expresly and largely especially in his Preface to his comment on Hosea and in his Catholicus Orthodoxus against Baily Where also he may be seen decrying the observation of Lent if it pretend to be Apostolical He is indeed a most professed Champion of the Presbyterian cause in almost every thing under debate As for Isaac Casaubon he was indeed a very Learned Critick and for ought I know a person truly pious Mr. D. accounts him his own and therefore in the very title Page of his Vindiciae brings in his testimony to the Church of England out of an Epistle written to Claudius Salmasius Quod sime conjectura non fallit totius Reformatoinis pars integerrima est in Anglia ubi cum studio veritatis viget studium antiquitatis These words are indeed found in an Epistle written raptim hastily by Casaubon to Salmasius much about that time when some of our Bishops had declared their approbation of some of Casaubons Theological Essaies which sundry Divines both from Holland and France had disliked In this good mood Casaubon commends the English for the study of Antiquity but at other times he grievously complains to Thuanus and Heinsius that we encourage no study but Theology In the 604 Epis he asks what good could come of instructing his two sons in learning Medicina hic sane non viget Jurisprudentia illa vetus vera plane jacet vix de nomine paucis nota Epistle 799. he intimates his design to send his son Merick to Heinsius because he desired to have him well exercised in Greek Latin Hebrew and could not hope that should be done in England Is not the study of Antiquity like to be carried on well where a young man cannot he trained up to any eminent skill in Hebrew Greek or Latin I suppose we had not in this last Epistle been so extremely undervalued had not the learned man been exasperated by Mr. Mountague whose endeavours against Baronius he judged very injurious to his own credit and reputation as may be seen Epistle 717 718. This may suffice to make us not to be proud of Casaubons commendation if I thought it not sufficient I could go near to prove that Casaubon judged men more or less studious of antiquity according as they were more or less zealous against the Arminians But I let pass his synodical determinations and come to his Sermon where I find him Pag. 16. giving leave to Rome to rank our Reformers among the Contentious if it can be found that either they have laid aside or taken up any one thing whereof it may be said that the Holy Apostles or Apostolick Churches had or had not such a Custom he addes indeed Rome was never able to do it nor never shall But she knows well enough that she can for she knows that we have taken up Surplices which were not used by the Holy Apostles or any Apostolick Churches and we give Baronies to our Bishops which neither the Apostles nor any Apostolick Churches did and we place our Baptisteries in our Temples which was done neither by Apostles nor Apostolical Churches On the other side we have left off Unction and Love-feasts and the Holy Kiss all which were used by the Apostles and Apostolical Churches So that Rome by Mr. D's carelesly worded proposition hath leave to reckon our Reformers among contentious ones P. 17. He useth a plain Turkish Argument to confirm and uphold the cause of the Church for he saith that the miraculous manner whereby it hath pleased God to raise her up ought to be to all an evident proof that she is her beloveds and her beloved is hers and an argument that her Reformation is certainly the work of God and his Counsel which shall stand Just thus the Papists were wont to prate when Popery was restored by Q. Mary and just thus also did the Fanaticks argue when they were permitted by God to conquer three flourishing Kingdomes and to put all the Nations round about into a pannick fear Let us not be high minded but rejoice in trembling God hath pleaded with us by his strange judgments since Episcopacy was re-established among us we have had a sharp war a dreadful fire a sweeping Pestilence I do not say because Episcopacy is restored but because sin doth abound and prophaness runs like a river and mighty flowing stream if we do not soundly humble our selves God may soon take from us his worship our Ministers and all that Reformation in the which we glory and yet his Counsel will stand nevertheless Pag. 22. He perfectly affronteth the express words of our Church in the Liturgy for there it is said that the commination of sinners is used until the Primitive discipline of putting persons convicted of notorious sins to pennance at the beginning of Lent and only until that discipline can be restored which is much to be wished But Mr. D. saith there can be nothing more powerful to touch sinners to the quick and to draw them from their evil courses than the Commination to which the whole Congregation is bound to say Amen after every particular denunciation of Gods curse upon all sorts of sinners who persist in their sins And indeed it is meet he should say so for he had before given Rome leave to call us Contentious if we had left off any custom used in the Apostolick Churches and we here do confess that we have left off one that was very godly indeed we say it is to be wished it were restored but who hinders the restoring of it but our selves Have other Churches power to enjoyn Penance and have we none Or will other people submit to that discipline and not ours Are not fornicators put to open pennance and why may not other sinners be so punished too But not to multiply interrogatories the Church holds pennance would be more powerful than the form of commination she useth Mr. D. saith nothing can be more powerful than the commination he will sure impose some pennance on himself for this boldness and watch his Pen better for the time to come Perhaps he will say his meaning was honest and wholesome viz. that the form of Commination is very powerful to touch sinners to the quick if so he may do well to consider 1. Whether it be conducible to tye Ministers never to use it but on Ashwednesdays unless they have particular order from their Ordinaries for why should so powerful a preservative against sin be used but once a year especially seeing the use of it but once a year is found insufficient to reclaim profaneness cum primis saluturis est caeremonia sed non video cur debeat exhiberi solum uno die non saepius said the Great Bucer when he saw it restrained by the first Book of K. Edward to one day thereupon it was altered in following Liturgies to divers times in the year Grindals Articles enjoyned it to be used on some Sunday near the three great feasts of the Church
