Selected quad for the lemma: church_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
church_n	act_n	bishop_n	presbyter_n	3,131	5	10.0517	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A77860	Reasons shewing the necessity of reformation of the publick [brace]1. doctrine, 2. worship, [double brace] 3. rites and ceremonies, 4. church-government, and discipline, reputed to be (but indeed, not) established by law. Humbly offered to the serious consideration of this present Parliament. By divers ministers of sundry counties in England.	Burges, Cornelius, 1589?-1665.	1660 (1660)	Wing B5678; Thomason E764_4; ESTC R205206	61,780	69

de se quem industrium noverint Archidiaconum vocent Constat ergo APOSTOLICA INSTITUTIONE omnes Presbyteros esse Episcopos licet nunc illi majores hoc nomen obtineant Episcopus enim Superintendens dicitur omnis Presbyter debet intendere curam super oves sibi commissas For brevity sake we forbear to English this long allegation The sum of it is that in the Primitive Church Bishops and Presbyters were one in respect of Order however a Bishop chosen by the Presbytery were over them in respect of place and degree 4. Bishops being Consecrated have power by the Stat. of 5.6 Edw. 6. and 8. Eliz. 1. to Ordain both Deacons and Presbyters which the Book incongruously calleth Priests But whereas the Episcopal Party claimeth sole Ordination as if no Minister can be rightly Ordained who is not ordained by a Bishop and under this pretence many of the present Prelatical Party stick not to degrade and unordain such Ministers as are Ordained by Presbyters alone even where no Bishops are allowed to execute that Office and Schismatically to advise and perswade all to withdraw from all Assemblies and Ordinances as being no Ordinances of Christ where such Ministers as are ordained onely by the Presbytery without a Bishop do administer We must give this Answer 1. That there is no Scripture that appropriateth this to Bishops alone 2. There are several warrants in the New Testament to justifie the laying on of hands without a Bishop in their sense When Barnabas and Saul after called Paul were to be sent out to preach the Holy Ghost commanded to separate them for that Work whereupon Simeon sur-named Niger Lucius of Cyrene and Manaen not one of them a Bishop in our Prelatical Advocates sense laid hands on them and sent them forth Acts 13. Thus Timothee was ordained by the laying on of hands of the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4.14 This made him a preaching Presbyter and Bishop although the laying on of Pauls hands made him an Evangelist 2 Tim. 1.6 3. The Book of Ordination it self though it appoint the Bishop to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the president and chief Actor yet it allows him not to act as in Confirmation of Children alone in the Ordaining of Presbyters or Priests But the Bishop with the Priests present shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth Orders So the Rubrick therefore no Bishop hath sole power of Ordination nor may he Ordain alone 4. That very Statute of 8. Eliz. 1. which ratifieth the Book of Ordination doth not tye all to that one Form as appears by the Stat. of 13. Eliz. 12. which saith thus Be it Enacted by the Authority of this present Parliament That every person under the degree of a Bishop which doth or shall pretend to be a Priest or Minister of Gods holy Word and Sacraments by reason of any other form of Institution Consecration or Ordering then the form set forth by Parliament in the time of the late King of most worthy memory King Edward the sixth or now used in the Reign of our most gracious Soveraign Lady before the Feast of the Nativity next coming shall in the presence of the Bishop Subscribe to all the Articles of Religion c. Therefore the Law intended not to tye all to the form of Ordination by Bishops but tyeth Bishops to give them Institution if they subscribe the Articles and be otherwise qualified as that Act prescribeth 5. This is to un-un-Church all the Protestant Churches in Christendom where there are no Bishops and to deny them Communion with the Church of England which hitherto hath owned them and held Communion with them as true Churches of Christ Now in sew words we must a little take notice of the necessity of Reforming that Book it self 1. In the Preface For where that saith It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there hath been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons it hath been shewed before that however we read of Bishops Presbyters or Elders and Deacons these are not three distinct Orders of the Ministry for that Bishops and Presbyters are of the same Order Nor are Presbyters Priests there being no such name in the New Testament nor any such Office in the Ministry of the Gospel Now seeing this Preface is so much made use of and wrested to prove an untruth touching the distinction of