their hands As for what His Majesty is made to say pag. 36. That it suits neither with the Authority nor decency of Confirmation that every ordinary Pastor should do it and that there was as great reason that none should confirm without licence from the Bishop as none Preach without his licence I doubt the Relator hath both wronged the King and the Bishops cause The King for we can scarce conceive he should have such high thoughts of the Authority or decency of confirmation as to imagine that either was lessened by being administred by those by whom Baptism is administred And the Bishops cause also for it will not serve their turn that Presbyters should not confirm without their Licence as they do not Preach without their Licence unless it be also made appear that none can be licensed to confirm but themselves Before I pass from this I must also advert That the Relator makes the King to tax St. Jerome for asserting that a Bishop is not Divinae ordinationis and the Bishop of London to insert That if he could not prove his ordination lawful out of the Scriptures he would not be a Bishop four hours Wherein I observe the policy of the Bishop who reserved power to himself to continue a Bishop if he could prove his ordination lawful by the Scriptures he knew well enough that his Ordination might be lawful and vet a Bishop not be Divinae Ordinationis That is lawful by Scripture which no Scripture Law condemns or forbids but he that should say that every thing not prohibited is Divinae ordinationis would have much a-do to prove that he himself had any meetness to be consecrated a Bishop I suppose I can prove that it is lawful for me to wear a Beaver but when I had so proved should I not be ridiculous if I should say that a Beaver was Divinae ordinationis Besides if Dr. Reynolds had chanced to gravel the Bishop with an argument about the lawfulness of his Ordination he to keep his Bishoprick would presently have replied that he was ordained to be a Presbyter but he was only consecrated to be a Bishop and by that means he might have kept his lands and his credit too Let us now proceed with Dr. Reynolds who is made to say that the words in the 37th Article The Bishop of Rome hath no authority in this land be not sufficient unless it were added nor ought to have It is like the Doctor had observed that the Oath of Supremacy runs to that or the like effect And he had never heard it is as like that the King and his Council heartily laughed at the framers of that Oath and therefore scarce expected to be told that a Puritan was a Protestant frighted out of his wits for propounding that the Article might be as fully worded as the Oath yet it seems he had the hap to be laughed at for his honest well-meant motion so the Relator acquaints us p. 37. P. 38. The Dr. moved that this proposition The intention of the Minister is not of the essence of the Sacrament might be added unto the Book of Articles the rather because some in England had preached it to be essential Had it been told him that if he would name those men who so Preached they should be suspended till they had recalled so false and uncomfortable an opinion or that there was enough in the Articles to infer that the intention of the Minister is not essential to the Sacrament it had been sufficient but to say that His Majesty utterly disliked this motion for two reasons and to name but one of the two and to stuff up that with a story concerning Mr. Craig was to put the world under a temptation to think too meanly of their King It is unfit to thrust every position negative into the Book of Articles for that would swell the Book into a volume as big as the Bible and also confound the Reader therefore I may not insert this short position the Ministers intention is not of the essence of the Sacrament into the English Articles This is made to be the Kings argument to which whether Dr. Reynolds could reply nothing others may judge Here we might also speak of the Nine Articles of Lambeth put into the Irish Confession not long after this Conference but never put into ours though it seems the Doctor moved twice they might be put in For my part I am not sorry they are left out for some honest men may question the truth of them and not be able in faith to subscribe them and so the Church lose the benefit of their parts As for Latitudinarians they would have subscribed them in a sense of their own devising though they had thought them false in the sense of the framers and imposers of them or they would have said that by subscribing they did not declare the assent of their minds to the truth of the Articles but only their purpose not to publish their dissent to them so as to make a disturbance in the Church about them A Jesuit Papist and a Latitudinarian Protestant will stick at no subscription whatsoever As for the Dean of Paul his discourse to vindicate himself I am not concerned to contradict him in it but I think he contradicts himself if Dr. Barlow doth him no wrong p. 41 42. The motion made by the Dr. and related p. 43. concerning a Catechism produced a very considerable addition to the old Catechism which was all he aimed at in it also he succeeded in his motion that a straiter course might be taken for reformation of the general abuse and prophanation of the Sabbath day for that the Relator saith found a general and unanimous assent So that the Bishops then did not think it Judaism to call the Lords day Sabbath nor to provide for its sanctification Nor did he miscarry in his motion for a new Translation of the Bible for not long after the Conference a new one was published which hath been generally used ever since to Gods glory and the Churches edification As for his Majesties profession that he could never yet see a Bible well translated into English and that the Geneva Translation was the worst of all I believe his Majesty repented of it or else he had not given leave to Dr. Morton to defend the two places in the Geneva Notes that he took particular exception to Dr. Reynolds for conclusion of what concerned doctrine moved That unlawful and seditious books might be suppressed at least restrained and imparted to a few This a man might think would have been entertained with a general assent and consent but contrariwise the Bishop of London supposing himself to be principally aimed at answereth to what he was never accused of and saith but without any proof That the Book De Jure Magistratus in subditos was published by a great disciplinarian but named him not and the King is said to tell the Doctor that he was a better
also infer That Francis Mason had no dislike of Popish Hierarchy because in a Dedicatory to Henry Bishop of Paris he calls him Amplissimum Praesulem and Antistitem Clarissimum and Virum Reverendissimum Dr. Heylin was not Master of so much charitable Logick for speaking Hist of Pres p. 282. of Bishop Grindals holding correspondence with Calvin and Beza Zanchy Bullinger Gualter and some other of the chief Divines among the Switzers he concludes at length That they all had their ends upon him for the advancing of Presbytery and Inconformity in the Church of England And really I have observed that most of the Divines that have by their Letters stroaked our Bishops have in some places of their Writings given a shrewd knock to the Cause defended by them Mr. Durell p. 281. tells us That Danaeus his calling the Archbishop Reverendissimum in Christo Patrem c. is as much as can be wished to testifie his good liking of the Church of England as it is by Law established And yet John Canne a very troublesome Separatist makes use of a passage in Danaeus to justifie his separation from the Church of England Mr. Ball clearly proves that the passage doth not warrant separation but yet Danâ—us might have written more moderately for these are his words on 1 Tim. 5. Ex his omnibus apparet quam nulla sit vel non legitima eorum verbi Dâ—i ministrorum vel Ecclesiae pastorum vocatio qui solius Regis vel Reginae vel Patroni vel Episeopi vel Archiepiscopi authoritate diplomate bullis jussu judicio fiunt vel eligun tur Id quod dolendum est fieri adhuc in iis Ecclesiis quae tamon purum Dei verbum habent sequuntur veluti in media Anglia Nan Anglos homines alioqui sapientissimos acutissimos pientissimos in istis tamen Papisticae Idololatriae tyrannidis reliquiis agnoscendis tollendis scientes prudentesque caecutire mirum est Itaque praeclare sentiunt qui omnem illam chartulariam Episcopaticam Curionum pastorum Ecclesiae ereandorum rationem item ex solo Episcopi consensu diplomate ministrorum verbi coelestis vocationem approbationem inaugurationem damnant tollendamque ex reformata ad Dei verbum Ecclesia censent quod ordo Dei verbo praescriptus in ordinatione hujusmodi personarum sit praetermissus ac violatus sicut perspicue apparet Denique senatui Ecclesiastico populo Christiano insomne suum atque suffragium misere sit hac ratione in hee genere vocationum Ecclesiasticarum ademptum in unum quendum Episcopum magna tyrannide atque abusu translatum Dominus Deus talibus corruptionibus quae adhuc in Ecclesiis ipsius supersunt defenduntur mederi magna sua misericordia dignetur velit quae tandem certe magnam Ecclesiae Dei ruinam secum trahent ipsum sacrosanctum verbi Ministerium reddent efficientq vel mercenarium vel omnino contemptibile abjectum Quod Dominus avertat Certainly this is not as much as can be wished to testifie Danaeus his good liking of the Church of England as it is by Law established Friderick Spanhem is another whose complaisant Dedicatory to the great Vsher seems to Mr. D. a sufficient argument to prove that the Reformed Church of Geneva is no enemy to the Bishops of the Church of England and yet Spanhem in that very third part of his Evangelical Doubts which he dedicates to the Archbishop determines it lawful for the innocent person after divorce to marry another wife quite contrary to Ecclesiastical Laws still unrepealed in the Church of England Well that is but a Peccadillo because many of our own Conformable Divines are of the same mind and as I suppose some of our Bishops also Dr. Abbot answering Bishops Second part p. 315. saith That the limitation of divorce which our Saviour giveth maketh it lawful for the party innocent to marry again the delinquent being left to the censure of the Church until satisfaction be given of true repentance for so hainous a sin The Church of England notwithstanding for the preventing of some mischiess that by the wickedness of men do arise by the abuse of the liberty of marriage upon divorce useth a restraint of that liberty that the parties divorced shall put in caution not to marry again as long as they both live As for the Authors of the reformation of our Ecclesiastical laws de Adult divort c. 6. they determine plainly Cum alter conjux adulterii damnatus est alteri licebit innocenti novum ad matrimonium si volet progredi and c. 7. Judex quoties alterum conjugem adulterii condemnat alteri sincerae personae libertatem denunciare debet ad novum matrimonium transeundi And cap. 19. Mensae societas thori solebat in certis criminibus adimi conjugibus salvo tamen inter illos reliquo matrimonii jure quae constitutio cum à sacris literis aliena sit maximam perversitatem habeat malorum sentinam in matrimonium comportaverit illud authoritate nostra totum aboleri placet But this it seems is not current doctrine now and so let it pass The aforesaid Friderick Spanhem makes Ruling-Elders to be one of those orders of Officers that are designed by Christ for the ruling of his Church and affirms them to be grounded on Scripture 1 Cor. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 So I find him quoted by Hornbeck Institut Theol. p. 523 524. And it will be difficult for Mr. Durell to prove that he can approve the divine right of Episcopacy who makes Lay-Elders commonly so called a divine institution Leaving Episcopacy let us come to Liturgy that we may see whether Mr. Durell be any more happy in managing that Controversie I do easily grant that he hath by a whole cloud of witnesses proved 1. That set-forms of prayer are lawful 2. That most Churches reformed do use set-forms of prayer 3. That the old English Common prayer-book was not so corrupt as that a man could not without defiling his conscience joyn with those who made use of it in the service of God But all these things had been proved many years before by an old Nonconformist who died about the beginning of the late Wars Mr. John Ball both in his tryal of the grounds tending to separation and in his answer to Mr. Cann and others If Mr. Durell will do any thing to purpose in this Controversie relating to Liturgies he must prove 1. That it is lawful for any Church so strictly to tye up her Ministers to a form as not to allow them to make any use of their own gifts in prayer in publick Or else 2dly That our Church hath not so tied up her Ministers but that they may still any Rubrick or Canon to the contrary notwithstanding use their own prayer at some times and upon some occasions in the publick If he will endeavour to prove the first the Presbyterians will be concerned to
If words flow from the mouth of Gods messenger not seen before that the hearers are rendred more attent and more profound admirers of the grace of God For if prescribed things only be always recited what will there be to excite attention Curiosity rather will be excited whilest this and the other by beholding the same things in his Books attendeth whether they be accurately read what place is here for devotion Neither is it to be thought that ours are bound to the Books delivered to them to words and syllables it is free to them to use any thing drawn out of the treasures of mystical wisdom which make to excite zeal according to variety of occasions Whence it comes to pass that Godly hearers are scarce ever present at Sacred mysteries without new motion of heart Page 61. It is said that the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas take those things in which they differ from the Reformed Church of England to be sinful and that therefore they would have her conform to them By whom is this said in such indefinite terms as are here made use of I doubt it will be found that none have so said at least none that are called or accounted Presbyterians and if none can be found what opinion will the world have of Mr. D's veracity But if any have said that some reformed Churches abroad have accounted some things in which the English Church differs from them to be sinful it is a thing so manifest that I wonder Mr. D. can find a forehead to deny it He mentioneth in this place the Reformed Churches in the Electorate of Brandenburg and I do not observe him to have mentioned them any where else I suppose by the Churches he joyneth them with that he meaneth such as close with that Reformation that the Elector himself affecteth and would fain have introduced and it will not be amiss to let our Countrymen understand what that is The heads of it are recited in the Continuation of Thuanus at the year 1614. Page 396 397. Edit Francof 1628. 