said at the Grave than in the Pulpit L. But some say none of those words signifie the persons Salvation but his removal hence M. Read them If those do not none do L. But some say that by Excommunicate is meant Excommunicable or such as ought to be Excommunicate and then what more can you desire M. Their saying is a presumptuous contradiction to that which they consent to what reason have they for it Is Excommunicate and Excommunicable all one Or may they put what sense they list on Laws If they do but tell the Bishops this much they will make them know that they are not made Judges of who is Excommunicable When I have craved but the alteration of that word they answered me with contempt that so every Priest or Curate should have the power of damning whom he please But sure Siâ—encing our judgment of a man is not damning him But what place is there for any doubt when the Book nameth the three sorts excepted exceptio firmat regulam in non exceptis Yea the express exposition in the Canon â—8 is If he shall refuse to Christen the one or bury the other that is Any brought except the party deceased were Denounced Excommunicate Majori Excommunicatione for some grievous and notorious Crime and no man able to testifie of his repentance he shall be Suspended by the Bishop of the Diocese from his ministry by the space of three months And alas how many thousand Infidels Hobbists Sadducees Hereticks Adulterers Thieves Perjured Scorners at godliness c. are among us unexcommunicated If all in England be saved except the Unbaptized Excommunicate and Self-murtherers which de singulis one by one must be said of all the rest either Scripture and Pulpits are much mistaken or else we that live among men are in a dream and our senses are all deceived CHAP. XVII Point XIV Of Consenting to Read the Apocrypha L. WHat harm is there in reading the Apocrypha M. I told you that we scruple not reading most of it in the place of Homilies or other Books especially the books called Wisedom and Ecclesiasticus But 1. Many Bishops and Doctours of the Church of England have accused the books of Tobit of down right lies and the books of Iudith Bell and Dragon c. as being meer fictions 2. And when we read these it is to be done in the same order as we read the Scripture by the name of Lessons which is the Title given to the Chapters read out of the Old and New Testament 3. And if we could yet read all these that will not serve unless we declare our Assent Consent and Approbation of the Appointment of them in the book which we cannot do L. But they are for the most part to be read but on week days or holy days M. The Conforming Clergy Consent and Covenant to the Imposition that requireth them to read the Common-Prayer every day in the week unless they be hindred by sickness or some urgent cause And so it is still the publick Service God's Service is all to be done with holy Reverence and if the Book of Tobit and some others be guilty of so many gross falsehoods as Protestants have and do still accuse them of I fear both to use them as Lessons in the place of God's Word lest it be prophanation and also to subscribe or declare my Approbation of the Calender and that use lest I be guilty of the sin of all the Ministers in England that so use it And it 's dangerous to seem to tell the people that so many books are God's Word that are not such For they understand not the Greek word Apocrypha and every Reader at least that is not Licensed to Preach is forbidden by the Canon to expound even that one word to them CHAP. XVIII Point XV. Of Assenting to Mistranslations and Subscribing that they are not contrary to the Word of God. L. ARE not the Epistles and Gospels used according to the last Translation M. Yes in the new Books they are but the Psalms are not L. What great mistranslations are there M. Sometimes a whole Verse or more is left out and sometimes the Translation is quite contrary to the Text. As Psal. 105. 28. They rebelled against his word instead of They rebelled not against his word And in the Book which this justifieth are many in the Epistles and Gospels I have cited them at large elsewhere L. How cometh there to be so many faults in the old Translation M. The work was an excellent good work But the Authors it seems for want of skill in the Hebrew followed the Septuagint Greek translation which hath these and many such defects L. Sure it is lawful to use and follow the Septuagint for the Apostles did so in the New Testament M. 1. The Apostles some times use it and sometimes follow the Hebrew against it and sometimes neither 2. But to Use it is one thing and to Justifie it is another thing It was in common use in the time of Christ and his Apostles and they used that in speaking to the people which use made intelligible and acceptable And we scruple not using it But all the works of Man are imperfect as Man is And why must we subscribe that there is nothing in it contrary to the word of God When as