ceeding we have found by fad Experience that Ecclefiaftical Cenfures, which in the Primitive Church were very dreadful and juftly formidable to all Offenders, are now generally esteemed to be little more than Bruta Fulmina, and are become in a manner defpicable. Wherefore I cannot but be perfwaded that if these Causes must be determined by Spiritual Cenfures, they ought to have a Spiritual Judge to Hear and Determine as well as to pronounce the Sentence: And no Question but Clergy-Men may be as capable to judge of fuch Matters now as they have been formerly, and in fome Dioceffes do it ftill, and might in all, if our Bishops pleased, without any alteration of the Laws now in force.

But then there are other Matters of a pure Spiritual Nature wherein thefe Lay-Chanchel, lors Act, even to the Exercife of all Epifcopal Jurifdiction. They inftitute to Livings, grant Licenses to Preach, They visit and cen fure the Clergy, deprive and degrade them if there be occasion, and fuch like. Now methinks, if my Lords the Bishops have not leifure to do these things themselves within their refpective Dioceffes, they fhould appoint fome of their own Order as their Vicars for this pur pofe, which our Conftitution allows them to do as I shall shew in another Chapter where I treat of the Churepifcopi or Bishops Suffragan, or at least they may have them of the Clergy, fo that fuch Authority may not be communica ted to lefs than a Presbyter. Were not their Lordships Candor and Love to their Clergy teftified many other ways, one might be apt to think they had very defpicable Opinions of them to fubject them to the Power of LayP ž Men

1 Cor. 6. 5.

Men in Spiritual Caufes, as if none of their own Order could be qualified for fuch a Trust. For tho' the Laws of this Realm permit LayMen to exercife Spiritual Jurifdiction, yet they leave all Bishops at Liberty whether they will commit any fuch Jurifdiction to them or not: fo that it is not fo much our Constitution as our Practice that is blameable in this Point. May not the Words of St. Paul be applicable to us on this Occafion, Is it fo, that there is not a Wife Man amongst the Clergy? No not one that shall be able to judge between his Brethren? Are not the Clergy as capable of understanding the Canons and Ecclefiaftical Laws by which they are to be guided and governed as Lay-Men? Are not thofe whofe Advice and Confent must be had in the making new Canons capable of judging by those already made? Or is it foreign to the Business and Duties of a Clergy-Man to make himself a Mafter of thofe Laws by which both he and his Brethren are to be guided in all their Actions and Ministrations?

With what Face can we blame the Presbyterians for admitting Lay-Elders to a share in the Ecclefiaftical Power, when our own Bishops commit a greater Power to Lay-Chancellors? For the Minifters fit in their Confiftories as Coaffeffors with the Elders, and judge together with them: But with us the Lay-Chancellor is fole Judge, and the Presbyter who pronounces the Sentence which the Chancellor awards is no Co-affeffor to him, but only the Executioner to Excommunicate upon another's Judgment and not his own. So that their LayEldership may seem the more tolerable Abuse. And the Non-conformists above an hundred

Years

Years ago caft this in our Teeth. Shall they (fays the Vindicator of the Non-conformists of Devon and Cornwall, An. 1606, pag. 13.) take Lay-Men to deal in Church Cenfures, and yet deride it in us? And the Moderate Men of this Age, who are Zealous for Comprehenfion, fuppofe the Diffenters will not easily be brought into the Church 'till this is rectified. As we may fee in the Effay for Comprehenfion (Printed for F. Hartley, 1701.) where it is made one, Article of the New Reformation proposed by that Author, That the Power of the Keys be fo entirely put into the Hands of the Clergy, that no Lay-Man be permitted to exercife any Ecclefiaftical, Jurifdiction by Cenfures, Sufpenfions or Excommunications; but in all thofe Instances wherein the Church is permitted to exercise her Power by the Laws, it be performed and executed by Spiritual Perfons. Mr. Calamy alfo, in the tenth Chapter of his Abridgment of Mr. Baxter's Life and Times, urges it as one Reason why the Dif fenters cannot conform to the Church, because the Epifcopal Government is managed by Chancellors Courts, where Lay-Men exercife the Church-Keys by decretive Excommunications. Now, tho' this Abuse be not by any means fufficient to juftifie a Separation from the Church, yet it is certainly such an Abuse as the Church ought to be afhamed of, and to endeavour to rectifie: And I could never yet hear a good Argument in Defence of it.

