the Church by Diocesan Bishops is agreeable to the practice of the best and purest Ages of the Church and to the Judgment of the wisest and holiest Fathers of it And that their Power and Jurisdiction was as absolute and extended as far or farther than any Bishops this day in England I shall shew hereafter that Episcopal Government as now settled in England has been and is at this day commended and approved of by all the most Eminent Divines beyond Seas Perhaps some may say if the Government of the Church by Diocesan Bishops be so agreeable to that of the Primitive Church and approved of by other reform'd Churches as we pretend it is how comes it that they all did not follow the pattern of England and become all Diocesan Churches I answer They may as well ask us Why all the Nations of the World that were subject to the Roman Emperors did not upon the decay of the Roman Empire when they resum'd their just Rights of Government to themselves become all Monarchies according to the Pattern of England Some Nations besides England Ireland and Scotland did assume Episcopal Government as Denmark Sweden c. but perhaps it was not consistent with the present Circumstances or Politick Constitution of all places at the time of the Reformation to set up Episcopal Government as indeed it was not And therefore since neither Episcopal nor any other particular kind of Government is so essential to a Church as that a true Church may not be without it in case of indispensible Necessity they put themselves some under one Form of Government some under another as was most agreeable to their present constitution but with this Caution every where That all Protestants of every whole Church be the Government what it will should be oblig'd to Conform to the Establish'd Church in which they liv'd For though every National or whole Church had a Power to chuse what kind of Government they pleased for themselves yet 't was never allow'd that particular scrupulous People among themselves had Power to do so too This Power of subdividing was never pretended to nor practis'd in any other Nation since the Reformation but in England So that though they do all allow the Antiquity and Usefulness of Episcopal Government yet since 't is not Essential to a true Church no more than that of the Presbyterian or Independent nor convenient at this time for all places some may refuse it and yet it does not follow that we in England should do so since 't is convenient for us and more agreeable to the Laws and Constitution of these Kingdoms and comes by much nearer the Practice of the Primitive Churches than any other whatsoever But they say we make Episcopal Government Essential to a true Church for that we will suffer none to execute the Office of a Minister here in England unless they be ordain'd by a Bishop To this I answer 'T is plain we do not make Episcopal Government Essential to a true Church For we allow all the Reform'd Churches to be true Churches and Communicate with them and yet some of them have no Diocesan Bishops 'T is true by the Laws of this Church and Nation none are to be admitted to execute the Office of a Minister in any Cathedral or Parish Church or Chapel nor to hold any Ecclesiastical Benefice within these Kingdoms but such as are willing to submit to the Orders and Government of this Church and the Laws of the Land And therefore since both the Laws of this Church and Nation do require that all Ministers who desire to serve in this Church shall declare publickly that they assent to and approve of our Form of Worship c. and are willing to use the same as the Church appoints and that they shall receive their Ordination and Licence to execute their Office from the Bishops 'T is but reasonable that such as want these Qualifications shou'd be refus'd the Liberty of executing their Office in these Kingdoms * The Church of England does not say absolutely that all those Ministers who want Episcopal Ordination are no true Ministers but only that none shall be accounted a lawful Bishop Priest or Deacon so as to execute their Function in the Church of England unless they be once Ordain'd by a Bishop as appears by the Preface to the Ordination But the reason we refuse them is not so much because that Presbyterian Ordination does not make them true Ministers according to God's Law as though no instance can be given of Ordination without a Bishop in Scripture or Antiquity but all to the contrary because they stubbornly refuse to submit to our Laws and Constitutions and contemn the lawful Authority under which God has plac'd them and commanded them that they should obey And this is evident from the Statute of 14 Car. 2. In which there is a particular Proviso That all Ministers of Foreign reform'd Churches who come into this Kingdom by the King's Permission are to be excepted out of and excus'd from the Penalties of that Act. And this Custom of requiring Conformity and Subscriptions from all who desire to be admitted to the Office of the Ministry is agreeable to the Practice of every settled Church that has been ever since Christ's days as will appear hereafter The 3d. Objection against the Constitution of our Church is That our * By National Churches are meant the whole Churches of such Nations as upon the decay of the Roman Empire resum'd their just Right of Government to themselves both in Church and State National Church which we call The Church of England has no Foundation and wants Discipline All being incroach'd and swallow'd up in the Bishops and the Pastors of every Parish who ought to have full Power to execute every part of it are depriv'd thereof But this is false for the Presbyters in our Church have as great Power in Ecclesiastical Matters as ever they had in the Primitive Church What Power are they depriv'd of by the Bishops that they had then By the Laws of our Church no Rules of Discipline no Articles of Doctrine no Form of Worship can be introduc'd by the Bishops or impos'd upon any without the consent of the whole Presbytery of the Nation in Convocation who appear either in Person or by Proxy The only Authority that the Bishops of the Church of England have above the Presbytes is Government Ordination and Censures which were all appropriated to the Apostles and Bishops in the Primitive Church St. Cyprian assures us it was so in the African Church in his Third Book Ep. 10. 