If God ask us why we did not teach our families visit the sick instruct ignorant neighbours study better for to discharge our Ministerial work that we might be men of knowledge and such like the doubt is whether it will pass for a good answer to say we had not time because we must twice a day read the Common-Prayer XXI Assenting Approving and Consenting to all things even to all forms orders c. includeth the order of the Liturgy Two Rules of the order of Prayer are commonly acknowledged 1. The nature and order of the matter to be expressed 2. The Lords Prayer us a directory delivered by Christ 2. The Nonconformists that think that for the main there is nothing but good contained in most of the Prayers of the Liturgy yet think that they are greatly disordered and defective neither formed according to the order of matter nor of the Lords Prayer but like an immethodical Sermon which is unsuitable to the high subjects and honourable work of holy worship 3. They have oft offered whenever it will be well taken to give in a Catalogue of the disorders and defects of the Liturgy Which yet they think it lawful to use in obedience or for unity or when no better may be used But not to approve of such disorder as we do not approve of the failings of any of our own duties though we are daily guilty of them unwillingly XXII The Preface to the Book of Ordination saith that It is evident to all men diligently reading holy Scriptures and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these ORDERS in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons as several OFFICES which are repeated oft in the Collects at Ordination To this all must Assent and Consent 2. Some of us are conscious that we have diligently read the holy Scriptures and ancient Authors and yet three ORDERS and OFFICES are not evident to us 3. We have great reason to believe that Calvin Beza and many more Reformers Blondell Salmatius Robert Parker Gersom Bucer Calderwood Cartwright John Reynolds Ames Ainsworth and multitudes of such Protestants did diligently read both Scriptures and Ancients As also Dr. Sâ—illingfleet Bishop Edw. Reynolds and many such who thought that Scripture instituted no particular forms of Government As also Armachanus and many other Papists who think that Bishops and Priests do not differ ordine but gradu which the R. Reverend Archbishop Usher ordinarily professed We cannot assert that none of these diligently read Scripture or ancient Authors 4. But especially when we find that even the ancient Church of England was of another mind as is legible in the Canons of Aelfrick to Wulfine in Spelman pag. 573. 576. which conclude that in the old large sense there were but seven Ecclesiastical Orders or Degrees and that the Bishops and Presbyters are not two but one Hand pluris interest inter Missalem Presbyterum Episcopum quam quod Episcopus constitutus sit ad ordinationes conferendas ad visitandum seu inspiciendum curandumque ea quae ad Deum pertinent quod nimiae crederetur multitudini si omnis Presbyter hoc idem faceret Ambo siquidem UNUM tenent EUNDEMQUE ORDINEM quamvis dignior sit illa pars Episcopi 18. Non est alius ORDO constitutus in Ecclesiasticis Ministeriis c. Et Leg. Canuti p. 551. Pastores vocamus Episcopos Sacerdotes quorum partes sunt eruditione at que doctrina gregem Domini speculari ac desendere c. 5. And Dr. Stillingsleet hath proved by sufficient evidence that the same was the judgment of Archbishop Cranmer and other Reformers of the Church of England And it is the judgment of some of our Bishops and Conformists now All which we speak not to shew which side we think to be in the right but that the state of the question is Whether we can assent to this as true and approve and consent that it be used as is appointed That it 's evident to all men diligently reading c. that de facto there were three ORDERS and Offices from the Apostles times XXIII The ordering of Priests requireth the Bishop to speak to the people at the Ordination of Priests calling them to come forth in the name of God and shew what crime or impediment they know in the persons to be ordained c. In imitation of the ancient Churches when the Congregation over which they were set had their voice in his election or reception 2. The doubt is whether such a solemn invitation as in God's name be not too vain to be Assented and Approved and Consented to in a Church where the people over whom he is set never use to be present nor invited to it nor have any notice of it or any call to meddle therein being usually many miles and often many score miles distant nor any other people called to that work and rarely any people there that have any knowledge of the man and his conversation XXIV The Ordaining of Priests and the Consecration of Bishops both use these words as concerning the Office Receive the Holy Ghost for the Office and work of a Priest of a Bishop c. 2. It is not doubted but that the Holy Ghost must set Pastors over the Flocks 1. By qualifying men for the Office and making them desirous of it Both Grace Ability and Willingness are of him 2. By giving the Ordainers a discerning skill to know whom to ordain 3. By giving the flock a discerning and a willing mind We yet know not of any other Collation of the Holy Ghost which Ordination can make Nor know we that in any of these senses these words can be well understood For 1. Grace Gifts and Willingness are the dispositio recipient is presupposed we see not how it can be lawful to ordain him that seemeth not before to have them what else are they examined about Nor know we that God hath given any power to the Ordainers now by the laying on of hands to make an ungodly man godly or an unlearned or ignorant man to be learned or wise or a man of ill utterance to have a better tongue or an unwilling man to be willing The Apostles had a miraculous power of giving the Holy Ghost for extraordinary works and for abilities suddenly infused and they did it we never knew of any in our age that did it and therefore suppose that they have no promise or power so to do 2. And to give a discerning skill to the Ordainers 3. Or to give a discerning or willing mind to the people are neither of them a giving the Holy Ghost to the Priest The doubt is whether this be not an abuse of the words which Christ himself or his Apostles used and so not to be assented to approved and consented to 3. Yet is it not denyed but that Ministerial Authority is given by the ordainers as Ministers Deliverers or Investers But Authority is not the Holy Ghost so called 4. Nor
of Miracles since the Apostles hath assured us that his separation from communion with these Bishops though cruel to Hereticks so gross was confirmed by vision and by an Angel from Heaven and he forbidden their communion for the time to come We again mention this as not yet having heard any answer to it 11. Our own Canons forbid the people to communicate with Ministers for lesser faults as private Preaching Sacraments Fasts Conventicles or out of their own Parishes c. 12. Moses the Monk aforementioned is commended by Historians because he would not be ordained by Lucius not because erroneous but because he had persecuted others by the countenance of Valens the Emperour Though his persecution extended not to the silencing of thousands or hundreds or very many that we read of And as is aforesaid he chose to be ordained by banished men 13. Especially if men have no obligation to that insufficient heretical or ungodly Priest but humane because a Patron presented him or a Magistrate imposed him or because Parish-order which is a humane thing of meer convenience will else seem violated When as the avoiding of the danger of a false Pastor and the guilt of his sin which by owning him may be incurred and escaping the great loss of a faithful Pastor's guidance when we are conscious that we greatly need it are things of greater importance and of Moral and Evangelical Divine obligation In this case we cannot prove it Schism to avoid a wicked Priest The Bishops hold it a duty to avoid a Nonconformist that hath not their License But such a one as is foredescribed hath not Christ's License and is a Nonconformist to his Laws Again let it be noted 1. That even under the Jewish Law Magistrates were not the chusers of the Priests but God chose them by setling the Priesthood on one line 2. That Christ hath by his Spirit in the Apostles altered the Priesthood and the way of their calling and entrance under the Gospel 3. That the Church neer a thousand years was in possession of that way and many hundred of those years the possession was universal in all the Churches 4. That the chusing of Bishops or Priests by Magistrates or Lay-Patrons was none of that way which Christ appointed Therefore seeing it is not the chusing or making but the Governing of Bishops or Priests that is committed to Princes and Christ's Law is the first by which they must govern it seemeth to us that they cannot oblige the Subjects to take up with wicked Pastors when better are prohibited and are to be had LXVII 21. In those times and Countries where the allowed Bishops are corrupted by ignorance heresie ungodliness or faction and set themselves to bring in an unconscionable corrupt sort of Ministers into the Churches and will not ordain fit and conscionable men or by snares divide the Churches and cast out the most worthy and impose sinful conditions on all whom they will ordain it seemeth to us to be no Schism to seek ordination from other Bishops and in case of necessity at least to be ordained by such Presbyters as are either the sole or chief or equal Pastors in Parochial Churches especially in Cities and to perform the Office of Presbyters without such Bishops consent We here suppose such Bishops had themselves been duely elected and ordained yet 1. They have their power to edification and not to destruction 2. We are more obliged to Christ's interest and the Churches safety than to them God will have mercy rather than Sacrifice and preferreth mens salvation to ceremony or Church Laws 3. So the Oâ—â—â—odox forsook the Arrian and other wicked Bishops Malignity and wickedness is poison in the Clergy as well as Heresie and Schism So as is aforesaid Moses and Martin disowned the bad Bishops that were neer them so the Protestants disowned the Papist Bishops And Bugenhagius Pomeranus a Presbyter reformed and ordained Bishops in Denmark Bishop Vsher himself told one of us that being asked by his Sovereign whether he found that ever Presbyters ordained Presbyters he answered I can shew your Majesty more even where Presbyters made Bishops citing the Alexandrian custom out of Jerom to Evagrius The Judgment of English Bishops and Divines for the validity of such Ordination by Presbyters and of the Ordination in the Reformed Churches abroad some of us have proved heretofore at large 4. Christ having made a Law which conferreth the Pastoral Power on him that is made a due Receiver as the King's Charter doth the Power of the Lord Mayor on him that is duly chosen to it it followeth that no more is absolutely necessary to such reception of that Power but that the person be duly qualified and have consent and opportunity and the best investiture which the time and place will afford Of which Voetius de desperata causa Papatus and one of us in a Dispute of Ordination have long ago said that which we suppose will never be well answered 5. And Grotius de Imperio summ Potest circa Sacra an excellent Book hath shewed that he that is the sole Pastor of a Church is in effect a Bishop And indeed Dr. Hammond as is said in his Disser and Annotations asserteth de sacto that in Scriptures one Bishop without any Presbyter under him was setled in each Church so that every Pastor of a particular Church then was a Bishop as far as can be proved And if that was the Apostolical institution that every Church have a Bishop and that there was no sole Pastor at least but Bishops then he that is ordained the Pastor at least sole or chief of a particular Church is ordained a Bishop The reason is because his Office and Power followeth the Law and Charter of Christ that made it and not of the investing Ministerial Ordainer if he would alter it or pronounce it otherwise LXVI 22. Not to obey Lay-Chancellours where they govern the Church by the power of the Keys decreeing Excommunications and Absolutions and performing the work of Exploration and Admonition belonging to Bishops in order thereto we take to be no Schism nor to refuse subscribing or swearing to such a Government LXVII 23. Not sacrilegiously to desert the sacred Ministry when vowed and consecrated thereto is no Schism LXVIII 24. Where such sins are made the Condition of Ministration by men in power as that all the whole Ministry of a Kingdom are bound in conscience to deny consent and conformity thereto it is the duty of all the Ministry in primo instante to forbear their Ministerial Office or none for the reason is the same to all For example If ten or twenty untrue or unrighteous forbidden things must be subscribed declared covenanted or sworn or as many sins practised yea were it but one no doubt but the whole Ministry is bound to deny Conformity to any one such thing Now if all these must forbear or lay down their Office because forbidden by men to exercise it then it is
they promised it was not thâ—y but the Parents that were bound to perform 3. Or Nonconformists in this point who purposed before hand to be but the Parents Râ—pâ—esentatives and that the promise and obligation should all be devolved from them on the Parents though they knew the Church meant otherwise and that they were not bound to the Churches sense and therefore their standing to hear this is your part was no consent to take it for their part And none of all these do answer the Churches sense in their undertaking And if we are commonly baptized and made Christians in a way of false Vowing or Covenanting of such persons or of â—â—lusâ—â—y Equâ—vocation it is not well 11. We know not where Parents can procure any to undertake this Office as the Church imposeth it that credâ—â—ly signifie themselves able and willing to performâ—â— we could not do it our selves were we never so desirous Perhaps some Rich men might hire others to take their Children into their Care and Education as must be promised but who would do so for the poor yea for all the poor of England And the Nonconformists are not satisfied that it is lawful to engage any in a perfidious covenanting before God when before-hand they have no credible signification of any purpose to perform it Nay when the Parent resolveth to educate his own Child and not to trust him to the Provision or care of others 12. The Minister Covenanting to use the form in the Book of Common Prayer prescribed in administration of the Sacraments and no other Can. 36. No Parent may speak a word in the name of his own Child nor to enter him there into the Covenant of God nor profess that he offereth him to Baptism by virtue of and in confidence in the promise I will be thy God and the God of thy seed in their Generations Nor to promise himself what the Godfathers are to promise The words also of the Can. 29. are these No Parent shall be urged to be PRESENT nor be admitted to answer as Godfather for his own Child Nor any Godfather or Godmother shall be suffered to make any other answer or speech than by the Book of Common Prayer is prescribed in that behalf 13. It is the Godfathers work also by the Liturgy to take care that the Child be brought to the Bishop to be confirmed by him in the manner of the Church of England as soon as he can say the Creed Lords Prayer and ten Commandments and be further instructed in the Church Catechism which Godfathers use not at all to perform nor do the Parents use to expect it Nor doth one Child of a multitude understand what the Baptismal Covenant is of many a year after they have learned to say the said Catechism 14. That the Godfathers stand not there as the Representers of the Parents is evident according to the sense of the Church because the Parent himself is not suffered to do it or speak one covenanting word nor must be urged to be present nor are they to speak in the Parents name in any of their undertakings Nor is there the least intimation that the Church taketh the Sponsor for the Parents Representative 15. The Parents are to be admonished not to defer the Baptism of their Children longer than the first or second Sunday unless upon a great and reasonable cause to be approved by the Curate whether they can get understanding credible Godfathers or not These are the Matters of Fact Here note 1. That there is no Controversie between the Conformists and Nonconformists whether Christians Infants should be baptized 2. Nor whether a Conformists baptizing be valid 3. Nor whether the Parents presence be absolutely necessary and another may not speak in his name 4. Nor whether Adopters or any Proprieters may not covenant for the Child 5. Nor whether the old Sponsors be lawful who 1. Witnessed the credibility of the Parent 2. And undertook the Christian Education of the Child if the Parents should either die or apostatize The Nonconformists are against no such Sponsors though they think that their Children have right to Baptism without such 6. Nor do they deny that Baptism in the Parish Churches is valid and lawful as to the Parents and Godfathers if they do but agree on the Nonconformists way that the Sponsors shall but represent the Parents and that they be not bound by the contrary judgment of the Authors of the Liturgy to the contrary But the questions are 1. Whether a Christians Child whose Parents have no way forfeited their credit have not right to Baptism without other Godfathers 2. Whether the Parent should not solemnly enter his own Child into the Covenant of God as well as in times of Circumcision And whether any Parent should be forbidden it viz. to appear and speak as the Representer of the Child or Undertaker for him and Promiser of his Education 3. Whether that Child must profess by another that He Himself Believeth Renounceth Repenteth and Desireth Baptism And it be not rather to be prosessed that he is the seed of a Believing Penitent Parent whose Will is as his Will and is under God's Promise I will he thy God and the God of thy seed 4. Whether a Christian Parent may consent to the persidious undertaking of any Godfathers who give him not the least reason to believe that they intend that provision for the Children which they undertake Or else may let his Child be unbaptized till he can get such a credible Undertaker which is never like to be with most or many 5. Whether the Children of Heathens or Infidels or Atheists have right to Baptism upon the presentation of any Godfather who never adopteth them or taketh them for his own nor giveth any credible notice that he really intendeth to educate those Children as pro forma he seemeth to undertake Or whether such Children are truly said to believe because the Godfather or Minister or Congregation or Diocess or Nation or Catholick Church believe III. The Nonconformists are not of one mind about receiving the Lords Supper Kneeling Many judge it Lawful though neither necessary nor most eligible were they free some judge it also most eligible And some judge it as things stand unlawful Their reasons are 1. In doubtful cases duty lieth on the surest side But this to them is a doubtful case on one side and to imitate Christs institution by such sitting as men use to do at meat is certainly Lawful 2. Because they think this Kneeling violateth the reasons of the second Commandment being used where by whole Countries of Papists round about us and many among us it signifieth Bread-Worship or Idolatry by the same Action at the same season used For they suppose that the second Commandment forbiddeth Images as being External Corporal Idolatry and Symbolizing scandalously with Idolators though the mind intend the worshiping of the true God alone And such they think this kneeling is and that it encourageth the
called barren If one of these be God's Word the Nonconformists think that the other is contrary to it 4. In the old Book in the Psalms there are whole verses left out which are in the Hebrew Text and our new Translation and divers translated in a quite different sense the former following the Septuagint 5. The Rubrick for Christmas day is Then shall follow the Collect of the Nativity which shall be said continually unto New-years day And the Collect for all these several daies is Aâ—mighty God which hast given us thine only begotten Son to take our Nature upon him and THIS DAY to be born of a pure Virgin So the Collect on Whitsunday is God which upon this day c. The Rubrick is The same Collect to be read Munday and Teesday So on Christmas day and seven daies after Because thou hast given Jesus Christ thine only Son to be born as on this day for us c. And on Whitsunday and six daies after According to whose most true promise the Holy Ghost came down this day from Heaven These things and such other we must approve in the foresaid Approbation of all things in the old Common-Prayer-Book V. We must Assent Approve and Consent to all the mis-translations in the present Liturgy as well as to justifie the old Edition That before-cited Psal 105. 28. is in the present Book and so are the rest of the omissions and differences in the Psalms before mentioned which are many Different Translations which have all the same sense may be all called God's Word because their sense is so But where they have different senses so far one of them is contrary to God's Word For God's Word is one and true and not contrary to it self The question is not whether these faulty Translations were not a good work and a great mercy to the Church till we had a better Nor whether they may not be lawfully used where there is no better Yea or where there is a better if the Command of Governours or Concord make it best for that time and place But it is Whether all the faults of the Translation may be Assented Approved and Consented to We commit some failings and sins every day but we may not Approve of them and profess that we Consent so to do 2. Some Conformists here think that the Declaration is to be taken properly without any force or distorting and they say that both Translations are justifiable because one followeth the Hebrew and the other the Septuagint and Christ and his Apostles have justified both by using them But others of them hold that this instance proveth that by All things Assented and consented to must be meant only All things that are not by humane frailty mistaken or erroneous or els that by Assenting and Approving must be meant no more than Assenting that they may be Used And so they consent with the Nonconformists in the matter but not in the exposition of the words And to the former they say 1. That there are other mistranslations besides those that follow the septuagint 2. That Christ and the Apostles by citing some Texts according to the septuagint do not thereby approve of all the rest for they cite others otherwise 3. That by citing them they justifie not alwaies the translation but only the sense so far as it is cited for it being that scripture which the people then commonly used 3. And they say that if this objection should hinder mens Assenting to the Liturgy it might as well hinder their Assenting to the Bible in our translations And indeed we know no Nonconformist who would declare or subscribe that he doth Assent to Approve and Consent to all things Contained in the Bible according to any Translation but only all things Contained in the Bible as it was delivered by the sacred writers and in all Translations so far as they truly signifie or express that to us But if they might but say as one part expounds the Declaration We Assent c. To all things Contained c. That are not by humane frailty mistaken they would soon Conform herein 6. The Calendar in the Common Prayer appointeth the publick reading of the Books called Apocrypha beginning September 28. And so Continuing to November 24. Every day of the week except the proper Lessons interposed Part of the Apocrypha to be read are the Book of Tobit Judith Bell and the Dragon c. 2. Learned Bishops and Divines of the Church of England have written to prove that these Books are not only Aprocryphal but fabulous and have manifest untruths As that the intralls of a fish will drive away all Devils and keep them from returning When Christ saith This kind goeth not out but by Fasting and Prayer And when the Angel saith that He was the son of Ananias of the tribe of Napthali c. 3. These Books are to be read just in the place and order as the Sacred Scriptures are and under the same title of the First Lesson Only called Apocrypha in the Bibles But 1. It is not appointed that the Priest tell the people so 2. If it were they understand not Commonly what Apocrypha signifieth 3. If they were sometime told it they forget it and apply not that name to every Lesson that they thence hear 4. It is not denyed that the sounder Books that are Apocrypha may be read in the Church as a Homily may be with due notice of their difference from the Canonical Books But the question is whether not only they but the Books proved fabulous by many Protestants may be there read and that instead of so much of the holy Scripture then omitted and that without any better notice given to the Common people of the difference 5. And the chief doubt is whether this may not only be done but also the Calendar as so appointing it may be Approved of and Consented to by us all 7 It hath been before opened that no Parent is permitted to be Godfather to his own Child or to speak one word at his baptizing to enter him into the Covenant of God or dedicate him to him nor to promise in his name nor to undertake any part of his Christian education nor so much as to be urged to be present Nor is there a word to intimate that the Godfathers represent the Parent or speak in his name or stead but the contrary is implyed Though the Parents are to procure these God fathers 2. It hath also been before shewed how great a Controversie it is whether Infants Right to Gods promises and Church state be not by that Covenant I will be thy God and the God of thy seed implyed in 1. Cor. 7. 14. els were your Children unclean but now are they holy And so whether Infants have any right upon a Godfathers words there who never took them for his own if on the Parents account they have no right And whether such Godfathers act be truly the Child 's in
is it denyed but that as Father Son and Holy Ghost do enter into Covenant with us as Christians in our baptism so do they with Ministers as such in their ordination-covenant But such a Relation to the Holy Ghost as the Ministers future helper in his work cannot well be supposed to be all that is meant by the words Receive the Holy Ghost both Scripture and common use taking them in another sense XXV This Oath in the Consecration of Bishops is to be taken by every Bishop In the name of God Amen I. N. Chosen Bishop of the Church and See of N. do profess and promise all due reverence and obedience to the Arch Bishop and to the Metropolitical Church of N. and to their successours so help me God through Jesus Christ 2. It is not pretended that any such Oaths of obedience were instituted by Christ or his Apostles or were used in the Churches for many hundred years nor till the Papacy was rising which was furthered by such Oaths 3. They that suppose Bishops to be successours of the Apostles cannot make them subjects to any other Ecclesiastical Rulers without asserting that the Apostles were Governours over one another which we find not that they do 4. It was many hundred years before Arch-Bishops had any Governing power over Bishops or exacted any obedience from them being not Episcopi Episcoporum as the Carthage Fathers in Cyprian professed But were only such as had the first seats and voices in the Synods 5. The question therefore is whether such Oaths as necessary to a Bishops consecration be to be Approved and consented to XXVI An Oath of Canonical obedience also is put upon all that are made Priests and Deacons And Priests at their ordination must make this Covenant that they will reverently obey their Ordinary and other chief Ministers unto whom is committed the charge and Government over them 2. The ordinary is not only the Bishop but also the Chancellour Officials Surrogates Comissaries Arch-Deacons and all that are Judges ' in the Ecclesiastical Courts 3. to obey them that are thus de facto set over us is no less than to obey them in the excercise of that power which is given them as so set over us 4. The doubt is whether they that take any of them to be Usurpers of an Ecclesiastical power which indeed they have not and can prove it to be so should swear or Covenant obedience to them as such e. g. It is commonly confessed by the Conformists that the true power of the Keys of excommunication and Absolution is appropriated by Christ to the Clergy And yet our Chancellours being lay men do decretively excercise that power The question is may we swear or Covenant to obey them 5. And seeing Christ never gave one Presbyter the Government of others as Archdeacons Surrogates Officials c. whether all the rest may swear obedience to them or Approve of and consent to the use of such Oaths And divers Councils have condemned it as a dangerous practice for Bishops to tle subject Presbyters to them by Oaths XXVII Ministers that live among the people have greatest advantage to know the penitent from the impenitent 2. But it is the foresaid lay Chancellours who usually know nothing of them but by reports that excommunicate and absolve them And the Parish-Minister must as a cryer readeth a proclamation or sentence of a Judge openly read these excommunications and absolutions 3. These excommunications must pass according to the Canons against all that shall affirm that there is any thing in the book of Common-Prayer râ—pugnant to the Scripture or any of the 39 Articles â—rroneous or any of the Rites and Ceremonies such as he may not with a good conscience subscribe to or that the Government by arch-Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Arch-Deacons and the rest that bear Office in the Church of England is repugnant to the word of God or that any thing in the form and manner of making consecrating Bishops Priests or Deacons is repugnant to the word of God c. 4. The present doubt is whether a Minister who knoweth such of his Parish to be godly peaceable men whom the Chancellour decretively excommunicateth may both openly read and declare such excommunications and also swear or Covenant so to do in obedience to the Ordinary And whether when he knoweth that a wicked impenitent man is absolved he may pronounce such absolutions XXVIII The Oath of Canonical obedience seemeth to mean obedience according to the Canons And he that Covenanteth to obey his ordinary must be supposed to mean no less than According to the Canon Laws by which he is known to govern and as Government thereby is excercised 2. And if so then there are more things in the Canons and present Government which the Nonconformists dare not swear or Covenant to obey besides those already named than we will now stand to enumerate XXIX The Rubrick saith that the Minister who repelleth any from the Sacrament shall be obliged to give an account of the same to the Ordinary within 14 daies after at the furthest 2. If all that by gross ignorance Atheism Infidelity Sadducism Heresie Schism Drunkenness Whoredom Stealing Malice c. are uncapable of the Communion be presented to the Ordinary within 14 daies no charity that is guided by knowledge of the common state of the people can think that in London Diocess there would be fewer than many score thousands presented at once And in other Diocesses many score hundreds at least 3. Some Ministers dwell a hundred Miles or neer from the Bishops And the Bishops are divers of them so much at London or abroad as that it cannot be expected that all these must be presented to the Bishop himself but to the Chancellours court as is usual 4. The Chancellours Court is so far from most Ministers in the Land and the prosecuting so many when proof is demanded will be so chargeable and take up so much time as that it will undo many poor Ministers that have scarce enough to maintain their families and it will take up the time which they should use in the necessary labours for their flocks 5. The Chancellour is a lay man to whom they must be presented And the issue will be but a lay mans excommunicating them if obstinate or absolving them Which is not justified by the Bishops themselves 6. At the said Chancellours court things are managed as at a civil judicature There is not that endeavour to convince sinners by Scripture and to draw them to true Repentance by humbling evidence intreaties and prayers for them as should be for the saving of a soul from sin But the charges of the court fees and the fears of a prison after excommunication maketh it an unacceptable and as unlikely means to convert men as the stocks 7. Therefore for a minister to present all his Parishioners to such courts whom he is bound to deny the Sacrament to were but to make him seem their greatest
before he dyed he joyned with Peter of Alexandria by synodal Letters to Anathematize the Council of Calcedon and yet wrote to the Bishop of Rome that he renounced Communion with Peter and he wrote to Peter that he renounced Communion with the Bishop of Rome Euphemius succeeded him and he rased Peters name out of the Book and joyned with the Roman Bishop Peter and Euphemius as Generals were gathering synodical Armies against each other and Peter dyeth Athanasius that succeeded him would fain have reconciled his Church but could not Palladius succeeded Peter Cnapheus at Antioch Both these Patriarchs joyn together to curse the Council of Calcedon They die John succeeded at Alexandria and Flavianus at Antioch These also joyn to curse the Council while the Patriarchs of Rome and Constantinople are for it and curse them Zeno dieth and Anastasius Dicorus is chosen Emperour He saith Niceph. l. 16. c. 25 being a man of Peace and desiring the ceasing of all contention left all to their liberty to thank of the Council of Calceaon as they pleased Hereupon the Bishops fell into three Parties some fervent for every word of the Council some cursed it and some were for Zeno's Henoticon or silence or suspension These renounced communion accordingly with one another the East was one way the West another and Libya another Nay the Eastern Bishops among themselves the Western among themselves and the Lybian among themselves renounced communion with each other Niceph. c. 25 Tanta confusio ment iumque Caligo saith the Historiaâ— orbem universum incessit The Emperour having resolved to keep peace and make no change was forced to fall upon those of both sides that were most turbulent At Constantinople he put out Euphemius or for dislike of him This Emperour before his inthroning had given under his hand to Euphemius a promise to stand for the Council He demanded his writing again Euphemius denied him and was cast out Macedonius succeeded him He had the same writing The Emperour demanded it of him He also denied him The Emperour would have put him out The people rise up in sedition and cryed It is a time of Martyrdom Let us aâ—l stâ—â—k to the Bishop And they reviled the Emperour calling him a Manichee unworthy the Empire The Emperour was fain to submit to Macedonius who sharply rebuked him as the Churches enemy but in time he remembred this and cast out Macedonius and burnt the Councils Acts and put Timothy in his place who presently pull'd down the Image of Macedonius The Patriarchs also of Alex. Antioch Bishop of Jerusalem were all cast out even those that were against the Council Pet. Cnapheus had made one Xenaâ—as a Persian servant unbaptized Bishop of Hierapolis He was against Images and brought a troop of Monks to Antioch to force Flavianus the Bishop to curse the Council Flavianus denied it The people stuck to the Bishop and so unanswerably disputed down the Monks that so great a multitude of them were slain as that they threw their bodies into the River Orontes to save them labour of burying of them Nicep c. 27. But this was not all another troop of Monks of Caelosrria that were of Flavianus side hearing of the tumult flockt to Antioch and made another slaughter as great as the former saith the Historian For this the Emperour banished Flavianus whose followers thought his punishment too great after all these murders Peter being dead the Bishops of Alexandria Egypt and Lybia fell in pieces among themselves each having their separate Conventions The rest of the East also separated from the West because the West would not communicate with them unless they would curse Nestorius Eutyches Dioscorus Moggus and Acacius And yet saith Niceph. l. 16. c. â—8 Qui Germani Dioscori Eutychetis sectatores suere ad maximam paucitatem redacti sunt Xenaias bringeth to Flavian the names of Theodore Theodorite Ibas and others as Nestorians and tells him if he anothemarize not all these he is a Nestorian whatever he say to the contrary Flavian was unwilling but his timerous fellow-Bishops perswading him he wrote his curse against them and sent it to the Emperour Xenaias then went further and required him to curse the Council They prevailed with the Isaurian Bishops to consent and all renounced the refusers as Nestorians And thus the Council having in name condemned the Nestorians and Eutychians the Eutychians called all Nestorians that cursed not the Council and got many cast out After Flavian Severâ—s got in at Antioch The first day he cursed the Council though it 's said that he swore to the Emperour before that he would not Nicep c. 29. In Palestine there were renewed the like confusions about the condemnation of Flavian and Macedonius About Antioch Severus Letters frightened many Bishops to curse the Council and those that held two Natures Some Bishops revoked their sentence and said they did it for fear Some stood out And the Isaurian Bishops when they repented condemned Severus himself that drove them to subscribe And some Bishops fled from their Churches for fear Cosmas and Severianus sent a condemnation to Severus The Emperour hearing of it sent his Procurator to cast them out of their Bishopricks for presuming to condemn their Patriarchs The Procurator found the people so resolute that he sent word to the Emperour that these two Bishops could not be cast out without blood-shed The Emperour answered that he would not have a drop of blood shed for the business Helias Bishop of Jerusalem found all the other Churches in such confusion condemning one another that he would communicate with none of them but Euphemius at Const Nicâ—p c. 32. And that you may see how people then were moved a Monk or Abbot Theodosius gathering an Assembly loudly cryed out in the Pulpit If any man equal not the four Councils with the four Evangelests let him be Anathema This voice of their Captain resolved them all and they took it as a Law that the four Councils should be sacris libris accensenda and wrote to the Emperour certamen se de eis ad sanguinem usque subituros This was then the submission to Princes by the adherents to the Councils of the Bishops And they went about to the Cities to bring them to joyn with them The Emperour wrote to Helias to reform this He rejecting his Letters Souldiers were sent to compel them The Orthodox Monks gathered by the Bishops tumultuously cast the Emperours Souldiers out of the Church c. 34 After another conflux they anathematized those that adhered to Severus The Emperour provoked sent Olympius with a band of Souldiers to conquer them He came and cast out Helias and put in John The Monks gather again and the Souldiers being gone they cause John to engage himself to be against Severus and stand for the Council though unto blood which contrary to his word to Olympius he did The Emperour deposed Olympius and sent another Captain Anastasius who put the Bishop in prison and
