As for that tedious discourse that followeth in foure leaves about our overliberall concession that suppose the word Angell be meant Individually yet it made nothing for the upholding of a Dioce san Bishop with sole power of ordination and jurisdiction as a distinct order superiour to Presbyters we will be very briefe in our answer to it to prevent surfet and because it is more then we need have yeelded and also because so little is said of it to the purpose by this Remonstrant And here let the Reader observe 1. That of the foure Authors cited in the upholding of the individuall Angel Doctor Fulke is falsely alleged and the other three Master Beza Doctor Raynolds and Pareus though they interpret the word Angell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for one singular person yet we are sure none of them held Episcopacy by divine right For D. Raynolds his letters to S. Francis Knowles now in print will witnesse and for Beza and Pareus it is well knowne that they were Presbyterians We expected many of the ancient Fathers to make good this interpretation but we see he is beholding to those for it who are none of the lest enemies to the Hierarchall preeminency and therefore we may be the more secure that no great prejudice can come to our cause by this interpretation if taken in the sence of these Authors 2. That the great question is what makes this interpretation for a Diocesan Bishop with sole power of ordination and jurisdiction as a distinct order above Presbyters But the Remonstrant cunningly conceales halfe the question and answers much every way And why so Because if there were many Angels in each Church and yet but one singled out and called The Angel of that Church it must needs follow that there was a superiority and inequality But what is this to the question in hand The thing to be proved is not onely that this Angell had a superiority but a superiority of jurisdiction over his fellow Angels but of this altum silentium Doctor Reynolds will tell you that this was onely a superiority of order and that all jurisdiction was exercised in common Beza will tell you that this Angell was onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that he was Angelus Praeses not Angelus Princeps And that he was Praeses mutabilis and ambulatorius just as a Moderator in an assembly or as the Speaker in the House of Commons which is onely during the Parliament Both which interpretations may well stand with the superiority and inequality you speake of Our first argument to prove that though the word Angel be taken individually that yet nothing will hence follow to uphold a Diocesan Bishop with sole power of jurisdiction as a distinct order Superior to Presbyters was because it was never yet nor never will be proved that these Angels were Diocesan Bishops considering that parishes were not so numerous as to be divided into Diocesses in Saint Iohns daies And the seven Starres are sayd to be fixed in their seven Candlestickes not one Star over divers Candlesticks And Tindall together with the old translation calls them seven congregations And because we read that at Ephesus that was one of those Candlestickes there was but one flock for the answer of all which we expected a learned discourse to prove that the seven Churches were Diocesan and so consequently the Angels Diocesan Angels But the Remonstrant baulkes his worke as too great for his shoulders and instead of solid Divinity turnes criticke and playes upon words and syllables Domitian like catching at flies when he should have beene busied about greater matters First he tels us That if Parishes were not united into Diocesses or were not so many as to be divided into Diocesses which we thinke all one notwithstanding your parenthesis in Saint Iohns daies and therefore no Diocesan Bishop by the same reason we may as well argue that there were no parochiall Bishops neither since that then no parishes were as yet distinguished Which we grant to be very true But if there were no Parochiall Bishops in the Apostles daies much lesse Diocesan The Apostolicall Bishops were Bishops of one Church and not of one parish as we meane by parish till many yeeres after But not to quarrell at the word parish or diocesse let but the Remonstrant shewe us that these Angels were Bishops over divers setled Churches or divers fixed congregations nobis erit alter Apollo For our parts we are sure that at first the number of beleevers even in the greatest Cities were so few as that they might well meete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one and the same place and these were called the Church of the City and therefore to ordaine Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are all one in Scripture And it cannot be demonstratively proved that they became so numerous in the Apostles daies in any great City so as that they could not meet in one and the same place But yet we confesse that it is very probable that it was so in Ierusalem if you compare Acts 2. 41. 4. 4. 5. 14. And whether it was so also in these severall Asian Churches we know not but however this is agreed upon on all parts That beleevers in great Cities were not divided into set and fixed congregations or parishes till long after the Apostles daies And that therefore if when they multiplied they had divers meeting places that yet notwithstanding these meeting places were frequented promiscuously and indistinctly and were taught and governed by all the Presbyters promiscuously and in common and were all called but one Church as is evident in Hierusalem Act. 8. 1. Act. 15. 6. 22. 16. 4. 21. 18. So also in these seven Churches where the beleevers of every City are called but one Church and were governed in common by divers Angels or Presbyters as we see plainely proved in the Church of Ephesus Acts 20. 28. Henâ—e it followeth that there were no sole-ruling Bishops nor one Bishop over divers Churches or set Congregations in Saint Iohns daies Secondly according to his wonted language he tels us of making Bulls and Solecismes because wee say that the seven Starres are said to be fixed in their seven Candlestickes whereas these Starres are said to be in the right hand of Christ as if these two were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Know sir That in regard of their protection they are said to be in Christs right hand but in regard of their â—unction and Office they may be truely said to be fixed in their seven Candlestickes But instead of picking quarrels at words you should have done well if you could to prove that these Candlestickes were diocesan Churches We say each Starre had its Candlesticke not one Starre over divers And wee thinke that this Candlesticke was but one particular Church or one set Congregation though happily when they multiplyed they might meete indistinctly in divers under divers Angels equally governing For this
20. of Acts Presbyters and Bishops to be all one Doe we prove the Bishops described in Timothy and Titus to be one and the same in name and office with a Presbyter Doe we prove that their Churches were all governed Communi Consilio Presbyterorum All shall be granted us and yet the Divine right of Episcopacy be still held up by this sleight by telling us that before the Apostles left the earth they made over their authority to some prime men Demand where this is extant The Angels of the seven Churches are pleaded presently And partly because we have no other Scripture of latter inspiration and edition whereby to prove the contrary Another inducement is because the writers neere the Apostles times make frequent mention of a Bishop and as they would have us beleeve some waies distinguished from a Presbyter Some of them mentioning the very men that were the Angels of these Churches as Polycarpus of Smyrna Ignatius who is said to have beene martyred within twelve yeeres after the Revelation was written wrote letters to the severall Churches wherein he mentioneth their Bishops distinct from their Presbyters Now saith the author of Episcopacy by divine right the Apostles immediate successors could best tell what they next before them did Who can better tell a mans pace then he that followes him close at heeles And this hath so plausibâ—e a shew that all are condemned as blind or wilfull who will either doubt that Episcopacy was of Apostolicall institution or thinke that the Church of Christ should in so short a time deviate from the institution of the Apostles But now how insufficient a ground this is for the raising up of so mighty a Fabricke as Episcopacy by Divine right or Apostolicall institution wee desire the Reader to judge by that that followes First the thing they lay as their foundation is a meere metaphoricall word and such as is ordinarily applied to Presbyters in common Secondly the Penman of those seven Epistles did never in them nor in any of his other writings so much as use the name of Bishop he names Presbyters frequently especially in this booke yea where he would set out the office of those that are neerest to the throne of Christ in his Church Revel 4. And whereas in Saint Iohns daies some new expressions were used in the Christian Church which were not in Scripture As the Christian Sabbath began to be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Christ himselfe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now both these are found in the writings of S. Iohn and it is strange to us that the Apostle should mention a new phrase and not mention a new office erected in the Church as you would make us beleeve Neither thirdly in any of his writings the least intimation of superiority of one Presbyter over another save onely where he names Diotrephes as one ambitiously affecting such a Primacy Nor is there any one word in these Epistles whence an Episcopall authority may be collected So that did not the testimonies that lived soone after make the argument plausible it would appeare ridiculous But alas the suffrage of all the writers in the world is infinitely unable to command an Act of Divine faith without which divine right cannot be apprehended Suppose we were as verily perswaded that Ignatius wrote the Epistles which goe under his name which yet we have just cause to doubt of as knowing that many learned men reject a great part of them and some all as we can be perswaded that Tully wrote his All this can perswade no further that the Apostles ordained and appointed Bishops as their successors but onely by a humane faith but neither is that so The most immediate and unquestionable successors of the Apostles give cleare evidence to the contrary It is granted on all sides that there is no peece of antiquity that deserves more esteeme then the Epistle of Clement lately brought to light by the industry and labour of that learned Gentleman Master Patricke Young And in that Epistle Bishops and Presbyters are all one as appeares by what followes The occasion of that Epistle seemes to be a new sedition raysed by the Corinthians against their Presbyters page 57. 58. not as Bishop Hall saies the continuation of the schismes amongst them in the Apostles daies Clemens to remove their present sedition tels them how God hath alwaies appointed severall orders in his Church which must not be confounded first telling them how it was in the Jewish Church then for the times of the Gospell tels them that Christ sent his Apostles through Countries and Cities in which they constituted the first fruits or the chiefe of them unto Bishops and Deacons for them who should beleeve afterward p. 54. 55. Those whom hee calls there Bishops afterwards throughout the Epistle he cals Presbyters pa. 58 62 69. All which places doe evidently convince that in Clement his judgement the Apostle appointed but two officers that is Bishops and Deacons to bring men to beleeve Because when he had reckoned up three orders appointed by God among the Jewes High-priests Priests and Levites comming to recite orders appointed by the Apostles under the Gospell hee doth mention onely Bishops and Deacons and those Bishops which at first he opposeth to Deacons ever after he cals Presbyters And here we cannot but wonder at the strange boldnesse of the author of Epis. by divine right who hath endevoured to wire-draw this Author so much magnified by him to maintaine his Prelaticall Episcopacy and that both by foysting in the word withall into this translation which is not in the Text that the Reader might be seduced to beleeve that the offices of Episcopacy and Presbytery were two different offices And also by willingly misunderstanding Clement his phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he would have us understand Episcopacy as distinct from Presbyterie whereas the whole series of the Epistle evidently proves that the word Episcopus Presbyter are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And so also by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee would have us to understand that the contention then in Corinth was only about the name whereas it appeares by the Epistle it selfe that the controversie was not about the name but dignity of Episcopacy for it was about the deposition of their godly Presbyters p. 57 58. And the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is thus interpreted by Beza Eph. 1. 21. Phil. 2. 9. Heb. 1. 4. and Mead in Apoc. 11. p. 156. In which places 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is rendred by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is put for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By all this we see that the most genuine and neerest successor of the Apostles knew no such difference Lastly it is worth our observation that the same writers who as they say testifie that these 7. Angels were in a superiour degree to Presbyters do likewise affirm
