that one Bishop should have so many Cities underneath him Unto whom I answered That I could no farther go than to St. Paul's text which set in every City a Bishop Then asked he me If I thought it now unright seeing the Ordinance of the Church that one Bishop should have so many Cities I answered That I knew none Ordinance of the Church as concerning this thing but St. Paul's saying only Nevertheless I did see a contrary custom and practise in the world but I know not the Original thereof Then said he That in the Apostles time there were divers Cities some seven miles some six miles long and over them was there set but one Bishop and of their Suburbs also so likewise now a Bishop hath also but One City to his Cathedral Church and the Countrey about it as Suburbs unto it Methought this was far-fetcht but I durst not deny it because it was so great Authority and of so holy a Father and of so great a Divine But this I dare say that his Holiness could never prove it by Scripture nor yet by any Authority of Doctors nor yet by any practise of the Apostles and yet it must be true because a Pillar of the Church hath spoken it But let us see what the Doctors say to mine Article Athanasius doth declare this Text of the Apostle I have left thee behind c. He would not commit unto one Bishop a whole Ylde but he did injoyn that every City should have his proper Pastor supposing that by this means they should more diligently oversee the people and also that the labour should be more easie to bear c. Also Chrysostome on that same Text He would not that a whole Countrey should be permitted unto one man but he enjoined to every man his Cure by that means he knew that his labour should be more easie and the subjects should be with more diligence govern'd if the Teachers were not distract with the governing of many Churches but had cure and charge of one Church only c. Methinks these be plain words and able to move a man to speak as much as I did But grant that you may have all these Cities yet can you make it none Heresie For my Lord Cardinal granted that it was but against him and against you which be no Gods But I poor man must be an Heretick there is no remedy You will have it so and who is able to say nay Not all Scripture nor yet God himself By this time the Reader cannot but be well satisfied that the great thing aim'd at by the first great Lights England had in Henry the 8ths days as a most effectual way to carry on a Reformation was the reducing the Popish Hierarchy to an Apostolical Presbytery The Presbyterian Discipline that is The Government of Gospel-Churches by Presbyters and Deacons being of Divine Institution is most admirably suited to the designed End of promoting the Glory of God the Power of Religion c. A Discipline the truth of which hath been sealed by the blood of blessed Protestant Martyrs a thing in which our Episcoparians cannot make theâ—r boast Moreover 't is manifest that this was not only the apprehension of Tindall Barnes and Lambert but that all the Clergy in Henry the 8ths time denied a Diocesan Episcopacy to be of Divine Institution asserting that in the New Testament there is no mention made but of Deacons or Ministers and Priests or Bishops This is in a Paper sign'd by Cromwell and many others Yea and in the necessary Erudition of a Christian man as is acknowledged by the Judicious Dr. Burnet who in his Addenda to the first part of the Reformation doth say That both in this Writing and in the necessary Erudition of a Christian man Bishops and Priests are spoken of as one and the same Office Though I must confess that the Dr. doth differ from those Divines and although he gives us not satisfaction in his Reply yet he speaks more ingenuously and more to the purpose than either this Gentleman or Dr. Stillingfleet himself 4. The old Nonconformists in Queen Elizabeths days agreeing with those worthy Martyrs Tyndall Lambert and Barnes concerning the most effectual way of carrying on the Reformation applied themselves seriously to the Work The Viciousness of some of the Clergy in Queen Elizabeths days was as grievous unto the Nonconformist as unto those glorious Martyrs a Reformation in Manners and in order thereunto in Church-Discipline was what they aim'd at 'T is very evident That a further Reformation than was carried on by Queen Elezabeth was very desirable for in some respects she carried it not so far as King Edward himself had done ' For Queen Elizabeth as Dr. Burnet most admirably expresseth it though she had been bred up from her Infancy with a Hatred to the Papacy and a Love to the Reformation yet as her first Impressions in her Fathers Reign were in favour of such old Rites as he had still retained so in her nature she loved State and some Magnificence in Religion as well as in every thing else She thought that in her Brothers Reign they had stript it too much of external Ornaments and had made their Doctrine too narrow in some Points Therefore she intended to have some things explain'd in more general Terms that so all Parties might be comprehended by them She inclin'd to keep up Images in Churches and to have the manner of Christ's Presence in the Sacrament left in some general words that those who believe a Corporal Presence might not be driven away from the Church by too nice an explanation of it History of Reform part 2. l. 3. As to this last Particular the Rubrick that explain'd the Reason for the kneeling at the Sacrament That thereby no Adoration is intended to any corporal presence of Christs flesh and blood because that is only in Heaven which had been in King Edwards Liturgy is left out and kneeling at the Sacrament to many a Protestant much more offensive than formerly The great Propension in Queen Elizabeth's days to gain over the Popish party to her Communion by those Alterations made in the Liturgy in favour of the Papist the ordering the Sacramental Bread to be made round in the fashion of the Wafers used in the time of Queen Mary the requiring the Table to be placed where the Altar stood c. was attended with the Conformity of many who were cordially affected to the Interest of the Church of Rome at which time there was not a sufficient number of learned men to supply the Cures which filled the Church as Heylin saith with an Ignorant and Illiterate Clergy whose learning went no further than the Liturgy or Book of Homilies though otherwise conformable unto the Rules of the Church The Old Nonconformists still desiring a further Reformation than was carried on in King Edwards days but â—â—â—â—ing rather a turning toward Rome could not but be greatly grieved They in their places