I nor any other person is obliged by the vow to endeavour any such alteration of Church Government V. 12. The fifth Part of the Matter The Declaration and Oath as not understood of not resisting any Commissioned VI. 13. The sixth Part of the Matter To cease preaching and administring Sacraments till we conform at least not to preach to more than a family and four persons VII 14. The seventh Part Consequential Not to come within five miles of any City or Corporation which sendeth Burgesses to Parliament or of any place where we have preached to more than aforesaid since the Act of oblivion 15. The Adjuncts and the other Matters agreed on which affright the Nonconformists 16. The case and practice of the Ministers since they were silenced Additions occasioned by Mr. L. Fresh Suit and some others about National Churches THE Question stated § 3 c. Whether we are obliged by or to the Jewish National Polity § 5 c. or by scripture to a National limitation of them Whether a National Church-form be lawful § 30 c Whether it be a prudential desirable form § 38 c The resolution of this by a short history of Prelacie and Councils § 39 c. Obj. From the necessity of Appeals § 40 c. Obj. Shall all gather Churches that will ib. Obj. The Apostles have successours ib. Q. Whether the King or who is the National Church Head § 41. 42 c A Christian Kingdom what § 43 Q. Must real holyness in the judgment of rational Charity be required in all Church members § 1 Q. What Covenanting is necessary to particular Church relation § 5 c. The spirit maketh Ministrs how I. The Epistle of an African Council in Cyprian Ep. 68. p. 200. to Felix a Presbyter and the Laity at Legio and Asturica and to Laelius the Deacon and the Laity at Emerita concerning their Bishops Bafilides and Martial worthy to be read as to our present controversies II. The Letter of Rob. Grosthead the good Bishop of Lincoln to Pope Innocent containing the reason of his Nonconformity and shewing that hindring preaching is the greatest sin next Divelism and Antichristianism Out of Mat. Parâ— An. 1253. p. 871. 872. III. An extract from Bishop Saunderson de juramento SECT I. The Reasons of this writing and the sense of the word CHURCH IT was the saying of acute and holy Augustine though we call him not with Fromondus Omniscâ—um that no man ought to be patient under an accusation of Heresie He meaneth by Patience a silent neglect of his own Just Vindication Not that we must be like Hectoring Duellers that would kill or hurt others in revenge or in a sinful way of Vindication But by silence those that slander men may be encouraged in their sin to their own destruction and those that value the slandered persons may be tempted to think too well of Heresie for their sakes And the honour of God and his Truth and our own good names so far as they are serviceable are none of them to be disregarded We have with grieved souls beheld the Land of our Nativity distracted by Divisions and much if not most about Religion we wish it were not against Religion by some that indeed have no true Religion Teachers against Teachers in Discourses Sermons Books rendring each other despicable and unlovely and some calling out aloud to Rulers to draw the Sword against their Brethren so learnedly and industriously pleading the Cause against each other with the Laity high and low as if the destroying of their Love and kindling Wrath and Hatred were the Evangelical necessary work and without this zeal and skill and diligence hard to be accomplished No wonder then if we have people against people families divided and all confounded and this grievous Schism carryed on by crying out against each other as Schismaticks and implacably causing it while we loudly inveigh against it The case is lamentable that distraction should be thus expressed and promoted and when God hath warned us by the mischiefs of an odious Civil War and hath tryed us again with peace with all Nations about us when most of them are involved in grievous Wars that yet we will not give peace to one another but live as if Peace were the Plague which we most desire to escape Yet as it is the good providence of God that the Names of Wisdom Godliness Truth Justice Mercy Honesty and Vertue are all still honourable even among those that hate and oppose them and the names of Folly Ungodliness Lying Unjustice Unmercifulness Dishonesty and Vice are all dishonourable where the things themselves are followed and prevail so Love Peace and Concord are names that are by most commended when if most were for the things indeed we were in a hopeful way of recovery And Malice Schism and Discord are cryed down by those whom no intreaty will prevail with to forbear them or to accept any remedy against them Yet we are thus far prepared for peace that if we be not false Hypocrites if we did but know which is the true way of Love Peace and Concord we would follow it And if we knew what is Schism indeed we would avoid it And its pity that men that think themselves wise should yet not know the way of Love and Peace Especially that the Learned Preachers of the Gospel of Love and Peace should still be the incendiaries and stir up the Laity that would be more peaceable against each other And that after so many Volumes of History have these thirteen hundred years at least asperst the Clergy with the reproach of being the contentious troublers of the world And yet must we despair of a cure of so odious a disease The thing that Books Sermons and Discourses cry out against those called Non Conformists for is Humorous Obstinate Schism and Disobedience in Preaching when forbidders and keeping up Assemblies not allowed and gathering Churches out of Churches separating from the Parish-Communion and Church of England If we can find out the Schismatick we hope he will be condemned by us all But that the Cause may be heard at least in some part before it is judged we that publish this here give an account of our own judgment and those that we are best acquainted with how far we hold it lawful or unlawful to gather Churches or to separate from Churches or to differ from what is established by Authority But the Application to our particular Case and our Arguments thereabout we must not here presume to publish They that accuse others as Schismaticks and Separatists for deserting Churches or gathering Churches out of Churches and will not tell us what they mean by the word Church nor give us leave to tell them what we mean but judge in confusion and despise explication and necessary distinction are men that we can neither be edified by nor edifie in this way SECT II. The Various Opinions of such us we have to do with
though we hear that some of them take us as not sincere for keeping up a difference and giving no more reasons of it The thing which we so greatly desire leave to do but dare not be so bold yet as to venture by it to displease them who condemn us for not doing it lest their anger would be sharper to us if we do it so great is our difficulty between this Soylla and Charybdis But we hope we may adventure to open some part of the Matter of Fact which Conformity and Nonconformity are concerned in that so men may conjecture at the Case themselves which will be no reflexion on the Government barely to tell what they command nor a challenging any of our Superiours to a disputation nor a charging them as faulty that cannot bear it 1. Matters of Fact to be foreknown to the true understanding of the Cause 1. THE root of the difference between the Old Nonconformists and the Conformists was that one sort thought they should stick to the meer Scripture Rule and simplicity and go far from all additions which were found invented or abused by the Papists in Doctrine Worship and Government and the other side thought that they should shew more reverence to the customs of the ancient Church and retain that which was not forbidden in the Scripture which was introduced before the ripeness of the Papacy or before the year 600 at least and which was found lawful in the Roman Church and common to them with the Greek that we might not seem singular odd and humorous or to go further from the Papists than reason and necessity drave us And the Laity seemed no where so sensible of the difference as between the way of Ceremony and unceremonious simplicity and the way of our many short Liturgick Prayers and Offices and the way of free-praying from the present sense and habits of the speaker while pacificators thought both seasonably good 2. The sad eruption of this difference among the Exiles at Frankford while Dr. Cox and Mr. Horn and their party strove for the English Liturgie and the other party strove against it for the freer way is at large reported in a book called the troubles at Frankford 3. Queen Elizabeth and King James discountenancing and suppressing the Nonconformists they attempted in Northamtonshire and Warwickshire a little while to have set and kept up private Churches and governed them in the Presbyterian way But that attempt was soon broken and frustrate by the industry of Bishop Whitguift and Banctoft And the Nonconformists lived according to their various opportunities some of them conformed some were by connivence permitted in peculiars and small impropriate places or Chappels that had little maintenance in the publick Ministry which kept them from gathering secret Churches some of them had this liberty a great part of their lives as Mr. Hildersham Mr. Dod Mr. Hering Mr. Paget Mr. Midsley senior and junior Mr. Langley Mr. Slater and Mr. Ash at Bremicham Mr. Tailor Mr. Pateman Mr. Paul Bayne Mr. Fox of Tewksbury John Fox and many more Some had this liberty all their lives as Mr. Knewstubs Dr. Chadderton Dr. Reignolds Dr. Humphrey Mr. Perkins Mr. John Ball Mr. Barnet Mr. Geeree Mr. Root Mr. Atkins Mr. Gilpin John Rogers and many others some were fain to shift up and down by hiding themselves and by flight and these preached sometimes secretly in the houses where they were and sometime publickly for a day and away where they could be admitted so did Mr. Parker Mr. Bradshaw Mr. Nicols Mr. Brightman Mr. Brumskil Mr. Humphrey Fen