1. Images Crosses Statues are to be removed out of Churches 2. Altars remaining since Popery and built to perform the Sacrifice of the Mass are to be taken away and in place of them are to be put oblong wooden Tables covered with black cloth a linnen cloth when the Supper is to be administred being put upon it 3. Instead of Hosts Wafers are to be used which being cut into long pieces should be received and broken by the hands of those who come to the Lords Table 4. That instead of Chalices used in Mass Cups should be used in the administration of the Lords Supper 5. The Casiolae which may very well signifie the Surplice as well as other Vestments are to be left to the Popish Priests 6. No linnen is to be put under or offer'd to those who come to the Lords Table nor are they to kneel as if Christ were corporally present 7. The sign of the Cross is not to be added at the end of the benediction 8. The Ministers of the Gospel are not to turn the back to men 9. Prayers and Epistles are not to be sung before Sermon but read 10. Auricular Confession is to be left off 11. At the Name of Jesus knees are not to be bowed or head uncovered 12. Prayers in the Pulpit are not to be muttered but pronounced with a loud voice 13. The Supper of the Lord is not for fear of danger to be administred to sick persons especially when the plague is abroad 14. Stone-Fonts are to be removed and Basons substituted in their rooms 15. The Decalogue is not to be recited imperfect but intire 16. The Catechism in some things that are exroneous is to be amended 17. The Sacred Trinity a mystery to be adored and ineffable is not to be represented by any images either carved or painted 18. The words of the holy Supper are to be interpreted by Sacramental analogy and collation of other places of holy Scripture 19. To the Gospels and Epistles which are explicated on Lords days and yearly repeated Ministers ought not so to be bound that they may not instead of them read and preach upon any other notable Text of the Bible Dr. Heylin hath exemplified the heads of this designed Reformation on purpose to show as he tells us Hist of Presby 412. how Calvinian and Lutheran Churches differ and how near ours approacheth to the latter and I have exemplified them to shew that if Ceremonies be but gnats English Presbyterians are not the only persons that do strain at them declaring also my just abhorrence of the Historians impudence in ascribing the designment of this Reformation to the plots and practices of a subtil Lady P. 85. Mr. D. having before recited a Letter of Mr. Chabrets in which he makes a question whether the Liturgy received at the Savoy Congregation be the same that was used in Q. Eliz. King James or King Charles I.'s time or another compiled by Archbishop Laud that had been occasion of much trouble adds words of great reproach against those who accused the late Lord Archbishop of making a new Book of Common-prayer other than those that were used in the times of our last three Soveraigns this he makes a thing that never was But he is now to know that Archbishop Laud did make or cause to be made a Common-prayer-book for the Kirk of Scotland different in many things from any that had been used here in England in any of the three last Soveraigns Reigns which Common-prayer-book among other things occasioned great disturbances betwixt the two Kingdoms nay he made some alterations in the Liturgy for England that were not very pleasing to some palates among the sons of the Church what they were if Mr. D. pleaseth he may see in Mr. Prynnes Epistle Dedicatory to his Quench-coal It is not for such a poor creature as I am to blame or find fault with those alterations which I find imitated in our last edition of the Liturgy Only I wonder why in the Office for the Fifth of November Ministers are not directed to read the Statute for the observing of that day seeing it is by law appointed to be read Ibid. He complains that our Convocations are beyond seas represented to consist only of Archbishops and Bishops and that the inferior Clergy is not permitted to sit and vote in them Really if any gave such information he was but too like to Mr. D. speaking of that which he either did not or would not understand The Convocations of England do consist of an upper and lower House and though the Upper House consists but of Archbishops and Bishops yet the Lower consists of the inferior Clergy Deans Prebendaries Arch-deacons and Proctors of the Clergy P. 116. Mr. D. calls our Convocations a Council consisting of above sixscore reverend grave and learned Divines chosen out of many thousands whereof twenty-six are Archbishops and Bishops a greater number Deans and Prebends and