Prayer or the present Liturgy Ceremonies and Administration of Religious Offices 't is his own Comment and he is not obliged to confute it Yet thus much I will say on his behalf that upon my knowledg he is in his judgment for a Form of Prayer in Publique-Offices and Administrations and hath a very hearty esteem for that of our Church but I cannot say so of the Ceremonies I think he might be easily perswaded to part with them and if some exceptionable passages in the Liturgy and Rubricks were altered I believe he would make no opposition to it But he charges this admirable Conformist as he is pleased to call him with giving away at once the Episcopal Office and instead of it sets up a Bishop in every Parish and either an Antichristian Bishop of Bishops or an Ecclesiastical Minister of State to govern them How little there is of truth in this charge may be collected from what I have said already The Conformist sets up no more Bishops than the necessities of the Church and the duty and work of the Episcopal-Office requires and I understand not that this is giving away the Episcopal Office And if this Author can free Metropolitan Bishops from Antichristianism which he says some do derive from the very days of the Apostles and that not without some good appearance of Reason I hope the Conformist will defend the Episcopi Episcoporum from that appellation As to what he says of an Ecclesiastical Minister of State the Conformist hath no more to reply than this He hopes this Gentleman will not plead an Exemption for the Clergy from under the Civil Magistrates Power and Government and if this be granted I know not what can be matter of Controversie between him and this Author For he supposes him to exercise no Power over the Bishops but what is inherent in the King and in this Minister of State by Delegation that is in few words to see that they do their own Duty carefully reprove their Negligence and Male-administrations and preserve peace among them And what is there in this Doctrine that our Author should take such offence at I am yet to seek He addes And alters the whole frame of our Worship leaves every man to do as he lists and all this without injury to our present Constitution In these Lines to speak plainly there is not one word of truth as any man may easily collect from what I have said already And this Gentleman himself confesses in the next page That the Conformist will not indeed allow of universal Toleration How this can be reconciled with Leaving all men to do as they list I am not able to tell That the Conformist said That those that hinder the Union of Presbyterians with the Church of England by continuing the Impositions are Factors for the Pope I do easily acknowledg and I believe he is still of the same minde and as I remember he gave some Reasons for it too which this Gentleman takes no notice of When he confutes them perhaps he may hear of a Vindication if there be just reason for it Pag. the 8th he proceeds thus He i.e. the Conform pleads for the Indulgence of others particularly the Independents who he says will be content with their own Congregations and is mightily taken with Mr. Humfreys Project That the tolerated Churches such as Independents be declared parts of the National Church whereof the King to be the Head The Countrey-Conformist is so great a Lover of Peace that I do easily suppose he might be pleased with Mr. H's Project as he calls it and I do assure him that I my self am much more pleased with it since I read his Book than I was before though I had always a value for it For I think the Design of uniting the Dissenting Protestants in this Nation is into one National Church whereof the King to be the Head more laudable than the design of uniting Protestants in a General Council or in a Pope Primate or Metropolitan which seems to be the design of our Author though he hath not Courage or Instruction enough as yet to speak it out For he affirms 1. That the Episcopal Office and Power is but one and not resident in the Bishops of the Universal Church p. 212. 2. That the Independency of Bishops is inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity p. 115. And 3. that although equals have no Authority over one the other yet a Collegue hath Authority over any one of his Collegues p. 213. 4. That the Bonds and Combinations of Churches are of Divine Right though the ordering and determination of them be of Humane Prudence p. 258. 5. That the Unity of the Church is as much of Divine Right as any Form of Government in it and that the whole Church may be divided into greater or lesser parts as may best serve the ends of Peace and Unity And that it seems strange to him that a National or Patriarchal Church should not be thought as much a Divine Institution as any particular Church p. 259. And further he adds When Christ and his Apostles have instituted one Form of Government for all particular Churches and commanded them all to live in Unity Peace Communion and amicable Correspondency with each other the Union and Combination of Churches into one according to this Institution to serve the ends of Catholick Communion must be thought as much a Divine Institution as the bounds of particular Churches For if we will not allow those Churches to be of Divine Institution which have Officers of Divine Appointment and are formed according to the general Directions of Christ and his Apostles so as may serve the ends of Church-Government I know not where to find a Church of Divine Institution in the world pag. 259 260. These are the words of our Author from whence we may collect many things for our Information 1. That the Bishops of the Catholique Church are the regent part thereof in the same sense that the Bishops of any National Church are the regent part of that Church For although there be no Superiority among Bishops their Power and Office being the same yet Independency among them being inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity both in the National and in the Universal Church they are bound to unite for the Government of both and this by Divine Command Authority and Obligation 2. That whatsoever is determined by the Bishops of the Catholick Church doth oblige all particular Bishops and all Christians all the world over provided they determine nothing contrary to the Word of God 3. That whatever Bishop shall refuse their Canons and Determinations and govern his particular Church by other Laws than they shall appoint is a Schismatick and they may Depose and Excommunicate him yea if a whole combination of Bishops do refuse to govern their National Church by their Laws Appointments and Constitutions they are all Schismaticks and if the Nation refuse to forsake such Bishops they are all Schismaticks