Mr. Sutchff Mr. Thomas and many more and after their silencing Mr Cotton Mr. Hooker and many more that went to America Mr. Cartwright was permitted in the Hospital at Warwick Mr. Harvey and Mr. Hind at Bunbery in Cheshire and many more kept in having small maintenance being in peculiar or priviledged places Mr. Rathband Mr. Angier Mr. Johnson Mr. Gee Mr. Hancock and many others oft silenced had after liberty by fits Mr. Bowrne of Manchester Mr. Broxholm in Darbyshire Mr. Cooper of Huntingtonshire at Elton and many others suffered more and laboured more privately Dr. Ames was invited to Franekera some were further alienated from the English Prelacie and separated from their Churches and some of them called Brownists were so hot at home that they were put to death Mr. Ainsworth Johnson Robinson and others fled beyond seas and there gathered Churches of those that followed them and broke by divisions among themselves The old Nonconformists being most dead and the later gone most to America we cannot learn that in 1640 there were many more Nonconformist Ministers in England than there be Counties if so many 4. The Conformists shortly fell into dissension among themselves especially about three things Arminianism as it was called and Conciliation with the Church of Rome and Prerogative Dr. Heylin in the Life of ArchBishop Laud doth fully open all these differences and tells us that Archbishop Abbot was the Head of one party and in point of Antiarminianism even Archbishop Whitgist before him with Whitaker and others had made the Lambeth Articles driven the Arminians from Cambridge King James had discountenanced them in Holland and sent six Divines to the Synod of Dort who owned and helpt to form those Articles And he tells us that Bishop Laud had no Bishops on his side but Bishop Neale Bishop Buckeridge Bishop Corbet and Bishop Howson and after Bishop Mountague and thought it not safe to trust his Cause to a Convocation the major part called then The Church of England 1. Cryed down Arminianism as dangerous Doctrine 2. Cryed down any neerer approach to the Papists and the Toleration of them 3. And were much for the Law against absoluteness in the King and Dr. Heylins and Rushworth's Collect. will tell you the full story of Manwaring Sibthorp and Archbishop Abbots refusing to license Sibthorp's Book and the Consequents of all Thus these two Parties grew into jealousies the Old Church-men accusing the New on these three accounts and the New ones striving as Dr. Heylin describeth them to get into power and overturn the Old 5. In this contention the Parliaments also involved themselves and the Majority still clave to the Majority of the Bishops and Clergy then called the Church of England And in all or most Parliaments cried up Religion Law and Propriety and the Liberty of Subjects and cried down Arminianism Monopolies Connivence and Favouring of Papists and their increase thereby expressing by Speeches and Remonstrances their jealousies in all these points till they were dissolved 6. The writings of Bishop Jewel and much more Bishop Bilson and most of all Mr. Richard Hooker and such as were of their mind shew us what Principles there and then were by the Laiety that followed them received We will not recite their words lest our intent be misunderstood neither Bishop Bilsons instances in what cases Kings may be resisted by armes Nor Mr. Hookers that
maketh Legislation the natural right of the Body politick and governing power to be thence derived to depend upon the Body and to returne to it by escheats when heirs fail and that the King is singulis Major and universis Minor c. His eighth Book was in print long before Bishop Gauden published it who yet vindicateth it to be Hookers own 7. In 1637 1638 1639. A. Bishop Land useing more severity against dissenters than had been used of late before and the visitations more enquiring after private fasts and meetings and going out of mens own Parishes to hear and such like and also the Book for sports on the Lords daies being necessarily to be read by all the Conformable Ministers in the Churches and Altars Railes and Bowing towards them being brought in and in many places afternoon Sermons and Lectures put down the minds of men before filled with the aforementioned jealousies were made much more jealous than before And after the imprisonment of some the stigmatizing of some and the removall of many beyond the Seas and the death of more the Nonconformable Ministers were reduced to the paucity before mentioned but the minds of many people were more alienated from the later set of Bishops and the old sort of Conformists more jealous of them and more afraid of Popery c. than before 8. The new Liturgy then imposed on the Scots with the other changes there attempted the designes charged on the Marq. of Hamilton the fear of the Lords losing the Tyths c. which Dr. Heylin mentioneth as the causes or occasions of their arming there with the progress thereof and their entring into England and the advantage thence taken by some English Lords to advise the King to call a Parliament once and again and the discontents and proceedings of that Parliament against the two Ministers of the King for former things with such other matters we had rather the reader took from others than from us We are unwilling to be the mentioners of any more than concerneth our present cause and the things are very commonly known 9. On the 23. of October 1641. The Irish suddenly rose and murdered no less than two hundred thousand persons and Dublin narrowly escaped them of which we refer the Reader to the examinations published by Dr. Henry Jones since a Bishop in Ireland and to the history of Sir John Temple and to the Earl of Orery's Answer to Mr. Welsh 10. The dreadfulness of this Massacre so far exceeding the French the news sent over that the Irish said that they had the Kings Commission and the foregoing jealousies of the people and the Parliaments Declarations raised in multitudes of the people a fear that the Irish when they had ended their work there would come over hither and do the like and that they had partakers in England of whom we were in danger and that there was no way of safety but to adhere to the Parliament for their own defence or else it would quickly be too late to complain 11. In 1642. the lamentable Civil Warr brake out At which time as far as ever we could learn by acquaintance with some of them and report of others excepting an inconsiderable number the Houses of Lords and Commons consisted of those that had still lived in conformity to the Church of England and the Episcopal Government and were such Conformists as Dr. Heylin describeth Archbishop Abbot and the Clergy and Parliaments of his times to have been Crying out of the danger of a new partie that said they would shake our Religion Liberties and Property And such were they when the War began Presbytery being then little known among them 12. Their fear of being overpowred by the party of whom they seemed to think themselves in sudden danger caused some of them to countenance such Petitionings and clamours of the Londoners Apprentices and others as we think disorders and provocation of the King 13. The first open beginning was about the Militia And whether the Lord Lieutenants whom the Parliament chose were not almost all Episcopal Conformists we intreat the Reader but to peruse the Catalogue in the ordinance for that Militia and to ask any that well knew them as some of us did many of them and he may certainly be satisfied 14. The same we say 1. Of the far greatest part of the General Officers Collonels Lieutenant-Collonels and Majors of the Earl of Essex's Army 2. And of the Sea-Captains 3. And of the Major Generals of Brigades and Counties through the Land 15. When the Parliament's Armies were worsted and weakened by the King and they found themselves in danger of being overcome they intreated help from the Scots who taking the advantage of their straits brought in the Covenant as the Condition of their help which the Parliament rather accepted than they would lose them which at first was imposed on none by force But to pass by all other Considerations was judged by many wise men to be an occasion of division as making the opposition to Prelacy to be the terms of the Kingdoms Unity and Concord when they might know that the King and a great if not the greatest part of the Kingdom were of the contrary mind and so it was thought to be as the Papal terms of Unity a means of unavoidable division But others thought that because it tied them to no endeavours but in their Places and Callings they might take it 16. The Assembly of Divines at Westminster were men that had lived in Conformity except about eight or nine of them and the Scots But being such as thought Conformity lawful in case of deprivation but the things imposed to be a snare which should be removed if it could be lawfully done they also received the Covenant but were divided about the sense of the word Prelacy many professing their Judgment to be for Moderate Episcopacy whereupon the describing additions Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons were added And upon such a Profession that it disclaimed not all Episcopacy Mr. Coleman is said to have given the Covenant to the House of Lords And they complained of the Parliament which tied them to meddle with nothing but what they offered to them 17. This Covenant and Vow was taken by the Parliament and by their Garrisons and Souldiers that would volunrarily take it as a test whom they would trust the rest being had in suspension And after the wars by such as were ordained Ministers and by the Kings adherents when they made their compositions so far was it afterward imposed But many Ministers and Gentlemen refused it and so did Cromwel's Souldiers and in many Counties few did take it 18. How far the Parliament was from being Presbyterians may partly be seen in the Propositions sent from them by the Earl of Essex to the King at Nottingham and partly by their defeating all the desires and endeavours of those that would have Presbytery setled through the Land We know of no places but London and
