lost the Revenues of a good part of a Bishoprick as 't is said which he had purchased And it may be others of these Brethren are ejected as they had ejected others For these times are like those Ruffin Hist eccl l. 1. c. 21. Ea tempestate foeda facies ecclesiae admodum turpis erat non enim sicut prius ab externis sed à propriis vastabatur Fugabat alius alius fugabatur uterque de ecclesia erat praevaricatio erat lapsus ruina multorum Similis poena sed impar victoria similiter cruciabantur sed non similiter gloriabantur quia dolebat ecclesia etiam illius casum qui impellebat ad lapsum At that time the face of the Church was foul and uncomely indeed for not now as formerly the Church was destroyed by enemies but by her own One is driven the other drives him away and both of them of the Church Offences and falls and ruines there were of many All were like sufferers but not all like conquerors All were tortured alike but all could not glory alike for the Church did lament even his fall that forced another to miscarrry saith the Historian But to leave the men and to come unto the matter 3. Their matter The premises are not established they say because there is Addition Detraction and Alterations made in them since the Originals and first establishment For Answer Object 1 Addit Substract Alterat Answ we may note here a twofold distinction 1. Of persons private or publick 2. Of things lighter or more material to apply these If the Alterations Additions or Detractions alledged be done by private hands and in things of lesser moment Misprisions in lesser things by private hands the main continuing unviolate It would be better thought on whether such a misprision be it casu or consilio unwittingly or willingly ought to invalid a publick act For then perhaps neither the Brethren have an authentick Bible nor any Lawyer a true Statute-Book because there are many faults do happen by the pen and by the press which may have happened in the things we speak of But secondly if such alterations In more material ones and by publick persons c. be made by publick persons or in things material it must be considered what powers the Laws do give unto them in these affairs now it is certain and the Brethren acknowledge it that until 17 Carol. 11. The King had freedome by Law to appoint under his Broad Seal Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical Reasons for Reform p. 51. to amend whatsoever might be reformable in the Church And in the Act for uniformity of Common-Prayer Act for uniformity of Com. Prayer at the end of it it is granted unto the Queen that if there shall happen any irreverence in the service of God by the mis-using the orders appointed in the Common-Prayer-Book she may by her Commissioners or by the advice of the Metropolitan ordain further rites or ceremonies for the advancement of the glory of God c. Several Acts in K. Hen. 8. Edw. 6. Q Eliz particulaâ—ly that of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. Necessit of Reform p. 50. Now by this and other particular Acts that restored all Ecclesiastical power from the Pope unto the Crown And particularly by the Act of 1 Eliz. cap. 1. wherein having first united and annexed all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction to the Imperial Crown of this Kingdom they are the words of the Brethren it addeth what power shall be given by commission under the Great Seal to exercise the same in this following clause viz. And that your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings or Queens of this Realm shall have full power and authority by vertue of this Act by Letters Patents under the Great Seal of England to assign name and authorise when and as often as your Highness your Heirs and Successors shall think meet and convenient and for such and so long time as shall please your Highness your Heirs or Successors such person or persons being natural born Subjects to your Highness your Heirs or Successors as your Majesty your Heirs or Successors shall think meet to exercise and use occupy and execute under your Highness your Heirs and Successors all manner of jurisdictions priviledges and preheminencies in any wise touching or concerning any spiritual or ecclesiastical jurisdiction within these your Realms of England and Ireland or any other your Highness Dominions and Countries And to visit reform redress order correct and amend all such errors heresies schismes abuses offences contempts and enormities whatsoever which by any manner spiritual or ecclesiastical power authority or jurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed ordered redressed corrected restrained or amended to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of vertue and the conservation of peace and unity of this Realm Now howsoever the Brethren would make this Act void after the Act of 17 Car. 1. of which anon yet the things we speak of being transacted before remain in force by vertue of that Act. And certain it is that not only the Kings themselves but the Parliaments also the Judges the Ministry have always thought that by the King some alterations might be made by vertue of these Acts without violation of Law provided nothing were done contrary to any thing in the Book contained Preface to the Com. Prayeâ— Book especially when the King shall be supplicated by his people thereunto Hence the King in his Proclamation for the Authorizing of the Book of Common-Prayer by occasion of the Conference at Hampton Court which having reflected on saith Kings Proclamat for establishing the Book of Com. Prayer And for that purpose namely to satisfie the scruples of some tender consciences gave forth Our Commission under Our Great Seal of England to the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and others according to