In contradiction to which the Dean's Substitute's Assertion is p. 226. That Excommunication casts a man out of the visible Society of Christ's Church not of this or that particular Church only but of the Whole Christian Church He that is cast out of one Church is thereby cast out of all and separated from the Body of Christ which is but One. And therefore such are out of a state of Salvation As if it had been said in opposition to Mr. Hooker Such as are Excommunicate are shut out clean from the Visible Church yea and from the Mystical Church A Notion that Mr. Hooker considers as held by none but Papists for he immediatly addresseth himself to the Church of Rome thus With what congruity then saith he doth the Church of Rome deny that her enemies whom she holds always for Hereticks do at all appertain to the Church of Christ How exclude they us from being any part of the Church of Christ under the colour and pretence of Heresie when they cannot but grant it possible even for him i. e. the Pope to be as touching his own personal perswasion Heretical who in their opinion not only is of the Church but holdeth the chief place of Authority over the same The like may be said by way of Answer unto our Author Moreover the Learned and Judicious Dr. Field Son of the Church is as full in contradicting what is asserted by our Author For this Dr. of the Church discoursing about the Schismatick says lib. 1. c. 13. That their departure is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remain parts of the Church of God Schismaticks notwithstanding their Separation remain still conjoyn'd with the rest of God's people in respect of the profession of the whole saving Truth of God all outward acts of Religion and Divine Worship Power of Order and Holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remain parts of the Church of God The like is asserted of such as are cast out by Excommunication c. 15. But I 'll not enlarge any further having sufficiently evinc'd that the Opinions of this man who treats the Dissenters with so much scorn and contempt are such as were antiently by Queen Elizabeths Protestants exploded as Popish and at this very time I verily believe rejected by the greatest part of the Episcopal Clergy and that the Contest now is not so much between Dissenters and the Church of England as between a few under the name of the Church of England on the one part and the greater number of the Church of England with the Dissenter on the other The former under the notion of running down Dissenters are preparing materials to meet the Papist The other to the end they may the more effectually prevent the Designs of Rome have sent forth their Plea for the Nonconformist finding themselves concern'd to check the Insolence of those who in this day of common Calamity would ruine the conscientious Protestant Dissenter This being so I must beseech the Reader not to misapprehend me in what follows as if I had been speaking reproachfully of the Church of England because I cannot but discover how agreeable the Sentunents of the Deans Substitute about Church-Government are unto those embrac'd by the French Papist That I may the more clearly shew what are the mischievous Tendencies of our Author's Notion about Church-Government I will give in short the most distinct and truest state of the Controversie I can shewing what is granted by sound Protestants and what not What are the Doctrines of the Papists How far the French and Italian Papist agree and wherein they differ and in what respects the Dean's Substitute concurs with the French § 1. All are so far agreed as to conclude That God hath had a Church at all times in every Age of the World We might be very particular in considering the divers Denominations under which the Church falls answerable to the divers capacities of the Members thereof and the divers states in which it is and hath been which I shall at this time pass by § 2. That the Church is but One one Body united to one Head § 3. That this One Church must be considered as the Members thereof are scattered up and down the World c. and as they are joyned together in particular Societies The former is call'd the Church Universal the other a Particular Church The Papists themselves do acknowledge That the Church must be considered as Universal and as Particular though they look'd on the Universal to be such whose whole existence was in Particulars as Universale est unum in multis singularibus Whence it follows That such as are not members of a Particular Church they belong not unto the Catholick Visible Church This very Notion hath been embrac'd by some to wit the Old Independents but of late it hath been generally exploded by Divines of that name they leaving it to entertain such as the Dean's Substitute § 4. That the Church of Christ is under Government There is such a thing as Church-Government Jure divino The Papists both French and Italian The Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational or Anabaptist heartily agree in Thesi about this § 5. The great difference is concerning what that Church-Government is which is of Divine Institution Where 't is seated whether in a Particular or in the Universal Church and whether it be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical or mixt § 6. The Papists with whom the Doctor 's Substitute doth agree assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government That all Church-Officers belong to the Universal Church and have an Original Right to govern the whole Universal Church Take the notion as found in the Defence We must saith he consider that all the Apostles had relation to the whole Church and therefore though being finite creatures they could not be every where at a time but betook themselves to different places and planted Churches in several Countreys and did more peculiarly apply themselves to the government of those Churches which they themselves had planted and ordained Bishops to succeed them in their care and charge yet their Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church did still remain which they might re-assume when they saw occasion for it and which did oblige them to take care as far as possibly they could that the Church of Christ suffer'd no injury by the heresie or evil practises of any of their Colleagues P. 212. § 7. The Protestants excepting some obscure Writers assert particular Churches to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government among whom there are these differences 1. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from the Congregational and Anabaptistical about the extent of particular Churches e. g. the latter concluding that their number must be no more than are capable of personal communion the former contrarily judg That a company of a greater extent may be
