and to say incoherenâ— things and such as none else would say contradictory not only of all sober men who have wrote before him but of himself also is his Peculiar And so I leave him To the Charitable Admonition THis being addrest to Nonconformists I must confess does not properly concern me and is for the most part so well said that I heartily wish it had been the whole Book but since our Author finds himself oblig'd in Charity to think of those misguided men I must also upon the same Principle have a concern for him and earnestly beg him to revise what he has wrote and see whether he has laid Grounds in it for Socinianism and all kinds of Separation and whether he has done a good Office to Religion to supply Dissenters whom he declaâ—es to be obliged to obey the Government with all the Arguments he could think of to palliate and countenance their disobedience Surely men are not too well principled that it should be needful to unsettle them nor too dutiful that therâ— should be reason to check them in their duty And in a time when as my Author himself observes Separation and many following Divisions have caused many to abhor the Church and turn to Popery It is obvious to apprehend that the doing every thing which the maddest Separatist requires and making Religion slovenly and despicable will not probably retain those who are tempted to Popery or recover them who have revolted to it It will not be enough to say that the Book has every where in it sober and honest truths for so has the Cracovian Catechism and the Alcoran nay there is scarce any Conjuring Book which does not for the greatest part consist of devout and godly Prayers We are told by our Author That it is above two years since he had these thoughts in which time he has read and conferr'd all he could to discover if he were in an Error but for all he could yet meet wiâ—h does not find it so but hopes all he says is truth and that it may be useful to the Publick in this present conjuncture of Affairs Now this is certainly a most prodigious thing that a man in two years time should never be once awake converse with any good Book or man of Sense or have the least reflexion upon what is either truth or expedience I never read this Book entirely over more than once nor have I had much leisure to consider it And yet I presume any indifferent Reader will see what gross misadventures have been detected by me and probably himself will discover many more For in earnest there are every where such blots that one can hardly avoid the hitting such flaws in Discourse that there needs no picking of holes or looking narrowly to find the Incoherence but the passage lies wide open and one may fairly drive a Cart and Horses thorow Upon the whole matter I cannot but conclude that Pride or Discontent or some other very prevalent Passion has here interposed For what else should make a man think himself fit to renverse the established Constitution of the Church and give his advice to the Parliament how they should evacuate all their Laws What should make him almost in every Period contradict himself pretend to the knowledge of Antiquity and Religion rant against Universities disparage the Ministers and Preaching of the Nation and at the same time discover the grossest ignorance and inconsideration as is imaginable And amidst all this acknowledge obligations to Submission and Conformity and whatever he has spoke against And after two years deliberation not to see that which is evident at the first glance to any one that has but half an eye All this I say muâ—t be the Product of some one or many violent Passions Let my Author seriously consider where this Fundamental mischief lies search his own heart and desire the Searcher of hearts to discover it to him He says he has Fasted and Prayed let him do so again but with Humility and Earnestness and the good God be merciful to him FINIS
Godhead and the Shiboleth of his Eternal Generation and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am no friend to the unravelling of Mysteries and making them so evident as to forfeit their nature yet I must not be so much a Socinian notwithstanding our Authors opinion concerning the procession of the Holy Ghost of I will send the Comforter Or of the Sacrament This is my Body To believe every one Orthodox who admits those words to be Scripture and declaratory of truth He says indeed that we have no other sâ—fe way to speak of divine matters but in Scripture Lâ—ngâ—age â—psissiâ—is verbis with the very same words How then I pray comes it about that we may speak of them in Dutch or French or English they are none of them the ipsissima verba the original Hebrew or Greek It were easie to shew how much of our Creed the Socinian would have us cashier on this account and how pestilent consequences have been drawn from these unhappy Premises Nay let us give even the Socinians their due they in their sober Moods are not so extravagantly mad as is our Author Volkelius in his Fifth Book and Seventh Chapter says Sacris voluminibus ob ipsorum perfectionem nihil nec adjiciendum nec subtrahendum hoc tamen non eo consilio à nobis dictum existimari velim quasi omnes dictiones omnes sententias omnesque collectiones iisdem literis ac syllabis in S. Scriptura non expressas ob hoc ipsum repudiâ—mus Nam vel dictio aut phrasis aliqua subaudiri vel sententia aliqua si non verbis reipsâ tamen in S. literis contineri