in this course When nothing would do but they must come to Excommunication how wisely did they govern the Brethren to bring them to declare their consent * 2 Cor. 10.6 obedientially to their Elders for they deny the Government to be Democratical nor will I own the Fraternity to be the first subject of the Keys In the beginning it was not so as our Lord said in another case Mat. 19.8 and to the beginning we must go and your * Primit Government of Church p. 147. Thorndike speaks excellently to this why the Congregation ought to be concern'd in this Now when all were agreed how dreadful was the sentence what pale faces how many tears did it cause in the Congregation a solemn sight to behold the Church putting the person out of the Congregation Terrible as an army of banners Cant. 6 1◠I have often thought of the Text since After this how excellently did the Church walk towards an Excommunicate person to bring to Repentance And what rare effects have I known of this Ordinance without any Writs de Excommunicato capiendo alas these could never effect what I have known to the humbling of such a person And now Sir do you think that we who have seen these things can join with your Church where this Ordinance so majestical so terrible is so horribly profaned I pray Sir pardon me though I stand off from it But I pray Sir why do your Bishops excommunicate those who were never of your Church why do they not Excommunicate the French or Dutch True they live under your Laws but your Law is they must be admitted by the Cross and being Infants could not help it As to your Discourse about particular Congregations and Diocesan Churches it is not my purpose to meddle with it only I desire you to tell me why a Pastor of a single Congregation may not be as fit to govern that Congregation as your single Bishop to govern a thousand Congregations as it is with your Church where did the Apostles ordain but one single Pastor to a Church we have eight Churches recorded in the Epistles and the Acts but we read in them all several Elders to carry on Church-work As for Timothy and Titus being Bishops in our controverted sense enough hath been said about them Strange that we should have twelve Apostles beside Paul and Barnabas many Elders and several Evangelists and but two Bishops who were Evangelists too recorded in holy Writ to be the pattern for the succeeding Bishops when where and how those two were made Bishops we cannot find And for the large Diocesses so large that 't is impossible for a Bishop to perform the Duties the Lord requires of a Pastor to one quarter of the Diocess Pag. 203 The Petitioners for Reformation in King James's reign tell his Majesty That in Augustine's time there were in one Province under Carthage of the Catholick and Donatist Bishops above nine hundred Of the Catholicks part there were present 286 and absent 120 by reason of sickness and old age Episcopal Churches void 60 in all 466. Of the Donatists there were present 279 absent 120 Churches void 60 in all 459. These come near the matter make him but Episcopus praeses and as to Officers and Churches I may come to agree with you leaving my brethren to their judgments Several other things I took notice of in your Book that may easily be answered as the perplexing scruples you mention pag. 384 385. If we must baptize only by the Parents right that men must run into No none at all But Sir did you not forget your self very much p. 393. when you tell us the differences between the Popish Ceremonies and your Ceremonies viz. That yours are appointed only for decency and order Sir do not your Preface to your Ceremonies tell us another story viz. of a significacy in them to put us in mind of our duty 2. Of an aptness in them to stir up our dull minds to our duty Here is some efficacy in them to help to the performance of duty stirring up dull minds these do not much differ from the efficacy you say the Papists give to theirs for the purging away some sorts of sins I think both alike As for your French Letters who told le Moyne what he writes pag. 404. That we believe that a man cannot be saved in the Church of England I never heard such a word from any Dissenter nor ever had I such a thought Certainly none of our Bishops would write such a line to him So that this must be the figment of a French mans brain which we abhor for the story he writes p. 409. of a Nonconformist that he heard preach I could tell him a story of one of our late Bishops ten times worse but the Press shall not know it but you shall Sir I have given you a few of my thoughts reading over your Book while my Papers were in the Press which have lain by me several years and must tell you I am not yet satisfied with the title of your Book viz. the Vnreasonableness of Separation c. To your Prayer in the end of your Preface I heartily say Amen Amen SIR I am your Servant to love and honour You G. F. THE QUESTIONS Between the CONFORMIST AND Nonconformist Truly stated and briefly discussed IT was not without the ordering of Divine Providence that the day which the Imitators of the Heathens 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did consecrate to their St. Bartholomew should be the day on which the blood of so many thousand Protestants was poured out in France and the day also on which so many hundreds of Gospel-Ministers to whom Christ had given both will and skill for his work success in his work were turned out of his work in England The crime both there and here which they found was the same the Princes found against Daniel in the Law of his God A day of gladness it was to many but not to all upon the same ground One Conformist and a man of note tells a Captain under his Majesty since his Return that he was glad so many Ministers refused to conform the Captain would know his reason he gives it thus Had all Ministers conformed people would have thought there was nothing in Religion only a thing to talk of in the Pulpit and serve a State-design for these Ministers will turn any way the State turn But by their giving up their livings and exposing themselves and families to outward evils rather than they would conform to things imposed not agreeable as they apprehended to the Gospel they preached they have convinced men there is reality in Religion and given a check to Atheism This was the substance and to be sure he was not more glad than I was when the Captain told me his Discourse How zealous yet some have been to bring us over to Conformity the many Books published for it and against us have declared Some of
Apoc. 18.4 how were they made and kept his people else must we therefore hold Communion with Babylon 3ly Christ holds Communion with his people in the Lutheran Churches I doubt not but if they impose upon you the Doctrine of the Ubiquity of Christs Humane Nature as a condition of Communion will you hold Communion with them 9ly Persecution joined to Imposition upon the members of Christs body what Christ never imposed renders the sin of the Imposing-Church much greater and refusing Communion with such a Persecuting Imposing Church is no Schism If Christ doth give us leave to flee from one Persecuting City to another where there is no Persecution then if a City be a Persecuting City by reason of a Persecuting Church surely he doth not bind us to hold Communion with that Persecuting Church 10ly Though one particular Church cannot communicate with another particular Church because of their corrupt Impositions yet if that Church which cannot communicate with the other will admit of those members of that Church who walk as become Christians in all other points excepting those Imposed corruptions which at present they cannot see being blinded with those deluding notions of indifferency and circumstances that Church cannot be charged with Schism though they refuse communion with the Imposing Church for we give communion to their members only exclude their imposed corruptions I do not mean such members as voluntarily took that solemn Oath c. of reforming those corruptions and now return to them again I look on this as a greater sin but for others I know several of our Churches would give them communion I do not say all will but then how are we Schismaticks 11ly Particular Churches may be so corrupt both in Doctrine Worship and Conversation that the sounder members not only may but ought to separate from them to save their own souls from infection and this is not Schism but Duty 12ly The case of those who are actual members of those Churches where these corruptions are is different from those who are no members of such Churches they have something else to do before they may separate 13ly If it be our sin to communicate with such as we know to be notoriously wicked unless we follow the rule of Christ Mat. 18.15 16 c. to seek the removal of them or do not our duty to reform the Pastor Cure of Church-Division pag. 100. or remove him as Mr. Baxtar tells us How we shall communicate without sin though we had nothing else to trouble us I know not that many such come to the Sacraments and who more boldly than they we know which way shall we reform them the Curate hath no Juridical power To the Spiritual Court must we go To the Diocesan must we go we are like to mend it carry Witnesses how many miles when yet the power we cannot own to be of Christ When all is done have a Writ upon our backs to bring us to the common Law and what then Whence to conclude they have dealt unworthily by us who bring the old Nonconformists against us to condemn us as if the state of this Church were the same with the true Church of England POSTSCRIPT AFTER I had finished I met with a Pamphlet Entituled The reason of Episcopal Inspection asserted in a Sermon at a Vesitation in Cambridg by John Templer D. D. The scope of the Sermon is to prove the Divine Right of Prelacy over Elders and Congregations And that the Author might shew himself to be a true Son of the Church he hath given sufficient proof in every particular For the Liturgy that is so perfect that he saith the most accuminated Intellect is not able with justice to charge it with any error p. 18. All then the old Nonconformists Parker Ames Bradshaw Cartwright Richardson Didoclavius c. together with the latter Nonconformists who were appointed with others by the Kings command to review the Liturgy and have given an account what things in it were to be corrected Calvin also for saying he found in it some Tolerabiles Ineptiae are all by this accuminated Doctor dub'd for so many Dunces They must be men of higher Acumens than these that can find any just cause against it these have said nothing considerable But whatever be the opinion of this Author yet Mr. Jeans a man of an acute Intellect one of their own and as great a Zealot once as he can be confesseth when he intended to write in defence of the Discipline and Ceremonies when he read these mens Books he found such arguments in them as were never answered and thereupon layed by his Pen his judgment being quickly altered but if you be a person of a more accuminated Intellect why did you not answer those dull fellows and therein do us a kindness that we might have conformed as well as you He tells the Reader p. 17. If this order of Prelacy had a period the Dissenters would never pitch upon any one way A. 1. The same saith the old Gentleman at Rome these Dissenting Protestants cannot pitch upon one way Hence no period must be put to the Papal Government 2ly You were very cunning Sir to pitch upon the warm side of the hedg thereby to save your selves from persecution and keep your fat Livings then cry up obedience to Governours pity the Martyrs had no better Intellects to have taken this course too and so have saved their stakes 3. If men would lay by their self-interests we might sooner pitch upon one way but so long as he sits at Rome and the Jews are uncalled I look but for little of this unity in the Gentile-Churches But to the main scope of his Sermon Had it been to prove the Divine Right of an Episcopus Praeses or Primus Presbyter as Ambrose calls a Bishop with the Presbytery or Ecclesiastical Senate I should not have been his opposer but it is an Episcopus Princeps and that not with but over the Presbytery superiour in power which he contends for how strongly proved we shall see His Text was Act. 15.36 Paul said to Barnabas Let us go again and visit our Brethren c. That the Doctor intended out of this Text to prove such a Visitation as was then when he Preached and so in England when Bishops visit I presume else he deceived him to whom he dedicates it and the four Doctors that Licensed it See how the Text will force it The Proposition or Antecedent is this Paul and Barnabas two Apostles Act. 14.14 Persons of extraordinary mission commission and qualifications for the office having by their Preaching converted many people from Heathenism to the Faith of Christ gathered them into Churches and set Elders over them These Elders and Churches being but all young Converts and through the relicts of corruption in them and the malice of Satan and his Emissaries without them being in danger to miscarry in Doctrine or manners these two Apostles go to visit the Churches which they had planted
Form then I hope they will not blame us though we refuse to subject unto it as we would refuse subjection to one in the Commonwealth who is not an Officer according to Law Professing withal for my self and I dare say for all the Nonconformists in England that if it can be made good that Christ hath appointed such a Government in his Church we will most willingly subject unto it being glad we are eased of such a burden Pride shall never hinder us though that be so much charged upon us For the first the Doctor meets with several arguments that some have produced to prove there must be a Form appointed and he answers them but his answers do not satisfie I had prepared a reply to his answers but lay it by To their Arguments I would add one or two more First if Christ hath determined no form of Government in his Church then the Form may be Monarchical and Bellarmine's argument to prove it for the prevention of Schism will carry it a simili saith he c. de Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 9. Dr. Stillingfleet might have spared the seventh Chapter of his Rational Account wherein he labours to disprove the Jesuit arguing for the Monarchical Form Kings are supream in all cases Ecclesiastical says the Church of England the supream Magistrate may determine the Form says Doctor Stillingfleet then the Ten Kings may give their power to the Beast without any error A Pastor and a Deacon may serve at first while believers are few but when the Church is enlarged to a whole Nation there must be another Form of Government saith the Doctor p. 180. Irenic Go on Sir when the Church is enlarged to many Nations there may be another Form and why not then Monarchical Christ having determined none as the Doctor saith Above one thousand Presbyters in a Diocess may devolve the exercise of that power which Christ hath committed to them actu primo to one person according to Dr. Stillingfleet so may ten thousand as well for ought I know to one Bishop and he may exercise it by his Arch-deacon Chancellor Commissaries as well as now 2ly If God determine a Form of Government in the Jewish Church then Christ in the Christian Church Christs Kingly-Government in the heart is secret none can see that his visible Government by which he is made known to the world is known by his Ordinances Government of his House as our Courts at Westminster Sessions and Assizes shew our Kings Government with the Profession of the Christian Faith and conversation of Christians accordingly He is faithful in his house Heb. 3.6 that House is his Church which he builds not the Commonwealth qua sic 3ly To determine a Form of Government argues more Soveraignty more Perfection more Wisdom in the supream Governour than to appoint only an unformed Government as it were a meer materiae prima If a Prince give a Charter to a Corporation a Patent to a Colony he appoints the form of their Government He that gives the form in other things gives the perfection of the thing Christs Form in the Church carries authority and hath an awe upon the hearts of Believers this notion brings Christ in his wisdom and Soveraignty below an earthly Prince 4ly Dr. Stillingfleet hath affirmed Christ hath appointed a form of Government in his Church for whereas the Jesuit is pleading for the Monarchical form of the Church-Government because wise men have thought that to be best the Doctor answers What is this to the proving what Government Christ hath appointed in his Church for that is the best Government of the Church not which Philosophers and Politicians have thought best but which our Saviour hath appointed in his word Ration Account p. 464. then Christ hath appointed a form in his word and I hope that is Jure Divino else the Jesuit is not answered We need no more proof 2. For the second Quest What then is that form A. I shall lay several Propositions and clear them by Scripture First Prop. In all Churches in the New Testament where we read of Elders we read of several Elders in one Church we never read but of one Elder in a Church that I call to mind 1. In the Church of Jerusalem one Church but divers Elders Act. 15.6 23 v. 16. ch 4. 2ly In the Church of the Romans one Church but several Elders as Rom. 12.6 c. 3ly In the Church at Antioch one Church but more Elders Act. 13.1 4ly In the Church of Corinth there were divers Elders witness the Schism 5ly In the Church of Ephesus divers Elders Act. 20.17 6ly In the Church of Philippi were several Elders Phil. 1.1 So Polycarpus's Epistle to the Church declares 7ly In the Church of the Colossians several Elders Col. 1.7 4.17 Epaphras and Archippus we are sure of the Dutch say Onesimus also from Ch. 4.9 8ly In the Church of the Thessalonians were several Elders 1 Thes 5.12 Let any man that opposes me produce one Church where there was but one single Pastor though if it were so it will not save us for the Churches then had the Apostles living among them and could help that single Pastor if the Church were but new planted 9ly In Act 14.24 The Apostles ordained them Elders not an Elder in every Church Mr. Thorndike one of your own joining this Text with Tit. 1.5 crosses Dr. Stillingfleet's gloss on the Text i. e. saith the Doctor no Church wanted an Elder not that every Church had more Elders but Mr. Thorndike thus not meaning one Elder in a place but Presbyteries Colledg of Presbyters with common advice to order the Churches planted in those cities This agrees with the plain Gramar of the Text 2. with eight examples I gave before 3ly The Syriack is full for our sense The Doctor while he labours to darken this Text forgets himself strangely for p. 239. He lays this for a foundation to clear the Apostolical practise viz. that the Apostles in framing Churches did observe the customs of the Jewish Synagogues And p. 248. Having cleared that there was a peculiar form of Government in the Synagogues and that the Apostles copied out the Government of the Christian Churches by them Now p. 429. he tells us there were divers Rulers in a Synagogue is evident from Act. 13.15 he supposes Ten wise men did jointly concur for ruling the affairs of the Synagogue p. 250. so many Elders to make a Bench. Strange the Doctor should forget his foundation For Act. 20.17 Dr. Stillingfleet Dr. Hammond with Irenaeus darken that Text. I might have shown how cross Dr. Hammond and Irenaeus are one to another Forsooth the Bishops of Asia not only the Elders of Ephesus were sent for according to Hammond Grotius is clear against Hammond de Imper. p. 343 393. But I should answer thus 1. Consider how many miles Philippi was distant from Jerusalem the way Paul sailed c. according to Bunting who gives an account of
all the miles from Port to Port that Paul sailed it was two thousand one hundred and fifty six miles if he mistake not 2ly Consider how many days between the Feast of Unleavened bread and Pentecost for Paul to sail these miles 3ly What time Paul set sail from Philippi 4ly How many days he stayed in several places all which I had cast up 5ly When he came at Miletum thirty days at least were spent he had but twenty days of these he stays eight days by the way besides two days journey going and coming between Miletum and Ephesus as they reckon it from Miletum to Jerusalem 844 miles according to Bunting he stays at Philips house Act. 21.8 10. At Miletum Act. 20.16 He hasted if possible c. yet now he sends for the Bishops of Asia this is the fancy of that learned man Besides if he can prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the 17 vers and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 v. 28. be words of the Plural Number then his great learning may perswade us to something For his other notion on Phil. 1.1 the Jewish and Christian Bishop Dr. Stillingfleet hath answered him I add 1. In matter of fact one would think Chrysostom and Ambrose should know a little better than Dr. Hammond of yesterday and they could have given other answers than they have done upon the Text. 2ly When Paul Phil. 4.15 saith O ye Philippians he means the same persons in Ch. 1.4 but if one in France should write to the French Church in London would they write O ye Londoners they are but strangers as the Jews in Philippi 3. In the Church of Thessalonica there were Elders 1 Thes 5.12 but none Jewish Christian Bishops 1 Thes 1.9 These turned from Idols c. not so the Jews So in Ephesus several Elders but no Jewish distinct Elders Ephes 2.11 12. make that clear I could give more answers Prop. 2. The Elders in the Gospel-churches had all of them Ministerial power committed to them alike I mean the ordinary teaching Elders So Bishop Jewel If it be a heresie to say that by the Scriptures of God a Bishop and Priest are all one then many of the Fathers whom he mentions yea Paul himself must be a Heretick Dr. Stillingfleet hath yielded this and we desire no more the truth is the same if he be changed this question Learned Pens have discussed I let it alone Prop. 3. This equality of power which the Elders received from Christ did continue all the time the Apostles lived This I think Dr. Stillingfleet yields p. 275. the Epistle of Clemens to the Corinthians after the Apostles time and of Polycarpus to the Philippians declare the same The Teachers Act. 13.1 2 3. did Ordain so several of the ancient and modern Divines Lutherans and Calvinists so understand it there is a full definition of Ordination If this were Peter's see where is that Bishop had there been an Apostle he had been mentioned The Church of Corinth ought to have Excommunicated the Incestuous person though Paul had not sent to them or here joined with them Chrysostom on the Text speaks fully to the point Prop. 4. The number of the Elders increasing in the Church by reason of the increase of the Believers One of these Elders and most probably that Elder which was first Ordained by the Apostles in the Church had a Primacy as to order and honour but not as to power and jurisdiction over his fellow Elders The Text commands it 1 Cor. 14. ult Order must be and where there is a Plurality to avoid confusion there must be one If there be Twenty Justices of the Peace in a County and the King add Ten more it doth not alter the form of Government At the Sessions one must be for order sake the Judg of the Sessions and the other Justices do not devolve the exercise of their power upon him nor hath he more power than the rest every one exerts his own power So in the Parliament a Speaker must be but no superiority of power nor devolving the exercise of the power of the other Members upon him so it is in the Church That Eminent Servant of Christ Mr. Thomas Hooker alloweth of an Episcopus Humanus in the Consociation of Churches to moderate the actions of the Assembly to propound things to be agitated to gather voices to pronounce the Sentence which passed by common approbation Reason and order saith he forceth such a kind of proceeding Survey Chu Disc p. 1. Cap. 2. p. 22 23. only the constancy of it he denies from experience There is the pinch Prop. 5. This Primacy I humbly conceive did continue in that Elder during his life unless for some default he were cast out by his fellow Elders I shall wrangle with none of my brethren nor differ from them in affection about it but I shall ground my notion on the Angel of the Church Apoc. 2. c. 1st The word doth not connote any superiority of power over the rest no more than when the King wrote from Breda or at any other time to the Speaker of the House of Lords or Commons or to the Judg of the Sessions did or do argue any superiority of power but only order what Isidore saith of the word Angelus Angelorum vox est nomen Officii ne naturae cum mittuntur vocantur Angeli So here all Elders are sent Rom. 10.15 if sent then they are Angels Superiority of power among the ordinary teaching Elders was the first step Antichrist took to get into his Chair 2ly The word is to be taken individually not collectively So famous Reynolds against Hart p. 314. So Beza Piscator Paraeus and many others The instances our brethren give to prove collectively some do not prove it others as the Ram the Goat in Daniel the Antichristian Beast c. in the Revel I humbly conceive give away the Cause for there was ever one superiour in power which I will not yield 3ly That this person was during life c. The Argument brought against it is no Scripture but humane Prudence from experience so Mr. Hooker To which I say keep out but superiority of power and the danger is avoided and no doubt while the Churches kept that out this form of government carried on things very well You cannot then charge me with being cross to Scripture in my opinion 2ly Since you cannot prove me so then I prove my sense from the practice of the primitive Churches of which we have the Histories which to me is of great force in proving the sense of a Text that seems very fair and have no other Scripture to contradict that sense how much the Histories of them speak of a single person who is ignorant and that during life Ambrose or whoever it was as ancient as he in his Comment on the 4 Ephes speaks home to the point see Thes Salmar p. 3. p. 299. 3ly By the Seven Epistles to
the Churches I find him in his Primacy do you prove it was but for one or two Sessions not during his life Certainly that Angel was well known in the Church to whom Christ wrote in some Churches commending him in others discommending though its true the Epistles concerned the whole Church 4ly This Angel is not the Moderator in a consociation of Churches as Reverend Mr. Hooker speaks of whose constancy in the place may be bad but the Primate among the Elders of one particular Church so that his fear does not reach us Q. 3. For the Jus Divinum of this This form Dr. Stillingfleet cannot deny the Apostles did constitute in the Churches but it seems the Apostolical practice though they were guided by the Spirit of Christ is not sufficient to make a Jus Divinum a positive Law for it is demanded 1st There was no positive Law for the change of the seventh-day Sabbath but yet the Dr. tells us the Apostolical practice is sufficient for they were guided by an Infallible Spirit p. 12 13. If so in a matter of far greater moment than in this I hope it is sufficient the Dr. cannot deny it 2ly Dr. Stillingfleet denies the 18. Mat. 15 16. proves Excommunication Then what positive Law hath he for Excommunications Deacons Ordination of Church-Officers 3ly The Apostolical form did best conduce to the end of Government which the Dr. urges much against the Jesuit Rat. Account p. 462. I pray compare that form then and our form now under which did or do ignorance and prophaneness most abound 4ly If not so then one great end of the Acts of the Apostles which Oecumenius calls the Evangelium Spiritus sancti is lost A Lapide in his Preface to that Book speaks excellently 5ly I set up this Form you demand my authority I answer It was the Form they set up who were guided by an Infallible Spirit and Christ owned the Form in writing to it You set up your Form different from it I demand of you shew me your authority and see which is best 6ly If Apostolical practise be not sufficient then you may to Rome for a Form for ought I know I know no stop As to the Author of the Book Samaritanism I am sure the Author was nothing a-kin to the good Samaritan for he shews himself a man of a vinegar-spirit his discourse as to Church-Government is built upon this foundation That Form of Government which appeared for hundreds of years first only and was de facto Instituted of God that only hath Divine right to warrant it p. 10 11. In p. 37. I find this was Episcopacy but this is very false these three terms first only and hundreds of years are not found in Episcopacy The first Governours had power over Bishops and Archbishops if any such Creatures were 2ly They were not the only Governours for the Presbyters governed while the Apostles lived 3ly The first Governours did not last hundreds of years 4ly The first Government was not confined to a narrow Diocess as Episcopacy was In Augustine's time there were in one Province under Carthage of the Catholicks and Donatists above nine hundred Bishops but their first Governours had all Nations for their Diocess and that made their Government Apostolical I am sure there is none such now Again Presbyters were first before Bishops witness your own Tribe that tell the world Episcopacy was set up to prevent Schism among Presbyters after the Schism in Corinth among the Presbyters According to this Author there is no Government at all in the Church for these three Terms are found in no form of Government now therefore I leave him As for his fine language wherewith he courts us as Jack-straws Fools Knaves Peevish c. this Samaritans Oil and Wine we bear it the Disciple is not above his Master There is another Question of very great consequence but for these times not so useful therefore I will only state it and give mens opinion about it and leave it though I had prepared something to speak to it Q. Whether every particular Congregation consisting of one teaching Elder and a number of visible Christians be a particular Church according to the New Testament or may not yea ought not several particular Congregations unite to make up one particular Church By a Church I mean an Organical Church invested with all the power and exercise of the Keys within it self both quo ad actum primum secundum such were the eight Churches I mentioned before Learned and pious Ames Med. Theol. l. 1. c. 39. tells us That a Church in the New Testament is a Parochial Church such a company or congregation as ordinarily meet in one place to worship God Sure I am that ordinarily there is but one teaching-Elder in such a Church And this Church hath as much power as the National Church of the Jews met together Compare his 16 18 Theses great use he makes of the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 11.20 so doth a reverend Brother who knew my opinion quote it with a little warmth but my good Brother must prove there was but one Teaching-Elder in that Church else his argument will be guilty of Ignoratio Elenchi five answers more I would have given Mr. Tho. Hooker giving the true sense of Independency saith it imports thus much Every particular congregation rightly constituted and compleated hath sufficiency in it self to exercise all the Ordinances of Christ. Surv. Ch. Dis part 2. pag. 80. But then it seems it must be compleated and to this compleating are required a Pastor Teacher Ruling-Elder Deacon one at least of all these So pag. 4. ib. and without these though a particular Congregation may be called a true Church as a man that hath but one eye one arm or leg may be still defined Animal rationale as having a reasonable soul yet he is but maimed no intire man such is that Church pag. 2. Ibid. I pray how many such Congregations have we The Synod held at Boston in New England Septemb. 10. 1679 the last year pag. 10 11. calling for a full supply of Officers in the Churches speak thus The defect of the Churches on this account is very lamentable there being in most of the Churches only one Teaching Officer for the burden of the whole Congregation to lye upon The Lord Christ would not have instituted Pastors Teachers Ruling Elders nor the Apostles have ordained Elders in every Church Act. 14.23 Tit. 1.5 if he had not seen there was need of them for the good of his people and therefore for men to think they can do well enough without them is both to break the second Commandment and to reflect upon the wisdom of Christ as if he did appoint unnecessary Officers in his Church Thus the Synod Half the question then is gained the Independents yield it men worthy to be listned to for they take up the word of God for their only Rule I know there is a
observe the 11. and 13. ver going before we may well guess 3. If you refer it to his Office as you do and would thence infer the perpetuity of his Office to the Worlds end I deny that to be the meaning For when the Apostle charges him 2 Tim. 4.5 do the work of an Evangelist c. there the word Evangelist is taken in the same sense with Eph. 4 11. not only Calvin and Gerhard but Scultetus though an Episcopal man yieldeth and it were absurd to think otherwise But that Timothy in the 1. Epistle Chap. 1.3 should be ordained a Bishop as you say and long after this charged to do the work of an Evangelist they must have dull Intellects indeed that know nothing of an Evangelist and a Bishop who beelieve it The Evangelist being one fixed to no place and had the power of Miracles as Eusebius and the Scriptures testifie This was a Commandment so incumbent upon Timothy that his Salvation or miscarrying was concerned in it as he performed it and so it is true of all Ministers but for an Evangelist the French Church the Low Countries Scotland New-England where Mr. Eliot hath more right of Superiority over the Churches of the Indians than any Prelate in the World yet would detest your Doctrine nor any Churches that I know of own an Evangelist As yet then the proof fails Thus we find in Clemens Epistle to the Corinthians a Metropolitan Church forsooth there is no mention made of any such Prelate But pag. 2.62 69. and 73. especially he mentions only Elders without any distinction A Bishop being but Primus Presbyter Primi Presbyteri Episcopi appellabantur Ambros in 4 Eph. as Ambrose calls him it may stand with Episcopus Praeses Thus Polycarpus in his Epistle to the Church in Philippi another Metropolis saith Dr. Hammond there is no menion of any such Prelate but pag. 18. he exhorts them to be subject to the Elders and Deacons answering to Paul Phil. 1.1 For Timothy's being twice ordained and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mentioned 1 Tim. 4.14 which you would have understood of Prophets c p. 45 46. What you aim at in Timothy's twice Ordination I know not whether that we may be twice ordained though first by Presbyters let it first be proved that Timothy was twice ordained to the same Office Timothy first ordained by the Apostle himself you say 2 Tim. 1.6 I pray Sir to what Office say and prove from Divine Writ If the second time ordained not to an inferiour Office I hope the first Ordination by an Apostle the second to a higher Office by Inferiour Officers I pray when was he ordained an Evangelist Nor does your notion of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 take to be meant of any other Prophets different from Paul for we know that Paul excelled in all gifts 1 Cor. 14.18 as of Tongues so no question of Prophesie Why therefore Paul might not be He to whom the Spirit revealed this concerning Timothy as yet so young and so to take him along for his Companion give us a Reason for it seems there was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 given 1 Tim. 4.14 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in 2 Tim. 1.6 he bids him stir up the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was in him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Apostles did convey gifts we know by their imposing of hands though the Presbitery joyned with the Apostle in his Ordination and so I know not above One Ordination that ever Timothy had and that to an Evangelist His third and last Topick to prove the Superiority of this Prelate is the practise of the universal Church pag. 42. To which add his saying pag. 53. As for Prelacy the Essence whereof lyes in a Superiority of an Ecclesiastical person over Elders in a certain precinct it was ever owned by the Church as agreeable to the Canon of Scripture Sir did you deliver this in the Pulpit for a Truth where be sure no man ought to speak any thing but Truth Have not you read Austins Epistle to Hierom Epistle 18. in which Austin writes thus to him Quanquam enim secundum honorum Vocabula quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyterio major est c. Surely you have read Hieroms Comment upon Tit. 1. Episcopi noverint se magis consuetudine quam Dispositionis Dominicae veritate Presbyteris esse majores To which A. B. Anselm subscribes in his Comment on the same Chapter What Sir is Ecclesiae usus and Consuetudo the same with Canon of Scripture Have not you read Estius Sent. l. 4. d. 24. calling those Hereticks that are not of your Opinion and undertaking to prove the jus Divinum of Prelacy as you do he saith thus Quod autem jure Divino sint Episcopi Presbyteris Superiores si non ita clarum este sacris Scripturis aliunde tamen satis efficaciter probari potest Have you not read what Medina saith of the Fathers in this point and what our Bishop Jewel naming the same Fathers that Medina did adds Paul himself must be a Heretick if Bishop and Presbyter be not the same according to the Scriptures Much more I might add that I wonder you could write such a line And what Sir will you exclude all those Churches from being parts of the Catholick Church that have not nor do own your Prelacy or what Church do you mean when you say the Church hath owned That so many of the Church were of your Opinion this with your Metropolitan Arch-Bishop brought that Whore in Apoc. 17. to her Chair without which that Prophecy had not been fulfilled to this day so that though it is not true what you say yet if it had been true it had not much prevailed with me but God hath left Testimony against it both in his Word and in the Church As for your notion p. 51. The reason why the Apostles wrote to the Churches that were in the cities which were Metropoles was to shew that all the Churches which were in that Province did depend upon that Metropolis Government and this Bishop was an Archbishop p. 50. I pray Sir which of the Apostles told you this was their reason or where do you find this written The Apostle mentions but but one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Pet. 5.4 This notion I see you are so taken with that p. 51. you tell us this Hypothesis gives the most intelligible account why all the Churches in Asia are reduced to Seven An Intelligible account then we have of that which I had a desire to know but because the Lord had hidden it it became not me to inquire after his secrets but now we have a reason why all the Churches in Asia are reduced to Seven 1. I pray Sir give us since you are so acquainted with Christs secrets an Intelligible account why since there were so many Churches in Europe and those Churches in the Metropoles yet the Lord writes not to one of
them in the Apocalyps only to Asia Was not Rome a Metropoles and there a Church 2ly Are you sure these were all Metropoles It seems there is some question about Philadelphia and your solution does not satisfie So for Thyatira it seems Pliny doth not give it this honour but Ptolomy doth So that we must rest upon a Humane Faith and prove which of these was the truest Writer 3ly But are you sure there were no more Churches in Asia than fell under the seven Archbishops Which of these was Archbishop to the Churches in Galatia that was a Province in Asia but none of these Cities Metropolis there for Ancyra was Antioch a Metropolis then under none of these yet there a Church To which I pray did Colosse belong Cappadocia Pontus Bithinia were all Provinces in Asia and in these were Churches no doubt for the Apostle writing to the Believers in these Provinces 1 Pet. 1.1 in the 5th Chap. v. 1 2. He charges the Elders to feed the flock Yet none of the seven Churches were Metropoles in any of these Provinces I could instance in divers more This I suppose the Doctor Preached to make amends for the fault he committed in being ordained first by Presbyters for now he talks of Archbishops in the Apostles days whereas Mr. Thorndike pag. 45. Prim. Gov. and the old Episcopal men tell us Archbishops came in long after As for your discourse from p. 60. to the end in which you tell your Reader something concerning Rules about Order Decency Circumstantials in Religion Adiaphorus matters c. and what the Church may do to preserve it self against opposers that thereby p. 62. you might justifie the punishment inflicted upon us for our Nonconformity Sir this is but the old Cheat to blind the people as if we opposed Order Decency and Circumstantials in Religion and for the punishment inflicted will you justifie it that Governours may for every errour in things pertaining to God punish their people for not conforming to them as we are punished but how much less then for non-conforming to Humane Inventions in the Worship of God which as yet all the Pulpits and Presses have not proved to be our error I mean our non conformity to them but our Duty And for that which p. 61. you would bring as a proof viz. That the Churches Determination upon some particu ars in conformity to the general command is no addition to the Rule c. It is very true if there be a conformity to the general command but if you will undertake as here you implicitely assert to prove that the Forms of Prayer Ceremonies Prelacy Re-ordination Abjuration of the Covenant all which are imposed upon us are all of them but particulars conformable to the general command of God Sir let us but have the liberty of the Press and you shall soon find one that will answer you I suppose there are but few pious Conformists in England that will justifie the casting of about two thousand Ministers out of their work because they could not submit to these Impositions in the matters of God had it been in things concerning the Commonwealth that had been another case then let him blame us Whence we are quite mistaken in Dr. Templer A POSTSCRIPT to the Reverend Dr. STILLINGFLEET SIR THE former pages were printed off sooner than I was aware of but give me leave to add these lines to clear my self from that sin of Schism which which you charge me among my Brethren a little further since I still continue the same love and honourable respects to you Three cases there are you tell us p. 213. in which the Sripture allows of Separation 1. Idolatrous worship 2. False doctrine imposed 3. Indifferent things made necessary to salvation of this latter one word by and by But there are two others wherein Paul gives particular directions but such as do not amount to separation viz. 1. Different opinions about meats and drinks observation of Jewish Holy-days In these points he advises not to censure one another but notwithstanding this difference join together as Christians in the duties common to them all Thus you A. Sir This is very true accordingly as I meet with Christians of different apprehensions Episcopal Presbyterian Independent Anabaptists some few of which I have found sober men and sound in all points but that let these men be sound in the faith and walk with a Gospel-conversation subjecting to Church government though in their different ways I give the Lords Supper to them all refusing communion with none for these opinions 2. But my good Brother are you not beside the question Did they in those duties which were common to them all as Christians impose such things as the Lord never imposed as terms of Communion This is our case both in Prayer Baptism Lords Supper Discipline which are duties common to us all in all these you impose your own inventions not our Lords injunctions so did not they And what if they would impose their Jewish Holydays which yet were once Gods own appointment upon the Gentiles to observe them who knew they were abrogated Sir you impose Holydays of mens appointing upon us which is far worse God's Authority is higher than yours 2. The second thing you mention is the corrupt lives of men in the Church c. where you explain 1 Cor. 5.11 No not to eat but Sir I prefer your Hammond's explication to which I refer the Reader see his Pararaph and his Notes As to that third ground which may warrant Separation you say viz. The imposing of things indifferent as necessary to our salvation A. Sir is our salvation all that we should regard Is not the glory and honour of God a thing to be attended Is not this glory and honour of his the first thing to be intended in his Worship Is it not his honour when his Soveraignty and Wisdom alone commands in his Worship In case he be deprived of his Worship is this honour to him Sir you make your Inventions though in themselves indifferent yet being commanded by mans Authority to alter in some sort their natures they are the words of your Canon upon the Cross and so necessary you make them that without these God shall have no worship at all Witness Barthol mewday As to the Liturgy which you impose you tell us p. 332. you will say nothing Dr. Falkner having so well defended it A. I know it is imputed to our pride and conceitedness of our own gifts that we use it not Sir I do profess in words of sobriety if you or Dr. Falkner can assure me infullibly that I should be pleasing to God and that I should discharge my Office as I ought only by reading Forms of Prayer I will be as ready to use nothing but Forms as you are ready and resolute to impose them I would use also that Form of prayer before my Sermon which your 55th Canon does command to be used before Sermon and
so nothing but Forms which is the sense of your Church I say may I be but as pleasing to God My reason is I observe it would very much please my corrupt lazy unbelieving heart I should not need then to beg of God the presence of his Spirit to help me as to the matter of prayer nor need I act my faith and dependance upon him as conscious of my own insufficiency 2 Cor. 3.5 for all my prayer is prepared to a syllable I should not then labour with my proud heart to submit quietly to Gods pleasure though he doth substract and not afford that presence sometimes which he doth at other times For here are the same words and syllables at all times his absence or presence hath no room here It may be the Friendly Debater that can jeer I see at Christian experiences will jeer at me too because I give this experience of my corrupt heart but I care not As for Dr. Falkner let but the Question be truly stated and I do not find one Scripture-argument he hath brought that concludes the Question for his own humane reasons I little regard them in divine Worship As for private Christians I know your Clergy look on them as the Pharisees did upon the vulgar Joh. 7.49 but Sir I know more of them than you or Dr. Falkner plain Mechanicks have I known well Catechised and humble Christians excellent in practical piety kept their station did not aspire to be Preachers but for gifts of prayer few Clergy-men must come near them I profess I fall short of them I have known some of them when they did keep their Fasts as they did often they divided the work of Prayer the first began with Confession the second went on with Petition for themselves the third Petition for Church and Kingdom c. the fourth Thanksgiving every one kept to his own part and did not meddle with anothers part Such excellent matter so compacted without Tautologies each of them for a good time about an hour if not more apiece to the wondering of those who joyned with them Such answers of prayer I have known to others that they have praised God for assurance that he had heard them before they rose off their knees and at that time it was done a thing of very great consequence but heard not of it till two days after Here was no reading of Liturgies these were old Jacobs sons could wrestle and prevail with God and yet must be punished if they came not to Church and set above an hour in the cold to hear a Minister read that which their boys could do at home and blessed be God that England in this dark day hath many thousands of such plain but praying Christians however despised and punished As for that Question Whether every particular Congregation makes a particular Church which you deny and oppose the Dissenters p. 234. c. I pray Sir why do you not answer Mr. Alsop's Text which he brings p. 45. from 1 Cor. 11.18 compared with 20. that Text deserves an answer and till that be done they are not confuted you have left out the strongest Argument Sir you must state the Question a little closer else you will not carry it I doubt not but there may be one particular Congregation which may be invested with the power and execute all the power of the keys and I think that is a Church For instance take your own Congregation and a few more in London where four or five thousand meet to worship God so large are your places with Galleries also I would suppose in such a Congregation there would be required four Teaching Elders four Ruling Elders Sir I must own that Officer though I think there hath been an error in assigning him that power which is not due to him and four Deacons Let all these Officers ply their work as hard as they will I doubt not but they will find their hands full and hearts full too unless the Four thousand be the better Christians But Sir will you deny this Congregation to be such a Church as we read of in the Gospel compleat as to exercise of all the power of the keys I am sure you will not As for your Reason for Episcopal Government another ground of difference between us which you give us in your Preface pag. 5. quoting Mr. Noyes of New-England in your Treatise pag. 234. agreeing with you viz. It is hard to perswade considering men that the Christian Church should degenerate so soon so unanimously so universally c. Mr. Noyes Would not Elders so many knowing men at least some of them have contended for Truth wherein their own Liberties were so much interessed Aerius his opposing of Bishops so long after their rise and standing is inconsiderable c. Sir much here might be said but I leave it to those with whom you have to deal as for Mr. Noyes I know him very well and know what may cause him to write for Episcopal Government That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bear with my words for I am sure it is contrary to Scripture and Reason of the Congregational men That the Fraternity or Plebs is the first subject of the power of the keys have made such work in Congregational Churches to my knowledg that their Elders have felt the need of that principle and made them to think again But good Brother what Episcopacy is it you mean if you mean only Episcopus Praeses I am of your opinion it was the government in the Apostles time when Elders in a particular Church were multiplied And if we would but exercise more meekness and patience one with another Consult the Scriptures more attentively we shall find that the true Government and Constitution of the Church takes in somthing of Episcopacy somthing of Presbytery something of Independency But Sir if you mean Episcopus Princeps which is our Case one that hath a Superiority of power above Presbyters with which these must not meddle and this Bishop such large Diocess as ours are and this Bishop also the Sole Pastor over the Diocess as Bishop Morley checking Mr. Baxter tells him that the Bishop of Worcester and not Mr. Baxter is Pastor of Kidderminster as well as of all other Parochial Churches in that Diocess pag. 2. Sir this Episcopacy you and Mr. Noyes have to prove that it was ever in the Apostles time or of Christs Institution for this we utterly deny The Presidential Episcopacy as I may term it lasted as it is conceived by Learned men till the middle of the second Century or towards the end of it your self does not deny it Iren. pag. 275 276. But for this Princely Episcopacy when that began to be set up then began the Degeneracy of the Apostolical Government Though Mr. Noyes makes little of Aerius yet Medina tells the world that Jerome Austin Ambrose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostom Theodore Theophilacct were all of Aerins his judgment and you say Medinas judgment will prove true Iren. 276. So say Bishop Jewel and Learned Whitaker Quam Epiphanius frigidissimis rationibus refellit saith Whitaker Tom. 1. pag. 149. As for their Diocesses beside what I have said before you tell us they were not very large since all the Parishes could communicate on the same day with what was sent from the Cathedral Church Iren. pag. 370. Sure I am what you plead for now does not agree with the last Paragraph of your Irenicum where you were nearer the Truth How they should come to degenerate so soon is easily understood if we believe the 2 Thes 2 3 4 and 7. ver and the 17. Chap. of the Revelation If positâ permissione infallibiliter sequitur quod permittitur which I am sure is true then it is as true if the Spirit foretels what shall come to pass that must come to pass good Austni good Cyprian and other good Bishops by their Superiority of power and large Diocesses did prepare the way for wicked Boniface the third and he made the Catholick Church his Diocess it was impossible for him else to come there had the Churches kept to the Apostolical Government That Counsel and prediction of God was secretly and severely brought about by men This was once your your Opinion Ire pag. 197 198. Though the Elders had equal power from Christ yet being it was to be exercised but in a co-ordinate way with others you tell us they might devolve the exercise of their power to others Iren. 276. and Dr. Templer tells us there is a greater probability of an Vnion of Judgment when all within a certain precinct lie under an obligation to be determined by the reason of One c. when there is only matter of Right and Liberty which require care pains watch but no profit or gain come into the Purse as here we can easily and readily listen to Reason that may take us off from Duty and part with that Right which hath no profit but only pains annexed to it FINIS