And what has been the effect of this kind of Government by the Bishop or his Chancellor folely without his Presbytery,without Affeffors? When this Authority was exercised and exerted its Power, it brought ftrange Clamours against the Church, and the general Cry was, P 3

* Down

+ ibid. p. 120,

&c.

Sir E. DeeringsDown then with our Prelatical Hierarchy or Speeches, p. 76. Hierarchical Prelacy, fuch as we now have. Nor were these only the Words of the Mob, but of a Gentleman who pleaded hard in the House of Commons to convince them of the Apoftolical Inftitution of Epifcopacy: And fuffered very much for maintaining it. In fine it brought upon this Church and State the most miferable Confufions that ever befel it. And when all these Troubles were happily brought to an end, fo that the Royal Power was reftored and Epifcopacy with it; yet the Remembrance of thofe Difmal Calamities fo difheartned the Bishops from Exercising their Authority as they had formerly done, that they flackened the Reins of Ecclefiaftical Difcipline to fuch a Degree that fcarce the Shadow of it now remains. The Cafe then in fhort is this: whilft Ecclefiaftical Discipline was exercised by the Bishop in conjunction with his Presbyters, it preferved its Authority fo as to make the greatest afraid of its Cenfures. When the Bishops came to take this Power folely into their own Hands, and execute it by themfelves and their Chancellors without Affeffors, which began, as I have fhewed when the Papacy was at the height, their Authority was fupported by the Papal Power, and fo preferved whilft that continued: But when that Authority was most justly abolished in this Realm, then this fole Power in the Bishop and his Chancellor would not be long endured; And tho' it has been again restored, yet it retains little Efteem and Reverence, and cannot preferve the Vigour of Ecclefiaftical Difcipline, which I conceive nothing can fo well retrieve as Restoration of Presbyteries, that

is,

is, of the Deans and Chapters to their ancient Powers to be Affeffors to their Bishop, which by the Common Law (as has been proved) they are still efteemed to be.

СНАР.

XII.

Of Chorepifcopi, or Bishops Suffragan.

Can. 13. & Neo

of Bishops,

* N the Primitive Church there were Bishops Concil. Ancyr. frequently placed in Villages of the larger cel. Can. 13. & Diocefles, who were from thence called, Cho- Antioch, Can. 16. repifcopi But they were fubject to the Bishop of the City,, under whofe Jurifdiction the Village was, and therefore could act nothing but by his Licence and Commiffion. Opinions have been divided concerning thefe Chorepifcopi, whether they were real Bishops, or fimple Presbyters, with fomething more of Autho rity than other Presbyters commonly had. Of the Conicer. Mr. Mafon fays, There were two forts of Chorepif- Priefts and Dea, copi, the first had no Epifcopal Confecration, which cons. p. 90. Edit. are reprov'd, and that Justly; for they were only Priests and not Bishops, (and therefore could not Confecrate a Bifhop, which is the Subject he is there treating upon, but were condemned by the Bishop of Rome for fo doing) and of the fe Damafus fpeaks in the Judgment of Bellarmine. The Second had Epifcopal Confecration, and these, tho' they had no City, nor Diocefs of their own, but only fome Country Town for their See, yet in regard of their Confecration, were true Bishops. But this very Learned Man gives us no Proofs from Antiquity for this Opinion, and therefore the Truth of it may be juftly fufpected.

P 4

This

1613: