           the
           Right
           of
           Primogeniture
           was
           taken
           from
           Reuben
           ,
           and
           divided
           between
           Levi
           and
           Judah
           ;
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           as
           the
           principal
           part
           of
           it
           ,
           was
           given
           to
           the
           Elder
           Brother
           of
           the
           Two.
           And
           as
           it
           advanced
           the
           whole
           Nation
           of
           the
           Israellites
           above
           all
           the
           Nations
           of
           the
           Earth
           that
           GOD
           himself
           ,
           the
           Supream
           infinitely
           perfect
           Being
           ,
           was
           their
           Portion
           ,
           and
           the
           Lot
           of
           their
           Inheritance
           ;
           and
           that
           indeed
           it
           was
           the
           Segullah
           or
           Peculium
           in
           contradistinction
           to
           all
           
             other
             Nations
          
           ;
           so
           when
           the
           same
           GOD
           is
           pleased
           to
           stile
           himself
           the
           
             Levites
             portion
          
           ,
           that
           very
           Appellative
           imports
           their
           Excellency
           above
           all
           the
           
             other
             Tribes
          
           out
           of
           which
           the
           Kings
           were
           chosen
           ,
           and
           makes
           them
           a
           Peculium
           in
           contradistinction
           to
           the
           
             other
             Peculium
          
           ,
           which
           had
           no
           
             other
             Title
          
           to
           that
           stile
           ,
           but
           what
           was
           common
           to
           the
           
             whole
             Nation
          
           in
           general
           .
        
      
       
         
           §.
           XXXII
           .
           The
           Benefits
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           out
           of
           the
           Power
           ,
           and
           far
           greater
           than
           any
           in
           the
           Power
           ,
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
        
         
           Nor
           can
           this
           be
           thought
           strange
           ,
           if
           we
           consider
           the
           Opinions
           than
           generally
           receiv'd
           concerning
           the
           Benefits
           then
           expected
           from
           their
           Perist-hood
           ,
           far
           greater
           than
           could
           be
           pretended
           to
           by
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           This
           was
           indisputable
           ,
           when
           its
           benefits
           were
           believ'd
           to
           extend
           to
           the
           
             Future
             Life
          
           as
           well
           as
           this
           ,
           as
           it
           was
           generally
           believed
           by
           the
           Jews
           of
           the
           
             Apostolical
             Age
          
           (
           excepting
           only
           the
           Sect
           of
           the
           
             Sadducees
             ,
          
           )
           and
           as
           we
           Christians
           are
           assured
           of
           it
           now
           in
           the
           times
           of
           the
           Gospel
           .
           Whether
           those
           Rewards
           were
           by
           GOD
           
             eexpresly
             Cove
             nanted
          
           for
           ,
           or
           only
           as
           a
           Divine
           gratuity
           reserved
           for
           the
           Peculium
           as
           his
           Favourites
           ,
           more
           than
           could
           be
           expected
           from
           the
           Letter
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ;
           or
           whether
           they
           were
           implicitely
           understood
           ,
           as
           included
           in
           the
           Mystical
           sense
           of
           the
           Covenant
           it self
           ,
           as
           either
           discovered
           by
           the
           
             Mystical
             Reasonings
          
           ,
           or
           the
           
             Oral
             Traditions
          
           of
           their
           Ancestors
           ,
           is
           not
           perhaps
           so
           easie
           to
           determine
           .
           Yet
           certain
           it
           is
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           actually
           and
           generally
           believed
           by
           the
           Jews
           of
           the
           
             Apostolical
             Age.
          
           This
           appears
           in
           that
           it
           is
           noted
           as
           a
           singularity
           in
           the
           Sadducees
           to
           deny
           them
           ;
           Thence
           it
           appears
           ,
           that
           the
           Three
           
             other
             Sects
          
           of
           the
           
             Pharisees
             ,
             Essens
          
           ,
           and
           Galilaeans
           ,
           were
           all
           agreed
           against
           the
           Sadducees
           in
           asserting
           them
           .
           And
           how
           inconsiderable
           the
           interest
           of
           the
           Sadducees
           was
           then
           ,
           appears
           in
           
           the
           
           Apostle's
           taking
           Sanctuary
           in
           the
           
             single
             Sect
          
           of
           the
           *
           Pharisees
           alone
           for
           securing
           himself
           against
           them
           .
           Now
           all
           the
           Challenge
           of
           the.
           Benefits
           proper
           to
           the
           Peculium
           ,
           depended
           on
           the
           Right
           they
           had
           to
           partake
           in
           the
           publick
           Sacrifices
           ,
           and
           the
           Covenant
           transacted
           in
           them
           .
           God's
           Promises
           were
           his
           part
           of
           that
           Covenant
           ,
           and
           the
           Covenant
           is
           expresly
           said
           to
           have
           been
           by
           Sacrifice
           ,
           Psal.
           L.
           5.
           that
           being
           the
           Ordinary
           way
           used
           in
           those
           times
           of
           transacting
           Covenants
           between
           Mankind
           also
           .
           As
           therefore
           it
           was
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           ,
           to
           which
           the
           Right
           of
           Sacrificing
           was
           then
           confined
           ,
           to
           admit
           to
           ,
           or
           exclude
           from
           ,
           the
           participation
           of
           the
           Sacrifice
           ,
           so
           it
           must
           consequently
           have
           been
           in
           the
           power
           of
           that
           
             Sacred
             Function
          
           ,
           to
           grant
           or
           deny
           ,
           these
           Benefits
           ,
           which
           were
           not
           attainable
           otherwise
           than
           by
           those
           Sacrifices
           But
           these
           are
           Benefits
           manifestly
           beyond
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           and
           manifestly
           greater
           than
           any
           to
           which
           
             his
             Power
          
           does
           extend
           .
           The
           Magistrate
           can
           conser
           no
           Title
           to
           Future
           and
           
             Eternal
             Rewards
          
           to
           Persons
           otherwise
           never
           so
           well
           qualified
           for
           receiving
           them
           .
           He
           cannot
           oblige
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           to
           
             ratify
             in
             Heaven
          
           ,
           what
           is
           transacted
           by
           him
           on
           Earth
           ,
           as
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           could
           ,
           who
           was
           (
           in
           the
           sense
           of
           those
           times
           )
           taken
           for
           his
           Authorized
           Representative
           .
           GOD
           ,
           at
           his
           first
           
             permission
             of
             Kings
          
           ,
           neither
           suppressed
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           nor
           united
           it
           in
           the
           Person
           of
           the
           King
           :
           And
           therfore
           there
           can
           be
           no
           pretence
           that
           what
           was
           not
           otherwise
           in
           his
           Power
           ,
           was
           put
           in
           his
           Power
           
             thence
             forward
          
           by
           any
           particular
           provision
           or
           gift
           of
           GOD.
           How
           than
           could
           he
           pretend
           to
           to
           that
           Power
           ?
           How
           could
           he
           give
           or
           take
           away
           a
           Power
           from
           others
           ,
           to
           which
           himself
           could
           not
           pretend
           ?
           How
           could
           he
           suppose
           his
           Act
           would
           be
           ratified
           in
           Heaven
           ?
           Or
           how
           imagine
           GOD
           obliged
           by
           it
           ,
           to
           reject
           the
           Priest
           whom
           he
           as
           Prince
           was
           pleased
           to
           reject
           ,
           and
           accept
           of
           others
           who
           were
           permitted
           only
           by
           his
           Authority
           to
           officiate
           at
           GOD's
           Altar
           ?
           And
           what
           could
           all
           his
           intermedling
           in
           these
           matters
           signify
           ,
           if
           he
           cannot
           
             oblige
             God
          
           to
           ratify
           what
           is
           done
           by
           him
           ?
           if
           notwithstanding
           GOD
           should
           accept
           of
           the
           Person
           rejected
           by
           him
           ,
           and
           reject
           the
           Person
           obtruded
           by
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ?
           Nothing
           certainly
           ,
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           which
           is
           the
           principal
           consideration
           in
           this
           Case
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXXIII
           .
           The
           ancient
           Jews
           of
           the
           Apostle's
           Age
           did
           believe
           their
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           available
           to
           a
           future
           and
           a
           eternal
           state
           .
        
         
           I
           cannot
           for
           my
           Life
           ,
           conceive
           how
           our
           Adversaries
           can
           avoid
           the
           force
           of
           this
           Argument
           ,
           if
           the
           Benefits
           procured
           by
           the
           
             Sacerdotal
             Office
          
           were
           thought
           Spiritual
           ,
           and
           principally
           relating
           to
           a
           future
           and
           eternal
           state
           ;
           things
           perfectly
           out
           of
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           and
           incomparably
           exceeding
           whatsoever
           is
           within
           it
           .
           And
           that
           this
           was
           the
           sense
           of
           that
           Age
           ,
           I
           need
           not
           insist
           on
           the
           Article
           of
           our
           own
           
           Church
           .
           It
           sufficiently
           appears
           from
           the
           earliest
           coaeval
           Monuments
           of
           that
           Age
           ,
           not
           only
           that
           they
           thought
           the
           
             Sacerdotal
             Office
          
           to
           have
           influence
           on
           the
           
             future
             state
          
           ;
           but
           that
           they
           did
           on
           that
           very
           account
           ,
           believe
           it
           superior
           to
           the
           Office
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           Besides
           what
           I
           now
           mentioned
           concerning
           their
           agreement
           against
           the
           Sadduces
           ,
           the
           Two
           only
           Jewish
           Authors
           that
           we
           have
           undoubtedly
           coaeval
           with
           the
           Apostles
           ,
           Philo
           and
           Josephus
           ,
           are
           both
           of
           them
           sufficiently
           clear
           in
           these
           particulars
           ,
           That
           the
           Priests
           Ministry
           was
           thought
           available
           for
           the
           future
           state
           ,
           what
           can
           be
           clearer
           than
           those
           Words
           of
           Philo
           ?
           Where
           he
           tells
           us
           ,
           that
           *
           
             Priests
             and
             Prophets
             were
             Men
             of
             God
             ,
          
           and
           therefore
           
             did
             not
             vouchsafe
             to
             account
             themselves
             of
             any
             particular
             City
             in
             this
             World
             ,
          
           or
           
             Citizens
             of
             the
             World
             in
             general
          
           (
           as
           some
           of
           the
           Philosophers
           did
           )
           
             but
             soared
             above
             all
             that
             was
             sensible
             ,
             and
             being
             translated
             to
             the
             Intellectual
             World
             ,
             fixed
             their
             Habitations
             there
             ,
             being
             registred
             in
             the
             City
             of
             Incorruptible
             Incorporeal
             Ideas
             .
          
           And
           it
           were
           easie
           to
           shew
           ,
           that
           the
           Language
           and
           Notions
           of
           the
           
             N.
             T.
          
           concerning
           the
           correspondence
           between
           the
           
             visible
             Priest
             hood
          
           on
           Earth
           ,
           and
           the
           Archetypal
           †
           Priest-hood
           of
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           in
           Heaven
           ,
           and
           between
           the
           
             visible
             Tabernacle
          
           in
           Jerusalem
           ,
           and
           the
           true
           ‡
           Tabernacle
           in
           Heaven
           ,
           not
           pitched
           by
           Men
           but
           God
           ,
           were
           perfectly
           agreeable
           to
           these
           Notions
           of
           Philo
           ,
           who
           was
           such
           as
           the
           Apostles
           were
           before
           their
           Conversion
           to
           the
           Christian
           Religion
           ;
           and
           that
           all
           the
           Benefits
           of
           their
           outward
           Ministry
           ,
           were
           thought
           due
           to
           this
           Mystical
           Communication
           with
           that
           which
           was
           Invisible
           ;
           by
           which
           it
           may
           appear
           ,
           that
           those
           words
           of
           Philo
           were
           perfectly
           agreeable
           to
           his
           avowed
           Principles
           .
           Now
           how
           could
           the
           Magistrate
           pretend
           to
           promote
           or
           interrupt
           this
           
             Mystical
             communication
          
           between
           the
           Earthly
           and
           Heavenly
           Offices
           ?
           How
           could
           he
           therefore
           advance
           any
           Person
           to
           that
           Dignity
           ,
           or
           exclude
           him
           from
           it
           ?
           Josephus
           also
           is
           as
           clear
           in
           owning
           a
           
             future
             state
          
           ,
           which
           by
           these
           Principles
           could
           not
           be
           claim'd
           by
           any
           but
           on
           account
           of
           this
           
             Mystical
             Communication
          
           ,
           and
           consequently
           of
           that
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           which
           was
           thought
           to
           have
           a
           
             just
             Title
          
           to
           it
           .
           He
           also
           expresses
           that
           state
           by
           the
           Laaguage
           of
           the
           *
           Christians
           
           also
           of
           that
           Age.
           To
           these
           I
           might
           add
           the
           Testimony
           of
           a
           third
           
             Tewish
             Hellenist
          
           ,
           the
           Author
           of
           the
           Apocryphal
           Book
           of
           Wisdom
           .
           He
           also
           ,
           Personates
           Solomom
           making
           the
           Temple
           built
           by
           himself
           to
           be
           a
           Resemblance
           of
           the
           Holy
           †
           
             Tabernacle
             which
             God
             had
             prepared
             from
             the
             beginning
             .
          
           Which
           shews
           ,
           that
           this
           
             Mystical
             Communication
          
           was
           understood
           ,
           even
           then
           when
           that
           Author
           lived
           ,
           who
           seems
           to
           have
           been
           elder
           than
           even
           the
           Apostles
           themselves
           .
           How
           could
           the
           Magistrate
           pretend
           to
           any
           Right
           in
           Affairs
           of
           this
           nature
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXXIV
           .
           And
           consequently
           ,
           did
           expresly
           own
           it
           for
           mor
           Honourable
           than
           the
           Magistracy
           it self
           .
        
         
           So
           far
           is
           he
           from
           any
           Right
           to
           intermeddle
           in
           these
           matters
           ,
           that
           if
           these
           things
           be
           true
           ,
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           must
           needs
           be
           own'd
           for
           an
           Authority
           of
           a
           higher
           nature
           ,
           and
           more
           Noble
           than
           even
           the
           Magistracy
           it self
           .
           Nay
           ,
           this
           very
           Consequence
           was
           inferred
           from
           those
           Principles
           ,
           and
           own'd
           as
           true
           in
           that
           very
           Age.
           Philo
           owns
           it
           for
           the
           
             highest
             honour
          
           possible
           :
           Speaking
           concerning
           the
           Words
           of
           Moses
           there
           mentioned
           ,
           *
           Using
           (
           says
           he
           )
           
             an
             Hyperbolical
             Expression
             of
             Honour
             ,
             GOD
             ,
             he
             says
             ,
             is
             their
             lot
             ,
             with
             relation
             to
             the
             Consecrated
             Gifts
             ,
             on
             Two
             Account
             :
             one
             ,
             of
             the
          
           Highest
           Honour
           ,
           
             because
             they
             are
             Partakers
             of
             those
             things
             which
             are
             by
             way
             of
             gratitude
             ,
             allotted
             to
             GOD
             :
             The
             other
             ,
             because
             they
             are
             employed
             on
             those
             things
             alone
             which
             belong
             to
             Expiations
             ,
             as
             if
             they
             were
             Guardians
          
           (
           or
           Gurators
           ,
           that
           is
           the
           Roman
           Word
           )
           of
           
             the
             Inheritances
          
           .
           The
           Similitude
           seems
           to
           be
           taken
           from
           the
           Roman
           Custom
           of
           making
           Tutors
           and
           Curators
           of
           young
           Heirs
           ,
           whose
           Estates
           ,
           till
           they
           themselves
           came
           to
           Age
           ,
           were
           said
           to
           be
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           of
           such
           Tutors
           and
           Curators
           ,
           being
           till
           then
           ,
           at
           their
           disposal
           Supposing
           that
           the
           Revenues
           of
           GOD
           were
           so
           at
           the
           disposal
           of
           the
           Priest
           ,
           as
           the
           Estates
           of
           the
           Young
           Heirs
           were
           so
           at
           the
           disposal
           of
           the
           Curators
           .
           This
           Philo
           takes
           to
           be
           the
           reason
           why
           GOD
           was
           pleas'd
           to
           call
           himself
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           of
           the
           Priests
           ,
           as
           if
           GOD
           himself
           had
           been
           their
           Pupil
           ,
           which
           was
           indeed
           a
           very
           Hyperbolical
           Expression
           of
           the
           
             HIGHEST
             HONOUR
          
           that
           could
           be
           ascribed
           to
           Mortals
           .
           But
           this
           is
           general
           only
           .
           He
           else
           where
           expresly
           equals
           ,
           nay
           prefers
           the
           Dignity
           of
           the
           
             Sacerdocal
             Office
          
           to
           the
           Regal
           .
           He
           equals
           them
           in
           that
           same
           Discourse
           .
           
             It
             is
             manifest
          
           ,
           says
           he
           ,
           that
           
           
             the
             Law
             prescribes
             that
             reverence
             and
             honour
             to
             the
             Priests
             ,
             which
             is
             proper
             to
             the
             King.
          
           In
           another
           place
           he
           prefers
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           .
           These
           are
           his
           
           Words
           ;
           †
           
             Priest
             hood
             is
             the
             properest
             reward
             of
             a
             Pious
          
           
           
             Man
             ,
             who
             professes
             himself
             to
             serve
             the
             Father
             ,
             whose
             service
             is
             better
             ,
             not
             only
             than
             Liberty
             ,
             but
             also
             than
             a
             KINGDOM
             .
          
           Nor
           was
           this
           a
           singular
           Opinion
           of
           
             Philo.
             Jesephus
          
           also
           is
           of
           the
           same
           mind
           .
           The
           Scripture
           it self
           owns
           the
           Power
           of
           Moses
           to
           have
           been
           Regal
           ,
           when
           it
           calls
           him
           a
           *
           
             King
             in
             Jeshurum
          
           ;
           when
           it
           says
           ,
           that
           the
           †
           
             Voice
             of
             a
             King
             was
             among
             the
             Israelites
             ,
          
           there
           being
           no
           other
           besides
           Moses
           who
           could
           pretend
           to
           it
           .
           And
           his
           Right
           was
           as
           absolute
           ,
           and
           as
           free
           from
           any
           Judicatory
           then
           established
           ,
           that
           could
           call
           him
           to
           an
           Account
           ,
           as
           any
           of
           the
           Kings
           themselves
           .
           This
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           is
           manifest
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Supream
             Power
          
           of
           the
           Jews
           as
           to
           Seculars
           ,
           which
           is
           all
           that
           I
           am
           concerned
           for
           at
           present
           ,
           was
           lodged
           in
           him
           ,
           and
           in
           him
           alone
           ,
           and
           that
           he
           had
           no
           Rival
           in
           it
           .
           Yet
           Moses
           himself
           ,
           as
           Josephus
           Personates
           him
           ,
           owns
           his
           Brother's
           Priest-hood
           as
           preferable
           to
           his
           own
           Office
           of
           the
           Magistracy
           .
           For
           so
           he
           makes
           him
           speak
           concernig
           his
           disposal
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           :
           ‖
           
             If
             I
             had
             not
             had
             regard
             to
             God
             and
             his
             Laws
             in
             giving
             this
          
           
           
             Honour
             .
             I
             would
             not
             have
             endured
             to
             pass
             my self
             by
             ,
             to
             give
             it
             to
             any
             other
             .
             For
             I
             am
             more
             nearly
             related
             to
             my self
             ,
             than
             I
             am
             even
             to
             my
             Brother
             ,
             and
             more
             disposed
             to
             love
             my self
             them
             him
             .
          
           He
           plainly
           supposes
           him
           to
           have
           denied
           himself
           in
           what
           he
           had
           done
           in
           distribution
           of
           those
           Offices
           ,
           which
           he
           could
           never
           have
           said
           ,
           with
           any
           consistency
           ,
           if
           
           he
           had
           reserved
           himself
           the
           
             nobler
             Office
          
           of
           the
           Two.
           This
           Mr.
           Selden
           was
           not
           aware
           of
           ,
           when
           he
           therefore
           conceives
           the
           Author
           of
           the
           Testaments
           of
           the
           Patriarchs
           to
           have
           lived
           in
           
             modern
             times
          
           ,
           because
           he
           prefers
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           before
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistracy
          
           ,
           as
           if
           that
           Doctrine
           had
           been
           first
           brought
           in
           ,
           in
           the
           times
           of
           the
           Popes
           Encroachments
           on
           the
           Right
           of
           Princes
           in
           the
           West
           .
           Had
           he
           recollected
           himself
           ,
           he
           might
           have
           found
           the
           same
           Doctrine
           in
           the
           East
           ,
           and
           in
           those
           
             Earlier
             Ages
          
           ,
           wherein
           no
           Examples
           could
           be
           found
           of
           such
           Encroachments
           .
           He
           might
           have
           remembred
           that
           the
           Work
           he
           there
           disputes
           of
           ,
           was
           brought
           by
           Lincolnieufis
           first
           from
           the
           East
           to
           these
           Western
           parts
           ,
           and
           therefore
           was
           written
           by
           an
           Eastern
           Author
           ,
           where
           there
           were
           no
           Bishops
           pretending
           to
           a
           
             Civil
             Independency
          
           on
           the
           Empire
           ,
           or
           to
           a
           Right
           of
           
             deposing
             Princes
          
           ,
           and
           
             absolving
             Subjects
          
           from
           their
           Oaths
           of
           Allegiance
           ,
           who
           might
           have
           been
           gratified
           by
           such
           Doctrines
           .
           For
           my
           part
           ,
           I
           take
           that
           work
           to
           have
           been
           written
           
           in
           the
           
             Apostolical
             Age.
          
           It
           is
           expresly
           quoted
           by
           Origen
           ,
           long
           before
           such
           Encorachments
           on
           
             Temporal
             Rights
          
           were
           thought
           of
           It
           is
           written
           in
           the
           
             Hellenistical
             Greek
             Hebrew
          
           Stile
           ,
           then
           ordinarily
           used
           ,
           when
           the
           Apostolical
           Converts
           had
           formerly
           been
           for
           the
           most
           part
           Jews
           ,
           bevond
           the
           skill
           of
           the
           Modern
           Times
           to
           have
           imitated
           it
           .
           Besides
           ,
           it
           mentions
           the
           
             Apostolical
             times
          
           as
           the
           
             last
             times
          
           ,
           a
           mistake
           frequent
           in
           the
           Reasonings
           of
           
             those
             times
          
           ,
           but
           which
           could
           not
           have
           been
           believed
           by
           any
           who
           lived
           at
           an
           
           Age's
           distance
           from
           them
           .
           It
           has
           very
           little
           ;
           if
           any
           thing
           ,
           relating
           to
           the
           Destruction
           of
           the
           Temple
           by
           Titus
           ,
           which
           the
           Design
           of
           the
           Author
           would
           have
           obliged
           him
           to
           have
           been
           large
           in
           ,
           if
           he
           had
           lived
           after
           it
           .
           These
           things
           considered
           ,
           will
           make
           that
           Work
           also
           fit
           to
           be
           considered
           ,
           as
           another
           Testimony
           of
           the
           Sense
           of
           the
           Jews
           in
           the
           Ages
           of
           the
           Apostles
           ;
           the
           Style
           and
           Notions
           of
           the
           Author
           making
           it
           ,
           every
           way
           ,
           seem
           probable
           that
           he
           was
           a
           Convert
           from
           them
           .
           This
           Doctrine
           therefore
           being
           then
           believed
           ,
           must
           perfectly
           have
           destroyed
           all
           Pretensions
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           in
           Affairs
           of
           this
           Nature
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           in
           the
           Opinion
           of
           those
           who
           believed
           it
           .
           The
           Magistrate
           of
           
             this
             World
          
           ,
           could
           not
           ,
           in
           his
           
             own
             Right
          
           ,
           challenge
           any
           Power
           in
           things
           relating
           to
           the
           
             other
             World.
          
           The
           only
           way
           therefore
           left
           him
           ,
           by
           which
           he
           might
           challenge
           it
           ,
           must
           have
           been
           some
           Donation
           of
           GOD.
           Yet
           niether
           for
           this
           was
           there
           any
           the
           least
           Pretence
           .
           No
           Text
           of
           written
           Revelation
           ever
           so
           much
           ,
           that
           I
           know
           of
           ,
           as
           Pretended
           for
           it
           .
           And
           no
           likelihood
           for
           it
           ,
           in
           the
           Nature
           of
           the
           thing
           it self
           .
           No
           probability
           ,
           that
           GOD
           would
           intrust
           Concernments
           of
           a
           Nature
           incomparably
           more
           Noble
           ,
           with
           a
           Magistracy
           less
           Noble
           than
           the
           Trusts
           committed
           to
           it
           .
           No
           probability
           ,
           that
           GOD
           would
           hereby
           expose
           interests
           so
           much
           in
           themselves
           
             more
             valuable
          
           and
           dearer
           to
           himself
           ,
           to
           the
           hazard
           of
           being
           postponed
           to
           those
           
             less
             noble
          
           ends
           for
           which
           the
           
             Secular
             Magistrate
          
           was
           principally
           concerned
           .
           These
           things
           supposed
           ,
           cut
           off
           all
           Pretensions
           of
           Right
           ,
           imaginable
           in
           such
           Cases
           .
           And
           the
           dreadfull
           Examples
           of
           GOD's
           Severity
           against
           meddling
           in
           
             Holy
             things
          
           without
           Right
           ;
           even
           in
           the
           Cases
           of
           Saul
           and
           Uzziah
           ,
           who
           were
           themselves
           invested
           with
           the
           
             Supream
             Civil
             Authority
          
           ,
           must
           have
           been
           thought
           sufficient
           to
           deter
           all
           Posterity
           from
           intermedling
           in
           such
           matters
           ,
           without
           very
           just
           and
           evident
           Claims
           of
           Right
           for
           doing
           so
           .
        
      
       
         
         
           §
           XXXV
           .
           This
           same
           Reasonning
           holds
           on
           account
           of
           the
           
             Priest
             representing
             GOD
          
           ,
           though
           without
           relation
           to
           a
           
             Future
             State.
          
           
        
         
           Nor
           did
           this
           Reasoning
           hold
           only
           our
           Supposition
           that
           the
           Benefits
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           were
           thought
           to
           extend
           to
           a
           
             future
             State.
          
           Though
           it
           had
           only
           related
           to
           
             this
             World
          
           ,
           as
           all
           other
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           besides
           that
           of
           the
           Jews
           ,
           did
           undoubtedly
           ;
           yet
           even
           so
           ,
           there
           was
           no
           reason
           to
           believe
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           had
           any
           Rights
           to
           dispose
           of
           it
           .
           This
           at
           least
           was
           thought
           certain
           that
           the
           High
           Priest
           who
           could
           oblige
           GOD
           to
           
             accept
             him
          
           and
           his
           Obligations
           ,
           (
           without
           which
           all
           his
           Ministry
           must
           have
           been
           unavailable
           )
           must
           first
           have
           been
           suppos'd
           to
           derive
           Authority
           from
           God.
           Had
           the
           Priest
           only
           represented
           the
           People
           ,
           there
           might
           have
           been
           some
           pretence
           for
           the
           Magistrates
           interest
           in
           appointing
           and
           removing
           the
           Person
           of
           the
           Priest
           ,
           as
           being
           himself
           invested
           with
           all
           the
           Power
           that
           can
           be
           derived
           from
           an
           Original
           purely
           Humane
           .
           But
           as
           the
           Priest
           has
           a
           Power
           of
           Blessing
           and
           Cursing
           Authoritatively
           ,
           so
           as
           to
           oblige
           GOD
           to
           ratify
           his
           Blessing
           and
           Curses
           ,
           as
           Men
           have
           qualified
           themselves
           respectively
           ;
           so
           it
           is
           certain
           that
           he
           cannot
           oblige
           GOD
           ,
           unless
           he
           represent
           GOD
           ,
           which
           he
           can
           never
           do
           ,
           unless
           GOD
           have
           granted
           him
           Authority
           to
           do
           so
           .
           And
           as
           he
           does
           not
           only
           offer
           the
           Peoples
           Prayers
           and
           Sacrifices
           ,
           but
           offers
           them
           with
           a
           Title
           to
           acceptance
           ,
           so
           he
           must
           himself
           be
           a
           
             Person
             acceptable
             to
             GOD
          
           on
           account
           of
           his
           Office
           ,
           which
           he
           cannot
           be
           presumed
           to
           be
           if
           he
           come
           into
           his
           Office
           any
           other
           way
           than
           GOD
           has
           appointed
           for
           his
           Admission
           .
           Indeed
           the
           whole
           ground
           of
           his
           obliging
           GOD
           depends
           on
           
             GOD'S
             Promise
          
           ,
           which
           is
           
             GOD'S
             Part
          
           of
           the
           Covenant
           .
           And
           in
           this
           regard
           none
           can
           oblige
           GOD
           but
           the
           Priest
           ,
           and
           no
           Priest
           but
           he
           who
           has
           before
           been
           appointed
           by
           God
           to
           do
           so
           .
           Covenants
           are
           mutual
           ,
           and
           therefore
           require
           ,
           and
           give
           Security
           ,
           on
           
             both
             Parts
          
           concerned
           in
           them
           .
           The
           Priest
           therefore
           ,
           as
           ,
           in
           a
           lower
           sense
           ,
           mediating
           in
           this
           Covenant
           between
           GOD
           and
           Man
           ,
           is
           to
           procure
           Security
           on
           GODS
           side
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           on
           ours
           .
           This
           he
           cannot
           do
           but
           by
           obliging
           GOD
           to
           promise
           Performance
           on
           his
           part
           ,
           of
           what
           is
           to
           be
           done
           by
           him
           as
           
             his
             part
          
           of
           the
           Covenant
           .
           And
           that
           Promise
           being
           GOD'S
           part
           of
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           he
           cannot
           be
           obliged
           to
           it
           any
           other
           way
           than
           as
           he
           is
           obliged
           to
           the
           Covenant
           it self
           .
           Nor
           can
           he
           be
           obliged
           by
           the
           Covenant
           ,
           if
           the
           Priest
           be
           not
           
             first
             Authorized
          
           by
           him
           to
           Covenant
           for
           him
           ,
           and
           to
           oblige
           him
           by
           that
           Act
           of
           his
           own
           Authority
           .
           Thus
           there
           ,
           fore
           it
           appears
           that
           the
           Priest
           as
           a
           Common
           Mediator
           in
           a
           Covenant
           between
           GOD
           and
           Man
           ,
           must
           therefore
           be
           invested
           with
           a
           Divine
           ,
           as
           well
           a
           Humane
           ,
           Authority
           .
        
      
       
         
         
           §
           XXXVI
           .
           And
           that
           also
           according
           to
           the
           Opinions
           of
           those
           times
           .
        
         
           Nor
           was
           this
           Reasoning
           only
           true
           ,
           but
           also
           believed
           to
           be
           so
           in
           the
           times
           I
           am
           now
           discoursing
           of
           .
           St.
           Paul
           plainly
           supposes
           it
           as
           true
           of
           Priests
           in
           general
           ,
           in
           his
           Reasonings
           in
           the
           Epistle
           to
           the
           Hebrews
           ,
           That
           Priests
           ought
           to
           be
           Authorized
           by
           the
           GOD
           for
           whom
           they
           are
           to
           Officiate
           .
           
             Every
             High
             Priests
             taken
             from
             among
             Men
             is
             ordain'd
             for
             Men
             in
             things
             pertaining
             to
             GOD
             ,
             that
             he
             may
             offer
             both
             gifts
             and
             Sacrifices
             for
             Sin.
          
           Heb.
           V.
           I.
           And
           he
           tells
           us
           by
           whom
           they
           were
           so
           taken
           and
           ordained
           ,
           
             v.
             4.
             
             No
             Man
             taketh
             this
             honour
             to
             himself
             ;
             but
             he
             that
             was
             called
             of
             GOD
             ,
             as
             was
             Aaron
             .
          
           The
           Proposition
           is
           Universal
           .
           Accordingly
           he
           observes
           that
           
             CHRIST
             also
             glorified
             not
             himself
             ;
             to
             be
             made
             an
             High
             Priest
             :
             But
             he
             that
             said
             unto
             him
             ,
             Thou
             art
             my
             Son
             ,
             to
             day
             have
             I
             begotten
             thee
             ,
          
           v.
           5.
           
           And
           that
           he
           also
           was
           
             called
             of
             GOD
             an
             High
             Priest
             ,
          
           though
           
             of
             the
             Order
             of
             Melchisedec
          
           .
           v.
           10.
           
           The
           Duty
           must
           be
           Universal
           ,
           when
           he
           Reasons
           thus
           upon
           it
           from
           the
           Aaronical
           Priest-hood
           (
           which
           himself
           counts
           of
           
             another
             Order
          
           Chap.
           VII
           .
           11.
           )
           to
           that
           of
           Melchisedec
           .
           The
           Apostle
           here
           Speaks
           exactly
           according
           to
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Old
           Testament
           .
           GOD
           there
           also
           says
           concerning
           Aaron
           and
           his
           Sons
           :
           
             I
             have
             given
             your
             Priests
             Office
             unto
             You.
          
           Numb
           .
           XVIII
           .
           7.
           
           And
           again
           :
           
             Behold
             I
             also
             have
             given
             Thee
             the
             Charge
             of
             mine
             ●eave
             offerings
             ,
             of
             all
             the
             hallowed
             things
             of
             the
             Children
             of
             Israel
             .
             Unto
             thee
             have
             I
             given
             them
             by
             reason
             of
             the
             Anointing
             ,
             and
             to
             thy
             Sons
             ,
             by
             an
             Ordinance
             for
             ever
             .
          
           v.
           8.
           
           This
           was
           said
           after
           the
           punishment
           of
           Korah
           ,
           and
           the
           Second
           confirmation
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           to
           them
           ,
           by
           the
           blossoming
           of
           
             Aarons
             Rod.
          
           No
           doubt
           with
           a
           design
           to
           intimate
           that
           they
           who
           should
           come
           in
           otherwise
           ,
           should
           be
           as
           
             Korah
             and
             his
             Company
          
           (
           so
           it
           is
           expressed
           Chap
           XVI
           .
           40
           )
           though
           not
           in
           the
           Miraculousness
           of
           their
           Punishment
           ,
           yet
           at
           least
           in
           the
           Unacceptableness
           of
           their
           Ministry
           .
           It
           is
           withal
           observable
           further
           ,
           that
           GODS
           giving
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           is
           said
           to
           have
           been
           
             by
             reason
             of
             the
             Anointing
          
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           by
           the
           Rites
           of
           Consecration
           .
           It
           is
           certain
           .
           GOD
           did
           intend
           ,
           as
           in
           other
           things
           ,
           so
           particularly
           in
           his
           Priests
           ,
           on
           occasion
           of
           whom
           he
           says
           it
           ,
           to
           be
           
             Sanctified
             in
             them
             that
             come
             nigh
             him
             ,
          
           Lev.
           X.
           3.
           
           In
           order
           whereunto
           it
           was
           requisite
           that
           they
           also
           should
           be
           Holy
           as
           he
           was
           Holy
           :
           This
           was
           a
           federal
           and
           
             external
             Holiness
          
           ,
           upon
           account
           of
           their
           being
           initiated
           into
           their
           Office
           by
           the
           external
           and
           federal
           Rites
           of
           Consecration
           ,
           among
           which
           this
           of
           the
           Anointing
           was
           the
           principal
           .
           Whosoever
           therefore
           was
           not
           thus
           Anointed
           ,
           was
           ,
           for
           that
           very
           reason
           ,
           presumed
           not
           to
           be
           Holy
           ,
           nor
           therefore
           acceptable
           to
           GOD
           ,
           and
           consequently
           uncapable
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           .
           But
           this
           Anointing
           required
           not
           only
           the
           Holiness
           of
           the
           Oyntment
           ,
           but
           of
           the
           Person
           also
           that
           administred
           it
           ,
           and
           that
           in
           a
           higher
           degree
           than
           could
           belong
           to
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           The
           Princes
           indeed
           had
           an
           Unction
           ,
           and
           were
           by
           that
           enabled
           to
           perform
           some
           
           lower
           Acts
           of
           Consecration
           .
           So
           Solomon
           makes
           the
           Prayer
           of
           Dedication
           of
           the
           Temple
           .
           But
           the
           principal
           Consecration
           of
           the
           Temple
           was
           by
           the
           Sacrifices
           ,
           in
           which
           the
           forementioned
           examples
           of
           Saul
           and
           Uzziah
           shew
           that
           the
           Prince
           had
           no
           Right
           to
           intermeddle
           .
           What
           Moses
           did
           in
           the
           
             Consecrating
             Aaron
          
           and
           his
           Sons
           ,
           was
           by
           special
           direction
           from
           GOD
           ,
           and
           before
           GOD
           had
           confined
           to
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           and
           therefore
           could
           not
           be
           made
           a
           Precedent
           afterwards
           .
           After
           that
           
             first
             Consecration
          
           was
           performed
           ,
           we
           never
           find
           Moses
           any
           further
           intermeddling
           ,
           but
           he
           leaves
           all
           the
           Acts
           of
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           afterward
           to
           them
           who
           ,
           by
           that
           
             first
             Consecration
          
           ,
           were
           Authorized
           for
           them
           .
           
             The
             Unction
          
           and
           Holiness
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           did
           so
           far
           exceed
           the
           Unction
           and
           Holiness
           of
           the
           
             Regal
             Power
          
           ,
           that
           the
           Princes
           intervention
           in
           the
           Consecrating
           of
           a
           Priest
           could
           not
           ,
           in
           the
           sense
           of
           those
           times
           ,
           be
           taken
           for
           the
           Act
           of
           GOD
           ,
           requisite
           for
           giving
           a
           Priest-hood
           .
           It
           is
           very
           true
           ,
           the
           King
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           his
           Anointing
           ,
           was
           counted
           Holy.
           And
           so
           were
           
             all
             the
             Congregation
             holy
          
           .
           Numb
           .
           XVI
           .
           3.
           
           And
           it
           is
           reckoned
           among
           the
           Privildeges
           of
           the
           Peculium
           in
           General
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           a
           Holy-Priest-hood
           .
           Yet
           that
           did
           not
           excuse
           them
           from
           a
           great
           Piacular
           crime
           ,
           whenever
           they
           invaded
           any
           Offices
           of
           their
           own
           Priest-hood
           .
           Every
           lower
           degree
           of
           Holiness
           was
           counted
           Prophane
           in
           comparison
           of
           that
           which
           was
           above
           it
           .
           As
           therefore
           the
           Gentiles
           were
           reputed
           Prophane
           in
           comparison
           of
           the
           Jews
           ,
           who
           were
           equal
           in
           Holiness
           to
           the
           Gentiles
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           ;
           so
           the
           Laity
           of
           the
           Jews
           were
           reckoned
           Prophane
           in
           Comparison
           of
           the
           Levites
           ,
           as
           the
           Levites
           also
           ,
           in
           comparison
           of
           the
           Ordinary
           Priests
           ,
           and
           those
           also
           in
           comparison
           of
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           ;
           and
           were
           accordingly
           treated
           by
           GOD
           ,
           it
           they
           presumed
           on
           Offices
           higher
           than
           those
           committed
           to
           them
           .
           Though
           therefore
           the
           Prince
           was
           more
           Holy
           than
           the
           Laity
           .
           yet
           that
           did
           not
           warrant
           his
           invasion
           of
           the
           Office
           of
           the
           meanest
           Levite
           .
           So
           far
           it
           was
           from
           giving
           him
           any
           Power
           over
           the
           
             High
             Priesthood
          
           it self
           .
           He
           had
           no
           Power
           of
           Inaugurating
           ,
           and
           therefore
           had
           none
           of
           Exaugurating
           ,
           to
           speak
           in
           the
           old
           
             Roman
             Pontifical
          
           Style
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXXVII
           .
           Solomons
           Act
           on
           Abiathar
           was
           only
           of
           Force
           .
        
         
           Thus
           it
           appears
           on
           all
           accounts
           ,
           that
           judging
           by
           the
           Doctrines
           received
           in
           that
           Age
           ,
           Solomon
           could
           not
           pretend
           any
           
             direct
             Power
          
           ,
           for
           depriving
           Abiathor
           of
           his
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           .
           Hence
           it
           follows
           3ly
           ,
           That
           all
           that
           Solomon
           could
           do
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           his
           
             Regal
             Power
          
           ,
           was
           only
           to
           exercise
           that
           external
           Force
           on
           him
           ,
           which
           he
           might
           justify
           ,
           on
           consideration
           of
           his
           
             Secular
             Crime
          
           ,
           as
           his
           Sovereign
           in
           Seculars
           ,
           which
           though
           it
           could
           not
           in
           Conscience
           deprive
           Abiathar
           of
           his
           Right
           yet
           might
           (
           in
           the
           Consequence
           )
           make
           all
           the
           exercise
           of
           his
           Right
           impracticable
           .
           And
           indeed
           the
           words
           of
           the
           Text
           imply
           no
           more
           than
           what
           was
           the
           effect
           of
           pure
           force
           .
           So
           
             Solomon
             THRUST
             out
             Abia
             thar
             from
             being
             Priest
             unto
             the
             Lord
             ,
          
           1
           Kings
           11.
           27.
           
           And
           that
           very
           
           agreeably
           to
           the
           true
           importance
           of
           the
           Word
           there
           used
           .
           The
           vulgar
           Latine
           renders
           it
           ejecit
           .
           The
           LXXII
           .
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           .
           The
           Hebrew
           roo
           is
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           which
           the
           LXXII
           .
           render
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           but
           most
           frequently
           ,
           as
           in
           this
           very
           place
           ,
           by
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           words
           all
           of
           them
           denoting
           violence
           .
           Nor
           can
           we
           think
           that
           this
           Word
           ,
           rather
           than
           any
           other
           that
           might
           have
           been
           used
           ,
           was
           chosen
           without
           a
           particular
           design
           .
           That
           seems
           to
           be
           to
           let
           us
           understand
           ,
           what
           I
           have
           now
           been
           proving
           ,
           that
           Solomon
           could
           not
           make
           
             Abiathar
             cease
          
           to
           be
           a
           
             Priest
             unto
             the
             Lord
          
           by
           any
           Judicial
           determination
           that
           might
           directly
           affect
           his
           Right
           ,
           but
           by
           the
           force
           now
           mentioned
           ,
           which
           might
           make
           the
           Exercise
           of
           his
           Right
           impracticable
           .
           This
           Solomon
           might
           do
           by
           banishing
           him
           from
           Jerusalem
           ,
           and
           confining
           him
           to
           Anathoth
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXXVIII
           .
           VVhich
           Force
           might
           ,
           in
           the
           Consequence
           render
           the
           Exercise
           of
           his
           Right
           impracticable
           .
        
         
           For
           it
           is
           to
           be
           remembered
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Jewish
             Priest-hood
          
           included
           seveveral
           
             Secular
             Rights
          
           ,
           which
           must
           therefore
           have
           been
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Secular
             Magistracy
          
           ;
           and
           as
           to
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Offices
          
           ,
           was
           so
           confined
           to
           places
           ,
           which
           the
           Magistrate
           could
           hinder
           the
           Priests
           from
           by
           his
           Power
           of
           
             External
             Force
          
           ,
           that
           ,
           in
           case
           he
           would
           make
           use
           of
           his
           Force
           to
           hinder
           them
           ,
           the
           whole
           Exercise
           of
           the
           Right
           of
           Priest-hood
           would
           thereby
           be
           rendered
           impractable
           .
           It
           included
           ,
           by
           
             Divine
             Institution
          
           ,
           many
           Secular
           Rights
           .
           Particularly
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           Oracle
           of
           Urim
           ,
           by
           which
           many
           
             Secular
             Causes
          
           were
           to
           be
           determined
           ,
           and
           by
           which
           ,
           (
           on
           account
           of
           the
           Governments
           being
           Theocratical
           )
           the
           Supream
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           as
           well
           as
           the
           Subject
           ,
           was
           in
           Conscience
           to
           be
           concluded
           .
           This
           was
           consulted
           by
           the
           Elders
           of
           Israel
           concerning
           their
           designed
           Expedition
           against
           the
           *
           Benjamits
           ,
           by
           Saul
           on
           the
           miraculous
           victory
           of
           †
           Jonathan
           ,
           by
           David
           in
           the
           Cases
           of
           Sauls
           Exepedition
           against
           him
           ,
           and
           the
           treachery
           of
           the
           Men
           of
           Keilah
           ,
           and
           his
           own
           Expedition
           against
           the
           Philistians
           .
           And
           the
           Elders
           of
           Israel
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           time
           of
           Joshua
           ,
           are
           blamed
           for
           not
           *
           
             Asking
             Counsel
             at
             the
             Mouth
             of
             the
             Lord
          
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           Peace
           made
           with
           the
           Gibeonites
           ,
           by
           which
           we
           understand
           the
           Obligation
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           as
           well
           to
           consult
           ,
           as
           to
           observe
           this
           Oracle
           .
           And
           in
           private
           Cases
           ,
           when
           a
           Cause
           fell
           out
           †
           
             too
             hard
             in
             Judgment
          
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           for
           the
           Decision
           of
           the
           
             Ordinary
             Judges
             ,
             between
             blood
             and
             blood
             ,
             between
             plea
             and
             plea
             ,
             and
             between
             stroke
             and
             stroke
             ,
          
           as
           in
           the
           time
           of
           Moses
           ,
           they
           consulted
           him
           ,
           and
           he
           consulted
           GOD
           ;
           so
           afterwards
           the
           ordinary
           course
           was
           ,
           to
           make
           the
           
             Ultimate
             Appeal
          
           to
           the
           Priests
           (
           no
           doubt
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           more
           principally
           ,
           )
           and
           to
           stand
           to
           their
           award
           under
           of
           pain
           Death
           .
           These
           Causes
           which
           concerned
           blood
           and
           blood
           ,
           and
           stroke
           and
           stroke
           ,
           were
           undoubtedly
           Secular
           ,
           as
           
           also
           the
           Capital
           punishment
           to
           be
           afflicted
           on
           those
           that
           proved
           refactory
           .
           These
           
             Secular
             Rights
             GOD
          
           annext
           inseparably
           to
           the
           Priest-hood
           .
           But
           the
           execution
           of
           them
           wholly
           depended
           on
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Sword
           ,
           which
           GOD
           was
           pleas'd
           intirely
           to
           permit
           to
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           whom
           the
           Priests
           could
           therefore
           only
           oblige
           in
           Conscience
           ,
           which
           obligation
           if
           the
           Magistrate
           would
           not
           regard
           ,
           it
           was
           fully
           in
           his
           Power
           to
           hinder
           the
           Execution
           of
           such
           Decrees
           .
           So
           also
           ,
           even
           the
           Spirituals
           of
           that
           
             Sacerdotal
             Office
          
           depended
           on
           things
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           The
           
             Lawful
             Priest
          
           himself
           could
           Sacrifice
           no
           where
           but
           in
           the
           Temple
           ,
           and
           at
           the
           Altar
           of
           Jerusalem
           ,
           and
           in
           the
           particular
           Vestments
           prescribed
           by
           the
           Law.
           If
           he
           did
           ,
           such
           Sacrifices
           would
           not
           only
           be
           unacceptable
           ,
           but
           Piacular
           .
           This
           the
           Romans
           very
           well
           understood
           ,
           when
           ,
           by
           locking
           up
           the
           Vestments
           in
           the
           Fort
           Antonia
           ,
           and
           by
           keeping
           a
           guard
           there
           that
           should
           command
           the
           Temple
           ,
           to
           which
           the
           Fort
           was
           contiguous
           ,
           they
           engrossed
           the
           disposal
           of
           the
           
             High
             Priest
             hood
          
           intirely
           to
           themselves
           .
           And
           it
           was
           also
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           Solomon
           to
           make
           the
           whole
           Exercise
           of
           
           Abiathar's
           Priest-hood
           impracticable
           ,
           by
           the
           like
           force
           which
           he
           had
           a
           Right
           ,
           as
           a
           Prince
           ,
           to
           exercise
           ,
           where
           he
           should
           judge
           it
           necessary
           for
           the
           good
           of
           the
           
             Secular
             Society
          
           ,
           for
           which
           he
           was
           principally
           concerned
           .
           This
           was
           an
           indirect
           Power
           over
           
           Abiathar's
           Spirituals
           in
           order
           to
           his
           
             own
             Temporals
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XXXIX
           .
           Yet
           Solomon
           was
           in
           Conscience
           obliged
           to
           be
           cautions
           in
           exercising
           this
           Force
           against
           the
           Priest-hood
           .
        
