a

exemption from episcopal jurisdiction was at first a privilege granted by our sovereigns. Thus William the Conqueror, to perpetuate the memory of his victory over Harold, and to endear himself to the clergy, founded an abbey in the field where the battle was fought, called Battle-Abbey. And in the charter of the foundation, this clause was inserted: "It shall also "be free and quiet for ever from all subjection "to bishops or dominion of any other person." Can any thing be imagined more directly affecting the authority of the Church? The constitutions of Clarendon likewise, which relate to the clergy, were asserted by the king and parliament as "the ancient customs of the kingdom," and submitted to by the whole body of the clergy, not even excepting Becket himself, though he soon changed his mind. (5.) In the ages immediately succeeding, the papacy became superior to the temporal authority. But at last, owing to the long residence of the Popes at Avignon and the schism which ensued upon their return to Rome, they began to lose ground. Then the

These constitutions were made at Clarendon, A. D. 1164, and were calculated to set bounds to the encroachments of the Se of Rome. See Collier's Eccl. Hist. vol. 1. cent. xii.

This removal took place under the pontificate of Clement V. at the request of Philip the Fair.-See Mosheim's Hist. cent. xiv. par. ii. c. ii.

a

councils took courage, and resolved to assert the freedom of the Church from the papal tyranny. Pragmatic sanctions were made in several nations to maintain their liberty, in which the bishops not only asserted their independency on the papacy, but endeavoured to throw off the civil authority, particularly in the point of elections. This disposed princes to enter into agreements with the Popes, by which they divided the rights and pretensions of the Church between them, and the former yielded a great deal to the latter in order to be protected in that which they reserved to themselves. Great restraints, however, were laid on the See of Rome and the clergy by the appeals that were introduced into the secular courts from the ordinary judgments of the ecclesiastical courts, or the bulls and legates brought with them. In or

der to this, a distinction was invented, which seemed not to interfere with the ecclesiastical authority, at the same time that the secular court was made the judge of it. The appeal lay upon the pretence that the ecclesiastical

The councils of Pisa aud Constance were summoned A. D. 1409, and 1414, which declared the authority of the Pope inferior to that of a general council.-See Mosheim's Hist. cent. xv. par. ii. c. ii.

By the pragmatic sanction of France, each Church chose its Bishop, and every Monastery its own Abbot, but by the concordate made between Francis 1. and Leo X. the nomination of these was vested in the crown.

judge had committed some abuse in the way of proceeding, or in his sentence. This abuse was to be examined by the secular court according to the laws of the Church only, but they always either confirmed or reversed the sentence. This example has likewise been followed even by those princes that acknowledge the papal authority, who have invented distinctions to impose such checks upon it as are necessary.

3. The truth of our assertion appears from reason. For if any rank of men were exempted from the jurisdiction of their princes, they would cease to be subjects; and if any kind of causes, spiritual ones particularly, were excluded from their cognisance, it would be easy to reduce every thing to such a relation to these, that their authority would be very precarious and feeble; nor could any thing tend more to prejudice governors against Christianity, than if they found that the condition of receiving it was a renouncing of their natural

power.

Having thus stated the nature of this authority, it may be necessary to consider the ground on which it is to be claimed, and the degree to which it extends. 1. As to the former, it is plain that this power is independent of the Prince's religion, whether he be a Christian or not, whether he be a good or a bad character; by the same tenure that he holds his sovereignty, he

holds this also. Thus Artaxerxes possessed it as well as David or Solomon, when the Jews were once lawfully his subjects; and the Christians owed the same duty to the Emperors while Heathen that they paid them when Christian. As the relations of nature, of parent and child for instance, continue the same whatsoever men's persuasion in religion be; so likewise civil relations, as prince and subject, are neither increased nor diminished by the truth of their sentiments concerning religion.

2. As to the degree to which this power extends, it must be regarded, (1.) As to persons. All persons without exception are subject to the prince's authority; every soul is subject to the higher powers;" and so far from the office of a clergyman exempting him from that authority, a crime committed by him is attended even with worse consequences than if committed by an ordinary individual. Thus treason, spoken from the pulpit, is rendered more criminal by its publicity and the effect it is likely to produce. (2.) As to causes. With respect to those things which are either directly commanded or forbidden by God, the magistrate has no other authority than of executing the laws of God, and of using his utmost industry to procure obedience to them. His authority only extends to indifferent things, and in these it certainly ought to be obeyed. A distinction, however, ought

F F

here to be observed between two cases which may occur. The one is, when the magistrate acts as if he intended to preserve religion, but commits errors in his management. The other is, when he acts as if he intended to destroy religion, and divide and distract those who profess it. In the former case, every thing that is not sinful in itself ought to be done in compliance with his authority. But on the other hand, when it is plain his design is to destroy the Faith, then less regard is to be paid to his office, and the people may adhere to their pastors in defence of religion, and in opposition to his attacks. In fine, the power of the king in ecclesiastical matters is here stated with great moderation. And though the term "head" is omitted, even that has a foundation in an expression of Samuel to Saul. (1. Sam. xv. 17.) In the strictest sense, as the head communicates vital influence to the whole body, Christ is the only head of the Church, but as it may figuratively stand for the fountain of order and government, the sovereign may with propriety be called "The Head of the Church."

III. The Article asserts the lawfulness of capital punishments.

The truth of this assertion appears (1.) from the Mosaic dispensation. In this we find that God appointed many capital punishments, even for offences against positive precepts. Since,