from Popery are 1. That it cherisheth Ignorance and I am sure that is the soil of all wickedness God Christ the Spirit and Scripture are Light and Satan is the Prince of Darkness 2. That it liveth like the Leech on blood hating and destroying the most holy persons who differ from them To these my Soul is unreconcilable I hate cruelty to Papists or Infidels much more to godly faithful persons that do hurt to none And I think I have convinced Mr. Dodwell himself that I am not inclined for the avoiding of Popery to run into any contrary Extreme nor to imitate them thaâ— ignorantly call Truth or harmless things Antichristian or Popish The name of Popery doth not affright me from any truth of God What I have written in many Books especially in the last part of my Catholick Theology and what censures I have suffered for it which never moved me to comply with the Censurers I think prove it I again and again profess That if the Papists or such as I now deal with would but prove that God ever made or allowed such a Church as they plead for in the world that is an Vniversal Church constituted or unified by any one Head or Supreme Governing pâ—râ— Monarchical or Aristocratical under Christ the Dispute whether it be Pope or Council or Cardinals or Colledge of Bishops in all the world shall not hinder me from a chearful and joyful declaring my self a Papist without partiality fear or shame in the sense that the word Papist hath still signified with such as I converse with These things I have taken the boldness to ask some of the greatest that on the fore mentioned terms appropriate the name of the Church of England to their Sect or Party and I could get no answer from them viz. Whether they took the Councils of Constance and Basil for Papists And whether they now take the Bishops and Church of France for Papists And whether they took Gerson Cusanus Cassander Erasmus for Papists or not 2. If yea What is the difference between the said Papists Church-Form and Government and that which these call the Church Catholick and Dispute for 3. If not Then is not the Controversie de nomine Whether the French Bishops and Church and the said Councils being of the same Form and Religion with the Church of England as called by these men ought to be called Papists or not And for that I shall strive with none Let every man call them as he seeth cause or if he will as they will call themselves Let them be Papists in France and Protestants in England I contend not for names But I wonder not at these Church-men if they unchurch the French Protestants and condemn their Ministry and Sacraments as none How else could their Persecution be justified And O that they would tell us what Churches they be that they live in communion with Whether the French Spanish Italian Greeks Nestorians Jacobites Copties Abassines be in their Communion or not If yea Whether the Reformed Churches be not as worthy of their communion If not whether the Church of England be all the Catholick Church in their account O that we could long more for God's righteous final Iudgment to which we appeal though Mr. Dodwell be against it and for the world of perfect Light and Love and Union Dated Septemb. 2. 1681. appointed a Publick Fast for the burning of London I have not time to gather the Errata of the Press I cast my eye on these Pag. 9. l. 19. for natures r. names p. 10. l. antep dele and. p. 11. l. antep r. is in p. 17. l. 1. for or r. over p. 5. l. 29. after excommunicating r. Christ's servants for not forsaking their faithful Pastors p. 10. l. ult for of r. by p. 16. l. 32. for our r. one p. 90. l. 12 r. temerity p. 139. l. 17. for by r. to pag. 151. l. 4. for by r. my c. THE CONTENTS A Late Letter of Mr. Dodwell's with the Answer written since the rest was printed Chap. 1. Of Mr. Dodwell's displeasure against me as if I accused him to be a Papist and wronged the Councils of Bishops p. 1. Chap. 2. His schismatical Church-destroying Scheme the sum of his great schismatical book confuted p. 7 Chap. 3. The consequents of Mr. Dodwell's foresaid Doctrine p. 21 Chap. 4. My words of Gods Collation of Ministerial Authority vindicated from the forgeries and fallacies of Mr. Dodwell p. 27 What my assertion is of the cause of Church power p. 29. The contrary p. 32. The truth proved p 33 c. His objections answered p. 36. c. Bishops are of God p. 46. c. His sad qualification of Ministers p. 48. Preferring God is no wrong to Government p. 54. What succession we have p. 54. Of Aidan and Finans Episcopacy p. 57. His assertion of supreme Church-power from whom there is no appeal to Scripture to God or the life to come and whose intention is the measure of the power of all ordained by them examined p. 57 c. Whether the Church on earth be one visible society under one visible humane Government p. 59. Whether Divine Authority may not be pretended for practising contrary to some superiors p. 60 Chap. 5. Wherein Mr Dodwell's deceits and their danger lie p. 63. Whether there be but one sense of all terms which causes obliging men to mean all that have skill in causes are to understand p. 63. Twelve great doctrinal Articles in which we differ from Mr. Dodwell p. 65. Some questions put to him p. 68 His second Letter to me from Ireland p. 70. My Answer to it p. 75. proving the impossibtlity of just Discipline in the Diocesan way which I dissent from The short Answer to Mr. Dodwell's long Letter which Dr Sherlocke and Mr. Morrice extol which is fully answered in my Treatise of Episcopacy p. 90. A Letter sent to Mr. Dodwell Mar. 12 1681. A Letter to Mr. Dodwell Nov. 15. 1680. Anothâ—r to him of July 9. 1677. opening many of our chief differences p. 100. Another after a personal conference sent to him but returned because he was gone into the Country debating with him eleven of our great differences in which Mr. Dodwell may be known p. 118. An Account of my dissent from Dr. Sherlocke his Doctrine Accusations and Argumentation specially about the essence of the Universal a National and Single Church and the nature of Schism c. CHap. 1. The Historical Proem Chap. 2. My â—etter and Counsâ—l to Mr. Sherlocke many years ago advising him to expound or retract his words which seem to deny the three Articles of our Baptismal covenant our belief in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost p. 162 His Answer p. 173 Chap. 3. Of the ill manner of these mens Confutations p. 174 Chap. 4. The main part of our difference viz. what is the essential form of the Catholick National and single Churches p. 182 Chap. 5. What is the
excommunications Why then are the openly wicked so numerous 2. Do you think men can change their judgment meerly because they are commanded or excommunicated If a man study and pray and endeavour to the utmost to know the truth and you say that yet he erreth will a censure cure his understanding E. g. a Nestorian a Monothelite an Anabaptist c. much less when a man knoweth that he is in the right and the censurer fighteth againd truth and duty Men in some diseases will rage at the sight of certain things which would not much trouble them if the disease were cured Macedonius and Nestorius that were judged Hereticks themselves could not bear the Bishops and meetings of the Novatians But Atticus could and they lived together in Christian Love I know those places now in England where a Conformable and Nonconformable Minister live in so great love and the latter go still to the Parish-Churches and the former sometimes come to them as that no considerable trouble ariseth by their difference And I know other places where the publick Ministers cannot bear any that hear not themselves yea or that constantly hearing them hear any other that dissenteth But they seek to win Dissenters as Fowlers would bring Birds to the Net by showting and throwing stones at them and Anglers would catch Fish by beating the Waters VI. I will tell you also that I much dissent from you in that when I told you that the Tyranny of Prelates hath done more hurt than the disobedience and discord of the People towards them you said you do not think so Qu. Do you think that Thieves have killed as many men as Wars have done If it be true that Iulius Caesar and his Armies killed 1192000. persons besides those that he slew in the Civil Wars That Darius lost