Orders and gives such a name to Ministers as argues them to be Sacerdotes Sacrificuli sacrificing Priests which is not so but repugnant to their Office it ought to be reformed 2. In the Ordering of Deacons the Bishop alone is to lay on hands whereas it is not so to be done in the Ordering of Priests as they are nick-named or Consecration of Bishops And this also is contrary to the practice of the Apostles themselves expressed in that very Scripture Act. 6. appointed to be one of the Epistles to be read at that time where after choosing the seven Deacons it is said These they set before the Apostles and when they bad prayed THEY not one of them laid their hands on them Now seeing this was so and that at every Ordination of Deacons other Ministers beside the Bishop are present and seeing further it is said in the third Prayer then used after the Letany that God did inspire his Apostles to chuse to this Order St. Stephen with other which directly crosseth the Text which saith The whole multitude chose them and that by order from the Apostles Why should such a practice be continued by a single Bishop so contrary to that of the Apostles themselves and every other Ordination in our own Church 3. In the Ordering of Priests We say as before that Title or name of Priest ought to be changed for the Reasons abovesaid But that which most offendeth is that in the very act of Ordaining the Bishop takes upon him to give that which none but God himself hath power to bestow where it saith Receive the Holy Ghost c. which be the words of Christ himself to his Apostles without any warrant from him to be used by Bishops or any others For however Ordination be necessary yet there can be no reason that a Bishop or other persons should in this assume more in officiating then in all other Ministrations where the words of Institution in Baptisin in the administring the Lords Supper c. are first rehearsed and then at the act of ministring a Prayer is used not a Magisterial use of the very words of Christ himself in the first institution as is obvious to all This therefore savors of presumption not to be admitted in so holy an action especially where a Bishop shall as by report some now do take upon him to breathe upon the person he ordaineth as Christ did upon his Apostles Moreover it being now claimed as peculiar to Episcopacy as a distinct

elected there can be legally and regularly no succession of Bishops There is no necessity of such a Consequence nor of making more Archbishops or Deans and Chapters or continuing of any such if it shall please the King and Parliament by any Act or Statute to appoint any other way and course of Election and Consecration of Bishops Which is as easie to be done as any thing else Enacted in Parliament there being no Divine Right so much as pretended unto for such Election or Consecration as of late was used in England 2. Whereas it is of late much insisted upon that Episcopacy is not only an Office of Precedency and Presidency above other Presbyters and Ministers given to them by the free Election of the rest to regulate order and act things agreed upon by the Presbytery joyned with them as the Commander in chief in an Army as the Capital Justice in a Court or as the Speaker in either House of Parliament but that it is a distinct and specifical Order by Divine Right Superiour to all other Presbyters which Order onely is Authorized to exercise such things as none else may medle with We say that this in England was never at all arrogated by any Bishops till of very late times 2. The things they make peculiar to Bishops ratione Ordinis are sole Ordination and sole Jurisdiction as if none had power in either of these but themselves neither of which even they who pretend to derive their Episcopacy from the Apostles ever undertook to make good by any solid Antiquity Yea 3. those very Antiquities which they allege are either spurious or else speak nothing either of sole Ordination or of sole Jurisdiction but rather the contrary as might easily be made out But we tye our selves to speak to these particulars only as said to be made out by Law 3. This was never yielded by any Law of England nor by the Book of Ordination For however that Book established in 5.6 Edw. 6. and after repeal by Queen Mary confirmed in 8. Eliz. cap. 1. Yet when it speaks of the making of Bishops it calls that a Consecration and not an Ordination as it doth when it speaks of making Deacons and Presbyters which it calleth Priests calling one The form and manner of Ordering Deacons the other The form of Ordering Priests But when it speaks of the other it changeth this Word Ordering and calls it The form of Consecrating an Archbishop or Bishop Which shews plainly that the Book of Ordination never meant to make Bishops or as Dr. Gauden calls it Legal Episcopacy to be not only in Degree and Office of Prolocutor but in a distinct Order of Christ's and his Apostles institution