to make good but that 1. I am assured that Daillee is like in a short time to be vindicated by some of his own 2. I am now also fallen into a place where I can have no books but what my own Library affords and though I have most of the ancient Fathers of some Edition yet in a matter of this nature I shall neither be able to satisfie my self nor others unless I had opportunity to consult all the Editions of them or at least the most renowned For it often happeneth that when a man thinketh he hath the Fathers on his side and hath brought their testimonies too plain to be eluded for his opinion he reapeth no benefit thereby because those who differ from him deny the copies according to which he proceedeth to be such as are to be relied on It was my hap not long since to read Dr. Waltons Prolegomena that I might see what he could say for the comparative novelty of the Hebrew Letters that we at present use among other arguments I found him to make use of the authority of Eusebius his Chronicle ad annum mundi 4740. the words quoted out of him are these Fuit Esdras eruditissimus legis divinae clarus omnium Judaeorum magister qui de captivitate regressi suerunt in Judaeam affirmaturque divinas Scripturas memoriter condidisse ut Samari tanis non miscerentur literas Judaicas commutasse What is his collection hence why this Hic videmus Eusebium non tantum hanc literarum mutationem diserte asserere sed etiam ejus causam adferre ut sc Judaeicum Samaritanis non miscerentur I could see no such disert or manifest assertion of the change of the Letters in this testimony of Eusebius He that only saith affirmatur cannot be concluded so much as to deliver his own opinion Many Historians and Chronographers use affirmatur or some word of like import in such matters as they themselves do not believe and I hope for the credit of Eusebius that he did not think Esdram divinas scripturas memoriter condidisse and if so it is not like that he believed the other part of the affirmation neither But Mr. Baily a learned and industrious Scotch-man in his lately published Historical and Chronological Work lib. 1. p. 197. tells me That he had read over and over Eusebius his Chronicle as well the Greek as the Latin Copy set forth by Scaliger with great care out of the best Manuscripts and could not find one word in them concerning this change of Letters by Esdras and yet if Scaliger had in any Copy of good repute found any thing that might have confirmed this change of Letters he would no doubt have inserted it because he doth with so much passion take upon him to defend that change Now if this be true as I doubt it is that Dr. Walton in his prologue to so renowned a Work as the Polyglotts followed a Translation of Eusebius that was corrupted I may well be affrighted from examining testimonies of Fathers till I be where I may be assured that the testimonies I am to examine are not counterfeited In the mean time I shall lay down some few things concerning the Fathers 1. Many times the usefulness and almost absolute necessity of being acquainted with the Oriental Languages and the Writings of the Fathers is most cried up by those who themselves are but strangers to them It is not many years since a son of the Church at a Lecture in the Countrey Preached up the necessity of the knowledge of the Original Hebrew affirming that they were not worthy the name of Divines who did not well understand it but this pert young man being at Dinner taken to task about his own skill in Hebrew it was found that he could not so much as read Hebrew yet he was out-done by the bold Jesuit who as Melchior Adam relates the story in his life pag. 845. in a Dispute with Graserus about the Hebrew Text of the Bibles made boast of his skill in Hebrew but this Father of the society having an Hebrew Bible without points put into his hands knew not which was the top which was the bottom of the Pages which occasioned Graserus his Scholar to laugh at his daring ignorance so that the Nobleman who brought this Father withdrew and wish'd him so ignorant to be gone They who have read the reasons of Edmund Campian cannot but know how much he boasted of the Fathers as if they had been all his own from first to last even as much as Gregory the 13th on this account he earnestly desired to be admitted to dispute with our Divines Quo quo se moverit adversarius feret incommodum Patres admiserit captus est Excluserit nullus est But when this vain-glorious creature came to be disputed with it was found that he could not understand a Greek Father and that it might well be questioned whether he could so much as read Greek Dr. Fulk plainly tells him in the third days conference that it was not above a dozen years since he heard him at Oxford ask a Stationer for Irenaeus's Epistles In the fourth days conference when Mr. Clark brought Tertullians Book against Hermogenes to prove the Scriptures sufficiency he knew of no such book and yet when he was convinced that there was such a book then he could answer and pretended to know upon what account Tertullian argued against Hermogenes And he pretended in the same days conference that he knew the meaning of St. Basil and yet would not or could not read the place in Greek though it were easie and the sentence short and though he knew not where to find it in the Latin book So it seemed not improbable to some that Campian made not that confident Pamphlet but only turned it into good Latin Thompson also in his Treatise de Amissione Intercisione justificationis gratiae musters up the testimonies of many Fathers but when his book was only manuscript one who knew him asked him this question Vnde tot Patrum testimonia usurparet qui patres vix quidem attigisset I could shew the like ignorance and confidence in another Arminian who troubled Mr. Robert Baily of Scotland with testimonies of Fathers against Predestination but such as were all taken out of Vossius and concluded them with an Item that Beza and Calvin acknowledged the Fathers to be against themselves quoting as Vossius through an oversight had done Beza on Rom. 9.39 when as that Chapter hath but 33 Verses in it And Calvins third book of Institutions 33 Chapter when there be but 25 Chapters in that whole book I could also discover a great many now living who carry it in their Sermons and Discourses as if they followed the ancient Fathers when indeed they follow none but Hugh Groot But would I by all this insinuate that Mr. Scrivener is not well versed in the Fathers for whom he Apologizeth I answer I would insinuate no
