is the Churches meaning cannot be better manifested then in the words of Mr. Alexander Noel before mentioned who being Prolocutor of the Convocation in the year 1562. when this Article was disputed approved and ratified cannot in reason be supposed to be ignorant of the true sense and meaning of this Church in that particular And he accordingly in his Catechism publickly allowed of with reference to a local Descent doth declare it thus viz. Ut Christus corpore in terrae viscera ita anima corpore separata ad Inferos descendit pariterque Mortis ejus vis ad mortuos Inferosque adeo ipsos usque eò permanavit ut Animae incredulorum tristissimae ipsorum incredulitati maximè debitae condemnationis sensum perciperent ipseque Satanas Inferorum Princeps tyrannidis suae tenebrarum potentiam omnem afflictam profligatam ruina oppressam esse animad verteret Id est As Christ descended in his body into the bowels of the earth so in his soul separated from that body he descended also into Hell by means whereof the power and efficacy of his death was not made known onely to the dead but the Divels themselves insomuch that both the souls of the unbelievers did sensibly perceive that condemnation which was most justly due to them for their incredulity and Satan himself the Prince of Divels did as plainly see that his tyrannie and all the powers of darknesse were opprest ruined and destroyed But on the contrary the Lord Primate alloweth not any such local Descent as is maintained by the Church and defended by the most learned Members of it who have left us any thing in writing about this Article And yet he neither follows the opinion of Calvin himself nor of the generality of those of the Calvinian party who herein differ from their Master but goes a new way of a later discovery in which although he had few Leaders he hath found many followers By Christs Descending into Hell he would have nothing else to be understood but his continuing in the state of separation between the body and the soul his remaining under the power of Death during the time that he lay buried in the grave which is no more in effect though it differ somewhat in the terms then to say that he died and was buried and rose not till the third day as the Creed instructs us And yet to set out this opinion to the best advantage he hath laid out more cost upon it then upon all the rest of his Answer to the Jesuits Challenge thronging together so many citations concerning the word Hades out of old Greek Authors so many Critical Observations on their Words and Phrases out of Grammarians Scholiasts and Etymologists as serve abundantly both to amaze the ignorant and to confound the learned Nothing lesse meant in all those Collections then to assert the Doctrine of the Church of England in this particular no more then he hath done in the other Points before remembred though all of them are either to be found in the Book of Articles to which he had subscribed as Doctor Bernard hath informed us p. 118. or in the Book of Common Prayer which he was bound to conform himself unto both in judgment and practice as being impos'd by Act of Parliament on the Church of Ireland 7. I should now proceed to see what difference there is between the Doctrine of the Church of England and the Lord Primates own judgment in the point of Free-will which he hath given us in his Answer to the Jesuits Challenge p. 464. But because that point hath some relation to the Nine Articles of Lambeth I shall take no other notice of it then as it is comprehended in those Articles in the defence whereof the Lord Primate did appear with so great affection as made him very gracious in the eyes of the Calvinian Party both at Home and Abroad But this together with the little esteem he had of the Orders Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England is left to be the subject of the following Section SECT XI The Articles of Lambeth when made and on what occasion Dislik't and supprest by Queen Elizabeth and rejected by King James at the Conference at Hampton-Court Countenanced and defended by the Lord Primate who for so doing is much honoured by the English Puritans The History of Goteschalcus publisht by him and the great thanks he received for it from Doctor Twisse What else it was that made the Lord Primate so esteemed by the Brethren here His Inconformity to the Orders Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England in six particulars WE are informed by Doctor Bernard that the Lord Primate did fully approve the Articles of Religion of the Church of England in points of Doctrine as the same more enlarged in the Articles of Ireland and that he also did approve the Discipline and Constitution of both Churches p. 144. By which if Doctor Bernard means that the Articles of England were the same with those of the Church of Ireland though more enlarged in theirs of Ireland than in ours of England he is much mistaken there being many things contained in the Articles of the Church of Ireland extremely differing from the Doctrine of the Church of England as shall be shewn particularly in a place more proper But because the Lord Primate is no otherwise concerned therein then in relation to the Nine Articles of Lambeth which are incorporated and contained in those of Ireland I shall confine my self precisely unto that particular And I shall find enough in that to shew the Lord Primates further differences from the Church of England those Articles containing all the Calvinian Rigours in the Points of Praedestination Grace Free-will c. which have produced so much Disturbance in these parts of Christendom Those Articles first occasioned by some Differences which arose in Cambridge between Doctor Whitaker the Queens Professor and Doctor Peter Baro the Lady Margarets Professor in that University agreed on at a private meeting in Lambeth-house Anno 1595. None but the Lord Arch-Bishop of Canterbury the Bishop Elect of London and the Bishop of Bangor with some learned men of Doctor Whitakers own party being present at it and being so made were sent to Cambridge rather to silence Doctor Baro than to compose the Differences by any equal expedient So that being made on a particular occasion at a private meeting and by men not impowered to any such purpose they were never looked on otherwise than as private Opinions not as the Tendries of this Church So far disliked by Q. Elizabeth when she first heard of them that they were presently supprest by her command and so supprest that we hear no more news of them till the Conference at Hampton-Court where they found no better entertainment from the hands of King James for Doctor Reinolds having mov'd that the Nine Orthodoxal Assertions as he called them which were made at Lambeth might be added
But since he hath appeal'd to the Book of Homilies to the Book of Homilies let him go where he shall find as little comfort as he found in the Statute For in the Homily touching the time and place of prayer out of which the Lord Primate hath selected this particular passage it is thus doctrinally resolved viz. As concerning the time in which God hath appointed his people to assemble together solemnly it doth appear by the fourth Commandment c. And albeit this commandment of God doth not bind Christian people so streightly to observe and keep the utter Ceremonies of the Sabbath day as it did the Jewes as touching the forbearing of work and labour in the time of great necessity and as touching the precise keeping of the seventh day after the manner of the Jews for we keep now the first day which is our Sunday and make that our Sabbath that is our day of rest in honour of our Saviour Christ who as upon that day rose from death conquering the same most triumphantly Yet notwithstanding whatsoever is found in the Commandment appertaining to the Law of Nature as a thing most godly most iust and needful for the setting forth of Gods glory ought to be retained and kept of all good christian people So that it being thus resolved that there is no more of the fourth Commandment to be retained by good Christian people then what is found appertaining to the Law of Nature that the law of nature doth not tie us to one day in 7. or more to one day of the 7. then to any other let us next see by what Authority the day was changed how it came to be translated from the 7th to the first Concerning which it follows thus in the said Homily viz. This example and commandment of God the godly christian people began to follow immediately after the Ascension of our Lord Christ and began to chuse them a standing day of the week to come together in the very same with that before declared in the Act of Parliament yet not the seventh day which the Jewes kept but the Lords day the day of the Lords Resurrection the day after the seventh day which is the first day of the week c. Sit hence which time Gods people hath always in all ages without any gainsaying used to come together on the Sunday to celebrate and honour Gods blessed name and carefully to keep that day in holy rest and quietness both man and woman child servant and stranger So far the Homily and by the Homily it appears plainly that the keeping of the Lords day is not grounded on any commandment of Christ nor any precept of the Apostles but that it was chosen as a standing day of the week to come together in by the godly christian people immediately after Christs Ascension and hath so continued ever since So then the keeping of the Lords day being built on no other grounds as is declared both in the Homily and the Act of Parliament then the authority of the Church the consent of godly Christian people it must needs follow thereupon that it is to be kept with no greater strictness with reference either unto worldly business or honest recreations then what is required of the people by the Law of the Land the Canons of the Church or by the Edicts and Proclamations of the King or other supreme Governour under whom we live And if