at once 200 000 and abundance of such instances in lower degrees may be given sure poor Thieves and Murderers come far short of this account And so it is in the present case Gregory Nazian was a wise and good man who saith the people were factious and too unruly but at Const. were honest and meant well But how sadly doth he describe the Bishops as rageâ—ing even in their Councils and as the far greater causes of all calamity Judg by the Twenty instances that I before gave you about their excommunication How few Heresies or Schisms were there of old that the Bishops were not the notorious causes of The Samosatinians Apollinarians Macedonians Nestorians Acephali the Monothelites yea the Donatists Novatians the Phantasiasticks and almost all The Arrians began by a Presbyter but if Petavius cites them truly as he doth too many Bishops led him the way and most of the Bishops followed and were the men that kept up and increased the Heresie far beyond the people or the Presbyters Eutychus a Monk began his Cause but he was quickly contemned by his followers and did little in comparison of Dioscorus Severus and many hundred more Bishops And is it the People or the Bishops that now keep East and West in mutual damnations Have the Peoples divisions done more harm than the Papal Schism and Usurpations and Cruelties killing about 2000000. as is said of Albigenses and Waldenses the Inquisitions bloody Wars against the Germane Emperors and many English Kings the Rebellion against the Greek Emperor Leo Isaurus and destruction of the Eastern Empire our Smithfield Bone-fires and innumerable other Cruelties Desolations Heresies and Schisms Are all these less than the abuse of Liberty by Inferiors in Praying Preaching or Disorders Judg Hale saith That he had a friend that stored a very great Pond of Three or Four Acres with a great number of Fish and at Seven years end only put in Two very small Pikes and at the draught of his Pond there was not one Fish left but the Two Pikes grown to an excessive bigness and all the rest with their millions of fry devoured by the pair of Tyrants Hale of the Orig. of Man Sect. 2. cap. 9 pag. 208. The Block had been a better Ruler The Lord forgive the Presbyterians their over-keenness against Sects before the Pikes have made an end of them Pardon truth to Your Servant Ri. Baxter For the Learned Mr. Henry Dowell after a personal Conference with him SIR COncord and Peace are so very desirable to the ends of Christianity that I am glad to hear you speak for them in the general though I take your way to be certainly destructive of them and because you think the like of mine and so while we are agreed for the end we greatly differ about the means I shall here perform what I last offered you viz. I. An explication of my own sense of the way of Church-concord because you said I am still upon the destructive part viz. 1. My fundamental Principles 2. The way of concord which I suppose to be sufficient and only likely as appointed by God to attain that end II. The reasons of my utter dissent from your way III. A Proposal for our further debating of these differences I. I hope if you are a man of charity or impartiality it will be no hard matter to you to believe that I am willing to be acquainted with healing truth that I say not as willing as you and if I be unhappy in the success of my Enquiries it is not for want of searching diligence And your parts assure me that it is so with you But it is the usual effect of one received error to let in many more and it is so either with me or you And lest it should prove my unhappiness I shall thankfully accept your remedying informations 1. The Principles which I presuppose are such as these 1. As God as Creator so Christ as Redeemer is the Universal King and Head over all things to the Church which is his body Ephes. 1.22 23. Ioh. 17.2 c. 2. He hath made Vniversal Laws to be means of this Universal Government 3. His Universal Laws are in suo genere sufficient to their proper use 4. There is no other Universal King or Ruler of the world or of the Church whether Personal or Collective And therefore none that hath power of Universal Legislation or Jurisdiction 5. Much less any that hath a superiour power to alter Gods Universal Laws by abrogation subrogation suspension or dispensation Nor will God himself alter them and substitute new ones As Tertullian saith We at first believe this that no more is to be believed 6. These Laws of our Universal Governour are partly of natural Revelation and partly of Supernatural viz. by himself and by his Spirit in his Apostles given in an extraordinary measure to this end to lead them into all truth which is delivered to us in their Scripture-records 7. Some local precepts whose matter was narrow and temporary even the mutable customs of that time and place were also narrow and temporary as the washing of feet anointing vailing women the kiss of peace c
Catholick Church as described by Arch-Bishop Bramhall Bishop Gunning Dr. Saywell Mr. Thorndike Mr. Dodwell Mr. Sherlocke and the French Papists p. 193. Some notes on Dr. Saywell's Communion p. 198. More on Dr. Sherlocke's p. 203 Chap. 6. What is the Vnion and necessary Communion of the Catholick Church according to this accusing Defender p. 207. His unsatisfactory solutions manifested and Dr. Isaac Barrow's excellent Treatise of Church-Vnity published by Dr. Tillotson defended against his vain exceptions Chap. 7. Of the rest of his book p. 228. A late Letter from Mr. Dodwell calling for more Answer with the Answer to it written since the rest was Printed though it be here placed Reverend Sir I Am now in the Country and as yet in so unsetled a condition as obliges me to be a Stranger to new Works However by the short view I have when I come into Shops I find you put me off for a Reply to Mr. Clarksons little Pamphlet concerning Diocesan Jurisdiction I have got it and perused it and the design of my writing at present is to acquaint you with the reason why I think my self unconcerned in it if that be all I must expect from you in Answer to my yet unanswered Letters You must excuse me if I cannot think that Book an Answer which as it was written before them by your own confession so neither doth it foresee the accounts given in those Letters nor provide against them Whether it do so let the Reader judge But to return to the account intended why I cannot think my self concerned in this new Pamphlet of Mr. Clarkson's be pleased to understand that the excellent Dean of St. Pauls being engaged against you on the same Argument of my Letters was pleased to put himself to the trouble of perusing my Papers as they came from the Press purposely that he might avoid repeating what had been said by me This being so you may easily understand how far I am concerned in what is said to him when it was indeed wholly distinct from mine Not that I should have been unwilling to serve that great Person but that I know he is in much better hands already Mr. Clarkson in this Pamphlet as he has only mentioned Dr. Stillingfleets name so he hath confined himself to his Arguments and hath taken notice of nothing in my Letters not considered by the Doctor If he will be pleased to engage further I confess I like his temper better than any I have seen of your late Brethren except Dr. Owen Such an Adversary I should desire as would confine himself to the Cause without digressing to personal Slanders There is one mistake in him which you may be pleased to acquaint him with and that is his translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thousands more than once and sometimes where his Argument is grounded on it that it may appear to be his mistake rather than the Printers The mistake is small and separable from the main Cause but withal is very evident But according to his candour in acknowledging it so I shall see what candour I may expect from him in the main Cause if he think fit to engage with me in it As to your Answers to my Objections against your Ministry in our Oral Debates had they been unproved Assertions I should then have thought them sufficiently answered with Denials But you know the Assertions are proved in the body of my Book and till I see my Principles unravelled and Answers more distinctly applied to the junctures where