Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
cause_n ecclesiastical_a king_n supremacy_n 2,485 5 10.5338 5 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A27006 Reliquiæ Baxterianæ, or, Mr. Richard Baxters narrative of the most memorable passages of his life and times faithfully publish'd from his own original manuscript by Matthew Sylvester. Baxter, Richard, 1615-1691.; Sylvester, Matthew, 1636 or 7-1708. 1696 (1696) Wing B1370; ESTC R16109 1,288,485 824

There are 7 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

suggest nor did we ever hear any just Reasons given for their di●ient from the Ecclesiastical Hierarchy or Prelacy as it was stated and established in this Kingdom Which we believe to be for the main the true ancient primitive Episcopacy and that to be more than a meer presidency of Order Neither do we find that the same was in any Time ballanced or managed by any Authoritative Commixtion of Presbyters therewith Though it hath been then and in all Times since usually exercised with the Assistance and Counsel of Presbyters in subordination to the Bishops § 8. And we cannot but wonder that the Administration of Government by one single Person should by them be affirmed to be so liable to Corruptions Partialities Tyrannies and other Evils that for the avoiding thereof it should be needful to have others joyned with him in the power of Government Which if applyed to the Civil State is a most dangerous Insinuation And we verily believe what Experience and the Constitutions of Kingdoms Armies and even private Families sufficiently confirmeth in all which the Government is administred by the Authority of one single Person although the Advice of others may be requisite also but without any share in the Government that the Government of many is not only most subject to all the aforesaid Evils and Inconveniencies but more likely also to breed and soment perpetual Factions both in Church and State than the Government by one is or can be And since no Government can certainly prevent all Evils that which is liable to the least and sewest is certainly to be preferred As to the four particular Instances of things amiss c. § 9. 1. We cannot grant that the Extent of any Diocess is so great but that the Bishop may well perform that wherein the proper Office and Duty of a Bishop doth consist which is not the personal Inspection of every Man's Soul under his Government which is the Work of every Parochial Minister in his Cure but the Pastoral Charge of overseeing directing and taking care that the Ministers and other Ecclesiastical Officers within his Diocess do their several respective Duties in their several Stations as they ought to do And if some Diocesses shall be thought of too large Extent the Bishops may have Suffragan Bishops to assist them as the Laws allow It being a great mistake that the Personal Inspection of the Bishop is in all places of his Diocess at all times necessary For by the same reason neither Princes nor Governours of Provinces nor Generals of Armies nor Mayors of great Cities nor Ministers of great Parishes could ever be able to discharge their Duties in their several Places and Charges § 10. 2. We confess the Bishops did as by the Law they were enabled depute part of the Administration of their Ecclesiastical Jurisdictions to Chancellors Commissaries and Officials as Men better skill'd in the Civil and Canon Laws But as for Matters of more Spiritual Concernment viz. the Sentences of Excommunication and Absolution with other Censures of the Church we conceive they belong properly to the Bishop to decree and pronounce either by himself where for the present he resideth or by some grave Ecclesiastical Person by him Surrogated for that purpose in such Places where he cannot be Personally present Wherein if many things have been done amiss for the time past or shall be seasonably conceived inconvenient for the future we shall be as willing to have the same Reformed and Remedied as any other Persons whatsoever § 11. 3. Whether a Bishop be a distinct Order from Presbyter or not or whether they have power of sole Ordination or no is not now the Question But we affirm that the Bishops of this Realm have constantly for ought we know or have heard to the contrary Ordained with the Assistance of Presbyters and the Imposition of their Hands together with the Bishops And we conceive it very fit that in the exercise of that part of their Jurisdiction which appertaineth to the Censures of the Church they should likewise have the Advice and Assistance of some Presbyters And for this purpose the Colledges of Deans and Chapters are thought to have been instituted that the Bishops in their several Diocess might have their Advice and Assistance in the Administration of their weighty Pastoral Charge § 12. 4. This last dependeth upon Matter of Fact Wherein if any Bishops have or shall do otherwise than according to Law they were and are to be answerable for the same And it is our desire as well as theirs that nothing may be done or imposed by the Bishop but according to the known Laws For Reforming of which Evils c. § 13. 