concerning the constitutive Regent part of a National church whose existence must be acknowledged if a National church as such be a Governed church or a Body Politick but yet this cannot be found out For which reason they distinguish between a Governed Society and a Body Politick between a Governing and a Regent part and assert That the National church is a Govern'd Society but not a Body Politick that it hath a Governing but not a Regent part the like of an Universal church This is the true state of our Author's Judgment wherein we have an admirable account of the Gentleman 's acute distinguishing the excellency of which I 'll leave to the entertainment of his Admirers and if he please consider the Notion according to his own stating it that is to gratifie him I won't insist on the word Policy nor Regent nor constitutive Regent part but only on government Governours and Governed and so our Enquiry being about the Government of the Universal Church we must consider what is necessary thereunto and see whether what our Author asserts be agreeable unto such a constitution for if not so 't is far from Truth To consider what it is that is necessary to the constitution of any Governed Body that is what is so necessary that the absence thereof is destructive to the Constitution To this I Answer That a Governing and a Governed part is so necessary unto Goverement that where either one of these be absent there can be no Government A Governed Body cannot be without a Governing part neither can this be without a part Governed Government doth necessarily infer both these remove either one the Government is destroyed Government is a Relation resulting from that mutual respect the Governing and Governed parts have to each other whence as Sublato uno Relatorum tollitur alterum and where there is nor Subject nor Term i. e. nor Relate nor Correlate there can be no Relation Remove the Governing part from the Universal or National Church and the Government ceases Paternity may be where there is no Father assoon as Government without a Governing part Whence I infer That where there is a Fixed Government there must be a fixed Governing part This premised Let us next enquire whether or no what our Author asserts be suitable to this undoubted Rule Doth he shew us such a Governing part The Government is a constant fixed Government but where is the constant fixed Governing part 'T is a General Council saith he i. e. the universal Bishops in their Colledge assembled But is this a fixed Governing part Is it not evident to an ordinary capacity that the assembling such a Council of all the Bishops in the World is a difficulty insuperable and that without such an Assembly 't is impossible they should by joynt consent govern the Universal Church The astembling of the Catholick Bishops is as easie as the gathering together their consent per literas format as and much more conducive to the desired End because when assembled they can debate the matters before 'em and with the greater judgment give their determinations But 't is well known that had such an Assembly been possible yet the Church of God for the first 300 years had no such Assembly excepting that in the Apostles days i. e. it had no such Governing part which is as if it had been said There was no Government in the Universal Church the first 300 years To gratifie our Author Let us suppose that the Universal Church is as such a Governed Society and that it hath its Governours But though this be so yet it must be still acknowedged that a Governour cannot be without Power to Govern I would therefore beseech my Author to shew me What is that Power with which this Colledge of Bishops are invested Is it Legislative only or also Executive Whether the one or the other is it in the Colledge Subjectively and Formally or only in 'em as in fine seu regulante or supplente or How 'T would be necessary that our Author consult the Parisian Doctors if he will speak to the purpose when he espouses their Notion Let our Author assert as it pleaseth him at an adventure it matters not for his Notion is such as necessarily directs us to conclude what he must if he will be consistent with himself assert and that is this All Church-Government is Universal and as such it must be exercised no one being a Governour in the Church but he that is a Catholick Officer That the due course of exercising this Power is when it flows originally from the Head unto all its Members That it flows from the Invisible or rather unseen Head in Heaven immediately unto the visible Head on Earth is granted by all those who assert an Universal Church-Government though there is a Dispute among the Papists whether this Head be the Council or the Pope As it flows immediately from Christ to the visible Head so it proceeds from this visible Head unto the Patriarchs from thence to the Metropolitans from thence to the Diocesans For which Reason if any are injur'd by their Diocesan they may Appeal to their Metropolitan from thence to their Patriarch from thence to the Pope or Council This our Author must hold That there may be no wrong done the Little Ones of Christ if any be grieved by One he may Appeal unto an Higher till he comes unto the Highest Power on Earth from whence if he find not relief he must acquiesce leaving the whole to him who is in Heaven But if there be no constant visible Head actually existing where shall the grieved lodge his last Appeal The Dean's Substitute supposes an equality of Power in Patriarchs Metropolitans and Diocesans whence if his Diocesan doth abuse his Power he is not accountable to any Metropolitan nor Patriarch but only unto the Catholick Colledge The which being so 't will follow That Executive Power must be lodg'd in some Supreme Head Subjectively who can receive Appeals I say Subjectively or Formally and not only Virtually for 't is an Executive Power only that can relieve in this case which cannot Actually be where 't is only Virtually For which Reason 't is evident that according to our Author there must be a fixed Governing part invested with an Executive Power from whom relief is to be expected if at any time the Diocesan doth abuse his Power which Governing part must be either a Colledge of Bishops or one single Person And if the obtaining the former be as indeed 't is impossible the acknowledging the latter is necessary Thus we see how fairly this Gentleman at length leads us to Rome or some other Pope as the only necessary way of governing the Church In doing which he doth but carry on the Project of which Sir Francis Winnington takes notice at the Trial of the Lord Stafford when he assured the Lords That as an encouragement to the POPISH PLOTTERS there did appear in some men too easie
