matters of Faith and that the Scripture could not be a sufficient Rule For Faith and Holy Life unless it enclude a determination of all prudential circumstances that none should be ordered in the Church which are not there appointed To decry all such things as Vnlawful because in our Church there hath been much strife and contention about them to the breach of the Churches Peace may appear to be a very weak argument from observing that both the Jewish and the Apostolical and Primitive Christian Churches and several Lutheran Churches of late have enjoyed a very peaceable state together with such Ecclesiastical Constitutions but the more manifest cause of strife and contention is from misunderstanding in some and from want of humility and obedience in others and these persons have found matter sufficient for them to make a breach of the Churches Peace in other points besides Ceremonies 2. As to that Objection that the allowing any Authority for the appointing such things in the Church will leave its power in a boundless and unlimited state if this was of any force it would equally oppose all other commanding Authority in every superior relation in the World And as secular Rules have Authority to make Laws for the Peace and Order of Kingdoms but not to exercise oppression nor to change the nature of Good and Evil nor to make any divine Precepts so Rulers in the Church are allowed to direct and appoint what tendeth to good order and decency but may not deliver any thing as Gods command which is not nor alter any of his Precepts and Institutions nor to enjoin things needlesly burdensom How the allowing some Ceremonies in the Christian Church is a quite different thing from the reducing the Ceremonial law of the Jews hath been shewed in the first Section of this Chapter Wherefore I now come to examine the Scripture evidence which some plead against Ecclesiastical Rites and Constitutions 3. Obj. 1. The sin of Nadab and Abihu for which fire came out from the Lord and devoured them was their offering strange fire before the Lord which he commanded them not Lev. 10.1 2. And this is supposed by them who urge this Objection to be only an outward rite or circumstance of worship in making use of that fire in the service of God which was not enjoined and about which he had made no determination Ans 1. Cypr. Ep. 73. de Vnit Eccl. It was much more truly acknowledged of old that the sin of Nadab and Abihu was that what they did was Dei traditione contempta Iren. adv Haer. l. 5. c. 44. in despite of what God had declared to the contrary and therefore their sin hath been frequently parallel'd with the sin of Corah Dathan and Abiram And whereas the Scripture declareth their sin to be a doing that which God commandeth them not that Phrase in the holy Scriptures which I commanded them not doth not denote gods having enjoined nothing about that particular action but ordinarily by a Meiosis intimateth Gods having severely prohibited it Thus God declared their building high places of Tophet and of Baal to burn their Sons and their Daughters to be things he commanded them not Jer. 7.31 Jer. 19.5 and the same expression is used concerning committing Adultery with their Neighbours Wives and speaking lying words in the name of the Lord Jer. 29.23 and concerning the serving other Gods and worshipping the Sun Moon and the Host of Heaven Dent. 17.3 all which things were vehemently forbidden in the Law of God Wherefore some have thought that the sin of Nadab and Abihu consisted in Offring strange Incense Fag in loc which God had expresly forbidden Ex. 30.9 Which opinion is declared by Fagius and doubtless this was the judgment of Josephus though the ordinary Copies of Josephus express it to be their Offring other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sacrifices than Moses had commanded Joseph Ant. l. 3. c. 10. but that it should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Incense is manifest by comparing Josephus with the Hebrew and the Septuagint Others have observed that before that time God had appointed Aaron only and not his Sons to offer any incense unto him and therefore it might be an act of great presumption in them and when Corah presumed to invade the Priests Office to offer incense botht he Samaritan Version and the Septuagint reading the Hebrew with a little variation of the points in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Num. 16.37 called that which he offered strange fire And some others have thought them so boldly irreverent as against the command of God to thrust themselves into the holy of holies This is collected by some of the Jewish Doctors from Lev. 16.1 2 3. and is admitted by Junius Jun. in Lev. 10.1 4. Ans 2. But admitting that their sin consisted in making use of that fire which God did not allow we must further assert with Munster that God having caused fire miraculously to consume the Sacrifice uon the Altar Lev. 9.24 and commanded that the fire upon the Altar should be continually burning to wit for the use of Gods service and should never go out Lev. 6.12 13. their offering other fire was an opposing of Gods command For if any should imagine that when God had commanded incense to be offered which must be offered with fire he did leave it undetermined what fire they should make use of and that in this case the choice of any sort of fire because it was not commanded was a grievous sin this would represent the holy and righteous will of God as contradictory to it self and as inevitably forcing the Priests to be guilty of sin because upon this unreasonable supposition their offring incense with fire which was their duty and commanded of God must necessarily be accounted a sin and displeasing to God And if such positions were admitted they will bring after them a numerous train of manifest absurdities and contradictions as that the Priest ought as God had commanded to burn wood upon his Altar but might in no wise make use of any sort or kind of wood to that purpose because God had not particularly enjoined it and the like may be said of the kind of Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper and of divers other things under the time of Christianity 5. Obj. 2. God commanded Deut. 12.32 Whatsoever I command you observe and do thou shalt not add thereto nor diminish from it Ans 1. That these words do properly condemn on the one hand superstition of the making any thing a part of Religion and the Law of God which indeed is not and on the other hand want of Religious reverence in neglecting obedience to what God had enjoined and commanded But that divers things referring to the worship of God were allowably under the Jâ—â—â—sh despensation ordered as matters 〈…〉 expediency by humane prudeâ—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—ve in a former Section given suâ—â—â—◠〈◊〉 â—â—â—â—mony and if such appointment 〈…〉 been