         
           But
           then
           it
           is
           to
           be
           considered
           further
           4ly
           ,
           (
           by
           the
           opinions
           of
           those
           times
           grounded
           on
           Reasons
           lasting
           
             still
             )
             Princes
          
           ,
           though
           they
           had
           that
           Power
           annext
           to
           their
           Office
           ,
           were
           notwithstanding
           obliged
           in
           Conscience
           ,
           to
           be
           sparing
           in
           the
           Use
           of
           it
           against
           such
           
             Holy
             Persons
          
           as
           Abiathar
           was
           .
           
             Holy
             places
          
           were
           every
           where
           ,
           by
           the
           consent
           of
           
             Civilized
             Nations
          
           ,
           allowed
           the
           Right
           of
           protecting
           such
           as
           fled
           to
           them
           ,
           if
           they
           were
           not
           guilty
           of
           the
           highest
           Piacular
           Crimes
           .
           Thus
           it
           was
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           *
           Adonijah
           ,
           and
           others
           mentioned
           in
           the
           Old
           Testament
           .
           Thus
           ,
           in
           the
           Cases
           of
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           and
           Supplices
           ,
           among
           the
           Greeks
           and
           Romans
           ,
           The
           
             Piaculum
             Cylonianum
          
           among
           the
           Athenians
           was
           famous
           .
           Though
           †
           Cylon
           justly
           deserved
           what
           he
           suffered
           ,
           yet
           because
           some
           of
           his
           party
           were
           killed
           in
           the
           Sanctuary
           ,
           the
           displeasure
           of
           the
           Deity
           ,
           on
           that
           account
           ,
           was
           to
           be
           atoned
           by
           a
           Solemn
           Expiation
           ,
           which
           was
           performed
           by
           Epimenides
           .
           And
           if
           the
           places
           were
           thus
           reverenced
           on
           account
           of
           their
           Consecration
           ,
           much
           more
           the
           Priests
           from
           whom
           they
           received
           it
           .
           This
           is
           exactly
           the
           Reasoning
           of
           our
           Blessed
           Saviour
           in
           a
           *
           Like
           Case
           .
           Accordingly
           it
           was
           a
           general
           Rule
           :
           †
           
             Touch
             not
             mine
             Anointed
          
           ,
           for
           whose
           sakes
           even
           ‖‡
           Kings
           also
           are
           said
           
           to
           have
           been
           reprov'd
           .
           This
           was
           the
           Security
           of
           the
           whole
           Peculium
           of
           Israel
           ,
           among
           the
           many
           Nations
           through
           whom
           they
           passed
           in
           their
           Expedition
           from
           Aegypt
           to
           Canaan
           .
           This
           was
           the
           Security
           of
           the
           Prince
           himself
           ,
           that
           none
           could
           *
           
             Stretch
             out
             his
             hand
             against
             the
             Lord
             's
             Anointed
             ,
             and
             be
             guiltless
             ,
          
           That
           is
           ,
           without
           being
           guilty
           of
           a
           Piacular
           Crime
           .
           And
           how
           could
           Solomon
           hope
           that
           Assassinates
           would
           regard
           his
           
             own
             Anointing
          
           ,
           if
           himself
           had
           violated
           an
           Anointing
           so
           much
           greater
           and
           Holyer
           then
           his
           own
           ,
           from
           whence
           his
           own
           was
           derived
           ?
           This
           reverance
           also
           to
           
             Holy
             Persons
          
           obtained
           by
           the
           consent
           of
           
             Civilized
             Nations
          
           ,
           which
           is
           to
           us
           an
           Argument
           of
           the
           Law
           of
           
             Nations
             .
             Aesop
          
           as
           a
           Person
           Holy
           and
           beloved
           of
           the
           GODS
           was
           revenged
           by
           them
           .
           The
           like
           was
           their
           Opinion
           of
           several
           Poets
           also
           ,
           as
           
             Pindar
             ,
             Stesichorus
          
           ,
           &c.
           
           And
           this
           also
           was
           among
           them
           Translated
           to
           the
           Interests
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magestrate
          
           ,
           The
           Tribunes
           of
           the
           People
           among
           the
           Romans
           were
           first
           secured
           by
           it
           .
           Afterwards
           the
           Emperours
           were
           so
           also
           ,
           by
           having
           the
           
             Tribunitian
             Power
          
           and
           the
           Pontificate
           annexed
           to
           their
           Office.
           And
           how
           far
           this
           opinion
           prevailed
           ,
           even
           among
           the
           Jews
           of
           those
           Earlier
           Ages
           ,
           appears
           plainly
           in
           the
           Murder
           of
           Abimeleck
           and
           the
           Priests
           by
           Saul
           .
           His
           own
           *
           Servants
           could
           not
           be
           prevailed
           upon
           to
           do
           it
           .
           None
           indeed
           but
           †
           Doeg
           the
           Edomite
           ,
           who
           being
           of
           an
           other
           Nations
           might
           be
           supposed
           to
           have
           less
           regard
           for
           the
           
             Jewish
             Consecration
          
           .
           And
           there
           was
           particular
           reason
           for
           this
           revernce
           to
           the
           Priest-hood
           in
           the
           Jewish
           Governments
           as
           it
           was
           Theocratical
           .
           As
           it
           was
           such
           ,
           the
           Magistrate
           was
           more
           particularly
           obliged
           to
           do
           every
           thing
           according
           to
           the
           mind
           of
           GOD
           himself
           whose
           Vicegerent
           he
           was
           .
           And
           GOD
           being
           the
           principal
           and
           Supream
           Governour
           ,
           he
           was
           as
           much
           concerned
           in
           every
           thing
           ,
           to
           take
           care
           that
           it
           were
           performed
           according
           to
           his
           pleasure
           ,
           as
           every
           inferior
           Magistrate
           is
           bound
           ,
           at
           his
           peril
           ,
           to
           do
           every
           thing
           according
           to
           the
           mind
           of
           the
           
             Supreme
             Legislator
          
           ,
           rather
           than
           his
           own
           .
           This
           would
           oblige
           the
           Prince
           to
           value
           every
           thing
           according
           to
           the
           esteem
           that
           GOD
           was
           pleased
           to
           put
           upon
           it
           .
           and
           therefore
           to
           make
           Religion
           his
           Principal
           Care
           as
           it
           was
           certain
           GOD
           did
           ,
           and
           to
           make
           his
           own
           Interest
           to
           give
           way
           to
           the
           Interests
           of
           Religion
           ,
           and
           the
           Honour
           of
           his
           
             own
             Function
          
           ,
           to
           the
           Honour
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           ,
           as
           he
           would
           approve
           himself
           faithful
           in
           the
           Trusts
           committed
           to
           him
           .
           That
           GOD
           had
           given
           the
           
             less
             Noble
          
           Office
           a
           more
           effectual
           Security
           ,
           as
           to
           this
           world
           ,
           against
           encroachments
           ,
           he
           had
           reason
           to
           look
           on
           as
           a
           Wise
           provision
           for
           the
           Publick
           ,
           that
           where
           there
           might
           otherwise
           have
           been
           the
           most
           
             Specious
             pretentions
          
           ,
           and
           consequently
           the
           greatest
           Temptations
           to
           encroaching
           ,
           there
           might
           be
           the
           lesser
           advantage
           for
           it
           .
           But
           it
           
           ought
           by
           no
           means
           to
           embolden
           him
           to
           be
           the
           first
           aggressor
           .
           He
           had
           reason
           to
           fear
           ,
           in
           those
           Ages
           so
           Famous
           for
           the
           frequency
           of
           
             Divine
             interpositions
          
           ,
           GOD
           himself
           might
           the
           rather
           think
           himself
           the
           more
           obliged
           ,
           by
           the
           Rules
           of
           his
           
             own
             Providence
          
           ,
           to
           vindicate
           the
           
             Sacred
             Power
          
           ,
           by
           how
           much
           the
           more
           he
           had
           left
           it
           destitute
           of
           
             Humane
             Patronage
             .
             Uzziah
          
           afterwards
           found
           it
           so
           .
           This
           therefore
           must
           have
           obliged
           Solomom
           to
           use
           the
           
             Coercive
             Power
          
           granted
           him
           ,
           rather
           in
           his
           own
           defence
           ,
           than
           in
           a
           way
           that
           might
           ,
           even
           in
           consequence
           ,
           look
           like
           violence
           to
           so
           Holy
           an
           Office
           ,
        
      
       
         
           §
           XL.
           What
           Solomon
           did
           was
           only
           to
           fullfill
           what
           GOD
           had
           before
           threatned
           against
           the
           Family
           of
           Eli.
           
        
         
           And
           to
           make
           it
           probable
           that
           Solomon
           had
           these
           very
           considerations
           before
           him
           ,
           to
           contribute
           nothing
           by
           his
           Legal
           Force
           to
           this
           deprivation
           ,
           but
           what
           was
           agreeable
           to
           his
           own
           Station
           and
           the
           mind
           of
           GOD
           ;
           I
           observe
           5ly
           that
           the
           Text
           it self
           gives
           a
           Reason
           of
           what
           he
           did
           ,
           perfectly
           Suitable
           to
           such
           thoughts
           ,
           that
           he
           did
           it
           only
           as
           an
           Executioner
           of
           the
           Prediction
           of
           Samuel
           concerning
           the
           removal
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           from
           the
           House
           of
           Ithamar
           .
           The
           Words
           are
           these
           :
           *
           So
           
             Solomon
             thrust
             out
             Abiathar
             from
             being
             Priest
             to
             the
             Lord
             ,
             THAT
             he
             might
             fulfil
             the
             Word
             of
             the
             Lord
             ,
             which
             he
             spake
             concerning
             the
             house
             of
          
           Eli
           in
           Shilo
           .
           I
           know
           very
           well
           that
           this
           particle
           that
           ,
           is
           used
           in
           the
           
             N.
             T.
          
           when
           a
           Prophesy
           was
           fullfilled
           in
           the
           Event
           ,
           though
           he
           who
           fulfilled
           it
           knew
           nothing
           of
           the
           Matter
           .
           But
           the
           circumstances
           of
           this
           place
           make
           it
           probable
           that
           Solomon
           knew
           what
           he
           did
           ,
           and
           intended
           the
           accomplishment
           of
           that
           Prophesy
           ,
           and
           that
           what
           he
           did
           was
           done
           by
           him
           purposely
           ,
           for
           that
           very
           end
           ,
           that
           he
           might
           fullfill
           it
           .
           The
           Prediction
           was
           very
           notorious
           ,
           being
           twice
           repeated
           ,
           first
           by
           a
           
             Man
             of
             GOD
             ,
             1
             Sam.
          
           II.
           27
           ,
           then
           by
           Samuel
           also
           ,
           Chap.
           III.
           11.
           as
           the
           first
           initiation
           of
           him
           into
           his
           Prophetick
           Office
           ,
           which
           recommended
           him
           to
           
             all
             Israel
             from
             Dan
             to
             Beersheba
             ,
          
           as
           one
           that
           
             was
             established
             to
             be
             a
             Prophet
             of
             the
             Lord
             ,
             v.
          
           20.
           
           It
           was
           also
           in
           both
           Cases
           notified
           to
           Eli
           himself
           ,
           that
           all
           ,
           as
           well
           Friends
           as
           Enemies
           ,
           might
           know
           it
           .
           How
           therefore
           can
           we
           believe
           Solomon
           ignorant
           of
           it
           ?
           Then
           the
           distance
           of
           the
           time
           between
           Eli
           and
           Abiathar
           was
           such
           ,
           as
           that
           there
           was
           reason
           to
           expect
           that
           it
           should
           be
           fullfilled
           in
           Abiathar
           ,
           if
           it
           were
           fullfilled
           at
           all
           .
           Such
           punishments
           of
           the
           Children
           for
           the
           Parents
           were
           not
           usually
           deferred
           beyond
           the
           
             fourth
             generation
          
           ,
           as
           appears
           from
           the
           words
           of
           the
           2d
           Commandment
           .
           So
           also
           in
           the
           
             Heathen
             History
          
           ,
           the
           treachery
           of
           Gyges
           against
           Candaules
           was
           punished
           in
           Croesus
           ,
           who
           was
           in
           the
           fourth
           generation
           descended
           from
           Gyges
           ;
           as
           
           Jehu's
           Conspiracy
           was
           also
           ,
           in
           his
           fourth
           generation
           ,
           in
           the
           Sacred
           History
           .
           By
           these
           Examples
           we
           find
           a
           consent
           in
           those
           Traditions
           of
           the
           earlier
           Times
           .
           And
           the
           distance
           between
           Eli
           and
           Abiathar
           could
           
           not
           be
           less
           .
           *
           Josephus
           indeed
           makes
           Eli
           to
           have
           been
           the
           Grand-Father
           to
           Abiathar
           .
           But
           it
           is
           certain
           that
           they
           were
           further
           removed
           than
           so
           .
           Abiathar
           was
           himself
           the
           Son
           of
           Ahimelech
           ,
           and
           Ahimelech
           the
           Son
           of
           Ahitub
           .
           So
           Ahitub
           must
           have
           been
           his
           Grand-Father
           .
           Thus
           it
           appears
           that
           Abiathar
           was
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           in
           the
           fourth
           Generation
           from
           Eli
           ,
           whose
           Sin
           was
           to
           be
           punished
           in
           him
           .
           Further
           yet
           ,
           Ahitub
           is
           said
           to
           have
           been
           the
           
             Brother
             of
             Ichabod
             ,
             the
             Son
             of
             Phineas
             ,
             the
             Son
             of
             Eli
             ,
          
           1
           Sam.
           XIV
           .
           3.
           
           Thus
           Abiathar
           will
           be
           the
           Vth
           from
           Eli
           ,
           (
           if
           
             both
             terms
          
           be
           included
           )
           and
           in
           the
           4th
           Generation
           ,
           in
           the
           utmost
           way
           of
           counting
           possible
           .
           There
           was
           therefore
           no
           reason
           to
           expect
           any
           further
           delay
           of
           that
           punishment
           which
           had
           been
           so
           long
           before
           predicted
           .
           And
           therefore
           Abiathar
           was
           the
           Person
           in
           whom
           it
           was
           to
           be
           expected
           .
           This
           being
           so
           ,
           Solomon
           could
           not
           but
           look
           on
           it
           as
           very
           Providential
           ,
           that
           Abiathar
           should
           be
           permitted
           by
           GOD
           to
           fall
           into
           the
           conspiracy
           of
           Adonijah
           ,
           and
           thereby
           to
           incur
           his
           Royal
           displeasure
           ,
           in
           whose
           Power
           it
           was
           to
           execute
           the
           Divine
           Sentence
           on
           him
           ,
           by
           that
           Power
           of
           Force
           which
           GOD
           had
           committed
           to
           the
           Prince
           .
           It
           tended
           withal
           very
           much
           to
           confirm
           the
           same
           Observation
           ,
           that
           ,
           for
           above
           40
           Years
           since
           his
           first
           evil
           (
           for
           so
           many
           years
           were
           contained
           in
           Davids
           Reign
           reckoned
           from
           the
           death
           of
           
             Saul
             )
             Abiathar
          
           should
           have
           no
           Posterity
           that
           might
           Succeed
           him
           in
           his
           Office
           ,
           if
           this
           was
           indeed
           his
           Case
           .
           For
           by
           this
           it
           appar'd
           necessary
           that
           if
           he
           were
           depriv'd
           ,
           the
           whole
           family
           of
           Ithamar
           should
           be
           deprived
           also
           ,
           at
           least
           the
           Family
           of
           Eli
           ,
           as
           the
           Prophesies
           forementioned
           had
           foretold
           .
           For
           as
           for
           the
           rest
           of
           his
           
             Family
             ,
             Saul
          
           seems
           to
           have
           destroyed
           it
           universally
           .
           These
           Observations
           put
           together
           might
           give
           reason
           to
           believe
           ,
           that
           this
           was
           the
           very
           time
           design'd
           by
           GOD
           for
           the
           accomplishment
           of
           this
           Prophesy
           .
           At
           the
           same
           time
           Zadok
           was
           firm
           to
           
           Solomon's
           Interests
           ,
           which
           seemed
           to
           tend
           to
           fullfil
           the
           Prophesy
           to
           Phineas
           of
           an
           
             everlasting
             Priest-hood
          
           ,
           implying
           that
           the
           time
           should
           come
           ,
           when
           the
           whole
           succession
           from
           Aaron
           should
           be
           confined
           to
           the
           Family
           of
           Phineas
           ,
           which
           therefore
           was
           not
           to
           fail
           together
           with
           the
           other
           collateral
           Branches
           derived
           from
           Aaron
           .
           But
           I
           rather
           believe
           ,
           that
           
           Abiathar's
           Family
           did
           not
           fail
           intirely
           ,
           which
           still
           makes
           further
           for
           my
           purpose
           ,
           that
           what
           Solomon
           did
           in
           this
           matter
           ,
           was
           really
           with
           a
           design
           and
           prospect
           on
           the
           Prophesy
           it self
           .
           Otherwise
           ,
           had
           he
           only
           designed
           a
           Personal
           punishment
           for
           Abiathar
           ,
           that
           might
           have
           been
           done
           by
           removing
           him
           form
           the
           Priest-hood
           ,
           and
           Substituting
           the
           next
           of
           the
           Family
           of
           Ithamar
           in
           his
           place
           .
           What
           he
           did
           more
           is
           not
           ,
           any
           other
           way
           ,
           so
           well
           accountable
           ,
           as
           by
           supposing
           him
           to
           have
           had
           a
           direct
           design
           of
           fullfilling
           the
           Prophesy
           .
           It
           is
           otherwise
           as
           apparent
           from
           the
           Prophesy
           
           it self
           ,
           that
           Eli
           was
           to
           have
           a
           Posterity
           that
           was
           to
           Survive
           the
           fulfilling
           of
           the
           Prophesy
           ,
           as
           that
           they
           were
           to
           be
           deprived
           of
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           by
           it
           .
           What
           else
           can
           be
           the
           meaning
           of
           those
           Words
           ?
           *
           
             And
             it
             shall
             come
             to
             pass
             ,
             that
             every
             one
             that
             is
             left
             in
             thine
             House
             ,
             shall
             come
             and
             crouch
             to
             him
          
           (
           the
           
             faithful
             Priest
          
           before
           mentioned
           ,
           not
           of
           
           Eli's
           Family
           )
           
             for
             a
             piece
             of
             Silver
             ,
             and
             a
             morsel
             of
             Bread
             ,
             and
             shall
             say
             Put
             me
             (
             I
             pray
             thee
             )
             into
             one
             of
             the
             Priests
             Offices
             ,
             that
             I
             may
             eat
             a
             piece
             of
             bread
             .
          
           Now
           ,
           in
           this
           way
           of
           Reasoning
           here
           mentioned
           ,
           GOD
           himself
           had
           declared
           his
           pleasure
           that
           Abiathar
           ,
           and
           the
           House
           of
           Ithamar
           too
           ,
           should
           be
           deprived
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           ;
           and
           deprived
           at
           that
           very
           time
           .
           So
           that
           Solomon
           had
           nothing
           more
           to
           do
           in
           it
           ,
           than
           to
           use
           that
           Lawful
           Power
           God
           had
           given
           him
           for
           forcing
           him
           out
           of
           his
           Possession
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           
             XLI
             .
             Abiathar
          
           was
           not
           then
           the
           
             High-Priest
             ▪
          
           properly
           so
           called
           ,
           but
           Zadok
           .
        
         
           But
           whatever
           
           Solomon's
           concernment
           was
           in
           the
           Deprivation
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           I
           add
           farther
           ,
           6ly
           that
           it
           was
           not
           an
           Example
           ,
           so
           far
           it
           was
           from
           being
           a
           Precedent
           ,
           of
           a
           Deprivation
           of
           a
           
             High
             Priest
          
           properly
           so
           called
           .
           I
           deny
           not
           but
           Abiathar
           was
           a
           
             High
             Priest
          
           ,
           but
           not
           in
           the
           appropriated
           Sense
           .
           The
           
             N.
             T.
          
           History
           and
           Josephus
           ,
           mention
           whole
           Bodie
           of
           High-Priests
           ,
           who
           with
           the
           Bodies
           of
           the
           Scribes
           ,
           made
           up
           the
           
             Jewish
             Judicatories
          
           relating
           to
           Religion
           .
           These
           might
           consist
           ,
           partly
           of
           those
           who
           had
           been
           High-Priests
           ,
           partly
           of
           the
           Heads
           of
           the
           Several
           
             Sacerdotal
             Families
          
           ,
           partly
           of
           the
           Heads
           of
           the
           
             Sacerdotal
             courses
          
           .
           But
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           concerned
           in
           our
           present
           despute
           ,
           is
           he
           only
           who
           answered
           our
           
             Christian
             Bishops
          
           ,
           as
           a
           Principle
           of
           the
           Unity
           of
           the
           
             Jewish
             Communion
          
           ,
           as
           the
           Bishops
           are
           in
           the
           Christian.
           This
           could
           have
           been
           only
           one
           ,
           the
           chief
           of
           all
           who
           were
           called
           by
           the
           
             common
             name
          
           of
           
             High
             Priests
          
           ,
           who
           could
           be
           the
           Principle
           of
           Unity
           .
           And
           I
           deny
           Abiathar
           to
           have
           been
           
             High
             Priest
          
           simply
           in
           this
           appropriated
           Sense
           .
           *
           For
           Zadoc
           is
           frequently
           mentioned
           with
           him
           ,
           yet
           so
           ,
           as
           that
           he
           is
           always
           preferred
           before
           him
           .
           And
           this
           ,
           in
           Davids
           time
           as
           well
           as
           
           Solomon's
           ,
           which
           plainly
           shews
           that
           this
           Superiority
           did
           not
           begin
           from
           the
           Expulsion
           of
           Abiathar
           .
           From
           that
           time
           he
           was
           alone
           ,
           and
           therefore
           had
           so
           little
           reason
           to
           be
           reckoned
           in
           the
           first
           place
           ,
           that
           he
           had
           no
           reason
           to
           be
           joined
           with
           him
           at
           all
           .
           Indeed
           he
           was
           every
           way
           
             Superiour
             to
             Abiathar
          
           ,
           as
           well
           in
           order
           of
           time
           ,
           as
           in
           the
           Dignity
           of
           his
           Office.
           In
           order
           of
           time
           .
           For
           he
           is
           joined
           not
           with
           Abiathar
           only
           ,
           but
           with
           †
           Ahimelech
           also
           ,
           and
           so
           joyned
           with
           him
           as
           still
           to
           have
           the
           precedency
           of
           him
           also
           .
           If
           Ahimelech
           be
           the
           true
           Person
           designed
           to
           be
           
             joined
             ▪
          
           with
           Zadok
           in
           these
           places
           ,
           he
           cannot
           be
           the
           Son
           of
           our
           Abiathar
           ,
           *
           as
           the
           Doctor
           fancies
           ,
           because
           both
           places
           
           refer
           him
           to
           the
           time
           of
           David
           If
           he
           were
           his
           Father
           ,
           then
           as
           it
           is
           certain
           that
           Ahimelech
           was
           put
           to
           Death
           by
           Saul
           ,
           so
           it
           must
           be
           certain
           that
           Zadok
           who
           was
           coaeval
           with
           him
           ,
           must
           have
           been
           in
           the
           time
           of
           Saul
           also
           ,
           and
           before
           Abiathar
           .
           But
           perhaps
           there
           may
           have
           been
           an
           easie
           transposition
           of
           Ahimelech
           the
           son
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           instead
           of
           
             Abiathar
             the
             Son
             of
             Ahimelech
          
           ,
           in
           both
           Places
           .
           So
           they
           will
           be
           parallel
           to
           those
           other
           places
           now
           mentioned
           ,
           where
           they
           are
           so
           joyned
           ,
           and
           the
           time
           of
           both
           will
           agree
           with
           the
           time
           assigned
           them
           in
           the
           Text
           ,
           that
           of
           David
           ,
           whose
           Reign
           will
           hardly
           admit
           of
           any
           Collegue
           for
           Zadok
           ,
           besides
           our
           Abiathar
           .
           Besides
           ,
           as
           the
           time
           of
           David
           is
           inconsistent
           with
           either
           a
           Son
           or
           a
           Father
           of
           our
           Abiathar
           ,
           so
           neither
           was
           the
           Father
           of
           our
           Abiathar
           ,
           the
           Son
           of
           another
           Abiathar
           ,
           but
           of
           Ahitub
           .
           Unless
           possibly
           both
           Father
           and
           Son
           of
           had
           both
           Names
           ,
           that
           of
           Ahimelech
           and
           of
           Abiathar
           also
           .
           It
           is
           certain
           that
           Ahimelech
           the
           Father
           ,
           under
           whom
           David
           did
           eat
           the
           
             Shew
             bread
          
           ,
           is
           in
           the
           Gospel
           called
           *
           Abiathar
           .
           But
           whether
           I
           may
           securely
           reason
           from
           these
           Readings
           or
           not
           ,
           it
           is
           certain
           from
           the
           Unanimous
           Consent
           of
           so
           many
           other
           places
           ,
           that
           Zadok
           was
           
             High
             Priest
          
           ,
           and
           Superiour
           to
           Abiathar
           in
           that
           Office
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           time
           of
           David
           .
           This
           is
           at
           once
           sufficient
           to
           overthrow
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           Fancy
           ,
           that
           
           Zadok's
           
             High-Priest
             hood
          
           commenced
           from
           the
           Expulsion
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           and
           those
           of
           Josephus
           also
           ,
           and
           of
           the
           Rabbins
           ,
           who
           made
           the
           
             High-Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           for
           many
           Generations
           ,
           translated
           from
           the
           Family
           of
           Eleazar
           ,
           to
           that
           of
           Ithamar
           ,
           and
           not
           restored
           to
           its
           true
           oncient
           course
           ,
           till
           this
           dishonour
           of
           Abiathar
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XLII
           .
           There
           were
           in
           those
           times
           
             two
             High-Priests
          
           at
           once
           ;
           the
           chief
           ,
           such
           as
           Zadok
           was
           ,
           of
           the
           Family
           of
           Eleazar
           ,
           the
           lower
           ,
           such
           as
           Abiathar
           ,
           of
           the
           Family
           of
           Ithamar
           .
        
         
           They
           had
           no
           Books
           to
           inform
           them
           in
           this
           matter
           more
           than
           we
           ,
           no
           other
           coaeval
           Writings
           but
           the
           Scriptures
           ,
           which
           no
           where
           assert
           any
           such
           matter
           in
           
             plain
             terms
          
           The
           only
           way
           remaining
           therefore
           how
           they
           might
           gather
           this
           Opinion
           thence
           ,
           must
           be
           by
           their
           own
           Reasoning
           and
           Consequences
           .
           And
           it
           is
           not
           very
           difficult
           to
           guess
           what
           those
           might
           be
           .
           There
           is
           indeed
           no
           
             High
             Priest
          
           mentioned
           in
           the
           interval
           from
           Phineas
           to
           Abiathar
           ,
           but
           
             Eli
             ,
             Ahias
          
           and
           Ahimelech
           ,
           all
           of
           the
           Race
           of
           Ithamar
           .
           Thence
           they
           conceived
           that
           all
           the
           stock
           of
           Phineas
           for
           that
           time
           ,
           were
           
             private
             Persons
          
           ;
           not-invested
           with
           the
           
             High-Priest
             hood
          
           .
           But
           the
           Name
           of
           
             High
             Priest
          
           is
           never
           given
           to
           any
           of
           those
           Predecessors
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           much
           less
           in
           the
           
             appropriated
             Sense
          
           of
           which
           I
           am
           now
           discoursing
           .
           How
           then
           do
           they
           come
           to
           know
           that
           they
           were
           High-Priests
           in
           the
           Sense
           here
           disputed
           ?
           Is
           it
           because
           Ahias
           ministred
           before
           the
           Ark
           ,
           and
           Ahimelech
           and
           Abiathar
           gave
           Divine
           Answers
           to
           David
           ?
           But
           how
           do
           they
           know
           that
           this
           Office
           of
           giving
           Responses
           by
           Urim
           ,
           was
           so
           the
           prerogative
           of
           the
           
             first
             High-Priest
          
           ,
           that
           it
           might
           not
           in
           his
           absence
           agree
           to
           the
           
             lower
             High
             Priest
          
           
           of
           the
           
             Junior
             Family
          
           ?
           Why
           might
           not
           the
           Two
           Families
           take
           their
           turns
           ,
           for
           the
           mutual
           ease
           ,
           in
           these
           Offices
           of
           attending
           the
           King
           ,
           as
           the
           
             Ordinary
             Priests
          
           did
           afterwards
           in
           their
           24
           Courses
           in
           attending
           on
           the
           Temple
           ?
           And
           why
           might
           not
           these
           times
           fall
           on
           the
           courses
           of
           Ithamar
           ?
           The
           great
           occasion
           of
           their
           mistake
           is
           ,
           that
           judging
           of
           the
           Customs
           of
           these
           more
           ancient
           times
           by
           more
           
             modern
             practices
          
           ,
           they
           thought
           none
           capable
           of
           wearing
           the
           Ephod
           ,
           by
           which
           the
           Oracle
           of
           Urim
           was
           given
           ,
           but
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           ,
           properly
           so
           called
           in
           the
           
             appropriated
             sense
          
           ,
           in
           which
           there
           could
           be
           no
           more
           at
           
             one
             time
          
           ,
           but
           one
           .
           And
           that
           which
           gave
           them
           this
           Occasion
           ,
           was
           ,
           that
           this
           Ephod
           is
           reckoned
           among
           the
           Garments
           peculiar
           to
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           ,
           in
           contradiction
           to
           the
           Priests
           of
           
             lower
             Orders
          
           .
           But
           upon
           a
           closer
           examination
           ,
           they
           might
           have
           found
           that
           the
           High-Priesthood
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           execution
           of
           it
           ,
           was
           common
           to
           Aaron
           and
           all
           his
           Sons
           ,
           and
           therefore
           that
           the
           Vestments
           were
           so
           too
           ,
           only
           with
           dependence
           on
           him
           ,
           while
           he
           lived
           ,
           and
           on
           him
           who
           should
           afterwards
           succeed
           him
           in
           his
           Prerogatives
           ,
           as
           first
           and
           chief
           of
           those
           who
           did
           yet
           all
           partake
           in
           the
           execution
           of
           the
           High-Priest-hood
           .
           This
           seems
           clear
           in
           all
           the
           places
           where
           the
           High-Priesthood
           is
           spoken
           of
           in
           the
           
             Pentaeuch
             .
             Aaron
          
           is
           hardly
           ever
           mentioned
           without
           his
           Sons
           ,
           as
           joint
           sharers
           with
           him
           in
           it
           .
           The
           first
           Command
           was
           ,
           that
           *
           
             Aaron
             and
             his
             Sons
          
           should
           be
           
             taken
             from
             among
             the
             Children
             of
          
           Israel
           ,
           
             that
             HE
             might
             minister
             in
             the
             Priest
             Office.
          
           They
           are
           *
           consecrated
           together
           ,
           and
           by
           one
           common
           Form
           ,
           which
           seems
           plain
           to
           imply
           ,
           that
           the
           Power
           communicated
           by
           that
           Form
           ,
           was
           common
           also
           ,
           only
           reserving
           the
           Rights
           of
           the
           Prerogative
           .
           Their
           †
           Washings
           were
           the
           same
           ,
           and
           their
           *
           Unction
           also
           ,
           which
           was
           the
           principal
           Rite
           of
           Consecration
           ,
           which
           entitled
           them
           to
           all
           the
           Right
           they
           could
           pretend
           to
           as
           the
           
             Lord
             's
             Anointed
          
           .
           The
           †
           Offerings
           were
           also
           common
           among
           them
           ,
           both
           those
           which
           were
           to
           be
           
             shared
             by
          
           them
           ,
           and
           those
           which
           were
           
             offered
             for
          
           them
           .
           The
           Form
           of
           *
           Blessing
           the
           People
           prescribed
           to
           both
           ,
           is
           exactly
           the
           same
           .
           And
           from
           this
           power
           of
           blessing
           ,
           the
           †
           Apostle
           reasons
           ,
           in
           judging
           the
           greatness
           and
           excellency
           of
           Priest-hoods
           .
           The
           *
           Levites
           also
           were
           given
           in
           common
           to
           Aaron
           and
           his
           Sons
           .
           And
           even
           in
           this
           very
           particular
           of
           the
           
             Vestments
             ,
             Aaron
          
           is
           not
           mentioned
           alone
           ,
           but
           his
           Sons
           also
           are
           joined
           with
           him
           .
           
             The
             Holy
          
           †
           
             Garments
             were
             for
          
           Aaron
           
             and
             his
             Sons
             ,
             that
             he
             might
             minister
             unto
             GOD
             in
             the
          
           Priest's
           Office.
           That
           HE
           alone
           is
           so
           often
           said
           to
           minister
           ,
           even
           when
           THEY
           also
           are
           joyned
           with
           him
           ,
           shews
           plainly
           their
           dependence
           on
           him
           ,
           as
           a
           Principle
           of
           Unity
           .
           Accordingly
           all
           
           Aaron's
           Sons
           were
           joyned
           with
           him
           in
           this
           Affair
           .
           So
           the
           Text
           runs
           ,
           *
           
             That
             he
             may
             minister
             unto
             me
             in
             the
             Priest's
             Office
             ,
             even
          
           Aaron
           ,
           Nadab
           and
           Abihu
           ,
           Eleazar
           and
           Ithamar
           ,
           Aaron's
           Sons
           .
           
           So
           that
           all
           the
           Four
           should
           have
           had
           High-Priests
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           all
           of
           them
           left
           Posterity
           .
           This
           is
           expresly
           given
           as
           the
           Reason
           why
           the
           common
           Rights
           were
           only
           succeeded
           to
           in
           the
           Families
           of
           Eleazer
           and
           Ithamar
           ,
           that
           the
           other
           Brethren
           left
           no
           Posterity
           .
           †
           Nadab
           and
           Abihu
           
             died
             before
             their
             Father
             ,
             and
             had
             no
             Children
             ;
             THEREFORE
          
           Eleazar
           and
           Ithamar
           
             executed
             the
             Priest's
             Office.
          
           Wherein
           then
           consisted
           that
           Appropriation
           of
           those
           Vestments
           to
           the
           
             High
             Priest
             properly
          
           so
           called
           ?
           That
           there
           was
           but
           one
           of
           those
           Vestments
           made
           ,
           which
           could
           therefore
           ,
           on
           no
           occasions
           ,
           be
           worn
           by
           any
           more
           than
           one
           at
           once
           :
           That
           these
           were
           in
           the
           custody
           ,
           or
           at
           least
           ,
           at
           the
           disposal
           of
           the
           
             first
             High-Priest
          
           ,
           and
           could
           therefore
           be
           worn
           by
           none
           of
           the
           rest
           ,
           without
           his
           particular
           Favour
           and
           Indulgence
           :
           That
           they
           were
           therefore
           worn
           only
           by
           
             that
             High
             Priest
          
           ,
           who
           was
           the
           principal
           in
           the
           particular
           respective
           Ministry
           :
           That
           therefore
           they
           were
           worn
           by
           the
           
             first
             High
             Priest
          
           as
           often
           as
           he
           ministred
           ,
           because
           he
           never
           could
           be
           other
           than
           principal
           ;
           but
           by
           the
           second
           ,
           never
           but
           when
           ,
           by
           the
           absence
           of
           the
           first
           ,
           he
           thereby
           came
           to
           be
           principal
           .
           And
           hereby
           a
           clear
           account
           is
           given
           how
           the
           
           High-Priest's
           Office
           was
           performed
           ,
           in
           case
           of
           the
           Sickness
           ,
           or
           Uncleanness
           ,
           or
           any
           other
           incapacitating
           Circumstance
           ,
           of
           him
           whose
           particular
           duty
           it
           was
           .
           In
           this
           Case
           ,
           the
           
             second
             High-Priest
          
           might
           perform
           it
           for
           him
           .
           This
           was
           a
           Case
           which
           might
           probably
           and
           frequently
           fall
           out
           ,
           and
           therefore
           was
           particularly
           to
           be
           provided
           for
           in
           the
           Constitution
           .
           The
           rather
           ,
           because
           in
           the
           day
           of
           Expiation
           it
           might
           have
           been
           of
           formidable
           Consequence
           to
           the
           whole
           Nation
           ,
           if
           the
           Solemnity
           of
           that
           great
           day
           had
           been
           omitted
           ,
           even
           on
           what
           account
           soever
           ,
           and
           thereby
           the
           
             Annual
             Sins
          
           of
           the
           Peculium
           had
           not
           been
           attoned
           for
           .
           The
           Rabbinical
           Sagan
           ,
           is
           not
           a
           Scriptural
           but
           Chaldee
           Term
           ,
           and
           therefore
           wholly
           derived
           not
           from
           well-attested
           Traditions
           ,
           but
           later
           Reasonings
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XLIII
           .
           No
           deprivation
           of
           the
           Posterity
           of
           Phineas
           in
           those
           times
           .
        
         
           Thus
           therefore
           it
           appears
           ,
           that
           all
           the
           Conjectures
           of
           the
           
             private
             Life
          
           of
           the
           Posterity
           of
           Phineas
           ,
           till
           the
           expulsion
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           are
           perfectly
           groundless
           and
           precarious
           .
           They
           who
           first
           thought
           of
           it
           ,
           ought
           to
           have
           considered
           how
           this
           was
           reconcilable
           with
           the
           Promises
           made
           to
           Phineas
           of
           an
           *
           
             everlasting
             Priesthood
          
           ,
           if
           either
           he
           ,
           or
           his
           immediate
           Posterity
           ,
           had
           been
           deprived
           of
           the
           Priesthood
           ,
           and
           not
           restored
           till
           so
           many
           Ages
           after
           .
           None
           could
           have
           thought
           it
           reconcilable
           ,
           who
           had
           lived
           in
           
             those
             Ages
          
           before
           the
           Restitution
           .
           Nor
           are
           there
           any
           later
           Demerits
           of
           Phineas
           pretended
           ,
           that
           might
           occasion
           ,
           nor
           any
           Prophecies
           that
           gave
           the
           least
           warning
           of
           ,
           even
           that
           Interruption
           ,
           in
           an
           Age
           whose
           Rewards
           and
           Punishments
           were
           particularly
           adapted
           to
           Mens
           Behaviour
           in
           
             this
             World.
          
           It
           now
           appears
           ,
           that
           
           Ithamar's
           Posterity
           might
           ,
           by
           this
           Constitution
           ,
           officiate
           as
           
             High
             Priests
          
           ,
           without
           being
           so
           in
           the
           
             strict
             
             ense
          
           of
           the
           Word
           .
           It
           also
           appears
           ,
           that
           on
           account
           of
           the
           same
           Constitution
           ,
           Zadok
           was
           before
           Abiathar
           ,
           as
           being
           of
           the
           
             Elder
             Family
          
           of
           Eleazer
           ,
           and
           that
           therefore
           his
           being
           always
           mentioned
           
             before
             Abiathar
          
           was
           grounded
           on
           the
           real
           greater
           Dignity
           of
           his
           Priesthood
           before
           that
           of
           Abiathar
           .
           Whilst
           Aaron
           lived
           ,
           we
           have
           seen
           how
           his
           pre-eminence
           ,
           and
           his
           
             Sons
             dependance
          
           was
           maintain'd
           ,
           by
           his
           being
           said
           to
           do
           what
           they
           all
           assisted
           him
           in
           .
           This
           therefore
           being
           the
           Prerogative
           of
           the
           Principle
           of
           Unity
           ,
           must
           have
           descended
           from
           Aaron
           to
           his
           Successor
           in
           the
           Prerogative
           .
           Accordingly
           we
           find
           ,
           at
           
           Aaron's
           Death
           ,
           that
           the
           Right
           of
           his
           Vestments
           did
           not
           descend
           to
           his
           Sons
           in
           common
           ,
           but
           only
           to
           *
           Eleazer
           .
           This
           Josephus
           himself
           confesses
           to
           have
           been
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           his
           Primogeniture
           .
           What
           made
           him
           then
           not
           think
           on
           some
           better
           account
           than
           that
           he
           gives
           ,
           why
           Zadok
           is
           preferred
           to
           Abiathar
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           time
           of
           David
           ?
           All
           the
           Reason
           he
           gives
           for
           it
           is
           ,
           that
           he
           was
           his
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           
           David's
           †
           Friend
           .
           How
           is
           this
           reconcilable
           with
           what
           he
           says
           elsewhere
           ,
           that
           the
           Posterity
           of
           Phineas
           did
           *
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           were
           
             private
             Persons
          
           till
           this
           restitution
           of
           the
           Priesthood
           by
           Solomon
           ,
           to
           the
           Family
           of
           Phineas
           ,
           at
           the
           Expulsion
           of
           Abiathar
           ?
           Yet
           even
           in
           this
           †
           later
           place
           also
           ,
           he
           owns
           that
           Zadok
           was
           
             High
             Priest
          
           under
           David
           .
           Could
           the
           Restitution
           be
           made
           by
           Solomon
           ,
           and
           yet
           Zadok
           be
           
             High
             Priest
          
           in
           the
           time
           of
           David
           ?
           Was
           it
           likely
           that
           so
           religious
           a
           Prince
           as
           David
           could
           prefer
           a
           
             private
             Person
          
           before
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           ,
           only
           because
           he
           was
           his
           Friend
           ?
           But
           it
           was
           the
           plain
           Testimony
           of
           the
           Scriptures
           asserting
           the
           Priesthood
           of
           Zadok
           in
           the
           time
           of
           David
           ,
           that
           forced
           Josephus
           to
           these
           Contradictions
           to
           his
           own
           Reasonings
           .
           He
           might
           have
           found
           a
           
             better
             Title
          
           for
           Zadock
           than
           
             David's
             Friendship
          
           ,
           if
           he
           had
           but
           remembred
           that
           Zadok
           had
           the
           same
           Title
           with
           Eleazer
           ,
           which
           himself
           had
           founded
           on
           the
           Right
           of
           Primogeniture
           .
           But
           we
           need
           not
           ground
           
           Zadok's
           Right
           on
           the
           bare
           Opinion
           of
           so
           inconsiderate
           ,
           and
           therefore
           so
           inconsistent
           ,
           a
           Writer
           .
           The
           Scripture
           it self
           is
           sufficiently
           clear
           in
           this
           matter
           .
           Speaking
           of
           the
           Garment's
           of
           Aaron
           ,
           no
           doubt
           those
           peculiar
           to
           the
           
             High
             Pristhood
          
           strictly
           understood
           ,
           it
           adds
           ,
           *
           
             And
             that
             son
             that
             is
             Priest
             in
             his
             stead
             ,
             shall
             put
             them
             on
             seven
             days
             when
             he
             cometh
             into
             the
             Tabernacle
             of
             the
             Congregation
             ,
             to
             minister
             in
             the
             holy
             place
             .
          
           The
           Sacred
           Writer
           manifestly
           supposes
           only
           one
           of
           his
           Sons
           that
           had
           so
           frequently
           been
           joined
           with
           him
           in
           the
           Administration
           of
           his
           Office
           ,
           who
           could
           succeed
           him
           in
           the
           Right
           to
           the
           Vestments
           :
           And
           who
           could
           that
           
             one
             Son
          
           be
           ,
           by
           the
           Customs
           of
           those
           times
           ,
           who
           could
           plead
           the
           
             best
             Title
          
           to
           succeed
           him
           in
           
             incommunicable
             indivisible
             Prerogatives
          
           ,
           but
           the
           Eldest
           ?
           How
           then
           can
           we
           doubt
           of
           the
           Title
           of
           Zadok
           before
           
             Abiathar
             ,
             Zadok
          
           being
           descended
           from
           the
           
             Elder
             Brother
          
           ?
        
      
       
         
         
           §
           
             XLIV
             .
             Zadok
          
           put
           in
           the
           room
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           Courses
           of
           Ithamar
           ,
           which
           were
           not
           under
           him
           before
           .
        
