for many Papists doubt of the Divine right of Prelacy that doubt not of the Divine unalterable right of the Priestly or Presbyter-power and work And will this cure men of Schism to tell them that God hath not so much as made and specified the Parish-Pastors Office and it is but a humane invention which you forsake § 27. And I would crave of this confident man to consider whether he reach not high and horrid Sacriledg if he make the Invester to be first the Owner and then the Donor Did we devote our selves to Patrons in our Ministry or to Diocesans or immediately to God If we covenanted only to be Gods Ministers for the Churches good then let them take heed that claim propriety in us as Priests And if Tythes and Glebes were devoted to God and not to Princes or Patrons I doubt he that maketh Patrons the Proprietaries and proper Donors will prove Sacrilegious and be convinced at last that he should only have taken Princes and Pastors for such Trustees as determine of the Receiver but give not the things § 28. If it be otherwise Princes Patrons and Prelates are greater and richer than I ever thought them 1. Then all the Bishopricks in England are the King 's till he give them 2. Then all the Tythes Glebes and Temples in England are the Patrons till they give them or else the Bishops or Chancellors who investeth men in them by institution and induction And the Patron and Bishop may have a hard suit to determine which is the Proprietor 3. And then a Bishop that Ordaineth a thousand Priests was the Owner of all their Relations before and so as they that are for the pre-existence of souls dispute whether they pre-existed individually or only in animâ universali so these that are for the pre existence of Priesthoods in the Diocesans must dispute whether they were in the Prelate a thousand individual Priesthoods before or but one common Priesthood that fell into individuals by Ordination If they say that they were but virtually in the Prelate that kills their Cause for then they did not pre-exist for existere est esse extra causas And this only saith that the Prelate had an effective vertue that could make them But the species was made before and so was the obliging and Donative Law therefore the Prelate had not power to do what God had done before § 29. I take it for granted because I know him that all this is nothing to Mr. Dodwell but to me it is moreover something 1. That the highest esteemers of Diocesans Ordination make it but a Sacrament 2 And that the Investing Minister is not the Owner and Donor of the Relation and Gift in any of their Seven Sacraments 1. In Baptism God only giveth the Right and Relation which the Minister by Investiture solemnizeth but giveth it not as his own Else every Lay-man and woman by their judgment should have multitudes of Christendoms of their own to bestow 2. In Confirmation the Priest never pretendeth to be the giver of the Spirit but by his act to fit the person to receive it The Holy Ghost is said to fall on them that heard the word before Baptism Act. 10.44 45 and they were after baptized He fell on them Act. 11.15 And Peter and Iohn prayed for the Samaritans that they might receive the Holy Ghost Act. 8.15 and they laid hands on them and they received the Holy Ghost v. 17. but not that they gave the Holy Ghost though by the laying on of their hands and their prayers he was given as he was on them without Act. 2. 3. And in Matrimony it 's confessed that the Priest is not the Owner and Donor of the Husbands power but a Ministerial Invester 4. And in the Eucharist even they that think the bread is made God take not the Priest as the efficient cause but a disposing instrument nor that he giveth God to the Receiver as the Owner or Donor but delivereth him as a Minister 5. The same is true of Penance Extreme Unction and therefore must be so also in Ordination If the King send a thousand Commissions to Captains Judges Justices c. the Messenger is not the Owner or Donor of them all nor may make any alteration of them yea if he intrust the Chancellor to name all the Justices he doth thereby but determine of the person that shall receive the Commission but altereth nothing of the Office nor is the Donor of it All this is plain to us but not to Mr. Dodwell § 30. Saith he p. 39. Are not many actual practices grounded on circumstances Are not many of those circumstances obnoxious to great mutability Are not ordinary Governours the competent Iudges of their actual change Ans. 1. And did not Christ promise his Spirit to his Apostles for the performance of their Commissions And were not those Commissions to gather and settle his Churches and teach them all that he commanded them And did not Christ by that Spirit make Pastors and Teachers as is before proved And did not the Apostles faithfully perform their trust 2. And doth he not see that by this he also subverteth his foundation of Prelatical power also as having no better institution than the Priesthood And then who are those Governours of the Church that he talks of that must judg And how prove they their jugding-power 3. And it were a kindness if he would tell us what change it is that thâ— Diocesans may make in the Priestly Office and work and tell us the bounds of their power if it have any And whether they may put down the Preaching part the Praying part the Sacraments or which of them And whether this be the power that hath put out the Sacramental Cup and made all the changes that are made in the Church To tell us of these ordinary Governours changing-power is a hard word to us that took Christs Laws delivered by his Spirit to be perfect and unchangeable However some circumstances are changed which were noted to be but occasional § 31. To return his Consequence p. 40. Since it is certain that the power of Oâ—daining others was not given to nor for some hundred years exercised by that species of Diocesans who were neither the Bishops of single Churches associated for personal present Communion nor were the Overseers of such Bishops but the Bishops of Diocesses that have many score or hundred unbishoped stated worshipping Assemblies it will follow by his arguing that these never had their Office from the Apostles and much less a continued succession of it § 32. He next pleadeth the Nullity of the Presbyterians Ordination 1. Because if they had Ordaining power it is only in Assemblies where Bishops are Presidents and Edict them 2. And because they carry it not by Plurality of Voices But I am a weary with answering such trifling things and the later part is a known mistake I never heard of one contradicting Voice against the Ordination of any
by not multiplying Bishops as Churches or Converts needed it began the grand sin and calamity which hath undone us and therefore are not to be our Pattern Orbis major est urbe 6. Were Bishops necessarily to be distributed by Cities the Empires that have few or no Cities must have few or no Bishops and an Emperor might aliud agâ—ndo depose all the Bishops by dis franchizing the Cities 7. But every Corporation oppidum like our Market-Towns was then truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if you will but procure every such City with us to have a Bishop and the Office of such Bishops to be to drive men from sin and not to it and to silence Blasphemers and not faithful Preachers of the Gospel all our controversies of Prelacy are then at an end 8. And you must remember that great Cities had long but few Christians in comparison of the Heathens till Constantine's time and mostly long after And when Patrick with his own hand Ordained Three Hundred and Fifty Bishops in your Ireland they were but Ecclesiarum fundatores and with them he founded but septingentas Ecclesias and Ordained Five Thousand Clerks if Ioceline be true Vit. Patriâ— cap. 185. and not rather the far more credible report of Antonin in Chrâ—n tit 11. cap. 18. § 2. and Vincent specul histor lib. 20. cap. 23. who say that Ecclesias funâ—avit 365. â—rdinavit Episcopos eodem numero 365. et eo amplius in quibus spiritus Dei crat Presbyteros autem usque ad 3â—00 ordinavit Aâ— Vsher â—â—ceth them de primord Eccl. Br. p 9â—7 which is Ninius number there So that here is no more Churchâ—s thâ—n â—ishops and about Nine Presbyters to a Bishop You tell me of above One thousand Clergy-men at Rome in Corâ—elius's 〈◊〉 Ans. 1. This was above Two hundred and Fifty years after Christs Birth 2. I never took all the impotent persons poor and Widows in the Church to be Clergy-men and Clergy-women Cornelius his account is that there are Six and Forty Presbyters Seven Deacons Seven Sub-Deacons Two and Forty Acolytes Two and Fifty Exorcists and Readers with Porters Widows and impotent persons above One thousand and Fifty souls considering 1. How their Meetings were then obscure and small in Houses as the tolerated Churches in London And in so vast a City in how many distant places Besides the sub-urbicarian Assemblies 4 And how many Presbyters used still to be with the Bishop in the same Assembly 5. And that here are in all but Seven Deacons 6. And that many then were Presbyters that used not to Preach but for privater over-sight and as the Bishops Assessors 7. And that the poorer sort most commonly received the Gospel 8. And that none of these but the Six and Forty Presbyters had any power in the Discipline 9. And that by all this reckoning the whole Church maintained not besides the Officers near a thousand poor we may probably conjecture that the whole Church of that Bishop was not bigger than some one London-Parish Stepney Giles Cripplegate Martins c. where are about Fifty thousand souls 10. And when none were Christians but persecuted Volunteers they were the holiest and best of men and I have tryed that Six hundred such make less work for Discipline than Ten of the Rabble that are driven into our Churches and choose them rather than the Goal But when all 's done Two Cities under the power of great temptation are not to be our Rule against Gods Word and the state of all other Churches in the world and undeniable experience It 's true that you say that to erect another Altar was counted Schism that is Altare contra altare because when the Phrase came up no Church had more than one Altar Your Instances intimated of Antioch and Carthage I believe not and can give you had I liberty a Volume of proof from Antiquity that for Two hundred and Fifty years if not much longer Ignatius's Rule was true that every Church had one Altar and one Bishop at least except the two aforesaid Vlphilas was but an Arrian Bishop of a few Goths newly turned Arrians and the first that translated the Scriptures into the Gothick Tongue so that no Churches among them had the Scripture till after his translating and these few were presently persecuted to rhe death by Athanarichus ut socrat lib. 4 cap. 32. You may call these few a Kingdom if you please How few of the Indians were converted when Frumentius not Aedesius as you say was made their Bishop it 's easie to gather by the History Scythia and Persia used to have each a Bishop and he lived in the Roman Empire as near them as he durst as not being tolerated usually in their Land And as few it 's like Mosâ—s had among the Arabians there being no mention in the History of any thing to perswade us that he had many Churches under him that I remember And the work of these Bâ—shops was to ordain Presbyters who had the power of the Keys exceptae Ordinatione did all that Bishops did as Hierome saith So that then a Diocess had not one sole Church-Governour and therefore where you gather that yet Discipline was not dissolved I answer 1. In all this you leave out a matter of chief consideration viz. That all the Presbyters then were assistants in Discipline and had a true Church-Government over the people which now they have not 2. It 's strange that we that have eyes and ears must be sent to the Indians and ancient History to know whether one Bishop can hear and try and admonish so many thousands at once as we see by experience are those Objects of Discipline which the Scripture describeth and when we see that it is not done And after all this we have talk't but of a â—hantasm for it is not one Bishop but one Lay man a Chancellor that useth this Decretory power of the Keys over all these fouls so far as they are used as to the ordinary Court-tryals and exerciâ—e and the Bishop rarely medleth with it Again Nonconformists doubt not to prove that the Diocesan frame whiâ—h they dare not swear to 1. Doth depose the species of Churches of Gods Institution 2 And the Discipline it self almost totally 3. And the species of Presbyters 4. And the old species of Bishops And instead of each of these setteth up a new species of man's invention wholly different and inconsistent And that they are not willing to Swear Subscribe or deliberately and solemnly enter into a Church-Covenant That in their Places and Callings they will never endeavour any alteration of this no not by a request or word you may less wonder than if some were then loath to Swear or Covenant never to endeavour to take down the Priests of Dan and Bethel or reform the high places It 's dangerous making a solemn Ministerial Covenant Never to obey God in any one great matter and never to repent of so doing Again our Reasons
of Salvation such could not be brought to Faith Holiness and Salvation for want of teaching it is yet my sin to preach to them and my duty to let them rather be damned if I have not the Bishops consent to teach them and that because it is the Bishop and not I that shall answer for their damnation VIII That it is disputable with you whether those to whom Church power is given viz. Diocesans may not change not only the local temporary circumstances but the very Church-forms and suspend Laws of Christ. IX That Baptism entreth the Baptized into some particular Church and consequently under this fore-described Church-Government X. That in the case of Preaching the Gospel Ministers may in many cases do it though Emperours and Kings forbid them as in the days of Constantius Valens yea and better men but not if the Bishop forbid them or consent not XI That circa Sacra if the King command the Churches for Uniformity one Translation of the Bible one Version or Meter of the Psalms one Liturgy one Time or Place of Worship c. and the Bishop another we ought to obey the Bishop against the command of the King XII That the required Subscriptions Declarations Rubricks and Canons are primarily the Laws of the Church which the King and Parliament do confirm by their Sanction and therefore the Church is the Expounder of them These are some of your Assertions which I cannot yet receive I. My Reasons against the first are these 1. Because this maketh Gods of men and so is Idolatry giving them Gods proper Power and Prerogative 2. Yea it taketh down God or his Laws and setteth them above him For there cannot be two Absolute Governors that have not one Will. If I must not appeal from them to God then I must appeal from God to them that is I must break his Law if they bid me or else they are not Absolute 3. This maketh all Gods Laws at the will of maâ— as alterable or dispensible Man may forbid all that God commandeth and I must obey 4. Then all Villanies may be made Virtues or Duties at the will of man If they command us to curse God or Blaspheme or be perjured or commit Fornication Murder or Idolatry it would become a Duty 5. Then the Power and Lives of Kings would be at the Clergies mercy For if their power be Absolute they may make Treason and Rebellion a Duty 6. And all Family-Societies and Civil Converse migbt be overthrown while an Absolute Clergy may disoblige men from all duty to one another 7. Then the Council at Lateran which you have excellently proved in your Considerations to be the Author of its Canons doth or did oblige Princes to exterminate their Reformed Subjects and disoblige Subjects from their Allegiance to Princes that obey not the Pope herein and are excommunicate So of Greg. 7 th's Council Rom. 8. Then did the Church or Kingdom of England well to disobey or forsake the Roman Power that was over them 9. Were not our Martyrs rather Rebels that died for disobeying an Absolute Power 10. How should two contradicting Absolute Powers viz. General Councils be both obeyed E. g Nicen. 1. and Arimini Sirm. and Tyr. or Ephes. 2 and Calced 11. How will this stand with the Judgment and practice of the Apostles that said Whether it be meet that we obey God or man judg ye 12. How will it stand with Conformity to the Church of England that in the Articles saith that General Councils may err and have erred in matter of Faith c. 13. Is it not against the sense of all mankind even the common Light of Nature where utter Atheism hath not prevailed Say not that I wrong you by laying all this odium on your self I lay it but on your words And I doubt not but though disputing Interest draw such words from you on consideration you will re-call them by some limitations II. My Reasons against your second must pre-suppose that we understand one another as to the sense of the word Diocesan Church which being your â—erm had I been with you I must have desired you first to explain The word Diocess of old you know signified a part of the Empire larger than a Province and that had many Metropolitans in it I suppose that is not your sense Sometimes now it is taken for that space of ground which we call a Diocess sometimes for all the people in that space And with us a Diocesan Church is a Church of the lowest Order containing in it a multitude of fixed Parochial Congregations which have every one their stated Presbyter who is no Bishop and Vnum altare and are no Churches but parts of a Church and which is individuated by one Bishop and the measuring-space of ground whose inhabitants are its Members Till you tell me the contrary I must take this for your sense For you profess to me that you speak of such Diocesan Churches as ours and they have some above a thousand others many hundred Parishes and you say our Parishes are not Churches but Parts of a Church and so Families are 2. Either you mean that a Diocesan Church is the first in order of Execution and Existence or else in order of Intention and so last in Existence and Execution I know not your meaning and therefore must speak to both I. That a Diocesan Church is first in Intention is denied by me and disproved though it belong to you to prove it 1. Intentions no where declared of God in mature or supernatural Revelations are not to be asserted of him as Truths But a prime intention of a Diocesan Church is no where declared of God Ergo not to be asserted of him as truth 2. It is the end or ultimum rei complementum which is first in intention where there is ordo intentionis But a Diocesan Church is not the end or ultimum rei complementum Ergo not first intended The Major is not deniable The Minor hath the consent as far I as know of all the world For they are all either for the Hierarchy or against it They that are for it say that a Metropolitan is above a Diocesan and a Provincial above a Metropolitan and a Patriarchal above a Provincial and a National which hath Patriarchs as the Empire had above that and â—ay the new Catholicks an humane universal above a National Church as the complement or perfection and therefore must be first intended But those that are against the Hierarchy think that all these are Church-corruptions or humane policies set up by Usurpation and therefore not of prime Divine Intention 3. If you should go this way I would first debate the question with you how far there is such a thing as ordo intentionis to be ascribed to God For though St. Thomas as you use to call him assert such intentions it is with many limitations and others deny it and all confess that it needeth much Explication to be
more than a Ceremony that knoweth it if the King command me to Preach at one hour or one place and the Bishop at another or to use for Uniformity such a Translation Metre Liturgy Utensils Garments c and the Bishops others I will obey the King before the Bishop But if either or both command me to sin I will obey neither so and if they would take me off from that which Christ hath made a real part of my own Office as commanding that I shall preach and pray in no words but such as they prescribe c. I think neither hath power to do this But Bishop Bilson of Christian Obedience and Bishop Andrews in his Tortura Toetis and Buckeridg of Rochester and Grotius de imprrio sum Potest circa Sacra have said so much of the Power of Kings about Religion as that I think I need not add any more And by the same Arguments that you will absolve me from obeying if the King forbid me to Preach by the same you absolve if the Bishop forbid me If I may disobey Constantius and Valens I may disobey Eusebius Nicomed Theognis Maris If I may disobey Theodosius junior Anastasius Zeno Iustinian I may disobey Petrus Moggus Dioscorus Severus c. But you will much cross your â—nds if you tell the Londoners that they may preach and worship God though the King forbid them but not at all if the Bishop forbid them For he that exalteth himself or is sinfully exalted by others shall be brought low If the reverence of the King were not greater in England than of the Bishops the consciences of many thousands would stick but little at disobedience There are so many cases first to be resolved As 1. Whether such Diocesans deposing all Parochial Churches and Bishops and reducing them to Chappels or parts only of a Church be not against Christs Law 2. Whether they destroy not the ancient order of particular Churches Bishops and Discipline 3. Who made their office and by what power 4. Who chose and called them to it 5. Whether their Commands be not null as contrary to Gods 6 How far Communion with them that silence hundreds of faithful Ministers and set up in their stead c. is lawful Many such questions the people are not so easily satisfied in as you are XI And the three last all set together look with an ill design The Preface to Dr. Rich. Cousins Tables tells the King That the Church-Government here is the Kings or derived from him and dependant on him and Grotius de Imperio sum potest proveth at large the Power of Kings circa sacra as doth Spalatensis and many more and that Canons are but good counsel till the King make them Laws And we know no Law-makers but the King and Parliament But if the Church be the Expounders of the Liturgy Rubrick and Canons Articles and Acts of Uniformity and out of Convocation-time the Bishops be the Church and the Archbishops be the Rulers of the Bishops that swear obedience to them this hath a dangerous aspect For then it is in the power of the Bishops if not of the Archbishops only to put a sense upon our 39 Articles Rubricks c. consistent with Popery or Heresie and so to change the Religion of the Kingdom without King or Parliament or against them at their pleasure And thus Officers of mans making who become a Church of mans devising may have advantage by this and the former Articles to destroy Godliness Christianity and Humanity Indeed by the Preface to the Liturgy the Bishop is made the Expounder of any thing doubtful in the Book and by the Index the Act of Uniformity is made part of the Book But this affrighteth me the more from declaring 1. Because I must consent to all the Penalties and Impositions of the Act it self 2. And the Bishop Exposition is limited so that it must be contrary to nothing in the Book Thus I have given you the reasons of my destructive Conference If I had been with you and we had been to enter upon any dispute that tendeth to satisfaction I would have endeavoured to avoid the common frustraters of Disputes 1. By ambiguous words 2. And subjects that are no subjects Therefore if you desire any such dispute I. I intreat you to write me down your sense of some terms which we shall frequently use and I will do the like of any at your desire As what you mean 1. By the word Bishop 2. By a Church 3. By a particular Church 4. By a Diocess and Diocesan Church 5. By a National Church 6. By the Vniversal Church 7. By Church Government and Iurisdiction 8. By Schism I shall dispute no terms unexplained lest one take them in one sense and the other in another and so we dispute but about a sound of words II. I desire that the denied Subject of the Question may not be taken for granted instead of being proved On these terms supposing the common Laws of Disputation especially avoiding words that have no determinate sense I shall not refuse whenever you invite me and I am able to debate with you any of these points that I am concerned in especially whether my Preaching Christs Gospel as I do be my sin or my duty And if our great distance in Principles put either of us upon râ—â—sons that seem dishonouring to the person opposed we shall I hope 〈…〉 that it is the opinion only that is directly intended But 〈…〉 opinion is the persons opinion if it be bad is a dishâ—nâ—â—r whiâ—â— the owner only is guilty of and the opponent caâ—not 〈…〉 must not forbear to open the evil of the cause for avoiding the dishonour of the owner but must the rather open it in hope that the owner will disown it when he understandeth truly what it is For I suppose it is evidence of Truth that we desire In Conclusion remember I pray you 1. That it is not the ancient Episcopacy which was in Cyprians days yea which agreeth with Epiphanius's Intimations and Petavius excellent Notes thereon in Haeres 69. which I deny And I conjecture that at this day in England there are more Episcopal than Presbyterian silenced Non-conformists 2. That what sort of Prelacy or higher Rulers I dare not subscribe to yet I can live quietly and submissively under though not obey them by sinning against God or breaking my Vows of Baptism or Ordination and perfidiously leaving souls to Satan Nothing more threateneth the subversion of the Church-Government than swearing men to approve of all thâ—t's in it Many can submit and live in peace that dare not subscribe or swear Approbation It was the caetâ—ra Oath 1640 that constrained me to thâ—se searches which 〈◊〉 me a Nonconformist It is an easie maâ—â—er for Overdoers to add but a claâ—se or two more to their Oaths and Subscriptions which shall maâ—e almost all the conscionable Ministers of the Kingdom Nonconformists 3. Whenever notorious necessity ceaseth by the sufficient number and qâ—ality of Conforming Preachers I will cease Preaching in England But death is liker first to silence me Though I take my Conforming to be a Complex of heinous sins should I be guilty of it yet till I am called I perswade none to Nonformity for fear of casting them occasionally out of the Ministry preferring their work before the change of their judgment till such endeavours are clearly made by duty But all your endeavour as far as ever I perceived is not so much to draw us to Conformity as to persuade us to give over Preaching Christs Gospel so contrary are our designs 1 Thes· 2.15 16. Methinks is a fearful Text. And so are the words of the Liturgy before the Sacrament If any of you be a hinderer of Gods Word repent or take not this Sacrament lest Satan enter into you as he did into Judas and fill you c. FINIS This was written long ago The Earl of Orery ☜
submit to all unsinful conditions of the Episcopal communion where they live if imposed by the Ecclesiastical Government thereof This proved by these two degrees 1. That the supposition of their being less secure of salvation out of this Episcopal communion than in it is sufficient to prove them obliged to submit to all terms not directly sinful however unexpedient rather than separate themselves or suffer themselves to be excluded from this communion chap. 1. § 7 8 9 10. 2. That there is indeed less security of salvation to be had even on performance of the Moral conditions of salvation out of this Episcopal communion than in it This proved from two things 1. That they cannot be so well assured of their salvation in the use of extraordinary as of ordinary means nay that they being left to extraordinaries is a condition either very hazardous or at least very uncomfortable at present whatever it may prove hereafter Ch. II. 2. That these ordinary means of salvation are in respect of every particular person confined to the Episcopal communion of the place he lives in as long as he lives in it This proved from Two things 1. That these ordinary means of salvation are confined to the external Communion of the visible Church This proved from Four things 1. We cannot be assured that God will do for us what is necessary for our salvation on his part otherwise than by his express promises that he will do it Chap. III. § 1 2. 2. The ordinary means how we may assure our selves of our interest in his promises is by our interest in his Covenant by which they are conveyed to us Chap. III. from § 5. to the end 3. The ordinary means by which we may assure our selves of our interest in this Covenant with him is by our partaking in these external solemnities by which this Covenant is transacted and maintained Chap. IV V VI VII 4. The participation in these external solemnities with any legal validity is only to be had in the external Communion of the visible Church Chap. VIII B. II. That this visible Church to whose external Communion these ordinary means of salvation are confined is no other than the Episcopal Communion of the place where any one lives whilest he lives there This proved in Two parts a 1. That the visible Church to whose external Communion these ordinary means of salvation are consined is the Episcopal Communion This proved by these degrees A. 1. That salvation is not ordinarily to be expected without an external participation of the Sacraments 1. Negatively Not by those other popular means which ordinary persons are apt to trust in to the neglect of the Sacraments that is 1. Not by hearing the Word Preached Chap. IX 2. Not by private Prayer nor indeed by any out of the Communion of the Church Chap. X XI XII XIII XIV 2. Positively That salvation is ordinarily to be expected only by this external participation of the Sacraments 1. Proved concerning Baptism Chap. XV. 2. Concerning the Lords Supper Chap. XVI XVII II. That the validity of the Sacraments depends on the Authority of the persons by whom they are administred Chap. XVIII III. No other Ministers have the Authority of Administring the Sacraments but only they who receive their Orders in Episcopal Communion This proved by Four degrees 1. That the Authority of Administring the Sacraments must be derived from God Chap. XIX 2. That though it be derived from God yet it is not so derived without the mediation of those men to whom it was at first committed Chap. XX. 3. That it cannot be so derived from those men to whom it was first committed without a continued succession of persons orderly receiving Authority from those who had Authority to give it them from those first times of the Apostles to ours at present Chap. XXI 4. That this Authority is not now to be expected any where but in the Episcopal Communion Chap. XXII XXIII XXIV XXV b. 2. That the Episcopal Communion to which every particular person is obliged to joyn himself as he would enjoy the ordinary means of his own particular salvation is the Episcopal Communion of the place wherein he lives whilest he lives in it Chap. XXVI b. II. That the nature of this obligation to unsinful conditions of their Episcopal Communion is such as will make them guilty of the sin of SCHISM who rather than they will submit to such Conditions either separate themselves or suffer themselves to be excluded from Communion by their respective Diocesan Ordinaries Chap. XXVII Here is Episcopal Communion talkt of without telling what is the Episcopacy or what the Communion which he means and how both are known Confusion 1. There are usurping Bishops not truly called or chosen 2. There are Heretical Bishops 3. There may be divers Bishops in one City or County which of these mean you 4. He may be one fit for others and not for me nor am I to take him for my Pastor As the Greek Bishop in London and many Latine Bishops that spake not English heretofore or his faultiness may make it my duty to chuse a better 5. What if the King and Law command the contrary 6. All this is nothing for submitting to sinful conditions 2. As it is a duty to refuse sinful conditions so of many particular Churches to chuse the fittest for our communion The French and Dutch and Greeks in London are not Schismaticks for not being subject to this Bishop or locally communicating with him 2. You tell us not how a man shall know he is of the Bishops communion among a thousand parish-Parish-Churches that differ in many things and own the Bishop in some things and not in others 3. Few of the Diocess ever locally communicate with our Bishops and mentally the Nonconformists communicate in Essentials at least 4. Most Christians on earth are guilty of Schism and yet are not prevalently Schismaticks but still members of the Catholick Church 5. The Bishops e. g. in France are more guilty of the Schism than the Protestants See Dr. Stillingfleet's Defence of Laud. 1. This is false in the fore-excepted cases 1. If he be a Bishop to others and not to me unless communion include not subjection for so we communicate with many other Bishops 2. If the condition imposed be a thing which a Superior Power forbiddeth King or in some cases Parents The matter and consequences are so weighty as tell us it is not well done to abuse dull Readers thus with the deceitful unexplained nature of Episcopacy and Communion The love of truth and souls forbid such deceit 1. If some receive only Parish-bishops of the old sort and others also their Archbishops and others such Diocesans as put down all Parish-bishops which of these have Episcopal communion 2. When of old many Ages Voting and Fighting could not tell men which was the true Bishop among many competitors and when at Rome there were oft two or three at once and when
the worst oft carried the possession and Councils themselves were for divers whih was the Episcopal communion 3. Is communion and subjection all one with him or divers If divers I have communion with many Bishops that I am not subject to If the same how many must each man be subject to and in what order and cases 4. Communion is 1. mental or local and the first 1. In essentials 2. Integrals 3. Accidents of Christianity I have communion with all Christians in Essentials with the best in most integrals with none in all nor in all accidents 4. I am more secure in the mental communion of many Bishops than of some one and of All in Essentials and certain things than of some one in suspected things especially in universal communion with Christ and his whole Church 2. He that hath no communion with any true Bishops of Gods institution in his judgment will and profession hath no communion with Christs Church But if they are 1. of a false species 2. incapable 3. unordained 4. obtruders not consented to by the Clergy and the Flock it 's safest to disown them 5. And â—f they turn wolves thorns and thistles or hereticks 2. It 's dangerous to refuse communion with the true Episcopi Gregis but not with such as depose them 3. And its doubtful as to the Episcopi Episcoporum 1. It 's but deceit to distinguish only ordinary and extraordinary in speaking of the necessity of means The Gospel written or preached is an ordinary means which to want is hazardous indeed so is meditation prayer and sacraments where they may well be had and Pastors to administer them But there are many lesser means that may be wanting or ignorantly refused where salvation is safe The Church of England thinks preaching to be such which forbiddeth men to go for Preaching and from a bare Reader in his own Parish And the Indians converted by Frumentius and Edesius might have certain salvation before they had any Pastor And so may they that cannot know among contenders which is the true Pastor either as to the species or individual But 2. Comunion in every lawful thing is no ordinary requisite means of salvation Mark Reader that he said that suffer themselves to be excluded from Communion by such Governours for refusing submission to unsinful things And Dr. Saywell Bishop Gunnings Chaplain and this man make such refusal and schism damnable Now mark here how they make all indifferent imposed things consequently necessary to salvation and make all such indifferences to be Articles of faith or necessary to salvation to be believed E.g. if Organs the Cross in Baptism Surplices Church-images Exorcisms and five hundred such be indifferent and commanded by the Bishop he that is excommunicated for not conforming to them or withdraweth for it is a damnable Schismatick Ergo it is necessary to salvation to conform to every one of them in that case Ergo it 's necessary to salvation to hold them to be lawful or else to use them while I verily take them to be sins To what a mass now have these men brought the Aâ—ticles or necessaries to salvation Doth any living man know all lawful things to be such 1. Then in Abassia where there is but one Abuna Bishop local Communion with him is impossible to most 2. And how is the Patriarch of Alexandria who ordaineth him of that Place that is another Kingdom 2. Then in one Place-Communion with Papists in another with Greeks Moscovites Abisines Armenians c. is necessary in unsinful things 3. Who will judg but the Excommunicator what is unsinful as to his act 4. What a case were men in at Rome under Formosus Stephen Sergius Eugenius 4. Iohn 12. and 22. c. and at Alexandria under Peter Meletius Paulinus Flavianus and so oft in other Schisms and Nullities 5. The Novatians and Ioannites had the ordinary means of salvation in Constantinople under separate Pastors But it 's true that the ordinary means are confined to the visible Church and its external Communion where it may be had Of which more anon 1. Some think that if God had only commanded men to love him call upon him hate sin seek life eternal without an express promise one might be sure it should not be done in vain 2 But God hath expresly promised salvation to all that truly love trust and obey him and seek first Gods Kingdom and are pure in heart holy and love all men though they were excommunicate for not crossing subscribing or thinking Diocesans unlawful Chap. 3. The Promises of God and his Covenant on his part are all one Those that God promiseth to save shall certainly be savâ—d who those are the Gospel fully tâ—lls us yea and told men before the particular Churches were fixed under their proper Pastors called Elders and Bishops in the Scripture 3 Transaction is an ambiguous word 1. It was transacted by making the promise by Christ on Earth 2. It is transacted by giving the consenting penitent Believer a Right before God to Christ and salvation when he first truly so consenteth 3. It is transacted by a solemn Mâ—nisterial Investiture sealing and delivering that Right for the fuller comfort of the consenter and in soro Ecclesiae to give the Right of external Communion as a Tessara when the person is baptizâ—d 4. It is transacted by renewed confirmation and for further grace daily in the Eucharist I love not to offend you but I must be true to truth and souls and therefore tell men that these Generals and Confusions are but Cheats 3. Would you have men believe that external solemnities are necessary to the Right of Heart Covenanters before God as to salvetion Or that all external solemnities are of the same necessity The Church of England takes Confirmation to de an external solemnity for assuring men of Gods favour by the sign of Imposition of a Diocesans hands and yet bind you to profess that it is not necessary to salvation but the baptized Infants are certainly and undoubtedly saved without it Litanies Processions and many external solemnities are not essential to external Communion with the visible Church Chap. 8 O tremendous Is it no other Is not the universal visible Church consisting of all professed Christians Headed only by Christ the only universal Church visible in the world Is there no Communion with this as such Had the baptized Eunuch by Philip the Evangelist no Communion with the visible Church nor promise of salvation nor the Iberians Indians and many others that were baptized before they knew or had a Bishop Do not baptizing Presbyters and Lay-men say Turtullian and the Papists assure men of salvation though they should not hear of a Bishop Why was not Diocesan Episcopacy in the Creed if the belief and obedience be necessary to salvation a 1. 1. Apostles and Evangelists took men into the visible Communion of the universal Church before they had particular church-Church-Bishops 2. Fixed Church-Communion was exercised universally under
