think our Episcopacy to be Primitive for Doctor Hammond in his Answer to Blondel complains of him as if he were so far from being touched with any care of our Church or sense of our miseries that he thought meet contrarily more sharply to prick those that were already oppressed and endeavoured to triumph over our Church when it was sick and staggering and ready by reason of inward troubles to give up the Ghost let Mr. Durell now consider whether he will make his Countryman Blondell an Enemy to our Hierarchy or make our Countryman Dr. Hammond a Calumniatour one of the two he must unavoidably do And for the future let him bethink himself how to wipe off that great and black blot which he hath let fall upon some of the best and most obedient of the Sons of the Church of England page 2. viz. that they weakly suffered themselves to be brought into a bad and false opinion of the Transmarine reformed Churches meeâ—ly by the reports given them by the new Presbyterians For certainly it is little to their credit when they had the Confessions and Symbolical Books of the reformed Churches in their Libraries never to consult them but to take up reports concerning their Neighbours from Men whose interest did lead them to make the world believe that they had a many Friends abroad though but few at home Doubtless our Episcopal Divines knew well enough that the Hierarchy they aimed at was not countenanced by Sister-Churches and long before Smectymnuus was heard of or ever such a creature as an Ordinance of Lords and Commons saw the light one among us had said publickly perfecto odio odi Calvinum and Bishop Laud had inured his tongue to say Ecclesia Romana and Turba Genevensis he had also told Bishop Hall that though he did well to put a difference betwixt the Scottish and other Churches yet he had written more favourably even of other Churches than their cause would then bare and the good cause then in hand did work so powerfully even upon the Holy and Learned Bishop Hall himself that he adventured as Mr. Prin tells us to reordain Mr. John Dury though he had been before ordained in some Reformed Church Such an Episcopacy as was claimed by Arch-bishop Cranmer the far greater part at least of present Non-Conformists could admit but such an Episcopacy as Arch-bishop Laud was introducing they cannot yet digest and that is the Episcopacy that the present book of Ordination if assented and consented unto would engage us in and let it not seem strange that the present Non-Conformists startle at it when as Dr. Holland the Kings professour of Divinity in Oxford was so much offended with Dr. Laud for asserting it that he did not stick to affirm he was a Schismatick and went about to make a Division betwixt the English and other Reformed Churches yet though the Non-Conformists do not like such a kind of Hierarchy they will if they consult the peace of their Consciences use no such incivil language against it as some of Mr. Durells Countrymen have done they will not be so uncivil as to call Dr. Hammond Knave which is the English to Salmasius his Nebulo they will not say as Maresius does in his Examen of Dr. Prideaux his four Questions pag. 1. That Dr. Hammond as proceeded to such a degree of fury as professedly to propugne the cause of the Pope Much less will they say that the English Bishops had better consulted their eminence if they had acted more moderately in it and had rather with the rest of Protestants made it to be of humane institution than so stifly to assert the jus divinum of it for as a bow by too much bending of it is broken so they too much stretching their Authority and dignity fell quite from it like the Camel in the Fable who because he affected horns lost his ears pag. 68. least of all will they say as the same Author says pag. 71. which I tremble to English Praesules Angli ex parte collimarunt ad Papismi restitutionem jure postliminii and pag. 111. Vt dicam quod res est haec defensio temporalis Jurisdictionis pro Ecclesiae Ministris portio aliqua est illius fermenti Papistici quo Hierarchiae Anglicanae massa paulatim se infici passa fuit dum magis ambit Typhum Seculi quam humilitatem Crucis meditatur To conclude all when the Learned Gataker was most bitterly railed upon by Lilly for being a Presbyterian he answers in his Apology pag. 24. A duly bounded and well regulated Prelacy joyned with a Presbytery wherein one as President Superintendent Moderator term him what you please whether Annual or Occasional or more constant and continual either in regard of years or parts or both jointly hath some preheminence above the rest yet so as that he do nothing without joint consent of the rest Such a Prelacy I never durst nor yet dare condemn The like he says for divers others if not the greater part of the Assembly pag. 26. And the same dare I adventure to say in reference to the far greater part of the present suffering Ministers nay I may further undertake for them that if any one should publish in print that the difference betwixt a Bishop and Presbyter is by divine institution they would not think themselves any way concerned to have such a one suspended from his Ministry yet if my memory greatly fail me not Mounsieur Peter Moulin in his first Epistle to Bishop Andrews making Apology for some passages in his Tract of the Vocation of Pastors excepted against by