to be sinners Accordingly he took three Verses out of Psal 14. one out of Psal 140. another out of Psal 10. another out of Isa 59. All which the Old Translators unadvisedly thrust into the 14. Psalm as parts of that one Scripture I forbear to mention other Psalms wherein sometimes words sometimes whole verses are left out and much of the rest is very improperly and impertinently translated which in the Leiturgy provided for Scotland was redressed yet the Book for sundry other defects impertinencies and redundances was refused This makes sport for Papists and Atheists to find how much our Translations publickly used do enterfere and jar and how corrupt some of them be Thus of the differences between the old Common-prayer-books confirmed by Law and the present Common-prayer-books so much magnified and adored not only by the common sort but by too many of those who pretend to learning and skill in the Publike Offices of the Church of England but abuse the people yea Magistracy and God himself therein For still the Preface of the Book runs thus That nothing is enjoyned to be read but that which is the pure word of God or that which is evidently grounded thereupon which as our bold Masters have ordered the matter is false and a meer cheat put upon the people of God Having thus given a taste of the Differences between the Old and New Books I hold it needful to shew how unsafe it might be hereupon to conclude no more but this Then let the present Book of Common-prayer be compared with the old that was established and be reformed by it For even in the Book that was established by Parliament there are sundry incongruous and uncomely expressions unwarrantable passages and some gross mistakes of the Scripture it self especially in the Translations of the Epistles and Gospels Which Translation used in the Book of Common-prayer is as antient as the 35. of Hen. 8. and used first in private Primmars being translated out of the Mass books and other Offices of the Romish Church for want of a better Translation in the Reign of Edward the sixth For Example Gâ—sp The old Translation on 2 Sund. after Epiph. When men be drunk But in the new When men have well drunk Epist Indeed Dr. Prideaux saith all these are amended in the Kings New Transtation of the Bible But what is this to the Service-book in which these corrupt passages are still printed and pressed to be read in Divine Service on 4 Sund. in Lent Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia and hordereth upon the City which is now called Jerusalem a gross mistake both of Scripture and Topography The new Translation therefore renders it thus This Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to Hierusalem which now is He saith not Mount Sinai is Agar for that is not so But Hagar is mount Sinai that is a representation or figure of it Nor doth the Apostle say that mount Sinai in Arabia bordered upon Hierusalem For that is false Arabia being many hundred miles distant from Hierusalem And the Mount whereof St. Paul speaks was a type of it not bordering on it Epist on Palm-Sunday He was found in his apparel as a man In the new He was found in fashion as a man The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imports not apparel but the form or figure which includeth the real substance and true nature of the thing whereof it is a form Epist on 16 Sun after Trin. Which is Father of all that is called father in heaven and in earth Then the Father must needs be Father to himself The new Translation therefore renders it Of whom the whole family of heaven and earth is named So the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Much more might be added not only against the present unestablished Leiturgy but against that which was confirmed But this shall suffice For my intention neither is nor ever was to destroy or cast off all Forms but only to shew some grounds of exception against this And seeing this is so much cried up that the most place all their Devotion and Religion in it and come little short of the Israelites in abusing of the brazen Serpent which by Gods own command was erected in the Wilderness Authority may consider whether it be not honourable safe and necessary to deal with both Books as Hezekiah did with that Idolized Serpent and carefully to provide a better in the room as that good King did in reforming the whole Publick Service of God there being now far better means and fairer opportunities of so doing than in the times of compiling the Antient Leiturgy by those Reverend and Renowned Bishops and Matyrs that did compose it ROM 10.22 Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Having reprinted the foregoing Sheet we must now go on in the same Order and Method as was before promised to observe some more incongruous and unworthy passages all which call for a New Form of Liturgy in the rest of the Kalendar Rubricks and Body of the Book it self I. In the KALENDAR THe Kalendar is either that which appoints Proper Lessons for Sundays and Holy-days to speak in the Common-prayer-book Language or that which in each Month sheweth what Chapters are to be daily read on week-days according to the days of the month and is prefixed in all Editions to the Book it self In the Proper Lessons appointed for Holy-days The Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. omitteth proper Lessons for the Conversion of Paul because that was then no Holy-day but abrogated by the Act of 5.6 Edw. 6. ca. 3. Therefore in the Common Kalendar then established the first Lessons for that day being Jan. 25. as being a Common-day of the Week were Gen. 46. and Gen. 47. But in the Book of 1 Eliz. these two Chapters are laid by and Wisd 5 and 6. put in the room This however toucht upon in the printed Sheet is here again taken notice of to shew by this among other arguments that the Book then printed was not confirmed by 1. Eliz. 2. because that Act admits of no alterations of Lessons on Holy-days or other days save only on Sundays Yet is this also thrust into the New Scotish Leiturgy and that day made an Holy-day again And whereas in all the proper Lessons for Holy-days in 5.6 Edw. 6. only All Saints day had for those Lessons Wisd 3 and 5. and all other Holy-day Lessons were Lessons out of the Canonical Books the Kalendar of 1 Eliz. hath appointed 20. more Apocryphal Chapters for Holy-days and thrust out so many Canonical Chapters that by the Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. were appointed for those very days as for instance  Kalendar 5.6 Edw. Kal. of 1 Eliz. On the Purification None yet on Feb. 1 which is the Day Exod. 12. Exod. 13. Wisd 9. Wisd 12. On St. Mathias None yet on Feb. 25. which is the Day Numb 33. Numb 34. Wisd 19. Ecclus. 3. On the
Day lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin Most men are convinced of the necessity of repenting but such is the deceitfulness of their hearts that too many defer it and that upon that very ground expressed in these words which have no ground or warrant from the Word of God At what time soever a sinner repenteth c. as if he could repent when he list which carries many to Hell It is true this is seemingly put off by a great Doctor thus D. P. de Disciâ— Eccl. 2. â— Sect. 3. Dixit Dominus quoad sensum licet non verbatim The Book speaks the sense although not the very words of the Text. But this is too frigid an answer to satisfie the Objection For 1. It is said to be a sentence of Scripture not an Exhortation according to the sense onely It is one thing to give the sense another to repeat the words 2. This agrees not with the sense but is contrary thereunto as was but now demonstrated Therefore it is untrue and injurious to charge the Apostles with the like in alledging the Old Testament in the New 2. That expression in the general Confession of sins viz. There is no health in us although well meant is incongruous and improper because most of the common sort understand not the true meaning of it yet patter it over out of custom without being through their ignorance duly sensible of what is indeed intended by it Howbeit the Minister may not alter the Phrase 3. After the first Lesson at Morn Prayer Te Deum or Benedicite both of them being Apochrypals are to be read before the second Lesson and so they interrupt the continued reading of the holy Scripture which the Preface to that Book would bear us in hand is provided against As for Te Deum or We praise thee O God c. it is a piece taken out of the Mass-Book and in Popish Churches usually sung at times of great Victories Deliverances and other Triumphs From thence some Bishops little to their credit have introduced it upon like occasions into Protestant Churches that being no where enjoyned nor warranted by any Law in force This shews what able men such Bishops are to govern that know not how to express their thanksgiving to God for any extraordinary mercy so well as in a superstitious formal dress usually sung in Popish Churches And as for Benedicite viz. O all ye works of the Lord c. it is a piece of the Mass-Book also and taken out of the Apocryphal song of the three Children And it is bungled too not set forth as it is in the Song it self as by comparing them may appear And whereas that Song is said in the Title of it in the Apocrypha to be the song of the three holy Children which followeth in the third of Daniel after this place And they walked in the midst of the fire praising God and blessing the Lord this is an abusing and belying of the Canonical Text in Daniel 3. in which there is no hint of any such