Congregational or Parochial Bishops or Pastors without such as our Diocesans It must be Pastoral or true Episcopal regular Communion 3. Many Individual Bishops separating from one another have been and may be in one City 4. If e. g. the Bishop of Lincoln have many Counties and one differing from him were chosen by the Clergy at Leicester Hartford c. as he was by the King which of them is the Bishop on the place If Gloucester Clergy and People had chose another when Goodman a Papist was Bishop which was the Bishop 1. 1. Salvation is pronounced by Conformists to be certain upon Baptism without any other Sacrament 2. Popes and Papists are as much as any for tying salvation to Sacraments and yet a Pope Victor and his Council at Benevent 1078. decree that rather than Communicate with a Simonist they should persist without visible Communion and in mind joined to Christ have his Communion 3. What shall they do ordinarily in Italy Spain France c. that have none but Papist Bishops 1. Wilful neglect of any known means sheweth wilful disobedience against God But many means may be ignorantly neglected without destroying assurance of salvation Turtullian thought children should stay from Baptism unless in danger of death and Nazianzen was for some years delay This ignorance damned not the practisers Apocryphal books divers Sacraments Ceremonies Church-Offices Doctrines have been controverted means among true Christians 2. Faith comes by hearing Rom. 10. Christ blesseth them that hear and do it Thousands are mentioned as believing by hearing and salvation is promised to Faith 2. 1. Whoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved Ask and ye shall have True faith and conversion wrought by hearing Gods word and working by true love and prayer hath many a promise of pardon and salvation 2. Is a baptized praying believer out of the Communion of Christs Church though he doubt of Diocesans or Patriarchs He is not 2. 1. Ordinarily faith comes by hearing and hearing by preaching and he that truly believeth shall be saved Iohn 13.16 2. I think many Score or Hundreds of Protestant Divines have proved that Baptism giveth not the first Right to life but only solemnly confirmeth sealeth and by Ministerial investiture publickly delivereth that which true Faith received before See Gataker's two Tracts on Dr. Ward 's and Dr. Davenant's Theses 3. What 's Baptism to Episcopacy till King Iames alter'd it Women might Baptize in England and Priests still may And are men Baptized into the Name or Belief of Diocesans as Bellarmine saith Baptism binds them to the Pope Prove this if you can 2. If Baptism undoubtedly save at what Age doth the effect cease 2. The Lords Supper is necessary for corroboration and for expressing true obedience and living by Faith on Christ where it can lawfully be had and the need and use of it is understood B. This is false If they be given by a Lay-man falsly pretending Orders or by one who hath no Authority through uncapacity or usurpation yet the receiver loseth not his Right he taketh it as from God and if his ignorance be not culpable there is not so much as disobedience in it 2. If I prove that Papists have no such Authority as you plead for are all their Baptisms and Ordinations null III. Episcopal Communion is the Cothurnus the Hose drawn over your ulcer and snare 1. We have mental Communion in Essentials with all true Bishops in the world 2. We have Subject Communion with true Parish-Bishops 3. And with their Ruling Bishops at least as Magistrates 4. Novatians Luciferians Donatists and others in time of Schisms had all Orders in Episcopal Communion and so have Papists Greeks Moscovites Armenians 5. Parish-Bishops have more proof of Authority from Christ than the Diocesans or many hundred Congregations that have no other Bishops 6. Authority may be given by God without any Ordination where it cannot be had or not without sinning 1. No doubt but all true Authority must be derived from God 2. Those to whom it was first given were the Twelve Apostles They are considered 1. As the Inspired Prophetical Declarers and Recorders of the Laws and Doctrine and Promises of Christ. 2. As chief Pastors of the Church to gather and rule it All Gods gifts and graces that come to us by the mediation of the Gospel come by the Apostles mediation in the first sense as declaring Christs Will how Ministers shall be made in all Ages And as chief Pastors gathering and setling the first Churches which by Christs Charter shall call their Pastors and so others to the end of the world they may be said to be Mediators herein 3. But they mediate not as the Donors of the Pastoral power as being Pastors themselves but only as Ministerial investers The Sacraments come not to us without the mediation of the Apostles but they made them not nor make them effectual nor make new Apostles to deliver them 3. This is deceitful confusion 1. Authority to Administer Sacraments and Authority to call others to administer them are different things 2. And so is succession of Apostolical power and succession of common Ministry 3. And so is giving power as the Donor and giving it as an investing servant 4. And proper giving it and improper which is but qualifying the persons to receive it 1. Apostolical Prophetical conveyance harh no such succession 2. The Flock that have no Authority to Administer Sacraments partake of the Authority to call others to do it 3. Inferiors may have Authority to call Superiors else the highest could not be made 4. None of these people give the power but their Election is part of the receivers qualifications to whom God giveth it by his Law or Charter And then as serâ—ants they solemnize the Investiture 5. The power of this Law or Charter is never interrupted But if all Pastors were dead an Hundred years it would renew Pastoral power in the Church without uninterrupted Donors or Investers 4. This conveying power is where-ever Gods Law and capable receivers are A capable receiver is 1. One personally qualified with sufficiency and willingness 2. And that hath the Churches and Ordainers necessary consent when ordinary for order sake the Ordainers then must invest him by declaring him authorized by God c. The regular Ordination like publick Matrimony after contract is to be by authorized Ordainers and most Bishops Diocesan Papists Greeks Moscovites Armenian c. are of more doubtful Authority than Congregational or Parish Bishops though the former usurp the name as appropriated to them b. 2. 1. Then men in Rome Italy Spain France c. must be of the Papists Prelates Churches and Communion 2. Paulinus and Flavian Donatists Novatians Arrians c. may have Bishops in the same place And the Orthodox two or more at once Grotius thought as many as there were Synagogues in a City 3. Then if I prove the chief Pastor of a Parish or city-City-Church to be
a true Bishop by vertue of Gods Law and if he have better Qualification and Election and Ordination to be of surer Authority than the Diocesan it 's his Communion that we must prefer 4. But indeed Baptism and Salvation are ordinarily given before Episcopal Communion of any sort 5. They that thought the Pope Antichrist as most Protestant Bishops long did thought it a duty to reject the Communion of the Bishops of the places where they lived And Denmark and other Countries set up others against them that were ordained by Bugenhagius and other Prsbyters 6. Parochial and Diocesan bounds are humane mutable institutions 7. If the Bishop of the place be a Schismatick the Communion of a better near is better b. II. 1. All causleless separation from any Christians or causleless disobedience to any Pastor or neglect of any Christian duty needful to the Churches peace and concord and every opinion and practice that is against them doth make a man guilty of sinful Division or Schism in some degree And while every Christian hath many errors and sins which all tend to some sinful breach as the least sore is solutio continui I cannot see but every man living hath some guilt of Schism nor that there is any Church on earth that hath not some such guilt But every degree of guilt denominateth not the man or Church a Schismatick in a predominant or mortal sense And in Charity I hope that even some of those heinous Schismaticks may be saved that divide the Churches by their usurpation obtrusion sinful impositions and worldly domination yea some that in blind zeal put down parish-Parish-Bishops and smite and silence the Pastors and scatter the Flocks And if I must have Communion with none that 's guilty of Schism with what Church or Bishop should I joyn And if their Sacraments be invalid what a case is Italy Spain France yea and England in Must all be baptized again that they baptized 2. But it 's no schism but a duty for the people as far to forsake a sinful Bishop much more an usurper as Cyprian and that Council advised them to do in the case of Martial and Basilides 3. And after all this deceitful confusion note Reader that he denieth not our disobedience to be lawful in case of sinful conditions imposed And if we fully prove not this to be our case let our accusers silence us and let our guilt be our shame 4. And if people that had Parish-Bishops on the place where they lived lawfully called shall forsake them to obey a Diocesan that is not on the place but perhaps Forty or Fifty or Sixty Miles off and never saw them and was obtruded contrary to the ancient Canons which nullifie such and sets himself to silence faithful Pastors and persecute them and other godly Christians for not sinning heinously upon deliberate choice and covenant doth not even this man conclude such to be Schismaticks that are out of the ordinary way and hope of salvation CHAP. III. The consequence of Mr. Dodwell's foresaid doctrine 1. THOSE that live under the Popish Bishops in Italy Spain France c. must live in their communion and under their command in all unsinful things 2. The Protestant Churches that have not Episcopal Ordination are no true Churches and have no true Ministers or Sacraments nor any Covenant-right to salvation 3. The Protestant Churches are in the same unchurched damnable case that have Bishops if they have not an uninterrupted succession of such from the Apostles canonically ordained 4. Therefore the Churches of Denmark Germany c. that have Superintendents ordained at the Reformation by Bugenhagius Pomeranus a Presbyter and all the rest whose succession was interrupted are in the same case 5. It is Schism and rejecting Sacraments and Covenant-right to salvation in all the people that continue in such Protestant Churches and communicate with them 6. It is better for the Protestants in France to joyn with the Papists than to live as they do without Sacraments or Church-communion 7. Yet by self contradiction it will follow that certainly the Church of Rome and all that derive their ordination from that Church have no true Bishops Ministers Sacraments Churches nor Covenant-right to salvation for it 's certain their true succession hath been oft interrupted 1. By such utterly uncapable persons as all History describeth and even Baronius calleth Apostaticos non Apostolicos and such as divers General Councils judged Hereticks Infidels Simoniaks c. e g. Eugenius 4. who yet kept in 2. By such whose false ordination the Canons expresly null 3. By many Schisms two or three Popes at once of whom none can tell who had the right or whether any 4 By the Popes taking on him to be Christs Universal Vicar an Office in specie usurpt which he maketh his Episcopacy and as such giveth his orders And all his Presbyters have turned the true Ministry into the false one of Mass-Priests and being no true Ministers can give no true Sacraments by his rule 8. Yea it is certain that few if any Churches on earth can prove such an uninterrupted succession as he and the Papists describe and most it s known have no such thing 9. Therefore if any have such a succession they cannot know it it being a thing that cannot be proved and so cannot be sure that they are true Churches c. 10. For the certainty of any true Ministry Church Sacraments and Salvation dependeth on such knowledg of History as is not in the world viz. To know that this Bishop and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and so up to the Apostles were every one true Bishops and truly Ordained which no mortal man can know 11. Men that by a Prince against even the Nullifying Canons can but get possession of Patriarchal and Diocesan Churches without the Clergy or peoples choice have thereby the power of damning men that fear God at their pleasure For 1. they must pass for the Bishops of the place 2. They may command any unsinful thing and excommunicate him that doth not obey 3. He is a Schismatick that suffers himself so to be Excommunicate and so is in a damnable state 4. He cannot hinder it not knowing the thing to be unsinful 12. For by this whoever will escape damnable schism must be one that knoweth the unsinfulness as he speaks of all things in the world that are such which a Prelate may command or else he must do any thing which he judgeth sin if a Prelate command it But that is wicked Idolizing man 13. And therefore by this rule no man living can be saved that a Prelate hath a mind to damn or from his damning impositions For no man living knoweth the lawfulness of all lawful things and therefore may take a commanded thing for sin that is not and then if he wilfully do that which he judgeth sin he rebelleth against God if he do it not the Prelate may excommunicate him and unresistibly make
judgers of the personal qualifications and that ordinis gratia ordinarily their approbation choice or consent shall be a relative part of their Receptive qualification 6. God himself giveth all the personal qualifications 7 He is ready to help the approvers and chusers to discern all these and to judg aright of them 8. The person being thus made a capable Recipient by personal qualifications and relative due Approbation Election and Consent God's Donation or Law doth give him Right and oblige him to the office-work And the Electors Approvers and Consenters are none of the proper efficient Donors or causes of this right and obligation but only efficient causes of his relative receptive capacity 9. That therefore the right and obligation is immediately from Gods Law by resultancy as the established medium of Gods conveyance but not immediately without any means of his receptively to make him materiam dispositam 10. That all this is true both of Soveraign Civil Power and of Church-power in Bishops and Pastors 11. That yet besides Approbation and Election God hath for the publick notice and order of the Church appointed a Regular Ministerial Investiture by which the Approved shall be solemnly put into possession as Kings are crowned and Ministers instituted and Ordination usually containeth both the approbation part of the election and the investiture 12 But this Investiture being but a Ministerial delivery of possession proveth not the Investor to be any Donor of the Power to the King or to the Bishop or Pastor 13. Nor is it necessary save ordinis gratia and in foro ecclesiae to avoid intrusion and confusion but not when it is set against the end or the end may and must be sought without it 14. Who it is that hath the power of this Ordination Approbation and Investiture is much of the controversie of these times some say it is the Magistrate but those that say it is the bishops are not agreed what species of bishops it is whether the chief Pastors of each particular Parish true Church or only a Diocesan that is the sole bishop of many parishes that are no true Churches or only Diocesans that are Archbishops over many true parish-Parish-churches and bishops 15. But the Fundamentum juris being Christs Statute-Law or Grant and all that is left to man being but qualitatively or relatively to make the person an immediately capable Recipient and ministerially invest him therefore it follows that if at Alexandria Antioch Ierusalem Cesarea Constantinople London all the old bishops were dead or hereticks a just title may be restored without the ordination of one that had successive canonical ordination because there needeth no efficient donor but Christ and his Law and the receptive capacity may be without such ordination where it is not to be had as among Papists that will not ordain one on lawful terms c. for Order it self is but for the thing ordered and not against it And I will have mercy and not sacrifice â—morals before rituals and all power is to edification c. are certain rules And God never made men judges in partem utram libet whether there shall be Churches and Pastors and Worship or none or whether there shall be Civil Government or none no nor of what the species the Church-Offices shall be 16. I use to explain this by many expository similitudes 1. If the Laws of God authorize Soveraignty and the Constitution of the Kingdom say it shall be Monarchy were it Elective the Electors are not Efficients of power but determiners of the Recipient And if it be Hereditary or Elective the Investers by coronation are no efficients of the power but Ministerial deliverers of possession and that but necessary ad ordinem and not ad esse potestatis 2. If the King by a Charter to the University state the power of the Chancellor Vicechancellor Proctors and all the Masters of Colledges and then tell them who shall be capable and how chosen and how inveâ—ted here his power is immediately from the Kings Charter as the efficient Instrument and all that others do is but to determine of the Recipient and invest him 3. So it is as to the power of the Lord Mayor of London and the Mayors and Bailiffs of all Corporations 4. So it is in the essential power of the Husband over the Wife the woman chuseth who shall have it and the Parson that marrieth them investeth him in it but God only is the efficient donor of his Law 17. Therefore it is not in the power of the Electors Approvers or Investors to alter any of the Power established by God If both the woman and the Priest say that the man shall be her Husband but shall have no government of her it is a nullity Gods Law shall stand If the City and the Recorder say You shall be Lord Mayor but not have all the power given by the Kings Charter its vain and he shall have all that the Charter giveth him If the A Bp crown the King and say You shall be King but not have all the power stated by the Constitution on the King this depriveth not the King of his power unless he give away that which God hath not stated on him but men so if an Ordaining Prelate Patron or Parish say This is a true Parish Church and we choose and Ordain you the true Pastor of it but you shall have but part of the true Pastoral Power stablished on the office by God it 's null Gods Institution shall be the measure of his power 18. But I confess that if God had left Church-Officers as much to the will of men as he hath done the Civil the case had been otherwise for Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy are all lawful And the King or other supreme power may make new Species of Judges and Magistrates and Officers and alter them as they see cause And it would have been so in the Church if as the Italians at Trent would have carried it Christ had immediately Instituted only the Papacy and left it to the Pope to make Bishops and to Bishops to make Priests And yet I would not wrong the worst I cannot say that they would have empowered the Pope to change the Species of Priests or Bishops But God hath fixed the Species by making a setled Law for all the work and all the Authority to do it though Accidentals may be altered in work and Office § 6. This is the clear state of my assertions which how grosly Mr. Dodwell hath falsified in his forged description I will not stay to open But it is a great stress and fabrick that he layeth on the contrary supposition that his Species of Bishops are the givers of the Powers and so we can have no other or more than they are willing to give us And let him that thinks he spoke a sentence of truth and sense to prove it enjoy his error I would quickly prove the contrary to him if I knew what he
the wisest and best man had right to the Crown or Church-power If copious discourses to the contrary will not hinder such busie disputers from such inhumane slanders are they meet to be disputed with I have over and over said that 1. Gifts or the best abilities 2. And due election or approbation of the Ordainers 3. And the peoples election and consent all set together do but make up the Qualification or Receptive disposition of the Recipient 4. Yea and his consent conjoined and that where all these in the necessary degree concur the power resulteth to that capâ—ble person from none of them all but immediately from God Law which is his instrument giving power to persons so qualified And that besides all these Ministerial Investiture for Orders sake when it may be had should introduce him into possession yea and the Magistrate must be judg whom he will countenance protect or tolerate But the case of Ordination and Investiture are necessary only where they may be had lawfully and without crossing their end as sacrifice was compared with mercy and the Rest of the Sabbath compared to works of charity and necessity § 43. And as it is the trick of such dealers p. 81. he must have Governours to do his work and therefore must not leave out that which may make us odious to them but tells men that our Hypothesis is unreconcilable with government in this life in that it permits persons to assume Authority and to extend it as far as they think fit by appealing to Writings against the sense of all the visible authority of this life Ans. 1. But â—f this Hypothesis be none of his Adversaries but come out of the Meal-Tub or forge of Inventers what shall such men be called 2. We permit no person to assume Authority But Writings are not so contemptible to us in comparison of that which you take to be all the visible Authority of the Church It is your Richard Hooker that saith that the Law maketh the King and giveth and measureth his power and that it's usurpation which obligeth no mans Conscience when power is taken and usâ—d which the Law never gave What I think of this I have elsewhere shewed The Statutes are not so contemptible in this case but the great Lawyers think they may be appealed to from visible Rulers in several cases And you must talk at other rates than you have done in your tedious fallacious Vagaries before wise Christians will believe that we may not appeal from Prelates to the written Word of God when the power used by them is justly questioned If not how caâ—e the Reformed Churches to justifie their Reformation Was it not by appealing to Scripture against the visible Church Rulers that were commonly against them Were not Pâ—pes Council Prelates and Priests against them for the far greatest part Did it overthrow all Government of the world to appeal from these to the â—cripture I hereby undertake to prove that neither Popes Prelates or Priests have any Church-Authority bâ—t what God hatâ— given them by his Word And is it not thâ—â— necessary to try it by that Word Must we take thâ—â—r own words for all that Popes or Prelates câ—â—im And it will put the Pope and Council hard to it to prove any Authority from God if the Scripture do not give it them And if it give it them it may give it others § 44. And whâ—n 〈◊〉 done we are far from granting that we have lesâ— to shâ—â— for our succession from the Apostleâ— than Popes or 〈…〉 have 1 We are 〈◊〉 that we have the same â—aptism Eucharist Creed Lâ—â—ds Praâ—â—r Dâ—calogue and Scriptâ—re delivered down from the Aâ—ostles 2. We are sure that we have a Ministry of the same species which Christ and his â—pirit in the Apostles instituted 3. We know that our Churches and Worship and Doctrine are the â—ame that are described and setled by the Apostles 4. We know that our present Ministers are qualified as the Apostâ—â—â— requiâ—ed 5. And that they are Elected or 〈◊〉 to by the 〈◊〉 is the Apostles required 6. And that they have as good an Ordination and Investiture as the Apostles ever made necessary to the Ministry That is 1. They have the Approbation of senior Pastors and many of them of Diocesans All that were put into any places by the Parliament when the Bishops were down were to have the Westminster Assemblies Approbation under their hands And that Assembly as called consisted of many Diocesans with many score grave Eminent Divines though the Diocesans were not actually present And a signed Approbation and Allowance hath the Essence of all that is of absolute necessity in Ordination 2. They were Ordained by true Bishops 1. All true Presbyters are Episcopi gregis and joyn in Ordination here in Enggland 2 The chief Pastors of City-Churches having Curates under them are Episcopi Eminentes vel Praesides such as Ordained for above Two hundred years after the Apostles And 3. The chosen Presidents of Synods were such Bishops But all these concurred in the Nonconformists Ordinations when the Diocesans were down They were Ordained at and by a Synod of Presbyters in some great Town or City where the Moderator and the chief City-Pastors were part 3. Many of them were Ordained by Diocesans 4. Many Ordained as aforesaid were after approved by Diocesans some by Imposition of Hands and all by Word or Writing for Archbishop Vsher did in my hearing by Word and in Writing more publickly declare his opinion of such Presbyters Ordination as valid â—though he excused not such as deposed the Diocesans from the guilt of Schism and so did the many other Bishops whom I formerly cited yea even Bancroft himself And surely all this hath all that is essential to Ordination 5. And we know that such a Ministry hath continued to propagate the Church and Gospel in the world since the Apostles days But we confess 1. That we cannot prove that such Ministers have still succeâ—ded in the same Towns 2. Nor that no one from whom their Ordination came down from the Apostles did pretend to have Orders or Authority when he had none 3. Or that no one of them in 1660. years was an Heretick or a Schismatick or a Papist 4. Or that no one Ordained in wrong words 5. Or that no one Ordained contrary to the Canons out of his own limits or without three Bishops or without the Presbyters 6. Or that no Competitors were Ordained by several Bishops Mr. Dodwell is a great Historian when he hath proved all this of all or any of his Clergy-friends he hath done something more than multiply words § 45. But on the other side we can easily prove and have proved 1. That our Diocesans are not of the same species with those of old 2 That the Apostles did not make them I think Mr. Dodwell will say that the Presbyters first made them by consent the Children begot the Fathers 3 And Dr. Hammond will defend it that
there is no certainty that any Subject Presbyters were made by the Apostles in Scripture times So that the very species of their Clergy hath no such succession as distinct from ours 4. And he that will read the Church-History and Councils declaring the multitude of doleful intercisions in East and West by Heresies the Patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch Constantinople Ierusalem and Rome and most of the chief Seats of Bishops having been judged Hereticks Simoniacks or no Bishops by General Councils yea Roman Bishops judged some of them Infidels and Diabolical by the Councils of Constance Basâ—l c. I say he that knoweth this History must know that the Diocesans that from these derive their succession have certainly had frequent and notorious intercisions § 46. And this leads me to another part of Mr. Dodwell's work viz. his proof that Aidan and Finan were Bishops As if this had been a great part of his Cause Such diverting noise is a great part of the art of deceiving Because I had said that Aiden and Finan were not Bishops but Presbyters that is when they came out of Scotland into Northumberland I apprehended that some men of his gâ—â—ius and design would be willing to mistake me and therefore Printed an Explication of the Words in the end of my first Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet But Mr. D would have men think that I said that they were never made and called Bishops at all and that I read not Beda from whom alone near Five and Thirty years ago I took almost all that I assert concerning them Let the Reader see my foresaid Explication If Mr. Dodwell will give us more than noise and mist about this matter 1. Let him prove that it was Diocesan Bishops that Ordained these Scots before they came into England when Beda saith they were sent from those Monasteries that were ruled by Presbyters and which would not so much as eat or communicate with the Roman Bishops 2. Let him prove that any Bishops in England Consecrated hem or made them Bishops here when Beda tells us that they were the first in the North and therefore had none here to Ordain them 3. Let him prove that they were here made true Diocesan Bishops of our species When 1. they had no Presbyters at first under them and therefore ruled none and had but one Congregation for one man can be but in one place at once 2. Their Church in Lindisfarne was not made of stone but of wood covered or thatcht with reeds and they are not said to have any other Church under them 3. They went indeed to preach all over the Country but not as to a Church but as to Heathens to convert them 4. Let him prove that ever they took themselves to be of a distinct order from Presbyters 5. At a Synod Bed c. 25. we find no more but the King and his Son and Hilda a woman-Abbess and three or four of this sort of Bishops far below our Ordaining City-Presbyters and their Synods But unlearned men that value Books by interest and preconceived opinions may think that by such talk Mr. Dodwell hath done some great matter § 47. But saith he p. 81 82. Our Hypothesis obliging inferiour Governours to prove their title to their office and the extent of it from the intention of their supream Governours does oblige all to a strict dependance on the supreme visible power so as to leave no place for appeal concerning the practice of such Government which as it lasts only for this life so it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice c. Ans. Alas for the poor world and Church that will be cheated at so gross a rate 1. Did you not know that the grand error that Protestants charge Papists with is the asserting of any such thing as a supreme visible power over the Church universal besides Christ. And did you think that your roteing over the name to them that deny the thing would make a wise man change his Religion 2. By your Hypothesis then no man can prove his title to his Office who either believeth not that there is any such universal Supreme or that knoweth not who it is I know no Competitors but the Pope and General Councils unless the Patriarch of Constantinople be one 3. And he that knoweth not the intention of this Supreme power is still unable to prove his office 4. And he that knoweth the intention of the Ordaining Diocesan is never the better if he know not the intention of the Supreme And what if the intention of the Supreme and of the Diocesan are contrary 5. But by your Hypothesis the Governours may alter the very species of the Priesthood as they please and what ever God saith of it in his Institution or Law it must be to us no other in kind or extent than the Governours intend If they say I ordain thee to baptize but not to teach or to do both but not to celebrate the Lords-Supper or to do that but not to pray or praise God or not to use the Keys of the Church our power is limited accordingly Then if the Prelates make Mass-Priests their intention is the measure of their power Answer the Papists then that ask Was it ever the intention of the Pope and his Prelates that the English Bishops should disclaim the Pope or the Mass or reform without them as they did 6. Seeing the English Bishops by you derive their succession from Willfred and Augustine and Rome is not the Church of Rome the â—ittest Judg of the extent of their power as knowing their own intentions Nay if they were so blind as to intend them power to pull down themselves may they not recall it 7. Did ever Protestant preach this Doctrine That there is no appeal from the supreme Prelates to God O dreadful what may men come to and what error so great that a former may not introduce Disgrace not the Church of England so much as thus to intimate that they set up themselves so as that there is no appeal to Scripture or God himself from them God hath commanded Preaching Praying Praises Baptism the Lords-Supper holy assemblies c. if the supreme Prelates interdict and forbid all these is there no appeal to God I have told you how much Robert Grosthead abhor'd this Doctrine and so told Pope Innocent the 4 th What absolute blind obedience to Prelates is this 8. And what a reason brings he That the practice lasteth only for this life and therefore c Doth any of our actions here last longer than while they are doing Praying Praise Sacraments obeying the King doing good to the poor c. and so swearing cursing adultery rebellion atheism blasphemy here last only for this life Must we therefore obey men without appeal to God if they forbid us all duty and command all sin 9. And what did the man mean when he said That it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its
consented to all the General Councils 3. You shall chuse what Name I shall call you by If it be Protestant far be it from me to deny it you But as your Book publisheth your judgment to the world you will give me leave to tell men what is in it And to profess my self that I am no such Protestant as takes the Church of Rome to be a true Church of uninterrupted succession which gave our Bishops their Office and Power and that all the Reformed that have not Diocesan Bishops are no Churches no Ministers have no Sacraments no pardon of sin or hope of salvation by promise and known ordinary grounds which the Roman Church hath Yea that they sin against the Holy Ghost Yea and that this is the case of the Episcopal Protestants that have not had an uninterrupted succession of Episcopal Ordination and that the French Protestants were better turn Papists than to continue such Protestants as they are I take all this for your judgment But I vindicate you so far as to say that you oft contradict your self and so possibly may yet come off If you should say that neither such Protestants nor Papists have Sacraments and part in the Covenant of grace pardon and salvation you would leave so few for Heaven and so many for Hell as I will not imagine you to be guilty oâ— II. As to the Second I must tell all that I take it but for trifling to call us to answer the same things again which are answered so long ago and have no reply from Papists or any other And I doubt not but you know that it is the main charge which the Papists assault the Reformed Churches with and put their chief trust in which you also bring against them And we still believe that Iansenius did it much stronglier than you and much more than yours is by Voâ—tius against him fully answered and your denial moveth us not III. To satisfie your Third demand I remember a small Script which I published 1659 or 1660 and therewith send it you by which with what I read to you you may conjecture at my terms specially if you joyn my Preface to Cathol Theologie I take it for granted that it will not satisfie you But pardon my freedom for saying that while I perceive your Confidence ordinarily to go quite beyond your Proofs and while my Principles call me to love more as brethren than yours do and engage me not to justifie persecution of men better than my self I shall think never the worse of them for that IV. As to your judgment for my ceasing to Preach I dare not obey it I think if I say these men forbid me God will not take it for an excuse after such charges as Scripture layeth down and such promises as in Ordination I made and such necessity of souls as I am sure of and such encouragements as God hath given me I fear hearing Thou slothful servant c. as much as the guilt of other heinous sins I have not lived idly and if I silence my self I invite God by death to silence me and judg me as obeying man against him I am past doubt that Satan and my flesh give me the same counsel as you do I have abundant arguments for my Preaching which I never heard a â—ational answer of and which such a poor Objection as Then there will be no Order will not confute especially when all the Ministers of England are bound to be Nonconformists and consequently to â—ease Preaching if I am so bound And why not next all Christians to cease hearing and praying if so forbidden If it be only Christs Gospel that I Preach I cannot but suspect the voice that saith Give over Preaching Accept this account of the sense of Your Friend Rich. Baxter To Mr. Dodwell Nov. 15th 1680. SIR YOurs of Oct. 16 th I received Nov. 11 th which intimateth the Second Edition of your Letters which I hear not of your last Letter to me signifying your purpose to publish your long Letter from Ireland to me caused me to Print an old Treatise of Episcopacy which I had cast by and now send you as an answer to that Letter I thank you for your admonition and desire of my repentance It shall make me if I can search yet more diligently but I find no probability of being able the like lamentations of my sin and wrong to the Church I have long had from Papists Antinomians Anabaptists and Separatists and some Quakers and Seekers and I despair of satisfying them nor can I be of all their minds and I find here but one Argument to draw me to yours viz my taking the Oath of Canonical obedience And 1. You know not that I took it Many Ordained men did not To tell you the truth I entered so rawly that though I well remember my Subscription I remember not that I took that Oath I remember I took it not for my Ordination but at the same time taking a License for a School some Oath the Register suddenly thrust on me and I remember not what it was which was and is my sin 2. If I took it surely I never intended to bind my self to any but my true Ordinary And when he is dead and the very Order for near Twenty years publickly though culpably put down and none existent where I lived I never saw it proved that I am sworn to all that after are set up over others by the King without the Clergies or Peoples choice or consent contrary to the Judgment of the Church for One thousand years and that without and against my own consent And that he that sweareth obedience to his present Ordinary is thereby sworn though he never dream't of it to all that ever shall succeed him what changes soever be made and though judging them Usurpers I renounce them If it be said that I virtually consent by the Convocation I deny it nor did the City of London consent for they had not one chosen Clerk there They chose Mr. Calamy and me and we were both refused by the Bishop and only the Dignitaries of the City admitted What if I had sworn obedience in 1639. to the Presbytery in Scotland or 1649. in England and after they are put down and I find them to be an unlawful power and they are restored again doth my first Oath bind me to the latter stock against my consent 3. The English Ecclesiastical Law-Books which I have read do tell me that the Chancellor Official Commissary Archdeacons and every Iudex Ordinarius is my Ordinary whatever you say against it And some Bishops themselves have judged the Lay-Chancellors Judgment by the use of the Keys to be a great sin Quest. Whether then an ignorant Oath to obey such Usurpers repented of do bind to obey them still What if in France I had sworn obedience to their Bishops and after see that it was an unlawful Oath quod materiam am I bound by it till death 4.