potest vel denique ex iisdem colligi Id autem qualecunque est perinde habendum existimamus ac â—i disertissimè scriptum extaret Neque enim in sola verba sed praecipuè in verborum sententiam animum intendere debemus Such is the perfection of the holy Scripture that nothing is to be added to or taken from it This we say not that we reject all Words Sentences and Inferences which are not there in the same Letters and Syllables For many times Words and Phrases are to be understood and divers things though not verbally yet really may be be contained in the Scripture or inferred from it All which we take to be the same thing as if it were most expresly written for we must not consider naked words but the meaning of them Thus much a soberer man I am sorry to add a better principled Christian is this Socinian than our Pretender to Naked Truth But he is so liberal as to give a reason of hâ—s opinion If in Divine Matters we once give way to Humane Deductions a cuâ—ning Sophisâ—er may soon lead a weak Disputant into many Errors Truly very well urged Whose fault is it that men are weak Disputants or being so that they will meddle with Controversie St. Paul has abundantly provided in the case Him that is weak in the Faith receive but not to doubtful Disputations Men of Parts and Learning will comprehend a Deduction as perfectly as the Text it self And they who are deficient either in natural or acquiâ—ed Knowledge will understand neither one or other whereof we have an example here before us And now a mighty heat is struck upon the sudden against School-Divinity as the greatest plague to Christian Religion In which career our Author to shew his Learning tells us That the School at Alexandria was the first Divinity-School he reads of He might have better told us of the School of one Tyrannus where St. Paul read his Lectures Certainly the Angelical the irrefragable the subtil and most founded Doctors would have been very proud of sâ—ch Antiqâ—ity as the age of Pantenus But Peter Lombard it is likely would not have taken it well to be robb'd of his Mastership and to be made an Usher nay School-boy to Pantenus Well we will pass this over The School of Alexandria we are told was set up by Pantenus Our Author might more â—easonably have said that it was set up by St. Mark had he ever heard of Eâ—sebius his relation he could not have been so grosly ignorant In this very account here pointed to he expresly says that this School was in Pantenus his time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There was of ancient Custom settled with them a School of the holy Scriptures Now Pantenus lived in the time of Commodus and what could then be said to have been from ancient times will bid fair to be almost as old as Christianity it self Our Author goes on with the same ill Stars and the very next Period is a new misadventure From this School says he sprung forth tâ—at damnable Heresie of the Arians What shall we say if Arius were neither bred up at all nor was a Professor in this School but an Afriâ—an by birth and a plain Parish Priest of Alexandria Nay farther what shall we say iâ— this School was employed in an honest Catechism-Lecture or Exposition of the Scripture and had nothing more to do with teaching School-Divinity than in teaching Anatomy or Mathematicks Will not this Gentleman whoever he is appear a wonderful meek Writer fitter to deal in a Romance than Church History Of his Country and Employment Epiphanius informs us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was of Libya by his Country and being made a Priest in Alexandria was preferred to the Church called Baucalis And that we may be more assured of the nature of his Employment Epiphanius presently reckons up the other Churches of that great City and recites the names of several of the Rectors of them That this School was for Catechizing St. Ierom is most express who in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers says that Clement after Pantenus Alexandriae Ecclesiasticam Scholam tenuit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Magister fuit Clement after Pantenus kept the Ecclesiastical School at Alexandria and was Catechist there We see then what a goodly Bracelet of â—alse Pearls our Author has hung together upon a string in hopes to adorn himself with them One would now have the curiosity to ghess what should come into his head positively to assert so many false and extravagant things Was Pantenus a Heretick or noted for a great Sophister and man of Notions and thereby obnoxious to have the great plague to Christian Religion School-Divinity fathered upon him Nothing of all this He is by Eusebius l. 5. c. 10. stiled 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a most famous man and said to have shewed so much and such Divine Zeal for the Word of God as to have gone and preached the Gospel unto the Indians And that after his return he was made Master of this School where partly by Words partly by Writing he expounded the Treasures of Divine Knowledge But secondly had this School at any time been so unfortunate as to have bred up notorious Hereticks or perverse Disputers that did mischief in the Church Nothing of this neither it was the happy Nursery
