go under the Names of the most approved Authors of the Primitive times referring therein after a more especiall manner to the Epistles of Ignatius are neither spurious nor corrupted But hence it will follow that what is alleadged by you out of Ignatius for the support of the Episcopall cause is not of that waight as to prove what was the practice of the Church in the time of the true Ignatius much less to prove what was the universall practice of the Primitive Church long before the assembling of the Council of Nice or to evidence that that Council in the 6th Canon had any reference to the words of Ignatius which you cite and which might as well be foysted into his works afterwards as other things and so nothing thence to be concluded either with the shew of any certainty or of any good measure of probability 5. Now whereas you will have these ancient customes touching the power and priviledges of the Metrapolitans and Patriarchs to be deduced from St. Marke the Evangelist who you say was not onely Bishop of Alexandria but of the Churches of Egipt Lybia and Pentapolis and will have the subordination of all inferiour Officers in the Church to the Bishop in every Diocess of the Bishop in every Province to the Metropolitan of the Metropolitan in every region to the Patriarch or Primate these standing Powers as you call them and subjection to be defined and asserted by the ancient Canons yea the most ancient even immemoriall Apostolicall tradition and custome you must either prove that the customes standing Powers and subjection that you speak of are warranted defined and asserted by the Canon of Scripture which you will never be able to do or else you do hereby intimate that you would have it to be believed that there are some customes and traditions that are Apostolicall and to be received as such that are not found written in the Canon of the Scripture But by this assertion you gratifie the Papists and open a door to let into the Church the many unwritten traditions they would obtrude upon it under the specious name and title of Apostolicall traditions though you might have known they are abundantly therein consuted by our Divines that yet were never answered by them or any other patrons of unwritten traditions And upon this account we hope we shall be sufficiently excused though we forbear to either examin or say any thing particularly to the Councils and Dr. Hammond that you cite for this purpose But as touching Marke the Evangelist whom you will have to be not onely Bishop of Alexandria but also of Egypt Lybia and Pent apolis also you do herein assert things inconsistent sc that he was an Evangelist and yet an ordinary Bishop For Evangelists properly were extraordinary Officers extraordinarily employd in Preaching of the Gospel without any setled residence upon any one charge were companions of the Apostles and under the Apostles had the care of all Churches and in which sense Mark was an Evangelist as well as in regard of the Gospel which he wrote But Bishops were Officers that were ordinary and fixed to one particular charge neither did they ordinarily travell with the Apostles from place to place as the Evangelists did Neither could Evangelists be any more called Bishops properly then the Apostles could be so called who were not such formally but onely eminently and virtually But as touching Eusebius whom you cite Scaliger saith concerning him that he read ancient Histories parum attentè But further you are to consider that the Apostles themselves were called Bishops in those times and yet they could not be so called properly as is proved by Mr. Banes in his Diocesan Triall who there gives reasons why Apostles neither were nor might be both Apostles and Bishops properly We shall onely urge one of the reasons there mentioned which also doth strongly prove that Mark the Evangelist neither was nor could be an ordinary Bishop for then he is made liable to errour as all ordinary Bishops were and are and then in writing of his Gospel as well as in his teaching he might erre and hereupon occasion is given to call that part of Canonical Scripture in question as the asserting the Apostles to be Bishops properly gives the like occasion to call all their writings in question which is dangerous and no wayes to be admitted of And hence it will follow in what sense soever you call Mark an Evangelist yet he could not be a Bishop properly although it should be granted he had an inspection under the Apostles of all those parts you mention 6. But thus farre we hope it is manifest unto the Reader that as yet you are to shew what the practice of the Church was in point of Church-Government for the space of the first three hundred years after Christ that which you have alleadged out of the Council of Nice not manifesting it either for the whole space or the greatest part thereof as appears by what we have said touching this matter Neither must we allow what again you here further assert sc that General Councils are the best enterpreters of the mind and wiâ—l of God in Scripture touching Church Government the Scripture it self being a farre more sure and safe interpreter of Gods will and minde therein revealed in the plain places thereof when there is a doubt and difficulty arising from the darkness of some other places and as hath been fully shewed as also considering that there was some swerving in point of Church Government from Scripture rule before the first general Council met or assembled when yet there was more purity as to that matter then there was afterward 7. Neither must we suffer that to pass for currant which you here say of Calvin sc that though he disliked the name Hierarchy yet he allowed the thing The place you here chiefly referre to is as we judge that place in his Institutions lib. 4. cap. 4. Sect. 1 2 3. but especially what we find Sect. 4. where we grant having mentioned Bishops Archbishops and Patriarchs and having given the reason of the first institution of them in that fourth Section he hath these words Gubernationem sic constitutam nonnulli Hierarchiam vocarunt nomine ut mihi videtur improprie certè Scripturis inusitato c. Verum si rem omisso vocabulo intuemur reperiemus veteres Episcopos non aliam regendae Ecclesiae formam voluisse fingere ab ea quam Deus verbo suo praescripsit i. e. the Governement of the Church so constituted some called the Hierarchie by an improper name as it seems unto me certainly by a name not used in the Scriptures c. But if omitting the Word we look upon the thing we shall find that the ancient Bishops would not frame another forme of governing the Church from that which God hath prescribed in his Word He speaks then here of what was in their intention not as approving every thing they did He saith they
and the reformed Churches abroad that we know not what can be added more And yet we do not say That there is no present Government in any Church or Assembly of Saints but where our Discipline and Government is erected intirely in all the parts of it no more then we should deny him to be a man in whom there were a defect of some integral parts or in whom there were some superfluous members But as when Antichristianisme so overspead the face of the Church in those dark times before the Reformation God preserved a Church Ministery and Ordinances though not without the mixture of many corruptions in doctrine and worship even amongst the Papists themselves So there was some of Christs Government and Discipline in the worst times though not intirely nor without the mixture of much corruption in that Discipline and Government And yet if you consult Antiquity you will not finde that the Presbyterian Government hath lyen hid so long as that for the space of 1500 years it could never be found till this present You have heard what rule did anciently belong to Presbyters notwithstanding that through the corruptions that crept into the Church in after times the exercise of that power was long disused And the like may be said of Ruling Elders and as hath been shewed by others But it is what de jure ought to be and not what de facto is or hath been which is that which you and we are chiefly to attend and concerning which the Scripture must be the onely Judge as we have said before But you say now subjection to our present Government is required by us and then demand Whether all that observe not our rank and order and subject not themselves to our present Government must be taken for lawlesse persons for so say you doth this close connexion of ours seem to import viz Many who do not subject but live c. But here you do reason fallaciously a bene conjunctis ad male divisa For in our Paper we spake of such as did live in a sinful and total neglect of the Lords Supper That were scandalous and offensive in their lives drunkards unclean persons and that will noâ— subject themselves to the present Government but live as lawlesse persons And therefore the lawlesse persons we meant and as might plainly have been gathered from our words were such who as they subiected not themselves to the present Government of the Church so they were also scandalous and offensive in their lives we joyning these together whom you divide And whether such as will neither submit themselves to the Laws of God nor the Government that is settled in the Church by the Civil Power be not lawlesse persons we leave it to you to judge But yet we do here also minde you That however we do not judge all those to be lawlesse persons that do out of conscience not come up to the observation of all those Rules which are or shall be established by Authority for regulating the outward worship of God and Government of the Church being otherwise blamelesse yet both you and we may well remember that such as should have refused to have subjected themselves to the late Prelatical Government would have been accounted in those times to have been lawlesse persons SECT IX BUt you say When we make it an order that notice shall be taken of all persons that forsake the publik Assemblies of the Saints you would gladly know how farr we extend this Saintship this Church and Assembly of Saints To which we answer as farr as the Apostle did when writing to the Church of Corinth and the Churches of Galatia he calls them Saints and Churches notwithstanding there were some in those Churches that were leavened with unsound doctrine and grosly erroneous In Corinth some that denied the Resurrection made rents and schisms and sundry grosly scandalous In the Churches of Galatia such as mixed works with Faith in the point of Justification and of which the Apostle Paul would have those Churches to take notice even to the censuring of them they being spots to those Assemblies and however Saints by profession and in regard of outward calling being in Covenant with God and having been baptized yet answered not their profession by suitable conversation And therefore however there be sundry of the like stamp in our Assemblies we do not therefore unchurch them or make our Assemblies not the Assemblies of the Saints because of the corruption of such members And seeing our principles and practises are manifestly known to be utterly against the opinions and practises of the Donatists of old and those that have of late rent themselves from our Churches because of the scandalousnesse of the corrupt members that are found in them though the sin of these in our Churches is aggravated by giving that occasion you might well have spared your pains in transcribing out of Augustine what he justly said unto those schismaticks that he had to deal with Nay you might rather have gathered from our Paper That seeing we said that notice should be taken of all those that should forsake the publick Assemblies of the Saints our purpose was to have censured such as the Donatists were That we purposed to observe and censure those that did maintain and hold up private meetings in opposition to the publick That cry down our Churches and publick Assemblies Ministery and Ordinances as you know several forts do and who as they hold sundry grosse errors that subvert the faith so in regard of those and other their practises that in their own nature doe manifestly subvert the order unity and peace that Christ hath established in his Church doe justly fall under Church censure according to the rules of our Government above mentioned And that therefore we were not altogether silent concerning either the sin or punishment of such as did erre grosly in doctrinals or in discipline so as to make such dangerous rents from the Church as the fore-named Sectaries do Contrary to what you say of us in your Paper And further by such as forsake the publick Assemblies of the Saints of whom we said notice should be taken you might have gathered our meaning was that such of which sort there are but too many amongst us who out of a principle of carelesness sloth worldliness or manifest prophaneness do on the Lords day either idle out the time or else are worse imployed when they should resort to the publick Assemblies and who as they are no friends to any private meetings for the good of their souls in the use of any private means of conference or prayer for that end So they doe also Atheistically turn their backs on all the publick Ordinances forsaking them and the Assemblies where these are dispensed should be taken notice of in order to censure if there was not reformation and to neither of which sort of persons any indulgence is granted by any Laws of the Land that we
are cast upon us and the Church of God The Arguments you here urge are two we shall speak unto them both and in their order 1. And here we shall speak in the first place unto the charge of Schisme that you would fasten upon us reserving unto another place our Answer unto the charge of Perjury where you do it more plainly and expresly though here you might intend to insinuate it But as touching that of Schisme you plainely declare That such Ministers and of this sort you say there are many amongst us though if we should put you to prove this you would never be able to make it out as return not to that canonical Obedience as you call it which they were sworn to as you say lye under the blot of Schisme But in your next Paper you charge us with this more then once and call it a Rent indeed a Schisme in the highest We shall not examine that which you here seem to take for granted sc that all Ministers that were ordained by Bishops did swear Canonicall Obedience to them which we are sure is very untrue concerning many as how far those that did take any such Oathes were bound to obey is not to our purpose now to discuss But as to that blot of Schisme you would bring us and the Ministers of these Nations under who return not to that Obedience they sometimes yielded to their severall Diocesans we must speak the more fully because the Charge is foul 1. But we shall in the first place speak something of the nature of Schisme The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Schisme signifies a Rent or Division So it is used 1 Cor. 12. 25. That there be no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Schisme in the body In Js. 7. 43. its sayd There was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a schisme or division among the people because of Christ And John 9. 16. Therefore some of the Pharisees said this man is not of God because he keepeth not the Sabbath day Others said how can a man that is a sinner do such Miracles And there was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a division or schism among them So John 10. 19. And so we read Acts 4. 4. That the multitude was divided and part held with the Jews and part with the Apostles This acceptation of the word is general and may comprehend under its Latitude any kind of Dissention And hereupon Divines though restraining it to Dissentions or Divisions about matters of Religion speak of a good Schisme that is justifiable which is the dissolution of a bad Union and that is but a conspiracy against God as was that Union that was amongst the Jews before they heard the Doctrine of Christ of which John 10. 