we please to look into the Act of Parliament before remembred we shall find it thus in reference unto worldly business viz. It shall be lawful to every Huusbandman Labourer Fisherman and to all and every other Person or Persons of what Estate Degree or Condition he or they be upon the Holy dayes aforesaid of which the Lords day is there reckoned for one in Harvest or at any other times in the year when necessity shall so require to labour ride fish or work any kind of work at their free will and pleasure any thing in this Act to the contrary notwithstanding The like we also find as to worldly business in the Queens Iniunctions published in the first year of her Reign in which the Sunday is not onely counted with the other holy dayes but labour labour at some times permitted and which is more enjoyned upon it For in those Injunctions it is ordered with a non obstante That all Parsons Vicars and Curates shall teach and declare unto their Parishoners that they may with a safe and quiet conscience after Common-prayer in the time of Harvest labour upon the holy and festival dayes and save that thing which God hath sent And if for any Scrupulosity or grudge of conscience men should superstitiously abstain from working on these dayes that then they should grievously offend and displease God And though it may be said that the Queens Injunction and every thing therein contained was buried in the same Grave with her yet cannot this be said of the Act of Parliament which is still in force and gives as much permission unto Worldly businesse as the said Injunction And as for Recreations there was not onely permission of such civil pastimes and man-like exercises by which the spirits of men might be refresht and their bodies strengthned but even of Common Enterludes Bear-baitings Bull-baitings and the like fit onely for the entertainment of the ruder or more vulgar sort For though the Magistrates of the City of London obtained from Queen Elizabeth Anno 1580. that Playes and Enterludes should no more be acted on the Sunday within the liberties of their City and that in the year 1583. many were terrified from beholding the like rude sports upon that day by the falling of a Scaffold in Paris Garden whereby many were hurt and eight killed out right yet there was no restraint of either in other parts of the Realm till King James to give a little contentment to the Puritan party in the beginning of his Reign prohibited the same by his Proclamation bearing date at Theobalds May 7. 1630. But for all other civil Recreations they were not onely permitted as they had been formerly but a Declaration issued from that King about sixteen years after concerning lawful sports from which some of the preciser sort of Justices had by their own authority restrained the people In the next place let us behold the Sunday or Lords day comparatively with the Saints days and other Festivals and we shall find them built on the same foundation the same Divine offices performed in both and the like diligent attendance required on both For in the Act of Parliament 5 6. of Edw. 6. before remembred the appointing of all holy dayes and set times of worship being first declared to be left by the Authority of Gods Word unto the liberty of Christs Church to be determined in every countrey by the discretion of the Rulers thereof it is next signified what dayes shall be accounted holy dayes and what shall not For so it
Verdict of the Church of England the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit as nothing more could be left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles afterward to adde unto it But against this Judgment I appeal and must reverse the same by Writ of Error For first although the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit in the Realm of England as is here affirmed it was obtained rather by the practises of the Sabbatarians who were instant in season and out of season to promote the Cause then by any countenance given unto it by the Church and the Rulers of it And secondly if any such Verdict had been given it was not given by any Jury which was legally summoned or trusted by the Church to act any thing in that particular And then the Foreman of this Jury must be Doctor Bound Master Greenham Master Perkins Doctor Lewis Bayley Master Dod Master Clever Doctor Gouge Master Whateley Doctor Sibs Doctor Preston Master Bifield Doctor Twisse and Master Ley must make up the Pannel the five Smectymnuans and he that pulled down the Cross in Saint Pauls Church-yard standing by in a readiness to put in for the Tales as occasion served Unless the Verdict had been given by these or such as these the Lords day never had attained such a pitch of credit as is here supposed but how a Verdict so given in may be affirmed to be a Verdict of the Church of England I am yet to seek So that except there had been something left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles to adde unto it The Sabbatarian Brethren would have found small comfort from any Verdict given on their side by the Church of England The Church of England differs as much in this point from the Articles of Ireland as the Lord Primate differeth in it from the Church of England The Lord Primate sets it down for a Proposition that the setting apart of one day in seven for Gods solemn worship is juris Divini Positivi recorded in the fourth Commandment p. 105. But the Lords Spiritual the most eminent Representers of the Church of England declared in the Parliament in the 5 6. of Edw. 6. That there is no certain time or definite number of dayes prescribed in holy Scripture but the appointment both of the time and also of the number of dayes is left by the Authority of Gods word to the liberty of Christs Church to be determined and assigned orderly in every Countrey by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers thereof as they shall judge most expedient to the setting forth Gods glory and edification of their people The Church of England hath declared in the Homily of the time and place of prayer that the Lords day was instituted by the Authority of the Church and the consent of godly Christian people after Christs Ascension But the Lord Primate doth entitle it unto Christ himself and to that end alledgeth a passage out of the Homily De Semente ascribed but ascribed falsly unto S. Athanasius viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The proper meaning of which words hath been shewen already in the first Section of this Treatise The Lord Primate in conformity to the Articles of the Church of Ireland affirms for certain that the whole day must be set apart for Gods solemn worship But in the Church of England there is liberty given upon that day not onely for honest Recreations but also for such necessary works of labour as are not or have not been restrained by the Laws of the Land Which makes the difference in this case between the Lord Primate and the Church of England to be irreconcilable And here I would have left the Lord Primates Letter writ to his Honourable Friend the Contents whereof have been the sole Subject of the present Section but that the Lord Primate will not so part with the Historian he must needs bestow a dash upon him before he leaves him telling his Honourable Friend How little credit the Historian deserves in his Geography when he brings news of the remote parts of the world that tells so many untruths of things so lately and so publickly acted in his neighbour Nation This I must needs say comes in very unhandsomely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dictum at the best and savours little of that moderation humility and meekness of Spirit for which Doctor Bernard hath so fam'd him not onely in this present Treatise but his Funeral Sermon But let this pass cum caeteris erroribus without more ado I have some other game in chase to which now I hasten SECT X. Seven Points of Doctrine in which the Lord Primate differeth from the Church of England The Lord Primates judgment in the point of Episcopacy and the ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas That Bishops and Presbyters did differ Ordine and not onely Gradu proved by three passages in the Book of Consecration and by the different forms of the Ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons used in the said Book The form and manner of making Bishops Priests and Deacons expresly regulated by the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage The Ordination of Presbyters by Presbyters declared unlawful by the Rules of the Primitive Church The Universal Redemption of Mankind by the blood of Christ maintained by the Church of England but denied by the Lord Primate not constant to himselfe in his own opinion A Real presence of Christ in the Sacrament maintained by the Church of England and affirmed by the most eminent Prelates of it but both denied and opposed by the Lord Primate in his Answer to the Jesuites challenge That the Priest hath power to forgive sins proved by three several passages out of the Book of common-Common-Prayer The meaning of the two first passages subverted by the Lord Primates Gloss or Descant on them but no notice taken by him of the last which is most material That the Priest forgiveth sins either Declarativè or Optativè better approved by the Lord Primate neither of which come up close to the Church of England and the reason why The Church of England holdeth that the Priect forgiveth sins Authoritativè by a delegated not a soveraign power and that she so holdeth is affirmed by some learned men of the Church of Rome The benefit of Absolution from the hands of the Priest humbly desired and received by Doctor Reynolds at the time of his death The Church of England maintains a local Descent and the proof thereof The Church not altered in her judgement since the first making of that Article Anno 1552. as some men imagine The Lord Primate goes a different way from the Church of England and the great pains by him taken to make it good A transition to the nine Articles of Lambeth THe difference between the Church of England and the Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath we have shewed already and well it were if he differed from the Church of England
