the rest as any other member of the Congregation if they shall all sin scandalously either in the execution of their Office or in any other ordinary manner then the Congregation that chose themfreely hath as free power to depose them and to place others in their room if the Congregation shall erre either in choosing or deposing of her spiritual Officers then hath the Civil Magistrate alone power and authority to punish them for their fault to compel them to better choice or to defend against them those officers that without just causes they shall depose or deprive The same Doctrine is desended by Dr. Ames Medul Theol p. 1. cap. 35. 5. They hold that insufficient Ministers obtruded upon Churches were not to be acknowledged for Ministers and if their lawful Ministers were without just cause ejected by any Superiour Powers Engl. purit ch 2. pos 8. they did still retain the Right and Honour of being their Pastors They hold that the Congregation having once made choice of their Spiritual Officers unto whom they commit the Regiment of their Souls they ought not without just cause and that which is apparently warrantable by the word of God to discharge deprive or depose them but ought to live in all Canonical Obedience and Subjection unto them agreeable unto the word of God and if by permission of the civil Magistrate they shall by other Ecclesiastical Officers be suspended or deprived for any cause in their apprehension good and justifiable by the word of God then they hold it the bounden duty of the Congregation to be continual Suppliants to God and humble Suitors unto Civil Authority for the restauration of them unto their Administrations which if it cannot be obtained yet this much honour they are to give unto them as to acknowledge them unto the Death their Spiritual Guides and Governours though they be rigorously deprived of their Ministry and Service And Chap. 3. pos 9. They hold that the People of God ought not to acknowledge any such for their Pastors as are not able by Preaching to interpret and apply the word of God unto them aud therefore that no ignorant and Sole-reading Priests are to be reputed the Ministers of Jesus Christ who sendeth none into his Ministry and Service but such as he adorneth in some Measurewith Spiritual gifts and they cannot be perswaded that the faculty of reading in ones Mother Tongue the Scriptures c. which any ordinary Turk or Infidel hath can be called in any Congruity of Speech a Ministerial gift of Christ And posit 12. They hold that it is as great an injury to force a Congregation or Church to maintain as their Pastor with Tythes and such like Donations that Person that either is not able to instruct them or that refuseth in his own Person ordinarily to do it as to force a man to maintain one for his wife that either is not a Woman or that refuseth in her own person to do the dutios of a Wife unto him 6. They hold that the Holy Scriptures are a perfect Rule of Doctrine Worship Discipline and Ceremonies and that to add new Ceremonies of mens own invention was a breach of the second Commandment With this Mr. Parker begins his Book of Ecclesiastical polity that we are to deduce from Scripture all that concerns the Church of Christ Thus the Protestation We deny no Authority to the King in matters Ecclesiastical but only that which Christ Jesus the only head of the Church hath directly and precisely appropriated unto himself Protest pos 22. and hath denied to communicate to any other Creature or Creatures in the world for we hold that Christ alone is the Doctor of the Church in matters of Religion and that the word of Christ which he hath given unto his Church is of absolute perfection containing in it all parts of the true Religion both for substance and Ceremony and a perfect Direction in all Ecclesiastical matters whatsoever unto and from which it is not lawful for any Man or Angel to add or detract Thus Mr. Bradshaw in his Addition to the 12th Argument against Ceremonies argues All Inventions and Devises of man grounded only upon the will of man and not upon any necessity of Nature or Civility set apart to Gods outward Worship are contrary to the second Commandment These Ceremonies are such Ergo See more in the place 7. They held Ceremonies enjoyned by our Lyturgy unlawful The Cross in Baptism was condemned by all Mr. Parker and Mr. Bradshaw in particular wrote against it The Surplice was rejected by most Kneeling at the Lords Supper was disliked by all but yet thought Tolerable and that it might be submitted unto by some of the most Learned The Protestours declare themselves thus We refuse Obedience only to such Canons as require the performance of such Acts and Rites of Religion as are rejected and abandoned of all other Reformed Churches as Superstitious disorders Protest pos 21. such as are special Mysteries of the Romish Antichristian Idolatry such as have been controverted in the Church ever since the last breaking forth of the Light of the Gospel out of the Cloud of Popery in Luthers time such as all Protestant writers and defenders of our Faith beyond the Seas and most of our own Countrey-men have either in general or particular condemned as vain idle and unprofitable such as all the faithful and painful Pastors of this Realm and in a manner all States and Degrees of the same would be content were removed and swept out of the Church and for which few or none are zealous but the Prelates and their Adherents Mr. Bradshaw wrote Twelve Arguments against the Ceremonies with as much vehemency as any have done since 12 Gen. Arg. against Cerem Arg. 1 'T is Will VVorship therefore sinful Arg. 2. 'T is a sinful Compliance with the Papists in derogation from the honour of the Reformed Churches to use them Arg. 5. 'T is Schismatical maintaining differences at home and abroad when the Authors acknowledge the things imposed indifferent and that they might without sin or inconvenience be let alone Arg. 6. That it is Communicating with the Papists in Idolatrous and Superstitious worship especially those Papists that live amongst us and see how much we symbolize with them Arg. 9. Because these Ceremonies are Sacraments of humane institution Arg. 10. Because they that use them do thereby acknowledge homage to an usurped authority in the Church Arg. 12. Because they are the occasion of the damnation of great numbers viz. the Papists who are hardened by them and ignorant Protestants who place all their Religion in them and because the usual excuse for these and all other humane impositions which the Dr. also makes frequent use of is that they are not imposed as things necessary to Salvation but as matters of Order Decency and the like Mr. Bradshaw draws his Eleventh Argument from hence That the Ceremonies are therefore unlawfull because made
AN APOLOGY FOR THE NON-CONFORMISTS SHEWING Their Reasons both for their not Conforming and for their Preaching PUBLICKLY though forbidden by LAW WITH AN Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet's Sermon and his Defence of It. So much as concerneth the Non-Conformists PREACHING By John Troughton Minister of the Gospel Gal. 5. v. 15. But if ye bite and devour one another take heed that ye be not consumed one of another LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst and are to be sold at the Bible and three Crowns in Cheap-side 1681. THE EPISTLE TO THE READER Good Reader THE first part of this Discourse was written last Summer occasioned by Dr. Stillingfleet's Sermon but so many Answers to it came forth and there was so much discourse of his Reply long before it appeared that it was laid aside till We might know what further strength the Dr. had to bring into the field which when I had considered I found no reason to alter any thing considerable of what was writ before but only to add something in answer to a few things suggested in the Drs. second Book which therefore I have made a second Part. I must beg pardon for some Repetitions especially in the Historical Parts the Drs. Discourse inforcing me to them I do not meddle with the many Questions about Church Government and Ceremonies which the Dr. and his other Opponents have started my design is only to shew the most plain and the most generally prevailing Reasons of the Non-Conformists for their practice in dissenting from the Liturgy and in exercising their Ministry though ejected and this I do because the Dr. hath endeavoured to represent Vs especially in the latter of these as acting against our own Principles and Consciences as if we knew it was Schism but dare not tell the People so Therefore I have plainly given our Sense of things and shall leave it to the Judgement of the Readers What the Dr. hath said against our practice I have considered being unconcerned with all the rest and if He please at any time hereafter to give us his Arguments directly to this Question which he first proposed viz. Whether the Non-Conformists Preaching to their own People when forcibly cast out or to other People that call them in this time of Confusion and Oppression of the Church be Schisme or Sinful I say if He shall give us his Arguments which He may do in a few sheets they shall be examined with as much impartiallity and Candour as He shall please to write them In the mean time our Adversaries may here see we have some Reason for what We do and our Friends may see that we do not own the Principles of Separation and Confusion Farewel Part First CHAP. I. Of the Nature and end of a Church with the several sorts of Churches THat we may the more distinctly set forth the Persons and causes of our Dissent and Separation from them who appropriate to themselves the name of the Church of England as well as its revenues and preferments it will be needfull by way of preparative briefly to consider what is the nature and end of the Church what the several sorts of Churches be what Communion we must have with them and what Separation from them is Lawfull or Unlawfull First Then for the nature and end of the Church It is a sacred Society or Common-Wealth whereof Jesus Christ is the Head King and Governour vnited unto him first and then to each other for these two great ends viz to Glorifie God in him and that they may be saved from sin and Satan and at last glorified with him I call it a sacred Common-Wealth to distinguish it from all other assemblies civil or military or natural which may and often and signified by the Hebrew Greek and Latin Names of a Church The Church is a society or Common-Wealth i. e. ordered and consisting of governour and governed not an accidentall confused Congregation of men Christ is the head King and Governour of this Society hence it is called his body and his fullness as a People be to their King Eph. 1.24 His Kingdome his People yea his House and Temple Eph. 2.21.22 And he is also cal'd the Head of the Church or King Prince Lawgiver Lord c. As Union is the bond of all society so the Church also is an united policy the Union of societies is voluntary consent and agreement among themselves but whereas men in civil societies may first unite among themselves and then chuse a common Head or Governour and unite with him this society is made up of singular Members of whom each one singly and for himself doth first unite with Christ his Head and Governour by agreement and consent and then secondly doth joyn with all those that have or shall subject themselves to the same Governour order is good for ends and orderly societies do combine for proper ends to be attain'd by such combination and as those ends are good or bad so is that Corporation of men to be adjudged good or evil The Church is United for sacred and holy ends and therefore it is a sacred Common-wealth the proper ends which this combination of Christ and his Church respect are that God may be glorified through Jesus Christ viz immediately