a reason is demanded seeing every Lords day is celebrated upon the same account that Easter is viz. the memory of the Resurrection of our Lord. Lastly It is non-sense or worse say these sensible men to require that the people should receive the Sacram. and other Rites thrice a year as implying the Popish Sacraments or else Superstitious ceremonies Antique Answ 1 Crossings c. When the Lord did three times enjoyn his Antient people to appear before him three times in the year Deut. 16.16 Exod. 23.14 and 34.24 with Levit. 23.38 whereof Easter was one yet he did not forbid their free-will-offerings much less do they that make this trine-appearance with an ad minimum and at least More they desire and exhort unto less they will nor permit They dispence not with Gods own invitation who hath set no precise time do exhort the people often in his name and bind them to some frequency if exhortation will not serve 1 Cor. 1. Next They that were not sent to baptize but had Answ 2 work of more necessity and haste their silence must not be construed to a Prohibition Gal. 4. explain'd And when they do reprove those that observed times and days and moneths and years As part of Moses Law obligatory to Christians and upon some opinion of righteousness thereby in derogation to the All-sufficiency of Christs righteousness Gal. 2. chap. 3. chap. 5. 6. 1 Tim. 6. they do no more thereby forbid the observation of times as invitements and advantages unto piety then when they exhort to be rich in good works and lay up for our selves a good foundation that we may lay hold on eternal life Rom. 3. do therefore forbid us to believe that a man is justified by the faith of Jesus Christ and that we are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 6. ult but for eternal life it is the gift of God When our Saviour forbad to call any Answ 3 man father upon earth he meant not to confute the Law Matth. 15.4 nor his own reproof of the Pharisees who made all things whereby they might gain to be Corban and so suffered not a man to help his father or his mother from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but a fresh mans consequence To conclude That because our Saviour in one sense forbad to swear at all Matth. 5. interpreted upon viz. the Pharisees exposition and dispensation and that whatsoever was more proceeded of evil he ever meant to condemn himself when he added Amen Amen 2 Cor. 1.21 Revel 10.6 which is literally more or the Saints or Angels both which we find to have taken deep oaths upon great occasions is a Quakers Logick Again Such is the frailty of our memories that Answ 4 without some standing memorials we should not seriously mind the things that do belong unto our peace The use of solemn Festivals And such is the hardness of our hearts that unless these times be solemn and therefore can be but seldome for familiaritas parit contemptum we should have little impression of them Hence ever since we read of any instituted Church we find they had their stata tempora not only hebdomadary but yearly also Yea nature did thus much dictate unto the Heathen that besides those days of the week wherein they did some special worship unto their Idols the footsteps whereof remain still in the appellations of them yet they had also their Annua solennia yea and Olympiads also more rare and solemner Now it is not unknown I suppose unto the Brethren that why Easter to be one seeing every Lords day is in memory of the Resurrection It is a question that should have been put first to our Fathers yea our Universal Mother who were more concerned to answer for they have told us Illa autem quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus Aug. ep 118. ad Januar. c. 1. quae quidem toto terrarum orbe observantur datur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenariis conciliis quorum est in ecclesia saluberrima authoritas commendata atque statuta retineri The antâ—quity of the four solemn Feastivals sicuti quòd domini Passio Resurrectio Ascensio in Coelum Adventus de coelo Sp. Sancti anniversaria solennitate celebrantur That those things which are not written in the Scriptures but kept by tradition and which are observed throughout all Churches we are thereby given to understand that they were instituted and commended unto us either by the Apostles themselves or by some General Councils who have a Soveraign Authority in the Church as the yearly celebration of the Passion and the Resurrection and the Ascension of our Lord and the coming down of the H. Ghost Thus that Father of whom as was noted above out of Calvin we must learn if we would know the certainty of the judgment of Antiquity and of our Mother the Primitive Church And particularly for Easter The same Author gives us to understand Chap. 1. Aug. ib. cap. 7. Nonnullos probabilis quaedam ratio delectavit ut uno certo die per annum quo ipsam coenam Dominus dedit tanquam ad insigniorem commemorationem post cibos offerri accipi liceat corpus sanguis domini That some are of opinion that the body and blood of our Lord should be offered namely by the Minister to the people and received upon one certain day in the year namely that whereon he himself received it which they do on a very probable ground viz. that the commemoration might be the more solemn Which ground holds with us in celebrating the Communion both upon the day that Christ himself did as also upon that whereon we commemorate that action of his whereby he applyed the efficacy of all his sufferings Easter day his Resurrection for he was delivered for our sins and was raised again for our justification We do it therefore upon these daies specially Hom. 4. ult as well as on others more ordinarily viz. That the commemoration might be the more solemn But they aim at the root whilest they strike at one of the branches and are offended at the genus Festival times besides the Sabbath as well as at Easter specially Of which to that of the Antient Church related by S. Austin I shall only add that They are the splendour and outward dignity of our Religion R. Hook Eccles pol. l. 5. § 72. in fine forcible witnesses of antient truth provocations to the exercises of all piety shadows of our endless felicity in Heaven on Earth everlasting Records and Memorials Wherein they which cannot be drawn to hearken to that we teach may only by looking upon what we do in a manner read whatsoever we believe The last thing they object against this Rubrick is a meer calumny and yet they raise a great tragedy upon it