which they have made who have beene intoxicated with the Golden Chalice of the whore of Babylons abominations hath so alienated the affections of people from them as that what doome so ever they are sentenced unto it is no other then what they have brought upon themselves As for our part we are still of the same mind that honourable maintenance ought to be given to the Ministers of the Gospell not onely to live but to be hospitable Indeed we instanced in many that did abuse their large revenues But you are pleased to say That in this Ablative age the fault is rare and hardly instanceable We thinke the contrary is more hardly instanceable And as for your Ablative age if you meane it of poore Presbyters who have beene deprived of all their subsistance by the unmercifulnesse of Bishops whom they with teares have besought to pitty their wives and children we yeeld it to be too true Or if you meane in regard of the purity of the ordinances the frequency of preaching the freedome of conceived prayer We denie not but in this sence also it may be called the Ablative age But if you relate it to Episcopacy and their Cathedrals with whom it is now the Accusative age We hope that the yeere of recompense is come and that in due time for all their Ablations they may be made a gratefull ablation We have done with this section and feare not to appeale to the same judicious eyes the Remonstrant doth to judge to whose part that Vale of absurd inconsequences and bold ignorance which hee brands us withall doth most properly appertaine SECT XIV IN this Section hee comes to make good his anâ—wers formerly given to some objections by him propounded and by us further urged The first objection was from that prejudice which Episcopacy challenging a divine originall doth to Soveraignty which was wont to be acknowledged not onely as the conserving but as the creating cause of it in former times The Remonstrant thinks this objection is sufficiently removed by telling us there is a compatiblenesse in this case of Gods act and the Kings And what can wee say to this Sir you know what we have said already and not onely said but proved it and yet will confidently tell us you have made good by undeniable proofes that besides the ground which our Saviour layd of this imparity the blessed Apostles by inspiration from God made this difference c. Made good when where by what proofs Something you have told us about the Apostles but not a word in all the defence of any ground laid by our Saviour of this imparitie yet the man dreams of undeniable proofs of that whereof he never spake word Wee must therefore tell you againe take it as you please that if the Bishops disclaime the influence of Soveraignty into their creation and say that the King doth not make them Bishops they must have no being at all Nor can your questions stop our mouthes Where or when did the King ever create a Bishop Name the man and take the cause Wee grant you Sir that so much as there is of a Presbyter in a Bishop so much is Divine But that imparity and jurisdiction exercised out of his own demandated authority which are the very formalities of Episcopacie these had their first derivation from the Consent Customes Councell Constitution of the Church which did first demandate this Episcopall authority to one particular person afterwards the Pope having obtained a Monarchie over the Church did from himself demandate that authority that formerly the Church did and since the happy ejection of the Popes tyrannicall usurpations out of these Dominions our Princes being invested with all that Ecclesiasticall power which that Tyrant had usurped that same imparity and authority which was originally demandated from the Church successively from the Pope is now from the King Looke what influence the Church ever had into the creation of Bishops the same the Pope had after and looke what influence the Pope had heretofore the same our Laws have placed in the King which is so cleere that the Remonstrant dares not touch or answer There was a Statute made the first of Edward the sixth inabling the King to make Bishops by his Letters patents Onely Hence all the Bishops in King Edwards the sixt time were created Bishops by the Kings Letters patents ONELY in which all parts of Ecclesiasticall jurisdiction are granted them in precise words praeter ultra jus divinum Besides and beyond divine right to be executed onely nomine vice Authoritate nostri Regis in the Kings royall stead name and Authority as the patents of severall Bishops in the Rolls declare But besides the Kings Letters the Bishop is solemnly ordained by the imposition of the hands of the Metropolitan and other of his brethren these as from God invest him in his holy calling As from God Good sir prove that prove that the Metropolitan and Bishops in such imposition of hands are the instruments of God not the instruments of the King prove they doe it by Commission received from God and not by command of the King onely Produce one warrant from Scripture one president of a Bishop so ordained by a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops and without more dispute take all Shortly resolve us but this one thing what is it that takes a man out of the ordinary ranke of Presbyters and advanceth him to an imparity and power of jurisdiction is it humane authority testified in the Letters of the King or is it divine authority testified by the significative action of imposition of hands by the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops if the former you grant the cause if the latter consider with what good warrant you can make a form of Ordination by the hands of a Metropolitan and fellow Bishops which is a meer humane invention to be not onely a signe but a mean of conveying a peculiar and superiour power from Divine Authority and of making a Presbyter a Bishop Iuredivino Finally Sir make as much as you can of your Ordination by a Metropolitan slight as much as you please your unworthy comparison between the King and our Patrons yet did the Kings Conge d'eslire give you no more humane right to Episcopacie then the hands of the Metropolitan and fellow Bishops give you of right Divine you would be Bishops by neither It is not your confident re-inforcing of your comparison that shal call carry it till you have first proved it from Scripture that God never instituted an order of Presbyters or Ministers in his Church as wee have proved God never instituted an order of Bishops Secondly that by the Laws of the land as much of the Ministeriall power over a particular Congregation is in the patron as there is of Episcopall power in the King Till then wee beseech you let it rest undetermined whether your self or we may best be sent to Simons Cell We say no more
A VINDICATION OF THE ANSWER TO THE HUMBLE REMONSTRANCE FROM THE UNJUST IMPUTATION OF FRIVOLOUSNESSE AND FALSHOOD Wherein The cause of LITURGY and EPISCOPACY is further debated By the same SMECTYMNUUS LONDON Printed for Iohn Rothwell at the Fountaine and Beare in Cheapside TO THE MOST HONORABLE LORDS AND THE KNIGHTS CITIZENS AND BVRGESSES OF THE HONORABLE HOVSE OF COMMONS IT was the expectation that the whole Kingdome had of your high worth and faithfull resolutions to reforme what was amisse both in Church and State which gave us the confidence to present unto you our former treatise And now your reall performance and noble Actions tending to the publicke peace and good have added much more chearefulnesse in our second addresse towards you the rather for that the cause in question betweene us and the Remonstrant about Episcopacy and Liturgie is a great part of that worke to which God hath directed your present consultations Seeing therefore it belongs to you next under God and his Majestie to dispose and order these things Wee leave our endeavours at your feete beseeching you to consider not onely how we have vindicated our selves from the accusations of our adversarie but more especially what may bee gathered out of it for the advancement of the reformation now happily begunne among us The Lord of life and glory bee a Sunne and shield unto you TO THE READER Good Reader THE Booke which we here undertake to answer is so full fraught with bitter invectives false aspertions hyperbolicall confidence selfe contradictions and such like extravagancies as that we have thought fit to lay them all before thee in one full view by way of preface rather then to interrupt our following discourse by observing them as they lie scattered in the booke it selfe Suffer us therefore to give thee notice of these few particulars First wee are deepely charged and accused not onely to the ordinarie Reader but even to the Kings Majestie himself of misallegations misinterpretations mistranslations and false quotations and that in such an high nature as that the Authour calles God to witnesse before whom he is shortly to give an account that hee never saw any Author that would dare to professe Christian sincerity so fowle to overlash And this is not once or twice but often repeated with great asseveration exclamations Which when we first reade being conscious of our innocency and fidelity we could not but stand amazed and wonder to see our selves so unexpectedly and wee hope undeservedly transformed into men or rather monsters of men so transcedently perfidious and so supersuperlatively unfaithfull and wicked And indeede if to be accused to a fault bee a sufficient argument to make us guilty wee must needes bee for ever branded with such an high measure of ignominy as that it is not a whole sea of water that will serve to wash off the filth of such accusations But wee doubt not but that the ingenuous peruser of this booke will finde that as it was the glory of one of the Cato's that hee was thirty times accused and yet never sound guiltie so it will be our honour and credit when hee shall see that all this clamour and noyse is but a bearing of false witnesse against his brethren Si accusasse sat est quis erit innocens It was the the wicked counsell of Matchiavell Calumniare fortiter aliquid adhoerebit This counsell the Papists have made use of in answering of Protestant writers and the Bishops themselves in their answers to some of the unconforming Ministers bookes And we have good reason to thinke that the Authour of this Defence hath trod in the same steps For after all his generall exclamations and accusations there are but foure places in which hee undertakes to prove us false The first is for halfe citing of Hieroms testimonie The second is for abusing Nazianzene The third is for misinterpreting Origen about Lay Elders The fourth is for foysting in Cyprian True it is hee tells us of want of fidelity in citing the Counsell of Antioch and Ancyra of misalledging of Whitakers of misenglishing Tertullian and of guilty translating of Iustin Martyr But hee doth not so much as endeavour to make good what he tells us and therefore we cannot but beleeve that hee used more Machiavelisme then honestly in such aspersions As for Authors which hee himselfe hath both misalledged and misinterpreted wee doe not onely say it but the Reader shall finde it demonstratively proved in the ensuring treatise Secondly if to be railed upon reviled slighted and scorned bee sufficient to bring men into discredit then certainely we must be esteemed as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the dung of scouring and filth of the world For never man since Mountagues Appeale wrote with more scorne and contempt Wee are caâ—led Vaine frivolous Cavillers insolent spightfull riotous proud false unjust triflers factious Brotherly slanderers sullen and crabbed peices Lyars egregious and palpable calumniators wilfully shutting our eyes against the truth such as the Readers may be ashamed off witlesse malicious uncharitable envious frivolous wasters of unseasonable words swelling up a windy bulke with groundlesse exceptions against our eyes and conscience tedious and loose disputers Patronizers of branded Heretiques impotent weake and absurd men grossely ignorant such as fowly over-reach men of weake judgement and strong malice commonly spightfull and seldome witty violent and subtile machinators against and disturbers of Gods ordinances some whole sections meere declamations worthy of nothing but of contempt and silence ill bred sons of the Church spitting in the face of our Mother fomentors of unjust dislikes against lawfull goverment making wickedly false suggestions wanting witt and grace to understand the true meaning of the Jus Divinum of Episcopacy worthy to be punished for their presumption disobedience men that make no conscience by what meanes wee uphold a side and winne a Proselyte These are the flowers with which his defence is garnished and the titles with which he honours those whom hee calles his Brethren Wee will make no other Apologie for our selves but what Austin did in the same kind who when hee was told that his railing adversarie was to hard for him hee said it was and easie thing that way to conquer Austin but the Reader should perceive it was Clamore not veritate by loud crying not by truth And what Hierom saith against Helvidius Arbitror te veritate convictum a maledicta converti It is a signe of a man not able to stand before the truth when hee betakes himselfe to reproachfull language Thirdly if multitude of daring protestations and bold asseverations be sufficient proofes of arguments propounded and if confident slightings and scornefull denyalls bee sufficient answers to us and our arguments never any man hath better defended Episcopacie or more strongly confuted those that oppose it In his very first page hee begges the question and affirmes his cause to bee Gods cause Gods truth and if his opposers were as many