Superiour to a Presbyter It is indeed an easie matter for a bold man to contradict this and to say that the antient Writers call the Solemn form of consecrating a Bishop by no other name then that of Ordinatio Episcopi but it seems it is not so easie to prove what he saith For he produceth no such proof at all so that this confident saying touching such Ordination of Bishops affirmed by his Adversary to be a Novel Popish Position that this is Not Novel he is sure is but a meer shift and a put off no confutation at all And where he is pleased afterwards to urge the Preface to the Book of Ordination Dr Heylin Certam Epistol p. 143. which mentioneth three Orders of Ministers in the Church Bishops Priests and Deacons and one passage in one of the Prayers at the Consecration of an Archbishop or Bishop to prove that Episcopacy is a distinct Order from and Superiour to that of Presbyters he must be intreated to take notice 1. That the Preface alleged saith not as he speaks these THREE Orders but onely these Orders of Ministers c. But even there by way of explanation the Preface calls them Offices which Offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation c. now we deny them not to be distinct Offices only we cannot admit in his sense the Office of a Bishop to be a distinct Order above Presbytery For even in that very Preface it speaks of Consecrating not of Ordaining a Bishop as the Book all along doth of Ordering that is Ordaining of Deacons and Priests but never of other then of Consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops that is of setting them over the rest in degree to be the mouth and hand of the rest in executing what by the rest is agreed upon And 2. touching that Prayer he mentions wherein Episcopacy is called in that Part of the Book it self which concerneth Bishops an Order This is but a wyre-drawing of the Words and a meer wresting of them The Words of the Prayer are these Almighty God giver of all good things which by thy holy Spirit hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold this thy Servant now called to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop c. Now how do these words prove a Bishop to be a distinct Order when speaking of the person then to be made Bishop it is not said he is called to the Order but to the Work and Ministry of a Bishop And seeing he onely talks of antient Writers but produceth none we shall make bold to mind him what is the sense of the Canon-Law which he pleads to be still in force in England if Lindwood that great English Canonist be of any value with him who saith expresly Episcopatus non est Ordo Yea the very Book of Ordination in ordering of Priests appointing 1 Tim. 3. to be then read If any desire the Office of a Bishop he desireth an honest work A Bishop must be blameless c. doth more then tacitly admit a Bishop and a Presbyter not to differ in Order To which we shall add the judgement of an antient Archbishop of Canterbury even Anselmus himself an high man for the Pope and a great Contestor with the King for Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction even beyond the bounds of the Laws of this Land who in his Commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians where Paul cap. 1. saluteth but two Orders Bishops and Deacons on the word Episcopis saith thus Episcopis id est Presbyteris Episcopos namque pro Presbyteris more suo posuit Non enim plures Episcopi in una civitate erant neque Presbyteros intermitteret ut ad Diaconos descenderet Sed dignitatem excellentiam Presbyterorum declarat dum eosdem qui Presbyteri sunt Episcopos esse manifestat Quod autem postea unus electus est qui caeteris praeponeretur in Schismatis remedio facium est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Evangelium rumperet Nam est Alexandriae a Marco Evangelista usque ad Heraclam Dionysium Episcopos qui sederunt in Centuria 3. Presbyterum unum de se elecium in Excelsiori loco Gradu collocatum Episcopum nominabant quomodo si Exercitus Imperatorem faciat aut Diaconi elegant

Order to have the sole power of Ordination which hath been proved not to be so It is requisite that herein also some Declaration be made to the contrary that we may not give offence to the Protestant Churches with whom we hold Communion nor admit of such an untruth among our selves to which all must subscribe 4. As for Consecrating of Archbishops and Bishops in which the same Scripture 1 Tim. 3. is read again that was used in Ordaining of Priests which sheweth that the Compilers of that Book never dreamt of a distinction of Orders between Bishops and Presbyters we onely say thus much That there being no warrant in Scripture for Archbishops but onely from the practice of after-times whereby they were by men onely called to that height we see no necessity of their Consecration no more doth our Church for that it makes the same Consecration which is for Bishops to serve for