thing Yet must this come in and be kept in in our Liturgy though cast out of the Scotch Book to give another lye to the Preface of our Book of Common-Prayer of which more by and by 4. The many Antiphonies Responds except the peoples saying Amen have no pattern or warrant in the Word Yet above an hundred of these Antiphonies and Responsals or Answerings between Minister Clerk and people are enjoyned to be used beside the accompanying of him in the Confession of sins Creed reading every other verse of the Psalms c. How can such things having no warrant in the Word be done in Faith in the Publique Worship of God and not rather be accounted Will-Worship This is the rather to be excepted against not onely because it is so frequent in the Mass-Books but no where else but because also the Preface to the Book of Common-Prayer saith That the reading of the holy Scripture is therein so set forth that all things shall be done in order without breaking one piece thereof from another and for this cause be cut off Antiphonies Responds Invitatories and such like things as did break the continual course of the reading of the Scripture How then do so many Responds and Answers of Clerk and People while the Minister is reading as likewise those Anthems before-mentioned which interpose between the first and second Lesson all which are still continued in the Book agree with that Preface still printed with the Book 5. If the Letany must be read which contains petitions for more particulars then all the Book besides and being put into one continued prayer without so many interpositions and interruptions might be of far better use then now it is why must the praying part be so much performed by the People and not by the Minister whose proper Office it is in publique to pray for the people as their mouth and not they to be his mouth There is no ground for this in Scripture yet we must be made to believe that there is nothing in the Leiturgy but what is evidently grounded upon the Word And wherefore must that clause in the Let any from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable Enormities be still left out was there no fear of his return to tyrannize over this Land again Had he ever more Instruments at Work in this Kingdom since the Reformation then now If it be said The Act for Vniformity gives notice of an alteration in the Letany yet that Act doth not tell us what that is in particular Therefore till that alteration be named that clause needeth not yea ought not to be omitted so long as the Letany is used 6. In the Book printed in 1 Eliz. there be added after the Letany two Prayers one for the then Queen another for Bishops both which were prayed for before in the Letany and also in the Prayer at the Communion for the whole estate of Christs Church which are not in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. And in 1 Jac. these were continued with one other Prayer for Queen Anne the Prince c. Now albeit the Prayers for the King Queen and Royal Family be useful and necessary yet when the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. admits of no alterations from or additions to that Book in 5.6 Ed. 6. save only in proper Lessons for Sundays one in the Letany and two more in the Communion and none other or otherwise how can those Prayers be used without making them that use them liable to the Law if rigorously urged till they be confirmed by Act of Parliament Or rather till that Act of 1. Eliz. 2. be repealed and taken away 7. Albeit the Preface to the Book saith that therein many things be left out whereof some be untrue some uncertain some vain and superstitious and nothing is ordained to be read but the very pure Word of God the holy Scriptures or
four other learned and grave Persons Masters of Art at the least and allowed for publique Preachers What Law for confining Ordination to four times a year If there be a Law do Bishops now observe it Is it not usual to ordain in other mens Diocesses which they can no more legally do then a Sheriff execute his Office when he is out of his County How often do Deans and Prebendaries assist at Ordinations And why must all other Assistants be Masters of Arts at least What Law or Rule for any of these things unless for being Assistants to and Co-ordainers with the Bishop which this Canon doth tacitely deny when it saith such and such shall be present but not a word of their Laying on of Hands according to the Book of Ordination And whereas by the 36th Canon Subscription is enjoyned to the Books of Common-prayer and of Ordination not only upon all Ordinations and Institutions to Benefices c. which by Can. 37. is required also of all Lecturers Catechists Readers yea by Can. 77. of all School-masters too unless to the last clause of Art 2. touching using the book of Common-prayer whereas the Statute of 13. Eliz. 12. requires no subscription but to the 39. Articles nor that save only of such as are to be instituted to a Benefice not at Ordination or at taking Licenses to Preach only The 38th Canon touching Revolters after Subscription hath been spoken to before The 40th Canon enjoyning an Oath against Simony is necessary yet against Law and particularly against the Petition of Right This therefore we say no more of but humbly pray such an Oath may be imposed by Law But whereas the 49th Canon prohibiteth Ministers not to expound Scripture c. if not Licensed by the Bishop this is expresly contrary to Law 8. Eliz. 1. which confirmeth the Book of Ordination in and by which every one ordained a Presbyter hath the Bible delivered into his hand by the Bishop with these Words Take thou Authority to preach the Word of God c. Yet must every such ordained Minister be compelled to be at the charge of taking out a further License from the same Bishop at the same time to preach in the same place or else not to perform that duty which he promised solemnly to the Bishop and by him was authorized to perform at his Ordination Nor may any Ministers be suffered by the 51. Canon to preach in any other Church without shewing such License although otherwise well known to be sufficiently authorized thereunto And whereas the 62. Canon alloweth Ministers to celebrate Matrimony between other persons without asking the Bannes in Churches if he have a License for doing of it from the Bishop Archdeacon or their Officicals this is expresly contradictory to the Book of Common-prayer Rubrick 1. before the form of Matrimony and so contrary to Law of 1. Eliz. 2. if that Book be confirmed thereby There be sundry other Exceptions justly to be taken to the Book of Canons as namely to such Ecclesiastical Offices besides Bishops and Presbyters as be admitted to bear a share in Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction albeit they be Lay-men while yet they abominate Lay-Elders in the Presbyterian Government beside many other all which we at present forbear not as approving of them but as hoping for a Reformation of that as well as of other things We therefore shall now only with all humility propound a few Queries very necessary as we conceive to be seriously considered 1 Quere Whether if there be any thing of substance altered in or added to the Articles of Religion or Books of Common-Prayer or Ordination and those Alterations or Additions not expresly mentioned and confirmed by Parliament this doth not make those Books to be void in Law if pleaded at Law The Grounds of this Quere are the Acts of 13. Eliz. 12. as touching the Articles that of 1. Eliz. 2. as to the Book of Common-prayer and the Statute of Eliz. 8.1 and of 5.6 Edw. 6.1 as to Ordination Which last named Act saith that the Books therein mentioned were annexed to the said Statute yet are they not to be found inrolled therewith no more is the other Book of Articles in 13. Eliz. inrolled with that Act. 2 Quere Whether the Statutes which are said to confirm any of the things named in the former Quere mentioning only the Titles but not reciting the matter of the Books themselves do make those Books or the things contained in them which have been several times altered although never so much as said to be inrolled nor found so to be do make those things to be established and good in Law because now commonly reputed received and generally used as ratified by Law The Ground of this Quere is that clause in 1. Eliz. 2. which after mentioning some Alterations but not particularly naming them in the Common-prayer-book prohibiteth all other Alterations saying And none other or otherwise 3 Quere If any man be indited or sued at Law upon the Statute of 1. Eliz. 2. for not reading of or coming to hear the Book of Common-prayer or upon the Stat. of 13. Eliz. 12. for not reading the Articles of 1562 and the Defendant plead Not guilty and deny these Books to be those confirmed by those Laws till the Plaintiff prove them to be of Record whether is not the Plaintiff bound to prove that and in the mean time the Defendant not punishable by those Statutes The Grounds of this Quere are first that there are no Records of these to be found secondly the Books have been several times altered since those Acts and thirdly many punished upon the said Acts because those Books have been generally received and used as established by Law 4 Quere Whether notwithstanding the Royal Licence before and Assent after any Canons made in Convocation be valid in Law before they be ratified by Act of Parliament as the Service-book and Articles of Religion were said to be and whether by consequent the Canons of 1603. be now binding The grounds hereof