of Divine Worship did it by the Aid of the Holy Ghost 'T is true this expression could not escape the censure of such as were Popishly affected they thinking it too much that it was said the Book was drawn by the aid of the Holy Ghost as if the import of those expressions had been nothing less than that those persons concern'd in the drawing it up had been extraordinarily inspir'd But 't was well answer'd by such as said That it must not be so understood that 't was only to be taken in that sense as all good motions and consultations are directed or assisted by the secret influences of Gods H. Spirit which doth often help good men even in their imperfect actions where the good that is done is justly ascrib'd to the grace of God For this consult that truly Judicious and Deserving Dr. Burnet in his History of the Reformation Part 2. lib. 1. p. 94. The same that is said of this expression when applied to the first Composers of the Divine Service may be said of such as are assisted in free prayer by the secret Influences of the Holy Spirit Moreover 2. The Clergy at their Ordinination were to receive the Holy Ghost In King Edward's days whenever a Bishop or Priest was Ordained 't was said Receive thou the Holy Ghost in the Name of the Father c. But to what purpose if not to aid and assist them in the discharge of their Ministerial Function viz. in Prayer in Preaching in giving private Admenitions and Exhortations c. Hence I argue The Spirit accordingly is given them or not If not no wonder they reproach its work and gracious Influences to say no more But if they do at their Ordination receive a plentiful portion of the Spirit how can they talk so much against the Assistances thereof vouchsafed to others What is it confin'd unto the Clergy only or unto the Episcopal Clergy that none without canting must mention One word of the Spirit But 3. 'T is surprizing that any of our Clergy should speak any thing against the secret motions of Gods Spirit for surely such of them as are just and true and faithful to God and their own souls have actually felt so much of the Internal workings of the Holy Ghost on their souls that they were thereby quickned and moved to enter on the work of the Ministry Thus 't is with them or at least they are conscientiously perswaded of as much and can such as have felt the power of the Holy Ghost on their own hearts speak evil of the Assistance it affords unto others That the honest among the Episcopal Clergy are such as know what 't is to be moved by the Holy Spirit as they themselves trust is evident from the answer they give to the question propos'd to them when they are presented to Orders which is Do you trust that you are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon you this Office and Ministration to serve God for the promoting his glory and for the edifying his people To which the answer is He trusts he is It may be some may inquire How comes it to pass then that so many of the Clergy thus ordained do not only neglect their own work but by their uncomely discourses reflect on this very spirit To this no other answer but that of the Learned and Pious Dr. Burnet shall be given who in his Hist of the Reformation Par. 2. l. p. 145. thus expresseth himself It has been oft lamented that many come to receive Orders before they have seriously read over these Questions and examined themselves whether they could with a good conscience make the Answers there prescribed since it is scarce credible that men of common honesty would lye in the presence of God on so great an occasion and yet 't is too visible that many have not any such inward vocation nor have ever considered seriously what it is If it were well apprehended that heat that many have to get into Orders would soon abate who perhaps have nothing in their eye but some place of Profit or Benefice to which way must be made by that preceding Ceremony and so enter into Orders as others are associated into Fraternities and Corporations with little previous sense of that Holy Character they are to receive when they thus dedicate their Lives and Labours to the Service of God in the Gospel In the Primitive Church the apprehersion of this made even good and holy men afraid to enter under such bonds and therefore they were often to be drag'd almost by force or catcht at unawares and be so initiated as appears in the Lives of these two Greek Fathers Nazianzen and Chrysâ—stome If men make their first step to the Holy Altar by such a lye as is their pretending to a motion of the Holy Ghost concerning which they know little but that they have nothing at all of it they have no reason to expect that Blessing which otherwise attends on such Dedications And it had been happy for the Church if all those that are authoriz'd to confer Orders had stood on this more critically and not been contented with a bare putting these Questions to those who come to be Ordain'd but had used a due strictness before-hand sutable to that grave admonition of St. Paul to Timothy Lay hands suddenly on no man and be not partakers of other mens sins How would the Church have flourish'd if this worthy Drs. counsel had been both given and taken at the beginning of the Reformation If all that entred on the Ministry had felt the mighty power of the Spirit in turning them from darkness to light from the power of Satan unto God! How would they have labour'd for the conversion and edification of their hearers The which work could not prosper in their hands but such as were born of God receiving the Spirit would have been enabled by it to cry Abba Father Spiritual and free prayer would have been from the beginning so well known that the suggesting it to have been Jesuitical would with the greatest contempt and scorn be rejected and those many rash and indecent epithetes given it would have been consider'd but as the overtacts of ill-will to the Reformation of the Church of England § II. The Account our Author gives of the first Separation is very unrrue For 1. It was not the laying aside All forms of prayer that the old Nonconformists prest hard for They were for the amending the Liturgy but not for the removing all Liturgies 'T is true in K. Edward's days there was a contest between Hooper and Ridley c. about the old Popish Vestments but not about Forms of Prayer In Queen Maries days at Franckfort there were great contentions among some of them who before had used the English Liturgy but not that those who were against the use of the English Liturgy at that time were against it as it was a Form of Prayer but they apprehended that they being