and directly in acknowledging him worshipping and honouring him seeking his Love favour and blessing c. In those ways and by those means which he the head and Lawgiver shall prescribe natural and civil societies if combined for honest ends are for the Glory of God remotely in lower things but the Church is immediately concerned in gloryfiing him and that not as a Creatour only but as a Redeemer also by Jesus Christ and as the end of all good society is the good of the community and of every person in it as far as can be attained and not of one part only so the Church is united to Christ and every Member to the Church for their own spiritual good immediately and directly viz that they may be every one everlastingly happy in serving and enjoying him which must be brought about by recovering them out of the misery that they are in by sin which is their Salvation and putting them into the possession of the Kingdom of Heaven which will be their Glorification civil and natural societies are for civil and natural good and advantage but the Church is a spiritual Common-Wealth for spiritual ends only hence it hath its name in the New Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a company of men called out for some special end called whence out of this world not out of the place presently but out of the concerns and designs of this world they are not of this World as I am not of this world John 17.16 And to whom are they called to Jesus Christ as their Head and King to serve him and be subject to him and that not in managing the business and interest of this world but in obeying and honouring him immediately in order to
a better and publickly authorized Translation they judg'd it a matter of no small Offence 7. The Reading of the Apochryphal Scriptures as parts of the publick worship and that without any distinction from the Canonical They accounted it an intolerable thing that Fables and Fictions should be solemnly Read to the People with the same Reverence as the Word of God and such are many of the Apocryphal Books and the rest being only of Humane Authority the reading of them ought not to be made a Solemn part of Divine Worship The Conformists say that Reading the Scripture is Preaching and the Non-conformists say it is not fit meer Humane or Fabulous writings should be preached to God's People when they meet to Worship him by hearing his word Above all they were offended that a great deal of the Holy Scriptures is left out of the Liturgy and so never to be Read in the Congregation and Apocryphal Chapters put in their Room 8. Holy-days or Festivals in the honour of Saints They would not deny but if the Church thought fit they might observe the days of Our Saviours Nativity Passion Resurrection Ascension and sending the Holy Ghost as other Protestant Churches do provided they might be kept seriously and not made of the same necessity with the Sabbath but when all divine worship of the Creatures is Idolatrous and the keeping of days in Honour of them as well as Building Temples to them was ever reckoned a part of Divine Honour and to be sure is more Honour then ever God commanded or allowed to any of his Servants They knew not how to excuse this practice that it should be a part of a Churches Liturgy 9. Nor could they approve the Doctrines of the certain Regeneration of all in Baptism and that Infants dying after Baptism before the Commission of actual sin are undoubtedly saved which are laid down in the Liturgies as undoubted Articles of Faith whereas there is no Scripture that clearly proveth either of them and at best they are points disputed on by Learned men on both sides Nor could they excuse the practice of refusing Parents to promise for their own Children in Baptism seeing it is upon their Account only and Gods Covenant with them that the Children are admitted to be Baptized and they are thereby engaged to breed them up in Faith and Obedience much less that Strangers should receive the charge of the Baptized who have no authority over them who neither care what they promise nor are ever called to account how they perform their promise for if they should few would undertake the charge and so this custom would fall to the ground 10. They excepted against the Ordination of Deacons to read Divine Service Baptize and Bury and to preach with special License this they say was to create a new fort of office in the Church which Christ never appointed nor gave his Ministers Authority to appoint it Deacons were to look after the poor and that was all their work and though the Primitive Christians sometimes used them to read the Scriptures in the Congregation yet they never ordained them to this as an office yea though they should be admitted to read Prayers to Marry or Bury yet this is no sacred office appointed by Christ that should constitute a distinct order of Ministers and if as grave and prudent persons they might be admitted to do these offices either for want of Ministers or to assist them yet may they by no means be suffered to Baptize it being as peculiar to the Ministry as to administer the Lords Supper and the admission of Members into the Church as sacred and solemn a work as to confirm and Build up the Members of it These were the principal objections of the Non-conformists against the Liturgy which were some of them at least exemplified and confirmed by many particulars of lesser moment in themselves but all tending to make their desire of a Reformation of the Service Book to seem reasonable and the work necessary Rea. 2. The Second thing the Old Non-conformists disliked in the Church of England was the Government of it by Prelates i. e. Bishops with sole power of Jurisdiction Many of the Old Non-conformists thought Episcopacy utterly unlawfull and an usurpation not to be born but the rest who looking upon it as a humane constitution as our Law doth thought it Lawfull and that it might be submitted to did