the form which the LAWS of this Realm in like case prescribe to be used to make the said EXPLANATION c. And it is also certain that the same not only Kings successively but also Parliaments and Judges with all the other Magistracy have taken all the premises viz. The Doctrine or Articles of Religion the Worship or Common-Prayer-Book The Discipline and Government to be established by Law Or else how will the Brethren or how can any other free the Kings from Arbitrary Government the Parliaments from betraying the publick liberties the Judges from perjury and perverting Law and other Magistrates from oppressing of the people if men have been punished for disobedience to these if not established by Law But surely we may more safely confide in the judgment of so many Acts of Parliament and Laws of so many Princes By divers Ministers of sundry Counties so in the title K. Ja. Instructions to Preachers 1622. Artic. 4. Parliaments Judges Magistrates then in the conjectures of certain Country or County Ministers what is Law The rather because this being a Prerogative Ecclesiastical
jurisdiction belonging to Soveraign Princes is expresly forbidden Ministers to meddle with further then they are presidented in the Homily of Obedience and in the rest of the Homilies and Articles of Religion And besides that the declaring of Law in general is proper to the Judges for to you saith our * Kings Speech at the Dissolution of the Parl. after his assents unto the Petition of Rights late Soveraign speaking to the Judges in Parliament only under me belongs the interpretation of Law But Thirdly should we grant that according to the punctilio's and formalities of Law they should not be established by that of the Land yet the Church hath its Law also that whatsoever is imposed by the Governors thereof for edification Note agreeable or not repugnant to the Scriptures especially if God and experience have set their seal thereunto as the premises have had and that custome and tract of time have given them prescription which the Apostle after all reasoning flies unto if such things should be excepted against by others 1 Cor. 11.16 yet doubtless very improperly by those 1 Cor. 9.1 2. whose seed of generation and milk of infancy and strong meat of riper age they have been in the Lord. Yea I add and who by their profession and subscripsion have been particularly obliged to them But oftentimes it cometh to pass that the watchmen themselves who were appointed for the Safeguarding of the Church Serm. before the Hâ— Com. Feb. 18. 1620. prove in this kind to be the smiters and wounders of her saith the Primate of Ireland And no marvel for veteres scrutans historias invenire non possum scidisse ecclesiam de domo Dei populos seduxisse praeter eos qui Sacerdotes à Deo positi fuerant prophetae id est speculatores Searching the antient Records Hier. in Hos 9.8 Tom. 6. I cannot find that any other have rent the Church and have seduced the people from the house of God but they who have been appointed Priests by God and Prophets thar is Watchmen saith St. Jerome I have done with the first Exception against the premises viz. their non-establishment in general Subsect 1. Articles not established COme we now to the particular proofs of their non-establishment with replies unto them And first 2. Partic. Except against the establishment of the premises the Doctrine or the Articles of Religion they are not say the Brethren established because neither doth the Act 13 Eliz. name them in particular nor so much as their number but only the title page nor is it known where the original is enrolled Answ Omitting what several others may have more pertinently answered in their replies to the Brethren none of which I have read my conceptions are First Necessity of Reform p. 1 2 That this reflects gross negligence upon the then Parliament if they laid that foundation weak upon which the whole fabrick of Religion in this Church was to be raised But Secondly Do the Brethren imagine that the Parliament intended to establish titulum sine re the title and leave the matter uncertain Surely not only that Parliament but all since The Princes also and Judges ever since have taken the Articles as now they are to be confirmed then K. Declarat bâ—fore the Articles 4 Car. 3.1 and to contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England who surely had good assurance that they did accord with the original Thirdly Again if all Acts of State be void whereof the originals are not extant although confirmed by Act of Parliament what the inference may be I leave to the Learned in the Laws to judge for my self I take it to be a suggestion of a very dangerous consequence This for the Articles Subsect II. Common-Prayer-Book NExt for the Liturgy or Common-Prayer-Book That they say is not established First because it is not the same that was established by the Parliament 1 Eliz. 2. And secondly because if it were yet it is not established by Law because that of 1 Eliz. 2. it self doth not appear to be established neither because it is not agreeable to the Act nor annexed to it nor the original to be found 1. Com. Prayer Book of Q. Eliz. To begin with the Book of Queen Elizabeth and then to come to that now in use Touching the former the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. touching uniformity of Common-Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments enjoyneth the use of that Book with the allowance of one alteration or addition of certain Lessons to be used every Sunday in the year Except And the form of the Letany altered and corrected and two sentences only added in the delivery of the Sacraments to the Communicants and none other or otherwise from the common-Common-Prayer Book confirmed by Parliament in the fifth and sixth years