matters it by which of the two hands All the breaches of the Ten Commandements are punishable by Law And other things as Ignorance and other Scandals or the same are taken notice of by the Rubricks of the Liturgy and especially by that before the Communion wherein the Minister hath power given him and is admonished to restrain the scandalous Next for the manner and persons by whom this Discipline is commonly exercised 3. The Manner The Judges and the Bishops Officers what matters it if the thing be as well done as is usual in so great bodies as was said and as the condition present of the Church will bear Though Christ himself baptized not but his Disciples was it not therefore a right admission John 4.2 But these that depart for Discipline it is oft-times for fear it should be exercised upon them being lawless in many things 1 Tim 5. Gal. 6. and ungodly and who themselves can hear none as the Apostle speaks in the like case But if it were formerly the left hand and that not clean enough if by such as were not fit persons either for their Calling or Corruptions there may be a Spunge in that case provided Howsoever it is the Authority from whence not the Officer by whom the thing is managed Lastly Though there should have been or yet may be not only in the manner of the administration or the Application and use of it but also much defect in the thing it self as to the Discipline in this Church Calv. Inst lib. 4. cap. 1. Sect. 15. Verum quia non ita sedulo semper advigilent Pastores interdum etiam indulgentiores sunt quà m oporteat vel impediuntur quo minus eam quam vellent severitatem exercere possint fit ut non semper submandantur etiam palam mali à sanctorum Contubernio Verum etiamsi Ecclesia in officio cesset non protinus uniuscujusque privati erit judicium separationis sibi sumere Aliud est malorum fugere contubernium aliud ipsorum odio Ecclesiae Communionem renuntiare Yet because the Pastors do not alwaies watch so diligently and sometime they are more indulgent than is meet or they are hindred that they cannot exercise that severity that they could wish by which means it comes to pass that open evil men are not alwaies removed from the society of the Saints yet although the Church be slack in its duty it is not therefore every private members part to assume to himself the judgement of Separation It is one thing to fly from the society of evil men and another thing through the hatred of them to renounce the Communion of the Church saith Calvin with which dismiss I should conclude this head of Discipline also but that the former Brethren ne quicquam omnino intactum relinquerent that they might turn every stone and shake all Foundations forgetting that he that removeth such Stones shall be hurt therewith Eccles 10. and that breaketh the Churches hedge a Serpent shall bite him have also charged this Now Discipline Discipline is the Order of Church-Government for the preservation of the Doctrine the Worship the Assemblies and is as the Fense unto the Garden or the Tower unto the City and is contained in certain Rules Canons and Ecclesiastical Laws for the preservation of Unity Order and Decency in the former particulars Necessit Reform pag. 54. The Canons of 1603. Their exceptions are against the Canons chiefly established in Convocation and confirmed by the Kings Authority Anno 1603. They object especially their Non-establishment by Law their contradiction to the Laws Why the Brethren except against these Canons is not here particularly answered c. which discourse savouring more of the Hall of Westmin than of the Abby leave it I shall there to be decided The rather because it consists most of Repetitions as they are better at those than at repentings which is not spoken to reflect on such repeatings as are grave and serious for those are commanded Deut. 6.7 for Matters answered above particularly As also because by indeavouring to make things plain this Tractate is grown in immensum so that the thought of it troubles my self and more the perusal of it may the Reader As for the things they insist on being of that nature as they are did my self think as the Brethren do R. Hook Eccles pol. l. 5. p. 20. that viz. they might be illegal perhaps in some things or inconvenient nevertheless as in other things of like nature even so in these my private judgement I should be loath to oppose against the force of their Reverend Authority who by their Place Parts and Experience have cause to see further and have judged otherwise of them Aug. ad Januar Ep. 118. in fine ipso but rather take counsel of Austin unto Januarius in the like Argument Ut ea quae proloquutus sum serves quantum potes ut decet Ecclesiae prudentem ac pacificum filium That those things which I have spoken saith hee thou shouldest observe as much as may be as becometh a prudent and peaceable Son of the Church But wee may take up in this case most justly that complaint that he hath in the same Epistle Idem ibid. cap. 2. Sensi enim saepe dolens gemens multas infirmorum perturbationes fieri per quorundam fratrum contensiosam obstinationem superstitiosam timiditatem quae in rebus hujusmodis quae neque Scripturae sanctae authoritate neque universalis Ecclesiae traditione neque vitae corrigendae utilitate ad certum possunt terminum pervenire tantum quia subest qualiscunque ratiocinatio cogitantis aut quia in suâ patriâ sic ipse consuevit aut quia ibi vidit ubi peregrinationem suam quo remotiorem à suis eo doctiorem factam putat tam litigiosas excitant quaestiones ut nisi quod ipsi faciunt nihil rectum existiment I have often found saith he mourning for it and grieving that much of the unsettledness of the weak is occasioned by the contentious obstinacy and superstitious fearfulness of some Brethren which in such things as are not determined by the Authority of the Holy Scripture nor by the tradition of the Universal Church nor by the benefit of correction of life can ever come to any certain period onely because there is some appearance of reason in him that fancieth so or because he is used to do so in his own Country or because he hath seen it so in his travels which by how much the farther they were off from his own Country the more learned he thinketh them to be do raise such litigious questions that unless it be what they do themselves they think nothing well done Thus far he I have done with the Discipline CHAP. VIII Of the Government by the Ministry in general and by Episcopacy in particular SECT I. Ministers ◠Cause of Separation The Government I Address my self now