every mistake in it is contrary to it L. It seems then you would not subscribe to the Bible that there is nothing in it contrary to the Word of God M. I will subscribe to the truth of all that is in the true Copies of the Original if there by any such And I will subscribe that the various Lections in those Copies that we have are not the failing of the Holy Ghost or Apostles nor are such as leave us in just doubt of any necessary Truth And I will subscribe to the Translation so far as it agreeth with the Original But I will not subscribe that any Translation is perfect or faultless or to this or that Hebrew or Greek Copie as if in every word or Lection it certainly agreed with the Autographs And why should men make snares for the Church by imposing Professions that any mere man's works are perfect when all mortal men are confessedly imperfect Is it not enough peaceable to use them and to profess that all the word of God is infallible Truth L. But I cannot think that an Approbation of all the Translations is intended in your Assent and Consent M. Are they no part of that which is contained in the Book and prescribed by it Or could not the Parliament speak sense Chap. XIX Point XVI Of Consenting to reject all from Communion who desire not our Episcopal Confirmation L. ME thinks you that have written a Book for Confirmation should not scruple consenting to this M. I told you that I am so far from scrupling the true use of Confirmation that I think it is the want of it that is the greatest corruption of
faulty or repugnant to God's word and will not assent and consent to all therein 3. The Papists hereby scandalized do scorn us and say The question is not now of an Infallibility or a Judge that all must assent to It is but who this Infaliible Iudge is whether it be the Pope and a General Council or the English Convocation which is liker to be of greater authority and infallibility we require no greater assent and consent of you to the Canons of the Universal Church than the State and Church of England require to their Books 4. This seemeth to us to let the Articles Liturgie and Ordination Book above the Bible 1. God himself hath not made the assent and consent to every thing contained and prescribed in the Bible necessary to Salvation or to the Ministry 1. There are divers Books in our Bibles whose Divine authority many have questioned who yet were not for that degraded The Apochryphal books are yet controverted by men tolerated on both sides There are hundreds of various Readings where no one is necessitated to determine for this or that Translations are all faulty being the work of faulty men And no wise men will declare that this or that or any Translation hath nothing in it contrary to the Original Word of God. And are our Bishops Books more faultless 5. It is a sin to Confederate with and Encourage such audacious Lording it over the Faith and Souls of men and such ill Examples L. Your instances shew that you expound them too strictly Can you imagine them so insolent and impious as to impose their own Books more strictly than the Bible and require more Assent and Consent M. Call it what you will I must suppose that matter of Fact which is undeniably evident to our senses It 's an ill argument This is unreasonable and ungodly or inhumane Ergo It was not done What is so false absurd or impious that man may not do L. Some say They are Articles of Peace only and not of Faith. M. Some Brains will be cheated with a meer noise of words as Birds with a whistle We deny not but Peace is one of the ends of the Impositions but the question is what are the Means Or whether they will take it for Conformity to promise I will live peaceably or I Assent that I should live in Peace Are you not bound in order to peace to Assent and Consent to all things in the Books Say I Assent that some things are true and good and some things false and bad which yet for Peace I will use and try how it will be taken L. Well What is there in these Books contrary to Gods Word or which you may not Assent and Consent to M. The number is greater than we would have them I will come to the chief of them which I before named to you L. I forgat to tell you that it is not all contained that is Assented to but all that is both contained and prescribed M. 1. A meer quibble to cheat Conscience Ask the Bishop Morley and Bishop Gunning yet living whether this was the sence and I will take their answer 2. Then Assent and Contained had been put in in vain and to deceive if Consent and Prescribed signifie as much without them 3. The word approbation in this Act and nothing contrary to Gods Word in the Canon confute this quibble 4. I told you were it so it 's never the better All in the Book is prescribed to some use They are outside men that think Vse reacheth but the Body Are Articles of Faith Assertions of no use CHAP. IX Point VI. Of the Article of Baptized Infants Salvation M. THE sixth Point of our Non-conformity is a new Article of Faith in these words in a Rubrick which we must Profess Assent and Consent to It is certain by the Word of God that Children which are baptized and dying before they commit actual sin are undoubtedly saved L. And what have you against Assenting to this M. 1. That it is a New Article of Faith. 