Can. 27. And also that their Children are not to be baptized unless they will submit them to the dedicating sign of the Cross no nor to be buried with Christian Burial of which more afterward 3. If they have a Minister in their own Parish that never preacheth or so bad as that they dare not commit the Pastoral care of their souls to him they must not be admitted to Communion in any other neighbour Parishes Can. 28. That they are ipso facto excommunicated shall be anon shewed SECT IX The Matters of Fact that concern the Conformity and Nonconformity of the Ministers And 1. of Assâ—nt Consent and Subscription that nothing is contrary to God's Word 1. THE Canon to be subscribed 36th willingly and ex animo is That the Book of Common-Prayer and of ordaining of Bishops Priests and Deacons containeth in it NOTHING CONTRARY TO THE WORD OF GOD and that he himself will use the form in the said Book prescribed in publick Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments and none other 2. The meaning of this subscription is not agreed of by the Conformists that take it As to the first clause some say that by Nothing Contrary to the word is meant as it is spoken Nothing indeed Others say by Nothing is meant Nothing which I have discerned so to be Or Nothing except such failings as all humane writings are lyable to And by Contrary Some say Contrary in the Common sense of the word is meant But others say that by Contrary is meant so far Contrary as should drive us from Communion with the Church or Contrary to any great doctrine or precept of the Word of God And the Nonconformists interpret it as the first sort do according to the usual and proper meaning of the words 3. So the later clause that he himself will use that form in publick prayer and administration of the Sacraments and none other Dr. Heylin and very many others suppose is meant properly as is spoken viz. That by the form is meant all the words and orders and that by publick prayer is meant as is spoken All publick prayer used by a Minister in the publick assemblies And that by None other is meant neither wholly nor in part But others think that by Form is meant only the form of words and not the orders And that by none other is meant only No other Book of Common-Prayer or set Liturgie Or No other entire form and order excluding this And that it doth not mean No other form before or after Sermon in the Pulpit or in some parts of Worship so it be of our own Composure Nor yet that we may not use sometime some other order than is prescribed in the Rubricks viz. 1. Sometime read other Chapters than the Calender prescribeth because that Liberty is expressed in the Preface to the second Book of Homilies 2. Sometimes to give the Sacrament to some that kneel not 3. To baptize some without the Cross c. of which more hereafter Because the Rubrick saith only you shall do thus but saith not you shall do no otherwise But to this the former sort answer 1. That if any universal Negative none other may be particularly or limitedly interpreted upon our own surmises no Laws Covenants or Promises signifie any thing and no words are intelligible 2. That we subscribe strictly to this Article to use no other form But not so to the Book of Homilies but only that we take it for wholsom Doctrine 3. That if the Rubrick for Crossing Kneeling c. exclude not all other inconsistent forms of administration it signifieth nothing but leaveth every man to his own will 4. It is yet a greater doubt with the Conformists themselves whether these words be not at least a Covenant that They will use no other printed prescribed Liturgy And so some think that it plainly obligeth them not to use those printed Forms which the Archbishops and Bishops have used to draw up and impose for several Publick Fasts Thanksgivings and particular occasions But others think that it doth not bind them to disobey the Bishops therein but that such exceptions were intended though not exprest or at least had been inserted if not forgotten II. The Act of Uniformity requireth that every Minister that officiates Do openly and publickly before the Congregation there assembled declare his unseigned Assent and Consent to the Use of all things in the Book contained and prescribed in these words and no other I A. B. do here declare my unfeigned Assent and Consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the Book eatâ—tuled The Book of Common-Prayer Administration of the Sacraments and other Râ—tes and Ceremonies of the Church according to the use of the Church of England together with the Psâ—â—ter or Psalms of David pointed as they are to be sung or said in Churches and the form or mâ—â—â—er of making ordaining and consecrating of Bishops Priests and Deacons And page 10. He shall declare his unfeigned Assent and Consent unto and Approbation of the said Book and to the use of all the Prayers Rites and Ceremonies Forms and Orders therein contained and prescribed according to the form aforesaid 2. The Conformists themselves are not agreed of the meaning of these plain words One party expounding them as the Nonconformists do according to the properest and ordinary use of the words and the other party otherwise The former hold that as many Acts of Parliament Contein more in the body of the Act than in the Title and make the means more extensive than the end so here the ASSENT and CONSENT to the USE of the Book is the END in the first clause and APPROBATION also in the second And that the Declaring that form of words is the Means to that end That Assent signifieth Assent to the Truth and Consent and Approbation relate to the Goodness rectitude and use And that this is not only of the Prayers and other parts which the subscriber is to Read to the people but as is exprest of all things without exception Conteined in and prescribed by it particularly to all the Prayers Rites Ceremonies Forms and Orders without collusion or equivocation The other part hold that all this signifieth no more but that I Assent that I may lawfully use and I Consent to use so much as belongeth to my place and that I will not unpeaceably oppose it Their argument is Because to the Use is mentioned before the Form of words To which the other answer as before that 1. That Approbation is mentioned after as well as Use 2. That the Means are larger than the end As in the Corporation Act the end is the preventing of Rebellion but the Means is Declaring that There is no obligation on me or any-other from that Oath 3. That without gross violence Assent can be judged to mean no less than Assenting that it is true 4. That there is not a'word in the Book which was not intended for
the Kingdom of Heaven 12. Therefore either we consent to pronounce almost all such to be saved at a time when our words take the deepest impression or else more exceptions must be made 13. Some say that the Excommunicable are included in the Excommunicated But the Canon and the express words of the Liturgy and the Churches abhorrence that the Priest shall be Judge do so notoriously confute this bold assertion that by such stretches almost any thing may be said or sworn and it shall not be known by authority when or how far any Subject is obliged by Covenants or Oaths XVIII The Liturgy requireth that such ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof at all times of their Ministration shall be retained and in use as were in this Church of England by the authority of Parliament in the 2d Tear of Ed. 6. 2. The Canon of the same Church expoundeth their meaning cap. 58. Thus every Minister saying the publick prayers or Ministring the Sacraments or other rites of the Church shall wear a decent and comely Surplice c. 3. We suppose in the 2d of King Ed. 6. The Cope Alb and other vestments were in use which seem forbidden by the Common-Prayer Book in the 5th and 6th of Ed. 6. 4. The Conformists agree not of the sense of this Rubrick 1. Whether all these are hereby reduced or not 2. Whether it forbid all Ministers to officiate without a Surplice or only Command the use of it without an implyed penalty But the words and the forecited Canons shew that the Church intended an exclusion of all that will not use it And we must subscribe to administer in no other form 5. The Nonconformists differ about the Surplice some taking it to be Lawful and others to be unlawful But they Commonly hold that Preaching Christs Gospel is commanded by God and that Ministers by their ordination are obliged to do the work of that Office and that Surplices are not commanded by God and therefore if a man mistakingly should take the use of the Surplice to be sinful he should not therefore be ejected and silenced And therefore they dare not declare Approbation and Consent to the Rubrick or subscribed form in the Canon which implyeth this restraint XIX The Damnatory sentences in the Creed called Athanasius's are to be Assented Approved and Consented to 2. If they referred but to the Doctrine of the Trinity and not to the particulars of that explication it would not be excepted against But some R. Reverend Conformists do profess that those sentences are untrue and not to be approved 3. But such think that the Churches meaning is not to require us to Assent or Approve them as true but only to Consent to use them And they prove it because the same Church requireth us to Read the Books of Tobit c. which have palpable untruths and not to believe them to be true 4. But that reason seemeth null and vain 1. Because the Apocrypha is no part of the Book to which we must Profess Assent Approbation and Consent nor to which by the Canon we must ex animo subscribe that there is nothing in it contrary to the Word of God But Athanasius's Creed with those damnatory sentences are part of that Book Indeed the Liturgy requireth us to read those Apocryphal untruths but they are no part of the Book 2. And it being not the sense of the Liturgy but of a Statute of Parliament which we here doubt of it seemeth insufficient if