of Edw. 6. Now because the Book of Q. Elizabeth referreth to that and that the alterations mentioned in that of Q. Eliz. from that of Edw. 6. are not particularly named in the Act for conformity of common-Common-Prayer And because the original Book of Edw. 6. is lost and this of Q. Eliz. printed differs from that of Edw. 6. the Brethren infer that the Book of Q. Eliz. is not established or not evident that Answ 1 it is established by the Act. I might answer That these being niceties of Law and the alterations insisted on either in Q. Eliz. Book or in the present one from that Answ 2 not being many or much material And being generally Answ 3 received as established the matter being godly Answ 4 and presence of God in the comfort and edification of Answ 5 his people thereby evidently approving of it I might as I said answer viderint alii let men of skill in Law look to that point But seeing I take their objections from Law to be easily answerable go to let us try their strength The Parliament of the 1 Eliz. 2. Q. Eliz. Liturgy established did know that the former Book of 5 6 Edw. 6. was abolished by an Act 1 Mar. 2. and mention it in the Act. And that the Original was taken off the Parliament Roll and so lost They did not think it necessary notwithstanding this either to name particularly the alterations made or to annex the Book unto their Act. Now the Q. and Parl. did judge that they had done enough to establish the Book the Brethren affirm not Wherein if they were right in their matter yet not in their modesty But they are amiss there also For the Parl. knowing the Book of Edw. 6. to have been in all Churches and in every mans hand and themselves allowing not the original which was lost but the printed ones with the alterations they mention it was most easie for any man to find by comparing the Books printed by this Act with those of Edw. 6. which were the alterations the Parl. having named where they were and concerning what But because by this it appears according
of the Old and New Testament The Church of England receiveth the Canon of Scripture according to the antient Church exactly as the Church of England doth Secondly that he saith that is secundum majorum traditionem ex patrum monumentis That it is according to the tradition of the Church and out of the writings of the Fathers Whereby we see the Church of England follows antiquity in reception of the books of holy Scripture more truly than the Church of Rome doth But this obiter and the way Again Bullinger citeth the judgment of Bibliander Bibliander de opt genere interpretandi Hebraica whose words are Ecclesiasticos libros etiam Hagiographa nominant sancta scripta Quae etsi non habent idoneam authoritatem roborandi ea quae in contentionem veniunt ut Canonici Scriptores non tamen rejiciuntur ut Apocrypha qualis fuit prophetia Eldad Medad c. Ecclesiastici autem lâ—bri etiam in Scholam auditoria fidelis populi admâ—ssi sunt tam venerandi multis ut Judith etiam in ordinem canonicae Scripturae à quibusdam reponatur Which having the same sense I forbear to English Onely he saith that the Book of Judith was by some accounted Scripture I suppose he meaneth Origen which I think may as little claim that priviledge as any other Lastly Bullinger goes over every book of them and shews the benefit that the Church may reap by the reading of them And saith We may better learn the form of Houshold-government out of Tobit and Judith and the Ethicks or rules of good living out of Ecclesiasticus and the book of Wisdom than out of Plato Aristotle and Xenophon And the way of a religious Soldier out the Maccabees And of the first book of them he saith Ac tanti omnino hic liber est ut boni illo non possent citra jacturam carere That it is verily of such worth that a good man cannot without loss be without it Which is consonant unto that of King James speaking of the same book Conf. Hamp Court pag. 61. viz. Who shewed the use of the Maccabees to be very good to make up the story of the persecution of the Jews c. And of the History of Bel and the Dragon Bullinger saith Viderint autem qui eam historiam pro fabula damnant quibus nitantur Authoribus Ego video Historiam refertissimam esse multiplici fructu eruditione Let them look to it saith he what Authors they rest upon who condemn it for a fable I observe it to be a History full fraught with fruitful instructions And he names what In a word his whole discourse on these books is worth reading And it is to be noted that this was with the allowance of the rest of the Ministers of Tigur where this book was printed Necessit Reform pag. 20. Basilic Doron But the authority of King James is by some Brethren objected against the Apocrypha viz. As for the Apocrypha books I omit them because I am no Papist and indeed some of them are not like the ditement of the Spirit of God Answ Thus say they the King But it seems time and reading had further ripened the Kings judgment in that point For afterward when he upon great occasion solemnly delivered his judgment Confer Hamp Court second day confer p. 61. è Cathedrâ in reference to the satisfaction of his whole Kingdom this was the result His Majesty in the end said He would take an even order between both Affirming that he would not wish all Canonical books to be read in the Church unless there were one to interpret nor any Apocrypha at all wherein there was * He explains himself presently in allowing the book of Maccabees wherein he acknowledgeth some errors any error But for the other which were clear and correspondent to the Scripture he would have them read for else said he why were they printed and therein shewed the use of the book of Maccabees very good to make up the story of the Persecutions of the Jews but not to teach a man to sacrifice for the dead