1. The Primates Reduction though not published in his Life time was formed many years before his Death and shewed to some Persons ready to attest the same in the Year 1640. but it is not consistent with two other Discourses of the same Learned Primate viz. the one of the Original of Episcopacy and the other of the Original of Metropolitans both printed in the Year 1641. and written with great diligence and much variety of ancient Learning In neither of which is to be found any mention of the Reduction aforesaid Neither is there in either of them propounded any such Model of Church Government as in the said Reduction is contained Which doubtless would have been done had that Platform been according to his setled Judgment in those Matters In which Reduction there are sundry things as namely the Conforming of Suffragans to the number of Rural Deaneries which are apparently private Conceptions of his own accommodated at that time for the taking off some present from Animosities but wholly destitute of any Colour of Testimony or President from Antiquity nor is any such by him offered towards the proof thereof And it would be considered whether the Final Resolution of all Ecclesiastical Power and Jurisdiction into a National Synod where it seemeth to be placed in that Reduction without naming the King or without any dependance upon him or relation to him be not destructive of the King's Supremacy in causes Ecclesiastical It is observable nevertheless that even in the Reduction Archi-Episcopacy is acknowledged As for the super-added Particulars § 14. 1. The Appointment and Election of Suffragans is by the Law already vested in the King whose Power therein is by the Course here proposed taken away § 15. 2. What they mean by Associations in this place they explain not but we conceive it dangerous that any Association whatsoever is understood thereby should be made or entered into without the King's Authority § 16. 3. We do not take the Oaths Promises and Subscriptions by Law required of Ministers at their Ordination Institution c. to be unnecessary although they be responsible to the Laws if they do amiss it being thought requisite as well by such Cautions to prevent Offences as to punish Offenders afterwards Upon all which Consideration it is that
intend only Bishops and King by Church and State 1. It would suppose that King and Parliament do take Bishops and King for two coordinate Heads in governing the Kingdom 2. And that they set the Bishops before the King which is not to be supposed 5. And to put all out of question the Oath is but Conform to former Statutes Oaths Articles of Religion and Canons 1. The Statutes which declare the King to be only Supreme Governour of the Church I need not cite 2. The Oath of Supremacy is well known of all 3. The very first Canon is that the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury and all Bishops c. shall faithfully keep and observe all the Laws for the King's Supremacy over the Church of England in causes Ecclesiastical And the 2d Canon is to condemn the dangers of it And the 36. Canon obligeth all Ministers to subscribe that the King's Majesty under God is the only Supreme Governour of this Realm as well in all spiritual and Ecclesiastical things or causes as temporal And as the Parliament are called the Representative of the People or Kingdom as distinct from the Head so the 139. Canon excommunicateth all them that affirm that the Sacred Synod of this Nation in the Name of Christ and by the King's Authority Aslembled is not the true Church of England by Representation So that they claim to be but the Representative of the Church as it is the Body distinct from the Head Christ aud the King as their chief Governour 4. And all that are Ordained are likewise to take the Oath of Supremacy I do utterly testify and declare in my Conscience that the King's Highness is the only Supreme Governour of this Realm as well in all Spiritual or Ecclesiastical things or Causes as Temporal 5. And It is also inserted in the Articles of Religion Art 35. And it is added expositorily Where we attribute to the Queen's Majesty the Chief Government by which title we understand the minds of some slanderous folks to be offended we give not to our Princes the Ministring either of God's Word or of the Sacraments but that only prerogative which we see to have been given always to all Godly Princes in holy Scriptures by God himself that is that they should rule all Estates and Degrees committed to their Charge by God whether they be Ecclesiastcal or Temporal and restrain with the Civil Sword the Stubborn and evil Doers Here it is to be noted that though no doubt but the Keys of Excommunication and absolution belong to the Pastors and to the Civil Magistrate yet the Law and this Article by the word Government mean only Coercive Government by the Sword and do include the power of the Keys under the title of Ministring the Word and Sacraments Church Guidance being indeed nothing else but the Explication and Application of God's word to Cases and Consciences and administring the Sacraments accordingly So that as in the very Article of Religion Supreme Government appropriated to the King only is contradistinguish'd from Ministring the Word and Sacraments which is not called Government there so are we to understand this Law and Oath And many Learned Men think that Guidance is a fitter name than Government for the Pastor's Office And therefore Grotius de Imper. Sum. Pot. would rather have the Name Canons or Rulers used than Laws as to their Determinations Though no doubt but the name Government may be well applyed to the Pastor's Part so we distinguish as Bilston and other judicious men use to do calling one Government by God's Word upon the Conscience and the other Government by the sword as seconding Precepts with enforcing penalties and Mulcts § 301. While this Test was carrying on in the house of Lords and 500 pounds Voted to be the penalty of the Refusers before it could come to the Commons a difference fell between the Lords and Commons about their priviledges by occasion of two Suits that were brought before the Lords in which two Members of the Commons were parties which occasioned the Commons to send to the Tower Sir Iohn Fagg one of their Members for appearing at the Lords Bar without their consent and four Counsellours Sir Iohn Churchill Sergeant Pemberton Sergeant Pecke and another for pleading there And the Lords Voted it Illegal and that they should be released Sir Iohn Robinson Lieutenant of the Tower