indeed it doth not but he also might have done well before he dabled in the Printers Ink to read over some Compendiums then would he have amended the Title of above Fifty Pages in his Book not writing The Conformity of the Reformed Churches with the Reformed Church of England for this Enunciation There is a conformity betwixt the Reformed Churches and the Reformed Church of England in the things of present controversie cannot be proved but by an Induction shewing that all or the most or the most famous Reformed Churches agree with the Church of England in all or most or the chiefest of those matters the present Nonconformists scruple Hath he shewed this he doth as good as confess he hath not for Page 53. Sect. 63. giving us the summa totalis of his atchievements he plainly says it amounts but to thus much There is hardly one of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England that is not used in some one Reformed Church or other Which suppose he had proved as he hath not he is many stages off from the conclusion he propounded to infer if he deem he is not let him write a Book to prove that the Language of the Matachuses is conformable to the English Language because there is some one word in which both languages do agree and see whether he will not be laughed at to purpose But I will free my mind from all prejudices that may be taken against Mr. D. on the account of his Country nor will I create him any odium from the high elogiums he bestows on the Earl of Clarendon sentenced by King and Parliament to perpetual banishment as unworthy to live in England though I wonder Mr. D. doth no where bewail his sin or misery in heaping so many praises on him who deserved so few 'T is not the man but his Book I am to undertake and in it I will shew 1. Where there is a real controversy betwixt Episcoparians and Presbyterians he quite mistakes it 2. That he takes a great deal of pains to prove that which was never questioned by any sober man among us 3. That he defiles his Paper with many untruths and falshoods 4. That he hath let fall not a few passages which are manifestly prejudicial and destructive to the Church of England as it is now established As to the real controversies now on foot the principal of them may be reduced to three general Heads Episcopacy Liturgy Ceremonies The Presbyterians say that if they conform they must receive Episcopacy as an order by Divine Law superior to Presbytery and invested with sole power of order and jurisdiction Search Mr. Durell's Book with Candles and if there be in it any one Line tending to prove that either there is any such Episcopacy in any one reformed Church or that any one Reformed Church if her judgment were asked would approve such an Episcopacy and I will confess my self mistaken He reckoneth himself most secure of the Lutheran Churches and among the Lutherans especially of such as are governed by a Monarchy particularly he tells us That in Denmark they have Bishops and Arch bishops name and thing Page 5. How much he is mistaken in this will soon appear if we consult the History of the Reformation of that Kingdom About the year 1537 Bugenbagius is sent for into Denmark where the Twelfth of August he performed all the Ecclesiastical part of the Kings Coronation and Fourteen days after that Coronation he ordained Seven Superintendents to be keepers and executors of all Ecclesiastical Ordination and to do the office of Bishops Now I ask seeing Bugenhage was but a Presbyter whether he put the Superintendents into an order higher than his own if he did who gave him an authority so to do If he did not then are there no Bishops properly so called in Denmark Melchior Adam who relates this of Bugenhagius relates also in the life of Luther that he calling Three other Presbyters to join with him in laying on of hands ordained Nicholas Amdsorf Bishop repudiating one chosen by the Colledg of Canons and very dear to the Emperor That is he ordained one by the name of a Bishop but he was only a Presbyter and could not think himself to be of an higher Order being ordained by Luther that was but a meer Presbyter Gerhard acquaints us That the Papists or at least some of them did proclaim the Ordinations in their Churches to be void and null because performed by Luther who was no Bishop but that ever any Lutheran thought their Ordinations less valid on that account will never be proved I have read Hunnius his Demonstration of the Lutheran Ministry and though he were himself a Superintendent yet he so little magnifies his Office that he sticks not to affirm That he who ordains ordains only as the Officer of the Church and that any one whatever that should by the Church be set to ordain would ordain as validly as a Bishop doth And if it will do Mr. D. any kindness I can and will on his desire direct him to a Lutheran who calls us Anglos Papizantes for straining Episcopacy so high and appropriating Ordination to that Order Chemnitius had occasion to examine the Anathematizing Decrees of the Conventicle of Trent one of them was If any one shall say that a Bishop is not superior to a Presbyter let him be Anathema There he was necessitated to shew the judgment of the Lutheran Churches and yet he there delivereth nothing but what the English Presbyterians can subscribe to and though the incomparable Philip Melancthon was blamed for giving more to Bishops than was meet yet he hath not given more to them than what the English Nonconformists are ready to give them Thus of the Lutheran Churches It will not be so difficult for me to find out the judgment of the Churches more strictly called Reformed because I shall find the most famous of them except the Gallican meeting together at the Synod of Dort Of the Gallican therefore by themselves and I say that the Writers of those Churches have done more against our English Hierarchy than the Writers of any or all Reformed Churches besides For 1. Some of them have made it their business to overthrow the credit of Ignatius his Epistles from which more than from any writing whatever our Hierarchy doth strengthen it self Did not Salmasius and Blondell strain their diligence to prove that even the most correct Copy of Ignatius is spurious And when our learned Hammond had taken some pains to vindicate the Epistles Maresius quarrels with Bâ—ondell because he did not presently all other business laid aside take the Doctor to task and maintain against him the Apology he had made for St. Hieroms opinion yet Dally tells us that Blondell had intended to answer for himself had he not been prevented by death Because death did prevent him therefore his friend Monsieur Dally hath done that work for him and it is said that Dr. Pierson hath
If words flow from the mouth of Gods messenger not seen before that the hearers are rendred more attent and more profound admirers of the grace of God For if prescribed things only be always recited what will there be to excite attention Curiosity rather will be excited whilest this and the other by beholding the same things in his Books attendeth whether they be accurately read what place is here for devotion Neither is it to be thought that ours are bound to the Books delivered to them to words and syllables it is free to them to use any thing drawn out of the treasures of mystical wisdom which make to excite zeal according to variety of occasions Whence it comes to pass that Godly hearers are scarce ever present at Sacred mysteries without new motion of heart Page 61. It is said that the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas take those things in which they differ from the Reformed Church of England to be sinful and that therefore they would have her conform to them By whom is this said in such indefinite terms as are here made use of I doubt it will be found that none have so said at least none that are called or accounted Presbyterians and if none can be found what opinion will the world have of Mr. D's veracity But if any have said that some reformed Churches abroad have accounted some things in which the English Church differs from them to be sinful it is a thing so manifest that I wonder Mr. D. can find a forehead to deny it He mentioneth in this place the Reformed Churches in the Electorate of Brandenburg and I do not observe him to have mentioned them any where else I suppose by the Churches he joyneth them with that he meaneth such as close with that Reformation that the Elector himself affecteth and would fain have introduced and it will not be amiss to let our Countrymen understand what that is The heads of it are recited in the Continuation of Thuanus at the year 1614. Page 396 397. Edit Francof 1628. 