Cens c. 11. And Bucer in his Censura declareth it to be an ancient and simplex ritus apure or innocent Rite and that he judgeth the use thereof to be neither indecent nor unprofitable 17. I know there are some who think their own apprehensions so much above all others that they are no otherwise moved by testimonies which are produced against them than to express their censures Altar Damasc c. 10. p. 830. and sometimes their contempt o◠the most worthy Writers and on this manner doth Didoclavius deal with the testimony of Bucer which I now produced saith he it is frigida diluta censura nec satis expendisse videtur it was his dull and weak judgment about this matter and he did not seem to have considered what he wrote But let not such think that their authority is of any value to be put in the balance against the Primitive Church and so many reformed Churches and Writers and therefore as there being no just cause from the consideration of this rite it self and the use thereof to condemn it the censure of such persons is unjust and uncharitable and the dislike of others who are more modest in their opposition is also groundless SECT III. Of laying on hands in Confirmation THis Imposition of hands is the more opposed Didocl Altar Damasc c. 5. p. 359. Except of Presbyt p. 29. because of those Declarative words in the Prayer used at Confirmation Vpon whom after the example of the holy Apostles we have now laid our hands to certifie them by this sign of thy favour and gracious goodness to them The Non Conformists here will neither allow that the Apostles practice should be accounted any example for laying on hands in Confirmation nor that this sign may be used to certifie Gods grace and favour which seemeth say they to speak it a Sacrament 2. Wherefore we are first to consider what Warrant this imposition of hands in Confirmation may claim from the practice of the Apostles We read Act. 8.15 17 18. that after Philip had baptized at Samaria by the Apostles prayer accompanied with imposition of hands they received the Holy Ghost and the same is related concerning the Disciples at Ephesus Act. 19.6 Here we have an Apostolical practice evident that they imposed hands and prayed and thereupon the Holy Ghost was received It is indeed acknowledged that in those instances there was a visible and miraculous testimony of the presence of the Holy Spirit by speaking with Tongues c. but the chief blessing of Gods Spirit consisteth in the inward Graces of the Spirit which were not peculiar to that time and that the obtaining the strengthning grace of the Spirit was in an especial manner designed by the Apostles imposition of hands is declared by Irenaeus Iren. adv Haeres l. 4. c. 75. Aug. Tract 6. in Ep. 1. Johan and it was justly esteemed by S. Austin that the Holy Ghost is here received where no miraculous gifts are bestowed but the gracious dispositions of love peace and unity are entertained And prayer especially the most solemn Prayer of the Bishop or chief Officer of the Church joyned with imposition of hands which was a testimony of peculiar benediction used by dying Jacob and others under the Old Testament and by Christ and his Apostles under the New is a means to obtain this blessing to such who are disposed and qualified for the receiving thereof but that those who indulge and give way to their corruptions and passions as the Corinthians did by their divisions could not receive the increase of the grace and strength of the Holy Spirit by the Apostolical imposition of hands is also asserted in the place above-mentioned by Irenaeus And if any persons will contend that the imposition of hands now received in the Church cannot be a practice according to the example of the Apostles because in those times the Holy Ghost was oft miraculously received which cannot now be expected he may as well assert that the imposition of hands for Ordination is not continued in the Church from the example of the Apostles because then the Holy Ghost was sometimes extraordinarily given thereby or that our praying and preaching is not a doing that for which we have the Apostles for an example because we cannot by them expect such wonderful gifts as sometimes were conferred under the Apostles doctrine and by their prayer 3. And by the searching into Antiquity we may discern the general use of this Imposition of hands in the Church as from the Apostles When the Apostle Heb. 6.2 speaketh of the Foundation of the Doctrine of Baptisms and of laying on of hands the ordinary exposition of the Greek and Latine Fathers refer those words unto Confirmation and in the same sense are they understood by Calvin Beza Illyricus and many other Protestants Eusebius ralateth a story Eccl. Hist l. 3. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein Confirmation was used under the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 while S. John was yet alive and Cornelius noted it as a defect in Novatus the Schismatick that he never obtained Confirmation from the Bishop for receiving the Holy Ghost which he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eus Hist l. 6. c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as his words are related in Eusebius Tertullian in his short account of the Rites of the Church Tertul. de Resur Cam. c. 8. De Baptism c. 8. after he had mentioned Baptism expresseth Confirmation in these words Caro manus impositione adumbratur ut anima Spiritu illuminetur and in his Book De Baptisma saith that after Baptism is used imposition of hands calling for and inviting the holy Spirit by that benediction Cypr. Ep. 73. S. Cyprians testimony is yet more full who saith that for those whom Philip baptized that which lacked was performed by Peter and John by whose prayer and imposition of hands the Holy Ghost was invocated and poured forth upon them which also saith he is now practised among us that those who are baptized in the Church are presented to the chief Officers of the Church that by our prayer and imposition of hands they may obtain the Holy Ghost and may by Confirmation attain to the highest Order of Christians or signaculo dominico consummentur S. Ambrose speaketh of Confirmation Amb. de Sacr. l. 3. c. 2. Hieron adv Lucif Aug. Cont. l. 3. c. 16. l. 5. c. 23. in Psal 130. that the holy Spirit is thereby obtained by prayer S. Hierom approveth it for Apostolical and S. Austin in divers places defendeth the practice hereof with relation to the Apostolical imposition of hands and for the receiving the Holy Ghost even when the miraculous gifts of the Spirit were no more communicated and this imposition of hands was enjoyned by the ancient Council of Elvira Conc. Elib c. 38. unto them who being baptized in case of necessity did afterwards recover their health And therefore this practice of the