obeyed the Commons for which the Lords Voted him a Delinquent And so far went they in daily Voting at each other that the King was fain to Prorogue the Parliament Iune 9. till October 13. there appearing no hope of Reconciling them Which rejoiced many that they rose without doing any further harm § 302. Iune 9. Keting the Informer being commonly detested for prosecuting me was cast in Gaol for Debt and wrote to me to endeavour his Deliverance which I did and in his Letters saith Sir I assure you I do verily believe that God hath bestowed all this affliction on me because I was so vile a wretch as to trouble you And I assure you I never did a thing in my Life that hath so much troubled my self as that did I pray God forgive me And truly I do not think of any that went that way to work that ever God would favour him with his mercy And truly without a great deal of mercy from God I do not think that ever I shall thrive or prosper And I hope you will be pleased to pray to God for me c. § 303. A while before another of the chief Informers of the City and my Accuser Marishall died in the Counter where his Creditors laid him to keep him from doing more harm Yet did not the Bishops change or cease Two more Informers were set on work who first assaulted Mr. Case's Meeting and next got in as hearers into Mr. Read's Meeting where I was Preaching And when they would have gone out to fetch Justices for they were known the doors were lockt to keep them in till I had done and one of them supposed to be sent from Fullum stayed weeping Yet went they straight to the Justices and the week following heard me again as Informers at my Lectures but I have not yet heard of their Accusation § 304. But this week Iune 9. Sir Thamas Davis notwithstanding all his foresaid Warnings and Confessions sent his Warrants to a Justice of the Division where I dwell to distrein on me upon two Judgments for 50 pounds for Preaching my Lecture in New-street Some Conformists are paid to the value of 20 pounds a Sermon for their Preaching and I must pay 20 pounds and 40 pounds a Sermon for Preaching for nothing O what Pastors hath the Church of England who think it worth all their unwearied Labours and all the odium which they contract from the People to keep such as I am from Preaching the Gospel of Christ and to undo us for it as far as they are able though these many years they do not for they cannot
be Schismaticks with them that unite not in their Center or at least be not tyed to union by their ligaments So he is a Schismatick to a Papist that Centers not in the Pope as the Principium unitatis and visible Head of the Church and in the Roman Church as the Heart of the Church Catholick denominating the whole He is a Schismatīck with some others that owns not every Order or Ceremony which they maintain For my part I should think that he that 〈◊〉 in ●hr●●t and ●●●deth the sound and wholsome Doctrine contained in the Creeds of the Church and maintaineth love and unity with all Christians to the utmost extent of his natural capacity even with all that he is capable of holding Communion with is no Schismatick nor his attempts for that end Schismatical Combinations If there were a Bishop in this Diocess and he should go one way suppose he command that all Church Assemblies be at such a time and all worship in such a form and all the Presbyters and People go another way whether they do well or ill so the thing itself be tollerable and will not meet at the time nor worship God in the form which he prescribeth I should think I were guilty of Schism if I separated from all these Churches and guilty of ungodliness if I wholly forsook and forbore all publick worship of God because I could have none according to the Bishops commanding Much more if there were no Bishop in the Diocess at all This seems to be our case in respect of both Worship and Discipline at least for the most part Is that man guilty of no Schisme nor Impiety who will rather have no Discipline exercised at all on the profane and scandalous but all Vice go without controul and the rage of Mens sins provoke Heaven yet more against us who will rather have no Ministerial Worship of God in Prayer or Praise no Sacraments no Solemn Assemblies to this end no Ministerial Teaching of the people but have all Mens Souls given over to perdition the bread of life taken from their mouths and God deprived of all his Worship then any of this should be done without Bishops That had rather the Church doors were shut up and we lived like Heathens than we should Worship God without a Bishops Commands and that when we have none to command us 3. We distinguish of the necessity of Bishops either it is a necessity ad bene esse for the right ordering of the Church when it may be had or it is a necessity ad esse to the very being of a Church or of Gods Worship without which we may not offer God any publick Service or have any Communion with any Congregation that so doth The former we leave as not fit for our determination and therefore we do not contradict you in it nor seek to draw you to own any Declaration against it The latter we do deny there is no such necessity of Bishops as that God can have no Church without them and that we must rather separate from all our Assemblies and never offer God any publick Worship then do it without them remembring still that we speak of those Bishops whom we are charged with rejecting and not the Pastors of particular Congregations And in this distinction of necessity and in this conclusion I have the consent of the generality of the Protestant Bishops so far as I know to a Man as far as their Writings declare to us their Minds and therefore Episcopal Divines may consent Except to Sect. 2. 