19. By this kind of Schisme afterwards the whole World was rent and of which Christ speaks Matth. 20. 35. For I am come to set a man at variance against his Father c. And hereupon Gerhardus in answer to Bellarmines charge of Schism upon the Protestants saith Denique concedimus nos esse sano sensu schismaticos quia scilicet ab Ecclesia Romana ejus capite Pontifice Romano secessionem fecimus nequaquam vero ab unitate Ecclessiae ejus capite Christo Jesu nos separavimus At beatum schisma per quod Christo verae catholicae Ecclesiae uniti sumus This Schisme is that which is commanded Come out of her my people Revel 18. 4. And of this Schisme Ambrose speaks Siqua est Ecclesia quae fidem respuit deserenda est 1. e. If there be any Church that refuseth the faith it is to be forsaken But as when we speak of Schisme it is usually taken in the worse part so it is the bad and sinfull Shisme that is here spoken of But thus also it is sometimes taken generally for any division in the Church that is unwarrantable and so it comprehends also Heresie And so the words Heresie and Schisme are sometimes used in the same sense 1 Cor. 11. 19. For there must needs be Heresies or Schismes or Sects that those that are approved may be made manifest among them Although strictly Heresie be opposed unto Faith and Schisme unto Charity And this leads us to shew what Schisme is taken strictly and properly which in brief may be thus described Schisme is a dissolution or breach of that union that ought to be amongst Christians consenting together in the same Faith And because this breach of Union doth chiefly appear in denying or refusing Communion with the Church in the use of Gods publick Ordinances therefore that kind of separation is by a kind of singular appropriation truly and rightly called Schisme Thus much for the opening the nature of Schisme Now because you here charge us with it we must needs tell you the charge is great For Schisme truly and properly so called and as it is taken in the worser part is a very hurtfull dangerous and pernicious evil The Apostle warned to take heed of it and condemned it in the Church of Corinth 1 Cor. 1. V. 10. 11 12 13. It is a work of the flesh and therefore the Apostle proves the Corinthians to be carnall because of the divisions that were among them 1 Cor. 3. 3 4. It is a great offence against Christs being a rending of the Unity of his mystical Body It is a wrong unto the Church whose peace is thereby disturbed and to the Members of the Church their edification being thereby hindred And to conclude Schisme opens the door unto Heresie into which it doth oftentimes degenerate and so makes way to separation from Christ And therefore you here charging us to lye under the blot of Schisme untill Episcopacy be againe admitted of and there be a returning to that Obedience that formerly hath been given to the Bishops should have produced some Arguments for the making out your Charge But here you are wholly silent and think it sufficient to insinuate this so high a Charge without giving any reasons to convince us of our guiltinesses As if we must presently without reason judge our selves because you accuse us 2. Yet because some may be ready to take the matter upon trust and except we purge our selves from this Crime by saying something for our selves conclude we are guilty because you say so we shall therefore in the second place offer to the Reader these following considerations that we may thereby clear our selves from this foul aspersion 1. That though Episcopacy be never restored and neither we nor any other Ministers in this Land return to that Canonicall Obedience that hath formerly been yielded yet still both we and they may continue in Communion with the same Church of England that we held Communion with during the continuance of Episcopacy and with which we also do hold communion in all the Ordinances of Gods Worship Word Sacraments and Prayer This in the beginning of this Paper you do not deny for you there speak of us as
such lawless persons whether drunkards swearers c. as will not subject themselves to the present Government of the Church they are onely punishable by the civil Magistrate and that we cannot exclude them the Church by any of our censures this is as easily by us denied as it is by you asserted and we leave it to be judged of by the Reader upon his perusall of what hath been said by both whether you or we have the better reason for what is herein maintained by us But we must again mind you that notwithstanding in our answer we had here told you that however we did not judg all those to be lawless persons that do out of conscience not come up to the observation of all those rules which are or shall be established by Authority for regulating the outward worship of God and Government of his Church yet both you and we might well remember that such as should have refused to have subjected themselves to the late Prelaticall Government would have been accounted in those times lawless persons yet to this also you do here say nothing although it was one of your queries in your first Paper whether all that subjected not themselves to our present Government must be taken for lawless persons and which was a matter more considerable to have replied to then to have put us off as you do with that which is not at all here to the purpose your querie to which we answered not being about our power to censure the persons that we counted lawless but who those lawless persons were The Gentlemens Paper Sect. IX To our next Quaere viz. How farre you extend this Saintship this Church and Assembly of Saints You answer As farre as the Apostle did when writing to the Church of Corinth and Galatia he calls them Saints and Churches notwithstanding the gross errours of many members in them and therefore though there may be sundry of the like stamp in your Assemblies you do not un-un-church them or make your Assemblies not Assemblies of Saints because of the corruption of such Members c. But by your leave you answer not our question which was not Whether all your Assemblies were called assemblies of Saints for no question you will not un-church your selves or un-saint your Assemblies notwithstanding the corruptions in them But whether none else but you were accounted Saints none Bretheren and Sisters in Christ but such as stand for your pretended discipline If so then the Donatists crime may be imputed to you and we say with St. Augustin O Impudentem Vocem Nay but this cannot be laid in your dish whose principles and practises are so manifestly against the practises and opinions of the Donatists of old it may more fitly be charged upon such as have rent themselves from your Churches But who are they that have rent from your Church we hear but of few that ever admitted themselves members or prosessed themselves of your association that ever rent from it Those that are out say they were never of you never had sworn obedience to or subscribed any Articles of yours as you or many of you had sworn Canonicall obedience to the Government by Bishops and subscribed the 39 Articles of the Church of England Here is a rent indeed a Schism in the highest which is not satisfied but with the utter overthrow of that Church from whom they rent and rasing out those Articles of Religion they had formerly confirmed by their own subscription saying Illa non est c. O Impudentem Vocem this saying doth not concern you But still we are unsatisfied in the word Publique what you mean thereby to which you Answer Such as you by your profession and practise do own for publique such as you do constantly frequent and stir up others to frequent also where are also the publique Ordinances of the word Sacraments and Prayer dispensed But here again you come not home to our Question Whether none are publique Assemblies nay publique Assemblies of Saints but such as you constantly frequent or whose discipline you own however publique yours are And then your Order is Notice shall be taken of all Persons that forsake the publique Assemblies Notice of all Persons in order to censure so is your meaning and purpose as a little before you have said we may gather from your Paper to censure all Persons that maintain private meetings in opposition to publique whether out of conscience or out of a principle of carelesness sloth worldliness c. All Persons that crie down your Churches Ministry c. is your purpose and meaning by that order And you say further Neither do we transgress any Laws of the Land which have made no Proviso to exempt any man that we meddle with c. Here sure you are mistaken for you can no more proceed to censure such as forsake the publique Assemblies by virtue of any Ordinance of Parliament or rule laid down in your form of Church Government then you or any other Minister or Magistrate civill or Ecclesiastical can punish them by an Act of 1. Eliza. intituled An Act for Vniformity of Prayer and Administration of Sacraments or by an Act of 35. Eliza. Intituled An Act for punishing of Persons obstinately refusing to come to Church c. Or an Act of 23. Eliza. against such as refuse to come to Church All which with your Ordinance are repealed by an Act made Septemb. 27. 1650. Intituled An Act for relief of Religious and peaceable pcople from the rigor of former Acts of Parliament in matters of Religion By which these are not only repealed but it is enacted further That all and every the branches clauses Articles and Proviso's Expressed and contained in any other Act or Ordinance of Parliament whereby or wherein any penalty or punishment is imposed or mentioned to be imposed on any Person for not repayring to their respective Parish Churches c. shall be and are by the Authority aforesaid wholly repealed and made void None by this Act shall be censured or punished by virtue of any former Act or Ordinance for refusing to come to their Parish Church c. though they obstinately refuse And if by no former then not by that you pretend to Now to the end no prophane and licentious Person may take occasion by the repealing of the said Laws intended onely for relief of pious and peaceable minded people from the rigor of them o neglect the performance of Religious duties It is further enacted by the Authority aforesaid That all and every Person and Persons within this Commonwealth and the territories thereof shall having no reasonable excuse for their absence upon every Lords day dayes of publique thanksgiving and humiliation diligently resort to some publique place where the service and worship of God is Exercised or shall be present at some other place in the practise of some Religious duty either of Prayer Preaching reading or Expounding the Scriptures or conferring upon the same And
be it further declared by the Authority aforesaid That every Person and Persons that shall not diligently perform the duties aforesaid according to the true meaning thereof not having reasonable excuse to the cootrary shall be deemed and taken to be offenders against this Law and shall be proceeded against accordingly Can you say now that you have power to censure such as forsake the publique Assemblies by any Ordinance of Parliament or rules as you call them of your Church Government when not only the pious and peaceable minded people but the obstinate also are exempted from the rigor of former Laws and onely taken to be offenders against this Law and no other and shall be proceeded against accordingly Dare you yet proceed to censure notwithstanding this Act If you do you are very bold and may run into a Praemunire Though you say you are not to be blamed for any mistakes that may arise ab ignorantia juris whether simple or effected A strange saying we have heard it said Ignorantia facti excusat but Ignorantia juris non excusat no not a simple ignorance much less an affected one The Animadversions of the Class upon it 1. IF you had weighed what we had answered you could not with any colour have said that we answered not your question you might have observed that we spake of our Assemblies as they were parts of the Church of England and of the same constitution with her and whom though those of the separation do un-church in regard of the mixture or the scandalous persons in them denying our Church in that respect to be true or our assemblies to be the assemblies of Saints yet we justified in our Answer from the examples of the Church of Corinth and the Churches of Galatia to whom the Apostle writes as to Saints and calls Churches notwithstanding such corruptions in them though we did not deny but the scandalous in our Church and assemblies were the spots thereof And seeing we acknowledged such assemblies were true Churches notwithstanding those scandalous persons that were found in them you had no reason to imagin that none else besides our selves were by us accounted Saints none brethren and sisters in Christ but such as stand for our discipline which you cannot mention but you must brand in calling it pretended you might from our answer have gathered that all other assemblies in our Land where the word of God and Sacraments are dispensed were taken into the number of those assemblies we spake of they being parts also of the Church of England as well as our own however they may some of them differ from us in point of discipline We told you in our Answer particularly that in the Church of Corinth there were some that denied the resurrection others made rents and schismes and sundry grosly scandalous and yet it was a true Church And therefore how should we be conceived to have denied such assemblies in our Land that are parts of the Church of England and of the same constitution with her for the substance not to be the assemblies of the Saints if they stand not for our Discipline Yet you would make the world to beleeve we meant no further in that Answer we gave you then not to un-Church or un-Saint our selves or assemblies because of the corruptions of them which yet we must tell you might have been the fewer if you and others who are members of these assemblies had shewed your selves more pliable to good order and discipline and to have been furtherers and not hinderers of their reformation 2. We spake in our Answer of some that had of late rent themselves from our Churches because of the scandalousness of the corrupt members and said that seeing our principles and practises are manifestly known to be utterly against them as against the opinions and practises of the Douatists of old you had no reason to apply that of Augustine unto us when he cried out against them ô impudentem vocem But now you will not have any to have rent themselves from our Church excepting such who having admitted themselves members or professed themselves of our Association have rent themselves from us and who you say are but a few so farre as you have heard But here you do not approve your selves good disputants against those of the separation who being by their birth members of the Church of England whereof our assemblies are but parts and of the same constitution with her as we said before and have rent themselves from it or from our Assemblies that are parts of it are justly chargeable with schisme they having hereby rent themselves from a true Church wherof they were members and whose membership is argued from their being born in gremio Ecclesiae not from their admitting themselves members of it afterward or their professing of themselves to be thereof members We had in our Answer to your first Paper hinted to you this ground of their membership when in Answer to what you had to the like purpose there suggested as you do here we told you that the severall Congregations within this Land that make a profession of the true Christian and Apostolike faith are true Churches of Jesus Christ that the severall members of these Congregations are by their birth members as those that were born in the Jewish Church are said to be by the Apostle Jews by nature Gal. 2. that this their membership was sealed to them in their baptisme that did solemnly admit them as into the universall Church so into the particular wherein they were born But as in this Paper where you should have replied to these propositions if you approved not of them you answered nothing to them though in your first Paper you would have exempted your selves from being subject to our Government because you had not admitted your selves members of some one or other of our Congregations or were any associates of ours as you there expressed your selves so here you come over again with the same unsound principle and yet say nothing to make it out intimating that none are to be accounted to have rent themselves from us but such as have admitted themselves members or professed themselves of our association whereas if being members by their birth of the Church of England they after rend themselves from any of our assemblies or others that are parts and members of it and of the same constitution with it they are guilty of schisme and which you must say or whatever you cry out against it you do not upon any sure principle oppose it 3. But this blot of schisme you would fasten upon us however though it be neither upon your own principles here laid down or any other whereby you can prove us guilty And to make this out you say that we or many of us had sworn Canonical obedience to the Government by Bishops and subscribed the 39 Articles of the Church of England and hereupon because we are not now for