no power to cross or violate these his Laws And if they do it notoriously it is null and worse and no act of authority but of sin e. g. If Bishops baptize unconverted Infidels or give the other Sacrament to such or to notorious wicked impenitent persons 3. I believe that if one or many Bishops or Priests do disobey these Laws of Christ their sin doth not oblige all other persons to rebel or sin with them or disoblige them from their duty e. g. If some Bishops should refuse to receive penitent believers and their â—eed into the Church by Baptism others are nevertheless bound to receive them and not all the Bishops in the world to keep them out because some do it sinfully so if some Bishops would feed them with unâ—ound Doctrine or corrupt Gods Worship e. g. with Image-worship or language unintâ—lligible c. others must not follow them but do better And if some Bishops turn Christs sheep out of his sold and pasture unjustly denying them Communion others must not do wickedly with them but must receive such else one tyrant might oblige all the Churches to tyranny 4. But while the power of the Keys is lawfully used he that is justly cast out of the Communion of one Church should not be received to Communion with any other that hath just notice of his Exclusion till the cause be removed 5. But the notice of it concerneth not those that living out of reach are uncapable of Communion with that person If a woman in this Parish be Excommunicated as a Scold or a man as a Drunkard c. the Bishop is not bound to send notice of their names and case to Ethiopia or Armenia nor to all the Christian World no nor to all England Nor do they use to do it to all the Parishes in the Diocess but only to that one where the person liveth But I doubt not but all that Church should know of it of which he was a Communicating member by the way why is not all the Diocess told of it but that men are conscious that he hath not Personal communion with them and therefore need not be so Excommunicated 6. Therefore mens limited capacity allowing them Personal Communion but in a narrow compass there needs no Confederacy of all the Christian World for the rejecting of those that one of them hath first rejected 7. But in well-ordered agreeing Churches none should be received presently into the Communion of another Church without due notice of his aptitude or capacity which regularly should be by the Certificates of the Church whence he came called Communicatory Letters or if he was never before admitted to the Sacrament because not at age his own Personal profession giveth him right and so it doth in the Countries where through neglect such Certificates or Testimonies are not in use sobeit there come in no proof against him that he stands Excommunicate or deserveth it A professing Christian hath right to Communion if he travel through all the Churches in the World till his profession be disproved or his claim disabled by just testimony If a man be Excommunicate in e. g. Lincoln-Diocess in one Parish-Church above a thousand Parishes more of the same Church Diocesan may receive him for want of notice unless they are bound to receive no stranger of another Parish and that is a kind of Excommunicating of all Christians from the Communion of all the Christian World except one Parish 8. The Legal Excommunication which is only a general pronunciation that such or such sinners in specie shall be actually excommunicate is done already by God himself in his Universal Laws And no man ought to make Laws to Excommunicate any that Gods Laws do not decree to be Excommunicate save that when there is a difficulty in discerning whether this or that Doctrine or practice be indeed the sin so condemned in Gods Laws mens Laws may expound it to remove that difficulty If all were excommunicate that Gods own Laws do require to be excommunicate alas how great would the number be So little need is there that Voluminous Councils should excommunicate many more and that Councils should be added to Councils to the end of the world to make new Laws for excommunicating men 9. Where God hath commanded all Christians in his Laws to avoid any sort of wicked men and with such not to eat the fact being once notorious the person is so far ipso jure excommunicate as that all are bound to avoid familiarity with that person though no Bishop sentence him But the Pastors having the Church Keys we must not go out of the Church because such a man is there for who shall be in the Church is at his Judgment but who shall be at my Table is at mine 10. But if the Church it self be essentiated of such as God thus commandeth all to avoid and this be notorious every Christian must avoid that Church The Essentials of a Church are the pars regens pars subdita the Pastors and the Body of the flock If either be so far corrupt the Church is corupt When any one essential part is wanting or depraved then the Essence is wanting or depraved Therefore where many Pastors make up the pars regens of a particular Church it is not the heresie or wickedness of some one only that will warrant a separation because one is but an integral and not an essential part But where one Bishop only is the essential regent constitutive part there that one mans heresie or notorious wickedness such as we are commanded to have no Communion with will allow us to avoid that Church as a Church though not each Member of it who are parts still of the Universal Church If I knew what further explication of my thoughts it is that you desire I should be ready to give it you III. As to the coercive power which you talk of it is strange if we can differ about the nature of it but we greatly differ I suppose about the extent of it Pardon me if to avoid confusion I first speak of the Name and then of the Thing 1. Though our ordinary use of the words coactive and coercive be to signifie that which worketh either on the Body and its provision only or on the Mind by force upon the Body or Estate yet if you will but tell me what you mean by it so distinctly that we may not be entangled with Logomachy take it in what sense you will The words which you use are the signification of your mind I desire but to understand and to be understood I follow Bishop Bilson of Christ. Obed. and others commonly that distinguish the power of Magistrates and Pastors by the Names of the power of the Sword and of the Word By the first they mean all power of corporal mulâ—ts and penalties directly such for he that grievâ—th the mind consequently troubleth the body By the latter they mean all that Official power of Gods
Church-ruin to be devised than to suppose a more extensive Concord to be possible and necessary than indeed is and so to set up an impossible End and Means and to deny Concord and Peace to all that cannot have it on those terms If all should be denied to be the Kings Subjects who dare not profess Assent Consent and approbation of every law and part or word of the laws or that agree not of the meaning of every law or that differ in any matters of Religion what a Schism Confusion and Ruine would it unavoidably make in the Kingdom and how few Subjects would it leave the King Even as if none but men of the same stature visage or wit should be Subjects 4 The necessary Union and Concord of Christians is a matter of so great importance that it cannot be supposed that Christ is the sole Universal Lawgiver and yet hath not ordained or determined what shall be the terms of necessary Christian Unity and Concord And indeed he hath determined it Viz. I. He hath ordained Baptism himself to be our Christning or our visible Investiture in the Church Universal that is our Relation to Christ as the Head of his Universal Kingdom or Body And every rightfully baptized person till by violating that Covenant he forfeit his benefits is to be taken by us as a Member of Christ a Child of God and an Heir of Heaven and we are bound to love him as a brother and use him accordingly in all due Offices of Love And because the Church into which Baptism entereth us consists of Christian Pastors and People Apostles and Prophets having been as Foundations infallibly delivering us now recorded in Scripture the Word of Life and ordinary Pastors being appointed to teach and guide the people in holy Doctrine Worship and Conversation therefore it is implied that the baptized person at Age understandeth this and consenteth thereunto that is to receive as infallible the recorded sacred Doctrine of the infallible persons Apostles and Prophets and the ordinary Ministry of such ordinary Pastors and Teachers as he shall discern to be set over him by the Word and Spirit of Christ. Whether this consent to the Pastoral-Office be necessary to the Being of a Christian or only to the Well-being is a controversie with which I need not stop or lengthâ—n in this account But Baptism as such doth not enter us into any particular Church II. 1. Christ by himself and his â—pirit in the Apostles hath ordained that Christians shall be associated into particular Churches consisting of the aforesaid Ordinary Pastors and their Flocks for Personal Communion in holy Dâ—ctrine Worship and Conversation in all which these Pastors are their Guides according to the Laws or Word of Christ already delivered by the inâ—allible Ministry of the Apostles and Prophets against or beyond which Christ hath given them no power Their Office is of his own making and describing and their power to determine undetermined useful circumstances in Gods Worship and Church-discipline is but a power to obey Christs general commands to do all thingâ— in Love Peace Order Decency and to Edification which they may not violate 2. Every Christian that hath opportunity should be a Member of some such particular Church Statedly if it may be if not yet transiently But some may want such opportunity as single persons converted or cast among Infidels Travellers Embassadors Factors and other Merchants among Infidels or where Christianity is so corrupted by the Pâ—stors as that they will not allow men Communion without sinful Oaths Covenants Professions Words or Practices 3. No one at Age can be a Member of the Universal or of any particular Church and so the Subjâ—ct of that Pastor against his will or without his own consent however Antecedent Obligations may bind men to consent 4. Every such Church should have its proper Bishop and in Ignatius's time its Unity was describâ—d by One Altar and One Bishop with his fellow Presbyters and Deacons 5. Such Bâ—shops or Pastors were to be ordained by Senior Bishops or Pâ—stors and received by the Eâ—ection or Consent of the whole Church and for many hundred years no Churches received their Bishops on any other terms The Ordainers and the People or Church receiving him having each a necessary consent as a double Key for the security of the Church to which afterwards the Christian Magiâ—â—rates consent was added according to Gods word so far as protecting and countenancing of the Bishop did require The senior Bishops must consent to his Ordination the people must consent to him as formally related to themselves as their Pastor and the Magistrate as to one to be protected by him 6 As without mutual consent the relation of Pastor and flock is not founded so Gods Providence must direct every man to know what particular Church he should be of and whom by consent to take for the guide of his soul. In England men may freely chuse what Church and Pastor they will stand related to every man having liberty to dwell in what Parish or Diocess he please without asking leave of the Bishop to remove 7. The individuating or distinguâ—shing of particular Churches by peculiar Circuits or proper spaces of ground is no further of Gods institution than it is the performance of the general commands of doing all in order to edification c. And as in prosperous times under godly peaceable Princes it is greatly convenient and desirable so in several cases of Division Church-corruption by Heresie or Tyranny Persecution c. it is inconvenient and it becomes a necessary duty to gather Churches in the same space of ground where only some other Pastor had a Church before The cases in which this is lawful and the cases in which Separation is unlawful having written largely in another paper I shall offer it to you when you desire it 8. It is not of absolute necessity that all the members of a particular Church do always or usually meet in one place though it be very convenient and desirable where it may be done for Persecution may prohibit it or want of a large capacious place or the great dâ—stance of some of the Inhabitants or the age or weakness of others and therefore in the ancient Churches though at first they usually were all assembled in one place yet after when they encreased the Canons required all the people to assemble with the Bishop but at certain chief Festivals in the year having Chappels or Oratories in the Villages where they mâ—t on other days And with us many Parishes of great extent have many Chappels of ease 9. But that the end of the Association be not only for distanâ— communion by Delegates or Letters or meer relation to one common Ruler as all the Empire had to the Emperour but for PERSONAL COMMVNION of Pastor and Flock so that they may at least per vices meet together or live within the reach of each others personal notice and converse and Communion in
Doctrine Worship and Discipline this is essential to a partiicular Church primi ordinis of Divine Institution of which I now treat III. 1. As Christians must gather into particular Churches under their proper Bishops so these Churches must hold a certain Communion among themselves so much as is necessary to their mutual Edification and Preservation of which Synods and Communicatory Letters and Messengers are the means 2. An association of several Churches for Communion of Churches doth tota specie differ from an association of individual Christians into one Church primae speciei And it differeth in the matter end and kind of Communion 3. If these several Churches agree in the same Baptismal Covenant in the same ancient Creed or Articles of Faith and in the same love and holy desires summed up by Christ in the Lords-prayer and in taking the commands of Christ for the Rule of their conversation and receiving Gods Revelations recorded in the holy Scriptures so far as they understand them renouncing all contraries to any of this so soon as they perceive them so to be this should suffice to their loving and comfortable communion without any desires of Domination or Government over one another And though I will not do any thing unpeaceably against Patriarchs Metropolitans Archbishops or Diocesans if they govern according to the Laws of God yet I know no Divine right that any of them have to be the Rulers of the particular Bishops and Churches Though a humane presidency for order we deny not nor that junior Bishops do owe some respect and submission to the Seniors 4. Though the General Laws of Christ for concord edification c. do enable Magistrates by command or Pastors by contract to chuse and make new Officers of their own which God never particularly instituted for the determining and executing such circumstantials as God hath left to humane prudence as Presidents Moderators Churchwardens Summoners c. yet I deny 1. That any Officer of meer humane Institution hath a superior proper Ecclesiastical Power of the Keys to be a Bishop of Bishops and to govern the Governouâ—s of the particular Churches by Excommunications Depositions and Absolutions seeing ex ratione rei it belongeth to the same Legislator who instituted the inferiour order to have instituted the Superiour if he would have had it 2. And I peremptorily deny that any such pretended Superiour Patriarch Primate Metropolitan Archbishop c. hath any power save Diabolical to deprive any particular Churches Bishops or Christians of any of the Priviledges setled on them by Christs Vniversal Laws or to disoblige them from any duties required by Christ. IV. It belongeth to the Office of Princes and Magistrates only to Rule all both Clergy and Laity by the sword or force even to drive Ministers to do their certain duty and to punish them for sin And they are to keep peace among the Churches and as bad as the Secular Powers have been had they not kept peace better than the Bishops have done I am possest with horrour to think what a field of blood the Churches had been throughout the world since the Exaltation of the Clergy V. Christ only is as the Universal Legislator so the Universal final judg from whom there is no appeal VI. Every Christian as a Rational Agent hath a Judgment of discerning by which he must judg whether his Rulers commands be according to Christs commands or not And if they be must obey Christ in them If not must not obey them against Christ but appeal to him And if any do this erroneously it is his sin if justly it is his duty These six Particulars I take to be the sufficient means which Christ hath appointed for the concord of the Church and that the seven points of Concord mentioned by the Apostle should satisfie us herein viz. 1. One body 2. One Spirit 3. One hope of our calling 4 One Lord. 5. One Faith 6. One Baptism 7. One God and Father of all And they that agree in these are bound to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace as knowing that the Kingdom of God consisteth not in meats and dâ—inks but in Righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost And he that in these serveth Christ is acceptable to God and should be approved of men Rom. 14.17 18. Ephes. 4.6 7 c. Nor is it lawful for any to hate persecute silence or Excommunicate their Brethren that agree in these or to divide distract or confound the Churches for the interest of their several Preeminences or Provinces which have no higher than humane authority perhaps questionable at least unquestionably below the authority of God and null when it is against it I am sure by the Church-History of all ages since Christ the great divider of the Christian World hath been the Pride of a worldly too ignorant Clergy 1. Striving who should be greatest 2. Striving about ambiguous words 3. Imposing unnecessary things by their Authority upon the Churches to be ignorant of this is impossible to me when once I have read the History of the Church which warneth me what to suspect as the causes of our distractions for the things that had been are And how unexcusable these three evils are and how contrary to Christ these Texts do tell me I. Luk 22.24 25 26 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3 4. 1 Cor. 3.5 6 7 22. 2 Cor. 1.24 II. 2 Tim. 2.14 16 23 24 25. 1 Tim. 1.4 5 6. III. 2 Cor. 11.3 Act. 15.28 Revel 2.24 25 Mat. 15.8 9. Rom. 14 15 throughout To tell you that I am not only as you say on the destructive part I have thus told you briefly what I assert as the way to peace And now I shall destructively tell you why I differ from your Principles as truly destructive of truth unity and peace Some of the Principles which I have heard from your mouth which I dissent from are these I. That the Church must have some Ecclesiastical Governours that are absolute from whom no man may appeal to an invisible Power II. That Diocesan Churches are the first in order of Divine Institution III. That diocesan-Diocesan-Bishops by consent may make other Church-forms as National Patriarchal c. And that such Churches are not made by Princes but by the consent of Prelates IV. That these Church-forms of mans making stand in a Governing Superiority over those of Gods making V. That where by such consent of Diocesans such superior Jurisdictions are once setled it is a sin for any to gather Assemblies within the local bounds of their Jurisdiction without their consent VI. That you cannot see how those that do so can be saved VII That if I preach on the account of my Ministerial office and the peoples necessity to such as else would have no Preaching nor any publick worship of God e. g. in a Parish where there are 40000 more than can hear in the Parish-Church though I must conclude that according to the ordinary way
understood II. But if it be a priority of Existence in order of execution that you mean it disproveth it self For 1. It is contrary to the nature of production that two or twenty or an hundred stated Congregations should be before on t as it is that I should write a page before a line and a line before a word and a word before a letter 2. It is contrary to the Scripture-History which telleth us that Christ called his Disciples by degrees a few first and more after and that the Apostles accordingly converted men from the number of 120 they rose to 3000 more and after to 5000 c. And that ordinarily the Churches in Scripture-times were such as could and often did meet in one place though that be nâ—t necessary as I said before hath so copious evidence as that I will not here trouble you with it 3. Either the Apostles Ordained Bishops before subject Presbyters or such Presbyters before Bishops or both at once If both at once as two Orders it 's strange that they called both Orders promiscuously by the same names sometimes Bishops sometimes Presbyters and sometimes Pastors and Teachers without any distinguishing Epithete or notice And it 's strange that we never find any mention of the two sorts of Congregations one the Bishops Cathedral and the other the Parish Presbyters Congregation If you say that they were the Bishops themselves and first Ordained only subject-Presbyters under them that cannot hold For doubtless there were more than twelve or thirteen Churches the number of Apostles in their times nor were they fixed Bishops but indefinite gatherers and edifiers of the Churches And either those Elders first Ordained by the Apostles were Bishops or else there were Churches without Bishops for they Ordained Elders in every City and in every Church And either the Elders first Ordained by the Apostles had the power of Ordaining others or not If they had then either they were Bishops or else subject-Presbyters were Ordained to be Ordainers yea to Ordain Bishops if such were to be after ordained And so indeed it would be suitable to your conceiâ— that the inferiour order of Diocesans do by consent make superior Metropolitans Provincials Nationals and Patriarchs to rule them and with Hieromes report ad Evagr. that the Alexandrian Presbyters made the Bishops as the Army doth a General But this making of Children to beget Fathers is so commonly denied that I need not more dispute against it 3 But I think most of the Hierarchical way will say that the Apostles first Ordained Bishops that those Bishops might Ordain subject-Presbyters And if so the Churches could be but single Congregation at the first till the subject-Presbyters were Ordained Yea Dr. Hammond as aforesaid asserteth in Act. 11. and in Dissert c. that there is no proof there were any of the Order of subject-Presbyters in Scripture-times and he thinketh that most of his party were of his mind and that the name Bishop Elder and Pastor in Scripture signifie only those that we now call Bishops And in this he followeth Dion Petavius and Fr. a Sancta Clara de Episcop who saith that it came from Scotus And if this be so then in all Scripture-times there was no Church of more than one worshipping Congregation For we are agreed that Church-meetings were for the publick Worship of God and celebration of Sacraments and exercise of Discipline which no meer Lay-man might lawfully guide the people in and perform as such assemblies did require And one Bishop could be but in one place at once And if there were many Bishops there were many Churches So that according to Dr. Hammond and all of his mind there was no Church in Scripture-times of more than one stated ordinary Worshipping Congregation because there were no subject-Presbyters If you say that yet this was a Diocesan Church because it had a Diocesan Bishop I answer why is he called a Diocesan Bishop if he had not a Diocesan Church If you mean that he was designed to turn his single Congregation into many by increase 1. That must not be said only but proved 2. And that supposeth that his one congregation was first before the many And I hope you â—ake not Infidels for parts of the Church because they are to be converted hereafter Those that are no members of the Church make not the Church and so make it not to be Diocesan One Congregation is not an hundred or a thousand because so many will be hereafter If you mean that such a space of ground was assigned to the Bishops to gather and govern Churches in I answer 1. Gathering Churches is a work antecedent to Episcopacy 2. The Ground is no part of the Church It is a Church of men and not of soil and houses that we speak of 3. Nor indeed will you ever prove that the Apostles measured out or distinguished Churches by the space of ground So that the first Churches were not Diocesan III. As to your Third Opinion 1. Officers are denominated from the work which they are to do There are works to be done circa sacra about the holy Ministerial works as Accidental as to 〈◊〉 to Church buildings Utensils and Lands to Summon Synods and Register their Acts to moderate in disputations and to take votes c. These the Magistrate may appoint Officers to peâ—â—orm and if he do not the Churches by his permission may do it by consent And there are works proper to the Magistrate viz. to force men to their duty by mulcts or corporal penalties I deny none of these But the works of Ordination Pastoral Guidance Excommunication and Absolution by the power of the Keys are proper to the sacred Office which Christ hath instituted And I shall not believe till I see it proved that any men have power to make any new Order or Office of this sort which Christ never made by himseelf or his Spirit in his Apostles much less that Inferiors may make Superior Offices For 1. It belongeth to the same power to make one especially the Superior Church-Office which made the other of the same General nature If without Christs institution no man could be Episcopus gregis and have the power of the Keys over the people then by parity of Reason without his institution no man can be Episcopus Episcoporum and have the power of the Keys over the Bishops 2. Dr. Hammond's argument against Presbyters Ordination is Nemo dat quod non habet which though it serve not his turn on several accounts both because 1. They have the Order which they confer 2. Because Ordination is not giving but Ministerial delivery by Investiture yet in this case it will hold For 1. This is supposed to be a new institution of an Office 2. And that of an higher power than ever the Institutors had themselves The King giveth all his Officers their power but all of them cannot give the King his power The Patriarch cannot make a Pope nor the
perceive from whom they come when the damnation of poor people must be so easily submitted to if the Bishop do but command the means Methinks you wrong the Bishops by such odious Suppositions and Assertions as if you would make men believe that they are the Grievous Wolves that spare not the flock and the thorns and thistles that are made to prick and rend the people But I believe that the Bishops faultiness in mens damnation would be no exeuse to me if I be accessory 4. And I doubt not but if you unjustly ipso facto Excommunicate men it neither depriveth them of the right nor absolveth them from the duty of publick Worship and Church-Communion And I am ashamed to read and hear Preachers publickly reproaching them for not holding constant Communion with the Parish-Churches when it 's notorious that the Canon hath thus Excommunicated them yea though it were their duty sometime to intrude And I beseech you judg as a Christian or a man whether you can think such Arguments should draw the people themselves to be of your mind Go to them and speak out Neighbours I confess that while you live in ignorance and sin for want of teaching and publick worship you are in the way to damnation but it is the Bishop and not the silenced Preacher that shall answer for it Will they not reply And shall not the Bishop then he damned instead of us as well as instead of the silenced Preacher VIII Your doubt about mens power to change Christs setled form of Church-government is but a consequent of your first of mens absolute power But 1. if they change Gods Laws or instituted Church-forms or Government may they not change their own And if so there is some hope of a Reformation But why then did the Canons of 1640. in the Et caetera Oath swear the Clergy never to consent to change And why are we now to swear in the Oxford Oath That we will never endeavour any alteration of Church-Government tho' the keys be in the power of Lay-Chancellors and tho' the King may command us to endeavour it must the Nation or Clergy swear never in their own places to endeavour any alteration of the Bishops Institutions as you take them and yet may the Bishops alter the very Form of Government and Churches made by our Universal King 2. What an uncertain mutable thing may Christs Laws or Church-Government prove while mutable men may change it at their pleasure 3. To what purpose is Antiquity and Tradition so much pleaded by Hierarchical Divines as if that were the Test to know the right Government and Church if the Bishops may alter it 4. If thus much of Christs Laws and Institutions may be altered by Prelates how shall we be sure that all the rest is not also at their will and mercy or which is it that they may alter and which not 5. Doth not this set man so far above God or equal with him as will still tempt men to think that more are Antichristian than the Pope If you say that it is by Gods own grant I wait for your proof that God granteth power to any man above his Laws Those that he made but Local or Temporary himself are not abrogated or changed by man where they bind not for they never bound any but their proper subjects e. g. The Iewish Laws as such never bound the Gentile world and the command of washing feet bound only thâ—se where the use of going bare-leg'd with Sandals in a hot Country made it an office of kindness and so of other Temporary precepts 6. How contrary is this to the common Christian Doctrine that we must obey none that command us to sin against God For by the first assertion and this it seemeth that it cannot be a sin which the Bishops command 7. I pray you put in an exception for the Power and Lives of Kings and the Laws of the Land and the Property and Liberty of the Subjects and one word for the Protestant Religion For we English-men think God to be greater than the King or St. Patrick and Gods Laws to be firmer than the Statutes of King and Parliament And yet I doubt that the King and some Parliament will be angry if you do but say that the Bishops by consent may change their Statutes or lawful Officers and Powers And Bishops if you say that Episcopacy may be changed IX Baptism as such entereth not the Baptized into any particular Church but only into the Vniversal headed by Christ yet a man may at the same time be entered into the Vniversal and into a particular Church but that is by a double consent and not by Baptism as such In this I know none that agree with you but some few of the Independents in New-England and some of the Papists I confess Bellarmine saith That by Baptism we are virtually obliged to the Pope being baptized by a Ministry and into a Church of which he is the Head But the contrary is proved 1. From the express form of the Baptismal Covenant which only tyeth us to Christ and his Universal Church and maketh us Christians But to be a Christian dedicated to the Father Son and Holy Ghost is one thing and to be a part of the Pastoral Charge of A. B. or N. N. is another thing 2. What particular Church was the Eunuch Act. 8. baptized into Not that of Ierusalem for he was going from it never like to see it more Not that in Ethiopia for there was none till he began it If you say of Philips Church 1. I pray you where was that 2. And how prove you it 3. Specially if it was Philip the Deacon that had no Church being no Bishop 3. May not men be baptized in Turkey or among other Infidels or Indians where there is no Church And is the first baptized man among them a Church himself Paul thanketh God that he baptized no more of the Corinthians lest they should think that he baptized into his own name And doth every Baptizer baptize to himself or to his Bishop A man may baptize out of all Diocesses or in another's X. As to your next Assertion I grant that when a Bishop or a beggar speaketh the Commands of God and a King speaketh against it we must follow that Bishop or beggar rather than the King because this is but obeying God before men But supposing that it is a thing indifferent and but circa sacra and not a proper part of the Agent Pastors Office I confess to you I will obey the King before the Bishop 1. Because it is a thing that is under the Power of the King to command and if so the King is the Supreme and not the Bishop 2. Bishops themselves are Subjects of the King and owe him obedience Therefore rule not over or before him in matters belonging to his Office 3. Bishops are chosen by the King for I suppose no man takes the Dean and Chapters choice for