Bishops made them Substitutes under them to help them which they called Priests and kept the name of Bishops to themselves But out of the Deacons sprang all the Mischief For through their hands went all things they ministred unto the Clergy they ministred unto the Poor they were in favour with great and small And when the Bishops Office began to have rest and be Honourable then the Deacons through Favour and Gifts climbed up thereunto as lightly as he that hath the old Abbots Treasure succeedeth with us And by the means of their practice and acquaintance in the world they were more subtle and worldly wise than the old Bishops and less learned in Gods word as our Prelates are when they come from Stewardships in Gentlemens Houses and from surveying of great mens Lands c. Then while they that had the Plow by the tail looked back the Plow went awry Faith waxed feeble and faint Love waxed cold the Scripture waxed dark Christ was no more seen He was in the Mount with Moses and therefore the Bishops would have a God upon the earth whom they might see and thereupon they began to dispute who should be greatest So far Mr. Tyndal in his Practice of Popish Prelates 3. The Malady and Disease of those times with their Causes were no sooner understood but several Worthy Persons applied themselves to a diligent search after the most proper Remedy and found that a Reformation must begin among the Clergy that all things must be reduc'd to the Apostolical Institution Discipline must be strictly exercised the which could not with effect be accomplished but by bringing all things to the first Institution For which reason Mr. Tyndall makes his enquiry after those Officers the Apostles ordain'd in Christs Church and what their Offices were concerning which take Mr. Tyndal's own sense in his discourse of the Practice of Popish Prelates Wherefore the Apostles saith he following and obeying the Rule Doctrine and Commandment of our Saviour Jesus Christ ordained in his Kingdom and Congregation Two Officers One called after the Greek word Bishop in English an Overseer which same was called Priest after the Greek Elder in English because of his Age Discretion and sadness for he was as nigh as could be always an Elderly man And this Overseer hath put his hands unto the Plow of Gods Word and sed Christs Flock and tended them only without looking unto any other business in the world Another Officer they chose and called him Deacon after the Greek a Minister in English to minister the alms of the people unto the poor and needy For in the Congregation of Christ love maketh every mans gifts and goods common unto the necessity of his neighbour Wherefore the love of God being yet hot in the hearts of men the rich that had the substance of this worlds goods brought of their abundance great plenty unto the sustentation of the poor and delivered it unto the hands of the Deacons Mr. Tyndall judg'd that according to the Apostolical Institution there were no other Officers in the Church but Elders and Deacons The Elders being of the same Office and Order with the Bishops they being two names belonging to one and the same person There is saith he Presbuteros called an Elder by Birth which same called immediately a Bishop or Overseer to declare what Persons are meant they were called Elders because of their Age Gravity c. and Bishops and Overseers by reason of their Offices And all that were called Elders or Priests if they so will were called Bishops also though they have divided the names now which thing thou mayest evidently see by the first Chap. of Titus and the 20th of the Acts Those Overseers which we now call Bishops after the Greek word were alway biding in one place to Govern the Congregation there Tyndal of the word Elder But Deacons were Overseers of the Poor and crept not into Orders till the Church grew Rich. Tyndal was not alone in this opinion it being also the sense of Famous Lambert and Dr. Barns who strenuously defended and at the last sealed this Truth with their blood One of the Articles for which they were burnt being about the Order of Priesthood I 'le give you in the first place Lambert's own answer to the ninth Article as I find it in Acts and Mon. Vol. 2. As touching Priesthood saith Lambert in the Primitive Church when virtue bare as ancient Doctors do deem and Scripture in mine opinion recordeth the same the most room there were no more Officers in the Church of God than Bishops and Deacons that is to say Ministers as witnesseth beside Scripture full apertly Hierome in his Commentaries upon the Epistles of Paul whereas he saith That those that we call Priests were all one and no other but Bishops and the Bishops none other but Priests men ancient both in Age and Learning so near as they could be chosen Neither were they institute and chosen as they be now-adays with small regard of a Bishop or his Officer only apposing them if they can coâ—â—â—e a Collect but they were chosen not only of the Bishop but also with the consent of the people among whom they should have their living as sheweth Saint Cyprian and the people as he saith ought to have power to chuse their priests that be men of good Learning of good and honest report but alack for pity such Elections are now banished and new fashions brought in which if we should confer with the form of the Election shewed of Christ by his Apostle Paul we should find no small diversity but all turned upside down To conclude I say the Order or state of Priests and Deacons was ordained by God but Subdeacons and Conjurers otherwise called Exorcistae or Acolitae which we call Benet and Collect were instituted by the invention of men and this you may find in the Law Dist 21. and other places where it is written Subdiaconatus tempore Apostâ—lorum non fuit sacer Subdeaconship in the time of the Apostles was no holy Order Dr. Barns in like manner had the same objected against him in the Articles for which he was burned I 'le give you the Article and his own sentiments concerning it as Mr. Fox relates in a Discourse set forth with Mr. Tyndal and John Frith's Works Article 6. I will never believe nor yet I can never believe that one man may be by the Law of Ood a Bishop of two or three Cities yea of an whole Countrey for it is contrary to Saint Paul which saith I have left thee behind to set in every City a Bishop And if you find in one place of Scripture that they be called Episcopi you shall find in many that they be called Presbyteri I was brought before my Lord Cardinal into his Gallery and there he read all my Articles till he came to this and there he stopped and said That this touched him and therefore he asked me if I thought it wrong