yet dislike our Episcopacy partly because of the secular grandure power and imployments our Bishops were invested with which made them unable and unwilling to discharge the office of a Pastour in the Church partly because the Church hath nothing to do in their election except an empty shew and therefore persons were most commonly prefer'd not for true Episcopal Qualifications but because they could make interest with Superiours but principally because the Bishops arrogated to themselves the whole power of governing the Church and excluded all the Ministers from any share therein a thing most unexcusable in them who acknowledge themselves to be of the same order with the Presbyters and only in a degree of honour above them and that by the Authority of the Civil Magistrate Whereas even those that with any probability or sobriety maintain the Divine Right of Episcopacy do nevertheless acknowledge that he may neither ordain nor govern without the advice and consent of his Presbyters This was look'd upon as intollerable that the power of governing the Church which was committed by Christ to all his Ministers should be wrested from them generally by a few of their Brethren And that they who are thought fit to dispense the Word and Sacraments the cheif keys of the Kingdom of Heaven whereby men are brought to the Faith admitted into the Church and bnilt up in it should not have power to censure offenders and to receive the Penitent again to Communion which are things of lesser moment and depending on the former and yet without which the former could not be managed in a fit manner for Edification By this means Ministers are deprived of one half of their Office and Power and are both discouraged and hindered in the other half For who will regard their Preaching who have not Liberty to judge what persons are fit to be admitted into the Church or who in it deserves censure or to be cast out of it And the Bishops themselves in undertaking the whole work of Governing the Church took that upon them which they never could nor did manage for the Churches Edification R. 3d. The Non-Conformists were much dissatisfied about the Discipline of the Church both in respect of the Rule of it and the Officers that manage it The Rule they say is not taken out of the Scripture which is the only Rule and Law of Christ's Church but it is the Roman Civil and Canon Law which at best were suited to their own times and People in many things very defective and in others erroneous and superstitious There
of men appointed by David by Divine inspiration for this work and so the manner and method also was appointed by God and Art and rules of Musick were then acceptable and part of the Ceremonial worship But there being such Offices nor such service appointed in the Christian Church this is no warrant for our Responses Neither do the Scriptures give any warrant or example for observing dayes as sacred in the honour of Saints Or of instituting new Offices in the Church or new Ceremonies of worship but on the contrary our Saviour declares that men worship in vain that teach for Doctriens the Commandements of men Matth. 15.9 It seems then That Decency and Order which men purposely devise to add significancy or comliness to gods worship is abominable in his sight he hath no need of mans service and therefore will accept of nothing but what is appointed and carried on by his own Spirit Neither do the Scriptures appoint or warrant any superiority of Bishops above ordinary Ministers at least not such as that they should have sole power of governing the Church The high Priests of old had no such power of the Priests as this Learned Doctor hath proved in his Irenicum They had some peculiar things appropriated to their office but were themselves subject to the Sanhedrim The Apostles were all of one Order and had no authority over each other and governed the Church only by consent Gal. 2.9 Nor is there any distinction made betwixt ordinary Ministers except what they see needful to make amongst themselves for the good of the Church This all our old Bishops acknowledged and therefore pleaded for Episcopacy only as an humane constitution And those who of late wrote for its Divine-right do yet the most learned of them acknowledge that it cannot be proved from Scripture unless perhaps from the angels of the Church of Asia which this Dr. hath solidly confuted It was alwaies objected to the Non-conformists that the Scriptures do not forbid those things though they do not command them But they replyed that the Non-command of any thing in Gods worship and Church is a prohibition except of those things only that occasionally become necessary or that are naturally necessary circumstances of such actions as are commanded for it would argue great imperfection in the Law if it should omit things that are constantly or generally necessary for the good of the Church And as Moses closed his Law with this command that none should adde or diminish it so Christ having given his Law to his Church and appointed Officers with power to make govern and cast members out of it as there was need without giving them liberty to adde or alter He also did virtually prohibit such additions or alterations till he shall come again and their Commission being only to teach baptize and to teach all that Christ commands to the end of the world Mat. 28.18.19 This doth sufficiently restrain them from making or teaching cammands of their own all their authority being grounded on that Commission 2. From Antiquity the Non-Conformists alledge that the primitive Churches for many hundred years had no stated Liturgies prescribing the words as well as method of worship Justin Martyr in his second Apoligy designedly gives an account of the Christian worship viz the order and method of praying preaching admitting of Members administring both Sacraments but hath no word of a prescribed form but he saith the Minister prayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he was able Tertullian giving the same account in his Apol. Cap. 39. saith likewise sine monitore quia de pectore oramus they prayed by heart and therefore had no prompter much less a book We read that Constantine the great Euseb de vit constant l. 4. cap 19.20 having abolished idolatry composed a form of Prayer for his Heathen Souldiers wherein t hey should pray to one God the Creatour of all things but we read of no form imposed on Christians There are indeed Lyturgies that goe under the names of the Apostle James Basil Chrysostome and Ambrose but they convince themselves to be forged by later men and so are an argument that there were no such things in the primitive times but when the Church was over-run with errours and superstitions it was appointed in Africa that the Ministers should either receive a form of Prayer from their Bishops Cansil Milevet 2 dum Can. 12. or shew their own Prayer to them for their approbation but this was above 400 years after Christ the usurpation of Bishops Lazines and ambition of Ministers ignorance and superstition in the people bred Liturgies and they grew up together Nor is their any mention of Responses in the Antient Church a superstitions story of a vision of Angels singing an Hymn in that manner by turns is pretended to be seen by Ignatius dead long before nor had the antient Church days holy to Saints for 300 years and upward we find only mention amongst them of Easter-day and yet that caused such division and contentions that it might have been a warning to after ages for contending about things that God hath not commanded The Apocryphal Books were indeed read in the Christian Church very antiently though they never were amongst the Jews but it was more excusable in them then in us because it was long e're the books of the Scripture especially the books of the New Testament were gathered into one Volumn or it was agreed among the Churches which were Canonical and which Apocryphal for some of the Apocryphal were read in some Churches as Canonical and some of the Canonical were by some Churches rejected The Cross in Baptism was so long unknown to the Church that it is hard to say when it came in though the sign of the Cross was commonly used amongst them upon their Cloaths in their Hats to distinguish them from Heathens and as a token that they were Christians the Montanists began to make a superstititious use of the Cross and so did many others soon after Constantine himself can scarce be excused if Eusebius be credited but that it was annexed to Baptism and made a symbole of mens embracing Christianity there is no record Kneeling at the Lords Supper was not enjoyned till transubstantion was established above 1200 years after Christ nor is any general example for it pretneded in former ages The Surplice was much Elder then the Cross in Baptism or kneeling at the Supper yet for 200 years and upwards there is no mention of it nor is it known when or how it came in many Rites Customs and Ceremonies were used in the Primitive Churches some being derived from the Jews some from the Heathens by the converts of both sorts yet not imposed upon others the Apostles Rule being yet observed that no man should judge another in meats or drinks Col. 2.16 Rom. 14. or in respect of an holy day i. e. the Jewish Festivals which were once of divine institution Nor did the
2. But instead of amending any thing amiss or disliked in the Liturgy some things were added to make it more offensive viz Sundays are more expresly reckoned as Church-Feasts than in the former book the new book saith thus a Table of all the Feasts that are to be observed in the Church of England through the year all Sundays in the year The former book thus these holy days to be observed and no other all Sundays in the year The word Holy-day which was somewhat suspicious is now changed to Feast-day and Sundays put in the number of Feast-days without any distinction which makes it more evident that they are accounted but Church Festivals The 29 of September in the old book is appointed a Festival to Michael the Arch-Angel the new book adds and to all Angels so that this is a Festival in the honour of all the Angels as the First of Novemb. is in honour of all the Saints also two new Holy-days are added never before enjoyned by the former book viz St Pauls Conversion and St Barnabas Moreover in the book of Consecration several passages are added declaring Bishops to be a distinct order from the Presbyters and the 36th Artic. is appointed to be understood of this book herein they contradict the Law and the Judgment of all our first Reformers in K. Edw. and Q. Eliz. days and the very book of Consecration it self 3. Nevertheless all Ministers are to approve this book and that by a publick declaration in the Congregation when they first enter upon their Ministry in these words and no other I vid. Act. of unif Ann. 14 Can. 2. A B do here declare my unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the book entituled the book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and other Rites and Ceremonies of the Church according to the use of the Church of England together with the Psalter of Psalms of David pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches and the form or manner of making ordaining and consecrating of Bishops Priest and Deacons It is said in excuse of this imposition that it is only a consent to the use not an approbation of the truth and goodness of all contained in the book because the words immediate foregoing are that Ministers should declare their unfeigned assent and consent to the use of all things in that book contained and prescribed Be it so and that the words Assent and Consent signifie the same things after the manner of Lawyers though some doubt it and those words to the use c. are not expressed in the form of a Declaration which they ought