1. Whether in this Worcestershire Association whoever will enter into it doth not therein oblige himself to acknowledge those for Presbyters and Pastors of Churches who profess themselves to have been made such in a Church where there are and were Bishops that never denyed them Orders without the Hands Consent or Knowladge of the Bishop yea in a time when Bishops were without any accusation before any Ecclesiastical Superiour Synod or other unheard ejected laid by by their own sheep and Presbyters that owed them obedience Reply to Sect. 2. To your first Question I answer 1. You must distinguish of punishing and ejecting Bishops that deserve it and casting out their Order 2. Between casting out the appurtenances and corruptions which made up the English sort of Prelacie as differing from the Primitive and casting out the Order and Office of Bishops simply in itself 3. Between those Men that do cast them out and those that do not 4. Between a Church that hath Bishops and one that hath none 5. Between them that can have Ordination by them and those that cannot 6. Between those Ministers of this Association that were Ordained by Bishops and those that were not 7. Between the Irregularity and sinfulness or Ordination and the nullity thereof and so between a Minister regularly Ordained and a Minister Irregularly Ordained who is a Minister still Hereupon I answer further in these conclusions 1. That too many of the Bishops lately ejected did deserve it is beyond dispute 2. Whether the Parliament in the state that they were in had not power to punish them by Imprisonment or Ejection as Solemon did Abiathar without an Ecclesiastical Superior or whether the Clergy be exempted from such punishment by the Secular power till they are delivered up to them by the Ecclesiastical Head hath been voluminously disputed in the world already Sutcliffe Bilson Iewel and a multitude more have proved that Kings have power in all Causes and over all Persons as well Ecclesiastical as Civil and that the Pope hath no power of Jurisdiction in England let the Oath of Supremacy judge and if the Metropolitan of Canterbury or the highest Ecclesiastical Power miscarry who shall restrain or eject them but the Civil Power unless we go to the Pope for more acceptable witnesses I commend to you Spalatensis Grotius and Saravia yea Fr. de Victoria and several Parisians The two former one de Republ. Eccles. the other de Imperio summarum potestatum will never be well answered If it be said the King did it not I answer I think the Authority by whom that much was done that we now speak of will be acknowledged sufficient by most that were against the fact and that fought against the Parliament that understood the Laws It was long before the King withdrew 3. Many of those that approved of the Ejection of those unworthy men yet approved not of the dissolution of the Office and such may be many and for ought you know most or all of the Ministers here Associated Though I suppose rather it is otherwise yet while Men do for peace silence their opinions who knows what they are And sure I am many among us had no hand in the downfall of the Bishops and whether any at all be lyable in this to your Charge besides my self whereof more anon I know not most of our Association were in the Universities in the Wars and the rest were some I
Name of Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Government And so by the Name they seduce Mens minds to think that this is indeed the use of the Keys which God hath put into the Churches Hands 3. Hereby they greatly encourage the Usurpation of the Pope and his Clergy who set up such Courts for probate of Wills and Causes of Matrimony and rule the Church in a Secular manner though many of them confess that directly the Church hath no forcing Power And this they call the Churches Power and Spiritual Government and Ecclesiastical Iurisdiction and say that it belongeth not to Kings and that no King can in Conscience restrain them of it but must protect them in it And so they set up Imperium in Imperio and as Bishop Bedle said of Ireland The Pope hath a Kingdom there in the Kingdom greater than the Kings Against which Ludov. Molinaeus hath written at large in two or three Treatises So that when the Papal Power in England was cast down and their Courts subjected to the King and the Oath of Supremacy formed it was under the Name of Ecclesiastical and Spiritual Power that it was acknowledged to be in the King who yet claimeth no proper Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power so greatly were these Terms abused and so are they still as applied to our Bishops Courts so that the King is said by us to be Chief Governour in all Causes Ecclesiastical because Coercive Power in Church Matters which is proper to the Magistrate was possessed and claimed by the Clergy And in all Popish Kingdoms the Kings are but half Kings through these Usurpations of the Clergy And for us to Exercise the same kind of Power mixt with the Exercise of the Keys and that by the same Name is greatly to countenance the Usurpers § 352. If it be said That the Church claimeth no Coercive Power but as granted them by the King or that it is the Magistrate that annexeth Mulcts and Penalties and not the Church I answer 1. They perswade the Magistrate that he ought to do so 2. Force is not a meer Accident but confessed by them to be the very Life of their Government It is that which bringeth People to their Courts and enforceth all their Precepts and causeth Obedience to them so that it is part of the very Constitution of their Government And as to Fees and Commutation of Penance Pecuniary Mulcts are thus imposed by themselves 3. Their very Courts and Officers are of a Secular Form 4. The Magistrate is but the Executioner of their Sentence He must grant out a Writ and imprison a Man quatenus excommunicate without sitting in Judgment upon the Cause himself and trying the Person according to his