edifyingly and lastingly be effected that when all our undermining scorning and opposing enemies do hear and see these things they may be much cast down in their own eyes perceiving that this work hath been wrought of our God in whose arms of mercy and truth we leave you and the Cause we manage Manchester Jan. 11. 1658. Signed in the Name and by the appointment of the Class by John Harrison Moderator THE EPISTLE To the READER IT is no new thing that such workes as have been most eminently conducing to the glory of God and the Churches greatest wellfare have met with strong oppositions When the Adversaries of Judah and Benjamin heard that the Children of the captivity builded the Temple unto the Lord God of Israel they set themselves diverse waies to hinder and obstruct the worke When Sanballat and Tobiah and the Arabians and the Ammonites and the Ashdodites heard that the walls of Jerusalem were made up and that the breaches began to be stopped then they were very wroth and conspired all of them together to come and to fight against Jerusalem and to hinder it When Jesus Christ the eternall Son of God the brightness of his Fathers glory and express Image of his Person appeared in the world cloathed with our nature though he came about a worke of greatest consequence that ever was yet his enimies withstood and opposed his Kingdome Of this the Psalmist prophesied before it came to pass Psal 2. 1 2. Why did the Heathen rage and the people imagine a vaine thing The Kings of the Earth set themselves and the people take counsell together against the Lord and against his annointed saying Let us breake their bands asunder and cast away their cords from us And this the Church saw fulfilled who in their Prayer unto God applied unto the times wherein they lived what he by the mouth of his Servant David had foretold so long before saying For of a truth against thy holy Childe Jesus whom thou hast annointed both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the people of Israel were gathered together for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsell determined before to be done It would be here too long to go through the Books of the N. T. and tell what persecutions were raised against the Apostles of our Lord and Saviour for executing that Commission which he had given them when he commanded them to go teach all Nations or to go through the story of the Church and speak of the diverse kindes of tortures and torments which thousands of all rankes endured in the times of the ten Primitive persecutions under the Heathen Emperours to tell of the Martyrdome of Ignatius Polycarpus Justin Martyr Irenaeus Cyprian and many others glorious lights and worthy Confessors of the truth for no other reason but because they studied to advance Christs Gospell We will instance something in latter times When the Romish Synagogue having most abominably apostatiz'd both in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Governement Luther and other faithfull Servants of Christ did earnestly bend themselves to endeavour a reformation in Religion the Antichristian world was mad with fury To come yet a little nearer home When Religion was reformed in Scotland in Doctrine and Worship the Church of Christ there had many conflicts and the worke was long obstructed before the Governement and Discipline of Christ could be fully established amongst them as it is in fresh remembrance what troubles they passed through more lately in their contending against Episcopacy and the Ceremonies which had been introduced amongst them to the great prejudice of their Ancient Church governement and Discipline But here it may not be forgotten how when the Parliament of famous memory that was convened eighteen yeares agoe having taken into their pious consideration the condition of our own Church at home and judging that a further reformation in matters of Religion then had been made in the daies of Queen Elizabeth was necessary and setting upon that work as also the vindication of the liberties of this English Nation were forced to take up Armes for their own defence against that Partie that could not brooke the Reformation which they intended And to what an height that opposition grew in after time and with what difficulties they conflicted for many years together because they would not give up that cause they had undertaken to defend is so well known to even such as may be but strangers in our Israel that we may spare the pains of a full recitall But yet nothing of all this is to be wondered at Satan must needs be like himselfe and stir the more when he sees his Kingdome begin to shake And corruption will rage when it is crossed God also hath a wise hand in these oppositions not only thereby the more inflaming the zeal and brightning up other graces in his faithfull servants trying and exercising their faith and patience the purging and purifying and making them white but also getting himself the greater glory when his worke is carried on notwithstanding the greatest opposition of his and his Churches enemies And here we cannot but with all thankfullness to Almighty God take notice of this hand that was most eminently lifted up in the worke of Reformation begun by that late forementioned Parliament as there is cause why also we should to the honour and glory of his great Name and the praise of that Parliament unto the generations that may come hereafter acknowledg their unwearied pains courage and constancy in that worke Much was done yea very much by that illustrious and worthy Parliament By them the foundation of reformation was laid in the solemne League and Covenant which they not only took themselves but ordained should be solemnely taken in all places throughout the Kingdome of England and Dominion of Wales And for the better and more orderly taking thereof appointed and injoyned certain directions to be strictly followed And in pursuance of this League and Covenant engageing every one that tooke it in their severall places to indeavour the refomation of Religion in England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and governement according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches and to bring the Churches of God in the three Kingdomes to the nearest conjunction and uniformity of Religion Confession of Faith forme of Church Government Directory for worship and Catechizing After consultation had with the Reverend Pious and Learned Assembly of Divines called together to that purpose they judged it necessary that the Book of Common Prayer should be abolished and the Directory for the publick worship of God and in their Ordinance mentioned should be established and observed in all the Churches within this Land as appears by their Ordinance of January the 3. 1644. for that purpose By them Prelacy that is Church Government by Archbishops Bishops their Chancellors and Commissaries Deanes Deanes and Chapters Archdeacons and all other Ecclesiasticall
every lawful Minister to whom the Key of Doctrine is committed by himself singly or else it is Juridical and this belongs to Synods and Councils who having the Key of Discipline are invested with authority to inquire into try examine censure and judge of matters of Doctrine and Discipline authoritatively although they be tyed to the rule of Gods Word in such proceedings as Judges to the Law and likewise to censure offenders according to their merit when such cases are regularly and orderly brought before them And in this sense it was that we submitted our apprehensions in the Paper published to the Judgement of the Provincial Assembly And we believe when the Apostle tels us 1 Cor. 14. 32. That the spirits os the Prophets are subject to the Prophets And our Saviour Christ-saith Mat. 18. â—ell the Church And when we consider what was practised by Paul and Barnabas and certain others who upon occasion of a contest that arose in the Church at Antioch about a matter of Doctrine were sent up from that Church to Jerusalem to the Apostles and Elders about that question from these and other Scriptural grounds we had sufficient ground for so doing We are sure also That Whitaker de Conciliis quaestione quinta and Chamierus in his Panstratia de oecumenico Pontifice ubi de Authoritate Papae in Ecclesia cap. 13. cap. 14. And generally all our Protestant Divines against the Papists alledging the Texts above-mentioned and others do prove abundantly that in the sense declared the Pope is to be subject to a general Council wherein also sundry Papists do concur with them And questionless if in the time of Augustine who was no contemner of Synods and Councils any in this sense had declared that they would not have submitted their apprehensions to their judgement he would have cried out against them as well as against the Donatists O impudentem vocem And we hope when you have weighed the matter better you will not in this sense see any reason to refuse to submit either your sense and apprehensions of our Paper or what you may publish as your own private Judgements in other matters about Religion to the Judgement of a general Council supposing it might be had SECT III. WE have now done with your Preface and come to the matter it self wherein you professe 1. To joyn with us in a deep sense of the several grosse sins and errors of the times desiring earnestly to mourn first for your own sins next for the sixs of others c. And here we do heartily pray that neither we nor you may any of us condemn our selves either by professing our sorrow for what sins we may practise or by refusing to help forward the good that we professe to allow of but may testifie the truth of our sorrow for our own and other mens sins by suitable indeavors to reform what is amisse in our selves and helping forward every one in his place the reformation of others 2 In the next place you say You are also sensible with us that there are sundry persons grosly ignorant in the mainpoints of Christian Religion And if so we hope you will acknowledge that where after the injoying of plenty of Preaching and the publick Catechizing that hath been used for many years together and much more where there hath been lesse of this meanes many continue grosly ignorant in the main points of Religion it is at least not to be condemned in such Ministers as shall be willing to take the paines by private Catechizing to instruct such persons This course being to the Ministers a matter of paines onely and that hereupon where the publick Catechizing attaines not its desired end the private may be good and useful that so poor souls perish not for lack of knowledge 3. Lastly You hope That we with you are sensible and greived though you say we do not mention them for the grosse errors in judgement and damnable Doctrines of many who have rent themselves into as many several Heresies as they have into Sects and Schisms You may perceive by the title of our Paper that it was a representation of our apprehensions to the Provincial Assembly in the Case to us propounded by the said Provincial and what that was we shall particularly declare anon although by what we say had been complained of and represented unto us it might be gathered and therefore we were chiefly to apply our selves to that which was therein our main work and businesse That the grosse and damnable errors that the loosness of these times have brought forth are to be bewailed if it were possible with tears of bloud is most freely to be confessed And whether we lay them not to heart in some poor measure God the searcher of all hearts he knows as what complaints have been made of these by the members of this Classis both in their prayers and preaching men can witnesse and likewise what testimonies have been given to the truth of Jesus Christ and against the errors of the times subscribed with their hands and published to the world though therein but concurring with the rest of their Reverend Brethren in this Province in the Province of London and other Counties of the Land posterity may read when we are in our graves But as to the most of the Congregations belonging to this Classis the great business to be looked after was the use of our best indeavors for the informing of the ignorant and the reforming of the scandalous the numbers of these being great and of those that are so grosly erroneous as to maintain damnable doctrines and whereof you professe your selves to be so sensible very inconsiderable in comparison of the former and in sundry of our Congregations if not in most blessed be God for it not any at all that we know of And therefore there was not that reason to make any such expresse mention of these as of the former although in our Paper we were not herein neither altogether silent as will after appear Having professed your agreement with us thus farre you go on to declare your selves That touching the way of informing the ignorant and reforming the wicked and erroneous you shall not much dissent And 1. You say For the Information and instruction of the ignorant by way of Catechizing before they be admitted to the Sacrament the course by us published provided you say it be in publick little differeth from the Order prescribed by the Church of England and other Reformed Churches abroad before any be admitted to the Sacrament of the Lords Sapper That all Children and others so many as it is fit to instruct after that manner be publickly catechized is that which we heartily wish had been and were more generally practised in our own Church at home as it is practised by the Reformed Churches abroad And certainly had the publick catechizing of Children and others been more generally and constantly practised there had not been that cause
