A Christian Directory

4. If one that is in an unlawful Ecclesiastical Office, be also at once in another that is lawful, we may swear obedience to him in respect of the Lawful Office. So it is Lawful to swear obedience to the Pope in Italy, as a Temporal Prince in his own Dominions: And to a Cardinal, (as Richelieu, Mazarin, Ximenes, &c.) as the Kings Minister, exercising a power derived from him: So it is lawful for a Tenant, where Law and Custom requireth it, to swear fidelity to a Lay Elder, as his Landlord or Temporal Lord and Master. And so the old Non-conformists, who thought the English Prelacy an unlawful Office, yet maintained that it is Lawful to take the Oath of Canonical obedience, because they thought it was imposed by the King and Laws, and that we swear to them not as Officers claiming a Divine Right in the Spiritual Government, but as Ordinaries, or Officers made by the King to exercise so much of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction under him, as he can delegate; according to the Oath of Supremacy, in which we all acknowledge the King to be Supreme in all Ecclesiastical Causes, that is, Not the Supreme Pastor, Bishop or Spiritual Key-bearer or Ruler, but the Supreme Civil Ruler of the Church, who hath the power of the Sword, and of determining all things extrinsic to the Pastoral Office; and so of the Coercive Government of all Pastors and Churches, as well as of other Subjects. And if Prelacy were proved never so unlawful, no doubt but by the Kings Command we may swear or perform formal obedience to a Prelate as he is the Kings Officer. Of the Non-conformists judgement in this, read Bradshaw against Can, &c.

4. If one that is in an unlawful Ecclesiastical Office, be also at once in another that is lawful, we may swear obedience to him in respect of the Lawful Office. So it is Lawful to swear obedience to the Pope in Italy, as a Temporal Prince in his own Dominions: And to a Cardinal, (as Richelieu, Mazarine, Ximenes, &c.) as the Kings Minister, exercising a power derived from him: So it is lawful for a Tenant, where Law and Custome requireth it, to swear fidelity to a Lay Elder, as his Landlord or Temporal Lord and Master. And so the old Non-conformists, who thought the English Prelacy an unlawful Office, yet maintained that it is Lawful to take the Oath of Canonical obedience, because they thought it was imposed by the King and Laws, and that we swear to them not as Officers claiming a Divine Right in the Spiritual Government, but as Ordinaries, or Officers made by the King to exercise so much of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction under him, as he can delegate; according to the Oath of Supremacy, in which we all acknowledge the King to be Supream in all Ecclesiastical Causes, that is, Not the Supream Pastor, Bishop or Spiritual Key-bearer or Ruler, but the Supream Civil Ruler of the Church, who hath the power of the Sword, and of determining all things extrinsick to the Pastoral Office; and so of the Coercive Government of all Pastors and Churches, as well as of other Subjects. And if Prelacy were proved never so unlawful, no doubt but by the Kings Command we may swear or perform formal obedience to a Prelate as he is the Kings Officer. Of the Non-conformists judgement in this, read Bradshaw against Canne, &c.