AN ANSWER TO Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke Confuting an Universal Humane Church-Supremacy Aristocratical and Monarchical as Church-Tyranny and Popery And defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's Treatise against it By Richard Baxter Preparatory to a fuller Treatise against such an Universal Soveraignty as contrary to Reason Christianity the Protestant Profession and the Church of England though the Corrupters usurp that Title LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers Chappel 1682. READER THough the difference between Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Thorndike and such others and those condemned by them be very great I would not have it seem greater than it is The sum of it is as followeth 1. Mr. Dodwell thinketh that there is no true Ministry Church-Sacraments nor Covenant-right to pardon and salvation but where there is a Ministry delivering the Sacraments who were ordained by Bishops in his sense of Bishops who had their Ordination from other Bishops and they from others by an uninterrupted chain of succession from the Apostles We know that by this Doctrine he condemneth or unchurcheth not only the Reformed Churches the Greeks and other Easterns but the Church of Rome it self and leaveth no certainty of the very being of any one Church on earth And we maintain that the sacred Scripture is the universal Law of Christ in which he hath described and instituted the office and work of the sacred Ministry and appointed the way of their continuance in the world by necessary Qualification Election Consent and ordinarily regular Ordination That as Presbyters now lay on hands with the Bishop so senior Pastors are the Ordainers as the Colledg of Physicians license Physicians and the Convocation of Doctors make Doctors and man generateth man But to avoid contention and division the Churches have used to make one of these Presbyters or Pastors a President and partly a Ruler in each Colledg and Church and given him a Negative voice in Ordinations against which we strive not but maintain 1. That his consent is not so necessary as that no one can be a true Presbyter that hath it not As the Clergy at Rome in Cyprian's days long governed when they had no Bishop so if the Bishop be dead or refuse to ordain or would ordain none but Hereâ—icks or uncapable men or would tyrannize and impose men not consented to the Ordination is valid that is made without him And 2. That the true chief Pastor of every particular formed Church is a true Bishop though Diocesans should deny it 3. And that even Ordination it self is necessary but for Order where it may be had and not to the Being of the Ministry where it cannot be had on lawful terms no more than Coronation to the King or publick solemnization to Marriage 4. And we are assured that if Regular Ordination were interrupted by death heresie refusal neglect e. g. at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople Jerusalem c. Christs Charter or Scripture-Law would presently restore it to persons duly qualified chosen and ordained by the fittest there that can be had 5. If this were not so as multitudes of schismatical and unlawful Popes Ordinations at Rome would be invalid e. g. John 13. and 21. and 23. and Eugenius 4th deposed as a Heretick by a General Council c. so every usurping Bishop that pretendeth falsly that he was himself lawfully ordained would nullifie Churches Ministry and Sacraments of all ordained by him And many have falsly pretended to Orders 6. And that if men must refuse the Government and Sacraments of all Bishops and Presbyters that do not prove to them a Regular Ordination uninterrupted for 1600. years all the Ministry on earth may be refused and none for so doing should be called Schismaticks I never yet heard or saw a Bishop prove such a succession nor ever knew one that would take his Oath on it that he was a true Bishop on such terms II. Mr. Dodwell thinks that the Presbyters yea and Bishops were not given by God Pag. 60. saith he But where do they find that God ever gave Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Where note that it is of the Office in specie that we speake But we think that God hath made or instituted the Office and its work And if he did not 1. Who did If men was it Clerg-ymen or Lay-men If Lay-men was it Christians or Infidels And by what Authority Do the children beget the fathers and yet may not Presbyters propagate their species If Clergy-men who were they If not Apostles or Prophets or Evangelists they were none If these then it seems the Apostles did it not as Bishops for it is the making of the first Bishops that we question And what the Apostles did not as Bishops but as commissioned Apostles Christ did by his Spirit And they that will do the like must have the like Office Authority and Spirit If God gave not Bishops because the Apostles made them then God gave us not the Scripture because the Apostles and Evangelists wrote it And is not this the same or worse Doctrine than that which the Italian Iesuits would have had pass at Trent against Gods making Bishops or their Office And if God gave not Bishops or Presbyters they that reject them reject no gift or institution of God And if men made them how come they to be essential to the Church Did not Christ and his Spirit in the Apostles institute so much as the Church-essentials And if men made Bishops and Presbyters in specie may not man unmake them III. Mr. Dodwell maintaineth that the power of Presbyters is to be measured by the intention of the Ordainers who give it them and not by any Scripture-institution charter or description We maintain the contrary that God having instituted and described the Office of Bishops Pastors Presbyters Gods Law in Scripture is the Rule by which the office-power and obligation and work in the essentials must be known Otherwise 1. It would be supposed that God made not the office of Bishops or Presbyters which is false 2. That Ordainers may make new Churches Bishops or Presbyters in specie yea as many species of them as they shall intend 3. That they may abrogate or change the ancient species They may make one office only for preaching another only for praying another only for Baptism another only for the Lords Supper and others for new work of their own The Papists themselves abhor this Doctrine 4. Then no man can know the measure of his Authority not knowing the intentions of the Ordainers Perhaps three or ten ordainihg Bishops may have three or ten several intents 5. Then the Bishop may put down Gods Worship or Sacraments by limiting the Priests power 6. It 's contrary to all Ministerial Investitures The Investing Minister is not the Owner or the Donor but delivereth possession of what the Owner and Donor contracted for or gave If the Archbishop Crowning the King would infringe his Prerogative it 's a
Nullity because he is not the Giver of it nor is his intention but the Kingdoms constitution the measure of it If the Priest would make the man whom he marrieth to a woman no governour of her it 's a Nullity for it is not his intent that makes the power 7. If this were otherwise I call and call again but in vain to Mr. Dodwell and all his party to tell me how the Bishops and Priests of the Church of England in the days of Henry the 8th and Edward the 6th and Queen Elizabeth came to have power to put down the Mass to set up the Liturgie to take down Images and to reform as they did when it was certainly contrary to the intention of their Ordainers 8. And setting this point together with the other that Ordination of Presbyters is null I ask them and ask again but all in vain 1. Do not Bishops generate their Species and make Bishops their equals 2. Who then can give his Office to the Archhishop if he have no Superior in England unless his Inferiors give it or you fly to a Forreign Iurisdiction 3. Whose Intention is it that giveth power to the Pope if he be greatest Or to the General Council if it be greatest If there be none above them either God or Inferiours give them their power 4. And what if these Inferiours that make Popes Primates or Councils by Intention would take down half their power Is it then done What self-contradiction and confusion would some men rather run into than grant Christ to be Christ that is the only Vniversal Head and Legislator to the Church on Earth IV. Accordingly Mr. D. holdeth that there is a supreme Authority in man over the Universal Church from whose intention and sense it is not lawful for us to appeal so much as to the Sacred Scripture no nor to the Day of Iudgment for any practice different from them See his Reply p. 80 81 82 83 84 85. Though we hold that no unjust Appeal should suspend the authorised Acts of a Governour this Doctrine seems to me to be worse than Antichristian and to put down God If God indeed be the Vniversal Soveraign Lawgiver and the final Iudge if God be God and man be man and not above him to say that we must not obey him before man and disobey man that commands what he forbids or that we must not appeal from mans subordinate Law to his supreme Law nor from mans judgment to his final judgment and to say as he and Thorndike do that to do so and practise accordingly is inconsistent with all Government are things that I had hoped my ears or eyes should never have seen or heard delivered by a sober Christian. Papists most commoâ—ly abhor it save some few Flatterers of the Pope If â—his be so a man must not only worship Images swear to the Pope and do all that Councils command but also curse Christ if the Turkish Rulers bid him blaspheme God if Heathen Rulers bid him and condemn all the Martyrs as Rebels that did subvert all Government by practising contrary to it and appealing to God And then man must be every where of the Rulers Religion and do whatever wickedness he commandeth Dan. 1. and 3.6 and the Church for three hundred years and more tell us of other kind of Examples V. Mr. D. holdeth this Absolute Destructive Power to be essentially necessary to the Vnity of the Catholick Church which is the sum of Thorndike's Book I would not go further from them or the French in the point of Vnity than I needs must I shall therefore tell you what is our judgment of it 1. We grant them that Christ's Church on earth is one and its Vnity is part of its very essence as the Vnity of the parts of a House Ship c. 2. We hold that this essential Vnity consisteth in the Vnion of all Christians with Christ the only unifying Vniversal Head and that the Vnity described Ephes. 4.4 5 6. sufficeth to it viz. One Body of Christ one Spirit one Hope of Grace and Glory one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father c. And that all this is prescribed in the Gospel and every true Christian hath all this 3. That all must endeavour to keep this Vnity in the bond of peace and to be in every lesser matter of one mind as far as they can And the Pastors of the Churches to beautifie and strengthen the Church by as much concord as they can well obtain 4. But that perfect concord being the fruit of personal perfection will never be had on earth And the differences of the infirm that cannot be cured must be tolerated in tender Brotherly Love And to persecute or destroy Christians who unite in Christ and the Essentials of Christianity because they are not of one size of knowledg and differ in lesser things is the work of Satan the Enemy of Love and the great Destroyer 5. We believe that Synods or Councils are so far good and useful as they are needful to the foresaid strength and concord of the Churches But that they are for Agreement and not for direct Regiment as Archbishop Usher was wont to say Councils are not for Government of the several Bishops by the Majority but for Consultation and Concord And they that cannot in all things consent to them in Accidentals or lesser matters are not therefore cut off from Christ's Vniversal Church But it is a fault peevishly and causelesly to dissent and be singular a breach of Christ's general Law of doing our work as much as we can in Love and Concord Plainly Reader do you know the difference between the Senate of Rome or Venice and the Assembly at Nimmegen Ratisbone or Frankford The said Senate is una persona Politica though plures naturales and hath the Supreme Government by Vote in Legislation and Iudgment and it is Rebellion there to disown their Power and a Crime not to obey it At Nimmegen Ratisbone c. many Princes or their Agents meet for Peace and Christian Concord It is a sin for any of them to be causelesly against any Vote that is useful to those ends But no one of them nor the major Vote is Governour of the rest nor is any one to be dispossest of his Dominion that seeth reason to dissent This is plain truth Though Dr. Sherlock find fault with the Learned and Iudicious Dr. Barrow for asserting it in his Treatise against the Papacy And it being not Regiment but Concord that is the end of Synods as over Bishops there is no more use than possibility of an Vniversal Council or one Vniversal Colledge But the necessity and aptitude of Councils for strengthning concord must measure their extent What Mr. D's opinion is of the degree of corporal punishment which he would have used to his ends I know not Mr. Thorndike is against Death and Banishment For my part the two greatest things that have alienated me
from Popery are 1. That it cherisheth Ignorance and I am sure that is the soil of all wickedness God Christ the Spirit and Scripture are Light and Satan is the Prince of Darkness 2. That it liveth like the Leech on blood hating and destroying the most holy persons who differ from them To these my Soul is unreconcilable I hate cruelty to Papists or Infidels much more to godly faithful persons that do hurt to none And I think I have convinced Mr. Dodwell himself that I am not inclined for the avoiding of Popery to run into any contrary Extreme nor to imitate them thaâ— ignorantly call Truth or harmless things Antichristian or Popish The name of Popery doth not affright me from any truth of God What I have written in many Books especially in the last part of my Catholick Theology and what censures I have suffered for it which never moved me to comply with the Censurers I think prove it I again and again profess That if the Papists or such as I now deal with would but prove that God ever made or allowed such a Church as they plead for in the world that is an Vniversal Church constituted or unified by any one Head or Supreme Governing pâ—râ— Monarchical or Aristocratical under Christ the Dispute whether it be Pope or Council or Cardinals or Colledge of Bishops in all the world shall not hinder me from a chearful and joyful declaring my self a Papist without partiality fear or shame in the sense that the word Papist hath still signified with such as I converse with These things I have taken the boldness to ask some of the greatest that on the fore mentioned terms appropriate the name of the Church of England to their Sect or Party and I could get no answer from them viz. Whether they took the Councils of Constance and Basil for Papists And whether they now take the Bishops and Church of France for Papists And whether they took Gerson Cusanus Cassander Erasmus for Papists or not 2. If yea What is the difference between the said Papists Church-Form and Government and that which these call the Church Catholick and Dispute for 3. If not Then is not the Controversie de nomine Whether the French Bishops and Church and the said Councils being of the same Form and Religion with the Church of England as called by these men ought to be called Papists or not And for that I shall strive with none Let every man call them as he seeth cause or if he will as they will call themselves Let them be Papists in France and Protestants in England I contend not for names But I wonder not at these Church-men if they unchurch the French Protestants and condemn their Ministry and Sacraments as none How else could their Persecution be justified And O that they would tell us what Churches they be that they live in communion with Whether the French Spanish Italian Greeks Nestorians Jacobites Copties Abassines be in their Communion or not If yea Whether the Reformed Churches be not as worthy of their communion If not whether the Church of England be all the Catholick Church in their account O that we could long more for God's righteous final Iudgment to which we appeal though Mr. Dodwell be against it and for the world of perfect Light and Love and Union Dated Septemb. 2. 1681. appointed a Publick Fast for the burning of London I have not time to gather the Errata of the Press I cast my eye on these Pag. 9. l. 19. for natures r. names p. 10. l. antep dele and. p. 11. l. antep r. is in p. 17. l. 1. for or r. over p. 5. l. 29. after excommunicating r. Christ's servants for not forsaking their faithful Pastors p. 10. l. ult for of r. by p. 16. l. 32. for our r. one p. 90. l. 12 r. temerity p. 139. l. 17. for by r. to pag. 151. l. 4. for by r. my c. THE CONTENTS A Late Letter of Mr. Dodwell's with the Answer written since the rest was printed Chap. 1. Of Mr. Dodwell's displeasure against me as if I accused him to be a Papist and wronged the Councils of Bishops p. 1. Chap. 2. His schismatical Church-destroying Scheme the sum of his great schismatical book confuted p. 7 Chap. 3. The consequents of Mr. Dodwell's foresaid Doctrine p. 21 Chap. 4. My words of Gods Collation of Ministerial Authority vindicated from the forgeries and fallacies of Mr. Dodwell p. 27 What my assertion is of the cause of Church power p. 29. The contrary p. 32. The truth proved p 33 c. His objections answered p. 36. c. Bishops are of God p. 46. c. His sad qualification of Ministers p. 48. Preferring God is no wrong to Government p. 54. What succession we have p. 54. Of Aidan and Finans Episcopacy p. 57. His assertion of supreme Church-power from whom there is no appeal to Scripture to God or the life to come and whose intention is the measure of the power of all ordained by them examined p. 57 c. Whether the Church on earth be one visible society under one visible humane Government p. 59. Whether Divine Authority may not be pretended for practising contrary to some superiors p. 60 Chap. 5. Wherein Mr Dodwell's deceits and their danger lie p. 63. Whether there be but one sense of all terms which causes obliging men to mean all that have skill in causes are to understand p. 63. Twelve great doctrinal Articles in which we differ from Mr. Dodwell p. 65. Some questions put to him p. 68 His second Letter to me from Ireland p. 70. My Answer to it p. 75. proving the impossibtlity of just Discipline in the Diocesan way which I dissent from The short Answer to Mr. Dodwell's long Letter which Dr Sherlocke and Mr. Morrice extol which is fully answered in my Treatise of Episcopacy p. 90. A Letter sent to Mr. Dodwell Mar. 12 1681. A Letter to Mr. Dodwell Nov. 15. 1680. Anothâ—r to him of July 9. 1677. opening many of our chief differences p. 100. Another after a personal conference sent to him but returned because he was gone into the Country debating with him eleven of our great differences in which Mr. Dodwell may be known p. 118. An Account of my dissent from Dr. Sherlocke his Doctrine Accusations and Argumentation specially about the essence of the Universal a National and Single Church and the nature of Schism c. CHap. 1. The Historical Proem Chap. 2. My â—etter and Counsâ—l to Mr. Sherlocke many years ago advising him to expound or retract his words which seem to deny the three Articles of our Baptismal covenant our belief in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost p. 162 His Answer p. 173 Chap. 3. Of the ill manner of these mens Confutations p. 174 Chap. 4. The main part of our difference viz. what is the essential form of the Catholick National and single Churches p. 182 Chap. 5. What is the
benefit I have considered your Books you are confident of my erring and wronging the Church and I am as confident of yours that you are a Misleader of an extraordinary size that would set up an Vniversal humane Supreme Government which Protestants have taken for Popery and Treason against Christ and who falsly unchurch the Reformed Churches and deny them all Covenant-right to Salvation while you tolâ— me your self that It is not for the Christian Interest to hold thâ—â— the Roman Bishops Ordination as you require it hath had an intercision Is it a crime to speak truth of you or a slander to say That the Doctrine of an Humane Absolute Vniversal Soveraignty is the most Fundamental part of Popery And is it no Sin or Slander for you to condemn so many Millions falsly even the purest and holiest of the Churches on Earth if not the whole by self-contradiction is it a damning sin not to feed cloath and visit in Prison one of Christ's little ones And is it a meritorious virtue in Mr. Dodwell to unchurch or unchristen or degrade if not condemn to Hell all the Reformed Churches nominally but not really excepting England Yea and to go about with a persecuting Spirit and Diligence to provoke Magistrates to lay them in Jayls with Rogues because they dare not give over Preaching the Gospel to which they were devoted in their Ordition Reproachâ—ng those Magistrates as Contemners of Religion who will not punish us as Deceivers as if it were not you that is the Deceiver Should I presume to judge that so many and such men through Christendom as you condemn were all so ignorant and so bad as not to know the common Verities necessary to the essence of the Ministry and to Salvation and that 't is I that can teach it them by such media as Mr Dodwell useth while he knoweth that Voetius hath answered a far abler Defender of his Cause I should sure be reputed a man so extremely proud as that no complemental humble deportment would excuse As for the Question Whether you are a Papist what obligation lieth on me to decide it Why should you expect that I should say you are none Do you not better know your self And is not your own word fitter to tell your minde I do but tell what your Doctrine is And I will speak so much plainer than I did as to say That 1. to hold a humane Universal Church-Supremacy Aristocratical or Monarchical 2. And that this Power is so absolute that there is no Appeal from it to Scripture or Gods Judgment 3. And that this Power doth make universal Laws for all the Church by General Councils 4. And that the Pope hath the Primacy or Presidentship in those Councils ordinarily 5. And that he is the Principium Vnitatis 6. And that it belongs to the President antecedently to call Councils and to him alone so that they are but unlawful Routs or rebellious if they assemble without his Call And that they are Schismaticks who dissent and disobey this Supremacy 8. And that the Reformed Churches for want of your Episcopal Ordination uninterrupted from the Apostles times are no true Churches have no true Ministry or Sacraments or Covenant-right to Salvation but by pretending them do sin against the Holy Ghost 9 But that the Church of Rome by vertue of an uninterrupted Episcopal Succession is a true Church hath a true Ministry and Sacraments and Covenant right to Salvation 10. And that the French-Church which we call Papists are safer than the Protestants there 11. And imply that the said French Clergy and the Councils of Constance and Basil were no Papists 12. And that the said Protestants being Schismaticks and sinning against the Holy Ghost the Magistrates that will not be Contemners of Religion are bound to punish them As if in England and France your bellows were needful to blow the fire These things asserted among you by Bishop Bramhall Heylin Mr. Thorndike and you and such others the Protestants have been hitherto used to call Popery But I will not dispute with you a mere question of the fitness of the name If you had rather call it Church Tyranny Cruelty or Diabolism And is all this a Virtue in you And is it a sin in me to defend Christ's flock and the true Unity of his Church and to detect such Deceivers and bear my testimony for Truth Love and Concord against such Dividers and Destroyers It 's a hard case then that such as â— are in that the more unfeignedly we desire to know God's Will and the more diligently and impartially we study it and the more it costeth us the greater sinners we are And no sins have been so loudly charged on me as Praying and Preaching the Gospel and laborious vindicating God's Truth and Servants It doth not follow if you hate them or would have them ruined that every man sinneth that doth not as you do And whereas you would get some countenance to your Writings by the name of Dr. Stillingfleet as having perused them c. Either he is or is not of your mind If not this doth but adde to your deceit If he be your Cause will do more against the Conscience and Reputation of Dr. Stillingfleet than far greater Parts and Reputation than his can do for your Cause And Sir what should I get should I give a Voluminous Answer to all your books When I have confuted you as far as I have done I have but lost my labour The Church-men that I hear from despise it and say What is Mr. Dodwell to us He is an unordained man he knoweth why and his book was rejected by the Bishop of London His opinions are odd and the Church of England is not of his mind Yea Mr. Cheny would perswade us that you are a singular contemned fellow But it 's a useful way to set such an one as you to do mens business and to boast as Dr Sherlocke and Mr. Morrice do of your performance and yet to disown you when their cause requireth it But it is an abuse of us that dissent from you to connive only at your published Books and then to boast of them as unanswerable And when we have lost our precious time in shewing their deceit and schismatical Love-destroying tendency then to say to us You have done nothing VVhat is this to us Mr. Dodwell is an odd disowned man and none of the English Clergy If God and Conscience would give me leave I could presently be a good man and a pardoned sinner with you It is but honouring you and saying as you say I could so be extoll'd by almost any Sect Papist Quaker c. But it must be but by one for all the rest would nevertheless revile accuse me and condemn me as you do the Protestant Churches And the Quakers like you say we sin against the Holy Ghost The old Sabbatarian Dr. before-named in his first Letter accused me as aforesaid and when I profest my self
willing to learn of him as his Disciple I was in his next The unwearied Labourer in Christs harvest and his marvellous joy c. And in the rest when I could not receive his reasonings I became worse and more mâ—serable than ever It 's a wonderful meritoriouâ— excellency with such men to become their Proselytes and admirers As true Charity and Piety would fain propagate Truâ—h Goodness and happiness so Pride Self-conceit and a Sectarian Spirit are like the inordinate lust of fornicators impatient longer than they are propagating their spurious kind And indeed the inordinate height of your self-conceitedness and confidence in gross confounding error will make chast souls afraid of your procacious sollicitations Had you sought my corporal destruction and not the Churches ruin for which you profess a zeal I might silently have let you take your course But the sober world so well knoweth that Satan and Papists are so much against the plain and serious preaching of the Gospel and so much for blood or cruelty towards Dissenters how faithful and truly religious soever that if you go on to be like them 1. In laâ—bouring us to cease preaching And 2. To call for punishment we know what to those that will not cease you will cherish men in the opinion that you are a Papist more than all your friends and talk can make them believe that you are not Sir when sin groweth crying and common I am one that dare not preach impenitency by hiding it and saying it is a doubtful or a little thing though I expect that guilt should be impatient and some Doctors should go on to say behind my back that less than this is unchristian and intemperate passion or abuse Methinks you who judg millions of true believers and lovers of God and holiness to damnation and by Printing this go about to have all men think them such and consequently to love them no better than the damnable should be loved should never be so partially tender as not to endure to be but told what you say and do And will you be angry with sober Christians for startling at such a Doctrine that All our other qualifications though we believe and love God c. will not save us unless we have the Sacrament from a Minister ordained by a Bishop of your described species and he from such another c. to the beginning Can Christian ears relish the description of such a Hell as containeth the believing Christian lovers of God and Holiness who call'd upon his name and sought first his Kingdom and Righteousness and forsook all for Christ but were damned for want of an uninterrupted Diocesan Ordination of the Priest that gave them the Sacrament and all his predecessors Sure Christians hitherto han't believed that Diocesans Sacraments will make a Heaven of wicked ungodly men nor the want of them make a Hell of Saints And will you be angry with me for not believing that God is such a one as will for ever hate and damn in Hell the souls that loved him above all Will he take that love from them when they die Or do they continue in Hell to love him while he hateth and tormenteth them Were not that to call him worse than the Devil whom they do not love You only tell us that they cannot be saved for want of your species of Sacramenters But if you meant not by this their Damnation but a Purgatory or Annihilation it 's meet you should deal plainly and tell us what it is They are Articles of our Faith and Religion That whoever believeth sincerely in Christ shall not perish but have everlasting life And that there is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth And that eye hath not seen c. what God hath prepared for them that love him When Dr. VVilkins once preached in Pauls Church an excellent Sermon for peace and concord on mutual forbearance on Rom. 14.17 The kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost For he that in these things serveth Christ is accepted of God and approved of men he accosted me at the Pulpit foot with these true words I am sure this Sermon pleased you If Dr. Tillotson will publish that Sermon as he hath done Dr. Isaac Barrow's those two books will more shame your love-killing schismatical doctrine than all that I have said against you And if the fore-mentioned moderating Doctors go on to publish me to be a man of unpeaceable provoking language for saying that such doctrines and practices are great sins they will seem to me to take the preaching of Repentance for reviling and that he is the sinner that tells men of sin and that the Laity are far happier men who may be called to Repentance for their vices than the Clergy or Church-corrupters who are heinously wronged if their sins be named and they be but intreated to consider and repent yea if we but tell the reason why we dare not do as they in a time when we have cause to study such Texts as Ezek. 9.4 Perhaps God may permit your principles to get the upper hand But if he do I shall love them never the better but the worse and shall better love the world which forsake not God nor is forsaken by him Mr. DODWEL's LEVIATHAN or Absolute Destructive Prelacy the Son of ABADDON APOLLYON and not of IESVS CHRIST c. CHAP. I. Of Mr. Dodwel's displeasure against me as if I accused him to be a Papist and accused unjustly the Councils of Bishops § 1. WHEN Mr. Dodwell in a tedious Volume did null the Reformed Churches their Ministry Sacraments and Covenant-title to salvation meerly for want of uninterrupted succession down from the Apostles of Ordination by such as he appropriateth the name of Bishops to I aggravated his fault as being one that professeth himself a Protestant He took this to be an accusation of Popery I Published to satisfie him that I meant no such thing but de nomine will call him what he calls himself and de re will be no judg of any thing but his books and words to which I leave the Reader to know him This satisfieth him not but he continueth so much concerned that I doubt he will make men think there is some tender place that is so impatient of a mis-supposed touch I have nothing to do with him or his Religion as his further than he assaulteth us by his Writings And he is the Accuser and the Accusation is of no less moment than aforesaid and sinning against the Holy Ghost and of Schism and subverting all Government if we do but practice differently from the Prelates will and alledg Scripture and Gods Authority for it and appeal to Christ. I am but on the Defence against all this § 2. I profess it is not meer education prejudices custom or worldly interest which keep me from Popery or his way of absolute obedience to Prelates I have studied what may