of our Presbyterian discipline c. Unto which we say That we have constantly professed against those of the separation That the several Assemblies or Congregations within this Land that make a profession of the true Christian and Apostolique Faith are true Churches of Jesus Christ That the several members of these Congregations are by their birth members as those that were born in the Jewish Church are said to be by the Apostle Jewes by nature Gal. 2. That this their membership was sealed to them in their Baptism that did solemnly admit them as into the universal Church so into the particular wherein they were born We have also constantly maintained against the afore-mentioned Persons That the Ministers of these Churches are true Ministers notwithstanding that exception of theirs against them that they were ordained by Bishops who also themselves were true Ministers in our Judgement though we cannot acknowledge that by divine right they were superiour to their fellow brethren either in regard of order or jurisdiction And that therefore the Word and Sacraments the most essential marks of a true visible Church according to the professed Judgement of our Divines against the Papists on the one hand and those of the separation on the other dispensed by these Vinisters were and are the true Ordinances of Jesus Christ And that hereupon our work was not when the Presbyterian Government was appointed to constitute Churches but to reform them onely And that therefore none within our bounds except they shall renounce Christianity and their Baptisme can be deemed by us to be without in the Apostles sense and so therefore not within the compass and verge of our Presbyterian Government Neither is it their not associating with us in regard of Government that doth exempt them from censure by it if they should be such offenders as by the rules thereof were justly censurable It not being a matter arbitrary for private Persons at their own will and pleasure to exempt themselves from under that Ecclesiastical Government that is settled by Authority And as you know it would not have been allowed of under the former Government 2 And therefore whether you and all others within our bounds be not comprehended within our Government according to the rules laid down in the Ordinance of Parliament above mentioned appointing the form of Church Government to be used in the Church of England and Ireland and therein ordaining as hath been recited before in the first page thereof and to which we referre you Especially considering that all within the bounds of our several Parishes that are no other now then formerly even Papists and Anabaptists and other Sectaries were under the late Prelatical Government we leave it to you to judge Onely if so we wish you to consider that then you are brought under the Government of Presbytery not so much by us as by the Parliament appointing this Government And then we think you who warn us not to contemn civil power might well out of respect to the Authority ordaining it but especially considering the word Presbytery is a known Scripture expression 1 Tim. 4 and interpreted by sundry of the Fathers as we do as hath been declared before have used a more civil expression then to have called it a common fold into which it should seem your complains it that you should be driven Although Presbytery layes restraint on none but such as being scandalous in their lives and so contemning the Laws of God are therefore truly and indeed the lawless Persons that we speak of But whereas as you suppose This is our chief design in this as in other transactions of ours to subject all to our Government We doe refer our selves to our course of life past and hope it will witnesse with us to all that will judge impartially what our designes have been in our other transactions And as touching our design in the Paper published whether it hath been ought but the information of the ignorant and reformation of the scandalous to the Glory of God and their salvation we leave it to be judged by those that will judge of mens intentions by what is expressed in their words and actions We know very well we are charged by some that we affect Dominion to Lord it over the People and to have all sorts of Persons of what rank soever to stoop to us But we do openly professe that the Government of the Church that is committed unto men is not Despotical but Ministerial That it is no Dominion but a Ministery onely And that the Officers that are intrusted with it are themselves to be subject both in regard of their bodies and estates to the Civil power That by the Ordinance of God they are appointed to be under and that in their Government they have nothing to do with the bodies and estates of any Persons but with their Souls onely Although here we desire to enquire of you whether if you be indeed for the settling of any Government at all in the Church as you professe to be you do not think that all should be subject to it We cannot judge you to be so irrational as to be for a Government and that yet subiection to it must be denyed And if the late Government of the Prelacy was not blamed by you because it required subjection to it we wish you to consider whether upon this account you have reason to censure us But further whereas you tell us That we garnish over our Government with the specious title of Christs Government Throne and Scepter We wish you to consider what in your Answer to an objection that you frame out of our Paper your selves doe say You there tell us You pray for the establishment of such Church Government as is consonant to the will of God and universal practice of primitive Churches that Ecclesiastical Discipline may be exercised in the hands of them to whom it was committed by Christ and left by him to be transferred from hand to hand to the end of the World The expressions you here use are as high touching that Government you would have established as any have been that ever we have used of ours For your prayer is That Ecclesiastical Discipline may be exercised in the hands of them to whom it was committed by Christ and left by him to be transferred from hand to hand to the end of the world The Government then that you are for must be with you Christs Government Throne and Scepter And why do you then condemn us if we have used such expressions concerning our Government till you have convinced us that it is not such When yet you take to your selves the liberty to use the like language concerning the Government you pray may be established But where as you say Presbytery is the main thing driven at here and that however she comes ushered in with a Godly pretence of sorrow for the sins and the ignorance of the times and the duty incumbent upon us
to exercise the power that Christ hath committed to us for edification and not for destruction that these are but so many waste Papers wherein Presbytery is wrapped up to make it look more handsomely and passe more currantly We do earnestly desire That in the examination of your consciences you would seriously consider whether you have not both transgressed the rules of Charity in passing such hard censures upon us and also usurped that which belongs not to you in making your selves judges of what fals not under your cognizance The things you mention belonging only to be tried by your and our Master to whom we must all stand or fall But we are heartily sorry that Presbytery which stands in no need of any painting or cover to make it look more handsomely and passe more currantly should be accounted by you the anguis in herba whereof you had need to beware it having never given that offence to any as to merit such language SECT VI. BUt now you frame an objection out of our Paper and return your Answer professing That you pray for the establishment of such Church Government throughout his Highnesse Dominions as is consonant to the will of God and universal practice of primitive Churches c. In that you do here joyn the will of God and the universal practice of primitive Churches together as you joyned the Word of God and the constant practise of the Catholique Church before you seem to us to make up the rule whereby we must judge what Government it is that you pray might be established of these two viz. the will of God and the universal practise of primitive Churches Or that it is the universal practise of primitive Churches that must be our sure guide and comment upon the Word of God to tell us what is his will revealed there touching Church Government and discipline If this be your sense as we apprehend it is we must needs professe that herein we greatly differ from you as not conceiving it to be sound and orthodox It being the Word of God alone and the approved practise of the Church recorded there whether it was the universal and constant practise of the Church or no that is to be the onely rule to judge by in this or any other controversies in matters of Religion But yet admitting for the present the rule you seem to make we should desire to know from you what that Church Government is which is so consonant to the will of God and universal practise of primitive Churches For our own parts we think it will be very hard for you or any others to demonstrate out of any Records of Antiquity what was the universal practise of primitive Churches for the whole space of the first 300. yeares after Christ or the greatest part thereof excepting so much as is left upon record in the Scriptures of the new Testament the Monuments of Antiquity that concern those times for the greatest part of them being both imperfect and far from shewing us what was the universal practise of the Church then though the practises of some Churches may be mentioned and likewise very questionable At least it will not be easie to assure us that some of those that goe under the names of the most approved Authors of those times are neither spurious nor corrupted And hereupon it will unavoidably follow that we shall be left very doubtful what Government it is that is most consonant to the universal and constant practise of primitive Churches for that time But as touching the rule it self which you seem here to lay down we cannot close with it We do much honour and reverence the Primitive Churches But yet we believe we owe more reverence to the Scriptures then to judge them either imperfect or not to have light enough in themselves for the resolving all doubts touching matters of faith or practise except it be first resolved what was either the concurrent interpretation of the Fathers or the universal and constant practise of the Churches of those times Besides that admitting this for a rule that the universal and constant practise of the primitive Churches must be that which must assure us what is the will of God revealed in Scripture concerning the Government which he hath appointed in the Church our faith is hereupon resolved into a most uncertain ground and so made fallible and turned into opinion For what monuments of Antiquity besides the Scriptures can assure us touching the matters of fact therein contained that they were such indeed as they are there reported to be the Authors of them themselves being men that were not infallibly guided by the Spirit But yet supposing we could be infallibly assured which yet never can be what was the universal and constant practise of the primitive Churches how shall that be a rule to assure us what is most consonant to the will of God When as we see not especially in such matters as are not absolutely necessary to salvation but that the universal practise of the Churches might in some things be dissonant to the will of God revealed in Scriptures And so the universal practise of primitive Churches can be no certain rule to judge by what Church Government is most consonant to the will of God revealed in his Word We know there are corruptions in the best of men There was such hot contention betwixt Paul and Barnabas as caused them to part asunder Peter so failed in his practise as that though before some came from James he did eat with the Gentiles yet when they were come he withdrew himself fearing them of the Circumcision And hereupon not only other Jews likewise dissembled with him but Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation Whence it 's clear that the examples of the best men even in those things wherein they went contrary to the rule of Gods Word are of a spreading nature and the better the Persons that give the bad examples are the greater the danger of the more universal leavening Nay we finde that not onely some few Apostolical men had their failings but even Apostolical primitive Churches did in the very face of the Apostles they being yet alive make great defection both in regard of opinions and practises As from the examples of the Churches of Corinth Galatia and the Churches of Asia is manifest The Apostle also tels us that even in his time the mystery of iniquity began to work And in after times we know how the Doctrine was corrupted what grosse superstition crept into the Church what domination was striven for amongst the Pastors and Bishops of the Churches till at length Antichrist was got up into his seat unto which height yet he came not all at once but by steps and degrees Besides it is of fresh remembrance that notwithstanding the reformation happily brought about in our own Church in regard of Doctrine and worship after those dismal Marian times yet the corruption in regard of
create that happy and desirable Peace among us that is so thirsted after by all good men 2. But yet we cannot dissemble what we apprehend and is in our thoughts that there are some sorts of Persons in this Land that till God change their Judgments and the frame of their Spirits though we shall so far as is possible and as much as lyeth in us live peaceably with them and with all others and shall be ready to requite good for evill by all Offices and Duties of love toward them yet we see little hopes of any reall and hearty Union and closure with them And here we must profess that however we were willing for our own exoneration if no other end should be thereby attained to entertain a Treaty with you touching an Accommodation and which was pursued by us with all Cordialness and Sincerity being desirous to wait on God in the use of the means for that purpose so far as we saw any hope not knowing what God might work out thereby as will appeare we doubt not to the Reader from our Narrative yet you have now discovered so much bitterness and distemper of Spirit and so much unsoundness in your Principles and Opinions together with a resolvedness to adhere to them for ought we can discern to the contrary that till God do open your Eyes and change your hearts giving you a through sense of and sâ—uâ—d humiliation for what to your own shame you have published to the World in your Papers we have not any great hopes of accommodating with you though we shall not in the mean season cease to pray for you and use the best means we can to bring you into the right way from which you have turned aside But yet we desire we might not be here mistaken For as for such as are moderate and godly Episcopall men That hold Ordination by Presbyters to be lawfull and valid that a Bishop and Presbyter are one and the same Order of Ministery which are not your Tenents as will appear from both this and your next Paper and that are Orthodox in doctrinall Truths though we may differ from them in Judgment in some Points touching Church Government yet they are such as we do heartily desire to accommodate with and we believe that such tearms might be propounded that betwixt them and us there might be an happy Union as we could heartily wish that all and every of you with whom we have here to deal were of this stamp Although here also we must not conceal that we have many reasons why we dare not admit of moderate Episcopacy as the tearms of accommodation with those of this sort And because it is that which you press us with fully expecting we should submit unto what is propounded by Doctor Vsher in his reduction of Episcopacy unto the form of Synodicall Government received in the ancient Church although as we have hinted to you we have reason from your own Papers to judge you aime at more then is there propounded we shall not here refuse to give you some of our reasons why we cannot consent to you in these Proposals as you know moderate Episcopacy was that we expresly cautioned against in our Answer to your first Paper And 1 First We shall here mind you of what is well observed by our reverend Brethren of the Province of London in their Jus divinum Ministerii Evangelici Part second in the Appendix Pag 117 118 119. There they lay down their fifth Proposition in these words That when the distinction between a Bishop and Presbyter first began in the Church of Christ it was not grounded upon a Jus divinum but upon prudentiall Reasons and Arguments And the chief of them was as Hierome and divers after him say In remedium Schismatis ut dissentionum plantaria evellerentur For the remedy of Schisme and that the Seeds of Errour might be rooted out of the Church This Proposition thus layd down they add Now that this prudentiall way invented no doubt at first upon a good intention was not the way of God appears as Smectymnus hath well shewn thus Because we read in the Apostles dayes there were Divisions Rom. 16. 