salus in summi Sacerdotii dignitate pendet cui si non exors quaedam ab omnibus eminens detur Potestas Hieron adâ—ers Luciferiaâ— Circ Med. tot in Ecclesiis efficientur Schismata quot Sacerdotes unde venit ut sine Chrismate Episcopi Jussione neque Presbyter neque Diaconus jus habeant baptizandi The safety of the Church saith hee depends upon the dignity of the chief Priesthood so hee calls Episcopacy unto which unless there be granted an exempted and above all eminent power there will bee so many Schisms in the Churches as there are Priests whence it comes to pass that without the Ordination â—hrismate and Authority Jussione of the Bâ—â—hop neither Presbâ—ter nor Deacon hath power to baptize Which last words exclude the notion of this place its being understood of Christs Again Ut Pontifices Christi qui tamen rectam fidem praedicant Ad Theophilum advers Error Jo. Heros Tom. 2. non Dominorum metu sed Patrum honore reveremur non sumus tam instati cordis ut ignoremus quid debeatur Sacerdotibus Christi c. That wee may saith hee those namely which preach the Orthodox Faith prosecute such Bishops not with the fear of Masters but the honour of Fathers For wee are not so swollen with pride that wee understand not what is due to the Priests of God Now in these places Although hee do sometimes imply Episcopacy to be of divine Authority as where he compares it to the office of Aaron Sometimes Apostolical as where hee saith it of their Tradition And sometimes Ecclesiastical but by the Authority of the whole world yet in all hee acknowledgeth such power in the Bishop to do that in the Church that none other may either in the nature of the thing as the extirpation of Schisms which could not be done before or in the right of Authority as Ordination and imposition of hands without which the Presbyters have no power at all not so much as to baptize So that let Episcopacy and Presbytery differ in order or in degree onely so long as some main parts of Jurisdiction can be performed onely by him or not without his pre-eminent Authority why struggle wee with that truth and that sword of the Spirit on which edge soever whereof wee fall wee are certainly wounded The General is but a souldier to use the Brethrens own comparison but may hee not do something that a common souldier yea the whole Council of Commanders cannot do So the Pylot in a ship not onely for his skill but for his place Magistrates may be said all to bee in the same order and to differ in degree one y But what Protestant is so weak of head and wilde of heart as to top Tyburn for denying the Kings Supremacy It being granted that there is the same use of a Bishop in the Church as of an Emperour or Commander in chief in an Army For the Church is an Army with banners as both Hieron Cant. 6.4 and the Brethren yeeld the question is not in what raâ—k or file but in what pâ—ace and power Not what Name but what Authority hee hath But too too much of this Criticism SUBSECT III. Necessit Ref. p. 44. TO that which the Brethren oppose viz. That there are examples of Ordinâ—tion in the New Testament without a Bishop if the assertion were strong yet is the proof weak For the laying on of the hands of Simeon Niger of Lucius of Cyrene and Mana en mentioned upon Paul and Barnabas Act. 13.1 was no Ordination for the one was an Apostle and the other an Evangelist before It was but a special and solemn mission Imposition of hands in which case laying on of hands was usual in that * Eam ceremoniam mutuati fuerant Apostoli ex veteri gentis suae consuetudine Cal. in 2 Tim. 1.6 Heb. 7. Nation even by those who were not properly Ecclesiastical men as Jacob laid his hands upon Ephraim and Manasseth and even among our selves wee often lay our hands on the head of a childe when wee pray God to bless him This imposition of hands therefore doth not argue â—urâ—sdiction in this place but the symbol of Blessing For if it were and that without controversie the less is blessed of the g eater Then must these Brethren be superiours to the Apostle Paul and Barnabas none of them beiâ—g an Apostle themselves which I suppose the Brethren will not say Mat. 18. Our Saviours laying his hands upon the children and blessing them was according to the custome though with more than common efficacy and authority That afterward it was applied to Ordination and by a Metonymy set for Ordination it self 〈…〉 doth not make it proper unto that but makes that the more solemn by this Again it might be said that these named in the Church of Antioch were Prophets as the Text calls them and Teachers but such as were Apostolical men such as Barnabas who afterward visited in his own name being accompanied by John Mark Act. 15. for societies sakes the Churches of Cyprus and 't is like several others also So that such persons are sometime called Apostles Rom. 16.7 Andronicus and Junia were of note among the Apostles Titus and the Brethren sent to Hierusalem are said to be the Apostles so in the original of the Churches And some were tryed 2 Cor. 8.23 which said they were Apostles but were not Rev. 2.2 which could not be understood of the Twelve nor of Paul Thirdly What might be done by extraordinary power or precept of the Holy Ghost doth not prejudice the observation of order where there is no such foundation Numb 23. Else every man that sees such a thing as Phinees did might do present execution Fourthly What might be done by such as were no Bishops where no Bishop was appointed doth not justifie the usurpation of those who contemn such Authority Moses did consecrate before Aaron was instituted but afterward it had been intrusion for him so to do Exod. 24. And the young men did sacrifice before the institution of the Priesthood might they do so also afterward 1 Tim. 4.14 Calvin in loâ— That Timothy was ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery The text saith But Calvin saith that hee rather thinketh it was the office than the Colledge of the Presbyters But howsoever yet this excludes not the Apostles presence who elsewhere saith it was by the Imposition of his hands Yea so 2 Tim. 1.6 that huc magis inclinat conjectura unum tantum fuisse qui manus imponeret That the conjecture leads rather to think that one onely laid on hands though in the name of the rest saith Mr. Calvin Sole Oâ—dinâ—tion Which may obstruct the Brethrens confidence that say there is no example in Scripture of sole Ordination but for this we contend not To say that the Ordination by the Presbyters made him a Preaching