his Remonstrance hee made no mention of Diocesan Bishops whereas all know that he undertooke the defence of such Bishops which were petitioned against in Parliament whom none will deny to bee Diocesan Bishops In his 5. pag. speaking of the changing of Civill governement mentioned in the Remonstrance he professeth that he did not aime at our Civill Governement Let but the Reader survey the words of the Remonstance pag. 8. and it will appeare plainely ac si solaribus radijs descriptum esset That the comparison was purposely made betwixt the attempts of them that would have altered our Civill governement and those that indeavored the alteration of our Church governement And whereas he bids as pag. 135. to take our soleordination and sole jurisdiction to sole our next paire of shoes withall yet notwitstanding hee makes it his great worke to answer all our arguments against the sole power of Bishops and when all is done allowes the Presbyter onely an assistance but no power in Ordination nor jurisdiction Lastly in the stating of the question he distinguisheth betweene divine and Apostolicall authority and denyeth that Bishops are of Divine authority as ordained immediately by Christ. And yet he saith That Christ himselfe hath laid the ground of this imparitie in his first agents And that by the evidence of Timothy and Titus and the Asian Angels to whom Christ himselfe wrote he hath made good that just claime of the sacred Hierarchy This is the summe of that good Reader that we thought fit to praemonish thee of Wee now dismisse thee to the booke it selfe and commend thee and it to the blessing of God A Vindication of the ANSWER to the humble Remonstrance SECT I. IF wee thought our silence would onely prejudice our selves wee could contentedly sit downe and forbeare Replyes not doubting but intelligent men comparing cause with cause and reason with reason would easily see with whom the truth rests but wee fearing that many who have not either ability or leisure to search into the grounds of things themselves would fearce thinke it possible that so much confidence as the Remonstrant shewes should be severed from a good cause or so much contempt should bee powred upon us that are not the bad defenders of a cause much worse Wee must discharge our duty in cleering the cause and truth of God and that will cleer us from all the foule aspersions which the Remonstrant hath been nothing sparing to cast upon us Whose Defence in every Leafe terms us either ignorant lyers witlesse falsifiers malicious spightfull slanderous violent and subtill Machinators against the Church and disturbers of her peace c. and this not onely in a cursory way but in such a devout and religious form as we make question whether ever any man before him did so solemnly traduce speaking it in the presence of God that he never saw any Writer professing Christian sincerity so fouly to overlash To the presence of God before whom his protestation is made our accesse is equall and at that Tribunall wee doubt not through the grace of Christ but to approve both our selves our cause And had we the same accesse unto our Sovereigne wee should lesse regard those bitter invective accusations wherewith hee hath so profusely charged us in his Sacred eares But our meanesse forbids us to make immediate addresses to the throne which he hath made his refuge yet may it please that Royall Majesty whom God hath anointed over us to vouchsafe an eye unto these papers wee have that trust in the Justice of our Sovereigne the goodnesse of our Cause the integrity of our consciences in all our Quotations as we doubt not but his Majesty will cleerly see that our Persons cause and carriage have been misrepresented to him The cause our Remonstrant saith is Gods it is true of the cause agitated though not of the cause by him defended and we desire what ever he hath done to manage it in Gods way to love in the truth and speak the truth in love The charity of our Remonstrant wee will not question though in the first congresse hee doth as good as call us Devils because so often in his book he cals us Brethren But that which hee calls truth and the truth of God we must crave leave to doe more then bring in question notwithstanding the impregnable confidence of this Irrefragable Doctor Our Histories record of Harold Cupbearer to Edward the Confessor that wayting on the Cup he stumbled with one foot and almost fell but that hee recovered himself with the other at which his father smiling said Now one brother helps another The Remonstrant calls us Brethren and supposeth hee sees us stumbling in the very entrance of our answer and what help doth our Brother lend us Onely entertains us Sannis Cathinnis and tels us it is an ill signe to stumble at the threshold Yet not alwayes an ill signe Sir wee accept this stumbling for such an Omen as Caesar had at his Landing in Affrick and our William the Conquerour at his first landing in England which they tooke for the first signe of their victory and possession An what 's this Stumble The Answer mentions the Areopagi instead of the Areopagites Grande nefas Of such an impiety as this did Duraeus once accuse our Learned Whitakers from whom wee will in part borrow our answer It is well the good of the Church depends not upon a piece of Latine But can our Remonstrant perswade himselfe that his Answerers should have so much Clarklike ignorance as never to have heard of Areopagita If he can yet we are sure he can never perswade his ingenious Readers but some one at least of that Legion which hee fancies conjured up against his Remonstrance might have heard of Dionysius Areopagita that by a man that had not studied to cast contempt upon us it might have beene thought rather a stumble in the Transcribers or Printers then the Authours But what if there be no stumble here What if the fault be in the Remonstrants eyes and not in the Answerers words What if hee stumble and not they and what if it be but a straw he stumbles at For though Areopagus be the name of the place and Areopagitae the name of the persons yet it is no such impropriety in speech to signifie the persons by the place had wee said the Admired sonnes of Iustice the two Houses of Parliament had this been such a Soloecisme and will this Remonstrant deny us that liberty for which we have Natures Patent and the example of the best Authors in other Tongues To smooth or square to lengthen or cut off Exoticke words according as will best suit with our own Dialect If we were called to give an account of this Syllabicall Errour before a Deske of Grammarians wee could with ease produce presidents enough in approved Authors but we will onely give an instance in the word it self from Ioan. Sarisburi lib. 5. de Nugis
Curialibus cap. 9. Eum Senatum vero Athenienses Areopagum dicebant eo quod in illis totius populi virtus consisteret We hope our Remonstrant hath now recovered his stumble and next we find him leaping being as good at leaping over blocks as hee is at stumbling at straws it is his practice through his whole booke what ever objection made by us he finds too heavy to remove he over-leaps it This course hee begins here for wee having charged him with some words sounding to contempt in his Preface he falls a quarrellling with our Logick for calling that a Preface which hee intended as one of the main pieces of the substance of his book Which certainly if Captatio Benevolentiae be the work of a Preface he that reads the Remonstrance to the ninth page will find that the preceding pages have been but by way of insinuation and there he comes to the proposition and narration of his cause But if our Logick was bad hee knew his Ethicks were worse and therefore these misdemeanours which we justly charged upon him and he knew not how to excuse or answer his Politicks taught him to leap over Counting all to the fourth page as light froth that will sink alone which seems to us a strange piece of Physik and if we would cry quit with the Remonstrant make our Reader as merry with him as he would make his Readers with us wee could tell him a Tale in the margent But some thing it seems is of a little more solid substance it is as scum that will not so easily sink alone wherein you appeâ—l to indifferent eyes to judge whether we do not endevour to cast unjust envy upon you against the cleer evidence of any knowing mans conscience Content Onely put the case right you tell your Judges that you had said That if Antiquity may be the rule the Civill policie as in generall notion hath sometimes varied the Sacred never the Civill came from Arburary Imposâ—rs the Sacred from men inspired now these gracious Interpreters would draw your words to the present and particular government of our own Monarchie as if you implied that variable and arbitrary and are not ashamed to mention that deadly name of Treason Our charge upon this is that in the judgement of this Remonstrant if any had dared to attempt the alteration of Monarchicall Government they had been lesse culpable then in petitioning the alteration of Episcopall and conclude that if he had found such a passage in any of those whom he cals lewd Libellers all had rung with Treason Treason Now let the indifferent Reader let the most Honourable Parliament let the Sacred Majesty of our King Judge whether we doe the man wrong First this we know that one of the most confident Advocates of Episcopacie hath said it that where a Nationall Church is setled in the orderly regiment of certain grave Overseers to seek to abandon this forme and to bring in a forreigne Discipline is as unreasonable as to cast off the yoke of just anâ— hereditary Monarchy and to affect many headed Soveraignty which wee thinke is an assertion insolent enough that sets the Mitre as high as the Crowne God blesse our sacred Monarchie from such friends But this Remonstrant rises higher and sets the Mitre above the Crown Telling us that Civill Government comes from Arbitrarie Imposers this from men inspired and is in that respect by the Remonstrant challenged to be of divine right If Civill Government here include Monarchie as by the Remonstrants owne explication it doth certainly this is to advance Episcopacie above Monarchie and to make it more sinfull and dangerous to alter Episcopacy which according to the Remonstrant challenges God for the founder then Monarchie which saith this Remonstrant according to originall Authority had its foundation in the â—â—ee Arbitrement of men Yet did we never say that this was Treason knowing such crimes to be above our cognizance wee mentioned indeed the name of Treason but as from your mouth not our own We said If you had found any such in any c. the world would have rung with the loud cryes of treason treason it was our conjecture which you have now made good in this defence For you that are so full of charity to impute it to us as if that wee had vilified the judgement of King Iames as you do pag. 23. whom we mentioned not but as a most famous and ever admired Prince had any â—ord faln from us which through the grace of God we hope never shall tending to the disparagement either of the Royall Person or power What work would you have made with that Be sparing Sir of charging your poore Neighbours so impetuously with malice and uncharitablenesse till yee have taught your selfe to be more charitable and lesse maliâ—ious To what wee alleaged in the instance of William Rufus King and Pope Pius to shew that Episcopall Government which he calls sacred naturally tends not onely not to depend upon but to subdue the civill authority to it selfe His answer is first That William Rufus was a Prince noted for grosly irreligious That those were tyrannicall Popish Bishops That the Pope was Antichrist That he answered so because hee was unwilling they should shew as good cards for their standing as hee pretended for his own And lastly all this makes nothing against our Bishops who professe notwithstanding the divine right of their calling to hold their places and the exercise of their jurisdiction wholly from the King So then here is no Falsification all that was produced is granted true onely exception taken against the persons produced King William hee was irreligious Daniel observes that former times being unhappy in their compilers of History the Scepter which rules over the fames of Princes who for the most part were Monks had all their Princes personated either Religious or irreligious as they humoured or offended the Bishops Rochet and the Monks belly No wonder then if so small a friend to Bishops be condemned as irreligious But then those Bishops were Popish Tyrannous Bishops But it was not their Popery but their Episcopall dignity that made them tyrannize and it was their Tyranny and not their Popery that made them odious to their King who was Popish as well as they And it hath beene ever usuall to both former and latter Bishops to tyrannize over such as feare them and to flatter such as they feare The Pope hee is Antichrist wee are glad to heare you call him so some thought a yeere agoe you would scarce have given him such a nickname unlesse you meant to have falne out with the rest of your brethren and what if the Pope be Antichrist may wee not bring the testimony of Antichrist against Antichristian Bishops As Paul brought the witnesse of a Cretian Poet against Cretian Liers May not we alleage Beelzebub against Beliall without honouring him But the Pope so answered because he was unwilling they should shew as
