Illud totum à Chrysostomo repetitum repudiari necesse est Quem trahit volentem trahit So he in the second Book of his Institutions Cap. 3. Upon which Dictate of their Master the Calvinists or Contra-Remonstrants whom the Lord Primate in compiling the Articles of Ireland followeth point per point affirmed expresly in the Conference holden at the Hague Sicut ad Nativitatem suam nemo de suo quicquam confert neque ad sui excitationem à mortuis quicquam confert de suo Ita etiam ad Conversionem suam nemo homo quicquam confert That is to say that as a man contributes nothing either towards his natural Generation or Resurrection from the dead so doth he not contribute any thing towards his Conversion and Regeneration Ninthly the twentieth Article of England ascribes unto the Church a power in determining Controversies of the faith of which the Articles of Ireland are utterly silent as if the Church were vested with no such authority contrary to Acts 15. v. 6 c. Tenthly it is declared in the 34. Article of the Church of England That whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the word of God and be ordained and approved by common Authority ought to be rebuked openly that others may fear to do the like as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak Brethren But of this there is nothing said in the Articles of Ireland and thereby a wide gap laid open to all private men either out of singularity faction or perverseness of spirit to oppose the Ceremonies of the Church and deny conformity thereunto at their will and pleasure Eleventhly the 36. Article of England approves the Book of the Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. of which Consecration we find nothing in the Articles of Ireland as if such Consecrations had something in them which of it selfe is superstitious and ungodly or that the calling of Bishops was not warranted by the word of God Twelfthly it is declared in the 38. Article of England That the riches and goods of Christians are not common as touching the right title and possession of the same as certain Anabaptists do falsly boast Of which the Articles of Ireland are as silent as in the point of Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops the dangerous consequence whereof may be felt too soon I know that these two last passages may rather argue some deficiency in the Articles of Ireland then any contrariety unto those of England But I have cause enough to think that many of those who willingly subscribe the Articles of Ireland as being totally Genevian both in the matter and method will be apt to boggle at these two the first as being contrary to the common Principles of the Presbyterians the second as being no less opposite to that levelling humour which doth affect as great a Parity in the Civil State as the others have contended for in the Ecclesiastical And thus far I have gone along with Doctor Bernard in answering all the several Charges which are laid upon me and freeing my selfe from all such opposition to the publick Doctrine of this Church as I stand accused for A crime for which I could not easily acquit my self and not take notice by the way how much the Doctrine Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England were opposed by him who laid that heavy charge upon me In the pursuit of which particulars I have not gone much further though somewhat further I have gone then I am warranted and instructed by Doctor Bernard himself and possibly had not gone so far but that I knew how speedily the examples of some men may be drawn into practice their practice made exemplary and the Obliquities of their judgement taken up as a Rule for others if warning of the danger be not given in convenient time Magnos errores magnorum virorum authoritate transmitti as was well observed by Vadianus is a thing too ordinary It is my wish that the business may rest here though I fear it will not the Doctors Book being such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an occasion of creating new contentions and reviving the old as if it had been publisht and intended to no other end then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to put the whole State of Greece into fresh combustions Others there are who either are concerned by name or interessed in the defence of that which they have formerly written in the Churches cause who may conceive themselves obliged to the like engagements as well to do themselves right in the eyes of the world as to maintain the dignity of the Episcopal calling in behalfe of the Church And to these last I shall refer the further prosecuting of the point of Episcopacy as it relates to Doctor Bernards actings in it who by furnishing the Lord Primates naked Affirmation with some Armour of Proof and citing many Forraign and Domestick Authors of the same opinion hath made himself a second party in the Quarrel and consequently stands bound by the Laws of Duel to abide the Combat If in that part which I have done I have done any thing amiss as I hope I have not I shall crave pardon for my errors though I may say with truth and modesty enough Si fuit errandum causas habet error honestas in the Poets language if well in any thing I shall expect no thanks for it from the hands of men considering that when I have done the best I can I am but an unprofitable servant in the Church of Christ a Tacit. in vit Agric. b In Epist ad Aenae c 2 Kings 23. 18. d Tertul. Apolog. 1 Sam. 28. 15. Deut. 18. 11. Andriant 12. Tom. 6. Contra Judaeos Dial. cum Tryâ—hone Lib. 1. Epist 2. Tostatus in Exod. 12. a Tract in Joan. b De 10. Cordis cap. 3. In Psal 91. c In Psal 23. Answ to Sir Tho. More p. 287. Declarat of Baptism p. 96. Contra Valent. Gentil Tom. 1. p. 254. Catech. qu. 103. Simner in Exod 20. Gomarus de orig Sabbati Bound Editio 2. p. 10. In Ezek. c. 20. In Rom. 3 In Orthod fide l. 24. c. 4. In Luk. 19. In Exod. 2. qu. 11. Hosp in de Fest Ethn. Jud. l. 3. c. 3. Annal. d. 7. De creat hominis l. 1. ad finem Hebr. 7. 10. Chap. 16. 29. In Decalogo Opera dies Dies Geniales l. 3. c. 18. Hospin De orig Fest c. 5. 2 Edit p. 65. Joseph adversus Apion l. 2. De Abrahamo Problem loc 55 Apud Euseb a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Purch pilgr. l. 1. c. 4. Emend Temp. l. 3. Id. l. 4. Id. l. 1. Ed. 2. In Levit. 13. qu. 3. Hist l. 36. Marlorat 7. a Illic secundâ feriâ populus terrae cum flamine regulo convenire solebant propter judicia Helmold Chron. Sclav l. 1. c. 24. Page 80. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. De doctr temp l. 7. c. 3. Emend temp l. 2. Epist Oenon. ad Parid. Isych l. 6. in Levit. c. 23. In Psal 47. De coronâ mil. c. 3. Can. 16. Can. 49. Can. 52. De Castigatione Epist 289. Expos fidei Cath. 24. Injunct 20. In Exod. 20. qu. 12. Ibid. In Can. Con. Laod. In Can. Sol. Hom. 30. Iâ— omnes cap. de seriis Ad Eustochian In Num. Hom. 2. Hom. 5. in Mat. 1. Conc. Matiscon Can. 1. Collat. doct Cathol Protestant cap. 68. Synod Dordra Sess 14. Resp ad Cal. Gent. Consil redeundi Artic. 35. 36. Carthag 4 Can. 3. Ibid. Can. 4. Can. 2. Concil Antioch Can. 19. True subject p. 779. Mont. Gag cap. 11. p. 78. * Tacit. inâ— Agric.