repetition of this Testimony Non Crambe bis cocta haec bis repetita placebunt In Musick streins often repeatâ—d are In mental harmony why is' t a jarr nemo post divinum judicium post populi suffragium post Coepiscoporum consensum judicem se non jam Episcopi sed Dei faceret Nemo dissidio unitatis Christi Ecclesiam scinderet c. For from no other root saith hee either Heresies spring or Schisms do arise than from this That Obedience is not given to the Priest or Minister of God so hee calls the Bishop by way of eminency as the words following declare And that it is not considered that there is for the time but One Priest and but ONE JUDGE in Christs stead To whom if the WHOLE Church according as the Scripture hath appointed were obedient no man would move any thing against the Colledge of Ministers no man after Gods sentence the peoples suffrage election or approbation after the consent of the other Bishops would make himself Judge not now of the Bishop but of God himself In which Testimony onely by the way noting that populi suffragium must be according to Calvins observation not properly an Election though in a large sense it may be called so according to that of the former Author elsewhere Quum ipsa plebs maxime habeat potestatem L. 1. Ep. 4. vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi That the people have chief right either to chuse good Ministers or of refusing those that are bad But either a signification of their desire whom they would have or else an approbation of the Election made by the Bishops and confirmed by the Magistrate So Calvin Instit lib. 4. cap. 4. s 12. Cap. 13. Laodic Concil Est quidem illud fateor optimâ ratione sancitum in Laodicensi concilio ne turbis electio permitteretur primum soli Clerici eligebant offerebant Magistratui tum ad multitudinem res deferebatur Aut si à multitudine incipiebatur tantum id fiebat ut sciretur quem potissimum expeteret It is saith hee I confess excellently decreed in the Councel of Laodicea that the election of Ministers should not be permitted to the people But first the Clergy did chuse then they presented him to the Magistrate and lastly hee was propounded to the people c. But this occasionally onely to prevent mistaking As to the former Testimony of Cyprian out of it wee learne First That the eminency of one Minister above the rest in Government is of Divine Institution Post Judicum divinum Secondly That hee being chosen hath a sole superiour power of judgement in the Church to whom all must be obedient I say not hee hath a sole power absolutely but a sole superiour power over all within his Diocess and Jurisdiction by this Testimony whatsoever is to be said of the thing it self according to the Word of God And indeed the liberty or advantage that Civil Laws give of exercising Episcopal Authority doth not imply they have no other The Church hath taught us they may concur Will you such as be unquiet disobedient and criminous within your Diocess Book of Consecrat Q. At the consecrat of a Bishop correct and punish according to such Authority as yee have by Gods Word and as to you shall be committed by the Ordinance of this Realm 〈…〉 Ecclesiastical whether in order or degree which at present wee dispute not be according to Scripture as before hath been shewn Government and Jurisdiction cannot bee separated from it although the Laws should not confer any yea forbid it seeing the Church cannot subsist without Government which cannot be exercised regularly without Bishops Cypr. lib. 8. Ep. 3 The same Cyprian and in the same Epistle now cited shewing it to be the design of Satan in setting men to oppose godly Bishops that so hee may destroy Discipline and by that the Church it self saith Apparet quis impugnet non scilicet Christus qui Sacerdotes aut constituit aut protegit sed ille qui Christi adversarius Ecclesiae ejus inimicus Ob hoc Ecclesiae praepositum sua infestatione persequitur ut Gubernatore sublato atrocius atque violentius circa Ecclesiae naufragia grassetur Who it is and upon what design that opposeth Episcopacy It appears saith hee who opposeth the Bishop to be sure not Christ who either appointeth or protecteth Bishops But hee who is Christs adversary and his Churches enemy for this end persecutes and infests the Church Ruler that the Pylot being taken off hee might with greater cruelty and violence make spoil and shipwrack of the Church Thus far Cyprian And this here for the Right of this office in humane and divine SUBSECT II. THe next is whether it bee a distinct Order from or a superiour Degree above the Presbytery or ordinary Ministry Whether Episcopacy be a different order Necess Ref. p. 42. Touching the judgement of the Church of England in which point there need not be any great controversie if men that have little else to defend themselves were not too captious of words Of which sort of controversies the Apostle giveth warning viz. 2 Tim. 2.14 That wee should not strive about words without profit Answ 1 The Preface to the Book of Ordination of Ministers saith Preface to the Book of Ordination It is evident to all men diligently reading holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been THESE ORDERS of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons which offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation that no man by his own private authority might presume to execute any of them Where it is plain that saying these Orders and then naming three it is as much as if it had said These three Orders which is the Exception the Brethren have against it And because it calleth them presently Offices But that altereth not what it said before for every order is an office and every office is in some order Again they evidently prevaricate for whereas they say that the passage Almighty God which hast appointed divers orders of Ministers in the Church or in thy Church is in one prayer at the consecration namely of a Bishop It must be noted that it is three times in the book viz. At the ordering of a Deacen of a Priest and consecrating of a Bishop Now applying this word in prayer divers orders of Ministers to every one of those offices Can any man in his conscience doubt but that they took them for several orders who compiled the book and which being confirmed by Parliament and Convocation 8. Eliz. cap. 1. is the judgement of the Church of England in this point although it doth not every time it mentions the Bishop name order but sometime Office and Ministry That the book calls the inauguration of a Bishop Consecration of Bishops not an ordering but a Consecration doth not overthrow what