be holding up of the hand in token of his owning the Church-Covenant c. Now Sir let me suppose as you do suppose that the Pastors of the Independent Churches should baptize several persons but never admit them into their Churches by this ceremony of holding up the hand let them baptize many thousands and these thousands chuse other Pastors who are rightly qualified and ordained by Prayer Fasting and Imposition of hands of the Eldership The Independents cannot charge these Churches with schism and separation from their Churches for they never admitted them by that ceremony and rite of Admission of holding up the hand into their Churches Now Sir apply it for about twenty years there was publick Baptism administred but not by your Liturgy much less with the Cross How many thousands do you think in the space of so many years may be baptized none of these were ever admitted into your Church by those words VVe receive this child c. and sign him with the sign of the cross But of many such do our Congregations consist who were never your members why then do you call them separatists from you Besides Sir your Liturgy admits of private Baptism and then no such admission by the Cross and abundance have been thus baptized without it to my knowledg For my own particular I cannot tell whither I was so admitted my Parents never told me so and for my godly Father I am sure he hated humane inventions in the Worship of God I was born they told me in winter time extream for cold the house half a mile from Church and I being their only Son at that time it 's a question whether they would carry me forth in such an extream cold season so far As for the Church-Register that nor any other that ever I saw specifies nothing of my being admitted into your Church by the Cross but only of my being baptized but that say you and truly is into the Catholick Church No Registers then recording who were so admitted it will be hard matter for these who are ancient to prove their admission into your Church and if we were not I know not how we can now be admitted For this Rite of Admission is used only at Baptism unless we will yield to be Rebaptized and so to be admitted by the Cross this you will not admit no more than we We read of the Apostles admitting of many believers God added to the Church Act. 2. ult but never that they used this rite of admission the sign of the Cross only this is our happiness we are more wife more holy greater lovers of Christ than ever the Apostles were though we profess we are built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.20 that their examples are too low for us Besides Sir is it not meet that when children come to years of discretion they should then be called before the Church to declare whether they own their Baptismal Covenant and also their admission into the Church they are reputed members of as you say the Independents require their Children to own the Church-Covenant let them now be members of the Church by their own consent Truly Sir if it come to that since we read what your Canons say of the Cross and how it is abused in Popery and how strange this is to the Apostolical admission we should not like it But are not children members of the same Churches with their Parents though we think so yet this is nothing to the practise of your Church For as in your administration of Baptism the Parental Covenant Abraham and his seed which is the ground of the Administration is wholly omitted so the Parent he must stand by as if he were a Heathen the business is only with the God fathers and Godmothers an invention of Higinus Bishop of Rome about 144 years after Christ who first added these to Baptism a person of no great worth of whom it is said Nihil praclari de gubernatione factis ejus commemorari potest So much cause have I to beg pardon for my defects in the education of my own Children that I would not be Sponsor for the child of the best friend I have in England But however this is not it but the sign of the Cross with such words that makes the admission into your Church 2. Q. But if there be a Separation or Schism the question is who is the cause of it A. Schism must needs be theirs whose the cause of it is saith Bishop Land in which you justifie him Ration Account p. 324 325. I humbly conceive that whoever imposes other terms of Communion than Christ hath imposed he or they are the cause of the schism We do not say you necessarily separate from all Churches that have errors or corruptions in them supposing those errors and corruptions be not imposed on us as conditions of communion Ibid. p. 332. I pray do not think that we suppose you impose such gross things upon us as Rome imposed on you No Sir we bless God for that great advance which was made by our first Reformers But whereas you say you retain only such innocent Ceremonies which were in use before the Papal power grew to that height I pray first are you sure that All the Churches did use them 2. Did they use all that are imposed on us I know they used others but did they use to tye up their Ministers to such syllables in prayer or else must not pray Did they kneel at the Lords Supper we know the contrary c. 3. Did they impose these as conditions of Communion But grant there were such Ceremonies and other things as now imposed upon us I will say of them Downh de Antichristo p. 151 what Bishop Downham saith of the opinions and traditions differing from the holy Scriptures which the Pontificians say were received of the Fathers they are to be referred to that Apostasie the Apostle foretold 2 Thes 2.3 when he said the mystery of iniquity already worketh v. 7. And I pray Sir since the examples and practises of those Churches are made so much use of against us let me give you my thoughts in a similitude of your own In your Epistle to your Rational Account c. dedicated to the King you tell his Majesty that the Church of England in the late confusions suffered an Eclipse but since his Majesties Restauration she hath recovered her luster c. Sir we observe when the Sun riseth it doth not suddenly go into an Eclipse but gradually so that common people do not mind it until the light of it be sensibly obscured so nor doth it come out of its Eclipse suddenly at once but gradually but it will not cease its motion till it appears in its glory It is the same with the Gospel-Church it did not presently suddenly fall into that dark Eclipse which it suffered under the Antichristian Papal power but it got into it by degrees the Churches not
discerning it the mystery of iniquity wrought it is no fancy of mine but the Apostles express words The subtil serpent he wrought among the Churches under fair pretences in the second Century some addition made to Worship and Government of the Church in the third Century more in the fourth Century more so increased the Eclipse still under fair reasons till the Serpent had got the man of sin into his Throne and the Prediction fulfilled So hath the Churches coming out of the Eclipse been but gradual in Doctrine Government Worship by our worthy Reformers but as the evil spirit deceived then by Gods permission to bring about the Prophesie so the Spirit of Christ in the hearts of our first Reformers wrought powerfully and so doth the same Spirit still work and will work till the Church be quite out of her Eclipse and comes to be satisfied with the Soveraignty and Wisdom of Christ declared in the simplicity of the Gospel let men call it schism fanaticism or what they please But Sir you tell us of Mr. Ball Mr. Hildersham Mr. Giffard c. worthy men I grant they were so and honour them much and Nonconformists who condemned Separation from your Church and no more was imposed than in their time and this takes up a great part of your Book Sir while some excellent men at home conformed but groaned under the burden as I remember Mr. John Rogers of Dedham an eminent Saint though he did conform I never saw him wear a Surplice nor heard him use but a few prayers and those I think he said Memoriter not read them but this he would do in his Preaching draw his finger about his throat and say Let them take me and hang me up so they will but remove these stumbling-blocks out of the Church How many thousands of choice Christians plucked up their stakes here forsook their dear friends and native Country shut up themselves in Ships to whom a prison for the time had been more elegible went remote into a howling Wilderness there underwent great hardships water was their common drink and glad if they might have had but that which they had given at their doors here many of them and all this suffering was to avoid your Impositions and that they might dwell in the House of God and enjoy all things therein according to his own appointment But what cared your Church for this let Gods people groan at home suffer abroad they shall do it rather than your Church will part with a few trifles as your own Mr. Carre calls the ceremonies Sir is this the spirit of the true Spouse of Christ But as I said the same Spirit will work which acted those holy men till the Church be totally out of her Eclipse what ever those worthy men you mention have said But to speak more close I deny that the state of your Church now is the same it was then when these worthy men condemned Separation from it For 1. There are many thousands now in England who were never admitted into your Church were never members of it then they could not condemn these as Separatists from it This I have proved before from your Interpretation of the sign of the Cross It was not so in their time 2 The Liturgy and the Homilies were then brought in out of necessity because of the want of gifts now it is imposed in scorn and opposition of gifts By what some of your Arch-deacons have spoken in your Courts and others we can conclude no other than it was composed to bring over the Papists to your Church and for several years the Papists did frequent your Divine Service but now it was imposed with such words as in my next that it was made an engine to turn Protestants out of your Church A Member of that Parliament that made the Act for Vniformity visiting his Sister a Lady who told it me related to her what they were about she disliked their Act and told him I see then you are laying a snare in the gate Ay said he if we can find any way to catch the Rogues we will have them 3. Then they were not required to assent and consent c. but now it is imposed with these terms and I am confident that divers who have subscribed with these terms do but lye 4. 'T is true we have the same 39 Articles that was before and those Articles were assented to and assent required in that Church Rational Account p. 54 55. But now you have told the world that Bishop Bramhall gives the sense of the Church of England thus viz. She does not define any of these Questions as necessary to be believed c. Neither do we look upon them as Essentials of saving faith c. Neither do we oblige any man to believe them but only not to contradict them And this is the opinion of the Grandees in this your Church this would have been abhor'd before 5. As those 39 Articles were believed by that Clergy so they did defend them and Preached them but this Clergy can both print and preach against them I mean the great and sound Doctrines in them I do not say all of them I put the question to one of your Clergy and asked him in earnest what he thought of this Clergy as to the Doctrine of the Church of England contained in these Articles he answered me Divide them into three parts he thought two of the three were fallen from it 6. In that Church there were abundance of godly plain-hearted Ministers whose Religion was not confined to a Pulpit but walked among their people as became Ministers seeking the good of their souls I deny not but God hath some such now but for the generality of them I say nothing my self only I can tell you what others have said A learned and pious Divine so far a friend to Conformity that I doubt not but he hath subscribed he told me Though your Church would give him a Living he would not take it because he would not have such an occasion to bring him among your Clergy And discoursing with another of your Clergy whom for learning wit and piety I do honour about Mr. A's Book and his Dialect which you call uncomely writing said he Truly we have such a frothy vain Clergy gone off from that solidity and gravity that become Divine things that if Books come not out in this dress they will but scorn them but in that Book besides wit there is good matter Pridentem dicere verum c. This was his sense of Mr. A's Book But. Sir if such as these be thrust upon us must we own them for our Ministers What Sir will you deny the peoples power of Election which the Papists grant the people had till Charles the Great or till Lewis his Son about 830 years See I pray Pamelius his Annotations upon these words of Cyprian Epist 68. Quando ipsa plebs maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos
sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi How could a man write plainer for the peoples power of Election But our Protestants tell us that only from the time of Frederick the second who died Ann. 1250 or there about were the people excluded from the power of chusing Pastors and it was the deed of Gregory the ninth as Krantzius reporteth 7. That Church did believe and prove the Pope c. to be the Antichrist Rome-christian to be the Whore Apoc. 17. thus the Bishops and our Professors of Divinity c. but I can meet but with very few of this Church of that opinion Dr. Hammond the Oracle of this new Edition of the Clergy cannot find him in the 2 Thes 2. nor in Apoc. 17. the Pope is an honest man with him Bishop Bramhall tells us Our contest is not with the Church of Rome but the Court of Rome I find that you have declared 1. That the Church of Rome is a true Church 2. That they retain the fundamentals of Religion 3. That salsation is to be had in the Church of Rome Lay all together here is a fair Bridg laid to go over to Rome To say that God hath his people under the Jurisdiction of Rome is one thing Apoc. 18.4 but to say the Church of Rome is a true Church is another thing a Wife and a Whore differ 8. In that Church Re-ordination to the same office was never heard of but exploded as it is in all Churches else but in this Church it is imposed 9. There was no Oath taken nor Covenant made with the great God to reform the House of God in Doctrine Worship and Discipline according to the word of God this ought to be though the Covenant had not been made had the things imposed been according to the Word of God this Covenant had bound us to them that Covenant will not be beaten out of the hearts of them who know God and fear an Oath what ever other persons make of it the least then men can do is to abstain from those things which were once cast out as being unconformable to the word of God and shall those people have no Ordinances for fear of a separation 10. In that Church Quakers were not known but under this Church they swarm that raze the foundation and destroy all Gospel-ordinances And many people being offenced with your imposition and disgusted with your Clergy lay in great danger of being carried away with them and I doubt not abundance had gone but that by our Preaching and administring all Ordinances they have been kept close to Gospel truths Gospel-ordinances and Gospel-ministry The Quakers and Papists are not so hated by your Clergy as we are From all which I conclude the Cause is not the same and had Mr. Ball Mr. Hildersham c. been living in our days they would I doubt not have done as we do But then we are charged with bringing in of Popery and this takes up several leafs of your Preface Heylin one of yours tells us indeed I perswade my self Geograp in Quarto Edit pag 470. had the Reformed party abroad continued an allowable correspondence in some circumstances with the Romish Church as the Church of England doth now it had been far greater and less stomacked and this was the censure of Monsieur de Rhosny when he observed the Majesty and decency of our Church-service in our Cathedrals On the other side Harding Bristow and Carrier seducing Jesuits assured themselves that they might yet convert England to the Catholick Church whose Service and Ceremonies she yet retained Nor do I see any such alteration made in this Edition but if Pope Pius the 4th and Gregory the 13th offered to confirm the former and the Council of Trent affirmed they might do it then the Pope may do this for ought I know But how do we bring in Popery Pref. p 7. you tell us out of Bishop Sanderson the first way is by pulling down Episcopacy c. But Sir Bishops are restored and you tell the King the Church of England is out of her Eclipse that she shines in a firmament above her Adversaries I pray Sir what is the matter that now Popery is coming in as a flood upon us cannot these Bishops the English Banks keep it out I say nothing how strongly they act in Parliament against it the Kingdom talk enough of it I pray Sir tell us what have you Conformists done more against Popery than the Dissenters have done 1. Have you prayed earnestly against it so have we 2. Have you Preached against it so have we 3. Have you Printed against it as you have done excellently and we thank you for it so have ours The first Book I saw was Fiat Lux. I saw a second Impression and wondered I heard of no answer from your Church Dr. Owen was the man that answered it Ann. 1662. so long ours have appeared 4. Have your Clergy kept their monthly Fasts four or five years foreseeing what now is coming upon us if God prevent it not so have several of our Ministers with the hazard of our Estates and Persons by Informers from whom you were free 5. Did you the last year at least for the chief part of the year beside your family-prayers set a part sometime between fix and seven in the morning one day in the week to pray purposely that God would deliver this Nation from these bloody Papists and their cursed Idolatry and Doctrines c. so have we in several Counties and layed the same charge on our people 6. Do you think you shall be put to defend our Legal right to the Protestant Religion by what I am loth to mention the sword since the Lollards-Tower the Bishops Cole-house c. are out of date they are too thirsty and must have larger draughts I believe there will be no distinction then between a true Protestant Conformist and us therefore we must join with you Why then do you charge us with bringing in of Popery I desire your Church would not put us upon temptation we wrong them not in their Tythes but charge our people to pay them exactly and do not grudg us the little that we have to bring us in bread I thank God I am not very lazy in my place but if you will give me twelve pound per Annum for my stipend you shall have it and thank you too But I bless God I may work for so good a Master A little more as to our Communion with your Church Sir some of us have lived in Gods House where we saw the Government hath been carried on by Officers of his own appointment according to his own Rule and what a majesty have we beheld in it Admonitions first privately then publickly by the Elders continuing in this course of admonishing to try if they could bring to repentance sometimes longer sometimes shorter as the sin hath been and they in prudence saw reasons I have known them waste half a year