K. James useth these or the like words That if he had made the difference betwixt a Bishop and Presbyter to be founded on a divine Law his own Churches would have inflicted Ecclesiastical censures upon him It will concern Mr. Durell highly either to prove that Moulin wronged his own Churches or that they have abated of their zeal against Episcopy for if he prove neither of these he will lose that which is better then all his Ecclesiastical revenues a good name and when his hand is in at this work he may also do well to take Bishop Mountague to task who in his appeal to Caesar by his Majesties special direction and command perused by Dr. White and approved as fit to be Printed says p. 70. That the Discipline of the Church of England in the Synod of Dort and other Dutch Synods is held unlawful If it be held unlawful in the Synod of Dort it may be presumed it was held unlawful by almost all other Reformed Churches for almost all sent thither their Delegates and these Delegates approved the confession of Faith in which onely the Discipline of our Church can be thought to be condemned Now let Mr. Durell bid his zeal awake for certainly Hannibal est ad portas either he or Bishop Mountague will be found false witnesses against the Reformed Churches I will not determine whither must be branded for a
the Congregation could neither hear nor see the Minister what I say but meer Superstition 14thly Page 42. He falls again to the abusing of Presbyterians saying That they ought to have as bad an Opinion of the Trine aspersion of the Cross in Baptisme adding towards the end of that Page his confidence That if the Trine aspersion were used in our Church or if she had retained the Trine immersion as at the beginning of King Edward rhe Sixth's Reign it would be counted a great Superstition This is a great slander no Presbyterians that ever I heard of have any such Principles from which they can charge Superstition upon Trine immersion or upon Trine aspersion they say it is the command of God that water should be applied to the Baptized had he commanded that this application should be by dipping or sprinkling once or twice his command must have been observed seeing there is no such Command they say that Superiours are at liberty to appoint which they please provided nothing be appointed that is imprudent or uncharitable and now that we are fallen upon this point I would gladly know what it is that our Church hath appointed by the Liturgy I see the Minister is appointed to dipp the Child in the water if the Sponsors certifie that the Babe can well endure it but if they certifie that the Child is weak it shall suffice to pour water upon it so that here is no allowance of any Rite but Dipping unless there be a Certificate of the Childs weakness But when I wonder did any Baptist demand such a Certificate as for the Quoties no meaner a man than Bishop Mountague in his Articles of Visitation positively asserted that the Child is thrice to be aspersed with water on the face So that the Act of Uniformity notwithstanding it seems the Doctors of the Church were not agreed and for ought I can observe notwithstanding any Rubrick or Canon now in force Ministers are at their Liberty to apply the water once or thrice though I think Bishop Mountague was much mistaken when he said that the Child was thrice to be aspersed the Church hath not commanded Trine aspersion but there is no constat that she hath forbidden it Nor is this the only thing in our Administration of Baptisme about which I am at a loss Immersion I do hugely approve yea I cannot see how it can be forborn unless charity or modesty on something of that nature do forbid it But what may be the Reason that our Church allows not pouring water upon Infants without a Certificate that they are weak and yet in the form of Baptism appointed for adult persons leaves it wholly at the Ministers discretion either to dip them into the water or to pour water upon them There is another thing in which aqua mihi haeret I am marvellously also perplext about the Administrator or Administratrix of Baptism In the Hampton-Court Conference K. James stumbled something at some expressions in our Liturgy which seemed to give Liberty to women and Maids to Administer Baptisme in case of extreme necessity and he was then answer'd by Archbishop Whitgift that Baptism by Women and Lay-persons was not allow'd in the practise of the Church but was enquired of and censur'd in the Bishops Visitations and that the words in the Book inferred no such meaning But Bishop Bancroft declared that the Church by those words did intend in case of necessity a permission of private persons to Baptize and that this permission was agreeable to the practise of the ancient Churches Withal opening the absurdities and impieties of their Opinion who think there is no necessity of Baptisme I confess I could not but wonder that they who had so strongly pleaded for the Liturgy and pleas'd themselves in silencing those who could not conform unto it should be as contrary as North and South in expounding a material passage of it But however for the credit of the Ordinance I rejoyced greatly to find that at the motion of the King it was ordred that the words A Lawful Minister should be put into the Rubrick for by this means I thought us sufficiently secured against any female Baptizers