17. and Schismes 1 Cor. 3. 3. and 11. 18. yet the Apostle was not directed by the Holy-ghost to ordaine Bishops for the taking away of those Schismes Neither in the Rules he prescribes for healing of those Breaches doth he mention Bishops for that end Neither doth he mention this in his directions to Timothy and Titus for the Ordination of Bishops or Elders as one end of their Ordination or one peculiar duty of their Office And though the Apostle saith Opportet haereses esse ut qui probati sunt manifesti fiant inter vas Yet the Apostle no where saith Opportet Episcopos esse ut tollantur haereses quae manifestae fiunt There must be Bishops that those Heresies which are amongst you may be removed 2 Because the Holy-ghost who could foresee what would ensue thereupon would never ordain that for a remedy which would not only be ineffectual to the cutting off of evil but become a Stirrop for Antichrist to get up into the Saddle For if there be a necessity of setting up one Bishop over many Presbyters for preventing Schisms there is as great a necessity for setting up one Archbishop over many Bishops and one Patriarch over many Archbishops and one Pope over all unless men will imagine that there is a danger of Schisme only amongst Presbyters and not among Bishops and Archbishops which is contrary to Reason Truth History and our own experience And then they add hence it is that Musculus having proved by Act. 20. Phil 1. 1. Tit. 1. 5. 1 Pet. 5. 1. that in the Apostles times a Bishop and a Presbyter were all one he adds But after the Apostles times when amongst the Elders of the Church as Hierom sayth Schisms arose and as I verily think they began to strive for Majority by little and little they began to choose one amongst the rest out of the number of Elders that should be above the rest in an higher degree called Bishop But whether that device of man profited the Church or no the times following could better judge then when it first began And further addeth that if Hierom others had seen as much as they that came after they would have concluded that it was never brought in by Gods Spirit to take away Schism as was pretended but brought in by Satan to wast destroy the former Ministry that fed the Flock Thus far Musculus Sadael also hath this memorable passage The difference between Bishops and other Ministers came in for remedy of Schisme But they that devised it little thought what a Gate they opened to the ambition of Bishops Hence also Dr. Whitakers asking how came in the inequality between Bishops Presbyters answereth out of Hierom that the Schism and Faction of some occasioned the ancient
we said had spoken so fully touching that point that we knew not what could be added more We shall give the Reader some short accompt of what he may find more at large in the Authors themselves only mentioning some things which the London Ministers in their Jus divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici and the Provinciall Assembly of London in their Vindication of the Presbyterian Government have upon the Texts we urged to prove from them the Divine right of ruling a Elders Office 1. The first Text we urged for the divine right of the ruling Elders Office was Rom. 12. 6 7 8. which runs thus Having then Gifts differing according to the Grace given whether Prophesie let us Prophesie according to the proportion of Faith or Ministry let us wait on our Ministry or he that teacheth on teaching or he that exhorteth on exhortation He that giveth â—et him do it with simplicity He that ruleth with diligence He that sheweth mercy with cheerfulness Upon this Text the Provinciall Assembly of London in their Vindication do thus express themselves In which words say they we have a perfect enumeration of all the ordinary Offices of the Church These Offices are reduced first to two generall heads Prophesie and Ministry and are therefore set down in the Abstract By Prophesie is meant the Faculty of right understanding interpreting and expounding the Scriptures Ministry comprehends all other Employments in the Church Then these generals are subdivided into the speciall Offices contained under them and are therefore put down in the Concrete Under Prophesie are contained 1. He that teacheth that is the Doctor or Teacher 2. He that exhorteth i. e. the Pastor Under Ministry are comprised 1. He that giveth that is the Deacon 2. He that ruleth that is the ruling Elder 3. He that sheweth mercy which * Office pertained unto them who in those dayes had care of the sick So that in these words we have the ruling Elder plainly set down and contradistinguished from the teaching and exhorting Elder as appears by the distributive Particles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whether he that teacheth whether he that exhorteth whether he that ruleth c. And here likewise we have the Divine Institution of the ruling Elder for so the words hold forth Having then gifts differing according to the Grace that is given unto us And this also in the third Verse According as God hath dealt to every man c. This Officer is the Gift of Gods free Grace to the Church for the good of it Thus far the Provinciall Assembly of London And then they vindicate the Text from what is objected against it The London Ministers in their Jus divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici do urge the Argument drawn hence for the Jus divinum of the ruling Elders Office more fully After they had given a view of the scope and contexture of the Chapter and given the like exposition of the Text quoting also Paraeus and Piscator and Calvin and Beza on the place who give the same exposition as is manifest to him that will but consult those Interpreters upon the Text they then do argue thus from this place Major Whatsoever 1 Members of Christs organical body have an 2 ordinary 3 Office of ruling therein given 4 them of God 5 distinct from all other ordinary standing Officers in the Church 6 together with direction from God how they are to rule they are the ruling Elders we seek and that Jure divino Minor But 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. He that ruleth mentioned in Rom. 12. 8. is a 1 Member of Christs Organicall Body having an 2 ordinary 3 Office of ruling therein 4 given him of God 5 distinct from all other standing Officers in the Church 6 together with direction how he is to rule Conclus Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. He that ruleth mentioned in Rom. 12. 8. is the ruling Elder we seek and that Jure divino The severall particulars noted in the Major and Minor Propositions they do distinctly prove and are too large here to transcribe but they may be seen all made good from Pag. 125. to Pag. 131. And to which we refer the Reader Then they proceed to vindicate this Text from the severall exceptions made against the alledging of it for the proof of the Divine right of the ruling Elders Office by Feild Sutlive Bilson from Pag. 130. to pag. 136. And as touching Dr. Sutlive they have a remarkable passage which they note in the Margin pag. 131. which we think fit to recite in their own words which are as followeth As for this Dr. Sutlive divers times hereafter mentioned the Reader may please to take notice here once for all that he told a reverend Minister in London yet living and ready if need were to testifie the same upon Oath who declared it to one of the Authors of this Treatise Feb. 16. 1646. That he was sorry with all his heart that ever he put Pen to Paper to write against Beza as he had done in the behalf of the proud domineering Prelates And he spoke this with great indignation It is good for men then to take heed that they be not too hot for the Prelacy nor too earnest in contending against the Office of ruling Elders for we see they may come to repent hereof before they die 2. In the next place follows 1 Cor. 12. 28. And God hath set some in the Church first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then gifts of healing helps Governments diversities of Tongues The Provinciall Assembly of London in their Vindication urge this Text thus Here we have an enumeration of sundry Officers of the Church and amongst others there are Helps Governments By Helps are meant Deacons as not onely our reformed Divines but Chrysostome and Estius and others observe And by Governments are meant the ruling Elders That this may the better appear they do here prove six things 1. That by Governments are meant men exercising Government the Abstract being put for the Concrete which they shew appears first by the beginning of the Verse God hath set some in his Church which relates to Persons not to Offices Secondly By the 29 and 30 Verses where the Apostle speaks Concretively of those things which he had spoken of before Abstractively Are all Workers of Miracles Have all the gifts of Healing Do all speak with Tongues c. And so by consequence Are all Helpers are all Governours 2. That the Governour here meant must needs be a Church Governour not the civil Magistrate because this is beside the whole scope of the Chapter treating meerly on Spirituall Church Matters not at all of Secular or Civil Because also it is said expresly That he is seated in the Church Now the Magistrate as such is not placed by God in the Church but in the Common-weale And lastly Because the Apostle writes of such Governours that had at that time
actuall existence in the Church whereas neither then nor some hundred years after was there any Christian Magistrate 3. That this Church-Governour is seated by God in his Church and so is a Plant of Gods one planting 4. That this Church Governour is a Church Officer For though it be a question amongst the Learned whether some of the persons here named as the Workers of Miracles and those that had the Gift ef Healing and of Tongues were seated by God as Officers in the Church and not rather only as eminent Members endued with these eminent Gifts yet it is most certain that whosoever is seated by God in his Church as a Church-Governour must needs be a Church Officer For the nature of the Gift doth necessarily imply an Office which they do further shew from the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendred Governments being a Metaphor taken from Pilots or Ship-masters governing their Ships 5. That this Church-Governour is an ordinary and perpetuall Officer in his Church as they shew does appear from the perpetuall necessity of him in the Church a Church without Government being as a Ship without a Pilot as a Kingdome without a Magistrate as a World without a Sun 6. That this Church-governour is an Officer contradistinguished in the Text from the Apostles Prophets Teachers and all other Officers in the Church This they prove 1. By the Apostles manner of expressing their Offices in an enumerative form first Apostles secondarily Prophets thirdly Teachers after that Miracles then Gifts of Healing c. 2. By the Recapitulation V. 29. 30. Are all Apostles Are all Prophets Are all Teachers Are all Workers of Miracles c. 3. By the scope of the whole Chapter which is to set down different Gifts and Offices in different Subjects as they do more at large shew answering an Objection and then shewing that this Interpretation which they have given is not onely the Interpretation of reformed Divines both Lutherans and Calvenists but of the ancient Fathers and even the Papists themselves And here they quote Gerhardus de ministerio ecclesiastico Calvin in locum P. Martyr in locum Beza in locum Piscator in locum Ambrose in locum Chrysost in locum Salmer in loc Septimo loco ponit gubernatores i. e. eos qui praesunt aliis gubernant plebemque in Offici◠continent Et Ecclesia Christi habet suam politiam cum pastor per se omnia praestare non posset adjungebantur duo Presbyteri de quibus dixit qui bene praesunt presbyteri duplici honore digni habeantur maxime qui laborant verbo doctrina qui una cum pastore deliberabant de ecclesiae cura instauratione qui etiam fidei atque honestae vitae consortes erant Thus far the Provinciall Assembly of London The London Ministers in their Jus divinum do urge the Argument hence thus Major Whatsoever Officers God himself now under the new Testament hath set in the Church as Governours therein distinct from all other Church-governours whether extraordinary or ordinary they are the ruling Elders we enquire after and that Jure divine Minor But the Governments named in 1 Cor. 12. 28. are Officers which God himself now under the new Testament hath set in the Church as Governours therein distinct from all other Church-governours whether extraordinary or ordinary The Major being in it self cleer they prove the Minor in the severall Branches of it proving 1. That the Church here spoken of is the Church of Christ now under the N. T. 2. That the Governments here mentioned are Officers set in this Church not out of the Church as Rulers governing therein 3. That they are set not by man but by God himself 4. That these Governments thus set in the Church are distinct not onely from all Governours out of the Church but also from all governing Officers within the Church Whence the Conclusion is inferred Therefore these Governments in 1 Cor. 12. 28. are the ruling Elders enquired after and that Jure divino This Argument thus urged is confirmed in the severall Branches of it from Pag. 136. to Pag. 144. And after they vindicate the urging of this Text for this purpose from the severall exceptions made against the same by Dr. Feild Sutlive Whitgift Mr. Coleman and Bilson from Pag. 144. to Pag. 150. 3. The third and last Text we urged for the Divine right of ruling Elders Office was 1 Tim. 5. 17. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy double honour especially they who labour in the Word and Doctrine For the understanding of whichwords the Provinciall Assembly of London lay down this Rule That every Text of Scripture is to be interpreted according to the literall and Grammaticall construction unless it be contrary to the Analogy of Faith or the Rule of Life or the circumstances of the Text. Otherwise say they we shall make a Nose of Wax of the Scriptures and draw quidlibet ex quolibet And then they add Now according to the Grammaticall Construction there are plainly held forth two sorts of Elders The one only ruling and the other also labouring in the Word and Doctrine Then they give the true Analysis of the words thus 1. Here is a Genus a General and that is Elders 2. Two distinct Species or kinds of Elders Those that rule well and those that labour in Word and Doctrine as Pastor and Doctor 3. We have two Particles expressing these two kinds of Elders Ruling Labouring The first do onely rule the second do also labour in Word and Doctrine 4 Here are two distinct Articles distinctly annexed to these two Participles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that rule they that labour 5. Here is an eminent discretive Particle set before these two kinds of Elders these two Participles these two Articles evidently distinguishing one from the other Viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 especially they that labour c. They do urge out of Dr. Whitaker That it is absurd to say that this Text is to be understood of one and the same Elder If a man should say All the Students in the University are worthy of double honour especially they that are Professors of Divinity he must necessarily understand it of two sorts of Students Or if a man should say All Gentlemen that do Service for the Kingdomes in their Counties are worthy of double honour especially they that do Service in the Parliament this must needs be understood of different persons And however they do take notice that Archbishop Whilgift Bishop King Bishop Bilson Bishop Downame and others labour to fasten divers other Interpretations upon these words yet they observe that all other senses that are given of these words are either such as are disagreeing from the literall and Grammaticall Construction or such as fall into one of these two absurdities either to maintain a Non preaching Ministry or a lazy preaching Ministry to deserve double honour and which they make to appear particularly as