12. 28. 27. And so it was in St. Augustine's Time See Cod. Eccl. Afr. c. 6 7 9 c. But say they the Power of Ordination is taken away from the Presbyters and lodg'd solely in the Bishops and 't is plain say they in the Apostles days the Presbyters did Ordain for Timothy was ordain'd by laying on the hands of the
between them Is not this truly the case among them I appeal to their own Consciences whether this be truth which I say How can these Men pretend then that they have us'd all proper means to satisfie their Consciences They who really scruple things out of tenderness of Conscience would be sincerely willing to be better inform'd and would look upon them as their best Friends who endeavour to inform them but instead of this they fly out into rage and violent Passions against those who offer to remove their Scruples and for their kindness return most reproachful bitter Language both on the Persons tho' never so Eminent and the thing tho' never so Sacred which is visible in all their Books of Controversie And even in common Discourse How difficult is it to obtain from the Zeal of many of our Dissenters so much truce as to hear what one can say to them with patience and civility They tell us in plain terms we may spare our breath and not pretend to teach them they understand their Duty better than we do They are satisfied in their own minds that they are in the right and will not be wheedled out of their Opinion by all that we can say This is truth Mr. Baxter himself has own'd as much in his Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet p. 81. where he affirms in his own name and the name of his People That he who thinks that his own or others reasonings will ever change all the truly honest Christians in the Land knows so little of Matters or of Men or of Conscience as that he is not fit to be a Bishop or a Priest What will they say now to this will their Scruples of Conscience excuse their Separation and Disobedience when 't is evident they will not use the proper means to satisfie their Consciences Nay farther When they declare 't is needless to go about to remove their Scruples for they are resolv'd beforehand they will not be convinc'd Let no Man say so for shame 't is against common Reason and the Opinion of all learned Men and even of Mr. Baxter himself But we will suppose for once that every particular Dissenter has done his utmost indeavour to satisfie his Conscience and that after all they cannot conquer their Scruples What then Must they therefore proceed to Separation No this was never allowed by Christ nor his Apostles nor by any Christian Church since their time not even by our Dissenters themselves heretofore Our Saviour himself did not separate from the Jewish Church though there were many things amiss in it nor advise others to do so says Vines a Non-Conformist in his Book on the Sacrament pag. 39. In the Apostles days we find there were some who scrupled some things that were enjoin'd but notwithstanding the difference of Men's Judgments and their pretended Scruples of Conscience the Apostles did prescribe Rules of Uniformity and allow'd none to Separate from the Church and frequent Meetings of their own setting up because they could not conquer their Scruples And this very Argument did the Assembly of Divines at Westminster Anno Dom. 1648. use against their Dissenting Brethren the Independents who pleaded for Separation upon the account of Conscience as the Dissenters do now See Papers for Accommodation pag. 111. And when the Independents told them they could not satisfie their Consciences so as to Conform to their Church Government and therefore begg'd That they may be allow'd separate Congregations the Assembly positively refused it and urged them to Conform to their way of Worship c. and charged them with Schism if they did not For say they To desire separate Congregations as to those parts of Worship where they own they can join with us is very unreasonable for tenderness of Conscience may justifie non-Communion in the thing scrupled but it cannot justifie a Separation See the Papers for Accommodation pag. 20 21 22 51 c. For if it should say they it then would make way for infinite Divisions and sub-Divisions and give countenance to perpetual Schism in the Church ib. p. 68 73 c. And then the Assembly justifie themselves in so doing by the practice of the Saints in the Apostles days For they tell them they desire no more of them hereby than what they were confident was practised by the Saints at Philippi namely To hold practical Communion in things wherein they Doctrinally agreed ib. p. 115. So that if the judgment of their own Brethren in a full Assembly may be taken upon the most weighty Debate and serious Deliberation