Archbishops Upon this account we see no reason why a solemn Oath of Canonical Obedience to the Archbishop should then be administred to every person that is to be Bishop The Exception against that Expression of the Archbishop in the act of Consecration of a Bishop Take the Holy Ghost being spoken to before here we onely make the same profession against it which there we did and so leave it and proceed to the next Head of Ecclesiastical Government which is Jurisdiction II. Of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction IT hath been of late the claim of our Bishops to have in them the sole power of Jurisdiction in Causes Ecclesiastical which is now pleaded for so boldly and openly by their Advocates and such as asspire to the same Office and Dignity that it is now made though very groundlesly an Essential part of Episcopacy by Divine Right witness among other the Author of an Answer to a Letter sent to Doctor Turner to Oxford who alledgeth several Scriptures viz. 1 Tim. 5.19 Tit. 1.5 to prove that Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction is in Bishops onely To the same effect the Author of another Book intituled Church-Lands not to be sold So others But seeing Bishops can exercise no Jurisdiction in England but what is allowed by the Laws of the Land as we shall after make it manifest to every eye we shall not much trouble our selves at this time with their claim by Divine Right Howbeit lest they should think there is nothing to be said against it we desire it may be considered which is known to all that have seriously consulted Antiquity that in the Primitive Ages of the Church there was no Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction exercised but by the Bishops and their Consistory of Presbyters together Even in Rome it self there was even in Cyprians time a number of the Clergy who acted with the Bishop as well as elsewhere Thence grew by Corruption their Conclave of Cardinals And from the same Original here in England first Monks afterwards Deans and Chapters were joyned with the Bishops to assist both in Ordination and Jurisdiction although of late times they joyned with them in neither Such was the Pride of the one and the Idleness of the other Which last his late Majesty was content to part withal They being of no use but onely to confirm Grants of the Bishop as he confirmed theirs keeping sundry Benefices of Cure in their hands and seldome or never residing on them under pretence of residence near the Bishop whereas the Canons of 1603. require them to reside on their Benefices with Cure all but the space of one moneth in the year * Can. 44. unless he be a Dean Master Warden or chief Governour of a Cathedral or Church who by Can. 42. is to reside there ninety days Conjunctim or Divisim This is spoken not to justifie the Continuation of Deans and Chapters or to move for reducing them to the ancient course of corrupt times in making them alone to be the Adjutors of Bishops for Jurisdiction is as proper to all the Presbytery as to those Cathedral Presbyters But we urge it meerly and onely to demonstrate the falshood of that upstart Assertion that Bishops have sole power of Jurisdiction And that we may contract our selves within necessary brevity considering to whom we make our Address we shall give but one instance more and that shall be out of the Book of Ordination in the Ordering of Priests Where among other Questions propounded by the Bishop to him that is to be ordained Priest this is one Will you reverently obey your Ordinary and other chief Ministers unto whom the Government and Charge is committed over you following with a glad mind and will their godly Admonition and submitting your self to their godly Judgements To this each of them that are to be ordained answereth I will so do the Lord being my helper By this it is evident that more beside Bishops have power of Jurisdiction If it be said this may be meant of ARchdeacons Deans c. that have it under the Bishop what is this to the intituling of all Ministers thereunto It is answered out of the Rubrick before the Communion whereby every Curate is authorized to keep off from that Sacrament every open and notorious Liver by whom the Congregation is offended until he have openly declared himself to have truely repented and amended his former wicked life that the Congregation may thereby be satisfied Yea where he finds hatred and variance he is to suspend from the Sacrament the party refusing to be reconciled to the other and be content to forgive from the bottom of his heart all that the other hath transgressed against him and to make amends for that he himself hath offended What is this but as much and as high Jurisdiction as any Bishop can use in that particular If this suffice not take one passage more In the same Book of Ordination in the Ordering of Priests The Bishop asketh every person whom he ordaineth a Priest this Question