[Thorndike's second tract upon the subject.] agreed to desire Indulgence" on the following terms (which are borrowed in form and almost in words from Cromwell's Act of Establishment, prelacy of course being carefully omitted-they are taken from Barlow's MS.)" The Indulgence desired for those who cannot come within the Comprehensive Bill, is as follows-that those who professe faith in God the Father; and Jesus Christ His Eternall Sonne, the true God; and in the Holy Ghost, God co-equal with the Father and the Sonne, God blessed for ever; and doe acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and N. Testaments to be the revealed word and will of God: though in other things they differ in doctrine, worship, and discipline, from the publique profession of the State, may not be compelled thereto by penalties, nor restrained from their profession, but protected from all injuries and molestation in their assembleinge for the exercise of religion in the profession and practice of their faith. Provided that this shall not extend to the liberty or exercises of those who shall disturb the publique peace in those assemblies; nor to Popery; or the countenancing such who publish horrible blasphemies, or hold forth or practise licentiousness or profaneness under the profession of Christ. Care to be taken that their meeting-places be publique and open, and authorized by the justices of the Quarter Sessions, who are to be authorized and required hereunto." The proposal of course shared the fate of the general scheme of which it was a part. The second of the tracts of Thorndike here published, under the title of the Plea of Weakness and Tender Consciences Discussed and Answered, appears to have been written in relation to this second proposal, embracing both Comprehension and Toleration, and extending to Independents as well as Presbyterians. Thorndike refers in that tract to the particular conditions of the proposed double scheme: scil. to the intended form of words with which Presbyterian ministers were to be admitted to minister in the Church—"Take thou a legal authority" &c.,—and to the proposed "rate-penalty" upon Independents. Nor does the earlier scheme, of October, 1667, appear to have advanced so far, or to have become so public, as that of February, 1667; which seems from Pepys' Diary (above quoted) to have been matter of common talk.] I. But the petitioner will never pardon all the good lan- SECT. guage this requeste comes in, when it imposes upon us to believe, that the "reformed Christianity" of presbyterians [Presbyteaches men to be "good subjects." Let them look to the cannot be The earlier part of this tract, of which the MS. is preserved in the library of the Dean and Chapter of Westminster, has apparently been written, and subsequently torn off and destroyed, the section here numbered [I.] being on a single loose page. The part wanting at the end of it appears never to have been written at all: as there are a large number of blank pages after its present termination. The title (for which see Section [VIII.]), and the marginal headings and numbering of the sections, are added by the editor. It is now printed for the first time. Internal evidence, and the date of the pamphlet (see next note but one) to which it is a reply, fix its date to the end of the year 1667: a date, with which the references to the second volume of the Works of Episcopius (Rotterdam, 1665) as then " lately set forth," and to the fears of Hobbism at the Universities, and the assumption throughout that the project of comprehension (crushed decisively by Parliament Feb. 1667) was still on foot, coincide. bi. e. Thorndike himself. In the MS. was originally written, both here and in one or two other places, "I ;" but the pronoun is scored through, and the circuitous but less obnoxious phrase of "the petitioner" substituted. See the long note prefixed to this tract for an account of Corbet's pamphlet, to which the tract itself is a reply. d Discourse of Religion of England, shewing that Reformed Christianity &c. &c., sect. iii. pp. 3-9; of which section the title is, "That Popery dis And poseth subjects to Rebellion." its first argument is, the "continual thundering of excommunications," which hath sounded through the Christian world in all ages, since the beginning of the Papal reign, against kings, emperors, and other princes and states that presumed to dispute their dictates, or cross their designs, to the loosing of subjects from the bonds of allegiance, and the deposing of sovereigns:" the "unexampled abasements," which "the imperial majesty hath suffered in the persons of sundry emperors by prodigious instances of Papal pride," &c. And again--" The pope's temporal dominions began and grew up in rebellion and usurpation, for which cause they have nourished factions and filled the world with wars and tumults, and maintained most outragious and tedious conflicts with many emperors, even till they had crippled and broke the back of the empire itself." Ibid., pp. 3, 4.-On the other hand, ibid., sect. viii. 17-19, the writer busies himself to prove, "that the Reformed Religion makes good Christians and good subjects:" arguing, that "it teacheth obedience to the civil magistrates, without the controle of any superior or collateral power:" and that it is not "concerned, if dangerous positions fall from the pen of some writers" (Beza or Buchanan for example). Further, "If any aberration in practice hath been found in its professors, it is not to be charged therewith, because it condemns it; but the general practice in this point hath been conformable to the doctrine." And again, Scotland and France occurring as instances incon terians good sub SECT. charge he lays on them, that they shall never be able to I. distinguish themselves from papistse in that point. And he jects any admires, how the argument which the request useth' should more than be overseen :-the wars between the emperors and the popes, papists.] or such as the popes have raised against the emperors, having assoiled them of their allegiance to them being excommunicate, do demonstrate, that rebellion against sovereigns is a part of the Romish faith. Suppose now the popes were then the emperor's subjects, which can never be proved: suppose their vassals, which joined with the pope, were their subjects; which may very well be questioned. Good God! Two armies joining battle, one upon the pope's cause, the other upon the emperor's that so scholar-like a pen should make this an argument, that rebellion was the religion of both parties! What will not prejudice of religion persuade him to say, that can say this! The wars of the holy league