the proof may seem to fail I am not likely to see any reason to change my minde Till you attempt this I am content the Reader judg whether what you have done or shall hereafter do in the like way deserve the name of a Confutation If I must never expect any further satisfaction from you for the Slanders you have raised against me all the return I intend is my hearty Prayer to God to qualifie you for your forgiveness not only of that sin but of the many others of your late writings by your re-union to the Church from which you are fallen on which account alone I have proved that you can expect forgiveness I am obliged not only on my own account but to the Publick to which you have shewn your self an Enemy on this occasion to reflect on you but I desire to leave no monuments against you to Posterity God may yet have mercy on you and let you see the mischief you are doing before it be too late That he will do so is the most unfeigned request of him who notwithstanding your many and great provocations will still endeavour to approve himself Shrewsbury Sept. 19 1681. Yours as far as is consistent with his Duty to the Publick Henry Dodwell When you have occasion to write to me send your Lettrs to be left with Mr. Took Sir I Received not yours of Septemb. 19 1681. till Octob. 21. through the miscarriage of one that should have delivered it What you have to say to Mr. Clarkson write to himself and not to me As to your call for more Answer to your Books you shall have more I had wrote one long ago and cast it by Men are weary of our Controversies and had rather all of us gave over But if I should shew the errour and impertinency of every such word in your great Book it might be a years work when I look not to live so long and it might make so great a Volume in Folio that few I think would buy or read And what great good will it do the world to tell them how grossly you abuse the Chuch and how confidently and voluminously you err As to your charge of Slandering you and wronging the Church and being unqualified for forgiveness I have the same Accusations from Quakers Anabaptists Antinomians and Papists almost in the same words Within these two hours an ancient Doctor sent me as hard words As being a self condemned person to be forsaken as opposing the Commands of God and the Faith of Iesus for not yielding to his asserting of the Seventh-day-Sabbath and condemning the Lords-days observation I have these thirty six years lived under such Accusations It is no new thing for Seducers to use affrighting words instead of proof and to say Except ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses you cannot be saved It 's the cry of most Sects You cannot be saved but in our way Sir No man living hath more cause to be loath to err and to be willing to know the Truth I am as sure as I can be if I know any thing of my own minde that I am not only willing to know the Truth but to know it at a far dearer rate than it was ever like to cost me in this world I am sure that I have not been slothful in seeking it I am sure that I would joyfully recant any Errour that you or any man can convince me of with hearty thanks for so great a
there is no certainty that any Subject Presbyters were made by the Apostles in Scripture times So that the very species of their Clergy hath no such succession as distinct from ours 4. And he that will read the Church-History and Councils declaring the multitude of doleful intercisions in East and West by Heresies the Patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch Constantinople Ierusalem and Rome and most of the chief Seats of Bishops having been judged Hereticks Simoniacks or no Bishops by General Councils yea Roman Bishops judged some of them Infidels and Diabolical by the Councils of Constance Basâ—l c. I say he that knoweth this History must know that the Diocesans that from these derive their succession have certainly had frequent and notorious intercisions § 46. And this leads me to another part of Mr. Dodwell's work viz. his proof that Aidan and Finan were Bishops As if this had been a great part of his Cause Such diverting noise is a great part of the art of deceiving Because I had said that Aiden and Finan were not Bishops but Presbyters that is when they came out of Scotland into Northumberland I apprehended that some men of his gâ—â—ius and design would be willing to mistake me and therefore Printed an Explication of the Words in the end of my first Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet But Mr. D would have men think that I said that they were never made and called Bishops at all and that I read not Beda from whom alone near Five and Thirty years ago I took almost all that I assert concerning them Let the Reader see my foresaid Explication If Mr. Dodwell will give us more than noise and mist about this matter 1. Let him prove that it was Diocesan Bishops that Ordained these Scots before they came into England when Beda saith they were sent from those Monasteries that were ruled by Presbyters and which would not so much as eat or communicate with the Roman Bishops 2. Let him prove that any Bishops in England Consecrated hem or made them Bishops here when Beda tells us that they were the first in the North and therefore had none here to Ordain them 3. Let him prove that they were here made true Diocesan Bishops of our species When 1. they had no Presbyters at first under them and therefore ruled none and had but one Congregation for one man can be but in one place at once 2. Their Church in Lindisfarne was not made of stone but of wood covered or thatcht with reeds and they are not said to have any other Church under them 3. They went indeed to preach all over the Country but not as to a Church but as to Heathens to convert them 4. Let him prove that ever they took themselves to be of a distinct order from Presbyters 5. At a Synod Bed c. 25. we find no more but the King and his Son and Hilda a woman-Abbess and three or four of this sort of Bishops far below our Ordaining City-Presbyters and their Synods But unlearned men that value Books by interest and preconceived opinions may think that by such talk Mr. Dodwell hath done some great matter § 47. But saith he p. 81 82. Our Hypothesis obliging inferiour Governours to prove their title to their office and the extent of it from the intention of their supream Governours does oblige all to a strict dependance on the supreme visible power so as to leave no place for appeal concerning the practice of such Government which as it lasts only for this life so it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice c. Ans. Alas for the poor world and Church that will be cheated at so gross a rate 1. Did you not know that the grand error that Protestants charge Papists with is the asserting of any such thing as a supreme visible power over the Church universal besides Christ. And did you think that your roteing over the name to them that deny the thing would make a wise man change his Religion 2. By your Hypothesis then no man can prove his title to his Office who either believeth not that there is any such universal Supreme or that knoweth not who it is I know no Competitors but the Pope and General Councils unless the Patriarch of Constantinople be one 3. And he that knoweth not the intention of this Supreme power is still unable to prove his office 4. And he that knoweth the intention of the Ordaining Diocesan is never the better if he know not the intention of the Supreme And what if the intention of the Supreme and of the Diocesan are contrary 5. But by your Hypothesis the Governours may alter the very species of the Priesthood as they please and what ever God saith of it in his Institution or Law it must be to us no other in kind or extent than the Governours intend If they say I ordain thee to baptize but not to teach or to do both but not to celebrate the Lords-Supper or to do that but not to pray or praise God or not to use the Keys of the Church our power is limited accordingly Then if the Prelates make Mass-Priests their intention is the measure of their power Answer the Papists then that ask Was it ever the intention of the Pope and his Prelates that the English Bishops should disclaim the Pope or the Mass or reform without them as they did 6. Seeing