Rome p. 6. where a speech imputed to Luther is justified as a charitahle and not too indulgent a profession viz. That under the Papacie is all good true Christianitie the very kernel of Christianity c. Compare this with what the Bishop of Salisbury saith in his begged suffrage who thus speaks That the Church of Rome is no more a true Church than an arrant Whore is a true wife to her husband To disprove what he affirmed that the Liturgy was taken out of Models not Roman but Christian We produced King Edwards Proclamation to which he answers nothing onely ownes that and scornes us thinking to wipe off all exceptions with the glorious names of Martyrs and Confessors that composed it For whom though wee dare not glory in man yet wee blesse God as well as he But with all if we should say there were some holy Martyrs and Confessors of the same reformed Religion that were Opposers of it and suffered in opposition even to a persecution the lives of some of them being pursued from City to City which he knows is most true and so may any that will read the booke called the troubles of Frankfort Would this be a sufficient argument in his judgment for the remoâ—all of it But this is not the strength by which our Liturgie stands it stands confirmed by Parliamentary Acts and King Iames his Proclamation to which wee answered that neither the King nor the Parliament intended such a rigorous pressing of the Liturgie as we have felt Secondly that neither our own Laws nor the Proclamation of that ever admired Prince are as unalterable as the Lawes of the Medes and Persians this he cals a bold flout of purpose to render us odious to our dread Sovereigne and the Honorable house as likewise in the next page seems to impute that language to us which is his own our loyall hearts startle to think of a repetition of the words they are in pag. 23. of the Defence and are concerning King Iames whom in the clause wee had last in hand wee mentioned with the deserved memory of a famous and ever admired Prince We confesse in some passages of that booke wee tooke liberty to use some cheerfull expressions provoked thereto by the strange confidence and little strength of our Remonstrant Remembring that of Tertullian It wel agrees with truth to laugh because it is of a pleasant disposition and to sport with her competitors because it is secure and feares not the wals of her bulwarks But what ever we have done in other places here wee attest the great Searcher of hearts it never came into our thoughts to use a light expression much lesse to flout in so bold a manner as hee accuseth us Nor doe wee thinke it possible that any charitable Reader could suppose wee aimed at any other then what we expresse more plainly pag. 20. of our answer of the power of Princes and Parliaments in changing their laws His next business is with our queres the first whereof was this Whether it be not fit to consider of the alteration of the Liturgie which we hoped had beene presented in such modest termes speaking of an alteration not an utter abrogation of consideration of an alteration not prescribing the alteration onely of a fitnes of such an alteration not of the necessity of such an alteration as should never have occasioned such a sarcasticall Declaration as he their makes The thing propounded is so equall that the Remonstrant who makes conscience to agree with us in as little as hee may here is forced to confesse much against his will for which we may thank the Honorable Parliament there is some need of alteration but this coÌ„fession is joined with such a height of scoâ—nâ—t seems to threaten those who ever they are that should dare attempt it exprest in such away of diminution as gives just cause to suspect it is a meer designe to gain upon the Parliament and by a pretended shadow of an alteration to prevent a reall and totall reformation he tels us of wiser heads then our own that will consider of the alteration if here hee mean the Parliament hee meanes the same to whom wee have presented these considerations concerning whom wee doubt not but they will make another manner of an alteration then the Remonstrant speaks of consisting onely of a bare change of a few expressions and that in the manner of them Onely But if these wise heads hee here speaks of are such as his own that it may be are complotting some kind of a castigation of the Liturgie then wee feare that although the times will not serve to make such an alteration as that of the English Liturgie sent into Scotland yet the alteration is like to be no better than in Queene Elizabeths time when the Parliament having given order for the alteration and correction of the Letany all the Alteration that was made in it was onely the taking out of that one suffrage from the Pope of Rome and all his detestable enormities good Lord deliver us The Remonstraut tels us of a Martyr whom he cals Silly and Ignorant wee dare not Doctor Taylor that magnified the Liturgy to Bishop Gardiner as compleat but where this story is you tell us not wee could answer story with story which would please you much lesse then this doth us we could tell you of a Martyr that said it was the Mark of the Beast to receive from the Bishop a Licence to preach Wee could tell you of that Doctor Tailor who when hee was degraded having his corner Cap and the rest of his Priestly Robes put on when they were taken off again said hee now I am rid of my fools coat That our proposition of entring into consideration about altering the Liturgie might not seeme unreasonable wee set downe our reasons enforcing such alteration all which the Remonstrant brings under the severity of his censure First wee say it symbolizeth so much with the Popish Masse as that the Pope would have approved it which hee denyes not if he had we could have proved it from a man above suspition in this cause Doctor Morton Onely hee saith If the Devill confesse Christ to be the Son of God shal I disclaim the truth because it passed through a damned mouth but you know Sir that Christ would not receive such a Confession from the Devils mouth nor Paul neither Act. 16. and loth wee would be to go to the Devill to learne a confession It is true Gold in the impurest Chanell is not to be contemned but what need we goe to the Chanell for gold when wee can have it in the purest stream or what need we goe to the Roman Portuâ—se for a Prayer when wee can have one more free from jealousies in another place Will a wiseman goe to the Stews to seek an honest woman to make his wife Our second Reason why wee propounded this quaere was because this was composed into this forme on
purpose to bring the Papist to our Churches which wee finde to bee with so little successe c. In answer to which the Remonstrant first commends the project as charitable and gracious The nature of the project wee never intended to dispute onely wee produced this to shew that there was not the same reason for the retaining of this forme that there was for the first introducing of it because experience tels us it hath not prevailed to that end to which it was at first designed Yes it did saith the Remonstrant for Sir Edward Coke tels us till the eleventh yeere of Queene Elizabeth all came to Church those times knew no recusant Pardon us Sir If we tell you that it was not the converting power of the Liturgie but the constraining power of the Law that brought them thither which afterwards not being pressed with that life and vigour that it had bin gave incouragemeÌ„t to the Popish fact oÌ„ to take heart adde also that at the same time the Pope negotiated to have her Liturgie to be allowed by his authority so as the Queene would acknowledge his Supremacie which when it grew hopelesse then the Jesuitish Casuists begun to draw on the Papists to a Recusancie But might the complying of our Papists be attributed soly to the inoffensivenesse of our Liturgie Yet what credit is this to our Church to have such a forme of publike worship as Papists may without offence joyne with us in and yet their Popish principles live in their hearts still How shall that reclayme an erring soule that brings their bodies to Church leaves their hearts stil in error And wheras the Remonstrant would impute the not winning of Papists rather to the want or weaknesse in preaching Be it so in the mean time let the Bishops see how they will cleere their souls of this sinne who having the sole power of admitting Ministers into the Church have admitted so many weak ones and have rejected so many faithfull able Preachers for not conforming to their beggerly rudiments And when we said that this our Liturgie hath lost us many rather then wonne any Wee meant not onely of such as are lost to the Popish part But let the Remonstrant take it so it is neither paradox nor slander For let an acute Jesuite have but this argument to weild against a Protestant not well grounded in our Religion as too many such there are in England It is evident that the Church of Rome is the ancient and true Church and not yours for you see your Service is wholly taken out of ours How would a weake Christian expedite himselfe here To the third reason this quaere was grounded upon the many stumbling blocks the Liturgie lays before the feet of many He tels us that these stumbling blocks are removâ—d by many We confesse indeed endeavours used by many whether effected or no that we question wee know it is no easie thing when a scruple hath once taken possession of the conscience to cast it out again Among the many the Remonstrant is pleased to refer us to Master Fisher for himself will not vouchsafe to foule his fingers with the removing of one of those blocks we mentioned whose book among all that have travelled in that way we think that any intâ—lligent Reader will judge most unable to give solid satisfaction to a scrupling conscience Tell us wee beseech you is it enough for a conscience that scruples the Surplice to say That it is as lawfull for you to enjoyn the Surplice and punish the omitting of it as it was for Solomon to enjoin Shimei not to goe out of Jerusalem and to punish him for the breach of that injunction or That the Surplice is a significative of divine alacritie and integritie and the expectation of glory Is it possible that a man that reads this should stuÌ„ble at the Surplice after The Cross is not onely lawfull in the use of it but the removall of it would be scandalous and perillous to the State Baptisme is necessary to salvation Children dying unbaptized are in a forlorne condition therefore Midwives may baptize c. Let the Reader judge whether this be to remove stumbling blocks from before the feet of men or to lay more But if this Remonstrant think Master Fisher so able and happy a remover of those occasions of offence wee wonder how his quick sight could see cause of any alteration so much as in the manner of the expression knowing Master Fisher undertakes the defence not onely of the Substance but of the very Circumstances and Syllables in the whole Book But his last put off is this that if there be ought in it that may danger scandall it is under carefull hands to remove it The Lord be praysed it is so it is under carefull hands and hearts more mercifull then this Remonstrant is to remit troubled Consciences to No Better Cure then Master Fishers Book who we hope will do by those as the Helvetians did by some things that were stumbled at among them though they were none but Anabaptists that stumbled at them yet the State did by Authority remove them and Zwinglius their professed adversary gives them thanks for occasioning the removall To the fourth which was that it is Idolized and accounted as the onely worship of God in England c. At Amsterdame saith hee but hee knew wee spoke of such as adore it as an Idoll not such as abhorre it as an Idoll though it pleaseth him to put it off with a scoffe retorting upon us others say rather too many doe injuriously make an Idoll of preaching shall wee therefore consider of abandoning it We hope Sir you are not serious if you be that not a little your self is guilty of Idolizing the Liturgy Dare you in cool bloodequalize this very individuall Liturgy with Gods Ordinance of preaching and say there is as little sinne or danger in considering of the utter abandoning of preaching as there is in the abandoning of this present established Liturgie Cave dixeris The fift Argument was from the great distaste it meets with in many This hee imputes to nothing but their ill teaching and betakes himselfe to his old shifts of diversion and saith By the same reason multitudes of people distasting the truth of wholsome doctrine shall we to humour them abandon both It is a griefe to see this distast grow to such a height as tends to a separation and it is as strange to us that this Remonstrant should have a heart so void of pity as that the yielding to the altering or removing of a thing indifferent which stands as a wall of separation betwixt us and our brethren should be presented to publike view under no better notion then the humouring of a company of ill taught men or as the Remonstrant elsewhere calls them brainsick men or as another Booke men that have need of dark roomes and Ellebore For that ill teaching to which hee imputes this generall