be said for it as well as against it and I never met but with Two Objections which seemed to me worthy of much further search One was that seeing de facto Popery and high Prelacy have so far and long ruled in the Church whether it be credible that Christ would so permit it if he hated it and give his Church de facto no better government 2. Whether mens great proneness to discord make not Popery Italian or French a prudent course And to these 1. I am sure that Christ came to destroy the works of the Devil and save his people from their sins and make them holy a peculiar people zealous of good works and gather a Church of such out of the world and rule them in a Communion of Saints till he bring them to perfection Therefore I have great reason to suspect those men and that order and course of government which cherisheth ignorance and sin in Ministers and People and hunteth and silenceth faithful Ministers and suppresseth persecuteth tormenteth burneth the most conscionable Christians that for fear of offending God disobey them that turn serious Religion and spiriritual Worship of God into bodily exercises and meer Conformity to their wills and outward taking Sacraments and using commanded Ceremonies and words under the shadow whereof for 1000. years piety hath withered and impiety prospered Christ promised to be with his servants to the end of the world Mat 28.30 And I cannot but think that he is most with those that are most acquainted with his Gospel and most love him and obey him and are most holy and heavenly and walk not after the flesh but the spirit rather than with the ignorant fleshly worldly malignant Persecutors that set them against serious godliness and godly men § 3. And I take not any notices of the time present from any thing but certain experience nor of the Ages past from enemies or suspected but of the eldest times from all our common Church-history and of the last 1000 or 1200 years as to the worst part of their actions from their own greatest friends and flatterers such as Baronius Binnius Platina Petavius and others § 4. And the matter of fact I confess hath had much power on my judgment Had the Popes and Lording sort of Diocesans been promoters of love and holiness in the Church and not the woful scandal of it and the enemies of good men and serious piety I should have been stronglier tempted to own their form of government to be of God though I am assured that Nature maketh one man or one Council uncapable of proper government over all the earth I should never have opposed that which doth good But destruction silencing persecuting cruelties rebellions worldliness ignorance malignity and cherishing sin and suppressing piety and the very word of God I am sure are all the work of the Devil what name or titles soever are pretended for them § 5. And the fact being to me past dispute I quietly submit to the dreadful providence of God that permitteth it considering 1. The Church on Earth is no better than the Angels of Heaven were and if so many of the Angels kept not their first estate but fell by Pride what wonder if many Bishops do so 2. If Adam and Eve both fell from Innocency and that so soon it is not incredible that the Serpent should beguile some Bishops to depart from the simplicity that is in Christ. 3. And if the first born man Cain murdered his righteous brother by malignant envy for his true Religion it 's no wonder if some Clergy-men are such 4. And if the whole world so soon was drowned in wickedness that only Noah and his house were meet to be saved from the flood what wonder if the Church had too great a deluge of iniquity 5. And to be short if Noah himself fall after such deliverance and a Cham be cursed that had been saved and their posterity proved so bad that all the Canaanites c. must be destroyed if Sodom's flames too better warned Lot or his Wife and Children if Abraham have an Ismael and Isaac an Esau and Iacob envious Sons and two Murderers and two Adulterers If Israel sin and die in the Wilderness if Aaron after that he had seen make them an Idol if Nadab and Abihu die as they did if Eli's and Samuel's Sons proved all so bad and in the days of the Judges there were so many revolts and ruins if the first King Saul so soon revolted if David so fell and Absolom so sinned and Solomon himself If Ten Tribes so quickly broke off from David's house and left him but Two if those Two proved as bad as the Prophets tell us and went into Captivity And if the Nation rebelled against Christ and be cursed and scattered over the Earth what wonder if the Pope and proudest Prelate did corrupt the Church of God If Christs chosen Twelve had a Iudas among them if the rest strove who should be greatest if Peter denied him and they all forsook him and fled if Heresies swarmed in the Apostles days and Iewish Teachers would have subjected the Gentiles to Moses's Law if all forsook Paul in his Tryal and many accused him before and such as Diotrephes cast out the Brethren and prated maliciously against Iohn if Christ tell us of a little flock and not many Noble and great are called if it be as hard for the Rich to be saved as Christ saith if for Three hundred years the Church was a persecuted people and if the Patriarchs and Bishops themselves for many hundred years after accused one another in Councils and accused such Councils themselves of Heresies and other crimes as much as is yet visible they did why should I be scandalized at the badness of Bishops and Councils and the woful corruptions of the Church Especially considering 1. That it was chiefly but the worldly proud domineering sort that thus miscarried as the very Angels did 2. That God kept up still a great number of humble and holy Bishops and Presbyters that joined not in usurpations and pride with the rest 3. And that God blest their labours to the saving of so many Millions of souls and propagating true serious Religion to this day Yea some of the great Patriarchs themselves have been holy humble men 4. And when God preserved by an humble Ministry so many Christians as the Albigenses Waldenses and many among the Papists themselves from the liking and guilt of the Roman corruptions 5. And when God hath raised so learned humble and holy a Ministry to reform the Churches and blest their labours in Europe and specially in England as he hath done even those that Mr. Dodwell degradeth yea many pious Diocesans here and elsewhere who yet cannot prove their title by his pretended way of successive Canonical Ordinations nor durst have sworn that they had such a call § 6. I am sure that the work of Christ is the restoring of Gods Image holy
him a damnable schismatick 14. And hereby there are as many hundred new Articles of Faith made as there are things lawful which a Prelate will command For though all is not to be done that is to be believed yet all must be believed to be lawful and duty which must be done as such e. g. We cannot love God worship him hear and read his Word c. as by Divine obedience unless we believe it to be our duty by a Divine command Therefore when as Mr. Dodwell Dr. Saywell and such others tell us what damning schism it is to disobey such commands of the Bishops or to suffer our selves to be Excommunicate it plainly includeth that it is as damning a sin to take any lawful thing to be a sin and not to believe it to be lawful whatever the Bishop shall command And so to how many hundred indifferent things may the Articles of our Faith be extended while it is made ordinarily necessary to Salvation to do them and therefore to believe them to be lawful 15 By this he confoundeth Communion and Obedience I may have communion with many Bishops whom I am not bound to obey But I cannot hinder them from Excommunicating me without obeying them 16. Yea he maketh Communion and Salvation to lye not only on such obedience but on such perfection of obedience as reacheth to every lawful indifferent thing Whereas God himself under the Gospel accepteth of sincerity instead of perfection which the Law required of perfect man 17. This is the way to make Bishops absolute Lords of Kings and States and all the world if they can make them believe that on pain of damnation for schism all must obey them even in every indifferent thing 18. If you would ferret him out of his Burrough ask Mr. Dodwell what if the Bishop of the place where I live contradict the Archbishop or the Synod or most of the Bishops in the land which must I obey to escape damning schism Doubtless he will allow me to disobey my Bishop But what if the National Synod gainsay the Provincial He will say I may disobey the Provincial But what if a Council of many Nations called General gainsay the National and it be known that our National Church is gainsayed by the far greatest part of the Bishops in the world which must I obey If the National why not a Provincial against them And why are not they Schismaticks for disobeying a General Council If it be the greater Council that I must obey 1. What 's become then of his doctrine of obeying the Episcopacy of the place where we live 2. And then we are brought under a foreign Jurisdiction 3. And who but the Pope must call that General Council preside approve c. 4. And among all the erroneous and contradicting Councils called General how shall all Christians know which of them to obey We see whither all will come at last But saith Bishop Bilson To such Councils called General we owe respect for concord if they abuse us not by error or usurpation but subjection and obedience we owe them none 19. How hardly will these men ever resolve one's conscience which is to be taken for the Episcopacy of the place when there are in the same place both different species of Bishops and also divers Bishops of the same species and all pretending to be right In Ireland both the Papist and Protestant Bishops pretend to just succession and so they did in Bohemia Poland Transylvania Hungary c. And doth salvation lye on mens knowledg who hath right 20. And how contrary is it to the way of Christ and the ancient Church that made the Baptismal covenant the terms of salvation for men to make it necessary for every poor man and woman that will have Covenant-right to salvation and escape damning schism to be able to decide the controversies between all such pretenders and to know whether their Bishops be of a true species and have true Ordination and to be such rare Historians as to know that all the line of Ordainers down from the Apostles to their Bishops were truly ordained O difficult terms 21. Doth he not condemn all those Ancient and Modern Christians as Fautors oâ— damning Doctrine who thought that when there were none of the Clergy to do it lay-men might baptize and give the Lords Supper Grotius told us his judgment for it in Dissertat de Caenae administrat ubi Pastores non sunt And he hath vindicated Tertullian's judgment for it confessed by Rigaltius Anton. Govea tells us it was the case of the Christians of Malabar c. called of St. Thomas whose Bishops being all destroyed they caused a Deacon to administer the Eucharist as the Bishops and Presbyters had done which Grotius also repeateth Ionan Antiochenus magnified by Socrates lib. 6. cap. 3. when at Antioch there were two Churches with two Bishops Meletius and Paulinus stuck to Meletius till he died and after for three years would communicate with neither Did he by this become a damned Schismatick or lose his Covenant-right to salvation 22. Many of old were chosen for Bishops before they were baptized the cases of Ambrose Nectarius Synesius c. are known If the Church thought them all to be in a state of damnation for want of the Sacrament it 's strange that they would choose them to be their Bishops though it was irregular Indeed it 's true that Grotius saith ibid. in fine that Chrysostomes Nazianzenes and others cases tell us that it was ordinary in the greek-Greek-Church to delay baptizing even the children of the faithful till at full years about Twenty Were they all that while without any promise of salvation or ordinary hope 23. What a task will it be for Mr. Dodwell to tell us what state the baptized are in till they receive the Lords Supper Baptism saveth them once but yet till they receive the Lords Supper by a Minister in successive Episcopal Orders they have no Covenant-title to salvation by his way But some Communicate not till Thirty years old some not till One and Twenty and in England scarce any before Sixteen Are they all this while the children of God or of the Devil And when is it that their Christianity ceaseth for want of the other Sacrament I believe that if they truly believe they are Gods children before they come to the second Sacrament or the third as some call it Was Constantine Mag. in a state of damnation who was not baptized till near his death Or the good Emperour Valentinian who died unbaptizâ—d but taken by Ambrose for a blessed man What absurdities are men fain to use to get the Mastery of the Christian world by making men believe that they can save or damn them by the power of Sacraments 24. And how is this man for Conformity by which they subscribe assent to the certain salvation of Infants so dying without Confirmation and ordain that the Lords Supper be not Administred to any till they are
ready to be Confirmed by learning the Catechism and recognizing the Covenant c. 25. Doth he not make the chief Bishops and Reformers of the Church of England to be the promoters of the Doctrine which he accounteth so damnable when Dr. Stillingfleet in his Irenicon recites the words of Cranmer and others of them at a Consultation down-right against not only the necessity of his uninterrupted succâ—ssion but also even of Episcopal Ordination it self And I have elsewhere cited about Fourteen of them for the validity of Ordination without Bishops And Dr. Stillingfleet Bishop Edw. Reignnolds and many more held that no Form of Government was of Divine determination Did all these plead for damning Schism against all title to salvation 26. And what could more directly contradict the main tenor of the Gospel which tells us of the saving power of the Word Preached how it converteth souls and promiseth salvation to all that truly believe and repent Insomuch that Paul thanks God that he baptizâ—d few of the Corinthians because God sent him not to baptize but to Preach the Gospel 27. But his Doctrine feigneth that God will damn them that truly believe repent love God forsake sin for want of the Sacrament or else that the Word converteth none but only Sacraments convert men 28. And then it will follow that none but unbelievers impenitent wicked men should be first admitted to the Sacrament for if that only converteth then it is only the unconverted that must first be received to it 29 When all 's done he doth but contradict his end for it 's hard to find a National Episcopacy on earth which imposeth no unlawful thing on Ministers or people And with all such he speaketh not for our Communion 30. Either Ordination and Collation of Church-power must be given by Superiors or by Equals if by Equals why may not Presbyters make Presbyters If by Superiors then who shall give the Pope his Power Or if you think any other be the highest who makes them such Who giveth the Archbishop of Canterbury his Power 31. In short as far as I can understand these men deny all Covenant-right to salvation to all men living and all true Sacraments and Church-Communion or at least all knowledg of any such thing seeing as it is certain that in most Churches such Ordination as they describe hath not had an uninterrupted succession so no man is sure that any one Church or man hath had such And they that silence us for not subscribing declaring and swearing obedience to our Diocesans and other Ordinaries are bold men if they dare swear themselves that they are true Bishops and have any Authority to rule and command us by an uninterrupted succession of a Canonical Episcopal Ordination down from the Apostles But I have already in my Book of Concord Part 3. Chap. 9. opened so many palpable and pernicious absurdities and ill consequents of Mr. Dodwell's Doctrine which he dare not undertake to answer but sâ—ly passeth by that I must expect the Reader will there peruse them who will judg uprightly between him and me and therefore will hear what both have said And those that will judg falsly upon partial trust to save themselves the labour of tryal are out of the reach of ordinary means to be saved from deceivers CHAP. IV. My words of Gods Collation of Ministerial Authority Vindicated from the forgeries and fallacies of Mr. Dodwell § 1. CHRIST hath taught me to judg of Prophets or Teachers by their fruits more than by their cloathing Mat. 7. And the fruits which are of God are those which express the Divine Nature and Image viz. holy Light and Truth holy Love and holy Life and Practice and the promoting of these in the world And Christ hath taught me that the Devil is 1. Against holy Light and Truth the Prince of Darkness and a Lyar and the Father of Lyes 2. Against holy Love accusing slandring and rendring as odious the servants and ways of Christ. 3. Against holy righteous and sober living and an opposer of it and a persecutor and murderer of the Saints And those that are likest Satan in these three parts of his Image and whose works are more certainly the works of these three Diabolical Principles I am taught by Christ to judg of by their fruits So much as there is in Mr. Dodwell's labours of holy Truth holy Love and helps to holy living so much sure is of God But so much as there is in his or any of his Parties cause of deceit and falshood and defence of ignorance so much as there is of Malignity Calumny or making odious the servants of Christ so much as there is of cruelty and destruction and silencing faithful Ministers and promoting ungodliness by upholding its defences I am obliged to resist as being from him against whom in my baptismal Covenant I was engaged § 2. He giveth his Reader the sum of my doctrine in this point p. 29 c. a chain of forgeries or putid falshoods Either he knew that he wrote falsly or he did not if yea then it seems he thinks that God or his Church needed his lyes if not how unfit is he to write against what he understandeth not But what made him devise a frame of his own words of above six pages to express my words by if he meant not to deceive those that would believe his writing without reading mine § 3. And whether it be from the Lord of love or the enemy of love that he goeth so far to the unchurching and damning of so many of the Reformed Churches besides the Churches of the Southern and Eastern parts of the world if not of all Churches on earth let the sons of Love consider § 4. And whether his endeavours to persuade all the Nonconformists to give over preaching Christs Gospel and all publick Worship of God till they can conscionably conform and his reasonings for that frame that hath long excluded true discipline and sheltered ignorance and ungodliness be of God and all his copious discourses to that end are to save souls or to starve and murder them I leave to mens impartial trial § 5. I so often and fully repeated my judgment of the Calling of the Ministry as leaveth his Forgeries inexcusable The sum is this 1. There is no power but of God 2. Gods universal Laws are the prime Laws and the only universal Laws of the Church or world 3. In his Laws God hath established or instituted the work and the species of that Ecclesiastical Ministry which he will have to teach and guide his Church to the end of the world And therein signified his owning of them as sent by him and promised them his help and blessing 4. In that Law he hath told us what men they are that he will thus own and bless and described the Essentials and the Integrals of their Receptive disposition or qualifications 5. He hath in that Law told us who shall be the tryers and
Chief Iustice Lord Admiral c. shall have such and such power and be thus and thus invested in the place if there were an intercision of an hundred yâ—ars the next person so chosen will from the Law immediately receive his power And the Investiture is but for publick Order and the Investers regular succession no nor the act it self never necessary ad esse where it cannot be had as I proved against Mr. D. in my Book of Concord The Archbishops succession that Crowneth him is not necessary to the power of the King § 20. And obligation to the Office-work is as essential to the Officer as is the power to do it And it is only the Governours that lay on another an obligation to duty except what by contract a man layeth on himself and none are the obliging Governours of the highest Powers Civil or Ecclesiastical but God therefore theirs must flow only from God Therefore the thing is not unusual And if Bishops were as much superior to Parish-Pastors as the Lord Chancellor is to a Constable yet they were but Governours of them in tantum quoad exercitum and not Donors of their power The Constables power is immediately from the Soveraigns Law and so is the Ministers from Christ for he is the only universal Soveraign § 21. Mr. Dodwell saith These are bare similies Ans. These are plain explications of the conveyance of power from the Soveraign of all He saith That the power is not properly given by the Ordainer is but begged by me Ans. A begging affirmer may easily write Books at that rate But saith â—e They connot give an instance from humane Charters where the acts of men not invested are valid in Law Ans. 1. Will you tell the King so to his saace that before his Coronation no act is valid that he doth 2. No doubt but as publick Matrimony after secret Marriage is necessary in foro civili ordinis gratiâ where it may be had and yet when it was done by a Justice without a Priest yea or by the persons publick contract only it was no nullity no nor coram Deo before so to regular order the most orderly Investiture is needful but not ad esse much less that all the Investers circumstances also and all his predecessors have been regular 3. Investing here is the act of a servant only solemnizing the entrance or delivery of possession But such a servant is not the Owner and Donâ—â— of thâ— power 4. The Papists and Protestants confess that the power of Invâ—sting is so humane and mutable that it cannot be necessary ad esse potestatis I told you how oft the power of choosing â—nd investing Popes hath beeen changed And the old Canons make the Act of three Bishops necessary to Invest or consecrate one But did God determinâ— of three Or can you prove onâ— Bishops Ordination a Nullity 5. In the Civil State some Officers are made without any Investiture as Constables Headboroughs Church Wardens and others and some the Charter imposeth Investiture on But whether if Recorders Stewards Town Clerks that by Charter are to Invest be dead or refuse their Act the Mayor Bayliff or other Officers be therefore none and the Government be dead let Lawyers tell you 6. Sure I am that Hen. 4. and the rest of the Germane Emperors who fought and strove so long against Hildebrand and his Adherents for the Investing-power were no Bishops and all the Councils of Bishops who stood for the Emperors never took them for Bâ—shops and therefore thought not that Ivesting was an Act proper to Episcopal-power 7. I have before proved that ancient Writers and Papists and many Protestants agree that Baptism is valid administred by Lay-men that I say not women 8. Mr. Dodwell self-condemningly saith that a presumptuous Ordination of the Priest serves to the validity of Sacraments though indeed he were not Ordained and that God is bound to make such Acts to the people good 9. Mr. D. must beg belief instead of proving it if he tell us that the stated teaching of Gods Word to a Church is not as truly the work of the Pastor as is the Admistring the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lords Supper It is one of the principal of the Jesuits jugglings to make the people think that till they can prove their Teachers the rightly Ordained Ministers of Christ they are not bound to hear them or believe them Our Parents mostly were never Ordained Bishops or Priests Must not Children therefore hear them and believe them fide humanâ And hath not that God who appointed Parents to teach his Law to their children lying down and rising up and to educate them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord thereby signified that Parents instruction is the first ordinary means appointed by God for the conveying of saving knowledg and faith And if the help of Parents though unordained be Gods ordinary means of the first saving faith shall We say with such men as Mr. Dodwell that we have no Covenant right to salvation till we have the Sacrament from the hand of a Minister that had a regular Ordination uninterruptedly down from the Apostles 10. Did the Three hundred Act. 2. and the Eunuch Act. 8. refuse Baptism till they were satisfied by proof that the Baptizers were rightly called Ministers Paul tells those that questioned his Apostolick power that he was an Apostle to them whatever he was to others and that they should know first whether Christ were in them and so whether he were not a true Minister and not begin at the trying of the Ministry 2 Cor. 13.4 5 6 7. Gal. 3.1 2 3 4. c. 11. The Acts of the Parliament called irregularly by General Monk were they that restored King Charles the 2 d and were confirmed by him as valid through the defect of a Regular Summons and by necessity 12. I have fully proved in my Treatise of Episcopacy that the Species of Bishops which Mr. Dodwell pleaded for is not the same which the Churches had for 200. or 300. years And then where is his regular succession from the Apostles § 22. He saith also p. 37. They cannot give an Instance of any power setled by Charter whereupon the Acts of any persons lawfully Invested though confessedly less qualified are not thought valid A plain sign that their Investiture doth properly confer such power Ans. Words fitted to deceive 1. He that is unqualified is not lawfully Invested and yet the Act of the Invester may be right had the Recipient been lawful 2. He saith Less qualified when he knew that our question is of the unqualified 3. Investiture giveth it as the Act of the Power and Donor by a servant delivering orderly possession but doth not make or prove the Investing Minister the Owner or Donor no more than he was that from the Emperor Henry delivered the Bishops the Staff and Ring or the Priest that Marrieth the persons 4. Burroughs and Cities choose and return Burgesses for
Parliament by Charter yet if they are unqualified when they come thither the choice is judged null If a City choose and Invest a proclaimed Rebel for Mayor I will believe it null or invalid though Mr. D. will not And if he write Forty Books with such streams of confident words to prove that the Election and Investiture of the dâ—â—lared Heretick Bishops at Alexandria Antioch Constantinople and most of the Empire in many Ages Arrians Eutichians c. were yet judged valid by the Councils of the Orthodox no man that ever read the Councils will believe him 5. Nor will I believe him that any Bishops Ordination can make a true Bishop or Priest of a Woman an Infant or a professed Heathen Infidel or proper Heretick or any uncapable person any more than he can make a Woman to be a Husband or a dumb man the University Orator § 23. He saith They cannot give an Instance of any Power setled by Charter whereupon a failure of all who are by the Charter empowred to dispose of Offices the power must devolve to those who are not by the Charter empowred to dispose of them and where such a Charter is not thought in Law to fail by becoming unpracticable till the supreme power interpose c. Ans. Still the same fraud If all empowred to dispose of Offices is an ambiguous word The Prince disposeth of them by giving the Power and the Electors by choosing the Receivers and the Minister by delivering the Insignia If Electors and all die indeed there are none to determine of the Receiver And yet if the Plague kill most of the Electors at Age and leave not a due number when the rest left come to Age and choose the Charter will renew the Office-power 2. But if it be only the Ministerial Invester that faileth the sense of the Lawgiver must be judged of by the words and by other notices and the light of common Reason e. g. Whether it be the meaning of the Charter which saith that the Recorder shall give the Oath or the former Mayor shall deliver the Insignia that if the Recorder or Mayor be dead or sick or mad or wilfully refuse the City shall have no Mayor or if no Priest will Marry folks all England must live unmarried or if the Archbishops and Bishops will Ordain none but Hereticks all the Churches must have no other Ministers And here Nature and Christ teach us that the Means is only for the End and Order for the thing ordered and God will have us understand his own Laws so as that Rituals give place to Morals I will have mercy and not sacrifice And sure if the King of Spains Charter for the making of Governours at the West Indies should not express or reasonably imply a Remedy in case of the failure of circumstances of meer Order his Countrey might be lost before they could send to Spain for a new Charter or new power And Mr. D. saith Which is the very case impugned by me of the Nonconformists And so judg whether he must not turn a Seeker and say that all Ministry Churches and Sacraments cease till a new Commission comes from Heaven upon the failure of every such circumstance yea when almost all the Churches charge each other with failures and intercisions and the very species of the Ordainers is so much altered If the King send his Army into the Indies or his Navies and mention no power but the Generals as chief or no way of choosing a new General but by the Field-Officers choice and giving him an Oath by the Secretary c. yet no man doubteth but it was his meaning that if the General die or turn Rebel yea and the major part of the Field-Officers or the Secretary the Army should choose another General rather than perish and the Kings service miscarry § 24. He addeth They cannot give an Instance of any humane Charter that ever allows any person empowered to extend his own power by a private exposition of the Charter against the sense of all the visible supreme powers of the society Ans. This opens the Core of the Aposthume 1. We deny as confidently as any French or Italians affirm that there is any such thing at a supreme visible power over the universal Church under Jesus Christ and therefore none such is disobeyed or contradicted 2. And we maintain That by Divine appointment there is no visible National supreme Church-power but that of the Civil Christian Soveraign and therefore none such disobeyed 3. And we hold that no man can extend his own power further than Christs own Law extendeth it False expositions give no power 4. And therefore we prove by your own Rule that Christ being the only supreme universal Ruler and having described and specified the Office of a Pastor and order of a Church no Bishops can by their private exposition turn a single Church into a Diocesan or a Presbyter of Christs description into an half Presbyter of their own making But if they make a man a Pastor his power and work shall be what Christ saith and not what the Ordaâ—ner will Investing-Ministers Acts are null if they contradict the Order of the Donor If the King give you a Parsonage of 300. l. a year and the Instituter say you shall have but 100. l. out of it it 's vain he instituteth you but as the Donors instrument in the same Benefice and power given by him § 25. He addeth p. 38. Where can they find such a Charter for the power of Presbyters in Scripture as they speak of Ans. Nay then we are far from agreeing if you think that the very Species of a Pastors Office is not found in Scripture as of Christs institution Thâ—n it seems the Bishops make the very Species The Italian Bishops at Trent scarce gave so much to the Pope Then why may not the Bishops put down Presbyters if they make the Species or make as many Species as they please Indeed Dr. Hammond thought that there was no evidence of the Order of Subject Presbyters in Scripture-times And if God instituted none let us have none But I have told you before and often where in Scripture the true Pastors Office is described § 26. He adds They may find some actual practices but will they call that a Charter Ans. This is indeed to strike at our foundation If we prove not Christ to be King and Lawgiver and that his Laws or Governing-precepts were partly given by himself and partly by his Spirit in his Commissioned Apostles and these Recorded Sealed and Delivered in Scripture If we prove not that these as the authorized Agents of Christ delivered his Will by words and practice in setling and describing the Pastors of his Churches then take the Ministry and spare not for mans invention I cited you before the Texts that are our proof But if the Office which you call Priestly be of mans making in specie I doubt the Diocesans will prove so much more