Libertas Ecclesiastica OR A DISCOURSE Vindicating the lawfulness of those things which are chiefly excepted against in the Church of England especially in its LITVRGY and WORSHIP And manifesting their agreeableness with the Doctrine and practice both of Ancient and Modern Churches By WILLIAM FALKNER Preacher at St. Nicholas in Lyn Regis LONDON Printed by J. M. for Walter Kettilby at the Bishops-Head in St. Pauls Church-Yard 1674. IMPRIMATUR Jan. 23. 167â— â— Sam. Parker TO The most Reverend Father in God Gilbert by Divine Providence Lord Archbishop of Canterbury Primate of all England and Metropolitan and one of His Majesties most Honourable Privy Council c. May it please your Grace YOur Grace being a Person of such singular Eminency in the Church of England I humbly crave leave to present to your hands this following Discourse which contains a Vindication of the Publick Worship of our Church from those Exceptions which by Dissenters have been made against it And the main Design of this Treatise being to promote Christian Vnity by representing the evil consequences of such unnecessary Discords and Schisms and the great unreasonableness of those pretences which have been alledged for their Justification it will nâ—t I hope be judged incongruous that it should address it self to your Grace whose high Office in the Church tendeth to advance the Vnity thereof and entitleth you to the publick Patronage of Peace and Truth I cannot doubt your Graces approbation of this design which is at all times useful but more especially in this present Juncture of Affairs if God please to grant success which is my earnest prayer For as all good men who prefer Truth and the sincere practice of Piety before their own prejudices wills and passions cannot but approve of such honest endeavours to rectifie mistakes and compose the minds of men to peace so all who are pious and wise cannot but discern a greater necessity and a more particular obligation at this time to silence all these little janglings and quarrels if they have any respect to the main interest and concerns of the Reformed Profession And I hope My Lord that the late Alarum we had from our common Enemies may open mens eyes to see the mischief of rending the Church into so many Factions and may dispose them to receive just and reasonable satisfaction And though what hath been excellently performed by former Writers upon this Subject be sufficiently satisfactory yet my labour herein may not be wholly useless considering the humour of this Age which is more apt to read new Books than to seek for old ones But though the cause I have undertaken deserves your Graces Patronage yet my own personal defects might justly have discouraged me from presenting this discourse to one of so high Dignity and so great a Judgment had not the cause it self been so good that it needed no Art and Colours to set it off but is sufficiently justified when it is rightly represented and understood and your Graces Candour and Clemency so well known as to encourage me to hope for a favourable Acceptance which is the only thing I beg in this humble Address unto your Grace favourably to accept of this small Present from him who unfeignedly prayeth for your Graces prosperity and is intirely devoted to the service and interest of Truth and Peace and Humbly honoureth your Grace with all due Observance W. Falkner THE PREFACE TO THE READER Christian Reader THE design of this discourse being to remove or at least to allay those fierce contentions about the external forms of worship to which we owe all those unhappy Schisms which good men so heartily bewail it was necessary in order to this end to rectifie those mistakes and prejudices which abuse well-minded men who have not throughly consider'd things and to correct those corrupt passions that quarrelsom and contentious humour which perverts others To these two causes we owe most of our present disorders it is too evident what hand the latter of these has had in them while divers Persons wanting a due sense of the evil and danger of these discords and a due regard to the Peace and Unity of the Church have been too zealous and forward to maintain and promote such dissensions thereby to serve the Interest of their own parties and to oppose the settlement of the Church upon sure and lasting principles now I had no other way of dealing with these men but to convince them of the great evil of such contentions and how much it is the duty of every Christian to study Peace and Unity For there is nothing more evident than that mens minds are strangely byassed by their affections and Interests and clouded by passion and therefore while they are so peremptorily resolved upon their way while they are so fond of their own Inventions while they are devoted to the service of a Party and account those men their Enemies who should rule and govern them and inform them better there is no expectation that reason and argument should prevail with them And if those arguments which I have made use of for this purpose should be effectual to calm the passions of men and to work in them a Christian and peaceable temper of mind I can easily foretel the success of my following discourse the design of which is to rectifie those mistakes and misapprehensions which some men labour under which either concern the particular Rites and offices of our Church or the General rule of duty or Ecclesiastical liberty by which the Church must be directed and guided in matters of order The first hath occasion'd various exceptions against some Rites and Ceremonies and particular passages in our forms of Prayer and I have spent great part of this Treatise in answering such objections by which I hope it will appear what little reason there is to disturb the Peace of the Church and to separate from our Communion upon such pretences Concerning the General Rule which ought ever to be observed in the Church about matters of order there are some who will allow nothing except some few circumstances to be determined by the Authority of the Church unless it be directly enjoined by a particular divine Institution and for a more plausible colour they reject all such rules of order or regular administration under the terms of unscriptural conditions of Communion But in answer to this I have made it appear to be an unjust and unreasonable exception against the establisht order of any Church that there are some things determined and appointed by the Authority of Superiours which have always been accounted of an Indifferent nature and are indeed the proper matters of Ecclesiastical Liberty And I hope I have abundantly proved to the satisfaction of all sober inquirers that prudent and well ordered Ecclesiastical Constitutions and appointments for the promoting order and decency and the advancement of Religion and Piety are very allowable and unblameable nay that it is impossible that