distast if there be any such wee for our parts are innocent our care for our part hath beene to informe our people that such stumbling blocks as these are not sufficient causes of Separation But wee thinke nay we know that some few Prelats by their over-rigorous pressing of the Service-book and Ceremonies have made more Separatists than all the Preachers disaffected to the Ceremonies in England Our last reason was from the difference betweene this and all other Churches To which he answers that difference in Liturgies will breed no dis-union between Churches Secondly if it be requisite to seeke conformity our is the more ancient Liturgie and our the more noble Church Therefore fit for them to conforme to us rather then we to them It is true every difference in Liturgies doth not necessitate a dis-union of Churches but here the difference is too large to be covered with a few fig-leaves It is too well known our Ceremonies and other things in our Liturgies will not downe with other reformed Churches to the second it is not the precedencie in times that gains the Glory but the exactnesse of the work Our first Reformation was onely in doctrine theirs in doctrine and discipline too For the third that ours is the more noble Church We desire not to ecclipse the glory of this Church but rather to intreat the Lord to increase it a thousand fold how great soever it be and to ennoble it in this particular in removing what ever is a stumbling block out of the way of his people But why saith the Remonstrant should we rather conforme to the Liturgies of the Reformed Churches then those of all other Christians Grecians Armenians Copths c. should we set down what wee have read in the Liturgies of those Churches wee believe the Remonstrant would blush for intimating there is as much reason to conform to their Liturgies as those of the Reformed Churches Our second quaere is not so weak as this Remonstrant supposeth it is this whether the first Reformers of Religion did ever intend the use of a Liturgie further then to be a help in the want and to the weaknes of the Ministers In way of Answer he asketh Whether we can think that our Reformers had any other intentions then all other the founders of Liturgies No indeed wee thinke no other and howsoever the Remonstrant according to his confidence tels us that the least part of their eare was the helpe of the Ministers weaknesse yet their words tell us it was the main drift of those that first brought prescribed forms of prayer into the Church and therefore wee conceived it might possibly be the intention of our Reformers also witnesse the 23 Canon of the fourth Councell of Carthage ut nemo patrem nominet profilio c. So the Composers of the Liturgie for the French Church in in Frankfort He formulae serviunt tantum rudioribus nullius liberiati praescribitur These formes serve onely for the ignorant not prescribing to any mans liberty And were it so that the mayn drift of the Composers of Liturgies were to helpe the dâ—votion of the people yet what a help to devotion many find it though we dispute not it will be hard fâ—r this Remonstrant to perswade many thousands who desire with devout hearts to worship God that the being constantly bound to the same formes though in themselves neither for matter nor composure subject to just exception will prove such a great help to their devotion But this wee are sure that if the knowing before hand the matter and the words wherewith it should be clothed make people the more intent upon devotion if this be an infallible argument it pleads against the use of present conception either in praying or preaching or any other administration either publike or private and how contradictory this is to what the Remonstrant hath professed of his reverent and pious esteem of conceived prayer let himselfe see It is neither boldly nor untruly said that all other reformed Churches though they use Liturgies do not bind Ministers to the use of them If we may trust the Canons and the Rubricks of those Churches we may both boldly and truly say it In the Canons of the Dutch Churches agreed upon in their Synod we find a Canon enjoyning some days in every week to be set apart for preaching and praying and the very next Canon saith the Minister shall conceive prayers either by the Dictate of the Spirit or by a set forme So in the first Rubricke of the Liturgie of Geneva the Minister is to exhort the people to pray quibus ei visum fuerit verbis in what words he shall think fit and though that Liturgie containe formes of prayer for publike use yet we doe not finde in all that Liturgie where they are tyed to the use of those forms and no other we finde where they are left free as in one place in Dominico die mane haec ut plurimum adhibetur formula Upon the Lords Day in the morning for the most part this prayer is used for the most part then not alwayes So in another after the Lords Super this thanksgiving or some other like it is used then they are not absolutely tied to the use of that and by this wee have learned how to construe what he hath quoted out of Master Calvine And indeed any man that reads that Epistle may easily construe what was Master Calvines judgement about Liturgies not that men should be so tied to words and forms as to have no liberty to recede from them For in the same Epistle hee doth advise to have a summary collection of doctrine which all should follow and to the observing of which all both Bishops and Ministers should be bound by Oath Yet we hope the Remonstrant will not say that Calvine did advise that Bishops and Ministers should be bound by oath not to vary from that forme of doctrine Calvine advises a set form of Catechisme will the Remonstrant say that Calvine meant the Ministers should never vary from the syllables of that forme provided they did dictate pro captu populi in quibus situs sit verus Christianismus The very words by himself quoted shew what Calvins end was in advising a set Liturgie viz. to helpe the simplicity and unskilfulnesse of some to prevent the innovation of others that the consort of all Churches among themselves might more certainly appeare all which ends may be obtained without limiting all Ministers to the words and syllables of a set forme provided they pray to that effect Which is all that is required in the Liturgies of other Churches Wee could name you many other Liturgies wherein there are not further bounds laid upon the Minister then thus Hae sunt formulae quas tamen sequitur Minister pro suo arbitrio These are forms which the Minister follows according to his liking And again Spiritus sanctus non est alligandus formulis The Holy
Ghost is not to be tyed to forms Minister concludit Orationem quam pro suo arbitrio dicit Haec esto formula nisi quid ille suâ sponie possit melius The Minister concludes the prayer which hee sayes according to his own discretion let this be that forme except of his own accord hee can doe better In another Minister ad precandum hisce aut similibus verbis invitat ad hunc modum orat in these or the like words And by this we hope the Remonstrant seeth that what wee have said was more truly then boldly spoken As for the Lutheran Churches though we blesse God for that truth that is among them for that glorious instrument of their Reformation yet we think the Remonstrant will not say that the Lutheran Churches came out so perfectly in the first Edition but that desiderantur nonnulla nor can he be ignorant that in the ordinary phrase of writing they are called the Protestant Churches the other the Reformed Churches and what if the Reformed Churches be as the Remonstrant calls them out of his respect hee beares them but a poore handfull yet is this handfull in respect of purity of truth and worship among them to be preferred before all the Christian World besides The Rubrick in the Liturgie of Edward the sixth saith he is misconstrued Because it intends onely the peoples ease and more willing addiction to hearing Two of the very ends for which wee desire a liberty which if some Ordinaries upon his certain knowledge have often yielded many now upon our certaine knowledge have denied it and ordered Sermons should rather be constantly cut short then any part of the Liturgie omitted why should it be a fault in us to desire that as a favour from this Honourable House which the Remonstrant grants an ordinary may without offence yield at his own discretion 3 The Homilies we say are left free reason therefore the Liturgie should which argument he confesseth might hold force did they utterly abridge all Ministers of the publike use of any conceived prayers We know some men have endevoured sacrilegiously to rob all Ministers of the exercise of the gift of prayer on what occasion soever And our argument is as strong against limiting in prayer as it is against limiting in preaching either in whole or in part and he saith nothing against it onely determines tanquam è Cathedrâ that it is no lesse sacrilege to rob the people of a set form by the liberty of a free exprâ—ssion Then it is to rob them of the Ministers gift of preaching or praying But the Remonstrant must prove that set forms and Liturgies stinted and enjoyned are not onely lawfull but Ordinances of God and not only warranted but commanded as well as preaching or praying before he doe so peremptorily conclude the taking of set formes away by the liberty of a free expression to be sacrilege and his bold closure of this Answer how true it is let him look in what we have said before of the Liturgies of other Churches 4 His fourth Answer That it is a false ground that the imposing of the book tyes godly men from exercising their gift in prayer would have been condemned for heresie in some Consistories in England within these few yeeres by such as did from the imposition of the one forbid the other Whether the liberty of prayer be infringed wholly by a set Liturgie wee dispute not But it is beyond dispute that the not binding to a Liturgie would endanger the liberty of prayer lesse 5 Our fift Reason was because many deny their presence at our Church-meeting in regard of those imposed prayers and we finde no better way to recover them from that distance in which they stand then by leaving the Liturgie free The Remonstrant saith There is no reason of such alienation from our assemblies upon such grounds The reasonablenesse or unreasonablenesse of this we determine not in the mean time wee are sure thus it is For our parts we professe that wee are not against a free use of a Liturgie nor doe we count a Liturgie a sufficient ground of separation from the Church we say with Augustine Non putamus scindendas esse Ecclesias propter ea quae nos ex se neque digniores neque indigniores coram Deo facere possunt Yet wee feare it is not the Remonstrants Dilemma that will reduce such as upon this ground are upon point of forsaking our Church assemblies The Liturgie saith hee is either good or evill if evill it is not lawfull to be used if good it is not unlawfull to be imposed The persons of whom wee speake and with whom in this argument he hath to deal will deny both and tell him the Liturgie is neither good nor yet may lawfully be imposed if it were good it may be the Remonstram might have work enough to perswade some men of either and whether it be easier to satisfie the consciences of many thousands in England that are troubled about this by argument and disputing or by loosing the bond of imposition and taking away the cause of dispute and trouble or to behold the confusion that will follow if the Lord do not in mercy direct to some means of prevention is not hard to determine The Remonstranâ— inclines to the third and making it but a small matter turns it off with O miserable misled people whom nothing will reclaim but a perfect confusion a perfect deformity a more profitable nonsence And so confident he is that this will be the issue that though this confusion appeare in no other Churches who perhaps hee grants contradicting himselfe begun without a Liturgie yet with us it could be no lesse then what hee hath prophesied yea so resolute he is not to yield to a liberty in what is established that whereas wee said that liberty in Liturgies could breed no more confusion then liberty in the Homilies we evidently see by his answer that had the reading of Homilies beene as strictly enjoyned as the Book of Common-prayer the ablest Minister in England were the Law in the Remonstrants hands must be held as strictly to them as to this Yea lastly whereas wee had said that if enjoyned at all it might be as a punishment upon the insufficient thereby to quicken them up to more diligence and care he scoffs at this as a singular project and unheard of mulct and yet himselfe comes out with a project about preaching never a whit better and doth as good as confirme our saying in the latter end Surely where God hath bestowed gifts it is fit they should be imployed and improved to the best advantage of his people But where there is nothing but an empty over-meening and proud ignorance there is great reason for a just restraint Let the ingenious Reader peruse the words and consider how much they differ from that which he calls our singular project and withall judge whether this conclusion of the Remonstrant after all his