of those five there is but one material and of any consequence in the main concernments of the Cause the other four being either extrinsecal or of less importance more then to shew that nothing in that History which was found liable to exception should escape uncensured Assuredly it had been a work more proper for so great an Antiquary a man so verst and studied in all parts of Learning to have returned a full and complete Answer to that History had he found it answerable then to except against some few passages in it of no greater moment and by so doing to justifie and confirm the Author in all the rest Exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis is a good old rule and which I might crave leave to use to my best advantage but that I am resolved to try my fortune and make good those passages against which the Lord Primate hath excepted To the defence whereof with all due reverence to his Name and Memory I shall now proceed Noster duorum eventus ostendat utra gens sit melior And first the Lord Primate tells us this that when he gave himselfe to the reading of the Fathers he took no heed unto any thing that concerned this Argument as little dreaming that any such Controversie would have arisen amongst us p. 74. And I concur with him in words though perhaps not in meaning also there being none who reads the Fathers with care and caution who can suppose that any Controversie should arise about the Sabbath against the morality whereof the Fathers generally declare upon all occasions The Lord Primate tells us of Saint Augustin pag. 75. That purposely selecting those things which appertained unto us Christians he doth wholly pretermit that Precept in the recital of the Commandments of the Decalogue To which Testimony though this alone may seem sufficient to confirme the point I shall adde some more And first the said Saint Augustine tells us that it is no part of the Moral Law for he divides the Law of Moses into these two parts viz. Sacraments and Moral Duties accounting Circumcision the New Moons Sabbaths and the Sacrifices to appertain unto the first ad mores autem Non occides c. and these Commandments Thou shalt not kill Thou shalt not commit Adultery and the rest to be contained within the second The like saith Chrysostom that this Commandment is not any of those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which naturally were implanted in us or made known unto our conscience 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but that it was temporary and occasional and such as was to have an end where all the rest were necessary and perpetual Tertullian also in his Treatise against the Jewes saith that it was not Spirituale aeternum Mandatum sed temporale quod quandoque cessaret not a spiritual and eternal institution but a temporal onely Finally to ascend no higher Justine Martyr more expresly in his Dispute with Trypho a learned Jew maintains the Sabbath to be onely a Mosaical Ordinance and that it was imposed upon the Israelites 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because of their hard-heartedness and irregularity And as for the Lords day which succeeded in the place thereof the Fathers generally think no otherwise of it then as an Ecclesiastical Institution not founded upon any precept either of Christ or his Apostles but built perhaps upon some Apostolical practice which gave the Church authority to change the day and to translate it from the Seventh on which God rested to the First day of the week the day of our Saviours Resurrection And though the Lord Primate to gain unto the Lords day the Reputation of having somewhat in it of Divine Institution ascribes the alteration of the day to our Lord and Saviour page 76. yet neither the Author whom he cites nor the Authority by him cited will evince the point And first the Author will not do it the Homily De Semente out of which the following proof is taken being supposed by the Learned not to have been writ by Athanasius but put into his Works as his by some that had a mind to entitle him to it as generally all the Works of the Ancient Fathers have many supposititious writings intermingled with them Secondly the Authority or Words cited will not do it neither though at first sight they seem to come home to make proof thereof The words are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say the Lord translated the Sabbath from the seventh day of the week to the Lords day or first day of the week Which words are to be understood not as if done by his Commandment but on his occasion the Resurrection of our Lord upon that day being the principal motive which did induce his Church to make choice thereof for a day of Worship For otherwise the false Athanasius whosoever he was must cross and contradict the true who having told us that it was commanded at the first that the Sabbath should be observed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his own words are in memory of the accomplishment of the worlds Creation ascribes the institution of the Lords day to the voluntary usage of the Church of God without any Commandment from our Saviour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. We celebrate saith he the Lords day as a memorial of the beginning of a new Creation which is plain enough In the next place it is acknowledged by the Lord Primate That generally the word Sabbatum in the writings of the Fathers doth denote our Saturday p. 74. Which notwithstanding either because it was affirmed by the Historian History of the Sabbath Part 2. Chap. 2. Num. 12. that the word Sabbatum was not used to signifie the Lords day by any approved Writer for the space of a thousand years and upward or not to leave the Sabbatarian Brethren at so great a loss in that particular he would fain find out one though but one of a thousand who hath used it to denote our Christian Festivities also Where not that the Lord Primate doth not say as indeed he could not that the word Sabbatum was used to signifie the Lords day but onely to signifie the other Festivals of the Church the Christian Festivities as he calls them in which how much he is mistaken we shall see anon That one here meant and mentioned is Sidonius Apollinaris Bishop of Auvergne in France who describing the moderation of the Table of Theoderick King of the Goths upon the Eves and the excess on the Holy-day following he writeth of the one that his Convivium diebus profestis simile privato est that his Table on the working-dayes was furnished like the Table of private men but of the other dayes or Festivals he telleth us this De luxu autem illo Sabbatario narrationi mâ—ae supersedendum est qui nec latentes potest latere personas that is to say that his excess or Sabbatarian luxury required
Mr. Ley accused by the Lord Primate for being too cold and waterish in the point of the Sabbath That by the Declaration of the three Estates convened in Parliament 5. 6. of Edw. 6. the times of publick worship are left to the liberty of the Church and that by the Doctrine of the Homilies the keeping of the Lords day hath no other ground then the consent of godly Christian people in the Primitive times No more of the fourth commandment to be now retained by the Book of Homilies then what belongs to the Law of Nature Working in Harvest and doing other necessary business permitted on the Lords day both by that Act of Parliament and the Queens Iniunctions No restraint made from Recreations on the Lords day till the first of King James The Sundaies and other Festivals made equal in a manner by the publick Liturgy and equal altogether by two Acts of Parliament The Answer to the Lord Primates Obiection from the Book of Homilies with reference to the grounds before laid down The difference between the Homilies of England and the Articles of Ireland in the present case Several strong Arguments to prove the Homily to mean no otherwise then as laid down in the said Answer Doctor Bounds Sabbath Doctrines lookt on as a general grievance and the care taken to suppress them WE are now come unto the third most material charge of all the rest by which the Historian stands accused for opposing the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies to which he had formerly subscribed and that too in so gross a manner that all the Sophistry he had could neither save him harmless for it nor defend him in it This is an heavy charge indeed and that it may appear the greater the Lord Primate layes it down with all those aggravations which might render the Historian the less able either to traverse the Indictment or plead