or to kill himself Thus far the King whâ—ch if the Brethren knew they did not well to cover and if they knew it not and were not vers'd in the most authentical books and writings of this nature as that Conference is a special one they were not fit to deal in such an Argument So also in the same place of the same Conference pag. 61 62. the King opened and defended a passage in Ecclesiasticus one of the Apocryphal books objected against as unsound and closes all with this salt quippe to the opposers What trow ye makes these men so angry with Ecclesiasticus by my saul I think he was a Bishop c. You see with what judgment the Brethren have quoted the King against the Apocrypha and yet as a crowing argument they insist upon it Again Object 2 Hierom. Ep. ad Laetam Tom. 1. St. Hieron is also produced as a witness against these books viz. That he should advise a Lady say they caveat omnia Apocrypha that she should take heed of all the Apocrypha Answ There are several causes of mistaking and mis-representing of an Author as 1 That men rest on Quotations Causes of misunderstanding and mis-representing of an Author and read them not themselves 2 That they understand not the language and Idiom of the writer 3 That they weigh not his scope and drift 4 That they ponder not the context 5 That they compare not one place with another 6 That they consider not the circumstances time place c. 7 That they consult not others that may illustrate him Then for misrepresenting him 1 That they make no bones of it 2 That they conceit they shall not be seen by every eye 3 And that when they be they have a brow to bear it so what they say may serve the turn at present It so fares here For if the Brethren read the place they quote in Jerom it is sure they understood not what he meant by Apocrypha Erasmus therefore on the place shall teach them Inscribuntur Petro Paulo nonnulla ipsi Christo Erasm in Hierom â—p ad Laetam num 79. veluti epistola Jesu ad Abygarum regem They are saith he ascribed to Peter to Paul and some to Christ himself as the Epistle of Jesus unto Agborus Where you see that Jerome did not mean by the Apocrypha onely the Books joyned with the Old Testament but those also yea those especially that were affixed to the New Again They did not weigh Jerom's scope for it was onely to instruct a young Girl in reading in that place not to shew what the Church might do or did Fourthly They did not compare this passage with others where he expresseth himself ex professo As where he speaks of the Books which bear Solomons name but are not his used to be read
Scripture This refers especially to the seventh Article touching Predestination c. whose words in the latter part they are Lastly Ministers are not prohibited absolutely from searching but from that which is curious Answ 5 and beyond sobriety This for the doubtfulness of the Articles The second exception is their erroneousness 2. Error for on this the Brethren insist though under the other covered head of doubtfulness First because it is said Not every deadly sin committed willingly after Baptism Artic. 16. is a sin against the holy Ghost they infer that the Church holds the distinction of venial and deadly sin which is Popish What if the Article speak in the then received language and according to such distinction not owning of it therefore in the sense held by the adversary but using it for the purpose they had in hand viz. that though all sins be deadly of themselves yet seeing some are greater than other grant the worst which they call deadly sin as we usually express a great evil by that word that it is a deadly one as a deadly grief a deadly mischief yet is not every such a sin against the holy Ghost especially when the Church hath in other places so plainly declared her self to the people as in the Homilies Catechism and common-prayer-Common-prayer-book in the last whereof it prescribeth confession of sins to be made twice every day by all the Congregation Now it is not to be thought that every one is guilty of deadly sin every day in the sense expressed so that the people are in no great danger by that expression And the Articles declaring Artic. 11. Artic. 22. that we are accounted righteous before God onely for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ And that there is none other satisfaction for sin but that offering of Christ alone and damning of all Purgatory Pardons worshipping of Images and Reliques and invocation of Saints do declare they count no sin in it self venial but by the blood of Christ Again Artic. 20. where because 't is said The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith Because the Kings declaration and the Act before that say That the Articles must be taken in the literal and grammatical sense they infer ' That if a Convocation declare any thing in the premises they must assent and subscribe in the literal sense or be deprived But I it is not forbidden either by that Act or the Kings Declaration to enquire the literal sense and so to examine them nor 2 are they required by that declaration to subscribe to what a Synod shall conclude in the literal and grammatical sense of such conclusions or Canons but onely to the literal and grammatical sense of the Articles This therefore is a captious inference upon the Declaration and the Act. And so much more are their exceptions against the 34 Article That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant unto the Word of God and be ordained by common authority c. But are there not three or four Cautions in it that should defend it from all calumny 1. That these Traditions and Rites must not be repugnant to the Word of God 2. That they be established by common Authority 3. That a man do transgress of his own private judgment And 4. willingly purposely