that was Ordained in our Synods § 33. And he hath half disabled me to answer him from p. 50. forwards where he feigneth me to maintain that Authority must necessarily result from true qualifications For it is taken for uncivil to give his words their proper name But if the Reader will pardon the Repetition I may remind him how probable it is that Mr. Dodwell trusted that his Reader would believe his words without perusing what I wrote where he might have seen 1. That I say that the Authority resulteth not from the qualifications but from Christs Law Grant or Charter 2. That personal qualifications of gifts or grace are but part of the necessary Dispasitio Recipientis but that moreover there is needful 1. Opportunity 2. And need of his Office 3. And to a Bishop the flocks consent if not election And ordinis gratia where moral necessiâ—y dispenseth not with order the Ordainers approbation and consent 5. And to regular possession where it may be had a due Investiture so that there is a Relative part as well as a Qualitative of the Receptive disposition necessary And all the following leaves in which he disputeth against me as maintaining a power resulting from meer qualities are so unbeseeming a Divine and a Câ—ristian that I will not soul my paper with their due confutation But they are suitable to that man who thinks himself wise good and fit enough to Unchurch and condemn so much as he doth of the Christian world on pretence of pleading for obedience to the Diocesans § 34. And where he adds p. 50. Or that it so depends on them qualifications as that where the persons ordained may want any of them there the whol Ordination must be null because of the incapacity of the matter This also he denieth Ans. 1. I still distinguish between the Qualifications necessary ad esse and those only ad bene esse or integral If he would perswade the Reader that I null Ordination for want of the latter his weakness or designed ill intent is such as warneth his Readers to take heed of believing him If he mean it only of the former as I speak I have before confuted him that dare say that no qualification is necessary ad esse Then a Pope Ioan or woman-Priest or Prelate or a professed enemy of God or Christ may be a Priest And he may be a Pastor of a Church to feed them by the Word who never heard or know what was the Word or Church Cannot the best believer go to Heaven if all your Priests will but deny him the Sacrament and yet may a man be validly a Bishop and the Key keeper of Heaven that believeth not that there is a God a Christ or Heaven and so professeth This maketh me remember the old Roman Canons how no Bishop must be deposed for lying with his own Sister unless a great multitude of Witnesses testifie it and the Councils that decreed no Layman shall witness against a Clergy-man c. But Election consent the Ordainers approbation ordinarily are part of my Qualifications And if these be unnecessary what doth the man plead for And is a false approbation of a man that wanteth Essentials more necessary than having them How contrary is this to the Doctrine of the Council of Carthage in the Epistle in Cyprian of Martial and Basilides and to many honest Councils § 35. P. 90. At the end of this insinuated false accusation he asketh Where do we find that God ever gave Bishops Presbyters and Deacons though he gave Apostles Pastors and Teachers those extraordinary Offices indeed seem to have been made neither of man nor by man but by God immediately c. Ans. 1. Hath he said a word to prove that Pastors and Teachers are not ordinary Officers contrary to the common judgment of the Church in all ages 2. Whether he mean Bishops in the Dative Case or the Accusative I know not If the later let him speak out and say God gave not Bishops But how proveth he that Presbyters and Bishops are not Pastors or Teachers 3. The Text tells you Ephes. 4.14 15 16. that these offices were given for the continued stated use of the Church For the perfecting of the Saints the work of the Ministry for the edifying the body of Christ till we all come in the unity of the faith and the knowledg of the Son of God to a perfect man c. Was this temporary 4. It seems he disclaimeth Bishops being made in making Apostles 5. Christ by his Spirit in the Apostles ordered the Churches § 36. P. 65. he saith They never find any of those Officers to whom succession is at present pretended made immediately by God but by the intervention of men c. Ans. Still deceiving confusion 1. Intervention is a word of fraud and may signifie only that act which determineth of and qualifieth the receiver and it may signifie the Donation or making of the office It is this that we speak of 2. The Intervention of infallibly inspired men commissioned to deliver and record Christs own will hath an efficiency instrumental in making the office in that the Spirit in them doth it and they do make instrumentally the Charter or Law which giveth the power and Christ doth what they did by his Commission and Spirit If you can prove that our Diocesans have this Commission spirit and power if they write new Sacred Scriptures or make new Sacraments and Church-forms and offices we will obey them But prove it well 3. Did any man but Christ send forth the Seventy Yet most Prelatists hold that those were the predecessors of the Presbyters 4. By this it seems he again denieth that Christ himself instituted the Order of Bishops by making Apostles And if so he will sorely shake his standing for then they must prove all their power from the Apostles or following persons institutions and not make them successors of the Apostles own Office for they made not their own Office And Dr. Stillingfleet thinks there were no Bishops or few made in the Apostles times as Dr. Hammond thinks of subject-Presbyters And if Christs Spirit in the Apostles made not these Offices who made the Scripture which is Gods Law I despair of seeing it proved that any since them were authorized to make them And if men only made the Episcopal and Presbyters Office men may unmake them § 37. A case put to me within this hour remindeth me how much these men prefer Ordination not only in it self but in this circumstance of Prelatical uninterrupted succession before Baptism which is our Christning There are some godly young men that have Communicated in the Lords Supper that were the children of Quakers and Anabaptists some were never baptized and some know not whether they were or not and being born near Two hundred Miles hence cannot learn or come to any certainty The question is Whether these that have Communicated should yet be baptized which is to make Christians of
if she have no more The Priests that the Pope sent from Italy into England â—hat could speak no English knew what you mention perhaps But it 's necessary also that the Pastor teach all this knowledg to all the flock which is not done with saying few words This man minds me of the saying of an Atheistical Phâ—sician What needs there all this Preaching and stir I can tell them all in three words it is but think well and say well and do well Dr. Saywell and Mr Dodwell that are so much for our silence seem to be too near to this mans mind But saith St. Paul Who is sufficient for these things 8. Yet this sort of men that can accept of so little of God in the Priests so be it they will but be ruled by the Prelate who I suppose need ad esse be no wiser or better himself in their opinion are the rigidest silencers and excommunicators of others the wisest and holiest Pastors and Christians as Schismaticks or Hereticks if they obey not the Diocesan in every indifferent thing or be not of their mind in what they decree such odds is in their demands for God and for the Prelates He that doth but understand the common dealings of the world is capable of saying over the Liturgy of the Sacrament and a little knowledg and no honesty or piety may serve ad esse But if the Councils of Prelates yea or his single Diocesan command him never so many things as indifferent which the poor Priest feareth are perjury lying false worship or other heinous sins he is to be Excommunicated from Christian society and cast out of the Ministry and as a Schismatick not only to be silenced but to be damned if such as Mr. Saywell and Mr. Dodwell and their Masters be to be believed § 40. But saith he P. 74. How can they prove that Preaching is at all any essential part of the Office c. Ans. 1. From Christs own practice and his command to those whom he called and sent and from their practice and the Holy Ghosts determination by them Mat. 4.17 10.7 11.1 Mar. 1.4 38. 3.14 Luk. 4.18 19 43. 9.2 60. Act. 5.42 10.42 Rom. 10.8 10 14 15. Mat. 28.19 Mar. 16.16 20. Act. 30.20 8 5 2â— 40 9.20 13.5 42. 20.7 20 to the end Phil. 1.17 18. 1 Tim. 3.16 2 Tim. 3.16 2 Tim. 4.1 2. 1 Cor 1.21 2 Tim. 2.2 24. Tit. 2.3 Where do you find that ever any one in the New Testament was ordained a Mass Priest or Sacrament Priest and not a Teacher 2. When did you prove that actual giving the Sacrament was essential to a Bishop or Presbyter not only Paul baptized few but many Parish Priests leave that work to their Curates and some Bishopâ— leave both the Sacraments to their Chaplains or Priests I suppose you know that in the ancient Churches one Assembly had usually a Bishop with many Presbyters and Deacons and usually the Bishop did both preach and celebrate the Eucharist Can you prove that the rest did any 〈◊〉 celebrate than preach 3. But if you are willing you may easily know that we take Preaching to â—ave more modes than making a set Sermon in the Pulpit The Presbyters of old were all Preachers Sometimes in the Pulpit when the Bishop or chief speaker was absent sick or required it Sometimes to smaller parties in Houses or Chappels or lesser meetings sometime by conference as Christ preached to the Woman Iob. 4. And if you think otherwise yet I am confident by experience that it is an easier thing and requireth less skill to make a Pulpit studied Sermon than to deal convincingly in conference with particular persons that need our teaching And a man may learn to say Mass or Liturgies that hath no tolerable fitness to teach 4. But if Preaching and Teaching be all one with you as they are with me is it not a strange question to ask How we prove that Preaching that is Teaching is at all essential to their Office As if you should ask How we prove that Teaching is essential to a Schoolmaster or Tutor or that to Rule is essential to a Ruler or to give Physick essential to a Physician What can you take the Office to be that includeth not Teaching Neither Christs Apostles nor the ancient Church ever ordained any to give Sacraments without Teaching however Papists make the essence of the Priesthood to be in the power of making the body and blood of God Nay how can they celebrate the Sacraments without Preaching or Teaching Can they justly baptize the adult and not teach them the great Articles of the Creed which they must profess and the great and many duties to be done and the great and many benefits to be received And doth he think it such a small and easie matter to teach men all the Articles of the Creed the sense of the Lords prayer the Ten Commandments and the nature of the Sacrament of Baptism and the Lords-supper It may be hâ— will say that it is some other Preaching that he meaneth But he speaketh to me who in the hearing of Dâ— Warmstrie and of Mr. Th. Baldwin who is yet living did offer Bishop Morley when he â—orbad me to preach in his Diocess to promise him to preach only the Catechism-Doctrine on Baptism the Creed the Lords prayer the Ten Câ—mmandments and the Lords supper Archbishop Vsher in his â—ermon before King Iames on Ephâ—s 4 3. boldly affiâ—â—â—th That lâ—t the learnedsâ— of them all try it when they will they shall find that it requireth greater skill to open to the â—gnoraâ—t intelligiâ—ly these Catâ—chism common truths than to handle points of controverted School-Divinity § 41. It may be objected 1 Cor. 12. Are all Teachers and Rom. 12. He that teacheth on teaching Ans. It 's evident that Teachers or Doctors are there put for some eminently gifted above others in opening and defending sound Doctrine and not for all Teachers in general For Exhortation is distinguished from it which yet is the greatest pâ—rt of most Sermons Paul was the chief Speaker yet Barnabas was a Teacher We are more than he is for many Ministers in each Church where the chief Speaker shall usually preach but the other as assistants in their time and place and not to be meer Sacramenters § 42. His next recollections run all upon such intimated or expressed untruths meerly forged by him contrary to my copious Explications and against the rules of common honesty that I will not lose my own and the Readers time in particular answers to them He would perswade the Readers that I affirm that power immediately results from gifts who never had such a thought but say it neither resulteth from them mediately nor immediately This dealing is so grosly false that it is neither credit to his cause nor him Would he make men think that I take him to have most authority or power that hath the best gifts As if
practice Is this the rate of these mens wise disputations 1. A murderers practice may be disputed at the Assizes when his act is past 2. Shall not all the actions of men in this world be examined and judged of by Christ hereafter What no men judged according to their works or for any thing done in the body 3. Or did he mean that God will justifie us for any Villany that we shall do in obedience to the Supreme Clergy 4. Or did he think that by appealing to Gods judgment we challenge them there to dispute with us What to make of this mans demonstrations little do I know § 48. He adds P. 82. For how fallible soever they may be conceived to be in expounding Scripture yet none can deny them to be the most certain as well as the most competent Iudges of their own intentions Ans. 1. That 's true And if their intentions may make Doctrine Worship and Priesthood what they please it much concerneth us that they conceal not their intentions But I would I knew whose intention this must be whether the supreme Clergies or the Ordainers and what to do if divers mens intentions differ and what bounds are set to their intentions and how many hundred sorts of Priests Doctrine or worship they may make 2. You touch their fallibility tenderly as a thing that some may conceive But it seems let them never so falsely expound Scripture their own intentions still shall prevail against all the word of God I would you would answer Dr. Stillingfleet's Rational Account which confuteth you § 49. He proceeds As certainly therefore as God hath made his Church a visible society and constituted a visible Government in it so certainly it is to be presumed that their Hypothesis must be false c. Ans. 1. Trifle not at this deceiving rate with plain men that love the light If by a visible Society with a visible Government you mean as we have great reason to think With a visible Government over it besides Christ do not thus as Mr. Thorndike and others of you do go on to beg it and build vast structures on it but prove it to us and we will yield prove to me that the Vniversal Church is a Society that must have one visâ—ble supreme Government under Christ and I here declare to you that I will turn Papist presently and will not wrangle against any man for calling me a Papist though I may not own all that Popes say and do as those do that Grotius called Papists I will not talk with Bishop Gunning of a Collegium Pastorum governing all the Christian world per literas formatas nor be so moderate as those French Papists that make an Vniversal Council which never was nor ever must be the supreme Church-power I will presently be for the Pope though not as absolute But why answer you not what we have said against it particularly my Sermon in the Morning-Lectures against Popery 2. But if by a visible power in the Church you mean not one over the Church the Independents deny it not while every City hath its proper Mayor and so every Church its Pastor it is a visible power in the Kingdom but not over it as a Kingdom All the Justices of Peace are visible powers in the Kingdom but not Supreme nor as one Aristocracy over the whole Seeing all my dissent from Popery and from you is founded in my judgment against any one universal Supreme besides Christ Monarch Aristocracy or Democracy I seriously intreat you to write your strongest arguments on that subject to convince me and answer what I have said to Mr. Iohnson and you may spare all the rest of your labour as to me This will do all § 50. P. 83. He adds How can subjects preserve their due Subordination to their Superiors if they practice differently and while they defend their practices and pretend Divine authority for them Ans. 1. As the three Confessors did Dan. 3. and as Daniel did Dan. 6. and as the Apostles did Act. 2. 3. 4. And as all the Bishops and Churches did for three hundred years And as the Orthodox did under Valens Constantine Theodosius junior Anastasius Philippicus c. 2. They may defend it by proving that there is a God who is supreme and that there is no power but of him and none against him and that man is not God and therefore hath no power but limited and that to disobey usurpation is not to disobey power and that God must be obeyed before man 3. This is high language and harsh to Protestant and Christian ears What! are you serious Must none in Rome Italy Spain France c. practise contrary to their Governours nor in Turky neither Nor in China Iapan c Is it unlawful to read the Scripture to pray to worship God to be baptized to profess our selves Christians to speak a good word or do a good deed to feed our Children or relieve our Parents c. if Governours forbid us This is far worse than to forbid the Scripture in a known tongue if when we know it we must not obey it if Governours forbid us nor so much as plead Divine Authority for doing what Gods word commandeth us Is Gods authority so contemptible in comparison of Prelates Or doth it so little concern us as that we may not so much as plead it for any practice forbidden us by superiours This Doctrine must needs startle a Christians heart It 's far unlike Bishop Bilsons of subjection and such others If you really mean so that whatever God commandeth us in Scripture we must do none of it if the Governours forbid us or else we overthrow all Governments speak it out and prove it but Christians will abhor it And yet this same man calleth the Martyrs Saints when his argument makes them rebels W. Iohnson would not have talkt at this rate § 51. And I would fain know whether he that first saith that it subverteth all Government and after nameth supreme Church-Government do really mean it of all or of Church-Government only 1. If of all the man is no Papist I will gratifie him to proclaim it for he is no Christian. He that thinks that men must not plead Gods Authority for doing any thing different from the wills of Turkish Iewish or Heathen Governours surely is no Christian No nor if he had confined this power to Christian Governours 2. But if he mean it only of Church-Governours how come they to have so absolute a power more than Civil Magistrates May we plead Gods Authority against a King and not against the Prelates What proof was ever given of this Then the Prelates is far above the Kings Then the Prelate is an absolute Governour of the King himself Let Kings and Parliaments but understand these men and we fear not their deceits Are they willing to give over all worship of God and confessing Christ and all duties of Religion Justice or Charity if the Supreme
Clergy will but forbid them See I beseech you worthy Country-men what sort of men and Doctrine you have to do with § 52. And why doth the man talk only against different practice Doth he not know that Government commandeth duty as well as forbiddeth the contrary Is not Omission against Government as well as Commission If the King command Taxes Military service c. may we disobey and call it Passive obedience What if the Bishops only forbid us to confess Christ to come to Church to Pray to give Alms to do any good May we forbear sobeit we do not the contrary Doubtless if Gods Word and Authority may not be pleaded for any duty which God commandeth and the Prelates forbid neither may it be pleaded for the Omission of any Villany commanded by Prelates no not Inquisition Torments or Massacres which God forbids But this man hath the Gramatical skill to call Omissive obedience by the name of Passive § 53. It 's like he will next say that I make odious suppositions That the supreme Church-power may command any Villanies and forbid Christian duties Ans. 1. I despair of getting any of these designers to tell me which is the Supreme Universal Church-power so as to be well understood I never heard of any pretenders but Pope and General Councils and as Bishop Guning holds the Colledg of all the Bishops in the world And certainly Pope and Councils have set up Heresies and decreed even the exterminating of all that will not dis-believe all their senses and deny Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine They have decreed deposing Kings absolving Subjects from their Allegiance adoring Images c. And what is it that yet they may not do If they say with Peter If all men deny thee I will not how shall I know that they say true Doth not the Church of England tell us that Councils have erred c § 54. And be not these very honest Sons of the Church of England that affirm it irreconcilable to Government to alledg Divine Authority of any different practices without exception and at the same time to Subscribe to Art 21.19.6.18 of the sufficiency of Scripture That the Churches of Jerusalem Alexandria Antioch Rome have erred in matters of Faith That the Church may not Ordain any thing contrary to Gods Written Word That General Councils may err and have erred and that things Ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they are taken out of the holy Scripture And those are accursed that presume to say that every man may be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth And why not if he must do all that the Governours require or nothing divers to them § 55. My Reason forbids me to trace such a Writer as this any further To tell men of every vain Harangue and confident discourse that 's full of gross error or false report is work unworthy of time and labour but I will a little more open the Coar of his deceit CHAP. V. Wherein Mr. Dodwell's deceits and the danger of them do consist § 1. AS to his Method of disputing that you may detect his fallacies he hath got this absurd ptetence p. 90. That there is but one sense of all Terms which Causes oblige men to mean and that every one ought to know who pretends to have skill in Causes Ans. Would you have thought that ever a man should publickly use such a Cothurnus among the Learned What a man is obliged to mean is one thing and what he doth mean is another And is there any one that knoweth what humane Language is that knoweth not that almost all words have various significations Doth he not know by how good reason the Schools oblige Disputants first to explain their Terms And what need there is of Definition to explain them He instanceth in the words Bishops and the Church of England And might have added the Catholick Church And doth he not know that it is the species of Bishops that we differ about and will the general name here explain each parties sense When we are for one sort of Bishops and against another And is it not such fraud as souls should not be abused by to refuse wilfully to define the Episcopacy that he meaneth and then plead that all should understand him And why is it not as much ignorance in him not to understand me as in me not to understand him when I use distinct explication which he obstinately refuseth And doth not Dr. Stillingfleet's case shame what he saith of the Church of England who was hardly brought to explain it and at last denieth the very being of the Church in Mr. Dodwell's sense which of you was to blame to meddle with the Word till you had skill in Causes to understand it without a Definition And doth not Dr. Stillingfleet take it as the Introduction of Popery to hold a Constitutive Regent Church-Government National or Catholick and so he and Mr. Dodwell mean not the same thing by the Church Catholick nor Bishop Guning Mr. Thorndike or the Church of Rome who are all for an Universal humane Supreme power And who is he that hath read Dr. Challoners Credo Eccles. Cathol Chillingworth Bishop Mortons Grand Imposture Bishop Bilson Dr. White Dr. Whitaker Dr. Sutliffe Bishop Andrews Bishop Carlton c. Chamier Sadeel Melancthon Bucer c. who knoweth not that the Papists and Prorestants by the name of the Catholick Church do mean several things and that we deny the very being of any such Church as they call the Catholick And is this the bold and happy Disputant that will save the Schools and World the labour of explaining Terms and foreagreeing of the sense and put men on disputing where the Subjâ—ct is denied and fill a Book with tedious confident Harangues and then hide all the fraud by saying that there is but one sense of all Terms which Causes oblige mâ—n to mean and that every one ought to know who pretend to have skill in Causes When the Cause disputed is only managed by words as they signifie the minds of the Speakers about the real matters § 2. And as to the material fundamental difference between Mr. Dodwell's party and us it lyeth in these following things I. We totally differ about the nature of Gods Government of man II. And about the use of the Holy Scripture and Gods Laws III. About the nature and extent of all humane Government IV. About the form of moral good and evil V. About the essential form of the Catholick Church VI. About Gods ordinary means of saving Grace VII About the use of Preaching VIII About the duty of worshipping God in Sacred Assemblies or the Communion of Saints IX About the difference of Apostles and the office of the Bishops X. About the office of a Presbyter or Parish-Pastor XI About the Necessaries to Ministry Churches Christianity and ordinary title to Salvation XII And
of his species they are no Ministers or Churches and have no Sacrament and Covenant title to Salvation but are Schismaticks and by their Ministry sin against the Holy Ghost And so destroyeth all certainty of title to Salvation and of Church-communion Ministry and Sacraments to all the Christian World § 14 XII Lastly we think that men shall be judged by their keeping or breaking Gods Law and according to what they did in the body But he would have us obey the Supreme Clergy and not plead Scripture or Divine authority for our different practice because the Government that lasteth but for this life ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice § 15. I conclude with a request to him to resolve me these doubts 1. Whether Prophets having immediate messages from Heaven were not differenced from the teaching Priests and Pastors 2. Whether false Prophets were not grievously threatened among the Iews and whether Christ did not command us to beware of false Prophets 3. Whether he be not a false Prophet worse than a false teacher that falsely pretendeth to that which is proper to a Prophet 4. Whether it be not proper to a Prophet to deliver as immediately from God new Laws to the universal Church yea or to any Church which are not in the Scripture nor are revealed by it as Gods means besides the determination of circumstances left to humane prudence variable pro re nata if Moses and the Apostles in Legislation acted as Prophets do not they so that pretend to do the like 5. Whether the General Councils of Bishops and the Pope have not done the work proper to the Prophetical office when they have made Laws for the unversal Church and this as by Divine authority and undertaken to give all the Church the sense of Scripture which only shall be obligatory to them thereby For it is the maker of the sense that is the maker of the Law especially when they pretend to Infallibility or to be secured from erring in faith by Divine inspiration how ignorant or bad soever they be singly Is not this pretended authority and inspiration that of Prophets as different from meer Teachers and Guides by Gods Law already made 6. If it be so how many such Papal Councils arrogating such power have been false Prophets 7. But if they pretend not Inspiration nor Prophetical authority from God nor yet authority given them by the Scriptures or Laws of God already made or falsly pretend such then is not this to usurp Christs own authority and so instead of being false Prophets to be partly Vice-Christs or Law-givers to his universal Church called commonly Antichrists I would willingly have things so cleared that men may be freed from all such suspicions But if you are still confident that the universal Church hath a visible supreme Government besides Christs I should be glad 1. To see it proved 2. To know whose it is and how we may know them 3. And to know its true extent If you intend no fraud you cannot refuse me this when I promise you if performed I will let fall the suit and no more trouble you with lesser Controversies I have no Copy of my first Letter to Mr. Dodwell upon a Book which he sent me This is his Answer Reverend and Worthy Sir I Have received your very kind Letter wherein I hardly know whether I should be more thankful for your approbation or your reproof both of them being in their kind so useful and both of them being by you performed with so great civility I am confident that if our modern disputes had been moderated with that candor men would certainly have been more peaceful and very Orthodox than now we find them I could very heartily have wished that the opinions wherein we differ had not been of that nature as to sâ—parate Communion for this I look upon as the only circumstance that can make such differences grievous to a pious person for as for those others which exasperate many that Dissenters are not so wise to discern the truth or so fortunate in avoiding prejudices or lighting on faithful informations in a time when they are capâ—ble of receiving them or that they are not so submissive as themselves expect to that Pope which Luther has long since observed in every mans â—eart c. are reasons either sinful or at least insufficient to excuse the sin of uncharitableness upon such an account but as they aâ—e considering them as tempered with that piety and moderation which may expiate their other malignities that they are rather alledged as Apologies for your selves than as obligations on others rather to excuse your deformity in assisting at our Altars than erecting others in opposition to them that you are still iâ—quisitive and desirous of further information and ready to lay down your mistakes where you are convinced that they are such that still you preserve a pâ—aceable mind and embrace our Communion it sâ—lf in voto though perhaps not actually these are so valuable considerations even before God as well as man for excusing from the guilt of error as that whatever I may think of your opâ—nions I hope it shall not hinder me from a cordial respect and veneration for your person As I do very much esteem the good opinion of so great a lover of pâ—â—ce and piety as your self and should have been sorry to have given any juâ—t occasion of offence to you so I am not a little glad that upon a review of the particulars mentioned in your Letter I find my self so very innocent For as for my Preface the main parts of it wherein the disrepect of the Clergy is shewn to have been an Introductory to the Atheism of the age we live in and that the Conformable Clergy that is such as would answer the design of the Church not only as to their exterior demeanor in publick solemn Assemblies but also as to the qualifications of their persons and the conduct of their whole lives could not prove either trifling in their Preaching or scandalous in their examples and therefore that the Church is not responsible for their misdemeanors where they prove otherwise and that the Laity are in their proportion obliged to the same duties with the Clergy and therefore may make use of the advices there prescribed or where the errors of our modern School-Divinity are touched and some Proposals made for their reformation in these things I say I can see no occasion of offence but rather some preservatives against it The only thing I suppose you aim at is my taxing some opinions of Nonconformists and that with as little personal reflection as I was able which I conceived prejudicial to Church-authority which because you seem to disown I do not see why you should apprehend your self as particularly concerned especially there being nothing in the discourse whereby you could conclude either your self or any of your moderate temper to have been intended I will assure
it from the Bishop himself that Bishop Sanderson who was a Member of your Conference interposed those words in the Act of Parliament where it is required that Ministers declare their unfeigned assent and consent to the use of all things in the Book of Common-Prayer c. designedly that this Objection might be prevented The new Article of Faith inserted in the Rubrick I do not know nor can I now get the Books that past betwixt you at the Conference to find what you mean That Lay-Chancellors were put down and that the Bishops did more consult their Presbyteries I could for my own part hâ—artily wish But â— cannot think abuses momentous enough to warrant a Schism and I know your self are for bearing with some things that are not so wâ—ll liked of rather than that the Church of God should be divided for them In brief I do not understand any of the Six Particulars mentioned as the Reasons that keep you off though indeed you disapprove them both because you do not undertake to determine what they might be to others but only what they are to persons of your mind though I confess this may be understood as a modest declining to judg of others and because you conceive piety the most likely means to unite us which could not be if we imposed any thing on you against your Consciences So that the only one may be presumed to have been thought sufficient by you to this purpose seems to have been another which because you intimate somewhat obscurely I do not know whether you would be willing that it should be taken notice of But however I suppose that it self does I suppose only deprive us of your Clerical not your Laical Communion God give us all to discern the things that belong to peace As for other Questions we may patiently await our Lords leisure who when he comes shall tell us all things and in the mean time preserve Charity and be wise unto sobriety I hope Sir you will excuse my freedom and let me know whether I may in any thing be serviceable to you and above all things reserve a portion in your Prayers for Trin. Col. near Dublin Decemb. 14. 1672. Your unfeigned Well-wisher HENRY DODWELL For the Worthy and much Honoured Mr. Henry Dodwell at Trinity Colledg near Dublin in Ireland Worthy Sir I Heartily thank you for your patience with my free expressions and for your grave and kind reply As to the main cause of the Nonconformists should I enter upon that which I cannot prosecute I should greatly injure it my self and you I must again crave your patience with my freedom The sins which they fear whether justly is the question are so heinous that they dare not mention them lest their condemners and afflicters cannot bear it and so many that to open them justly will require a great Volume and therefore not by me to be done in a Letter Only to what you have said let me mind you in transitu 1. That you mistake me if you think that I excepted against your Preface as medling with me any otherwise than as I am one of those Nonconformists with whom I am acquainted who are mostly of my mind And I suppose you would take it for no honour to be thought to be better acquainted with the most of them in England than I am 2. That your intimations about the old Nonconformists are not to our business seeing the name of Nonconformists maketh not nor proveth all or many so named to be of the same mind Nor is your mention of our Treaty or Papers of 1660 more pertinent it being the old Cause only that we had to do with the new Laws of Conformity being not then existent which have made it quite another thing Only I assure you if my superiours would not take it for a crime and injâ—ry to do what Iustin 〈…〉 for their mistaken Cause 〈…〉 it I would endeavour to shew another 〈…〉 and Nonconformity than is commonly taken 〈…〉 also to give you who so well understand Antiquity 〈…〉 evidence of our Conformity to the ancient 〈…〉 300 and mostly for 600 years after Christ. 〈◊〉 â—hat I may not say nothing to you 〈…〉 only employ 〈◊〉 lines about your sugâ—â—â—tions concerning the possibility of truâ— Discâ—pline by Dâ—â—â—esans as they are with us And still you mâ—st pardon my 〈◊〉 of speech I must say that it is the câ—â—amity of Churches when their Prelates and Pastors are men that never were acquainted with the flocks but spend one half 〈◊〉 their days in Schools and Colleâ—ges and the other in Noblenâ—â—â—â— or Gentlemens houses and then talk confidently of the pâ—or people whom they know not and the Discipline which they â—â—ver tryed Even you whom I honour as a person of extraordinary worth constrain me by this your Letter to think that I diâ—pute as about war with one that never stormed a Garison nor fought a battel or as about Navigation with one that was never one month at â—ea I. Our first question is What the Pastoral Office is and especially Discipline II Our next is Whether it may be delegated to or done by one that is not of Gods Institution for the doing of it III. And then we shall soon see whether it be possible for our Diocesans to do it or any considerable part of it I. If the Erastians be in the right that none of our Discipline is necessary besides that by the Sword and our Preaching then we may put up the Controversie on both sides But if that be the work of Bishops now which was so in Scripture-times the matter will hold no long dispute To shorten thâ—t work I desire you to peruse its like you have done Dr. Hammonds Paraphrase on all the Texts that mention Bishops and Presbyters with his Treatise of the Keys where he will tell you that it was the Bishops Office to be the ordinary Preacher to Pray to celebrate the Eucharist to visit the Sick to keep and distribute the alms and offerings of the Church as Curators for the Poor with much more work And that every single Congregation had such a Bishop that ever met to celebrate Gods publick Worship and that there was not a meeâ—ing of a Christian Church without such for the said Worship in Scripture-times for he saith that there is no proof that there were any other Presbyters in Scripture-times And for Discipline it is past doubt 1. That as to the matter of 〈◊〉 iâ— must consist of a personal watch over each member of â—he 〈◊〉 that every one in it that liveth in gross sin or Infidel or Heathenish or Herâ—tical error and ignorance be orderly admonished first mâ—re privately afterward more openly and lastâ—y most 〈◊〉 and that he be by convincing reasons and â—xhortations perswaded to repentance That the penitent muâ—t be 〈◊〉 and confirmed the obstinately impenitent rejected as uâ—meet for the Communion of the Church And for the manner it is agreed that it must be done with