not guilty to the Bill I wonder saith he in his Letter to an Honourable Person pag. 110. how Doctor Heylyn having himself subscribed to the Articles of Religion agreed upon in the Synod held at London Anno 1562. can oppose the conclusion which he findeth directly laid down in the Homily of the time and place of Prayer viz. God hath given express charge to all men in the fourth Commandment that upon the Sabbath day which is now our Sunday they shall cease from all weekly and week-day labour to the intent that like as God himself wrought six dayes and rested the seventh and blessed and consecrated it to quietness and rest from labour even so Gods obedient people should use the Sunday holily and rest from their common and dayly business and also give themselves wholly to the heavenly exercise of Gods true Religion and service This is the charge which the Historian suffers under wherewith the Lord Primate as it seems did so please himself that like a crambe his cocta it is served in again in his Letter unto Mr. Ley but ushered in with greater preparation then before it was For whereas Mr. Ley had hammered a Discourse about the Sabbath which he communicated to the Lord Primate to the end it might be approved by him the Lord Primate finds some fault with the modesty of the man as if he came not home enough in his Propositions to the point in hand Your second Proposition saith he p. 105. is too waterish viz. That this Doctrine rather then the contrary is to be held the Doctrine of the Church of England and may well be gathered out of her publick Liturgy and the first part of the Homily concerning the place and time of prayer Whereas you should have said that this is to be held undoubtedly the Doctrine of the Church of England For if there could be any reasonable doubt made of the meaning of the Church of England in her Liturgy who should better declare her meaning then her self in her Homily where she peremptorily declareth her mind That in the fourth Commandment God hath given express charge to all men c. as before we had it Assuredly a man that reads these passages cannot chuse but think that the Lord Primate was a very zealous Champion for the Doctrine of the Church of England but upon better consideration we shall find it otherwise that he only advocateth for the Sabbatarians not onely contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England but the practise also which that we may the better see I shall lay down plainly and without any sophistry at all upon what grounds the Lords day stood in the Church of England at the time of the making of this Homily both absolutely in it self and relatively in respect of the other Holy dayes And first we are to understand that by the joint Declaration of the Lords Spiritual Temporal and the Commons assembled in Parliament in the 5. 6. years of King Edw. 6. the Lords day stands on no other ground then the Authority of the Church not as enjoyned by Christ or ordained by any of his Apostles For in that Parliament to the honour of Almighty God it was thus declared viz. Forasmuch as men be not at all times so mindful to laud and praise God so ready to resort to hear Gods holy word and to come to the holy Communion c. as their bounden duty doth require therefore to call men to remembrance of their duty and to help their infirmities it hath been wholsomly provided that there should be some certain times and dayes appointed wherein Christians should cease from all kind of labour and apply themselves onely and wholly unto the aforesaid holy works properly pertaining to true Religion c. which works as they may well be called Gods service so the times especially appointed for the same are called holy dayes Not for the matter or the nature either of the time or day c. for so all dayes and times are of like holiness but for the nature and condition of such holy works c. whereunto such dayes and times are sanctified and hallowed that is to say separated from all profane uses and dedicated not unto any Saint or Creature but onely unto God and his service dayesâ—rescribed â—rescribed in holy Scripture but the appointment both of the time and also of the number of dayes is left by the Authority of Gods word unto the liberty of Christs Church to be determined and assigned orderly in every Country by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers thereof as they shall judge most expedient to the setting forth of Gods glory and edification of their people Which Statute being repealed in the Reign of Queen Mary was revived again in the first year of Queen Elizabeth and did not stand in force at the time of the making of this Homily which the Lord Primate so much builds on but at such time also as he wrote his Letter to Mr. Ley and to that Honourable Person whosoever he was
which was so plainly and professedly contrary to her own Injunctions Secondly from the strong Alarm which was taken generally by the Clergy and the most knowing men of the Laity also at the coming out of Doctor Bounds Book about the Sabbath Anno 1595. In which book it is declared amongst other things that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual That there is great reason why we Christians should take our selves as straightly bound to rest upon the Lords day as the Jewes were upon their Sabbath that there should be no buying of victuals upon that day no Carriers Packmen Drovers or other men to be suffered to travel no Scholars to study the Liberal Arts no Lawyers to consult the case of their Clients or peruse their Evidences no Justices to examine Causes for preservation of the peace no Bells to ring upon that day no solemn Feasts or Wedding Dinners to be made on it with so many other prohibitions and negative precepts that men of all sorts and professions looked upon it as a common grievance Thirdly from the great care which was presently taken by such as were in Authority to suppress those Doctrines the said Book being called in by Arch-Bishop Whitgift both by his Letters missive and his visitations as soon as the danger was discovered Anno 1599. and a command signified in the Queens name by Chief Justice Popham at the Assizes held at Bury in Suffolk Anno 1600. that the said Book should no more be printed though afterward in the more remiss Government of King James it came out again with many Additions Anno 1606. Fourthly and finally from the permitting of all sorts of Recreations even common Enterludes and Bear-baitings in the so much celebrated Reign of Queen Elizabeth as also by the Declaration about Lawful sports published by King James An. 1618. and revived afterwards by King Charles Anno 1633 which certainly those godly and religions Princes would neither have suffered nor have done had they conceived it to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England of which they were such zealous Patrons and such stout Defenders No breaking of Subscription here by the Historian no crossing or opposing of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies and consequently no such need of Sophistry to elude the Lord Primates Argument which was drawn from thence as the said Honourable Person N. N. must believe there was SECT VIII A further Argument to prove the meaning of the Homily as before laid down The high esteem which the Church of England hath of the ancient Fathers as also of the usages of the primitive times with her respect unto the neighbouring Reformed Churches No restraint from labour on the Lords day imposed by the Council of Laodicea Beza's opinion of the liberty in those times allowed of Law-suits and Handy-crafts prohibited in great Cities on the Lords day by the Emperour Constantine but Husbandry permitted in the country Villages Proof from Saint Jerome Chrysostom Augustine that after the Divine service of the day was ended the rest of the day was spent in mens several businesses Husbandry first restrained in the Western Churches in the Council of Orleans Anno 540. and by the Edict of the Emperour Leo Philosophus in the Eastern parts about the year 890. Several restraints laid on the Lords day by the Council of Mascon Anno 588. Pope Gregory offended at such restraints and his censure of such as did enioyn them The liberty allowed in the Lutheran Churches on the Lords day as also in those of the Palatinate till after the year 1612. Nor in the Churches of the Low-Countries till the year 1618. Not onely servile Works but Fairs and Markets continued on the Lords day in those Countries till the same year also Necessary labour permitted on the Lords day in the Reformed Churches of the Switzers