bottom of his 35 p. he says Ignatius charges the Bishop to take Coâ—â—nizance of every Member of his Church not excepting the very Servants and that it was the Custom then in every Congregation to receive the Sacrament every Lords day and that they never received it but from the Hand of the Bishop Hence he concludes that such Bishops must be the Pastors of single Congrezations and adds that this Argument has been copiously mannaged by Blundel Baxter Owen Clarkson and others This Gent. as in all other Quotations leaves me to find this I have met with the passage in St. Ignatius's Ep. to Polycarp Bishop of the Smyrmans where he saith Converse with all man by man as God shall enaâ—â—e thee he saith further Let nothing be done without thy Sentence c. A little farther he saith Let Congregations be gather'd more frequently and take the names of all Persons Let neither Men nor Maid Servants be despised by thee And in the same Ep. he saith Be mindful of the Bishop that God may be mindful of you I could give my Life for those persons who are Subject to the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons Let the Reader consider all the parts together and then Judge how reasonably Congregational Bishops can be hence inferr'd 1. It is evident that Polycarp was not Bishop of one Single Congregation only by these words call the Congregations together c. in the Plural Number 2. His Jurisdiction and Authority over the Congregations is manifest in these words Let nothing be done without thy Sentence 3. The Subjection 〈◊〉 to the Bishop from these Congragations contain'd in this Exhortation to them Be mindful of the Bishop that God may be mindful of you 4. The Distinction of the three Sacred Orders in the Church about which these men have made such a bussle in the world are plainly set down and overthrows all their pretentions to Congregational Bishops for saith he J could give my life for these persons who are Subject to the Bishop Pres yters and Deacons Here is a plurality of Congregations and a plurality of Presbyters and Deacons and but one Bishop From his not reading or concealing the most material parts in this Ep. wherein lye the true Sentiments of St. Ignatius how Triumphantly does he conclude for Congregational Bishops whereas the whole is altogether against it Then he glories in the copious management of this Argument by Blundel Baxter Owen Clarkson and others Alass all these have been judiciously Answered by Bramhal Hammond Morris Stillingfleet Dodwell c. In his 36. p. saith he It is observable in the passage cited out of Irenaeus the Presbyters are said to have their Succession from the Apostles and infers from thence that the Presbyters are the Apostles Successors as well as Bishops and must conseq ently have the same power How frequently in the writings of the Fathers and in Scripture are Bishops called Presbyters as that word signifies Seniority or Dignity and are not they sometimes called Deacons too but as it would be very absur'd to infer from hence an Equality of Bishops and Deacons so would it be unreasonable to conclude concerning Bishop and Presbyter That our Author is mistaken in St. Irenaeus's sense of the word Presbyter appears by the words immediately subjoyned which are these Qui cum Episcopatus Successione Charisma veritatis certum Secundum placitum Patris acceserâ—nt L. 4. C. 43. Who that is the Presbyters above mentioned with the Succession of Episcopacy have received the Infallible Gift of Truth according to the Will of the Father It is plain that no other can be here ment but those of the highest Order in the Church Bishops My Author p. 37. accuseth me that I designed not fair dealing with Mr. H-ry it was a great omission in me I therefore take his thô very sharp Rebuke very kindly Mr. H-ry in his 19 p. Parag. 6. very Orthodoxly saith Separation from Communion with those that we have joyned our selves to without a Cause give me leave to call it Separation for Separation sake without any regard had to any think amiss in the Church we Separate from or any thing better in that we joyn our selves to is Schism Then he proves the truth of this Proposition from his own description of Schism and then concludes When we quite cast off Communion with our Brethren out of Ambition Animosity to their persons affectation of Novelty and Singularity and the like Now our Author lest this truth so plainly set down by Mr. H-ry should carry too sharp an edge upon 'em in p. 37. brings in his Insinuation as he in vain supposeth to guard them from the stroke they must naturally receive from the applying of it to them For says he We all grant that for persons wilfully to with-draw themselves from such particular Churches as are framed according to Scripture Rules and impose no new and needless Terms is to act Schismatically because such wilfull Separation cannot be without the breach of Charity The difficulties which my Author which indeed are none at all would put lyes in Churches framed according to Scripture Rules c. It is Schism in Mr. H-ry's Judgment to Separate from a Church without any regard had to any thing amiss