that upon this general principle, that the discipline c E N T. and worship of the Christian church ought to be XVI. restored to their primitive simplicity, and freed SECT.III.

from the human inventions and additions that were employed by superstition in the times of ignorance, to render them more striking to the deluded multitude.

PART II.

ment and

of these

XXX. The few heads of difference, between the The motwo communions, which have been now briefly me pointed out, have furnished an inexhaustible fund importance of controversy to the contending parties, and differences been drawn out into a multitude of intricate questions, and subjects of debate, that, by consequences fairly or injudiciously deduced, have widened the scene of contention, and extended to almost all the important truths of religion. Thus the debate concerning the manner in which the body and blood of CHRIST are present in the Eucharist, opened to the disputants a large field of inquiry, in which the nature and fruits of the institutions called Sacraments, the majesty and glory of CHRIST's humanity, together with the communication of the divine perfections to it, and that inward frame of spirit that is required in the worship that is addressed to the divine Saviour, were carefully examined. In like manner, the controversy, which had for its object the divine decrees, led the doctors, by whom it was carried on, into the most subtile and profound researches concerning the nature of the divine attributes, particularly those of justice and goodness, the doctrines of fate or necessity, the connexion between human liberty and divine prescience, the extent of God's love to mankind, and of the benefits that arise from the merits of CHRIST as mediator, the operations of that divine spirit or power that rectifies the wills and sanctifies the affections of men, the perseverance of the elect in their covenant with God, and in a state of salvation, and

other

CENT. other points of great moment and importance. XVI. The subject of debate, that was drawn from the PARTI. use of certain external rites and ceremonies in reli

SECT. III.

To whom

governing

gious worship, was also productive of several questions and enquiries. For besides the researches into the origin and antiquity of certain institutions to which it gave occasion, it naturally led to a discussion of the following important questions: viz. "What are the special marks that characterize things INDIFFERENT?- How far is it lawful to comply with the demands of an adversary, whose opposition is only directed against things esteemed indifferent in their own nature?-What is the extent of Christian liberty?-Whether or no it be lawful to retain, in condescension to the prejudices of the people, or with a view to their benefit, certain ancient rites and institutions, which, although they carry a superstitious aspect, may nevertheless be susceptible of a favourable and rational interpretation?

XXXI. It has always been a question much the right of debated among protestants, and more especially the church in England and Holland, where it has excited great belongs. commotions and tumults, to whom the right of governing the church, and the power of deciding in religious matters, properly belong? This controversy has been determined in favour of those who maintain, that the power of deciding, in matters of religious doctrine, discipline, and government, is, by the appointment of CHRIST himself, vested in the church, and therefore ought by no means to be intrusted with, or exercised by the civil magistrate; while, at the same time, they grant, that it is the business of the latter to assist the church with his protection and advice, to convoke and preside in its synods and councils, to take care that the clergy do not attempt to carry on any thing that may be prejudicial to the interests of the state, and, by his authority, to confirm the validity, and secure the execution, of the ecclesiastical

SECT. III.

ecclesiastical laws enacted by the church underc E N T. his inspection. It is true, that from the time of XVI. Henry VIII. the Kings of England consider PART II themselves as supreme heads of the church, and that in relation to its spiritual, as well as its temporal concerns; and it is plain enough, that, on the strength of this important title, both Henry VIII. and his son Edward assumed an extensive authority and jurisdiction in the church, and looked upon their spiritual power, as equal to that which had been unworthily enjoyed by the Roman pontif [w]. But Queen Elizabeth receded considerably from these high pretensions, and dininished the spiritual power of her successors, by declaring that the jurisdiction of the kings of England extended only to the ministers of religion, and not to religion itself; to the rulers of the church, and not to the church itself; or, in other words, that the persons of the clergy were alone subject to their civil authority [x]. Accordingly, we see that the constitution of the church of England resembles perfectly that of the state, and that there is a striking analogy between the civil and ecclesiastical government established in that country. The clergy, consisting of the upper and lower houses of convocation, are immediately-assembled by the archbishop of Canterbury, in consequence of an order from the sovereign, and propose in these meetings, by common consent, such measures as seem necessary to the well-being of the church; these measures are laid before the king and parliament, and derive from their apVOL. IV. probation

E e

[w] See Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. i. p. 1г. [x] See Courayel, Supplement aux deux Ouvrages pour le Defense de la validité des Ordinations Anglicanes, chap. xv. p. 486.