q. d. as what is not according to the word of God All this being most plain and obvious to an ordinary Capacity that is not biassed by Prejudice c. Let the world judge who is in the FAULT They who keep close to Scripture or they who recede therefrom They who will do any thing but Sin for Peace Or they who will exercise their Authority and impose unnecessary things with the greatest Violence imaginable I say with the greatest Violence imaginable for they are impos'd with such a severe Threatning anrex'd that whoever refuses a compliance is cut off from the Catholick Church and given over to the Devil Hence 't is that they imposing Indifferent things as necessary to Salvation do according to Dr. Stillingfleet's own Rule declare themselves to be the Schismatical Dividers I say according to Dr. Stillingfleet's own Rule compar'd with his Substitutes Notion In the Doctor 's Unreasonableness of Separation p. 213. he saith That there are three Cases wheren the Scripture allow of Separation The last of which is When men make things Indifferent Necessary to Salvation and divide the Church upon that account and this was the Case of the false Apostles who urged the Ceremonies of the Law as necessary to Salvation Now although St. Paul himself complied sometimes with the practice of them Yet when these false Apostles came to enforce the Observation of them as necessary to Salvation then he bids the Christians at Philippi to beware of them i. e. To fly their Communion and have nothing to do with chem From this Rule of Dr. Stillingfleet it must follow That if the Church of England make things Indifferent Necessary to Salvation our Separation from the Church is allowed by the Scriptures yea commanded and enjoyned We must beware of 'em i. e. to fly their Communnion and have nothing to do with them But that things Indifferent are made necessary by the Church of England according to his Doctrine doth appear irrefragably That which is Necessary to our Communion with the Catholick Church is according to his Doctrine necessary to Salvation But Indifferent things are Necessary to our Communion with the Church of England which is One with the Communion with the Catholick Church in that according to him they are made necessary to our Communion with the Church of England which is One with the Communion with the Catholique Church according to his constant Judgment Ergo. Or in other Terms Whatever is made necessary to our being Members of the Catholique Church is made necessary to Savation for to be Members of the Catholick Church and to be in a state of Salvation is the same and to be Members of the particular Church of England and Members of the Catholick Church is one and the same with our Author p. 248. As if it had been said To be Members of the Church of England is to be in a state of Salvation but not to be Members of the Church of England is to be out of a state of Salvation Whence what is made necessary to our being Members of the Church of England is made necessary to our Salvation that is The many indifferent Ceremonies impos'd as terms of our Communion with the Church of England are made necessary for Salvation according to our Author For which reason the Scripture allows our Separation yea the Scripture bids us beware of her that is to fly her Communion and have nothing to do with her Thus the Doctor in conjunction with his Substitute furnishes us with an unanswerable Argument to clear the Dissenter from the odious Sin of Schism which in short is this From such as make Indifferent things Necessary to Salvation we must Separate This is Dr. Stillingfleet's But the Church of England makes Indifferent things necessary to Salvation This is the Dr's Substitutes Notion Ergo We may yea we must Separate that is 'T is the Will of God we should Separate or 't is our Duty and therefore not our Sin to separate i. e. We are not the Schismaticks This is Argumentum ad Hominem and either this Author must quit his Doctrine or acquit us of Schisme But to treat our Author with the greater Civility we 'll suppose him to be so tenacious of his own Doctrine that he 'll rather discharge us of Schisme than abandon his beloved Notions for which reason seeing 't is on all sides acknowledged that there is a Faulty Division among us and consequently a Faulty Divider who is the Schismatick He must be either the Dissenter or the Conformist but not the Dissenter as we have already prov'd from our Author 's own Topicks Ergo the Conformist Here we might have put an end to this Discourse and would do so had not our Author 's fertil Brain furnish'd us with another Argument that doth as fully evince the Conformist to be the Schismatick as the former clear'd the Dissenter In the management of this Argument we 'll consider the Netion of Dr. Peter Gunning and Peirson as compared with our Author The I earned G. and P. in a Conference with the Papists assert That a Superiours unjust casting any out of the Church is Schismatical If the Governours of the Church do by sinful Impositions or unjust Excommunications cast any out of the Church they are Schismatical This our Author won't deny But according to his Notion The Church of England are guilty of such Impositions and do unjustly Excommunicate Dissenters 1. That the Impositions are sinful is evident in that Indifferent things as has been prov'd are made necessary to Salvation The making any indifferent thing Necessary to Salvation is sinful But the imposing indifferent things as terms of Catholique Communion is the making such things Necessary to Salvation Ergo Sinful Ergo The Imposer is Schismatical But 2. Whoever doth unjustly Excommunicate any are Schismatical This is Dr. Gunning's sense But the Church of England if they agree with our Author Excommunicates the Dissenter unjustly Ergo c. That the Church of England Excommunicates unjustly according to the Doctrine of our Author is demonstrable even in that the Church doth as he would have it by Excommunication cast thousands out of a state of Salvation for not complying with little uncommanded things Whence I argue thus To Excommunicate or cast us out of a state of Salvation merely because we cannot comply with what God never commanded us is to Excommunicate unjustly But so doth the Church of England if we may pass a censure on her as our Author provokes us to do for the Church according unto him doth Excommunicate that is shut Heaven-gates against such to whom our Lord Jesus Christ hath promised the opening them To illustrate this with the greater clearness I beseech the Reader to consider That Salvation is promised by Jesus Christ unto all such as do sincerely Believe truly Repent and lead an Holy Life in all Godliness and Honesty Though a man may be daily guilty of lesser Evils yet if he believe in Christ
