can after this, be no longer call'd in Queftion: Both the Bishop of London and Dr. Sharp were Justly, and Worthily Sufpended.

The Reformation in Edward the Sixth's Days was Legal and Evangelical, and the overthrowing that Reformation in Queen Mary's Reign was the fame.

But give me leave to tell you, Sir, you drew Arbitrary Confequences from the King's Nomination, which was no more than a Concordate between the Church and the State, in confideration of the Temporalities; but to urge that this Confers Power, is to fay, that a Lay Patron when he Prefents a Perfon to a Living, gives him a Power to Preach the Gofpel, Adminifter the Sacraments, in that Parish; which is evidently falfe, because the Pre-fentation is of no Value without the Inftitution of the Bishop; otherwife a Lay Patron may as well Transfer thofe Powers to a Laick, or Preach himfelf, as give them to a Clergyman. But let me know, my Lord, if without the Confecration, a King can give to any Perfon Authority to Exercife the Epifcopal Powers, if he can, he makes Bishops by Authority deriv'd from his Masters, the People; if he cannot, the Confecration gives fomewhat to a Bishop which the Prince cannot take away, accor ding to your own Hypothefes.

I defire you to turn your Eye over fome of your former Treatifes in behalf of the Rights of Epif copacy, in your Defence of Epifcopal Ordination, c. 3. §. 2. P. 30. (a) I find that Bishops have loft

ground

(a) The Apostles did indeed, in the Cafe of an Office, which they thought too different from the main end of their Apoftleship for themfelves to attend to, put it upon the People to Nominate the Perfons whom they thought proper to be Dea cons, but in the first place it doth not appear that they accounted this any Privilege of the People. Brief Defence of Epif copal Ordinat. c. 3. §. 2. p. 190.

ground fince that Book was publish'd, and your appealing to the Laws of the Land, when the Controverfy is about a Divine Right, is advancing the Laws of the Land, above the Laws of God. But I hope in a fhort time the English Constitution will be clear'd from fuch a foul Sacrilege; your Appeal to the Laws of the Land, against the Rights of the Church, will be found as Groundlefs, as your Appeals to the Laws against the True Constitution in the State.

In the fucceeding Paragraph a manifeft falfehood appear'd, which I was Aftonifh'd at to find dropping from the Pen of one who calls himself a Bifhop, viz. That the Bishops bad upon their bended Knees acknowledg'd they held their Bishopricks and Poffellions of the fame, as well Temporalities as Spiritualis ties of the King's Majefty; whereas in all the Oaths of Homage that I have Read, the Temporalities are exprefly mention'd without the Spiritualitics.

Your next point, and indeed it is a grand one, is to prove from the Nature and Extent of the Power of Self-defence, that the State may deprive Bifhops, but the Argument I take to be Naught, and to have the worst Confequences attending it.

I fhall readily grant with you p. 44. That the Gofpel has not Abridg'd the State of thofe Powers which are Effentially neceffary to the Préfervation of Society, and which belong'd to the State before Chriftianity appear'd in the World, But Chriftian Society is an Institution which does not interfere with the State. This was Demonftrated in the Elements of Policy, its End, its Rewards and Punishments were intirely different, and when the Spiritual Governour moves beyond his Sphere, and incroaches upon the State, our Religion does not protect him from Civil Punish

ments.

ments. Therefore Civil Society by what a Bifhop can do in his proper Station, is no more affected, than the Affairs of our Earth are affected by the Tranfactions in the World of the Moon.

Your Cafe of Praying for the Destruction of a Government by what has been laid down, is easily anfwer'd, mixing Civil Affairs in our Prayers of Interceffion, and Thanksgiving, is fo far a Civil A as it affects the Fortune or Life of my Neighbour, becaufe 'tis the part of the Civil Magiftrate to defend both from Damage; if therefore a Priest prays for the Destruction of a Lawful Monarch, the Sovereign may Punish him for the fame, but not with Spiritual, but Carnal Weapons, he may diveft him of his Temporalities, and if he pleases, put him to Death. But I cannot fee how he can Diffolve du-· ring his Life the relation between his Flock and him. This Civil Power, as it extends to deprivation of Life, is furely fufficient to answer all the ends of Self-prefervation, without incroaching upon Spiritual Authority. The Magiftrate, I in my Confcience believe cannot diffolve the Contract between a Man and his Wife, tho' he may Hang the Man for Treafon, or other Crimes committed against the State.