which have come to my hand but all were not written with the same Spirit As they came to hand so I perused them to see if I could find any thing to convince me And whereas there are five things imposed upon us 1. The Liturgy with stinted forms of prayer 2. Mystical Ceremonies 3. Subjection to such Episcopacy 4. Re-ordination 5. Renouncing the Covenant I applied my self to the three first Questions chiefly For if it can be proved that these are agreeable with and conformable to the Laws of God as the Friendly Debate and Dr. Templer would perswade their Readers then Re-ordination may be admitted and the Covenant renounced As to the two first Quest Mr. Carre was the first man I met with that argued for them after him I met with the Friendly Debate next with the Serious and compassionate Enquiry c. Dr. Goodman the Author as I hear Nemine contradicente but last of Mr. Falkner a man of an excellent spirit whom I shall honour and one that hath said more than all before Before he came forth I had drawn up my answer to all the former and was loth to throw away all I had done because I saw there were some things in these Authors which Mr. Falkner had not else I would wholly have attended him but where I saw they all agreed there I considered them conjunct where one had what the other had not there severally As to the third Quest something I found in a piece Entituled Samaritanism As to the Learned Dr. Stilling fleet by throwing down the Jus Divinum of any form of Church Government he prepared the way for our subjection to such Episcopacy if his principle be sound For the serious and compassionate Enquiry I found little in that piece as to our questions unless a man were so simple to take fine words for strong arguments and Rhetorick for Logick For his Discourse about schism I shall consider it in its place But the chief things I observed in him were his odious comparisons between the Conformist and Nonconformist begun at p. 21. and continued some pages His slighting that worthy Father blessed Austin the contempt he throws upon the Synod of Dort which I did never expect from the pen of a Son of the Church of England But I see this Church of England and the famons Church of England are not the same I need not say any thing there is an acute pen hath given him so full and solid an answer that I ver expect to read his Reply To what he saith pag. 3. That the Nonconformists blame the Doctrine of the Church viz. the 39 Articles are not so punctual in defining the five points debated at the Synod of Dort c. I think I may say I have been in the company of as many Nonconformists as that Author but I have not heard them blame the Articles therefore But this fault I have heard found and do find that we are commanded to affent to the 34 35 36. Articles with the same faith we do to the fundamental Articles of our Faith and Salvation therein contained I thought among the Confessions of Faith these 39 Articles were looked upon as the Confession of the Faith of the Church of England but I find it otherwise now for Dr. Stillingfleet in his defence of Bishop Laud p. 54. being pinched by the Jesuit who in this point is not answered tells us The Church of England makes no Articles of Faith but such as have the Testimony of the whole Christian world in all Ages acknowledged to be such by Rome it self And in other things she requires subscription to them not as Articles of Faith but inferiour truths which she expects a submission to in order to her peace and tranquility Afterwards p 82 104. He distinguisheth between the internal assent of the mind and the external act the Church doth not require the first but the latter To confirm his saying he quotes Archbishop Bramhall often expressing the sense of the Church of England as to her 39 Articles thus Neither doth the Church of England define any of these questions as necessary to be believed either necessitate medii vel praecepti which is much less but only bindeth her Sons for peace sake not to oppose them And in another place more fully We do not suffer any man to reject the 39 Articles of the Church of England at his pleasure neither do we look on them as essentials of saving Faith or Legacies of Christ and his Apostles but in a mean as pious opinions fitted for the preservation of unity neither do we oblige any man to believe them but only not to contradict them Thus the Archbishop And this is not his opinion alone but generally of the Grandees of this Church as an intelligent and sober Conformist tells me When I read these lines first I read them again and again to see if I were not mistaken they were so strange unto me at the first reading when I saw I was not mistaken I turned to the beginning to see who did License it and was amazed when I saw the name According to this Cerinthus Pelagius Arius Socinus Turks Jews yea Vaninus may all subscribe the Articles and be Sons of the Church of England if they can but keep their tongues from contradicting them though they do not believe one of them Though I am a Nonconformist yet I am such a friend to the Church of England as to her Doctrine that I abhor these lines and charge that Bishop Bramhall with doing wrong to the Church It seems when other Churches abroad read these 39 Articles as the Confession of the Faith of the Church of England and suppose we do believe them to be true they are grosly mistaken it may be we believe not one the Church do not oblige her Sons to it but only not to contradict them They are deluded the Church reproached and God is mocked Several things I could say to the disproving of this sense but to what worthy Dr. Stilling fleet hath said I should desire him to name that Book of publick authority to warrant what he saith 1. The Kings Declaration prefixed for the confirmation of them and with that I question not but the Bishops did agree * The Declaration expressed With the advice of so many of our Bishops c. makes no such distinction of superiour and inferiour Truths but speaking of all the 39 Articles jointly taken together thus declareth The Articles of the Church of England do contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to Gods word c. requiring all our subjects to continue in the Vniform profession thereof Again requires all Clergy men to submit to every Article in the plain and full meaning thereof and shall not put their own sense and comment to be the meaning of the Article but shall take it in the literal and Grammatical sense Again doth not the fifth Canon say Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that
several houses at that time where they had prepared in one house such bitter herbs as Sichory Wild Lettice which they say they used in another house Wormwood and Horehound in another Centory Germander in another bitter Almonds and Gentian c. so mention twenty more differences yet if Bitternesses were observed the rule was kept Again shall these bitternesses be boiled or raw beaten into a sawce like our Mustard as Scaliger saith the Churoseth was here is nothing determined be sure there be bitternesses and the general Rule is kept Again here is no mention made of drink but to have a Lamb and unleavened bread eaten and bitter things and not drink it had been a dry Feast fit to choak them Again the Lamb must be roast but how must it be without a Spit as we use sometimes or with a Spit and if so whether with a Spit made of Iron c. or Wood and that of a Pomegranate tree as a Learned man supposeth who can tell there is nothing determined or expressed and I prefume that Learned Author was not there to turn the Spit Again it must be roast but must the fire be made of wood or coal or turff or other combustible matter not a word of any such thing Thus I might reckon up many more circumstances that I wonder at this Author and another of his party answering for their Ceremonies telling us This is the difference between the Law and the Gospel that under the Law all ceremonies and circumstances are exactly prescribed not so under the Gospel How true this is the Reader may judg Leaving then this Author a while let us come to the stating of the Questions and for the first about Forms of Prayer Mr. Carre begins his Book and states the Question thus 1. Forms of Prayer are lawful thus it was stated in the Commencement-house when Dr. Fern was Vicechancellor and moderated I yield it being my own practice to compose Forms for my Children and for others who could not express themselves in fit words in their families before their servants and what then what is this to our business 2. For the Ceremonies The Church hath power in circumstances and who denies it 3. For Government some Episcopacy is lawful The Proposition must not be universal for then we shall setch in a Universal Bishop which as yet our opponents do not like Make it particular for my part I yield it I shall therefore now give the true state of the Questions and then leave it to the judicious Reader to see whether any one argument the Conformists use conclude the Questions For the First about imposed Forms of Prayer the question is this Quest The Question about Forms Prayer stated Whether the Lord Jesus hath given such power to any ordinary persons Civil or Ecclesiastical to compise and impose their Forms of Prayer upon his Ministers in the Gospel-church whom he hath sufficiently qualified for his work unto which he hath called them so that in their ministration and worshipping of God by prayer his Ministers must be tyed up to those very Forms and Syllables and not vary from them Let me open the Question 1st That Christ is Lord of his House King of his Church having the only power over it to institute what he please no Christian will deny 2ly True Ministers of the Gospel are his Ministers they have their talents and abilities from him their call and authority from him Their Laws and Doctrine what they must preach and how they must order all things in the Church from him They have a promise of his Presence and unto him must they give an account of their work 3ly These Ministers being his are sufficiently qualified in one sense it is true 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2 Cor. 2. 16. who is sufficient but yet again Timothy is charged that those whom he takes into the Ministry be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sufficient men Praying and Preaching are the two great works of a Minister Act. 6.4 to declare the will of God to the people and to open and present the wants of the people unto God is their business and whom Christ sends of his errand he fits them for both or never sends them Ephes 4.8 11. He prepareth gifts for his If your Forms of Prayer will make a man sufficient I know not who shall be insufficient if he can but read well 4ly These are Christs Ministers in the Gospel church I hope 't is no strange thing to put a difference between the Ministers of the Old and New Testament Gal 4.1 2 Cor. 3 c. that the Spirit is given by Christs Ascension in a greater measure both as to gifts and grace to the body of the Gospel-Church than to the old Church hath been unquestioned Divinity by the Conformists 5ly For ordinary persons to impose such as cannot dare not lay claim to an extraodinary Mission as the Prophets and Apostles had Yet the Apostles never imposed their Prayers on the Churches 6ly For these to tye up Christs Ministers to words and syllables in Prayer from which they must not vary This is the practise indeed but this is the question by what right this is done What I have heard in answer to it is that the Church allows our own Prayers before and after Sermon 1. Whether the Church allow it I cannot tell the genuine Sons of the Church say no and will use only the Canon-prayer The Arch-Deacon in his Visitation did dehort the Ministers from the use of their own prayers with these words Though I do not command nor enjoin you yet I advise you to it it is more out of fear it would cause such an Odium among the people should they take them off from their own prayers wholly in places where there is any knowledg in ignorant places they use none at all but the Common-Prayer as I have certain intelligence of divers places The Fathers of the Church in their Conterence with the other Ministers at the Kings first coming in thus express themselves Account of the Proceedings c. p. 19. VVe heartily desire that according to this Proposal great care may be taken to suppress those private conceptions of pray ers before and after Sermons As the Judges are the Interpreters of Statute-Laws so surely the Bishops of the Canons Now it is clear they would take away all but Book-prayer The judgment of Bishop VVren and Bishop Cozens is well known 2ly But if superiors being but ordinary persons have power to impose their Forms at Baptism the Lords supper c. all but before and after Sermon is it because their power of imposing is limited by God where I pray certainly by what power they take away the use of our own prayers before and after Sacraments they may before and after Sermons and that we see they desire it might be done but that they fear the consequence Let us come to their reasons for this One they draw from the Scriptures and that is
Masters or was it because the art of Canonizing by the Triple-Crown was not then known as it is now with whom it seems as in other things you are pleased to symbolize so in this The next Head are their Reasons why these Forms must be imposed Now as to all their Humane reasons in these cases concerning God I shall not much weigh them For there is no man will set up his Inventions in Gods Worship without Reasons Jeroboam will not set up the Calves at Dan and Bethel but he hath his Reasons 1 King 12.26 27 28 c. He is a fool indeed that hath no reason to give for his act I much applaud one sentence of the Schools in this case and it had been well if they had kept to it Sacra scriptura est lex Ecclasiae fidei mensura Regula intellectus Humanae ratiocinationis fraenum I will yet take a view of their Reasons that are of moment One I find in the Fr. Deb. Par. 1. pag. 93. It is so lawful to use a form of words in prayer that it is in a sort necessary we can have no security that the service of God will be performed well without one The best of men though their hearts be full of good desires may from some cause or other want such words as are fit to express their meaning hence may use words rude slovenly obscure c. Mr. Carre hath one like to it only he doth not put the word necessary to it Necessity I grant is a strong reason Ans Rude slovenly words are such as I do not remember I have heard once I heard an expression that was not so becoming and the person being told of it reformed it and never used it more a better way to deal with persons than impose and tye up to syllables 2ly Will not this reflect upon Christ very much Either 1st He did not foreknow the infirmities of his people 2ly Or though he did yet he knew how to help them or pardon them and yet accept of their service 3ly Or if he did foreknow them and by a form of words imposed all these infirmities might be prevented his Worship secured and better performed than now it can be without a form Heb. 3.6 then Christ was not faithful in his House as a Son that would not provide for a thing necessary in his House The limitation after a sort necessary will not serve the turn but it must reflect upon his honour Could not he have commanded his Apostles to compose one Liturgy that should have served all the Churches in the world So it had been one Lord one Faith one Baptism and one Liturgy and then that trite but pitiful reason from Vniformity had been answered As if that unity Christ requires in his people and worship could not be preserved without Uniformity in words and syllables 3ly But there are some men even of your Conformists a few whose words when they have liberty to use their own gift are so apt that the Devil himself cannot find a rude or slovenly expression why must Forms be imposed upon such men 4ly We must have a Form before and after Sermon too for something may fall out which may cause rude and slovenly words in those prayers and so have nothing but Book-prayer 5ly We must take away all Preaching too and use only Homilies for fear of rude slovenly words and unhandsome expressions in Sermons where be sure they are too common with some How many Sermons in Conventicles Dr. Goodman heard that he can charge them upon us as he doth in his odious Comparisons p. 21 22 c. I know not I suppose he never heard one may be I can tell him of an expression of one of his Bishops and that in print too that was not very handsome for a Sermon But if he denies this because we may write down our Sermons and read them as commonly you do truly that doth not always serve neither But however I reply so may you compose your own prayers and write them down and read them as you do your other prayers imposed and so prevent slovenly words 6ly Suppose we meet as often we do with cases which when we come to spread them before God your Book-prayer hath no words at all What shall we do now our own words we must not use they may be rude and slovenly and for your Forms there is none suit the case in words at all it seems we must let the case alone Fr. Deb. p 96 97. urgeth this argument It is as lawful to use a Form of Prayer in prose as in verse but here you do not stick at it when you can sing David 's Psalms translated into English Meter though the words be mean uncouth and the sense often mistaken Ans Where lyes the strength of your argument if in the uncouth words for this cause and the sense changed I have not used the Psalms by Hopkins and Sternbold many years Others are used generally by the Nonconformists 2ly Prayer or praise offered to God in verse require some art to make true Verse and fit Rime suitable to English ears every one who hath the gift of Prayer hath not the gift of Poetry 3ly The people being to join in singing and lift up their voice on high if they do not know before hand what to sing will make mad work there cannot be joint singing without a Form so that it is necessary But in prayer their hearts are only to join and give their Amen If the Pastor be the mouth of the Congregation and the Service publick belonging to a publick person 4ly But it seems they are David's Psalms composed by a Prophet 2 Sam. 23.1 2 3. part of the Canon and what was done here was by the Commandment of the Lord 2 Chron. 29 25 30. 35.15 2 Chron. 8.14 So that still Sir your consequence is denied the question not concluded But pag 94. All Churches in the world have had their publick Forms Fr. Deb. he tell us I pray add and those imposed by ordinary men and all the Ministers tyed up to them else you miss the question I pray Sir speak low the little word All makes such a noise that it troubles What the Apostolical Churches too Will you prove to us invincibly that the Liturgies which go under the name of Peters James Marks Andrews Liturgies are genuine faithfully theirs and not spurious Learned Mornaus * De Eucharist cap. 2. hath spoken so much to these and so convincingly also * Crit. Sacr. L. 1. cap 3. Rivet quoting Bellarmine against them that I wonder any Protestant should name them to patronize their Liturgies If All Churches c. what is the reason that Mr. Falkner dare not venture above thirteen hundred and Mr. Carre but twelve hundred years and leave three hundred years of the best times of the Church next to Christ in which they dare not affirm there were any Forms imposed Of which a word