and honest Recreations in the French and Genevian Churches as also in the Kirk of Scotland The conclusion and application of the last Argument IT hath been proved sufficiently in the former Section that the passage alledged by the Lord Primate from the Book of Homilies and that twice for failing is capable of no such sense and meaning as he puts upon it for if it were the Homily must not only contradict it self but the Authors of it must be thought to propound a Doctrine directly contrary to the Queens Injunctions and the publick Liturgy of this Church and several Acts of Parliament which were then in force And which is more the whole body of Gods people in this Land by following their necessary business and lawful pleasures upon the Sunday or Lords day when no attendance at the place and hours of Gods publick service was required of them must be supposed to have run on in a course of sin against Gods Commandments and of contempt and disobedience to the publick Doctrine of the Church for the space of 80. years and upwards without contradiction or restraint which to imagine in a Church so wisely constituted and in a State founded on so many good Lawes cannot find place with any man of sober judgement But there is one Argument yet to come of as much weight and consequence as those before that is to say that if any such restraint from labour and honest recreations was by the Doctrine of this Church imposed on the people of God this Church must openly oppose the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers the laudable usages and customes of the Primitive times together with the general practise and perswasion of all the Protestant and Reformed Churches in these parts of the world a matter so abhorrent from the principles of the first Reformers and from the Canons and Determinations of this Church and the Rulers of it that no surmises of this kind can consist with reason The Church of England hath alwayes held the Fathers in an high regard whether we look upon them in their learned and laborious writings or as convened in General National and Provincial Councils appealing to them in all Differences between her and the Church of Rome and making use of their authority and consent in expounding Scripture witness that famous challenge made by Bishop Jewel in a Sermon preached at Saint Pauls Cross Anno 1560. in which he publickly declared that if all or any of the learned men of the Church of Rome could produce any one sentence out of the writings of any of the ancient Fathers or any General or National Council for the space of the first 600. years in justification of some Doctrines by them maintained and by us denied he would relinquish his own Religion and subscribe to theirs Witness the Canon made in a Convocation of the Prelates and Câ—ergy of England Anno 1571. Cap. De concionatoribus by which it was ordered and decreed that nothing should be preacht to the people but what was consonant unto the Doctrine of the old and
Verdict of the Church of England the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit as nothing more could be left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles afterward to adde unto it But against this Judgment I appeal and must reverse the same by Writ of Error For first although the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit in the Realm of England as is here affirmed it was obtained rather by the practises of the Sabbatarians who were instant in season and out of season to promote the Cause then by any countenance given unto it by the Church and the Rulers of it And secondly if any such Verdict had been given it was not given by any Jury which was legally summoned or trusted by the Church to act any thing in that particular And then the Foreman of this Jury must be Doctor Bound Master Greenham Master Perkins Doctor Lewis Bayley Master Dod Master Clever Doctor Gouge Master Whateley Doctor Sibs Doctor Preston Master Bifield Doctor Twisse and Master Ley must make up the Pannel the five Smectymnuans and he that pulled down the Cross in Saint Pauls Church-yard standing by in a readiness to put in for the Tales as occasion served Unless the Verdict had been given by these or such as these the Lords day never had attained such a pitch of credit as is here supposed but how a Verdict so given in may be affirmed to be a Verdict of the Church of England I am yet to seek So that except there had been something left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles to adde unto it The Sabbatarian Brethren would have found small comfort from any Verdict given on their side by the Church of England The Church of England differs as much in this point from the Articles of Ireland as the Lord Primate differeth in it from the Church of England The Lord Primate sets it down for a Proposition that the setting apart of one day in seven for Gods solemn worship is juris Divini Positivi recorded in the fourth Commandment p. 105. But the Lords Spiritual the most eminent Representers of the Church of England declared in the Parliament in the 5 6. of Edw. 6. That there is no certain time or definite number of dayes prescribed in holy Scripture but the appointment both of the time and also of the number of dayes is left by the Authority of Gods word to the liberty of Christs Church to be determined and assigned orderly in every Countrey by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers thereof as they shall judge most expedient to the setting forth Gods glory and edification of their people The Church of England hath declared in the Homily of the time and place of prayer that the Lords day was instituted by the Authority of the Church and the consent of godly Christian people after Christs Ascension But the Lord Primate doth entitle it unto Christ himself and to that end alledgeth a passage out of the Homily De Semente ascribed but ascribed falsly unto S. Athanasius viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The proper meaning of which words hath been shewen already in the first Section of this Treatise The Lord Primate in conformity to the Articles of the Church of Ireland affirms for certain that the whole day must be set apart for Gods solemn worship But in the Church of England there is liberty given upon that day not onely for honest Recreations but also for such necessary works of labour as are not or have not been restrained by the Laws of the Land Which makes the difference in this case between the Lord Primate and the Church of England to be irreconcilable And here I would have left the Lord Primates Letter writ to his Honourable Friend the Contents whereof have been the sole Subject of the present Section but that the Lord Primate will not so part with the Historian he must needs bestow a dash upon him before he leaves him telling his Honourable Friend How little credit the Historian deserves in his Geography when he brings news of the remote parts of the world that tells so many untruths of things so lately and so publickly acted in his neighbour Nation This I must needs say comes in very unhandsomely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dictum at the best and savours little of that moderation humility and meekness of Spirit for which Doctor Bernard hath so fam'd him not onely in this present Treatise but his Funeral Sermon But let this pass cum caeteris erroribus without more ado I have some other game in chase to which now I hasten SECT X. Seven Points of Doctrine in which the Lord Primate differeth from the Church of England The Lord Primates judgment in the point of Episcopacy and the ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas That Bishops and Presbyters did differ Ordine and not onely Gradu proved by three passages in the Book of Consecration and by the different forms of the Ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons used in the said Book The form and manner of making Bishops Priests and Deacons expresly regulated by the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage The Ordination of Presbyters by Presbyters declared unlawful by the Rules of the Primitive Church The Universal Redemption of Mankind by the blood of Christ maintained by the Church of England but denied by the Lord Primate not constant to himselfe in his own opinion A Real presence of Christ in the Sacrament maintained by the Church of England and affirmed by the most eminent Prelates of it but both denied and opposed by the Lord Primate in his Answer to the Jesuites challenge That the Priest hath power to forgive sins proved by three several passages out of the Book of Common-Prayer The meaning of the two first passages subverted by the Lord Primates Gloss or Descant on them but no notice taken by him of the last which is most material That the Priest forgiveth sins either Declarativè or Optativè better approved by the Lord Primate neither of which come up close to the Church of England and the reason why The Church of England holdeth that the Priect forgiveth sins Authoritativè by a delegated not a soveraign power and that she so holdeth is affirmed by some learned men of the Church of Rome The benefit of Absolution from the hands of the Priest humbly desired and received by Doctor Reynolds at the time of his death The Church of England maintains a local Descent and the proof thereof The Church not altered in her judgement since the first making of that Article Anno 1552. as some men imagine The Lord Primate goes a different way from the Church of England and the great pains by him taken to make it good A transition to the nine Articles of Lambeth THe difference between the Church of England and the Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath we have shewed already and well it were if he differed from the Church of England