their setting up separate Meetings and forsaking the Church upon the account of some Scruples which they pretend they cannot conquer is Sinful and Schismatical And when the Assembly of Divines was pressed farther by their Dissenting Brethren they desired them to answer in this one thing Whether some must be denyed the liberty of their Conscience in matters of practice or none If none then say they we must Renounce our Covenant and let in Prelacy again and all other ways If a denial of Liberty to some may be just then Vniformity may be settled notwithstanding Men's different Judgments or pretence of Conscience Papers for Accommodation pag. 116. Agreeable hereto is the practice of the Independents themselves where they have the power as in New-England no Separation is there allow'd upon the account of Scruples of Conscience as appears by their Book of Statutes which they have lately Printed and by their telling Mr. Williams a famous Minister among them that if nothing will serve him but Separation because he could not conquer his Scruples The World was wide enough and so away they banish'd them in the midst of Winter From what has been said it appears That though there were some things amiss in the Church of England which our Dissenters could not satisfie their Consciences about yet this would not justifie Separation from the Church though perhaps it might after due pains taken to inform themselves aright concerning them justifie their non-Communion in the things scrupled Now I will shew that there is really no cause to forsake the Church of England upon the account of Conscience And that all those who do forsake the Church and frequent separate Meetings are condemn'd for Schismaticks by the most Eminent Divines of all the Reformed Churches beyond Seas and by Mr. Baxter Dr. Owen Mr. Gifford Corbet and many other of the Non-Conformists themselves heretofore For First they all agree That no Man is obliged in Conscience to separate from any Church that is sound in Doctrine and has the Sacraments rightly and duly administer'd The Scripture allows Separation only in these three cases First In case of Idolatrous Worship Secondly In case of False Doctrine imposed instead of True And Thirdly In case things indifferent be made necessary to Salvation But where these Three are wanting nothing will justifie Separation See Canon Nicen. 6 15 16. Constant c. 6. Chalced. 17 20 26. Antioch c. 2 5. Cod.
withdrawing themselves from under the Government of the Church 'T is real Schism We do not enter into a comparison of your order with that under which we live all are subject to inconveniencies ours have hers as well as yours It is enough for us to know that the same Divine Providence which by an indispensible necessity and by conjuncture of Affairs did at the beginning of the Reformation put our Churches under that of the Presbytery has put yours under that of the Episcopacy and as we are assured that you do not despise our simplicity so neither ought we to oppose our selves against your Preheminence See both these Letters and a third from Monsieur L' Angle to the same purpose at large in the latter end of Dr. Stillingfleet 's Misch of Separ Thus much for the foreign Divines Now we will come nearer home and see what our Dissenters themselves have thought of the Church of England from which they separate First then Several of the Dissenters to avoid the imputation of Brownism do sincerely profess before God and all the World That they hold the Church of England to be a true Church of Christ with which they did and would hold Communion notwithstanding any defilement or unwarranted Power of Church Government exercised therein See the Apologetical Narrative p. 5 6. Again They own that our Parochial Churches are true Churches and that they can find no fault with the Doctrine of our Church and that 't is lawful and * If occasional Communion be lawful constant is a Duty See Papers for Accomm p. 47 51 56. sometimes a Duty to communicate with us Baxter 's Defence of his Cure p. 38. and 64. Corbet of Schism p. 41. Peace-offering in the name of the Congreg party Anno Dom. 1667. p. 10. True way of Conc. part 3. c. 1. sect 40. and Mr. Baxter in his last Answer to Bagshaw p. 30 31. has these words You little know what pernicious design the Devil has upon you in perswading you to desire and indeavour to pull down the interest of Christ and Religion which is upheld in the Parish Churches of this Land and to think that 't is best to bring them as low in reality and reputation as you can and contract the Religious Interest all into private Meetings And see also Mr. Baxter 's Plea for Peace p. 240. to the same purpose And lastly Dr. Owen in his Book of Evangelical Love p. 54. acknowledges That they look upon the Church of England measuring it by the Doctrine received since the Reformation to be as sound and healthful a part of the Catholick Church as any in the World I have now prov'd that Separation from a true Church is sinful and schismatical I have proved the Church of England to be a true Church and all this I have proved from their own Writings How will they now justify their Separation or clear themselves from the imputation of Schism What will they say to this Is Schism not a sin Or is their Separation from us not Schism If they say it is not Schism Why then our Non-conformist Ministers know better what is Schism than all the Learned Divines of the Church of England and the most Eminent Men of all the Reformed Churches beyond Seas do For I have shewed from their own words That they