to have been yet we must observe First That this was a further alteration of the Case of Conformity to make it more intollerable Q. Eliz. Act of Uniformity only required that Ministers should be bound to read the book of Common Prayer and no other Liturgies or forms of prayer in publick The Canons went further and did require they should subscribe at their Ordination before the Bishop that the book of Common Prayer and of Ordination hath nothing in it contrary to the word of God that it may be lawfully used and that he himself will use that and no other but this new Declaration is to be made publickly before the Congregation on forfeiture of their Ministry and place that so there may be no favour shewed to any Also it requireth unfeigned Assent and Consent which cannot mean less then an hearty approbation of the use of what is enjoyned which is much more then barely to judge that nothing is contrary to Gods word and that they may be Lawfully used This Assent and Consent is to be made to all and every thing contained in and prescribed by the book of Common Prayer c. and then the particulars are specified viz the Prayers the Administration of Sacraments and of other Rites and Ceremonies and the book of ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons and the Psalter or Psalms of David as they use to be said in the Church of England Here is nothing omitted of all those things the Non-Conformists used to object against some as unlawfull and others as inconvenient and not for edification yet now they must from their hearts allow the use of them each one in particular not omitting the corrupt translation of the Pslams contradicted by our own allowed Bibles which how they could do who long contended that many of these things ought to be reformed let all that have Conscience judg The Non-Conformists think no form of words could have been contrived more spitefully either to keep them from conforming or to make them lay wast their Consciences if they did conform besides that they know from the mouths of the compilers that they did design it for these ends that they might either root out every branch of Conformity out of mens judgments or every Non-Conformist out of the Church 4. The Act requires this Assent and Consent not only of all that should hereafter enter the Ministry but of all those likewise that were already Ministers and were either Pastours or Lecturers in any Congregation and this Declaration to be made together with the subscription hereafter to be mentioned by a certain day viz before the 24th of August Anno 1662 whereas it is generally known that the book of Common Prayer came not out of the press abroad till within two or three days of that said 24th of August so that it was impossible that it should be seen much more that it should be considered by half the Ministers in England before that day and those that were resolved to keep their Places did a great part of them subscribe before they had read the book which practise doth manifest a further design to root out all that made any Conscience of what they said or subscribed seeing they must doe it without consideration or loose their places however to devise and impose new Terms of Communion upon men that are in the quiet possession and practice of their ministry is very unjust and contrary to all peace and by this practise men shall never be at quiet for though they have conform'd to all things enjoyned they know not how soon a prevailing faction will enjoyn them more nor what that will be especially the things enjoyned in the Declaration and Subscription being such as was known before hand many of the Ministers in place could not subscribe to with safe Consciences It is apparent that their design was not the peace of the Church but to remove them out of the Church 5. It is further required that all should have Episcopal Ordination who should in any sort exercise the Ministry had this concerned only those that should thereafter come to be ordained it had been more tolerable though it would have been contrary to Q. Eliz. moderation and reflecting upon all other reformed Churches An. Eliz. 13. who have not Episcopal Ordination
concerning the Divine right of Bishops above Presbyters which they so expresly disavowed both in their printed books and in the Manuscript of divers questions decided by them the account whereof we owe to this Learned man Irenic p. 2. and last All this therefore from the honour of our Reformers is but a flourish But now Sect. 3. We have three Reasons given why our Reformers left such Ceremonies in the Church 1. He saith it was out of Reverence to Antiquity they being of use in the Primitive times long before Popery and yet three of the chief Men Peter Martyr Martyn Bucer Paulus Fagius who were sent from beyond Sea to assist in the Reformation promoted no such continuance of these venerable Antiquities in the Churches abroad where they had been made use of before to help to reform And how Ancient were these Ceremonies Why the Surplice he saith was used in Augustine and Hieroms time that was 400 years after Christ and Superstition came in apace Images in Churches and praying for and to the Dead and such like And Ceremonies were so many that Augustine complained of the condition of the Church in his time in that regard was worse then that of the Church under the Law The Sacrament he saith was received about Constantines time in a posture of Adoration That was standing Sc. from the time of Easter to Whitsuntide as all other publick Worship was then performed in remembrance of Christs Resurrection But did they kneel The Dr. will not say so nor can he produce any evidence that kneeling at the Communion was commonly used till divers Hundred years after Popery had defiled the Western Church The Cross he saith was much Ancienter and used with much Superstition even in Tertullian 's time but the Dr. saith not it was used in Baptism nor is