Supper and are taken eaten and drank by them which though it be onely in an Heavenly and Spiritual manner yet are they both given and taken truly and really or in very deed by Gods faithful people By which it seems that it is agreed on on both sides that is to say the Church of England and the Church of Rome that there is a true and real presence of Christ in the holy Eucharist the disagreement being onely in the modus Praesentiae But on the contrary the Lord Primate in his Answer to the Jesuits challenge hath written one whole Chapter against the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament In which though he would seem to aim at the Church of Rome though by that Church not onely the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament but the corporal eating of his body is maintained and taught yet doth he strike obliquely and on the by on the Church of England All that he doth allow concerning the real presence is no more then this viz. That in the receiving of the blessed Sacrament we are to distinguish between the outward and thâ— inward Action of the Communicant In the outward wiâ—â— our bodily mouth we receive really the visible elements of Bread and Wine in the inward we do by faith really receive the Body and Blood of our Lord that is to say we are truely and indeed made partakers of Christ crucified to the spiritual strengthning of our inward man Which is no more then any Calvinist in the pack which either do not understand or wilfully oppose the Doctrines of the Church of England will stick to say 5. The Church of England teacheth that the Priest hath power to forgive sins as may be easily proved by three several Arguments not very easie to be answered The first is from those solemn words used in the Ordination of the Priest or Presbyter that is to say Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins ye forgive they are forgiven and whose sins ye retain they are retained Which were a gross prophanation of the words of our Lord and Saviour and a meer mockery of the Priest if no such power were given unto him as is there affirmed The second Argument is taken from one of the Exhortations before the Communion where we find it thus viz. And because it is requisite that no man should come to the holy Communion but with a full trust in Gods mercy and with a quiet conscience therefore if there be any of you which by the means aforesaid cannot quiet his own Conscience but requireth further comfort or counsel then let him come to me or to some other discreet and learned Minister of Gods word and open his grief that he may receive such ghostly counsel advice and comfort as his conscience may be relieved and that by the Ministry of Gods word he may receive comfort and the benefit of absolution to the quieting of his conscience and avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness The third and most material proof we have in the form prescribed for the visitation of the sick In which it is required that after the sick person hath made a confession of his faith and profest himselfe to be in charity with all men he shall then make a special confession if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter And then it followeth that after such confession the Minister shall absolve him in this manner viz. Our Lord Jesus Christ who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truly repent and believe in him of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences and by his Authority committed to me I absolve thee from all thy sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Amen Of the first of these three places deduced all of them from the best Monuments and Records of the Church of England the Lord Primate takes notice in his Answer to the Jesuites challenge p. 109. where he treatech purposely of the Priests power to forgive sins but gives us such a gloss upon it as utterly subverts as well the Doctrine of this Church in that particular as her purpose in it and of the second he takes notice p. 81. where he speaks purposely of Confession but gives us such a gloss upon that also as he did on the other But of the third which is more positive and material then the other two he is not pleased to take any notice at all as if no such Doctrine were either taught by the Church of England or no such power had been ever exercised by the Ministers of it For in the canvassing of this point he declares sometimes that the Priest doth forgive sins onely declarative by the way of declaration only when on the consideration of the true Faith and sincere Repentance of the party penitent he doth declare unto him in the name of God that his sins are pardoned and sometimes that the Priest forgives sins only optativè by the way of prayers and intercession when on the like consideration he makes his prayers unto God that the sins of the penitent may be pardoned Neither of which comes up unto the Doctrine of the Church of England which holdeth that the Priest forgiveth sins authoritativè by vertue of a power committed to him by our Lord and Saviour That the supreme power of forgiving sins is in God alone against whose Divine Majesty all sins of what sort soever may be truly said to be committed was never questioned by any which pretended to the Christian faith The power which is given to the Priest is but a delegated gower such as is exercised by Judges under Soveraign Princes where they are not tied unto the Verdict of twelve men as with us in England who by the power committed to them in their several Circuits and Divisions do actually absolve the party which is brought before them if on good proof they find him innocent of the crimes which he stands accused for and so discharge him of his Irons And such a power as this I say is both given to and exercised by the Priests or Presbyters in the Church of England For if they did forgive sins onely Declarativè that form of Absolution which follows the general Confession in the beginning of the Common-prayer-Book would have been sufficient that is to say Almighty God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which desireth not the death of a sinner but rather that he may turn from his wickedness and live and hath given power and commandment to his Ministers to declare and pronounce to his people being penitent the absolution and remission of their sins and pardoneth and absolveth all them which truly repent and unfainedly believe his holy Gospel Or if he did forgive sins onely Optativè in the way of prayers and intercession there could not be a better way of Absolution then that which is prescribed to be used by the Priest or Bishop after the general confession made by such