1. Images Crosses Statues are to be removed out of Churches 2. Altars remaining since Popery and built to perform the Sacrifice of the Mass are to be taken away and in place of them are to be put oblong wooden Tables covered with black cloth a linnen cloth when the Supper is to be administred being put upon it 3. Instead of Hosts Wafers are to be used which being cut into long pieces should be received and broken by the hands of those who come to the Lords Table 4. That instead of Chalices used in Mass Cups should be used in the administration of the Lords Supper 5. The Casiolae which may very well signifie the Surplice as well as other Vestments are to be left to the Popish Priests 6. No linnen is to be put under or offer'd to those who come to the Lords Table nor are they to kneel as if Christ were corporally present 7. The sign of the Cross is not to be added at the end of the benediction 8. The Ministers of the Gospel are not to turn the back to men 9. Prayers and Epistles are not to be sung before Sermon but read 10. Auricular Confession is to be left off 11. At the Name of Jesus knees are not to be bowed or head uncovered 12. Prayers in the Pulpit are not to be muttered but pronounced with a loud voice 13. The Supper of the Lord is not for fear of danger to be administred to sick persons especially when the plague is abroad 14. Stone-Fonts are to be removed and Basons substituted in their rooms 15. The Decalogue is not to be recited imperfect but intire 16. The Catechism in some things that are exroneous is to be amended 17. The Sacred Trinity a mystery to be adored and ineffable is not to be represented by any images either carved or painted 18. The words of the holy Supper are to be interpreted by Sacramental analogy and collation of other places of holy Scripture 19. To the Gospels and Epistles which are explicated on Lords days and yearly repeated Ministers ought not so to be bound that they may not instead of them read and preach upon any other notable Text of the Bible Dr. Heylin hath exemplified the heads of this designed Reformation on purpose to show as he tells us Hist of Presby 412. how Calvinian and Lutheran Churches differ and how near ours approacheth to the latter and I have exemplified them to shew that if Ceremonies be but gnats English Presbyterians are not the only persons that do strain at them declaring also my just abhorrence of the Historians impudence in ascribing the designment of this Reformation to the plots and practices of a subtil Lady P. 85. Mr. D. having before recited a Letter of Mr. Chabrets in which he makes a question whether the Liturgy received at the Savoy Congregation be the same that was used in Q. Eliz. King James or King Charles I.'s time or another compiled by Archbishop Laud that had been occasion of much trouble adds words of great reproach against those who accused the late Lord Archbishop of making a new Book of Common-prayer other than those that were used in the times of our last three Soveraigns this he makes a thing that never was But he is now to know that Archbishop Laud did make or cause to be made a common-prayer-Common-prayer-book for the Kirk of Scotland different in many things from any that had been used here in England in any of the three last Soveraigns Reigns which common-prayer-Common-prayer-book among other things occasioned great disturbances betwixt the two Kingdoms nay he made some alterations in the Liturgy for England that were not very pleasing to some palates among the sons of the Church what they were if Mr. D. pleaseth he may see in Mr. Prynnes Epistle Dedicatory to his Quench-coal It is not for such a poor creature as I am to blame or find fault with those alterations which I find imitated in our last edition of the Liturgy Only I wonder why in the Office for the Fifth of November Ministers are not directed to read the Statute for the observing of that day seeing it is by law appointed to be read Ibid. He complains that our Convocations are beyond seas represented to consist only of Archbishops and Bishops and that the inferior Clergy is not permitted to sit and vote in them Really if any gave such information he was but too like to Mr. D. speaking of that which he either did not or would not understand The Convocations of England do consist of an upper and lower House and though the Upper House consists but of Archbishops and Bishops yet the Lower consists of the inferior Clergy Deans Prebendaries Arch-deacons and Proctors of the Clergy P. 116. Mr. D. calls our Convocations a Council consisting of above sixscore reverend grave and learned Divines chosen out of many thousands whereof twenty-six are Archbishops and Bishops a greater number Deans and Prebends and
yet many of them never declared dislike of Episcopacy nor opened their mouths against Ceremonies never took the Covenant nor Engagement were presented to vacant Livings by the true and undoubted Patrons By Gods blessing they added to the Church such as should be saved His Majesties return they defired so as none more yet they must not be suffered to continue in an Ecclesiastical Benefice unless they will submit to a thing scarce ever heard of Reordination It may be their mistake that they do not judge Ordination by Presbyters to be a nullity but what is this to Schism Obj. I may expect you will thus accost me If Mr. D. be so easily mastered why do you not pay a debt of love you owe why do you not write in Latin as once Mr. Nichols did in English A Plea for the Innocent Resp Verily for this reason because I love not to have to do with those who when they are put to silence know not how to be ashamed such a one this Monsieur is for not long ago he met with a Noble Gentleman of this Nation who hearing him say That all the Divines beyond seas condemned the English Nonconformists told him plainly That he knew it was not so and that some in France looked on him as an apostate for complying so far as he had done and when he replied These are only some unwise hot-headed men the honourable person rejoined Nay they are worthy