are first that all other Constitutions are or are reputed to be ratified in Parliament Secondly the Statute of 1. Eliz. 2. which gives power to the Queen her Heirs and Successours to grant Licence to Commissioners Bishops and others to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction when it speaks of withdrawing or altering any Rites and Ceremonies or adding new the power is there given to the Queen alone without mention of Heirs and Successours And when any thing is ordered or authorized by the King although under the Great Seal yet the enforcing thereof before ratification by Parliament is held to be contrary to the Petition of Right We shall now close up all with this humble Advertisement that whereas it is pleaded by some that Liturgies and among them the substance of ours are ancienter then the Popish Mass-Books by many hundreds of years whence they infer the weakness and folly of their Objections who say that all or most or any of the things contained in our Service-Book are taken out of the Mass-Book and so are Popish and upon that account would have them abolished and for that purpose produce some passages out of Ignatius Clem Alexandrinus Justin Martyr Tertullian Cyprian Chrysostome c. wherein sundry things in use among us are found mentioned in them and by some the Liturgy of St. James Peter c. are also urged although by many Learned men censured as supposititious Yet none of these Authors do mention any Publick Form the same for substance with ours although they speak of Publick Prayers made in the Congregation which none ever denyed Publick Prayer is one thing a Publick Form another Nor are we against all Liturgies but onely against that which is liable to such material Exceptions as necessitate us to desire a new Form And albeit some of the Rites and Ceremonies now in use may be mentioned in sundry of the Fathers within the first 600 years after Christ yet the mentioning of them is no evidence of the lawfulness of them or that they are not Popish although of latter times espoused by that Synagogue of Rome for as much as Popery was in the Egge and the mystery of iniquity began to work although under disguises and other names even in the time of St. Paul himself 2 Thes 2.7 Yea some of those very Fathers have sundry passages in them which condemn those very things which are now cryed up upon the very authority of their venerable names We shall for brevity give but one instance which every Reader may find in the Preface touching Ceremonies before the Book of Common-Prayer which albeit it hath been before alledged we here briefly touch upon again for better satisfaction of such as cannot consult the Author himself The particular mentioned in that Preface is a passage out of St. Augustine who was so far from approving such a number of Ceremonies yet not to be compared with the multitude in after-times that he complained that hereby Christians were in worse case then were the Jews and therefore counselled to take off that yoke and burden so soon as it might quietly be done And this was one of the Grounds and Reasons there alledged of the cutting off of so many superstitious Ceremonies in the first Reformation under that blessed King Edward the sixth which of late our Arminians and Grotian Divines and Prelates have sought to recal under the colour and guise of Antiquity for which they produce onely some bits and scraps of Fathers to prove their Antiquity but no solid Arguments to make out their lawfulness and conveniency and yet seek to impose them on those who hold themselves bound to hate the garments spotted with the flesh as well as the flesh that is the corruption it self We therefore conclude That it is not bare Antiquity but Divine Verity that must be the onely Rule and Standard of all Doctrine Worship Rites and Ceremonies Ordination Jurisdiction and Discipline among all that intend Conformity to the Mind of Christ FINIS Page 2. line 7. read 4 Car. p. 7. l. 4. r. them in print p. 34. l. 18. r. that and another p. 43. l. 26. r. Presbyteris l. 30. r. qui.
satisfying their carnal and fleshly lusts but to have many children because every one of them hoped and begged oft-times of God in their Prayers that that blessed seed which God promised should come into the world to break the Serpents head might come and be born of his stock and kindred As if all did not know out of what Tribe Christ was to issue Par. 2. Hom. 2. of Alms pag. 160. The same lesson doth the Holy Ghost teach us in sundry places of the Scripture saying Mercifulness and alms-giving purgeth from all sins delivereth from death and suffereth not the soul to come into darkness For this is alledged Tob. 4. ver 10. Then there is added The wise Preacher the son of Sirach confirmeth the same when he saith That as water quencheth burningfire even so mercy and alms resisteth and reconcileth sins Excellent sense For this Ecclus. 5. is quoted in the margent But it is cap. 3.30 where the words in the New Translation are Alms maketh an atonement for sins Of which words however a charitable construction may be wyre-drawn yet those expressions the same lesson doth the Holy Ghost teach us in sundry places of the Scripture evidently admit of these two gross Errours 1. That the Book of Tobit is to be taken for Holy Scripture 2. That it was indited by the Holy Ghost The former of these is contrary to Art 6. in which only the Canonical Books there named are owned for the Scripture of the Old Testament And that of Tobit is there numbred among the Apoeryphals which the Article saith out of Hierom the Church doth not apply to establish Doctrine yet this Homily applies these Apocryphal passages to confirm the Doctrine of Alms deeds And as touching the Holy Ghosts teaching of this in those places alledged out of Tobit and Siracides this is denyed by all who receive not those Books as Canonical Take but one witness instead of many King James who in his Book directed to his Eldest son and called Basilicon Doren having spoken to him of reading of the Holy Scriptures saith thus As to the Apocrypha Books I omit them because I am no Papist and indeed some of them are no way like the ditement of the Spirit of God 6. That by the 37th Article as it is still printed and may not be altered where it is said The Queens Majesty hath the chief power in the Realm of England c. meaning Queen Elizabeth who is after named therein all Ministers are bound to read those very words unto this day and may not say The Kings Majesty hath the chief power for the Articles must be read every word of them as they are printed with the Kings Declaration before them or the Minister must be deprived if he alter any word or shall not take it in the sense of the very Letter of it And if he keep not to all the very words of the Articles who can swear that he did read them after his Induction if put unto it 7. That by this means we shall have no setled or fixed Doctrine of the Church of England at all if so often as the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation shall obtain License to deliberate of all such things as they shall think fit to explain and shall obtain thereto the Royal Assent they may put what sense they please upon the Doctrine established which by the Declaration prefixed to the Articles is promised to be from time to time granted unto them If it be said There is an easie Cure for all this The Declaration before the 39 Articles was never confirmed by any Act of Parliament nor is now in force or if it be it is but the taking of that away and causing the Books to be printed without it So will the subscribers to the Articles be at as much liberty as by the Act of 13 Eliz. was allowed them To this it is Answered that this will signifie nothing if Ministers be still tyed to subscription For 1. It hath been already declared yea adjudged that by that Statute there is no liberty for any man to subscribe the Articles with any limitation or explication if any credit be given to Sir Edward Cook who saith * Instit 4.47 p. 324. edit 1658. that he hath heard Wray chief Justice in the Kings Bench Pasch 23 Eliz. quoting Dier 23 Eliz. 377. lib. 6. fol. 69. Grenes Case Smiths Case report that where one Smith subscribed to the said 39 Articles of Religion with this addition so far forth as the same were agreeable to the Word of God that it was resolved by him and all the Judges of England that this subscription was not according to the Statute of 13 Eliz. Because the Statute required an absolute subscription and this subscription made it conditional and that this Act was made for avoiding diversities of opinions c. And by this Addition the party might by his own private opinion take some of them to be against the Word of God and by this means diversities of opinions should not be avoided which was the scope of the Statute and the very Act it self made touching subscription hereby of none effect Thus He. 2. This shews a necessity of repealing that branch of the Act so far as it concerneth subscription because 1. if we may not subscribe with such an addition so far forth as the same Articles are agreeable to Gods Word it must needs be granted that the Composers of them are admitted to be infallible and their Articles of equal Authority with Canonical Scripture or else that the Statute intended to tyrannize over the Consciences of men which is not to be imagined 2. There is no more necessity for Ministers to subscribe those Articles which that Act confirmes then there is for others to subscribe to all other Acts of Parliament which do concern them If an Act once confirm and ratifie a thing under a penalty it will take place and keep all in as much obedience as if all the Subscriptions in the world were made to it It is not particular Subscriptions but publique Legislative Authority that makes it a binding Law 3. This Subscription is for the most part required of men while they be young and have not time or solidity throughly to ponder and weigh all the Articles in the balance of the Sanctuary or in the scaies of the Laws so that hereby they are cast into a snare ere they be aware and by their own inconsiderate and rash act bound as men are apt to make them believe if they afterwards upon never so just grounds begin to hesitate to maintain every of those Articles although contrary to the Word of God which is expresly contrary to the very Letter of the 20th Article which saith It is not lawful to ordain any thing that is contrary to Gods Word written And afterwards As it ought not to decree any thing against the same that is the Word so beside the same ought it not to enforce any thing