and affectionately recommended and hath naturally such other dangerous attendants as have been above observed to be the result of the breach or want of the Churches Peace This sin is to the Church what Sedition is to the State the most manifest and direct means to hinder its Government and to destroy that Society which is best preserved in true Vnity and of which as Christ himself hath so every Christian ought to have a tender regard It is to the body of Christ what disjointing is to the body of man it hindreth the actions of the body and the usefulness of the members to each other it weakneth the whole and causeth pain and anxious grief to those other members which are not senseless and is ordinarily accompanied with swelling tumours in the part ill-affected and out of order 12. And as it self is contrary to Gods Commandment so its influence promoteth all manner of sin and is called by Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an original of evils Ign. Ep. ad Smyrn For besides the evils above mentioned which accompany this sin as it includeth a breach of the Churches Peace it is apt to prevail with the Separatist to so much impiety as to place much of his Religion in that which is his sin viz. his unwarrantable separation and it is oft if not ordinarily attended with so great uncharitableness as to be pleased with respect to the interest of their party in hearing if not speaking evil concerning others who withstand them It promoteth prosaneness and disadvantageth Religion in others by rendring censures and admonitions of the Church when they are administred the less efficacious upon the offenders who are the more ready to conclude that it is no great shame or danger to be excluded from that Society of Christians from which many who profess Religion do exclude themselves And upon this and other easily discernable accounts it is a probable occasion of remisness in the exercising discipline which would be more enforced and enlivened by a more general Union whereby also divers obstacles and impediments would be removed Athan. Synops in 1. Ep. ad Cor. Thus Athanasius was of opinion that the Corinthian divisions were the cause why the incestious person was not rejected SECT IV. Some false Conceptions of Schism refuted 1. But because there are some notions or rather misrepresentations of this sin of Schism designed to excuse many from the guilt thereof whom the rules of Christianity do envolve under it I shall endeavour to discover the insufficiency of such Plaisters either to cover or cure so great and dangerous wounds as the deep rents made in the Church to which they are applyed 2. A first false Conception of Schism A first Notion is the natural result of the New-England Independant Principles of Church-Communion They assert expresly Ans to 32. Qu. quo 4. that Baptism neither maketh nor admitteth any to be members of the Church and call it the opinion of Papists and Anabaptists that we enter into the Church by Baptism But they assert the foundation of Church-Society to be laid in their Church-Covenant which is a particular contract among themselves binding themselves to God and one to another to live in Christian Society with that particular Congregation to which they join themselves by this contract Apol. for Chur. Coven p. 3 5 15. And this Church-Covenant is they say the Constitutive form of a Church and joining in it is that which maketh a particular person a member of a Church And from hence it may be easily infered that there can be no duty of holding and therefore no sin of Schism in withdrawing or neglecting Communion where they have not made this engagement by that particular Covenant 3. But this notion of the Vnion and Communion of the Church doth confine it to such strait limits as to exclude in a manner all Christians of all ages from Church Society but themselves and is thereby uncharitable and no stranger to Schism and can not consist with the full and due sense of the Churches Catholicism for the ancient Church did never account the obligation to Christian Communion to be so narrow a thing as only to respect a particular Congregation and therefore never framed any such particular Covenant This is also directly contrary to S. Paul who as an argument to Union and against Schism saith 1 Cor. 12 13. By one Spirit we are all baptized into one body and teacheth us that we are baptized into Christ Rom. 6.3 and thereby are planted together in the likeness of his death v. 5. and that they who are baptized into Christ do put on Christ Gal. 3.27 Which Scriptures do sufficiently express that by our Baptism as we undertake the Christian life so we thereby are admitted to be members of the Church or body of Christ and are engaged as members to Vnity therein and to continue in Communion therewith Whereas if this notion was admitted the grounds for the being and Vnion of the Church which the Scriptures lay down together with the Apostolical and Primitive practice must be accounted as insufficient and the necessary support of its being and Union must be derived from this late invention All which things are sufficient to manifest the errour of this opinion and to shew that there may be a sinful breach of the Vnity of the Church among them who never entred into that Church Covenant 4. A second Notion Dr. Owen of Love Church Peace c. 3. But one of that way of our own Nation treating of Schism and separation acknowledgeth Baptism to give Relation to or entrance into the Catholick Church visible but still owneth a particular contract or joint consent among themselves to be the only bond for external Ecclesiastical Communion in a particular Church or as he expresseth it to be that wherein the Vnion of such a Church doth consist which will be hereafter further considered N. 19 20. Dr. Owen's Review of Schism ch 8 9. And he giveth us this representation of Schism That the sin of Schism doth not consist in the want of or breach of external Vnity by separation but in the want of internal Vnity by needless divisions of judgment in a particular Congregation as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he saith is used 1 Cor. c. 1.11 Hence these assertions are laid down 1. That the departing of any man or men from any particular Church as to the Communion peculiar to such a Church is no where in Scripture called Schism nor is so in the nature of the thing it self 2. One Church refusing to hold that Communion with another which ought to be between them is not Schism properly so called 5. But if we here consider the matter or thing it self we must enquire whether Christian Religion doth allow needless separations in the Christian Church And surely he must have strange thoughts of the earnest commands and frequent arguments for Christian Unity who supposeth them to regard only an inward