Scripture This refers especially to the seventh Article touching Predestination c. whose words in the latter part they are Lastly Ministers are not prohibited absolutely from searching but from that which is curious Answ 5 and beyond sobriety This for the doubtfulness of the Articles The second exception is their erroneousness 2. Error for on this the Brethren insist though under the other covered head of doubtfulness First because it is said Not every deadly sin committed willingly after Baptism Artic. 16. is a sin against the holy Ghost they infer that the Church holds the distinction of venial and deadly sin which is Popish What if the Article speak in the then received language and according to such distinction not owning of it therefore in the sense held by the adversary but using it for the purpose they had in hand viz. that though all sins be deadly of themselves yet seeing some are greater than other grant the worst which they call deadly sin as we usually express a great evil by that word that it is a deadly one as a deadly grief a deadly mischief yet is not every such a sin against the holy Ghost especially when the Church hath in other places so plainly declared her self to the people as in the Homilies Catechism and Common-prayer-book in the last whereof it prescribeth confession of sins to be made twice every day by all the Congregation Now it is not to be thought that every one is guilty of deadly sin every day in the sense expressed so that the people are in no great danger by that expression And the Articles declaring Artic. 11. Artic. 22. that we are accounted righteous before God onely for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ And that there is none other satisfaction for sin but that offering of Christ alone and damning of all Purgatory Pardons worshipping of Images and Reliques and invocation of Saints do declare they count no sin in it self venial but by the blood of Christ Again Artic. 20. where because 't is said The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith Because the Kings declaration and the Act before that say That the Articles must be taken in the literal and grammatical sense they infer ' That if a Convocation declare any thing in the premises they must assent and subscribe in the literal sense or be deprived But I it is not forbidden either by that Act or the Kings Declaration to enquire the literal sense and so to examine them nor 2 are they required by that declaration to subscribe to what a Synod shall conclude in the literal and grammatical sense of such conclusions or Canons but onely to the literal and grammatical sense of the Articles This therefore is a captious inference upon the Declaration and the Act. And so much more are their exceptions against the 34 Article That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant unto the Word of God and be ordained by common authority c. But are there not three or four Cautions in it that should defend it from all calumny 1. That these Traditions and Rites must not be repugnant to the Word of God 2. That they be established by common Authority 3. That a man do transgress of his own private judgment And 4. willingly purposely Yea and 5. openly This exception taketh away the obedience to all Church-Laws yea to all Civill Laws they may as well except against subscribing if any such Act were to the sense of this Article applyed to the Laws of the Kingdom As suppose they should be enjoyned to subscribe That whosoever shall through his private judgment willingly and purposely openly break the Laws of the Land which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained by common Authority and to take these words of the Act in the literal and grammatical sense without putting their own private or new sense upon it c. Would not such persons be thought unworthy to have any place in any Common-wealth that should refuse And why then in the Church surely they must be both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men without yoke and without use and that per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is pernitious unto all Societies and men of Belial 3. Artic. 35. Their third exception is against Artic. 35. wherein is required the subscribing to the Book of Homilies as a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for these times Against this they object that there are false doctrines or assertions in them First in general subscription to the Homilies is intended by the Church The Homilies how to be understood in Subscription not in so punctual and verbal a degree as is required unto the Articles as appears because the Articles are to be distinctly and severally read and the expressions in them every one assented to the Homilies not so but onely as they agree with the Articles which are the superior rule unto them Not therefore to every expression or sentence no nor doctrine nor assertion if any were contrary to the definitive doctrine of the Articles All men know that there is a greater latitude of expression allowed to popular Sermons as the Homilies are than to Articles And the Brethren would have their Sermons to contain necessary and wholesome doctrine yet perhaps will not be so hardy as to affirm that they may not have uttered some sentences not so true or congruous if exactly scanned or that nullnm unquam verbum emisit eorum quisque quod revocare vellet as he said above And lest there should any inconvenience arise to the people though now the danger is little the Homilies being so much if not too much laid aside the Common-prayer and reading of the Scripture publickly together with preaching according to the Articles are provided as a remedy Yea which is more if one Homily speak less warily in any material point it is corrected in another as in the Homily of Alms-deeds seeming in one passage or so to ascribe some kind of merit unto them though it doth not taking the word properly yet it explaineth it before-hand in another namely in the Homily of Salvation or Justification wherein that doctrine is excellently set forth as also in the Homily of Faith So when in the Homily of Alms Tobith is cited as Scripture not onely the Article doth regulate that expression but every ones Bible also Instructions to Preachers Artic. 1. Ann. 1622. Besides every exhortatory expression must not be called a doctrine or an assertion but that which as a point is purposely insisted on to be maintained of which sort I believe verily the Brethren will never be able to instance in any one out of the Homilies And indeed had they observed the instructions of King James above mentioned viz. That no preacher