and well tempered Ministers Yet did not Mr. D. change the copy of his countenance Is it possible then that I should bring him to repentance In a word if you account Mr. D. an Author any way considerable you have near you our old friend S. E. let him cull out of the Vindiciae what he esteemeth most strong that do you send to me if I do not by the first return of the Carrier send you a satisfactory answer provided it be directed not against persons but the Cause then account me a very vain-glorious animal In the mean time listen not to those who are given to vain jangling and false-witness bearing but put on charity the bond of perfection so shall an abundant entrance be administred unto you into that Kingdom where there are no perverse disputers to that Kingdom that we may be both brought is the sincere prayer of SIR Your humble servant W. B. LOng time after I had written the Appendix against Dr. Heylin I was informed that something else was come abroad in Latin in the which the Nonconformists were concerned I could not think any thing was said in it that had not been said before and therefore I had once some thoughts never so much as to look into it but being told that the Author of it was Mr. Matthew Scrivener reputed at Cambridge while he there resided a close Student and great Scholar I resolved to cast my eye upon some Pages of it that so if it seemed written with any candor and judgement I might either give an answer to it or tell such Nonconforming friends as I was acquainted with that I found it unanswerable But looking into it at the Stationers shop I soon found it to be made up of little besides scurrility and calumny Monsieur Daillees Book of the Right use of the Fathers which I thought no Protestant had looked on without admiration nor Papist without terror this English Presbyter undertakes to answer endeavours first of all to make it appear that the Book deserved not the Elogiums that some of great name and esteem among us had bestowed upon it and that Mr. Daillee was but a Cham taking delight to lay open the nakedness of the Fathers Then proceeds to give him a general and particular answer I confess I was moved not a little to see a writer that had deserved so well of the Reformed Religion so unworthily dealt with by one pretending to be a Protestant For what one thing hath Mr. J. D. said more or less about the Fathers than what had been said many years before by some of our most eminent Divines in England It must be acknowledged that he hath handled the point more copioufly than any who went before him and the heads of his discourse are exemplified with a most admirable collection of particulars but that he hath brought the Fathers any one peg lower than they had been brought by Juel Humfred Whitaker Rainolds Dr. George Abbot Down c. will never be proved Bishop Cosins hath put together all the reasons that were scattered and dispersed in other mens writings to prove the Non-canonicalness of the Apocryphal Books now it would be no wonder if a Protestant in some writing should obiter take notice that the Bishop in some particular had mistook himself but he that should professedly undertake to answer him would scarce be accounted other than a Papist e. c. The Bishop saith p. 18. All the Canonical Books of the Old Testament were originally written in Hebrew except c. but these other books he means those canonized at Trent were all confessedly first written in the Greek tongue c. I may doubt whether all the controverted books were first written in the Greek tongue I may confidently affirm this is not confessed concerning all the controverted books for who knows not that Ecclesiasticus is generally affirmed to be written first in Hebrew to say nothing of other books and yet not be thought spightful nor Popish but if I should publish a whole book against the Bishop labouring to lessen his reputation and esteem to weaken the authorities by him produced would not any man say that either I was a Papist or that I cared not how much I gratified the Papist so I could but show my teeth against Bishop Cosins yet just such a game it is that Mr. Scrivener plays Obj. But if what he hath said against Daillee be truth if his answers to him be rational is it not meet he should be honoured Will it not be for our credit and reputation to let the Papists know that we will not spare our own how renowned soever where they exceed the bounds of modesty and sobriety Ans If any one through a zeal without knowledg against Popery shall say those things against the Fathers that may discourage those who have leasure and money from buying and reading of them or so weaken their authority as to prejudice the interest of Christianity he doth deserve praise and commendation who shall endeavour to bring the Fathers to their due esteem But neither hath Mr. Daillee wronged the Fathers nor Mr. Scrivener righted them but because Mr. Scrivener heard a Presbyterian in a Sermon put off an objection taken from the authority of the Fathers by referring his hearers to Mr. Daillee therefore he resolves to encounter Mr. Daillee And as spleen seems to be the chief thing that put him on this undertaking so in the managing of it he hath discovered more of petulant spleen than of judgment This censure I had some purpose
Fathers 2. If I find any doctrine pretty unanimously asserted by Fathers though I see no foundation for it in Scripture I shall not think my self concerned to oppose that doctrine till I find something in Scripture that it contradicts But I am also certain that most of the Fathers that I say not all had their errors and some of them so gross that he who should now hold them would scarce be thought meet to be a Church-officer Therefore I am resolved to study Scripture with care and conscience and on that to build my faith In so doing I shall be sure to obey my Saviours precept and I may promise my self the assistance of the Spirit whose office it is to lead me into all truth And if those doctrines that I have good assurance be grounded on Scripture be charged with novelty and singularity then shall I rejoice if I can find the Fathers consenting with me Other good ends I can propound to my self in reading of the Fathers but the main end I aim at is to stop the mouth of gainsayers especially those who glory in Antiquity and make consent of Fathers their rule I will not reject any truth because it is but newly discovered nor yet embrace any error because it is of long continuance or because some great and good man had the ill hap to be the first Author of it Never shall any Socinian have occasion to say of me as I find it by one of that Sect objected to the Reformed Scripturam sacram ex illorum Patrum Conciliorumque mente explicant Ab illis doctrinae capita repetunt Illorum auctoritate confirmant Neque adversus Pontificios tantum sed adversus eos disputantes qui à Patribus se dissentire non inficiantur perpetuum illum Patrum Conciliorumque consensum perpetuo crepant Eosque qui