not impertinent to tell us what is taken for the sense of the Church for the doubt is What is the sense of the Parliament which we can no otherwise know but by the plain words till they will otherwise declare their meaning 5. And indeed if the passages in Tobit which some Reverend Bishops call Lies about the Angel's saying that he was the Son of Ananias of the Tribe of Napthali and the fishes driving away all Devils that they shall never return were but to be read we know not how to approve of that Law Calendar or Rubrick that commandeth such reading of them But yet that is much less than the Assent required to Athanasius's Creed which yet we take save those damnatory sentences to be the best explication of the Mystery of the sacred Trinity which in so short a summe is extant in the Church XX. The Liturgy saith All Priests and Deacons are to say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly not being let by sickness or some other urgent cause And the Curate that ministreth in every Parish-Church or Chapel being at home and not being otherwise reasonably hindred shall say the same in the Parish-Church or Chapel where he ministreth c. 2. The Conformists agree not of the sense of this some think that the ordinary incommodities of such a commanded use may pass as those hinderances or urgent causes mentioned in the exceptions But the more plain and ingenuous dealers hold that the urgent causes and hinderances here mentioned must be somewhat extraordinary and not any thing which is the usual case of most Ministers 3. Cathedrals and some other Churches have many Priests and Deacons of whom one only can daily ossiciate in publick And many are Chaplains in such mens houses as will have other free prayers used And most Ministers have great and necessary work to do which must all be left undone while the Common Prayer is said over by them twice a day They have Sermons to study many Books to read that they may be furnished with necessary knowledge for their work They have abundance of ignorant parishioners to instruct exhort or comfort They have the sick to visit the dead to bury the Sacraments to administer families to govern instruct and provide for And many find free prayer from the immediate sense of their case and wants to be so profitable to them that they cannot spare it All which and more require the the strictest improvement of every minute of their time And if the Liturgy be read over by every Priest and Deacon twice a day it is certain that much of these aforesaid must be omitted And it is a great part of our Christian duty when two good things come together to choose that which hic et nunc is the greater to choose the lesser then being a sin 4. Therefore the Nonconformists dare not Assent Approve and Consent to the tying of every Priest and Deacon ordinarily to read over the Liturgy twice every day And they are the more averse to such Approbation by seeing so very few Conformists Comparatively to practice this themselves which sheweth that they take it to be unlawful seeing it is their judgement that our Rulers must be obeyed in all things which are lawful to be so done And if they that make such declarations of Approbation think it unlawful ordinarily to keep them we may doubt whether it be lawful so to make them as is required of us 5.
the fact is enough to warrant the execution Though a Judge may also pass a sentence if he see cause vid. Calv. Lexic Jurid And others commonly There are some others that go further and think it unlawful to have Communion with the Parish Churches because they thus excommunicate us first without more cause and because they take the Pastors to be scandalous by the foresaid Oaths Declarations and subscriptions and those that have not the peoples consent to be no true Pastors But these are herein disowned by the most and very few Ministers are of their mind that we know of though many of the people much incline to it especially they that live where the Priests are ignorant scandalous slothful or malignant because Paâ—l saith Wâ—â—h sâ—câ— no not to eat But others tell them that 1. It is not the Parish-Ministers that made the excommunicating Laws 2. And if they sin themselves it is ignorantly 3. And we have not a call and opportunity to hear and judge them XI Even those called Independents hold if Mr. Ph. Nyes Manuscript to that end may tell us their minds that it is lawful to hear the publick Parish Ministers because the Magistrate may set Teachers over the People and require them to hear them Though they hold that the People should choose their Pastors and that the Sacraments should be administred and received freely and not by force Yea such Anabaptists as Mr. Tombes as is visible in his Book hold that Communion with the parish-Parish-Church is lawful in the Word Prayer and Lords Supper XII We commonly hold that men unjastly excommunicated are not thereby disobliged from publick worshiping of God and living under Pastoral oversight and Church discipline nor are bound to endanger their own salvation by neglecting such duties and losing such helps and priviledges and therefore must be of such Churches as they can if they cannot be of such as they would or as are allowed by the Magistrate XIII It is not in the power of our selves to escape such excommunications For we are not able to change our own understandings so far as to hold every thing before named to be lawful Some of us are able to say that we have with a willingness to see the truth studied the case of the old Conformity above forty years and the case of the New-conformity now above seventeen years and read almost all that hath been written for them which we thought might add to our information and prayed earnestly that God would not suffer us to erre and the longer we study it the more we are confirmed In this case we suffer publick and private obloquy and reproach and not only these seventeen years the loss of all Ministerial Maintenance but the danger of 40 l. a Sermon and imprisonment in common Gaols and the ruine of our estates and health And in reason it s as easie to think that they that hold their opinion on such terms are like to be as impartial in their studies as they whose way leadeth to preferment wealth and honour of which we were capable of a part We say therefore again that to Consâ—â—m or prevent the Canons Excommunication ipso facto is not in our power And they that say God will not condemn men for that which they were not able to avoid or help should not do otherwise themselves XIV When the 1800 or 2000 Ministers were silenced the far greatest part of them forbore all publick Preaching and only taught some few in private at such hours as hindered not the publick Assemblies and many of them lived as private men XV. To this day it is so with many of the Nonconformists Those that live where they find small need of their Preaching or else have no call or opportunity and cannot remove their dwellings do hold no Assemblies but as other men content themselves to be Auditors Those that live where are godly and peaceable Ministers in Publick who yet need help do lead the people constantly to the Parish-Churches and teach them themselves at other hours and help them from house to house This is ordinary in the Countries and even in London with many Ministers that hold no Assemblies yea many that were ejected out of City Parish-Churches XVI Those called Independents do keep up such Churches as they had gathered before when none of our present oaths declarations subscriptions or practices were imposed on them which is not therefore to be taken as new XVII As to the rest it was the great and terrible Plague in 1665. which made this change in their Assembling and Ministration When the publick Ministers forsook the City and the rich left the poor to misery and death and people lookt every day for their last when they that heard a Sermon one day were buried the next when death had awakened the people to Repentance and a regard of their everlasting state divers Nonconformable Ministers resolved to stay with them They begg'd money out of the Countries for the poor and relieved them They got into the empty Pulpits and preached to them And when Preachers and Hearers lookt every day for their last it is easie to conceive that there was serious Preaching and serious Hearing By this many that died were helpt in their preparations and through God's great mercies multitudes that survived repented and became the serious seekers of a better world The men that did this were mostly unmarried and could easilier venture their own lives than such as had families and some of them that had families yet trusted God and most did scape We know but of one pious Germane Minister that died of the Plague in the City and one of another Disease if not through want and two that fled from it in the Country And when God had blest these mens faithful labours with the conversion of many souls especially Apprentices and young people the experience so engaged their mutual affections that the Ministers resolved that they would live and die in such service as God had so blessed and preserved them in and their hearers resolved that they would not forsake their Teachers And thus the dreadful Plague began that which so much now offendeth men as a dangerous Schism XVIII And when some men out of excessive caution were ready to think that when that Plague was ceased having killed about an hundred thousand the Ministers should lay by that publick work and retire again into secret corners God confuted them by his next dreadful judgement burning down the City the next year 1666 So that there were neither Churches to go to nor Ministers in the Parishes to Preach nor rich men to maintain them And could any soul that hated not Christ and mens salvation have wished the Nonconformists then to desert the miserable people When they newly came from under the terrour of such a dreadful Plague and when success and Gods protection had so greatly encouraged them and when presently they were deprived of their worldly treasure and had not houses or