in France had never been, I believe, had not religion been ingredient. But is there any eloquence to persuade, that those papists that fought for the king had the same religion at the heart? I meddle not with the wars of reformed Christians against their sovereigns. I had rather there were no remembrance of any such in story, than take upon me, that religion was sistent with this assertion, for the former, at Geneva, about the same time, the year 1536. The captains of the one are Bellarmine, Simancha, Mariana, &c.; the chieftains of the other are Beza (if it be his book De Jure Magistratus, as is believed), Buchanan, Stephanus Junius" (i. e. Hubert Languet), "&c.: the former in favour of the pope, the latter in hatred of the pope; yet both former and latter may rise up in judgment' with our incendiaries and condemn them;' for if they had had as gracious a prince as king Charles" (I.), "they had never broached such tenets to the world." Bramhall, Serpent Salve (written in 1643), Pref. to the Reader; Works, Pt. ii. Disc. ii. vol. iii. pp. 300, 301.-And see also above in Rt. of Ch. in Chr. St., c. v. § 63, sq. e See last note. A summary of the Papal side of the comparison is in Overall's Convocation Book, Bk. iii. cc. viii. to the end, pp. 240, sq.: and a mass of materials in Foulis's History of Romish Treasons and Usurpations, fol. Lond. 1671. f See above in note d. I. no part of the cause". But I will challenge the Scottish to SECT. distinguish itself from the holy league of France. The difference I see in the catholic Christianity of the one, and the reformed Christianity of the other. But if it be Christianity in the one for subjects to rise against their sovereign to secure religion, no more than in the other to reform it, the religion of the one will be as far from truly reformed as the religion of the other from truly catholic. And for the weight of this point in religion, it is well enough known, that king James of good memory, and the best pens of his time, have stiled this "the heresy of Hildebrand:" because Pope Gregory VII., Hildebrand by name, was the first that raised subjects against their sovereigns, being excommunicate, by loosing them of their allegiance. Not without cause. So deeply is it rooted in Christianity, consisting in bearing Christ's cross, to continue in that state of this world wherein they are called to be Christians. For as they must needs renounce Christ's cross, which they lay upon their adversaries, so they do peremptorily obstruct the prevailing of Christianity, when they clear it not of the imputation of questioning the peace of the world. And therefore it is clearly to be affirmed, that only the catholics of the Church of England are free of this imputation papists and puritans being both manifestly involved in it, and the rest of the Reformation, as not willingly to be charged, so not easily to be cleared. As for the English papists that it was upon no accident, but out of sense of religion, that part of them stick to their allegiance, the original of the difference betwixt them during their imprisonment in the castle of Wisbeach is sufficient witness'. * h See ibid., in the last words of the last quotation from Corbet. i Corbet (Disc. of Rel. of Engl., sect. viii. pp. 18, 19) goes so far as to affirm, that "Protestants have never disowned their king for difference in religion, as the most of the Roman Catholics of France dealt with Henry the Fourth, by the Pope's instigation." "Hæresis Hildebrandina." Rt. of Ch. in Chr. St., c. v. § 100. See 1 See above in Due Way of Composing Differences &c., § 18; and in Just Weights and Measures, cc. iii. § 6, xx. § 1, 4; and notes there: and below in Discourse of Forbearance or Pe nalties &c., c. xxviii. And for the his- SECT. [An Act comprehending presby terians as Church, [11.] Nor must it be granted (which the request takes for granted), that an Act comprehending presbyterians as presbyterians in the privileges of this Church, would give satissuch in the faction and peace in matters of religion to this kingdom. would fail For, first, what satisfaction could it give the papists to sec of its pur- the presbyterians admitted to the privilege they demand? not give Can they satisfy them, that they ought not to be papists, satisfaction when the reformation of the Church of England cannot do matters of it? Why then are they not seen in those daily disputes, religion.] whereby unstable spirits usually palliate the frequent revolts pose, and or peace in that we hear of to the Church of Rome? Why do they not take upon them to persuade such spirits, that the pope is antichrist and the papists idolaters"? which if they could persuade them, then must they needs persuade them, that to turn papists is to renounce their salvation and Christianity. Or if they dare not undertake this, how dare they condemn the visible Church, supposing the faith and authorizing the laws of it: by virtue whereof many revolts are prevented; and those, which are not prevented, fall out most an end for want of that confidence, which Christian people should have in their pastors that do maintain that faith. Certainly, in point of religion, it will be small satisfaction to the world, that our cause against the see of Rome is more straitened by that Act. As for the favour which the papists m Corbet, Disc. of Rel. of Engl., sect. x. p. 21, sets himself to prove, that "it is for the behoof of religion and true piety, and for the interest of this state, that Reformed Christianity be setled in its full extent." In sect. xiv. p. 28, he argues accordingly for "a more comprehensive state of religion;" which he defines to consist in "setling the nation" under the threefold form of "an establishment, a limited toleration, and a discreet connivence." And in sect. xv. pp. 29, sq. he explains the intended extent of his "establishment," by urging the removal of all subscription save to the "substance of religion;" which however he does not attempt practically to define. And, lastly, in sect. xvi. pp. 32, sq., he urges, that "dissenters," or (as he afterwards limits his assertion) presbyterians," are "capable of being brought into such a comprehension." Such "latitude," he conceives (sect. x. p. 21), as it " promotes the great designs of Christ's Gospel, so it settles this nation, and is for matter of religion its right and sure basis." And in sect. xxi. pp. 43, sq., he enlarges upon the advantages which his plan will bring to the interest of the Church and clergy." See Due Way of Composing Differences &c., § 4: Just Weights and Measures, c. i. § 2-7, c. ii. § 1; c. xxi. § 15, 16. • See Discourse of Fo:bearance or Penalties &c., c. xix. |