Brethren of one and the same Church and Fellowship And we know not what other Church you mean but the Church of England some of you that are the Subscribers of this Paper not being Members of the particular Church at Manchester nor any of you acknowledging or owning our Presbyterian Classicall Church or Association And therefore you here take us to be of the same Church of England with your selves and confess that we are in fellowship with it notwithstanding Episcopacy be taken away and which is that which we our selves do constantly profess 2. That that Episcopacy that was submitted to by the Ministers of this Land of later times was burthensome and grievous It spoyled the Pastors of that power which of right did belong unto them and which they did not onely anciently exercise as Doctor Vsher shews in his Reduction of Episcopacy to the form of Synodicall Government received in the ancient Church Pag. 3 4 5. but which also by the order of the Church of England as the same Author out of the Book of Ordination shews did belong unto them For he there saith By the Order of the Church of England all Presbyters are charged to administer the Doctrine and Sacraments and the Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Realm hath received and that they might better understand what the Lord hath commanded them the Exhortation of St. Paul to the Elders of the Church of Ephesus is appointed to be read unto them at the time of their Ordination Take heed unto your selves and to all the Flock among whom the Holy-ghost hath made you Overseers to rule the Congregation of God which he hath purchased with his blood All which power the Pastors were deprived of during the prevalency of Episcopacy the Keys of the Kingdome of Heaven being taken out of their hands they having neither power to cast out of the Church the vilest of Offenders that were often kept in against their minds nor any power to restore into the Churches Communion such as had been never so unjustly excommunicated though of the best of their Flock And so that Episcopacy that formerly was submitted unto was a plain and manifest usurpation upon the Pastors Office and Authority was very oppressive and grievous unto the Church and injurious to her Communion and whereupon it will follow that there is no breach of that Union which ought to be maintained in the Church by not admitting of it again but rather the Churches peace the power that of right belongs unto the Pastors and the Priviledges of the Members are all better secured in the absence then in the presence of it 3. That however both godly Conformists as well as Nonconformists did groan under the burthensomness of it yet in licitis honest is they submitted and yielded Obedience to it whilst it continued established by the Laws of the Land And that out of respect to the peace of the Church although they did not thereby take themselves obliged to forbeare the use of any lawfull means for their deliverance from that bondage as opportunity was offered And hereupon they petitioned the Parliament of late for an abolition of it as had been formerly desired in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth and King James as when other Laws have been found to be inconvenient and mischievous it was never accounted any disturbance of the civil peace to remonstrate the grievousness of such Laws to the Parliament that they might be abolished 4. Let it also be further weighed that that Episcopacy to which you would perswade us by this Argument to return is now abolished and taken away by the Authority of Parliament as appears by the Acts and Ordinances for that purpose See them cited in our Animadversions on your next Paper Sect. 4. And therefore both the Bishops as such and that Superiority which they challenged and exercised over the Ministers in this Land are dead in Law and so there can be no guilt of Schisme lying on the Ministers in this Land for not returning to that Canonicall Obedience that is not hereupon any longer due or for not submitting themselves to that power and jurisdiction that is extinct There is the greater strength in this consideration if it be observed 1. That whatever Jurisdiction the Diocesan Bishops did exercise over Presbyters they did obtain onely by the Law of the Land and Canon of the Church 2. That the Parliament did lawfully take away that Jurisdiction from them and had therein the concurrence of a reverend and learned Assembly of Divines The first of these Propositions is clear upon this consideration that the Scripture makes a Bishop and a Presbyter all one This is clear from Titus 1. Ver. 5. compared with the seventh whence it appears that those whom the Apostle had called Elders or Presbyters Ver. 5. he calls Bishops Ver. 7. And indeed otherwise he had reasoned very inconsequently when laying down the qualifications of Elders Ver. 6. he saith Ver. 7. For a Bishop c. For a Bishop must be blameless Whereunto may be added that other known place Act. 20. 17. compared with Ver. 28. For the Apostle saith to those Elders that the Holy-ghost had made them Bishops or Overseers of the Church Besides what Office the Bishops had that the Elders had Both are charged to feed the Flock of Christ Act. 20. 28. 1 Pet. 5. 12. and which is both by Doctrine and Government The Keys of the Kingdome of Heaven were committed to them Mat. 16. 19. both the Key of Doctrine and the Key of Discipline The former is not denyed and for the other it is proved from 1 Thes 5. 12. 1 Tim. 5. 17. Heb. 13. 7 17 24. where we see they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that are over them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that rule well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those that rule And for power to Ordain we may see its plain from 1 Tim. 4. 14. where Timothy is charged not to neglect the Gift that was in him which was given him by Prophesie with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery This Text you your selves tell us in your next Paper Sect. 5. is understood by the Greek Fathers as Ignatius Chrysostome Theodoret Theophylact Oecumenius and others and some few of the Latines also Of the company of Presbyters i. e. Bishops who lay hands on the new made Bishops or Priests But from these several Texts thus urged it is very manifest that the Scripture makes a Bishop and a Presbyter both one or one and the same order of Ministry And hereupon it follows that whatever Jurisdiction the Diocesan Bishops exercised over Presbyters they had it not by Divine Right but obtained it onely by the Law of the Land and Canon of the Church And thus the first Proposition is clear We now come to make good the second And that the Parliament did lawfully take away the Jurisdiction and whole Office of Diocesan Bishops
defective in Government for want of Bishops yet he neither upon this account doth unchurch them nor would have refused Communion with them as you by what you do here hold forth must needs do 5. Nay lastly hence it will follow that when all the Bishops in these Lands and those that were Ordained by them shall be dead if there be no Bishops to be found in any other reformed Churches nor Ministers that were Ordained by them a retreat back againe to Rome must be sounded that so we might have a lawfull Ordained Ministry and a Church which yet cannot be but by owning the Pope as the Head of the Church and renouncing the Protestant Religion as in the mean season great advantage is given to the Popish Emissaries to ensnare the weak by such a dangerous Insinuation as this is sc That for want of Bishops or that when all the Bishops are dead and those that were Ordained by them we have amongst us neither Church nor Ministery nor Ordinances and thus must continue to the end of the World except we returne to Rome and which they will not be wanting to tell them But if you had consulted Bishop Jewell Bishop Downame Doctor Feild Bishop Davenant Mr. Mason and other Orthodox Episcopall Divines in this Point and weighed their Defences of the reformed Churches and Ministry against the Papists you would have found they would never have owned such a dangerous and unsound Position as the Argument you here urge us with to admit againe of Episcopacy doth imply Neither do we believe that they if they were now alive would judge that you had here argued well for your Mother the Church of England that hath her selfe also ever since the Reformation even during the time of Episcopacy acknowledged the reformed Churches of France Scotland Low-countries Geneva to be true Churches of Christ and hath given them the right hand of Fellowship as Sister Churches and owned their Ministers Ordained without Bishops by Presbyters onely to be true Ministers 2. We now come to the second thing implyed in this your second Argument with which you would perswade us to admit of Episcopacy which is as we have sayd before that if it be not restored there cannot be a succession of a lawfully Ordained Ministry Which succession yet you seem to judge to be necessary unto the continuance of the Church of God amongst us Here two things are implyed 1. The first whereof is that a Succession is necessary to the very being of the Church and of a lawfully Ordained Ministry And so 1. You do hereby strengthen the hands of the Papists who make the Succession of Bishops and Pastors without any interruption from the Apostles to be a Mark of the true Church although they are therein opposed generally by our Protestant Divines The Condition of the Church being many times such that the Succession of publick Teachers and Pastors is interrupted Doctor Sutlive saith well In externa successione quam haeretici saepe habent Orthodoxi non habent nihil est momenti 2. You do also hereby Minister occasion of such scruples unto private Christians as you will never be able satisfactorily to resolve For suppose one on this ground questions the truth of his Baptisme sc Because he doth not know whether he was baptized by one that was Ordained by a Bishop who himselfe also was Ordained by a former true Bishop and he by a former untill the Succession be carried on as high as that we are brought to such a Bishop that was ordained by one of the Apostles How will you be able making this Succession necessary to the continuing of the Church and a lawfully Ordained Ministry to resolve the scruples of such an one What Church-Story shall be able to resolve the doubts that may be moved on this occasion Or on what grounds holding the necessity of this Succession for the continuance of the Church and a lawfully Ordained Ministry will you be able to satisfie the Conscience of such as may be stumbled 3. Nay will not this Assertion give occasion to sundry to question all Churches Ministry and Ordinances and so to turn Seekers the Grounds you lay down giving them occasion to question the truth of our Churches Ministry and Ordinances 4. Neither shall the best and ablest Ministers that are already entred into that Calling or such as are to enter into it be able on your Principles in this particular either to satisfie their owne Consciences touching the lawfulness of their calling or be able to justifie and defend it against those that shall call it in question But our Protestant Divines have more sure Grounds on which to justifie our Churches Ministry and Ordinances and to satisfie their own and their peoples Consciences concerning them then what you insinuate 2. The second thing that is further implyed in this Argument is that the Succession of a lawfully Ordained Ministry to the end of the World doth depend upon Episcopacy which is not true There was a time when Bishops had no Superiority above Presbyters a Bishop and a Presbyter in Scripture sense being all one as hath been proved before And though this Superiority should never be restored unto them yet the Succession of a lawfully Ordained Ministry might be by the means of Presbyters Ordaining Presbyters And thus we say it was continued not onely in the dayes of Episcopacy though not without the mixture of some corruption cleaving to the Ordination then in use the Bishops notwithstanding their usurped Superiority above their fellow Brethren being themselves also Presbyters and so their Ordination valid in that respect and which we have constantly maintained against those of the separation but also in the darkest times of Popery and that our Ministry descended to us from Christ through the Apostate Church of Rome but not from the Apostate Church of Rome as our reverend Brethren of the Province of London do well express it in their Jus divinum ministerii Evangelici where they do solidly and learnedly prove That the Ministry which is an Institution of Christ passing to us through Rome is not made null and void no more then the Scriptures Sacraments or any other Gospel Ordinance which we now enjoy and which do also descend to us from the Apostles through the Romish Church And concerning which if any one do doubt we referre him unto the Book for his satisfaction Part 2. cap. 3. where as they well say this great truth so necessary to be knowne in these dayes is fully discussed and made out We have now at length done with both those Arguments we promised to speak to particularly with which you urged us to accept of the Proposall touching the taking in the Bishops wherein we have been the longer though perhaps this Discourse may by you be accounted tedious that so we might wipe off the foule aspersion of Schisme that we are therein charged with and likewise shew that the Church of God and a lawfully Ordained