Yea and 5. openly This exception taketh away the obedience to all Church-Laws yea to all Civill Laws they may as well except against subscribing if any such Act were to the sense of this Article applyed to the Laws of the Kingdom As suppose they should be enjoyned to subscribe That whosoever shall through his private judgment willingly and purposely openly break the Laws of the Land which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained by common Authority and to take these words of the Act in the literal and grammatical sense without putting their own private or new sense upon it c. Would not such persons be thought unworthy to have any place in any Common-wealth that should refuse And why then in the Church surely they must be both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men without yoke and without use and that per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is pernitious unto all Societies and men of Belial 3. Artic. 35. Their third exception is against Artic. 35. wherein is required the subscribing to the Book of Homilies as a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for these times Against this they object that there are false doctrines or assertions in them First in general subscription to the Homilies is intended by the Church The Homilies how to be understood in Subscription not in so punctual and verbal a degree as is required unto the Articles as appears because the Articles are to be distinctly and severally read and the expressions in them every one assented to the Homilies not so but onely as they agree with the Articles which are the superior rule unto them Not therefore to every expression or sentence no nor doctrine nor assertion if any were contrary to the definitive doctrine of the Articles All men know that there is a greater latitude of expression allowed to popular Sermons as the Homilies are than to Articles And the Brethren would have their Sermons to contain necessary and wholesome doctrine yet perhaps will not be so hardy as to affirm that they may not have uttered some sentences not so true or congruous if exactly scanned or that nullnm unquam verbum emisit eorum quisque quod revocare vellet as he said above And lest there should any inconvenience arise to the people though now the danger is little the Homilies being so much if not too much laid aside the Common-prayer and reading of the Scripture publickly together with preaching according to the Articles are provided as a remedy Yea which is more if one Homily speak less warily in any material point it is corrected in another as in the Homily of Alms-deeds seeming in one passage or so to ascribe some kind of merit unto them though it doth not taking the word properly yet it explaineth it before-hand in another namely in the Homily of Salvation or Justification wherein that doctrine is excellently set forth as also in the Homily of Faith So when in the Homily of Alms Tobith is cited as Scripture not onely the Article doth regulate that expression but every ones Bible also Instructions to Preachers Artic. 1. Ann. 1622. Besides every exhortatory expression must not be called a doctrine or an assertion but that which as a point is purposely insisted on to be maintained of which sort I believe verily the Brethren will never be able to instance in any one out of the Homilies And indeed had they observed the instructions of King James above mentioned viz. That no preacher
likeness-sake So are these also called Scripture and holy Scripture yea and sometimes Canonical some of them De doctr Christ lib. 2. cap. 8. by St. Austin But so that aliter Hieronymus accipit vocabulum hoc Canonicus aliter eam vocem Augustinus Innocentius Patres Carthaginuenses interpretanter Otherwise doth Jerom take the word Canonical and otherwise Austin Innocent and the Fathers at the Councel of Carthage saith our Whitaker Contr. 1. Q. 1. c. 4. And so I say otherwise do the Articles of our Church take the word Canonical and otherwise sometimes the Prayer-book and the Homilies But of this more largely above In the answer to the fourth general Exception Secondly These are brought in here not as an interrupting of the reading any more than the singing of a Psalm which though not express Scripture might be sung betwixt the Lessons or reading an Exhortation or Prayer for they are brought in by way of Hymn onely and are sung also in some Churches But in particular they except first against Te Deum Te Deum We praise thee O God c. that it is a piece taken out of the Mass-book and in Popish Churches usually sung Thence brought in by Bishops into Protestant Churches but no where enjoyned or warranted by any Law in force That it shews the Bishops are not able to give thanks themselves for extraordinary mercies That it is a superstitious formal dress c. Answ To the antiquity of Te Deum beyond the Mass-book its reference unto St. Ambrose might be testimony But it s being used there or taken thence doth no more derogate from the matter of it than it doth from the Psalmes Epistles and Gospels or then it doth from the Doctrine of Free-mercy against Merits which is yet there and in the very office of the Mass as we saw above In answer to the fifth general exception It is recorded as a reputation to the old Romans that they disdained not nec ab hoste doceri To learn even of an enemy for we In what is good all friends and fellows be That the Bishops brought it in does not argue want of ability to give thanks themselves but their want of self-conceit and singularity They prudently and modestly choosing to receive and close with what is good and of general reception That they might declare their communion with all Christians in what they might and fulfilling the Apostles prayer Rom. 15. With one mind and one mouth