those Heresies More easily is the Argument answered importing That the reception into our use the form of the Lords Prayer according to S. Matthew should by the same reason abrogate that of S. Luke being the shorter For first the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Lukes Gospel was never received into the Lyturgie of the Church and therefore could not be abrogated by the Churches making choice of the other which we find in S. Matthew And secondly it was not in the power of the Church to have abrogated that Prayer as it stands in S. Luke because it is a part of the Gospel of the word of God which the Church hath no Authority to change or alter and much lesse to abrogate All that the Church can be said to have done in this particular is that the Church made choice rather of the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Matthew then as it stands in S. Luke when it was absolutely in her power to make choice of either No contrariety to be found in any one clause of the said two Pater Nosters nor any the least contradiction to be met with between those three Creeds or any one Article of the same differing no otherwise in a manner but as the Commentary and the Text. But so it is not in the Case which is now before us nor in the supposition of making one general confession of all the Reformed Churches if they were severally subscribed with the Irish Articles He that subscribes unto the Articles of Ireland may without any doubt or scruple subscribe unto the Articles or Confessions of all the Reformed or Calvinian Churches But if he take the Articles of England also into that account he must of necessity subscribe to many plain and manifest contrarieties Against this nothing hath been said but that there is no substantial difference between those Articles as was conceived by the Lord Primate p. 118. that both Confessions are consistent as is affirmed by Doctor Bernards most eminent learned and judicious person p. 121. and finally that there is no difference in substance but onely in Method number of Subjects determined and other circumstantials as is declared by Doctor Bernard p. 119. But if the contrary be proved and that it shall appear that there is a substantial difference between those Articles that the Confessions of both Churches are inconsistent and that they do not onely differ in the Circumstantials of Method Number and the like I hope that then it will be granted that the approving and receiving of the Articles of England was virtually and in effect an Abrogating of the former Articles of the Church of Ireland And for the proof of this I shall compare some passages in the Articles of Ireland as they passed in Convocation Anno 1615. with the Doctrines publickly professed in the Church of England either contained expresly and in terminis in the Book of Articles or else delivered in some other publick Monument of Record of the Church of England to which those Articles relate First then The Articles of the Church of Ireland have entertained and incorporated the Nine Articles of Lambeth containing all the Calvinian Rigours in the Points of Predestination Grace Free-will c. which Articles or any of them could never find admittance in the Church of England by reason of their inconsistency with the authorized Doctrines of it as before was said so that by the incorporating of those Nine Articles into the Articles of Ireland there are as many aberrations from the doctrine of the Church of England Secondly It is said of Christ Num. 30. that for our sakes he endured most grievous torments immediately in his Soul and most painful sufferings in his Body The enduring of which grievous torments in his Soul as Calvin not without some touch of Blasphemy did first devise so did he lay it down for the true sense and meaning of the Article of Christs descending into Hell In which expression as the Articles of Ireland have taken up the words of Calvin so it may rationally be conceived that they take them with his meaning and construction also the rather in regard that there is no particular Article of Christs descending into Hell as in those of England and consequently no such Doctrine of a local Descent as the Church of England hath maintained Thirdly it is declared Num. 50. That the Abstinencies which are appointed by publick order of that State for eating of Fish and forbearing of Flesh at certain times and dayes appointed are no wayes meant to be Religious Fasts nor intended for the maintenance of any superstition in the choice of meats but are grounded meerly upon Politick Considerations for provision of things tending to the better preservation of the Common-wealth But the Church of England not taking notice of any Politick Considerations for the breeding of Cattle increase of shipping or the like as the Statists do nor intending the maintenance of any Superstition in choice of meats as the Papists do retaineth both her Weekly and her Annual Fasts ex vi Catholicae consuetudinis as Apostolical and Primitive Institutions and she retains them also not as Politick but as Religious Fasts as appears by the Epistle for Ash-wednesday taken out of the second Chapter of Joel from verse 12. unto verse 18. and by the Gospel for that day taken out of the sixth Chapter of S. Matthew from verse 16. unto verse 22. And more particularly from the Prayer appointed to be used on the first Sunday in Lent viz. O Lord which for our sakes didst fast fourty dayes and fourty nights give us grace to use such abstinence that our flesh being subdued to the Spirit we may ever obey the Godly motions in righteousness and true holinesse to thy honour and glory which livest and reignest c. Fourthly It is affirmed Num. 56. That the first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and therefore we are bound to rest therein from our common and daily businesse and to bestow that leisure upon Holy Exercises both publick and private How contrary this is to the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies we have seen already and if it be contrary to the Book of Homilies it must be also contrary to the Book of Articles by which those Homilies are approved and recommended to the use of the Church Besides it is declared in the seventh of those Articles first that the Law given by Moses as touching Ceremonies and Rites do not bind Christian men nor ought the Civil Precepts thereof to be received in any Common-wealth and secondly that no Christian whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral So that the Ceremonial part of the Law of Moses being wholly abrogated there is no more to be observed in any of the said Commandments then that which is naturally and plainly moral For otherwise the Old Testament must be
precept of the Moral Law or the Law of Natures are not to be dispenst withal upon any occasion or necessity whatsoever it be and much less to be changed and abrogated at the will of man which explanation not to dispute the mutability or immutability of a positive Law will find as many Adversaries as the proposition as that which crosseth with the Doctrine of some of the first Martyrs in the Church of England and with the first Reformers and other leading men of the Protestant and Reformed Churches And first it is resolved thus by Mr. Tyndal a man sufficiently famous for his great pains in translating the Bible into English who suffered Martyrdom in the year 1536. As for the Sabbath saith he we be Lords over the Sabbath and may yet change it into Monday or into any other day as we see need or may make every tenth day a holy day onely if we see cause why Neither was there any cause to change it from the Saturday but to put a difference between us and the Jewes neither need we any holy day at all if the people might be taught without it And somewhat to this purpose though not in terms so fully significant and express we find affirmed by John Frith a man of much learning for his age who suffered Martyrdom in the year 1533. Our fore-fathers saith he which were in the beginning of the Church did abrogate the Sabbath to the intent that men might have an example of Christian liberty c. Howbeit because it was necessary that a day should be reserved in which the people should come together to hear the word of God they ordained in stead of the Sabbath which was Saturday the next day following which is Sunday And although they might have kept the Saturday with the Jew as a thing indifferent yet they did much better Which words of his if they seem rather to demonstrate the Churches power in altering the time of worship from one day to another then the mutability of the precept on the which it was founded I am sure that Zuinglius the first Reformer of the Church among the Switzers will speak more fully to the purpose Hearken now Valentine saith he by what wayes and means the Sabbath may be made a ceremony if either we observe that day which the Jewes once did or think the Lords day so affixed unto any time Vt nefas sit illum in aliud tempus transferre that we conceive it an impiety it should be changed unto another on which as well as upon that we may not rest from labour and hearken to the word of God if perhaps such necessity should be this would indeed make it become a ceremony But Calvin speaks more plain then he when he professeth that he regarded not so much the number of seven Vt ejus servituti Ecclesias astringeret as to enthral the Church unto it And this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much as can be comprehended in so narrow a compass More largely Vrsine the Divinity Reader in the University of Heidelberg and a great follower of Calvin in all his writings who makes this difference