Accusation And what a dishonour do these Men put on Magistrates that make them their Executioners to imprison those whom they condemn inuudita causa at a venture be it right or wrong So much of the Nonconformists Charges against the English Prelacy § 353. By this you may see what they Answer to the Reasons of the Conformists As 1. To the willing Conformists who plead a Iur Divinum they say That if all that Gersom Bucer Didoclavius Blondell Salmasius Parker Baines c. have said against Episcopacy it self were certainly confuted yet it is quite another thing that is called Episcopacy by them that plead it Iure Divino If 1. Bishops of single Churches with a Presbytery under them 2. and General Bishops over these Bishops were both proved Iure Divine yet our Diocesans are proved to be contra jus Divinum 2. To the Latitudinarians and involuntary Conformists who plead that no Church-Government as to the form is of Divine Institution they answer 1. This is to condemn themselves and say Because no Form is of God's Institution therefore I will declare that the Episcopal Form is of Divine Institution for this is part of their Subscription or Declaration when they Profess Assent and Confent to all things in the Book of Common Prayer and Ordination And one thing in it is in these words with which the Book beginneth It is evident to all Men diligently reading holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons which Offices were evermore had in such reverend estimation c. So that here they declare that Bishops and Priests are not only distinct Degrees but distinct Orders and Offices and that since the Apostles time as evident by Scripture c. when yet many of the very Papists Schoolmen do deny it And the Collect in the Ordering of Priests runs thus Almighty God giver of all good things who by the holy Spirit hath appointed divers Orders of Ministers in the Church So that in plain English they declare That Episcopacy even as a distinct Order Office and Function for all these words are there is appointed by the Spirit of God because they believe that no Form is so appointed 2. That which Mr. Stillingfleet calleth A Form is none of the Substance of the Government it self nor the Offices in the Church He granteth that 1. Worshipping Assemblies are of Divine appointment 2. That every one of these must have one or more Pastors who have power in their Order to teach them and go before them in Worship and spiritually guide or govern them But 1. Whether a Church shall have one Pastor or more 2. Whether one of them shall be in some things subject to another 3. Whether constant Synods shall be held for concord of Associated Churches 4. Whether in these Synods one shall be Moderator and how long and with what Authority not unreasonable these he thinks are left undetermined And I am of his mind supposing General Rules to guide them by as he doth But the Matter and Manner of Church-Discipline being of God's appointment and the Nature and Ends of a particular Church and the Office of Pastors as well as the Form of the Church Universal it is past doubt that nothing which subverteth any of these is lawful And indeed if properly no Form of Government be instituted by God then no Form of a Church neither for the Form of Government is the Form of a Church considered in sensu politico and not as a meer Community And then the Church of England is not of God's making Quest. Who then made it Either another Church made this Church and then what was that Church and who made its Form and so ad Originem or no Church made it If no Church made the Church of England quo jure or what is its Authority and Honour If the King made it was he a Member of a Church or not If yea 1. There was then a Church-Form before the Church of England And who made that Church usque ad Originem If the King that made it was no Member of a Church then he that is no Member of a Church may institute a Church Form but quo jure and with what
the several Articles which I did in a small Book called Christian Concord In which I gave the reasons why the Episcopal Presbyterians and Independants might and should unite on such Terms without any change of any of their Principles But I confess that the new Episcopal Party that follow Grotius too far and deny the very being of all the Ministers and Churches that have not Diocesan Bishops are not capable of Union with the rest upon such Terms And hereby I gave notice to the Gentry and others of the Royalists in England of the great danger they were in of changing their Ecclesiastical Cause by following new Leaders that were for Grotianism But this Admonition did greatly offend the Guilty who now began to get the Reins though the old Episcopal Protestants confessed it to be all true There is nothing bringeth greater hatred and sufferings on a Man than to foreknow the mischief that Men in power are doing and intend and to warn the World of it For while they are resolutely going on with it they will proclain him a Slanderer that revealeth it and use him accordingly and never be ashamed when they have done it and thereby declared all which he foretold to be true § 170. 