glorifie God with the rest of his Church That it is no where enjoyned and warranted by any Law in force Not established is more than they have charged the Book hitherto with Answ having not nor indeed being not able to do it alledged any one thing added to the body of the Liturgy established by Law pag. 28. n. 6. but an Appendix as themselves reckon of three prayers one for the Queen or King another for the Bishops a third for Queen Anne and the Royal Progeny 2. Act uniform com pr. Besides it is also untrue for themselves acknowledge as it is in the Act for the Uniformity of Common-prayer that the Books of 5 6 Edw. 6. shall be established without alteration except one sentence in the Letany and the addition of two in the Lords Supper c. Now it is evident that TE DEUM is in King Edwards Books and in the Book of Queen Elizabeth established by Parliament as we now receive it with all the Kings Parliaments and Judges since and comprehended by Bucer in that Elogy of his before named viz. That all generally till the Communion was agreeable to Gods Word and the use of the primitive Church Which form of Communion then hath been since reformed in part as he directed So that Te Deum is as well established by Law as any other part of the Book This gross reeling of the Brethren doth not it argue now they were etcaetera To the last which touches the matter of it viz. That it is a superstitious formal dress Seeing this is a high charge not on it but on the Common-prayer-book also yea and on the Church of England it should have in particular been shewed by the Brethren wherein it is so for dolosus versatur in universalibus This is the fruit perhaps of their Law-studies they have learned the course of Chancery to charge heavy crimes and prove nothing But shall I open this mystery of iniquity to be suspected in the breasts of these Brethren they seem to be Socinians and enemies to the Godhead of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the Doctrine of the Trinity both which are there splendidly acknowledged and professed in the Hymn of Te Deum Mr. Cartwright as it seems before Dr Reynolds and the rest at Hampton-Court were ashamed to except against it though they spared not where they thought exception might with any modesty be taken But as I said here is not onely a profession of the doctrine of the Trinity and a kind of repetition of the common Creed by way of Hymn The special use of the hymn TE DEUM but a particular application of prayer unto our Lord Jesus Christ which is done in no other part of the Book so expresly except the Letany Communion This is the superstition it may be feared that the Brethren aim at for other there is none We may now understand them when they call it and other parts of the Book Popish superstitious and Antichristian namely in his sense who writing against the doctrine of the Trinity and the Godhead of the Lord Jesus entituled his book Antithesis doctrinae Christi Antichristi de uno vero Deo An opposition of the doctrine of Christ and of Antichrist concerning the one true God To which the learned Zanchy making answer shews that for strengthning our faith in the doctrine of the Godhead of Christ Zanch. epistol dedic ad Sturm ante Resp suam ad Arrianum Tom. 8. p. 6. Ad hanc fidem in cordibus nostris servandam fovendam augendam quà m necessaria est crebra ad Christum in coelo residentem pro nobis interpellantem mentis elevatio EJUSQUE ac patris invocatio à verâ porrò seriâ contemplatione personae Christi ab assiâ—ua beneficiorum ejus commemoratione denique ab ardenti nominis ejus invocatione quibus fovetur fidos nostra separari non potest studium perpetuum resipiscentiae c. sunt autem haec meditatio invocatio resipiscentia tria praecipua verae fidei effecta c. For the nourishing this our faith saith he in the Godhead of Christ namely in our hearts and for the encreasing and preserving of it Prayer to Christ necessary for the strengthning of faith in him how necessary is the often lifting up our minds to Christ sitting in heaven and interceding for us and as necessary is prayer to him and to the Father Now from the true and serious consideration of the
person of Christ and from the continual commemoration of his benefits and from the fervent calling upon his name whereby our faith is nourished there can not be separated an endeavour of perpetual repentance Three chief effects of faith Now these meditation prayers to him and repentance are the three chief effects of faith c. Let the Brethren then cease to quarrel Te Deum as Popish for this doctrine hath been preserved pure in the Popish Church as we saw above out of Zanchy or else confess their own Antichristianism In the answer to the fifth general Exception that is their Arianism and Socinianism Touching their exception in particular against Benedicite or O all ye works of the Lord Benedicite or O all ye works c. bless ye the Lord. It is first to be noted as appears in the Books of King Edw. 6. that this was appointed for Lent onely in the place of Answ 1 Te Deum We praise thee O God but since left indifferent Answ 2 Secondly for the matter of it it contains no other doctrine nor for the order any other method than what is in the 104 and 148 Psalms with something Answ 3 out of the 118 Psalm being a convenient compages of them What the Title is in the Apocrypha needs not to be mention'd here speaking of the Common-prayer-book Answ 4 in which it hath no title As for the reproaches here cast upon it and the holy Martyrs the compilers of the Liturgy who put it in of bungling and Mass-book and belying the Canonical Text because it is said to be the song of the three childr in the furnace Dan. 3. mentioned by Daniel which yet may be well understood to be so as Austin we heard above understood the Book of Wisd and