to be believed for necessity of Salvation But the Statute doth require belief of every one of these Articles when it enjoyns not only subscription but an assent unto them punishing all with Deprivation that shall affirm and maintain any Doctrine repugnant to them which every man must do if they be found contrariant to the Word or he must be false to God 4. If subscription to these or any other Articles be still continued How can any just liberty be granted to tender Consciences But that they must swallow all that is enjoyned although beside yea contrary to the Word or be persecuted and ruined Thus much of the Doubtfulness of the Articles and of the inconvenience and mischief of subscribing them Which inconvenience and mischief will be greater if we should be tyed to those Articles alone though never so sound as shall now appear in the Defectiveness of them 2. The Articles are Defective Because 1. The sixth Article speaking of the Holy Scripture saith In the name of the holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church Nevertheless albeit it enumerate the Canonical Books of the Old Testament yea and all the Apocrypha too yet it nameth not any of the New Testament but only concludeth thus All the Books of the New Testament as they are commonly received we do receive and account Canonical Now it being not unknown that there hath been doubts in the Church of some of them insomuch as the Epistle of St. James the second Epistle of St. Peter and several other books and passages in the New Testament have been not only doubted but refused the Article is defective in the not enumerating all the Books of the New Testament 2. There are no Articles for discovering and condemning sundry points of Popery in Doctrine which being first the Tenets of Arminius the first Protestant Writer that was not a professed Lutheran that ever openly maintained them are too commonly suckt in and cryed up by some as the Doctrine of the Church of England which since the Reformation never own'd them but are all maintained by Bellarmine and generally by all Franciscans and Jesuites but confuted by all approved Writers of the Protestant Reformed party that have written against Bellarmine and others of that crew as likewise by the learned Whitgift Whitaker Junius Zanchius Pareus Chamier Dr. Prideaux and many others The learned King James also took so much notice of and distaste at those Arminian-Popish Opinions touching Predestination abused universal Redemption universal Grace the manner of conversion and falling from grace that his Majesty was the chief procurer and promoter of the late Synode of Dort to which he sent Bishop Carlton Dr. Davenant Dr. Hall afterwards Bishops Dr. Goad and Dr. Balcanqual to assist in that Synode whose judgements touching all those points were given in to the said Council subscribed with their hands and afterwards printed and published Agreeable whereunto in the main hath the late Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster declared their judgements in the Confession of Faith afterwards ratified by both Houses of the late Long Parliment for which reason is that Assembly so much slighted reviled and opposed 3. Those Articles contain nothing of the Creation of Providence Fall of man of Sin of the Punishment of sin of Gods Covenants Effectual Calling Adoption Sanctification Faith Repentance Perseverance of the Law of God Christian liberty and Liberty of conscience Religious Worship of the Sabbath or Lords day of Marriage and Divorce the Communion of Saints Church-government and Discipline of the Resurrection or of the last Judgement all which the Scripture teacheth and that as necessary as appears by the comprizing most of them in the Apostles Creed and therefore necessary to be explained and held forth unto all as the Doctrine of this Church especially considering the differences and Controversies about many of them Upon this reason it was that the late Assembly of Divines have taken so much pains to compose several Articles which they call Chapters wherein both those of the 39 Articles which are held to be indeed fit to be retained are more fully cleared and explained and the rest added with pertinent proofs of Scripture to make it manifest that they are all evidently grounded upon the Word of God But all proofs are wanting in the 39 Articles no text of Scripture being produced to make cut any one of them II. Of WORSHIP THe Form of Publick Worship in England except Preaching is set down in the Liturgy or Book of Common-Prayer established by Law in 1 Eliz. 2. intituled An Act for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer and Service in the Church and the Administration of the Sacraments This Act repealeth another made in 1 Mar. 2. which had repealed a former Statute made in 5.6 Edw. 6. for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer c. and re-established that Common-Prayer-Book which the said last mentioned Act of Edw. 6. had ratified and confirmed But yet the Act of 1 Eliz. which authorizeth and enjoyneth the use of that Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. doth it with allowance of one alteration or addition of certain Lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year and the form of the Letany altered and corrected and two sentences onely added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the Communicants but none other or otherwise Now it is here to be observed that in the Act of 5.6 Edw. 6. for confirming that Book it is said that The Kings most Excellent Majesty with th' assent of the Lords and Commons in that Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same had caused the aforesaid Order of common service intituled The Book of Common-Prayer to be faithfully and godly perused explained and made fully perfect and by the foresaid Authority annexed and enjoyned it so explained and perfected to that present Statute So that the same was enrolled together with the Act it self Which being repealed by Queen Mary the Original Book was taken off from the Parliament-Roll and so lost But in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. there is no mention at all of joyning the Book then revived and re-confirmed to the said Act nor doth it appear that ever it was again enrolled whereby by having recourse to any Record or Parliament-Roll it may be proved that that Book of Common-Prayer printed in the year 1559. the first of Qâ—een Eliz. is confirmed by Law or that any man is bound to use it as the onely form now established by Parliament or to be punished for not using it at all And albeit the Act of 1 Eliz. Quere therefore whether he that either useth them not or useth other be punishaable taketh notice of some alterations above mentioned to be made in the Book then ratified yet it doth not name nor express what those alterations were So that all men are lest in a blind touching the same if put to prove that those
alterations now found in the printed Common-Prayer Books are the very same which the last mentioned Act intended to allow and confirm Howbeit that we may go so far as we can herein take notice that by-comparing the Book printed in 5 6 Edw. 6. with that which was printed in 1 Eliz. the alterations therein found which are onely hinted in the Stat. of 1 Eliz. 2. are these 1. As touching Proper Lessons The Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. appointed no Proper Lessons for Sundays except for Easter-day Whitsunday and Trinity Sunday but onely for Holy-Days The Lessons for all other Sundays were onely set down in the Kalendar in ordinary course of reading the rest of the Bible upon that and other days of the week in a continued way of reading all But the Book in 1 Eliz. in the Kalendar of Proper Lessons hath it thus Proper Lessons to be read for the first Lessons both at morning Prayer and evening Prayer on the Sundays throughout the year and for some also the second Lessons Then it after adds Lessons proper for Holy Days All which proper Lessons were appointed in 1 Eliz. to take place of all Chapters which in ordinary course of reading according to the day of each moneth had been before ordered in the Kalendar to be read without respect to either Sunday or Holy-Day but onely to the day of the moneth in course What alterations have been made either in that Book printed An. 1559. 