Let it be Examined if in our Church there be any thing amiss Are not all the Arcicles of saving Faith truly taught No just cause of Separation the Holy Sacraments duly Administred the Moral precepts and all the Rules of the Christian Religion plainly and constantly recommended unto us and prest upon us for our Excercise in the whole Course of our lives in the Sermons of our Clergy in all our Churches are not all things pertaining to a Godly Life and Salvation by our Church fully exhibited to us so as that no man can miscarry but by his own fault Here then sure can be nothing amâ—ss Can these men maintain and justifie then the truth of their Doctrine and separate themselves from us without pronounceing themselves Schismatics either their Doctrin is not true or these men are Schismatics in practice by their own shewing All the false and shiftless pretence they have is that the Church of England is not framed according to Scripture Rules and imposeth new and needless terms and therefore Separation from such a Church is no Schism That our Church is truly Apostolical and as truly framed as Jerusalem Antioch Alexandria and all other Primitive Churches according to Scripture Rules according to Christ Jesus's own Institution is fully proved in these papers So that that Objection is clearly Answered and is indeed vain and frivolous Now let his other as vain and frivolous Objection be considered viz. the Imposing new and needless Terms by which is I suppose meant Geremonies I must here crave leave to mention what I have before viz. the Love-â—cast the Holy kiss had no intrinsic vertue in them were no Essentials of Religion see his p. 2. mere Ceremonies and as this Gent. calls our
Majestic than in our Churches The truth of this will best appear from their practice None of their Addresses to K. James the second were presented 'till the Composure and Form thereof was deliberated and well weighed by more than One by the whole Classis of a County The Preacher saith Eccles 5.2 Be not rash with thy Mouth and let not thine Heart be hasty to utter any thing before God c. But they in their Conventicles Address the Majesty of Heaven they rush upon and approach his presence with the rash and Sudden thoughts of one single person with a Prayer newly Coined but whether Sterling true according to Standard being never tryed is uncertain for the people know it not nor the Orator till it be out they shew'd more Fear and Reverence to an earthly King than they dayly do to God Almighty Is this Rational Is this Grave In their Conventicles at the reading the Holy Scriptures among which the Psalms consisting of the highest strains of Devotion they Sit or Loll and are covered is this Grave and Majestic When the Minister as they call him offer up his rash and unconsider'd Prayers to God the People are in confused and irreverend postures as if there were some unconcern'd and trivial thing in hand is this Grave and Majestical He who Administers in their Divine Worship as they call it has no other Habit than what is due to and becomes a Tradesman or any other Layic in the Congregation and indeed therein they are very modest the Minister for the most part having no more claim to Priestly Garments than his Auditors is this Grave and Majestic The truth is these men are so humorsome that what is Rational they condemn as Senceless what is Grave and Majestical they condemn for Superstition and on the contrary what is Rude Irreverend and Foppish they esteem as Rational Grave and Majestical By this time it is very evident that the Dissenters in England do Separate from a Church wherein there is to use Mr. H-ry's words not any thing amiss i. e. not any thing that can give any just occasion to Separate from her and that the Communion for I cannot call it a Church or Society they joyn themselves to is so far from being better that in many Respects which I have mentioned it is so much worse that its an absurdity to compare them The Inference then drawn by Mr. H-ry from his own Proposition is clearly against them Mr. H-ry p. 19. that their Separation from our Church is clearly for Separation sake and is necessarily an Vncharitable Alienation of Affection and is consequently Schismatical Having also considered my Authors Notion of Schism to wit p. 37. for persons wilfully to with-draw themselves from such particular Churches as are framed according to Scripture Rules and impose no new or needless Terms is to act Schismatically because such wilful Separation when no cause is given cannot be without breach of Charity with our fellow-Christians which is the Scripture Notion of Schism Having shewed that our Church is truly framed according to Scripture Rules and that she imposeth neither New nor needless Terms this Inference of his is necessarily against them too viz. That the wilfull with-drawing of these men from such a particular Church as our Church is is to act Schismatically c. If any thing would prevail upon the Oâ—â—â—inacy of these men here is conviction from their own Reasoning 〈…〉 fair dealing with Mr. H-ry at this time will make an Attoneâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 