of the most eminent Propagators of the Christian Faith and at this time when Arianism entred the World merited this Character 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It continues to our times and is celebrated for persons powerful in the Word and study of Divine things What then could be the matter that should hare and lead a poor innocent man into such a Maze of falsehoods Why surely no more than this He had heard from the Parson of the Parish or some other good body in discourse that the Arian Heresie took its rise from Alexandria that it supported it self much with quirks of Philosophy and Sophistical Nicities and that there was a Divinity-School at Alexandria and a notable man one Pantenus had been Master of it and now if this were put together and all the Heresies of the world laid upon the back of this Pantenus and School-Divinity it would make a very pretty story and look like a learned account of Antiquity Just as if a stranger shoâ—ld have heard that there was a mischievous fanatical Rebellion which overrâ—n the whole Nation and was the cause of the destruction of so many thoâ—sands of Christians both body and soul fomented and carried on at Westmiâ—ster in England and likewise that there was a famous School and one Dr. Lambert Osbaston a noted man had been Master of it and then should tack all this together and say that Westminster School was a Seminary of Fanaticism and Rebellion and that Dr. Lambert Osbaston was the first and chief Promoter of it Now this ridiculous Fable is far more probable than that which our Author obtrudes upon us in that several of the Ringleaders in the laâ—e Rebellion as Sir Arthur Haslerig Sir Harry Vane Scot and others were really Scholars to Dr. Osbaston and Governours of that School nothing of which nature can be truly suggested of the other But our Author goes on and has certainly made a Vow not to say one true word in this whole Paragraph and keeps it most religiously His following period runs thus The Heresies before thiâ— were so gross and sensual that none took them up but dissolute or frantick people and soon vanisht But after this School-subtil way of arguing was brought into Christianity Heresie grew more refined and so subtil that the plain pious Fathers of the Church knew not how to lay hold of it c. But now what will become of us if there were refined and spiritual Heresies before Nay in a manner if this very Heresie were so What if they were followed by men neither dissolute nor frantick nor did soon vanish And that the Fathers of the Church were not so plain men but that they knew how to encounter this School-Divinity Monster Has not our Author the worst luck of any man that ever put Pen to Paper As to the sensuality and grossness of Heresie noâ— to look higher than the confines of this Age we talk of surely neither Novatianism nor the Heresie of Sabellius or Paulus Samosatenus of which Arianism was but an off-set were gross or sensual Nor were Novatus Tatian Tertullian and Origen who were all very considerable men and fell into Heresie before this time ever noted for being frantick or dissolute people But on the contrary their very severity of life and zeal for Vertue were the prime occasion of their Heresies Nor did their Heresies soon vanish but continued for several Ages some in their own others under new names and titles And whosoever reads the Controversies of those times will find that the pious Fathers of the Church were not quite baffled by School-distinctions and evasions nor did these Sophisters proud of their conquest triumph and carry away a specious appearance of truth But the advantage of Arius was quite of another kind in application and address 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was of taking and pleasant conversation always glozing and flattering as Epiphanius tells us then adds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He addrest to each particular â—ishop with insinuating arts and flatteries whereby he drew in many to be Partizans with him And as Sozomâ—n expresses it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 His Party finding it their interest to prepossess in their behalf the Bishops of each City they sent their â—gents to them with confessions of their Faith .... wâ—â—â—h practice turned mightily to their advantage But thâ—â—r chief advantage lay in their Court insinuations first with Constantines Sister during his life and after with Constantius his Sons after his death and when the Ariaâ—s had the suffrage of an Emperour on their side we need not impâ—te it to Sophistry that they prevailed Our Author having not as he thinks fully enough discovered to us the mysteries of his knowledge goes on with the same auspâ—ces of Ignorance and Error to acquaint us farther That this great bane of the Church took its rise from hence Many of the Primitive Doctors and Fathers being converted from Heathenism and having by loâ—g and great industry acquired much knowledge in natural Philosophy Antiquity Hisâ—ory and subtil Logick or Sophistry were very unwilling to abandon quite these their long studied and dearly beloved Sciences falsly so called and therefore translated them into Christianity c. And now we know perfectly the true cause of all the Heresies that ever came into the Church I will adventure notwithstanding all this to add one more to the number and say in opposition to what is here averred that Christianity received more advantage from Philosophy than ever it did damage from it It is true as Tertullian tells us that the Philosophers were the Patriarchs of Hereticks