         
           But
           then
           the
           Difficulty
           will
           be
           ,
           how
           these
           Words
           are
           to
           be
           under
           stood
           ;
           
             Zadok
             the
             Priest
             did
             the
             King
             put
             in
             the
             room
             of
             Abiathar
             ,
          
           1
           Kin
           II.
           35.
           
           Not
           certainly
           ,
           of
           his
           being
           then
           put
           first
           into
           the
           
             High
             Priest's
             Office
          
           ,
           if
           what
           I
           have
           already
           proved
           hold
           true
           ,
           that
           Zadok
           was
           already
           possessed
           of
           a
           
             nobler
             station
          
           in
           the
           Priesthood
           before
           ,
           than
           Abiathar
           himself
           was
           .
           That
           had
           been
           a
           degradation
           of
           Zadok
           ,
           rather
           than
           a
           promotion
           of
           him
           .
           But
           we
           have
           another
           ,
           and
           an
           easier
           and
           more
           probable
           account
           of
           it
           .
           *
           David
           had
           before
           divided
           the
           Two
           
             Sacerdotal
             Families
          
           of
           Eleazar
           and
           Ithamar
           ,
           into
           four
           and
           twenty
           Courses
           ,
           whereof
           sixteen
           were
           of
           the
           House
           of
           Eleazar
           ,
           and
           only
           eight
           of
           the
           Family
           of
           Ithamar
           .
           Those
           of
           the
           Family
           of
           Ithamar
           were
           committed
           then
           to
           the
           Care
           of
           Abiathar
           :
           For
           him
           I
           understand
           ,
           as
           I
           said
           before
           ,
           by
           the
           Name
           of
           Abimelech
           ,
           who
           was
           indeed
           the
           Son
           of
           Abimelech
           .
           The
           room
           therefore
           into
           which
           Zadok
           succeeded
           upon
           this
           Exile
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           was
           the
           Management
           of
           those
           eight
           remaining
           Courses
           of
           Ithamar
           ,
           which
           were
           not
           under
           him
           before
           .
           Thence
           forward
           therefore
           ,
           all
           the
           twenty
           four
           Courses
           were
           under
           the
           Disposal
           of
           the
           House
           of
           Eleazar
           .
           Yet
           so
           ,
           that
           the
           High-Priest
           of
           the
           Family
           of
           Eleazar
           ,
           did
           not
           immediately
           take
           care
           of
           them
           ,
           but
           committed
           them
           to
           another
           nominated
           ,
           as
           it
           should
           seem
           ,
           by
           himself
           ,
           but
           not
           one
           of
           the
           House
           of
           Ithamar
           .
           This
           I
           take
           to
           be
           the
           
             Second
             Priest
             mentioned
             ,
             2
             Kin.
             XXV
             .
             18.
             
             Jer.
          
           LII
           .
           24.
           in
           contradistinction
           to
           the
           
             Chief
             Priest
          
           ,
           who
           was
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           properly
           so
           called
           ,
           in
           the
           
             confined
             sense
             of
             the
             Word
          
           .
           And
           these
           eight
           Courses
           of
           Ithamar
           ,
           I
           take
           to
           be
           meant
           by
           them
           who
           are
           elsewhere
           called
           the
           †
           
             Priests
             of
             the
             second
             Order
          
           ,
           not
           hitherto
           so
           commonly
           understood
           .
           And
           perhaps
           the
           Levites
           also
           of
           the
           
             second
             Degree
             ,
             1
             Chr.
          
           XV.
           18.
           were
           they
           whose
           particular
           Office
           it
           was
           to
           attend
           these
           Priests
           of
           the
           
             second
             Order
          
           ,
           the
           whole
           Tribe
           of
           the
           Levites
           being
           given
           ,
           as
           I
           observed
           before
           ,
           to
           Aaron
           and
           his
           Sons
           ,
           in
           common
           .
           And
           that
           these
           
             second
             Priests
          
           ,
           under
           the
           House
           of
           Eleazar
           ,
           were
           not
           ,
           as
           formerly
           ,
           confined
           to
           the
           House
           of
           Ithamar
           ,
           I
           take
           to
           be
           the
           ground
           of
           the
           Inconvenience
           the
           Posterity
           of
           Eli
           were
           like
           to
           be
           reduced
           to
           by
           this
           Change
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           expressed
           in
           the
           Prophesy
           concerning
           it
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           to
           crouch
           to
           this
           
             second
             Priest
          
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           their
           being
           
             put
             into
             one
             of
             the
             Priests
             Office
             ,
             1
             Sam.
          
           II.
           36.
           
           There
           was
           more
           necessity
           of
           crouching
           now
           ,
           when
           they
           had
           to
           do
           with
           one
           not
           so
           
             nearly
             related
          
           to
           them
           ,
           than
           when
           they
           were
           always
           secure
           of
           having
           one
           to
           deal
           with
           ,
           who
           was
           of
           their
           
             own
             Family
          
           .
           This
           might
           be
           the
           Sagan
           ,
           mentioned
           by
           the
           Rabbins
           ,
           in
           the
           Language
           used
           after
           the
           Captivity
           ,
           who
           ,
           though
           he
           were
           more
           subject
           to
           the
           
             true
             High-Priest
          
           of
           the
           House
           of
           Eleazar
           than
           formerly
           ,
           might
           yet
           be
           serviceable
           to
           him
           in
           the
           same
           
           capacites
           that
           those
           were
           in
           ,
           who
           had
           been
           of
           the
           House
           of
           Ithamar
           ,
           in
           officiating
           for
           him
           ,
           when
           himself
           was
           under
           any
           
             Legal
             Impediment
          
           for
           performing
           his
           
             own
             Duty
          
           ,
           in
           his
           
             own
             Person
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XLV
           .
           The
           Jews
           ,
           by
           our
           Principles
           ,
           could
           not
           justify
           a
           separation
           on
           account
           of
           
             Abiathar
             .
             Their
          
           Case
           not
           like
           Ours
           .
        
         
           Hence
           it
           follows
           7ly
           ,
           that
           ,
           even
           by
           our
           Principles
           ,
           the
           Jews
           had
           no
           reason
           to
           make
           any
           Separation
           on
           Abiathar's
           account
           ,
           though
           we
           should
           suppose
           him
           deprived
           ,
           not
           unjustly
           only
           ,
           but
           invalidly
           also
           .
           For
           supposing
           his
           deprivation
           invalid
           ,
           all
           that
           can
           follow
           is
           ,
           that
           still
           he
           retain'd
           the
           same
           Right
           as
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           which
           he
           had
           before
           .
           But
           even
           that
           would
           not
           have
           sufficed
           for
           to
           justifie
           a
           Separation
           ,
           on
           his
           account
           .
           Even
           before
           ,
           not
           he
           ,
           but
           Zadok
           ;
           was
           the
           Principle
           of
           Unity
           .
           So
           that
           ,
           in
           case
           of
           difference
           ,
           they
           were
           still
           secure
           in
           adhering
           to
           Zadok
           ,
           in
           opposition
           to
           all
           others
           whatsoever
           ,
           whoever
           he
           were
           that
           occasioned
           the
           Separation
           .
           Even
           before
           ,
           therefore
           ,
           Zadok
           ,
           owed
           no
           duty
           to
           him
           ,
           but
           he
           to
           Zadok
           ;
           and
           consequently
           ,
           not
           Zadok
           ,
           but
           he
           .
           had
           been
           guilty
           of
           the
           Schism
           that
           would
           have
           followed
           upon
           the
           difference
           .
           If
           such
           an
           invalid
           deprivation
           could
           not
           affect
           ,
           or
           weaken
           ,
           the
           Title
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           as
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           much
           less
           can
           it
           be
           pretended
           to
           affect
           that
           of
           Zadok
           ,
           who
           was
           not
           any
           way
           concerned
           in
           it
           .
           Even
           before
           ,
           the
           Duty
           of
           the
           Communicants
           ,
           in
           case
           of
           such
           division
           ,
           had
           been
           still
           owing
           to
           Zadok
           ;
           and
           therefore
           they
           also
           must
           have
           involved
           themselves
           in
           the
           Schism
           ,
           if
           ,
           upon
           pretence
           of
           their
           duty
           to
           Abiathar
           ,
           they
           had
           violated
           their
           
             more
             sacred
          
           and
           obliging
           Duty
           to
           Zadok
           ,
           to
           whom
           Abiathar
           himself
           owed
           Duty
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           they
           .
           Indeed
           they
           owed
           Abiathar
           no
           Duty
           at
           all
           ,
           but
           in
           subordination
           and
           dependence
           on
           their
           antecedent
           Duty
           to
           Zadok
           :
           And
           therefore
           when
           that
           subordination
           and
           dependance
           had
           been
           taken
           away
           ,
           as
           it
           must
           have
           been
           by
           a
           notorious
           Separation
           ,
           they
           could
           not
           then
           owe
           Abiathar
           any
           duty
           at
           all
           ;
           and
           therefore
           thy
           must
           have
           broken
           their
           duty
           to
           Zadok
           ,
           in
           paying
           any
           to
           Abiathar
           .
           For
           thus
           it
           is
           in
           other
           subordination
           also
           .
           Whilst
           a
           General
           does
           himself
           observe
           his
           own
           Sovereign
           ,
           his
           Soldiers
           cannot
           pay
           their
           duty
           to
           the
           common
           Sovereign
           ,
           without
           paying
           it
           to
           the
           General
           ,
           who
           has
           the
           
             Sovereign's
             Authority
          
           to
           exact
           duty
           from
           them
           .
           But
           if
           the
           General
           ,
           revolt
           ,
           they
           are
           judged
           Rebels
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           he
           ,
           to
           the
           common
           Sovereign
           ,
           if
           ,
           upon
           any
           pretence
           whatsoever
           ,
           they
           pay
           him
           any
           Duty
           at
           all
           .
           So
           far
           this
           Case
           therefore
           is
           from
           being
           paralled
           to
           that
           of
           our
           present
           
             Holy
             Fathers
          
           ,
           that
           here
           the
           Reasoning
           and
           the
           Duty
           lie
           directly
           contrary
           .
           If
           our
           Fathers
           still
           retain
           their
           Right
           in
           Conscience
           (
           as
           they
           must
           ,
           if
           the
           Sentence
           of
           Deprivation
           be
           invalid
           ,
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           as
           pronounced
           by
           them
           who
           have
           no
           Right
           to
           judge
           them
           ,
           in
           relation
           to
           their
           Spiritual
           )
           
           then
           their
           Rivals
           can
           have
           none
           in
           the
           same
           Jurisdictions
           ,
           and
           the
           whole
           charge
           of
           Schisms
           must
           lye
           against
           them
           ,
           and
           those
           who
           maintain
           them
           in
           their
           Invasions
           of
           our
           Father's
           Rights
           .
           How
           can
           they
           then
           apply
           here
           the
           Case
           of
           Abiathar
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXVI
           .
           When
           Invasions
           had
           passed
           into
           a
           Prescription
           ,
           as
           in
           our
           
           Soviour's
           time
           ,
           he
           that
           was
           in
           Possession
           had
           really
           the
           
             best
             Title
          
           .
        
         
           Thus
           far
           I
           have
           proceeded
           on
           the
           Sense
           and
           Reasonings
           of
           those
           earlier
           times
           of
           the
           Jews
           ,
           which
           is
           certainly
           the
           truest
           and
           solidest
           way
           of
           judging
           concerning
           Obligations
           and
           Duties
           incumbent
           on
           the
           Subjects
           then
           .
           And
           by
           these
           it
           has
           appeared
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Civil
             Power
          
           could
           not
           pretend
           to
           any
           Right
           of
           depriving
           Priests
           of
           their
           Right
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           and
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           .
           This
           consideration
           did
           restrain
           Princes
           of
           their
           
             own
             Nation
          
           ,
           who
           had
           any
           regard
           to
           their
           Duty
           to
           GOD
           ,
           from
           putting
           the
           Case
           .
           But
           when
           they
           were
           not
           under
           the
           Government
           of
           Princes
           ,
           who
           were
           of
           their
           
             own
             Nation
          
           and
           Religion
           ,
           but
           under
           those
           who
           did
           not
           think
           themselves
           obliged
           by
           the
           positive
           Laws
           of
           GOD
           ,
           to
           protect
           the
           Priests
           from
           the
           Legal
           Power
           of
           force
           which
           GOD
           had
           committed
           to
           them
           ;
           this
           was
           the
           time
           indeed
           ,
           wherein
           we
           find
           Examples
           of
           
             true
             High-Priests
          
           ,
           even
           properly
           so
           called
           ,
           who
           were
           deprived
           by
           the
           
             Secular
             Power
          
           .
           Here
           therefore
           were
           Two
           Cases
           ;
           one
           was
           ,
           when
           the
           Practice
           of
           Intrusions
           was
           now
           grown
           so
           frequent
           ,
           that
           no
           
             High-Priest
             living
          
           had
           a
           better
           Title
           ;
           the
           other
           ,
           upon
           the
           
             first
             invasion
          
           ,
           when
           the
           true
           Predecessor
           was
           still
           living
           ,
           and
           had
           not
           renounced
           his
           Right
           .
           The
           former
           ,
           was
           the
           Case
           in
           the
           time
           of
           our
           Saviour
           .
           The
           old
           way
           of
           deriving
           the
           succession
           to
           the
           next
           of
           the
           Family
           who
           was
           legally
           qualified
           for
           it
           ,
           having
           none
           of
           those
           Corporal
           blemishes
           which
           by
           the
           Law
           could
           make
           him
           uncapable
           of
           it
           ,
           (
           on
           which
           account
           Eleazar
           succeeded
           Aaron
           )
           was
           long
           before
           that
           laid
           by
           a
           Prescription
           sufficient
           to
           antiquate
           it
           .
           For
           many
           Generations
           ,
           it
           had
           been
           disposed
           of
           by
           the
           
             Secular
             Princes
          
           who
           had
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Temple
           ,
           first
           by
           the
           Macedonians
           ,
           then
           by
           the
           Romans
           ,
           to
           Persons
           no
           otherwise
           qualified
           than
           by
           their
           being
           only
           of
           the
           Family
           of
           Aaron
           .
           There
           was
           therefore
           then
           no
           Person
           living
           who
           had
           a
           
             better
             Title
          
           as
           to
           the
           designation
           of
           his
           Person
           ,
           than
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           who
           had
           the
           command
           of
           the
           Temple
           ,
           and
           the
           
             Sacerdotal
             Vestments
          
           .
           As
           soon
           therefore
           as
           any
           Person
           was
           once
           possessed
           of
           the
           Temple
           and
           the
           Altar
           ,
           the
           
             same
             way
          
           as
           his
           Predessor
           had
           been
           ,
           his
           Right
           ,
           was
           every
           way
           ,
           
             as
             good
          
           as
           the
           Right
           of
           any
           other
           ,
           who
           could
           pretend
           against
           him
           ;
           in
           which
           case
           ,
           the
           
             publick
             Interest
          
           ,
           (
           which
           is
           inseparably
           Right
           )
           for
           
             ending
             Controversies
          
           ,
           has
           always
           given
           proference
           to
           the
           Possessor
           .
           Both
           of
           them
           were
           as
           well
           consecrated
           into
           the
           Office
           by
           Spiritual
           Persons
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           invested
           by
           the
           Lay-Power
           into
           the
           possession
           of
           the
           Externals
           requisite
           
           for
           executing
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Office
          
           committed
           to
           them
           .
           And
           that
           the
           later
           was
           consecrated
           into
           his
           
           Predecessor's
           Place
           ,
           both
           without
           the
           consent
           ,
           and
           by
           the
           subjects
           of
           his
           Predecessor
           ,
           was
           as
           applicable
           to
           all
           his
           Predecessors
           as
           himself
           ,
           and
           therefore
           must
           as
           much
           weaken
           
             their
             Title
          
           also
           ,
           as
           it
           did
           his
           ,
           and
           make
           them
           only
           equal
           to
           him
           ,
           on
           this
           consideration
           also
           .
           This
           would
           resolve
           the
           Right
           only
           into
           some
           dead
           Person
           ,
           whose
           Rights
           all
           Laws
           determine
           with
           their
           Lives
           ,
           especially
           were
           no
           Person
           living
           is
           concerned
           in
           them
           .
           All
           therefore
           that
           can
           be
           said
           in
           this
           Case
           is
           ,
           that
           what
           ought
           not
           to
           have
           been
           done
           at
           first
           ,
           was
           now
           done
           ,
           and
           ratified
           by
           Providence
           ,
           the
           same
           way
           as
           all
           other
           
             Humane
             Governments
          
           ,
           as
           well
           Secular
           as
           Sacred
           ,
           are
           usually
           changed
           by
           Prescription
           ;
           which
           by
           the
           Law
           of
           Nations
           ,
           and
           with
           relation
           to
           the
           good
           of
           Mankind
           ,
           and
           Governments
           in
           general
           ,
           is
           ,
           in
           process
           of
           time
           ,
           judged
           sufficien
           to
           extinguish
           an
           Original
           Right
           ,
           and
           to
           make
           that
           a
           RIGHT
           which
           at
           first
           was
           no
           other
           than
           invasion
           and
           Violence
           .
           This
           holds
           especcially
           where
           the
           Right
           is
           only
           Personal
           ,
           as
           that
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           was
           ;
           and
           the
           Person
           made
           uncapable
           of
           holding
           it
           .
           Mutilation
           alone
           was
           sufficient
           to
           have
           taken
           away
           the
           Right
           of
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           by
           the
           same
           Law
           that
           gave
           a
           Right
           to
           it
           ,
           and
           therefore
           much
           more
           Death
           .
           This
           was
           really
           the
           Case
           ,
           when
           our
           
             Blessed
             Saviour
          
           communicated
           with
           the
           High-Priests
           ,
           obtruded
           by
           the
           
             Romans
             .
             Josephus
          
           himself
           observes
           ,
           that
           whereas
           the
           
             High
             Priest-hood
          
           was
           before
           for
           Life
           ,
           then
           it
           was
           not
           
           so
           ,
           but
           during
           the
           pleasure
           of
           those
           who
           had
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Temple
           .
           And
           I
           know
           no
           Eternally
           obliging
           Law
           frow
           the
           nature
           of
           Priest-hood
           in
           general
           ,
           that
           makes
           it
           essential
           to
           the
           Priest-hood
           to
           be
           for
           Life
           ,
           more
           than
           for
           any
           other
           
             Humane
             Office.
          
           If
           it
           were
           therefore
           changeable
           ,
           such
           a
           prescription
           was
           undoubtedly
           sufficient
           for
           actually
           changing
           it
           .
           And
           if
           this
           Case
           hold
           any
           where
           among
           Christians
           ,
           it
           does
           so
           ,
           at
           present
           ,
           among
           the
           
             Constantinopolitane
             Greeks
          
           .
           They
           also
           now
           are
           brought
           to
           that
           pass
           ,
           that
           their
           Patriarchs
           have
           not
           their
           power
           given
           them
           for
           Life
           at
           the
           time
           it
           is
           given
           them
           ,
           but
           during
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           
             Infidel
             Magistrate
          
           .
           The
           Greeks
           therefore
           are
           under
           no
           Obligation
           of
           Conscience
           to
           assert
           the
           Rights
           of
           any
           Predecessor
           ,
           by
           refusing
           Communion
           with
           his
           Successor
           ,
           because
           the
           Predecessor
           himself
           had
           no
           better
           a
           Right
           ;
           and
           the
           Successor
           ,
           has
           on
           
             this
             account
          
           ,
           an
           equal
           Right
           ,
           but
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           Possession
           ,
           a
           better
           than
           he
           .
           But
           this
           can
           ,
           by
           no
           means
           ,
           be
           applied
           to
           the
           Case
           of
           our
           
             present
             Fathers
          
           .
           They
           ,
           at
           their
           Consecration
           ,
           had
           a
           
             power
             given
          
           and
           intended
           for
           Life
           ,
           which
           is
           not
           yet
           taken
           from
           them
           by
           the
           power
           ,
           that
           gave
           it
           them
           ;
           and
           therefore
           have
           manifestly
           ,
           by
           our
           present
           Constitution
           ,
           a
           
             better
             Title
          
           than
           their
           Successors
           .
           They
           are
           indeed
           THRUST
           out
           of
           their
           Possession
           as
           Abiathar
           ,
           
           but
           with
           no
           such
           evidence
           of
           the
           
             Divine
             Sentence
          
           passed
           against
           them
           ,
           as
           was
           in
           his
           Case
           .
           We
           have
           ,
           as
           yet
           ,
           no
           Prescription
           for
           such
           Violences
           ;
           nor
           have
           we
           to
           deal
           with
           an
           
             Infidel
             Magistracy
          
           ,
           as
           they
           had
           .
           Heathen
           Governours
           ,
           might
           with
           more
           consistency
           to
           their
           own
           Principles
           ,
           use
           such
           Violences
           so
           frequently
           ,
           as
           at
           length
           ,
           when
           all
           were
           dead
           who
           had
           a
           
             better
             Title
          
           ,
           to
           make
           them
           pass
           into
           a
           PRESCRIPTION
           .
           This
           can
           ,
           by
           no
           means
           ,
           become
           CHRISTIAN
           PRINCES
           ,
           DEFENDERS
           of
           the
           FAITH
           ,
           nor
           
             CHRISTIAN
             PARLIAMENTS
          
           ;
           mueh
           less
           ,
           MEMBERS
           of
           our
           late
           flourishing
           CHURCHES
           in
           these
           Dominions
           .
           This
           I
           say
           ,
           on
           Supposition
           only
           of
           the
           Legality
           of
           our
           Civil
           establishment
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XLVII
           .
           Among
           the
           Jews
           ,
           the
           true
           High-Priest
           was
           to
           be
           known
           by
           his
           possessing
           the
           
             One
             Altar
          
           .
           Among
           th
           Christians
           ,
           the
           true
           Altar
           was
           known
           by
           its
           
             being
             possessed
          
           by
           the
           true
           Bishop
           .
        
         
           If
           our
           Adversaries
           will
           needs
           Reason
           from
           Precedents
           of
           
             those
             times
          
           ,
           they
           must
           put
           a
           Case
           exactly
           Parallel
           with
           Ours
           ,
           of
           a
           High-Priest
           possessed
           of
           a
           Title
           unquestionably
           better
           than
           his
           Successors
           ,
           yet
           violently
           forced
           ,
           as
           Ours
           are
           ,
           out
           of
           his
           Possession
           .
           This
           Case
           ,
           I
           grant
           ,
           did
           frequently
           befall
           the
           Jews
           when
           they
           were
           Subject
           to
           
             Infidel
             Magistrates
          
           .
           But
           it
           was
           in
           
             such
             times
          
           whose
           Practice
           we
           cannot
           reckon
           upon
           as
           Infallible
           ,
           as
           we
           can
           upon
           that
           of
           our
           Blessed
           SAVIOUR
           and
           his
           Apostles
           .
           Here
           therefore
           we
           cannot
           reckon
           upon
           their
           bare
           Practice
           ,
           That
           ,
           what
           was
           done
           ,
           was
           as
           it
           ought
           to
           be
           ,
           purely
           on
           this
           account
           alone
           ,
           because
           it
           was
           done
           ;
           but
           ,
           independently
           on
           that
           ,
           we
           must
           enquire
           what
           the
           Principles
           then
           received
           obliged
           them
           to
           do
           ,
           if
           they
           would
           approve
           themselves
           true
           to
           them
           .
           And
           here
           ,
           I
           have
           already
           shewn
           that
           
             External
             Force
          
           alone
           was
           sufficient
           to
           make
           all
           exercise
           of
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
             impracticable
          
           ,
           to
           the
           Person
           so
           deprived
           by
           Secular
           Force
           .
           Hence
           it
           follows
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           not
           in
           their
           Power
           directly
           to
           assert
           his
           Right
           ,
           by
           communicating
           with
           him
           in
           Acts
           of
           his
           
             Sacerdotal
             Authority
          
           .
           For
           him
           to
           erect
           any
           
             other
             Altar
          
           ,
           where
           it
           might
           be
           in
           his
           Power
           to
           Officiate
           ,
           besides
           that
           in
           Jerusalem
           ,
           was
           condemned
           as
           Schismatical
           ,
           by
           the
           Doctrines
           of
           those
           Ages
           ,
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           Samaritans
           ,
           and
           upon
           the
           same
           accounts
           as
           the
           Worship
           in
           the
           
             High
             places
          
           had
           been
           condemned
           in
           the
           Scriptures
           ,
           and
           as
           the
           Altar
           built
           by
           the
           Tribes
           beyond
           Jordan
           was
           condemned
           ,
           till
           they
           knew
           the
           true
           design
           of
           that
           Altar
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           only
           for
           a
           Monument
           of
           their
           Interest
           in
           the
           Altar
           of
           Jerusalem
           ,
           not
           for
           
             opposite
             Sacrifices
          
           .
           The
           only
           way
           therefore
           left
           them
           to
           assert
           his
           Right
           ,
           had
           been
           to
           have
           abstained
           from
           Communicating
           in
           the
           Sacrifice
           of
           his
           Rival
           in
           the
           Temple
           .
           But
           there
           is
           great
           reason
           to
           believe
           that
           that
           was
           more
           than
           they
           could
           justify
           then
           ;
           and
           that
           reason
           ,
           peculiar
           to
           their
           Constitution
           at
           
             that
             time
          
           ,
           which
           therefore
           cannot
           be
           drawn
           into
           Consequence
           now
           under
           the
           Gospel
           ,
           nor
           applyed
           to
           the
           Case
           of
           our
           present
           Holy
           Fathers
           .
           It
           is
           certain
           
           that
           their
           Communion
           then
           was
           as
           much
           confined
           by
           GOD
           to
           the
           
             One
             Altar
          
           at
           Jerusalem
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           
             One
             High
             Priest.
          
           The
           only
           Consideration
           remaining
           ,
           is
           whether
           of
           the
           two
           Regards
           was
           principal
           .
           That
           is
           the
           proper
           way
           to
           determine
           ,
           whether
           was
           to
           
             give
             way
          
           to
           the
           other
           ,
           where
           both
           could
           not
           be
           had
           :
           That
           is
           ,
           whether
           that
           Altar
           was
           to
           be
           taken
           for
           the
           
             One
             Altar
          
           designed
           by
           GOD
           ,
           where
           the
           
             true
             High
             Priest
          
           officiated
           ,
           who
           had
           the
           nearest
           Title
           in
           the
           order
           of
           Succession
           from
           Aaron
           ?
           Or
           ,
           whether
           that
           
             High
             Priest
          
           was
           to
           be
           taken
           for
           the
           
             true
             Representative
          
           of
           GOD
           ,
           and
           thereby
           could
           oblige
           GOD
           to
           performance
           ,
           who
           officiated
           at
           the
           Altar
           of
           Jerusalem
           ,
           provided
           he
           were
           otherwise
           qualified
           ,
           by
           being
           of
           the
           Posterity
           of
           Aaron
           ,
           and
           of
           the
           Line
           of
           Phineas
           ,
           and
           fairly
           consecrated
           by
           those
           who
           had
           Power
           to
           consecrate
           him
           ,
           though
           he
           were
           not
           the
           next
           that
           was
           legally
           qualified
           ,
           of
           that
           very
           Line
           .
           And
           we
           have
           reason
           to
           believe
           ,
           that
           the
           Altar
           was
           the
           principal
           Consideration
           in
           the
           Design
           of
           GOD
           ,
           who
           thereby
           secured
           the
           Communion
           against
           
             Schismatical
             Factions
          
           ,
           even
           of
           the
           High-Priests
           themselves
           ,
           by
           allowing
           none
           for
           his
           
             authorized
             Representatives
          
           but
           those
           who
           were
           possessed
           of
           that
           
             One
             Altar
          
           .
           For
           Jerusalem
           alone
           is
           called
           the
           
             Holy
             City
          
           ,
           St.
           Matt.
           IV.
           5.
           
           XXVII
           .
           53.
           and
           so
           call'd
           in
           the
           Jewish
           Coins
           for
           that
           very
           Reason
           ,
           because
           that
           was
           the
           
             place
             where
             men
             ought
             to
             worship
             ,
          
           St.
           Joh
           IV.
           20.
           
           That
           only
           was
           the
           place
           whither
           they
           were
           to
           bring
           their
           Tythes
           and
           Offerings
           ,
           and
           where
           all
           their
           Males
           were
           ,
           thrice
           a
           Year
           ,
           to
           appear
           in
           Person
           .
           So
           that
           all
           face
           of
           publick
           Worship
           must
           have
           been
           laid
           aside
           at
           the
           Pleasure
           of
           their
           
             Infidel
             Princes
          
           ,
           if
           one
           Obtrusion
           of
           a
           remoter
           Person
           ,
           in
           the
           order
           of
           the
           Succession
           ,
           might
           have
           sufficed
           to
           hinder
           their
           communicating
           there
           ,
           which
           none
           can
           think
           but
           that
           GOD
           did
           intend
           to
           lay
           greater
           stress
           on
           ,
           than
           on
           the
           immediate
           Order
           of
           the
           Succession
           .
           It
           is
           certain
           ,
           they
           could
           not
           ,
           by
           the
           Law
           it self
           ,
           challenge
           their
           Dues
           for
           Maintenance
           any
           where
           else
           than
           there
           ,
           nor
           eat
           several
           of
           the
           Oblations
           any
           where
           else
           than
           in
           that
           
             holy
             place
          
           in
           their
           Temple
           .
           Which
           shews
           plainly
           ,
           that
           the
           Dues
           of
           Priesthood
           were
           not
           due
           to
           them
           on
           any
           other
           Condition
           ,
           than
           that
           of
           their
           officiating
           in
           that
           very
           place
           designed
           by
           GOD
           for
           their
           
             Holy
             Offices
          
           .
           Hence
           it
           appears
           ,
           that
           what
           Right
           they
           might
           pretend
           ,
           when
           they
           were
           excluded
           from
           the
           Altar
           of
           Jerusalem
           ,
           was
           only
           such
           a
           
             remote
             Right
          
           as
           Men
           ordinarily
           have
           to
           Offices
           ,
           before
           their
           Admission
           into
           the
           Legal
           Possession
           of
           them
           .
           They
           are
           indeed
           wronged
           if
           they
           be
           not
           admitted
           as
           the
           Law
           requires
           ;
           but
           till
           they
           be
           admitted
           ,
           the
           same
           Laws
           allow
           them
           no
           Title
           to
           the
           Profits
           ,
           and
           Duties
           ,
           and
           Dependencies
           annexed
           to
           the
           Office.
           This
           was
           the
           Practice
           of
           the
           Jews
           ,
           when
           there
           were
           Exumples
           of
           violent
           exclusion
           of
           those
           who
           
           by
           the
           Law
           had
           a
           Right
           to
           possess
           the
           Temple
           and
           Altar
           ,
           but
           did
           not
           actually
           possess
           them
           .
           And
           by
           the
           Reasoning
           now
           mentioned
           ,
           the
           Practice
           appears
           to
           have
           been
           agreeable
           to
           the
           Mind
           of
           the
           Divine
           Legislator
           ,
           But
           the
           Case
           is
           quite
           different
           in
           our
           Fathers
           Case
           under
           the
           Gospel
           .
           By
           the
           Apostolical
           Ignatius
           it
           appears
           ,
           that
           the
           Bishop
           is
           the
           Standard
           of
           our
           
             Christian
             Altars
          
           :
           That
           where
           he
           is
           ,
           there
           the
           Peculium
           is
           to
           *
           Assemble
           ;
           and
           they
           only
           who
           do
           so
           ,
           can
           ,
           by
           the
           Laws
           of
           Christianity
           ,
           be
           properly
           called
           the
           †
           Church
           :
           That
           his
           Altar
           is
           the
           
             True
             Altar
          
           ‖
           and
           his
           Eucharist
           the
           only
           *
           
             Valid
             Eucharist
          
           :
           and
           that
           no
           Acts
           of
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Authority
          
           are
           †
           acceptable
           to
           GOD
           ,
           or
           can
           expect
           a
           Ratification
           by
           him
           ,
           which
           are
           performed
           any
           where
           else
           than
           where
           he
           is
           ,
           or
           without
           his
           ‖
           Leave
           .
           This
           ruins
           all
           Consequences
           from
           
             their
             Practice
          
           then
           to
           our
           
             present
             Case
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XLVIII
           .
           The
           Reasons
           for
           Exemption
           from
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Prince
             stronger
          
           on
           our
           deprived
           Fathers
           Case
           ,
           than
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           Abiathar
           .
           Our
           Bishops
           are
           properly
           Priests
           .
        
         
           Hitherto
           I
           have
           considered
           the
           Case
           of
           Abiathar
           in
           general
           ,
           as
           it
           concerned
           the
           Jews
           ,
           with
           some
           general
           Strictures
           only
           ,
           with
           relation
           to
           our
           present
           Case
           .
           I
           now
           proceed
           farther
           to
           consider
           the
           same
           Reasonings
           ,
           insisted
           on
           by
           the
           Principles
           of
           those
           Ages
           ,
           for
           proving
           Abiathar
           exempt
           ,
           as
           to
           his
           Spirituals
           ,
           from
           the
           Jurisdiction
           of
           Solomon
           ,
           with
           relation
           to
           the
           Constitutions
           of
           the
           Gospel
           ,
           which
           are
           those
           by
           which
           our
           present
           Fathers
           Rights
           are
           to
           be
           estimated
           .
           Here
           therefore
           I
           design
           to
           shew
           that
           the
           same
           Reasonings
           hold
           ,
           and
           hold
           with
           more
           Evidence
           and
           Force
           ,
           for
           our
           deprived
           Fathers
           Rights
           ,
           than
           they
           did
           for
           those
           of
           Abiathar
           .
           First
           therefore
           our
           Episcopal
           Fathers
           Rights
           are
           as
           properly
           (
           indeed
           in
           a
           
             more
             noble
          
           sense
           )
           the
           Rights
           of
           a
           
           Priesthood
           as
           those
           of
           Abiathar
           were
           .
           So
           that
           it
           is
           very
           proper
           to
           reason
           from
           one
           to
           the
           other
           .
           I
           know
           how
           very
           difficulty
           this
           is
           admitted
           by
           many
           .
           And
           yet
           I
           wonder
           it
           should
           be
           so
           ,
           considering
           that
           it
           is
           manifest
           in
           the
           reasonings
           of
           the
           Writers
           of
           the
           
             Apostolical
             Age
          
           ,
           who
           reason
           from
           one
           to
           the
           other
           as
           plainly
           as
           I
           do
           ,
           which
           Reasonings
           must
           be
           perfectly
           unconclusive
           as
           proceeding
           on
           
             four
             terms
          
           ,
           if
           the
           Notion
           of
           Priesthood
           be
           not
           supposed
           
             univocally
             common
          
           to
           ours
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           the
           Jewish
           Ministry
           .
           Thus
           the
           Apostle
           Reasons
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           maintenance
           :
           
             Do
             ye
             not
             know
             that
             they
             which
             Minister
             about
             Holy
             things
             ,
             live
          
           
           
             of
             the
             things
             of
             the
             Temple
             ?
             And
             they
             which
             wait
             at
             the
             Altar
             ,
             are
             partakers
             of
             the
             Altar
             ?
             Even
             so
             hath
             the
             Lord
             ordained
             ,
             that
             they
             which
             preach
             the
             Gospel
             ,
             should
             live
             of
             the
             Gospel
             .
          
           GOD'S
           
             ordaining
             there
          
           ,
           is
           Supposed
           as
           known
           by
           them
           to
           whom
           he
           argues
           ,
           from
           what
           GOD
           had
           constituted
           in
           relation
           to
           the
           
             Jewish
             Priesthood
          
           ,
           and
           Temple
           ,
           and
           Altar
           ;
           which
           could
           by
           no
           means
           be
           applicable
           to
           his
           design
           for
           proving
           an
           Obligation
           under
           the
           Gospel
           ,
           for
           maintainance
           of
           the
           
             Gospel
             Ministry
          
           ,
           but
           by
           supposing
           our
           Case
           the
           same
           with
           theirs
           ,
           that
           we
           have
           a
           Priesthood
           ,
           a
           Temple
           ,
           and
           an
           Altar
           ,
           as
           properly
           as
           they
           .
           The
           same
           Apostle
           Reasons
           on
           the
           same
           supposal
           ,
           when
           he
           compares
           our
           Eucharistical
           Bread
           and
           
           Wine
           ,
           and
           the
           Communion
           we
           have
           with
           CHRIST
           by
           them
           ,
           with
           the
           Communion
           maintain'd
           both
           by
           the
           Jews
           and
           the
           Gentiles
           ,
           with
           their
           respective
           Deities
           ,
           by
           Sacrifice
           .
           With
           the
           Jews
           ,
           in
           these
           Words
           :
           
             Behold
             Israel
             after
             the
             Flesh
             :
             Are
             not
             they
             which
             eat
             of
             the
             Sacrifices
             ,
             partakers
             of
             the
             Altar
             ?
          
           v.
           18.
           
           Here
           plainly
           he
           supposes
           
             our
             partaking
             of
             the
             One
             Bread
             ,
          
           in
           the
           Words
           immediately
           preceeding
           ,
           to
           be
           the
           same
           thing
           with
           us
           ,
           
             as
             the
             eating
             of
             the
             Sacrifices
             ,
             and
             partaking
             of
             the
             Altar
             .
          
           How
           so
           ,
           if
           our
           Eucharist
           had
           not
           been
           properly
           a
           Sa●rifice
           ?
           With
           the
           Gentiles
           .
           where
           he
           compares
           our
           
             drinking
             the
             Cup
             of
             the
             LORD
             ,
          
           with
           
             drinking
             the
             Cup
             of
             Devils
          
           ;
           and
           our
           
             Partaking
             of
             the
             LORDS
             Table
          
           with
           
             partaking
             of
             the
             Tables
             of
             Devils
          
           v.
           21.
           and
           our
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           with
           Christ
           v.
           16.
           with
           a
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           with
           Devils
           ,
           v.
           20.
           
           It
           plainly
           appears
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Table
             of
             Devils
          
           was
           furnished
           with
           no
           other
           Feasts
           but
           Sacrifical
           ,
           and
           they
           are
           expresly
           called
           Sacrifices
           ,
           v.
           19
           ,
           20.
           
           These
           things
           also
           plainly
           shew
           ,
           that
           the
           benefits
           expected
           by
           the
           Christians
           from
           their
           Eucharist
           were
           transacted
           ,
           according
           to
           the
           then
           receiv'd
           Notions
           both
           of
           Jews
           and
           Gentiles
           ,
           by
           Sacrifices
           ,
           as
           properly
           so
           called
           as
           the
           others
           were
           ,
           as
           to
           all
           intents
           and
           purposes
           of
           Legal
           transaction
           .
           So
           again
           ,
           the
           same
           Apostle
           owns
           the
           Sacrifical
           Style
           ,
           when
           he
           calls
           that
           an
           Altar
           which
           
           he
           had
           elsewhere
           called
           the
           
             Lords
             Table
             :
             We
             have
             an
             Altar
             whereof
             they
             have
             no
             Right
             to
             eat
             ,
             which
             serve
             the
             Tabernacle
             .
          
           That
           Altar
           he
           compares
           with
           meats
           in
           the
           verse
           before
           ,
           and
           therefore
           must
           probably
           mean
           the
           
             Eucharistical
             Altar
          
           .
           Besides
           the
           Jews
           did
           pretend
           to
           
           the
           
             Heavenly
             Altar
          
           ,
           as
           is
           clear
           from
           the
           places
           formerly
           produced
           from
           Philo.
           But
           it
           was
           Notorious
           that
           their
           Priests
           as
           such
           had
           
             no
             Right
          
           to
           the
           Christian
           
             Eucharistical
             Altar
          
           ,
           nor
           did
           they
           ever
           pretend
           to
           it
           .
           This
           therefore
           was
           more
           unquestionable
           ,
           and
           more
           fit
           to
           be
           Reason'd
           on
           ,
           for
           the
           Apostles
           purpose
           .
           So
           also
           
             Clemens
             Romanus
          
           argues
           from
           
           the
           Sacredness
           of
           the
           
             Jewish
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           to
           the
           like
           Sacredness
           of
           the
           
             Gospel
             Ministry
          
           .
           And
           from
           the
           like
           Notions
           of
           an
           
             Altar
             ,
             Ignatius
          
           also
           Reasons
           in
           the
           places
           already
           mentioned
           .
           So
           many
           precedents
           we
           have
           of
           Reasonings
           of
           this
           kind
           in
           the
           
             Apostolical
             times
          
           themselves
           .
           And
           if
           he
           consider
           the
           things
           themselves
           sedately
           ,
           I
           see
           no
           reason
           why
           we
           should
           think
           these
           Notions
           strange
           in
           that
           Age.
           The
           
             Jewish
             Sacrifices
          
           themselves
           were
           not
           then
           thought
           available
           as
           they
           consisted
           in
           shedding
           the
           Bloud
           of
           Brutes
           ,
           but
           as
           they
           represented
           the
           
             Archcetypal
             Sacrifice
          
           of
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           and
           as
           
             Covenanting
             Symbols
          
           gave
           the
           Communicants
           a
           Right
           to
           what
           was
           represented
           by
           them
           .
           This
           was
           the
           truly
           beneficial
           Notion
           of
           a
           Covenant
           transacted
           by
           Sacrifice
           .
           And
           in
           this
           Sense
           ,
           I
           cannot
           conceive
           how
           our
           Adversaries
           can
           deny
           our
           Eucharist
           the
           name
           of
           a
           Sacrifice
           ,
           as
           properly
           ,
           as
           it
           agreed
           to
           any
           used
           among
           the
           Jews
           .
           Our
           Eucharist
           also
           was
           designed
           by
           our
           Lord
           to
           represent
           his
           own
           
             Archetypal
             Sacrifice
          
           on
           the
           Cross.
           And
           not
           only
           so
           ,
           but
           as
           a
           
             Covenanting
             Symbol
          
           ,
           to
           convey
           a
           Right
           to
           that
           Sacrifice
           ,
           so
           represented
           ,
           to
           the
           Worthy
           rightly
           disposed
           Communicant
           .
           What
           therefore
           can
           our
           Adversaries
           desire
           more
           for
           satisfying
           the
           proper
           beneficial
           Notion
           of
           a
           Sacrifice
           ?
           Wine
           may
           ,
           by
           
             Christs
             appointment
          
           ,
           signify
           his
           Bloud
           to
           
             Covenanting
             beneficial
          
           purposes
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           
             real
             Bloud
          
           itself
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           XLIX
           .
           The
           Gospel
           Priest-hood
           more
           Noble
           
             than
             that
             of
          
           Abiathar
           .
           
             The
             same
          
           Reasoning
           
             therefore
             holds
          
           now
           
             which
             did
          
           then
           ;
           but
           now
           more
           strongly
           .
        
         
           This
           therefore
           being
           supposed
           that
           our
           Gospel
           Ministry
           is
           a
           Priestheod
           ;
           I
           add
           further
           2ly
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           a
           Nobler
           one
           than
           that
           of
           Abiathar
           This
           I
           am
           sure
           is
           proved
           or
           supposed
           in
           all
           the
           N.
           
             T.
             Reasonings
          
           ,
           that
           whatsoever
           was
           Common
           to
           the
           old
           and
           the
           
             New
             Peculiam
          
           ,
           was
           still
           
             more
             excellent
          
           under
           the
           
             New
             Peculium
          
           than
           that
           which
           answer'd
           it
           under
           the
           old
           .
           I
           cannot
           now
           spare
           leisure
           to
           give
           Instances
           .
           It
           is
           at
           present
           sufficient
           for
           my
           purpose
           ,
           that
           what
           was
           
             less
             certain
          
           concerning
           the
           
             Jewish
             Priest-hood
          
           ,
           is
           
             more
             certain
          
           in
           Ours
           ;
           That
           the
           principal
           design
           of
           Ours
           is
           to
           oblige
           GOD
           to
           performance
           of
           Promises
           ,
           as
           
             his
             part
          
           of
           the
           
             New
             Covenant
             ,
             explicite
          
           and
           clear
           ,
           not
           only
           implicite
           as
           formerly
           ,
           in
           relation
           to
           Spiritual
           and
           Future
           and
           Eternal
           benefits
           ,
           which
           none
           but
           GOD
           is
           able
           to
           perform
           .
           In
           this
           regard
           the
           new
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           of
           which
           our
           Lord
           is
           a
           Mediator
           ,
           is
           called
           a
           
             better
             Testament
          
           ,
           Hebr.
           VII
           .
           22.
           as
           introductive
           of
           a
           
             better
             hope
          
           ,
           v.
           19.
           
             a
             better
             Covenant
             established
          
           
           
             on
             better
             Promises
          
           .
           Hebr.
           VIII
           6.
           
           
             Life
             and
             Immortality
          
           being
           
           elsewhere
           said
           to
           be
           
             brought
             to
             light
             by
             the
             Gospel
             .
          
           And
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           relating
           to
           this
           
             new
             Covenant
          
           is
           preferred
           before
           the
           other
           Levitical
           one
           ,
           in
           that
           
             Levi
             in
             Abraham
             pay'd
             Tithes
             and
             received
             a
             blessing
             from
             Melchisedec
             ,
          
           as
           the
           lesser
           from
           the
           greater
           .
           Hebr.
           VII
           .
           7
           ,
           9.
           
           In
           that
           the
           Priest-hood
           of
           the
           
             New
             Testament
          
           is
           an
           Everlasting
           one
           ,
           as
           all
           
             Archetypal
             Ideal
          
           beings
           were
           supposed
           to
           be
           ,
           in
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           
             Platonick
             Hellenists
          
           ,
           whose
           Language
           and
           Notions
           the
           Apostle
           alludes
           to
           in
           those
           places
           .
           Not
           only
           as
           it
           was
           Eternal
           in
           the
           Individual
           Person
           of
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           but
           also
           as
           it
           was
           to
           be
           so
           in
           the
           Succession
           of
           the
           
             Gospel
             Ministry
          
           ,
           which
           was
           never
           to
           give
           way
           to
           any
           other
           future
           dispensation
           ,
           as
           that
           of
           the
           Law
           did
           .
           Besides
           ,
           in
           that
           here
           the
           
             entrance
             into
             Heaven
             the
             true
             Tabernacle
             ,
          
           was
           more
           immediately
           performed
           by
           the
           
             Archetypal
             High
             Priest
          
           himself
           ;
           Hebr.
           VIII
           .
           1
           ,
           2.
           than
           under
           the
           Law
           ,
           where
           it
           was
           only
           shadowed
           by
           the
           High-Priests
           entring
           into
           the
           
             Holy
             of
             Holyes
          
           Hebr.
           IX
           .
           7.
           