do acknowledge the Church of England to be as true and sound a part of the Reform'd Church as any in the whole World and condemn all those that separate from her as guilty of Schism Doubtless these Men are as competent judges of Matters of Religion as any of our Dissenting Ministers And I am sure we have not the least reason to believe they would flatter us for they are strangers who have no dependance upon us and Men of more Piety and Honesty than to indulge us in any thing that is sinful But it may be they will say that all these Learned Divines beyond Seas who have acknowledged the Church of England to be a true Church are ignorant of the Errors and Corruptions in her But let me tell them They might have a little more civility than to suppose that so many godly upright Men would rashly give their judgment of Matters of so great moment as those are which relate to Religion before they were truly acquainted with the nature and circumstances of the thing And besides They ought not to judge of other Men by themselves Because the most of their own Divines are utter stangers to the practice and Constitution of other Churches as appears sufficiently by their Principles of Separation must they believe others to be so too No throughly accomplish'd Divine can be supposed to be ignorant of the true state and condition of any Reformed National Church much less of so great and considerable an one as the Church of England But to put this out of dispute it appears before that several of the most Eminent Men before-mentioned were in England for some years and frequented both the Churches and Meetings on purpose to acquaint themselves with both in order to giving their judgment of them Since therefore the Doctrine of the Church of England is sound and the Worship true and Government and Constitution of it as agreeable to that of the best and purest Ages of the Church as any now in the World let us in the name of God lay aside all those fears and jealousies that have possess'd the minds of too many of us concerning it and let us remember that not only the Peace and Prosperity of this Church and Nation and of every particular Member of it depends upon our Union but of the Protestant Religion all over the World Tho' there may be some things amiss in the Church of England it is not the business of private Men to Reform the Church or dispute the fitness or unfitness of every little imposition Their Duty is to Conform at least in the outward action and submit the fitness of such things to the Wisdom of those to whom God Almighty has intrusted the Government of the Church and Nation they may reasonably be thought more competent judges of what is convenient and fit to be done or not to be done than private Men can be And if any thing be amiss in the Government of the Church or the manner of God's Worship they are to answer for it not the People God will call them to an account for imposing upon his People things not agreeable to his Will But will never condemn us for doing our Duty in submitting to such Governors as he has placed over us 'T is true there are some things in Religion which are essential to it without which Men cannot be saved Now in case our Governours command us to act contrary to these we ought not to obey for we must obey God rather than Men But 't is agreed on all sides That the Church of England enjoins no such things and that they who live godly sober lives according
is setting up new parts of Worship as our Dissenters seem to do when they charge us with setting up new parts of Worship and making the Scriptures insufficient Adoration we all agree is a substantial and proper act of Divine Worship but whether this Adoration is perform'd by prostration or by bowing or by kneeling is a Circumstance in it self indifferent And therefore they who differ in these Circumstances do not differ in the act of Worship but in the manner See the Harmony of Confessions where you will find what the Opinions of other Reformed Churches are concerning the Lawfulness and Usefulness of Ceremonies The latter Helvetian Confession saith That there are different Rites and Ceremonies found in the Churches let no Man judge hereby that the Churches dissent And the Confession of Bohemia hath Wherefore those Rites and those good Ceremonies ought only to be kept which among the People of Christ do Edifie therefore whether they be extent or brought in by the Bishops or by the Councils Ecclesiastical or by other Authors whatsoever the simpler sort are not to trouble themselves about that but must use them to that which is good And a little after Although our Men do not equally observe all Ceremonies with other Churches which is not a thing necessary to be done yet are they not so minded as to move any Dissentions for the cause of Ceremonies although they be not judged to be altogether necessary so that they be not found contrary to God's Word And the Augustine Confession has Some Men then may ask whether we would have this life of Man to be without Order without Ceremonies In no wise But we teach That the true Pastors in their Churches may Ordain Publick Rites or Ceremonies And Beza in his 24th Epist agrees herein as has been said before And Calvin in his Book of the True way of Reformation Ch. 16. says He would not contend about Ceremonies not only those which are for decency but those which are Symbolical Let all thing s be done decently and in order says the Scripture And St. Paul tell us 1 Cor. 14. 