2. That it is arrogant and divisive making a grand Controversie one Article of Faith. 3. It is certainly false in most if not every one that declareth such assent 4. It is a dangerous adding to the Word of God. L. Why call you a Rubrick an Article of Faith M. It is most expresly made such What is an Article of Faith but that which must be Assented to as certain by the Word of God Will you deny the Name where there is this Definition L. But how do you prove it to be new M. Because it was never made for us before you have the affirmative If you say it was ever before prove it It 's not in the Bible it 's not in our 39 Articles nor Creed L. Are not the old words of the former Book to the same sense M. Not at all If they were why did the New Convocation alter them The old words plainly signifie no more than this that Infants baptized have all ex parte ministri and may be saved without Confirmation Exorcism Chrysme Spittle Salt Milk and Honey and such other additions supposing him ex parte sui under the promise of Salvation that is to be the seed of the Faithful Though I verily believe that after the making of the Common-prayer Book our Canon-Makers in Bancrofts dayes began to warp towards a worser sence But our Defenders of the Liturgy expound it as I say and the tenor of the words may tell the Reader that they meant no more L. Tell me first where it is that your Controversie lyeth M. I. Negatively 1. It is not whether the Infant Seed of one believing Parent should be Baptized This is agreed on 2. It is not whether those may be dedicated to God as our Children and baptized who are Adopted or any way made our own Children as Abrahams bought and born to him in his house as his propriety were Though we cannot say we are certain of this yet we will not contradict them that say they are 3. It is not whether Hypocrites Children have not so far a right to Baptisme Coram Ecclesia as that the Minister ought to baptize them if it be justly demanded 4. It is not whether there be a certainty of the Salvation of all the baptized Infants of true faithful Christians that die before actual sin Though all good Christians are not certain of this yet with the Synod of Dort we hold that Christians have no just cause to doubt of it 5. It is not whether they may not be good men that think all baptized ones absolutely in a state of Salvation None of these are the Controversie II. But it is 1. Whether all Infants without exception that be baptized are saved if they then die 2. Whether this be certain by the Word of God. 3. Whether all that be not undoubtedly certain of it should be no Ministers L. But it is not said All Infants but Infants indefinitely
forward to meddle with more publick Church matters without our Superiors invitation or consent but we may say that it is our judgment that these additions following would greatly strengthen the Interest of Religion Church and Concord I. That the Parish Churches be acknowledged True Churches and their Ministers such Overseers as are necessary to Essentiate True Churches that is That all Presbyters be Episcopi Gregis Overseers of the Flock and the Incumbent the President among his Curate Presbyters where there be such And that the Diocesan is not the sole Essentiating Church Pastors and the Diocesan Church the lowest particular Church and the Parish Assemblies but his Chapels or Parts of the lowest Church and the Parish Ministers his Curates and no true Pastors II. That no Lay-Elder Chancellour or Civilian have or use the Decretive Power of Excommunication or Absolution called the Keys III. That New and more Peaceable Canons be made instead of that Book which now obtaineth according to the Scripture Canons Or that there be no Canons but Scripture besides Statute Laws IV. That Bishops have no Forcing Power nor the Writ de Excommunicato Capiendo or any Force by the Sword be Annexed to Excommunication as such but that the Magistrates hear and judge before they punish and Obedience to Bishops be unconstrained and voluntary V. That Bishops judge Church-Causes in Session with their Presbyters and not alone nor with some few of their own Choice or with Lay-men but in regular Synods and Ordain there by their consent and after sufficient trial of them that seek Ordination And so of Institution VI. That Diocesses be not greater than the Diocesan is able to Oversee and that he forbid not the Parish Pastors their particular works but only use his general overcight and power on Appeals VII That Bishops oft visit the inferior Pastors and Churches and instruct the Juniors by direction and Example how to Preach and guide the Flock and rebuke the Erroneous