           This
           also
           advanced
           the
           Dignity
           of
           the
           
             Gospel
             Priest-hood
          
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           Ministers
           themselves
           as
           representing
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           more
           immediately
           ,
           and
           under
           a
           
             Noble
             depensation
          
           than
           they
           did
           who
           were
           of
           the
           Order
           of
           Aaron
           .
           Hebr.
           VII
           .
           11.
           
           To
           this
           also
           the
           Apostle
           adds
           that
           the
           
             Melchisedekian
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           as
           it
           was
           for
           ever
           ,
           so
           it
           was
           also
           by
           an
           Oath
           ,
           of
           which
           there
           was
           no
           use
           in
           the
           constitution
           of
           the
           
             Levitical
             Priest
             hood
          
           .
           Hebr.
           VII
           .
           20
           ,
           21.
           
           Thus
           therefore
           it
           every
           way
           appears
           that
           the
           Consequences
           inferred
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           must
           hold
           here
           ,
           but
           with
           more
           Force
           and
           Cogency
           .
           If
           the
           
             Levitical
             Priest
             hood
          
           exceeded
           the
           Dignity
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistracy
          
           ,
           much
           more
           the
           
             Evangelical
             Priest-hood
          
           must
           do
           so
           too
           .
           If
           that
           required
           a
           
             Divine
             call
          
           greater
           than
           could
           be
           given
           or
           repealed
           by
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
             ,
             this
          
           must
           do
           so
           also
           .
           If
           the
           Unction
           of
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
             then
          
           so
           far
           exceeded
           the
           Unction
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           as
           that
           the
           Magistrate
           could
           not
           invade
           the
           Office
           without
           Sacriledge
           and
           a
           Piacular
           Crime
           ,
           much
           less
           can
           he
           now
           justify
           his
           Invasion
           of
           a
           Priest-hood
           ,
           so
           much
           Holier
           than
           that
           was
           .
           If
           the
           Sacredness
           of
           their
           
             Office
             then
          
           was
           thought
           sufficent
           to
           awe
           all
           
             Conscientiou
             ,
             Magistrates
          
           from
           offering
           any
           thing
           that
           might
           look
           like
           violence
           to
           such
           
             Holy
             Persons
          
           ;
           a
           greater
           Sacredness
           of
           
             our
             Priest
             hood
             now
          
           ought
           in
           reason
           more
           to
           awe
           the
           
             Magistrate
             now
          
           under
           the
           
             Gospel
             Dispensation
          
           .
           The
           Punishment
           of
           such
           Encroachments
           was
           indeed
           more
           frequent
           and
           
             visible
             then
          
           ,
           but
           in
           the
           Apostle's
           Reasoning
           ,
           it
           is
           
             sorer
             now
          
           :
           Hebr.
           II.
           2
           ,
           3.
           
           X.
           29.
           
           I
           am
           sure
           it
           must
           needs
           be
           so
           ,
           if
           we
           believe
           our
           Religion
           ,
           that
           it
           s
           not
           being
           inflicted
           here
           is
           only
           a
           
             reserving
             it
          
           for
           the
           
             Future
             State.
          
           
        
      
       
         
         
           §
           L.
           This
           Reasoning
           was
           admitted
           
             in
             the
          
           Apostolical
           Age.
           
             Particularly
             by
          
           Clemens
           Romanus
           .
           
             He
             also
             Vindicates
             the
          
           Churches
           Rights
           against
           Lay-deprivations
           from
           Jewish
           Precedents
           .
        
         
           Nor
           are
           these
           Consequences
           only
           just
           from
           this
           concession
           ,
           but
           3ly
           ,
           agreeable
           also
           to
           the
           actual
           Sense
           of
           even
           that
           
             Apostolical
             Age.
          
           The
           Necessity
           of
           a
           
             Divine
             Call
          
           for
           Priest-hood
           in
           General
           is
           owned
           by
           the
           Sacred
           Author
           of
           the
           Epistle
           to
           the
           Hebrews
           ,
           as
           we
           have
           seen
           formerly
           ,
           and
           therefore
           could
           not
           be
           denyed
           by
           him
           concerning
           the
           
             Gospel
             Ministry
          
           ,
           which
           I
           have
           also
           shewn
           that
           he
           believed
           to
           be
           a
           Priest-hood
           .
           The
           Dignity
           also
           of
           the
           Priest-hood
           above
           the
           Magistracy
           is
           plainly
           own'd
           by
           the
           Author
           of
           the
           
             Testaments
             of
             the
             Twelve
             Patriarchs
          
           .
           This
           also
           will
           be
           another
           Testimony
           of
           the
           Christians
           of
           the
           
             Apostolical
             Age
          
           ,
           if
           what
           I
           have
           said
           before
           prove
           sufficient
           for
           shewing
           that
           he
           lived
           and
           wrote
           in
           
             that
             Age.
          
           However
           ,
           we
           have
           an
           Author
           unquestionably
           of
           that
           Age
           ,
           so
           clear
           and
           evident
           for
           our
           purpose
           ,
           that
           I
           cannot
           foresee
           what
           any
           of
           the
           Vindicators
           Adversaries
           can
           be
           able
           to
           reply
           to
           him
           .
           That
           is
           ,
           the
           
             Apostolical
             CLEMENS
          
           in
           his
           famous
           Epistle
           to
           the
           Corinthians
           .
           And
           which
           is
           more
           ,
           what
           he
           says
           ,
           he
           says
           in
           prospect
           of
           a
           Case
           as
           like
           ours
           as
           those
           times
           were
           capable
           of
           .
           SOME
           of
           the
           Laity
           who
           were
           inspired
           with
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Gifts
          
           mentioned
           1
           Cor.
           XII
           .
           8
           ,
           &c.
           had
           then
           taken
           upon
           them
           to
           make
           a
           Faction
           against
           the
           established
           Governuors
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           who
           restrained
           them
           from
           the
           disorderly
           Liberties
           they
           had
           been
           used
           to
           ,
           before
           the
           Government
           had
           been
           introduced
           and
           settled
           among
           them
           .
           Before
           ,
           they
           had
           been
           used
           to
           honours
           not
           suitable
           to
           their
           Station
           ,
           but
           their
           Gifts
           ;
           but
           Government
           being
           settled
           ,
           they
           were
           thereby
           obliged
           to
           confine
           themselves
           within
           the
           decorum
           of
           their
           Station
           .
           Hence
           that
           Emulation
           and
           Envy
           he
           there
           complains
           of
           ,
           when
           Persons
           formerly
           more
           regarded
           for
           their
           Gifts
           ,
           were
           now
           engaged
           in
           Duty
           to
           give
           way
           to
           others
           
             less
             Gifted
          
           ,
           but
           in
           a
           more
           
             eminent
             Station
          
           .
           This
           made
           those
           Gifted
           Brethren
           Mutinous
           ,
           and
           the
           esteem
           they
           had
           acquired
           by
           their
           Gifts
           so
           recommended
           them
           ,
           as
           that
           a
           defection
           followed
           so
           universal
           ,
           that
           the
           Governours
           were
           forced
           out
           of
           their
           
             Possession
             .
             CLEMENS
          
           calls
           it
           a
           †
           DEPRIVATION
           ,
           or
           by
           words
           implying
           it
           ,
           and
           argues
           against
           it
           exactly
           as
           we
           do
           ,
           on
           the
           Principles
           already
           mentioned
           .
           He
           insists
           on
           the
           care
           that
           GOD
           had
           taken
           formerly
           for
           asserting
           the
           Rights
           of
           the
           
             Jewish
             Priest
             hood
          
           ,
           and
           to
           let
           them
           see
           that
           it
           was
           himself
           who
           had
           appointed
           them
           to
           that
           Honour
           .
           *
           When
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           fell
           out
           ,
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           he
           observes
           how
           GOD
           decided
           it
           by
           the
           blossoming
           of
           
           
             Aarons
             rod.
          
           This
           plainly
           implyes
           ,
           that
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           or
           Emulation
           so
           often
           by
           him
           reproved
           in
           the
           Schismaticks
           ,
           concerned
           the
           Priest-hood
           also
           .
           He
           observes
           the
           Care
           GOD
           had
           taken
           then
           ,
           that
           all
           their
           †
           Offices
           should
           be
           performed
           in
           their
           due
           Order
           .
           This
           might
           be
           purposely
           to
           warn
           the
           gifted
           Brethren
           to
           forbear
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           1
           Cor.
           XIV
           .
           16.
           when
           now
           there
           was
           an
           Order
           of
           Men
           purposely
           allotted
           for
           the
           
             Eucharistical
             Sacrifices
          
           .
           He
           enumerates
           all
           Ranks
           of
           their
           Subordination
           ,
           ‖
           
             High
             Priests
             ,
             Priests
          
           and
           Levites
           ,
           nay
           Laicks
           also
           .
           He
           seems
           therein
           to
           intimate
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           Laicks
           who
           were
           guilty
           of
           that
           invasion
           of
           
             Sacerdotal
             Offices
          
           ,
           agalnst
           which
           he
           there
           disputes
           ,
           That
           is
           ,
           who
           were
           guilty
           of
           the
           deprivations
           now
           mentioned
           .
           Indeed
           he
           supposes
           such
           a
           deprivation
           to
           be
           an
           invasion
           of
           
             Sacerdotal
             Offices
          
           not
           tolerable
           in
           a
           Layman
           .
           And
           when
           he
           says
           this
           concerning
           the
           Laity
           in
           general
           ,
           who
           can
           doubt
           but
           that
           
             Christian
             Magistrates
          
           must
           be
           concluded
           in
           the
           Consequence
           of
           what
           he
           there
           discourses
           ?
           The
           same
           indignity
           of
           the
           Schismaticks
           ,
           as
           to
           their
           Station
           in
           the
           Church
           ,
           is
           implyed
           in
           what
           he
           elsewhere
           says
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           dishonourable
           against
           those
           who
           were
           Honourable
           .
           Against
           these
           therefore
           he
           so
           disputes
           ,
           that
           Laymen
           ought
           to
           be
           so
           far
           from
           pretending
           to
           exclude
           the
           Ecclesiastical
           Governours
           ,
           That
           even
           
             inferior
             Ecclesiasticks
          
           ought
           not
           to
           presume
           upon
           the
           Offices
           of
           those
           who
           were
           Superior
           to
           them
           in
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Subordination
          
           ,
           as
           the
           Levites
           were
           not
           to
           intermeddled
           in
           the
           Function
           of
           the
           
             Common
             Priests
          
           ,
           nor
           the
           
             Common
             Priests
          
           ,
           with
           that
           of
           the
           
             High
             Priest
          
           among
           the
           Jews
           .
           He
           therefore
           obliges
           them
           ,
           to
           perform
           their
           *
           
             Eucharistical
             Offices
          
           in
           the
           Rank
           and
           Station
           wherein
           GOD
           had
           placed
           them
           ,
           not
           transgressing
           their
           bounds
           as
           they
           had
           done
           fromerly
           ,
           as
           it
           should
           seem
           ,
           in
           imitation
           of
           the
           old
           Prophets
           ,
           who
           had
           ,
           as
           Prophets
           ,
           taken
           upon
           them
           ,
           not
           only
           to
           Communicate
           ,
           but
           to
           Officiate
           in
           Sacrifices
           .
           This
           he
           implys
           as
           a
           thing
           that
           ought
           no
           longer
           to
           be
           born
           with
           ,
           since
           the
           
             Eucharistical
             Ministry
          
           was
           now
           settled
           and
           established
           .
           He
           therefore
           observes
           further
           to
           this
           purpose
           ,
           that
           among
           the
           Jews
           ,
           whoever
           had
           been
           guilty
           of
           such
           Invasion
           ,
           had
           suffered
           †
           Capitally
           for
           it
           .
           He
           seems
           to
           allude
           to
           the
           known
           
           Stories
           of
           
             Corah
             ,
             Dathan
          
           and
           Abiram
           ,
           and
           Uzzah
           ,
           among
           whom
           were
           Examples
           of
           encroachments
           of
           both
           sorts
           ,
           some
           of
           the
           Laity
           ,
           on
           the
           Sacerdotal
           function
           in
           general
           ,
           such
           were
           Dathan
           and
           Abiram
           ,
           who
           were
           Reubenites
           ;
           some
           of
           inferior
           ,
           on
           the
           
             Superior
             Sacerdotal
          
           Stations
           .
           Thus
           he
           argues
           from
           these
           Precedents
           under
           the
           Law
           ,
           to
           prove
           the
           like
           Obligations
           under
           the
           Gospel
           .
           So
           far
           he
           was
           from
           our
           late
           Brethren's
           Fancies
           concerning
           the
           Unconclusiveness
           of
           such
           Arguments
           in
           this
           very
           Case
           of
           the
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §.
           LI.
           He
           does
           it
           also
           by
           the
           same
           Principles
           ,
           as
           
             by
             him
          
           owned
           agreeable
           to
           the
           Constitution
           of
           the
           Gospel
           .
        
         
           So
           far
           ,
           I
           say
           ,
           he
           was
           from
           that
           ,
           that
           he
           makes
           such
           Invasions
           more
           formidable
           now
           ,
           under
           so
           much
           a
           Nobler
           Dispensation
           .
           So
           his
           following
           Words
           imyly
           :
           *
           
             Take
             care
             ,
             my
             Brethren
             ,
             lest
             ,
             by
             how
             much
             our
             knowledge
             of
             the
             Divine
             Mysteries
          
           (
           that
           is
           the
           importance
           of
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           in
           that
           
             Age
             )
             is
             advanced
             ,
             by
             so
             much
             our
             danger
             be
             advanced
             also
             .
          
           And
           so
           far
           he
           was
           from
           being
           obliged
           ,
           by
           any
           exigency
           of
           his
           Cause
           ,
           to
           argue
           as
           he
           does
           ,
           from
           Precedents
           under
           tthe
           Law
           ,
           if
           that
           way
           of
           Reasoning
           had
           not
           then
           been
           judged
           ,
           solid
           ;
           that
           he
           tells
           us
           ,
           that
           Christ
           also
           had
           made
           the
           like
           Provision
           for
           securing
           the
           
             Gospel
             Ministry
          
           from
           the
           like
           Encroachments
           .
           He
           tells
           us
           therefore
           ,
           that
           the
           Apostles
           being
           forewarned
           by
           our
           Lord
           ,
           that
           the
           like
           Contentions
           should
           arise
           among
           the
           Christians
           ,
           concerning
           the
           *
           
             Name
             of
             Bishop
          
           ,
           as
           had
           been
           before
           ,
           among
           the
           Jews
           ,
           relating
           to
           the
           †
           
             Priest
             hood
          
           ;
           had
           therefore
           ,
           in
           their
           *
           foreknowledge
           of
           that
           very
           event
           ,
           taken
           the
           like
           care
           for
           preserving
           the
           Office
           from
           the
           like
           Invasions
           .
           The
           Apostles
           here
           mentioned
           ,
           I
           take
           to
           be
           St.
           Peter
           ,
           and
           St.
           Paul
           ,
           who
           had
           by
           their
           common
           Labours
           planted
           both
           Churches
           ,
           that
           of
           Rome
           ,
           from
           whom
           this
           Epistle
           was
           written
           ,
           and
           that
           of
           Corinth
           ,
           to
           whom
           .
           As
           therefore
           ,
           he
           calls
           them
           in
           this
           place
           ,
           ‖
           
             our
             Apostles
          
           ,
           so
           elsewhere
           he
           says
           ,
           that
           St.
           Peter
           and
           St.
           Paul
           had
           set
           a
           
             noble
             Example
             of
             patience
          
           *
           among
           us
           .
           These
           Two
           Places
           thus
           compared
           together
           ,
           give
           us
           to
           understand
           who
           the
           Apostles
           were
           of
           whom
           he
           there
           speaks
           .
           He
           therefore
           further
           acquaints
           us
           with
           the
           Expedients
           those
           Apostles
           took
           for
           securing
           the
           Holy
           Office
           from
           these
           foreseen
           invasions
           .
           He
           says
           ,
           they
           themselves
           †
           put
           several
           of
           those
           Persons
           into
           
           their
           Office
           ,
           of
           whom
           he
           was
           then
           discoursing
           ;
           that
           is
           ,
           of
           those
           who
           had
           been
           deprived
           by
           these
           
           Laical
           Mutiniers
           .
           This
           therefore
           ,
           it
           seems
           he
           looks
           on
           as
           an
           Argument
           ,
           that
           they
           who
           had
           been
           put
           in
           possession
           of
           their
           Places
           by
           Persons
           of
           the
           Supream
           Ecclesiastical
           Dignity
           ,
           should
           not
           be
           dispossessed
           at
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           Laity
           ,
           who
           ,
           how
           great
           soever
           their
           station
           might
           be
           otherwise
           ,
           yet
           were
           not
           regarded
           in
           their
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Judicatories
          
           ,
           but
           according
           to
           their
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Honours
          
           ,
           (
           St.
           James
           II.
           2
           ,
           3
           ,
           4
           ,
           5
           ,
           6.
           )
           which
           in
           the
           Laity
           were
           none
           at
           all
           .
           But
           there
           were
           at
           that
           time
           ,
           in
           their
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Presbytery
          
           ,
           some
           substituted
           in
           the
           place
           of
           those
           of
           the
           first
           settlement
           ,
           who
           were
           since
           deceased
           .
           And
           for
           these
           also
           he
           makes
           the
           Apostles
           to
           have
           taken
           care
           .
           He
           tells
           us
           ,
           that
           in
           foresight
           of
           this
           Case
           ,
           they
           provided
           for
           an
           *
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           an
           Inheritance
           that
           others
           might
           succeed
           into
           their
           Places
           .
           Possibly
           it
           ought
           to
           be
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           as
           denoting
           an
           
             Additional
             Law
          
           to
           those
           other
           †
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           received
           from
           our
           Lord
           ,
           which
           had
           formerly
           been
           mentioned
           by
           this
           same
           Author
           .
           So
           ,
           in
           imitation
           of
           
           Plato's
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           Philo
           ,
           as
           I
           remember
           ,
           calls
           Deuteronomy
           by
           the
           same
           Title
           of
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           as
           given
           a
           little
           before
           Moses
           his
           Death
           ,
           after
           the
           Collection
           of
           his
           
             former
             Laws
          
           .
           So
           our
           Author
           teaches
           us
           ,
           that
           this
           Law
           also
           for
           securing
           the
           Succession
           ,
           was
           given
           by
           these
           Apostles
           ,
           after
           they
           had
           now
           settled
           the
           Church
           of
           Corinth
           ,
           and
           ordained
           as
           many
           as
           they
           then
           thought
           necessary
           for
           the
           Government
           of
           it
           .
           That
           is
           the
           notion
           of
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           it
           signifies
           in
           him
           afterwards
           .
           as
           appears
           by
           another
           ‖
           Example
           very
           little
           distant
           from
           this
           same
           place
           .
           He
           tells
           us
           therefore
           what
           this
           
             Additional
             Law
          
           was
           ,
           that
           they
           who
           were
           to
           be
           substituted
           in
           their
           places
           as
           they
           died
           ,
           were
           to
           receive
           their
           Authority
           from
           Persons
           of
           the
           highest
           rank
           in
           the
           Church
           .
           That
           I
           take
           to
           be
           the
           Notion
           of
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           as
           that
           signifies
           to
           be
           had
           
             in
             reputation
          
           ,
           and
           as
           on
           the
           contrary
           contemptible
           Persons
           are
           said
           to
           be
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           like
           the
           proletarii
           or
           
             capite
             censi
          
           in
           the
           
             Roman
             matricula
          
           of
           Citizens
           ,
           Registred
           as
           so
           many
           Names
           ,
           not
           for
           any
           considerable
           benefit
           that
           their
           Cities
           receiv'd
           from
           them
           .
           These
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           therefore
           ,
           were
           such
           as
           by
           the
           Apostles
           themselves
           were
           designed
           for
           supplying
           the
           
             Apostolical
             Office
          
           after
           their
           deprature
           ,
           in
           filling
           up
           the
           Vacancies
           of
           those
           Presbyters
           ,
           who
           had
           been
           put
           in
           Office
           by
           the
           Apostle
           ,
           themselves
           ,
           as
           they
           ●ell
           This
           therefore
           St.
           Clemens
           ,
           in
           this
           Reasoning
           ,
           takes
           for
           a
           great
           Presumption
           ,
           that
           the
           Laity
           who
           were
           of
           the
           lowest
           rank
           in
           the
           Church
           ,
           should
           take
           upon
           them
           to
           displace
           those
           who
           had
           been
           put
           into
           their
           Office
           by
           the
           highest
           
           Ecclesiastical
           Authority
           .
           And
           yet
           the
           Laity
           whose
           Case
           he
           speaks
           of
           ,
           where
           Prophets
           ,
           and
           Spiritually
           gifted
           Persons
           ,
           which
           Gifts
           were
           always
           admitted
           for
           fairer
           pretences
           to
           
             Spiritual
             power
          
           ,
           than
           all
           the
           
             worldly
             Grandeur
          
           ,
           and
           the
           
             Secular
             terror
          
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
             .
             Prophets
          
           had
           been
           allowed
           that
           power
           even
           in
           Sacrificing
           ,
           which
           never
           was
           allowed
           the
           
             Secular
             Prince
          
           .
           Yet
           even
           against
           these
           ,
           St.
           Clemens
           asserts
           Rights
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           by
           the
           very
           same
           Topick
           insisted
           on
           by
           Us
           ,
           that
           the
           power
           of
           the
           Church
           was
           derived
           from
           God
           himself
           .
           We
           see
           he
           ascribes
           this
           power
           of
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           to
           the
           Authority
           of
           the
           Apostles
           .
           So
           he
           also
           derives
           the
           Authority
           of
           the
           Apostles
           themselves
           ,
           from
           God
           himself
           .
           *
           
             The
             Apostles
             taught
             us
             the
             Gospel
             from
             our
             Lord
             Jesus
             Christ
             ,
             Jesus
             Christ
             from
             God.
             Christ
             therefore
             was
             sent
             by
             God
             ,
             and
             the
             Apostles
             by
             Christ
             ;
             so
             both
             missions
             were
             orderly
             according
             to
             the
             Will
             of
             God.
          
           His
           designed
           inference
           therefore
           with
           reference
           to
           his
           Cause
           was
           ,
           that
           they
           who
           had
           been
           put
           in
           Office
           by
           an
           Authority
           so
           manifestly
           and
           nearly
           derived
           from
           God
           ,
           ought
           not
           to
           be
           turn'd
           out
           of
           their
           Office
           by
           a
           Power
           that
           could
           not
           pretend
           to
           any
           such
           power
           derived
           from
           God
           at
           all
           .
           In
           all
           these
           gradations
           ,
           he
           supposes
           none
           that
           gave
           it
           to
           the
           Laity
           ,
           on
           which
           account
           it
           is
           ,
           that
           he
           overthrows
           all
           Right
           they
           had
           to
           claim
           it
           .
           How
           then
           can
           the
           Magistrate
           pretend
           to
           it
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           LII
           .
           He
           draws
           the
           like
           Inferences
           from
           those
           Reasonings
           ,
           in
           Practice
           ,
           as
           we
           do
           .
        
         
           Thus
           then
           the
           Reasons
           from
           our
           Principles
           ,
           and
           therefore
           supposes
           them
           generally
           known
           ,
           and
           as
           generally
           granted
           ,
           even
           in
           that
           happy
           Age.
           That
           is
           not
           all
           :
           He
           pursues
           those
           Principles
           to
           the
           same
           uses
           in
           Practice
           ,
           that
           we
           are
           making
           of
           them
           now
           .
           Do
           
             we
             cleave
          
           to
           our
           deprived
           Fathers
           ,
           notwithstanding
           the
           Lay
           deprivation
           ?
           We
           do
           therein
           no
           more
           than
           what
           he
           advises
           also
           .
           *
           
             Let
             us
             reverence
          
           ,
           says
           he
           ,
           
             the
             Lord
             Jesus
             Christ
             ,
             whose
             Blood
             was
             given
             for
             us
             .
             Let
             us
             pay
             a
             Veneration
             to
             our
             Rulers
             ;
             let
             us
             honour
             our
             Presbyters
             .
          
           †
           
             Let
             us
             cleave
             to
             the
             Innocent
             and
             Rïghteous
             ,
             for
             these
             are
             the
             Elect
             of
             God.
          
           Do
           We
           complain
           of
           the
           desertion
           of
           our
           Bishops
           .
           and
           betraying
           of
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Rights
          
           ,
           as
           Schismatical
           ?
           And
           are
           we
           deeply
           concerned
           at
           the
           Consequences
           which
           have
           followed
           upon
           it
           ,
           distructive
           to
           our
           Common
           Religion
           ?
           And
           does
           not
           he
           the
           same
           ?
           
           *
           
             Your
             Sebism
             has
             deprived
             many
             ,
             has
             driven
             many
             to
             despondency
             ,
             to
             doubting
             of
             Religion
             ,
             and
             all
             of
             us
             to
             grief
             .
          
           I
           wish
           we
           could
           not
           also
           apply
           his
           following
           Words
           to
           our
           present
           Case
           :
           ‖
           
             And
             yet
             your
             Sedition
             holds
             on
             .
          
           Do
           we
           heartily
           wish
           that
           the
           
             Schismatical
             Rivals
          
           would
           think
           of
           Repentance
           ,
           and
           returning
           to
           their
           Duty
           ?
           And
           how
           are
           we
           therein
           singular
           ?
           Does
           not
           he
           recommend
           the
           like
           thoughts
           to
           the
           Schismaticks
           of
           his
           
             own
             time
          
           ?
           These
           are
           his
           words
           .
           *
           
             You
             therefore
             who
             have
             laid
             the
             Foundation
             of
             the
             Sedition
             ,
             be
             subject
             to
             the
             Presbyters
             ,
             and
             be
             disciplined
             to
             Repentance
             ;
             bending
             the
             knees
             of
             your
             heart
             ,
             learn
             to
             be
             subject
             ,
             laying
             aside
             the
             haughty
             and
             insolent
             arrogance
             of
             your
             Tongue
             .
          
           How
           worthy
           are
           his
           following
           Words
           of
           their
           Consideration
           ?
           ‖
           
             For
             it
             is
             better
             for
             you
             to
             be
             little
             ,
             and
             of
             good
             Repute
             in
             the
             Flock
             of
             Christ
             ,
             than
             seeming
             to
             have
             preheminence
             to
             be
             cast
             off
             from
             his
             hope
             .
          
           Let
           them
           never
           complain
           of
           the
           severity
           of
           our
           Censures
           ,
           when
           they
           find
           this
           Holy
           unconcerned
           Apostolical
           
             Fellow
             Labourer
          
           of
           St.
           Paul
           ,
           judging
           as
           hardly
           in
           a
           parallel
           Case
           .
           We
           here
           see
           ,
           that
           he
           thought
           
             such
             Schismaticks
          
           out
           of
           the
           Flock
           of
           Christ
           ,
           and
           
             cut
             off
             from
             his
             hope
          
           .
           He
           elsewhere
           adds
           ,
           with
           reference
           to
           the
           same
           Case
           ,
           and
           the
           same
           Persons
           ,
           †
           
             Christ
             is
             of
             those
             Who
             are
             humbly
             minded
             ,
             not
             of
             those
             who
             exalt
             themselves
             over
             his
             Flock
             .
          
           Plainly
           denying
           them
           any
           interest
           in
           Christ
           ,
           whilst
           they
           continued
           in
           that
           condition
           impenitent
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           whilst
           the
           Rivals
           hold
           their
           Schisinatical
           preheminence
           .
           He
           tells
           us
           ,
           that
           *
           
             it
             is
             no
             small
             crime
             ,
             if
             we
             cast
             them
             out
             of
             their
             Bishoprick
             ,
             who
             have
             offered
             their
             Sacrifical
             Gifts
             unreprovably
             and
             holily
             .
          
           He
           accordingly
           adds
           ;
           †
           
             It
             behoves
             us
             therefore
             ,
             Brethren
             ,
             to
             cleave
             to
             such
             Examples
             .
             For
             it
             is
             written
             ,
             Cleave
             unto
             those
             who
             are
             holy
             ,
             for
             they
             who
             cleave
             to
             them
             ,
             shall
             be
             made
             holy
             .
             And
             again
             ,
             in
             another
             place
             ,
             he
             says
             ,
             with
             the
             innocent
             thou
             wilt
             be
             innocent
             ,
             and
             with
             the
             perverse
             thou
             wilt
             be
             perverse
             .
          
           He
           supposes
           no
           Holiness
           reputed
           by
           GOD
           for
           such
           ,
           but
           in
           the
           
             true
             Communion
          
           .
           Thence
           he
           adds
           ,
           
           *
           
             Let
             us
             cleave
             therefore
             to
             the
             Innocent
             and
             Righteous
             ,
             for
             those
             are
             the
             Elect
             of
             God
          
           One
           of
           the
           Prerogatives
           of
           the
           Peculium
           ,
           is
           to
           be
           the
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           
             the
             chosen
             Generation
          
           .
           So
           that
           in
           confining
           the
           
             Elect
             of
             God
          
           ,
           to
           the
           
             true
             Communion
          
           ,
           he
           must
           necessarily
           be
           supposed
           to
           confine
           the
           Peculium
           to
           it
           also
           .
           His
           following
           Exhortation
           therefore
           
             firts
             our
          
           Circumstances
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           it
           did
           his
           .
           †
           
             Why
             are
             there
             Strifes
             and
             Anger
             's
             ,
             and
             Divisions
             and
             Schisms
             ,
             and
             War
             among
             you
             ?
             Have
             we
             not
             one
             God
             ,
             and
             one
             Christ
             ,
             and
             one
             Spirit
             of
             Grace
             that
             is
             shed
             upon
             Us
             ?
             And
             is
             there
             not
             one
             calling
             in
             Christ
             ?
             Why
             do
             we
             draw
             and
             tear
             asunder
             the
             Members
             of
             Christ
             ,
             and
             foment
             Seditions
             against
             our
             own
             Body
             ,
             and
             come
             to
             such
             Madness
             ,
             as
             to
             forget
             that
             we
             are
             Members
             of
             each
             other
             ?
          
           May
           this
           Pathetical
           Exhortation
           of
           so
           great
           a
           Person
           ,
           prevail
           with
           our
           Brethren
           to
           study
           some
           Expedient
           for
           securing
           our
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Liberties
          
           ,
           and
           healing
           the
           Breach
           they
           have
           been
           driven
           into
           by
           
             Carnal
             Politicks
          
           !
           What
           a
           Glory
           wou'd
           it
           be
           to
           them
           who
           are
           princpally
           engaged
           in
           it
           ,
           to
           do
           what
           he
           invites
           them
           to
           ?
           *
           
             Who
             is
             there
             among
             you
             Generous
             ?
             Who
             is
             Merciful
             ?
             Who
             full
             of
             Charity
             ?
             Let
             him
             say
             ,
             If
             the
             Sedition
             and
             Strife
             and
             Schisms
             be
             for
             my
             sake
             ,
             I
             depart
             ,
             I
             go
             away
             ,
             where
             you
             please
             ,
             and
             do
             whatsoever
             is
             required
             by
             the
             Multitude
             .
             Only
             let
             the
             Flock
             of
             Christ
             have
             peace
             with
             the
             Presbyters
             ,
             who
             are
             set
             over
             it
             .
             He
             who
             would
             do
             so
             ,
             would
             gain
             to
             himself
             great
             Glory
             in
             the
             LORD
             .
          
           How
           much
           would
           it
           advance
           their
           Honour
           here
           ,
           and
           their
           Peace
           hereafter
           ,
           if
           they
           would
           turn
           their
           Emulations
           for
           Preheminence
           ,
           into
           those
           more
           Noble
           ones
           of
           Humility
           ,
           and
           Peace
           ,
           and
           Condescention
           ?
           The
           worthy
           Doctor
           ,
           since
           his
           ingenuous
           owing
           his
           †
           Mistake
           of
           the
           Design
           of
           Clemens
           ,
           discover'd
           since
           by
           the
           Vindicator
           ,
           may
           be
           presumed
           ,
           by
           this
           time
           to
           be
           sensible
           ,
           now
           much
           it
           is
           more
           proper
           to
           make
           such
           Addresses
           to
           his
           .
           Fathers
           ,
           than
           ours
           .
           He
           must
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           acknowledge
           the
           making
           them
           so
           ,
           to
           be
           more
           agreeable
           to
           the
           Design
           of
           St.
           Clement
           .
        
      
       
         
         
           §
           LIII
           .
           The
           Laity
           cannot
           now
           pretend
           to
           any
           
             Indirect
             Right
          
           of
           
             depriving
             Bishops
          
           ,
           as
           the
           
             Jewish
             Princes
          
           could
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           
             Jewish
             Priesthood
          
           .
        
         
           Thus
           it
           appears
           ,
           that
           by
           the
           Principles
           ,
           even
           of
           the
           
             Apostolick
             Age
             ▪
          
           no
           Laity
           whatsoever
           can
           pretend
           to
           any
           
             direct
             Power
          
           over
           our
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           ,
           with
           regard
           to
           their
           purely
           Spiritual
           and
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Rights
          
           .
           I
           now
           proceed
           to
           shew
           4thly
           ,
           that
           they
           cannot
           now
           pretend
           even
           to
           an
           
             indirect
             Power
          
           (
           such
           as
           I
           shewed
           that
           Princes
           might
           pretend
           to
           the●
           )
           of
           depriving
           our
           Bishops
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           .
           For
           neither
           of
           the
           reasons
           given
           there
           ,
           will
           hold
           her
           .
           They
           cannot
           make
           their
           Right
           
             impracticable
             now
          
           ,
           as
           they
           could
           do
           then
           ,
           by
           excluding
           them
           from
           any
           particular
           place
           ,
           from
           which
           it
           is
           in
           their
           Power
           to
           exclude
           them
           .
           Their
           Consecrations
           and
           Eucharists
           are
           not
           now
           confined
           to
           Cathedrals
           ,
           as
           the
           
             Sacerdotal
             Acts
          
           of
           the
           
             Jewish
             Priesthood
          
           were
           to
           the
           Temple
           ,
           but
           are
           equally
           valid
           ,
           where
           ever
           they
           are
           exercised
           within
           their
           ow
           Jurisdictions
           .
           This
           hinders
           them
           from
           being
           perfectly
           useless
           when
           they
           are
           excluded
           from
           Cathedrals
           .
           Nor
           has
           GOD
           fixed
           upon
           any
           particular
           Places
           ,
           to
           which
           he
           has
           confined
           his
           own
           acceptance
           of
           them
           under
           the
           Gospel
           .
           But
           as
           we
           have
           seen
           from
           Ignatius
           ,
           (
           for
           I
           now
           descend
           no
           lower
           )
           the
           
             one
             acceptable
             Altar
          
           now
           follows
           the
           
             one
             Bishop
          
           ,
           not
           the
           
             Bishop
             the
             Altar
          
           .
           This
           hinders
           the
           
             Additional
             Right
          
           formerly
           accruing
           to
           a
           Possessor
           ,
           purely
           on
           account
           of
           his
           Possession
           ,
           which
           was
           then
           sufficient
           to
           make
           a
           
           Possessor's
           Right
           better
           ,
           which
           without
           Possession
           ,
           would
           have
           been
           worse
           than
           that
           of
           an
           
             excluded
             Predecessor
          
           .
           Nor
           indeed
           is
           there
           that
           
             Reason
             now
          
           ,
           as
           was
           then
           ,
           to
           expect
           that
           GOD
           should
           confine
           the
           Exercises
           of
           the
           
             Evangelical
             Priesthood
          
           to
           a
           
             particular
             place
          
           .
           Their
           Religion
           then
           was
           confined
           to
           a
           particular
           Nation
           ,
           and
           was
           part
           of
           the
           National
           Constitution
           ,
           as
           it
           was
           Theocratical
           .
           There
           was
           therefore
           all
           the
           Security
           given
           that
           Laws
           could
           give
           ,
           that
           their
           Princes
           should
           always
           Patronize
           it
           .
           One
           of
           
             another
             Nation
          
           was
           uncapable
           of
           the
           Office
           ,
           any
           other
           way
           than
           by
           Conquest
           .
           And
           that
           did
           necessarily
           suppose
           the
           Subversion
           of
           the
           Laws
           themselves
           ,
           and
           therefore
           of
           all
           the
           Security
           that
           could
           be
           given
           by
           Law.
           But
           the
           
             Evangelical
             Priesthood
          
           was
           first
           instituted
           by
           Christ
           ,
           and
           settled
           by
           the
           Apostles
           ,
           in
           a
           time
           when
           
             the
             Kings
             of
             the
             Earth
             stood
             up
             ,
             and
             the
             Rulers
             were
             gathered
             together
             a-against
             the
             Lord
             ,
             and
             against
             his
             Christ
             ,
          
           Acts
           IV.
           26
           ,
           Not
           only
           without
           the
           consent
           of
           ,
           but
           in
           opposition
           to
           all
           the
           
             Civil
             Powers
          
           then
           being
           .
           And
           therefore
           to
           have
           made
           it
           depend
           on
           the
           Pleasure
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           then
           ,
           had
           been
           perfectly
           inconsistent
           with
           a
           Design
           of
           securing
           and
           perpetuating
           it
           .
           And
           that
           could
           not
           have
           been
           avoided
           ,
           if
           it
           had
           depended
           on
           any
           thing
           that
           was
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Persecuting
             Magistrate
          
           .
           It
           was
           instituted
           and
           established
           under
           actual
           and
           
             violent
             Persecutions
          
           ,
           and
           therefore
           must
           have
           been
           fitted
           with
           Provisions
           that
           might
           enable
           it
           to
           subsist
           under
           a
           state
           of
           Persecution
           ,
           by
           a
           Power
           perfectly
           disentangled
           
           from
           the
           
             Secular
             Power
          
           .
           To
           this
           it
           was
           requisite
           ,
           that
           it
           should
           be
           under
           no
           obligation
           of
           Conscience
           ,
           to
           depend
           on
           any
           thing
           that
           was
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Persecuting
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           as
           it
           must
           have
           done
           ,
           if
           it
           had
           been
           obliged
           by
           GOD
           to
           any
           one
           particular
           Place
           .
           It
           was
           also
           requisite
           ,
           that
           this
           Priesthood
           being
           constituted
           by
           GOD
           as
           the
           cement
           of
           a
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           all
           that
           was
           requisite
           for
           managing
           that
           Society
           ,
           should
           have
           been
           by
           God
           ,
           (
           who
           was
           pleas'd
           to
           found
           that
           Society
           )
           conferred
           on
           the
           Priesthood
           ,
           as
           its
           Right
           in
           Conscience
           ,
           and
           therefore
           by
           the
           same
           Divine
           Power
           ,
           exempted
           from
           the
           Right
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           For
           all
           that
           this
           Priesthood
           could
           have
           to
           recommend
           Duty
           to
           the
           Consciences
           of
           its
           Subjects
           in
           a
           state
           of
           Persecution
           ,
           was
           only
           its
           Sacredness
           ,
           and
           the
           Obligation
           that
           lay
           on
           GOD
           to
           ratify
           his
           own
           Act
           ,
           in
           inflicting
           the
           Censures
           denounced
           by
           it
           against
           refractory
           Persons
           ;
           and
           therefore
           they
           must
           be
           very
           well
           satisfied
           ,
           that
           the
           Censures
           were
           denounced
           by
           one
           to
           whom
           GOD
           had
           given
           a
           Lawful
           Authority
           to
           denounce
           them
           .
           Otherwise
           ,
           they
           could
           not
           think
           
             GOD
             obliged
          
           to
           ratify
           them
           .
           And
           for
           this
           it
           was
           absolutely
           requisite
           ,
           that
           they
           should
           believe
           the
           Magistrate
           to
           have
           
             no
             Right
          
           in
           those
           Cases
           wherein
           those
           Censures
           were
           concerned
           .
           Otherwise
           ,
           they
           could
           not
           think
           God
           oblig'd
           to
           ratify
           them
           ,
           if
           they
           had
           been
           Invasions
           of
           the
           Right
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           .
           But
           the
           Districts
           were
           then
           absolutely
           necessary
           for
           making
           the
           
             Churches
             Censures
          
           ,
           as
           settled
           out
           by
           Lord
           and
           his
           
             Apostles
             practicable
          
           .
           By
           them
           the
           Bishops
           knew
           what
           Persons
           were
           liable
           to
           their
           particular
           respective
           Jurisdictions
           .
           By
           those
           the
           Subjects
           olso
           knew
           the
           particular
           Bishops
           to
           whose
           Censures
           they
           were
           obliged
           to
           pay
           a
           Deference
           .
           If
           the
           Bishop
           had
           censured
           Persons
           not
           belonging
           to
           his
           Jurisdiction
           ,
           by
           the
           settlement
           then
           made
           by
           the
           Apostles
           ,
           they
           could
           not
           think
           GOD
           obliged
           to
           second
           him
           in
           his
           Usurpations
           ,
           and
           therefore
           could
           be
           under
           no
           Obligation
           to
           regard
           such
           Censures
           .
           It
           was
           therefore
           absolutely
           necessary
           that
           the
           Right
           of
           Preaching
           the
           Gospel
           ,
           and
           settling
           districts
           ,
           without
           the
           leave
           of
           the
           Possessing
           Magistrates
           ,
           must
           by
           GOD
           have
           been
           made
           the
           Right
           of
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           ,
           in
           reference
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           and
           therefore
           could
           not
           at
           the
           same
           time
           have
           been
           the
           Right
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           What
           then
           will
           become
           of
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           imaginary
           
             Contract
             ?
             Bellarmine
          
           fancies
           ,
           that
           when
           the
           Magistrate
           was
           baptized
           ,
           he
           also
           was
           supposed
           to
           make
           an
           implicite
           Contract
           with
           the
           
           Bishop
           ,
           that
           his
           Crown
           should
           be
           at
           the
           Bishops
           disposal
           ,
           whenever
           the
           Bishop
           should
           judge
           that
           his
           holding
           it
           would
           be
           inconsistent
           with
           the
           
             Churches
             Interest
          
           .
           This
           is
           as
           reasonable
           as
           the
           
           Doctor
           's
           pretended
           Contract
           ,
           that
           on
           consideration
           of
           the
           leave
           allowed
           by
           the
           Magistrate
           
           for
           Preaching
           and
           settling
           districts
           in
           his
           Dominions
           ,
           the
           
             Bishops
             make
          
           
           an
           
             implicit
             contract
          
           with
           the
           Magistrate
           that
           they
           will
           submit
           to
           be
           deposed
           by
           him
           .
           when
           he
           shall
           judge
           their
           holding
           their
           places
           hurtful
           to
           his
           
             Worldly
             Interests
          
           .
           If
           either
           of
           these
           
             implicite
             Contracts
          
           would
           hold
           Bellermines
           is
           the
           more
           likely
           of
           the
           two
           ,
           that
           the
           
             lesser
             Worldly
             Interests
          
           should
           give
           way
           to
           the
           Spiritual
           .
           But
           from
           what
           has
           been
           said
           ,
           it
           appears
           that
           the
           Right
           of
           making
           Districts
           ,
           was
           a
           Right
           inseparable
           from
           the
           Authority
           given
           by
           GOD
           for
           making
           ,
           and
           governing
           Proselytes
           all
           the
           World
           over
           .
           If
           therefore
           it
           be
           not
           the
           Magistrates
           ,
           but
           their
           own
           ;
           what
           reason
           have
           they
           to
           make
           any
           ,
           however
           
             implicite
             Contracts
          
           ,
           for
           that
           which
           is
           their
           own
           already
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           LIV.
           Our
           Reasoning
           against
           the
           
             Magistrates
             Right
          
           of
           
             deprivation
             in
             Spiritual
          
           proceed
           Universally
           ,
           and
           therefore
           in
           Case
           of
           
             Temporal
             Crimes
          
           ,
           also
           the
           owning
           such
           a
           Power
           would
           have
           been
           Pernicious
           to
           the
           
             Primitive
             Christians
          
           also
           ,
           who
           were
           charged
           with
           
             Temporal
             Crimes
             ▪
          
        
         
           The
           Magistrate
           therefore
           cannot
           ,
           by
           the
           Constitutions
           of
           the
           Gospel
           ,
           pretend
           to
           any
           ●ight
           ,
           whether
           direct
           ,
           or
           indirect
           ,
           for
           depriving
           our
           Bishops
           of
           their
           
             Spiritual
             Power
          
           .
           This
           our
           Adversaries
           themselves
           do
           not
           deny
           ,
           where
           the
           Causes
           pretended
           for
           their
           deprivation
           ,
           are
           purely
           Spiritual
           .
           But
           where
           the
           Case
           is
           Temporal
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           here
           in
           our
           Fathers
           Case
           ,
           there
           they
           think
           that
           the
           Magistrate
           may
           punish
           them
           ,
           not
           only
           by
           Secular
           Punishments
           ,
           but
           by
           Deprivations
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           exercising
           of
           their
           
             Spiritual
             Right
          
           in
           Districts
           contained
           within
           his
           Dominions
           .
           But
           all
           that
           can
           fairly
           follow
           from
           their
           Crime
           being
           Secular
           ,
           is
           no
           more
           but
           this
           ,
           that
           it
           properly
           belongs
           to
           the
           Cognizance
           of
           the
           
             Secular
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           and
           is
           therefore
           justly
           punishable
           by
           them
           who
           have
           a
           
             JUST
             TITLE
          
           to
           the
           Supream
           
             Secular
             Authority
          
           ,
           That
           is
           ,
           in
           such
           a
           
             way
             ▪
          
           of
           Punishment
           as
           properly
           belongs
           to
           the
           Right
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           .
           And
           we
           allow
           that
           to
           extend
           as
           far
           as
           the
           