as are to receive the Communion viz. Almighty God our Heavenly Father who of his great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them which with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto him have mercy upon you pardon and deliver you from all your sins and confirm and strengthen you in all goodness and bring you to everlasting life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen Or else the first clause in the form of Absolution used at the visitation of the sick would have served the turn that is to say Our Lord Jesus Christ who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truely repent and believe in him of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences And there could be no reason at all imaginable why the next clause should be superadded to this prayer viz. And by his Authority committed to me I absolve thee from all thy sins c. if the Priest did not forgive sins Authoritativè by such a delegated and commissionated power as before we spake of And that this is the Doctrine and intent of the Church of England appears by the acknowledgement of two learned men of the opposite faction For thus saith one of the great sticklers for the Church of Rome viz. Hereunto is also pertinent the Doctrine of those Protestants who hold that Priests have power not onely to pronounce but to give remission of sins Yea it seemeth to be the Doctrine of the Communion-Book in the visitation of the sick where the Priest saith And by his Authority committed unto me I absolve thee from all thy sins Then which there could not come a clearer Testimony from the mouth of an Adversary And for the other side I will take Dr. Lewis Bayley afterwards Bishop of Bangor a man precise enough as to the perpetual morality of the Lords day Sabbath and Calvinist enough in some other Tenets of that rigid Sect And yet this man in his Book called the Practice of Piety not onely doth advise his sick Penitent to send in time for some godly Minister to whom he may unfold his griefs confess his sins that so he may receive the benefit of Absolution but tells him that then he should not doubt in foro conscientiae but that his sins be as verily forgiven on earth as if he did hear Christ himself in foro judicii pronouncing them to be forgiven in Heaven And this he doth exemplifie in Doctor Reynolds the ablest and most learned man of all that shewed themselves on the Puritan party who being on his death-bed did earnestly desire to receive the benefit of sacerdotal Absolution according to the form prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer and humbly received it at the hands of Dr. Holland the Kings Professor in Divinity in the University of Oxon for the time then being and when he was not able to express his joy thankfulness in the way of speech did most affectionatly kiss the hand that gave it and yet this Doctor had not only a chief hand in the Millenary Petition as they commonly called it presented to K. James at his first coming to this Crown wherein they excepted not only against the use but the very name of Absolution as being a forinsecal word which they desired to have corrected but managed the whole busines of it at Hampton Court And this he did with such fidelity and zeal that to give that party some contentment it was ordered in the Conference there that to the word Absolution in the Rubrick following the general confession these words Remission of sins should be added for explanation sake as it stil continueth so powerful an Orator is death as to perswade men in extremities of sickness to apply those remedies which in the times of health they neither thought lawful nor convenient to be used in such extremities 7. But to proceed in the Article of Christs descending into Hell the Church of England doth maintain a local descent that is to say That the Soul of Christ at such time as his body lay in the grave did locally descend into the nethermost parts in which the Devil and his Angels are reserved in everlasting chains of darkness unto the judgment of the great terrible day This proved at large by Bishop Bilson in his learned and laborious Work entituled The Survey of Christ's sufferings in which he hath amassed together whatsoever the Fathers Greek and Latine or any of the ancient Writers have affirmed of this Article with all the Points and Branches which depend upon it And that this was the meaning of the first Reformers when this Article amongst others was first agreed upon in the Convocation of the year 1552. appears by that passage of S. Peter which is cited by them touching Christs preaching to the Spirits which were in prison And though that passage be left out of the present Article according as it passed in the Convocation of the year 1562. yet cannot that be used as an Argument to prove that the Church hath altered her judgment in that Point as some men would have it that passage being left out for these reasons following For first that passage was conceived to make the Article too inclinable to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which makes the chief end of Christs descent into Hell to be the fetching thence the souls of the Fathers who died before and under the Law and secondly because it was conceived by some learned men that the Text was capable of some other construction than to be used for an argument of this Descent The judgment of the Church continueth still the same as before it was and is as plain and positive for a local descent as ever formerly She had not else left this Article in the same place in which She found it or given it the same distinct Title as before it had viz. De Descensu Christi ad Inferos in the Latine Copies of King Edward the Sixth that is to say Of the going down of Christ into Hell as in the English Copies of Queen Elizabeths Reign Nor indeed was there any reason why this Article should have any distinct place or Title at all unlesse the maintenance of a local Descent were intended by it For having spoken in the former Article of Christs Suffering Crucifying Death and Burial it had been a very great impertinency not to call it worse to make a distinct Article of his Descending into Hell if to Descend into Hell did signifie the same with this being buried as some men then fancied or that there were not in it some further meaning which might deserve a place distinct from his Death and Burial The Article speaking thus viz. As Christ died for us and was buried so is it to be believed that he went down into Hell is either to be understood of a local Descent or else we are tied to believe nothing by it but what was explicitely or implicitely comprehended in the former Article Now that this
we next proceed unto the Confirmation which he hath in hand And therein also pretermitting his whole Narrative touching the carriage of the business in the Convocation of the year 1634. we will pitch only on the examination of this point viz. whether the superinducing of the Articles of the Church of England were not a virtual repealing of the Articles of the Church of Ireland And for the better proceeding in it I think it not unnecessary to produce that Canon which is the ground of the Dispute The Title of it this viz. Of the Agreement of the Church of England and Ireland in the profession of the same Christian faith The Body of it this viz. For the manifestation of our Agreement with the Church of England in the Confession of the same Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments We do receive and approve the Book of Articles of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops and the whole Clergy in the whole convocation holden at London Anno Dom. 1562. for avoiding of the diversities of opinions and for the establishing of consent touching true Religion And therefore if any hereafter shall affirm that any of those Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous or such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe unto Let him be excommunicated and not absolved before he make a publick revocation of his error These are the very words of the Canon it selfe and from these words the Observator did conclude that the Articles of England were received in stead of the other but Doctor Bernard makes this construction of the Canon That there was not a reception of the one in stead of the other but the one with the other p. 119. That in the Canon the Articles of England are received not in stead but with those of Ireland p. 120. But which of the two is in the right will be best seen by the Arguments produced on both sides and by the Answers which are made to those several Arguments And first the Observator takes notice of some scandal given unto the Papists and the occasion of some derisions which they had thereby that in the Churches of three Kingdoms professing the same Religion being under the patronage of one soveraign Prince there should be three distinct and in some points contrary confessions and that for the avoiding of this scandal it was thought fit there should be one Confession or one Book of Articles onely for the Churches of England and Ireland not without hope that Scotland would soon follow after And thereupon he doth infer that if the superinducing or receiving of a new Confession be not a repealing of the old there must be two Confessions in the same Church differing in many points from one another Which would have been so far from creating an uniformity of belief between the Churches and taking away thereby the matter of derision which was given the Papists in two distinct and in some points contrary Confessions yet both pretending unto one and the same Religion that it would rather have increased their scorn and made a greater disagreement in Ireland it selfe then was before between the Churches of both Kingdoms The second Argument is taken from these words of Saint Paul Heb. 8. 