summe or substance of the Apostle in his Epistles altogether I say also that this is manifestly here destitute of reason The Apostle requires that all Christians should walk by the same rule in things whereto they have attained Therefore they must walk by the same rule in things whereto they have not attained Such is his force This walking by the same rule I am perswaded is a phrase or expression onely signifying the doing as others doe Now because they that had the knowledg of their liberty might doe as others did and were to use it must those that had not that knowledg do so likewise The contrary is apparent for they shall sin against their consciences if they doe The like case is here The Conformist among us looks upon all and every of those things that are injoyned about Uniformity in the Church to be lawfull and he values himself for perfect in this discerning indifferent things but the Nonconformist thinks these things unlawfull and that he shall sin if he yields to them and what if herein he be weak must the weak and perfect must both these here now walk by the same rule or do as one another do Nay must there be a Rule made on purpose by Authority about these very things wherein the difference lies to force them to act both alike when one of them if they do cannot possibly act in faith and so must needs sin Nothing more contrary to what I have laid down Nothing more contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostle I will add if by this Rule there be more meant then a Phrase and some Rule he will account there must be I would fain know why this Rule should be any other then that of the same Apostle otherwhere As many as walk according to this rule peace be upon them and the Israel of God And what is that Rule but Christianity it self the great Rule of the Christian Religion or Doctrine of the Gospel And what then will follow from thence The Doctor I remember reflects upon my Peaceable Design for being called an Answer to his Sermon I will undertake now upon this Supposition that that Title was as fit for my Book as this Text was for his Sermon Because we must walk according to the general rule of the Christian Religion in all things that are required of us as we attain to the knowledg thereof Therefore we must Conform to the Canons and Liturgy of the Church of England This is the Doctors Sermon upon that Text and I will tell you the Inference now of his Defender upon that Sermon Therefore must all that Conform not in the excluding themselves from Communion with the Church of England be excluded also out of the Catholick Church and consequently out of the Kingdome of Heaven By the way since I wrote this I was reading Doctor Owen and I find that he falls in with the last Interpretation of the Rule and he hath these words upon it Let the Apostles rule be produced says he with any probability of proof to be his and we are ready to subscribe and conform to it To which Doctor Stillingfleet Replies This is the Apostles rule to go as far as they can and if they can go no farther to sit down and not to break the peace of the Church Unto this Dr. Owen Answers The Apostles rule is not that we should go as far as we can but that so far as we have attained we must walk by the same rule I interpose here and say to the Doctor This is this must be the rule of the Apostle supposing that rule be meant as he understands it that is of the great rule of faith and love or law of the Gospel For this is part of that Rule It is part of that love we owe the Magistrate and our Conforming Brethren to go as far as we can or to come as near as we can to them But I answer then to the Dean It is part also of the same Rule to go no farther then we can Our duty of love requires the one Our duty of faith requires the other We may not doe any thing which we cannot doe in faith but we break the rule as it is the rule of faith as well as if we do not doe what we can we shall break the rule as it is the rule of love Whatsoever is not of faith is sin Now when the Dean hereupon goes on and teaches us that we must sit down and not break the peace of the Church when we can go no farther I Reply there is a breaking the peace of the Church in his sense or in òurs If we understand breaking the peace of the Church in his sense which is going from the Church to our Meetings I say he is out and that we must break the peace of the Church if this be the breaking it for this is that which is required of us in that branch of the Rule that we must go no farther then we can But when we go to private Meetings and leave the Church in this case where we suppose a man cannot act in faith or with perswasion in his conscience that it is lawful for him to go thither it is no breaking the peace of the Church in our sense but a part of our duty wee say of going no farther then we can We go as far as we can with them in holding the same Doctrine and Sacraments in acknowledging them as true Churches maintaining a Communion in love with them and doing all the good offices we can to them and when we can go no farther in this lyes our duty of going no farther then we can that we meet for worship otherwhere To assemble I say for worship is one part of the rule Not to assemble but to forbear any thing when we cannot act in faith is another part of the rule Put them both together and it comes to this that To go to other meetings when we cannot go to Church must be walking by the rule if this rule be the great rule of faith and of love out of question This I speak in the person of Doctor Owen who can and do go to Church my self but there is one eminent thing said by that eminent great man and very much accomplished Doctor We do and shall abide by this Principle p. 250. that Communion in faith and love with the administration of the same Sacraments is sufficient to preserve all Christians from the guilt of Schism though they cannot communicate together in some rites and rules of Worship and Order If the Doctor makes good this he does our work and till the Dean debates this he says nothing To return I observe in the fourth place for the Digression it self does but lead me hither that this Authour does industriously endeavour to bring the Controversie between Conformist and Nonconformist to this issue If the Church requires of us any things as necessary to her Communion which are sinful the schism is