external spiritual power of ability or freedom to minister them of this power we speak as being that which the Bishops as the spirituall governers of theyr Prov Dioc do confer I know a man may be restreyned by violâ—nce or other bodily impediment from the vse of this spirituall freedom but then he is restreyned from the vse of his power of right also Whosoever hath the one hath the other by the same act whosoever hath a lawfull calling hath both Of his great mistakeing vpon which notwithstanding he builds the weight of his answer both in this the former parte of the book which is that the Bishops Provinciall Diocesan authority administrations are civile derived from the king I shall speak hereafter He ads that it cannot stand with my plea that such a man preaching diligently professing that to be his mayn office should in this work be a branch of the prelacy dâ—â—t by his power receaved by him For. 1. this is not any parte of the prelates power as he is a prelate to preach the word Which he also would prove by an affirmation in my book which is though he weaken the evidence of the truth thereof in relateing it that the prelates office and order is founded vppon theyr usurpation of the rights and libertyes wherewith Christ the Lord in his word hath endowed his Church the Elders for theyr government and the people for theyr liberty for the calling of officers censureing of offenders Power therefore sayth he of preaching can be no parte of it First that which he admits in myne affirmation hath enough in it to overthrow his consequence For if it belong to the prelates to call ministers that in calling them they give them power authority though no absolute charge to preach according to the order of that Church then followeth it vndeniably that those ministers thus preaching do therein excercise the prelaâ—es power that it may be sayd of the ministers and Bishops as Christ sayd of his disciples himself that whosoever receaves them which are sent receaves them which send them In submitting vnto or withdrawing from him that is sent by the king in a work of his office men do submit vnto or withdraw from the king himself his authority so is it in all estates subordinations whether Ecclesiasticall or civile as every one that dimms it not in himself may see by the light of nature And if vnto this be added that as the whole nation is devided into two provinces vnder the two Arch-Bishops and the Provinces into â—â—ndry â—â—oâ—eses vnder the Bishops and they into theyr severall parrishes vnder the ministers thereof so the Arch-Bishops and Bishops do share out vnto the parrish preistes in theyr ordination other assignementes a parts of theyr charge to wit so much as concerns the ordinary service of the parrish as vnto theyr chancelours commissaryes and Arch-deccors on other parts for inferiour government reserveirg to themselves the Lordship ever both for the best advantage of theyr own honour and profit it will then evidently appear as that the part is a branch of the whole that the parochial ministery is a branch of the diâ—â—esâ—n provinciall pâ—â—lacy By which ministery we are not to vnderstand as doth myne opposite the work of preaching or any other work whatsoever but the office power exequuted vsed in these works For if we will exactly weigh things in a just ballance we must consider of these three distinct poynts in the ministery 1. The office 2. The power 3. The workes The office is the very state function conferred vpon a man by his calling from which office ariseth immediately power charge to minister and to perform the workes of that office in the performance of which workes the office is exequuted and power vsed And if preaching diligently faythfulâ—y were the pastours mayn office then should Apostles Prophets Evangelists have the same mayn office with pastours for they all do that work of diligent preaching one as we â—as an other besides that this work is lawfully performed by him that hath no office at all therefore cannot be the Pastours office mayn or mean 2ly It followeth not because the office of the prelates is founded vppon theyr vsurpation of the Churches rights in calling of officers consureing of â—fferdersâ— that therefore power of preaching is no parte of theyr office Men may by theyr office have power to do more then the very things vppon which theyr office is founded otherwise the parochiall ministery should be very slightily founded considering how many trifles and superstitions the ministers have not onely power but charge also to perform By this mans reasoning theyr office should be founded vppoÌ„ the wearing of a surplice makeing a crosse c. for these they have power to do yea not power to leav vndone by theyr office There are among men many lawfull offices or orders those lawfully founded and yet not so perfitly but that some evil actions are through humayn fraylty done in by them so on the contrary is the office of prelacy vnlawfull vnlawfully founded and yet not so absolutely but that