             Secular
             Honours
          
           ,
           and
           Revenues
           ,
           by
           the
           
             Secular
             Laws
          
           annexed
           to
           their
           Office
           ,
           nay
           to
           their
           Persons
           also
           ,
           as
           to
           what
           is
           Personal
           to
           them
           .
           This
           is
           perfectly
           sufficient
           to
           secure
           the
           Magistrate
           (
           in
           Case
           not
           only
           a
           
             single
             Bishop
          
           ,
           but
           the
           
             whole
             Synod
          
           ,
           should
           prove
           guilty
           of
           violating
           their
           Duty
           to
           him
           )
           whatever
           the
           Doctor
           pretends
           to
           the
           contrary
           .
           But
           that
           this
           will
           give
           him
           any
           
             new
             Right
          
           of
           punishing
           .
           which
           he
           cannot
           pretend
           to
           by
           the
           Nature
           of
           his
           Office
           ,
           our
           Adversaries
           have
           not
           yet
           pretended
           to
           prove
           .
           Till
           they
           do
           so
           ,
           or
           till
           they
           Answer
           what
           has
           now
           been
           produced
           to
           prove
           the
           contrary
           ,
           that
           his
           Right
           of
           Magistracy
           does
           no
           way
           reach
           the
           Spirituals
           of
           our
           Bishops
           ,
           no
           nor
           their
           Right
           to
           exercise
           them
           in
           Jurisdictions
           contained
           in
           his
           Dominions
           ;
           we
           may
           as
           easily
           deny
           ,
           as
           they
           assert
           ,
           that
           Power
           of
           Deprivation
           ,
           by
           them
           ascribed
           to
           the
           Magistrate
           .
           One
           would
           think
           ,
           that
           when
           we
           have
           proved
           the
           Nature
           of
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Power
          
           ,
           such
           as
           that
           it
           is
           not
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           any
           but
           GOD
           ,
           or
           those
           Authorized
           by
           GOD
           for
           this
           purpose
           ,
           to
           deprive
           them
           of
           that
           Power
           who
           have
           once
           received
           it
           ;
           and
           that
           neither
           the
           
           things
           themselves
           transacted
           by
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Power
          
           are
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           nor
           that
           GOD
           has
           given
           the
           Magistrate
           any
           Authority
           to
           represent
           him
           in
           these
           matters
           ,
           which
           may
           
             oblige
             him
          
           to
           ratify
           in
           Heaven
           what
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           in
           his
           name
           ,
           pretends
           to
           Act
           on
           Earth
           :
           It
           should
           unavoidably
           follow
           that
           the
           Magistrate
           has
           not
           this
           Power
           at
           all
           ,
           which
           if
           he
           have
           not
           in
           general
           ,
           he
           cannot
           have
           in
           this
           ,
           nor
           in
           any
           other
           particular
           Case
           assignable
           by
           our
           Adversaries
           .
           Why
           are
           they
           therefore
           so
           unreasonable
           as
           to
           expect
           ,
           after
           we
           have
           disproved
           this
           Power
           in
           general
           ,
           that
           we
           must
           be
           put
           to
           the
           further
           trouble
           of
           disproving
           it
           in
           a
           
             particular
             Case
          
           ?
           They
           themselves
           can
           easily
           perceive
           the
           partiality
           of
           their
           demands
           in
           other
           the
           like
           Cases
           .
           They
           who
           ,
           on
           the
           other
           side
           ,
           are
           for
           the
           encroachments
           of
           the
           Clergy
           upon
           the
           Rights
           of
           the
           Magistracy
           in
           order
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           in
           Case
           of
           Heresy
           ,
           do
           so
           far
           proceed
           successfully
           ,
           when
           they
           shew
           that
           Heresy
           is
           a
           Crime
           properly
           cognizable
           by
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Judicatories
          
           ,
           and
           that
           Magistrates
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           others
           ,
           are
           Subject
           to
           such
           Judicatories
           in
           matters
           purely
           Spiritual
           .
           But
           then
           the
           consequence
           would
           only
           be
           ,
           that
           a
           Magistrate
           ,
           so
           convicted
           of
           Heresy
           ,
           might
           by
           such
           
             Spiritual
             Judges
          
           be
           deprived
           of
           his
           Right
           to
           Communion
           ,
           and
           consequently
           of
           all
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Rights
          
           and
           benefits
           ,
           to
           which
           he
           is
           entitled
           as
           a
           Member
           of
           the
           
             true
             Communion
          
           .
           This
           is
           the
           utmost
           that
           
             Spiritual
             Judges
          
           can
           pretend
           to
           ,
           or
           wherein
           they
           can
           expect
           that
           GOD
           will
           second
           and
           ratify
           their
           Determinations
           .
           But
           when
           they
           proceed
           further
           to
           forbid
           all
           
             Civil
             Conversation
          
           with
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           to
           deprive
           him
           of
           his
           
             Civil
             Rights
          
           ,
           to
           absolve
           his
           Subjects
           from
           their
           Duty
           of
           
             Civil
             Obedience
          
           :
           These
           are
           consequences
           ,
           which
           ,
           I
           believe
           our
           Adversaries
           will
           not
           defend
           .
           Yet
           how
           they
           can
           avoid
           being
           obliged
           to
           it
           ,
           if
           they
           will
           be
           true
           to
           the
           Consequences
           of
           their
           reasonings
           in
           this
           Case
           ,
           for
           my
           part
           ,
           I
           cannot
           understand
           .
           For
           why
           may
           not
           the
           Church
           assume
           a
           Right
           of
           punishing
           Temporally
           ,
           a
           Crime
           that
           is
           really
           allowed
           to
           be
           of
           
             Spritual
             Cognizance
          
           ,
           if
           the
           Magistrate
           ;
           for
           a
           
             Temporal
             Crime
          
           ,
           may
           inflict
           a
           deprivation
           of
           Spirituals
           ?
           I
           do
           not
           now
           insist
           on
           what
           we
           have
           to
           say
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           validity
           of
           the
           Sentence
           given
           against
           our
           Fathers
           ,
           in
           respect
           of
           the
           
             Temporal
             Authority
          
           that
           can
           be
           pretended
           for
           it
           .
           However
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           sufficient
           to
           shew
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           only
           the
           Judgment
           of
           those
           ,
           who
           have
           
             given
             Judgment
          
           ,
           against
           them
           ,
           that
           they
           had
           even
           
             Temporal
             Authority
          
           sufficient
           for
           it
           .
           And
           if
           the
           
             Secular
             Powers
          
           may
           
             deprive
             Bishops
          
           ,
           for
           any
           Crime
           ,
           which
           they
           who
           deprive
           them
           ,
           shall
           be
           pleased
           to
           call
           Temporal
           ;
           and
           if
           we
           also
           ,
           are
           obliged
           to
           think
           such
           deprivatons
           sufficient
           to
           discharge
           Us
           from
           the
           Duty
           we
           owe
           them
           ,
           with
           regard
           to
           our
           Conscience
           :
           I
           cannot
           see
           how
           the
           
             Primitive
             
             Christian
             Bishops
          
           could
           have
           escaped
           such
           
             deprivation
             .
             Julion
          
           the
           Apostate
           pretended
           Temporal
           Reasons
           for
           most
           of
           his
           Persecutions
           ,
           purposely
           to
           hinder
           the
           Sufferers
           from
           the
           Glory
           of
           Matyrdome
           .
           And
           even
           in
           the
           earlyer
           Persecutions
           ,
           
             Secular
             Crimes
          
           were
           imputed
           to
           the
           Christians
           .
           That
           was
           the
           Case
           when
           the
           Burning
           of
           Rome
           was
           charged
           upon
           them
           in
           
           Nero's
           time
           ,
           and
           the
           burning
           of
           the
           Palace
           at
           Nicomedia
           ,
           in
           
           Diocletian's
           ;
           when
           the
           Stories
           of
           the
           Dog
           and
           Candle
           ;
           and
           
             Oedipodean
             incests
          
           and
           the
           Mothers
           of
           Children
           ,
           were
           pretended
           to
           be
           proved
           against
           them
           ,
           by
           the
           extorted
           confession
           of
           some
           Slaves
           in
           the
           time
           of
           
             Marcus
             Antoninus
          
           .
           Their
           very
           Meetings
           came
           under
           the
           
             Laws
             de
             Sodalitijs
          
           ,
           and
           
             de
             Hetaerijs
          
           ,
           and
           
             de
             Factionibus
          
           .
           And
           their
           refusing
           to
           Swear
           by
           the
           Genij
           of
           the
           Emperors
           ,
           or
           to
           Sacrifice
           for
           them
           ,
           were
           by
           the
           Interpretation
           of
           those
           times
           reducible
           to
           the
           Laws
           of
           
             loesa
             Majestas
          
           ,
           which
           we
           call
           Treason
           .
           Will
           our
           adversaries
           therefore
           grant
           that
           ,
           on
           these
           accounts
           ,
           those
           
             Pagan
             Emperors
          
           might
           have
           deposed
           the
           
             Christian
             Bishops
          
           ,
           and
           Absolved
           their
           Subjects
           from
           their
           Duties
           in
           Conscience
           owing
           to
           them
           ?
           If
           they
           will
           ,
           we
           are
           very
           sure
           our
           glorious
           Ancestors
           of
           
             those
             Ages
          
           were
           not
           of
           their
           mind
           .
           And
           let
           our
           Adversaries
           themselves
           judge
           ,
           whether
           we
           have
           most
           reason
           to
           follow
           ,
           as
           Guides
           of
           our
           Conscience
           .
           Besides
           the
           Advantage
           the
           
             Primitive
             Christians
          
           had
           for
           knowing
           Tradition
           better
           ,
           this
           was
           also
           a
           manifest
           one
           ;
           That
           our
           late
           Brethren's
           Practice
           goes
           along
           with
           their
           
             Worldly
             ,
             Interests
          
           ,
           and
           indeed
           never
           began
           ,
           till
           motives
           of
           such
           Interest
           inclined
           them
           to
           it
           ;
           but
           the
           Practice
           of
           the
           
             Primitive
             Christians
          
           was
           directly
           contradictory
           to
           such
           Interests
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LV.
           The
           
             Spiritual
             Rights
          
           of
           Our
           Fathers
           have
           been
           now
           invaded
           by
           
             Civil
             Force
          
           .
           Bare
           Characters
           .
           without
           Districts
           not
           sufficient
           to
           preserve
           the
           Church
           as
           a
           Body
           .
        
         
           But
           the
           strangest
           Answer
           of
           all
           is
           ,
           That
           our
           Adversaries
           cannot
           yet
           be
           perswaded
           that
           our
           H.
           Fathers
           
             Spiritual
             Rights
          
           have
           yet
           been
           invaded
           by
           
             secular
             Force
          
           .
           As
           this
           way
           of
           defence
           signifies
           their
           unwillingness
           to
           undertake
           the
           Patronage
           of
           such
           Invasions
           ,
           I
           confess
           ,
           I
           am
           not
           a
           little
           pleased
           with
           it
           ,
           in
           regard
           to
           the
           Liberty
           it
           may
           allow
           them
           hereafter
           ,
           if
           GOD
           shall
           be
           pleased
           to
           turn
           our
           Captivity
           ,
           to
           defend
           the
           Rights
           of
           their
           own
           Function
           ,
           when
           they
           may
           be
           defended
           without
           danger
           .
           And
           I
           do
           not
           know
           why
           ,
           even
           now
           ,
           the
           Clergy
           should
           be
           forward
           and
           Active
           in
           promoting
           a
           Casuistry
           that
           may
           absolve
           the
           Magistrate
           from
           the
           obligation
           incumbent
           on
           him
           in
           Conscience
           for
           their
           Protection
           .
           But
           it
           is
           a
           strange
           degree
           of
           Confidence
           to
           deny
           the
           Fact.
           Had
           they
           not
           set
           up
           
             other
             Bishops
          
           to
           exercise
           
             Spiritual
             Power
          
           in
           the
           
             same
             Jurisdictions
          
           ,
           they
           might
           indeed
           pretend
           to
           it
           ,
           But
           having
           done
           so
           ,
           it
           is
           from
           thence
           we
           date
           their
           Schism
           .
           Nor
           do
           I
           see
           ,
           how
           they
           can
           avoid
           the
           Charge
           of
           it
           .
           For
           if
           the
           Spirituals
           of
           our
           Fathers
           
           be
           yet
           untouched
           ,
           then
           they
           must
           still
           have
           the
           same
           Right
           over
           those
           
             same
             Jurisdictions
          
           ,
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           as
           they
           had
           ,
           and
           as
           was
           own'd
           by
           our
           Adversaries
           themselves
           formerly
           .
           If
           so
           ,
           their
           Rivals
           ,
           exercising
           
             Spiritual
             Power
          
           in
           the
           
             same
             Jurisdiction
          
           without
           their
           leave
           ,
           must
           be
           looked
           on
           as
           Invaders
           of
           their
           yet
           untouched
           uninvaded
           
             Spirituals
             Rights
          
           .
           If
           so
           ,
           they
           must
           ,
           in
           the
           Language
           of
           St.
           Cyprian
           be
           foras
           ,
           be
           aliens
           ,
           be
           
             non
             secundi
             ,
             sed
             nulli
          
           .
           Not
           barely
           on
           the
           Authority
           of
           that
           Holy
           Martyrs
           saying
           ,
           but
           as
           the
           Vindicator
           proved
           ,
           from
           the
           Nature
           of
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Monarchy
          
           ,
           which
           allows
           no
           more
           than
           one
           at
           once
           ,
           without
           conscent
           ,
           to
           have
           a
           Right
           within
           the
           
             same
             Jurisdiction
          
           .
           It
           is
           very
           plain
           from
           hence
           ,
           that
           their
           Right
           to
           their
           particular
           districts
           and
           Jurisdiction
           ,
           even
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           is
           actually
           invaded
           by
           their
           Intruders
           .
           And
           we
           have
           now
           ,
           and
           so
           had
           the
           Vindicator
           formerly
           ,
           shewn
           the
           settling
           of
           districts
           in
           order
           to
           
             Spiritual
             Jurisdiction
          
           ,
           to
           be
           a
           Right
           of
           the
           
             Church
             ,
             independent
          
           on
           the
           Favour
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           We
           have
           shewn
           that
           the
           Church
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           the
           State
           ,
           was
           by
           CHRIST
           and
           his
           Apostles
           made
           a
           
             visible
             Body
          
           ,
           and
           that
           
             their
             way
          
           of
           knowing
           the
           
             visible
             Governours
          
           ,
           and
           Subjects
           of
           this
           visible
           ,
           Body
           ,
           was
           ,
           even
           from
           the
           
             Apostles
             Time
          
           ,
           taken
           from
           the
           extent
           of
           those
           
             visible
             Districts
          
           ;
           that
           they
           who
           lived
           in
           these
           districts
           ,
           were
           all
           Subjects
           to
           the
           Governours
           of
           the
           districts
           ,
           and
           that
           the
           Governours
           of
           those
           districts
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           were
           the
           
             particular
             Governours
          
           to
           whom
           the
           Christian
           inhabitants
           of
           those
           Districts
           ,
           ow'd
           Obedience
           as
           to
           Spiritual
           :
           That
           whatever
           Right
           the
           Magistrate
           had
           formerly
           ,
           that
           might
           seem
           inconsistent
           with
           these
           Rights
           ,
           was
           by
           GOD
           himself
           taken
           away
           from
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           the
           making
           this
           way
           of
           propagating
           the
           Gospel
           ,
           Practicable
           ;
           yet
           so
           ,
           that
           Power
           enough
           was
           still
           left
           for
           securing
           the
           Authority
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           as
           to
           Temporals
           :
           That
           the
           first
           
             Christian
             Magistrates
          
           ,
           found
           the
           
             Church
             possessed
          
           of
           these
           Districts
           ,
           and
           the
           Bodies
           of
           the
           Christians
           ,
           in
           the
           several
           Districts
           ,
           possessed
           also
           of
           the
           Opinion
           of
           the
           Independency
           of
           those
           Districts
           ,
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           on
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrates
          
           ;
           which
           they
           had
           always
           made
           appear
           ,
           in
           all
           Difference
           between
           the
           Magistrate
           and
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           by
           their
           unanimous
           adherence
           to
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           :
           That
           therefore
           those
           Districts
           ,
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           were
           never
           derived
           from
           the
           Favour
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           and
           therefore
           not
           obnoxious
           to
           his
           disposal
           .
           Here
           therefore
           this
           whole
           Dispute
           is
           reducible
           to
           a
           short
           Dilemma
           .
           If
           the
           presumed
           Magistrate
           has
           not
           invaded
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Districts
          
           of
           our
           Fathers
           ;
           then
           the
           Intruders
           are
           Schismaticks
           for
           intermeddling
           with
           those
           Rights
           which
           their
           Predecessors
           are
           not
           deprived
           of
           .
           And
           all
           others
           also
           must
           be
           Schismaticks
           who
           own
           and
           Communicate
           with
           the
           Intruders
           .
           If
           the
           Rivals
           be
           not
           Intruders
           ,
           they
           must
           needs
           say
           that
           the
           Predecessors
           
           have
           lost
           their
           Right
           ,
           even
           to
           those
           Districts
           ,
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           .
           And
           how
           they
           should
           come
           to
           lose
           it
           but
           by
           the
           Sole
           Act
           of
           their
           Magistrate
           ,
           I
           know
           nothing
           that
           our
           Adversaries
           can
           pretend
           .
           There
           is
           manifestly
           no
           Act
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           that
           they
           can
           so
           much
           as
           pretend
           for
           it
           .
           Their
           Character
           ,
           they
           say
           ,
           is
           not
           yet
           touched
           .
           No
           wonder
           it
           should
           not
           ,
           since
           the
           Schoolmen
           ,
           from
           whom
           they
           borrow
           the
           term
           of
           Character
           ,
           hold
           Characters
           to
           be
           indelible
           by
           any
           
             Humane
             Authority
          
           whatsoever
           ,
           not
           only
           secular
           ,
           but
           Ecclesiastical
           also
           .
           However
           all
           the
           Use
           our
           Adversaries
           make
           of
           their
           remaining
           Character
           ,
           is
           only
           to
           make
           them
           restorable
           to
           their
           
             old
             Jurisdictions
          
           ,
           without
           a
           
             new
             Consecration
          
           ;
           and
           in
           the
           
             mean
             time
          
           ,
           to
           legitimate
           some
           Acts
           of
           
             Epicopal
             Power
          
           ,
           which
           must
           no
           be
           supposed
           to
           depend
           on
           a
           relation
           to
           a
           
             particular
             Jurisdiction
          
           .
           But
           this
           Character
           ,
           that
           has
           no
           relation
           to
           a
           
             particular
             District
          
           ,
           could
           not
           be
           sufficient
           for
           preserving
           Bodies
           (
           such
           as
           the
           Church
           was
           designed
           to
           be
           by
           ,
           them
           who
           founded
           it
           )
           in
           a
           State
           of
           independency
           on
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ;
           Bodies
           ,
           as
           then
           understood
           by
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           ,
           being
           determined
           and
           distinguished
           by
           such
           Districts
           .
           The
           allowing
           therefore
           the
           Heathen
           Persecuting
           Magistrates
           a
           Power
           of
           dissolving
           the
           relation
           of
           all
           the
           Bishops
           of
           their
           Dominions
           ,
           to
           particular
           Districts
           ,
           had
           parfectly
           dissolved
           all
           
             particular
             Churches
          
           ,
           as
           Bodies
           ,
           when
           the
           Magistrate
           was
           pleased
           to
           dissolve
           them
           ;
           and
           therefore
           cannot
           be
           agreeable
           to
           the
           design
           of
           CHRIST
           and
           his
           Apostles
           ,
           who
           intended
           to
           perpetuate
           Churches
           ,
           as
           
             Bodies
             ,
             independent
          
           on
           the
           state
           .
           And
           it
           is
           certain
           ,
           that
           this
           Power
           of
           discharging
           Ecclesiastcal
           Governours
           from
           the
           Districts
           in
           their
           
             own
             Dominions
          
           ,
           was
           not
           own'd
           in
           the
           Civil
           Powers
           by
           the
           Apostles
           and
           
             earliest
             Christians
          
           .
           Had
           it
           been
           so
           ,
           the
           Apostles
           themselves
           must
           have
           quitted
           Jerusalem
           ,
           when
           they
           were
           forbidden
           by
           the
           Sanbedrim
           ,
           and
           sought
           out
           other
           Converts
           and
           Districts
           ,
           wherein
           they
           might
           exercise
           their
           Function
           and
           Character
           .
           But
           where
           could
           they
           seek
           or
           find
           them
           ,
           but
           the
           
             same
             Objection
          
           ,
           would
           still
           recur
           from
           this
           Right
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ?
           There
           must
           therefore
           have
           been
           
             no
             Churches
          
           in
           the
           World
           ,
           if
           
             this
             Doctrine
          
           had
           been
           allowed
           of
           .
           But
           it
           is
           certain
           ,
           that
           the
           Apostles
           did
           still
           challenge
           and
           exercise
           their
           Jurisdiction
           in
           Jerusalem
           ,
           and
           were
           own'd
           and
           seconded
           in
           doing
           so
           ,
           by
           the
           
             Christians
             Inhabitants
          
           of
           that
           City
           ,
           against
           all
           the
           Persecutions
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           and
           were
           all
           of
           them
           own'd
           by
           GOD
           ,
           by
           the
           Credentials
           that
           followed
           them
           ,
           which
           could
           never
           have
           been
           ,
           if
           these
           their
           Practices
           had
           been
           Usurpations
           .
           And
           all
           the
           Right
           that
           
             Bishops
             then
          
           had
           for
           obliging
           the
           whole
           
             Catholick
             Church
          
           ,
           was
           grounded
           on
           the
           commerce
           of
           
             Communicatory
             Letters
          
           ,
           and
           the
           
             Common
             interest
          
           of
           all
           ,
           to
           ratify
           the
           Acts
           of
           
             particular
             Districts
          
           .
           Thence
           it
           appears
           ,
           that
           all
           exercise
           
           of
           Epicopacy
           ,
           as
           Catholick
           ,
           was
           grounded
           on
           the
           Right
           ,
           each
           Bishop
           had
           to
           a
           
             particular
             District
          
           .
           So
           vain
           are
           our
           Adversaries
           pretences
           for
           making
           our
           Bishops
           ,
           Bishops
           of
           the
           
             Catholick
             Church
          
           ,
           though
           deprived
           of
           Districts
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           the
           exercising
           any
           
             Episcopal
             Act
          
           for
           preserving
           the
           Face
           of
           a
           Body
           ,
           under
           a
           Persecution
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LVI
           .
           Supposing
           the
           Church
           and
           Christian
           State
           had
           made
           
             one
             Body
          
           ,
           yet
           more
           had
           been
           requisite
           to
           make
           that
           Supposition
           applicable
           to
           our
           
             present
             Case
          
           ,
           which
           is
           not
           yet
           taken
           notice
           of
           .
        
         
           But
           the
           Principle
           pretence
           of
           all
           that
           our
           Adversaries
           insist
           on
           ,
           is
           ,
           That
           in
           those
           earlier
           times
           ,
           the
           Church
           was
           indeed
           a
           Society
           distinct
           from
           the
           State
           ,
           and
           whilst
           it
           continued
           so
           ,
           the
           deprivations
           of
           the
           State
           ,
           could
           therefore
           not
           extend
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           which
           were
           the
           constituts
           of
           the
           Church
           as
           a
           Society
           distinct
           from
           it
           :
           But
           that
           there
           is
           no
           necessary
           consequence
           ,
           because
           it
           was
           so
           then
           ,
           that
           therefore
           it
           most
           be
           so
           now
           :
           That
           the
           Reasoning
           from
           the
           Sense
           and
           Practice
           of
           those
           Times
           ,
           does
           indeed
           hold
           where
           the
           Case
           is
           the
           same
           as
           it
           was
           then
           ,
           That
           is
           ,
           where
           the
           State
           consists
           of
           Infidels
           ;
           but
           not
           in
           ours
           ,
           wherein
           the
           State
           professes
           the
           
             Christian
             ,
             Religion
          
           .
           This
           is
           suggested
           by
           the
           worthy
           Author
           of
           the
           
             Defence
             of
             the
             Church
             of
             England
             ,
          
           as
           he
           calls
           it
           ,
           
             from
             the
             Charges
          
           of
           the
           Vindicator
           .
           And
           he
           has
           therein
           managed
           the
           Reasoning
           Part
           of
           this
           Dispute
           better
           than
           the
           Doctor
           ,
           in
           that
           he
           has
           pitched
           on
           the
           particular
           Proposition
           ,
           which
           he
           thinks
           needs
           
             further
             proof
          
           in
           the
           Scheme
           of
           the
           Vindicator
           ,
           seeming
           withal
           to
           allow
           that
           if
           this
           also
           be
           cleared
           ,
           the
           rest
           of
           the
           Vidicators
           Proof
           will
           hold
           ,
           as
           being
           firmly
           superstructed
           on
           it
           .
           This
           therefore
           brings
           the
           Question
           to
           a
           short
           issue
           ,
           and
           affords
           a
           further
           Subject
           of
           useful
           Discourse
           ,
           for
           improving
           what
           has
           been
           said
           already
           ,
           and
           I
           therefore
           return
           my
           hearty
           thanks
           to
           that
           Author
           for
           it
           ,
           only
           wishing
           that
           he
           had
           allowed
           himself
           a
           larger
           Scope
           for
           making
           that
           out
           ,
           which
           if
           proved
           ,
           would
           have
           been
           so
           very
           considerable
           for
           his
           purpose
           .
           Supposing
           he
           had
           proved
           his
           Assertion
           true
           ,
           yet
           other
           things
           ,
           remain'd
           to
           have
           been
           proved
           further
           ,
           for
           making
           it
           applicable
           to
           our
           present
           Case
           .
           Something
           more
           had
           certainly
           been
           requisite
           for
           his
           purpose
           ,
           than
           barely
           to
           suppose
           the
           Magistrate
           barely
           Christian.
           He
           might
           easily
           have
           foreseen
           that
           ,
           even
           among
           Christians
           ,
           there
           are
           different
           communions
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           HERISY
           and
           SCHISM
           .
           If
           the
           Magistrate
           therefore
           be
           guilty
           of
           either
           of
           those
           ,
           he
           is
           as
           uncapable
           of
           Uniting
           with
           the
           Church
           in
           one
           Cmmunion
           ,
           as
           if
           he
           were
           an
           IDOLATOR
           .
           And
           I
           suppose
           all
           the
           ground
           that
           worthy
           Person
           has
           for
           making
           a
           believing
           Prince's
           Case
           different
           from
           that
           of
           an
           Infidel
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           the
           Church's
           coalition
           into
           
             one
             Body
          
           with
           the
           Society
           that
           is
           governed
           by
           the
           believing
           Prince
           ,
           must
           be
           the
           Church's
           Union
           in
           Communion
           with
           him
           ,
           which
           it
           cannot
           have
           with
           an
           Infidel
           .
           For
           that
           
             Political
             Union
          
           ,
           which
           is
           requisite
           for
           
           Secular
           Government
           ,
           as
           far
           as
           it
           is
           consistent
           with
           difference
           in
           Communion
           ,
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           the
           Orthodox
           are
           as
           capable
           of
           maintaining
           with
           INFIDEL
           Princes
           ,
           as
           they
           are
           with
           either
           HERITICKS
           ,
           or
           SCHISMATICKS
           .
           And
           for
           applying
           that
           Case
           ,
           he
           might
           have
           considered
           further
           ,
           how
           far
           Communicating
           with
           Schismaticks
           in
           other
           places
           ,
           and
           
             setting
             up
          
           Schism
           where
           he
           found
           the
           
             true
             Communion
          
           established
           by
           Law
           ,
           and
           allowing
           no
           Patronage
           of
           Law
           ,
           without
           
             Schismatical
             conditions
          
           ,
           may
           go
           to
           prove
           a
           Prince's
           Case
           SCHISMATICAL
           .
           Then
           supposing
           the
           Church
           and
           State
           united
           into
           
             one
             Society
          
           ,
           he
           should
           have
           enquired
           further
           ,
           why
           this
           Union
           must
           rather
           be
           under
           the
           Secular
           ,
           than
           the
           spiritual
           ,
           common
           Monarch
           .
           This
           ,
           I
           am
           sure
           ,
           is
           against
           the
           
             General
             Rule
          
           of
           Subordinations
           ,
           to
           make
           the
           
             more
             Noble
          
           Power
           Subject
           to
           that
           which
           is
           less
           so
           ;
           and
           therefore
           ought
           to
           have
           been
           proved
           by
           reasens
           peculier
           to
           this
           
             particular
             coalition
          
           of
           two
           Societies
           into
           one
           .
           Such
           peculiar
           Reasons
           I
           doubt
           are
           more
           then
           ever
           we
           can
           expect
           from
           him
           .
           But
           supposing
           both
           these
           difficulties
           surmounted
           ,
           that
           the
           Church
           had
           a
           Prince
           of
           
             one
             Communion
          
           with
           her
           ,
           and
           that
           the
           
             two
             Societies
          
           now
           united
           ,
           were
           to
           be
           Governed
           rather
           by
           the
           PRINCE
           ,
           than
           the
           METROPOLITANE
           ;
           Yet
           still
           
             another
             Question
          
           remained
           worthy
           his
           Consideration
           ,
           
             how
             long
             this
             Union
             was
             to
             hold
             ?
          
           If
           irrevocably
           ,
           then
           the
           Church
           would
           be
           left
           destitute
           of
           a
           Power
           ,
           necessary
           for
           her
           subsitence
           ,
           whenever
           the
           Prince
           should
           Apostatize
           to
           Infidelity
           ,
           or
           an
           Infidel
           should
           succeed
           him
           by
           the
           Rules
           established
           for
           the
           Succession
           .
           If
           therefore
           the
           
             Church's
             Power
          
           be
           granted
           revocable
           ,
           the
           Enquiry
           then
           would
           be
           ,
           whether
           the
           Grant
           can
           in
           reason
           be
           supposed
           to
           hold
           any
           longer
           than
           the
           
             Prince's
             Protectoon
          
           of
           her
           .
           If
           so
           ;
           then
           whether
           ,
           when
           he
           revokes
           his
           Protection
           granted
           on
           Conscionable
           terms
           ,
           and
           Persecutes
           his
           Fellow
           Brethren
           ,
           for
           no
           other
           reason
           ,
           but
           for
           being
           true
           to
           the
           Principles
           of
           the
           
             old
             communion
          
           ,
           this
           be
           not
           the
           very
           Season
           wherein
           they
           are
           ,
           in
           
             Conscience
             ,
             absolved
          
           from
           their
           
             old
             Grants
          
           ,
           and
           are
           perfectly
           free
           to
           resume
           their
           old
           
             Spiritual
             Liberties
          
           ?
           I
           know
           our
           Adversary
           will
           understand
           me
           ,
           without
           any
           further
           application
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LVII
           .
           The
           Prince
           〈◊〉
           account
           of
           his
           being
           only
           a
           Christian
           ,
           has
           no
           Title
           to
           any
           
             Spiritual
             Authority
          
           .
        
         
           These
           things
           ,
           I
           say
           ,
           had
           been
           requisite
           to
           make
           his
           Doctrine
           Practicable
           ,
           if
           it
           had
           been
           proved
           ,
           and
           proved
           as
           well
           as
           himself
           desires
           to
           prove
           it
           .
           But
           ,
           for
           my
           part
           ,
           I
           am
           perfectly
           of
           the
           Vindicators
           mind
           ,
           nor
           do
           I
           see
           any
           reason
           to
           doubt
           but
           that
           his
           
             whole
             Proof
          
           will
           hold
           ,
           if
           this
           be
           the
           only
           suspicious
           Proposition
           concerned
           in
           it
           .
           I
           see
           no
           reason
           ,
           why
           the
           Church
           should
           loss
           her
           Liberties
           ,
           or
           
             Princes
             gain
          
           more
           Power
           by
           their
           Conversion
           ,
           than
           they
           had
           before
           .
           The
           Nature
           of
           the
           thing
           ,
           does
           not
           the
           least
           require
           it
           .
           Princes
           ,
           when
           they
           are
           received
           
           into
           the
           
             Church's
             Communion
          
           ,
           are
           received
           ,
           as
           other
           Laicks
           are
           ,
           by
           Baptism
           ;
           which
           can
           therefore
           intitle
           them
           to
           no
           more
           Power
           ,
           than
           other
           Christians
           ,
           who
           are
           admitted
           into
           the
           
             same
             Society
          
           ,
           the
           
             same
             way
          
           ,
           as
           they
           are
           .
           As
           therefore
           Baptism
           alone
           confers
           no
           
             spiritual
             Authority
          
           to
           others
           ,
           no
           more
           it
           can
           to
           the
           Prince
           ,
           who
           has
           no
           Preheminence
           above
           them
           ,
           on
           
             this
             account
          
           .
           When
           therefore
           he
           is
           baptized
           ,
           he
           still
           remains
           ,
           in
           reference
           to
           
             spiritual
             Power
          
           ,
           no
           more
           than
           a
           
             Private
             Person
          
           ,
           as
           all
           others
           do
           ,
           who
           have
           no
           more
           
             spiritual
             Authority
          
           given
           them
           ,
           than
           what
           is
           conferred
           upon
           them
           in
           their
           Baptism
           .
           How
           then
           comes
           he
           by
           this
           Power
           in
           Spirituals
           ,
           which
           our
           Adversaries
           challenge
           for
           him
           ?
           All
           our
           forementioned
           Reasons
           proceed
           as
           validly
           against
           his
           claim
           of
           
             spiritual
             Power
          
           ,
           whilst
           he
           continues
           only
           a
           Lay-man
           ,
           tho'
           Baptized
           ,
           as
           they
           did
           before
           his
           Baptism
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           
             spiritual
             Power
          
           is
           grounded
           on
           the
           Power
           of
           rewarding
           and
           
             punishing
             Spiritually
          
           ,
           by
           admitting
           to
           ,
           or
           excluding
           from
           ,
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Benefits
          
           of
           the
           Society
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           Power
           of
           that
           admission
           to
           ,
           or
           exclusion
           from
           ,
           those
           Benefits
           ,
           depends
           upon
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Incorporating
             Rites
          
           ;
           which
           being
           granted
           ,
           admit
           into
           the
           Body
           ,
           or
           if
           denyed
           ,
           exclude
           from
           it
           .
           Still
           the
           
             Incorporating
             Acts
          
           ,
           are
           the
           two
           Sacraments
           ,
           as
           we
           are
           Baptized
           into
           ,
           the
           
             spiritual
             Body
          
           ,
           and
           as
           we
           are
           
             made
             one
             spiritual
             Body
          
           ,
           by
           our
           partaking
           of
           
             one
             Bread
          
           :
           So
           that
           none
           can
           have
           the
           Power
           of
           these
           
             Incorporating
             Acts
          
           ,
           who
           has
           not
           the
           Power
           of
           Administring
           the
           Sacraments
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           Power
           of
           Administring
           the
           Sacraments
           ,
           is
           proper
           to
           the
           
             Evangelical
             Priest
             hood
          
           ;
           and
           it
           is
           still
           ,
           as
           unlawful
           for
           Princes
           to
           invade
           the
           
             Sacerdotal
             Offices
          
           ,
           as
           it
           was
           under
           the
           old
           Law
           ,
           when
           the
           Prince
           was
           obliged
           to
           be
           always
           of
           
             one
             Body
          
           ,
           with
           the
           Priest-hood
           ,
           in
           reference
           to
           Religious
           Acts
           of
           Communication
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           Reasoning
           of
           St.
           Clemens
           holds
           that
           Laymen
           are
           only
           to
           meddle
           with
           Acts
           properly
           Laical
           ,
           and
           proceeds
           with
           
             more
             Force
          
           than
           in
           the
           Case
           wherein
           that
           
             Holy
             Apostolical
             Person
          
           used
           it
           .
           The
           
             Gifted
             Laicks
          
           had
           been
           Baptized
           as
           well
           as
           our
           
             Believing
             Princes
          
           ,
           and
           in
           that
           regard
           were
           every
           way
           Equal
           with
           them
           .
           But
           as
           they
           were
           endued
           with
           
             Spiritual
             Gifts
          
           ,
           they
           were
           better
           qualified
           for
           
             extraordinary
             Calls
          
           to
           Acts
           of
           
             sacerdotal
             Power
          
           ,
           than
           Princes
           can
           be
           by
           any
           Pretensions
           to
           ,
           or
           Advantages
           of
           ,
           
             Worldly
             grandeur
             .
             Baptism
          
           indeed
           makes
           the
           Prince
           and
           the
           
             Church
             one
             Society
          
           ,
           as
           the
           Prince
           is
           thereby
           incorporated
           into
           the
           
             Priviledged
             Society
          
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           But
           then
           ,
           this
           
             Baptismal
             Union
          
           is
           rather
           of
           the
           Prince
           to
           the
           Bishop
           ,
           than
           of
           the
           Bishop
           to
           the
           Prince
           ,
           and
           therefore
           on
           the
           
             Bishop's
             terms
          
           ,
           not
           the
           
           Prince's
           .
           How
           then
           can
           the
           Prince's
           being
           receiv'd
           into
           the
           Church
           as
           a
           
             private
             Person
          
           ,
           and
           as
           a
           Subject
           to
           the
           
             spiritual
             Authority
          
           ,
           intitle
           him
           to
           any
           of
           that
           same
           Authority
           ,
           to
           which
           by
           his
           Baptism
           ,
           
           he
           professes
           his
           subjection
           ?
           He
           is
           indeed
           so
           far
           from
           being
           a
           
             Publick
             Person
          
           in
           his
           Baptism
           ,
           that
           the
           Obligation
           and
           Benefits
           of
           his
           Baptism
           ,
           are
           wholly
           Personal
           to
           himself
           ,
           none
           of
           his
           Subjects
           ,
           being
           in
           the
           least
           ,
           concerned
           in
           it
           .
           If
           he
           had
           acted
           as
           a
           
             Publick
             Person
          
           in
           it
           ,
           his
           
             single
             Act
          
           had
           obliged
           all
           his
           Subjects
           ,
           and
           would
           have
           consequently
           intituled
           them
           to
           all
           the
           benefits
           of
           his
           stipulation
           .
           But
           this
           is
           more
           than
           our
           Adversaries
           will
           pretend
           in
           this
           Case
           .
           How
           then
           can
           an
           Act
           purely
           Personal
           ,
           intitle
           him
           to
           an
           accession
           of
           
             Spiritual
             Authority
          
           ?
        
      
       
         
           §
           LVIII
           .
           A
           whole
           Nation
           ,
           by
           Baptism
           ,
           may
           be
           made
           
             one
             Society
          
           in
           the
           Church
           ,
           without
           prejudice
           to
           their
           being
           still
           a
           
             Society
             distinct
             from
             it
          
           .
        
         
           Thus
           far
           therefore
           it
           is
           certain
           ,
           that
           a
           
           Prince's
           admission
           into
           the
           Church
           ,
           is
           not
           alone
           sufficient
           for
           a
           Coalition
           of
           the
           State
           into
           
             one
             Body
          
           with
           the
           Church
           ,
           because
           that
           
             other
             Body
          
           of
           the
           State
           ,
           whereof
           he
           is
           head
           ,
           is
           not
           the
           least
           concern'd
           in
           this
           Act
           of
           his
           as
           a
           
             Private
             Person
          
           ,
           not
           as
           a
           Publick
           ,
           much
           less
           as
           a
           Head
           of
           any
           Body
           at
           all
           .
           Suppose
           we
           therefore
           the
           generality
           of
           a
           
             State
             converted
          
           and
           Baptized
           also
           .
           This
           will
           indeed
           make
           them
           
             one
             Body
          
           with
           the
           Church
           .
           But
           on
           the
           same
           terms
           as
           it
           made
           the
           Prince
           one
           ,
           that
           is
           ,
           on
           the
           
             Church's
             terms
          
           ,
           not
           on
           theirs
           :
           That
           is
           ,
           by
           so
           many
           repeated
           Personal
           Acts
           qualifying
           them
           for
           ,
           and
           receiving
           Baptism
           ,
           as
           there
           are
           supposed
           to
           be
           
             particular
             Persons
          
           in
           that
           whole
           
             Secular
             Society
          
           ,
           and
           as
           so
           many
           
             private
             Persons
          
           ,
           not
           as
           invested
           with
           any
           
             publick
             Authority
          
           in
           
             another
             Society
          
           .
           Still
           ,
           therefore
           ,
           Proselites
           of
           that
           kind
           ,
           how
           numerous
           soever
           ,
           can
           never
           hurt
           the
           Authority
           of
           that
           Society
           ,
           into
           which
           they
           are
           Incorporated
           only
           ,
           as
           so
           many
           
             private
             Persons
          
           .
           A
           whole
           Nations
           therefore
           ,
           how
           populous
           soever
           ,
           coming
           in
           on
           
             these
             terms
          
           ,
           cannot
           change
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           from
           what
           they
           find
           it
           .
           They
           add
           to
           the
           numbers
           of
           the
           Subjects
           of
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           and
           in
           that
           regard
           ,
           should
           rather
           advance
           ,
           than
           diminish
           ,
           the
           Authority
           of
           that
           
             new
             Society
          
           into
           which
           they
           are
           Incorporated
           And
           as
           their
           accession
           to
           the
           Church
           cannot
           make
           any
           change
           in
           the
           Government
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           so
           neither
           in
           their
           one
           .
           Their
           admission
           into
           the
           Church
           being
           only
           the
           Act
           of
           so
           many
           
             private
             Persons
          
           singly
           considered
           ,
           can
           therefore
           not
           concern
           them
           as
           a
           Society
           ,
           can
           therefore
           no
           way
           affect
           them
           as
           
             publick
             Persons
          
           ,
           and
           as
           concerned
           for
           the
           Government
           of
           the
           Society
           ,
           into
           which
           they
           were
           Incorporated
           before
           .
           There
           is
           therefore
           on
           neither
           side
           any
           explicite
           renunciation
           of
           
             ancient
             Rights
          
           ,
           nor
           yet
           by
           any
           fair
           Interpretation
           .
           Their
           coalition
           into
           
             one
             Body
          
           with
           the
           Church
           ,
           does
           not
           dissolve
           the
           same
           relation
           they
           had
           formerly
           to
           
             different
             Societies
          
           ,
           on
           different
           considerations
           .
           The
           Bishop
           ,
           though
           he
           act
           the
           part
           of
           a
           
             Publick
             Person
          
           in
           admitting
           them
           into
           his
           own
           Spiritual
           Society
           ,
           does
           not
           thereby
           put
           off
           his
           former
           Subjection
           as
           to
           Temporals
           ,
           nor
           acquire
           any
           
           thing
           inconsistent
           therewith
           .
           Nor
           does
           the
           Magistrate
           by
           his
           Subjection
           in
           Spirituals
           ,
           profess
           any
           thing
           not
           fairly
           reconcilable
           with
           his
           
             Temporal
             Sovereignity
          
           .
           Their
           coalition
           therefore
           into
           
             one
             Body
          
           ,
           is
           very
           well
           consistent
           with
           their
           still
           continuing
           as
           
             distinct
             Societies
          
           as
           they
           were
           before
           .
           Nor
           does
           our
           worthy
           Adversay
           object
           any
           thing
           to
           prove
           the
           contrary
           ,
           but
           that
           upon
           Conversion
           and
           Baptism
           of
           the
           Seculars
           ,
           the
           Church
           and
           State
           consist
           of
           the
           same
           Persons
           .
           
             How
             should
             the
             Church
             and
             State
             make
             Two
             distinst
             Societies
             ,
          
           says
           he
           ,
           
             where
             the
             Church
             and
             State
             consist
             of
             the
             very
             same
             Persons
             ?
          