â—â—â—mer Omission and allay my Adversaries bitter thoughts against me In my 〈◊〉 paper p. 7. I instanced the Authoritys of Ienatius Irenâ—us â—â—â—â—ian and A 〈…〉 who were all Bishops and Mattyrs and agree Tâ—â—â— for 〈◊〉 to disâ—â—ey then Bishops and Presbyters appointed set ever them and to Sâ—parate 〈◊〉 them oâ— to set up distinct Conventicles is 〈…〉 Is not by this understood diâ—â—râ—ty or Separation of Comâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 is not this properly Scâ—â—sm Yet for this my assirmation he does in his 45 p. peremptorily charge me and consequently those Pious Maâ—yrs with giving St. Paul the Lye It St. Paul condemn'd the Corinthians for admiring and barely preâ—â—â—â—ing one Minister before another of Schism shall that far greater and blacker Crime the fâ—â—saking and Separating from them â—o which the 〈◊〉 were not then arrived be excluded from Schism Shall a cut in the Arm be truly call'd Schism or Schissure and shall not the lopping off and Separating the Arm from the Body which is the Dissenters Case be accounted so Wherein do I give St. Paul the lye This Gent. is a topping Accuser The rest of his Book contains chiefly Bitter Invectives and Scurrilous Reflections at his bitter reviling of me I wonder not But stand amaz'd at his hardyness and indeed horrid and gross Impiety with so much Venom and Malice to take into Royal Sepulchers and render our Four Protestant Monarchs Infamous see his p. 61. of K. Charles the 2d he saith not to be paralell'd in Story I Q. Elizabeth's Reign our Church was again Reform'd all the Innovations and Superstitions which by a long series of time the Church of Rome had introduced into the Church and Consecrated with the Title of the Did Religion abolished the inestimable Blessing of the truly Ancient Cathoâ—e Religion revived and established this Religious Queen and all those pious Prelates to whom under God the praise of all that Glorious work was due escape noâ— his malice but in one breath blackens and defames them all these are his words in p. 75. That great Princess had sâ—â—â—thing of the Sire in her and there wanted not Prelatic breath to blow the Spark into a Flame The Universal Fame this Great Princess had for Wisdom and Piety the Turbuâ—en Humor and Insolent behaviour of the Dissenters towards Her you have an account of in Bish Barnet's Aâ—râ—dgment c. the 4th Book p. 381. Now notwithstanding that this man saith in his 2d p. that Penal Laws had a quite contrary effect and in his 3d p. that they have not hitherto brought Protestants to an exact Uniformity this Queen in the year 1592 made Penal Laws which being Vigorously Executed contrary to his maxims had the good effects and proper ends for which they were made supprest the Ring-leaders and put an end to their Conventicles and brought so many of them to Conformity that during Her reign afterwards she had no more disturbances from them and this I suppose to be the chief incentive of this Male-contents displeasure against this Great and Matchless Princess In his 56 p. concerning K. James the first he saith For when King 〈…〉 Englands Throne the Prelatic Party dreading least the Paâ—â—tans 〈…〉 great a share in his Favours upon the account of his Edâ—â—tion 〈…〉 the Scottish Nobility and Ministry might have upon hi◠〈…〉 Studies to creat a prejudice against them and fâ—â—ing no 〈…〉 take with him as the extending of his Authority and enlarging 〈◊〉 Pâ—rogative c.
upon him to contradict those Learned men who think the Angels mentioned in the Revel by St. John were Bishops he having granted this is all my desire and therefore all his witty Animadversions which follow are not worth my answering It would be but needless Repetition to say any thing to his following Paragraph in his 14. p. having fully answered it before In his p. 15. he says What do I mean in saying in these Multiplyed Churches there was no Variation and then very disingenuously changes my word for a word very different in signification and asks Was there no variety at all in any Circumstance of Worship and says the contrary may be prov'd even in the Apostles times and instances that which he calls a Scuffle Acts 15. betwixt the believing Jews and Gentiles about Jewish Ceremonies Here were no such different Circumstances as to divide their Communion therein there was no Variation their Unity was preserved the Jewish Ceremonies which the Converted Jews would have imposed on the Christian Gentiles were no Circumstances in the Christian Worship the Council at Jerasalem thought therefore necessary to forbid those Impositions now in this very Case the necessity of Apostolic Jurisdiction doth appear that by a decisive and definitive Sentence of Ecclesiastical Authority it may not be in the power of private Christians to impose their different Sentiments upon one another and that there may be no Variation nor breach of Unity in the public Worship of God So that this Instance is not at all for his purpose He says if I mean there was no variation from Scripture Rules tho we are afraid that will scarce hold yet we wish it had