Patribus illis olim Conciliisque contra dixerunt tanquam Haereticos merito damnatos esse censent Neque Patres propterea recipiunt quia cum scriptura consentiunt sed scripturam eo intelligendam modo censent quia Patres ita explicarunt Ideoque prius de unamini Patrum Conciliorumque consensu quam de vero scripturae sensu sunt solliciti Nec desunt qui affirmare non dubitant etsi sacrae literae illorum adversari sententiae manifestè viderentur si tamen Patres Conciliaque secus eas intellexerint malle se Patribus istis Conciliisque adhaerere quam privatum suum uti vocant de scripturis sequi judicium Neque illi è faece sunt sed qui ad summum in Theologia gradum conscenderunt I will judg from Scripture what is truth and unto what degree any truth is necessary but when I have found any opinion to be contrary to Scripture I shall be the more confident that I was not mistaken in accounting the opinion erroneous when I have found it condemned as such by many or all the Fathers that speak of it 3. There are but few against whom the Fathers are so frequently and fiercely quoted that need fear tryal by the Fathers By saying there are but few I intimate there are some in that number I place 1. The Socinians against whom I conceive the whole stream of Antiquity doth run very strongly for though some would have the doctrine of the Tâ—inity as it is commonly delivered in Christian Churches to be no older than the Nicene Council and though it cannot be denied but that divers of the Fathers who flourished before that Council have left in their Writings sundry ill sounding propositions yet if a man interpret their sayings candidly and remember that the signification of some Theological terms is somewhat varied since their times he shall be forced to acknowledg that they all agreed in this That the Father is God the Son God and the Holy Ghost God and all three but one God To demonstrate this consent against a late wretched discourse called Historia enucleata would be an employment well worthy Mr. Scriveners pains if he be so well versed in the ancient Fathers as he makes shew till he or some other will be at that pains the English Reader may help himself sufficiently from Mr. Estwick The greatest doubt seems to be about Origen whom sundry of the Church of Rome make an Arian Bellarmine mentions out of Pratum Spirituale a vision in the 〈…〉 was seen in hell with Arius and Nestoriu◠〈◊〉 de Purg. lib. 2. c. 8. where he also affirms that the fifth Synod condemned him as an Heretick Aquinas in his 1a quaest 34. calls him the fountain of Arianism but without any cause The Heresie of Arius for which he is most infamous in Ecclesiastical History is the denying of Christs Divinity He granted that Christ had a being before he was born of the Virgin Mary but withal said he was created by God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so as there was a time in which it might have been said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he was not That Origen ever held any such opinion I am not convinced Certain I am that in the Homilies ascribed to him I have observed most clear passages for the Deity of our Lord Jesus In his Books against Celsus he most strenuously defends his Divinity against that Sophister But are there not other places in his Writings in which he makes Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a man and no more than a man Ans So say some of the Ancients as also the wretched Transylvanian Ministers in their Books concerning the original and progress of the Trinity on which account they call him the most learned of the Fathers But when we have given him as many grains of allowance as must in charity be given to one who writ much and in great haste and whose Writings have fallen into false hands and by them been transmitted to us we need not say that he was an Arian or had any favourable thoughts of Arianism The Vision related by Bellarmine will not I suppose move any wise man As for Thomas Aquinas who would 〈◊〉 Origen to be the fountain of Arianism 〈◊〉 on those words John 1. In the beginning was the word he saith Verbum in divinis metaphoricè dicitur I must needs say it is a weak foundation to build so heavy a charge upon That great School-man doth thus put his 34. question Vtrum verbum in divinis sit personale an obscure question I wot he determines it affirmatively but first brings this as an objection against himself Nomina personalia proprie dicuntur in divinis ut pater filius sed verbum metaphorice dicitur in divinis ut Origenes dicit super Joannem A doughty objection no question and worthy to have a place in a sum of Divinity Personal names are used properly in the Mystery of the Trinity the word according to Origen is not used properly but metaphorically ergo it is not a personal name Because the minor could not be denied Origen must be accounted the fountain of Arianism
their hands As for what His Majesty is made to say pag. 36. That it suits neither with the Authority nor decency of Confirmation that every ordinary Pastor should do it and that there was as great reason that none should confirm without licence from the Bishop as none Preach without his licence I doubt the Relator hath both wronged the King and the Bishops cause The King for we can scarce conceive he should have such high thoughts of the Authority or decency of confirmation as to imagine that either was lessened by being administred by those by whom Baptism is administred And the Bishops cause also for it will not serve their turn that Presbyters should not confirm without their Licence as they do not Preach without their Licence unless it be also made appear that none can be licensed to confirm but themselves Before I pass from this I must also advert That the Relator makes the King to tax St. Jerome for asserting that a Bishop is not Divinae ordinationis and the Bishop of London to insert That if he could not prove his ordination lawful out of the Scriptures he would not be a Bishop four hours Wherein I observe the policy of the Bishop who reserved power to himself to continue a Bishop if he could prove his ordination lawful by the Scriptures he knew well enough that his Ordination might be lawful and vet a Bishop not be Divinae Ordinationis That is lawful by Scripture which no Scripture Law condemns or forbids but he that should say that every thing not prohibited is Divinae ordinationis would have much a-do to prove that he himself had any meetness to be consecrated a Bishop I suppose I can prove that it is lawful for me to wear a Beaver but when I had so proved should I not be ridiculous if I should say that a Beaver was Divinae ordinationis Besides if Dr. Reynolds had chanced to gravel the Bishop with an argument about the lawfulness of his Ordination he to keep his Bishoprick would presently have replied that he was ordained to be a Presbyter but he was only consecrated to be a Bishop and by that means he might have kept his lands and his credit too Let us now