Legal position of the Kirk in Scotland. 211 GOVERN- clergy. Could they starve the men, they think they could ORIGIN OF soon starve the order, and quickly get rid of priests, a sort of fellows,' as one is reported to have said particularly of bishops, 'that have troubled the world ever since the time of the Apostles,' and, maugre the malice of these men, and the devil's, I trust will still trouble it unto the end of the world. He inveighs in many places against those of the clergy, who, believing the Church to be a society distinct from the state, and independent of it, think that the magistrate hath not power of deprivings, though he himself hath taken this power from him, and makes no difficulty to deny him the "right to issue out writs de excommunicato capiendo,” and by consequence, of a power to make laws for such writs. And he commends the clergy, as he is pleased to miscall the presbyterian ministry of Scotland, for "not suffering the magistrate to back their excommunication with temporal force." To which I will take upon me to reply, that the magistrate in Scotland hath highly compensated the Kirk for the want of that assistance, by an act for taking away patronage", by another against toleration, and by another of additional securities for the Kirk, by which if a man should write in Scotland against the Kirk, and its power, and ministry, as he hath done against the Church in England, he would be soon put in a condition of never writing or speaking more. I believe, if the clergy of the Church of England should upon such terms desire the magistrate no longer to 'back their excommunications,' he, if asked, would tell him, that they were 'most unreasonable, inconsistent with the natural rights of the people, that they tended to slavery; and that when men came out of a state of nature into a state of government, they never gave, nor could give the magistrate such exorbitant and destructive power.' PREFAT. DISCOURSE, 212 His arguments against a distinct order of Priests. He endeavours to prove, in several places of his book*, SECT. XV. that "no one more than another," women not excepted, "can be reckoned a priest from Scripture." This is a great part of a book published four or five years since with this title: "The Principles of the Protestant Religion explained, in a Letter of Resolution to a Ladyy;" and, as hath been observed, was fully refuted in an answer, entitled, "The Necessity of Church Communion, printed by A. and J. Churchill, 1705," and thither I refer the reader; only I cannot but observe, for the honour of this worthy author, that it is one of his fraudulent practices to write after, and out of other books that have been already confuted, without taking notice of the answers to them, as I shall hereafter shew. The reasons he gives are these: first, "because the only sacrifices of our religion are prayers, praises, and thanksgivings, which every one of the congregation offers up for himself;" which is a reason levelled against all priesthood, the Jewish as well as the Christian, and the priesthood of our Lord and Saviour Jesus; to which, as I have observed before, these men are as much enemies as to the priesthood of His ministers, through which it is their design to wound that. By this way of reasoning there can be no such office as a master of requests to any earthly sovereign, because men Rights, chap. iii. § 26; iv. § 15, pp. 108, 130. y [This tract was published in 1704. It was written by the author of the Account of the Growth of Deism, and is the seventh of his tracts which were reprinted in one volume in 1709, to which edition the references below are made. The author is alluded to by Hickes, both in this work and in the preface to the Apologetical Vindication, as being a clergyman. The question discussed in the tract is, "Whether it is necessary for a Christian man to join himself publicly to some (one or other) Church communion of Christians?"-p. 182. It is decided (p. 196) not to be " necessary to make a man a good Christian," but highly conducive to an easy and quiet life and the communion of the Church is recommended, even though one does not believe its most essential doctrines, as original sin, the holy Trinity, the incarnation, (p. 206,) which are treated in a sneering tone. The z Preface to the Apologetical Vindication of the Church of England, [where extracts from the book are given.] a [Rights, p. 108.] 66 Authority necessary to sacerdotal acts. GOVERN-- 213 who present their petitions by his hands also offer them to ORIGIN OF the king themselves; and when the priests of the Jews offered up sacrifices for the whole congregation, or for single persons, the offerers also offered them up for themselves, and at the same time our Sovereign High-Priest in heaven intercedes for us when we pray, and makes our prayers acceptable to God, we also offer up our prayers for ourselves.' He farther saith, that "every one, as well as the minister," may 'apply the bread and wine to the same holy and spiritual use;" so every man may set or apply the king's broad or privy seal; but is every man commissioned to do it, or can every man do it with effect, or without treason? It is not what every man may or can naturally do, but what he is lawfully empowered to do, in ecclesiastical as well as civil societies. But power of ministering in churches of his erection is entirely founded on the natural right, which every congregation hath to choose its own ministers, men or women, it matters not; and this natural right, he saith, the primitive Christians made use of in forming of churches, though, as I have shewed above, they never mentioned this natural right when they were questioned for what they did; but of the power, and right, and authority that they received from God, as St. Paul did in the salutations of all his Epistles, in his apologies from the heavenly vision, and Peter and Acts 22.3— John, when they said unto the magistrates, "We ought to Acts 4. 19; obey God rather than men." The Apostles never styled 5. 