13. viz. Dicendo novum veteravit prius c. that is to say in that he saith a new Covenant he hath made the first old as our English reads it and then it followeth that that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away that is to say the old being disanulled by the new there must necessarily follow the abolishment of its use and practice So that unless it may be thought that Saint Paul was out in his Logick as I think it may not the superinducing of a new Covenant must be the abrogating of the old His third Argument is taken from the Abrogation of the Jewish Sabbath by superinducing of the Lords day for the day of Worship By means whereof the Sabbath was lessened in authority and reputation by little and little and in short time vvas absolutely laid aside in the Church of Christ the fourth Commandment by vvhich it vvas at first ordained being still in force His fourth and last Argument vvas that the first Liturgy of King Edward the sixth confirmed in Parliament vvith several penalties to those vvho should refuse to officiate by it or should not diligently resort and repair unto it as appears by the Statute 2 3. Edw. 6. c. 1. vvas actually repealed by the authorizing of the second Liturgy of the 5 6. of King Edw. 6. vvhich vvas forthvvith received into use and practice in all parts of the Kingdom the former Liturgy being no otherwise suppressed and called in then by the superinducing of this the Statute upon which it stood continuing unrepealed in full force and virtue and many Clauses of the same related to in the Statute which confirmed the second Upon which Ground it was inferred that the Articles of Ireland were virtually though not formally abrogated by the superinducing of the Articles of the Church of England Of the first and last of these four Arguments Doctor Bernard takes no notice at all and returns but one Answer to the second and third which notwithstanding may serve also for the first and last just as an Almanack calculated for the Meridian of London may generally serve for the use of all Great Britain The Answer is That the Apostles speech of making void the old Covenant by speaking of a new or taking in the first day of the Week to be the Sabbath instead of the last when but one of the seven was to be kept doth not fit the Case for in these there was a Superinduction and reception of the one for the other but in the Canon the Articles of England are received not instead but with those of Ireland which by his leave is not so much an Answer to the Observators Arguments as a plain begging of the Question For if this Answer will hold good in Ireland it might have held good also in the Land of Judaea and the Parts adjoyning where both the Lords-day and the Sabbath the old Law and the Gospel did for a time remain together As for the Doctors Arguments That the Reception of the Articles of the Church of England doth no more argue an Abrogation of the Articles of Ireland than that the Apostles Creed was abrogated by the reception of the Nicene and Athanasian p. 118. it is easily answered For as the Doctor well observes the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds are but Enlargements of the other and that in some particular Points onely in which the Hereticks of those times had disturbed the peace of the Church So that those Creeds are but the Explanations of the other in the Points disputed and were received by the Church with reference onely to the condemnation of some Heresies and the Explication of some Orthodox or Catholick Doctrines which had been opposed by
those Heresies More easily is the Argument answered importing That the reception into our use the form of the Lords Prayer according to S. Matthew should by the same reason abrogate that of S. Luke being the shorter For first the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Lukes Gospel was never received into the Lyturgie of the Church and therefore could not be abrogated by the Churches making choice of the other which we find in S. Matthew And secondly it was not in the power of the Church to have abrogated that Prayer as it stands in S. Luke because it is a part of the Gospel of the word of God which the Church hath no Authority to change or alter and much lesse to abrogate All that the Church can be said to have done in this particular is that the Church made choice rather of the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Matthew then as it stands in S. Luke when it was absolutely in her power to make choice of either No contrariety to be found in any one clause of the said two Pater Nosters nor any the least contradiction to be met with between those three Creeds or any one Article of the same differing no otherwise in a manner but as the Commentary and the Text. But so it is not in the Case which is now before us nor in the supposition of making one general confession of all the Reformed Churches if they were severally subscribed with the Irish Articles He that subscribes unto the Articles of Ireland may without any doubt or scruple subscribe unto the Articles or Confessions of all the Reformed or Calvinian Churches But if he take the Articles of England also into that account he must of necessity subscribe to many plain and manifest contrarieties Against this nothing hath been said but that there is no substantial difference between those Articles as was conceived by the Lord Primate p. 118. that both Confessions are consistent as is affirmed by Doctor Bernards most eminent learned and judicious person p. 121. and finally that there is no difference in substance but onely in Method number of Subjects determined and other circumstantials as is declared by Doctor Bernard p. 119. But if the contrary be proved and that it shall appear that there is a substantial difference between those Articles that the Confessions of both Churches are inconsistent and that they do not onely differ in the Circumstantials of Method Number and the like I hope that then it will be granted that the approving and receiving of the Articles of England was virtually and in effect an Abrogating of the former Articles of the Church of Ireland And for the proof of this I shall compare some passages in the Articles of Ireland as they passed in Convocation Anno 1615. with the Doctrines publickly professed in the Church of England either contained expresly and in terminis in the Book of Articles or else delivered in some other publick Monument of Record of the Church of England to which those Articles relate First then The Articles of the Church of Ireland have entertained and incorporated the Nine Articles of Lambeth containing all the Calvinian Rigours in the Points of Predestination Grace Free-will c. which Articles or any of them could never find admittance in the Church of England by reason of their inconsistency with the authorized Doctrines of it as before was said so that by the incorporating of those Nine Articles into the Articles of Ireland there are as many aberrations from the doctrine of the Church of England Secondly It is said of Christ Num. 30. that for our sakes he endured most grievous torments immediately in his Soul and most painful sufferings in his Body The enduring of which grievous torments in his Soul as Calvin not without some touch of Blasphemy did first devise so did he lay it down for the true sense and meaning of the Article of Christs descending into Hell In which expression as the Articles of Ireland have taken up the words of Calvin so it may rationally be conceived that they take them with his meaning and construction also the rather in regard that there is no particular Article of Christs descending into Hell as in those of England and consequently no such Doctrine of a local Descent as the Church of England hath maintained Thirdly it is declared Num. 50. That the Abstinencies which are appointed by publick order of that State for eating of Fish and forbearing of Flesh at certain times and dayes appointed are no wayes meant to be Religious