Ecclesiasticus to be called Solomons ob quandam similitudineÌ„ because of a kind of likeness so Ans It is no way probable but that those 3. children did praiâ—e â—od in the midst of the fire which they saw he restrained from hurting of them and might justly take occasion to magnifie God for his Works in the Creatures in giving them such vertues and yet restraining them at his pleasure and so if it were not indeed yet ob quandam similitudinem for some likeness sake it may not be unsitly called so But howsoever who shall compare it will find that it doth in all things follow the pattern of the Psalms above mentioned and so of the Scripture and though Apocryphal yet is a fit form of thanksgiving But as I said the Bunglings and mass-Mass-book and lying we leave them to the father of lies and to those his children that by imitating that Parent in calumny and falshood do merit to be his heirs But yet God in his mercy give them repentance and pardon and according to their Baptism the form whereof they do little less thâ—n blaspheme ' make them the members of Christ the children of God and inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven SECT IV. The Responds of the People THe fourth exception is against the Responds and Answers of the People to the Minister appointed in the Prayer-Book excepting Amen The Brethren say Fourth Excâ—ption The Respondâ— P. 27 28 n 4. They have no warrant from the Word and are Will-worship nor can be done in Faith That they interrupt the reading contrary to the Preface are taken out of the Mass-Book onely that there are above one hundred of them To which are added the Peoples answering the Confession of sins Creed and every other Verse of the Psalms But they omit the Principal the matter and the use of which anon First for the number Though they may be so many in the whole Number yet are they not all in one service but so divided that they are neither burdensome nor confused To the interrupting of the reading and the Mass-book hath been answered If all were reading where were the Liturgy Nowhere else That they are said to be no where else If they speak of the substance of them argues their want of reading in Antiquity which they would seem to have seriously consulted and of the practice of some in later times Are there not in the ancient Liturgies mentioned by themselves many Responds and Answers of the People Whether those Liturgies be theirs whose names they bear is not the question but ancient they are and the question is whether they had any such answerings of the People which every one by inspection may see they had We will cite but two Witnesses the one Ancient the other Modern The first shall be the Liturgy of Chrysostome How often is repeated besides the Amen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord have mercy upon us and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To thee O Lord we commend them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lord vouchsafe pardon And sometimes longer Responds than any of ours are and the very same in sense as at the Communion The Priest 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let us give thanks unto the Lord Liturg. Chrysost Tom. 6. Then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the People 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is meet and right to worship the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost the Trinity of the same and undivided substance And a little after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The People for so Chorus is taken also both in the Poets and as we shall see straightway in Neoterick Liturgies Holy holy holy Lord of Sabbath Heaven and Earth are full of thy Glory Hosanna in the highest Blessed be he that cometh in the Name of the Lord Hosanna in the highest And afterward the Priest and the Deacon having uttered their sentences 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The People We praise thee we bless thee we give thanks unto thee O Lord and we supplicate unto thee O our God Which are the words much of them of one of the Peoples Responds at the Communion in our Liturgy Lib. Hermaâ—i Archiep. Colon. Reformation The next for I omit other things shall be that notable Liturgy called the Book of the Reformation of Colon compiled by * Vid. Sleidan com lib. 15. Ad Ann. 1543. Against it the Popish party wrote the Antididagma Bucer one of our own Reformers and Melancthon and Pistorius all thorough-Protestants and men of eminency as all know in the Church The Book is so remarkable that it hath ben translated into English the Latine Copy I follow and it is a most usefull piece for all those Ministers that would seriò and in good earnest feed the Flock of God over which the holy Ghost hath made them Overseers In this Common Prayer Book besides the Symphony in Doctrine in some things carped at by the Brethren in our Liturgy of which anon there are several Responds and Answers of the People Not here to insist upon the Answers of the Sureties in Baptism in the name of the child As creditis credimus Answers of the witnesses in Baptism