Will you give your faithful diligence always so to minister the Doctrine and Sacraments and the DISCIPLINE of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Realm hath received the same c. To which each Priest is to answer I will so do by the help of the Lord. What can be a more clear evidence of the intention of our Church in the first Reformation then to admit all Presbyters to have a share in Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and in the Administration of it How long Bishops and others under them have had Ecclesiastical Consistories to exercise Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to us is not certain Yet it appeareth by Sir Edw. Cook ● Instit ca. 53. p. 2259. that William the Conqueror was the first that by his Charter to the Dean and Chapter of Lincoln did prohibit Sheriffs in their Tourne Courts wherein before-time all Ecclesiastical matters were heard and determined to intermedle any more with Ecclesiastical Causes but leave them to the Bishops Thence some conclude that Bishops have held Courts ever since William 1. Others finding no

REASONS SHEWING the Necessity of Reformation of the Publick 1. Doctrine 2. Worship 3. Rites and Ceremonies 4. Church-Government and Discipline Reputed to be but indeed not Established by LAW Humbly offered to the Serious Consideration of this present PARLIAMENT By divers Ministers of sundry Counties in ENGLAND 2 COR. 13.8 For we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth LONDON Printed by JA COTTREL MDCLX TO THE RIGHT HONORABLE THE Lords and Commons ASSEMBLED in PARLIAMENT IT is far from our thoughts to oppose or disparage Orthodox Doctrine a well-composed Liturgy Rites for decency and order Ordination of Ministers Apostolical Episcopacie or due Rules of Discipline We are for all these with Truth and against rigid Impositions which may debar a Christian of any liberty allowed him by Christ. Nor do we offer any Polemical Discourse or Theological Debates proper for a Divinity-School or Synod but onely what we humbly conceive more suitable to a Parliament Our work chiefly is out of those Laws which we as Ministers are bound to take special notice of and out of those Books said to be by those Laws settled to make out these two things First that so far as we can apprehend neither the Articles of Religion the Books of Com. Prayer or Ordination the Jurisdiction of Bishops claimed before 17 Car. 1. nor so much as their Being as Bishops sithence nor those Canons so much contended for are indeed established by Law Secondly that none of these as they now stand ought to be confirmed and setled But all with submission And this we trust shall not be censured as Eccentrick For albeit we acknowledge the learned in the Law to be far more able in matter of Law touching these things yet seeing every Subject is to inform himself of all such Laws as more especially concern his own calling we hope it will not be judged an extravagancie or presumption in us to produce those Laws which more nearly concern all of our Function Of this we apprehend some necessity 1. Because it is already too obvious that too many notwithstanding all pretences of Moderation do already fly higher than ever some in asserting Arminianisme to be the Doctrine of the Church of England thinking thereby to force all to imbrace it some in stickling for the Liturgy commonly used some still holding up sole Ordination by and sole Jurisdiction of Bishops and all Canons not onely made in England but in Rome it self if not repugnant to our Laws labouring to possess the people that all these are settled by Law and therefore to be continued and imposed without alteration and that all who seek a Reformation of them do oppose and violate the established Laws 2. Because if men go on in such ways and prevail therein it is to be feared that in short time every Minister of different judgement how able godly and useful soever will be put not onely out of his present place but out of the Ministry also as it hath already too often happened And indeed it can hardly be found in any age since the Conquest that where Kings have not curbed the violence of Bishops they have ever sharply persecuted all that threw off Popery which Persecutions usually produced Confusions in the Common-wealth For prevention whereof we humbly beseech all Noble Spirits and faithful prudent Patriots to look back upon the Mutinies Insurrections Rebellions in Edw. 6. his time occasioned by fomenting and not moderating the furious Zeal even of those that were most countenanced by that pious King which notwithstanding the Act of 1. Edw. 6.1 made many to flee so high as exasperated the other side so far as that it put several parts of the Kingdom into Combustion Nor will those rivers of blood shed in Q. Maries days by recalling the Bishops and others formerly deprived and giving way to their wonted tyranny in the height thereof be forgotten while ought of