the good work of preaching may be and is performed in and by it Which preaching being also an inferiour work of that office and order which is principally set vp for government and that wherwith the Bishops do litle trouble the Churches it maâ— well be excluded froÌ„ the foundation of theyr office though a work thereof as there are also many doctrines of Christian religion besydes those which are properly called the foundations thereof though a work good in it self yet in the extent of theyr power to preach when and where they list in theyr provinces and diocesses exorbitant and antichristian so a parte of theyr usurpation whether of the foundation or building it matters not a parte of which power they also share out vnto the ministers in theyr severall parrishes An other argument he bring vpoÌ„ an affirmatioÌ„ in my book p. 29 that preaching is no natural or necessary parte of the parochiall ministers office This myne assertion in the first place he reprocheth as an intemperate speach proceeding from an impotent sicknes of mynde which yet sayth he may be vsed agaynst my selfe If I were sick of any such impotency of mynde as he in his potency of mynde pronounceth I should surely fynde him a phisition of no value which brings no other medicine then a reproch to cure me withall Onely he insinuates a reason agaynst that I say which is that preaching the word is expresly mentioned in the ministers ordination And is it not also mentioned in the ordination of a Mas-preist of whose office notwithstanding it is no necessary or naturall parte yea is it not evident that one and the same ordination serves both for a Mas-preist parochiall minister being given by a popish Byshop and so
deriving spirituall authority from them And because Popeish kings have given theyr power to the beast shall Christian kings therefore take the beasts power vnto them which they should surely do in makeing themselves the spring-heades from whence floweth the power of makeing ministers excommunicateing offenders which the Prelates vse in theyr Provinces Diocesses And albeit for want of the bookes I cannot exactly set down the judgment of the lawes in this case yet may I safely affirm that they no where derive from the kings civile authority the power of these spirituall administrations but do onely make the king the establisher vphoulder civily of this power The same ecclesiasticall jurisdiction which had been in vse in popery a great part of the popish Hierarchy was confirmed Eliz pri so continueth at this day in vayn men apply theyr industry arâ— in the washing of this blackmore Neyther yet doth it follow though the lawes of the land did esteem this Iurisdiction civile that therefore it were such indeed They may and do misesteem many things especially of this kynde They esteem the Crosse Surplice c. indifferent yea comely â—dificative ceremonyes are they therefore such or so esteemed by this authour So for those corrupt vsurpations abuses which he affirmeth to be mingled with the Byshops so seeming vnto him civile power do not the lawes of the land esteem even them also lawfull laudable ordinances orders The Arguments therefore from the lawes esteem to the nature of the thing is of no force Now that the prelates Iurisdiction in theyr Prov Dioc is not civile but ecclesiasticall a spiritual externall power appeareth playnly by these Reasons First where he makes it civile because it is coactive or bodily enforceing I conclude on the contrary that because it is not so coactive therefore it is not civile The furthest the Byshops can go as Byshops is to excommunicate a man or to pronounce him an heretique which done they may deliver him to the secular power or procure a civile coactive processe agaynst him from the L Chauncelour in certayn cases 2 dly Where he affirmeth that the king might perform the works of theyr jurisdiction by other civile officers there neyther can be stronger nor need be other Arguments to prove the contrary then the very consideration of the nature of those theyr workes which are for substance the makeing of ministers excommunicateing of offenders with theyr contraryes appâ—rtenances which to call civile workes what is it but to make a civile religion 3 dly Let theyr consecration to theyr byshopricks be looked into and there wil be found in them no word or sillable insinuateing any civile authority but onely that which is spirituall for the feeding of the flock doeing the work wherevnto the H Ghost hath called them such scriptures also being therevnto applyed as conteyn in them onely the callings offices workes of the ministers of the Church 4 ly Theyr civile authority whether that which is peculiar to some of them as to be of the pryvy councell or high commission or that which is more ordinary coÌ„mon to all as to be Iusticers of peace in the countryes where they live is but one the same conveyed by one and the same ioynt calling commission with that of other counsaylers commissioners Iusticers therefore is nothing