they said in the Preface and in the Prayer in both which the book speaks of them as of several orders as wee saw but now for that word of Consecration is used for honours sake onely as being the separation of a person to a more eminent order If the Brethren could make advantage of it they might by the same Logomachy prove that Bishops Priests and Deacons are consecrated also for the Title of the Book saies The form and manner of consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons Ergo Priests and Deacons are consecrated as well it may bee said as that Bishops are consecrated therefore not ordered This for the judgement of the Church of England and of the Articles whereof the book of Ordination is a branch unto which the Brethren as it seems have also subscribed Artic. 36. For revolting from which Can. 38. they have merited the censures of the Church but that they say those Canons have now no powder but there may bee some in making If Linwood and Anshelme say Linwood constitut Anshelm in Phâ—l 1. that Episcopacy is not an order distinct from Presbyters wee are to note that these and many streams like have but one head which when it issued out this was a little troubled it is St. Hierom whom in this they follow and whose words they use Who being provoaked by John Bishop of Hierusalem Ad Evagr. Tom 2. in Ep. ad Tit. 1. took occasion warmly to make that a general note which hee had but from a few particular instances and the latitude of the word Bishop in Scripture That because there was not at that time any one so constituted at Ephesus Act. 22. when Paul left that Church therefore there was not one afterward when John wrote his Revelation and Christ sent the message to the Angel especially of that Church To say that Angel was the company of the Ministers Apoc 2. is to beg the question not to answer the proof Also because there was none one while more specially designed by Paul at Philippi or at least spoken to therefore there was none at Colosse when as the Apostle directs his speech to bee delivered to Archippus To say there was no other Minister there is to avoid what can not by such evasion be escaped Ephesus had a Bishop or call him what you will a superiour Governour to all the Ministers 1 Tim. 1. when Timothy was there and so had the Isle of Crete when Titus governed it Tit. 1. When the Apostle admonisheth the Hebrews to obey them that have the Rule over them Heb. 13. Act. 15. Gal. 2. 1 Cor. 3 5. 2 Cor. 3.6 Eph. 6.21 Rom. 13.4 cap. 15.8 doth it exclude the government of James or of Peter to whom Paul applyed himself as the pillars and rectors of that Church A speech uttered to many doth not shut out the precedency of some one among them The word Deacon is sometime applyed to the Apostles themselves and to the Evangelists And to the Magistrate Luk. 19.44 1 Pet. 2.12 and to â—hr st himself So the word Episcopacy sometimes signiâ—ies viâ—itation in general in the Scripture sometimes the offiâ—e of A ostleship Act. 1.20 And his Bishoprick let ano her take â—nâ— sometimes the office of a Bishop or Pastor or Presbyter 1 Tim. 3. Hee that desireth the office of a Bishop But this latitude of the Word in Scripture impedeth not but that the thing now understood thereby may be in Scripâ—ure distinct from that of Presbyter and is in all those plaâ—es and persons where and who had jurisdiction over other Ministers as the Apostles the Evangelists and others such as Timothy and Titus were But that Hieron even when hee disputes upon the Word was not so clear against the thing Ep. ad Evagr. in ipso fine appeâ—rs in that hee saith Presbyter Episcopus aliud aetatis aliud dignitatis est nomen Unde ad â—imotheum de ordinatione Episcopi Diaconi dicitur de Presbyteris omnino reticetur quia in Episcopo Presbyter continetur Et ut sciamus traditiones Apâ—stolicas sumptas de Veteri Testamento Qâ—od Aaron silii ejus atque Levitae in Templo fuerunt hoc sibi Episcopi Presbyteri Diaconi vendicent in Ecclesia The name saith hee of Presbyter and Bishops the one is a title of years the other of dignity Whence it is that in the Epistle to Timothy there is mention made of the ordination of a Bishop and a Deacon by the way note Consecration an Ordination that Antiquity doth name the consecration of a Bishop ordination which the Brethren deny but there is no mention there of the ordination of a Presbyter because that in a Bishop a Presbyter is also contained And that wee may understand the postolical traditions taken out of the Old Testament Hieron judgement of Epâ—scopacy whilst he dâ—sputes against it look what Aaron and his Sons and the Levites were in the Temple Let the Bishops and he Presbyters and the Deacons challenge unto themselves in the Church where first we have as much distinction yeelded as was betwixt Aaron and his Sons and the Levites between the Bishops and Presbyters and Deacons Secondly That this distinction is Apostolical and grounded on the equity of the orders of the Ministery in the Old Testament so that it is agreeable unto Scripture both in the Old and New Testament Thirdly That the word Bishop is used for Presbyter sometimes because it comprehends it But hee doth not say it is comprehended also of it SUBSECT II. Answ 2 BUt wee may quit this controversie about the distinction of the orders of Episcopacy and Presbytery for the question is of the power which of men in the same degree is not alwaies the same When the same Father saith in the same Epistle Quid enim facit exceptâ ordinatione Ep. ad Evagr. Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter What doth a Bishop excepting Ordination which a Presbyter doth not and where elsewhere hee saith That imposition of hands or confirmation of the Baptized was proper to the Bishops though hee qualifie it by saying that it was done ad honorem potius Sacerdotis quam ad legis necessitatem ' for the honour of the Priesthood for so by way of excellency hee often as also other of that time call Episcopacy as we saw above out of Cyprian rather than by necessity of the institution ' And when in the former Epistle and elsewhere hee saith Ad Evagr. in Tâ—t cap. 1. In toto orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ad quem omnis Ecclesiae cura pertineret Schismatum semina tollâ—rentur That it was decreed through the whole world that one should be elected out of the Presbyters and set over the rest unto whom the whole care of the Church should belong and the seeds of Schism taken away Also Ecclesiae