15. Having in the Postscript of my True Catholick given a short touch against a bitter Book of Mr. Thomas Pierce's against the Puritans and me it pleased him to write another Volume against Mr. Hickman and me just like the Man full of malignant bitterness against Godly men that were not of his Opinion and breathing out blood-thirsty malice in a very Rhetorical fluent style Abundance of Lies also are in it against the old Puritans as well as against me and in particular in charging Hacket's Villany upon Cartwright as a Confederate which I instance in because I have out of old Mr. Ash's Library a Manuscript of Mr. Cartwright's containing his full Vindication against that Calumny which some would fain have fastened on him in his time But Mr. Pierce's principal business was to defend Grotius In answer to which I wrote a little Treatise called The Grotian Religion discovered at the Invitation of Mr. Thomas Pierce In which I cited his own words especially out of his Discussio Apologetici Rivetaini wherein he openeth his Terms of Reconciliation with Rome viz. That it be acknowledged the Mistress Church and the Pope have his Supream Government but not Arbitrary but only according to the Canons To which end he defendeth the Council of Trent it self Pope Pius's Oath and all the Councils which is no other than the French sort of Popery I had not then heard of the Book written in France called Grotius Papizans nor of Sarravius's Epistles in which he witnesseth it from his own mouth But the very words which I cited contain an open Profession of Popery This Book the Printer abused printing every Section so distant to fill up Paper as if they had been several Chapters And in a Preface before it I vindicated the Synod of Dort where the Divines of England were chief Members from the abusive virulent Accusations of one that called himself Tilenus junior Hereupon Pierce wrote a much more railing malicious Volume than the former the liveliest Express of Satan's Image malignity bloody malice and falshood covered in handsome railing Rhetorick that ever I have seen from any that called himself a Protestant And the Preface was answered just in the same manner by one that stiled himself Philo-Tilenus Three such Men as this Tilenus junior Pierce and Gunning I have not heard of besides in England Of the Jesuites Opinion in Doctrinals and of the old Dominican Complexion the ablest Men that their Party hath in all the Land of great diligence in study and reading of excellent Oratory especially Tilenus junior and Pierce of temperate Lives but all their Parts so sharpened with furious persecuting Zeal against those that dislike Arminianism high Prelacy or full Conformity that they are like the Briars and Thorns which are not to be handled but by a fenced hand and breathe out Tereatnings against God's Servants better than themselves and seem unsatisfied with blood and ruines and still cry Give Give bidding as lowd defiance to Christian Charity as ever Arrius or any Heretick did to Faith This Book of mine of the Grotian Religion greatly offended many others but none of them could speak any Sence against it the Citations for Matter of Fact being unanswerable And it was only the Matter of Fact which I undertook viz. To prove that Grotius profest himself a moderate Papist But for his fault in so doing I little medled with it § 171. 16. Mr. Blake having replye to some things in my Apology especially about Right to Sacraments or the just subject of Baptism and the Lord's Supper I wrote five Disputations on those Points proving that it is not the reality of a Dogmatical or Justifying Faith nor yet the Profession of bare Assent called a Dogmatical Faith by many but only the Profession of a Saving Faith which is the Condition of Mens title to Church-Communion Coram Ecclèsiâ and that Hypocrites are but Analogically or Equivocally called Christians and Believers and Saints c. with much more to decide the most troublesome Controversie of that Time which was about the Necessary Qualification and Title of Church-Members and Communicants Many men have been perplexed about that Point and that Book Some think it cometh too near the Independants and some that it is too far from them and many think it very hard that A Credible Profession of True Faith and Repentance should be made the stated Qualification because they think it incredible that all the Jewish Members were such But I have sifted this Point more exactly and diligently in my thoughts than almost any Controversie whatsoever And fain I would have found some other Qualification to take up with 1. Either the Profession of some lower Faith than that which hath the Promise of Salvation 2. Or at least such a Profession of Saving Faith as needeth not to be credible at all c. But the Evidence of Truth hath forced me from all other ways and suffered me to rest no where but here That Profession should be made necessary without any respect at all to Credibility and consequently to the verity of the Faith professed is incredible and a Contradiction and the very word Profession signifieth more And I was forced to observe that those that in Charity would belive another Profession to be the title to Church-Communion do greatly cross their own design of Charity And while they would not be bound to believe men to be what they profess for fear of excluding many whom they cannot believe they do leave themselves and all others as not obliged to love any Church-Member as such with the love which is due to a True Christian but only with such a Love as they owe to the Members of the Devil and so deny them the Kernel of Charity by giving
Court of Justice declare That the King by his Laws commandeth us to assist the Sheriffs and Justices notwithstanding any Commission to the contrary under the great or little Seal and one shew us a Commission to the contrary which must we take for the King's Authority 8. Whether this extendeth to the Case of King Iohn who delivered the Kingdom to the Pope Or to those Instances of Bilson Barcley Grotius c. of changing the Government putting by the true Heir to whom we are Sworn in the Oath of Allegiance c. if Subjects pretend Commission for such Acts 9. Whether Parliament Judges in Court or private Men may by the King's Authority in his Laws defend their Lives against any that by a pretended Commission invadeth them or their Purses Houses or Companions 10. Whether we must take every Affirmer to have a Commission if he shew it not Or every shewn Commission to be current and not surreptitious though contrary