therefore you and all men may discern that when you say speaking of the humble Advice that in the eleventh Section all Ministers throughout the Land and their Assemblies professing the true Protestant Religion though of different judgments in worship and discipline are all of them equally protected in the liberty of their profession that proposition is a great deal larger then the humble Advice will allow of it expresly concluding even from that protection allowed to some others the way of Prelacy though it should be set up by some Ministers and others of the Protestant Religion and therefore all Ministers and their Assemblies though professing the Protestant Religion cannot equally lay claim to the protection there spoken of But for answer to all that you here urge out of this eleventh Section of the humble Advice we shall say two things 1. That as your selves speak only of protection allowed by it to some persons of different judgement in worship or discipline so whoever will peruse this Section shall not find that it saith one word touching the restraint of the exercise of Church-discipline towards any when it speaks of some that shall differ in other things sc that had been mentioned particularly before in doctrine worship or discipline from the publick profession held forth to whom it allows protection from injury as it grants them a freedom from mulcts and civil penalties and then after of such Ministers or publick Preachers who shall agree with the publick profession in matters of faith although in their judgement and practice they differ in matters of worship and discipline whom it makes capable being otherwise duely qualified and duely approved of some special grace and favour that the former sort are not capable of it is plain from those expressions that it owns a publique discipline which is not held forth any where but in the forme of Church Government established by Ordinance of Parliament for the Church of England and Ireland Aug. 29. 1648. that hath been often times mentioned But you will not find that the exercise of this publick discipline held forth is any where at all in this Section prohibited or that it is restrained in regard of its exercise towards any or limited only in that respect to the Ministers and Assemblies of this or the other perswasion And yet that this publick discipline held forth as aforesaid might be free from all suspition of any undue rigour or harshness towards any we shall here mention one rule which we recited with several other things in our answer to your first Paper touching the Order prescribed in the forme of Church Government of proceeding to excommunication which runs in these words But the persons who hold other errours in judgment about points wherein learned and godly men possibly may or do differ and which subvert not the faith nor are destructive to godliness or that be guilty of such sins of infirmity as are commonly found in the children of God or being otherwise sound in the faith and holy in life and so not falling under censure by the former rules endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace and do yet out of conscience not come up to the observation of all those rules which are or shall be established by authority for regulating the outward worship of God and government of his Church the sentence of excommunication for these causes shall not be denounced against them By this one rule it is very clear that as this discipline is not to be accused of undue severity so there is no repugnancy between the humble Advice and it 2. That which in the second place we have to say is that admitting your proposition were fully as large in the humble Advice in regard of the persons to whom you would have liberty to be extended as you have laid it down which yet we have shewed is not so yet how inconsequently do you argue when you will inferre an exemption of persons from Church censures authorized to be exercised by the forme of Church Government from the humble Advice because it affords them a protection against civil injuries As if this proposition were most certainly true All those that according to the humble Advice are to be protected against civil injuries are thereby exempted from Church censures and yet this must be proved or your consequence is never proved But to make that out we shall allow you time and in the mean season must deny it And so now all you have to the conclusion of this Section is but meer varnish although we are able to tell you as we have told you even now and often before what power is granted unto us who act by an unrepealed Ordinance of Parliament and yet in force that others have not although when you say are these within the bounds of our association subject to our Government unless they will renounce their Baptism and Christianity and which you would represent us to assert in that recital you make of our words in the beginning of the next Section you do therein manifestly offer violence to the words of our answer for if the Reader peruse the first part of the fifth Section of our answer he may there find that we declared our selves in the first place fully against those of the separation and concluded that discourse with these words that hereupon our work was not to constitute Churches but to reforme them only And that therefore none within our bounds except they shall renounce Christianity and their Baptisme can be deemed by us to be without in the Apostles sense this being our answer to what you had pressed us with in your first Paper pleading your exemption from under our Governement from the words of the Apostle and saying for what have you to do to judge those that are without The conclusion then that we inferd did answer that argument you urged from the Apostles words For its plain from our declaring our selves we judged none to be without in the Apostles sense but only Heathens of whom the Apostle spake or such as having formerly professed Christianity did renounce it and their Baptisme and that therefore none could be exempted by those words of the Apostle from being within the verge of our Presbyterian Governement which was the inference we thereupon made By all which it is very clear in what sense those words were to be taken that you here mention and that we did not say that except men did renounce Christianity and their Baptisme they were subject to our Government as you would have it to be but that they could not be judged by us to be without in the Apostles sense except they should make so great an apostacy and wherein we were more liberal and charitable toward you then you were toward your selves It is one thing that makes a member of the Catholick visible Church and another that makes a member of this or that particular Church as it is also true that
times and so their interpretations of Scriptures often more difficult to be understood then the Scriptures that they interpret this also is very considerable that it will be out of the compass and reach of the most persons of ordinary rank to procure all the writings of the Fathers and Councils that are yet extant as we do not beleeve that any of you are so well stored as that you have such a Library wherein all the Fathers or most of them might be consulted which yet were necessary to be procured if their unanimous consent must be the rule for interpretation of Scripture when there is a doubt or difficulty And if some persons might be found of that ability as to procure the Works of all the Fathers yet it is not easie to imagin how even the Learned though Divines much less the simple and ignorant could ever be able to reade over all their Works compare all the Fathers together and their interpretations that so they might when there was a doubt or difficulty gather what was the unanimous consent of the Fathers touching the interpretation of a Text the sense whereof we questioned And hereupon it will follow that what you propound as the rule yea and the best rule too for interpreting of Scripture is so farre from being such that it is a very unfit and unmeet rule being such as few or none if any at all are able in all cases or the most to make use of But by this time we doubt not notwithstanding your great confidence touching the sureness of your rule that it is manifest from the reasons we have given unto which we might add many more if there were need that your rule for the interpretation of the Scriptures participates not of the nature of what is to be a rule and therefore however the exposition of the Church Fathers and Councils is not to be despised yet it is not to be made a rule but that the onely sure rule for the interpreting of the Scriptures is the Scripture it self But because you alledge something for your assertion we shall now in the last place examine it of what nature and strength it is And â— You quote the late King in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although his assertion is more limited then yours as from the words you cite is clear and manifest And as touching that which his words are alledged for we must say that such a Church Government as is not found instituted in Scripture in regard of the substantials of it is therefore contrary to the commands of Scripture because not found instituted there and this we affirm touching that Episcopall Government that you plead for that superiority of a Bishop above a Presbyter in regard of order and jurisdiction being a meer device of man without and against Scripturall warrant as it was that that was unknown to the primitive Church in the more ancient and purer times and of which afterward 2. But you further add and say that except your rule for interpreting of Scripture be admitted of we shall seem to abound in our own sense and to utter our own fancies or desires to be believed on our bare word and so to give way to private interpretation whereas we should deliver that sense which hath been aforetime given by our forefathers and forerunners in the Christian faith unto which we say that whether it be the interpretation that we ourselves shall give of Scripture or it be the interpretation of others however Fathers or Councils and forerunners in the Christian faith yet if it be an interpretation inferred or brought to the Scripture and not found in the Scripture the uttering of that interpretation is the uttering our own or other mens fancies and so is that private interpretation of Scripture which the Apostle Peter 2d Epist ch 1. ver 20. condemns and to whose words there you do here point it being the Holy Ghost the author of Scripture whose interpretation is that publike interpretation that the whole Church and every member thereof is to give heed to and is that which is opposed to the private interpretation mentioned as the Apostle shews ver 21. in the words following But seeing you do here urge the very popish argument and that text which they quote touching the rule they make for interpretation of Scripture in direct opposition to our Protestant Divines it is hence very clear that your opinion touching the rule of interpreting of the Scriptures and judg of controversies in matters of Religion which you make to be the Churches exposition and consent of Fathers and Councils is the very same with theirs and wherein you approve not your selves to be either sound Protestants or to own the Doctrine of the Church of England against the Papists in this particular 3. Yet you go on and urge another argument for when there is a difference about interpretation of Scripture not to admit for a rule the exposition of the Church consent of Fathers and Councils you say that is dominari fidei to Lord it over the faith of others but we say as we have shewed before that to impose a necessity of admitting the interpretation given by the Church Fathers Councils when it is not evident from the Text so expounded either the words of it scope or other circumstances of it the things going before or following after or from some other Texts with which it is compared this is certainly dominari fidei to Lord it over the faith of Gods people and which Paul though so great an Apostle and immediately and infallibly inspired would not presume to do 2 Cor. 1. â—4 The Church having onely a Ministery committed to her which is onely to propound that sense of Scripture which the Scripture it self gives and no more 4. But thus say you the best and ablest defenders of our Protestant Religion defended it against the Papists though out of the word of God too giving the sense which the Fathers unanimously in the Primitive Church and Councils gave But this is not the question whether our Divines defended the Protestant Religion against the Papists not onely out of the Word of God but from the testimonie also of Fathers and Councils but whether they did ever make the unanimous consent of the Fathers and Councils the judg of controversies or rule for interpreting of Scripture He that shall hold the affirmative here doth plainly shew he is a stranger to the writings of the best and ablest defenders of the Protestant Religion We shall readily grant that our Divines do ex super abundanti defend the truth against the Papists from the testimony of Fathers and Councils but did never assert that the defence of it from the Scriptures alone was not sufficient as they would never have quarrelled with the Papists touching the judg of controversies and the rule for interpretation of Scripture if they would have been contented to have stood to its determination It s true Mr. Philpot that glorious
Martyr might be willing to fight with the Papists with those weapons they so oâ—ten call for Antiquity Vniversality Vnity but where did he ever refuse the Scriptures as the sole judge and determiner of controversies and the onely rule for interpretation of the Scriptures as you do Besides it is to be observed that it was matters of Doctrine that he and other Protestant writers did offer to defend against the Papists from the testimony of Fathers and Councils not matters touching Church Government and discipline which began sooner to be corrupted the mystery of iniquity working even in the Apostles dayes and the godly Fathers in the Primitive times sundry of them laying a foundation though unwillingly for Antichrists getting up into his seat when the Doctrine was kept pure and inviolable in respect whereof it is that Calvin whom you cite when he acknowledgeth that the first four generall Councils did contain nothing but the pure and native interpretation of the Scriptures doth expresly limit his words and saith quantum attinet ad fâ—dei dogmata so forre as concerns the doctrines of faith and as we have noted before in our Answer to your second Paper where also we have shewed you how those words of his are to be understood when he saith nullum esse nec melius nec certius remedium quam si verorum Episcoporum Synodus conveniat ubi controversum dogma excutiatur If there be a disputation or difference touching any Doctrine there is no better nor more certain remedâ— then if a Synod of true Bishops do convene where the controveâ—tâ—d Doâ—â—riae may be discussed but he concludes hoc autem perpetuum esse nego ut vera certa sit Scripturae interpretatio quae Concilii suffragiis fuerit recepta i. e. but this I deny to be perpetuall that that is a true and certain interpretation of Scripture which hath been received by the suffrages or determination of a Council And therefore you wrong Calvin and Mr. Philpot and the best and ablest of our Protestant Divines when you say they willingly submit to a judge and rule besides the Scriptures however they refuse noâ— to try the Doctrines of the adversaries by that which they themselves sc the Papists cannot except against it being their own rule they propound to be tried by sc the exposition of the Fathers and Councils and whose interpretation is not by them acknowledged to be that publike interpretation in opposition to the private wherein they professed to rest any farther then it appeareth to be the true sense of the Scripture or holy Ghost the only publike interâ—reter But it is you and not they that are so willing to submit to a judge and rule besides the Scriptures sc the primitive Churches practice and universall and unauimous consent of Fathers and generall Councils and to this rule you bring the Church Government to be tried thereby because your plea from Scripture for that kind of Episcopacy which you so earnestly contend for is but weak and the most you have to say for it is from Fathers and Councils and practice of the Church since the Canon of the Scripture hath been perfected although we must tell you that that Episcopacy which the Fathers you would be tried by speak of was nothing like that Episcopal Government of later times Neither will upon this score as you say our Presbytery be quite out of doors or be found to be wholly destitute of Examples and practice of the Church and testimonies of the Fathers neither can you prove that therein the whole stream runs so for Episcopacy that there is not the least rivulet for any others and as you from the late King affirm by which we are now brought unto what we put you upon in the first place to prove sc what that Church Government is which is so consonant to the will God and universall practice of primitive Churches 4. And therefore having fully discussed whatever you have urged against the Scriptures being the rule to judge by in this controversie we shall now not refuse to try what strength there is in what you alleadge for to prove what was the universal and constant practice of Primitive