33. God is not the author of confusion but of peace as in all the Churches of the Saints But to come home to our Dissenters Mr. Baxter in his Poor Man's Family Book p. 337. speaking of our publick Worship in our Parish Churches says In all the lawful Orders Gestures and Manners of behaviour in God's Worship affect not to differ from the rest but conform your self to the use of the Church for in the Church singularity is a Discord c. See Vines on the Sacrament to the same purpose p. 39. and many more Instances of this kind might be given but what has been said is sufficient to shew that such Ceremonies as serve for Order or Edification and are not directly contrary to God's Law are to be used according to the Opinion of all the Reformed Churches and most Eminent Men both at home and abroad Now How shall we know what Ceremonies are lawful and what not It is to be noted That the nature of Ceremonies is to be taken from the Doctrine which goes along with it and may be lawful and not lawful as that is If a Ceremony be made a substantial part of God's Worship and unalterable or be suppos'd so necessary as that the doing of it would be a thing meritorious or pleasing to God and the not doing of it sinful tho' there were no human Law which requir'd the doing of it Then it becomes sinful because it makes the Scriptures insufficient And this it was that made the Jewish Ceremony of washing before Meat sinful And so it is in many of the Ceremonies of the Church of Rome But when Ceremonies are injoin'd for the sake of Order and Uniformity in God's Worship according to the general Rules of the Scripture and to prevent the great Mischiefs which we should inevitably fall into if every Pastor and People were suffered to follow their several different judgments in the manner of God's Worship then they are lawful and good But say they If these Ceremonies do not bind the Consciences of Men Why does the Discipline and Censures of the Church force Men to use them I answer The Church does not oblige Men to the observance of these Ceremonies as things that bind the Conscience or which are necessary to be done or not done in themselves but the Reason why Men are forced to observe them and punish'd if they refuse is because they are appointed by the Church and disobedience to the Laws of Church or State made not contrary to the Law of God is sinful Rom. 13. 5. and 2. And for this they are punish'd and also for disturbing the publick Peace And thus we justify our bowing at the name of Jesus at seasonable times and all our Ceremonies since the Church has appointed them we ought to obey unless we can prove them to be sinful which no Man can do so long as the Worship is directed to a true Object to wit the Person of Christ As for the Ceremony of Bowing towards the Altar Note the Canon that appointed it did not oblige any to the observance of it but left them to their liberty As to the posture appointed by the Church of England for receiving the Lord's Supper to wit Kneeling 'T is a Circumstance which may be varied according to the Discretion of the Church In the Primitive Church it was always taken in the posture of Adoration which posture varied according to the Customs of Countries Now Kneeling being the posture of Adoration in these Kingdoms the Church of England has therefore appointed that it be taken kneeling And indeed 't is but very reasonable that so Sacred an Ordinance and so great a Benefit should be received in the most thankful and humble posture that may be and that surely is on our Knees which is also the fittest posture for those high strains of Devotion with which so Sacred a Work ought to be attended at the very instant of taking it The only Objection that I know is made against this posture of Kneeling at the Sacrament is because it is Idolatrous and contrary to Christ's own Practice 'T is strange that they will make us and the greatest part of the Reform'd Churches all Idolaters whether we will or no Does not our Book of Common Prayer at the end of the Communion Service tell them as plain as words can express it That we pay no Adoration to any thing in the Sacrament but Christ himself which is in Heaven and yet will they make us Idolaters for all this Has any of them ever writ so strong against Idolizing the Elements of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper as our Divines of the Church of England have done And yet will they perswade us we are Idolaters They may as well believe that we Worship the Stones in the Church-Walls when we kneel down to Pray in them And truly I
from their own writers by Dr. Comber his Defence of Liturgies 2 d. Part p. 305 c. Next for the Churches of Poland and Lithuania in 2 Synods held there Ann. Dom. 1633. and 1634. one certain Liturgy is injoin'd to be us'd in all those Dominions Certain prescrib'd Liturgies are also us'd in Transilvania Hungary Bohemia c. See at large Dr. Comb. ubi Supra and Monsieur Durell his View of the Government and publick Worship of God in the Reformed Churches beyond Seas Printed London 1662. Now for the Churches Reform'd by Calvin and others as Geneva France Helvetia Holland c. Calvin compos'd a Form of Divine Service which is us'd in the Church of Geneva and those of France at this day and their Ministers are bound to use them And see Calvin's Letter to the Protector of England during the Minority of King Ed. 6. the Protector at that time when the Common-Prayer Book was to be settled by Act of Parliament thought fit first to Advice with so Eminent a Man as Calvin was about it He writes to Calvin to know his Opinion therein Calvin returns him this answer For so much as