to Law 11. Whether he violateth not this Oath who should endeavour to alter so much of the Legislative Power as is in the Parliament or the Executive in the Established Courts of Justice Or is it meant only of Monarchy as such 12. Doth he not break this Oath who should endeavour to change the Person Governing as well as he that would change the Form of Government 13. If so doth it not also tye us to the Persons of Church-Governours seeing they are equally here twisted and Church-Government preposed 14. Is it the King 's Coercive Government of the Church by the Sword which is here meant according to the Oath of Supremacy Or Spiritual Government by the Keys Or both 15. Is it not the English Form of Church-Government by Diocesans that is here meant and not some other sort of Episcopacy which is not here And doth he not break this Oath who instead of a Bishop over 500 or 1000 Churches without any inferiour Bishop should endeavour to set up a Bishop in every great Church or Market-Town or as many as the Work requireth 16. Seeing Excommunication and Absolution are the notable parts of Spiritual Government and it is not only the Actions but the Actors or Governours that we Swear not to alter and Lay-Chancellors are the common Actors or Governours whether an endeavour to alter Lay-Chancellors Government as some did that procured his Majesty's Declaration concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs be not contrary to this Oath and excluded by any alteration 17. Whether petitioning or other peaceable means before allowed by Law be not any endeavour and a violation of this Oath 18. Whether not at any time c. tye us not to disobey the King if he should command us by Consultation or Conference to endeavour it Or if the Law be changed doth not this Oath still bind us Lastly Whether this following Sense in which we could take it be the true sense of the Oath I A B do Swear That a it is not Lawful upon any pretence whatsoever b to take up Arms against the King c And that I do abhor that Traytorous Position of taking Arms by his Authority against his Person or against those that are Commissionated by him d in pursuance of such Commission And that I will not at any time endeavour any alteration of Government either in Church or State e a In my Opinion b For the Subjects of his Majesty's Dominions c Either his Authority or his Person the Law forbidding both d Whether it be his Parliament Courts of Justice Legal Officers or any other Persons authorized by his publick Laws or his Commission supposing that no contrariety of Laws and Commissions by over-sight or otherwise do Arm the Subjects against each other e I will not endeavour any alteration of State-Government at all either as to the Person of the King or the Species of Government either as to the Legislative or Executive Power as in the King himself or his Parliament or Established Courts of Justice And therefore I declare That I take all the rest of this Oath only in a Sense consistent with this Clause implying no alteration in the Government And I will endeavour no alteration of the Coercive Government of the Church as it is in the King according to the Oath of Supremacy Nor any alienation of the Spiritual Power of the Keys from the Lawful Bishops and Pastors of the Church Nor will I endeavour to restore the Ancient Discipline by removing the Spiritual Government by the Keys out of the Hands of Lay-Chancellors into the Hands of so many able Pastors as the number of Churches and necessity of the work requireth nor any other Reformation of the Church by any Rebellious Schismatical or other unlawful means whatsoever nor do I believe that any Vow or Covenant obligeth me thereto declaring notwithstanding that it 's none of my meaning to bind my self from any Lawful Means of such Reformation nor to disobey the King if at any time He command me to endeavour the Alteration of any thing justly alterable The General Answer was as followeth UPon Serious Consideration of the Act of Parliament Entitled An Act for Restraining of Nonconformists from Inhabiting in Corporations And of the Oath therein mentioned I am of Opinion That there is nothing contained in that Oath according to the true Sense thereof But that it is not Lawful to take up Arms against the King or any Authorised by his Commission or for a private Person to endeavour the Alteration of the Monarchical Government in the State or the Government by Bishops in the Church And that any Person notwithstanding the taking of such Oath if he apprehend that the Lay-Judges in Bishop's Courts as to Sentence of Excommunication for Matters meerly Ecclesiastical or for any other Cause ought to be Reformed or that Bishopricks are of too large extent may safely Petition or use any lawful Endeavour for Reformation of the same For that such Petition or other Lawful Endeavour doth not tend to the Alteration of the Government but to the amendment of what shall be found amiss in the Government and Reformed by Lawful Authority and thereby the Government better Established And I conceive every Exposition of the said Oath upon Supposition or Presumption of an Obligation thereby to any thing which is contrary to the Law of God or the Kingdom is an illegal and a forced Exposition contrary to the intent and meaning of the said Oath and Act of Parliament for it is a Rule nullum iniquum est in Lege praesumendium And an Exposition tending to enjoyn any thing contrary to the Law of God would make the Act of Parliament void which ought not to be admitted when it bears a fair and plain Sense which is no more Than that Subjects ought not to take up Arms against their Lawful King or such as lawfully Commissionated by him and for private Persons to be unquiet in the place wherein they live to the disturbance of the Government in Church or State Iohn Fountain Feb. 6.