wrangling against our Queres be not as like Bellarmines tutissimum tamen c. as if it had beene cast â—n the same Scull How this way that the Remonstrant hath chosen would speed let the Reader judge In the meane time we blesse God who hath put it into the hearts of others into whose hands hee hath concredited the work to judge more wisely and consider more mercifully and to professe in the hearing of some of us that they would willingly part with that which was indifferent to themselves if they were but truly informed it was offensive to others According to that of Gregory Those customes which are knowne to bring any burthens upon the Churches it becomes us to consider of the removing of them Thus we have vindicated the first part of our answer concerning Liturgie Wherein we professe as in the presence of God that wee have written nothing out of a spirit of contention and faction but onely as lovers of the Truth and the peace of the Church which is now miserably divided in judgement and affections and like a young Hart upon the mountains of Bether which rents and distractions wee are so far from fomenting that wee would willingly goe over divers Seas as Calvin once said to finde out one uniforme way of worshipping of God in which all Christians might happily agree We well know that peace is the Helena that all are suiters unto and wee know as well that peace without truth is as a painted Iezabell and to be thrown downe by all those who are on the Lords side And therefore it hath and alwayes shall be our chiefe care and prayer that peace and truth may kisse greet each other And we hope that the Worthies of that Honourable Assembly who are the great Patrons of peace and truth will give a candid interpretation to these our endeavours and will doe that for which present and succeeding generations may justly record them as the Nehemiah's Ezrae's and Zorobabels of our decayed Ierusalem SECT III. THe businesse of the third Section is to extricate himselfe from those snares in which his owne words have entangled him his affection to his cause had transported him to use some over-reaching expressions lifting up the Antiquitie and extending the Universalitie of Episcopall Government beyond truth vilifying as wee know his custome is vvhatsoever hath been spoken or vvritten to the contrary Those things we laid to his charge Now see how miserably he excuseth himself read the Remonstrance our câ—llections from it in this Section and judge whether he hath sufficiently redeemed his credit who hath neither made any one ingenious confession of an oversight nor yet made good what he had spoken yet hee enters with his wonted confidence perswading himself he hath blown away all the arguments of the former Section and lays on us unmercifully calling us Cavellers Leasers Slanderers Calumniators worthy to be spit upon c. Such let us be esteemed if we be found deserving His first care and almost his greatest is to cleere himself from that which we spake of but by the way His condemning all that either writ or spoke against Episcopacy as weak or factious The God of heaven knows this saith hee never came within the verge of my thoughts Sir wee cannot parly with your thoughts but certainly if it were not in your thoughts your words mistake their errand For this proposition Episcopacie is cryed downe abroad either by weake or factious persons We beseech you let your Logick the want whereof you upbraid us vvith tell us quae quanta qualis if any man should say it grieves his heart to heare how the pure Protestant Religion is cryed downe abroad by either weake or factious persons would this have been interpreted to concerne onely such as cry downe the Protestant Religion here in England Certainly abroad not being limited as it was not in your Remonstrance though now you would limit it in your Defence is a vvord of such vast extent as reacheth not onely beyond the bounds of the Parliament but of the Kingdome too But see how justly you deale with us where you personate us as saying Sure the man is not in his right wits hear how he raves sure hee is in a deep phrensie vvho ever spake of the Remonstrant so contumeliously It is language more like his vvho sends men to darke rooms and to Ellebore Wee said indeed the Remonstrant was self-confounded and vvee know as vvell as you can tell us there is a self-confusion that is the effect of extream sorrow such a sorrow as makes men speak they knovv not vvhat and so did this Remonstrant some of vvhich expressions hee yet justifies some he minces This he justifies and saith hee ever will that hee is no peaceable nor wel-affected sonne of the Church of England that doth not wish well to Liturgie and Episcopacie What tell us novv once for all whither the Parliament doe not here come under the verge of your Proposition Whom before you vvere so carefull to exempt by one vvord abroad For this is vvell knowne if all those of the Nobilitie Gentrie and Communaltie that at this time stand not vvell affected to the present Liturgie and Hierarchie are to bee counted factious and ill affected the Reverend Fathers will have multitudes of disobedient sons to disple In the next page he endevours to make good vvhat he had spoken in the Remonstrance that Episcopall government by the joynt confession of all Reformed Divines derived it selfe from the times of the Apostles vvithout the contradiction of any one Congregation gregation in the Christian World unto this present Age. His Defence is first he said nothing of Diocesan Bishops then as good have said nothing at all but spake onely of Episcopall Government But vvas it not that Sacred Government vvhich some seek to wound and vvhat is that but Government by Diocesan Bishops vvhich he must prove to derive it selfe from the Apostles times or else eat his vvords Nay more then so hee must prove that the joynt Confession of all Reformed Divines acknowledge it and not think to put the Reader and us off with telling us no true Divines ever questioned whether Bishops were derived from the Apostles or no but what kind of Bishops they were Wee know what kinde of Bishops the Remonstrant pleads for and of them he said by the joynt confession of all Reformed Divines they were derived from the Apostles prove this or acknowledge your errour It is this kind of Bishops you must prove hath continued in the Christian World unto this age without the contradiction of any one Congregation We tell you of Scotland without Bishops you would put us off with China and Brasile c. but are they parts of the Christian World as Scotland is You never meant that every place through the whole World hath had a continued line of Bishops ever since the Apostles we thought you had for we are sure it is
who have laboured about the Reformation of the Church these five hundred yeeres of whom he names abundance have taught that all Pastors be they intitulated Bishops or Priests have equall authority and power by the Word of God and by this the Reader may know Doctor Reinolds his judgment concerning Episcopacie There is one thing more belongs to this Section as to the proper seat and that is the establishment which he seeks to Episcopacie froÌ„ the laws of the Kingdom to which we having answered that Laws are repealable the Parliament having a Nomotheticall power He answers though laws are repealable yet fundamentall laws are not subject to alteration upon personall abuses Secondly that he speaks not against an impossibility but an easinesse of change which our guiltinesse would willingly overlook But consider we beseech you how fitly is Episcopal Government made a piece of the fundamentall Laws of the Kingdome How did the Kingdome then once stand without Bishops as in the very page you had now to answer you might have seen once it did For doth not the Marginall tell you from Sir Edward Coke or rather from an Act reported by him in the 23 yeere of Edward the first that the holy Church was founded in the state of Prelacie within the Realme of England by the King and his progenitors which your guiltinesse will needs overlooke for feare you should see that there was a King of this Realme of England before there was a Prelacie And how then is Episcopacie one of the fundamentals of the Kingdome And whereas you say you spake onely against an easinesse of change read your words in the eighteenth page of your Remonstrance A man would thinke it were plea enough to challenge a reverend respect and an immunitie from all thoughts of alteration is this to speake against an easinesse or rather against a possibility of change For your conclusion that things indifferent or good having by continuance and generall approbation beene well rooted in Church and State may not upon light grounds be pulled up Good Sir never trouble your selfe about such an indifferent thing as Episcopacie is Never feare but if Episcopacie be rooted up it will be done by such hands as will not doe it upon light grounds SECT V. THey that would defend the Divine right of Episcopacie derive the pedigree of it from no lesse then Apostolicall and in that right divine institution so did this Remonstrant This we laboured in this Section to disprove and shew that it might be said of our Bishops as of those men Ezra 62. These men sought their Register among those that were reckoned by Genealogie but they were not found therefore were they as polluted put from the Priesthoâ—d For the Bishops whose pedigree is derived from the Apostles were no others then Presbyters this we evinced by foure mediums out of Scripture but insisted onely upon two the identitie of their name and office Before wee come to the Remonstrants answer wee will minde the Reader of what the Remonstrant saith That we have a better faculty at gathering then at strewing which if we have we shall here make good use of our faculty in gathering the choice flowers which himself hath scattered yielding unto us the mayn Scripture grounds whereby the Patrons of Episcopacie have endevoured to uphold their cause For himselfe confesseth the Bishops cause to be bad if it stand not by divine Right and compares the leaving of divine right and supporting themselves by the indulgence and munificence of religious Princes unto the evill condition of such men who when God hath withdrawn himselfe make flesh their arme And whether himselfe hath not surrendred up this divine right judge by that which followeth Our main argument was That Bishops and Presbyters in the originall authority of Scripture were the same Hee answers in the name of himselfe and his Party This is in expresse terms granted by us We argue it further That we never find in Scripture any other orders of Ministery but Bishops and Deacons He answers Brethren you might have spared to tell mee that which I have told you before And adds That when wee alleage the Apostles writings for the identity of Bishops and Presbytâ—rs we oppose not his assertion because he speaks of the monuments of immediate succession to the Apostolike times but we of the writing of the Apostles And for the two other arguments drawn from the identitie of the qualifications of Bishops and Presbyters for their Office and Ordination to their office hee answers Ne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quidem And yet notwithstanding that the Reader may not perceive how the Remonstrant betrayes his own cause he deals like the fish Sepia and casteth out a great deal of black inke before the eyes of the Reader that so hee may escape without observation But wee will trace him and finde him out where hee thinks himselfe most secure For first he falsly quotes our answer Whereas wee say That in originall authority Bishops Presbyters are the same he tels us we say That Bishops and Presbyters went originally for the same That is saith he There was at first a plain indentity in their denomination Which two answers differ Immane quantum And yet howsoever this very identity of denomination in Scripture is of no small consequence what ever the Remonstrant makes of it For the proper ends of Names being to distinguish things according to the difference of their natures and the supream wisdome of God being the imposer of these names who could neither be ignorant of the nature of these offices nor mistake the proper end of the imposition of names nor want variety to expresse himselfe the argument taken from the constant identity of denomination is not so contemptible as the Remonstrant pretends Especially considering that all the texts brought to prove the identity of names prove as intrinsecally the identity of Offices which we did cleerly manifest by that text Titus 1. 5 6 7. Where the Apostle requiring Presbyters to be thus and thus qualified renders the reason because Bishops must be so Which argument would no ways evince what the Apostle intended if there were onely an idenditie of names and not also of offices and qualifications When the names are the same and the Offices distinct who but one that cares not what hee affirmes would infer the same offices as a consequent from the identity of their names Who would say that the properties of the Constellation called Canis ought to be the same with the bruit creature so called because they have both one name And this we desire the Reader to take the more notice of because the Remonstrant passeth it over in silence Secondly the Remonstrant seemes to recant that which he had before granted tels us that though in the Apostolike Epistles there be no nominal distinction of the titles yet here is a reall distinction and specification of the duties as we shall see in due place