Protestant Religion remaineth Nor will it be unseasonable to reflect upon the throwing out of many worthy Ministers in Q. Elizabeths reign and of many moe under K. James For that Noble King immediately after his coming to the Crown was so plyed by Bishops that notwithstanding the Conference at Hampton Court the Prelatical Party prevailed so far that the Liturgy then much complained of remained in greatest part and in the most material points unreformed to which they all were compelled to subscribe which had never been required before and many Illegal Canons were made and inforced so far that within the space of two years as was credibly reported 70 Ministers were deprived 113 not suffered to preach and about 94 more were under Canonical Admonition the next door to Deprivation The carrying on of all which together with the countenancing of Arminianism formerly declared against by that Learned King James witness his promoting of the Synod of Dort did so much and so generally offend and exasperate that after many thousands were compelled to leave their native Countries to dwell in Mesech and to take up their habitations in the tents of Kedar others were drawn on to engage so deeply in the publick differences which as to matters of Religion were occasioned by the continuing of the former corruptions and by those Canons of 1639. as produced all those horrid and bloody effects which we abhor to mention and tremble to remember May it therefore please your Wisdoms Piety and Goodness to procure a review of all these things after the example of the Parliament in 3.4 Edw. 6. and to call some of the most moderate and able persons of every different party to assist therein and thereupon to settle all the things of God in a solid and moderate way that all Ordinances of Christ may be restored to their pristine Purity all Christians reduced to the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace and in the mean time nothing to be imposed which may grieve or offend those who shall be careful not to disturb the Publick Peace In order to which ends we humbly recommend to your Noble and Pious thoughts that of the Apostle Let your moderation be known to all men the LORD is at hand For this and for your Honours Your humble Servants shall ever pray REASONS SHEWING The Necessity of Reformation c. I. Of DOCTRINE THe Publick Doctrine of the Church of England as it is commonly received and insisted upon is said to be contained in the 39 Articles agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562. Those Articles are taken to be ratified and confirmed by Act of Parliament in 13 Eliz. cap. 12. Which Act provideth That no person shall be admitted to any Benefice with Cure except he shall first have subscribed the said Articles in presence of the Ordinary and publickly read the same in the Parish Church of that Benefice whereof he shall have Cure with declaration of his unfeigned assent thereunto

to be believed for necessity of Salvation But the Statute doth require belief of every one of these Articles when it enjoyns not only subscription but an assent unto them punishing all with Deprivation that shall affirm and maintain any Doctrine repugnant to them which every man must do if they be found contrariant to the Word or he must be false to God 4. If subscription to these or any other Articles be still continued How can any just liberty be granted to tender Consciences But that they must swallow all that is enjoyned although beside yea contrary to the Word or be persecuted and ruined Thus much of the Doubtfulness of the Articles and of the inconvenience and mischief of subscribing them Which inconvenience and mischief will be greater if we should be tyed to those Articles alone though never so sound as shall now appear in the Defectiveness of them 2. The Articles are Defective Because 1. The sixth Article speaking of the Holy Scripture saith In the name of the holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church Nevertheless albeit it enumerate the Canonical Books of the Old Testament yea and all the Apocrypha too yet it nameth not any of the New Testament but only concludeth thus All the Books of the New Testament as they are commonly received we do receive and account Canonical Now it being not unknown that there hath been doubts in the Church of some of them insomuch as the Epistle of St. James the second Epistle of St. Peter and several other books and passages in the New Testament have been not only doubted but refused the Article is defective in the not enumerating all the Books of the New Testament 2. There are no Articles for discovering and condemning sundry points of Popery in Doctrine which being first the Tenets of Arminius the first Protestant Writer that was not a professed Lutheran that ever openly maintained them are too commonly suckt in and cryed up by some as the Doctrine of the Church of England which since the Reformation