the English Bishops by you derive their succession from Willfred and Augustine and Rome is not the Church of Rome the â—ittest Judg of the extent of their power as knowing their own intentions Nay if they were so blind as to intend them power to pull down themselves may they not recall it 7. Did ever Protestant preach this Doctrine That there is no appeal from the supreme Prelates to God O dreadful what may men come to and what error so great that a former may not introduce Disgrace not the Church of England so much as thus to intimate that they set up themselves so as that there is no appeal to Scripture or God himself from them God hath commanded Preaching Praying Praises Baptism the Lords-Supper holy assemblies c. if the supreme Prelates interdict and forbid all these is there no appeal to God I have told you how much Robert Grosthead abhor'd this Doctrine and so told Pope Innocent the 4 th What absolute blind obedience to Prelates is this 8. And what a reason brings he That the practice lasteth only for this life and therefore c Doth any of our actions here last longer than while they are doing Praying Praise Sacraments obeying the King doing good to the poor c. and so swearing cursing adultery rebellion atheism blasphemy here last only for this life Must we therefore obey men without appeal to God if they forbid us all duty and command all sin 9. And what did the man mean when he said That it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its
you I intended none but such as were guilty and with being so I charged none particularly But that not only the old Puritans and Separatists of Queen Elizabeths times c. but also very many of ours now are guilty of them is too notorious to suppose you ignorant of it I could heartily wish that the number of better principled and more peaceable dissenters were greater than I fear it is Nor do I see that what is there said can make it unuseful even to the persons truly concerned that value truth more than any however beloved party seeing it may either let them see the ill consequence of their Principles and their influence on that Atheiâ—m and Prophaneness which I am confident themselves do most cordially detest which I conceive to be more likely to prevail with them than other arguments as being more suited to their pious dispâ—sitions or supposing that my fears were indeed groundless of the introduction of prophaneness by the contempt of Government or of contempt of Government by their disobedience to it yet might it at least warn them from confining on such dangerous consequâ—nces or from coming to them unawares by an abuse of Principles generally true but obnoxious to particular inconveniences when unwarily managed I mean it may put them in mind of the greater momentousness of good Government and peace than many of their differences and consequently of the great engagements incumbent on them for their preservation and that they would therefore so take care to oppose the particular abusive Constitutions of Government as not to bring their Government into contempt nor to suggâ—st unanswerable Apologies to factious persons for the future when they are unwilling to be obedient These are abuses which I believe your self would wish redressed in the Causers of our Church-divisions But if it could not be useful to them yet could it not be prejudicial to them nothing being urged either invidiously or imperiously and therefore no harm being done if I should prove utterly mistaken That you should marvel how Reviving Discipline could by me be expected from the constitution of our present Ecclesiastical Government does seem no less marvellous to me especially as to the exception you make against it for if it were impossible to maintain Discipline under a Government so far Monarchical as to appropriate the Decretory power of the Government of many to a single person though the execution be intrusted to many then it would follow that the secular Discipline under a secular Monarch of any extent were impossible also to be observed seeing it is as impossible for any such Prince to have a particular cognizance of every particular Cause much more of every particular person in his Dominions as for a Bishop in his Diocess As there it appears by experience I shall instance in a Scripture-example because I know that will be liable to least exception that David in an extent more vast and a people more numerous thâ—n that of the largest Diocesses 120. Miles in length and 60 Miles in breâ—dth and rather better in David's days where were accounted 1300000 men sit for War besides Artificers and such others not coming under that account was yet able to give a goâ—d account of his Government without particular inspection into all Causes or Communication of his powâ—r to numerous co-ordinate Presbyteries so I do not see why it may not as well hold for a possibility of Discipline under an Ecclesiastical Monarch of a much narrower extent for the reason produced by you seems to proceed from the nature of Government in general and therefore must proceed with the same force in seculars as Ecclesiasticals there being no ingredient peculiarly relaâ—ing to Religion much less to Christianity which might alter the case or argue a disparity for certainly Princes as well as Bishops are responsible for the miscarriage of their particular â—ubjects for they may be prevented by moral diligence and yet you will not thence conclude that every particular must come under his immediate personal care and cognizance nor is it proved that the Bishop is otherwise obliged to such a care upon peâ—uliar respects Besides that it is plainly against experience even in Ecclesistasticals for as it has fallen out in some places where there were many Cities the Bishops were proporâ—ionally multiplied as in Affrica and Ireland so that it was not upon account of the impossibility of managing the charge of much greater multitudes than the Inhabitants of those small Cities appears in that even in the very same places the greatness of no City was thought sufficient for multiplying the Bishops though it was for the Inferior Clergy I need not tell you how great Rome was and how full of Christians even in Decius's time under Cornelius which required the united endeavours of above a Thousand Clergies as appears from the said Cornelius's Epistle to Fabius of Antioch in Euseb. yet was one Bishop thought sufficient for all nay the erecting another in the same See was thought to be formal Schism as appears from the controversies of those Ages betwixt Cornelius and Novatian and St. Cyprian and Felicissimus The same also might have been shewn in several other Cities exceeding numerous and abounding with Christians as Antioch and Alexandria and Carthage c. which even in those early Ages when Discipline was at the greatest Rigour were yet Governed by single Bishops Nay whole Nations were sometimes Governed only by one as the Gotâ—s by Vlpilas and the Indians by Aedesius and the Arabians by Moses which is an Argument insisted on by some Presbyterians for shewing the probability of Ordinations by bare Presbyâ—â—rs Yâ—t are there no complaints of dissolution of Discipline in such places upon account of the greatness of their charge which to me seem sufficient convictions that the multitude of persons governed is not the reason of our present neglects in that particular When I said that Ignatius's Epistles were questioned by the Presbyterians I never said nor intended it concerning all for I knew of Vedelius's Apology for them much less did I lay it particularly to your charge so that if you had here forborn assuming to your self what was spoken of others many of whose Opinions I am confident you will not undertake to justifie there had been no occasion of this exception That other Presbyterians and those by far the greatest number have denied them cannot be questioned As for the Reasons for Nonconformity alledged by you and your Brethren of the Savoy Conference in 1660. if I might without offence presume to interpose my own thoughts they are as followeth 1. For the approving not only submitting to such things as you disliked and that by an Oath I am sure there are many Conformists themselves that understand no more to have been intended by the Church but only an Exterior submission not an Internal Approbation of the Particulars And particularly I have been inâ—ormed by a Letter from a very worthy credible person who pretends to have had