between the Lords day and the Sabbath That it was utterly unlawful to the Jewes either to neglect or change the Sabbath without express Commandment from God himself as being a ceremonial part of Divine Worship but for the Christian Church that that may design the first or second or any other day to Gods publick service so that our Christian Liberty be not thereby infringed or any opinion of necessity or holiness affixt unto them Ecclesia verò Christiana primum vel alium diem tribuit ministerio salva sua libertate sine opinions cultus vel necessitatis as his own words are Chemnitius yet more plainly for the Lutheran Churches who frequently affirms that it is libera observatio a voluntary observation that it is an especial part of our Christian liberty not to be tied to dayes and times in matters which concern Gods service and that the Apostles made it manifest by their example singulis diebus vel quocunque die that every day or any day may by the Church be set apart for religious exercises And finally as Bullinger Bucer Brentius cited by Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato è nostri◠non pauci besides many others of the Reformed Churches by telling us that the Church hath still a power to change the time of worship from one day to another do tacitly infer that the Church hath power to change that time from the seventh day to the tenth or twelfth as well as from the first day of the week to the third or fourth so they which teach us that the sanctifying of one day in seven is not the moral part of the fourth Commandment do imply no less Of which opinion beside Tostatus and the Schoolmen before remembred we find also Calvin to have been Lib. Instit 2. c. 8. 11. 34. besides Simler in Exod. 20. Aretius in his common places Loco 55. Franciscus Gomarus in his Book De origine Institutione Sabbati Ryvet in Exod. 20. p. 190. to whom Chemnitius may be added for the Lutheran Churches In one of which it is affirmed that the sanctifying of a seventh day rather then of the eighth or ninth juris est Divini sed ceremonialis And if it be ceremonial only though of Gods appointment it must be subject unto change and mutability as well as Circumcision and the Passover or any other of the legal or Mosaical Ordinances And by another it is said that it can neither be made good by the Law of Nature or Text of Scripture or any solid Argument drawn from thence Vnum è septem diebus ex vi praecepti quarti ad cultum Dei necessariò observandum that by the fourth commandment one day in seven is of necessity to be dedicated to Gods service which does as plainly contradict the Lord Primates second Proposition as the Explication of it is found contrary to the rest before The second way whereby the Lord Primate doth strengthen and support his positive Law and makes it to come more near to the Sabbatarians of these later times is by his fixing the first Institution of it on the second of Genesis which makes it equal in a manner to the Law of Nature if not part thereof For that the institution of it in the first beginning is the very same with making it a part or branch of the Law of Nature may be inferred first from these words of Tostatus in Gen. 2. Num Sabbatum cùm à Deo sanctificatum fuerit in primordio rerum c. whether the Sabbath being sanctified by God in the infancy of the World had been observed by men by the Law of Nature And secondly it may be inferred from Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato Sect. 2. Some saith he fetch the Original of the Sabbath from the beginning of the World
followeth in that Statute Be it enacted c. that all the dayes hereafter mentioned shall be kept and commanded to be kept holy dayes and none other that is to say all Sundayes in the year the feasts of the Circumcision of our Lord Jesus Christ of the Epiphany of the Purification with all the rest now kept and there named particularly The like ennumeration we have also in the Book of common-Common-prayer the publick Liturgy of this Church by Law established where we shall find it thus expressed That these shall be accounted holy dayes and none other that is to say all Sundayes in the year the feast of the Circumcision the Epiphany with all the rest before specified in the Act of Parliament Nor doth the Church onely rank the Lords day with other holy dayes in that enumeration of them but hath appointed the same Divine offices the Letany excepted onely to be performed upon the Saints days other festivals as upon the Sundays each of them having his proper Lesson Collect Epistle and Gospel as the Sunday hath and some of them their proper Psalms also which the Sunday hath not And as for the attendance of the people it is required with as much diligence upon the Saints dayes and other Festivals as upon the Lords day by the Laws of this land For so it is enacted in the Statute of the first of Queen Elizabeth viz. That all and every Person and Persons inhabiting within this Realm c. shall diligently and faithfully endeavour themselves to resort to their Parish Church or Chappel c. upon every Sunday and other dayes ordained and used to be kept as holy dayes then and there to abide orderly and soberly during the time of common prayer preaching or other service of God Nor was it only enacted that men should diligently repair to their Church or Chappel as well upon the other holy dayes as upon the Sunday but that the same penalty was imposed on such as without any reasonable let did absent themselves as well upon the one as upon the other For so it follows in that Statute viz. That every person so offending shall not alone be subject unto the censures of the Church but shall forfeit for every such offence twelve pence to be levied to the use of the poor of the same parish by the Church-wardens of the same c. Which grounds thus laid the Lord Primates Argument from the Book of Homilies will be easily answered For if the weight of his argument lie in the first words cited out of the Homily that in the fourth Commandment God hath given express charge to all men that upon the Sabbath day which is now our Sunday c. and therefore that the Sunday or Lords day may be called a Sabbath this will prove nothing but a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a contention about words and not within the compass of the Homily neither it being declared in the former words of the same Homily that we keep now the first day which is our Sunday and make that our Sabbath that is our day of rest So that the destinating of the Sunday or first day of the week for the day of rest makes it at the most but a tanquam to the Sabbath neither entituling it to the name nor prerogatives of it But if the weight of the Argument lie in these words viz. That men upon the Sunday or Lords day should cease from all weekly and work-day labour c. and also give themselves wholly to Heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service For the first part thereof touching the forbearing of all weekly and work-day labour is no otherwise to be understood but of such labours as are prohibited by the Laws of the Realm or otherwise may prove an avocation from Gods publick service at the times appointed for the same And as for the last words touching mens giving of themselves wholly to heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service they are of a far differing meaning from the Article of the Church of Ireland for which the Lord Primate chiefly stickleth in which it is declared that the first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God For certainly there is a great difference between the dedicating of a day wholly to the service of God as in the Articles of Ireland and the giving of our selves wholly to heavenly exercises as in the Homilies of England the one implying that no part of the day is to be otherwise spent then in the service of God no place being left either for necessary business or for lawful pleasure the other that in the Acts and times of publick worship we should give our selves wholly that is our whole selves souls and bodies to the performance of those heavenly exercises which are then required It had before been told us in this very Homily that nothing in the fourth Commandment was to be retained but what was found appertaining to the Law of Nature but it appertaineth not to the Law of Nature either that one day in seven should be set apart for Religious worship or that this one day wholly be so imployed vel quod per totam diem abstineatur ab operibus servilibus as Tostatus hath it or that there be an absolute cessation during the whole day from all servile works By consequence there is no more required of us by the Law of Nature in this case but that at the times appointed for Gods publick worship we wholly sequester our selves yea our very thoughts from all worldly business fixing our souls and all the faculties thereof upon that great and weighty business which we are in hand with That does indeed appertain to the Law of Nature Naturale est quod dum Deum colimus ab aliis abstineamus as Tostatus hath it and to this point we have been trained in the Schools of Piety Orantis est nihil nisi coelestia cogitare as was said before So that the meaning of the Homily in that place will be onely this that for those times which are appointed by the Church for the assembly of Gods people we should lay by our daily business and all worldly thoughts and wholly give our selves to the heavenly exercises of Gods true Religion and service as in the Homily we are willed And that this only was the meaning of the Homily in that place may be convincingly concluded from the reasons following First from the improbability that the Authors of that Homily should propound a Doctrine so evidently contrary to the Declaration of the Act of Parliament in the 5 6. of Edw. 6. which was then in force and unto which not onely the Commons and the Lords Temporal but even the Lords Spiritual and the King himselfe did most unanimously concur or that the Queen should authorize a Doctrin in the Book of Homilies as by ratifying the 39. Articles she must be supposed to have done