Churches in this matter But 1. We must remove that aspersion that you cast upon us when you say that we being sensible that the whole streame of the examples and practice of the Church and testimonies of the Fathers runs for Episcopacy have not way to evade this rule but unâ liturâ to blot out all records and monuments of Antiquity for the space of three hundred yeares after Christ as imperfâ—ct But the words that we used in our answer to your first Paper will speak for us which we shall here therefore recite because you do not Having put you to prove what that Church Government is which is so consonant to the will of God and universal practice of Primitive Churches we thus declared our selves For our parts we said we think it will be very hard for you or any others to demonstrate out of any records of antiquity what was the universal practice of Primitive Churches for the whole space of the first three hundred yeares after Christ or the greatest part thereof excepting so much as is left upon record in the Scriptures of the new Testament the monuments of Antiquity that concerne these times for the greatest part of them being both imperfect and far from shewing us what was the universal practice of the Church then though the practices of some Churches may be mentioned and likewise very questionable At least it will not be easie to assure us that some of those that go under the names of the most approved Authors of those times are neither spurious nor corrupted From the words of our answer thus recited it is manifest we did not unâ liturâ blot out all records and monuments of Antiquity for the space of three hundred yeares after Christ we only said they were imperfect and said it would be hard for you or any others to demonstrate out of any records of Antiquity what was the universal practice of Primitive Churches for the whole space of the first three hundred yeares after Christ or the greatest part thereof And is not this manifest to him that is conversant in Ecclesiastical story Doth not Baronius himself despair of making up any perfect story of a good part of this time next unto the Apostles dayes And if it had been easie for you to have demonstrated what was the universal practice of the Church for the whole or greatest part of this time why did you not begin your demonstration hereof sooner then from the Council of Nice Again we said that it would not be easie for to assure us that some of the works that go under the names of the most approved Authors of those times are neither spurious nor corrupted but we did not as you charge uâ— brand the most approved Authors of those times as spurious and corrupted The workes that
may be attributed to some approved Authors may be spurious or corrupted when yet the Authors themselves are not branded And therefore this is but another of your wonted slanders and which through out your Paper are but too common with you But as to the thing it self who knowes not but in the Primitive times there were many spurious works put forth under the names even of the Apostles as appears from 2 Thes 2. 2. and blessed Martyrs that yet are generally rejected as none of theirs and of which sort were those many false Gospels that we read of as of Thomas Andrew Nicodemus and St Peter and St Markes Mass of this sort also are the Apostles constitutions held for Apocryphal as Mr. Perkins shewes in the Decretals and were condemned by the sixth Council of Constantinople The works also of Dionysius Areopagita are by many learned men absolutely denyed to be the works of that Dionysius mentioned Act. 17. for which they do in their Comments upon that Chapter and elsewhere give many reasons We might instance in many others as we shall come anon to speak touching the Epistles that go under the name of Ignatius and unto which we had special reference in the passages we used that you here except against but yet without the least reflection upon so glorious a Confessor of the faith of Christ as he was And such as are equal judges and who know what were the practices of Impostors in the Primitive times in putting out their own corrupt writings under the names of the Apostles and blessed Martyrs of those times that thereby they might gain belief to their errors will be farre from censuring us to be void of all modesty and shewing thereby no great store either of judgement or honesty as you here do because we said some of the workes that go under the names of the most approved Authors of those times were spurious or corrupted considering what Rivet Cocus in his censur a patrum and Perkins in his preparatives to the demonstration of the probleme and other learned men do say touching this matter and we may here well say to you that you had shewed more judgement and honesty your selves if you had not censured us as persons destitute of both and also all modesty for that which all those that read the Fathers with any measure of judgement will readily acknowledge 2. Having vindicated our selves from what you aspersed us with we now come to examine what you cite for the antiquity of Episcopacy which is the Government you plead for And here we observe you take a very high jumpe to use your own expression over all that is to be found in the writings of the Fathers who lived in the three first Centuries of the Church and only pitch upon the Council of Nice that which you find there making as you apprehend most for your purpose and as you say shewing the practice of the Church in its forme of Church Government by Patriarch Metropolitan Archbishop Bishop c. Although you having a little before insisted upon the exposition and practice of the Church and the unanimous consent of Fathers as well as general Councils as the rule to which you would bring Church Governement to be tried and in your first Paper and this also telling of the universal and constant practice of the Church should not so quickly have forgot your own rule and mentioned nothing at all before the Council of Nice out of the writings of the Fathers to evidence what was the universal and constant practice of the Church for the whole space of the first three hundred yeares after Christ or the greatest part thereof touching Church Government especially considering that this was that which in our answer to your first Paper we had put you to prove But you think may be this you do sufficiently by citing the Council of Nice generall Councils shewing us as you say what the Churches practice was considering also that this Council did ratifie and confirme what had been anciently practised by the Church before the sixth Canon mentioning an ancient custome which by it is established Unto this and what further you do here urge for the proving from this Council that which you cite it for we have severall things to say 1. And first though we do most readily yeild all due reverence and esteem unto this Council that was and will be famous for the condemning of Arrius together with his damnable heresie yet we shall mind you of what Augustine quoted by Calvin and alleadged in our answer to your second Paper saith touching insisting on the testimony of this Council He in his Book against Maximinius when he would silence that Heretick contending with him touching the decrees of Synods saith that neither he would object to him the Synod of Nice nor he ought to object to him the Synod of Ariminum but would have them both to contend not by the authority of either of these Synods but by the authority of Scriptures It is also clear from Ecclesiastical story that Constantine did admonish this Council after they were assembled that in the determining and judging of heavenly Doctrine seeing they had in readiness the Evangelical Apostolical and Prophetical Bookes they should fetch from thence their formes of censure and so determine controversies of Religion from the Scriptures and according unto which religious and worthy counsel they proceeded disputing with Arrius from the Scriptures and by the testimonies thereof condemning his heresie 2. Seeing you will have it that the forme of Church Governement by Patriarch Metropolitan Archbishop Bishop c. was established by this Council and that this Council established nothing herein but what had been defined and asserted as you say afterward by the ancient Canons yea the most ancient even immemorial Apostolical tradition and custome and that the customes which this Council speakes of were deduced down to those times from St Mark the Evangelist We do here enquire of you whether the Church Governement that you would prove from this Council be jure divino or by divine right If it be as we suppose you will and must say it is for which purpose you say it is defined and asserted by immemorial Apostolical tradition and deduced from Mark the Evangelist we do then again enquire of you whether the Governement of the Church by Patriarch Metropolitan Archbishop c. be to be found in Scripture If you say it be we desire you to prove it and make it to appear that it is there found If you say it is not to be found in Scripture it is in vain to urge the authority of the Council of Nice or any other Councils for to prove the divine right of that which is not to be found in Scripture Further you should consider that you alleadging for it immemorial Apostolical traditions and customes of which the Scripture is silent do again joyn hands with the Papists pleading for the authority of unwritten traditions and
this be either sincere or ingenuous dealing we leave it to the Reader to judge 3. But as touching Calvin's being in his judgement for the Presbyterian Government as that which Christ hath in particular prescribed in his Word though here again you would make him a patronizer of the Government by Patriareh Archbishop Bishop c. in our answer we said was manifest from his works to the whole Christian world And is not this clear to any that will but consult what he hath written touching this matter Consult his Expositions and Commentaries Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Cor. 12. 28. 1 Tim. 5. 17. and you will find him there to be downright for the Jus divinum of the ruling Elders Office Consult his Institutions you will there find Lib. 4. Chap. 3. Sect. 8. expresly that he takes Bishops Presbyters and Pastors for one and the same and that according to the use of Scripture as he there speakes and argues for that purpose Tit. 1. 5. Phil. 1. 1. Act. 20. 17. and having reckoned up the preaching Officers he then comes in the very same Section and mentions the ruling Elders shewing that they are mentioned by Paul Rom. 12. 7 8. 1 Cor. 12. 28. We will but cite only one passage that he here hath concerning his quoting these Texts Guhernatores fuisse existimo seniores de plebe electos qui censurae morum exercendae disciplinae unà cum Episcopis praeessent Neque enim secus interpretari queas quod dicit qui praeejt id faciat in solicitudine Habuit igitur ab initio unaquaeque Ecclesia suum Senatum conscriptum ex viris piis gravibus sanctis penes quem er at illa de quâ posteà loquemur jurisdictio in corrigendis vitiis Porro eâ—usmodi ordinem non unius saeculi fuisse experientia ipsa declarat Est igitur hoc gubernationis munus saecuâ—is omnibus necessarium Whence it is very clear that Calvin's judgement is so full for the Office of the ruling Elders that otherwise he saith we shall not be able to interpret that of the Apostle He that ruleth let him do it with diligence And hence he concludes that every Church had from the beginning its Senate or Consistory that consisted of men that were godly grave and holy to whom did belong the jurisdiction in correcting of vices of which after he saith he will speak Further he saith that experience it self declares that this was not an order of one age and thence inferres that therefore the ruling Elders Office whom he undestands by the Office of Government is necessary for all ages Is it possible for any man to declare himself more fully and plainly for the Presbyterian Government then Calvin here doth We forbear to cite any other parts of his works we doubt not but the Reader by this will be sufficiently satisfied and will presently hereupon conclude that you but gather out of Calvin what you think makes for your purpose and when we cite him for that which he is so full for matter not much how you misrepresent him to the world that so you might make him to appear otherwise But we wish you to consider that it is not safe for any to make lies their refuge But you have notwithstanding all this the boldness to alleadge Calvin as a Patronizer of Episcopal Government as you did before And because you come over again with the same thing we shall be forced for his vindication to make some repetition of what we have in part already said That in Calvin which you here referre us to is the place in his Institutions which was before quoted sc Lib. 4. Chap. 4. Sect. 1. But in the Chapter immediately going before we have even now shewed that he declares himself fully for the Presbyterian Government but this you wholly conceal in which you deal not honestly with him Nay in the very first words of this Section which you cite he tells you he had been hitherto speaking of that order of governing the Church as it is delivered to us out of the pure word of God and concerning the Ministeryes as they were instituted of Christ And then he addes now that all these things might appear more clearly and familiarly it will be profitable in those things to take a view of the forme of the ancient Church which as he there saith will represent unto us a certain image of divine institution which are part of the words that you cite But hence it is clear that seeing it is Calvin's scope in this Chapter to compare the forme of Government in the ancient Church with that forme of Government that he had held forth in the Chapter going before from the Scriptures he judged whatever construction you put upon him to the contrary that that very Government in the substance of it which he had before proved was held forth in the Scriptures and which as we have already shewed from what we have cited out of him out of the third Chapter goin gbefore was the Presbyterian was to be found in the ancient Church in the purer times of it But in the next place he comes to prevent an Objection in these words Tametsi enim multos Canones ediderunt illorum temporum Episcopi quibusplus viderentur exprimere quam sacris literis expressum esset eâ tamen cautione totam suam Oeconomiam composuerunt ad unicom illom verbi Dei normami ut facile videas nihil fere hâc parte habuisse à verbo Dei alienum Hence it is yet further plain that however he confess that the Bishops of those times did seem to express in many of their Canons something more then was expressed in Scripture yet that he saith they did compose their whole Oeconomy unto the only rule of Gods word that one might easily see they had in this particular nothing almost differing from the word he hereby declares his judgement yet further that for the substance the Government of these times was the same with the Government he had held forth from the Scriptures in the former Chapter But hence it is also clear that as we observed before he did not approve of every thing in those Canons as also he presently after confesseth there was something deficient and wanting in them For however he excuse them in regard they endeavoured to keep the institution of God with a sincere endeavour yet he acknowledges that in something they erred although he saith not much as is clear from his own words which are as followes Verumetiam si quid posset in ipsorum institutis desiderari quia tamen sincero studio conati sunt Dei institutionem conservare ab ea non multum aberraverunt plurimum conducet hic breviter colligere qualem observationem habuerint And then he shewes what the Ministers of the ancient Church were Thus we have given a full and particular account of what Calvin hath in this Section and that in the very order which he himself observes