This must be understood with many restrictions, if it can be at all admitted. The whole tenor of Queen Elizabeth's reign shewed plainly that she did not pretend to less power in religious matters than any of her predecessors.

CENT. probation and authority the force of laws [y]. XVI But it must be acknowledged, that this matter PART II. has given occasion to much altercation and de

SECT. III.

The form of

cal govern

ment a

Reformed.

bate; nor has it been found easy to fix the extent of the jurisdiction and prerogatives of these great bodies in a manner conformable to their respective pretensions, since the king and his council explain them in one way, and the clergy, more especially those who are zealous for the spiritual supremacy and independency of the church, understand them in another. The truth of the matter is plainly this, that the ecclesiastical polity in England has never acquired a stable and consistent form, nor been reduced to clear and certain principles. It has rather been carried on and administered by ancient custom and precedent, than defined and fixed by any regular system of laws and institutions.

XXXII. If it was not an easy matter to deterecclesiasti- mine in what hands the power of deciding affairs of a religious nature was to be lodged, it was no mong the less difficult to fix the form of ecclesiastical government in which this power was to be administered. Many vehement disputes were kindled on this subject, which neither the lapse of time, nor the efforts of human wisdom, have been able to bring to an amicable issue. The Republic of Geneva, in consequence of the counsels of Calvin, judged it proper that the particular affairs of each church should be directed by a body of elders, or presbyters, all invested with an equal degree of power and authority; that matters of a more public and important nature were to be submitted

[y] Jo. Cosinus, De Ecclesiæ Anglicance Religione et • Disciplina, in the learned Thomas Smith's Vita Eruditiss. Vi rorum, published at London in 4to, in the year 1707.-See al so Lav. Wilkins, De Veteri et Moderna Synodi Anglic. Constitutione, tom. i. Concil. Magn. Britann. p. vii.-Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. i. p. 2, 3, 15, 132.

XVI.

mitted to the judgment of an assembly, or synod, c E N T. composed of elders chosen as deputies by the ser. III. churches of a whole province or district; and PART II. that all affairs of such extensive influence and high moment, as concerned the welfare of the sacied community in general, should be examined and decided, as in times of old, by a general assembly of the whole church. This form of ecclesiastical government the church of Geneva adopted for itself [z], and left no intreaties or methods of persuasion unemployed, that might recommend it to the other reformed churches with which they lived in fraternal communion. But it was obsti

[x] The account Dr Mosheim gives here and above (sect. XII. of this chapter) of the form of Ecclesiastical Government established by Calvin at Geneva, is far from being accurate. There are but two ecclesiastical bodies in that Republic, viz. the venerable company of the pastors and professors, and the consistory; for a just description of which, see the judicious Mr Keate's Short Account of the Ancient History, present Government, and Laws of the Republic of Geneva,' printed for Dodsley, in the year 1761, p. 110, 112, 121, 124. I would only remark, that what this sensible author observes, with respect to the Consistory, p. 124, of his interesting performance, belongs principally, if not wholly, to the Venerable Company.-Dr Mosheim seems to have been led into this mistake, by imagining that the ecclesiastical form of Government established in Scotland, where indeed all church affairs are managed by consistorial, provincial, and national assemblies, or, in other words, by presbyteries, synods, and ge neral synods, was a direct transcript of the hierarchy of Geneva. It is also probable, that he may have been deceived by reading in Neal's History of the Puritans, that the Scottish reformers approved of the discipline of the reformed churches of Geneva and Switzerland, and followed their plan of ecclesiastical government. But he ought to have observed, that this approbation and imitation related only to the democratical form of the church of Geneva, and the parity of its ministers. Be that as it may, the plan of government, which our historian here supposes to have place at Geneva, is in reality that which is observed in Scotland, and of which no more than the first and fundamental principles were taken from the discipline of Calvin. The small territory of Geneva would not admit of such a form of ecclesiastical polity as Dr Mosheim here describes.