which was so plainly and professedly contrary to her own Injunctions Secondly from the strong Alarm which was taken generally by the Clergy and the most knowing men of the Laity also at the coming out of Doctor Bounds Book about the Sabbath Anno 1595. In which book it is declared amongst other things that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual That there is great reason why we Christians should take our selves as straightly bound to rest upon the Lords day as the Jewes were upon their Sabbath that there should be no buying of victuals upon that day no Carriers Packmen Drovers or other men to be suffered to travel no Scholars to study the Liberal Arts no Lawyers to consult the case of their Clients or peruse their Evidences no Justices to examine Causes for preservation of the peace no Bells to ring upon that day no solemn Feasts or Wedding Dinners to be made on it with so many other prohibitions and negative precepts that men of all sorts and professions looked upon it as a common grievance Thirdly from the great care which was presently taken by such as were in Authority to suppress those Doctrines the said Book being called in by Arch-Bishop Whitgift both by his Letters missive and his visitations as soon as the danger was discovered Anno 1599. and a command signified in the Queens name by Chief Justice Popham at the Assizes held at Bury in Suffolk Anno 1600. that the said Book should no more be printed though afterward in the more remiss Government of King James it came out again with many Additions Anno 1606. Fourthly and finally from the permitting of all sorts of Recreations even common Enterludes and Bear-baitings in the so much celebrated Reign of Queen Elizabeth as also by the Declaration about Lawful sports published by King James An. 1618. and revived afterwards by King Charles Anno 1633 which certainly those godly and religions Princes would neither have suffered nor have done had they conceived it to be contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England of which they were such zealous Patrons and such stout Defenders No breaking of Subscription here by the Historian no crossing or opposing of the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies and consequently no such need of Sophistry to elude the Lord Primates Argument which was drawn from thence as the said Honourable Person N. N. must believe there was SECT VIII A further Argument to prove the meaning of the Homily as before laid down The high esteem which the Church of England hath of the ancient Fathers as also of the usages of the primitive times with her respect unto the neighbouring Reformed Churches No restraint from labour on the Lords day imposed by the Council of Laodicea Beza's opinion of the liberty in those times allowed of Law-suits and Handy-crafts prohibited in great Cities on the Lords day by the Emperour Constantine but Husbandry permitted in the country Villages Proof from Saint Jerome Chrysostom Augustine that after the Divine service of the day was ended the rest of the day was spent in mens several businesses Husbandry first restrained in the Western Churches in the Council of Orleans Anno 540. and by the Edict of the Emperour Leo Philosophus in the Eastern parts about the year 890. Several restraints laid on the Lords day by the Council of Mascon Anno 588. Pope Gregory offended at such restraints and his censure of such as did enioyn them The liberty allowed in the Lutheran Churches on the Lords day as also in those of the Palatinate till after the year 1612. Nor in the Churches of the Low-Countries till the year 1618. Not onely servile Works but Fairs and Markets continued on the Lords day in those Countries till the same year also Necessary labour permitted on the Lords day in the Reformed Churches of the Switzers and honest Recreations in the French and Genevian Churches as also in the Kirk of Scotland The conclusion and application of the last Argument IT hath been proved sufficiently in the former Section that the passage alledged by the Lord Primate from the Book of Homilies and that twice for failing is capable of no such sense and meaning as he puts upon it for if it were the Homily must not only contradict it self but the Authors of it must be thought to propound a Doctrine directly contrary to the Queens Injunctions and the publick Liturgy of this Church and several Acts of Parliament which were then in force And which is more the whole body of Gods people in this Land by following their necessary business and lawful pleasures upon the Sunday or Lords day when no attendance at the place and hours of Gods publick service was required of them must be supposed to have run on in a course of sin against Gods Commandments and of contempt and disobedience to the publick Doctrine of the Church for the space of 80. years and upwards without contradiction or restraint which to imagine in a Church so wisely constituted and in a State founded on so many good Lawes cannot find place with any man of sober judgement But there is one Argument yet to come of as much weight and consequence as those before that is to say that if any such restraint from labour and honest recreations was by the Doctrine of this Church imposed on the people of God this Church must openly oppose the Doctrine of the ancient Fathers the laudable usages and customes of the Primitive times together with the general practise and perswasion of all the Protestant and Reformed Churches in these parts of the world a matter so abhorrent from the principles of the first Reformers and from the Canons and Determinations of this Church and the Rulers of it that no surmises of this kind can consist with reason The Church of England hath alwayes held the Fathers in an high regard whether we look upon them in their learned and laborious writings or as convened in General National and Provincial Councils appealing to them in all Differences between her and the Church of Rome and making use of their authority and consent in expounding Scripture witness that famous challenge made by Bishop Jewel in a Sermon preached at Saint Pauls Cross Anno 1560. in which he publickly declared that if all or any of the learned men of the Church of Rome could produce any one sentence out of the writings of any of the ancient Fathers or any General or National Council for the space of the first 600. years in justification of some Doctrines by them maintained and by us denied he would relinquish his own Religion and subscribe to theirs Witness the Canon made in a Convocation of the Prelates and Câ—ergy of England Anno 1571. Cap. De concionatoribus by which it was ordered and decreed that nothing should be preacht to the people but what was consonant unto the Doctrine of the old and
in no point else But Doctor Bernard gives us some and the Answer to the Jesuites challenge hath given given us others First the Lord Primate tells us in a Letter writ to Doctor Bernard and by him now published That he ever declared his opinion to be but it was onely in private to some special Friends that Episcopus Presbyter gradu tantum differunt non ordine and consequently that in places where Bishops cannot be had the Ordination by Presbyters standeth valid And howsoever saith he I must needs think that the Churches which have no Bishops are thereby become very defective in their Government and that the Churches in France who living under a Popish power and cannot do what they would are more excusable in this defect then the Low-Countreyes that live under a a free State yet for the testifying my Communion with these Churches which I do love and honour as true Members of the Church universal I do profess that with like affection I should receive the blessed Sacrament at the hands of the Dutch Ministers if I were in Holland as I should do at the hands of the French Ministers if I were in Charentone And this I must needs say though I never saw it before in Print is no news to me at all For I have heard long since and from very good hands that the Lord Primate did so fully communicate his judgement in the point of Episcopacy to Doctor Preston then of Cambridge a man of quick parts and deep comprehensions that he used to say many times to his Friends and followers that if the Bishops of England did lay the foundation of their calling on no other grounds then the Primate did the differences between them would be soon agreed But on the other side it is the Doctrine of the Church of England that a Bishop and a Presbyter do differ Ordine in respect of some super our order which the Presbyter hath not and not Gradu onely in respect of some superiority of Degree which every Bishop hath above the Presbyters And this appears plainly by the Preface of the Book entituled The form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons approved by the Articles of the Church and established by the Laws of the Land in which Preface it is said expresly that it is evident unto all men diligently reading holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons It follows not long after thus viz. And therefore to the intent these Orders should be continued and reverently used and esteemed in this Church of England it is requisite that no man not being at this present Bishop Priest nor Deacon shall execute any of them except he be called tried examined and admitted according to the form hereafter following Here then we have 3. Orders of Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons the Bishop differing as much in Order from the Priest as the Priest differs in Order from the Deacon But because perhaps it may be said that this Preface is no part of the Book which stands approved by the Articles of the Church and establisht by the Laws of the Land let us next look into the body of the Book it selfe where in the