they alledge the Apostles doctrine practise To the Assertion first which is no less inconsiderately uttered than confidently affirmed if generally taken Absurdities of the Brethrens Assert For so it overthrows Civil bounds National Laws Divine and Ecclesiastical Institutions It overthrows Civil bounds Might not the Brethrens Neighbour say unto them Sirs your Garden your Orchard your Close your Land were once indifferent and common to all men it is not the Authority of any Man or Law that can make that proper to you and necessarily to belong to you which Providence at the Creation left common and indifferent for all men On such a discourse as this the Levellers go And my self knew a man that would therefore pay no rent to his Landlord saying Why should not he have a house as well as he Smile not Brethren for the parallel fully holds all Tenures were at first indifferent and common Secondly It destroys National Laws for 't is in it self indifferent whether for example theft shall be punished by restitution or imprisonment or scourging or death Now when the Law of any Nation hath appointed such a punishment necessarily to be inflicted upon such a Malefactor he may upon this ground say The kind of punishment is indifferent and no Law of man can make that necessary without injustice It everteth also even divine Ordinances The Water in Baptism the Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper are before separation indifferent and common Therefore they cannot in particular by this principle be made necessary and obliging to be used Lastly because they intend Ceremonies in Religion it takes away the ground of Ecclesiastical Institutions whose object is especially things in their own nature indifferent as times place persons gestures habits c. for what obedience can be expected where no Authority can make it necessary in such things which leads me to a Answ 2 second Answer Gen. viz. That though no Law can alter the nature of things in themselves metaphysically and abstractedly considered yet it may and doth alter the obligation of practice about them that what was free before to do or not is otherwise now For example It was indifferent whether Paul would sacrifice or not Act. 21. but after the Church had judged it requisite for him he thought it his duty now to do it Again it was indifferent for him to circumcise or not to circumcise Act. 16. Gal. 2.3 5. yet according to circumstances he did it to Timothy and would not do it to others To abstain from blood and from things strangled I suppose the Brethren count indifferent because the Apostle saith Every Creature of God is good 1 Tim. 4. and nothing to be refused yet the Apostles for that time made it a matter of necessity to abstain from them Act. 15. Whether a Man pray uncovered and the Woman covered might seem indifferent but the Apostle besides other Arguments determines it by the custom and practice of the Church as a matter necessary to go that way he propounded As to that clause Indifferent things cannot be made necessary if they offend tender Consciences and are scandalous to good men It is answered that The due performance of the Worship of God And the general edification of all Consciences When scandal is not to be regarded by directing the reverent performance of their duty And the satisfaction of the Consciences of the greater part of the Church together with the taking away the scandal from profession apt to be cast upon it by the Adversary for omitting these Ceremonies is of more consequence and ought to be more eyed by those in Authority then the satisfying of a few though good men Paul no doubt gave very great offence in sacrificing in circumcising Timothy Gal. 2.5 in not circumcising Titus and in being stiffe against it Yet because the more publick and common good of the Church was concerned his charity directed him to love the Body and tender the welfare of that rather then of some particular Members though otherwise pretious This for their proposition next for their proof from the Apostles Doctrine and Practice Their proof Rom. 14. First his Doctrine All things indeed are pure but it is evil to him that eateth with offence See to the like effect also the Proposit touching Reform of the Liturg. now in the Press And it is good neither to eat Flesh nor drink Wine whereby thy Brother stumbleth or is made weak To take heed lest our liberty become a stumbling-block But if one will use his liberty and the other will take offence then his charge is Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not and let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth 2. His practise If Meat make my Brother to offend 1 Cor. 8. I will eat no Flesh whilest the world standeth lest I make my Brother to offend Answ But do these things prove that things indifferent may not by Authority be made necessary as to practise Nothing less For the things the Apostle mentioneth were as to any publick Injunction by Authority then in being left free no Law passed on them And they were observed according as Conscience in some and Charity in others did direct But are the Brethren able to shew out of these or any other places of the Apostles doctrine or practice That after the Church hath declared that they seek not to be justified by Works Gal. 2. much less Ceremonies but by the Faith of Jesus Christ That they own but one Mediator betwixt God and Man 1 Tim. 2. even the Man Christ Jesus That they having an eye to decency order and reverence in the Worship of God 1 Cor. 14. to which they are injoyned do judge that such and such Ceremonies without opinion of holiness in the things themselves or of adding any substance to the matter of the Worship are usefull to the better performance of Gods service and edification of his people and not in themâ—elves contrariant thereunto Are they able to shew that the Apostle because either things are in themselves indifferent or because some would be offended at them did in such a case either by doctrine or practice incourage unto disobedience I trow they are not To be sure the places alleadged prove it not as hath been shewed they speaking only of such things as on which no Civil nor Ecclesiastical sanction had passed but were in every mans liberty And the Apostles doctrine and practice as we heard prove the contrary he referring to the custom of the Church 1 Cor. 11. as a determination in things of themselves indifferent and himself also practising divers things Act. 21.16 Gal. 2. that without all question did offend many tender Consciences Certain it is that things strangled and blood were things indifferent yet commanded as necessary for the time by the Apostles Act. 15. So Circumcision sacrificing c. practised by Paul with offence to some Thus of