work that God hath â—ade Officers to do already And then we need not say â—that Orders are Iure Divino if the Bishop may make more at his pleasure but quo jure and what shall set his bounds and end This seemeth more in kind than the Italians at Trent would have given to the Pope over Bishops Anâ— if they do not themselves also that same Essential part of their Office which they give to others they degrade themselves For the ceasing or alienation of an Essential part changeth the specieâ— But I suppose you will say 〈◊〉 is Preâ—byters to whom they may delegate this work And 〈◊〉 either it is a worâ— which God hath made part of the Presbyters Office or not If it be then that Presbyter doth his ow◠〈◊〉 appointed him by God and not another 〈…〉 not 〈◊〉 he maketh a new Officer who is â—either 〈…〉 But the 〈…〉 the Office 〈◊〉 that it may not be 〈◊〉 thoâ—gh Bishop may Ordain men to an Office of 〈…〉 the King or Church may make new Officers 〈…〉 Clock keepers Ostiaries c. 〈…〉 and obligation to personal duty to be done 〈◊〉 personâ—l abiâ—â—ty as is the Office of a Physician a Judg a School 〈…〉 a Pilot c where he that Authorâ—zeth and obligâ—th another statedly to do his work doth thereby make that other a Physician Judg School-Master Pilot c. This is but Ordinâ—tioâ— And if a Bishop be but one that may appoint others to do the Episcopal work then 1. Why is not every King a Bishop for he may appoint men to do a Bishops work And why is he not also a Physician Musician Pilot c. because he may do the like by them 2. And then the Bishop appointed by the King is no more a Bishop indeed than one appointed by a Bishop is But this delegation that I speak against is a smaller sin than such men choose To depute others to exercise Discipline whom God appointed not de specie thereto is but Sacriledg and Usurpation by alienating it from the true office and setting up a false one But yet the thing might some how be done if any were to do it But the almost total deposition and destruction of the Discipline it self and letting none do it by pretending the sole authority of doing it is another kind of sin Now to your answer from the similitude of Civil Monarchs I reply It is no wonder if we never agree about Church-offices if we no better agree of the general nature of them and their work Of which if you will please to read a sheet or two which I wrote the last year to Ludov. Molinaeus of the difference of Magistracy and Church-power and also read the Lord Bacons Considerations you will excuse me for here passing by what is there said I. The standing of the Magistrates Office is by the Law of Nature which therefore alloweth variety and mutations of inferior Orders as there is cause But the standing of the Clergy is by Supernatural Institution Our Book of Ordination saith there are three Orders c. Therefore man may not alter them or make more of that same kind II. Kingly power requireth not ad dispositionem materiae such Personal ability as the Pastoral-office doth A child may be a King and it may serve turn if he be but the head of power and give others commission to do all the rest of the Governing work But it is not so with a Judg a Physician an Orator or a Bishop who is not subjectum capax of the essence of the office without personal aptitude III. God hath described the Bishops office in Scripture as consisting of three parts viz. Teaching Priestly or about Worship and Sacraments and ruling as under Christs Prophetical Priestly and Kingly Office And he hath no where made one more proper to a Bishop than another nor said this is Essential and that is but Integral Therefore the Bishop may as well allow a Layman to administer the Sacraments c. as one not appointed to it by God to Rule by the Keys IV. The Bishops Pastoral Rule is only by Gods word upon the Conscience as Bishop Bilson of Obed. sheweth at large and all Protestants agree and not by any mulcts or corporal force If he use the sword or constraint it is not as a Bishop but as a Magistrate But the Kings is by the sword And will it follow that because the King may appoint another to apprehend men and carry them to prison c. that therefore a Bishop appointed by God to Preach Worship and Rule and therein to draw the Impenitent to Repentance by patient exhortations and reproofs c. may commit this to another never appointed to it of God V. Either it is the Bishops work as was said that is delegated by him or some other If properly his own than either he maketh more Bishops and that 's all we plead for or else a Presbyter or Layman may do a Bishops proper work And then what need of a Bishop to pass by the contradiction VI. But my chief answer to you is the King as Supreme Magistrate doth appoint and rule by others that are truly Magistrates They have every one a Judicial power in their several places under him even every Justice of Peace But you suppose the Bishop to set up no Bishops nor no Church-Governours under him at all A King can rule a Kingdom by Supremo Judgment when he hath hundreds of Judges under him who do it by his authority And if this had been all our dispute whether a Patriarch or Archbishop can rule a thousand Churches by a thousand Inferior Bishops or Church-rulers you had said something But doth it follow that your Church Monarch can over-see them all himself without any sub-oversees or rule them by Gods word on the Conscience without any sub-rulers You appropriate the Decretory Power to your Monarch and communicate only the executive Hold to that The whole Government is but Legislatio Iudicium Legislation now we meddle not with yet our Bishops allow it to the Presbyters in Convocation for they take Canons to be Church-Laws It is a lower power that is denied to them that they grant the higher to Bare execution is no Government A Hangman is no Governour A Governour may also be Executioner but a meer Executioner is no Governour The People are Executioners of Excommunications while they withdraw from the Excommunicate and with such do not eat c. as 1 Cor. 5. And the Parish-Priest is an Executioner while he as a Cryer proclaimeth or readeth the Chancellors Excommunication in the Church and when he denieth the Sacrament to those that he is bid deny it to I grant you that this is Communicated But it is the Judicial power it self which I have been proving the Bishop uncapable of Exploration is part of the Judicial work I know you include not that in execution which follows it If you did it would be a sad office for a Bishop to
sentence all men upon other mens trial and word As if the Bishop must Excommunicate all that some body else saith he must Excommunicate This turneth Decreeing into a Hangman-like Execution And the nature of the cause forbiddeth it No man is to be Excommunicate for any other crime as such but for Impenitence in some crime nor to be absolved after but upon Repentance Now if it were but whether a man de facto have been drunk or fornicated or perjured c. it were hard judging sententially meerly on trust from others but yet perhaps that might sometimes be done But when the case is Whether the man be penitent Personal trial is necessary to a Rational and Ecclesiastical administration of the sentence I conclude therefore that as a King can judg by many hundred Judges and a General command an Army by many hundred Commanders but not without any one by himself alone having Executioners under him So is it here VII And I pray you note one other difference In the Kingdom it is not one subject of an hundred or many hundreds that hath Law suits with others once in a year or seven years or his life Nor one of some hundreds where I have lived that findeth the Magistrate work as Criminal And in this we differ even from the Physician who in a City hath not one of many that is sick but we are all of a sinning corrupt disposition and the Pastor hath few of his flock that need not some personal applications in one degree or other And even as to gross sins lived in and ignorance or heresie against the very essence of Christianity it is a good Parish where a considerable part of it are not guilty so that it is easier for one Justice of Peace to send two or three thieves in a year to a Gaol and bind two or three to the good behaviour than for one Bishop to admonish exhort convince and judg 10000 impenitent sinners in a little time and hear all the Witnesses c. If you should have said that the Parish Priest is to reprove exhort convince them first till he prove them impenitent and he is to instruct the ignorant Infidels and Hereticks I answer 1. That is more than an executive power 2. We desire no more at all from Bishopâ— or any and know no other Episcopal power over the people but thus personally to convince men and declare to the Congregation upon proof the fitness or unfitnss of men for their Communion by penitence or impenitence But this is it that the Ministers are hindred from or denied They have no power to speak with any one ignorant Heretical Infidel or scandalous sinner in the Parish but such as are willing And few of the guilty are willing They will neither come to the Minister nor suffer him to come to them but shut their doors on him if they know that he cometh on such a work or else they will not be within Or if they be will tell him that they will not answer him When I came first to Kederminster the rabble multitude curst me in the streets and rose up against me but for saying That Infants Originally have that sin and misery which needs a Saviour yet such if they scorn to speak with us must be our Communicants for want of Pastoral power There is no Law or penalty that I ever knew of to constrain any to come to us receive us hear us or answer us if we had never so much cause to question them of or fortifie them against infidelity heresie ignorance or wicked lives And if any other accuse them to us as few will we must not judg them without trial It may be you will say Would you have them constrained by force to speak with the Pastor or give him any account of their faith life or knowledg besides coming with others into the Church I answer No we would have no force as we have none But then we would not be forced our selves by the Church-Lords and Monarchs to take our selves for the Pastors of such as refuse our Pastoral office and to give the Sacrament and all priviledges of Church-Communion to every one in the Parish who upon just suspicion of gross scandal heresie infidelity or ignorance obstinately refuseth to speak to us and give us any account or to be tried I that have yearly tried my Parish by Personal Conference know that thousands and thousands among us know not and therefore believe not whether Christ be God or man or Angel or what nor who the Holy Ghost is or why Christ died rose nor scarce any supernaturally revealed article of the Christian faith And that many that understand them believe them not And I desire no Church-power but not to take those 1. For Christians 2. And for my especial Christian flock 1. Who are no Christians 2. Who themselves refuse it Without their consent the Minister is forced on them They aâ—e forced by the sword to say that they are Christians and to come to Church and Communicate The old Christian Profession was I will be a Christian and hold Communion with the Church though I go to prison or death for it The Prelatical Christian Profession is I will rather be a Christian and Communicate than I will lye in Gaol and have all my Estate confiscate Seeing then that we have not the due power of a Pastor to deny our Office-administrations in Sacraments to those that refuse us in the other parts aforesaid we are utterly disabled from so much as preparing men for the Bishops or Chancellors Examination 3. But if it were otherwise that must not satisfie the Church-Monarch who must judg himself and therefore must hear by himself But you tell me It is plainly against experience in Ecclesiasticks Ans. It 's hard then to know any thing For I dispute all this while as if the question were Whether men in England speak English And if I herein err I am uncurable and therefore I allow you to despair of me You say The greatness of no City was thought sufficient to multiply Bishops Ans. 1. Gods Institution was that every Church have a Bishop Act. 14.23 c. 2. A particular Church then was A Society of Neighbour-Christians combined for Personal Communion in Gods Worship and holy living consisting of Pastor and flock 3. For 250 years I think you cannot prove that any one Bishop in the world save at Alexandria and Romr had more such Congregations and Altars than one nor these for a long time after the Apostles nor in many Churches of ome hundred years longer 4. At Antioch the third Patriarchate Ignatius professeth that every Church had one Altar and one Bishop with his Presbyters and Deacons fellow-servants And that in this one Church the Bishop must enquire of all by name even Servant-men and Maids and see that they absented not themselves from the Church Why is not Ignatius confuted if he erred Vid. Mede on the Point 5. Alexandria and Rome
to say I supposed in it but a single Pastor You are not accountable to me for such errors be they never so causless in my opinion It may be you had Reason to write against the old Nonconformists that are in another world and to think that for the Names sake it concerned us and to plead that Conformity to all the present Covenants and Oaths and Subscriptions is necessary because you could wish the Discipline more Regular as if we were to Subscribe to what is in your wishes It may be you had Reason to suppose the Parish-Priests to have the Government of the People even the power of the Church-Keys and yet sometimes to unsay it again without answering my Proof to the contrary when I take it for the chief supposition that causeth my Nonconformity And to prove copiously that a Bishop may govern a Diocess when he hath a Governor under him in every Parish without answering my Proofs that he hath no such under him but hath quantum in se half degraded the Presbyters And when I said that Discipline is not possible under such Diocesans as are with us you might have Reason that I know not of to leave out as are with us and to prove it possible with other Diocesans that have governing Presbyters under them Perhaps you had Reason to confound the Convincing Perswasive Declarative Power of a Iudg with that of a private man and thence to raise the supposition which you raise Perhaps you know some Medium between corporal force and Mulcts proper to the Magistrate and Authoritative perswasion and prevailing on the Conscience by the Reverence of Gods Laws though I know none And you were not bound to teach me what you know Perhaps you had Reason to think that I may Subscribe That no man in Three Kingdoms that hath Vowed it is bound to endeavour to alter our Church-Government by Lay-Chancellors because you defend it not but wish it altered And it may be you have Reasons unknown to me that none but Irregular endeavours are there disclaimed and that our Lawgivers spake universally and would be interpreted particularly with many such like But abscondita quae supra nos nihil ad nos What I may not pretend to understand I will not presume to censure but only say That I am uncapable of being informed by them This I am satisfied of that my Schismatical Principles take into Church-Communion such as you and those that are in knowledg below not only you but me even the weakest true Christians But upon your Catholick terms no man of my measure of knowledg must be tolerated to be a Preacher or a Christian in Church-Communion nor live at least out of Goal or some such penalty And if one at Muscovy can get a Courtier to make him a Bishop he and such other are the Church which why you still put it in the feminine Gender when it consisteth of Masculine Court-Bishops I know not And if he command us to do that which we account the most inhumane perjury if he think it to be but the renunciation of an unlawful Oath as I understand you we are Schismaticks if we obey him not Whether in cases of commanded blasphemy and all other crimes we must accordingly renounce our understandings I know not Though there be somewhat of Irony in all this there is nothing but what is consistent with the high estimation of your extraordinary worth And I must say that our different Educations I doubt not is a great cause of our different sentiments Had I never been a Pastor nor lived out of a Colledg and had met with such a taking Orator I might have thought as you do And had you converst with as many Country-people as I have done and such I think you would have thought as I do My great deceiver is Sense and Experience I am inclined to look near me in judging of present matters of fact As if our Controversie were Whether one Schoolmaster can govern a thousand Schools without any but Monitors under him and Teachers that have no Government And your way is from old Histories to prove that some body did so 1400 years ago or a thousand in some places of the world if stories deceive us not and therefore it may be so now Though none of those excellent men do it who are put into the places of the silenced Schismatical Ministers nor none of the excellent Bishops that are over us who are so good that one of them no doubt would do it were it possible But seriously I take it for a great mercy of God that honest Christians of little learning have that experience in the Practicals of Religion which the studied accurate plausible Orations of contradictors cannot overcome though they are not so well skill'd at the same weapons as to answer them Sir pardon and accept this short and thankful acknowledgment that I have received your Learned Tractate till I take the leisure if I so long live to return you an answer suitable to your discourse and expectations I rest Aug. 5. 1673. Your Servant RICH. BAXTER Mr. Dodwell desiring me not to make haste in answering him I sent him only this intending more but want of time and the quality of the task being put but to answer a multitude of words delayed it till he came to London and then I thought we might talk it out which we oft tried to little purpose His great proof of large Churches of many Altars from the only two that swelled first Rome and Alexandria are so fully answered in this annexed Letter which worthy Mr. Clerkson wrote to me that I think he needs no other answer since published by me As is a fâ—ll discourse on the Subject by Mr. Clerkson himself against Dr. Stâ—llingfleet A Copy of the Letter to Mr. Dodwell March 12. 1681. SIR SInce your Speech with me I have thought again of what you insisted on and find it consist of these four Points 1. Whether I charge you with Popery or at least do not vindicate you when so accused 2. Your reasons against answering Voetius and me 3. Your desire to know my terms of concord 4. Your perswading me to give over Preaching Lest words be mis-understood or forgotten I send you my Answer to each of these I. I take it to be none of my business to tell what Religion other men are of till I am called to it And then I take my self bound to judg every man what he professeth to be till I can disprove it 2. I distinguish the Name e. g. of Protestant or Papist from the Thing Accordingly 1. I am sure you deny your self to be a Papist and I believe you 2. What you mean by the word I refer all men that talk of it to your Books which are fitter to tell your mind than I am that know no mans heart Grotius took a Papist to be one that flattered Popes taking all to be just which they said and did and not one that
Word and Sacraments which worketh by the senses of hearing seeing and tasting upon the Conscience that is on the Understanding and Will and by these reformeth practice The word is thus deâ—ivered either Generally by common Doctrine which is historical assertive precepts prohibitions promises or threatnings or by personal application of these 1. By meer words as in personal instruction precept threatning c. and by declaration that this person proved and judged guilty of impenitency in such and such sin is uncapable of Church-communion therefore by auâ—hority from Christ I command him to forbear and you to avoid him And such a one being proved innocent or penitent hath by Gods Law right to Communion with his Church therefore I absolve him invite him receive him and command you in Christs name to hold loving Communion with him 2. Or it is the application of words and Sacramental signs togetâ—er by solemn tradition and investiture or the denying of such Sacraments Briefly Magistrates by mulcts prisons exile 〈◊〉 c. work on the body Pastors have no such power bâ—t by General Doctrine and personal application by words and Sacraments given or denied work on the mind or conscience 〈◊〉 which some call a Perswasive power distinguishing as Camero 〈◊〉 between private perswasion of an equal c. and Doctâ—ral Pastoral Official Perswasion whose force is by the Divine authority of the perswader used in Teaching Disciplinary judging and Sacraments If you will call this last coercive or by any other name you have your liberty I will do my part that you may understand me if I may not understand you 2. Now ad rem can we disagree how far this constraineth the unwilling Not without some great neglect or culpable defect I may suppose then that we are agreed of all these particulars 1. That Gods Laws have told us who must or must not have Sacramental Communion which we must obey whatever be the effects 2. That Excommunication is not only nor alway chiefly to bring the person Excommunicated to obedience no more than hanging but to keep the purity and reputation of the Church and the safety of the members and to warn others 3. That the way by which it is to affect the offender is 1. By shaming him 2. By striking his Conscience with the sense of Gods displeasure declared thus by his Ministers 4. So far as the Sacrament is a means of conveying grace to deny it is not to reform but to destroy But when the person hath made himself uncapable of the benefit of the Sacrament and apt to receive it abusively to his hurt then it may possibly humble him to be denied it 5. If the denial of the Sacrament work not on a mans Conscience morally as threatnings do it no way compelleth him to his duty nor saveth him from sin 6. De facto many hundred thousands of ignorant wicked members of Episcopal Churches are so far from being constrained to goodness by being without the Sacrament that they are content to be without it and loth to be forced to it 7. The more sin and wickedness any man hath the less true conscience and the less conscience the less doth he regard a due Excommunication 8. The Bishops themselves are conscious of the insufficiency of their Excommunications alone to compel any to obedience while they confess that without the Secular power of the sword to back it they would be but laught at and despised by the most Nor durst they ever try to govern by their Church Keys alone among us without the enforcement of the sword And at the same time while they Excommunicate them from the Sacrament they have a Law to lay them in Gaol and utterly ruin them if they will not receive it How loth are the Bishops to lose this compelling Law 9. I think few of my acquaintance in England do believe that any great number are brought to holy reformation no nor to Episcopal obedience by the fear of being kept from the Sacrament but that which they fear is the Corporal penalty that followeth lay by that and you may try 10. If you will trust to that spiritual power alone valeat quantum valere potest without corporal force few that I know of will resist you but many thousands will despise you as the Bishops well foresee bring as many to obedience by it as you can But if you mean that you must needs have the Magistrate to second you as your Lictor or Executioner and to imprison fine banish burn c. it would be too gross hypocrisie to call the effects of this coercive power the effects of Excommunication and to call it coercive power to deny a man the Sacrament because he feareth the sword 11. De facto there are supposed to be in the Parish that you dwell in above 60000 souls suppose 10000 of these yearly receive the Sacrament though some say it is not 5000. Are the other 40000 compelled to obedience by not communicating 12. All those forbear your Sacrament without any sense of coercion or loss 1. Who believe as you do that Sacramental Communion is a sin where it cannot lawfully be had that is say you where the Bishops forbid it say they where Gods Laws forbid it by reason of adherent sin 2. And that take the Bishops who forbid it them to be Usurpers that have no true calling as all the Papists do of our Bishops and many others 3. Who take it to be more eligible yea a necessary duty to hold Communion with purer societies 4. Besides all those Sectaries that make light of Sacraments in general What Papists Quakers Anabaptist Separatists c. are compelled to any good by the Bishops denying them the Sacrament 13. Nothing but Ignorance or Impudence can deny that the difficulty of knowing whose Excommunication it is that is to be dreaded as owned by God hath encouraged professed Christians so confusedly to Excommunicate one another as that this Excommunication hath been so far from constraining most to repentance that it hath made Christianity a horrid scandal to Infidels and Heathens by setting the Christian World in the odious confusion of Excommunicating one another To give some instances how far Excommunication is not coercive 1. Who but the Devil was the gainer of Pope Victor's Excommunicating the Asians about Easter-day Did it compel them to obedience 2. When the Orthodox Excommunicated the Arrians did it force them to obey When they got almost all the Bishops for them and Excommunicated and destroyed their Excommunicators 3. When the Cecilians or Orthodox and the Donatists for so many ages Excommunicated one another meerly upon the difference which party had the true Ordained Bishops did Excommunications force them to obedience 4. To pass forty other Sects when Rome Excommunicated yea and prosecuted the Novatians did it compel them to obey And did not Atticus Sisinnius and Proclus win more by allowing them their own Communion and living with them in love and peace Chrysostome since threatned
the Antecedent True Pastors have but the power to promote and order Gods worship but not to exclude or forbid it to any much less to all or 1000. without necessary cause 2. And then if Preaching and Hearing and Sacraments be ordinarily necessary to mens salvation then God hath left it to the will or power of the Bishops whether any of the people shall be ordinarily saved But that is not so 3. And then if the King should license or command us to Preach Pray and Communicate and the Bishop forbid it it were sin But that I will not believe unless the Cause more than the Authority make the difference To cooclude I hold that just use of the Keys is very necessary and that it is the great sin of England to reject it But that a false usurped use of excomunication hath been the incendiary of the Christian world which hath broken it to pieces caused horrid Schisms Rebellions Treasons Murders and bloody Wars I. The just use is 1. When a scandalous or great sinner is with convincing evidence told of his error and with seriousness yet with love and compassion intreated to repent and either prevailed with and so absolved or after due patience Authoritatively pronounced uncapable of Church-Communion and bound over to answer it at the Bar of Christ in terror if he repent not and this by the Pastor of that particular Church which either statedly or pro tempore he belongeth to 2. And when this is duly notified to such Neighbour-Pastors as he may seek Communion with and they agree not to receive any justly cast out by others but to receive and relieve the injured and falsly condemned 3. And when the King and his Justices permit not the ejected violently to intrude and take the Sacrament or joyn with the Church by force but preserveth forcibly the Peace and Priviledges of the Churches II. The excommunication that hath turned the Church into Factions and undone almost East and West is 1. When a Bishop because of his humane Superiory as Patriark Primate or Pope claimeth the power of excommunicating other Bishops as his Subjects whose Sentence must stand because of his Regent power 2. Or at least gathering a Council where he shall preside and that Council shall take themselves to have a Governing power of the Keys over the particular Bishop not only to renounce Communion with them themselves but to oblige all others to stand to their judicial Sentence 3. When Bishops shall meddle causelesly in other Bishops Churches and make themseves Judges either of distant unknown persons and cases or of such as they have nothing to do to try Yea judg men of other Countries or so distant as the Witnesses and Causes cannot without oppression be brought to their Bar. 4. When they disgrace Gods universal Laws of Communion as insâ—fficiâ—nt and make a multitude of unnecessary ensnaring dividing Laws of their own according to which they must be mens Judges 5. When these Laws are not made only for their own flocks and selves but for all the Christian world or for absent or dissenting persons 6. When men excommunicate others for hard words not understood that deserve it not as to real matter 7. Or do it to keep up an unlawful usurped power over those Churches that never consented to take them for their Pastors and to rule where they have no true Authority but such as standeth on a forcing strength 8. When Lay-Chancellors use the Keys of the Church 9. When men excommunicate others wickedly for doing their duty to God and man or unjustly without sufficient Cause 10. When unjust excommunicators force Ministers against their Consciences to publish their condemnations against those that they know to be not worthy of that Sentence if not the best of their flocks 11. And when they damn all as Hereticks Schismaticks c. that communicate with any that they thus unjustly damn 12. When they dishonour Kings and higher Pwers by disgracing excommunications much more when they depose them 13. When they tell Princes that it is their duty to banish imprison or destroy men because excommunicate and not reconciled and make Kings their Executioners And so of old when a Bishop was excommunicate he must presently be banished And they say the Scots horning is of the same nature If all had been either banished or imprisoned that were excommunicate aâ—d unreconciled in the pursuit of the General Councils of old how great a diminution would it have made of the free Subjects of the Empire And if Princes must strike with the Sword all that stand excommunicate without trying and judging the persons themselves it is no wonder if such Prelates as can first so debase them to be their Lictors can next depose them He is like to be a great Persecuter that will imprison or banish all that a proud contentious Clergy will excommunicate As corruptio optimi est pessima I doubt not but a wise humble holy spiritual loving heavenly zealous patient exemplary sort of Pastors is the means of continuing Christs Kingdom in the World and such are the Pillars and Basis of Truth in the House of God as it is said of Timothy not of the Church as is commonly mistaken So an ignorant worldly carnal proud usurping domineering hypocritical sort of Pastors have been the great plagues and causes of Schism confusion and common calamity And that when Satan can be the chuser of Pastors for Christs Church he will and too oft hath ever chuse such as shall most succesfully serve him in Christs Name And I doubt not but such holy Discipline as shall keep clean the Church of Christ and keep off the reproach of wickedness and uncleanness from the Christian Religion and manifest duly to the flock the difference between the precious and the vile is a great Ordinance of God which one man cannot exercise over many hundred Parishes and unknown people But an usurped domineering use of excommunication to subdue Kings Princes Nobles and people to the Jurisdiction Opinions and Canons of Popes Patriarchs Prelates or their Councils I think hath done not the least part of Satans work in the world And I must tell you that I have lived now near 62. now near 66. years and I never saw one man or woman reformed or converted by excommunication and I hope I have known thousands converted from their sin by Preaching even by some that are now forbidden to Preach All that ever I knew excommunicate were of two sorts 1. Dissenters from the Opinions of the Bishops or conscientious refusers of their commands And these all rejoice in their sufferings applying Blessed are ye when they cast out your names c. say all evil of you falsly c. or they take their censure for wicked persecution The Papists laugh at their Excommunicators and say What an odd conditioned Church have you that will cast us out that never came in and because we will not come in 2. Ungodly impenitent sinners And these hate