Scandalous Unpeaceable and Negligent VIII That the Bishops be Chosen by the Diocesan Synod and Consented to freely without force by their City flocks where they reside and Invested by the King who hath the power of Temporal Privileges IX That the City and neighbour Pastors be the Cathedral Dean and Prebends at least where City Churches want maintenance or that they ambulatorily Preach abroad where there is most need X. If Arch-Bishop Usher's Form or Reduction of Government to the Primitive state or else King Charles the Second his Declaration about Ecclesiastical Affairs be but setled by Law it will be a Healing and Great Reformation inferior Synods not hurtfully fettered being allowed under the Diocesan Synods And whether the Diocesans be Called Bishops or Arch-Bishops as Successors to the Apostles and Evangelists in the ordinary parts of their Office a general care of many Churches the name is to be left to each mans free judgment As to the ignorant clamors for a real or seeming Re-ordination 1. I have said so much against it in my Treatise of Episcopacy and my Disputation of Ordination in my Dispute of Church-Government and my Christian Concord that while the objectors by contempt refuse to read and answer them it will be no cure of their pride and partiality to repeat the same again But I say that I have fully proved unanswered that they that were Ordained by Synods of Incumbent Pastors and specially those also then approved by the Westminster Assembly had a better Ordination and that by true Bishops than either Papists or meer English Diocesans that are not Arch-bishops can give And yet they Re-ordain not Papists 1. Either they take the Parish-Churches that is the Pastor and Communicants distinct from the meer Auditors and Catechumens and from the Aliens to be true proper Churches in political Sense or not If yea Then those Churches have Bishops For Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo adunata ubi Episcopus ibi Ecclesia Their own Principle is That it is no proper political Church without a Bishop There are three degrees of Bishops 1. All Presbyters are Episcopi Gregis by the consent of Papists and Protestants 2. The chief Incumbents that have Curates or may have are Episcopi Praesides The Ordination without Diocesans was by these two sorts of Bishops 3. True Diocesans are Arch-bishops Episcopi generales plurium Ecclesiarum We refuse not their Ordination but Men have true Episcopal Ordination without it But if they say that the Diocesan is the lowest Bishop of a particular Church and that the Parish-Incumbent Rectors are no true Bishops and their Assemblies no true political Churches formed of Bishops but only parts of one Diocesan Church infimi Ordinis we abhor such Tyrannical Schismatical Diocesans and their pretence of proper power to Ordain and the Primitive Church had never any such Ordaniers or Bishops And I advise all Ministers neither to be Re-ordained by such nor to yield to the appearance of such an evil by coming under their equivocating imposition of hands lest they take God's Name in vain and harden Papists and Church-Tyrants in their false condemnation of the Reformed Churches If it be want of a legal right in England that they pretend let the Magistrate give you a Licence or Legal right I write not this for my own interest for I was Ordained by a Diocesan and am past all hopes or fears of Man. CHAP. LX. The Reasons of these ten Articles L. YOV must give me leave to tell you what objections are like to be raised against your proposed Articles of Reconciliation And first your own party will be unsatisfied in them and so they will do no good because here is not a word against Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Arch-deacons and the rest that bear office in their Courts which yet is the thing that you your self seem most to dissent from and which the Covenant did renounce M. 1. We have so much swearing and unswearing and forswearing that I will meddle as little as I can in things that look like Perjury You know that as the last Generation was sworn against Prelacy this new Generation is sworn to it Yea in a manner the whole Land is sworn or covenanted never to endeavour any alteration of it And how much soever I am against that Oath yet I will meddle as little as I can in urging men to that which they take for Perjury And I have elsewhere told you that the Covenant renounced not all Episcopacy many of the Assembly of Divines declared their dissent from any such renunciation and had entred their protestation against it as Dr. Cornel. Burges told me had not the Explication been added which confineth the Renunciation to the English frame And that the present Non-Conformists would have thankfully received the Primitive Episcopacy they shewed by their motion 1660. 2. We offer this form on supposition that we may not have what we think best but what we can joyfully submit to for our Concord and the Churches safety 3. I have