Script Angl. They who entred into the Ministry at Strasburgh after its first reformation did by Oath undertake to keep in the Communion and obedience of the Church and its Governours according to the law of God and their Canons Statutes and Ordinances And it is related from the laws of Geneva where an established Liturgy is one of their Constitutions that all they who were there received to the Ministry must oblige themselves by Oath to observe the Ecclesiastical Ordinances ordained by the Councils of that City In the Hungarian reformed Church they who enter the Ministry do by a very solemn Oath oblige themselves to the observations of the Ecclesiastical Canons Eccles Augl Vindic cap. 31. in fin and to the performing due obedience to the Bishop and other Superiours in the Church as may be seen in their Oath as it is fully exhibited by Mr. Durell from their Synodical Constitutions 5. The Subscriptions or Declarations required amongst us besides what for the present concerneth the Covenant are an acknowledgment of the Kings just authority to secure the Government of the Articles of Religion to preserve truth of Doctrine and of the Liturgy and Book of Ordination to maintain order and Uniformity to which end also tendeth the Oath of Canonical obedience wherein such obedience to the Bishop and his Successors is engaged in all lawful and honest things which must needs be blameless unless it could be accounted a sin to resolve to do good and honest things in a way of order Of these I shall in this discourse treat of what concerneth the Liturgy which is chiefly opugned and therefore requireth the principal consideration for the vindicating our Communion in the worship of God and the manifesting the unlawfulness of the breach thereof 6. Some declared allowance of the Liturgy hath since the reformation been ordinarily required in this Church Art 35. The Articles in the time of King Edward the Sixth contained an approbation both of the Book of Common Prayer and of Ordination In Queen Elizabeths time the allowance of the use and the Subscription to the Book of Common-Prayer was required by the Advertisements Advertism 7. Eliz Can. 1571. c. concionatores Tract 21. c. 1. and Canons and defended by Bishop Whitgift Since Queen Elizabeth the same hath been performed in the Subscription according to the 36th Canon and in the Declaration and Acknowledgment in the Act of Uniformity which in seense much agreeth therewith 7. The subscription required by the thirty sixth Canon is grounded upon the Constitutions of the Convocation confirmed by the authority of the Kings broad Seal according to his supream authority in causes Ecclesiastical and according to the Statute 25. Henr. 8. And so the Canons of the Church did of old frequently receive a confirmation by the Emperours sanction under his Sea which is a thing of so great antiquity that Eusebius relateth concerning Constantine the first Christian Emperour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that by his Seal Eus de Vit. Const l. 4. c. 27. he ratisied the determinations made by the Bishops in their Synods 8. That Article in this Canon which referreth to the Book of Common-Prayer doth enclude an acknowledging three things First that that Book containeth nothing contrary to the word of God which is intended to be manifested in the following Chapters touching the things chiefly opposed The second will be consequent thereupon viz. that it may lawfully be so used The third and last clause is a promise to use the form prescribed in that Book in publick Prayer and administration of the Sacraments and none other the lawfulness of which promise doth evidently follow from the former clause and its sense is of the same import with those words of the acknowledgment required in the Act of Uniformity viz. I will conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England as it is now established 9. But some especial doubts have been peculiarly entertained concerning the sense of the Declaration in the Act of Uniformity in giving unfeigned assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed in and by the Book of Common-Prayer c. But while our Government doth require the use of this form both the intended sense being the same with that of the two former clauses concerning the Liturgy in the Canon above-mentioned and the expression thereof may upon equitable and impartial consideration appear clearly and fairly justifiable To which purpose the true sense of assenting and consenting and the things to which this hath respect is to be enquired after 10. Wherefore it is first to be considered that as to assent when referred to things asserted is to owne the truth of them so when referred to things to be done ordered or used it is to allow that they should be put in practice in which latter sense assenting is one and the same with consenting Now the Act of Uniformity both immediately before this Declaration and in divers other places referreth this unfeigned assent and consent to the use of the things in that Book contained and prescribed and thereby directeth us to this ordinary sense of the word Assent as doth also the nature of the things to be assented to which for the main part are Prayers Thanksgivings and Rubricks which being no assertions or propositions are to be used but not properly to be believed This notion of assenting in the same signification with consenting is according to the frequent use of assensus in the Latin as when things are agreed unanimi assensu consensu and the marriage of Children is declared Littleton C. of Tenaunt in Dower that it should be de assensu consensu parentum and we read of dower de assensu patris in our English Law-Books and the same might be evidenced by various English Examples But this Declaration being required by our Statute Laws it may be sufficient to observe that this is a very common sense of the word assent in our English Statutes 11. 25. Ed. 1. c. 1 Pref. to 18. Ed. 3. to 2. Ric. 2. passim Thus from King Edw. I. will King Henry the seventh and sometimes after our Statute Laws are oft declared to be assented unto or to be made with the assent of the Lords c. But from Queen Elizabeths time downwards the Laws are oft expressed to be enacted by the King or Queen with the consent of the Lords c. and sometimes with their assent and consent as 1. Jac. 2. 21. Jac. 2. In the same sense par assent assensus and such like expressions are frequently used in our most ancient Statutes in their Latin and Frence Originals As in St. de Carl. Ordinat Forest c. 6. St. Lincoln Westm 4. Exilium Hug. le despenser Ordin pro ter Hib. And about common assaâ—s the word assent is three times in one paragraph used in this sense concerning the recovery of any land 14 Eliz. 8. by the assent and agreement of the persons to