sentence all men upon other mens trial and word As if the Bishop must Excommunicate all that some body else saith he must Excommunicate This turneth Decreeing into a Hangman-like Execution And the nature of the cause forbiddeth it No man is to be Excommunicate for any other crime as such but for Impenitence in some crime nor to be absolved after but upon Repentance Now if it were but whether a man de facto have been drunk or fornicated or perjured c. it were hard judging sententially meerly on trust from others but yet perhaps that might sometimes be done But when the case is Whether the man be penitent Personal trial is necessary to a Rational and Ecclesiastical administration of the sentence I conclude therefore that as a King can judg by many hundred Judges and a General command an Army by many hundred Commanders but not without any one by himself alone having Executioners under him So is it here VII And I pray you note one other difference In the Kingdom it is not one subject of an hundred or many hundreds that hath Law suits with others once in a year or seven years or his life Nor one of some hundreds where I have lived that findeth the Magistrate work as Criminal And in this we differ even from the Physician who in a City hath not one of many that is sick but we are all of a sinning corrupt disposition and the Pastor hath few of his flock that need not some personal applications in one degree or other And even as to gross sins lived in and ignorance or heresie against the very essence of Christianity it is a good Parish where a considerable part of it are not guilty so that it is easier for one Justice of Peace to send two or three thieves in a year to a Gaol and bind two or three to the good behaviour than for one Bishop to admonish exhort convince and judg 10000 impenitent sinners in a little time and hear all the Witnesses c. If you should have said that the Parish Priest is to reprove exhort convince them first till he prove them impenitent and he is to instruct the ignorant Infidels and Hereticks I answer 1. That is more than an executive power 2. We desire no more at all from Bishopâ— or any and know no other Episcopal power over the people but thus personally to convince men and declare to the Congregation upon proof the fitness or unfitnss of men for their Communion by penitence or impenitence But this is it that the Ministers are hindred from or denied They have no power to speak with any one ignorant Heretical Infidel or scandalous sinner in the Parish but such as are willing And few of the guilty are willing They will neither come to the Minister nor suffer him to come to them but shut their doors on him if they know that he cometh on such a work or else they will not be within Or if they be will tell him that they will not answer him When I came first to Kederminster the rabble multitude curst me in the streets and rose up against me but for saying That Infants Originally have that sin and misery which needs a Saviour yet such if they scorn to speak with us must be our Communicants for want of Pastoral power There is no Law or penalty that I ever knew of to constrain any to come to us receive us hear us or answer us if we had never so much cause to question them of or fortifie them against infidelity heresie ignorance or wicked lives And if any other accuse them to us as few will we must not judg them without trial It may be you will say Would you have them constrained by force to speak with the Pastor or give him any account of their faith life or knowledg besides coming with others into the Church I answer No we would have no force as we have none But then we would not be forced our selves by the Church-Lords and Monarchs to take our selves for the Pastors of such as refuse our Pastoral office and to give the Sacrament and all priviledges of Church-Communion to every one in the Parish who upon just suspicion of gross scandal heresie infidelity or ignorance obstinately refuseth to speak to us and give us any account or to be tried I that have yearly tried my Parish by Personal Conference know that thousands and thousands among us know not and therefore believe not whether Christ be God or man or Angel or what nor who the Holy Ghost is or why Christ died rose nor scarce any supernaturally revealed article of the Christian faith And that many that understand them believe them not And I desire no Church-power but not to take those 1. For Christians 2. And for my especial Christian flock 1. Who are no Christians 2. Who themselves refuse it Without their consent the Minister is forced on them They aâ—e forced by the sword to say that they are Christians and to come to Church and Communicate The old Christian Profession was I will be a Christian and hold Communion with the Church though I go to prison or death for it The Prelatical Christian Profession is I will rather be a Christian and Communicate than I will lye in Gaol and have all my Estate confiscate Seeing then that we have not the due power of a Pastor to deny our Office-administrations in Sacraments to those that refuse us in the other parts aforesaid we are utterly disabled from so much as preparing men for the Bishops or Chancellors Examination 3. But if it were otherwise that must not satisfie the Church-Monarch who must judg himself and therefore must hear by himself But you tell me It is plainly against experience in Ecclesiasticks Ans. It 's hard then to know any thing For I dispute all this while as if the question were Whether men in England speak English And if I herein err I am uncurable and therefore I allow you to despair of me You say The greatness of no City was thought sufficient to multiply Bishops Ans. 1. Gods Institution was that every Church have a Bishop Act. 14.23 c. 2. A particular Church then was A Society of Neighbour-Christians combined for Personal Communion in Gods Worship and holy living consisting of Pastor and flock 3. For 250 years I think you cannot prove that any one Bishop in the world save at Alexandria and Romr had more such Congregations and Altars than one nor these for a long time after the Apostles nor in many Churches of ome hundred years longer 4. At Antioch the third Patriarchate Ignatius professeth that every Church had one Altar and one Bishop with his Presbyters and Deacons fellow-servants And that in this one Church the Bishop must enquire of all by name even Servant-men and Maids and see that they absented not themselves from the Church Why is not Ignatius confuted if he erred Vid. Mede on the Point 5. Alexandria and Rome
the Antecedent True Pastors have but the power to promote and order Gods worship but not to exclude or forbid it to any much less to all or 1000. without necessary cause 2. And then if Preaching and Hearing and Sacraments be ordinarily necessary to mens salvation then God hath left it to the will or power of the Bishops whether any of the people shall be ordinarily saved But that is not so 3. And then if the King should license or command us to Preach Pray and Communicate and the Bishop forbid it it were sin But that I will not believe unless the Cause more than the Authority make the difference To cooclude I hold that just use of the Keys is very necessary and that it is the great sin of England to reject it But that a false usurped use of excomunication hath been the incendiary of the Christian world which hath broken it to pieces caused horrid Schisms Rebellions Treasons Murders and bloody Wars I. The just use is 1. When a scandalous or great sinner is with convincing evidence told of his error and with seriousness yet with love and compassion intreated to repent and either prevailed with and so absolved or after due patience Authoritatively pronounced uncapable of Church-Communion and bound over to answer it at the Bar of Christ in terror if he repent not and this by the Pastor of that particular Church which either statedly or pro tempore he belongeth to 2. And when this is duly notified to such Neighbour-Pastors as he may seek Communion with and they agree not to receive any justly cast out by others but to receive and relieve the injured