to other Churches and future times after what way and manner we worship God c. Answ 1. But Sir cannot that be done unless we leave them the words and syllables of our prayers to which we were continually bound up will not the Confession of our Faith and a Directory for Worship if the Assemblies Directory be not sufficient I pray let your party mend it do this sufficiently 2ly If this reason be forcible was it not as strong in the Apostolical Churches and much more than now Why did they not leave their Liturgies that all Churches after them might know their way and man ner of worshipping God all their words in prayer So name you but one argument that was not of as much validity in the Apostles time as now Vniformity prevention of errors of rude and slovenly words and expressions and what else you please Then do but bring us forth their Forms which they imposed upon the Churches and give us but infallible ground for our faith to believe that these they were and no alteration in the least then Sir we shall listen to your reasons From other men I have heard other arguments One I heard from a Learned Physician who had it from Bishop Sparrow in a Sermon and was much taken with the strength of it Suppose said he their own prayers were better than the prayers of the Church yet obedience is better than sacrifice Saul 's obedience had been more acceptable than the fat beasts he spared for sacrifice The strength of this argument let us see Here is a King commanded to give obedience to God immediately and that absolutely without any question Our case is we are called to give obedience to Superiours but creatures and that in such things which concern God immediately concerning which the Lord hath given us Commandments to which all Superiours are as strictly bound as that King was to Gods command Shall not we then first try whether Creatures commands agree with the Creators commands must not obedience to the Potter take place of obedience to the potsheard if not then Ephraim did well when he willingly obeyed the command of Jeroboam Hos 5.11 and Israel did well 2 King 17.8 in obeying the statutes of their Kings Whence in matters of God we are bound to try all things though the Commands be not sub codem gradu yet if we suspect them to be sub codem genere let us have leave to examine But in short were it not for God we could with as much ease give obedience to mens commands as you can But this instance is against the Bishop 2. If there be a Betterness and we deny to give it to God then give us leave to take heed of the curse Mal. 1.14 Another common saying is this All your conceived prayers are Forms to us Ergo these Forms are lawful Ans So is every mans Sermon a man may make one Sermon and in that comprehend all that is requisite to a mans Salvation but if a man should only read that Sermon every Lords day you would discern a difference between this Form and the Sermons you hear daily and think him worthy to be cast out of his Ministry All mens speeches are but Forms in your sense 2ly Therefore you do but Ludere Homonymia in the word Form In every effect there must be a Form though hard to find out But Prayers composed of Confessions Petitions c. in such syllables words sentences to which men are tyed up in the Worship of God this is the Form in question I grant by these your Prayers differ from others and so you make a formal difference So we can allow there will be Forms in every mans Prayer 3ly A man that improveth the gift which Christ hath given him resting upon the promise of the Spirit to help his Infirmities he doth as he ought Let his Prayers seem what they will to you they are not Forms according to the question he is not tyed up to syllables but hath his liberty to vary according to the subject-matter before him Occuring Providences and spirits assistance The Scripture grounds which have made me judg this unlawful are these 1. That Text Ephes 4 8 11 12. Christ when he ascended gave gifts unto men v. 8. and these men amongst others are Pastors and Teachers v. 11. the end of these gifts and officers For the perfecting of the Saints c. v. 12. True indeed these gifts differ very much in men So the 7th v. tells us But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ But though the measure differ yet so much is given to every Pastor and Teacher let him but be saithful in the improvement of it as shall serve the end Christ intended Thus Rom. 12.6 Having gifts c. I am sure among these gifts the gift of Prayer is one so requisite in a Minister and so common to all true Christians yea to Hypocrites But this practise renders Christs act but various and crosses him in what he did and doth in giving gifts for though he doth give them they must not use them nor improve them why then did he purchase them and give them it seems he gave gifts to one or two in a Nation composing of Prayers is not the work of a multitude to compose Prayers and these must be imposed on all the Ministers in a Nation with a stamp of Authority though Christ hath given gifts to all his Ministers and many of them as able and more able than are the Composers and Imposers but their gift must lye dormant they are tyed up to words It was a silly answer he gave They may use their gifts at home The Text confutes him 2ly That Command 2 Tim. 2.2 that Timothy look to it that those whom he admits into the Ministry be faithful men and able to teach others is any man so absurd to think that an ability to pray for others is not included remembring 1 Tim. 2.1 Act. 6.4 and a gift so common to all Christians But this crosseth the Command for though they be never so able to pray they shall not use their gift or ability but be tyed up to other mens words and syllables Why not before Sermons as before Sacraments give us a Text. But your own party think even those prayers are taken away or wish they were even before Sermon 3ly As Christ purchaseth and giveth gifts and requires gifts ability in those whom he calls to his work so no doubt but he will require an account of the use and improvement of those gifts That Ministerial gifts are comprehended in the Talents given forth Mat. 25.15 I think no understanding Divine will deny in the 19 v. he will reckon with them What account then shall we give for this when one Talent we neglected contenting our selves meerly with other mens words 4ly It renders the promise of the assistance of the Spirit in prayer Rom. 8.26 but vain in great
part The Spirit in prayer helpeth our Infirmities not only in the manner of our prayer but even in the matter of our prayer the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for so are the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Quid oremus this infirmity the Spirit helps but now you will spare the Spirit that trouble for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the things and words are all set down to a syllable Obj. The Fr. Deb. falsly so called for neither Author nor Book answer the title part 1. p. 88. tells us The Spirit of God doth not now suggest to any of us when we pray the very matter and words which we utter Ans 1. That the Spirit suggesteth All the words and matter I easily deny but that the Spirit doth help his people in the very matter of their prayers the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I must own it or give the lye to the Text. 2. Let me appeal to the experience of praying Christians Ministers and others when we have been called forth in our Ministerial work or at other times to pray that was the work lay before us when our hearts have been oppressed with some temptation our spirits quite down dead and flat the thoughts of our duty a terrour to us because we found no ability to it we could not tell what-to say unto the Lord we wanted words we wanted hearts we wanted every thing but to our work we must go we could not avoid it Well when we have been entred into our work have we not found a supply afforded our tongues untyed our hearts enlarged words and matter have come flowing in such sentences words and matter as were never in our minds before yet very apt and pertinent melting and warming that the best prayers ever we made have been at such times when we have gone most pressed with the sense of our own inability though it be not always so the Spirit is a free agent yet at these times whence could it come but from this good Spirit Shall he lose his glory 3. I thought that praying men use before-hand to pray for that good Spirit for a presence of Grace as to the spiritual manner of our work and a presence of assistance as to the matter of our work being conscious to our selves of the truth of the sayings of that great Apostle 2 Cor. 3.5 and 2.16 how the Spirit inspired the Prophets we enquire not but that he helpeth our Infirmities in our Duties shew me the sace of that Minister that feareth the Lord who will deny it and doth not feel the want of him Having these Scripture-grounds I go on to Arguments deduced also from Scripture 4. That practise which nourisheth Ministers in their laziness and sluggishness is certainly an unlawful practise But this practise of Composing and Imposing these Forms c. according to the question do so Ergo Ministers duty is to stir up the gifts of God which are in them 2 Tim. 1.6 but that duty now as to the gift of prayer is layed by The Fr. Debat tells us Part 1. pag. 124. That some of the Nonconformists are for Liturgy but they think it not convenient for men of their parts and gifts Truly Sir when our hearts are in any trim becoming the duty of prayer we find it a very great hindrance to be tyed up to the Forms of other men we cannot open our hearts nor spread before the Lord our desires in other mens conceptions we cannot work with their tools But when laziness despondency and unbelief prevail it is as convenient as may be for men of our sinful tempers I could tell you something of the experience of my own carnal heart as to this point but I find you are a person that jeer at the experiences of Christians and therefore let it alone 5. We are to pray for spiritual gifts 1 Cor. 14.1 I hope not only for extraordinary gifts Every good and perfect gift Jam. 1.17 tells us whence it comes Then for a gift of Preaching and a gift of Prayer But why should we pray for it if when the Lord hath given it we must not use it but be tyed up to other mens Forms 6. If you may impose Forms of Prayer then you may impose Forms of Preaching so leave us nothing but Forms of Prayer and Homilies to read as indeed they came in both together We have Forms of Preaching in the Scripture as you have of Prayer by what authority you take away one you may take away the other Your Humane reasons that I have met with as yet will as strongly argue for Forms of Preaching as of Prayer When this argument was urged in the Commencement-house the Respondent yielded it But Dr. Fern being then Moderator thought this was too gross and so denied the consequence Because in Prayer we spake to God but in preaching to men But the Doctors answer was invalid for in prayer we represent and are the mouth of a people of Infirmities we are but persons of Infirmities Here Infirmities are but like us the Lord expects no other from us Rom. 8.26 The Spirit helps our infirmities in prayer But in Preaching we speak from God we come in his Authority and require Faith and Obedience to what we preach therefore here we had need have a care what we speak for now we come with Thus saith the Lord. 7. Diversities of Gifts and Operations are the Spirits work and glory 1 Cor. 12.4.6 Diversities of Kinds and of Degrees in those kinds this diversity is seen in the gift of Prayer as well as in other gifts As to have in one Lords-day many thousands of Ministers confessing of sins petitioning for mercies pardon purging healing praying also for Kings c. they all aim at the same thing in their Prayers but the words sentences whereby they express the conceptions of their minds and desires of their hearts how various are they the same Spirit that gave this diversity of gifts assists them in the exercise of them And it is his glory which is taken away while these thousands of Ministers are tyed up to the same syllables in their Book This multi-form unity if I may so call it for here are various expressions different sentences yet all tend to one and the same thing hath better ground for it in Scripture than Vniformity in syllables 8. What want of wisdom care or grace yea want of all this with your Ceremonies charges upon the Apostles all men may see you pretend much wisdom and care of Gods worship in these things were the Apostles so defective in wisdom and care that they could not foresee the usefulness of these things in the Church and appoint them as well as you And that when there were the same reasons that you urge for them now in their time We are built upon the foundations of the Prophets and Apostles and take them to be as wise as any of their followers To conclude how honourable is this for the Ministry I will
the Rites of the Institution but doth much violate the second Commandment concerning shunning Idolatry To stand about the Lords-Table doth partake of the Rites and detracts nothing from the Institution But to partake sitting is the most convenient because by this neither are the rites of Institution violated nor doth it attract danger of superstition or Idolatry but this gesture is commended by the example of Christ himself in the first Institution and of the Apostles after the Institution Thus he with whom Maccovius agrees Before I go any further let me make use of one thing I meet with in the Fr. Debate part 2d pag. 397 399. this Author finding fault with us because we charge these Ceremonies as being additions to the word of God contrary to the command Deut. 12.32 yea Sir I own the argument he answers us These words saith he from the old separate Mr. Ainsworth you restrain to worship when as the Text speaks of the whole Law v. 1. Judicial as well but the Jews never thought that no particular Law might be made agreeable to the general Law And again p. 421. To save Christian Liberty saith he in matters of worship Gods Law hath only given us general rules whereby things are to be ordered in the Church according to which our Governours are to make particular Laws and we are to obey them I answer as to Mr. Ainsworth whatever were some of his private opinions his learning and piety command respect Whether the Judicial Law be there included I now list not to examine This you have affirmed 1. There are some general rules which the Lord hath prescribed in his word or general Laws 2ly Our Governours may make particular Laws 3ly But those particular Laws must be according to and agreeable with both which words you have used the general Law of God As when men cut little Creeks to bring water to a place they let in the water in the great River into these lesser Creeks * Pag. 61. Dr. Templer's similitude of gold being beaten out aims at this Now let Conformity stand or fall according to this saying of our adversary 1. Then produce you that general Law of God wherein he giveth liberty in general to ordinary Ministers in his Church to compose and impose their Forms of prayer upon all his other Ministers whom he hath given gifts sufficient for that office and tye them up to their Forms and syllables in their Administrations Upon this general Law your Church in England have made your particular Law and imposed your Forms The French Church have made their particular Laws and imposed their Forms The Dutch theirs and so on I pray Sir keep to the state of the question 2ly Produce the general Law where God hath given men that power to invent institute and adjoin Religious mystical Ceremonies to his worship Upon which general Law Rome makes her particular Laws and impose hers the Church of England makes her particular Laws and imposes hers the Lutherans make their particular Laws and impose theirs I hear but of few of other Protestant Churches that have such Ceremonies if any at all and