1 Eliz. of other proper Lessons not warranted by the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. namely of such as were before appointed for Holy-days c. or that have been made since shall be afterwards shewed 2. As touching the Letany there is no material alteration in that save onely this that whereas both the Books of 2 Edw. 6. ran thus From all sedition and privy conspiracy from the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable Enormities from all false Doctrine and Heresie c. those words touching the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable Enormities are lest out in 1 Eliz. 2. and ever sithence 3. In the Sacrament of the Lords Supper the words used at the delivery of the bread and wine ran thus Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ dyed for thee and feed on him in thine heart by faith with thanksgiving but in the Book of 1 Eliz. and in all since the words are these The Body of our Lord Jesus Christ which was given for thee preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life take and eat this in remembrance that Christ dyed for thee and feed on him in thine heart by faith with thanksgiving The words at giving the Cup in 5.6 Edw. 6. were these Drink this in remembrance Christs blood was shed for thee and be thankful But in 1 Eliz. and since the words are The Blood of our Jesus Christ which was shed for thee preserve thy Body and Soul into everlasting life drink this in remembrance Christs Blood was shed for thee and be thankful Now it is to be noted that whereas onely the two former Clauses which run in the forms of Prayers were in the Book of 2. Edw. 6. and the two latter Clauses onely are in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. as here above shewed that Book of 1. Eliz. takes in and joyns them both together If these be not the alterations to which the Act of 1 Eliz. referreth it will be very difficult if not impossible to find what they were Now having thus prepared the way to speak to the necessity of Reformation in Worship it is desired that all Readers of this Piece will take notice that there was lately printed in one sheet of Paper some of the Differences and alterations in the present Common-Prayer-Book from that which was established by Law in 5.6 Edw. 6. and in 1 Eliz. or at least supposed so to be which is but a Specimen or short hint of what is here intended to be set forth more largely and fully and that in the same Order and Method which is there propounded none of those printed Papers being now left it is thought fit to reprint and insert that sheet with some few Revisals in this larger Tract which shall now follow in the next place And then after that we shall add what shall be necessary for making out more fully the necessity of reforming the whole Liturgy not by way of reducing so much as of new moulding the whole Some of the DIFFERENCES and ALTERATIONS In the present Common-Prayer-Book FROM The Book established by Law in quinto sexto Edw. 6. and 1 Eliz. The KALENDAR THere are sundry Saints days although in black Letters not found in the Books of 5.6 Edw. 6. or 1. Eliz. to the number of 50. and moe Which however it may seem a small matter yet Time may turn them into Red Letters and so claim observance of them For Dr. Cousens in his Kalendar which he calls the Kalendar of the Church in his Book of Devotion hath put one of them already viz. St. Barnabies Day into Red. But however the Epistle and Gospel for that day and for the Conversion of St. Paul be extant in the Service-Book and in the Liturgy printed for Scotland An. 1637. both these are put into Red and enjoyned to be observed yet in 2. Edw. 6. and in 5.6 Edw. 6. those days were expunged out of the Catalogue of Holy Days On Aug. 7. The Name of Jesus is put in for an old Holy-day which however used in times of Popery but under a more gentle Title a a Fest Jesu yet even in 2. as well as in 5.6 Edw. 6. and 1 Eliz. it was expelled Howbeit Dr. Cousens in his forementioned Devotions hath already set down proper Lessons for that day viz. Mat. 1. and Philip. 2. which shews how desirous some are to keep an Holy-day to a Name The Order for Proper Lessons On Whitsunday 1. Eliz. the first Lesson at Even Prayer was Deut. 18. now that is thrust out and Wisd 1. crept into the room And if we look into the Lessons for Holy-days we shall find many Chapters of the Canonical Scripture laid aside and Apochyphal Chapters ordered to be read See some instances in the Margent at the Letter c c Old Kalendar The New Jan. 25. Gen. 46. Wisd 5. Jan. 25. Gen. 47. Wisd 6. Feb. 2. Exod. 12. Wisd 9. Feb. 2. Exod 13. Wisd 12. Feb. 2â— Numb 33. Wisd 19. Jun. 29. Job 31. Ecclus. 15. Jun. 29. Job 32. Ecclus 19. Jul. 25. Eccles 10. Ecclus. 21. Jul. 25. Eccles 11. Ecclus. 23. Aug. 24. Ezek 3. Ecclus. 25. Aug. 24. Ezek 6. Ecclus. 29. Sep. 21. Mic. 7. Ecclus 35. Sep. 21. Naum. 1. Ecclus 38. Sept. 29. Zach 7. Ecclus. 39. Sept. 29. Zach 8. Ecclus. 44. Octob. 18. Judg. 14. Ecclus. â—1 Dec. 28. Isa 60. Wisd 1. There are sundry other Lessons altered which I here omit It is true the Stat. of 1. Eliz. alloweth one alteration or addition
of certain Lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year but after mention of some by name it addeth And none other or otherwise Also in the present Kalendars there are four Chapters of Joshua left out that were in the Kalendars of 5. and 6. Edw. 6. And on Octob. 13. Judith 15.16 are appointed now to be read which was not so in 5.6 Edw. 6. This deserves consideration seeing so many Canonical Chapters of use are not at all appointed to be read in publick The RUBRICKS The first Page of the present Books appoint Ministers to use such Ornaments as were of use in 2. Edw. 6. not declaring what they be The Book of 2. Edw. 6. enjoyned onely a surâ—lis in Parish Churches and Chappels See last page of that Book where are notes for explanation So also in Rubr. before Morn Prayer 5 6. Edw. 6. The Book established in 5.6 Edw. 6. names a Surplice onely The Book of Canons Can. 58. enjoyneth other Ornaments Hereby some Ministers must break that Canon or the present Rubrick which the 14th Canon requireth all to observe So that the 14th Canon and the 58th contradict each other And neither those Canons nor that Rubrick nor this Book are established by Law After the Communion there are in all Service-Books of 5.6 Edw. 6. seven Rubricks Which number remaineth but the Third is divided into two and the fourth wholly lost In which fourth the Compilers had solidly and excellently declared in what sense they intended Kneeling at the Communion The loss whereof hath occasioned much stumbling and offence yea much trouble and persecution That Rubrick was this Although no Order can be so perfectly devised but it may be of some either for their Ignorance and Infirmity or else of Malice and Obstinacy misconstrued depraved or interpreted in a wrong part yet because brotherly Charity willeth that so much as conveniently may be Offences should be taken away therefore we willing to do the same Whereas it is Ordained in the Book of Common-Prayer in the Administration of the Lords Supper that the Communicants kneeling should receive the Holy Communion which thing being well meant for a signification of the humble and grateful acknowledging of the benefits of Christ given unto the Worthy Receiver and to avoid the profanation and disorder which about the holy Communion might else ensue Lest yet the same kneeling might be thought or taken otherwise we do declare that it is not meant thereby that any Adoration is done or ought to be done either unto the Sacramental Bread Wine there bodily received nor unto any real and essential Presence there being of Christs natural flesh and blood For as concerning the Sacramental Bread and Wine they remain still in their very natural Substances and therefore may not be adored for that were Idolatry to be abhorred of all faithful Christians And as concerning the natural Body and Bloud of our Saviour Christ they are in Heaven and not here for it is contrary to the truth of Christs true natural Body to be in moe places than one at one time The Body of the Book it self There is a whole Prayer now left out at the end of the Letany which was extant in the Books of 5.6 Edw. 6. to be used in times of Dearth or Famine which was this O God merciful Father which in the time of Heliseus the Prophet didst suddenly turn in Samaria great scarcity and dearth into plenty and cheapness and extream famine into abundance of victual have pity upon us that now be punished for our sins with like adversity Encrease the fruits of the Earth by thy heavenly benedi ction and grant that we receiving thy bountifvl liberality may use the same to thy glory our comfort and relief of our needy Neighbours through Jesu Christ our Lord Amen Moreover there are sundry Prayers some before some in King James his time put into the present Leiturgy as also some things into the Catechism which are not confirmed by Parliament Which Additions although useful being not legally ratified hath imboldened some to make alterations at their pleasure For instance The Prayer for the Queen and Royal Family before the year 1627. began thus Almighty God which hast promised to be a Father of thine elect and of their seed but now thus Almighty God the fountain of all goodness Which change was a great Presumption and may seem to imply an exclusion of the Royal Stem out of the number of Gods Elect. This alteration was first made in the Books appointed to be used about that time at publick Fasts and thence was stollen into the Book of Common-Prayer Of which no reason can be discovered unless this that the word Elect distasted the favourers of Popish Arminianism Likewise the reading Psalms now thrust into the Common Prayer Books pretended to be established by Law were no part thereof in 5.6 Edw. or in 1. Eliz. For neither of the Books then printed in Folio for publick use in Churches had the Psalms in them but only a direction what Psalms should every day be read which were accordingly read out of the Bibles then used in Churches It is therefore very hard and unreasonable to continue that Translation and to enjoyn and tye men to read out those abused Psalms as now they stand in that Book And it is a great wrong to the people that Version being very defective and corrupt Take some instances wherein that differs from the Kings last authorized Translation now only allowed to be read in Churches as also from the Original it self Psal 28.9 The Lord is my strength In the new thus Old Transt The Lord is their strength ver 8. 