and falsly condemned 3. And when the King and his Justices permit not the ejected violently to intrude and take the Sacrament or joyn with the Church by force but preserveth forcibly the Peace and Priviledges of the Churches II. The excommunication that hath turned the Church into Factions and undone almost East and West is 1. When a Bishop because of his humane Superiory as Patriark Primate or Pope claimeth the power of excommunicating other Bishops as his Subjects whose Sentence must stand because of his Regent power 2. Or at least gathering a Council where he shall preside and that Council shall take themselves to have a Governing power of the Keys over the particular Bishop not only to renounce Communion with them themselves but to oblige all others to stand to their judicial Sentence 3. When Bishops shall meddle causelesly in other Bishops Churches and make themseves Judges either of distant unknown persons and cases or of such as they have nothing to do to try Yea judg men of other Countries or so distant as the Witnesses and Causes cannot without oppression be brought to their Bar. 4. When they disgrace Gods universal Laws of Communion as insâ—fficiâ—nt and make a multitude of unnecessary ensnaring dividing Laws of their own according to which they must be mens Judges 5. When these Laws are not made only for their own flocks and selves but for all the Christian world or for absent or dissenting persons 6. When men excommunicate others for hard words not understood that deserve it not as to real matter 7. Or do it to keep up an unlawful usurped power over those Churches that never consented to take them for their Pastors and to rule where they have no true Authority but such as standeth on a forcing strength 8. When Lay-Chancellors use the Keys of the Church 9. When men excommunicate others wickedly for doing their duty to God and man or unjustly without sufficient Cause 10. When unjust excommunicators force Ministers against their Consciences to publish their condemnations against those that they know to be not worthy of that Sentence if not the best of their flocks 11. And when they damn all as Hereticks Schismaticks c. that communicate with any that they thus unjustly damn 12. When they dishonour Kings and higher Pwers by disgracing excommunications much more when they depose them 13. When they tell Princes that it is their duty to banish imprison or destroy men because excommunicate and not reconciled and make Kings their Executioners And so of old when a Bishop was excommunicate he must presently be banished And they say the Scots horning is of the same nature If all had been either banished or imprisoned that were excommunicate aâ—d unreconciled in the pursuit of the General Councils of old how great a diminution would it have made of the free Subjects of the Empire And if Princes must strike with the Sword all that stand excommunicate without trying and judging the persons themselves it is no wonder if such Prelates as can first so debase them to be their Lictors can next depose them He is like to be a great Persecuter that will imprison or banish all that a proud contentious Clergy will excommunicate As corruptio optimi est pessima I doubt not but a wise humble holy spiritual loving heavenly zealous patient exemplary sort of Pastors is the means of continuing Christs Kingdom in the World and such are the Pillars and Basis of Truth in the House of God as it is said of Timothy not of the Church as is commonly mistaken So an ignorant worldly carnal proud usurping domineering hypocritical sort of Pastors have been the great plagues and causes of Schism confusion and common calamity And that when Satan can be the chuser of Pastors for Christs Church he will and too oft hath ever chuse such as shall most succesfully serve him in Christs Name And I doubt not but such holy Discipline as shall keep clean the Church of Christ and keep off the reproach of wickedness and uncleanness from the Christian Religion and manifest duly to the flock the difference between the precious and the vile is a great Ordinance of God which one man cannot exercise over many hundred Parishes and unknown people But an usurped domineering use of excommunication to subdue Kings Princes Nobles and people to the Jurisdiction Opinions and Canons of Popes Patriarchs Prelates or their Councils I think hath done not the least part of Satans work in the world And I must tell you that I have lived now near 62. now near 66. years and I never saw one man or woman reformed or converted by excommunication and I hope I have known thousands converted from their sin by Preaching even by some that are now forbidden to Preach All that ever I knew excommunicate were of two sorts 1. Dissenters from the Opinions of the Bishops or conscientious refusers of their commands And these all rejoice in their sufferings applying Blessed are ye when they cast out your names c. say all evil of you falsly c. or they take their censure for wicked persecution The Papists laugh at their Excommunicators and say What an odd conditioned Church have you that will cast us out that never came in and because we will not come in 2. Ungodly impenitent sinners And these hate
the excommunicators for disgracing them and are driven further off from godliness than before But they will say they repent at any time rather than go to the Gaol I never saw one person brought to publick confession in the Assembly by the Bishops Discipline but I heard I was young of one or two that for Adultery stood in a White Sheet in the Church laughing at the sport or hating the imposers When there were no Bishops among us about 1650. many Episcopal Presbyterians c. agreed where I lived to exercise so much Discipline as we were all agreed belonged to Presbyters Hereupon I found good success in bringing some to repentance by admonition but never of any one that stood it out to an excommunication so far as we went which was only to admonish and pray for their repentance publickly and after to declare them unmeet for Christian Communion and to require the people to avoid them accordingly till they repent After this they hated us more than before and one of them laid hands on me in the Church-Yard to have killed me And I am sure that they reverenced those Ministers more than now Lay-Chancellors if not Bishops are by such reverenced So that experience convinced me that the penalty of excommunication is much more beneficial to others than to the excommunicate And how many thousands in your Parish do now voluntarily excommunicate themselves from the Sacrament and Church-Assemblies and find no Remorse or Reformation by it And if all of both sorts conscientious Dissenters and prophane despisers and sinners were excommunicated now by the Church of England without any corporal penalty adjoyned what do you think it would do upon them Would they not laugh at you or pity you Do not the Bishops believe this and therefore will not trust to their excommunications at all without the Sword I cannot magnifie the Discipline of such men as count themselves the Power of the Keys to be but a Leaden Sword a vain thing without the annexed enforcement of corporal penalties If it be but outward obedience to their commands which they drive men to without the heart 1. Men of no Conscience will soonest obey them as forced against their Consciences 2. And why do they abuse the name of the Keys as if it were the cause of that which it is no cause of but is done only by the Magistrates Sword It is the Writ De excom cap. that doth it and not the Keys And they that think unwilling persons have right to the great benefit of Church Communion yea all that had rather come â—o Church than lie in Gaol shall never have my assent If really your meaning be to set up the power of the Keys by themselves to do their proper work and not expect that Magistrates must joyn their forcing power to punish a man meerly because he beareth the Bishops punishment patiently without changing his mind Let it prevail as far as it can prevail who will fear it save for the Schism that it may cause But if it be your meaning all this while that under the name of denying the Sacrament it is Confiscation or the Gaol that must do the work I should wish for more of the Spirit of Christianity and less