without these God shall have no worship 3. For the third I know not whether this Author be of that mind that God hath left us only a general Law for the Government of the Church but appointed no particular Form of Government as the learned Dr. Stillingfleet hath asserted But for the two former we expect this Author to tell us where we shall find those two general Laws That common Evasion Though these things be not according to the word yet they are not contrary to the word will not serve the turn Yea this Author quite overthrows that distinction For he tell us Our Governours particular Laws must be according to and agreeable to the general Law of God A Law is a positive thing so are Governours particular Laws then so must the general Law be To say not contrary to the word what Law is this Non ens is no Law How can these particular Laws be said to be according to the Law and agreeable with the Law when no such Law can be found If the Law can be found then that distinction is but vain Though this Author hath said enough yet because this distinction is so common in their mouths I will but add a few Scriptures in which we shall find an injunction laid upon us that in matters concerning God our duty towards him we look that all things be according to his word The first Text is col 2.8 Beware lest any man spoil you through Philosophy and vain deceit according though we read after that makes no difference 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an Accusative Case secundum to the Traditions of men according to the rudiments of the world and not according to Christ Expositors differ about those words vain deceit I shall not trouble my self nor the Reader about them but by Traditions of men I see generally they understand those superstitious customs which have only mans authority for their institution such as the Pharisaical Traditions So Anselm c. but Baldwin Davenant Beza Gomarus Diodati apply them to the Popish worship What the rudiments of the world are Gal. 4.9 explains This is certain the troubles the Apostles met with in the Churches arose from these three heads Philosophy Superstitious Traditions and Moses Law Now all these are opposed to Christ if they were according to them and not according to Christ then they were contrary to Christ The second Text 1 Tim. 1.3 That they teach no other Doctrine upon which words Dr. Featly glosseth thus Timothy was to forbid any to preach not only Doctrine that was contrary but that which was beside that which the faithful had received from the Apostles And are not the things in question beside that the faithful received from the Apostles The third Text Mat. 28.20 Teaching them to observe what I have commanded you If he hath commanded these things you impose they shall be observed but not else Thus ran the Apostles Commission but we have found an art to interline the Commission and what is not expresly contrary to my command teach them to observe that also This interlining was under a hedg should an Ambassador thus interline his Commission it may cost him dear The Author of the Fr. Deb. here demands of us What command we have to take a Text and gloss upon it to pray before and after Sermon to sing Davids Psalms in English Meeter I see this Author will play at small games rather than stand out he will join with the Quakers for an argument 1st But Sir remember first your own words a general Law will help to serve our turn as to Prayer We have a command for it the time when left to our prudence We think when we are to preach the Word 't is a fit time now to confess sins to beg pardon for sins that they may not stand in the way
their admission were determined in the Scripture For their Ordination by imposition of hands this he proves out of Mr. Selden For their power and office he proves that Christ owned it Mat. 23.2 3. Though the Scripture had determined nothing about it Ans This Sir belongs to another question viz. Whether in the Jewish Church and if there then why not in the Christian Church Christ did approve of any Officers in the Church that were not of Gods but Humane appointment to preach his word Authoritatively this is a very considerable question but 't is not ours at this time so that this is not ad idem 2ly Yet as to the thing it self Imposition of hands upon men set apart to office was no Humane Invention that Sir you know it was Gods own appointment But whether all that taught in the Synagogues were first Officers 2. And those that had only mans authority for th eir Institution 3. And these had admission by Imposition of hands These are different questions and here we must have Scripture-light to convince us as for Mr. Selden we regard him not nor Scaliger whatever he saith of our ignorance which Quotation of yours out of him I observed well when I read him We are upon things that concern God Humane Quotations and so whatever you bring from Fathers and others I look on them as a Cypher as the Cypher may stand it signifies much and as it may stand it signifies nothing First give me a Scripture then give me Humane testimony suitable to it and it signifies much Yea if there be a Scripture not so clear and plain as some are yet may fairly carry such a sense and there be not another Scripture that doth plainly oppose that sense here the practise of the Churches next to the Apostles and so long since shall carry me into that sense Which I desire the Reader to consider and judg of my opinion because I shall make use of it afterwards but all mens opinions and Churches practises without a Scripture are but a Cypher before or without a figure to me they signifie nothing I know very well that Jews and Gentiles too have a nature that is cross to God in every Commandment our enmity will not let any command escape but even in his Instituted Worship where there is the least temptation there it will shew it self 't is not handsome enough as God appoints it unless we like Apes may dress it If Selden and Scaliger could have given us the practises of such a Church where this root of enmity was not then I should have listned to them very much But to the Argument 1. That all those who did teach in the Synagogues were Officers thus constituted as Mr. Selden tells us I suppose Mr. Falkner will not affirmit the example of our Lord Luk. 4.16 17 c. so of Paul Act. 13.15 16. shews the contrary Grotius we can believe for he speaks with the Scripture De Impor p. 374 saith he Notandum in synagogis Judaicis unicuique exercitato in sacris literis erant autem ferme omnes exceptis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pag. 375. qui mos hodie apud nos viget concessum fuisse sacras Literas Interpretari Afterwards he gives us the difference between the Interpreters of the Law in the Synagogue and of the Gospel in the Church In synagoga docebant quotquot 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 habebant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ecclesia probati quique honorem testimonio adopti ut Tertullianus loquitur i.e. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that according to him they were not Ordained The reasonof the difference he also giveth thus Not only because the Preaching of the Gospel is of more moment than the expounding of the Law but because in the Christian Church the Preachers of the word are likewise dispensers of the Sacraments but the Masters of the Synagogues administred no Sacraments no not Circumcision This is cross to Selden I shall yield to Grotius having Scripture on his side the other not All that teach in the Christian Church are Ordained not so in the Synagogue 2ly Weems exp Cer. Law 122. As to the Pharisees all the Pharisees were not Teaching-Pharisees not Porushim but Parushim Some were but Laick-Pharisees as we may call them saith VVeems Now since all of them were not Teachers and it is agreed by the Learned that many of the Priests and Levites were Pharisees and Gerhard proves from several verses here that these were such no private persons but persons in Office and he with Beza and Hammond ground this Text and Command of Christ upon Numb 11.16 they had Divine Institution 3ly Nor will we refuse to hear those who preach the Gospel soundly as if they expounded the Law truly Christ would have them heard though we judg their Ordination mixed with corruption or doubt whether they be rightly called their Ordination being questioned either because some are Ordained by such who as such are no Officers of Christ and others without Imposition of hands 4ly Dr. Lightfoot understands this Chair de Cathedra Legislativa and tells us that Christ here asserts the Authority of the Magistrates and exhorts to the obedience of them in lawful things And Grotius seems to incline this way and if so this is not to the purpose His second Instance is the habit of the Prophets a rough or hairy garment Ans But was this annexed and appropriated to Divine Worship or was it that garment they wore daily where ever they went so a Minister in his Gown and Cassock if you will make a civildistinction I like it very well but this touches not the question for the Garments in the Synagogal Assemblies out of Suetonius we little regard them if they were used for a Religious mystical signification which doth not appear and so reaches not the question if so you may tell us of the Fact but our question is de Jure His third Instance is from the decent gestures commanded and used in Nehem. 8. ch 9 Standing up c. Ans We like decent gestures very well and if that were all we will stand up at the reading of the Law of the Gospels and Epistles too we shall make no difference being all Divinely inspired Yea if that will content you and our health will bear it we will set uncovered too during the time of holy Worship which in these times is so much in practise and expected over it was in Queen Elizabeth's time though I do not like the ground of their uncovering but the 52 Injunction shews it was their allowance and custom in Sermon-time to sit covered else why do the Injunction require that at the naming of Jesus men should uncover their heads If they sate always uncovered how could they answer this His last Instance is their adding of Baptism or washing to Circumcision initiating their Proselytes Ans I have read indeed of such a practise taken up in the latter time of the Jews
in imitation of Johns Baptism but still Sir we want one thing and this God approved of how prove you that quo jure by what Divine warrant was it done If you intended to show us your reading that is one thing but if you intended to convince us you know this is not the way for you do but prove the Jews had as carnal hearts as we unless you can show us that what they did in Divine Worship was agreeable to that Rule which is the Law to them and to us by which we must all be judged Next Mr. Falkner comes to Natural Worship and shows their customs about an Oath which I shall take into consideration when I answer the Fr. Debate where I find an argument against us from hence His next the Rites as he calls them of Memorial Stones set up by Samuel Jacob Joshua Ans But how do these reach the question If they at London will erect a Monument that Posterity may know where that sore Judgment of God as Samuels was Mercy in the deflagration of the City began If Laban and Jacob will make a heap of stones in the place where they sware though it may be neither Laban or Jacob ever came to the place again to see these stones what are these to our question so that of Joshua what signification of an Oath is there in a stone lying on the ground they may remember that in this place Joshua made us swear The stone serves for a Witness that there was such a part of Worship there celebrated If Joshua had called men of other Nations to hear the Covenant and witness what they sware what would you make of those witnesses to force the question in hand The Stone was a witness on both sides Josh 24.27 for it hath heard all the words of the Lord which he spake unto us as well as of their engagement to God The Stone did not signifie the Oath His next Instance is in the use of sackcloth and ashes c. Ans But were these invented among the Jews and used by them only in a Religious way or were they common to others Heathens as well as Jews to show by a civil custom their submissions fear sorrow they were under lying low before their superiors or noting an afflicted state The servants of Benhadad come to Ahab with sackcloth on their loins 1 King 20.31 32. these were no Jews The King of Nineveh Jon. 3.8 cause men and beasts more than we read of among the Jews that I remember to be clothed with Sackcloth God threatens Moab with Sackcloth Jer. 48.37 The Prophet Joel in the name of God Joel 1.13 calls to the Priests to lye in Sackcloth Do but you show us as much for the questions in hand and we shall be satisfied When Tamar 2 Sam. 13.19 put ashes on her head was it upon a Religious account Who taught the Heathen King of Nineveh to sit in sackcloth and ashes Jon. 3.6 did the Church of the Jews and he obeyed them Still these conclude not the question As for the indifferency of the things which Mr. Falkner next mentions I shall leave that till I have considered his other Scripture-arguments for that I only regard He passeth on to the New Testament where I see Mr. Carre Dr. Stilling fleet Mr. Falkner and all of them agree in urging the Holy kiss the Love-feasts and Dr. Stillingfleet adds the Deaconess which are alterable Rites though Apostolical and layed by even by the Nonconformists But this still will not prove the question unless you will do it thus If we may detract from the word then we may add to the word both are forbidden but you detract from the word As indeed this is Omission the other is positive But I pray Sir do not you argue from our sin if we be guilty to justifie yours For if they be indeed of Apostolical Institution we will take them all up again For the Love-feasts that they were of Apostolical Institution especially as joined to the Lords-Supper I find nothing to perswade me to it Feasting was a civil custom for the maintaining of love long before any of the Apostles were born The Apostle finds them in use but 1 Cor. 11.22 34. he finds fault with them and takes them away from the Lords Supper Calvin and Beza both affirm the same If some Churches did retain them yet not all Just Mart. Apol. 2. giving us an account how they performed the worship of God on the Lords-day makes no mention of this though he doth of the Lords-Supper And for Feasting after Tertullian's fashion if we administer at noon time the poor Nonconformists use to have the poor of the Church to dine with them So that this reaches not me So for Kissing men kissing men and women kissing women which you say was meant by their kissing not men kissing women This also was a civil custom a thousand of years before any Apostle was born how then this should be called an Apostolical Constitution I cannot understand Our civil custom is to give the right-hand or the hand and signifies the same that kissing doth the Apostle modifies a civil custom of their own and we stand obliged to the same duty the Apostle intends in it even Love without Dissimulation For the Deaconess if it were indeed an office required in all Churches I think we have done ill to omit it If the Council of Laodicea Can. 11. did remove the Deaconesses as some think we regard no such Councils The Churches of Bohemia did keep up that Office as Comenius relates That it was an office properly so called I question The Deaconess was not ordained as were all Church-officers and that with Imposition of hands they who omit Imposition of hands let them answer it Danaeus saith Non tam fuit munus hoc publicum quam subsidium aliquod a Diaconis quaesitum she was a help to the Deacon in such thing as were not comely for a Deacon to meddle in if the Sisters of the Church were sick As to this point in Churches rightly constituted the Deacon takes so much care of the sick though poor that as to the Nurse Food and Physick there is no want this I know by good experience 2ly Danaeus thinks they were helpful at their Love-feasts to wash dress c. this end is easily answered they being removed The third was in the entertainment of strangers washing of feet as in those Countries was their custom but in our Countries where there is no such custom wearing shoos as we do and not so hot a Climate and here all are Christians nomine tenus that end and use is laid by The first use then only remains which is answered as I said before Dr. Stilling fleet he tells us dipping in Baptism is out of practise Ans It is but very lately then a Gentleman told me he well remembred the dipping of Infants the Common-Prayer-Book doth not lay it by but that leaves you to use it or sprinkling I