been so still By Scripture Rules here he certainly means the New Testament if this Gent. had any regard to Ecclesiastical Antiquity he would never have talked of Scripture that is New Tâ—â—â—ment Rules before they were written He says We have a Notion of Vnity lâ—yed down in my p. 2. in which we freely concur with him these are my words for he has not transcribed them fairly They are all one with that Church first mentioned at Jerusalem and which he omits all one with one another being all United into one Spiritual Society or Body under one Head Christ Jesus c. and which he has omitted too and are in all things the sune with that first Church United in one Baptism and one Faith and all partakers at the same Eucharist c. That says he is the same for substance for in that they all agreed in the Primitive times in the same Circumstances such a Vnity we hold and doubt not but in our Congregations this Vnity may be found And so he runs on in his 16. p. and endeavours to perswade all men just like the Donatists that these Dissenters are more truly Catholic than we That the Power delegated by our blessed Saviour to his Apostles was to be confer'd upon their Successors is certainly implyed in the promise Mat. 28.20 Lo I am with you alway even to the end of the world The Church of England truly Apostolical That the Church of England was Planted either by some of the Apostles or some of their Successors and that the Succession of Bishops has continued in this Church from that first propagation by as strong proofs as human Authority is capable of viz. by Records and Histories may appear and consequently that the Church of England is as truly an Apostolic and Catholic Church as Jerusalem Alexandria Antioch and those other Churches which were of the first Planting Her Orders then are to be equally obeved Her Unity and Peace as strictly mantained and whatsoever amounted to Schism in any of them must be so in her your Uniting then in a Communion Separate from this Church bears no similitude with Primitive Unity being contrary to their Practice And being that in your Congregations the Divine Authority is wanting there can be no such Unity found among you as Primitive Unity He Says the Eucharist was the same for Substance in the Primitive Congregations and that they all agreed in the same Circumstances It is very true for no difference would be allow'd Christians then durst not entertain so wicked and uncharitable a thought as that of setting up a Separate Congregation as you do They devoted themselves to the Command of their master to have Peace one with another Mark 9.50 Heb. 13.17 They for Conscience sake observ'd the Command of the Apostle Obey them that have the Rule over you If you would tread in their steps you would as Relgiously observe the Unity and Peace of the Established Church wherein you live in all Circumstances as they did All his next Paragraph Pa. 17. is the same in different Phrases He says the description I have given of Church Vnity ruins my whole Book and Cause an hasty Sentence for says he if this be the true proper Vnity of Churches then there may be true Church-Vnity without the Vniting of many particular Churches Ministers and People into one Diocesan Church under the Jurisdiction of a Prelate and his Officers c. Then he is not much against the conveniency of Parochial-Precincts but says according to my Definition it is not De essentia Vnitatis It is plain all that he drives at here is that there may be true Church Unity without Episcopacy I have answer'd this before by shewing that all Presbyters with their Particular Congregations that is Ministers and People now resolved into Parochial Churches within the Dioceses of the Respective Cities were United under the Jurisdiction of the Respective Bishop of each City So that the Vniting of many particular Churches Ministers People into one Diocesan Church under the jurisdiction of a Prelate is true Church Vnity as used in Primitive times by which it appears that this Gent. Doctrine viz. 1 Cor. 11.16 that there may be true Church Vnity without Episcopacy is a mere Innovation there being no such custom in the Churches of God as the Apostle speaks As for their Officers they have the Sanction of our Laws to Authorize them an Authority far greater than can be shewed for Lay Elders Officers subserviant to the Minister of every Congregation and thô generally ignorant and many of them cannot write their Names yet are made judges of their fellow Christians sufficiency in faith a novelty created by Calvin and how reasonable let the impartial judge He says so a man may plead to the jurisdiction of a Diocessan Prelate may step over Parish bounds c. So did Korah and his Congregation against Moses and Aaron Nam 16.2 10. their Controversie being the very same with yours against the Church they were for leveling the Priest-hood so are you they were for setting up a new model'd Congregation so are you God shewed his displeasure against their Pride and Disobedience by a most terrible destruction and the Apostle saith Rom. 15.4 Whatsoever things were written aforetimes were written for