concerns the Prayers and Ecclesiastical Rites I much approve that they be determined so that it may not be lawful for the Ministers to vary from it that it may be a help to the weakness of some That it may be a Testimony of the Churches consent And that it may put a stop to the levity of such as are for new things See Calv. Ep. p. 165. Ep. 87. to the Protector And see his Letter to Cox a Church of England Divine upon his Arrival at Franckford among his Epistles 164 165. See Beza his Approbation of Forms of Prayer Tom. 2. p. 229. In the French Church Mornay Lord Du-Plessis in his Book of the Mass allows of the Use and Antiquity of prescribed Forms See at large Dr. Comber of Liturgies 2d Part p. 313. And see there the famous Monsieur Daille agreeing herewith In the Church of Helvetia Bullinger tells us they used prescribed Forms keep Fasts and Holy-Days c. Bulling Decod 2. Serm. 1. p. 38. The Churches of Holland use Forms of Prayer for Baptism the Lord's Supper and all occasional Offices and also Liturgies c. which are all put into a Book of Common-Prayer And even in Scotland they have had a Common-Prayer Book for there are some of them now extant which were Printed Ann. 1594. supposed to be writ by Mr. Knox for the use of the Kirk of Scotland See the latter end of Dr. Comber his Defence of Liturgies 2d Part. And the Leyden Professors say That Forms of Prayer are not only lawful but very advantageous because every Christian cannot fitly conceive new Prayers and the attention of Auditors are not a little help'd in great assemblies by usual Forms See Dr. Falkner his Libertas Ecclesiastica p. 121. Thus much for Forms of Prayer in general But some perhaps may object against our Common-Prayer in particular To clear that I think 't were sufficient to tell them that it has been approv'd of by all the learned and godly Divines of the Church of England ever since the Reformation and confirm'd by several Parliaments And it cannot reasonably be suppos'd that God Almighty shou'd conceal his will from the greatest number of the most learned pious and judicious People of a Nation notwithstanding their frequent Prayers to God that he would direct them and their great Care and Study which they take to come to the knowledge of the truth and reveal it only to a few and those of the rawer injudicious sort who have had least time and study and means to come to greater Knowledge such as our Dissenters generally are This alone were sufficient to recommend our particular Common-Prayer But since our Dissenters will not allow so many several Parliaments and so many Successions of Learned Divines to be competent judges in this matter we are willing to stand to the judgment of our Neighbour Churches of the Reformed Religion concerning our Common-Prayer and the other Matters in controversy between us In King Edward 6th his days Archbishop Cranmer did request the famous Bucer to peruse the whole Book of Common-Prayer in order to his censuring what he thought was to be amended Bucer accordingly did so and declares his judgment of it thus In the prescript Form for the Communion and the daily Prayers I see nothing written in this Book which is not taken out of the Word of God if not in express words as the Psalms and Lessons yet in sence as the Collects And also the order of these Lessons and Prayers and the time when they are to be used are very agreeable to the Word of God and the Practice of the ancient Church See Bucer's Censure upon the Book of Common-Prayer c. 1. p. 457. And note this was before the Common-Prayer was amended as now it is Some things 't is true Bucer did wish to be amended which has been since done and most of them according to his Advice there Next the Archbishop of Spalato in his Book against Suarez p. 340. says That the English Liturgy contains nothing in it which is not Holy which is not Pious and truly Christian as well as Catholick Causabon in his Epistle to King James the first affirms the same And says farther That none at this day comes nearer the Form of the Ancient Church following a middle way between those who have offended both in excess and defect The next Authority for us is the learned Grotius who 't is certain had no Obligation to the Church of England but rather the contrary He says I am sure the English Liturgy the Rite of laying on of Hands on Children in memory of Baptism the Authority of Bishops of Synods consiting of none but the Clergy c. do sufficiently agree to the Orders of the Ancient Church from which we cannot deny but we have departed both in France and Holland See Grotius ad Boatslaer Ep. 62. p. 21. The next is the famous Lud. Capellus who was a famous French Divine of the Reformed Church and Divinity Professor in a famous Protestant University This Man lived to hear of our Independent Sect in England and writ most Learnedly against ' em Says he When miraculous Gifts ceased there was a necessity for Liturgies which were used in the First IV. Ages uncorrupted but afterwards Corruptions were introduced by the following Popes But upon the Reformation the Liturgy was purged from all its Corruptions and has been happily used in the several Reform'd Churches and with good success until very lately says he there arose a sort of morose scrupulous not to say downright superstitious Men who for many trifling Reasons of no moment not only dislike the Liturgy hitherto used in that Church but would have both it and the whole Order of Bishops to be utterly abolished in place whereof they would substitute that which they call their Directory c. and