but it is as true they were the Champions of Christian truth He must be a stranger to every thing that relates to the Church who know not how much Religion ows to Iustin Martâ—r Athenagoras Ammonius Pantenus Clemens of Alexandria and notwithstanding all his misadventures to Origen himself The last and most dangerous attempt against Christianity was the setting up Heathen Morality gilded over with Magick against Christian Ethicks laboured by Apollonius Tyanaeus Porphyry Iamlichus Plotinus Hierocles Simplicius and several others And had not the good providence of God raised up the before mentioned and other eminent Christian Philosophers to attaque them in their strengths and fight them with their own Weapons it is to be feared our holy Faith would not have had so easie or so clear a victory over the World But because our Author has so particular a Pique against Sophistry I shall desire him at his leisure to read the twenty ninth Chapter of the seventh Book of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History the Title of which Chapter is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 How Paulus Samosatenus baffled and confuted by one Malchion a Priest who had been a Sophister was deposed And sure the Sophister may be allowed to have done no small service who baffled and confuted that so considerable Heretick But the stop put to the Donatists Schism by the interposition of
Presbytery Well I have read over the Epistle and as our Author says wonder but it is at his great confidence to say that there is nothing to be met with in it to found a distinction between Episcopacy and Presbytery when as he expresly reserves the power of Ordination peculiarly to the Bishops which is the point chiefly contested between the Assertors of Episcopacy and Patrons of Presbyterian parity As to the second desire that the Reader should observe the various fate of St. Jerom and Aerius that the one is reviled as an Heretick the other passes for a Saint I will satisfie my Author in that particular and shew him a plain reason for it Aerius set himself against the Apostolical Government by Bishops dogmatized and separated himself from the Church St. Ierom always obeyed his Governours and remained in Communion with them upon other occasions exprest his opinion in behalf of their Authority And here only in a private Epistle to a Friend and that a very short one being scandalized at an unseasonable opinion which pretended Deacons to be equal in dignity to Priests as it is usual in such cases he depresses what he can the Order of Deacons and exalts to his utmost that of Priests in the mean time does not so much as attempt to prove any thing more than barely saying Quid aliud facit Episcopus excepta Ordinatione quod non facit Presbyter What does a Bishop more than a Presbyter besides Ordaining And then reckoning up several actions common to both Our kind-hearted Author hereupon tells us that this presently converted him nay as if this good nature of his were as meritorious as grace he thereupon assures himself that great is his reward in heaven Our man of learning with his accustomed dexterity and confidence runs down the business of Colluthus his Ordination of Priests and pities poor Bishop Hall for going about to prove from thence that Presbyters were not capable to Ordain How slightly soever our Author thinks of the matter Socrates in the first Book of his History puts it under the blackest Character 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He privately adventured on an action worthy of many deaths who having never been ordained a Priest did those things which belonged to the Function of a Priest This you are to know was said of Ischryas who had as good Orders as Colluthus a Priest could give him but yet antecedently to the Decree of the Council of Alexandria is declared never to have been ordained a Priest Let up now see why the old man was so much to be pitied because he had quite forgot that the famous Council of Nice consisting of above three hundred Bishops had made a Canon wherein they declare that if any Bishop should Ordain any of the Clergy belonging to another Bishops Diocess without consent and leave had of that Bishop to whose Diocess they did belong their Ordination should be null You see the irregular Ordination of a Bishop is as null as the irregular Ordination of a Presbyter Therefore the irregular Bishop and the irregular Presbyter are of the same Order of the same Authority neither able to Ordain Our Author according to his usual Sagacity knows no difference betwixt an Act that is null and void in it self and an Act voided by Law There is no question but Bishops and Priests and Deacons for their Crimes may be degraded and deposed but that is not the same thing with the never having been Bishops Priests or Deacons The Council of Alexandria declared the Ordinations of Colluthus to have been void ab initio that of Nice voids those that are irregular Surely these are very different matters That the invalidity of the Ordination in the later case was of this kind that is made invalid by way of Penalty and Sentence we may learn from the thirty fifth Apostolick Canon by which both Zonaras and Balsamon interpret this of Nice who decree that in case of ordaining in anothers Diocess the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Both he be deposed and they who were ordained by him And truly if they