follows that no Minister can be made but hee must have the Authority of the Holy Ghost Secondly It is necessary also that hee receive the Holy Ghost it self in the gifts and abilities of it for the discharge of this calling For no man can say that is effectually teach that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 12. And every spirit that confesseth that is soundly preacheth that Jesus is the Christ is of God 1 John 4.1 2. John 16. For it is the Holy Ghost onely that leadeth into all Truth concerning Christ Thirdly The conveyance of the Holy Ghost in all publick Ordinances is by some Ministerial hand as in Baptism and the Lords Supper wherein at least unto the faithful the Holy Ghost is conveyed So as in respect of the thing it self the Holy Ghost is necessary to bee conveyed to every Minister that is to bee ordained Sense of the words 2. Next for the meaning of the phrase First wee must observe That the word Holy Ghost here may be either taken for his person and gifts or for his Authority or both by a Metonymy It is taken for his gifts where it is said John 7. that the Holy Ghost was not yet because Christ was not yet glorified It is taken for his Authority when the Apostle saith that the Holy Ghost had made the Ministers of Ephesus the overseers of the flock Act. 20. Secondly wee may expound the words by way of declaration and solemn pronouncing as well as imparative or communicative bidding And the other words may bee so expounded also according as in absolution it is in one place in the Common Prayer-Book pronounced authoritatively yet it is expounded to bee onely a declaring and pronouncing Now to apply the former The word Holy Ghost here seems to bee taken for the Authority especially of the Holy Ghost to the exercise of the Ministerial function As if it were said Take thou the Authority of the Holy Ghost which hee hath appointed his Church to communicate and dispense to persons worthy for the Ministry of the Word in binding and loosing and of the Sacraments 3. To their exceptions First To the exception general it self that this form hath no warrant No warrant It is answered Answ That in other things they urge the Letter of the Scripture And surely where there is no incongruity in the thing nor impediment from some other cause from using the very words of Institution there cannot bee desired a better warrant Now that there is no such incongruity nor impediment shall bee shewn in answering unto the Reasons of the former exception whereof the first is that Proof none but God himself hath power to give the Holy Ghost But it hindreth not but that what none but a superiour Authority can have power to give originally may yet bee given ministerially Answ and by delegation from that superiour power Neither Moses had power to consecrate Aaron nor Samuel to confer the Kingdome unto David nor the Apostles themselves to give the Holy Ghost but by delegation and commission Which power if as to that right of the conferring the power and authority of the Holy Ghost to the ordaining of a Minister the Church ministerially hath not for without that power it cannot bee done then must every Minister receive his authority and outward call immediately from Heaven Neither is repugnant hereunto Lib. 1. dist 14. cap. 1. Hic quaeritur Aug. de Trin. l. 15. c. 26. either that of the Master of the sentences nor of Austin himself whence hee hath it viz. Neque enim aliquis discipulorum ejus dedit spiritum sanctum Orabant quippe ut veniret in eos quibus manum imponebant non eum ipsi dabant Quem morem in suis propositis etiam nunc servat Ecclesia Object For neither saith hee any of the Disc ples gave the Holy Ghost but they prayed that hee might come on those upon whom they laid their hands but gave him not themselves which custome the Church even now retaineth in her Bishops For our Church doth pray in laying on of hands and with and under the words Answ 1 of Institution asketh also before and after What form of words the Apostles used in laying on of hands and conferring the Holy Ghost is not expressed but unlikely it is that they used none Now those they used whether they were those used by our Saviour or others in form of praying cannot be determined nor therefore their example urged in that which our Church pretendeth not unto But the former will bee more evident in other ministrations also In Absolution the form is in the Liturgy in the visitation of the sick Imperative and authoritative as I may so speak and in a good sense so it is by his authority committed unto mee I absolve thee from all thy sin c. yet in the general absolution after the general confession at morning-prayer by which the former must bee expounded it is expressed to bee but declaratory by way of solemn and authoritative pronouncing and with the concurrence of prayer for efficacy of such declaration Almighty God who hast given power and commandment to declare and pronounce to his people being penitent the absolution and remission of their sins c. In Baptism the Holy Ghost and remission of sins is given and that by the ministration and the words spoken by the Minister So also in the Lords Supper the body and blood of Christ sacramentally is conferred by the words and action of the Minister none of which is in the power of any to bestow but God onely Shall wee therefore except against the fruits of those Ordinances or against the Minister for pronouncing such words and doing such actions Again as in the Absolution there goeth with the Pronounciation prayer also and so likewise in Baptism and the Lords Supper what hindereth but that the words may be taken under a precatory sense also and as including prayer which more expresly goeth both before and after The words therefore take thou the Holy Ghost do not argue an original or an inherent power but Ministerial onely and so as not excluding a precatory vertue also This to the first Reason The second is because they were the words of Christ himself to his Apostles what Proof 2 then were all Christs words to his Apostles peculiar to them Answ It was to his Apostles that hee gave the command of baptizing and teaching and of giving his last Supper Have none therefore power since to administer these Ordinances Again if no Minister can be made but by the Holy Ghost and his Authority and this Authority were proper onely to the Apostles because the words were spoken to them then is the Church deprived of the Holy Ghost ever since the Apostles nor hath power to ordain a Ministry The third reason is taken from the parallel of other administrations Proof wherein the words of institution in