thus he said but would Paul have said so if he had been in a Consistory with the rest of the Apostles my friend made no reply but held down his head supposing thereby he might make the Prelate recall his words this answer was becoming an Archbishop and worthy of Laud To be sure he silenced my friend Only this Sir let me say they used the argument upon your Hypothesis that the things are indifferent but though we grant the things considered absolutely or abstractedly in their own nature are indifferent yet consider them in their use we look on them as sinful To examine all that learned Mr. Falkner hath written would be tedious and needless for I should yield to him in many things had not the state of the question been mistaken Briefly therefore I will consider the case the Apostle had before him and apply our case to it The Lord having in the old Law forbidden divers meats and commanded the observation of divers days when Christ the substance the body was come these shadows vanished Some Believers in Christ understood this they knew though once they were under a Law yet at this time they were indifferent and so they knew their liberty Others because the Law was so express the observation had been many hundred years the words for ever added to those Laws they could not yet understand what the stronger Christians did The Apostle guided by the Spirit of Christ chargeth these stronger Christians not to judg despise refuse or offend these weaker Christians but to receive them into their hearts into Church-fellowship and all Church communion and not perplex their minds with those doubtful disputations or reasonings but wait and bear tenderly with them till the Lord shall reveal that truth also unto them For our case the things in question are no necessary circumstances of Divine Worship as time place c. which are necessary attendants of Worship and Antecedaneous to any act of mans will but such as have their dependance upon mans pleasure only Hence you tell us you may change them when you please Those things fell under the command of God and so not these unless as forbidden by the general Law of God as those meats were by particular Laws For a man a creature to institute a Doctrinal Religious Ceremony to teach men their duty they owe to God ordain it as a mean to help stir up their minds to their duty and annex this to the worship of God yea so as there must be no Divine Worship unless this Ceremony be used it is such high boldness it doth so touch the Lords Prerogative and tacitely so charge him with defect of wisdom as if he had not appointed means sufficient to teach his Creature but we must supply his defect by adding to his word that let superstition speak never so smoothly as it always comes with some pious end in the mouth it is no other but wretched impiety not will we by the help of his Grace conform unto it You who tell us these things are indifferent are yet so far from answering the Duty that Christ commands by the Apostle in these Chapters i. e. to receive us not to judg us not to offend us that in opposition to the command you thrust us out of the Lords work you shut us out from the Sacraments you excommunicate us imprison us and do what in you lye to destroy us both soul and body As to what you say p. 410. quoting Mr. Thorndike with whom you agree It is not meant a bare displeasing of our Brother but doing such actions which tend to occasion some to fall from Christianity disgust Christian Religion for which you quote the 15. v. Destroy not him c. The first part in some sense I should yield but for the latter part which carries this sense that the destruction in the 15. v. was by making them to fall from Christianity as if there were no other way to destroy them but that I conceive humbly that your self with Mr. Thorndike are both mistaken For that weak Christian might be strongly convinced that Christian Religion was true though he could not as yet see the repealing of those Laws upon the reasons I gave before yet through the unkindness pride cruelty of the stronger Christians who would judg despise him and not receive him unless he would eat the forbidden meats as they did and through their example whom he saw to eat he might be put upon a temptation to eat such meats too not in faith but with a doubtful conscience and so doing he was condemned according to the last verse So their pride unkindness and example did help to destroy their brother as much as in them lay Hence in the first verse of the Chapter the Apostle charges them not to trouble such a one with doubtful disputations 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. * Non cumeo disputis de usu libertatis quam nondum potest intelligere quod plus anxietatis kaesitationis rudibus animis parit quà m utilitatis Vatabl. In the last verse he ends with He that doubteth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is damned so that he begins and ends with doubtfulness Now had the weak Christian fallen off from the Faith the weak Christian would not have eaten such meats doubtfully and so bring himself under the danger of condemnation for so doing for to be sure he would eat none of those meats which made him fall off from Christianity because he saw Christians eat them there was no danger of his damning for eating with a doubting conscience so that this implys that he who eats with doubting did yet hold his Christianity Thus have some by reason of that unkindness and severity in imposing these Laws upon us been put upon Subscriptions with a doubtful Conscience in their temptations and afterwards have met with that which hath stung them This is the charity of your Church towards your brethren Nor doth that you say p. 435. help it viz. That these different practises had a peculiar respect to those times only of the first dawning of Christianity for the Church afterwards in their Canons condemned all those who observed those Mosaical Laws For we are under the same condition with those Christians who dare not eat the meat then because they had been forbidden in the Law so nor dare we submit to your Humane Inventions in the Worship of God because they are forbidden in the general Law Thou shalt not add Deut. 12.32 They are not according to Christ Col. 2.8 Christ put no such things into the Apostles Commission to Preach Mat. 28. ult So that with a doubtful conscience at least we must practise them and what is next we know Nor doth your obedience to authority help here which so many are glad they have that starting hole to run into and your self so much urge Had these strong brethren in this Rom. 14. been Princes or Archbishops and they should have commanded the weak brethren
member and yet both he and that particular Church too may be guilty of Schism So that his definition is too strait I will give him more advantage and let him take it I shall then give a description of Schism and open it Then I will lay down several Propositions tending to the clearing of the Question who are the true Schismaticks Schism is a renting or dissolving that Vnion which Christ our Head requireth in his visible body To open it I shall be short 1st That Christ hath a Body Natural and Mystical or a body in a mystery which is to him as his natural body is known to all Christians Ephes 1.22 speaking of Christ He is the head over all to the Church v. 23. which is his body This Head and this Body make up one Christ mystical 1 Cor. 12.12 so is Christ 2ly This Body of Christ is but one two Bodies joined to one Head much more thousands were monstrous All the believers in all the particular Churches of the world make up but this one Body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ehes 4 4. one body So Rom. 12.4 5. 1 Cor. 12.12 so Revel 19. ch 21. one Bride one Wife 3ly This body hath its bands or ligaments whereby the body is tyed to the Head and the members one to another For those to the Head I omit the other concern me in this place how the members are tyed one to another Now these ligaments are first Internal secondly are External 1. Internal and they 1. The blessed Spirit of Christ Ephes 4.4 One body and one spirit so 1 Cor. 12.13 The second is love Col. 3.14 Eph. 5.16 2. The External bands are the Sacraments or Seals of the New Covenant whether Government be any thing I shall touch afterwards But for the Sacraments they are the bands of this visible body they belong only to the members of this body one Baptism Ephes 4.5 belong only to that one body v. 4. 1 Cor. 11.17 We being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread Hence Excommunication in which men are cut off the Body and rendered durante hoc statu as Heathens and Publicans not visible members of Christ is by casting them out of Communion with their Body in these Ordinances In these Ordinances the visible members of the body declare that unity and internal band of love one to another Panis igitur fractio est unitatis dilectionis symbolum Virtute hujus Sacramenti con a lescimus in unum corpus invicem cum Christo Par. in loc Paraeus in loc who quotes Chrysostom and the practise of the old Christian Churches how Christians in this Ordinance did manifest their unity and love A Christians love I speak to the business in hand is twofold 1. There is a Christian love common to all 2. There is a Christian Ecclesiastical love proper to some as for Christian love I am bound to manifest that to the bodies and souls of all though Heathens I will pray with Heathens a silly thing to turn Excommunicated persons from Prayer which is Natural Worship I will Preach to Heathens I will exhort reprove encourage Heathens privately to comfort a Heathen as a Christian I cannot else I call not to mind what effects of love I manifest to a Christian but I will to a Heathen But for Christian Ecclesiastical love manifested by Communion in these Symbols or signs I will not manifest that to one Heathen only to the members of this visible body being one with them As for Episcopal Government which Dr. Goodman and this late Commencer adds First I would thank either of them if they would give us a stout piece against Erastus and his followers 2ly If by Episcopal Government they mean such as now is among us let them first prove it is of Divine Institution which all the Commencers in Cambridg or Oxford shall never be able to do so long as there is a Bible and if they cannot do that then where is the schism It 's rather our duty to separate from what is not of Christs planting in his house 3ly But let the Government be of Christs Institution yet wherein doth that Government shew it self among other things in letting in or casting out of this body by admitting or casting out from these Ordinances of the Sacraments but that refusing or separation from such Episcopal-Government meerly as Episcopal should be Mortale schisma this is but the figment of the delirant-brain of a Prelatical Zealot 2ly This Schism is in the visible body of Christ I hear there are schisms among you 1 Cor. 11.8 the house of Cloe 1 Cor. 1.11 saw them who informed Paul Schism it seems comes under the senses then it must be in the visible body when this body visibly met together By the visible body of Christ I understand all that make profession of their Faith in the Lord Jesus and the Doctrine of the Gospel soundly and do in their conversation visibly walk according to his Rules in his Gospel so that their conversation do not openly beâ—ly and deny their profession Tit. 1.16 That the one body of Christ mentioned 1 Cor. 12.12 in which there ought to be no schism v. 25. is meant the visible body of Christ I think none will deny So Rom. 12. Ephes 4. 1. It is such a body in which the Lord had set Apostles Evangelists 1 Cor. 12.18 Ephes 4.11 such a body to which extraordinary gifts were given But these were Apostles not to one particular Church but the Catholick Church visible 2. One member is to suffer or rejoice with another 1 Cor. 12.26 Ay if it be a member and real member of our particular Church of Corinth but for other Churches and unless we are sure they are invisible members let them go Is this the meaning 3. Are we baptized into a particular or the Catholick Church 1 Cor. 12.13 and Baptism belongs to the visible Church Other things I might mention but I think it will not be denied 3ly When then that union our Lord and Head requireth in this his visible body is rent dissolved when Communion is denied among the members of it contrary to his appointment Now Schism appears when the internal band Love is broken there is something of the nature the root of the sin is in it but that is hid Men can hypocritically and vilely meet together and hold communion in that Ordinance which holds forth unity and love and have their hearts wretchedly divided one from another this may be hid as I said But Schism properly so called is when the external band is broken when communion in those symbols or signs is denied on one side or refused on the other side without warrant from Christ so that the members do not meet and hold their communion as they ought but split into several pieces opposite one to another as if they were not members of that one body Now Schism is apparent
Therefore one Prelate but of ordinary mission commission and qualification that never converted one Church may be not one person in truth shall have power over many Elders and Congregations where he never Preached over so many that if he Preached every Lords-day he could not preach once in a year to them yea so many that if he Preached every day in the year he could not preach once in a year to them some Diocesses are so large This consequent from such an Antecedent my dull Intellect cannot reach I deny the Consequence What might be said I foresee and would have prevented it but I am in a Postscript and so can only touch things as I pass Arguments he fetches from three Topicks to prove the superiority of one single person over other Elders 1. From Reason p. 23. Though the Vniversal Church be built upon a Rock yet particular Churches are subject to Dilapidations c. Ergo. A. In matters belonging to the House of God I thought the will of him that built the House and is Lord over it should first have been consulted His will hath reason in it we are sure but for our reasons they will put no end to the debate for one thinks his reason is as good as another Quot capita tot sententiae It is Instituted worship we are upon depending upon the positive command of the Law giver But however I deny your consequence And that 1st Mr. Baxter Church-History gives sufficient proof From the woful experience the Church hath found of your Repairers these having been as great causes of the Dilapidations as any other That Bishops have been both great Schismaticks and Hereticks Bellarmine will tell you What woful work these have made in the Church of England in our time we do still remember but I will spare names let them alone in their graves Musculus not an English Nonconformist from the experience the Church had found of the mischiefs it suffered by these Repairers Musc loc Commun p. 195. sound out to prevent and heal Schism as Hierom tells us saith Had Hierom lived to these days to see how this counsel of setting up the Bishop above the Presbyter hath profited the Church he would have acknowledged it was not the counsel of the Holy Ghost to take away Schism as was pretended but the counsel of the Devil c. Thus he with much more he adds 2ly There are other means to repair without such Prelacy as experience hath proved in several Churches where Heresie and Schism have either been kept out or healed when crept in Profaneness suppressed better than ever it was in England by Prelacy 3ly That one Prelate is as subject to corruption in Doctrine and conversation as other Ministers and who shall repair him the Presbyters being inferior to him they must not be so sawcy that kind of Creature whom you call the Metropolitan is as subject to corruption as the other Prelate As to the proof you give p. 26 27. There is a greater probability of an union of judgments when all within a certain precinct lye under an obligation to be determined by the reason of one c. A. I thank you for this saith the now Pope Innocent this helps to strengthen my old worm-eaten Chair weak in the joints and ready to crack Heresie and Schism must be avoided in the Vniversal Church as well as in the Church in your Precinct but if the Bishops in your several Precincts differ in their Judgments about Heresie and Schism as they have done and will do now what more probable way for union of Judgments than to have them lye under an obligation to be determined by the reason of one and who should that one be but my self this is but the same reason that Bellarmine hath given for Pontifex Maximus 2ly In one Diocess are some hundreds of Elders all having the power of Jurisdiction ex aquo from Christ as the Learned Dr. Stillingfleet hath proved but however if this Doctor deny it among these there may be many as godly men of as solid reason and judgment as is this one Prelate yea it may be excel him in all and in years his Elder too yet all these must have their reasons and judgments subject to the determination of the reason of that one Prelate I shall not applaud him for a man of an accuminated Intellect that shall assert such an irrational Proposition 2. His second Topick is Gods Declaration for the perpetuity of Apostolical Government which was over other Elders and Congregations p. 28. Yea Sir this is of moment if you can carry it First Text Mat. 28.20 Teach baptize instruct all Nations to observe whatsoever was commanded them I pray add this And he commanded them to teach That one Prelate while the Church stands should have superior power over other Elders and Congregations then you do something Because you mention commands for Government name two or three Texts to stop the mouths of these Erastians But to the Text. It is not for nothing that our Lord while he mention Teaching Baptizing and under this the Lords Supper yet saith nothing of Government Surely he had a reason for it 2. I yield from the Apostles and other Elders Government recorded in the Scripture that Government belongs to the Eldership with the Erastians leave but from hence to infer that because the Apostles did exercise power over other Elders Ergo now one Prelate over other Elders I shall deny the Consequence For 1. you tell us p. 25. It 's true the Vnction whereby they were qualified for it was not of the vulgar composition But say I the Unction these Prelates have is but of the vulgar composition Hence to argue from extraordinary to ordinary is a kind of fallacy a kin to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They that exercise Government over other Governours as all Elders are had need be in Wisdom Learning Holiness and fitness for Government as Saul among his brethren higher by head and shoulders so were the Apostles and Evangelists above those Elders over whom they exercised Authority We find no such things amongst the men of the vulgar Vnction 2. Those Elders as well as the people were the Aposties Converts these being but newly brought home to the Faith well may their Fathers have power over them and cause enough to visit them the case is not so here 3ly When the Apostles come to deal with the ordinary Elders there is no intimation left of any such power of one Prelate over the rest You tell us p. 45. that Timothy was Ordained Bishop of Ephesus about the 13th year of Claudius I hope you will not force it from 1 Tim. 1.3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus He must have an illuminated Intellect indeed who can force the ordination of a Bishop out of these words Besides certainly had he been Bishop there Paul need not have besought him to be resident there but however sure I am he must be