proceed with Dr. Reynolds who is made to say that the words in the 37th Article The Bishop of Rome hath no authority in this land be not sufficient unless it were added nor ought to have It is like the Doctor had observed that the Oath of Supremacy runs to that or the like effect And he had never heard it is as like that the King and his Council heartily laughed at the framers of that Oath and therefore scarce expected to be told that a Puritan was a Protestant frighted out of his wits for propounding that the Article might be as fully worded as the Oath yet it seems he had the hap to be laughed at for his honest well-meant motion so the Relator acquaints us p. 37. P. 38. The Dr. moved that this proposition The intention of the Minister is not of the essence of the Sacrament might be added unto the Book of Articles the rather because some in England had preached it to be essential Had it been told him that if he would name those men who so Preached they should be suspended till they had recalled so false and uncomfortable an opinion or that there was enough in the Articles to infer that the intention of the Minister is not essential to the Sacrament it had been sufficient but to say that His Majesty utterly disliked this motion for two reasons and to name but one of the two and to stuff up that with a story concerning Mr. Craig was to put the world under a temptation to think too meanly of their King It is unfit to thrust every position negative into the Book of Articles for that would swell the Book into a volume as big as the Bible and also confound the Reader therefore I may not insert this short position the Ministers intention is not of the essence of the Sacrament into the English Articles This is made to be the Kings argument to which whether Dr. Reynolds could reply nothing others may judge Here we might also speak of the Nine Articles of Lambeth put into the Irish Confession not long after this Conference but never put into ours though it seems the Doctor moved twice they might be put in For my part I am not sorry they are left out for some honest men may question the truth of them and not be able in faith to subscribe them and so the Church lose the benefit of their parts As for Latitudinarians they would have subscribed them in a sense of their own devising though they had thought them false in the sense of the framers and imposers of them or they would have said that by subscribing they did not declare the assent of their minds to the truth of the Articles but only their purpose not to publish their dissent to them so as to make a disturbance in the Church about them A Jesuit Papist and a Latitudinarian Protestant will stick at no subscription whatsoever As for the Dean of Paul his discourse to vindicate himself I am not concerned to contradict him in it but I think he contradicts himself if Dr. Barlow doth him no wrong p. 41 42. The motion made by the Dr. and related p. 43. concerning a Catechism produced a very considerable addition to the old Catechism which was all he aimed at in it also he succeeded in his motion that a straiter course might be taken for reformation of the general abuse and prophanation of the Sabbath day for that the Relator saith found a general and unanimous assent So that the Bishops then did not think it Judaism to call the Lords day Sabbath nor to provide for its sanctification Nor did he miscarry in his motion for a new Translation of the Bible for not long after the Conference a new one was published which hath been generally used ever since to Gods glory and the Churches edification As for his Majesties profession that he could never yet see a Bible well translated into English and that the Geneva Translation was the worst of all I believe his Majesty repented of it or else he had not given leave to Dr. Morton to defend the two places in the Geneva Notes that he took particular exception to Dr. Reynolds for conclusion of what concerned doctrine moved That unlawful and seditious books might be suppressed at least restrained and imparted to a few This a man might think would have been entertained with a general assent and consent but contrariwise the Bishop of London supposing himself to be principally aimed at answereth to what he was never accused of and saith but without any proof That the Book De Jure Magistratus in subditos was published by a great disciplinarian but named him not and the King is said to tell the Doctor that he was a better
Baptism the last if his Translators have not abused him was scarce sound in any thing But the Cross was used in Constantine's times and why may it not now be used shall we accuse Constantine of Popery and Superstition Thus is the King said to have argued in the Conference and by his argument he gave us to understand that he liked not that any one should charge Constantine with Popery or Superstition I therefore will lay neither to his charge but yet his purpose not to be baptized till he might be baptized in the same River where Christ was baptized viz. Jordan if it did not proceed from superstition proceeded from a very odd humour God crossed him in that his design and put him under a necessity either to receive Baptism in another place than Jordan or not to receive it at all In this I follow Ensebius for whom should I rather follow than him who so well knew Constantine and hath transmitted his History to posterity If any man incline to those who would have Constantine baptized many years before at Rome I leave him to Scultetus in his Medulla who defends Eusebius against Baronius Mr. Knewstubb's second question was supposing the Church had power to add significant ceremonies whether she might there add them where Christ had already ordained one Which he supposed was no less derogatory to Christs Institution than if any Potentate of the Land should presume to add his Seal to the Great Seal of England To this Dr. Barlow saith p. 70. the King answered That the case was not alike for that no sign or thing was added to the Sacrament which was fully and perfectly finished before any mention of the Cross is made I dare not think this was King James his answer for it is only fitted and suted to our own Church as then it was ordered and still continues In the first Book of King Edward crossing was appointed before Baptism could be pretended to be perfected or indeed begun which was also the usage of the ancient Churches 2. I conceive the presumption of any subject would be great if he should add his own seal to confirm or signifie any thing that the King 's Great Seal was appointed to confirm and signifie though the Great Seal had been set before he set his Seal 3. Methinks the argument stands still in its full force If applying of water to a believer in the name of Father Son and Holy Ghost do signifie all that the Cross signifies to what end is the Cross used The child that is baptized with us is obliged by Baptism obediently to keep Gods holy will and commandments and walk