l. 7. and Computus Copticus in Scaliger they did not only allow and observe such days as lawful but they appointed and owned them as conducing to the honour and advancement of Christianity being piously and religiously used 8. Amongst the Protestants the Bohaemian Church Rat. Disc c. 3. and those of the Augustane Confession are very much agreeable to us in the observation of Festivals Conf. Boh. c. 15. Conf. Aug. c. 15. Conf. Helv. c. 24. and their approbation of these days not only as lawful but as useful and requisite is contained in their publick Confessions and the Church of Switzerland alloweth several such days with a Maximopere approbamus and the Dutch Church observe the Nativity of Christ and some other Festivals as appeareth from their Canons ratified by the Synod of Dort Indeed the Church of Geneva and that of Scotland which from 1560. till 1617. did herein follow it did not admit of any of these days but this was so little pleasing to Calvin the most eminent Minister of Geneva that he writing concerning the day of our Lords Nativity which was not there celebrated saith Calo Ep. Hallero Sancte testari possum I can in a sacred manner proiest that this thing was transacted when I neither knew of it nor had any such desire and he further declared that it was his endeavour that it might have been there observed Wherefore the laying aside all these days was even in his eyes the defect and blemish but not the perfection and bâ—â—â—ty of that Church 9. Besides all these arguments from authority to prove the allowableness of Festival days for Religious exerciss it may be considered that if it be both lawful and good when we have received some eminent mercy from God to set some hours or some particular day apart to praise and magnifie the goodness of God there is the same or greater reason to give allowance to the observation of these stated Christian Festivals For I think no man can deny that not only the benefits flowing from the great actions of our Saviour but even the advantages accruing to us from the Apostles and Evangelists by their faithful preaching the Gospel of Christ and giving testimony to his Doctrine and continuing stedfast therein unto the death is to us more valuable and advantageous than any temporal benefit whatsoever because our enjoying the knowledge of Christ and being Christians which is the fruit of the Apostles and Evangelists making known the Gospel to the World is a greater priviledge than any outward advantage in the World And the benefit of holy exercises and of being employed in glorifying God is so excellent that the use of particular times appointed for that purpose ought not be rejected by pious men though some men do abuse those means which they should emprove 10. But it is here objected that the fourth Commandment saith six days shall thou work and S. Paul blameth the Galatians for observing days and times and months and years Concerning which places waving divers other things which might be answered 1. Let the Objectors consider whether themselves would be willing to admit this to be the sense of either of these Texts That it is not lawful to set apart any day of the Week either for praying fasting or for praise and thanksgiving if this sense be allowed they must then condemn not only the instances abovementioned both of Jewish and Christian practice but they must also deny them that liberty which the prophet Joel commanded them to exercise Joel 2.15 sanctisy a Fast call a solemn Assembly and thereby render Gods command of none effect but if this sense of these Scriptures ought not to be admitted then cannot the Religious observation of Festival days be thereby condemned 2. These words six days shalt thou labour never were to the Jews a Precept of such an unlimited and unbounded sense as to admit of no other use of any day but in labour Indeed isoth idleness and negligence were here condemned and those days allowed and appointed for labour in this restrained sense or with this exception Vnless some reasonable and accountable occasion require the contrary The reason of this restrained sense will appear necessary because the solemn days of Gods appontment under the Jewish State ought to be observed even upon any of those six days though they required strict rest as the day of atonement did and because it was also lawful upon a providential occasion to employ a day in voluntary mourning for a sick or dead friend 2 Sam. 3.31 33 35. Ch. 12.16 17 or in rejoicing for the Circumcision of a Child or such like cause and it must be still acknowledged lawful for a Child Servant or Subject to employ a day upon the command of his Father Master or Soveraign in attendance upon their persons much more might the Jews keep a Fast or observe a Feast when Esther required and signal providence directed them thereto August Conc. Adimant c. 16. 3. The observing days and times condemned Gal. 4.10 concerneth wholly the Jewish solemnities as S. Aug. and S. Hierome observe and the scope of the place demonstrateth the observing which is opposite to Christianity Hier. in Loc. Thus he who keepeth the Jewish Sabbath out of Conscience to the Moisaical Law doth so far oppose Christianity and return to Judaism this being a shadow of good things to come Col. 2.16 17 and is condemned by S. Paul but he who Christianly observeth the Lords-day acteth for the advancement of Christianity and the honour of Christ and is not in this place blamed by the Apostle And so he who observeth the new Moons out of respect to the Law standeth charged with Judaizing but he who setteth apart any day for Christian exercises acteth as becometh a Christian for as he is the best Christian who is most frequently exercised in these practices so he cannot be blamed who especially upon some days engageth himself to these duties So that the difference between our observeing the Christian Festivals and the Jewish is answerable to the difference between Judaism and Christianity 11. As to that Objection against the observation of the days of the Annunciation or the Conception of our Saviour the Nativity Passion and Ascension of our Lord that these days are at least the less allowable because the Lords day is particularly appointed for the worship of God and the honourable memorial of the great undertaking and actions of our Saviour it may be sufficient to observe 1. That this argument seemeth equally to oppose the setting apart any other Portion of time besides the Lords day to be purposely and particularly employed for the Religious worship of God which would greatly prejudice the exercise of Religion or at least the insisting upon this objection will not allow Christians to engage themselves to glorifie God for Jesus Christ and to admire the grace of Christ upon any other day because this would require some other time to be