a Canon provides that they should not be in little Villages Ne vilesceret honos Episcopatus but these himselfe acknowledgeth are but the accessaries of Episcopacy by the donations of Magnificent Princes But what is the meaning of this where it may be had what doth he meane where it may be had with the favour of the Prince then the Primitive Church had never had any Or where it may be had with the willing subjection of the people then Episcopacy shall be an ordinance if the people will have it so Where it may be had what with quiet and conveniency then you make that which you call an ordinance of God subject to mans convenience Or what with possibility requiring that where Episcopacy may be had possibly it should what 's this lesse than a command yet saith the Remonstrant here is no expresse law of God requiring it Now we pray you review your worke and see how well you have stated the question To prove that Episcopacy was not a divine but a humane institution we produced out of antiquity some places that mention the occasion and authors of Episcopall imparity which are not as the Remonstrant absurdly the onely countenance of our cause Our first was that knowne text of Hiereme in the 1. Titus out of which we collected five things which the Remonstrant summes up thus First that a Bishop and a Presbyter are originally one Secondly that the imparity was grounded upon Ecclesiasticall custome That before this priority the Church was governed by the common Councell of Presbyters and that Bishops ought still so to governe And lastly that the occasion of this imparity was the division which through the divels instinct fell among Christians this the Remonstrant cals the summe of our collection But if his Arithmeticke be no honester then thus he shall summe no summes for us for he leaves out one Collection which is indeed principally considerable That this was not Hieromes owne opinion but the opinion of the scriptures This would have stopt the mouth of his satis imperitè Wel what saies the Remonstrant You look now that I should tell you the booke is of uncertaine credit No indeed sir we looked for no such matter because we know that booke is approved by men both of as great learning and of as little affection to Hieromes opinion as the Remonstrant is though his lesser commentaries on the epistles be questioned Or else you look that I should tell you Hierome was a Presbyter and not without some touch of envy to that higher dignity which he missed Truely sir this we looked for and the rather because Doct. Hall in his Episcopacy by Divine right part 2. page 122. saith that as he was naturally a waspish a hot good man so being now vexed with some crosse proceedings as he thought with Iohn of Ierusalem he flew out c. but what a slender answer is this Hierome was a Presbyter what then Hierome saith nothing here but what he saith from Scripture and is Scripture the lesse Scripture because produced by a Presbyter Hierome was a Presbyter and pleads for his owne order doth that make his argument the lesse creditable the author of Episcopacy by Divine right was a Bishop is it sufficient confutation of that booke to say hee was a Bishop that made it he must plead for his own honour and order Or you looke say you that I should tell you that wiser men then your selves have censured him in this point of Arrianisme No indeed for feare you should thereby comfort us against the same censure past so often upon our selves If Hierome suffer under the name of Aerian no wonder we doe but if wisermen than we have condemned him for Aerianisme wiser men then the Remonstant have quitted him of that crime But the Remonstrant thinkes to decline these common waies and set Hierome to answer Hierome which yet is no more then Bellarmine did before him and and puts us in mind that the same father passes a satis imperitè upon the same opinion in the Bishop of Hierusalem but a satis imperitè doth not condemne the opinion but the man for it may be truth which a man speakes though he speakes it imperitè yet to make sure worke the Remonstrant will set Hierome to answer himselfe what saith Hierome at first saith he Bishops and Presbyters had but one title No Hierome said not so nor did we Idem est ergo Presbyter qui Episcopus How doth the Remonstrant construe this Is this in English a Bishop and a Presbyter is the same or is it at first Bishops and Presbyters had but one title with what face can the Remonstrant charge us with infidelity in quotation and mis-englishing who useth no more fidelity himselfe that which Hierome speakes of the office he would restraine to the title that which Hierome speakes in the present tense as true in all the moments and fluxes of time he would remit to the time past They had but one title This the Remonstrant passeth from and slips from their Identity to their imparity inquiring the time and occasion of that and will needs force Hierome here to confesse Bishops in the Apostles daies because then they began to say I am of Paul c. but will take no notice at all of what our answer spake for the removing of this inference unlesse it be to slight it as a poore shift nor will take notice of that which Hierome himselfe speakes Haec propterea ut oftenderemus apud veteres eosdem fuisse Presbyteros quos Episcopos paulatim verò ut dissentionum plantaria evellerentur ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam intimating that Episcopacy was not presently invented as a cure of schisme but paulatim so that should it be granted that the schismes spoken of here were those in the Apostles daies yet it doth not follow that Episcopacy should be coaetaneous to these schismes because Hierome saith Paulatim ad unum omnem solicitudinem esse delatam Let the Remonstrant now aske Hierome not us why the remedy should be so late after the disease and here we desire the reader to observe that the Remonstrant doth meerely abuse him in telling him that Clemens in his Epistle to the Corinthians taxeth the continuance of the distractions raised in the Apostles daies when it is apparent that Clement speakes of a new schisme different from that Paul speakes of raised against ther Presbyters and the former schisme mentioned in the Scripture was onely among the people As for those Bishops whom Hierome names as made by the Apostles at present we say no more but this Hierome as a Divine saith Bishops and Presbyters are the same and to prove this produceth Scripture but Hierome speaking as an Historian mentions Bishops made by the Apostles and brings no Scripture for the proofe of that but onely the testimony of Eusebius his history who alone had writ before him of that subject Now let the
it save onely that their ambitious desires of ruling alone swayes them against their owne judgement and the determinations of the law But indeed if this communicating of all the important businesse of the Church with those grave assistants you speake of or with the Presbyters of the whole Diocesse if you will be onely an assuming them into the fellowship of consulting and deliberating without any decisive suffrage leaving the Bishop to follow or not to follow their advise this is but a meere cosenage of the reader and doth not hinder the sole power of Episcopall jurisdiction And this is all that Downam grants lib. 1. c. 7. p. 161. where he saith that Bishops doe assume Presbyters for advise and direction as a Prince doth his Counsellors not as a Consull doth his Senators who are cojudges with the Consul And this we perceive the Remonstrant well likes of as that which makes much for the honour of their function And now sir you see that we have not fished all night and caught nothing wee have caught your sole jurisdiction and might have caught your selfe were you not such a Proteus such a Polypus to shift your selfe into all formes and Colours Having proved that Bishops in all times succeeding the Apostles had Presbyters joyned with them in the exercise of their jurisdiction and that our Bishops have none is more evident then that it needs proofe This is more to you then Baculus in Angulo it cannot but be Spina in oculis Sagittain visceribus a thorne in your eye and an arrow in your heart convincing you to your griefe that the Bishops you plead for and the Bishops of former times are two SECT X. OUr next Section the Remonstrant saith runs yet wilder it is then because we prosecute a practice of the Bishops more extravagant then the former And that is the delegation of the power of their jurisdictiō to others which the Remonstrant would first excuse as an accidentall errour of some particular man not to be fastned upon all But we desire to know the man the Bishop in all England who hath not given power to Chancellors Commissaries Officials to suspend excommunicate absolve execute all censures but one and doth the Remonstrant thinke now to stoppe our mouthes with saying it is a particular error of some men whereas it is evident enough that our English Episcopacy cannot possibly be exercised without delegating of their power to a multitude of inferiour instruments Can one Bishop having 500. or a 1000. Parishes under him discharge all businesses belonging to testamentary and decimall causes and suites to preach Word and administer the Sacraments c. to take a due oversight also of all Ministers and people without the helpe of others Nor will that other excuse doe it That it is but an accidentall error and though granted concludes not that our Bishops challenge to themselves any other spirituall power then was delegated to Timothy and Titus Sir we abhorre it as an unworthy thing to compare our Bishops with Timothy or Titus the comparison is betweene our Bishops and Bishops of former times But to please you this once we will admit the comparison and shew howeven in this particular that you count so monstrous our Bishops challenge a power never delegated to Timothy nor Titus And we prove it thus Timothy and Titus never had a power delegated to them to devolve that power of governing the Church which God had intrusted into their hands upon persons incapable of it by Gods ordinance But our Bishops doe so Ergo. The Remonstrant thinkes by impleading other reformed Churches as guilty of the same crime to force us either to condemne them or to acquit him But the reformed Churches if they doe practise any such thing are of age to answer for themselves Our businesse is with the Remonstrant and the persons and practices which he hath taken the tuition of Whom we charging as in a generality with wholy intrusting the power of spirituall jurisdiction to their Chancellors and their Commissaries their good friend tels us we foulely overreach The assistance of these creatures they use indeed but they neither negligently or wilfully devest themselves of that and wholy put it into Laicke hands This is a meere slander that Bishops devest themselves of their power we never said That they doe either negligently or wilfully decline that office which they call theirs we need not say it is so apparent And as apparent it is that they doe intrust the power of jurisdiction wholly into Laicke hands for their Chancellors and Commissaries having power of jurisdiction by patent setled upon them and exercising that jurisdiction in all the parts of it conventing admonishing suspending excommunicating absolving without the presence or assistance of a Bishop or recourse to him we thinke impartiall Judges will say wee are neither slanderers nor over-reachers In our former answer we fully cleared from Cyprian how farre hee was from delegating his power to a Chancellour c. This he sleights as a negative authority yet it is sufficient to condemne a practice that never had being in the thoughts of primitive times And we beleeve it satisfies all others because the Remonstrant saith it is very like it was so Though according to his old way of diversion he tels us as Cyprian did not referre to a Chancellor so neither to the bench of a Laicke Presbytery yet he that is but meanly versed in Cyprian may easily see that it is no unusuall thing in that holy martyr to referre the determinations of causes ad Clerum Plebe◠But the Remonstrant thinkes to patronize the practice of our present Bishops by Silvanus the good Bishop of Troas And what did Silvanus to the countenancing of this practice perceiving that some of his Clergie did corruptly make gaine of causes civill causes causes of difference betweene party and party or as you phrase it page 91. unkind quarrels of dissenting neighbours he would no more appoint any of his Clergy to be Judge but made choice of some faithfull man of the Laity Now this is as much to the purpose good sir as Posthumus his pleading in Martiall We are confuting the practice of our Bishops in making over their spirituall jurisdiction to Laymen and he brings in a story of a good Bishop that having a bad Clergy intrusted honest men with civill judicature rather then them As full to the purpose is that of Ecclesiae ecdici or Episcoporum Ecdici to prove the Antiquity of Chancellors and Commissaries For their Ecdici were men appointed to be the advocates of the Church to plead the Churches cause before the Emperours against the tyranny of their potent adversaries But we never read that the Bishops did put over the government of the Church to them we could with all our hearts give this honour to Civilians to be the Churches advocates but not the Churches Judges which the Bishops give them leave to