           The
           very
           same
           way
           ,
           say
           I
           ,
           as
           our
           K.
           EDWARD
           the
           III.
           was
           ,
           at
           the
           same
           time
           ,
           a
           SOVEREIGN
           of
           England
           ,
           and
           SUBJECT
           of
           France
           ,
           when
           he
           swore
           homage
           to
           Philip
           of
           Valois
           for
           his
           Dominions
           in
           France
           .
           Yet
           who
           doubts
           but
           England
           and
           France
           were
           then
           two
           distinst
           and
           perfectly
           
             independent
             Societies
          
           ?
           The
           same
           way
           as
           the
           BISHOP
           himself
           was
           the
           Head
           of
           the
           CHURCH
           ,
           and
           yet
           a
           Subject
           of
           the
           STATE
           ,
           therefore
           a
           Member
           of
           
             BOTH
             Societies
          
           ,
           antecedently
           to
           any
           such
           Conversions
           ,
           or
           any
           Pretence
           that
           could
           be
           therefore
           made
           ,
           for
           a
           coalition
           of
           both
           into
           
             one
             Society
             .
             Conversion
          
           therefore
           ,
           thought
           it
           bring
           all
           Persons
           into
           
             one
             Society
          
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           yet
           does
           not
           hinder
           but
           that
           the
           
             Two
             Societies
          
           of
           the
           Church
           and
           State
           ,
           continue
           as
           distinct
           from
           each
           other
           as
           formerly
           ,
           whilst
           the
           same
           things
           remain
           that
           made
           them
           
             two
             Societies
          
           formerly
           .
           And
           Conversions
           do
           not
           hinder
           but
           that
           they
           may
           still
           remain
           so
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           Spirituals
           and
           Temporals
           ,
           are
           as
           distinct
           as
           ever
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           same
           Right
           continue
           for
           the
           Bishops
           to
           be
           the
           
             competent
             Judges
          
           of
           Spirituals
           ,
           as
           the
           Magistrate
           are
           ,
           of
           Temporals
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           same
           distinction
           of
           Laws
           continues
           ,
           by
           which
           the
           
             Two
             Societies
          
           are
           governed
           as
           formerly
           .
           That
           the
           Church
           is
           to
           be
           governed
           by
           the
           Church
           ,
           which
           are
           made
           by
           a
           Consent
           of
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           ,
           and
           that
           the
           State
           is
           governed
           by
           the
           Laws
           ,
           which
           receive
           their
           Sanction
           from
           the
           Lay-Authority
           .
           Still
           ,
           the
           Independence
           continues
           ,
           that
           the
           Bishops
           are
           as
           supream
           unappealable
           Judges
           for
           Spirituals
           ,
           as
           the
           Magistrates
           are
           for
           
             Temporals
             .
             Conversions
          
           I
           am
           sure
           ,
           do
           not
           hinder
           ,
           but
           that
           this
           also
           might
           have
           remained
           as
           it
           did
           formerly
           .
           For
           such
           a
           coalition
           of
           the
           
             Two
             Societies
          
           as
           our
           Adversary
           reasons
           for
           it
           ,
           would
           be
           necessary
           that
           the
           Government
           of
           one
           of
           the
           Societies
           should
           surrender
           ,
           or
           acknowledge
           a
           dependence
           on
           the
           Government
           of
           the
           other
           .
           But
           neither
           of
           them
           can
           be
           pretended
           at
           the
           
             first
             Conversions
          
           of
           Magistrates
           .
           Neither
           of
           them
           now
           ,
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           Church
           of
           England
           .
           The
           name
           of
           Head
           ,
           on
           which
           our
           Adversary
           insists
           ,
           is
           long
           ago
           laid
           aside
           by
           Q.
           Elizabeth
           .
           And
           one
           of
           our
           Articles
           disowns
           all
           Pretensions
           of
           our
           Princes
           to
           the
           power
           of
           preaching
           the
           Word
           ,
           and
           administring
           the
           Sacraments
           .
           This
           Article
           is
           ratified
           ,
           and
           made
           Law
           by
           an
           Act
           of
           Parliament
           .
           Upon
           
           these
           Considerations
           ,
           we
           can
           fairly
           take
           the
           Oath
           of
           Supremacy
           ,
           as
           thus
           intrepreted
           by
           the
           Legislators
           themselves
           ,
           without
           owning
           any
           subjection
           of
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           as
           to
           Causes
           
             purely
             Spiritual
          
           ,
           to
           the
           
             Supream
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           even
           in
           England
           .
           So
           far
           the
           Church
           and
           State
           are
           yet
           ,
           even
           here
           ,
           from
           being
           made
           
             one
             Society
          
           ,
           as
           our
           Adversary
           pretends
           .
           The
           Examples
           of
           Bishops
           taking
           out
           Patents
           for
           the
           Right
           of
           
             giving
             Orders
          
           ,
           were
           ,
           I
           believe
           ,
           never
           known
           before
           the
           Reign
           of
           HENRY
           the
           VIII
           .
           And
           that
           I
           hope
           our
           Adversary
           himself
           will
           not
           plead
           as
           a
           
             Reign
             of
             Presidents
          
           .
           If
           he
           do
           ,
           the
           Liberties
           of
           the
           People
           will
           be
           no
           more
           secure
           ,
           than
           those
           of
           the
           Clergy
           .
           Nothing
           was
           security
           against
           him
           ,
           who
           made
           such
           manifest
           invasions
           on
           the
           Two
           Fundamental
           Securities
           ,
           
             MAGNA
             CHARTA
          
           ,
           and
           his
           own
           OATH
           ,
           taken
           at
           his
           CORONATION
           .
           Thus
           clear
           it
           is
           ,
           that
           
             Conversions
             alone
          
           could
           not
           make
           any
           change
           in
           the
           Rights
           of
           Power
           in
           Spirituals
           ,
           of
           which
           the
           Church
           was
           possessed
           before
           ,
           notwithstanding
           that
           the
           Converts
           are
           thereby
           made
           
             one
             Body
          
           with
           the
           Church
           ,
           with
           which
           they
           were
           not
           one
           formerly
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LIX
           The
           
           Church's
           Obligations
           are
           more
           necessary
           for
           the
           subsisting
           of
           the
           State
           ,
           than
           those
           she
           receives
           from
           the
           State
           are
           for
           hers
           .
        
         
           If
           therefore
           the
           Majestrate
           will
           lay
           claim
           to
           a
           Right
           in
           Spirituals
           ,
           it
           must
           be
           on
           some
           other
           account
           than
           bare
           Conversion
           .
           That
           ,
           he
           must
           rather
           lose
           ,
           than
           gain
           by
           ,
           as
           I
           have
           already
           shewn
           ,
           because
           in
           his
           Conversion
           he
           comes
           to
           the
           
           Bishop's
           terms
           ,
           not
           the
           Bishop
           to
           his
           .
           Our
           Adversaries
           therefore
           have
           another
           Pretence
           for
           his
           Superiority
           in
           
             purely
             Spirituals
          
           .
           That
           is
           ,
           the
           benefit
           that
           the
           Church
           enjoys
           by
           the
           
           Magistrate's
           favour
           and
           protection
           ,
           the
           honours
           and
           profits
           annex'd
           to
           the
           
             sacred
             Offices
          
           ,
           and
           the
           security
           she
           has
           thereby
           against
           Adversaries
           ,
           and
           the
           assistance
           of
           the
           
             secular
             Arm
          
           for
           reducing
           Rebellious
           Subjects
           by
           
             secular
             coercions
          
           .
           For
           these
           things
           they
           think
           her
           obliged
           in
           Gratitude
           ,
           to
           remit
           some
           of
           her
           
             former
             Rights
          
           ,
           by
           way
           of
           compensation
           for
           them
           .
           And
           this
           Obligation
           in
           gratitude
           they
           conceive
           sufficient
           to
           engage
           her
           to
           an
           implicite
           and
           
             intrepretative
             Contract
          
           to
           continue
           this
           remitting
           of
           Rights
           on
           her
           part
           if
           she
           will
           ,
           in
           reason
           ,
           expect
           that
           the
           Magistrate
           shall
           continue
           his
           Favours
           .
           But
           ,
           I
           confess
           ,
           I
           cannot
           see
           ,
           proceeding
           on
           Principles
           that
           must
           be
           granted
           by
           all
           who
           believe
           Religion
           ,
           but
           that
           the
           disadvantage
           will
           still
           lye
           on
           the
           side
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           .
           For
           by
           this
           way
           of
           Reasoning
           ,
           the
           
             implicite
             Contract
          
           for
           
             remitting
             Rights
          
           ,
           will
           lye
           on
           
             that
             side
          
           which
           is
           
             most
             obliged
          
           ;
           and
           that
           side
           will
           appear
           most
           obliged
           ,
           which
           receives
           
             more
             benefit
          
           by
           the
           commerce
           than
           it
           gives
           .
           For
           this
           consideration
           of
           
             remitting
             Right
          
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           Gratitude
           ,
           comes
           only
           in
           by
           way
           of
           compensation
           for
           what
           is
           wanting
           on
           its
           own
           side
           ,
           to
           make
           the
           benefit
           it
           confers
           equal
           to
           that
           which
           it
           receives
           .
           But
           I
           cannot
           
           imagine
           how
           the
           Magistrate
           can
           pretend
           
             his
             Favours
          
           equal
           to
           those
           which
           he
           receives
           by
           Religion
           ,
           especially
           the
           
             true
             Religion
          
           .
           So
           far
           he
           is
           from
           exceeding
           them
           ,
           so
           as
           to
           expect
           any
           compensation
           for
           arrears
           due
           to
           him
           on
           ballancing
           his
           accounts
           .
           It
           is
           by
           Religion
           ,
           and
           by
           those
           Obligations
           which
           nothing
           but
           Religion
           can
           make
           sacred
           and
           inviolable
           ,
           that
           he
           holds
           his
           very
           Throne
           it self
           .
           If
           he
           hold
           his
           Throne
           by
           Compact
           ,
           nothing
           but
           Religion
           can
           hold
           the
           Subjects
           to
           the
           Contract
           made
           by
           them
           .
           If
           by
           any
           other
           Right
           ,
           nothing
           but
           that
           can
           oblige
           them
           to
           pay
           him
           that
           which
           by
           any
           sort
           of
           Right
           soever
           is
           his
           due
           .
           Where
           he
           has
           no
           force
           to
           exact
           duty
           from
           them
           ,
           nothing
           can
           restrain
           them
           but
           ties
           of
           Conscience
           ,
           and
           nothing
           alse
           can
           lay
           a
           restraint
           on
           their
           Conscience
           but
           Religion
           .
           Where
           he
           has
           a
           power
           of
           Force
           ,
           yet
           even
           that
           is
           not
           near
           so
           formidable
           at
           the
           
             irresistible
             power
          
           of
           Heaven
           ,
           and
           the
           fear
           of
           future
           and
           eternal
           Punishments
           .
           No
           Considerations
           but
           those
           ,
           can
           curb
           them
           from
           
             secret
             Practices
          
           ,
           which
           oftentimes
           subvert
           the
           greatest
           Humane
           Force
           by
           degrees
           insensible
           ,
           and
           therefore
           unaviodable
           .
           Nor
           is
           any
           Religion
           so
           conget
           on
           these
           accounts
           ,
           as
           that
           which
           is
           truest
           and
           most
           acceptable
           to
           
             GOD.
             GOD
          
           may
           be
           obliged
           ,
           by
           the
           general
           Laws
           of
           Providence
           ,
           for
           the
           
             general
             Good
          
           of
           Mankind
           ,
           to
           inflict
           Imprecations
           made
           for
           securing
           Faith
           ,
           even
           in
           
             false
             Religions
          
           .
           But
           he
           is
           most
           present
           at
           the
           Offices
           of
           his
           
             owe
             establishment
          
           ,
           and
           therefore
           they
           have
           the
           greatest
           reason
           to
           fear
           them
           who
           imprecate
           in
           that
           form
           which
           is
           most
           suitable
           to
           the
           
             ture
             Religion
          
           ,
           No
           Religion
           so
           formidable
           at
           that
           which
           threatens
           future
           and
           eternal
           Pains
           in
           case
           of
           Violation
           .
           No
           Religion
           can
           so
           well
           assure
           Us
           of
           the
           future
           and
           eternal
           State
           ,
           as
           
             Revealed
             Religion
          
           .
           No
           Revelation
           so
           well
           evidenced
           by
           Credentials
           attesting
           it
           in
           Ages
           of
           Writings
           and
           accurate
           Information
           ,
           as
           our
           
             Christian
             Religion
          
           .
           No
           one
           Communion
           even
           of
           Christians
           ,
           so
           just
           and
           equal
           against
           Invasions
           on
           either
           side
           ,
           either
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           or
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           as
           that
           of
           the
           
             Primitive
             Christians
          
           ;
           and
           of
           these
           Churches
           which
           lately
           came
           the
           nearest
           to
           those
           Primitive
           ,
           in
           these
           late
           flourishing
           Dominions
           .
           Thus
           it
           is
           every
           way
           certain
           ,
           that
           the
           Church
           does
           more
           contribute
           to
           the
           security
           of
           the
           State
           ,
           than
           that
           
             secular
             Protection
          
           ,
           which
           is
           all
           the
           State
           can
           contribute
           ,
           does
           to
           the
           security
           of
           the
           Church
           .
           The
           Church
           can
           subsist
           by
           her
           own
           Principles
           ,
           if
           she
           will
           be
           true
           to
           them
           ,
           without
           the
           support
           of
           
             external
             Power
          
           .
           The
           State
           cannot
           subsist
           without
           Force
           ,
           nor
           secure
           her
           Possession
           of
           a
           
             coercive
             Power
          
           ,
           without
           the
           support
           of
           Religion
           .
           Thus
           ,
           even
           in
           point
           of
           necessity
           ,
           the
           Church
           is
           
             more
             necessary
          
           to
           the
           State
           ,
           than
           the
           State
           is
           to
           the
           Church
           .
        
      
       
         
         
           §
           LX.
           The
           Benefits
           received
           by
           the
           State
           from
           the
           Church
           ,
           are
           also
           greater
           than
           those
           which
           the
           Church
           receives
           from
           the
           State.
           
        
         
           Nor
           only
           so
           .
           But
           the
           Obligations
           on
           the
           
           Church's
           side
           are
           greater
           ,
           and
           more
           beneficial
           to
           the
           seculars
           ,
           than
           those
           of
           the
           seculars
           can
           be
           to
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           .
           And
           this
           is
           withal
           a
           great
           consideration
           in
           judging
           concerning
           the
           Measures
           of
           Gratitude
           ,
           and
           the
           extent
           of
           what
           is
           to
           be
           done
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           a
           compensation
           .
           The
           greatness
           of
           the
           benefit
           on
           one
           side
           ,
           is
           the
           principal
           thing
           that
           requires
           additional
           Offices
           on
           the
           other
           side
           ,
           to
           make
           an
           equality
           on
           
             both
             sides
          
           ,
           which
           is
           that
           which
           we
           call
           a
           Compensation
           .
           Indeed
           the
           necessity
           of
           it
           is
           no
           otherwise
           a
           Consideration
           in
           this
           matter
           ,
           than
           as
           the
           need
           we
           have
           of
           a
           thing
           adds
           to
           the
           Price
           expected
           for
           it
           in
           ordinary
           Commerce
           .
           But
           the
           Benefits
           of
           Religion
           are
           without
           compare
           beyond
           all
           that
           can
           be
           pretended
           from
           the
           power
           of
           the
           State.
           Consider
           we
           the
           
             Supream
             Magistrate
          
           in
           his
           
             own
             Person
          
           ;
           and
           all
           that
           he
           enjoys
           as
           a
           Prince
           ,
           is
           not
           to
           be
           mentioned
           with
           what
           he
           may
           expect
           as
           a
           Member
           of
           the
           
             true
             Cammunion
          
           ,
           and
           a
           Professor
           of
           the
           
             true
             Religion
          
           .
           Our
           Saviour
           himself
           has
           told
           us
           ,
           that
           his
           
             gaining
             the
             whole
             World
          
           ,
           is
           no
           purchase
           nor
           profit
           ,
           if
           he
           lose
           his
           
             own
             Soul
          
           for
           it
           ,
           and
           that
           nothing
           can
           make
           amends
           for
           such
           a
           Loss
           .
           The
           Magistrate
           who
           believes
           his
           
             Christian
             Religion
             true
          
           ,
           cannot
           avoid
           believing
           this
           .
           And
           how
           can
           he
           that
           does
           so
           ,
           think
           the
           Church
           in
           his
           arrear
           for
           his
           favour
           and
           protection
           ?
           This
           is
           ,
           and
           in
           
             reason
             ought
             to
             be
          
           ,
           of
           more
           censequence
           to
           him
           than
           his
           Crown
           and
           Scepter
           ,
           which
           are
           a
           very
           
             small
             part
          
           of
           the
           purchase
           mentioned
           by
           our
           Lord
           ,
           nay
           ,
           than
           the
           flourishing
           of
           the
           
             whole
             Community
          
           for
           which
           he
           is
           concern'd
           .
           But
           we
           may
           consider
           him
           further
           as
           a
           
             publick
             Person
          
           ,
           inspired
           with
           a
           
             publick
             Spirit
          
           ,
           and
           with
           all
           that
           Zeal
           for
           the
           good
           of
           his
           Community
           ,
           which
           becomes
           his
           noble
           publick
           station
           .
           Consider
           him
           as
           devested
           from
           all
           private
           ,
           though
           greater
           interests
           ,
           in
           his
           Acts
           relating
           to
           the
           publick
           ;
           yet
           even
           so
           he
           must
           believe
           the
           whole
           Society
           ,
           for
           which
           he
           is
           concerned
           ,
           more
           obliged
           by
           being
           admitted
           into
           the
           
             true
             Church
          
           ,
           than
           that
           any
           thing
           that
           he
           can
           do
           by
           the
           power
           and
           interest
           of
           his
           whole
           Society
           ,
           can
           ever
           recompence
           it
           .
           So
           far
           he
           is
           from
           any
           hopes
           of
           supererogating
           and
           obliging
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           more
           than
           they
           deserve
           ,
           though
           all
           the
           favour
           done
           ,
           were
           no
           more
           than
           their
           admitting
           his
           whole
           Society
           ,
           into
           the
           
             true
             Communion
          
           .
           The
           saving
           of
           one
           Soul
           is
           ,
           in
           our
           Saviour's
           now
           mentioned
           Doctrine
           ,
           a
           greater
           benefit
           than
           what
           can
           be
           performed
           by
           the
           greatest
           Worldly
           Power
           .
           But
           the
           receiving
           his
           
             whole
             Community
          
           into
           their
           
             priviledged
             Society
          
           ,
           is
           a
           
             publick
             benefit
          
           to
           the
           
             whole
             Community
          
           ,
           and
           a
           benefit
           of
           the
           highest
           kind
           ,
           far
           exceeding
           that
           of
           which
           a
           single-Soul
           is
           capable
           ,
           which
           yet
           is
           too
           great
           for
           him
           to
           hope
           to
           recompence
           .
           As
           therefore
           he
           is
           obliged
           upon
           account
           of
           his
           Socitey
           ,
           to
           be
           grateful
           for
           kindnesses
           received
           from
           the
           Church
           ,
           so
           he
           never
           can
           hope
           
           by
           all
           the
           
             publick
             power
          
           of
           the
           Society
           of
           which
           he
           is
           possessed
           ,
           to
           make
           even
           with
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           .
           When
           he
           has
           done
           all
           he
           can
           ,
           his
           
             good
             will
          
           must
           by
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           be
           accepted
           for
           his
           deed
           .
           How
           can
           he
           then
           oblige
           them
           to
           any
           
             further
             accounts
          
           on
           their
           part
           ;
           that
           are
           to
           be
           
             made
             up
          
           by
           cession
           of
           their
           just
           Rights
           ?
           Even
           as
           to
           Temporals
           ,
           the
           whole
           Body
           of
           the
           State
           ,
           and
           the
           Prince
           as
           concerned
           for
           the
           Body
           ,
           are
           more
           obliged
           to
           the
           
             true
             Religion
          
           ,
           and
           the
           Society
           in
           which
           alone
           it
           is
           to
           be
           had
           ,
           than
           they
           are
           ever
           able
           to
           requite
           .
           Not
           now
           to
           mention
           the
           
             Temporal
             Blessings
          
           to
           which
           they
           are
           hereby
           intitled
           ,
           Godliness
           having
           the
           Promises
           of
           
             this
             Life
          
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           of
           
             that
             which
             is
             to
             come
          
           ;
           all
           that
           Justice
           in
           Conversation
           ,
           all
           that
           sweetness
           and
           obligingness
           which
           their
           Duty
           to
           GOD
           obliges
           
             Religious
             Persons
          
           to
           shew
           to
           all
           with
           whom
           they
           converse
           ;
           all
           that
           sincerity
           and
           
             open
             heartedness
          
           which
           makes
           Mankind
           love
           ,
           and
           trust
           ,
           and
           please
           each
           other
           ,
           are
           the
           most
           genuine
           fruits
           of
           the
           
             true
             Religion
          
           ,
           where
           it
           is
           heartily
           believed
           and
           practised
           .
           It
           can
           therefore
           be
           nothing
           but
           inconsideratness
           ,
           and
           disbelief
           ,
           and
           forgetfulness
           of
           the
           true
           value
           of
           things
           upon
           sober
           consideration
           ,
           that
           can
           tempt
           the
           Magistrate
           to
           think
           that
           the
           Church
           is
           so
           over-obliged
           to
           him
           for
           his
           protection
           ,
           as
           to
           need
           a
           compensation
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXI
           .
           
             If
             the
          
           State
           
             had
             been
          
           capable
           
             of
             conferring
             the
          
           greater
           Obligations
           ,
           
             yet
             a
             good
          
           Pious
           Magistrate
           
             could
             not
             ,
             in
             reason
             ,
             desire
             su●h
             a
          
           recompence
           
             as
             should
          
           oblige
           the
           Church
           to
           yield
           
             any
             of
             her
          
           Ancient
           Rights
           .
        
         
           It
           rather
           on
           the
           contrary
           appears
           ,
           that
           the
           
             greatest
             Obligations
          
           are
           on
           the
           
           Church's
           side
           ,
           and
           that
           therefore
           what
           compensation
           by
           cession
           of
           ancient
           Rights
           ,
           was
           necessary
           on
           account
           of
           Gratitude
           ,
           was
           rather
           to
           be
           expected
           from
           the
           Magistrate
           .
           The
           best
           and
           most
           
             pious
             Magistrates
          
           have
           always
           
             thought
             so
          
           ,
           who
           were
           certainly
           the
           most
           competent
           Judges
           of
           matters
           of
           Religion
           .
           Yet
           supposing
           it
           possible
           ,
           that
           the
           State
           could
           
             supererogate
             ▪
          
           a
           
             pious
             Magistrate
          
           would
           never
           desire
           nor
           accept
           of
           such
           a
           recompence
           ,
           as
           should
           oblige
           the
           Clergy
           to
           yield
           their
           ancient
           and
           
             original
             Rights
          
           ,
           conferred
           on
           them
           by
           GOD
           himself
           at
           their
           first
           establishment
           .
           He
           would
           presume
           that
           Power
           was
           necessary
           for
           the
           good
           of
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           which
           GOD
           was
           pleas'd
           to
           put
           them
           in
           possession
           of
           ,
           antecedently
           to
           the
           favours
           of
           
             secular
             Princes
          
           ,
           and
           could
           not
           find
           in
           his
           heart
           to
           deprive
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           of
           any
           Power
           which
           GOD
           himself
           had
           judged
           necessary
           for
           it
           .
           He
           might
           the
           rather
           presume
           it
           concernin
           a
           Society
           instituted
           under
           a
           Persecution
           ,
           and
           designed
           to
           continue
           the
           same
           under
           all
           the
           Revolutions
           ,
           not
           only
           of
           his
           own
           ,
           but
           all
           other
           states
           in
           the
           World.
           He
           would
           consider
           himself
           also
           as
           a
           Trustee
           of
           the
           Power
           committed
           to
           him
           by
           GOD
           ,
           and
           therefore
           under
           an
           Obligation
           to
           manage
           the
           Trust
           in
           that
           way
           that
           he
           could
           judge
           most
           agreeable
           to
           the
           mind
           of
           him
           who
           had
           committed
           the
           Trust
           to
           him
           .
           He
           would
           therefore
           think
           himself
           obliged
           to
           value
           all
           things
           according
           
           to
           the
           value
           that
           GOD
           has
           put
           upon
           them
           ;
           principally
           to
           regard
           that
           which
           was
           principal
           in
           the
           design
           of
           GOD
           ,
           and
           to
           make
           all
           other
           Considerations
           subservient
           to
           it
           ,
           which
           
             GOD
             intended
          
           should
           be
           so
           .
           This
           would
           oblige
           him
           to
           make
           all
           Designs
           for
           the
           
             Temporal
             Prosperity
          
           of
           his
           Subjects
           ,
           ultimately
           useful
           for
           the
           
             publick
             good
          
           of
           their
           Souls
           .
           This
           would
           oblige
           him
           further
           ,
           to
           mind
           that
           in
           the
           
             first
             place
          
           ,
           and
           principally
           those
           Expedients
           which
           more
           immediately
           tend
           to
           the
           promoting
           it
           ,
           and
           all
           other
           
             Temporal
             Politicks
          
           no
           otherwise
           ,
           nor
           further
           ,
           than
           as
           they
           also
           may
           promote
           it
           ,
           or
           at
           least
           be
           consistent
           with
           it
           .
           And
           in
           this
           way
           of
           Reasoning
           ,
           I
           know
           not
           how
           he
           could
           avoid
           preferring
           the
           Spiritual
           ,
           before
           his
           
             own
             Authority
          
           ,
           and
           therefore
           managing
           his
           own
           Authority
           in
           subserviency
           to
           it
           ,
           for
           the
           promoting
           and
           supporting
           it
           ,
           not
           for
           diminishing
           it
           .
           This
           I
           am
           sure
           every
           truly
           
             Christian
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           must
           look
           on
           as
           more
           solid
           and
           
             Judicious
             Reasoning
          
           ,
           from
           the
           Principles
           of
           the
           
             Christian
             Religion
          
           ,
           and
           securer
           therefore
           for
           his
           
             last
             Accounts
          
           to
           GOD
           ,
           and
           his
           
             Soul
             's
             Eternal
             Interest
          
           ,
           than
           to
           suffer
           himself
           to
           be
           influenced
           in
           matters
           of
           so
           momentous
           a
           nature
           ,
           by
           Atheistical
           fooleries
           and
           flirts
           of
           being
           Priest-ridden
           .
           This
           therefore
           being
           supposed
           ,
           how
           conscious
           soever
           such
           a
           Magistrate
           might
           be
           of
           his
           
             own
             good
             Will
          
           to
           the
           Church
           ,
           yet
           he
           would
           not
           be
           willing
           to
           accept
           of
           any
           branch
           of
           that
           Power
           which
           GOD
           had
           judged
           necessary
           for
           her
           ,
           that
           himself
           might
           have
           the
           managing
           it
           for
           her
           interest
           .
           He
           would
           not
           think
           it
           for
           the
           Glory
           of
           his
           time
           ,
           upon
           any
           pretence
           whatsoever
           ,
           to
           leave
           that
           
             Holy
             Society
          
           more
           destitute
           of
           Power
           than
           he
           found
           her
           .
           He
           must
           needs
           think
           ,
           that
           
             GOD's
             own
          
           settlement
           of
           it
           was
           the
           wisest
           ,
           that
           they
           were
           fittest
           for
           administring
           the
           Power
           ,
           who
           ,
           by
           the
           Nature
           of
           their
           Function
           were
           best
           qualified
           to
           understand
           the
           Causes
           in
           which
           it
           was
           conversant
           ,
           and
           who
           were
           most
           concerned
           for
           the
           good
           of
           the
           Society
           ,
           for
           whose
           
             use
             GOD
          
           had
           given
           it
           ;
           and
           who
           by
           Obligations
           of
           Conscience
           ,
           and
           by
           being
           destitute
           of
           
             external
             force
          
           ,
           were
           the
           least
           likely
           to
           design
           ,
           and
           least
           able
           to
           
             carry
             on
             encroachments
          
           to
           the
           injury
           of
           
             lriva
             powers
          
           .
           He
           would
           not
           be
           willing
           that
           a
           Successor
           should
           be
           trusted
           with
           an
           administration
           of
           such
           a
           Power
           ,
           which
           ,
           if
           
             ill
             administred
          
           ,
           might
           prove
           of
           so
           
             dangerous
             consequence
          
           to
           the
           
           Church's
           walfare
           ,
           and
           for
           whose
           good
           meaning
           he
           has
           not
           that
           security
           as
           he
           has
           for
           his
           own
           .
           He
           would
           not
           easily
           trust
           ,
           even
           his
           
             own
             partiality
          
           ,
           of
           his
           
             own
             mutability
          
           ,
           with
           it
           .
           These
           would
           be
           the
           natural
           Reasonings
           of
           a
           generous
           and
           
             well
             minded
             Prince
          
           :
           And
           methinks
           they
           should
           be
           so
           of
           pious
           and
           
             generous
             Parliaments
          
           also
           .
           Here
           has
           been
           very
           much
           Zeal
           pretended
           for
           securing
           our
           Church
           against
           a
           
             Popish
             Successor
          
           :
           This
           should
           make
           those
           who
           call
           themselves
           
             Protestant
             Parliaments
          
           ,
           unwilling
           to
           challenge
           that
           as
           a
           Right
           of
           Parliaments
           
           in
           general
           ,
           which
           may
           put
           it
           in
           the
           power
           of
           a
           
             Popish
             Parliament
          
           ,
           and
           indeed
           of
           any
           other
           that
           may
           be
           of
           
             another
             Communion
          
           ,
           to
           dissolve
           our
           Church
           ,
           as
           this
           Power
           of
           
             Lay
             deprivations
          
           will
           certainly
           do
           ,
           if
           they
           may
           be
           allowed
           as
           sufficient
           to
           discharge
           Us
           from
           our
           
             Spiritual
             duties
          
           to
           our
           so
           
             deprived
             Bishops
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           
             LXII
             ,
             Princes
          
           have
           been
           allowed
           by
           the
           Church
           a
           Right
           to
           keep
           Persons
           out
           ,
           not
           yet
           
             Canonically
             possessed
          
           ;
           but
           not
           to
           turn
           any
           out
           ,
           who
           were
           already
           in
           Possession
           of
           Bishopricks
           .
           And
           that
           without
           any
           proper
           Cession
           of
           Right
           on
           the
           
           Church's
           part
           .
        
         
           Thus
           it
           has
           appear'd
           ,
           that
           a
           
             well
             meaning
             Magistrate
          
           to
           the
           Interest
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           Religion
           ,
           has
           neither
           Obligation
           nor
           Equity
           to
           expect
           such
           a
           
             cession
             of
             Spiritual
             Rights
          
           on
           the
           Churches
           part
           ,
           as
           a
           compensation
           for
           his
           Protection
           ,
           nor
           would
           himself
           be
           inclinable
           to
           think
           he
           had
           any
           .
           What
           
             ill
             meaning
          
           ones
           may
           expect
           ,
           is
           not
           worthy
           our
           regard
           .
           Such
           are
           too
           partially
           concerned
           ,
           to
           be
           taken
           for
           competent
           Judges
           in
           Affairs
           of
           this
           nature
           :
           They
           neither
           deserve
           such
           a
           Cession
           ,
           nor
           indeed
           are
           fit
           to
           be
           trusted
           with
           it
           .
           However
           we
           deny
           not
           ,
           but
           that
           the
           Magistrate
           has
           a
           Right
           in
           the
           disposal
           of
           those
           favours
           which
           are
           requisite
           for
           the
           Churches
           interest
           in
           order
           to
           a
           
             legal
             Settlement
          
           and
           Protection
           .
           And
           he
           has
           withal
           thereupon
           a
           Right
           to
           expect
           a
           Security
           to
           be
           given
           him
           for
           his
           own
           
             Temporal
             Power
          
           ,
           against
           invasions
           from
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           ,
           in
           consideration
           even
           of
           that
           Act
           of
           Justice
           ,
           of
           securing
           them
           also
           from
           the
           like
           Invasions
           from
           the
           
             Temporal
             Power
          
           ,
           by
           his
           employing
           it
           in
           their
           defence
           ,
           though
           he
           be
           otherwise
           obliged
           in
           Conscience
           to
           protect
           that
           which
           himself
           believes
           to
           be
           the
           
             true
             Religion
          
           and
           the
           
             true
             Communion
          
           .
           But
           then
           this
           is
           no
           proper
           Cession
           of
           
             Spiritual
             Rights
          
           .
           For
           even
           antecedently
           to
           the
           amicable
           correspondence
           between
           the
           Church
           and
           State
           ,
           the
           Church
           was
           as
           much
           obliged
           in
           Conscience
           to
           forbear
           encroachments
           on
           the
           
             Temporal
             Rights
          
           ,
           as
           the
           Magistrate
           was
           on
           the
           Spiritual
           .
           Only
           the
           difference
           was
           ,
           that
           before
           the
           correspondence
           ,
           the
           Church
           her
           self
           took
           upon
           her
           to
           judge
           concerning
           the
           trustiness
           of
           the
           Persons
           put
           in
           Office
           by
           her
           ,
           having
           then
           no
           access
           to
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ;
           but
           afterwards
           she
           suffered
           him
           to
           judge
           himself
           of
           his
           
             own
             security
          
           .
           That
           was
           by
           not
           having
           Bishops
           imposed
           upon
           him
           to
           enjoy
           his
           Temporals
           annexed
           to
           their
           Office
           ,
           without
           his
           
             own
             approbation
          
           which
           was
           no
           more
           than
           what
           was
           generally
           reasonable
           on
           equal
           terms
           .
           This
           sometimes
           allowed
           him
           a
           power
           at
           first
           of
           stopping
           any
           Person
           proposed
           if
           he
           did
           not
           like
           him
           ,
           sometimes
           of
           pitching
           on
           the
           Person
           by
           the
           Right
           of
           a
           
             Lay
             Patron
          
           .
           So
           also
           he
           was
           allowed
           to
           judge
           concerning
           Canons
           ,
           whether
           they
           might
           prove
           prejudical
           to
           the
           
             Temporal
             Government
          
           ,
           before
           he
           seconded
           them
           with
           his
           
             Temporal
             Government
          
           ,
           and
           by
           
             secular
             Coercions
          
           ,
           which
           was
           also
           very
           just
           and
           equal
           ,
           without
           any
           cession
           on
           the
           Churches
           side
           .
           For
           this
           was
           only
           allowing
           him
           to
           judge
           where
           his
           
             own
             Power
          
           and
           Right
           was
           concerned
           .
           But
           then
           this
           
           Right
           was
           only
           to
           keep
           out
           a
           Person
           who
           was
           not
           yet
           possessed
           of
           the
           Power
           he
           pretended
           to
           ,
           by
           even
           the
           
             spiritual
             Right
          
           of
           Consecration
           ,
           and
           therefore
           no
           Act
           of
           Authority
           upon
           a
           Bishop
           properly
           so
           called
           ,
           but
           only
           on
           a
           Candidate
           for
           the
           Office.
           But
           there
           was
           never
           any
           Act
           of
           the
           
             Ancient
             Church
          
           so
           much
           as
           pretended
           ,
           that
           I
           know
           of
           ,
           that
           ever
           Allowed
           Princes
           to
           turn
           Bishops
           out
           of
           their
           
             spiritual
             Rights
          
           ,
           without
           Synods
           ,
           when
           they
           were
           once
           
             Canonically
             possessed
          
           of
           them
           .
           No
           Emperors
           of
           the
           
             same
             Communion
          
           that
           acted
           sedately
           ,
           and
           like
           Persons
           who
           regarded
           Principles
           ,
           who
           ever
           attempted
           it
           ,
           without
           at
           least
           packing
           or
           
             pretending
             Synods
          
           for
           the
           deprivation
           of
           Bishops
           .
           The
           Canons
           omitted
           by
           the
           Doctor
           are
           sufficient
           ,
           if
           there
           were
           no
           more
           ,
           to
           shew
           that
           this
           was
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           Jurisdiction
           of
           the
           
             Constantinopolitan
             Patriarchate
          
           .
           And
           even
           
             this
             Power
          
           that
           was
           allowed
           ,
           was
           allowed
           on
           Obligation
           of
           Interest
           ,
           not
           of
           Conscience
           .
           None
           could
           pretend
           to
           the
           Temporals
           annexed
           to
           the
           
             Episcopal
             Office
          
           without
           the
           Princes
           consent
           .
           And
           whilst
           the
           Correspondence
           between
           the
           Church
           and
           the
           Prince
           held
           ,
           there
           was
           no
           need
           of
           separating
           the
           
             spiritual
             Rights
          
           form
           the
           Temporal
           .
           But
           the
           Church
           was
           at
           perfect
           Liberty
           in
           Conscience
           ,
           if
           she
           was
           willing
           to
           want
           the
           Temporals
           ,
           to
           give
           the
           
             spiritual
             Power
          
           alone
           ,
           and
           much
           more
           to
           continue
           it
           ,
           where
           it
           was
           already
           given
           ,
           if
           she
           Judged
           the
           Prince's
           Impositions
           more
           prejudicial
           to
           her
           
             spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           than
           his
           Favour
           was
           advantageous
           ;
           and
           when
           that
           Case
           fell
           ,
           she
           was
           to
           Judge
           .
           Thus
           much
           therefore
           may
           be
           allowed
           the
           Magistrate
           on
           account
           of
           his
           
             own
             Right
          
           ,
           without
           any
           thoughts
           of
           Cession
           of
           the
           
           Church's
           Rights
           ,
           and
           without
           any
           acknowledgment
           of
           Obligation
           from
           the
           Magistrate
           that
           should
           make
           a
           
             Cession
             necessary
          
           ,
           or
           so
           much
           as
           reasonable
           .
           And
           the
           acknowledging
           a
           Liberty
           in
           the
           Magistrate
           to
           
             keep
             out
          
           ,
           does
           not
           in
           any
           Equity
           of
           Interpretation
           infer
           a
           Right
           to
           
             turn
             out
             Bishops
          
           ,
           and
           absolve
           their
           Subjects
           from
           their
           duties
           to
           them
           in
           spirituals
           ,
           and
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           ,
           this
           being
           greater
           than
           the
           Right
           that
           is
           confessed
           .
           Thus
           therefore
           there
           is
           not
           the
           least
           ground
           for
           an
           
             implicite
             compact
          
           on
           the
           
           Church's
           side
           ,
           for
           Cession
           of
           her
           Rights
           and
           Liberties
           .
           For
           this
           cannot
           be
           proved
           ,
           but
           from
           the
           Nature
           of
           a
           
             greater
             Obligation
          
           ,
           than
           can
           be
           othewise
           made
           amends
           for
           ,
           without
           a
           Cession
           ,
           or
           a
           grant
           of
           things
           greater
           than
           that
           of
           deprivation
           :
           Neither
           of
           which
           can
           be
           here
           so
           much
           as
           pretended
           ,
           and
           therefore
           the
           Church
           cannot
           in
           reason
           be
           pretended
           to
           have
           done
           it
           by
           a
           
             tacite
             consent
          
           ,
           or
           an
           
             implicite
             compact
          
           .
           And
           for
           an
           
             explicite
             compact
          
           ,
           that
           may
           seem
           to
           have
           agreed
           to
           it
           ,
           I
           do
           not
           think
           our
           Adversaries
           can
           pretend
           any
           ,
           before
           that
           Reign
           of
           Violence
           ,
           against
           
             Sacred
             Rights
          
           ,
           especially
           ,
           
           of
           Henry
           VIII
           .
           a
           Prince
           unbounded
           by
           any
           sense
           of
           Right
           whatsoever
           whether
           Sacred
           or
           Secular
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXIII
           .
           The
           Power
           of
           
             turning
             out
             Bishops
          
           once
           Possessed
           ,
           too
           great
           to
           be
           granted
           on
           any
           Consideration
           whatsoever
           .
        
         
           Indeed
           the
           Nature
           of
           this
           is
           such
           as
           cannot
           be
           granted
           by
           any
           Society
           that
           is
           absolute
           ,
           on
           any
           Consideration
           whatsoever
           .
           No
           Obligations
           that
           can
           be
           lay'd
           on
           a
           Society
           can
           be
           valued
           by
           it
           more
           than
           its
           own
           subsistence
           .
           It
           must
           Be
           ,
           to
           be
           capable
           ,
           of
           receiving
           Obligations
           ,
           and
           it
           must
           have
           a
           Security
           of
           its
           continuance
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           its
           having
           a
           Security
           ,
           that
           the
           Obligations
           shall
           be
           continued
           also
           .
           It
           s
           subsistence
           therefore
           is
           antecedent
           to
           all
           possible
           Obligations
           ,
           and
           therefore
           the
           securing
           that
           ,
           is
           of
           more
           importance
           to
           it
           than
           any
           possible
           Obligations
           .
           No
           
             present
             Obligations
          
           ,
           can
           be
           a
           sufficient
           recompence
           for
           them
           ,
           to
           put
           it
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           another
           ,
           to
           dissolve
           and
           destroy
           them
           as
           a
           Society
           .
           Especially
           such
           Obligations
           ,
           which
           concern
           them
           principally
           ,
           as
           they
           are
           a
           Society
           .
           They
           are
           therefore
           only
           
             Obligations
             Perpetual
          
           ,
           that
           can
           pretend
           to
           be
           an
           equivalent
           for
           a
           Society
           ,
           (
           that
           may
           promise
           to
           it self
           Perpetuity
           ,
           if
           governed
           by
           it self
           )
           to
           put
           it self
           in
           the
           power
           of
           
             another
             Society
          
           ,
           of
           interests
           seperable
           from
           its
           own
           .
           But
           that
           such
           Obligations
           to
           their
           Society
           ,
           shall
           be
           perpetual
           ,
           they
           can
           have
           no
           Security
           ,
           unless
           they
           be
           first
           secured
           ,
           that
           the
           Society
           it self
           shall
           be
           so
           .
           And
           for
           this
           ,
           it
           is
           a
           very
           justly
           suspicious
           circumstance
           ,
           if
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           who
           pretends
           to
           confer
           the
           Obligations
           ,
           refuses
           to
           do
           it
           ,
           but
           on
           condition
           that
           the
           Bishops
           will
           submit
           to
           hold
           during
           his
           pleasure
           .
           He
           who
           designs
           to
           weaken
           the
           security
           they
           have
           already
           ,
           is
           justly
           to
           be
           suspected
           of
           a
           design
           on
           the
           security
           it self
           .
           And
           the
           Church
           must
           needs
           look
           on
           it
           as
           a
           Diminution
           of
           the
           security
           ,
           for
           her
           subsistence
           ,
           if
           from
           subsisting
           as
           long
           as
           her
           self
           pleases
           ,
           (
           so
           she
           may
           do
           ,
           whilst
           she
           has
           her
           
             own
             Government
          
           in
           her
           
             own
             hands
          
           )
           she
           must
           be
           reduced
           to
           depend
           on
           the
           pleasure
           of
           another
           ,
           of
           affections
           variable
           from
           her
           Interests
           .
           She
           has
           therefore
           reason
           to
           break
           off
           all
           Treaty
           with
           a
           Magistrate
           ,
           who
           should
           openly
           treat
           with
           her
           on
           such
           terms
           ,
           as
           the
           Sheep
           were
           obliged
           to
           do
           (
           in
           the
           Apologue
           of
           Demosthenes
           )
           when
           the
           Wolves
           are
           said
           to
           have
           made
           specious
           proffers
           of
           Peace
           ,
           and
           future
           kindnesses
           ,
           on
           a
           like
           condition
           that
           the
           Dogs
           (
           which
           were
           the
           only
           
             real
             security
          
           the
           Sheep
           had
           to
           oblige
           the
           Wolves
           to
           performance
           )
           should
           be
           delivered
           up
           to
           be
           destroyed
           by
           them
           .
           So
           Semiramis
           when
           no
           doubt
           with
           great
           professions
           of
           good
           will
           ,
           she
           had
           prevailed
           with
           Ninus
           to
           allow
           her
           the
           Liberty
           of
           commanding
           his
           Dominions
           for
           one
           only
           day
           ,
           secured
           it
           to
           her self
           for
           ever
           ,
           by
           destroying
           him
           before
           the
           time
           appointed
           for
           her
           resignation
           .
           For
           to
           allow
           this
           Power
           to
           the
           Prince
           of
           depriving
           the
           
             Supreme
             Governours
          
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           I
           know
           not
           how
           it
           can
           be
           contrived
           
           without
           danger
           of
           ruine
           to
           the
           
             whole
             Society
          
           ,
           or
           at
           least
           ,
           without
           lessening
           the
           security
           it
           has
           ,
           whilst
           it
           is
           confined
           to
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           .
           To
           allow
           him
           a
           power
           of
           derpiving
           alone
           ,
           without
           a
           power
           of
           filling
           their
           Sees
           by
           substituting
           Successors
           ,
           will
           not
           indeed
           involve
           us
           in
           Schisms
           by
           communicating
           with
           those
           who
           administer
           their
           Jurisdiction
           for
           them
           by
           Authority
           derived
           from
           themselves
           ,
           tho'
           the
           Bishops
           themselves
           cannot
           interpose
           in
           the
           Administration
           of
           it
           .
           But
           it
           will
           at
           least
           disable
           the
           incumbent
           Ordinary
           ,
           to
           perform
           any
           
             Episcopal
             Office
          
           for
           his
           life
           ,
           if
           the
           the
           Magistrate
           be
           pleased
           so
           long
           to
           disable
           him
           for
           it
           .
           And
           by
           the
           same
           reason
           as
           this
           is
           granted
           concerning
           any
           one
           ,
           it
           may
           hold
           concerning
           the
           whole
           
             Episcopal
             College
          
           in
           the
           Dominions
           ,
           if
           he
           be
           pleased
           ,
           with
           a
           design
           of
           ruining
           the
           
             spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           to
           deprive
           them
           all
           for
           the
           same
           term
           ,
           of
           their
           several
           Lives
           .
           For
           this
           must
           evidently
           hazard
           the
           whole
           succession
           ,
           and
           dissolve
           the
           Constitution
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           in
           the
           
             next
             Age
          
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           in
           the
           opinion
           of
           the
           greatest
           part
           of
           Christendom
           ,
           if
           none
           of
           the
           Bishops
           in
           being
           ,
           be
           permitted
           to
           secure
           the
           succession
           by
           new
           consecrations
           .
           For
           this
           is
           a
           
             power
             greater
          
           ,
           than
           what
           is
           supposed
           to
           be
           in
           those
           who
           exercise
           their
           Jurisdiction
           in
           their
           Absence
           .
           The
           Presbyteries
           ,
           may
           perform
           what
           is
           requisite
           for
           their
           
             own
             time
          
           .
           But
           the
           Power
           of
           Ordination
           ,
           is
           not
           given
           them
           ,
           without
           which
           a
           succesion
           cannot
           be
           secured
           to
           posterity
           .
           To
           provide
           against
           this
           intolerable
           consequence
           ,
           The
           Church
           is
           obliged
           to
           take
           care
           that
           the
           supplying
           the
           Sees
           with
           
             new
             Bishops
          
           ,
           be
           not
           deferred
           so
           long
           till
           the
           whole
           
             Episcopal
             Order
          
           be
           Extinguished
           .
           Either
           therefore
           the
           
             Magistrates
             deprivation
          
           must
           discharge
           the
           Subjects
           from
           their
           Obligations
           in
           Conscience
           to
           the
           
             First
             Bishops
          
           ,
           or
           it
           must
           not
           .
           If
           it
           do
           not
           discharge
           them
           ,
           the
           
             Second
             Bishop
          
           who
           is
           consecrated
           into
           a
           
             full
             See
          
           ,
           where
           duty
           is
           still
           obliging
           ,
           must
           be
           a
           Schismatick
           ,
           and
           break
           the
           
             spiritual
             Society
          
           in
           pieces
           by
           
             intestine
             divisions
          
           among
           themselves
           .
           If
           he
           may
           discharge
           them
           ,
           then
           his
           depriving
           all
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           must
           be
           taken
           for
           a
           discharge
           of
           the
           Subjects
           of
           all
           the
           Diocesses
           in
           his
           Dominions
           ,
           from
           their
           duty
           to
           all
           their
           Bishops
           ,
           which
           must
           consequently
           disable
           them
           to
           do
           any
           
             Episcopal
             Act
          
           in
           any
           of
           them
           all
           ,
           for
           preservation
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           or
           of
           their
           
             own
             Order
          
           ,
           if
           the
           Obligation
           of
           such
           deprivations
           ,
           may
           be
           supposed
           to
           extend
           to
           Conscience
           .
           Thus
           the
           Church
           must
           necessarily
           be
           dissolved
           and
           destroyed
           whenever
           the
           Magistrate
           with
           the
           consent
           ,
           and
           assistance
           of
           the
           
             greater
             Society
          
           ,
           shall
           be
           pleased
           to
           dissolve
           it
           .
           This
           is
           inevitable
           wherever
           two
           absolute
           independent
           Societies
           by
           
             compacts
             do
          
           Unite
           in
           one
           ,
           under
           the
           Government
           of
           one
           of
           them
           as
           absolutely
           Supreme
           .
           Our
           Adversaries
           themselves
           will
           grant
           it
           in
           the
           other
           Case
           of
           encroachment
           of
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           ,
           on
           the
           Rights
           of
           the
           
             secular
             Magistates
          
           .
           When
           the
           Pope
           
           was
           allowed
           a
           Power
           of
           
             depriving
             Princes
          
           of
           their
           Crown
           ,
           and
           
             absolving
             their
             Subjects
          
           from
           their
           Duties
           ,
           and
           Oaths
           taken
           to
           them
           ,
           it
           was
           impossible
           for
           
             Secular
             Governments
          
           to
           defend
           themselves
           against
           the
           Pope
           ,
           tho'
           then
           the
           removal
           only
           of
           the
           Person
           was
           the
           thing
           pretended
           .
           In
           this
           Case
           ,
           our
           Adversaries
           themselves
           are
           sensible
           that
           the
           
             whole
             Society
          
           is
           concerned
           in
           him
           ,
           who
           has
           the
           power
           of
           the
           
             whole
             Society
          
           ,
           and
           the
           
             whole
             Right
          
           of
           Governing
           is
           concerned
           when
           a
           Possessor
           is
           put
           out
           ,
           who
           has
           as
           
             much
             Right
          
           by
           the
           Establishment
           as
           any
           other
           can
           have
           who
           shall
           pretend
           to
           succeed
           him
           .
           And
           why
           can
           they
           not
           see
           the
           inevitableness
           of
           the
           same
           Consequences
           ,
           in
           the
           contrary
           encroachments
           of
           the
           State
           upon
           the
           Church
           ,
           maintained
           by
           themselves
           .
           This
           therefore
           is
           a
           Power
           too
           great
           to
           be
           recompenced
           by
           any
           possible
           Obligations
           the
           State
           can
           put
           upon
           the
           Church
           ,
           and
           therefore
           such
           as
           ought
           not
           to
           be
           alienated
           upon
           any
           Possible
           pretence
           of
           Obligation
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXIV
           .
           In
           this
           Case
           ,
           particularly
           ,
           no
           Temporal
           Favour
           whatsoever
           can
           make
           amends
           for
           the
           loss
           of
           the
           benefits
           of
           the
           
             Spiritual
             So
             ciety
          
           .
           There
           can
           therefore
           be
           no
           
             implicite
             Contracts
          
           for
           such
           an
           Exchange
           that
           can
           in
           Equity
           oblige
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           to
           performance
           ,
           tho'
           it
           had
           been
           in
           their
           Power
           to
           make
           such
           a
           Contract
           .
        