of God in the Ordinance of Baptism and therefore this Salvation would not be an advantage slowing from their Baptism But if it be said that by Baptism the Covenant of grace is sealed to such Infants we must here further consider that Gods Covenant by reason of his faithfulness goodness and Soveraignty cannot be sealed as mens Covenants are to make it firm and binding when it would otherwise be void and of no force Wherefore there remain two ways whereby the Sacraments as they are on Gods part Seals of the Covenant of Grace may be of great advantage unto us the one is as they give further assurance of the priviledges of that Covenant for our comfort but of this benefit these infants are not capable partly because the receiving this comfort requireth the exercise of judgment and consideration and partly because the evident sureness of Gods Covenant can be no cause of consolation to them unless we admit that there is some ordinary means appointed of God whereby they may attain the blessings so assured the other way of advantage is by the benefits of Gods Covenant being sealed or surely conveyed as the present interest and priviledge of the persons rightly receiving these Seals and in this way which encludeth saying regeneration infants are indeed capable of receiving wonderful benefit thereby 8. 5. And omitting other arguments even the Prayers of the Church with faith and confidence upon the other grounds above-mentioned not doubting but earnestly believing that God will favourably receive those infants and embrace them with the arms of his mercy doth give further assurance of forgiveness of sin and a state of salvation for baptized Infants For God who hath declared his favour towards them and encluded them in his Covenant doth direct 1. Joh. 5.16 that if any man see his Brother sin a sin which is not unto death he shall ask and shall give life for them that sin not unto death and this general command encludeth Gods gracious answer to such Prayers and Prayer which is a general means to obtain Grace is used for the obtaining saving benefits in Baptism with the greater encouragement because the blessings prayed for are tendred in this Ordinance and by Gods promise unto Infants who receive Baptism To this purpose S. Augustine saith that remission of sins in Baptism is obtained per orationem De Bapt. cont Don. l. 3. c. 18. i. e. per columbae gemitum by the Prayers and groans of them who live in Peace Love and Vnity and our Church in the Prayer before the words of the Gospel in the Baptismal Office urgeth Gods promise Ask and you shall receive seek and you shall find c. the usefulness and benefit of Prayer being here the same in Baptism as it is in the most religiously prepared person for receiving the benefits of the Communion SECT IV. The Doctrine of the ancient and divers Reformed Churches herein observed 1. In observing the Doctrine of the ancient Church Conc. Milev c. 2. I shall begin with Councils The Council of Milevis condemned those who denyed infants to be baptized for the remission of sin or who asserted that they did not draw that original sin from Adam which is purged by the laver of regeneration and they declare that by the rule of the Catholick Church Infants are baptized for the remission of sin that that may be cleansed by regeneration which was derived by generation And this Canon of Milevis is the more considerable Conc. Carth. c. 124. because it was taken into the African Code and with that-Code was confirmed by the sixth General Council Conc. Trul. c. ◠The sixth general Council in another Canon requireth that those infants should be baptized without any scruple concerning whom there can be no sufficient testimony given that they were baptized before Conc. Trul. c. 84. and this it enjoineth lest such scruple should deprive them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of this Baptismal purging for sanctification Conc. Constant And whereas the Creed of the second general Council expresseth a belief of one Baptism for the remission of sins the Council of Milevis above mentioned avoucheth Conc. Mil. ubi supra those expressions to have been always so understood in the Church as to acknowledge that baptized Infants did thereby obtain actual pardon and remission And that African Synod whose Epistle is extant amongst S. Austins Works declared Aug. Ep. 90. that whosoever shall deny that little Children are delivered from perdition and do obtain Eternal Salvation by the Baptism of Christ let him be an Anathema 2. If we consult the ancient Fathers it is beyond all contradiction evident that real remission and regeneration of all baptized Infants is acknowledged by S. Aug. Ep. 23. de peccat Merit Remis l. 2. c. 28. passim by Optatus Advers Parm. l. 5. Fulgentius de fide ad Petr. c. 30. by Prosper and generally by the suceeding Writers of the Church But some have pretended Gatak de Bapt. Infant vi effic p. 268. that this position sprung from their eager opposition of the Pelagians who denied Children to be guilty of original sin for the removing of which pretence it will be requisite to give some testimony of the judgment of the Ecclesiastical Writers who lived before the appearing of the Pelagian tares S. Cyprian night two hundred years before Pelagius did not only express the mighty sensible efficacy of his own Baptism for conferring Grace to him in his Epistle to Donatus but in his Epistle to Fidus he declareth that Infants by their Baptism do obtain the grace and favour of God Cyp. Ep. 59. and the remission of their sins and several expressions of that Epistle do intimate that this is the end for which they are baptized and comparing the state of an Infant coming to Baptism with an adult person embracing Christianity and the true Faith he doth in this respect prefer the state of the Infant because ad remissam peccatorum hoc ipso facilius accedit c. he doth upon this account the more readily obtain the remission of sins because the sins forgiven to him were not his own acts but anothers or Original sin Orig. in Luc. Hom. 14. Origen in his Homilies upon S. Luke which were undoubtedly his and translated by S. Hierome saith that Children are baptized for the remission of sins but saith he of what sins and when did they sin and a little after answereth that by the Sacrament of Baptism nativitatis sordes the sins and defilements with which they were born are laid aside and for this cause saith he little ones are baptized for unless a man be born again of Water and of the Spirit he cannot see the Kingdom of God The same Doctrine is also asserted by Nazianzen in his 40th Oration Naz. Orat. 40. as the comparing some things not far from the beginning with others towards the middle thereof will manifest and this he