But he who doth not love to conceal any thing Dr. P. H. in his necessary Introduction to the History of Bishop Laud pag. 27. hath quite took away the cause of my rejoycing for he saith The alteration was greater in sound than sense it being the Opinion of many great Clerks that any man in cases of extreme necessity who can pronounce the words of Baptism may pass in the notion of account of a lawful Minister By any man I suppose he means any one that is de humano genere and by consequence either a Child or a Natural but I hope some one will give check to this extravagant Notion that so a stop may be put to the Licentiousness of those unto whom God hath no more given a power to Baptize than to Ordain Ministers And therefore I wish that to stop this gap instead of the Minister of the Parish or any other lawful Minister it had been said the lawful Minister of any other Parish and then I should have thought it impossible for any man to be so impudent as to opine that our Church had not restrained Baptisme to the Clergy But they who made our new Liturgy were wiser then I and some that have subscrib'd it it seems had got some such way of Interpretation as no Logick ever led me into 15thly Pag. 103. He makes bold with the whole Church of England For of her these are his words She holdeth subordination of Ministers in the Christian Church to be of Apostolical nay of Divine Institution having as she conceiveth for Grounds of this her Judgment besides Scripture the Practise of the Holy Apostles in their time of the Universal Church ever since until this later Age and which is more of Christ himself who ordained the Apostles and the Seventy Disciples in an imparity as two distinct Orders of Ministers in his Church I suppose this Reverend Praedicant doth not pretend to any faculty of discerning the secret thoughts and inward conceptions of our Churches heart farther then when she discov'rs them by some words or other signification let him therefore tell us where the Church hath declared her self thus to hold thus to conceive as in the fore-quoted words is represented That the Church holds subordination of Ministers to be an Apostolical Institution is plain enough and therefore Mr. D. beats the Air as oft as he brings any Testimonies for Episcopacie which do not place it among Apostolical Institutions but I cannot finde that the Church any where distinguisheth Apostolical and Divine much less doth she say that she hath besides Scripture the practice of the Apostles and of Christ himself The Practice of the Apostles and Christ himself are recorded in Scripture and be a part of Scripture and therefore it is not sense to say that she
when he comes to give them a standing Directory for Prayer he enjoyns them John 16. to ask in his Name assuring them that Prayers made in his Name should be answered but letting them know withal that at that time they had never asked any thing in his Name what shall we say to this If we should say that the Apostles Christs Directions notwithstanding had never used his Prayer the Brownists will make an advantage of such a Confession if we should say that though they used the Lords Prayer yet by using of it they had not prayed in the Name of Christ i. e. explicitely and so as they were to do after they had a more explicite knowledge of the Nature and Offices of Christ then though this prayer will still contain all needful matter to be prayed for yet it will admit of Dispute whether our prayers are not to be tendered unto God in such phrases and forms as do more distinctly mention the Death Resurrection and Intercession of our Blessed Mediator Granting the Doxology to be a part of the Lords Prayer as I am of a strong Opinion it is it is plain that is is not so distinct and particular as some others in the Epistles and Revelations be which offer and ascribe praise and Glory unto God by Christ as Eph. 3.21 or unto Christ as 1 Timothy 6.16 or to God and the Lamb Christ Jesus as Rev. 5.13 Later Doxologies do make an acknowledgment of the Blessed Trinity as to every Person Glory be to the Father and to the Son and to the Holy Ghost and it seems but meet that the Doxologies of Christians properly so called should have something in them to distinguish them from the Doxologies and Supplications not only of Heathens but also of Jews There be some that say our Lord took this form of prayer out of the Jewish Liturgies and one undertakes to give us an account from the Jewish Liturgies of that variety and difference that is to be found in the recital of it in Mathew and Luke viz. he would have us think that the prayer as in Mathew was intended for the Disciples more publick use as in Luke for their more private use But in all this that Learned Man does need a credulous Reader who will not too strictly enquire into the grounds of his asseveration Most plain it is that our Savior made this Prayer for his Disciples whilest they were Members of the Jewish Church and before he had blotted out the Hand-writing of Ordinances or had sent the Spirit to lead them into all Truth let it therefore be considered whether we are not rather ordinarily to express our selves in a Dialect more sutable to the New Testament Dispensation than is used in the Lords Prayer yet using that prayer also as a prayer and making it the patern and example as to the things to be prayed