there any proof of it and that was only to our case When he pleads that we need not reform beyond the example of the Primitive times viz those soon after the Apostles and saith it gives great advantage to the Papists to to reject the Customs of those times upon pretence that the Mistery of Iniquity was working even in the Apostles daies I desire to know where we shall stop and what Church shall we take for our pattern Do all did any of the Churches for the first 300 years use our Ceremonies in their publick Church Service or if they did were not others also used in many Churches now generally disallowed by Papists and Protestants As giving the Communion to Infants sending the Eulogies or consecrated Bread to those that were absent from the Sacrament and the like Mr. Mead no Non-Conformist hath proved that Saints and Image Worship in remoter and smaller degrees began very early in the Church amongst which he reckons the most Ancient use of the Cross in Tertullian's time with which they use to fortifie themselves against the Devil and all evil Accidents There were never more Heresies and Divisions in the Church Apost of the latter times then in the Primitive times Yea before the Apostles were dead there have been no Errours or Corruptions since but the like were then and must we not go beyond or pass by all these times and appeal only to Scripture as the only Rule for Constituring and Governing the Church Did the Judges or Kings of Judah that reformed their Church before the Captivity or Zerubbabel and Nehemiah after it ever make former times their President Did they not alwaies appeal to the Law of Moses If we must suppose the times next the Apostles had their Customs and Ceremonies from the Apostles because they lived so near them This opens a door to all Popish Traditions and overthrows the perfection of the Scripture Or if we suppose the present Church in every Age hath not as much Power of self-Government as the Primitive Church had or to appoint and alter their own Customes and Ceremonies we shall contradict our 20th Artic. and bring our selves into unsupportable slavery to all the Cannons and Customes of all former times and so the Christians as well as the Jews will need a Talmud besides their Bible It is probable our first Reformers seeing they must retain some Ceremonies retained those they thought most Ancient and least offensive and this was the Reason why they were retained and not laid aside 2. The Dr. saith These Ceremonies were retained for fear of the Popish Bishops who were some of them Learned Men least they should reproach the Reformers with innovation against the Primitive as well as the Popish Church Answ This was indeed the true and chief reason why our Reformations was no more compleat because the Popish Bishops that were joyned with the Reformers hindred them and the Popish People would not endure a through Reformation Mr. John Elliot a worthy Gentleman in the Parliament Ann. 3. Car. 1. said That he had seen in a Diary written with K. Edw. 6th own hand Rushw Colec part 1. pag. 661. these words That the Bishops at that time some for Ignorance some for Sloath some for Pride and Luxury and some for Popery were unfit for Discipline To which we must add that some of the good Bishops Bishop Ridley in particular being but late Converts from Popery had yet a Zeal for the old Customes and Ceremonies those that could be retained without manifest Superstition And so much they themselues acknowledge in the Preface to the Service Book before cited Now what Obligation is this upon us not to endeavour a further Reformation 3. He saith They had respect to the Lutheran Churches who retained the same and more Ceremonies Answ They might consider that seeing they must retain some of the old Customes it would be more excusable to retain these because some other Protestant Churches did retain them But that they did it in imitation of those Churches there is no ground to believe seeing till now our Church was alwaies charged to be too much addicted to Calvin and influenced by him and Beza both in K. Edw. and Queen Eliz. time Nor is there any Reason why the Lutherans themselves retained so much many Popish Ceremonies but because Luther being almost wholy intent upon reforming the Doctrine of the Church neglected matters of Discipline and Ceremonies which his Followers interpret his judgment So hard is it to make any Progress in any good design especially in matters of Religion beyond the first Efforts when mens first Affections and Zeal are cooled and the World with carnal self doth afterwards intangle their minds It is strange overlashing when the Dr. saith that our first Reformers dyed Martyrs for our Church They dyed indeed for the Doctrine and Worship of our Church as it is common to all Churches and grounded on the Word of God in opposition to the Idolatrv and Superstitions of Rome and particularly that Idol of the Mass But the disputable things of our Lyturgy as to Government Rites and Ceremonies were never in question then nor did
they bear any Testimony to them But some of those Martyrs refused Conformity to them themselves as was shewed before and those who were the chief occasions of retaining that form of Worship and those Ceremonies and to pleas whom the better men consented to them turned Papists again as Gardiner and Tunstall by Name and were the Persecutors of the rest CHAP. II. The Second Argument from the Principles and Practise of the Old Non-Conformists considered Their Principles and Practise the same with ours so farr as their circumstances did bear The Difference of Circumstances betwixt them and us THE Dr's Second Argument is taken from the Principles and Practise of the Old Non-Conformists and largly prosecuted from § 6 unto 17 shewing That they condemned Separation from the Church of England did not like of gathering separate Congregations wrote earnestly against the Separation of the Brownists and