Fasts nor intended for the maintenance of any superstition in the choice of meats but are grounded meerly upon Politick Considerations for provision of things tending to the better preservation of the Common-wealth But the Church of England not taking notice of any Politick Considerations for the breeding of Cattle increase of shipping or the like as the Statists do nor intending the maintenance of any Superstition in choice of meats as the Papists do retaineth both her Weekly and her Annual Fasts ex vi Catholicae consuetudinis as Apostolical and Primitive Institutions and she retains them also not as Politick but as Religious Fasts as appears by the Epistle for Ash-wednesday taken out of the second Chapter of Joel from verse 12. unto verse 18. and by the Gospel for that day taken out of the sixth Chapter of S. Matthew from verse 16. unto verse 22. And more particularly from the Prayer appointed to be used on the first Sunday in Lent viz. O Lord which for our sakes didst fast fourty dayes and fourty nights give us grace to use such abstinence that our flesh being subdued to the Spirit we may ever obey the Godly motions in righteousness and true holinesse to thy honour and glory which livest and reignest c. Fourthly It is affirmed Num. 56. That the first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and therefore we are bound to rest therein from our common and daily businesse and to bestow that leisure upon Holy Exercises both publick and private How contrary this is to the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies we have seen already and if it be contrary to the Book of Homilies it must be also contrary to the Book of Articles by which those Homilies are approved and recommended to the use of the Church Besides it is declared in the seventh of those Articles first that the Law given by Moses as touching Ceremonies and Rites do not bind Christian men nor ought the Civil Precepts thereof to be received in any Common-wealth and secondly that no Christian whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral So that the Ceremonial part of the Law of Moses being wholly abrogated there is no more to be observed in any of the said Commandments then that which is naturally and plainly moral For otherwise the Old Testament must be
contrary to the New which is denied in the first clause of this Article and secondly this Article must be contradicted by the Book of Homilies which in another of these Articles is approved as before was said As Adversaries to which truth the Author of the Book entitled The Faith Doctrine and Religion professed and protected in the Realm of England c. being a Commentary on the 39. Articles Perused and by the lawful Authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick doth account all such as have taught and published first that whereas all other things were so changed that they were clean taken away as the Priesthood the Sacrifice and Sacraments this day that is the Sabbath day was so changd that it yet remaineth and secondly that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual If so then no such thing required of Christians as to dedicate the first day of the week wholly to the service of God or to rest thereon from our common and dayly business as it is positively determined in this Article of the Church of Ireland Adde here those desperate consequences which have been raised by some men from these Sabbath-Doctrines It having been preacht in some of the Pulpits in this Kingdom as Mr. Rogers tells us in his Preface to the Book above mentioned that to do any servile work or business on the Lords day is as great a sin as to kill a man or commit adultery that to throw a Bowle to make a Feast or dress a VVedding Dinner on the Lords day is as great a sin as for a man to take a knife and cut his childs throat and that to ring more Bells then one on the Lords day is as great a sin as to commit a wilful murder Most desperate consequents indeed but such as naturally do arise from such dangerous premises Fifthly it is declared Num. 71. that we ought to judg those Ministers to be lawfully called and sent which be called and chosen to the work of the Ministry by men who have publick Authority given them in the Church This serves to countenance the Ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas ordained if I may so call it by the imposition of the hands of two Lay-Elders for each single Presbyter without the assistance or benediction of the Bishop and is directly contrary to the Book entituled The form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons according to which Book justified and approved by the 36. Article of the Church of England no Priest or Presbyter can be otherwise ordained then by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop Sixthly it is declared Num. 74. That God hath given power to his Ministers not simply to forgive sins which prerogative he hath reserved onely to himselfe but in his name to declare and pronounce unto such as truly repent and unfainedly believe his Holy Gospel the absolution and forgiveness of sins VVhich Doctrine how contrary it is to the Doctrine of the Church of England hath been shewed at large in the tenth Section of this Book To which I shall now onely adde that for the better encouragement of the penitent party to make a true and sincere confession of his sins that so the Priest may proceed to Absolution on the better grounds it is ordered by the 113. Canon of the year 1603. That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister for the unburthening of his conscience and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him the said Minister shall not at any time reveale and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same under pain of Irregularity By incurring of which pain of Irregularity he doth not onely actually forfeit all those spiritual promotions of which he is at that time possessed but is rendered utterly uncapable of receiving any other for the time to come Seventhly it is declared Num. 80. That the Bishop of Rome is so far from being the Supreme head of the Universal Church of Christ that his works and Doctrine do plainly discover him to be that man of sin foretold in the holy Scriptures whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth and abolish with the brightness of his coming Of which opinion the Lord Primate also was as is affirmed by Doctor Bernard p. 162. where he telleth that the Lord Primate had in two learned Sermons given his judgement at large that the Papacy was meant by Babylon in the seventeenth and eighteenth of the Revelation But there is no such Doctrine concerning Antichrist in the Book of Articles or in any other publick Monument or Record of the Church of England but the contrary rather And this appeareth by a prayer at the end of the second Homily for Whitsunday viz. That by the mighty power of the Holy Ghost the comfortable Doctrine of Christ may be truly preached truly received and truly followed in all places to the beating down of Sin Death the Pope the Devil and all the Kingdom of Antichrist In which words the Pope the Devil and the Kingdom of Antichrist being reckoned as the three great enemies of the Church of Christ it must needs be by the Doctrine of this Church in the Book of Homilies that the Pope and Antichrist are as much distinguished as either the Devil and the Pope or the Devil and Antichrist which no man of reason can conceive to be one and the same Eighthly the Church of England in the tenth Article speaks very favourably of the will of man in the act of Conversion and all the other Acts of Piety which depend upon it viz. That we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will according to that memorable saying of Saint Augustine the greatest Champion of Gods grace against the Pelagian Heresies Praevenit nos gratia Dei ut velimus subsequitur ne frustra velimus Whereas it is declared in the Articles of Ireland that man is meerly passive in the work of his own Conversion velut inanimatum quiddam as was said by Luther the Article affirming Num. 32. That no man can come unto Christ unless the Father draw him that is to say unless the Father doth so draw him that nothing be ascribed to mans will either in receiving of Grace preventing or working any thing by the assistance of Grace subsequent or Grace concurring no other kind of drawing by our Heavenly Father being allowed of in this Act in the Schools of Calvin For on this ground Calvin dislikes that saying of Saint Chrysostome that God draws none but such as are willing to come