inclination to the Inquisition-way Persecution never yet escaped its due odium or penalty by disowning its proper name I am more of St. Martin's mind than of Ithacius's V. One word more I add That I like not your making so light as you seem to me to do of the badness of some Ministers and People that are in the allowed Churches I know that the Papists speak much of the holiness of a Pope when perhaps a General Council saith he is a Murderer Adulterer Heretick c. and so call their Church Relatively holy I deny not that Relative holiness which is founded in meer profession But I believe that Christ came to gather a people to another sort of Godliness and by his Spirit to fill them with Divine and Heavenly Life Light and Love to God and man And I believe that all that have this though excommunicate shall be glorified And that without this all the obedience to Bishops that they give will never keep them out of Hell And I take it to be no great priviledg to march in an orderly Army to damnation or to be at peace in Satans power Hell will be Hell which way ever we come to it I confess were these Bishops in the right that Sancta Clara citeth that say The ignorant people might merit by hating God as an act of obedience if their Pastors should tell them it is their duty then this external obedience to them were more considerable But I had rather go in the Company that goeth to Heaven as all do that are true Lovers of God and man than in that which goeth to Hell as do the most Regular of the ungodly And yet I account true obedience and regularity a great duty of the godly and a great help to godliness And therefore I value the Means for the End Concord for Piety and salvation And I cannot think that there is not now in London a very laudable degree of Concord among all those that though in different Assemblies and with difference of opinions about small matters do hold one Body one Spirit one Lord one Faith one Baptism one Celestial hope and one God and Father of all and live in Love and Peace and Patience towards each other This is far greater Concord than the thousands of people that deserving excommunication for their wicked lives do hold in the bosom of the Church which receiveth them as children thereof And O! were it not for that uncharitable impatience which an ill selfish Spirit doth contain why should it seem to us a matter of such odium envy or out-cry for men to hear the same Gospel from another man which for some differing opinion they will not hear from us Or for men to communicate e. g. standing or sitting in a Congregation of that mind that weakly scruple to kneel at it with others the old Canons countenancing their gesture of standing more than kneeling What harm will it do me if under the strictest Laws of Peace men worshipped God by themselves that scruple some word or action in our worship E. g. a Nestorian that should think that it is improper to say that the Virgin Mary was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the denomination should be a ratione formali rather than a materiali Would Liberty in such matters with Love and Peace do more hurt to the Churches than Schismatical excommunications have done And indeed it is hard to make people able to reconcile a Conjunct earnâ—stness in driving the same men into the Church and casting them out yea of excommunicating them ipso facto by divers Canons sine sententia and accusing them for not communicating If it be for not repenting 1. Can you bring all the sinners about us to repentance by
Metropolitans a Patriarch that shall have a power over them which they never had themselves And what I say of Superior Orders and Offices I say of Synods For whether the power be Monarchicaâ— or Aristocratical or Democratical there is need of the same power in the Cause that maketh it No man can give that which he hath not to give If you should fly to such popular Principles as the Episcopal Champion Richard Hooker doth and the Jesuites in their Politicks and many yea most other Writers of Politicks and say That as the people are the givers of power to the Soveraign though they are no Governours themselves so the Bishops give power to the Episcopi Episcoporum personal or Synodical I answer The Principle is false about Civil Policy as I have proved against Mr. Hooker in my Christian Directory and as Dr. Hammond hath proved in the Kings Cause against Iohn Goodwin The power every man hath over himself doth so specifically differ from the power of Governing-Societies that the latter is not caused by all mens Contribution of the former and much more in Church-Government which God hath left less the Will of man as Mr. Dan. Cawdrâ—y hath proved To conclude I grant the Superiority of Magistrates and of their Officers circa sacra but not that Inferior Clergy-men may by consent make a Superior Species of Rulers or Episcopos Episcoporum by the Keys in eodem genere But I confess that how far Christ himself hath made Apostolick Successors or Archbishops as to the ordinary part of governing many Churches is a question to me of much more difficulty and moment As for the Patriarchal and other Superior Church-power in the Roman Empire that it was made partly by the Emperors themselves as the instances of the two Iustiniana's and many others shew and partly by Councils Authorized thereto by the Emperors is past all doubt IV. As to your fourth Opinion I include the reason of my denial of it in the description of it Whether you confess particular worshipping Churches that have each unum altare to be of Divine Institution I cannot tell but that you take the Diocesan to be so Divine you have told me and that you take the Superior Ruling-Churches to be made by them Now that Churches of mans making Universal or National or Patriarchal c should be the rightful Governors by the Keys over the Churches of Gods making must be either jure Divino or humano not jure humano For 1. Man cannot give the power of the Keys without God 2. And mans grant cannot over top Gods Indeed there is no power but of God 2. Not jure divino For if God give them the power God maketh that Species that containeth that power For God not to make the Office and not to give the power is all one 3. At least what satisfying proof you will give us that indeed God giveth power to Church-Officers of his own making themseves to make nobler superior Officers or Churches than themselves I cannot foresee And till it 's proved it is not to be believed 4. Yea it confoundeth the Inferiours and the Superiors For the Diocesans are so far the Superiors to the Provincial National Patriarchal c. in that they make them or give them their power and yet inferior in that they are to be subjects to them More Nonconformists do deny the power of men to make new Species of Churches and Church Rulers than their power to make new Ceremonies V. Your next mention'd Opinion that it is a sin to preach and congregate people within the local bounds of Diocesan or Provincial or other superior Jurisdictions without their consent falleth of it self if those foregoing fall which it is built upon 1. If it prove true that they that made these superior Jurisdictions had no power to make them but gave that which they had not to give then your foundation faileth 2. If it be proved that neither Christ nor his Apostles ever made a Law that Bishops Jurisdictions shall be limited measured and distributed by space of ground as our Parishes and Diocesses are so that all in such a compass shall be proper to one Pastor much less did ever divide our Diocesses or Parishes which me thinks none should deny then Preaching in that space of ground is no sin against such an Order of Christ. 