were to be deposed it is plain the Orders were in themselves valid and it is unquestionable that the Ordaining Bishops were so which is not to be said and can never be proved of a mere Presbyters And therefore the Triumph which is added here of dashing out the indelible Character or that the Line of a Diocess is a Conjurers Circle might very fairly have been laid aside And I appeal to the Reader and more than hope he will see how no proofs are brought for this Identity and parity of Order no Scripture no Primitive Council no general consent of Primitive Doctors and Fathers that he is perfectly out in every thing he avers and therefore for his poor judgment he may do well to keep it to himself and probably his Judgment is so poor because he himself is rich He in likelihood has imployed his time in Secular Concerns which had it been spent in Study would have rescued him from such gross misadventures as he at every turn incurrs But though the matter stand thus plain befâ—re us yet â—ince our Author has had the confidence to cite the Council of Nice in proof of the nullity of irregular Orders to shew with greater evidence his perpetual ignorance and mistake I will throw in for vantage the proceeding of this very Council in the Case of Meletius who had usurpt upon the rights of Peter Patriarch of Alexandria in the point here contested of Ordaining within his Diocess the words of Theodoret are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He invaded the Ordinations belonging to the other Now the Council decreed herein that Meletius should be suspended from the future exercise of his function and retain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the bare name of a Bishop but do no Act of his Function either in the City or Villages but the Orders conferred by him were as to their intrinsick validity ratified and acknowledged 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those already Ordained should Communicate and Officiate but come after the Clergy of each Church and Parish 'T is to be wondered at how this man who seems to have always lived in a hollow Tree came to have heard by chance that there was once such a thing in the World as the Council of Nice To the Chapter of Deacons OUr Author is resolved on all occasions to shew that he thinks himself wiser then both the Church and State and therefore in defiance unto both he attempts to prove that Deaconship is not Holy Orders and to bring about so gâ—nâ—rous a dâ—sign he makes nothing of stâ—â—ining a point with the Scripture since t is so unkind as to stand in his way It so happen'd that Petavius discoursing of Deacons had said what the Contents of our English Bibles and Commentators generally agreâ— in that Pâ—ilip the Deacon Preacht did Miracles and Baptiz'd and Converted the City of Samariâ— and that the History describ'd Act. 8. belongs to
him Now our Author is better advis'd and assures us that this more probably was Philip the Apostle St. Luke 't is true tells us that upon the Persecution against Stephen several of the Brethren went through all the Regions of Iudea and Samaria except the Apostles 't is says our Author a gross mistake the Apostles are not to be excepted but Philip the Apostle and not the Deacon went about these Regions Having thus happily entred himself into the Lists he goes on and tells us that the first we shall find of Deacons Officiating in Spiritual matters is in Iustin Martyr A modest man would thing that to be competent Antiquity but it seems to him that though in Greece it was then receiv'd it was not so in Africâ— for Terttullian says that the Christians received the Sacrament only from the hand of the President or Bishop that is what I said even now out of Ignatius that neither this nor any other sacred Office was to be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without the knowledg or consent of the Bishop Which thing our Author himself hereafter confesses And sure when the Bishop Consecrated both Elements and with his own hand delivered the Bread immediatly to every Communicant and gave the Cup to the Deacon to distribute after him 't will be a great truth to say that the Eucharist was only received from the hands of the Bishop But 't is a fatal thing to be haunted by ill luck what will become of our Authors Profound Learning if it should appear that the Deacon did distribute the Cup in Africa St. Cyprian will I hope be taken for a competent Witness in the Case who says in his Book de Lapsis Vbi solennibus adimpletis calicem Diaconus offerre praesentibus coepit When the other solemnities were performed and the Deacon distributed the Cup to them who were present Nay if St. Cyprian be to be believed he utterly confounds all our Authors pretensions at once saying that Diaconis non dâ—fuit sacerdotalis vigor there was not wanting to the Deacons sacerdotal power Ep. 13. allowing them somewhat of Priestly jurisdiction and in the twelfth Epistle giving them power to release from the Censures of the Church In articulo mortis si Presbyter repertus noâ— fuerit urgere exitus coeperit apud Diaconum quoque exomologesin facere delicti sui possint ut manu ejus in poenitentia imposita veniant ad Dominum cum pace If a Priest be not to be foâ—nd and death draw on they may make their Exomologesis or Confession before the Deacon that hands being laid on them as Penitents they may go to the Lord in peace Our Author proceeds and