21. themselves the servants and ministers of the people, in our author's sense, but of God, and Jesus Christ, who was sent from God, and the people's "servants for Jesus' sake." But against this Divine right and commission he hath set up the unalienable natural right", which he supposes men brought with them, from his precarious and absurd state of nature, into a civil state of government; and his whole book, which he hath founded on this scheme, must sink with it, till he can defend it against what I have said above, and against the Rehearsal, who to this present moment hath again and again challenged him to defend himself. He hath the modesty, as he thinks very wittily, to liken a convocation to "my Lord Tumond's cocks, who, though at Ibid., chap. vi. § 18, p. 204. [See Rights, pp. 28, 29.] с 21; 26. 19. 2 Cor. 4. 5. 214 Contentions in civil as well as ecclesiastical assemblies. PREFAT. first sight they seem all of a side, yet are no sooner put toSECT. XV. gether than they will spur at one another;" and that “if a DISCOURSE, prince had a mind to ruin a Church unperceived, he need only allow a convocation liberty to sit as long as they pleased." To what I have said above in answer to this spiteful reflection upon the differences of the clergy in synods and councils, I will only put him in mind, that Legion, when they please, can say the same thing of parliaments, or any other meeting of Christians, which they did not like, and that there was one, and but one parliament, whom the prince allowed to sit as long as they pleased, who ruined both King, Church, and Kingdom, and by their quarrels and contentions within doors, brought themselves from two honourable houses, with the king, according to law, at the head of them, to a most vile and contemptible rump in one tyrannical house, cursed by God, and hated by men. I have heard of a young lady, who by reading romances became a she Timon, because after long observation she could not find one such hero among men, as she found in those fictitious histories; and I think our Timon of priests and priesthood altogether as mad, though not so innocent as she. For all his invectives against the clergy for their faults, and particularly for their dissensions in synods, amounts to no more than that they are men, and like other men and Christians, when they meet together. But if God would please these malicious and other peevish malevolents of the clergy, he must give them priests without human infirmities; if I may say it, romantic priests, priests who have no less than the ideal perfection both of men and Christians, or else he must overrule the freedom of their wills, and make them impec d [This name was first adopted in an address to the House of Commons, sent on occasion of the imprisonment of six gentlemen of Kent, by order of the House of Commons, for presenting a petition from the grand jury and freeholders of their county, which the house voted "scandalous, insolent, and seditious," in 1701. A packet was put into the hands of the speaker (it was said) by the reputed writer, Defoe, in the disguise of a woman, which contained a letter to the speaker and a memorial to the house. It purposed to come "from them who have both a right to require and power to compel, the people of England," and was signed "our name is Legion, and we are many." The same signature was adopted in other similar papers in the years 1702 and 1703; which contain very violent language against parliaments. They are printed in Somers' collection of Tracts, vol. xi. pp. 255-273, second edition. The last was signed "Our name is million, and we are more." See Ralph's Hist. of England, vol. ii. pp. 946953.] The clergy have the faults and infirmities of men. 215 GOVERN MENT. cable and heroically good by irresistible grace. But why do ORIGIN OF I say, if God would please them? For I have shewed above, if He should make angelical men, or angels, priests, He could not please them, especially if they pretended to make creeds, or to be sent by God, and to be His ministers, and not the servants of the people, or to be their servants only for Jesus' sake, and by authority derived from Him. I once heard a debate between two gentlemen, whereof one was a great enemy and the other a friend to the clergy. The former inveighed bitterly against them upon the account of their pride, covetousness, and other vices, which our author is most liberal in charging of them with. After which the latter having said many other things in their defence, prayed him to tell what kind of men he would have priests to be. In answer to this, he made a description of men in such perfection of moral and Christian virtues as are not commonly to be found, though sought for with the cynic's lantern. Sir, replied the other, I wish to God that not only all priests, but all Christians were such men: but pray, Sir, do you know the number of clergymen we have in the nation? No, Sir, said he; but why do you ask that question? To inform you, replied the friend of the clergy, there are about twelve thousand clergymen in this nation; and I pray you to consider, if there are twelve thousand such men, or half that number in our whole country, as you would have priests to be. In truth, replied the other most ingenuously, after some pause, I think there are not; but I never considered this before, and hereafter I assure you, Sir, I will never speak against our clergy as I have been wont to do. I leave the application of this story to our author, and his club, who have exaggerated all the faults and failings of the clergy in their single, and in their synodical capacities, without truth, without mercy, and without making allowances for them as men. Amongst the rest, he hath one most invidious, as well as false way of speaking of them through his whole book, after this mannerf, their "assuming to themselves the power, &c.," and their "putting themselves in the place of God." And if he pleases he may say the same of e p. 154. Rights, pp. 84, 85. Ibid., p. 95. |