for in all the prayers that we make and let men have a care how they adventure to conclude their own prayers thus we further pray unto thee in that very form of words which Christ himself hath taught us till they have made themselves certain what form of words Christ did use when he directed his Disciples 3dly he saith Most of them had likewise wholly neglected the use of the Lords Supper for many years He might with as much truth have said that most of them for many years had lived without eating and drinking The most of them ministred the Sacraments frequently and I know where they have been blamed for administring it too frequently if this Characterizer say this is not a truth he may chance in a short time by printed Testimonials to see himself confuted But he hath not done but for a Conclusion tells us There was a great irreverence at Prayer in their Congregations very few kneeling many not so much as putting off their Hats and of this he saith he was an Eye-witness I demand only whether he think it be irreverence for a man not to kneel in the publick Congregation in time of Prayer Whether standing be not a posture of Reverence Whether in the London Churches it be not morally impossible for the one half of the Congregation to kneel in time of Prayer Into how many Congregations he went where many did not so much as put off their Hats in the time of Prayer And whether he either saw or heard that the Ministers of those Churches did any way countenance that irreverence If he cannot answer these Questions roundly and readily oh what work hath he made for an accusing Conscience For ought I know those in whom he observed this irreverence might be Sectaries who did more bitterly inveigh against Presbyterians than against any other men whatever perhaps also they might be Episcopal-men who designed to put an affront upon the Presbyterians Prayers just as now some are observed to sit upon their Breech all the time of Pulpit-prayer unless when just the Lords Prayer is repeating because forsooth Pulpit-prayer is not allowed by the Church but onely bidding of Prayer I write it with grief but I must write it I never in any Congregations where I have been observed so much irreverence as I have observed in those in which there is the greatest abundance of such as alwayes pretended a love to the English Liturgy particular Stories I might relate and would relate did I not fear to set deluded people at a greater distance from our Assemblies but if Mr. D. will call for them he shal have them by the peck by the bushel I need not stay about these particulars the World I trust will not long want sufficient information how much the Presbyterians have been abus'd by Mercenary Pens I have only two Animadversions on this Authors Sermon and then your trouble will not be much longer continued Pag. 20. He tells us That those who have Devotion and leisure enough to come to Church and be present at Divine Service may hear the whole Bible read every year the Old Testament once and the new no less than thrice A man scarce knows where to be present at Divine Service every day morning evening unless at some Cathedral or Collegiate Church for though all Priests and Deacons are appointed to say daily the Morning and Evening Prayer either privately or openly not being let by Sickness or some other urgent cause and though Curats be appointed being at home and not otherwise reasonably hindred to say the Prayers in the Parish Church or Chappel and to toll the Bell that the people may come and hear the word and pray with them yet the Assenters and Consenters that do this are as rare as black Swans and if a man had health and Devotion so much as to inable him to attend upon the Cathedral Service Morning and Evening from the first of January to the last of December yet should he not by that means hear the whole Bible read either the Old Testament once or the New Testament thrice there being several
in five of which he most grosly abuses him The first is That all Reformed Churches have Liturgies This I say follows not from any words of Capellus if Mr. Durell say it doth his Logick is his own let him make use of it The second is That the Liturgy of the Church of England is judged by this great man to be not onely pure and free from all Popish Superstition and Idolatry but also from all such things as were onerous and troublesome or which did contribute but little to the Edification of the Church as well as other Reformed Churches Twenty Cart-ropes will not pull this observation out of Capellus his words He onely speaks of the Liturgy made by the first Reformers of our Church which vastly differs from the present Liturgy that Mr. Durell takes upon him to defend The third Observation is of all most marvellous thus worded If these Liturgies ought to recede as little as possible from that of the Primitive Church as he doth intimate undoubtedly the Liturgy of the Church of England is the best and most perfect of them all If Mr. Durell will have this observed we will observe it as the issue of an over-confident fancy yet humbly praying that he would allow us to think that this observation hath no relation in the world to any words of Capellus If he may be judge our Liturgy differs more from the Primitive Liturgies then the Liturgy of any Reformed Churches for he sayes Primitive Liturgies were most