the Churches of England and faithfully to preserve the peace and happiness thereof And all those who are qualified with abilities according to the Law and take the Oaths and Declarations abovesaid shall be allowed to preach Lectures and Occasional Sermons and to Catechize and to be presented and admitted to any Benefice or to any Ecclesiastical or Academical promotions or to the teaching of Schools 3. Every person admitted to any Benefice with cure of Souls shall be obliged himself on some Lord's day within a time prefixed to read the Liturgy appointed for that day when it is satisfactorily altered and the greatest part of it in the mean time and to be often present at the reading of it and sometimes to administer the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper according to the said Liturgies And it shall by himself or some other allowed Minister be constantly used in his Church and the Sacraments frequently administred as is required by the Law 4. The 4th was against the Ceremonies without alteration in their own words save about bowing at the Name ●esus as after 5. No Bishop Chancellor or other Ecclesiastical Officers shall have power to silence any allowed Minister or suspend him 〈◊〉 officio vel beneficio arbitrarily or for any cause without a known Law And in case of any such arbitary or injurious silencing and suspension there shall be allowed an appeal to some of his Majestie 's Courts of Iustice so as it may be prosecuted in a competent time and at a tolerable expence being both Bishops and Presbyters and all Ecclesiastical persons are under the Government of the King and punishable by him for gross and injurious male-administrations 6. Though we judge it the Duty of Ministers to Catechize instruct exhort direct and comfort the people personally as well as publickly upon just occasion yet lest a pretended necessity of Examinations before the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper or an unwarrantable strictness should introduce Church-Tyranny and wrong the faithful by keeping them from the Communion let all those be admitted to the Communion who since their Infant baptism have at years of discretion manifested to the Bishop or the Ministers of the Parish Church where they live a tolerable understanding of the Essential points of Faith and Godliness that is of the Baptismal Covenant and of the nature and use of the Lord's Supper and have personally owned before them or the Church the Covenant which by others they made in Baptism professing their Resolution to keep the same in a Faithful Godly Righteous Charitable and Temporal Life and are not since this profession revolted to Atheism Insidelity or Heresy that is the denying of some Essential Article of faith and live not impenitently in any gross and scandalous sin And therefore in the Register of each Parish let all their Names be written who have either before their Confirmation or at any other time thus understandingly owned their Baptismal Covenant and a Certificate thereof from the Minister of the place shall serve without any further examination for their admission to Communion in that or any other Parish Church where they shall after live till by the aforesaid revolts they have merited their suspension 7. Because in many families there are none who can read or pray ●or call to remembrance what they have heard to edify themselves and spend the Lords day in holy Exercises and many of these live so far from the Church that they go more seldom than the rest and therefore have great need of the assistance of their Neighbours it is not to be taken for a Conventicle or unlawful meeting when Neighbours shall peaceably joyn together in reading the Scripture or any good books or repeating publick Sermons and praying and ●ging ●salms to God whilst they do it under the inspection of the Minister and not in opposition to the publick Assemblies Nor yet that meeting where the Minister shall privately Catechize his Neighbours or pray with them when they are in sickness danger or distress tho persons of several Families shall be present 8. Whereas the Canon and Rubrick forbid the ad●ission of notorious scandalous sinners to the Lords table be it enacted that those who are proved to deride or scorn at Christianity or the holy Scriptures or the Life of Reward and Punishment or the serious practice of a Godly Life and strict obedience to Gods Commands shall be numbered with the Scandalous sinners mentioned in the Canon and Rubrick and not admitted before repentance to the holy Communion § 69. The following paper will give you the reasons of all our alterations of their form of Words But I must add this that we thought not the form of Subscription sufficient to keep out a Papist from the established Ministery much less from a Toleration which we medled not with And here and in other alterations I bore the blame and they told me that no Man would put in such doubts but I. And I will here tell Posterity this Truth as a Mystery yet only to the blind which must not now be spoken that I believe that I have been guilty of hindering our own Liberties in all Treaties that ever I was employ'd in For I remember not one in which there was not some crevice or contrivance or terms offered for such a Toleration as would have let in the moderate Papists with us And if we would but have opened the Door to let the Papists in that their Toleration might have been charged upon us as being for our sakes and by our request or procu●ement we might in all likelihood have had our part But though for my own part I am not for Cruelty against Papists any more than others even when they are most cruel to us but could allow them a certain degree of liberty on Terms that shall secure the common Peace and the People's Souls yet I shall never be one of them that by any renewed pressures or severities shall be forced to petition for the Papists liberty if they must have it let them Petition for it themselves No craft of Iesuits or Prelates shall thunder me cudgel me or cheat me into the Opinion that it is now necessary for our own Ministry Liberty or Lives that we I say we Nonconformists be the famed Introducers of the Papists Toleration that so neither Papists nor Prelatists may bear the odium of it but may lay it all on us God do what he will with us his way is best but I think that this is not his way § 70. Upon these Alterations I was put to give in my Reasons of them which were as followeth The Reasons of our Alterations of your Proposals 1. I Put in Presidents c. to avoid Dispute whether such were meer Presbyters or as some think Bishops 2. I leave out time of disorder because it will else exclude all that were Ordained by Presbyters since the King came in 3. I put in Instituted and Authorized to intimate that it is not an Ordination to