         
           Particularly
           ,
           this
           Reasoning
           holds
           in
           our
           
             present
             Case
          
           ,
           more
           strongly
           than
           it
           would
           in
           others
           .
           It
           may
           indeed
           be
           possible
           ,
           by
           being
           Members
           of
           
             another
             Society
          
           ,
           that
           all
           the
           Particulars
           of
           which
           a
           Society
           does
           consist
           ,
           may
           enjoy
           
             greater
             advantages
          
           by
           being
           dissolved
           into
           another
           Society
           ,
           than
           by
           being
           a
           Society
           by
           themselves
           ,
           and
           at
           their
           own
           disposal
           .
           And
           a
           Case
           may
           therefore
           fall
           out
           ,
           wherein
           a
           
             less
             beneficial
             Society
          
           ,
           may
           not
           only
           put
           their
           Liberties
           in
           the
           power
           of
           
             another
             more
             beneficial
             Society
          
           ,
           to
           be
           by
           it
           disiolved
           at
           pleasure
           ,
           but
           may
           also
           actually
           surrender
           their
           very
           Liberties
           themselves
           ,
           in
           consideration
           of
           
             greater
             benefits
          
           ,
           to
           all
           the
           particulars
           of
           the
           
             less
             beneficial
             Society
          
           ,
           not
           only
           than
           those
           which
           they
           possess
           on
           account
           of
           their
           Incorporation
           ,
           but
           also
           than
           that
           Liberty
           also
           which
           they
           enjoy
           on
           account
           of
           their
           independency
           ,
           which
           is
           it self
           also
           a
           very
           valuable
           benefit
           ,
           and
           adds
           considerably
           to
           the
           other
           advantages
           of
           their
           
             present
             Society
          
           ,
           in
           the
           common
           esteem
           of
           Mankind
           .
           But
           for
           this
           ,
           two
           things
           are
           requisite
           to
           make
           the
           Case
           Practicable
           ,
           neither
           of
           which
           are
           applicable
           to
           the
           subject
           of
           our
           present
           Discourse
           First
           ,
           the
           benefits
           of
           the
           
             New
             Society
          
           ,
           must
           indeed
           be
           more
           valuable
           than
           those
           of
           the
           old
           one
           ,
           together
           with
           their
           Liberty
           considered
           into
           the
           bargain
           .
           2dly
           .
           They
           who
           are
           possessed
           of
           the
           Rights
           of
           the
           
             old
             Society
          
           ,
           must
           be
           possessed
           of
           them
           on
           their
           own
           Accounts
           ,
           not
           as
           Trustees
           of
           any
           other
           ,
           that
           so
           they
           may
           have
           no
           further
           Obligation
           to
           preserve
           them
           ,
           than
           their
           own
           
             present
             Interests
          
           in
           them
           ,
           and
           may
           therefore
           be
           at
           Liberty
           to
           accept
           of
           considerations
           of
           graeter
           present
           Interest
           .
           If
           either
           of
           these
           Considerations
           fail
           ,
           they
           cannot
           think
           themselves
           obliged
           in
           Equity
           to
           stand
           to
           such
           a
           Contract
           ,
           especially
           where
           no
           more
           is
           pretended
           than
           an
           implicite
           
           one
           ,
           not
           expressed
           in
           Words
           ,
           but
           gathered
           only
           from
           considerations
           of
           Equity
           .
           And
           here
           neither
           of
           them
           can
           be
           so
           much
           as
           pretended
           .
           First
           it
           cannot
           be
           pretended
           that
           any
           Secular
           Favours
           or
           Immunities
           whatsoever
           can
           make
           amends
           for
           the
           benefits
           of
           their
           
             present
             spiritual
             Society
          
           .
           This
           has
           been
           proved
           already
           .
           I
           shall
           therefore
           here
           take
           it
           for
           granted
           .
           Indeed
           it
           is
           in
           our
           present
           Case
           so
           very
           manifest
           ,
           that
           I
           need
           no
           great
           Favour
           of
           our
           Adversaries
           themselves
           to
           give
           me
           leave
           to
           do
           so
           .
           Supposing
           it
           therefore
           granted
           ,
           all
           the
           Rules
           of
           
             equitable
             Reasoning
          
           in
           the
           sense
           of
           those
           Ages
           wherein
           the
           State
           first
           became
           Christian
           ,
           will
           relieve
           the
           Church
           against
           any
           such
           pretentions
           ,
           as
           are
           here
           insisted
           on
           ,
           of
           an
           
             implicite
             contract
          
           for
           surrendring
           her
           
             independency
             .
             Societies
          
           had
           in
           the
           
             Roman
             Civil
             Law
          
           (
           which
           is
           the
           best
           standard
           for
           judging
           what
           was
           thought
           equitable
           in
           those
           times
           )
           the
           same
           favour
           as
           Minors
           ,
           from
           being
           obliged
           by
           over-reaching
           Contracts
           .
           And
           indeed
           there
           was
           reason
           for
           it
           ,
           when
           their
           Interests
           were
           transacted
           by
           others
           who
           as
           seldom
           consulted
           the
           sense
           of
           the
           Communities
           ,
           as
           Guardians
           did
           their
           Pupils
           ,
           and
           who
           were
           liable
           to
           as
           just
           suspicions
           of
           corrupt
           insidious
           dealings
           ,
           and
           private
           interests
           ,
           as
           Guardians
           were
           .
           This
           therefore
           would
           allow
           the
           Church
           a
           
             Restitution
             in
             integrum
          
           ,
           a
           perfect
           rescission
           of
           such
           a
           Contract
           ,
           made
           in
           her
           name
           by
           her
           Representatives
           ,
           where
           the
           disadvantage
           was
           in
           it
           so
           manifest
           ,
           as
           the
           
             alienating
             spiritual
             Rights
          
           in
           exchange
           for
           Temporal
           ;
           and
           the
           contract
           had
           yet
           proceeded
           no
           further
           than
           to
           be
           implicite
           only
           and
           interpretative
           .
           Indeed
           here
           the
           very
           Representatives
           themselves
           might
           expect
           to
           be
           relieved
           in
           Equity
           .
           For
           ,
           receiving
           a
           
             valuable
             consideration
          
           ,
           is
           that
           which
           is
           expresly
           mention'd
           ,
           even
           in
           our
           
             Modern
             Contracts
          
           ,
           even
           where
           that
           valuable
           consideration
           it
           self
           is
           not
           mentioned
           ,
           purposely
           to
           prevent
           their
           revecableness
           ,
           if
           it
           had
           not
           been
           mentioned
           .
           It
           is
           therefore
           supposed
           that
           when
           the
           Consideration
           is
           not
           valuable
           in
           comparison
           with
           the
           Right
           contracted
           for
           ,
           it
           is
           but
           reasonable
           in
           Equity
           ,
           that
           such
           a
           Contract
           be
           rescinded
           .
           Especially
           ,
           where
           the
           Contract
           is
           not
           expressed
           in
           Words
           ,
           there
           is
           no
           reason
           in
           Equity
           to
           presume
           that
           any
           such
           Alienation
           was
           intended
           .
           All
           that
           can
           be
           pretended
           in
           this
           Case
           ,
           is
           ,
           that
           the
           
           Prince's
           Favour
           ,
           and
           Protection
           ,
           is
           accepted
           of
           by
           the
           Representatives
           of
           the
           Church
           .
           But
           how
           does
           it
           appear
           ,
           without
           an
           
             explicite
             Contract
          
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           accepted
           of
           with
           a
           design
           of
           entring
           into
           a
           Contract
           ?
           How
           does
           it
           appear
           ,
           that
           it
           is
           accepted
           of
           as
           a
           consideration
           ?
           How
           does
           it
           appear
           ,
           that
           any
           Right
           ,
           on
           their
           
             own
             side
          
           ,
           is
           intended
           to
           be
           parted
           with
           in
           consideration
           of
           it
           ?
           How
           does
           it
           appear
           ,
           but
           that
           it
           is
           thought
           already
           sufficiently
           required
           in
           the
           favour
           already
           conferred
           on
           the
           Prince
           and
           his
           Subjects
           ,
           in
           admitting
           them
           into
           
           a
           Society
           so
           much
           more
           beneficial
           than
           their
           own
           ?
           If
           any
           Cession
           of
           Rights
           ,
           had
           been
           thought
           of
           ,
           why
           must
           it
           needs
           be
           of
           a
           Right
           ,
           so
           essential
           to
           its
           subsistence
           and
           continuance
           ,
           as
           that
           is
           of
           the
           Independence
           of
           the
           
             Supream
             Govornours
          
           of
           their
           
             own
             Society
          
           ?
           How
           can
           it
           appear
           ,
           that
           in
           accepting
           of
           the
           
           Prince's
           favours
           ,
           such
           a
           Contract
           as
           this
           was
           ever
           
             thought
             of
          
           ?
           Nay
           the
           very
           unequalness
           of
           it
           would
           be
           in
           Equity
           a
           
             strong
             Presumption
          
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           not
           though
           of
           ,
           nor
           intended
           ,
           nor
           ever
           would
           have
           been
           consented
           to
           ,
           if
           it
           had
           been
           expresly
           insisted
           on
           .
           It
           is
           certain
           many
           kindnesses
           are
           accepted
           of
           ,
           without
           any
           thoughts
           of
           a
           Contract
           ,
           It
           is
           
             strongly
             presumable
          
           such
           an
           Alienation
           as
           this
           ,
           would
           never
           have
           been
           consented
           to
           ,
           if
           it
           had
           been
           thought
           of
           .
           Here
           is
           no
           proof
           of
           a
           Contract
           ,
           but
           bare
           acceptance
           .
           On
           these
           considerations
           ,
           there
           can
           be
           no
           reason
           or
           Equity
           to
           oblige
           the
           Ecclesiasticks
           to
           stand
           to
           so
           partial
           an
           Interpretation
           of
           a
           Contract
           imposed
           on
           them
           by
           their
           Adversaries
           .
           Indeed
           there
           can
           be
           no
           such
           Contract
           at
           all
           ,
           as
           an
           implicite
           one
           ,
           which
           can
           be
           no
           otherwise
           proved
           ,
           but
           by
           
             reasonable
             equitable
             Interpretation
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXV
           .
           But
           here
           it
           is
           not
           in
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           to
           make
           such
           a
           Contract
           .
        
         
           Thus
           much
           might
           have
           been
           pleaded
           for
           discharging
           the
           
             Church
             Officers
          
           from
           these
           Obligations
           ,
           though
           they
           had
           indeed
           a
           Power
           to
           oblige
           themselves
           thus
           far
           ,
           and
           had
           no
           more
           to
           do
           in
           this
           matter
           ,
           than
           to
           consider
           whether
           there
           were
           prospects
           of
           
             present
             Interest
          
           sufficient
           to
           induce
           them
           to
           it
           .
           But
           that
           is
           not
           the
           Case
           here
           .
           All
           they
           can
           do
           ,
           on
           any
           consideration
           whatsoever
           ,
           by
           any
           however
           
             Explicite
             Compact
          
           is
           not
           sufficient
           to
           Alienate
           that
           Power
           ,
           by
           which
           the
           Church
           must
           again
           subsist
           ,
           whenever
           the
           Magistrate
           deserts
           her
           .
           For
           this
           Power
           is
           not
           her
           own
           ,
           but
           a
           trust
           commited
           to
           her
           
             by
             GOD
          
           ,
           and
           a
           trust
           committed
           to
           her
           ,
           with
           a
           design
           the
           Power
           should
           be
           perpetuated
           .
           Whatsoever
           therefore
           she
           does
           ,
           she
           cannot
           
             oblige
             God
          
           by
           an
           Act
           of
           Alienation
           of
           it
           .
           So
           a
           Servant
           that
           should
           Alienate
           his
           
             Lord's
             Rights
          
           without
           his
           leave
           ,
           cannot
           hinder
           his
           Lord
           from
           challenging
           them
           again
           ,
           nor
           any
           other
           Servant
           who
           is
           impower'd
           by
           his
           Lord
           to
           demand
           them
           .
           This
           is
           allowed
           among
           our
           hired
           Servants
           ,
           and
           much
           more
           with
           the
           
             Roman
             Slaves
          
           ,
           to
           whom
           the
           Scriptures
           allude
           in
           this
           matter
           .
           (
           The
           Apostles
           themselves
           call
           their
           Office
           a
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           and
           a
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           ,
           and
           an
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           Words
           in
           the
           Language
           of
           that
           time
           importing
           
             Slavery
             .
          
           )
           such
           were
           usually
           then
           intrusted
           with
           Stewardships
           .
           And
           the
           lower
           degree
           of
           Slavery
           ,
           that
           of
           a
           
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
             〈◊〉
          
           St.
           Paul
           looks
           on
           as
           a
           
             higher
             dignity
          
           of
           his
           
             Apostolical
             Office.
          
           And
           he
           calls
           his
           Power
           a
           trust
           ,
           and
           a
           dispensation
           ,
           and
           looks
           on
           himself
           as
           under
           an
           Obligation
           of
           fidelity
           ,
           to
           discharge
           it
           according
           to
           the
           mind
           of
           him
           who
           had
           committed
           the
           trust
           to
           him
           .
           This
           was
           undoubtedly
           
           to
           signify
           the
           Nature
           of
           his
           Power
           by
           the
           
             Roman
             Civil
             Laws
          
           received
           at
           that
           time
           ,
           which
           allowed
           Servants
           to
           
             acquire
             Actions
          
           to
           their
           Masters
           ,
           but
           not
           Alienate
           them
           without
           their
           express
           command
           .
           The
           Apostles
           themselves
           therefore
           were
           not
           at
           Liberty
           to
           Alienate
           this
           trust
           committed
           to
           them
           upon
           any
           considerations
           whatsoever
           of
           their
           own
           
             private
             convenience
          
           ;
           nor
           much
           less
           can
           they
           do
           it
           ,
           who
           now
           succeed
           them
           in
           a
           Power
           ,
           indeed
           derived
           from
           them
           ;
           but
           in
           many
           particulars
           more
           limited
           than
           theirs
           was
           .
           Besides
           this
           Power
           is
           intrusted
           with
           them
           not
           for
           themselves
           only
           ,
           but
           for
           the
           interest
           also
           of
           Souls
           in
           general
           .
           Thence
           it
           appears
           that
           they
           cannot
           be
           allowed
           to
           dispose
           of
           it
           on
           considerations
           relating
           to
           their
           
             private
             Interests
          
           .
           As
           it
           is
           a
           Trust
           for
           others
           ,
           the
           same
           Notions
           will
           take
           place
           here
           which
           did
           with
           the
           
             Roman
             Tutors
          
           and
           Curators
           ,
           who
           where
           also
           Officers
           in
           Trust
           for
           managing
           an
           Interest
           which
           was
           none
           of
           their
           own
           .
           Nothing
           they
           did
           to
           the
           Prejudice
           of
           the
           Pupil
           could
           oblige
           him
           to
           performance
           .
           Especially
           if
           they
           presumed
           to
           Alienate
           any
           part
           of
           the
           Inheritance
           entrusted
           with
           them
           on
           considerations
           of
           
             private
             Interests
          
           of
           their
           own
           .
           Such
           Contracts
           were
           perfectly
           rescinded
           ,
           and
           left
           no
           Obligation
           on
           him
           to
           ratify
           them
           when
           he
           came
           to
           age
           ,
           as
           
             other
             Contracts
          
           might
           ,
           which
           were
           beneficial
           to
           him
           .
           Here
           therefore
           they
           could
           lay
           no
           Obligation
           on
           GOD
           ,
           to
           ratify
           their
           Alienation
           of
           the
           Power
           intrusted
           with
           them
           ,
           to
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           And
           yet
           without
           a
           Right
           obliging
           GOD
           to
           ratify
           what
           was
           transacted
           by
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           ,
           all
           the
           Conveyances
           they
           could
           pretend
           to
           make
           of
           their
           
             Spiritual
             Rights
          
           to
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           must
           be
           perfectly
           insignificant
           For
           then
           GOD
           may
           still
           own
           him
           for
           a
           Bishop
           who
           is
           deprived
           by
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           and
           disown
           that
           Person
           as
           an
           Intruder
           ,
           who
           is
           substituted
           into
           his
           Office
           by
           the
           
             Lay
             Power
          
           .
           For
           it
           is
           
             GOD'S
             Act
          
           alone
           that
           can
           determine
           the
           Question
           as
           to
           Right
           ,
           and
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           Seeing
           therefore
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           cannot
           confer
           a
           Right
           upon
           the
           Magistrate
           to
           have
           his
           Acts
           ratified
           by
           GOD
           ;
           after
           all
           the
           Compacts
           they
           can
           make
           ,
           the
           Right
           continues
           as
           it
           was
           before
           .
           They
           who
           had
           the
           Right
           of
           making
           and
           
             depriving
             Bishops
          
           ,
           have
           the
           same
           Right
           still
           ,
           and
           may
           resume
           the
           exercise
           of
           it
           when
           they
           please
           ,
           and
           are
           obliged
           to
           do
           so
           ,
           as
           they
           will
           approve
           themselves
           faithful
           to
           their
           Trust
           ,
           when
           they
           shall
           judge
           the
           exigences
           of
           the
           Church
           to
           require
           it
           .
           What
           then
           can
           their
           Contract
           signify
           ,
           be
           it
           never
           so
           express
           ?
           It
           on
           the
           contrary
           appears
           ,
           that
           no
           consideration
           whatsoever
           of
           
             private
             Interest
          
           ,
           can
           be
           a
           reasonable
           inducement
           for
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Governours
          
           to
           enter
           into
           such
           Contracts
           ,
           not
           only
           because
           they
           cannot
           validly
           oblige
           themselves
           ,
           or
           confer
           any
           valid
           Right
           upon
           the
           Magistrate
           
           in
           this
           matter
           ,
           which
           he
           had
           not
           before
           ;
           but
           even
           in
           Consideration
           of
           their
           
             own
             Interest
          
           .
           Suppose
           the
           Favours
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           were
           indeed
           sufficient
           to
           countervail
           the
           
             Personal
             benefits
          
           they
           enjoyed
           ,
           purely
           on
           account
           of
           their
           being
           the
           Heads
           of
           a
           
             distinct
             independent
             Body
          
           ;
           yet
           it
           cannot
           be
           denyed
           but
           that
           the
           Punishment
           they
           have
           reason
           to
           fear
           from
           GOD
           on
           account
           of
           their
           Falshood
           to
           their
           Trust
           ,
           is
           without
           comparison
           greater
           than
           what
           can
           be
           recompenced
           by
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXVI
           .
           It
           is
           not
           agreeable
           to
           the
           mind
           of
           GOD
           ,
           that
           the
           Church
           should
           so
           concorporate
           with
           the
           State
           ,
           as
           that
           the
           Bishops
           should
           be
           deprivable
           at
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
        
         
           Indeed
           the
           Nature
           of
           the
           
             spiritual
             Society
          
           as
           constituted
           by
           GOD
           is
           such
           ,
           as
           that
           it
           cannot
           be
           thought
           agreeable
           to
           the
           mind
           of
           GOD
           ,
           that
           it
           should
           so
           concorporate
           with
           the
           State
           ,
           as
           wholly
           to
           depend
           on
           the
           Authority
           of
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           so
           as
           that
           its
           
             Supream
             Governours
          
           ,
           the
           Bishops
           ,
           should
           be
           subject
           to
           him
           in
           Spirituals
           also
           .
           It
           is
           not
           agreeable
           to
           his
           mind
           that
           the
           more
           
             Noble
             Society
          
           should
           be
           subjected
           to
           that
           which
           is
           
             less
             Noble
          
           ;
           that
           the
           Interests
           of
           Souls
           which
           are
           more
           valuable
           in
           his
           esteem
           than
           all
           the
           Kingdoms
           of
           the
           World
           ,
           should
           depend
           on
           the
           pleasures
           of
           particular
           Princes
           ,
           and
           the
           Interests
           of
           their
           particular
           little
           Districts
           .
           It
           is
           not
           agreeable
           ,
           that
           he
           should
           trust
           a
           Government
           of
           
             principal
             importance
          
           ,
           in
           the
           hands
           of
           those
           who
           are
           not
           likely
           to
           regard
           it
           ,
           as
           their
           
             principal
             employment
          
           ,
           who
           make
           the
           World
           their
           principal
           Study
           ,
           and
           take
           their
           understanding
           that
           ,
           and
           its
           concers
           throughly
           to
           be
           the
           principal
           accomplishment
           they
           are
           capable
           of
           ,
           for
           the
           discharging
           of
           that
           which
           they
           take
           to
           be
           their
           
             principal
             Office
          
           ,
           and
           who
           either
           take
           no
           pains
           at
           all
           to
           understand
           the
           concerns
           of
           Religion
           ,
           or
           do
           it
           no
           otherwise
           than
           as
           it
           is
           consistent
           with
           their
           other
           employments
           ,
           which
           are
           not
           indeed
           of
           that
           importance
           as
           matters
           of
           Religion
           are
           .
           It
           is
           much
           more
           likely
           that
           he
           intended
           that
           it
           should
           continue
           ,
           as
           himself
           had
           settled
           it
           at
           its
           first
           establishment
           ,
           in
           the
           hands
           of
           those
           whose
           Principal
           care
           it
           should
           be
           to
           mind
           it
           as
           it
           deserves
           ,
           That
           is
           ,
           Principally
           ,
           and
           other
           things
           ,
           no
           otherwise
           than
           as
           they
           may
           prove
           subservient
           to
           it
           .
           It
           is
           no
           way
           likely
           that
           he
           would
           have
           Religion
           left
           to
           their
           disposal
           ,
           who
           by
           their
           Office
           think
           themselves
           obliged
           to
           be
           swayed
           Principally
           by
           their
           Worldly
           interests
           ,
           than
           which
           there
           is
           hardly
           any
           thing
           more
           contradictory
           to
           the
           great
           ends
           of
           Religion
           ;
           to
           make
           Reformation
           of
           Manners
           necessary
           to
           be
           begun
           by
           Courts
           ,
           which
           are
           usually
           the
           Originals
           of
           the
           corruptions
           of
           that
           kind
           ,
           and
           the
           great
           hindrances
           to
           well
           meant
           designs
           of
           Reformation
           .
           An
           obvious
           consequence
           of
           such
           a
           trust
           would
           be
           ,
           that
           Religion
           ,
           which
           Princes
           do
           not
           take
           for
           their
           Principal
           Work
           ,
           must
           be
           made
           subservient
           to
           their
           
             worldly
             Politicks
          
           ,
           which
           Princes
           generally
           
           take
           for
           their
           Principal
           employment
           .
           And
           who
           can
           think
           that
           GOD
           would
           ever
           intend
           that
           a
           Religion
           at
           first
           established
           in
           a
           State
           of
           Independency
           on
           the
           
             secular
             Power
          
           ,
           should
           afterwards
           be
           brought
           to
           a
           State
           precarious
           ,
           and
           depending
           on
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           
             secular
             Magistrate
          
           ?
           GODS
           establishing
           it
           otherwife
           at
           first
           shewed
           plainly
           that
           it
           was
           better
           for
           the
           Church
           to
           be
           independent
           on
           the
           State
           ,
           whensoever
           there
           should
           be
           any
           difference
           between
           it
           and
           the
           
             secular
             Magistrate
          
           .
           This
           withal
           we
           are
           certain
           of
           ,
           that
           GOD
           is
           not
           changeable
           as
           man
           is
           ;
           but
           that
           whilst
           the
           same
           Reason
           holds
           ,
           or
           when
           the
           same
           Case
           returns
           ,
           his
           mind
           will
           be
           the
           same
           as
           it
           was
           before
           .
           When
           ever
           therefore
           the
           Magistrate
           who
           has
           once
           favoured
           the
           Church
           ,
           shall
           again
           desert
           it
           ,
           and
           withdraw
           his
           Protection
           from
           it
           ;
           we
           must
           then
           conclude
           that
           the
           Church
           is
           in
           the
           same
           condition
           she
           was
           in
           before
           the
           Magistrate
           received
           her
           into
           his
           Protection
           ;
           and
           therefore
           that
           it
           is
           GODS
           Pleasure
           also
           that
           she
           should
           subsist
           then
           ,
           as
           she
           had
           done
           before
           ,
           on
           her
           
             own
             Government
          
           .
           On
           her
           own
           Government
           ,
           I
           say
           ,
           as
           well
           qualified
           now
           ,
           as
           formerly
           ,
           for
           continuance
           ,
           and
           perpetuity
           ,
           by
           its
           independence
           on
           the
           pleasure
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           .
           This
           is
           indeed
           the
           only
           way
           of
           knowing
           
             GODS
             pleasure
          
           concerning
           a
           Case
           ,
           where
           no
           
             now
             Revelation
          
           is
           so
           much
           as
           pretended
           ,
           as
           none
           is
           here
           ,
           even
           by
           our
           Adversaries
           .
           This
           therefore
           being
           certain
           ,
           that
           ,
           in
           Case
           of
           a
           
             New
             breach
          
           ,
           GODS
           pleasure
           is
           that
           the
           Church
           should
           again
           be
           independent
           ;
           it
           will
           be
           also
           certain
           ,
           that
           in
           the
           Interval
           ;
           whilst
           the
           good
           correspondence
           holds
           between
           the
           
             two
             Societies
          
           ,
           GOD
           cannot
           allow
           such
           an
           Alienation
           of
           Power
           as
           shall
           disable
           her
           ,
           in
           Case
           of
           a
           
             now
             breach
          
           ,
           to
           persist
           on
           her
           
             old
             terms
          
           .
           This
           will
           requite
           that
           the
           
             old
             Society
          
           be
           preserved
           with
           the
           
             old
             Government
          
           of
           Bishops
           during
           the
           Interval
           .
           For
           the
           Church
           is
           not
           such
           a
           Society
           as
           other
           Humane
           ones
           ,
           that
           can
           be
           
             set
             up
          
           at
           pleasure
           by
           the
           Agreement
           of
           the
           particular
           Members
           of
           which
           it
           consists
           ,
           whenever
           they
           are
           Free
           from
           other
           antecedent
           inconsistent
           Obligations
           .
           This
           is
           a
           Society
           erected
           by
           GOD
           ,
           and
           requires
           Governours
           Authorized
           by
           him
           more
           than
           other
           
             Civil
             Societies
          
           do
           ,
           for
           Obliging
           him
           to
           confer
           
             spiritual
             Blessings
          
           exceeding
           the
           Power
           of
           the
           Members
           considered
           in
           themselve
           .
           GOD
           has
           given
           them
           no
           reason
           to
           expect
           ,
           when
           the
           breach
           shall
           fall
           ,
           that
           he
           will
           extraordinarily
           empower
           Men
           immediatly
           as
           he
           did
           the
           Apostles
           .
           The
           only
           way
           therefore
           for
           securing
           the
           continuance
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           is
           to
           keep
           up
           a
           Body
           of
           Governours
           .
           Authorized
           by
           the
           Apostles
           in
           that
           Succession
           ,
           which
           has
           been
           derived
           from
           them
           to
           our
           
             present
             times
          
           ,
           which
           cannot
           be
           ,
           unless
           the
           Succession
           it self
           be
           continued
           on
           ,
           in
           all
           the
           Interval
           of
           good
           Correspondence
           .
           This
           therefore
           requires
           that
           they
           do
           not
           suffer
           themselves
           so
           to
           be
           Incorporated
           into
           the
           State
           ,
           as
           to
           have
           
           no
           Governours
           of
           their
           own
           Acting
           by
           a
           
             highery
             Authority
          
           than
           what
           can
           be
           derived
           from
           the
           Prince
           .
           This
           consideration
           alone
           is
           sufficient
           to
           disprove
           our
           Adversaries
           fancy
           concerning
           the
           coalition
           of
           the
           
             Two
             Bodies
          
           ,
           under
           the
           King
           as
           the
           Common
           Head
           of
           both
           of
           them
           ,
           when
           ,
           in
           the
           mean
           time
           ,
           the
           Church
           is
           obliged
           to
           continue
           in
           her
           Bishops
           a
           power
           not
           derivable
           by
           any
           Patents
           from
           the
           KING
           .
           This
           Power
           therefore
           
             not
             derived
          
           from
           him
           ,
           must
           be
           perfectly
           independent
           on
           him
           .
           And
           indeed
           no
           Power
           but
           what
           is
           so
           ,
           can
           justify
           ,
           and
           make
           Practicable
           ,
           a
           Resumption
           of
           
             ancient
             Rights
          
           .
           For
           what
           ever
           depends
           on
           the
           Magistrate
           ,
           may
           ,
           and
           will
           in
           course
           ,
           be
           taken
           from
           the
           Bishop
           when
           the
           correspondence
           is
           interrupted
           .
           If
           therefore
           ,
           when
           it
           is
           taken
           away
           the
           Bishop
           has
           then
           no
           Right
           to
           Govern
           ,
           he
           cannot
           expect
           GOD
           will
           ratify
           any
           exercise
           of
           a
           Power
           to
           which
           he
           can
           pretend
           no
           Right
           .
           But
           without
           
           GOD's
           ratifying
           what
           is
           done
           by
           the
           Authority
           ,
           and
           good
           reason
           to
           presume
           that
           GOD
           is
           obliged
           to
           ractify
           it
           ,
           such
           a
           Government
           can
           signify
           nothing
           for
           keeping
           the
           Society
           in
           a
           Body
           ,
           that
           has
           nothing
           to
           recommend
           it
           ,
           but
           consideratinos
           relating
           to
           GOD
           and
           Conscience
           .
           The
           Alienation
           therefore
           of
           this
           Power
           so
           necessary
           for
           securing
           the
           Society
           ,
           being
           so
           plainly
           against
           the
           Mind
           of
           GOD
           in
           giving
           the
           Power
           ,
           no
           Act
           of
           Alienation
           of
           it
           ,
           can
           expect
           a
           ratification
           from
           GOD
           ,
           and
           therefore
           it
           must
           be
           
             Originally
             null
          
           and
           invalid
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXVII
           .
           The
           Magistrate
           is
           by
           no
           means
           ,
           a
           
             Competent
             Iudge
          
           of
           the
           
             Church's
             Interests
          
           .
        
         
           Besides
           ,
           there
           are
           other
           things
           so
           peculiar
           to
           the
           design
           of
           GOD
           ,
           in
           instituting
           the
           
             Spiritual
             Society
          
           ,
           that
           make
           it
           by
           no
           means
           probable
           ,
           that
           it
           was
           his
           pleasure
           ,
           that
           it
           should
           coalesce
           into
           
             one
             Society
          
           with
           the
           State
           under
           one
           common
           
             Supream
             Government
          
           ,
           both
           for
           Spiritisals
           and
           Temporals
           .
           It
           is
           inconsistent
           with
           the
           Office
           of
           the
           
             Supream
             Magistrate
          
           ,
           to
           endure
           that
           his
           Subjects
           should
           live
           under
           a
           state
           of
           
             perpetual
             Violence
          
           from
           another
           Power
           ,
           without
           using
           his
           utmost
           endeavours
           to
           resit
           it
           .
           The
           Church
           may
           ,
           and
           often
           must
           ,
           submit
           to
           a
           Persucution
           ,
           when
           it
           is
           not
           otherwise
           in
           her
           Power
           to
           avoid
           it
           but
           by
           resistance
           .
           She
           may
           with
           great
           generosity
           choose
           a
           Persecution
           ,
           when
           she
           judges
           it
           to
           be
           for
           the
           Interests
           of
           Religion
           ,
           and
           it
           is
           her
           Glory
           to
           overcome
           Evil
           with
           Good
           ,
           and
           to
           subdue
           her
           Enemies
           rather
           with
           Patience
           and
           Constancy
           ,
           than
           Arms
           and
           
             open
             violence
          
           .
           She
           can
           still
           subsist
           and
           gain
           by
           such
           a
           state
           ,
           whereas
           the
           
             Civil
             state
          
           is
           perfectly
           dissolved
           when
           once
           that
           violence
           becomes
           irresistable
           .
           The
           Magistrate
           is
           ,
           by
           the
           Law
           of
           Nations
           ,
           allowed
           to
           return
           violence
           for
           violence
           ,
           and
           to
           do
           many
           things
           when
           provoked
           by
           his
           Enemy
           ,
           which
           the
           Church
           can
           never
           decently
           do
           on
           any
           Provocation
           whatsoever
           .
           It
           is
           for
           the
           Interest
           of
           the
           Magistrate
           (
           if
           he
           look
           on
           Religion
           as
           his
           Interest
           )
           that
           the
           Church
           should
           be
           free
           in
           her
           Actings
           for
           Reformation
           of
           manners
           ,
           
           which
           she
           cannot
           be
           ,
           if
           the
           Bishops
           must
           ,
           at
           his
           pleasure
           ,
           be
           
             turned
             out
          
           of
           their
           Office
           ,
           for
           no
           other
           reason
           ,
           but
           their
           being
           faithful
           to
           it
           .
           The
           Church
           withal
           was
           designed
           by
           GOD
           for
           a
           Society
           that
           should
           correspond
           all
           the
           World
           over
           ,
           as
           they
           did
           anciently
           by
           their
           
             Communicatory
             Letters
          
           ,
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           .
           For
           her
           Censures
           can
           significe
           nothing
           for
           reclaiming
           Hereticks
           or
           
             ill
             Livers
          
           ,
           if
           they
           extend
           no
           further
           than
           her
           
             own
             Jurisdiction
          
           ;
           if
           they
           exclude
           not
           from
           Catholick
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           
             Diocesan
             Communion
          
           .
           She
           ought
           therefore
           to
           enquire
           into
           
             new
             Opinions
          
           ,
           as
           they
           may
           occasion
           difference
           of
           Communion
           ,
           that
           she
           may
           neither
           
             recommend
             Heriticks
          
           to
           the
           Communion
           with
           
             Foreign
             Churches
          
           ,
           nor
           receive
           them
           to
           her
           
             own
             Communion
          
           ,
           if
           recommended
           by
           them
           .
           This
           cannot
           be
           done
           by
           
             single
             Bishops
          
           ,
           because
           in
           these
           things
           ,
           at
           least
           ,
           they
           are
           to
           proceed
           by
           a
           
             common
             Rule
          
           ,
           and
           Unanimously
           ,
           not
           as
           in
           other
           things
           ,
           only
           by
           a
           Majority
           of
           Suffrages
           ,
           because
           no
           differences
           of
           Faith
           can
           be
           born
           with
           in
           the
           same
           Communion
           ,
           as
           differences
           of
           Opinion
           may
           be
           ,
           in
           other
           things
           of
           lesser
           importance
           .
           This
           will
           require
           frequent
           Synods
           ,
           such
           as
           they
           had
           farmerly
           before
           the
           State
           was
           Christian
           ,
           twice
           a
           Year
           in
           course
           ,
           besides
           what
           
             greater
             Synods
          
           ,
           might
           be
           thought
           necessary
           on
           extraordinary
           emergent
           Cases
           But
           these
           cannot
           be
           had
           ,
           if
           they
           must
           depend
           on
           the
           Pleasure
           of
           the
           
             Local
             Magistrates
             .
             General
             Synods
          
           cannot
           be
           had
           on
           these
           terms
           ,
           without
           a
           
             General
             Peace
          
           ,
           and
           freedom
           from
           Jealousies
           ,
           in
           all
           the
           
             Worldly
             state
          
           ,
           or
           till
           all
           the
           Dioceses
           in
           the
           World
           should
           come
           under
           the
           power
           of
           one
           
             Secular
             Magistracy
          
           .
           Nor
           were
           there
           any
           Synods
           of
           
             that
             kind
          
           before
           the
           Conversion
           of
           the
           Empire
           of
           the
           
             Christian
             Religion
          
           .
           However
           ,
           the
           Church
           was
           even
           then
           possessed
           of
           a
           Right
           of
           meeting
           in
           
             Provincial
             Synods
          
           for
           her
           
             own
             Affairs
          
           ,
           without
           asking
           the
           
             Magistrates
             leave
          
           ,
           pursuant
           to
           the
           
             general
             Right
          
           given
           her
           by
           GOD
           for
           propagating
           her
           Religion
           .
           And
           even
           those
           
             Provincial
             Synods
          
           had
           such
           a
           correspondence
           as
           was
           absolutely
           requisite
           for
           settling
           Unanimity
           and
           a
           good
           
             Under
             standing
          
           between
           them
           .
           But
           since
           they
           have
           depended
           on
           the
           Pleasure
           of
           
             Local
             Magistrates
          
           ,
           not
           only
           this
           correspondence
           ,
           but
           also
           the
           
             Subordinate
             Provincial
          
           and
           
             National
             Synods
          
           have
           been
           discontinued
           .
           Nor
           can
           this
           
             Catholick
             Correspondence
          
           which
           is
           notwithstanding
           so
           necessary
           for
           all
           (
           even
           Diocesane
           )
           Discipline
           ,
           be
           retrieved
           ,
           without
           the
           consent
           of
           so
           many
           
             Local
             Magistrates
          
           ,
           as
           have
           Churches
           in
           their
           Dominions
           ,
           if
           the
           Churches
           must
           be
           concluded
           by
           these
           pretended
           Contracts
           .
           But
           certainly
           Christ
           could
           never
           intend
           ,
           that
           a
           thing
           so
           universally
           necessary
           for
           that
           Discipline
           which
           is
           to
           be
           continued
           in
           all
           Ages
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           should
           depend
           on
           a
           consent
           of
           so
           many
           different
           Minds
           and
           Interests
           as
           are
           veryrarely
           to
           be
           expected
           in
           any
           Age.
           I
           see
           not
           therefore
           why
           it
           should
           be
           expected
           
           that
           Christ
           should
           ratify
           such
           Compacts
           against
           his
           
             own
             Designs
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXVIII
           .
           The
           Surrendry
           
             of
             the
          
           Clergy
           in
           Henry
           the
           VIIIth
           '
           
             s
             time
             ,
             cannot
          
           oblige
           
             their
             Posterits
          
           now
           .
        
         
           Thus
           it
           appears
           ,
           that
           no
           Contract
           has
           been
           made
           generally
           ,
           and
           that
           none
           can
           be
           made
           validly
           ,
           for
           Alienating
           the
           
             Church's
             Right
          
           ,
           of
           which
           she
           was
           possessed
           before
           the
           Conversion
           of
           Princes
           .
           Thence
           may
           be
           judged
           how
           little
           obliging
           those
           Act
           of
           the
           Clergy
           in
           the
           Sacrilegious
           Reign
           of
           Henry
           the
           VIIIth
           were
           ,
           for
           obliging
           themselves
           and
           their
           Posterity
           ,
           never
           to
           meet
           for
           Affairs
           concerning
           their
           Spiritual
           Function
           without
           the
           
             Prince's
             leave
          
           .
           Had
           that
           Right
           been
           a
           Property
           of
           their
           own
           conferred
           on
           them
           by
           a
           Humane
           Conveyance
           for
           the
           
             private
             benefit
          
           of
           their
           Function
           ,
           they
           might
           indeed
           have
           pretended
           a
           Right
           to
           
             oblige
             Posterity
          
           by
           those
           Acts
           of
           Resignation
           .
           But
           considering
           it
           as
           a
           Right
           not
           conferred
           ,
           but
           entrusted
           by
           GOD
           himself
           for
           greater
           ends
           than
           their
           own
           private
           Interests
           ;
           thy
           can
           pretend
           no
           Right
           to
           hinder
           Posterity
           from
           resuming
           the
           Priviledges
           then
           surrendred
           ,
           whenever
           they
           shall
           judge
           them
           necessary
           for
           those
           great
           ends
           for
           which
           their
           Function
           was
           entrusted
           with
           them
           .
           Especially
           what
           the
           Magistrate
           either
           has
           ,
           or
           can
           do
           ,
           in
           consideration
           of
           that
           surrendry
           ,
           falling
           infinitely
           short
           of
           being
           an
           Equivalent
           .
           Besides
           it
           is
           manifest
           ,
           that
           the
           Surrendry
           then
           made
           ,
           was
           perfectly
           forced
           on
           them
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           the
           Fine
           was
           laid
           upon
           the
           whole
           Body
           of
           the
           
             Clergy
             '
          
           on
           account
           of
           the
           Praemunire
           they
           had
           incurred
           for
           owning
           Cardinal
           
           WOLSEY's
           
             Legatine
             Power
          
           .
           It
           has
           therefore
           ,
           on
           that
           account
           also
           ,
           that
           consideration
           of
           the
           Force
           by
           which
           it
           was
           extorted
           ,
           for
           discharging
           Posterity
           ,
           from
           its
           obligation
           ,
           which
           ,
           added
           to
           the
           Considerations
           now
           mentioned
           ,
           will
           free
           it
           every
           way
           from
           the
           Obligation
           of
           the
           Contract
           .
           All
           that
           can
           be
           said
           for
           it
           ,
           must
           be
           grounded
           on
           some
           
             antecedent
             Right
          
           that
           the
           Prince
           might
           pretend
           before
           his
           Force
           ;
           and
           therefore
           it
           must
           not
           wholly
           be
           resolved
           into
           this
           
             extorted
             Surrendry
          
           .
           For
           if
           the
           Prince
           had
           no
           
             Right
             before
          
           his
           Force
           ,
           he
           could
           have
           none
           afterwards
           ,
           on
           account
           of
           Conscience
           ,
           whatever
           he
           might
           pretend
           by
           
             Human
             Secular
             Laws
          
           .
           For
           his
           Force
           without
           any
           
             antecedent
             Right
          
           ,
           had
           been
           no
           other
           but
           downright
           Injustice
           ,
           which
           could
           not
           entitle
           him
           ,
           nor
           his
           Successors
           ,
           to
           any
           Right
           in
           Conscience
           .
           Especially
           where
           the
           Right
           it self
           is
           of
           that
           nature
           ,
           as
           it
           is
           here
           ,
           that
           it
           belongs
           to
           a
           higher
           than
           
             Human
             Secular
             Judicatory
          
           .
           It
           therefore
           concerns
           our
           Advesaries
           to
           consider
           what
           they
           can
           pretend
           for
           that
           Right
           antecedent
           to
           that
           Force
           .
           And
           I
           think
           what
           has
           already
           been
           proved
           ,
           sufficient
           to
           cut
           them
           off
           from
           all
           Pretensions
           of
           Right
           by
           the
           Constitutions
           of
           the
           Gospel
           .
           For
           I
           have
           shewed
           ,
           that
           the
           Church
           was
           possessed
           of
           a
           Right
           to
           govern
           her self
           independently
           in
           
           
             visible
             Districts
          
           and
           Jurisdictions
           before
           any
           Conversions
           of
           Princes
           .
           I
           have
           shewn
           withal
           ,
           that
           no
           Contract
           either
           was
           made
           ,
           or
           could
           be
           made
           ,
           that
           could
           dispossess
           her
           of
           that
           Right
           ,
           with
           regard
           to
           Conscience
           .
           If
           therefore
           they
           will
           pretend
           to
           any
           such
           Right
           antecedent
           to
           the
           
             forcible
             surrendry
          
           ,
           it
           must
           be
           on
           some
           other
           Topick
           than
           that
           of
           the
           Constitution
           of
           the
           Gospel
           .
           The
           tell
           us
           therefore
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Jewish
             Kings
          
           in
           the
           old
           Testament
           ,
           ordered
           many
           things
           relating
           to
           Religion
           .
           Thence
           they
           infer
           ,
           that
           
             our
             Princes
          
           have
           the
           
             same
             Power
          
           now
           .
           But
           ,
           granting
           the
           Fact
           true
           ,
           that
           the
           
             Jewish
             Princes
          
           were
           invested
           with
           that
           Power
           ,
           it
           will
           however
           by
           no
           means
           follow
           ,
           that
           our
           
             Christian
             Princes
          
           must
           be
           so
           now
           ,
           If
           what
           I
           have
           already
           proved
           ,
           hold
           true
           .
           For
           having
           directly
           proved
           ,
           that
           the
           Constitution
           of
           the
           Gospel
           is
           otherwise
           ;
           the
           Question
           then
           will
           be
           ,
           
             whether
             Precedents
          
           are
           to
           take
           place
           .
           And
           that
           in
           this
           Case
           ,
           cannot
           be
           difficult
           ,
           according
           to
           the
           
             ordinary
             Rules
          
           of
           judging
           concerning
           the
           Practice
           of
           
             inconsistent
             Laws
          
           .
           These
           Rules
           are
           ,
           That
           Laws
           of
           
             greater
             importance
          
           take
           place
           of
           Laws
           of
           
             lesser
             importance
          
           ;
           That
           
             later
             Laws
          
           of
           even
           the
           same
           Legislative
           Power
           take
           place
           of
           
             elder
             Laws
          
           ,
           as
           being
           so
           far
           virtually
           repeals
           of
           them
           as
           their
           Practice
           proves
           inconsistent
           :
           That
           Laws
           more
           suited
           to
           
             present
             Circumstances
          
           take
           place
           of
           those
           which
           were
           made
           on
           a
           
             remoter
             prospect
          
           of
           our
           
             present
             Circumstances
          
           .
           And
           by
           all
           these
           Rules
           there
           can
           be
           no
           doubt
           but
           that
           now
           all
           such
           
             Legal
             Precedents
          
           are
           to
           be
           overruled
           by
           the
           
             peculiar
             Constitutions
          
           of
           the
           Gospel
           .
           This
           ,
           I
           am
           sure
           ,
           is
           generally
           admitted
           in
           
             other
             Reasonings
          
           of
           this
           kind
           .
           And
           there
           is
           nothing
           peculiar
           pleaded
           in
           this
           Case
           ,
           why
           
             Jewish
             precedents
          
           should
           rather
           overrule
           here
           than
           in
           other
           Instances
           .
           Much
           less
           is
           there
           any
           reason
           ,
           why
           they
           should
           take
           place
           at
           a
           distance
           ,
           upon
           the
           first
           Conversions
           of
           Princes
           ,
           when
           it
           is
           so
           manifest
           that
           they
           did
           not
           do
           so
           at
           the
           
             first
             Settlement
          
           of
           the
           
             Christian
             Churches
          
           .
           However
           ,
           as
           to
           this
           particular
           of
           Deprivation
           ,
           I
           have
           already
           given
           my
           reasons
           against
           the
           
             Magistrates
             Right
          
           ,
           even
           in
           the
           times
           of
           the
           Jews
           ,
           and
           have
           answer'd
           already
           what
           has
           been
           pretended
           to
           the
           contrary
           ,
           from
           the
           Case
           of
           Abiathar
           ,
           and
           those
           other
           
             later
             Deprivations
          
           by
           the
           
             Heathen
             Magistrates
          
           .
           And
           this
           is
           at
           present
           our
           Principal
           Dispute
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXIX
           .
           No
           Reasoning
           
             from
             the
          
           Rights
           
             of
             the
          
           Jewish
           Princes
           
             to
             the
          
           Rights
           of
           Christian
           Princes
           now
           .
        