form of consecrating an Arch-Bishop or Bishop we shall find a prayer in these words following viz. Almighty God giver of all good things who hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold this thy servant now called to the work and Ministry of a Bishop and replenish him so with the truth of thy Doctrine and innocency of life that both by word and deed he may faithfully serve thee in this office c. By which Prayer it doth as evidently appear as it did before in the Preface not onely that the office of a Bishop doth differ from the Office of the Priests and Deacons but that the Bishop is of a different Order from all other Ministers And this appears yet further by the different forms used in the ordering of the Priests and Deacons and the form of consecrating an Arch-Bishop or Bishop Which certainly the Church had never distinguished in such solemnity for frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora if the consecrating of a Bishop did not adde some further Order to him which before he had not as a Priest or Presbyter But because possibly some may say that the Church of England is either singular in this point or else did borrow these forms from the popish Ordinals as it is said to have borrowed her publick Liturgy from the popish Missals it will be found on the first search that nothing is done or appointed to be done by the Church of England but what was regulated and prescribed by the fourth Council of Carthage Anno 401. or thereabout In which Council it is first ordained that in the ordination of a Priest or Presbyter the Bishop holding his hand on his head and blessing him all the Presbyters that were present should hold their hands by the hands of the Bishop Whereas in the ordination of a Deacon it sufficeth that the Bishop alone put his hands upon the head of him that is ordained because he is not sanctified to priestly dignity but to the service of the Church But in the consecration of a Bishop it is there required that two Bishops holding the Book of Gospels over his head the third which regularly was to be the Metropolitan of the Province should pronounce the words of Consecration all the other Bishops which are present laying their hands upon him as others did I said that regularly the Bishop which pronounced the words of Consecration was to be the Metropolitan of the Province in which the New Bishop was ordained because we find it so ordered in the Council of Antioch Anno 365. in which it was decreed that a Bishop should not be ordained without a Synod and the presence of the Metropolitan that the Metropolitan by his letters should call unto him all the Bishops in the Province if conveniently they might come together if not that at the least the greater part should be present or give their consent by writing By which it seems that the consecration of a Bishop was esteemed a work of so great dignity in it self and of so great importance to the Church of Christ that all the Bishops of the Province were required to be present at it if they could conveniently But to return again to the fourth Council of Carthage we find therein three several and distinct forms of Ordination and consequently three several Orders of Ministers to be so ordained For otherwise it had been very unnecessary to use one form in the making of a Presbyter another in the consecrating of Bishops the one to be performed by the Bishop and some Presbyters onely the other not to be attempted but with the presence or the
as are to receive the Communion viz. Almighty God our Heavenly Father who of his great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them which with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto him have mercy upon you pardon and deliver you from all your sins and confirm and strengthen you in all goodness and bring you to everlasting life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen Or else the first clause in the form of Absolution used at the visitation of the sick would have served the turn that is to say Our Lord Jesus Christ who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truely repent and believe in him of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences And there could be no reason at all imaginable why the next clause should be superadded to this prayer viz. And by his Authority committed to me I absolve thee from all thy sins c. if the Priest did not forgive sins Authoritativè by such a delegated and commissionated power as before we spake of And that this is the Doctrine and intent of the Church of England appears by the acknowledgement of two learned men of the opposite faction For thus saith one of the great sticklers for the Church of Rome viz. Hereunto is also pertinent the Doctrine of those Protestants who hold that Priests have power not onely to pronounce but to give remission of sins Yea it seemeth to be the Doctrine of the Communion-Book in the visitation of the sick where the Priest saith And by his Authority committed unto me I absolve thee from all thy sins Then which there could not come a clearer Testimony from the mouth of an Adversary And for the other side I will take Dr. Lewis Bayley afterwards Bishop of Bangor a man precise enough as to the perpetual morality of the Lords day Sabbath and Calvinist enough in some other Tenets of that rigid Sect And yet this man in his Book called the Practice of Piety not onely doth advise his sick Penitent to send in time for some godly Minister to whom he may unfold his griefs confess his sins that so he may receive the benefit of Absolution but tells him that then he should not doubt in foro conscientiae but that his sins be as verily forgiven on earth as if he did hear Christ himself in foro judicii pronouncing them to be forgiven in Heaven And this he doth exemplifie in Doctor Reynolds the ablest and most learned man of all that shewed themselves on the Puritan party who being on his death-bed did earnestly desire to receive the benefit of sacerdotal Absolution according to the form prescribed in the Book of common-Common-prayer and humbly received it at the hands of Dr. Holland the Kings Professor in Divinity in the University of Oxon for the time then being and when he was not able to express his joy thankfulness in the way of speech did most affectionatly kiss the hand that gave it and yet this Doctor had not only a chief hand in the Millenary Petition as they commonly called it presented to K. James at his first coming to this Crown wherein they excepted not only against the use but the very name of Absolution as being a forinsecal word which they desired to have corrected but managed the whole busines of it at Hampton Court And this he did with such fidelity and zeal that to give that party some contentment it was ordered in the Conference there that to the word Absolution in the Rubrick following the general confession these words Remission of sins should be added for explanation sake as it stil continueth so powerful an Orator is death as to perswade men in extremities of sickness to apply those remedies which in the times of health they neither thought lawful nor convenient to be used in such extremities 7. But to proceed in the Article of Christs descending into Hell the Church of England doth maintain a local descent that is to say That the Soul of Christ at such time as his body lay in the grave did locally descend into the nethermost parts in which the Devil and his Angels are reserved in everlasting chains of darkness unto the judgment of the great terrible day This proved at large by Bishop Bilson in his learned and laborious Work entituled The Survey of Christ's sufferings in which he hath amassed together whatsoever the Fathers Greek and Latine or any of the ancient Writers have affirmed of this Article with all the Points and Branches which depend upon it And that this was the meaning of the first Reformers when this Article amongst others was first agreed upon in the Convocation of the year 1552. appears by that passage of S. Peter which is cited by them touching Christs preaching to the Spirits which were in prison And though that passage be left out of the present Article according as it passed in the Convocation of the year 1562. yet cannot that be used as an Argument to prove that the Church hath altered her judgment in that Point as some men would have it that passage being left out for these reasons following For first that passage was conceived to make the Article too inclinable to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which makes the chief end of Christs descent into Hell to be the fetching thence the souls of the Fathers who died before and under the Law and secondly because it was conceived by some learned men that the Text was capable of some other construction than to be used for an argument of this Descent The judgment of the Church continueth still the same as before it was and is as plain and positive for a local descent as ever formerly She had not else left this Article in the same place in which She found it or given it the same distinct Title as before it had viz. De Descensu Christi ad Inferos in the Latine Copies of King Edward the Sixth that is to say Of the going down of Christ into Hell as in the English Copies of Queen Elizabeths Reign Nor indeed was there any reason why this Article should have any distinct place or Title at all unlesse the maintenance of a local Descent were intended by it For having spoken in the former Article of Christs Suffering Crucifying Death and Burial it had been a very great impertinency not to call it worse to make a distinct Article of his Descending into Hell if to Descend into Hell did signifie the same with this being buried as some men then fancied or that there were not in it some further meaning which might deserve a place distinct from his Death and Burial The Article speaking thus viz. As Christ died for us and was buried so is it to be believed that he went down into Hell is either to be understood of a local Descent or else we are tied to believe nothing by it but what was explicitely or implicitely comprehended in the former Article Now that this