at all to that iurisdiction by which they ordeyn ministers and excommunicate offenders which the foresayd civile magistrates neyther have nor can have power to practise though by theyr civile power they do and may civilely restreyn men vnder peyn of bodily punishmeÌ„t Ad vnto this also that the Byshops may do excercise all every part of theyr episcopall authority where they have not the least civile authority viz in the cittyes and corporations within theyr Provinces and Diocesses as for example the Bishop of Norwich in the city of Norwich where his civile authority is no more then myne Lastly whereas all civile proceedings are made in the name of the king they on the contrary side proceed In the name of God though too oft verifying the old saying In nomine Dei incipit omne malum And by these reasons that which I did not suspect that any would have denyed is confirmed to wit that the Prelates power in theyr Provinces and Diocesses is not civile but a kynde of externall spirituall power which I have also in my former book proved Antichristian as vsurpeing vppon Christes royal prerogatives subverting the order of true Christian government su allowing vp as with full mouth both the peoples liberty and Elders government wherewtih Christ the Lord hath invested the true Church He proceedeth But if this be so then sayth Mr Rob those ministers are vnder no spirituall government and so be lawlesse persons and inordinate walkers c. His answers are 1. that they so govern themselves as that no honest man hath cause to abhor from theyr communion 2 that they are subiect to civile government even in spirituall actions in the larger acception of the word to externall regiment merely spirituall 3. that they are no more lawles persons then I my self was when I had no elder ioyned with me or am now with myne one Elder since I exclude the people from all government In these answers he neyther dealeth with me nor the cause of the Lord as is meet For first I do not in my book inter this exception vppon the former ground as he sets it down for his advantage as will appear in the examination of the 3. answer 2. I do not alledg it to prove communion vnlawfull with them as he insinuates but to reprove that vppon theyr own plea theyr Church-state standing as such as wherein they neyther do nor can enioy the spirituall externall government of Christ in his Church so neyther have that conscience which is meet of the commaundements of Christ by his Apostles to give due honour to them who rule well to submit themselves to those who are over them in the Lord nor of theyr own frayltyes in what need they stand of the Lords ordinances of this in speciall for theyr guidance conservation in his wayes And though he passe by this reproof not myne but the H Ghostes turning it off another way yet let the godly Reader with good conscience remember that the disciples of Christ are to observ whatsoever he hath commaunded his Apostles withall that it was the Prophets comfort that he should not be confounded when he had respect to all Gods cammaundemeÌ„ts 3. In his 1. 2. answer he speakes not at all to the purpose in hand our question not being about the personall government which a man hath over himself nor about civile government though in spirituall actions nor about government at all in the larger acceptation of the word ut onely as it is taken
A MANVMISSI ON TO A MANVDVCTION OR ANSWER TO A LETTER INFERRING PUBlique communion in the parrish assemblies upon private with godly persons there Stand fast in the liberty wherwith Christ hath made you free Gal. 5. 1. Be not partaker of other mens sinns keep thy self pure 1. Tim. 5. 22. By Iohn Robinson Anno Domini 1615. To the godly reader ALbeit I be justly sorry for all oppositions against the truth yet not so for this occasion of further manifesting that my formerly professed perswasion that publique communion with the parrish assemblies cannot be inferred vppon private with godly persons though members there the constitution and estate of the same assemblies rearing up a partitioÌ„ wall neyther so transparent as may be seen thorough mâ—â—h lesse so open as may be passed no not in the best charity as this manuducent supposeth but on the contrary so grosse entyre in evill as that no engine of wit or art can so batter it as to make a safe passage through it for a good conscience Needfull it were in a matter of this nature and weight that the manuducent or hand leader should guide men by the playn and open way of the sâ—riptures as is the way of the Lord in them layd down open playn as the King high way and beaten by the feet of the Apostolicall churches not by subtile Quaerees and doubtfull Suppositions and such under hand conveyances as may lead the vnwary into a maze and there loose him but cannot clear the way for an vpright coÌ„science Of the way of Christ it was prophesied of ould An high way shal be there and a way and it shal be called the way of holines the vnclean shall not pase over it for