Presbyter and Bishop as the Brethren do and that of Paul made him an Evangelist is to make him twice ordained which is not once proved and therefore may as easily be denied This for that they produce out of the Gospel To what they say from Law viz. That the Statute 13. Eliz. 12. binding all men not ordained by the Ordination book to subscribe the Articles before the feast of the nativity then coming and the Brethren thence inferring that the Law did not intend to binde all to this form of Ordination It is easie to see that the Statute refers to those then not ordained by it but by other order or in other places but is no cloak for any since What in the fifth place they add that this affixing the right of Ordination unto Bishops doth unchurch all the Protestant Churches is a cast of their office which is to calumniate For that is law and order in one place which is confusion or Schism in another The Apostles Rule 2 Thes 3. Reformed Churches That every man meddle with his own business may bee in some sense applicable to Churches also Wee know our own duty wee hope charitably they would do theirs had they the liberty wee have or the light They condemn not us wee despise not them but give them the right hand of fellowship and when occasion serves wee declare that wee are with them and they with us one bread and one body SECT IV. Of the book of Ordination SUBSECT I. Bishops imposition of hands on Deacons NExt that they may mark out iniquity and accomplish a diligent search for it and that so the nakedness of their Father and Mother if any were might in no part be covered with the veil of charity or modesty but exposed to the contempt and scorn of those in Gath and Askelon They fall upon the book of Ordination But what Book sure such as is written sententiis vivis The book of Ordination as the Jesuite spake of Savanarola upon the Psalms So composed for strength of Doctrine and piety of expression that there is no religious heart can think but that they were guided in it by the very Spirit of God and which did the Brethren conscionably peruse they would finde as wee say other fish to fry and instead of quarrelling with it fall down and ask God forgiveness for their breach of what they promised when they were ordained by it But to the particulars Omitting their quarrel to the three orders and the word Priest answered before Come wee to their exception against the ordering of Deacons which is P. 45. that the imposition of the hands of the Bishop alone upon them is contrary to Acts the sixth where 't is said that They and not one of them onely laid their hands on them But if it be of necessity that at the ordaining of the Deacon there must be the hands of all the Apostles or Ministers present Then more should be required thereunto than to the making of a Minister or a Bishop for that was done by Pauls hand as himself witnesseth in Timothy or at least it will follow that one Apostle 2 Timothy 2. if the rest were present had not power to make a Deacon Secondly Is it any way probable that all the Twelve laid their hands upon every one May not rather Calvins opinion above cited hee admitted viz. ' that one onely did it in the name of the rest Thirdly How will it follow that if all the Apostles laid on hands that therefore every Minister present with the Bishop must do so too unless they can shew that every private Minister doth come as neer the dignity of an Apostle as a Bishop doth who is a Governour of the Church Fourthly It is well noted in the Articles that some superstitions in the Church though there it speaks in another case have grown Artic. 25. of the Sacrament partly of the corrupt following of the Apostles The Apostles and not one onely might lay on hands because there were several to bee ordained And many occasions did admonish them of expedition Again Their Deacons were not in all points as ours which are admitted into the order of the Ministry Why the sole imposition of the Bishops hands is used in Deacons which because an inferiour one to represent the distinction of it and the dignity of the other viz. The Ministry usually so called or Priesthood it was thought convenient to impose the sole hand of the Bishop in the one But for more solemnity not more efficacies sake to adjoyn other Ministers to the Bishop in the other SUBSECT II. Apostles choose Deacons THey except secondly against that passage in the Except 2 prayer where it is said that God did inspire his Apostles to chuse into this order St. Stephen c. whereas they say Act. 6. the Text saith it was the multitude Now the Brethren say it was by order from the Apostles And it hindreth not but that the Apostles might chuse with them or if not their approbation is their chusing after the multitude had made theirs Where the Brethren say that to say the Apostles chose them directly ' crosseth the Text they give us a taste of their learning and of their Logick With them it seems Except 3 subordinata simul vera are contradictoria and Jonathan and David mortal enemies SUBSECT III. Receive the Holy Ghost BUt that which most offendeth say they is N. 3. Receive the Holy Ghost that in the very act of ordaining Priests or Ministers the Bishop takes upon him to give that which none but God himself hath power to bestow where it saith Receive the Holy Ghost c. which be the words of Christ himself to his Apostles without any warrant from him to bee used by any other Because in other ministrations where the words of Institution in Baptism in the administration of the Lords Supper c. are first rehearsed and then at the Act of ministring a prayer is used not a Magisterial use of the very words of Christ himself in the first institution For answer Answ First the Bishop is not to be laden with this odium alone if any were just but the rest of the Ministers also that impose hands with him the Bishop for orders sake being but their mouth But to the matter First To the thing it self next to their exceptions against it To the former Wee must first remember that the Holy Ghost is Christs Vicar upon earth in the Government of the Church in general Joh. 14. chap. 15. chap. 16. and therefore sent by him for that purpose And particularly assumeth to himself the calling of the Ministry As separate unto mee saith the Holy Ghost Barnabas and Saul for the work that I have appointed them Act. 13.2 And take heed unto your selves and unto the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you over-seers Act. 20. saith the Apostle to the Ministers of Ephesus Whence it