to the Articles of the Church of England the motion was not onely opposed by the Bishops but denied by the King opposed by the Bishops by reason of their inconsistency with the Doctrine of the Church of England denied and rejected by the King because he held the matters therein contained to be fitter for the publick Schools than the Book of Articles But on the contrary the Lord Primate alwayes shewed himself in favour of those Articles those Orthodoxal Assertions as the Doctor called them praetermitting no occasion to defend and countenance them and to that end caused them to be inserted into the Articles of the Church of Ireland Anno 1615. For if we may believe Dr. Bernard as in this case questionless we may it was his doing that these Nine Articles of Lambeth together wth the precise observance of the New Lords-day-Sabbath a different explication of the Article of Christs Descent into Hell from that allowed of by this Church and almost all the other Heterodoxies of the Sect of Calvin were interserted and incorporated into the Articles of Ireland we being told by Doctor Bernard in the History of his Life and Death p. 49. that in the Convocation held at Dublin Anno 1615. he being then a Member of that Synod was appointed to draw up those Articles which then and there were approved and ratified for the establisht Doctrine of the Church of Ireland This did he towards the advancing of the Calvinian Doctrines in his own native Countrey and for so doing was much flattered and applauded by the English Calvinists as the chief Patron of the Cause the Cause of God as some of them were pleased to call it Vissius a Divine of the Low Countreys publisht a Book entituled The Pelagian History demonstrating therein that the Fathers and other ancient Writers in their several ages maintained successively those Opinions in the matters of Predestination and the Points depending thereupon as the Remonstrants or Arminians as some call them did in the Belgick Churches A Book which suddenly grew into great reputation with most knowing and unbiassed men who had not been before engaged in the present quarrels And thereupon to give a stop to it in the middle of its full carere the Lord Primate published the History of Goteschalcus Of which thus Doctor Twisse in his Letter to the Lord Primate of the 29. of May 1640. Where having first spoken of his Singular Piety and Wisdom in reference to the necessitous condition of those times in inserting the History of Pelagius in his Book De primordiis Ecclesiarum Britannicarum so opportunely coming in his way he after addeth that his History of Goteschalcus was a piece of the like nature and that it came out most seasonably in respect of Vossius for the relieving of whose credit thereupon there had been many meetings by some in London that by the coming forth of that Piece he was the better inabled in the pursuit of his Answer to Corvinus which he was in hand with and to meet with the Dictates of N. N. who endeavoured to justifie some conceit of Vossius but upon very weak grounds Thus saith he I have observed with comfort the hand of God to have gone along with your Grace for the honouring the Cause of his Truth in so precious a Point as is the glory of his Grace And I nothing doubt but the same hand of our good God will be with you still and his wisdom will appear in all things you undertake whether of your own choice or upon the motion of others So he and in him we may partly see the minds of the rest But there was somewhat else which did as much indear him to that Party as the Nine Articles of Lambeth namely the little esteem he had of the Orders Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England which made him so agreeable to them that they plied him with continual Letters when he was in Ireland Doctor Bernard telling us and I dare take it on his word That he had seen divers Letters wrote unto him from those who were aspersed with the name of Puritans full of respect and large expressions of their love to him p. 160. And at his comings into England he was much visited by the Grandees and learned Men of that Faction not that they found any reason to make use of him for design and counsel but partly for the reputation which he brought with him to the Cause and partly for the benefit they received by conferring with him who was indeed a walking Concordance and a living Library Nor was he less courted by their Followers the Lay-Brethren also by whom he was caressed complemented feasted wheresoever he came many good people being admitted to those Meetings as well to feed on his Discourses as to fill their bellies For though Doctor Bernard please to tell us that the Lord Primate did approve the Discipline and Constitutions of both Churches yet when he comes unto particulars he confutes himself giving us gratis several instances which are but sorry proofs of such Approbation whether we look upon the Canons of the Church of England separately and in themselves or on the publick Liturgy also which though first fitted for the use and edification of the Church of England were afterwards imposed by Act of Parliament in that Kingdom on the Church of Ireland In the particulars whereof we shall go no further then Doctor Bernard doth conduct us First then It is appointed by one Rubrick in the Liturgy or Common-Prayer Book That all Priests and Deacons shall be bound to say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly except they be let by preaching studying of Divinity or some other urgent cause and in the rest it is directed in what course and order the said Morning and Evening Prayer is to be Officiated on what dayes the Letany is to be said or sung as also upon what dayes the Communion-service is to be used and in what part of that service the Sermon is to have its place and what other parts of that service are to follow after it Which last observance being neglected by some who would not tie themselves unto any Rule by others because being Lecturers onely they were not charged with Cure of Souls it was required by King Charles in some Instructions which he sent to all the Bishops severally and respectively in the Realm of England Anno 1628. That every Lecturer should read the Divine Service according to the Liturgy printed by Authority in his Surplice and Hood before the Lecture But on the contrary Doctor Bernard tells us of the Lord Primate That he was not so rigid as to tie all men in the private to an absolute necessary use of it or in the publick that a Sermon was not to be heard unlesse that did precede p. 145. He took great care as Doctor Bernard hath informed us p. 155. for the often publick reading of the Ten Commandments and the Creed
before the Congregation according to the custome of other Reformed Churches of which care there had been no need if the publick Liturgy had been read as it ought to be as well the Commandments as the Creed being appointed to be read publickly in the Course thereof But being it is said with reference to the Reformed Churches I want reason to believe that the often publick reading of the Commandments and the Creed supplied the place of the Publick Liturgy on the dayes of Preaching according to the Custome of some of the Reformed Churches which were therein imitated Secondly it is appointed by the Liturgy or Common-prayer-Book of Both Churches what dayes should be accounted holy and observed as Festivals each of them having their several Lessons Collects Epistles and Gospels as well the Sunday or Lords day it selfe or as the greater Festivals of Easter and Whitsuntide or those of the Ascension and Nativity of our Lord and Saviour No difference made between them except it be the addition of some proper Psalmes to some special Festivals in the intent and purpose of the publick Liturgies But whether the Lord Primate observed all these several Holy dayes which the Church allows of and in such manner as is prescribed by the Church may be very well doubted It s true that Doctor Bernard tells us that it was the Lord Primates judgement and opinion That the Annual Commemorations of the Articles of the Faith such as the Nativity Passion Resurrection of our Saviour c. were still to be observed which Saint Austin saith in his time were in use through the whole Catholick Church of Christ and is now in other Reformed Churches as a means to keep them in the memory of the vulgar according to the pattern of Gods injunction to the Israelites in the Old Testament for the types of them as appeared by his then constant preaching on those Subjects p. 152. But then it is as true withal that Doctor Bernard tells us nothing of the Lord Primates observation of the other Holy dayes as certainly he would have done had there been ground for it And therefore if the Lord Primate were so punctual in keeping the Anniversaries of the Nativity Passion Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord and Saviour and of the coming down of the Holy Ghost as Doctor Bernard saith he was it may be probably conceived that this was done rather in compliance with some of the forraign Reformed Churches which observe those dayes and those dayes onely than in obedience to the prescripts of the Churches of England and Ireland Thirdly the day of the Passion of our Saviour commonly called Goodfriday is by both Churches reckoned for jejunium statum a standing though but an Annual Fast as well as Lent the Ember dayes and Rogation week and hath its proper and distinct office that is to say its proper Lessons Collect Epistle and Gospel accommodated to the day and every way instructive in the story of our Saviours passion And it is ordered by the thirteenth Canon of the year 1603. That all Ministers shall observe the Orders Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of common-Common-prayer