But praying for the Destruction of a Lawful Government, I may be bold to fay, was not the Cafe of the Nonjurors at the Revolution, because they mention'd no Names; they pray'd for the King, and altho' their Opinions differ'd in relation to the Perfon, they defir'd their Prayers fhou'd tend to the Benefit of none but the Lawful King whofoever he might be. This we may prefume from their known Characters, which their worst Enemies who have any fenfe of Truth will bestow upon them for Piety and Sincerity.

If

If we confider the State of the Roman Empire before Conftantine, Ufurpers frequently broke into their Duty to their Prince, and caus'd themselves to be proclaim'd Emperors. The Primitive Chriftians, we may reasonably fuppofe continu'd praying after their old Way for the Emperor, without mentioning his Name, which in thofe times was never done. Did Albinus, or Nigrinus, put the Christians to Death, or deprive them of their Bifhopricks, for praying for the Destruction of the Government, because they did not mention Albinus, or Nigrinus, in their Prayers.

Your Comparison of Great, or Lefs, adapted to things of a different Species, is a New Logick to me; an Horfe may be fmall, in comparison with an Elephant, but he may be a large Creature, compar'd with another of the fame Speices : Deprivation and putting to Death are diftinct powers, and not compatible with the fame Perfons confider'd in one Capacity, and therefore they cannot be compar'd together as greater or lefs, neither can one be included in the other,

I can meet a Bishop upon the Highway, and knock out his Brains; the deprivation, as confequentially follows, as if the Civil Magiftrate fav'd me the Labour by doing it himself: But will you fay that any fingle Perfon can divest a Bishop of his Epifcopal Character, or that an Highwayman inftead of Shooting him thro' the Head, may deprive him of his Sacred Titles, and reduce him to the state of a Layman? If this be the Cafe, I beg of you to Travel with a strong Guard,

You tell us a Right to Imprifon (p. 51.) includes Deprivation, from whence I conclude: The Seven Bifhops were effectually depriv'd by King James, when they were fent to the Tower, and that a Bishop

is effectually depriv'd when he is laid up with

the Gout.

Abiathar will not reach your Cafe in the leaft, for thefe Reafons, the Center of Unity in the Jewish Church was not Perfonal, but Local, and was confin'd to the Temple at Jerufalem; therefore, no Schifm cou'd follow from Abiathar's Punishment. 2dly, I cannot find that Ahiathar incur'd any other Penalty than Banifhment, which confequently prevented his performing the Prieftly Office, which cou'd be done no where but at ferufalem; you may as well argue, that if the Egyptians, or any publick Enemy of the Jews, had taken Abiathar Prifoner, and carried him into another Country. That they had a power of depriving him. 3dly, As Abiathar's Life was forfeited by Treafon, Abiathar, for ought we know, might Compound to relinquifh his Priefthood to fave his Life.

Deprivation is, good Sir, a pure Spiritual Act, it can no more be faid to be included in the Act of Banifhment or Death, than a Man can hold a Spirit in his Arms. The effects of it are Invisible, the Spirit leaves the Perfon depriv'd, and the fecret and ineffable Workings of God's Grace peculiar to his Prieftly Character defert him. But does this confequentially follow from Banifhment? If the Authority is deriv'd from God, none but God can take that Authority away, and the Chriftian Priesthood is fo contriv'd, that distance of place does not prevent the Influence of its power.

I was therefore much fcandaliz'd at this. Notion, because it brings the Argument to this Dilemma, either the Epifcopal Powers are not deriv'd immediately from God, or the Civil Magiftrate can Sufpend a Divine Institution by a Superiour Power of his own.