he shal be with these the wayfareing man though fooles shall not erre therein But so many and doubtfull are the wyndeings of this mans way as that he who findes it had need be no wayfareing man but a town-dweller and well acquainted with all the secret turnings thereof nor a fool as the Prophet speaketh but one haveing wit indeed more then a good deal But let them in whose hearts are the highwayes of the Lord that they may goe froÌ„ strength to strength till they appear vnto God in Sion let them I say not suffer themselves to be led by the turnings of mans devise whatsoever but by the wordes of the wisdom of God which are all in righteousnes in which there is nothing wreathed or perverse but they are all playne to him that will understand and straight to him that would fynde knowledge Now for my persvasion about publique and private communion it is the same which I have manifested in my other book and that wherein so far as by the weak light which God hath given to shine in my heart I can discern I neyther wrong the good in that Church person or thing nor partake in the evill of eyther My trust is that God who hath given me my part though in great infirmity in the Prophets comfort with all my heart have I sought thee will also fulfill his request uppon me let me not wander from thy commandements IT was some addition of honour to Davids victory over the Philistime that he slew him with his own sword vpoÌ„ which hope mine opposite as it seemes enterprizeth the beating down of the partition wall of our separation from the parrish assemblies in theyr publique communion government and ministery by the engine of mine own acknowledgment of private communion with the persons peâ—sonall graces os many christians though otherwise members there uppon which acknowledgment he therefore propoundeth certeyn Quaerees or Demaunds in number seaven the first whereof is Suppose one of those many so qualifyed as that in the judgment of those that can disâ—â—rn he is competently fit to be employed in the publique ministery having his own 〈◊〉 given to thâ—t work and the hearts of many â—â—aâ—ing his help suppose I say that such a man not fyndeing means for the present of a comfortable enterance into that calling shalby leav in a publique assembly where many like himself and many unlike are gathered togather without any further calling for a â—yme perform the actions of prayer prâ—pâ—â—sying without any addition deâ—ractâ—ion or alteration of that which he had lawfully done in private my demaund is whether it be not lawfull to communicate with him in his work I answer that these exercises of religion not performed by this persoÌ„ by any publique calling or authority but onely by his personall gift desyre to do good are not publique or Church actions but private and personall nor communion with him therein publique but private communion no not though performed by him in a publique place which no more makes the action to be of publique nature or a Church action which in my whole book I make as they are the same then did the private chambers where the Apostles administred the word sacraments to the Churches make these theyr administrations private or personall Reason it self teacheth that publique actions are onely such as are performed by publique authority See Mr. Perkins in Treatise of Christian equity for this purpose The same answer serveth for the 2 d Qu which supposeth onely a longer continuance of tyme in the same course by coâ—niveâ—â—y of them in authority since mere continuance in the same course especially as an ordinate means â—o the same end altereth not the nature thereof And so this as the former Quaere is besides the purpose in hand Onely I ad that no man can continue thus preaching in a publique place especially some years but under the cloak appearance of a Byshops minister though he be not such indeed Suppose yet the same man obteyneth a licence from the L. Byshop of the Diocesse without any unlawfull condition for to continue in that his course I ask whether that leav or licence given doth pollute the actions seing a man may ask leav of the great Turk to preach the Gospell within his dominions This Supposition conteyneth a contradiction for the very obteyning receiving of the Bishops licence which yet I think no man doth before he have receaved orders as they are called is a real acknowledgment that the Byshop hath a lawfull power to graunt it which is an vnlawfull condition John Claydon a martyr of Christ was otherwise minded then this man wheÌ„ he witnessed that the Byshops licence to preach the word of God was the true character of the beast i. e. Antichrist Neyther is there the like reason of procuring the Byshops liecence to preach the gospell in his Province or Diocesse of asking leav of the great Turk to preach in his dominions For 1. he minceth the matter too much in making this obteyning of the Bishops licence to be nothing but the asking him leav as a man may ask leav of the great Turk that is desire