as well in reading the holy Scriptures and saying of Prayers as in Administration of the Sacraments without either diminishing in regard of preaching or in any other respect or adding any thing in the matter and form thereof But on the contrary Doctor Bernard telleth us that the Friday before Easter Good Friday by no means take heed of that appointed for the remembrance of the Passion of our Saviour was by the Lord Primate at Droghedah in Ireland observed duly as a solemn fast inclining the rather to that choice that is to say of making it a solemn not a standing fast out of prudence and the security from censure by the then custome of having Sermons beyond their ordinary limit in England and that when the publick prayers were ended that is to say so much of the publick prayers as might be no hindrance to his preaching be preached upon that subject extending himself in Prayer and Sermon beyond his ordinary time which being known to be his constant custom some from Dublin as other parts came to partake of it p. 154. Fourthly by the 55. Canon of the year 1603. there is a form of Prayer prescribed to be used by Preachers before their Sermons the beginning of which Canon is as followeth viz. Before all Sermons Lectures and Homilies Preachers and Ministers shall move the people to joyn with them in prayer in this Form or to this effect as briefly as conveniently they may Ye shall pray for Christs holy Catholick Church c. But on the contrary Doctor Bernard tells us of the Lord Primate that he did not onely spin out his own Prayers to a more then ordinary length as appeareth by the former passage but that he was also much for the Ministers improving of their gifts and abilities in prayer before Sermon and after according to his own practice p. 150. and that he required the like extemporary and unpremeditated prayers of his houshold Chaplains in his Family-prayers at six of the clock in the morning and at eight at night Fifthly it is appointed by the eighteenth Canon of the year 1603. That as often as in the Divine Service the Lord JESUS shall be mentioned due and lowly reverence shall be done by all persons present as it hath been accustomed testifying by these outward Ceremonies Gestures their inward Humility Christian Resolution and due acknowledgment that the Lord Jesus Christ the true and eternal Son of God is the onely Saviour of the World in whom alone all Mercies Graces and Promises of God to mankind for this life and the life to come are fully and wholly comprised But on the contrary Doctor Bernard tells us of the Lord Primate p. 147. That as for bowing at the name of Jesus though he censured not those that did either in our or other Reformed Churches according to the custome of each which we of England must needs take for a special favour yet he did not conceive the injunction of it could be founded upon that of the Apostle Phil. 2. 10. and wondered at some learned mens assertions that it was the exposition of all the Fathers upon it a touch for Doctor Andrews the late learned and most renowned Bishop of Winchester and as the wise composers of the Liturgy gave no direct injunction for it there so in Ireland he withstood the putting of it into the Canon Anno 1634. Sixthly it is appointed by the said eighteenth Canon of the year 1603. That no man shall cover his head in the Church or Chappel in the time of Divine Service whereof I hope the Sermon did deserve to be accounted part except he have some infirmity in which case let him wear a night-Cap or Coif and in the seventh Canon of the year 1640. that all good and well-affected people members of this Church be ready to tender their acknowledgement
contrary to the New which is denied in the first clause of this Article and secondly this Article must be contradicted by the Book of Homilies which in another of these Articles is approved as before was said As Adversaries to which truth the Author of the Book entitled The Faith Doctrine and Religion professed and protected in the Realm of England c. being a Commentary on the 39. Articles Perused and by the lawful Authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick doth account all such as have taught and published first that whereas all other things were so changed that they were clean taken away as the Priesthood the Sacrifice and Sacraments this day that is the Sabbath day was so changd that it yet remaineth and secondly that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual If so then no such thing required of Christians as to dedicate the first day of the week wholly to the service of God or to rest thereon from our common and dayly business as it is positively determined in this Article of the Church of Ireland Adde here those desperate consequences which have been raised by some men from these Sabbath-Doctrines It having been preacht in some of the Pulpits in this Kingdom as Mr. Rogers tells us in his Preface to the Book above mentioned that to do any servile work or business on the Lords day is as great a sin as to kill a man or commit adultery that to throw a Bowle to make a Feast or dress a VVedding Dinner on the Lords day is as great a sin as for a man to take a knife and cut his childs throat and that to ring more Bells then one on the Lords day is as great a sin as to commit a wilful murder Most desperate consequents indeed but such as naturally do arise from such dangerous premises Fifthly it is declared Num. 71. that we ought to judg those Ministers to be lawfully called and sent which be called and chosen to the work of the Ministry by men who have publick Authority given them in the Church This serves to countenance the Ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas ordained if I may so call it by the imposition of the hands of two Lay-Elders for each single Presbyter without the assistance or benediction of the Bishop and is directly contrary to the Book entituled The form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons according to which Book justified and approved by the 36. Article of the Church of England no Priest or Presbyter can be otherwise ordained then by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop Sixthly it is declared Num. 74. That God hath given power to his Ministers not simply to forgive sins which prerogative he hath reserved onely to himselfe but in his name to declare and pronounce unto such as truly repent and unfainedly believe his Holy Gospel the absolution and forgiveness of sins VVhich Doctrine how contrary it is to the Doctrine of the Church of England hath been shewed at large in the tenth Section of this Book To which I shall now onely adde that for the better encouragement of the penitent party to make a true and sincere confession of his sins that so the Priest may proceed to Absolution on the better grounds it is ordered by the 113. Canon of the year 1603. That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister for the unburthening of his conscience and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him the said Minister shall not at any time reveale and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same under pain of Irregularity By incurring of which pain of Irregularity he doth not onely actually forfeit all those spiritual promotions of which he is at that time possessed but is rendered utterly uncapable of receiving any other for the time to come Seventhly it is declared Num. 80. That the Bishop of Rome is so far from being the Supreme head of the Universal Church of Christ that his works and Doctrine do plainly discover him to be that man of sin foretold in the holy Scriptures whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth and abolish with the brightness of his coming Of which opinion the Lord Primate also was as is affirmed by Doctor Bernard p. 162. where he telleth that the Lord Primate had in two learned Sermons given his judgement at large that the Papacy was meant by Babylon in the seventeenth and eighteenth of the Revelation But there is no such Doctrine concerning Antichrist in the Book of Articles or in any other publick Monument or Record of the Church of England but the contrary rather And this appeareth by a prayer at the end of the second Homily for Whitsunday viz. That by the mighty power of the Holy Ghost the comfortable Doctrine of Christ may be truly preached truly received and truly followed in all places to the beating down of Sin Death the Pope the Devil and all the Kingdom of Antichrist In which words the Pope the Devil and the Kingdom of Antichrist being reckoned as the three great enemies of the Church of Christ it must needs be by the Doctrine of this Church in the Book of Homilies that the Pope and Antichrist are as much distinguished as either the Devil and the Pope or the Devil and Antichrist which no man of reason can conceive to be one and the same Eighthly the Church of England in the tenth Article speaks very favourably of the will of man in the act of Conversion and all the other Acts of Piety which depend upon it viz. That we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will according to that memorable saying of Saint Augustine the greatest Champion of Gods grace against the Pelagian Heresies Praevenit nos gratia Dei ut velimus subsequitur ne frustra velimus Whereas it is declared in the Articles of Ireland that man is meerly passive in the work of his own Conversion velut inanimatum quiddam as was said by Luther the Article affirming Num. 32. That no man can come unto Christ unless the Father draw him that is to say unless the Father doth so draw him that nothing be ascribed to mans will either in receiving of Grace preventing or working any thing by the assistance of Grace subsequent or Grace concurring no other kind of drawing by our Heavenly Father being allowed of in this Act in the Schools of Calvin For on this ground Calvin dislikes that saying of Saint Chrysostome that God draws none but such as are willing to come