         
           Indeed
           in
           this
           whole
           matter
           concerning
           Reasoning
           from
           the
           Jewish
           to
           the
           
             Evangelical
             Priesthood
          
           ,
           I
           have
           taken
           care
           to
           Argue
           barely
           from
           what
           was
           common
           to
           them
           both
           ,
           the
           Nature
           of
           Priesthood
           in
           general
           ,
           and
           in
           those
           very
           instances
           wherein
           even
           the
           
             Apostolical
             Christians
          
           admit
           the
           Argument
           .
           Our
           Adversaries
           on
           the
           contrary
           when
           they
           Reason
           from
           the
           
             Princes
             Power
             then
          
           ,
           to
           the
           Power
           of
           
             Christian
             Princes
             now
          
           ;
           
           they
           do
           not
           Argue
           ,
           as
           I
           have
           done
           from
           the
           Priesthood
           simply
           considered
           ,
           but
           from
           the
           Power
           annexed
           to
           the
           Priesthood
           ,
           yet
           seperable
           from
           it
           ,
           according
           to
           the
           design
           of
           GOD
           in
           the
           particular
           Constitution
           .
           The
           Power
           of
           Governing
           the
           Society
           ,
           whose
           
             holy
             Rights
          
           are
           administred
           by
           it
           ,
           is
           ,
           I
           confess
           ,
           very
           seperable
           from
           the
           Right
           of
           Priesthood
           in
           general
           ,
           and
           whether
           it
           was
           actually
           annexed
           to
           it
           ,
           or
           not
           ,
           is
           therefore
           to
           be
           judged
           by
           the
           
             particular
             constitution
          
           .
           But
           particularly
           for
           the
           
             Jewish
             State
          
           ,
           I
           rather
           believe
           that
           it
           was
           not
           annexed
           to
           it
           .
           For
           the
           Right
           of
           Government
           as
           annexed
           to
           the
           Priesthood
           ,
           is
           founded
           on
           the
           Right
           the
           Priest
           has
           to
           oblige
           subjects
           by
           excluding
           refractory
           Persons
           as
           such
           ,
           from
           partaking
           in
           his
           Sacrifices
           .
           But
           so
           much
           Erastus
           has
           ,
           I
           think
           well
           observed
           ,
           that
           the
           only
           things
           that
           then
           hindred
           from
           the
           Sacrifices
           ,
           were
           only
           
             Legal
             incapacities
          
           ,
           such
           as
           not
           being
           of
           the
           
             Holy
             Seed
          
           ,
           or
           being
           under
           some
           
             Legal
             Pollution
          
           ;
           not
           any
           whatsoever
           immoralities
           of
           Life
           .
           And
           therefore
           the
           Punishment
           for
           not
           standing
           to
           the
           award
           of
           the
           Priests
           was
           capital
           ,
           as
           being
           a
           disobedience
           to
           so
           much
           of
           the
           
             secular
             Government
          
           ,
           as
           it
           was
           Theocratical
           ;
           not
           exclusion
           from
           the
           Sacrifices
           of
           those
           who
           had
           been
           contemned
           by
           the
           delinguent
           Nor
           indeed
           was
           there
           that
           necessity
           that
           the
           Government
           ;
           even
           as
           to
           Spirituals
           ,
           should
           be
           annexed
           to
           the
           
             Priesthood
             then
          
           ,
           as
           there
           is
           under
           the
           
             Gospel
             now
          
           .
           The
           Prince
           was
           then
           always
           obliged
           to
           be
           a
           Jew
           ,
           and
           therefore
           of
           the
           Religion
           establish'd
           for
           that
           Nation
           by
           GOD
           himself
           .
           Now
           his
           being
           of
           
             an
             other
          
           than
           the
           
             true
             Religion
          
           ,
           is
           no
           hindrance
           by
           our
           modern
           Constitutions
           ,
           from
           having
           a
           Lawful
           Right
           to
           the
           
             secular
             Government
          
           .
           Then
           the
           Prince
           had
           a
           better
           pretence
           ,
           as
           the
           Head
           of
           the
           Theocracy
           ,
           to
           command
           in
           affairs
           concerning
           GOD
           ;
           than
           any
           Prince
           living
           can
           now
           ,
           when
           no
           State
           pretends
           to
           be
           Theocratical
           .
           Then
           all
           the
           concerns
           of
           the
           Peculium
           were
           confined
           to
           that
           single
           Nation
           which
           was
           wholly
           commanded
           by
           
             one
             Prince
             .
             Now
          
           the
           concerns
           of
           every
           
             National
             Church
          
           ,
           are
           mixed
           with
           those
           of
           all
           the
           other
           
             National
             Churches
          
           in
           the
           World
           ,
           with
           whom
           their
           Prince
           has
           no
           concern
           at
           all
           .
           This
           very
           consideration
           makes
           the
           National
           Church's
           Interests
           seperable
           from
           the
           Interests
           of
           their
           Prince
           ;
           of
           which
           he
           can
           therefore
           be
           by
           no
           means
           presumed
           a
           
             Competent
             Judge
          
           .
           That
           Priesthood
           was
           not
           intended
           to
           be
           Practicable
           in
           a
           time
           of
           Persecution
           and
           Independence
           on
           the
           
             Civil
             Government
          
           .
           On
           the
           contrary
           ,
           the
           want
           of
           all
           
             the
             Exercises
          
           of
           their
           Religion
           was
           the
           most
           dejecting
           consideration
           of
           their
           Captivities
           ,
           and
           one
           of
           the
           greatest
           inducements
           for
           good
           Men
           to
           be
           earnest
           with
           GOD
           in
           Prayer
           for
           a
           Restoration
           .
           They
           were
           then
           to
           be
           without
           a
           *
           Priesthood
           ,
           without
           an
           †
           Ephod
           ,
           without
           a
           Teraphim
           .
           And
           the
           ‡
           Temple
           of
           the
           Lord
           was
           the
           
           Principal
           thing
           bemoaned
           by
           them
           who
           pretended
           any
           Zeal
           for
           their
           Nation
           or
           Religion
           .
           No
           doubt
           on
           account
           of
           their
           losing
           all
           the
           comfort
           of
           
             Sacerdotal
             Ministrations
          
           which
           could
           be
           performed
           in
           no
           other
           place
           besides
           that
           particular
           Temple
           .
           Then
           the
           loss
           of
           their
           daily
           *
           Sacrifices
           was
           the
           highest
           Calamity
           that
           the
           Antichrist
           then
           expected
           could
           bring
           upon
           them
           .
           And
           the
           perfect
           uselesness
           of
           the
           Priests
           afther
           the
           destruction
           of
           the
           Temple
           made
           Titus
           put
           the
           Priests
           to
           the
           Sword
           when
           the
           obstinacy
           of
           the
           Jews
           had
           obliged
           him
           to
           destroy
           the
           Temple
           .
           So
           clear
           it
           was
           ,
           that
           that
           was
           not
           a
           Religion
           capable
           of
           subsisting
           in
           a
           Persecution
           ,
           as
           to
           the
           Exercises
           of
           it
           as
           a
           Communion
           .
           But
           it
           is
           withal
           as
           clear
           that
           our
           Church
           was
           instituted
           in
           a
           Persecution
           with
           a
           Power
           of
           
             depriving
             disobedient
             Subjects
          
           of
           the
           benefits
           of
           Communion
           ,
           and
           with
           a
           Power
           of
           
             exercising
             Sacredotal
             Offices
          
           in
           that
           very
           State
           of
           Independecy
           on
           the
           
             Civil
             Magistrate
          
           .
           And
           indeed
           that
           State
           was
           principally
           provided
           for
           here
           at
           the
           first
           Institution
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           which
           was
           not
           so
           much
           as
           designed
           in
           the
           
             Jewish
             Church
          
           ,
           Besides
           ,
           the
           clear
           and
           express
           Revelation
           of
           Spiritual
           and
           Eternal
           benefits
           conveyed
           by
           our
           
             Evangelical
             Priest-hood
          
           is
           a
           thing
           peculier
           to
           the
           Gospel
           .
           Yet
           this
           alone
           is
           sufficient
           to
           put
           it
           beyond
           all
           pretensions
           ,
           even
           of
           a
           
             Theocratical
             Magistracy
          
           ,
           designed
           only
           for
           Temporals
           .
           Thus
           therefore
           it
           every
           way
           appears
           that
           
             more
             Power
          
           is
           by
           GOD
           himself
           annexed
           to
           the
           Evangelical
           ,
           than
           to
           the
           
             Legal
             Priest-hood
          
           .
           This
           therefore
           is
           sufficient
           to
           overthrow
           our
           Adversaries
           Reasoning
           here
           ,
           that
           our
           Princes
           now
           may
           challenge
           all
           that
           Power
           that
           the
           
             Jewish
             Princes
          
           could
           formerly
           .
           For
           they
           cannot
           challenge
           that
           which
           ,
           though
           it
           was
           not
           then
           ,
           has
           yet
           been
           since
           annexed
           to
           our
           
             Evangelical
             Priest-hood
          
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXX
           .
           Our
           Present
           deprivations
           not
           justifiable
           by
           even
           our
           present
           
             Secular
             Laws
          
           .
        
         
           Yet
           after
           all
           ,
           we
           can
           even
           from
           the
           Laws
           of
           of
           our
           Countrys
           ,
           and
           the
           Supremacy
           settled
           by
           those
           very
           Laws
           ,
           except
           against
           the
           Sentence
           of
           Deprevation
           passed
           against
           our
           Fathers
           ,
           as
           to
           their
           Spirituals
           .
           The
           Supremacy
           in
           
             Causes
             Ecclesiastical
          
           is
           ,
           by
           all
           the
           Acts
           made
           concerning
           it
           ,
           vested
           ,
           not
           in
           the
           PARLIAMENT
           ,
           but
           in
           the
           KING
           .
           And
           even
           as
           it
           is
           in
           the
           KING
           ,
           it
           was
           never
           intended
           for
           him
           ,
           so
           as
           that
           it
           might
           be
           in
           his
           Power
           to
           confound
           the
           several
           Courts
           and
           Jurisdictions
           to
           which
           Causes
           are
           appropriated
           by
           the
           Laws
           themselves
           .
           The
           Acts
           for
           the
           Supremacy
           ,
           even
           in
           Temporals
           ,
           do
           not
           allow
           him
           to
           transfar
           any
           Cause
           from
           the
           Court
           appointed
           for
           it
           to
           his
           
             own
             hearing
          
           out
           of
           it
           ,
           nor
           even
           to
           any
           other
           Court
           ,
           than
           that
           to
           which
           the
           cognizance
           of
           it
           does
           properly
           belong
           .
           This
           holds
           ,
           as
           in
           other
           Cases
           ,
           so
           in
           this
           also
           ,
           of
           the
           Deprivations
           of
           
             spiritual
             Persons
          
           .
           And
           it
           is
           own'd
           to
           hold
           by
           Mr.
           Hooker
           himself
           in
           
             that
             very
             Book
          
           to
           which
           we
           are
           referred
           by
           our
           
           Adversaries
           .
           He
           owns
           it
           with
           express
           application
           to
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           KING
           himself
           ,
           the
           Seat
           of
           the
           Supremacy
           in
           Spirituals
           .
           He
           tells
           us
           ,
           that
           ,
           
             All
             Men
             are
             not
             for
             all
             things
             sufficient
             ,
             and
             therefore
             publick
          
           
           
             affairs
             being
             divided
             ,
             such
             Persons
             must
             be
             Authorized
             Judges
             in
             each
             kind
             ,
             as
             common
             Reason
             may
             presume
             to
             be
             most
             fit
             .
             Which
             cannot
             of
             KINGS
             and
             PRINCES
             ordinarily
             be
             presumed
             in
             Causes
             meerly
             Ecclesiastical
             ;
             so
             that
             even
             common
             sense
             doth
             rather
             adjudg
             this
             Burthen
             to
             other
             Men.
          
           He
           owns
           that
           
             Bishops
             alone
             were
             before
             accustomed
             to
             have
             the
          
           
           
             ordering
             of
             such
          
           [
           Ecclesiastical
           ]
           affairs
           .
           He
           confesses
           ,
           that
           
             Virtuous
             Emperours
             .
             such
             as
          
           Constantine
           
             the
             Great
             was
             ,
             made
             Conscience
             to
             Swerve
             unnecessarily
             from
             the
             Custom
             which
             had
             been
             used
             in
             the
             Church
             ,
             even
             when
             it
             lived
             under
             Infidels
             .
          
           I
           know
           not
           why
           others
           should
           not
           emulate
           the
           Example
           of
           so
           great
           a
           Prince
           ,
           if
           they
           also
           would
           be
           esteem'd
           ,
           in
           the
           Judgment
           of
           so
           great
           a
           
             Person
             ,
             Virtuous
          
           .
           I
           know
           not
           why
           it
           should
           not
           be
           counted
           commendable
           also
           in
           them
           ,
           if
           they
           also
           had
           made
           
             Conscience
             to
             Swerve
             unnecessarily
          
           from
           these
           acknowledged
           antient
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Liberties
          
           .
           He
           owns
           ,
           that
           this
           same
           Excellent
           Prince
           
             ratified
             the
             Order
             ,
             which
             had
             been
             before
             ,
             exhorting
             the
             Bishops
             to
             look
             to
             the
             Church
             ,
             and
             promising
             ,
             that
             he
             would
             do
             the
             Office
             of
             a
             Bishops
             over
             the
             Commonwealth
          
           ;
           and
           when
           he
           did
           take
           cognizance
           of
           Causes
           of
           this
           kind
           ,
           yet
           this
           great
           Person
           doubts
           whether
           he
           did
           so
           ,
           
             as
             purposing
             to
             give
             them
             Judicially
             any
             Sentence
             .
          
           Here
           we
           find
           plain
           confessions
           ,
           that
           the
           Church
           was
           in
           possession
           of
           these
           Liberties
           before
           the
           Conversion
           of
           this
           first
           
             Christian
             Emperor
          
           ,
           and
           that
           Emperor
           himself
           was
           so
           sensible
           of
           this
           Possession
           that
           he
           made
           a
           Conscience
           of
           invading
           it
           .
           And
           who
           could
           better
           Judge
           of
           his
           Right
           as
           a
           
             Christian
             Prince
          
           ,
           than
           he
           who
           was
           the
           first
           example
           of
           it
           ?
           Mr.
           Hooker
           does
           indeed
           think
           that
           Constantine
           
             abstained
             from
             what
             he
             might
             lawfully
             do
             .
          
           But
           he
           seems
           plainly
           to
           grant
           that
           the
           Emperor
           was
           of
           
             another
             mind
          
           ,
           when
           he
           says
           he
           
             made
             a
             Conscience
          
           of
           doing
           what
           Mr.
           Hooker
           thinks
           he
           
             might
             have
          
           
           done
           .
           That
           same
           Judicious
           Person
           adds
           further
           ,
           with
           reference
           to
           our
           particular
           Laws
           in
           
             England
             :
             There
             is
             no
             Cause
             given
             unto
             any
             to
             make
             Supplication
             ,
             as
             Hilary
             did
             ,
             that
             Civil
             Governours
             ,
             to
             whom
             Common
             wealth
             matters
             only
             belong
             ,
             may
             not
             presume
             to
             take
             upon
             them
             the
             Judgment
             of
             Ecclesiastical
             Causes
             .
             If
             the
             Cause
             be
             Spiritual
             ,
             Secular
          
           
           
             Courts
             do
             not
             meddle
             with
             it
             .
             We
             need
             not
             excuse
             our selves
             with
             Ambrose
             ,
             but
             boldly
             and
             lawfully
             we
             may
             refuse
             to
             answer
             before
             any
             Civil
             Judge
             in
             a
             matter
             which
             is
             not
             Civil
             ,
             so
             that
             we
             do
             not
             mistake
             either
             the
             Nature
             of
             the
             Cause
             ,
             or
             of
             the
             Court
             ,
             as
             we
             easily
             may
             do
             both
             ,
             without
             some
             better
             direction
             than
             can
             be
             by
             the
             Rules
             of
             this
             new
             sound
             Discipline
             .
             But
             of
             this
             most
             CERTAIN
             we
             are
             ,
             that
             our
             Laws
             
             do
             neither
             suffer
             a
             Spiritual
             Court
             to
             entertain
             in
             those
             Causes
             which
             by
             the
             Law
             are
             Civil
             ;
             nor
             yet
             ,
             if
             the
             matter
             be
             indeed
             Spiritual
             ,
             a
             meer
             Civil
             Court
             to
             give
             Judgment
             of
             it
             .
          
           Thus
           Mr.
           Hookeer
           .
           And
           he
           proves
           what
           he
           says
           in
           the
           Margin
           from
           passages
           of
           the
           Laws
           themselves
           ,
           and
           the
           Book
           
             de
             Nat.
             Brevium
          
           ,
           and
           Bracton
           ,
           plainly
           asserting
           the
           difference
           of
           those
           
             two
             Jurisdictions
          
           .
           I
           am
           sensible
           what
           a
           Scope
           I
           have
           here
           of
           enquiring
           into
           the
           Laws
           themselves
           ,
           and
           proving
           this
           Independently
           on
           the
           Testimony
           of
           this
           admirable
           Man.
           But
           perhaps
           I
           have
           already
           said
           more
           than
           can
           be
           Printed
           in
           this
           difficulty
           of
           our
           Circumstances
           .
           I
           therefore
           say
           no
           more
           at
           present
           ,
           but
           refer
           our
           Adversaries
           to
           him
           .
           The
           rather
           because
           he
           is
           indeed
           against
           me
           in
           making
           the
           
             Church
             one
             Body
          
           with
           the
           
             believing
             State
          
           ,
           and
           because
           one
           of
           our
           Adversaries
           has
           expresly
           insisted
           on
           his
           Authority
           .
           Both
           these
           reasons
           ,
           
           as
           well
           as
           the
           distance
           of
           the
           Age
           he
           lived
           in
           ,
           are
           sufficient
           to
           clear
           him
           of
           any
           ,
           the
           least
           ,
           suspicion
           of
           partiality
           on
           our
           side
           .
           Even
           in
           this
           very
           Cause
           he
           defends
           the
           Use
           of
           Lay
           Persons
           joyn'd
           in
           Commission
           with
           Spiritual
           ones
           for
           determining
           
             Spiritual
             Affairs
          
           .
           And
           possibly
           he
           may
           do
           so
           by
           Examples
           (
           if
           all
           Examples
           must
           pass
           for
           
             Precedents
             ,
          
           )
           since
           Henry
           VIIIths
           Usurpations
           .
           But
           when
           King
           JAMES
           the
           II
           ,
           added
           Laymen
           in
           the
           same
           Commission
           with
           the
           Bishops
           concerned
           in
           the
           Case
           of
           the
           Bishop
           of
           London
           ,
           with
           a
           Power
           of
           Deprivation
           or
           
             Suspension
             ab
             Officio
          
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           
             a
             Beneficio
          
           ;
           it
           is
           very
           well
           known
           that
           his
           Lordship
           excepted
           against
           the
           competency
           of
           his
           
             Lay
             Judges
          
           ,
           that
           as
           a
           Bishop
           of
           the
           
             Catholick
             Church
          
           he
           ought
           to
           be
           tryed
           by
           Bishops
           only
           .
           His
           Lorpship
           would
           do
           well
           now
           to
           remember
           his
           own
           Plea
           then
           ,
           in
           order
           to
           the
           judging
           of
           his
           own
           Case
           now
           ,
           how
           he
           can
           justify
           his
           Communicating
           with
           those
           who
           are
           set
           up
           against
           his
           Colleagues
           deprived
           no
           otherwise
           than
           by
           a
           
             Lay
             Power
          
           .
           It
           is
           well
           known
           that
           his
           Council
           then
           
             Learned
             in
             our
             Laws
          
           insisted
           on
           this
           Plea
           as
           maintainable
           by
           our
           
             present
             Laws
          
           made
           since
           the
           Constitution
           of
           the
           
             Ecclesiastical
             Supremacy
          
           .
           And
           what
           good
           
             Church
             of
             England
          
           Man
           was
           there
           then
           that
           did
           not
           think
           the
           Plea
           very
           just
           and
           reasonable
           ?
           Let
           those
           Lawyers
           be
           pleased
           to
           recollect
           what
           they
           had
           to
           say
           on
           that
           Case
           ,
           and
           try
           whether
           it
           will
           not
           also
           affect
           our
           
             present
             deprivations
          
           .
           It
           is
           very
           certain
           that
           the
           Liberties
           of
           
             H.
             Church
          
           are
           the
           very
           first
           things
           provided
           for
           in
           
             Magna
             Charta
          
           .
           and
           the
           
             Coronation
             Oath
          
           ,
           so
           that
           if
           these
           things
           be
           not
           inviolable
           ,
           nothing
           else
           can
           be
           so
           ,
           being
           
           Fundamental
           to
           all
           the
           Security
           that
           can
           be
           given
           by
           our
           
             present
             Constitution
          
           .
           And
           it
           is
           no
           way
           reasonable
           ,
           that
           bare
           Precedents
           ,
           without
           express
           Acts
           for
           Alienating
           such
           Rights
           as
           these
           are
           ,
           should
           be
           thought
           sufficient
           for
           extinguishing
           a
           Claim
           grounded
           on
           so
           inviolable
           a
           Security
           .
           If
           they
           be
           so
           ,
           Henry
           the
           VIIIth
           made
           such
           Precedents
           for
           violating
           
             Magna
             Charta
          
           ,
           and
           the
           
             Coronation
             Oath
          
           too
           ,
           that
           no
           Liberties
           of
           the
           People
           can
           now
           be
           secure
           .
           And
           it
           is
           withal
           as
           certain
           ,
           that
           in
           the
           Disputes
           which
           occasioned
           the
           passing
           
             Magna
             Charta
          
           ,
           this
           particular
           of
           the
           exemption
           of
           the
           Clergy
           ,
           was
           one
           point
           principally
           insisted
           on
           .
           Nay
           ,
           it
           was
           insisted
           on
           then
           to
           higher
           purposes
           than
           were
           reasonable
           ,
           or
           than
           I
           am
           concerned
           for
           now
           ,
           so
           far
           as
           to
           exempt
           them
           from
           
             Secular
             Courts
          
           ,
           even
           when
           they
           were
           guilty
           of
           
             Secular
             Crimes
          
           ,
           and
           even
           so
           it
           was
           most
           frequently
           determined
           in
           favour
           of
           the
           Clergy
           .
           That
           was
           
           Becket's
           Dispute
           ,
           which
           generally
           prevailed
           in
           the
           following
           Ages
           ,
           when
           he
           was
           Canonized
           ,
           and
           when
           Henry
           the
           IId
           had
           submitted
           to
           Pennance
           for
           what
           he
           had
           done
           in
           opposition
           to
           him
           .
           This
           Case
           of
           their
           Exemption
           as
           to
           their
           Spirituals
           ,
           which
           is
           all
           for
           which
           I
           am
           now
           concerned
           ,
           was
           than
           so
           generally
           acknowledged
           ,
           even
           by
           the
           Laity
           themselves
           ,
           that
           there
           was
           very
           little
           occasion
           of
           disputing
           it
           .
           Rarely
           was
           it
           ever
           invaded
           ,
           and
           
             more
             rarely
          
           yet
           (
           if
           ever
           )
           was
           that
           Invasion
           defended
           by
           themselves
           who
           were
           guilty
           of
           it
           ,
           till
           the
           Unhappy
           Times
           of
           Henry
           the
           VIIIth
           .
           So
           uncontroverted
           was
           the
           Right
           for
           which
           I
           plead
           ,
           that
           I
           do
           not
           think
           our
           Adversaries
           can
           give
           one
           single
           Instance
           of
           substituting
           a
           Successor
           into
           a
           See
           vacated
           by
           no
           better
           ,
           than
           a
           
             Lay
             deprivation
          
           .
           This
           privilege
           therefore
           against
           
             Lay
             deprivations
          
           ,
           was
           so
           undoubtedly
           the
           sense
           of
           
             Magna
             Charta
          
           ,
           and
           the
           
             Coronation
             Oath
          
           ,
           that
           on
           that
           account
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           in
           point
           of
           Right
           ,
           all
           Patriots
           ought
           to
           be
           Zealous
           for
           it
           ,
           as
           well
           as
           all
           good
           Christians
           ;
           all
           who
           have
           a
           true
           Concern
           for
           those
           Two
           
             Fundamental
             Securities
          
           of
           Property
           as
           well
           as
           of
           Religion
           ;
           all
           who
           are
           so
           wise
           ,
           as
           to
           foresee
           how
           far
           Precedents
           of
           violating
           them
           in
           one
           Instance
           ,
           may
           proceed
           for
           violating
           them
           in
           others
           also
           .
        
      
       
         
           §
           LXXI
           ,
           The
           Conclusion
           .
        
         
           I
           hope
           the
           Worthy
           Defender
           of
           the
           present
           Dividers
           of
           the
           Church
           of
           England
           will
           ,
           by
           this
           time
           ,
           see
           that
           this
           Proposition
           questioned
           by
           him
           .
           concerning
           the
           Distinction
           of
           the
           Church
           ,
           even
           from
           a
           Christian
           and
           
             Orthodox
             State
          
           ,
           is
           as
           firmly
           proved
           as
           any
           other
           particular
           of
           the
           Vindicators
           whole
           Hypothesis
           .
           I
           hope
           he
           will
           also
           find
           it
           conformable
           to
           those
           very
           same
           Authorities
           he
           was
           pleased
           to
           porduce
           against
           it
           ,
           
           that
           of
           Mr.
           Hooker
           ,
           and
           even
           of
           our
           
             Church
             of
             England
          
           ,
           as
           settled
           by
           our
           
             Ancient
             Laws
          
           .
           Though
           the
           Compass
           I
           am
           obliged
           to
           confine
           my self
           to
           ,
           will
           not
           allow
           me
           to
           follow
           either
           him
           or
           the
           Doctor
           into
           
             other
             Arguments
          
           ,
           or
           into
           particular
           Applications
           of
           this
           I
           have
           insisted
           on
           ;
           yet
           I
           have
           endeavoured
           to
           urge
           my
           Argument
           so
           ,
           as
           to
           obviate
           whatever
           they
           have
           said
           that
           might
           otherwise
           have
           seemed
           to
           weaken
           it
           .
           I
           now
           leave
           and
           recommend
           the
           Success
           to
           him
           whose
           Cause
           I
           have
           endeavour'd
           to
           plead
           ,
           not
           as
           I
           would
           ,
           but
           as
           I
           was
           able
           .
           A
           
             Good
             Cause
          
           alone
           is
           indeed
           a
           very
           great
           advantage
           above
           Artifices
           of
           Wit
           and
           Subtilty
           ,
           in
           pleading
           for
           an
           ill
           one
           .
           That
           is
           all
           that
           I
           pretended
           to
           .
           But
           it
           is
           God
           alone
           that
           must
           give
           the
           Word
           to
           the
           Preachers
           ,
           and
           dociliey
           to
           the
           hearers
           .
           And
           it
           is
           his
           usual
           way
           to
           glorifie
           his
           
             own
             Power
          
           ,
           in
           the
           weakness
           and
           contemptibleness
           of
           well-meaning
           Instruments
           .
           This
           Title
           I
           have
           ,
           and
           this
           alone
           ,
           to
           his
           Assistance
           and
           blessing
           on
           the
           management
           ,
           that
           it
           will
           appear
           to
           be
           his
           own
           Work
           ,
           if
           the
           
             Good
             Cause
          
           it self
           do
           not
           suffer
           by
           my
           concernment
           in
           it
           .
           The
           same
           good
           GOD
           dispose
           our
           Adversaries
           to
           follow
           the
           Truth
           rather
           than
           their
           
             Worldly
             Interests
          
           ;
           to
           consider
           impartially
           what
           is
           said
           ,
           how
           contradictory
           soever
           it
           may
           seem
           to
           their
           
             Fleshly
             Inclinations
          
           ,
           to
           examine
           with
           their
           more
           sagatious
           Judgments
           ,
           rather
           what
           the
           Cause
           it self
           would
           afford
           to
           be
           said
           for
           it
           ,
           than
           what
           has
           been
           said
           by
           me
           .
           He
           alone
           can
           revive
           in
           them
           their
           old
           love
           of
           the
           Truth
           of
           Peace
           ,
           of
           Unity
           ;
           their
           former
           seriousness
           in
           these
           concerns
           of
           the
           
             greatest
             importance
          
           to
           them
           ;
           their
           former
           ,
           or
           even
           the
           
             Primitive
             Zeal
          
           for
           the
           Interests
           of
           the
           Church
           and
           of
           Religion
           in
           this
           
             Unbelieving
             Apostatizing
          
           Generation
           .
           When
           he
           shall
           be
           pleased
           to
           do
           so
           ,
           we
           may
           then
           hope
           to
           see
           Endeavours
           for
           healing
           the
           Breaches
           themselves
           have
           made
           ;
           we
           may
           then
           hope
           to
           see
           them
           ambitious
           of
           doing
           it
           on
           the
           most
           
             Honourable
             Terms
          
           that
           may
           be
           for
           the
           
           Church's
           Security
           against
           
             future
             Invasions
          
           ,
           and
           against
           the
           Precedent
           of
           making
           
             Spiritual
             Interests
          
           give
           way
           to
           
             Worldly
             Politicks
          
           ;
           we
           may
           then
           hope
           to
           see
           them
           again
           as
           much
           concerned
           as
           we
           are
           ,
           nay
           ,
           as
           we
           ought
           to
           be
           ,
           that
           our
           Church
           and
           our
           Communion
           may
           not
           depend
           on
           the
           precarious
           pleasure
           of
           a
           
             Persecuting
             Magistrate
          
           .
           How
           much
           more
           pleasing
           a
           sight
           must
           this
           be
           to
           all
           generous
           and
           Christian
           Tempers
           than
           our
           present
           Divisions
           and
           Scandals
           ,
           and
           Animosities
           ?
           When
           ,
           O
           When
           ,
           shall
           it
           once
           be
           ?
        
         
           FINIS
           .
        
         
      
    
     
       
         Notes, typically marginal, from the original text
         
           Notes for div A36241-e3310
           
             *
             
               Preface
               to
               the
               Reader
            
             :
             The
             Vindication
             of
             the
             Civil
             Power
             ,
             in
             depriving
             a
             Bishop
             for
             Political
             Crimes
             ,
             
               I
               reserve
               for
               a
               particular
               Treatise
            
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e3780
           
             *
             
               Pref.
               to
               the
               Reader
            
             .
             I
             grant
             at
             present
             ,
             that
             all
             Lay-deprivations
             are
             invalid
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e4310
           
             †
             Pre.
             to
             the
             Reader
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e6830
           
             1
             Thess.
             v.
             ●●
             .
             ●●●
             .
             XIII
             .
             ●●
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e8330
           
             Matth.
             XIX
             .
             e●
             .
             Mark
             10.
             31.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e9530
           
             Ch.
             1.
             p.
             2.
             9.
             
          
           
             P.
             5.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e11910
           
             See
             Unity
             of
             Priesthood
             Nec
             .
             to
             Unity
             of
             Comm.
             
               p.
               63.
               &c.
            
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e13060
           
             Psal.
             XV.
             4.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e14450
           
             P.
             ●●
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e18970
           
             P.
             
          
           
             See
             P.
             18.
             
          
           
             P.
             10.
             
          
           
             P.
             11.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e21860
           
             P.
             11
             
          
           
             Sulp.
             Sever.
             
               Sacr.
               Hist.
            
             L.
             11.
             
          
           
             Orig
             
               in
               Num.
            
             Hom.
             X.
             
          
           
             Pearson
             ,
             vind
             .
             Ign
             ,
             Part
             11.
             c.
             9
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e25220
           
             ●
             .
             12.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e26260
           
             P.
             12.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e28360
           
             P.
             ●●
             .
          
           
             P.
             ●●
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e32330
           
             *
             
               Preface
               to
               the
               Reader
            
             :
             Should
             our
             Adversaries
             be
             able
             to
             produce
             such
             an
             Example
             (
             as
             I
             think
             they
             will
             never
             be
             able
             )
             't
             will
             advantage
             their
             Cause
             but
             little
             ,
             especially
             if
             it
             be
             one
             of
             the
             LATER
             AGES
             ,
             since
             it
             is
             not
             agreeable
             to
             the
             Practice
             of
             the
             Church
             in
             GENERAL
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e32820
           
             *
             C.
             1.
             
             §.
             9
             P.
             9.
             10.
             
          
           
             C.
             1.
             
             P.
             10.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e35210
           
             See
             above
             ,
             §
             XXIII
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e36130
           
             *
             1
             Kings
             II.
             1.
             
          
           
             †
             V.
             35.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e36970
           
             *
             1
             Sam.
             XIII
             .
             12.
             
          
           
             †
             2
             Sam.
             VII
             .
             6
             ,
             7.
             
          
           
             *
             2
             Kings
             XV.
             5.
             2
             
             Chron.
             XXVII
             .
             16.
             to
             21.
             
          
           
             †
             Numb
             .
             XVI
             .
          
           
             *
             Numb
             .
             XVII
             .
             8
             ,
             9
             ,
             10.
             
          
           
             †
             Numb
             .
             XVI
             .
             40.
             
          
           
             *
             Numb
             .
             XVI
             .
             9
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e38360
           
             *
             〈…〉
             XXIII
             .
             6.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e39610
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Philo
             de
             Gigantib
             .
             p.
             292.
             
             Ed.
             Paris
             .
             1640.
             
          
           
             †
             Heb.
             IV.
             14.
             
             VII
             .
             26.
             
             IX
             .
             23.
             24.
             
          
           
             ‡
             Heb.
             VIII
             .
             1
             ,
             2
             ,
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Joseph
             .
             
               Macab
               .
               c
            
             ,
             13.
             
             [
             See
             Mat.
             v
             ii
             .
             11.
             
             S
             Luke
             xiii
             .
             28
             ,
             29
             ]
             Again
             ,
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             cap.
             16.
             
             [
             St.
             Luke
             XX.
             38.
             ]
             The
             Bosome
             of
             Abrahan
             
               is
               there
               mentioned
               in
               the
            
             Translation
             
               of
               that
               Work
               by
            
             Erasmus
             p.
             1090
             Edit
             .
             Colon.
             
               Whether
               from
               any
            
             Greek
             
               he
               had
               I
               know
               not
               .
               But
               I
               think
               it
               is
               in
               the
            
             MS.
             of
             New-Colledge
             .
             
               See
               also
            
             Josephus
             '
             
               s
               Oration
            
             ,
             L.
             III.
             Bell
             Jud.
             
               c.
               p.
            
             852.
             
          
           
             †
             Wisdom
             IX
             .
             8.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e40780
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Philo
             de
             Praem
             .
             Sacerd.
             p.
             830.
             
             Edit
             ,
             Paris
             .
             1640.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             ibid
             p.
             832.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             Philo
             de
             Monarcia
             ,
             p.
             819.
             
          
           
             *
             Deut.
             XXXIII
             .
             5.
             
          
           
             †
             Numb
             .
             XXIII
             .
             21.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             Joseph
             .
             Antiquit
             .
             Lib.
             iv
             .
             Cap.
             2
             pag.
             104.
             
          
           
             
               See
               also
            
             Lib.
             III.
             Cap.
             9.
             
             Pag.
             87.
             
             
               Edit
               .
               Colon.
            
             1691.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e45780
           
             *
             Judg
             XX.
             27.
             28.
             1
             
             Sam
             ,
             XIV
             .
             18
             ,
             19.
             
          
           
             †
             1
             Sam.
             XXIII
             .
             9
             ,
             ●0
             ,
             11
             ,
             12.
             2
             
             Sam.
             V.
             23
             ,
             4.
             1
             
             Chr.
             XIV
             .
             14.
             15.
             
          
           
             *
             Josh.
             IX
             .
             15.
             
          
           
             †
             Deut.
             XVII
             .
             8
             ,
             11
             ,
             12
             ,
             13.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e46870
           
             *
             1
             Kings
             I.
             50.
             
          
           
             †
             Thucyd.
             Lib.
             1.
             
          
           
             *
             St
             Matt.
             XXIII
             .
             17
             ,
             19.
             
          
           
             †
             1
             Chr.
             XVI
             .
             12.
             
             Ps.
             CV
             .
             15.
             
          
           
             ‖‡
             1
             Chr.
             XVI
             .
             21.
             
             Ps.
             CV
             .
             14.
             
          
           
             *
             1
             Sam.
             XXIV
             .
             10.
             
             XXVI
             .
             9
             ,
             11
             ,
             23.
             
          
           
             *
             1
             Sam.
             XXII
             .
             1.
             7.
             
          
           
             †
             v.
             18.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e48340
           
             *
             1
             Kings
             II
             ●7
             .
          
           
             *
             Joseph
             Anti.
             Lib.
             VIII
             .
             c.
             1
             
          
           
             *
             1
             Sam.
             II.
             36.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e49970
           
             *
             2
             Sam
             :
             XV.
             29.
             35.
             
             XVII
             .
             15
             ,
             XIX
             .
             11.
             
             XX.
             25.
             1
             
             Kings
             IV.
             4.
             1
             
             Chr.
             XV.
             11.
             
          
           
             †
             2
             Sam.
             VIII
             .
             17.
             1
             
             Chr.
             XVIII
             .
             16
             
          
           
             *
             Chap.
             II.
             S.
             3.
             
             P.
             17.
             
          
           
             *
             St.
             Mark.
             II.
             26.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e51400
           
             *
             Exod.
             xxviii
             .
             1.
             1
             
             Chr.
             xxiii
             .
             13.
             
          
           
             *
             Exod.
             xxix
             .
             4
             ,
             &c.
             Lev.
             viii
             .
             2.
             &c.
             
          
           
             †
             Exod.
             xxx
             .
             19.
             xl
             .
             12.
             31.
             
          
           
             *
             Exod.
             xxx
             .
             30.
             
          
           
             †
             Lev.
             ii
             .
             3.
             vi
             .
             20.
             vii
             .
             34.
             xx
             iv
             .
             9.
             1
             
             Chr.
             vi
             .
             49.
             
          
           
             *
             Numb
             .
             vi
             .
             23.
             
          
           
             †
             Heb.
             vii
             .
             7
             ▪
             
          
           
             *
             Numb
             .
             iii.
             9.
             
             IV.
             19.
             27.
             
             VIII
             .
             13.
             19.
             22.
             
          
           
             †
             Exod.
             11.
             xxviii
             .
             4.
             43.
             
          
           
             *
             Exod.
             xx
             ▪
             viii
             .
             1.
             
          
           
             †
             1
             Chr.
             xxiv
             .
             2.
             
             Numb
             .
             iii.
             2
             ,
             3
             ,
             4.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e53510
           
             *
             Numb
             .
             xxv
             .
             15.
             
          
           
             *
             Numb
             .
             XX.
             26
             ,
             28.
             
             Joseph
             .
             Ant.
             lib.
             IV.
             c.
             4.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Joseph
             .
             Ant.
             lib.
             VII
             .
             c.
             6.
             p.
             222.
             
          
           
             *
             Joseph
             .
             Ant.
             lib.
             VIII
             .
             c.
             1.
             p.
             254.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
          
           
             *
             Exod.
             xxix
             .
             30
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e55090
           
             *
             2
             Chr.
             XXIV
             .
             ●
             .
             ●
             .
          
           
             †
             2
             Kin.
             XXIII
             .
             4.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e57090
           
             Joseph
             .
             Ant.
             L.
             xx
             .
             c.
             8.
             p.
             7●●
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e59410
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Ignat.
             
               Epist.
               ad
            
             Smyrn
             .
             n.
             8.
             
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             
               Etist
               .
               ad
            
             Magnes
             .
             n.
             6.
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             ,
             
               &c.
               ibid.
               n.
            
             7.
             
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             
               Epist.
               ad
            
             Philadelph
             .
             Inscrip
             .
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             
               ibid.
               n.
            
             3.
             
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             
               Epist.
               ad
            
             Trall
             .
             n.
             7.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Epist.
             ad
             Trall
             .
             n.
             3.
             
          
           
             ‖
             Ut
             quis
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             sit
             .
             quid
             sit
             faciondum
             ,
             it
             a
             hortatur
             .
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Epist.
             ad
             Eph.
             n.
             5.
             
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             Epist.
             ad
             Philadelph
             .
             n.
             4.
             
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             Epist.
             ad
             Trall
             .
             n.
             7.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             Epist.
             ad
             Smyrn
             .
             n.
             8.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             Ibid.
             
          
           
             ‖
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             Ibid.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e61780
           
             1
             Chr.
             ix
             .
             4
             
          
           
             1
             Cor.
             x.
             16
             ,
             17
             18.
             21.
             
          
           
             Heb.
             xiii
             .
             10.
             
          
           
             Clem.
             Rom.
             
               Ep.
               ad
            
             Corinth
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e63410
           
             2
             Tim.
             I.
             10.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e64710
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             43.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             ,
             &c.
             n.
             40.
             
          
           
             ‖
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             n.
             40.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             41.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             41.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e66610
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             n.
             41.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             43
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             ‖
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             6.
             
          
           
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             ,
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             &c.
             n.
             42.
             
          
           
             ‖
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             ,
             &c.
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             42.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e68470
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             n.
             21.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             46.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             ibid.
             
          
           
             ‖
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             ibid.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             57.
             
          
           
             ‖
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             ibid.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             16.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             44.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             n.
             46.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             46.
             
          
           
             †
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             ibid.
             
          
           
             *
             
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
               〈◊〉
            
             .
             n.
             54
             
          
           
             †
             Ch.
             18.
             p.
             197.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e69690
           
             Bellarm
             
               de
               Rom.
               Pontif.
            
             lib.
             V.
             ●
             7.
             
          
           
             Letter
             to
             a
             F●●end
             .
             p.
             20.
             
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e101100
           
             *
             2
             Chr.
             XV.
             3.
             
          
           
             †
             Hos.
             III
             4.
             
          
           
             ‡
             Jer.
             
             VII
             ●
             .
          
           
             *
             Dan.
             VII
             .
             1.
             12
             ,
             13.
             
             IX
             .
             27.
             
             XI
             .
             3.
             
             XII
             .
             11.
             
             Joseph
             .
             
               Bell
               Jud.
            
             L.
             VII
             .
          
        
         
           Notes for div A36241-e102750
           
             Hook.
             
               Eccl.
               Polie
               .
               Book
            
             VIII
             .
             p.
             463.
             ed.
             
             Lond.
             1682.
             
          
           
             ibid.
             P.
             465.
             
          
           
             ibid.
             
          
           
             P.
             466.
             
          
           
             Defence
             of
             the
             Church
             of
             
               England
               ,
               P.
            
             7.