according to his wont shews his Learning backward and quoting an Epistle of St. Ignatius ad Tralli Trallianos I presume he means finds and often laments that learned men go on in a Track one after another and some through inadvertency some through partiality take many passages of ancient Authors quite different from their meaning One would now expect some eminent discovery The fault in short is this that our Authors good Friend Vedelius Bishop Vsher Doctor Vossius Coâ—ellerius and as many others as have put forth Ignatius â—ave gone on in a Track and falsly translated these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Deacons being Ministers of Jesus Christ are to be honoured for they are not the Ministers of meats and drinks but of the Church and Servants of God to run thus and to concern Deacons when as indeed the words are meant of Priests Whosoever first translated this Epistle of Ignatius says our Author sure this fancy of Deacons ran much in his head otherwise he could never have found them here for it is evident the word Diaconus in this place relates to the Presbytery newly before mentioned c. Well we hear what you say but for all this are convinced you are infinitely mistaken And are sure that Doctor Isaac Vossius whatever became of other learned men did not go in a Track nor by inadvertency nor prejudice his Education if he could have been seduced leading him the other way but considered the place very particularly and adhering to the Translation which you despise concludes Miror Antiochum qui sermone 124. haec Ignatii citâ—t itâ— illa mutasse ut id quod de Diaconis hic dicitur Presbyteris attribuat modo apud illum locus sit integer nec aliqua exciderint verba I wonder Antiochus who in his 124. Sermon quotes these words should so change them that what 〈◊〉 here said of Deacons should by him be attributed to Priests if so be the place be entire with him and some words not left out Well but our Author has a mind that we should see the utmost of his skill I do the more wonder at the Interpreters mistake in this place because by the following words Ignatius here excludes the specifical Deacons saying not the Ministers of meat and drink To see the wonderful difference of mens understandings the most learned Doctor Isaac Vossius from these very words concludes the beforegoing Period was meant of Deacons specific Deacons since they must be called so from whence our Demonstrator proves they could not be spoke of them It is it seems a Scheme of speech which our Author never met with to say of things or persons you are not this or this but that when they are remarkably more that than this or this Thus God says to Samuel of the People who complaining of his Old Age and evil Sons desired a King that they had not rejected Samuel but God All men of common sense know very well the meaning to be that though they rejected the Prophet that was not to come into account with the Rebellion and Insolence wherein they rejected the Lord himself Though God commanded Sacrifices under the Law he expresly says he will have no Sacrifice and delights not in nay abhors Burnt Offerings yet this did not abrogate the Divine Institution nor make Almighty God contradict himself So St. Paul advises Philemon to receive Onesimus his servant not now as a servant but above a servant a Brother beloved By which words it is not to be inferred that he should presently manumit him but use him with kindness But vanity and ignorance are most incommodiously quartered together our Author had a mind to shew his reading and pick a quarrel with the Translator of a Father And then no doubt he must be a Giant in Learning and list himself with those Worthies that have slain their thousands But such is our Authors hard Fate that this inconsiderable Pâ—â—â—od which is here so earnestly controuled is said unquestionably almost in every Page of this holy Martyr So that should he have happened once in his life to be in the right he had gained nothing to his cause and besides from hence it is morally certain that our Author never read a Page together in Ignatius In this very shorâ— Epistle within
twenty Lines he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that does any thing without the Bishop the Presbyter and Deacon has not a pure conscience In that to the Magnesians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I admonish you to do all things in love the Bishop presiding in the place of God the Presbyters in the place of the Colledge of the Apostles and the Deacons most dearly bebeloved of me as those who are trusted with the Ministry of Jesus Christ. In that to the Philadelphians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hearken to the Bishop the Pâ—esbytery and the Deacons And again in the same Epistle he adds that it is necessary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To ordain there a Deacon to perform the Embassie of God One would think this a competent instance of our Authors intolerable insolence without any regard of truth or ingenuity to dictate to the World and pretend to correct learned men But this is not all it is manifest he never read this very Period whose Translation he pretends to mend For so Ignatius goes on there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So in like manner let all reverence the Deacon as Jesus Christ and also the Bishop as the Son of the Father and the Presbyters as God's