never own'd them but are all maintained by Bellarmine and generally by all Franciscans and Jesuites but confuted by all approved Writers of the Protestant Reformed party that have written against Bellarmine and others of that crew as likewise by the learned Whitgift Whitaker Junius Zanchius Pareus Chamier Dr. Prideaux and many others The learned King James also took so much notice of and distaste at those Arminian-Popish Opinions touching Predestination abused universal Redemption universal Grace the manner of conversion and falling from grace that his Majesty was the chief procurer and promoter of the late Synode of Dort to which he sent Bishop Carlton Dr. Davenant Dr. Hall afterwards Bishops Dr. Goad and Dr. Balcanqual to assist in that Synode whose judgements touching all those points were given in to the said Council subscribed with their hands and afterwards printed and published Agreeable whereunto in the main hath the late Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster declared their judgements in the Confession of Faith afterwards ratified by both Houses of the late Long Parliment for which reason is that Assembly so much slighted reviled and opposed 3. Those Articles contain nothing of the Creation of Providence Fall of man of Sin of the Punishment of sin of Gods Covenants Effectual Calling Adoption Sanctification Faith Repentance Perseverance of the Law of God Christian liberty and Liberty of conscience Religious Worship of the Sabbath or Lords day of Marriage and Divorce the Communion of Saints Church-government and Discipline of the Resurrection or of the last Judgement all which the Scripture teacheth and that as necessary as appears by the comprizing most of them in the Apostles Creed and therefore necessary to be explained and held forth unto all as the Doctrine of this Church especially considering the differences and Controversies about many of them Upon this reason it was that the late Assembly of Divines have taken so much pains to compose several Articles which they call Chapters wherein both those of the 39 Articles which are held to be indeed fit to be retained are more fully cleared and explained and the rest added with pertinent proofs of Scripture to make it manifest that they are all evidently grounded upon the Word of God But all proofs are wanting in the 39 Articles no text of Scripture being produced to make cut any one of them II. Of WORSHIP THe Form of Publick Worship in England except Preaching is set down in the Liturgy or Book of Common-Prayer established by Law in 1 Eliz. 2. intituled An Act for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer and Service in the Church and the Administration of the Sacraments This Act repealeth another made in 1 Mar. 2. which had repealed a former Statute made in 5.6 Edw. 6. for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer c. and re-established that Common-Prayer-Book which the said last mentioned Act of Edw. 6. had ratified and confirmed But yet the Act of 1 Eliz. which authorizeth and enjoyneth the use of that Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. doth it with allowance of one alteration or addition of certain Lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year and the form of the Letany altered and corrected and two sentences onely added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the Communicants but none other or otherwise Now it is here to be observed that in the Act of 5.6 Edw. 6. for confirming that Book it is said that The Kings most Excellent Majesty with th' assent of the Lords and Commons in that Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same had caused the aforesaid Order of common service intituled The Book of Common-Prayer to be faithfully and godly perused explained and made fully perfect and by the foresaid Authority annexed and enjoyned it so explained and perfected to that present Statute So that the same was enrolled together with the Act it self Which being repealed by Queen Mary the Original Book was taken off from the Parliament-Roll and so lost But in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. there is no mention at all of joyning the Book then revived and re-confirmed to the said Act nor doth it appear that ever it was again enrolled whereby by having recourse to any Record or Parliament-Roll it may be proved that that Book of Common-Prayer printed in the year 1559. the first of Q●een Eliz. is confirmed by Law or that any man is bound to use it as the onely form now established by Parliament or to be punished for not using it at all And albeit the Act of 1 Eliz. Quere therefore whether he that either useth them not or useth other be punishaable taketh notice of some alterations above mentioned to be made in the Book then ratified yet it doth not name nor express what those alterations were So that all men are lest in a blind touching the same if put to prove that those