37.38 Keep innocency and take heed to the thing that is right In the new Mark the perfect man and behold the just ver 37. 58.8 So let indignation vex them as a thing that is raw In the new He taketh them away as with a whirlewind both living and in his wrath ver 9. 68.6 Maketh men to be of one mind in an house In the new Setteth the solitary in families 105.28 They were not obedient In the new They rebelled not against his word * * Let which of those by Fuller or Dr. Prideaux be thought the better yet while they both stand they cause scandal 107.40 Though he suffer them to be evil intreated In the new He poureth contempt upon Princes 125.3 The rod of the wicked cometh not In the new the rod of the wicked resteth not upon the lot of the righteous In Psal 14. there are three whole Verses which are not in the Original nor in the revised Translation nor in the Greek 72. but only in the Popish vulgar Bibles To excuse it by saying All those Verses are found together in Rom. 3. is a fig-leaf For the Apostle never meant to produce all those words as taken out of one place but only to collect out of several Texts of the Old Testament sundry testimonies to prove all men
think that any detriment shall come to children by deferring of their Confirmation he shall know for truth that it is certain by Gods Word that children being baptized have all things necessary for their salvation and be undoubtedly saved Where is that Word of God This cannot be understood of Children after Baptism dying in Infancy for it speaks of such as are capable of Confirmation and of Confirmation deferred This supposeth their living a good while after Baptism even till they come to some understanding and are able to give some good account of the Catechism else can they not be admitted to Confirmation as appears by the first Rubrick before Confirmation before which time they may be guilty of many actual sins every of which without true repentance makes lyable to Condemnation So that this Rubrick gives to Children once baptised more assurance of their undoubted salvation than ever God hath given them For if they be baptised let them live or die be godly or wicked they must know for truth that it is certain but not by Gods Word they not onely have all things on Gods part necessary to salvation but are undoubtedly saved Is this a truth 7. The Rubrick after Matrimony saith The new-married persons the same day of their marriage MVST receive the holy Communion Who do so what necessity of so doing And if they do not so who shall be punished for their omission The Minister if any body because he is bound to do all things according to the Book if established and not otherwise And if the marryed Persons will not receive what can the Minister do As for the marryed persons they by the Rubrick before mentioned are not bound to receive above thrice in one year which if they do they need not receive on their marriage-day 8. In the last Rubrick after Communion of the sick it is said In the time of the Plague Sweat or such other like contagious times of Sicknesses or Diseases when none of the Parish or Neighbours can be gotten to communicate with the sick in their Houses for fear of the Infection upon special request of the diseased the Minister may onely communicate with him By this the Minister is bound not onely to visit every person sick of the Plague c. standing at some distance but to administer the Lords Supper also to him if he desire it and that alone if none else will joyn as it is not to be expected they should This is no way agreeable to Christianity or common Humanity Not to Christianity for first the very nature of the Sacrament requires a publick Administration because there must be a Communion of more then two persons in the receiving of it This appears plainly by several other Rubricks of the same Book For 1. in the first Rubrick after the publick Communion it is ordered that if there be not above twenty persons in the Parish of discretion to receive the Communion yet there shall be no Communion except four or three at the least communicate with the Priest If it be said this is the Order for Publick Communions but it concerns not Private Communions of the sick it is answered 1. that it appears not by the Word that there is any warrant much less necessity for such private Communions for the first Rubrick after Communion of the sick directeth the Minister thus If a man either by extremity of sickness or for want of warning in due time to the Curate or for lack of company to receive with him or by any other just impediment do not receive the Sacrament of Christs Body and Blood then the Curate shall instruct him that if he do truly repent of his sins and stedfastly believe that Jesus Christ hath suffered death upon the Cross for him and shed his Blood for his Redemption earnestly remembring the benefits he hath thereby and giving him hearty thanks therefore without all which what good will be get by receiving the Sacrament he doth eat and drink the Body and Blood of our Saviour Christ profitably to his souls health although he do not receive the Sacrament with his mouth 2. In the Rubrick before the Communion of the sick this Order is given that the Curate having knowledge over night or early in the morning of the desire of the sick person to receive the Communion and being signified also how many be appointed to communicate with him and having a convenient place in the sick mans house where the Curate may reverently minister and a good number to receive the Communion with the sick person with all things necessary for the same he shall there minister the holy Communion Therefore by these Rubricks no Communion is to be ministred to the sick where there be but two to receive it Secondly This is also no way agreeable to Humanity Must a Minister who hath the charge of many souls adventure his health and life to gratifie an infectious person in that which as by what hath been before alledged is no way of necessity to the fick mans salvation Must the Minister do this or be punished with Deprivation or otherwise What cruelty is this Nay the very Canons of 1603. Can. 67. provided more mercifully then so which runs thus When any person is dangerously sick in any Parish the Minister or Curate having knowledge thereof shall resort to him or her if the Disease be not known or probably suspected to be infectious to instruct and comfort them c. Here is a Dispensation in case of the Plague or other infectious disease for so much as visiting the sick and no word at all of giving the Holy Communion So much shall at present suffice to be spoken of the Rubricks III. Of the Body of the Book 1. THe first words of it which the Minister is to read are these At what time soever a sinner doth repent him of his sin from the bottom of his heart I will put all his wickedness out of my remembrance saith the Lord. This is in the Rubrick before it called A sentence of Scripture and the place alledged is Ezek. 21.22 But that Text runs otherwise in the Original and in the new Translation of the Bible viz. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed and keep all my statutes and do that which is lawful right he shall surely live he shall not die All his transgressions that he hath committed they shall not be mentioned unto him in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live Here is little harmony between the service-Service-Book and Gods Book especially considering the very first words in the Liturgy At what time soever Which hath no warrant from that Text and is dissonant from another To day if ye will hear his voice c. and from that Application of it Take heed brethren lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God but exhort one another dayly while it is called To