be to defend the Church against the tyranny of others but not to tyrannize over the Church Doctor Downeham was more ingenuous in this then this Remonstrant who grants that till about 400 yeeres after Christ Bishops had no ordinary Vicars that were not Clergy men No say we nor Clergy men neither the office was not knowne in those times neither can they produce any instance of any either of Laity or Clergy that ever those times saw in that office This saith the Remonstrant is a poore brave But till he can produce such instances our challenge will stand strong enough notwithstanding his great words But his put off is poorer to fly from officers intrusted with spirituall jurisdiction unto such inferiour instruments Secretaries and Atturneys as are of necessary service in all Courts of judicature whether Civill or Ecclesiasticall To make all sure the Remonstrant referres his Reader to Sir Thomas Ridley whose Treatise he stumbled upon in an ill houre for the maine of his cause for he tels us page 116. that Chancellors are equall or neere equall in time to Bishops as both the Law it selfe and stories shew So that while the Remonstrant is over studious to prove the Antiquity of Chancellors he overthrowes the Antiquity of Bishops incidit in Scyllam c. As for that he spake of the Ecclesiae Ecdici that they were the same in former times that our Chancellors are now If there be more credit to be given to his Papias and Gothofred then to the originall Canons themselves where they are called not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we yeeld the cause SECT XI HAving entered upon the differences betweene ours and former Bishops in point of jurisdiction we descended into a discovery of this in three particulars First in the sole jurisdiction ours assume Secondly In that delegation they make of this power Thirdly in their execution of that jurisdiction and here wee fall upon that unchristian and unnaturall proceeding of theirs by oathes Ex officio which the Remonstrant is very angry at and that hee may still approve himselfe the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or advocate of the worst causes engages all his strength and wit for the maintaining of that which hath beene the ruine of so many persons the racke of so many consciences the worst part of the Spanish Inquisition quo siculi non invenere Tyranni Tormâ—ntum majus To defend this he cares not how he abuseth us Mr. Calume the Lawyes the Scriptures So that he may but uphold this oath that is now sinking under the weight of its owne guilt First he abuses Scriptures in producing Exod. 22. 10 11. Num. 5. 19. as presidents for the oath Truly sir the onely text that would best have fitted your purpose is that of Caiphas the High Priest adjudging our Lord in the name of the living God Which how tyrannous an adjuration it was will easily appeare to any that consults interpreters upon that place Your alledged texts helpe you not a whit that of Exod. 22. 10 11. speakes to this purpose A man commits goods to his neighbour they miscarry under his hand it is knowne he had them how they miscarried it is not knowne in this case the man is to cleare his innocencie upon his oath what is this to the compelling of a man in cases criminall to betray himselfe by an oath The other text Numb 5. 19. availes you lesse for if such an oath were now lawfull then oathes Ex officio might be ministred in causes of death It is knowne Adultery was death by Moses his law and it is as well knowne that this Law of the water of jelousie was not morall but judiciall peculiar to the policie of the Jewes and that upon particular causes to wit the invate jealousie of that Nation which could no otherwise be appeased As for your instance out of Master Calvins Epistle wherein you would make your reader beleeve that the Consistory of Geneva did give such an oath to Camperell whereby he and the rest should be tied to discover their purposes and intentions No such thing appeares in the Epistle We finde indeed that two of that company having confesâ—ed the wickednesse wherewith they were charged and the rest impudently denying it Calvin thought it fit to make them confesse the truth upon oath Corneus who had confessed all before pressing them not to forsweare themselves prevailed so as that they confessed all and the dancing also above what was charged upon them All that we can collect is that an oath was thought meet to be given to make them confesse to Gods glory what was proved by two witnesses but that they were bound to confesse their intentions here is no syllable of it in the epistle And therefore to what purpose you bring in this to warrant your oath Ex officio unlesse it be for want of better instances we know not The Acts of Dioclesian Maxim Let them be blamed that called him Maximilian poore men cannot have their Presse wayted on as your greatnesse may You doe as good as passe by so doe you the practice of the ancient times and which is a greater jeofailer then our Maximillian and think it is enough to tell us this hinders not but in case of a justly grounded suspition and complaint of a halfe approved offence a man should manifest his innocency by oath When as we produced these testimonies to shew that of old no party was put to his oath upon halfe proofe nor proceeded against but upon apparent testimonies of more witnesses then one which might be conceived to be impartiall Whereby it is manifest that the proceedings in judicature for which you contend herein differ from them of old So hot is the man in the quarrell of his oath that he strikes his own friends to reach a blow at us charging his good friend Gregory with a plain contradiction for the words are his not ours in which he saith we contradict our selves This is the poore all hee hath said in defence of the oath Ex Officio and could he have said more it is like we should have heard it If the reader desire to see further how abominable this oath is how cryed downe by learned men how contrary to the Word of God the law of nature to the civill and and Canon lawes and to the statutes of our kingdome he may finde it in that proud braying schismatick Master Parker for so he is called in print For our parts we shall need to say no more about this oath God in mercy to his afflicted having put into the hearts of our Worthies to condemne it to hell from whence it came SECT XII OUr next Section the Remonstrant tels us he is resolved to neglect we should have as soone beleeved him if he had said so of all the rest we beleeve the neglect springs neither from a desire to ease us nor to anger us but
lest you should think we flout your modesty with an unbeseeming frumpe which whither our answer be guilty of as you here charge us let the Reader compare the 28 and 29 pages of your Remonstrance and our Answer to those pages and determine The second objection was from that imputation which this truth casts upon all Reformed Churches which want this government this the Remonstrant must needs endevour to satisfie that hee may decline the envie that attends this opinion But what needs the Remonstrant feare this envy Alasse the Reformed Churches are but a poore handfull Rumpantur ilia need the Remonstrant care Yet is it neither his large protestation of his honourable esteeme of those Sister Churches nor his solicitous cleering himselfe from the scandalous censures and disgracefull termes cast upon them by others under whose colours he now militares that will divert this envie unlesse he either desert his opinion or make a more just defence then he hath yet done The Defence is That from the opinion of the Di. right of Episc. no such consequence can be drawn as that those Churches that want Bishops are no Churches Episcopacy though reckoned among matters essential to the Church yet is not of the essence of a Church and this is no contradiction neither If you would have avoided the contradiction you should have expressed your selfe more distinctly knowing that things essentiall are of two sorts either such as are essentiall constitutivè or such as are essentiall consecutivè You had done well here had you declared whether you count Episcopacie essentiall to a Church constitutive or consecutivé if constitutivè then it is necessary to the being of a Church and it must follow where there is no Bishop there can be no Church If essentiall onely consecutivè wee would be glad to learne how those officers which by Divine institution have demandated to them peculiarly a power of ordaining all other officers in the Church without which the Church it selfe cannot be constituted and such a power as that those officers cannot be ordained without their hands should not bee essentiall to the Constitution of a Church or tend onely to the well being not to the being of it Either you must disclaim your own propositions or owne this inference and not think to put it off with telling your Reader It is enough for our friends to hold discipline of the being of a Church you dare not be so zealous If heat in an Episcopall cause may be called zeale you dare be as zealous as any man we know Your friends wee are sure are as zealous in the cause of their Episcopacie as any of ours have been in the defence of discipline Did ever any of our friends in their zeale rise higher then to frame an oath whereby to bind all men to maintaine their discipline You know some of yours have done as much but them wee know you will leave to their owne defence as you doe your learned Bishop of Norwich now he is dead It is work enough for you to defend your selfe and give satisfaction to the questions propounded First we demanded the reason why Popish Priests converted to our Religion are admitted without new ordination when some of our brethren flying in Queen Maries time and having received Ordination in the Reformed Churches were urged at their return to receive it again from our Bishops This shamelesse and partiall practice of our Prelats hee could not deny but frames two such answers of which the second confutes the first and neither second nor first justifies their practice In the first he denies a capability of admittance by our laws and yet in his second he confesseth many to be admitted without any legall exception which how well they consist let the Reader judge The second question was whether that office which by divine Right hath sole power of Ordination and ruling of all other officers in the Church belong not to the being but onely to the glory and perfection of a Church The Remonstrant is so angry at this question that before hee can finde leisure to answer it he must needs give a little vent to his choller Can we tell what these men would have saith he have they a mind to go beyond us in asserting that necessity and essentiall use of Episcopacie which we dare not avow What is that which you dare not avow is it that Episcopacy hath sole power of ordaining and ruling all other Officers in the Church But this wee are sure you will avow That imposition of hands in ordination and confirmation have ever been held so intrinsecall to Episcopacie that I would faine see where it can be shewed that ANY EXTREMITY OF NECESSITY was by the Catholike Church of Christ ever yet acknowledged for a warrant sufficient to diffuse them into other hands Is not this to say that the sole power of ordaining Officers is in the hands of the Bishop And dare not WE avow this now Blessed be they that have taken downe your confidence And where you are witty by the way you tell us we still talke of sole Ordination and sole Iurisdiction we may if we please keep that paire of soles for our next shooes Good Sir wee thanke you for your liberality but wee doubt you either part with them out of fear you shall no longer keep them or they will prove no longer worth the keeping But consider one thing we beseech you if you make this donation not onely in your own name but in the name of the whole Episcopall order you and they may turn Fratres Mendicantes and go bare foot if you part with these paire of soles and what will become of your Quid facit Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter exceptâ ordinatione You doe not contend say you for such a height of propriety c. that in what case soever of extremity and irresistable necessity this should be done onely by Episcopall hands You do not It is well you doe not but did you never meane to affirme it none of you Consider we beseech that forecited place Episcopacie Divine Right part 2. pag. 91. weigh the words and then speake and tell the Authour your judgement Our third question was There being in this mans thoughts the same jus divinum for Bishops that there is for Pastors and Elders whether if those reformed Churches wanted Pastors Elders too they should want nothing of the essence of a Church but onely of the glory and perfection of it The answer saith he is ready which is indeed no answer it is in sum but this that it would be better with them if they had Bishops too But how it would be if they wanted Bishops and Pastors and Elders too of that he saith nothing The Remonstrant had presumed to know so much of the mind of the Reformed Churches as to averre that if they might have their option they would gladly imbrace Episcopall government a foule imputation saith the Remonstrant