Senat and band of the Apostles without these the Church is not call'd But we have not done yet Behold a piece of ignorance and impudence more inexcusable than the former Poor Petaviâ—s is taken to task for calling St. Laurence a Deacon which many hundreds before him had very innocently done and generally all that ever heard of his Grediron or his Martyrdom or indeed the occasion of it are of his mind but it is our Authors priviledge to be ignorant of what every body else is informed of Now in the present misadventure he attempts a greater Mastery goes beyond and surpasses himself For in that very place of St. Ambrose which he cites the direct contrary of what he goes about to prove is in terminiâ— asserted For that speech of St. Laurence which he recapitulates and says That it plainly shews St. Laurence was a Priest not a bare Deacon tells us that he was a Deacon The words are Lib. 1. Offic. cap. 41. Quo progrederis sine filio Pater Quò Sacerdos sancte sine Diacono tuâ— properas c. O my Father speaking to his Bishop going to Martyrdom whither go you without your Son O holy Priest whither hasten you without your Deacon Had it not been better for our Author to have said St. Laurence was an Arch-deacon to credit the matter or a Deacon Cardinal than thus run counter to the words he alledged Unless a man owed himself a shame and was in dread he should never make honest payment and therefore on purpose spoke what he knew most absurd mere chance could never fall out so unluckily that he should not in a whole Book make one true recital of an Author or matter of Fact as he has done Yet after all this as if he had come off with mighty credit he closes his Chapter with a quod erat demonstrandum So I leave says he the Deacons to their proper Office of serving of Tables not finding in Scripture any thing more belonging to them Our Author having thus taken away we will expect the next Course where it is to be hoped we shall be better served and that at last the Banquet will make amends for the very ill Fare we have hitherto had To the Chapter of Church-Government OUr Author has a dexterity of talking extravagantly of several weighty subjects and this he calls handling them which being beyond his strength he heaves them to as much purpose as if they were Timber and thinks he has acquitted himself to admiration Having therefore handled the former points that is talkt beyond all aim and measure Foolishly Now he says he comes to the Authority of Bishops to Govern as well as to Ordain And truly if they are to do one as they are on his principle to do the other their Authority is likely to signifie but little being shared by every the meanest Priest But the out-cry is that the Power of the Keys is left to Chancellors Lay-men who have no more capacity to Sentence or Absolve a sinner then to dissolve the Heaven and the Earth and make a new Heaven and an Earth And thus the good man runs on like an Horse with an empty Cart exceedingly pleased with the ratling of the Wheels and gingling of the Bells but he never considers that all the proceedings of Chancellors in the Bishops Court are in consequence of the Canons of the Church which are the Decrees of Bishops Authoritatively met together which have defined such and such Doctrines Heretical such and such actions punishable with Suspension Sequestration or Deprivation and the like Now all that the Chancellor has to do is to examine the matter of Fact take the allegations and proofs and apply the Sanction of the Law to them But where that extends to the use of the Keys that is reserved to them who by Christs Institution are trusted therewith And if Dr. Duck did do an ill thing the fault lies at his door and t is well if in this profligate age a single instance can only be pitcht upon We have blessed be God a great happiness in the protection of our Municipal Laws none in the World being a firmer Bulwark of the Princes Rights and Peoples Liberties but should every clamorous Person be hearkned to who complains of the exorbitance of a Judg when if the matter be truly examined probably the ground of the dislike is that he did his duty we should soon tear out one anothers Throâ—ts and every mans hand would be against his Brother We know the worst of our present Constitution and desire not the hazards of a change To the Chapter of Confirmation THis Chapter begins with a liberal Confession that Confirmation or some such thing is necessary but t is a little odd that in a matter which approaches to the being necessary a loose succedaneum of some such thing should be sufficient Our Author like a true Empiric in all cases strives to bring in aliquid Nostri his preparation of the Medicin will render it Soveraign but the old known and received Forms must by no means be taken Having then made up a narrative of matter of Fact jumbling as his way is true and false together his first objection against Confirmation as it now stands is That it is not possible for a Bishop of so large a Diocess as some of ours are some extended Three or Fourscore Miles many Forty or Fifty Personally to Confirm half the Youth in a Diocess if he duly examine each one as is fit and necessary We see how this is performed in their Triennial Visitations Having put in a Caveat in behalf of the present Constitution and minded my Author again of his promise to the Lords and Commons that there was not a word in his Book against the known