that which is evidently grounded upon the same yet are there sundry things more in the Body of that Book which are neither certain nor true nor evidently grounded on the Word For to omit the imperfect and corrupt Translations mentioned before in the Sheet of Paper inserted into this present Book and many more not therein cited which shew there is too much which is not the very pure Word of God it is too too palpable that in the Prayers and proper Prefaces for Christmas day and Whitsunday as they are called there are some things not only uncertain but false yea impossible to be true and therefore not evidently grounded upon the Word of God In the Collect or Prayer for Christmas day and seven days after we must in prayer say unto God that he hath given Christ this day viz. Decemb. 25. to be born of a pure Virgin On what Scripture is this viz. that he was born that very day evidently grounded and if it did so appear how can we say the same without manifest and gross lying unto God seven other days more one after another seeing he was born but once and on one day onely The like must be said of the proper Preface for that Day of which before in the Rubricks Such also is the Collect for Whitsunday which begins thus God which as upon this day c. And more clearly in the Proper Preface it is said the Holy Ghost came down this day from heaven c. And this must be said not only on that day but on six days after Can this be true when he came down in that manner but once And when that day was is very uncertain especially with us with whom Whitsunday is a Moveable Feast falling out as Lent and Easter do some years in one month some in another but never on the same day of the same month two years together What horrible abusing of God and that in very Prayers is this 8. After the Proper Prefaces at the Communion followeth this Therefore with Angels and Archangels and with all the Company of heaven we laud and magnifie thy glorious Name c. Here is another uncertainty to say nothing of the untruth of it for the Scripture never speaks of more Archangels then one which is mentioned 1 Thes 4.16 This one was Michael Jude 12. to wit Christ the Prince of his people Dan. 10.21 which most if not all expound of Christ Even Him who is mentioned in Revel 12.7 where it is said There was war in heaven Michael and his Angels fought against the Dragon and the Dragon fought and his Angels and prevailed not c. It is true that the supposititious Dionysius Areopagita takes upon him in his Celestial Hierarchy to divide the Angels into three several Hierarchies but Quo warranto further then his own bare word he doth not at all so much as propound only he pretendeth to take it from Ephes 6.12 Col. 1.16 of which interpretations see Zanch. in Ephes that exposition being a meer dream 9. In one of the Prayers after the Communion it is prayed that those things which for our unworthiness we dare not and for our blindness we cannot ask vouchsafe to give us c. This is a Contradiction for while we say we dare not ask we do ask and pray him to give us Can we pray thus in faith Yes you will say when we pray for this for the worthiness of Christ as after followeth But then take this Reply If our own unworthiness causeth us not to dare to ask why do we pray elsewhere for ought else at all It is not mans worthiness but Gods promise 2 Sam. 7.18 19. and ver 25 26 27. and Psal 119.49 but especially Christs warrant and command Joh. 16.23 24. that gives us boldness to dare to ask whatsoever we need 10. In the second Prayer at publique Baptism we pray that Infants coming to Baptism may receive remission of their sins by spiritual regeneration How can this be it is true Remission of sins and regeneration flow from one and the same fountain and are both conveyed and sealed in Baptism seminally at least to those within the Covenant by the same Spirit But remission of sins is not received by or from spiritual Regeneration but by and from the bloud of Christ For without shedding of bloud there is no remission Heb. 9.22 that is to say the bloud of Jesus Christ cleanseth us in respect of guilt from all sin 1 Joh. 1.7 It is not then by the grace of regeneration wrought in us but by the bloud of Christ shed for us that we receive remission of sins Away then with that expression in Baptism unless we be more for mans falshood then for Gods Truth 11. All that is in the Catechism touching the Sacraments was contrary to the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. added in King James his Reign but never confirmed by Parliament therefore not safely to be used although somewhat in that kind be useful and necessary yet not that model The Answer to the first Question viz. to that How many Sacraments hath Christ ordained in his Church is this Two only as generally necessary to salvation which Answer is very dubious and liable to exception For it may without racking be interpreted as a tacite admission of more as Marriage Holy Orders c. though not generally necessary for all Again where it is demanded why are Infants baptized when by reason of their tender age they cannot perform them that is they cannot repent nor believe which the Answer to the next preceding Questions admits to be required of persons that are to be baptized the Answer is this Yes they do perform them by their Sureties c. which is a meer tale For however the Sureties promise and engage for these in behalf of the infant and upon that account a charge after Baptism is given to the Sureties to take care that the Infant so soon as he is able to learn be taught what he by them vowed in Baptism and what further is required of him yet it was never read or heard of in Scripture that one man either repented or believed in the name and room of another whereby that other did receive all or any of the spiritual benefits exhibited and sealed in either of the Sacraments to such as are admitted to them And to say the Infants perform repentance and believing by their Sureties because the Sureties vow them both in the Infants names is a strange and untrue expression for it is not vowing by one that another shall repent and believe when he is not at present able to do either that can truely be said to be a performing of them by him that makes that vow supposing him to be a true believer which many Sureties be not 12. In the Commination appointed and enjoyned by the Rubrick before it to be used divers times in the year however a learned Doctor would shift off the objection against it by saying Non tam
elected there can be legally and regularly no succession of Bishops There is no necessity of such a Consequence nor of making more Archbishops or Deans and Chapters or continuing of any such if it shall please the King and Parliament by any Act or Statute to appoint any other way and course of Election and Consecration of Bishops Which is as easie to be done as any thing else Enacted in Parliament there being no Divine Right so much as pretended unto for such Election or Consecration as of late was used in England 2. Whereas it is of late much insisted upon that Episcopacy is not only an Office of Precedency and Presidency above other Presbyters and Ministers given to them by the free Election of the rest to regulate order and act things agreed upon by the Presbytery joyned with them as the Commander in chief in an Army as the Capital Justice in a Court or as the Speaker in either House of Parliament but that it is a distinct and specifical Order by Divine Right Superiour to all other Presbyters which Order onely is Authorized to exercise such things as none else may medle with We say that this in England was never at all arrogated by any Bishops till of very late times 2. The things they make peculiar to Bishops ratione Ordinis are sole Ordination and sole Jurisdiction as if none had power in either of these but themselves neither of which even they who pretend to derive their Episcopacy from the Apostles ever undertook to make good by any solid Antiquity Yea 3. those very Antiquities which they allege are either spurious or else speak nothing either of sole Ordination or of sole Jurisdiction but rather the contrary as might easily be made out But we tye our selves to speak to these particulars only as said to be made out by Law 3. This was never yielded by any Law of England nor by the Book of Ordination For however that Book established in 5.6 Edw. 6. and after repeal by Queen Mary confirmed in 8. Eliz. cap. 1. Yet when it speaks of the making of Bishops it calls that a Consecration and not an Ordination as it doth when it speaks of making Deacons and Presbyters which it calleth Priests calling one The form and manner of Ordering Deacons the other The form of Ordering Priests But when it speaks of the other it changeth this Word Ordering and calls it The form of Consecrating an Archbishop or Bishop Which shews plainly that the Book of Ordination never meant to make Bishops or as Dr. Gauden calls it Legal Episcopacy to be not only in Degree and Office of Prolocutor but in a distinct Order of Christ's and his Apostles institution Superiour to a Presbyter It is indeed an easie matter for a bold man to contradict this and to say that the antient Writers call the Solemn form of consecrating a Bishop by no other name then that of Ordinatio Episcopi but it seems it is not so easie to prove what he saith For he produceth no such proof at all so that this confident saying touching such Ordination of Bishops affirmed by his Adversary to be a Novel Popish Position that this is Not Novel he is sure is but a meer shift and a put off no confutation at all And where he is pleased afterwards to urge the Preface to the Book of Ordination Dr Heylin Certam Epistol p. 143. which mentioneth three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons and one passage in one of the Prayers at the Consecration of an Archbishop or Bishop to prove that Episcopacy is a distinct Order from and Superiour to that of Presbyters he must be intreated to take notice 1. That the Preface alleged saith not as he speaks these THREE Orders but onely these Orders of Ministers c. But even there by way of explanation the Preface calls them Offices which Offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation c. now we deny them not to be distinct Offices only we cannot admit in his sense the Office of a Bishop to be a distinct Order above Presbytery For even in that very Preface it speaks of Consecrating not of Ordaining a Bishop as the Book all along