3. If it be proved as I undertake to do that this distribution by spaces of ground is a work that the King and his Officers are to do or the Churches by his permission by way of contract if he leave it to them and this in obedience to Gods General Laws of Order Peace Concord and Edification then these things will follow 1. That if the King give us Licenses to Preach within such a space of ground we have good Authority and break not the restraining Law And yet such as you accused us of schism as well when the King Licensed us as since 2. That this Law of local bounds doth bind us but as other humane Laws do which is say many Casuists not at all out of the case of scandal when they make not for the bonum publicum But say others more safely not when they notoriously make against 1. Either the bonum publicum which is finis regiminis 2. Or the general Law of God which must authorize them being against edification peace c. 3. When they are contrary to the great certain and indiâ—pensible Laws of God himself And that in such cases patient suffering the penalty which men inflict is instead of obedience to the prohibition and as in Daniels case Dan. 6 and â—he Apostles c. Therefore I am 〈…〉 to give you 1. My Concessions in what cases it 〈…〉 to 〈◊〉 the Magistrate in Preaching where he forbiddeth 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉 in what cases it is a great duty But to say that it is a sin because that the Clergy forbiddeth it must have better proof â—â—an I have seen even 1. That such Clergy-men are truly called by God 2. And that they have from him the assignation of this space of ground And 3. are by him empowered to forbid all others to preach on their land 4. And that even when Gods general Laws do make it our duty that they can suspend the obligation of such Laws even the greatest I am ready upon any just occasion to prove to you that I were a heinous sinner if I should have ceased such Preaching as I have used upon all the reasons that you alledg against it And wo to them that make our greatest and dearest duties to pass for sin and our greatest sin Isa. 5.20 Were it but one of the least commands I would be loth to break it and teach men so to do much less one of the greatest when men whose consciences tell them that they are totally devoted to God as Christians and as Ordained Ministers deny their worldly interest and preferments and serve him in poverty beholden for their daily bread and to
work that God hath â—ade Officers to do already And then we need not say â—that Orders are Iure Divino if the Bishop may make more at his pleasure but quo jure and what shall set his bounds and end This seemeth more in kind than the Italians at Trent would have given to the Pope over Bishops Anâ— if they do not themselves also that same Essential part of their Office which they give to others they degrade themselves For the ceasing or alienation of an Essential part changeth the specieâ— But I suppose you will say 〈◊〉 is Preâ—byters to whom they may delegate this work And 〈◊〉 either it is a worâ— which God hath made part of the Presbyters Office or not If it be then that Presbyter doth his ow◠〈◊〉 appointed him by God and not another 〈…〉 not 〈◊〉 he maketh a new Officer who is â—either 〈…〉 But the 〈…〉 the Office 〈◊〉 that it may not be 〈◊〉 thoâ—gh Bishop may Ordain men to an Office of 〈…〉 the King or Church may make new Officers 〈…〉 Clock keepers Ostiaries c. 〈…〉 and obligation to personal duty to be done 〈◊〉 personâ—l abiâ—â—ty as is the Office of a Physician a Judg a School 〈…〉 a Pilot c where he that Authorâ—zeth and obligâ—th another statedly to do his work doth thereby make that other a Physician Judg School-Master Pilot c. This is but Ordinâ—tioâ— And if a Bishop be but one that may appoint others to do the Episcopal work then 1. Why is not every King a Bishop for he may appoint men to do a Bishops work And why is he not also a Physician Musician Pilot c. because he may do the like by them 2. And then the Bishop appointed by the King is no more a Bishop indeed than one appointed by a Bishop is But this delegation that I speak against is a smaller sin than such men choose To depute others to exercise Discipline whom God appointed not de specie thereto is but Sacriledg and Usurpation by alienating it from the true office and setting up a false one But yet the thing might some how be done if any were to do it But the almost total deposition and destruction of the Discipline it self and letting none do it by pretending the sole authority of doing it is another kind of sin Now to your answer from the similitude of Civil Monarchs I reply It is no wonder if we never agree about Church-offices if we no better agree of the general nature of them and their work Of which if you will please to read a sheet or two which I wrote the last year to Ludov. Molinaeus of the difference of Magistracy and Church-power and also read the Lord Bacons Considerations you will excuse me for here passing by what is there said I. The standing of the Magistrates Office is by the Law of Nature which therefore alloweth variety and mutations of inferior Orders as there is cause But the standing of the Clergy is by Supernatural Institution Our Book of Ordination saith there are three Orders c. Therefore man may not alter them or make more of that same kind II. Kingly power requireth not ad dispositionem materiae such Personal ability as the Pastoral-office doth A child may be a King and it may serve turn if he be but the head of power and give others commission to do all the rest of the Governing work But it is not so with a Judg a Physician an Orator or a Bishop who is not subjectum capax of the essence of the office without personal aptitude III. God hath described the Bishops office in Scripture as consisting of three parts viz. Teaching Priestly or about Worship and Sacraments and ruling as under Christs Prophetical Priestly and Kingly Office And he hath no where made one more proper to a Bishop than another nor said this is Essential and that is but Integral Therefore the Bishop may as well allow a Layman to administer the Sacraments c. as one not appointed to it by God to Rule by the Keys IV. The Bishops Pastoral Rule is only by Gods word upon the Conscience as Bishop Bilson of Obed. sheweth at large and all Protestants agree and not by any mulcts or corporal force If he use the sword or constraint it is not as a Bishop but as a Magistrate But the Kings is by the sword And will it follow that because the King may appoint another to apprehend men and carry them to prison c. that therefore a Bishop appointed by God to Preach Worship and Rule and therein to draw the Impenitent to Repentance by patient exhortations and reproofs c. may commit this to another never appointed to it of God V. Either it is the Bishops work as was said that is delegated by him or some other If properly his own than either he maketh more Bishops and that 's all we plead for or else a Presbyter or Layman may do a Bishops proper work And then what need of a Bishop to pass by the contradiction VI. But my chief answer to you is the King as Supreme Magistrate doth appoint and rule by others that are truly Magistrates They have every one a Judicial power in their several places under him even every Justice of Peace But you suppose the Bishop to set up no Bishops nor no Church-Governours under him at all A King can rule a Kingdom by Supremo Judgment when he hath hundreds of Judges under him who do it by his authority And if this had been all our dispute whether a Patriarch or Archbishop can rule a thousand Churches by a thousand Inferior Bishops or Church-rulers you had said something But doth it follow that your Church Monarch can over-see them all himself without any sub-oversees or rule them by Gods word on the Conscience without any sub-rulers You appropriate the Decretory Power to your Monarch and communicate only the executive Hold to that The whole Government is but Legislatio Iudicium Legislation now we meddle not with yet our Bishops allow it to the Presbyters in Convocation for they take Canons to be Church-Laws It is a lower power that is denied to them that they grant the higher to Bare execution is no Government A Hangman is no Governour A Governour may also be Executioner but a meer Executioner is no Governour The People are Executioners of Excommunications while they withdraw from the Excommunicate and with such do not eat c. as 1 Cor. 5. And the Parish-Priest is an Executioner while he as a Cryer proclaimeth or readeth the Chancellors Excommunication in the Church and when he denieth the Sacrament to those that he is bid deny it to I grant you that this is Communicated But it is the Judicial power it self which I have been proving the Bishop uncapable of Exploration is part of the Judicial work I know you include not that in execution which follows it If you did it would be a sad office for a Bishop to