in the same all the days of his life what can the Cross oblige him to more Is not confessing the saith of Christ crucified one of Gods commandments I know a learned man hath replied that constancy is not distinctly signified in being baptized as it is in being crossed But I ask Is it any benefit to a man to have some ceremony used that doth more distinctly mind him of his constancy than Baptism did If it be none then such a ceremony is needless if it be some benefit how came it to pass that no Apostle ever used any such ceremony and why do we not excogitate other ceremonies to admonish us as distinctly of other duties Mr. Knewstubbes third question was In case the Church had power to institute such a sign how far such an Ordinance was to bind them without impeaching their Christian liberty The King charged him never more to speak to that point And therefore I will not speak to it at all but must needs say it was an odd question if it were so propounded as the Relator hath worded it Dr. Reynolds is again brought on the stage p. 71. objecting the example of the Brazen Serpent stampt to powder because the people abused it to Idolatry wishing the Cross because superstitiously abused might be abandoned also To this the King is made to say 1. If it were abused to Superstition in the time of Popery that plainly implies that it was well used before Popery As if nothing had been abused by the Papists in Divine Worship but what had been once well used 2. That there is no resemblance between the Brazen Serpent a material visible thing and the sign of the Cross made in the air As if a thing made in the air might not be abused to superstition as well as a material visible thing 3. That the Papists themselves did never ascribe any power or spiritual grace to the sign of the Cross in Baptism Whether they did or no their Writings will best testifie 4. The material Crosses which in time of Popery were made for men to fall down before them to worship are removed as they desired Whereas most present at the Conference knew that in many places they were not removed The next thing objected was the wearing of a Surplice a kind of Garment which the Priests of Isis used to wear To which His Majesty answered inter alia That if Heathens were commorant among us so as they might take occasion to be strengthned or confirmed in Paganism then there were just cause to suppress the wearing of it A notable answer and which the Nonconformists may do well to treasure up as like to stand them in good stead in these controversies With my body I thee worship is an old and odd phrase and if it may not be altered it must be explained and then Mumpsimus may do as well as Sumpsimus The Ring in Marriage Dr. Reynolds approved and the corner'd cap. Committing of Ecclesiastical censures unto Lay-chancellors the King promised to take order to reform p. 78. And Archbishop Grindal's prophesyings it is like enough His Majesty would not have disliked if he had not misunderstood the design of them And now I would fain know whether what the Bishops got by this Conference may not be put in a mans eye and he never see the worse Dr. Reynolds got a great deal by it viz. a new Translation of the Bible such an explication of the use of the Cross as if the story be true he did acquiesce in a large addition concerning the Sacraments in the Church-catechism c. so that Dr. Heylin in his History of Presbyterians quarrels with King James for giving any way to the Conference There is but one thing more I will concern my self to take notice of in Mr. Scrivener's Action against the New Schism he desires to have one place in which Presbyter signifies a Lay-man Though I think I could satisfie his desire in this yet I find not my self on any account obliged so to do for the English Nonconformists are not over-fond of Ruling-Elders those Churches that retain such Officers will not acknowledg them to be lay-men nor indeed have they any reason to acknowledg them to be such For why should Church-officers chosen by the Church and commended to the grace of God by prayer be called laicks because they labour at some employment to keep themselves from being chargeable to the congregation why then the Apostle Paul was for some part of his time a Laick for he laboured And in later times I could instance in men that for their Learning and Piety deserved to be Metropolitans who yet were fain to preach and work It were to be wished that many in England to whom the care of souls is committed were permitted and enjoyned to follow some calling in the week-days for by that means they would be less scandalous than now they are Why should men that know not what it is to study be forbidden to dig Are they Laicks because they do not preach Many we have in England who would think scorn to be termed Laicks that never did preach never had licence to preach Are they Laicks because they are not ordained by laying on of hands It will be hard to prove that that ceremony is essential to make a man a Church-officer But yet Mr. Scrivener hath good leave to fall upon these Ruling-Elders to bring them into any Court by a Quo VVarranto and if he do chance to cast them there be but few Nonconformists that will be at cost to bring the business to a new Trial. These Elders in some places are made the more pert because of the multiplicity and variety of answers that the Prelatical give to those places of Scripture on which their divine institution is pretended to be built It would tire an ordinary patience to reckon up the various expositions that are given of 1 Tim. 5.17 Scultetus censures the answers given by Bilson another condemns the answer given by Scultetus others confute all the answers given by Mr. Mede Among all that have written against Elders whether unlearned or learned I have not met with any that have satisfied me yet I can satisfie my self about this place For those Churches that argue heartily for these Elders do argue from the general word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the two participles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the two articles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the two species or kinds of Elders from the two participles two articles two special Elders divided and separated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the discretive particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let Mr. Scrivener face this argument with some of the old answers and see what will come on it And let him take heed how he strikes at these Lay-Elders as he will call them lest he wounds those among us known by the name of Lay-chancellors In the mean time I beseech him to commune with his own heart and to consider with what spirit he writ his books against Daillee and the English Nonconformists by so doing he will be brought I doubt not to take shame unto himself and so prevent the far greater shame of having his railings and calumnies laid open by others Quod erat exorandum FINIS