doth of Ordering that is Ordaining of Deacons and Priests but never of other then of Consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops that is of setting them over the rest in degree to be the mouth and hand of the rest in executing what by the rest is agreed upon And 2. touching that Prayer he mentions wherein Episcopacy is called in that Part of the Book it self which concerneth Bishops an Order This is but a wyre-drawing of the Words and a meer wresting of them The Words of the Prayer are these Almighty God giver of all good things which by thy holy Spirit hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold this thy Servant now called to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop c. Now how do these words prove a Bishop to be a distinct Order when speaking of the person then to be made Bishop it is not said he is called to the Order but to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop And seeing he onely talks of antient Writers but produceth none we shall make bold to mind him what is the sense of the Canon-Law which he pleads to be still in force in England if Lindwood that great English Canonist be of any value with him who saith expresly Episcopatus non est Ordo Yea the very Book of Ordination in ordering of Priests appointing 1 Tim. 3. to be then read If any desire the Office of a Bishop he desireth an honest work A Bishop must be blameless c. doth more then tacitly admit a Bishop and a Presbyter not to differ in Order To which we shall add the judgement of an antient Archbishop of Canterbury even Anselmus himself an high man for the Pope and a great Contestor with the King for Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction even beyond the bounds of the Laws of this Land who in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians where Paul cap. 1. saluteth but two Orders Bishops and Deacons on the word Episcopis saith thus Episcopis id est Presbyteris Episcopos namque pro Presbyteris more suo posuit Non enim plures Episcopi in una civitate erant neque Presbyteros intermitteret ut ad Diaconos descenderet Sed dignitatem excellentiam Presbyterorum declarat dum eosdem qui Presbyteri sunt Episcopos esse manifestat Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur in Schismatis remedio facium est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Evangelium rumperet Nam est Alexandriae a Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos qui sederunt in Centuria 3. Presbyterum unum de se elecium in Excelsiori loco Gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si Exercitus Imperatorem faciat aut Diaconi elegant
Order to have the sole power of Ordination which hath been proved not to be so It is requisite that herein also some Declaration be made to the contrary that we may not give offence to the Protestant Churches with whom we hold Communion nor admit of such an untruth among our selves to which all must subscribe 4. As for Consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops in which the same Scripture 1 Tim. 3. is read again that was used in Ordaining of Priests which sheweth that the Compilers of that Book never dreamt of a distinction of Orders between Bishops and Presbyters we onely say thus much That there being no warrant in Scripture for Archbishops but onely from the practice of after-times whereby they were by men onely called to that height we see no necessity of their Consecration no more doth our Church for that it makes the same Consecration which is for Bishops to serve for Archbishops Upon this account we see no reason why a solemn Oath of Canonical Obedience to the Archbishop should then be administred to every person that is to be Bishop The Exception against that Expression of the Archbishop in the act of Consecration of a Bishop Take the Holy Ghost being spoken to before here we onely make the same profession against it which there we did and so leave it and proceed to the next Head of Ecclesiastical Government which is Jurisdiction II. Of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction IT hath been of late the claim of our Bishops to have in them the sole power of Jurisdiction in Causes Ecclesiastical which is now pleaded for so boldly and openly by their Advocates and such as asspire to the same Office and Dignity that it is now made though very groundlesly an Essential part of Episcopacy by Divine Right witness among other the Author of an Answer to a Letter sent to Doctor Turner to Oxford who alledgeth several Scriptures viz. 1 Tim. 5.19 Tit. 1.5 to prove that Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is in Bishops onely To the same effect the Author of another Book intituled Church-Lands not to be sold So others But seeing Bishops can exercise no Jurisdiction in England but what is allowed by the Laws of the Land as we shall after make it manifest to every eye we shall not much trouble our selves at this time with their claim by Divine Right Howbeit lest they should think there is nothing to be said against it we desire it may be considered which is known to all that have seriously consulted Antiquity that in the Primitive Ages of the Church there was no Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction exercised but by the Bishops and their Consistory of Presbyters together Even in Rome it self there was even in Cyprians time a number of the Clergy who acted with the Bishop as well as elsewhere Thence grew by Corruption their Conclave of Cardinals And from the same Original here in England first Monks afterwards Deans and Chapters were joyned with the Bishops to assist both in Ordination and Jurisdiction although of late times they joyned with them in neither Such was the Pride of the one and the Idleness of the other Which last his late Majesty was content to part withal They being of no use but onely to confirm Grants of the Bishop as he confirmed theirs keeping sundry Benefices of Cure in their hands and seldome or never residing on them under pretence of residence near the Bishop whereas the Canons of 1603. require them to reside on their Benefices with Cure all but the space of one moneth in the year * Can. 44. unless he be a Dean Master Warden or chief Governour of a Cathedral or Church who by Can. 42. is to reside there ninety days Conjunctim or Divisim This is spoken not to justifie the Continuation of Deans and Chapters or to move for reducing them to the ancient course of corrupt times in making them alone to be the Adjutors of Bishops for Jurisdiction is as proper to all the Presbytery as to those Cathedral Presbyters But we urge it meerly and onely to demonstrate the falshood of that upstart Assertion that Bishops have sole power of Jurisdiction And that we may contract our selves within necessary brevity considering to whom we make our Address we shall give but one instance more and that shall be out of the Book of Ordination in the Ordering of Priests Where among other Questions propounded by the Bishop to him that is to be ordained Priest this is one Will you reverently obey your Ordinary and other chief Ministers unto whom the Government and Charge is committed over you following with a glad mind and will their godly Admonition and submitting your self to their godly Judgements To this each of them that are to be ordained answereth I will so do the Lord being my helper By this it is evident that more beside Bishops have power of Jurisdiction If it be said this may be meant of ARchdeacons Deans c. that have it under the Bishop what is this to the intituling of all Ministers thereunto It is answered out of the Rubrick before the Communion whereby every Curate is authorized to keep off from that Sacrament every open and notorious Liver by whom the Congregation is offended until he have openly declared himself to have truely repented and amended his former wicked life that the Congregation may thereby be satisfied Yea where he finds hatred and variance he is to suspend from the Sacrament the party refusing to be reconciled to the other and be content to forgive from the bottom of his heart all that the other hath transgressed against him and to make amends for that he himself hath offended What is this but as much and as high Jurisdiction as any Bishop can use in that particular If this suffice not take one passage more In the same Book of Ordination in the Ordering of Priests The Bishop asketh every person whom he ordaineth a Priest this Question Will you give your faithful diligence always so to minister the Doctrine and Sacraments and the DISCIPLINE of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Realm hath received the same c. To which each Priest is to answer I will so do by the help of the Lord. What can be a more clear evidence of the intention of our Church in the first Reformation then to admit all Presbyters to have a share in Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and in the Administration of it How long Bishops and others under them have had Ecclesiastical Consistories to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to us is not certain Yet it appeareth by Sir Edw. Cook â— Instit ca. 53. p. 2259. that William the Conqueror was the first that by his Charter to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln did prohibit Sheriffs in their Tourne Courts wherein before-time all Ecclesiastical matters were heard and determined to intermedle any more with Ecclesiastical Causes but leave them to the Bishops Thence some conclude that Bishops have held Courts ever since William 1. Others finding no