brief and most simple consisting of a few prayers c. Now if we should grant our Liturgy to be very simple certainly it is not very brief nor does it consist of but a few Prayers let Mr. Durell officiate according to it Morning and Evening which I never knew any Conformist to do and I will be bold to say his Sermons afterwards shall not be over tedious The fourth Observation is That of all who call themselves Reformed the Presbyterians are the first that ever left off the use of set Forms of Prayer Capellus hath not the word Presbyterians in his work nor am I certain whom Mr. Durell understands by them perhaps he means the English Presbyterians but how came they to be Presbyterians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Capellus was too wise a man to say that they were the first that left off set Forms of Prayer he knew well enough unless he onely was a stranger in Israel that many years before the Assembly met at Westminster set Forms of Prayer had been laid aside and condemned as unlawful by huge multitudes who were angry with the old meer Nonconformist because he would not seperate from the English Church as well as endeavour a Reformation of some things The fifth Observation is That the many reasons for which the Presbyterians had rejected the Common-Prayer Book are very light and almost of no moment at all 'T is true that Capellus hath written something to this purpose but it is the same Capellus who hath written so many bug-bear words against our English Bishops in his Theses de descrimine Episcopi Presbyteri de vario Ecclesiae regimine the former Theses he concludes thus That there was no cause why the Bishops and their Patrons should so greatly insult and onely not grow insolent against those whom invidiously they called Puritans and Presbyterians And let it be observed that if the Presbyterians had onely reproved and not cashiered the Common-Prayer Book their Reasons might have been sufficient notwithstanding any thing Capellus saith to the contrary Sixthly Mr. Durell would have it observed That the Presbyterians themselves who are the known Authors of the Directory are in Capellus his Judgment a froward peevish and superstitous Generation of men Capellus does indeed call the Composers of the Directory morose and froward but seems unwilling to call them superstitious and the same Capellus had commended them for shaking off the Yoke of Episcopacy in his Theses de Vario Ecclesiae regimine Sect. 24. Let Mr. Durell when he puts out next English these words for they seem framed according to the Heart of the Presbyterians and let him then also tell us why he calls the Presbyterians the known Authors of the Directory That Assembly that presented the Directory to the two Houses was as to most of its Members when first called Hierarchical and under an Oath of Canonical obedience there are not very many of them living at present of them diverse conform and are as deeply engaged to use Liturgical worship as Mr. Durell himself let him therefore when he has opportunity enquire of them whether they consented to have the Liturgy cashiered and how they came to fall in love with it again and what made them so fearful least the old subscription should choak us when as they themselves can swallow these new ones that are far bigger and more bulky By this time I hope it is come to my turn to make some observations upon the Theses of Capellus and my Observations may be the fewer because I have already suggested so many and the first thing I observe is That the men against whom Capellus was so not could not be the English Presbyterians unless they were falsly represented to him for these are his words pag. 710 711. They with whom we have to do bewray a manifest enough hatred against Formula's of Symbols or Confessions of Faith and of Catechism and the both antient and recent use and custome of them received in the Christian Church If these are the men he had to deal with then had he nothing to do with the English Presbyterians no men having more contended for Confessions of Faith and Catechisms in set words than they Secondly I observe that he represents himself and his fellow Professors as not condemning or inhibiting a free use of Prayers composed by Ministers themselves Nay these are his words pag. 713. We plainly think it both lawful and consentaneous that they who can do it should discover their gift and industry in praying as in preaching this onely we will that the use of such prayers ought not to hinder the Liturgy constituted by publick Authority and to take away and abrogate all use of it out of the Church And a little after he adds We deservedly condemn the rigour of those who under pretext of a praescript Form of Liturgy do study to eliminate out of the Church all use of Prayers conceived by Ministers themselves Let Mr. Durell consider whether this Damnatory sentence do not fall upon many of his own Patrons and Abettours Thirdly I observe that when the Professor comes to contract what he had said he determines concerning Formula's as if Smectymnuus had too much influenced him for he saith first That they are not absolutely in every time and place and with all men necessary because the Christian Church wanted them for some time and it does not appear from sacred or exotick History whether the Jewish Church did not want them before Christ and