doth also add to the honour of that holy estate and therefore it may well be mentioned as a further excellency of that holy relation that God hath consecrated it to such an excellent mystery that in it is signified and repented the spiritual Marriage and Vnity between Christ and his Church SECT IX Of the Communion of the sick and the Office for Burial 1. The Communion of the sick is very allowable because the dying state may need the best supports of Christian Faith the highest encouragements of Divine Grace and the chief means to strengthen hope all which is encluded in this Ordinance of the Lords Supper it being a pledge and assurance yea a tender from Christ of mercy and forgiveness to them who truly repent and believe And though the celebrating this holy Communion in private places Conc. Laod. c. 58. standeth condemned in ordinary cases by the ancient Canons Conc. Nic. c. 13. yet in this extraordinary Case sick or dying persons were ordinarily allowed to receive it and the Council of Nice doth well approve of the sick persons desire thereof And though it be sufficiently proved by Albaspinus that the Viaticum frequently given to dying Penitents did not always enclude the Eucharist yet it is manifest that they did frequently partake thereof 4. Conc. Carth. c. 76 78. as is expressed not only in the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage but in the more ancient testimony of Dionysius Alexandrinus Eus Hist Eccles l. 6. c. 36. 2. Divers Protestant Churches besides our own Rat. Disc c. 3. have retained the use thereof and amongst them the Bohaemian Syn. Petric Sect. 5. the Polonian with the consent of the Ministry of the three several Confessions Form Visit Aegr in Bucer and that of Strasburgh as it was in Bucers time And though this was not practised at Geneva Calv. de quibusd Ritib Aug. 12. 1561. Calv. Oleviano Cal. Dec. 1563. yet Calvin did in several places and even towards the end of his life testifie his allowance thereof and also that there were divers weighty causes which constrained him to judge that it ought not to be denied 3. But against this it is objected that some persons who have led vitious lives may earnestly desire the Communion in their sickness and yet not be truly penitent for their sins and therefore cannot worthily partake of those holy Mysteries To which I answer that even in this Case Christian Charity must encline to the more favourable part and since man hath no certain evidences to judge of sincere repentance the infallible discerning thereof must be reserved to the judgment of God And if this person hath lived vainly and exorbitantly the Minister may acquaint him with the nature if need be of true Faith and Repentance and the necessity thereof both to a dying Man and to a Communicant and if he appear so far as is in him desirous to practise and exercise those Christian Graces and to obtain the help of Jesus Christ and his Grace to deny him this Sacrament would be to deny him a testimony in Gods name that he will upon these conditions bestow grace and remission of sins and to shut up the means of Grace and remission from a Sinner who seeketh after it and certainly it cannot agree with the Ministers Office to reject those persons who in a dying state declare they would come to Christ And in the strict times of Primitive Discipline he was thought worthy to be deposed from his Ministry who either rejected or did not receive any Sinner upon his return and a peculiar Charity towards dying persons was expressed in divers ancient Canons 4. In the Office for Burial several expressions are misliked as being thought unmeet to be spoken of every person dying in the Churches Communion Where a first expression to be considered is That Almighty God of his great mercy hath taken to himself the Soul of the person departed When yet we cannot assert that every person dying in our Communion is eternally saved Ans Besides what may be said of the judgment of Charity the wise man telleth us Eccl. 12.7 that the Spirits of dying men return to God who gave them that is to be disposed of according to his righteousness and our Church in this place acknowledgeth the mercy of God through the grace of Christ who now hath the Keys of Hell and Death that dying persons do not forthwith go into the power of the Devil who had the power of Death Heb. 2.14 but do immediately go into the hands of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ to be disposed of by him according to the promises and conditions of the Gospel Covenant This is that which all Christians must acknowledge to flow from the great mercy of God towards man and that this is the sense intended in this place I am induced to believe because in the ancient Offices of Burial they magnified the Divine Power whereby the unjust and tyrannous power of the Devil was overcome and our Lord receiveth us Dioniss de Eccles Hier. c. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto his peculiar and most righteous judgment Yet even this sense doth express a general and firm confidence of the future happy state of all them who heartily embrace the Christian Faith and life as being consequent upon the gracious mediation and Soveraign Dominion of Jesus our Saviour 5. And whereas this Office calleth the deceased person Our Brother and Our dear Brother these Phrases may undoubtedly be applyed to every person who professing Christianity dyeth in the Churches Communion And that extensive sense of those words is sufficiently warranted by the use thereof in Scripture when it commands us to love our Brother not to put a stumbling block before our Brother not to defraud our Brother 1. Thes 4.6 to forgive our Brother Mat. 18.34 and when it speaketh of the Brother that walketh disorderly 2. Thes 3.6 and of admonishing him as a Brother v. 14. and of thy Brother trespassing against thee and if he hear thee thou hast gained thy Brother Chrys in Heb. 11. Hom. 25. Mat. 18.15 and if any man that is called a Brother be a Fornicator 1. Cor. 5.11 from which place S. Chrysostom observeth that every Christian man baptized by the laver of regeneration is there called a Brother Tertullian in a general sense as they are men alloweth even the Heathen to be accounted Brethren Apol. c. 39. though they be Mali fratres evil Brethren but in a more special sense he so esteemeth of all Christians Praep. Evang l. 1. c. 4. who acknowledge one God the Father and much to the same purpose writeth Eusebius Cyr. Hier. Praef. And Cyril telleth all those who gave up their names to Christianity that they become the Sons and Daughters of one Mother V. Albasp Obs l. 1. c. 19. So that this manner of expression in this Office is the same which the Scriptures and