when silenced themselves pleaded for quiet submission hoping that others might teach the people better then themselves ' Ans An Argument from Authority and Example especially in a matter of practise as this is is of great force though not to convince yet to induce mens mind to further consideration of what they do especially when it hath been proved by reason before as farr as the nature of the thing will bear but the Dr. having not given any direct argument either in his Sermon or this Book to prove the Preaching of the Non-Conformists Unlawfull which was the thing in question and from which I will not wander the Judgment of former men is of much less weight when it is brought instead of Scripture and Reason but we shall examine the force of it such as it is to remove the prejudice or Calumny that may be Created by it though it be no argument for what if the former Non-Conformists thought it unlawfull to preach when silenced by Law which yet by the way they generally were not but by the new impositions of Arch-Bishop Whitgift and the Canons of K. James which were not Law is it therefore certainly so indeed what if they thought it unlawfull for them in their circumstances is it therefore unlawfull for us in our present case or doth it follow that they would have thought it so had they lived under the same circumstances The circumstances of every Generation vary things and make many actions Lawfull or Unlawfull expedient or not expedient prudent or imprudent and of this none but the persons living and concerned in them are competent Judges Spectators can see but the outside of things Ancestors know nothing of them only they whose business and duty it is to consider what they ought to do in the present case are able throughly to judge what is meet for them to do or forbear But the Old Non-Conformists direct all their Zeal against Separation from the Church of England as it was practised by the Brownists and what hence can be inferr'd against the present Non-Conformists Preaching the Reader must judge For the further clearing of this matter I will briefly consider what were the general and avowed Principles of the old Non-Conformists in Ecclesiastical Matters what was their practise and what is peculiar in the present case beyond theirs 1. For their Principles 1. The Old Non-Conformists generally held the National Constitution of the Church of England as it is Collected into one body under the Bishops as the general Heads and Spiritual Officers of it to be unlawfull yea Antichristian injurious to the several Congregations or Parishes and contrary to the King 's unquestionable Supremacy The Dr. Confesseth this of those that presented the Admonition to the Parliament 1570 Part 1 Sect. 7. viz That they condemned the Government of Bishops as Antichristian and that they disliked the Ministry of the Church of England as ordained by and derived from the Bishops Now this Admonition was written by Mr. Cartwright in the name and by the consent of most Non-conformists then living Doctor Fuller saith that the Non-conformists in the latter end of Queen Elizabeth Church Hist Cent. 16. had a kind of Synod met in Coventry Ann. 588 agreed upon divers things as Canons some whereof were That Christ had appointed no Ministers in his Church but Presbyters and Deacons that the Bishops pretending themselves to be neither Presbyters nor Deacons but Officers distinct from them both were no Ministers of Christ nor to be acknowledged as such in his Church and that none ought to receive Ordination from them because they Ordained not as Presbyters but as Bishops i. e. by a power not derived from Christ This and much more he took from Bishop Bancroft Dr. Ames the supposed Author of the English Puritanism delivers this Dang posit Book 3. cap. 6. for the Judgment of the Puritans in those dayes They hold that there are not by any divine institution in the word any ordinary National Provincial or Diocesan Pastours Eng. Purit chap. 3. pag. 2. or Ministers under which the Pastours of particular Congregations are to be subject as Inferiour Officers and that if there were any such that when the word of God would have set them down mored istinctly and precisely then any of the rest for the higher place that one Occupies in the Church of the more necessity he is to the Church the more carefully would Christ the head of the Church have been in pointing him out and distinguishing him from other c. The same thing Dr. Ames layes down and proves as his own Judgment There is a Treatise written in the Name of all the Non-conformists directed to King james Medul Theol. cap. 32. de Eccl. instit item 35. called a Protestation of the King's Supremacy wherein they say pos 27. We hold that these Ecclesiastical persons that make claim to greater power and authority than this i. e. in particular Congregations as in the former position especially they that make claim jure Divino of power and Jurisdiction to meddle with other Churches then that one Congregation of which they are or ought to be members do usurp upon the Supremacy of the Civil Magistrate who alone hath and ought to have as we hold and maintain a power over the several Congregations in his Dominions and who alone ought by his Authority not only to prescribe Common Lawes and Canons of Vniformity and consent in Religion and worship of God unto them all but also to punish the offences of the several Congregations that they shall commit against the Lawes of God the Policy of this Realm and the Ecclesiastical Constitutions Enacted by his Authority and pos 28. We hold that the King ought not to give this Authority away or to commit it to any Ecclesiastical person or persons whatsoever but ought himself to be as it were Arch-Bishop and general Over-sear of all the Churches within his Dominions and ought to imploy under him his honourable Council his Judges Lieutenants c. and Pos 32. They crave that the Bishops may not be