the excommunicators for disgracing them and are driven further off from godliness than before But they will say they repent at any time rather than go to the Gaol I never saw one person brought to publick confession in the Assembly by the Bishops Discipline but I heard I was young of one or two that for Adultery stood in a White Sheet in the Church laughing at the sport or hating the imposers When there were no Bishops among us about 1650. many Episcopal Presbyterians c. agreed where I lived to exercise so much Discipline as we were all agreed belonged to Presbyters Hereupon I found good success in bringing some to repentance by admonition but never of any one that stood it out to an excommunication so far as we went which was only to admonish and pray for their repentance publickly and after to declare them unmeet for Christian Communion and to require the people to avoid them accordingly till they repent After this they hated us more than before and one of them laid hands on me in the Church-Yard to have killed me And I am sure that they reverenced those Ministers more than now Lay-Chancellors if not Bishops are by such reverenced So that experience convinced me that the penalty of excommunication is much more beneficial to others than to the excommunicate And how many thousands in your Parish do now voluntarily excommunicate themselves from the Sacrament and Church-Assemblies and find no Remorse or Reformation by it And if all of both sorts conscientious Dissenters and prophane despisers and sinners were excommunicated now by the Church of England without any corporal penalty adjoyned what do you think it would do upon them Would they not laugh at you or pity you Do not the Bishops believe this and therefore will not trust to their excommunications at all without the Sword I cannot magnifie the Discipline of such men as count themselves the Power of the Keys to be but a Leaden Sword a vain thing without the annexed enforcement of corporal penalties If it be but outward obedience to their commands which they drive men to without the heart 1. Men of no Conscience will soonest obey them as forced against their Consciences 2. And why do they abuse the name of the Keys as if it were the cause of that which it is no cause of but is done only by the Magistrates Sword It is the Writ De excom cap. that doth it and not the Keys And they that think unwilling persons have right to the great benefit of Church Communion yea all that had rather come â—o Church than lie in Gaol shall never have my assent If really your meaning be to set up the power of the Keys by themselves to do their proper work and not expect that Magistrates must joyn their forcing power to punish a man meerly because he beareth the Bishops punishment patiently without changing his mind Let it prevail as far as it can prevail who will fear it save for the Schism that it may cause But if it be your meaning all this while that under the name of denying the Sacrament it is Confiscation or the Gaol that must do the work I should wish for more of the Spirit of Christianity and less inclination to the Inquisition-way Persecution never yet escaped its due odium or penalty by disowning its proper name I am more of St. Martin's mind than of Ithacius's V. One word more I add That I like not your making so light as you seem to me to do of the badness of some Ministers and People that are in the allowed Churches I know that the Papists speak much of the holiness of a Pope when perhaps a General Council saith he is a Murderer Adulterer Heretick c. and so call their Church Relatively holy I deny not that Relative holiness which is founded in meer profession But I believe that Christ came to gather a people to another sort of Godliness and by his Spirit to fill them with Divine and Heavenly Life Light and Love to God and man And I believe that all that have this though excommunicate shall be glorified And that without this all the obedience to Bishops that they give will never keep them out of Hell And I take it to be no great priviledg to march in an orderly Army to damnation or to be at peace in Satans power Hell will be Hell which way ever we come to it I confess were these Bishops in the right that Sancta Clara citeth that say The ignorant people might merit by hating God as an act of obedience if their Pastors should tell them it is their duty then this external obedience to them were more considerable But I had rather go in the Company that goeth to Heaven as all do that are true Lovers of God and man than in that which goeth to Hell as do the most Regular of the ungodly And yet I account true obedience and regularity a great duty of the godly and a great help to godliness And therefore I value the Means for the End Concord for Piety and salvation And I cannot think that there is not now in London a very laudable degree of Concord among all those that though in different Assemblies and with difference of opinions about small matters do hold one Body one Spirit one Lord one Faith one Baptism one Celestial hope and one God and Father of all and live in Love and Peace and Patience towards each other This is far greater Concord than the thousands of people that deserving excommunication for their wicked lives do hold in the bosom of the Church which receiveth them as children thereof And O! were it not for that uncharitable impatience which an ill selfish Spirit doth contain why should it seem to us a matter of such odium envy or out-cry for men to hear the same Gospel from another man which for some differing opinion they will not hear from us Or for men to communicate e. g. standing or sitting in a Congregation of that mind that weakly scruple to kneel at it with others the old Canons countenancing their gesture of standing more than kneeling What harm will it do me if under the strictest Laws of Peace men worshipped God by themselves that scruple some word or action in our worship E. g. a Nestorian that should think that it is improper to say that the Virgin Mary was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that the denomination should be a ratione formali rather than a materiali Would Liberty in such matters with Love and Peace do more hurt to the Churches than Schismatical excommunications have done And indeed it is hard to make people able to reconcile a Conjunct earnâ—stness in driving the same men into the Church and casting them out yea of excommunicating them ipso facto by divers Canons sine sententia and accusing them for not communicating If it be for not repenting 1. Can you bring all the sinners about us to repentance by
excommunications Why then are the openly wicked so numerous 2. Do you think men can change their judgment meerly because they are commanded or excommunicated If a man study and pray and endeavour to the utmost to know the truth and you say that yet he erreth will a censure cure his understanding E. g. a Nestorian a Monothelite an Anabaptist c. much less when a man knoweth that he is in the right and the censurer fighteth againd truth and duty Men in some diseases will rage at the sight of certain things which would not much trouble them if the disease were cured Macedonius and Nestorius that were judged Hereticks themselves could not bear the Bishops and meetings of the Novatians But Atticus could and they lived together in Christian Love I know those places now in England where a Conformable and Nonconformable Minister live in so great love and the latter go still to the parish-Parish-Churches and the former sometimes come to them as that no considerable trouble ariseth by their difference And I know other places where the publick Ministers cannot bear any that hear not themselves yea or that constantly hearing them hear any other that dissenteth But they seek to win Dissenters as Fowlers would bring Birds to the Net by showting and throwing stones at them and Anglers would catch Fish by beating the Waters VI. I will tell you also that I much dissent from you in that when I told you that the Tyranny of Prelates hath done more hurt than the disobedience and discord of the People towards them you said you do not think so Qu. Do you think that Thieves have killed as many men as Wars have done If it be true that Iulius Caesar and his Armies killed 1192000. persons besides those that he slew in the Civil Wars That Darius lost at once 200 000 and abundance of such instances in lower degrees may be given sure poor Thieves and Murderers come far short of this account And so it is in the present case Gregory Nazian was a wise and good man who saith the people were factious and too unruly but at Const. were honest and meant well But how sadly doth he describe the Bishops as rageâ—ing even in their Councils and as the far greater causes of all calamity Judg by the Twenty instances that I before gave you about their excommunication How few Heresies or Schisms were there of old that the Bishops were not the notorious causes of The Samosatinians Apollinarians Macedonians Nestorians Acephali the Monothelites yea the Donatists Novatians the Phantasiasticks and almost all The Arrians began by a Presbyter but if Petavius cites them truly as he doth too many Bishops led him the way and most of the Bishops followed and were the men that kept up and increased the Heresie far beyond the people or the Presbyters Eutychus a Monk began his Cause but he was quickly contemned by his followers and did little in comparison of Dioscorus Severus and many hundred more Bishops And is it the People or the Bishops that now keep East and West in mutual damnations Have the Peoples divisions done more harm than the Papal Schism and Usurpations and Cruelties killing about 2000000. as is said of Albigenses and Waldenses the Inquisitions bloody Wars against the Germane Emperors and many English Kings the Rebellion against the Greek Emperor Leo Isaurus and destruction of the Eastern Empire our Smithfield Bone-fires and innumerable other Cruelties Desolations Heresies and Schisms Are all these less than the abuse of Liberty by Inferiors in Praying Preaching or Disorders Judg Hale saith That he had a friend that stored a very great Pond of Three or Four Acres with a great number of Fish and at Seven years end only put in Two very small Pikes and at the draught of his Pond there was not one Fish left but the Two Pikes grown to an excessive bigness and all the rest with their millions of fry devoured by the pair of Tyrants Hale of the Orig. of Man Sect. 2. cap. 9 pag. 208. The Block had been a better Ruler The Lord forgive the Presbyterians their over-keenness against Sects before the Pikes have made an end of them Pardon truth to Your Servant Ri. Baxter For the Learned Mr. Henry Dowell after a personal Conference with him SIR COncord and Peace are so very desirable to the ends of Christianity that I am glad to hear you speak for them in the general though I take your way to be certainly destructive of them and because you think the like of mine and so while we are agreed for the end we greatly differ about the means I shall here perform what I last offered you viz. I. An explication of my own sense of the way of Church-concord because you said I am still upon the destructive part viz. 1. My fundamental Principles 2. The way of concord which I suppose to be sufficient and only likely as appointed by God to attain that end II. The reasons of my utter dissent from your way III. A Proposal for our further debating of these differences I. I hope if you are a man of charity or impartiality it will be no hard matter to you to believe that I am willing to be acquainted with healing truth that I say not as willing as you and if I be unhappy in the success of my Enquiries it is not for want of searching diligence And your parts assure me that it is so with you But it is the usual effect of one received error to let in many more and it is so either with me or you And lest it should prove my unhappiness I shall thankfully accept your remedying informations 1. The Principles which I presuppose are such as these 1. As God as Creator so Christ as Redeemer is the Universal King and Head over all things to the Church which is his body Ephes. 1.22 23. Ioh. 17.2 c. 2. He hath made Vniversal Laws to be means of this Universal Government 3. His Universal Laws are in suo genere sufficient to their proper use 4. There is no other Universal King or Ruler of the world or of the Church whether Personal or Collective And therefore none that hath power of Universal Legislation or Jurisdiction 5. Much less any that hath a superiour power to alter Gods Universal Laws by abrogation subrogation suspension or dispensation Nor will God himself alter them and substitute new ones As Tertullian saith We at first believe this that no more is to be believed 6. These Laws of our Universal Governour are partly of natural Revelation and partly of Supernatural viz. by himself and by his Spirit in his Apostles given in an extraordinary measure to this end to lead them into all truth which is delivered to us in their Scripture-records 7. Some local precepts whose matter was narrow and temporary even the mutable customs of that time and place were also narrow and temporary as the washing of feet anointing vailing women the kiss of peace c
which maketh nothing for the mutability of the Universal Laws 8. No Pastors since the Apostles are by office or power appointed to make any Universal Laws for the Church nor any of the same kind and reason with Gods own Laws whose reason or cause was existent in the Apostles times but only to explain the word of God and apply it to particular persons and cases as Ministers under Christ in his Teaching Priestly and Governing office nor have the Apostles any other kind of Successors 9. Christ made not Peter or any one of his Apostles Governour of the rest But when they strove who should be the chief rebuked that expectation and determined That among them Preeminence should consist in excelling in humility and service 10. When the Corinthians were sick of the like disease Paul rebuked them for saying I am of Cephas and determineth that Apostles are but particular members of the body of which Christ only is the Head and not the Lords but Ministers and helpers of their faith 11 No Pastors as such have forcing power either to touch mens bodies or estates or inflict by the sword corporal penalties or mulcts But only by the word by which the power of the Keys is exercised to instruct men and urge Gods precepts promises and threats upon their Consciences 12. The Apostles were Bishops eminenter in that they called gathered and while they stayed with them governed Churches But not formaliter as taking any one particular Church for their proper charge But setled such fixed Bishops over them And though they distributed their labours about the world prudently and as the Spirit of Christ guided them yet we find not any probability that ever they divided the world into twelve or thirteen Provinces or ever setled twelve or thirteen chief Metropolitical seats in the world which their proper Successors as such should govern in preeminence Nor doth any History intimate such a thing nor yet that any Apostle took any City for his proper Diocess where another Apostle might not come and exercise equal Power 13. It seemeth that Christs sending out his seventy Disciples by two and two and the Apostles staying together much at Ierusalem and Paul and Barnabas's going forth together and after Paul Silas and Barnabas and Mark Peter and Paul supposed to be together at Rome c. that the Spirit of God did purposely prevent the intentions of any afterward of being the Metropolitical Successors of single Apostles or Disciples of Christs immediate sending in this or that City as their proper seat 14. As Grotius thinks that the Churches were instituted after the likeness of the Synagogues of which one City had many so Dr. Hammond endeavours to evince not only that Peter and Paul were Bishops of two distinct Churches of Rome one of the Iews and the other of the Gentile Christians but also that it was so in other Cities Dissertat 15. The Patriarchs were not 12 or 13 but three first and five afterward and none of them pretended to any power as especial Successors of any one Apostle but Antioch and Rome of Peter and that was not their first claim or title but an honorary reason why men afterward advanced them Alexandria claimed Succession but from St. Mark and Ierusalem from Iames no Apostle if Dr. Hammond and others be not much mistaken and Constantinople from none 16. The 28 Canon of Calcedon tels us enough of the foundation title and reason of Patriarchal power and all Church-History that the Metropolitical Powers were granted by Emperours either immediately or empowering Councils thereto 17. These Emperours having no power out of the Empire neither by themselves nor by Councils gave not any power that extended further than the Empire or that could by that title continue to any City which fell under the Government of another Prince 18 Aâ— theâ—e never was a Council truly Universal so the name Vniversal or Oecâ—menical was not of old given them in respect to the whole Christian world but to the whole Empire as the power that called them and the names of the Bishops subscribed c. fully prove 19. Before Christian Princes did empower them Councils were but for Counsel concord and correspondency and particular Pastors were bound by their Decrees only 1. For the evidence of truth which they made known 2. And by the General Law of God to maintain unity and peace and help each other But afterward by vertuâ— of the Princes Law or Will they exercised a direct Government over the particular Bishops and those were oft banished that did not submit to them 20. While Councils met but for Counsel and Concord and also when afterwards they were but Provincial or National under Kings where none of the Patriarchal Spirit and Interest did corrupt them they made excellent Orders and were a great blessing to the Churches Of the first sort e. g. were divers African and of the latter divers Spanish and French when neither Emperor nor Popâ— did over-rule them but the Gothish and French Kings moderately govern them But though I deny not any good which the Councils called General did especially the firâ—â— Nicene yet I must profess that the History of the Patriarchal Seats and the History of the General Councils and the Church-Wars then and after them managed by Four of the Patriarchs especially and their Bishops the confusion caused in most of the Churches the Anathematizâ—ng of one another the blood that hath been shed in the open streets of Monks and common people yea the fighting and fury of Bishops at the Councils to the death of some of them their â—iring out the endeavours of such Emperors and their Officers that would have kept Peace and Concord among them do all put me out of hope that the Peace and Concord of the Christian world should ever be setled by Popes Patriarchs or such kind of Councils which all have so long filled the Christian world with most calamitous divisions contentions and blood-shed and made the snares which continue its divisions and distractions to this day II. I conceive that the means of Church-concord appointed by God is as follows But I premise 1. It must be pre-supposed That no perfect Concord will be had on earth yea that there will unavoidably be very many differences which must be born So great is the diversity of mens natural Capacity and Temper their Education Company Teachers Helps Interests Callings Temptations c. that it is not probable that any Two men in all the world are in every particular of the same mind And every man that groweth in knowledg will more and more differ from himself and not be of the same mind as he was when he knew less 2. Yet must our increase in knowledg and Concord be our continual endeavour and it is the use of teaching to bring these differences caused by ignorance to as small a number as we can 3. There is scarce a more effectual means of Division and Confusion and
the ruin of their worldly Estates and the hazard of their lives in the Common Goals endeavour nothing but to Preach Christs Gospel to save mens souls from ignorance unbelief sensuality worldliness c. in case of the peoples undeniable necessity I say when such meet with men of the same profession who think not the Common Goals among Rogues and the forfeiture of Forty pound a Sermon as Enacted by Law to be enough to restrain them but also as in the name of Christ they will charge us with heinous sin unless we will perfidiously break our obligations to Christ and sacrilegiously alienate our selves from the work which we are devoted to many of us under the Bishops hands and unless we will be cruel to miserable souls and shut up the bowels of our compassion from them while we see them in need and in danger of damnation what fortitude do we need against such kind of Tempters and such Temptations If Drunkards and boys in the street only scorn'd me as a Puritan or Precisian it were less If Turkish Rulers did persecute me for my Preaching Christ it were less If mistaken Christian Rulers made me the scorn of the Nation and stript me of all my worldly maintenance and laid me with Malefactors in Prisons it were a less temptation than for a man to come in the name of Christ to tell me that I sin against him unless I will forsake my Calling break my Vows cease Preaching his Gospel betray thousands of souls to Satan and damnation and encourage all that endeavour it by yielding to all their temptations and giving them success But as Christ must be accused of sin as well as crucified and not allowed the honour of suffering as innocent so must his servants I will venture upon one argument on the by that may be somewhat by others though nothing to you for the invalidating of your accusation I saw from the hands of a Noble Lord an excellent truly Learned Manuscript said by him to be the Bishop of Lincolns to satisfie you who are said to judg it unlawful to subscribe to Athanasius's Creed What else you refuse I know not but by that much I perceive you are a strange kind of Nonconformist Now if it be unlawful for you to subscribe and conform or unlawful for me which I here undertake to prove before any equal competent Judges then it is unlawful for all the Ministers of England for none of them may do evil that good may come by it And then all the Ministers in England ought to cease Preaching if I ought to cease when they are forbidden The consequence will be denied by others though not by you And by the way How can you take the Bishops for Absolute from whom there is no appeal to an invisible power and yet disobey them if they bid you subscribe Athanasius Creed If it be a sin in me not to cease Preaching when I am silenced for Nonconformity and yet Nonconformity be a duty then it is a sin in all the Ministers of England not to be Nonformists and so not to cease Preaching But the latter part of the consequent is false Ergo so is the Antecedent 2. Yea directly your assertion puts it in the power of one superior to put down the Preaching of the Gospel and all Gods publick Worship in whole Countries or Kingdoms if not in the world and so Christ must be at their mercy whether he shall have any Church and so whether he shall be Christ and God whether he shall have any publick Worship In Ethiopia though Brierwood saith that yet after the decay of the Abassine Empire it is as big as Italy Germany France and Spain they have but one Bishop called their Abuna And if he forbad all Preaching or publick Worship in the Empire it is a sin to obey him And it is a great duty to gather Churches within his Church It is a sin in the Empire of Muscovie that all their Clergy obey their Patriarch and Prince in forbearing to Preach If all the Bishops of England should agree to reduce the Kingdom to one only Bishoprick and one Church and turn all the rest into Parish-Chappels it were a duty to disobey them and gather Churches in that one Church If the Patriarch of Alexandria Antioch or Constantinople had forbidden all in their limits to Preach and worship God publickly it had been a wickedness to obey them When Severus Antioch the Eutychian forbad the Orthodox to Preach in his Patriarchate it had been their sin to obey him yea or if Theodosius or Anastasius the Emperours had done it yea though a General Council of Ephes. 2. if not Ephes. 1. was on his side If the Pope whether as Pope or as Patriarch of the West Interdict all the Preachers and Churches in Venice or in Britain it were a sin to obey him The reasons are because their power is derived and limited to pass by the no power of Usurpers the greatest have it for edification and not for destruction None of them have power to make void the least continued Law of God by their Doctrines Precepts or Traditions All men must take heed of the leven of their false Doctrine and must beware of false Prophets and must prove all things and hold fast that which is good There is no true power but of God and therefore none against him It is better to obey God than men But of this you may in season have larger proof if you desire it VI. Your excluding us from Salvation that will not cease Preaching the Gospel of Salvation and worshipping God remembreth us 1. What a mercy it is that neither Pope nor any such condemner is made our final Judg. 2. How most Sects agree Papists Quakers c. in damning those that dance not after their Pipe 3. What various wiles of temptations Satan useth to hinder Christs Gospel and mens Salvation At once I have 1. A backward flesh that is the worst of all that saith Favour thy self and expose not thy self to all this labour obloquie hatred suffering loss and danger of death for nothing but that work which thy superiours think needless and forbid 2. I feel Satan setting in with the flesh and saying the same 3. Carnal and worldly friends say the same as Peter to Christ Mat. 16. 4. Displeased Sinners and Sectaries wish me silent 5. What Superiors say and do I need not mention 6. And to perfect all some Preachers in Press and Pulpit and you in Discourse declare us in danger of damnation as Schismaticks unless we will give over Preaching the Gospel O how easie were it to me to avoid that damnation And if I incur it how dearly do I purchase it It is a sad case that such poor souls as we are in that would fain know Gods will whatever study or suffering it cost us and after our most earnest search and prayers believe that if we forsook our trust and office and the peoples souls we
should be judged as sacrilegious perfidious hypocrites and yet we are told by wiser and greater men that our labours and sufferings do but damn us may not a man be damned at a cheaper rate than Forty pound a Sermon or the loss of all his worldly Estate and lying with malefactors and perhaps dying in a Goal under the published sacred infamy of being Schismaticks and enemies of the publick Government and peace c But this also we must be fortified against For Satan is sometime utterly impudent and will say Damn your selves by perfidiousness and let the people be damned quietly or else you shall be damned for Schismaticks But the long noise of damning Papists and Quakers have somewhat hardned or emboldened us It was an early trick Act. 15. Except ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses ye cannot be saved When lands and livings will not prevail when profit pleasure and honour fail when poverty reproach and prisons will not serve then comes You cannot else be saved How many Sects say Say as we say and do as we do and follow us or you cannot be saved But saith St. Paul It is a small thing with me to be judged of man or at mans day I have one that judgeth me even the Lord to whom we will appeal whatever you say against it But you must give me leave to think that to draw men from their great duty and the saving souls to heinous sin as in the name of Christ and to frighten men into Hell with the fear of damnation and the abused Word of God hath heinous aggravations which enticing men by sensuality to drunkenness whoredom or theft hath not VII To the next the matter of fact and antecedent Suppositions cannot be denied viz. 1. That it is probably supposed that there are inhabitants more than can hear the Preachers voice in the Parish-Churches in Martins Parish about 40000 in Stepney Parish near as many in Giles Cripplegate 30000 in Giles in the Fields near 20000 in Sepulchres Algate White-chappel Andrews Holborn and many other Out-Parishes very many thousands The last Bill of Mortality that I saw saith there died in Stepney Parish as many wanting one as in all the Ninety-seven Parishes of London and in Martins as many within six and in Giles Cripplegate as many within eight or thereabout 2. How shall they call on him in whom they have not believed and how shall they believe if they hear not and how shall they hear without a Preacher If the Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost Where Vision faileth the people perish even for lack of knowledg 3. Yet people by our Church Laws must be presented and prosecuted as Recusants if they come not to Church and so 40000 or 30000 should be presented and punished for want of room but it is a greater punishment to be strangers unto the Gospel 4. The Canon forbiddeth them going to and communicating in other Parishes and forbiddeth the Ministers to receive them 5. The Children of Christians are born with no more knowledg than the children of Heathens and need teaching as well as theirs to bring them to knowledg when they grow up 6. God will not save any adult person that is an Infidel impenitent unsanctified because he is bred up among Christians and Churches or born of Christians and Baptized but it will go worse with such unholy persons in the day of Judgment that have had the greatest means 7. If you can cast the fault on the people and say that they might remove their dwellings or break the Law and go to other Parishes or read at home c. that excuseth us not For the worse they are the more need they have of help If they were faultless what need had they of us 8. As to my own case whom you condemn I have told you that I have the Ordination of a Bishop and the License of the Bishop of this Diocess not nulled or recalled which by your principles one would think might serve if it had been against Gods own Laws And yet Gods Law and the Bishops License will not serve 9. Some other may say What 's your case to many others I answer To pass by a great deal not now to be said Let it be understood that the case is this Men are first silenced and excommunicated and so forbidden the publick Churches and all publick worship of God and then the Excommunicate are prosecuted and accused for not coming to Church Divers Canons do ipso facto that is sine sententiâ excommunicate all that do but say that any thing in the Liturgy or Discipline is unlawful or may not be done with a good conscience which all Nonconformists hold And it is not possible for us to repent of that as a wicked Error which after all means that we can possibly use appeareth unto us an undoubted truth that so our Excommunication may be taken off Now these silenced men are assured that God disobligeth them not from the duty of Preaching and these excommunicate men are assured that God doth not disoblige them from the duty of publick worship and Church-communion Therefore they must use it as they can when they may not use it as they would Men say the Papists should not call us Schismaticks because they cast us out and went from us and will you silence and excommunicate men as they undertake to prove for obeying God and then call them Schismaticks for not communicating with you or for worshipping God in such Church-communion as they can Indeed many of us communicate with you because we think not our selves bound tho' you excommunicate us ipso facto to do execution on our selves or to go further from you than necessity compelleth us tho' I must profess that Cyprians 68. Epistle p. 200. and St. Martin's Separation from the Bishops confirmed by Miracle sometimes sticks in my stomack But I cannot make so light as you do 1. Of such Texts as 2 Tim. 4.1 2. I chaâ—gâ— thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ who shall judg the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom preach the word be instant in season out of season reprove rebuke exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine 2. Nor of the murderous famishing of thousands of souls when to murder one child by famine deserveth death and hell 3. Nor of Christs Law of preferring Mercy before Sacrifice necessary Morals before Rituals Circumstantials or Ordinals which are all but propter rem ordinatam I remember you have told me That if the Bishop forbad all Gods publick worship in the Assemblies we must forbear Such sayings and this That I must let so many souls be untaught though they be damned because it is the Bishops fault and not mine do make me ready to tremble to think of them If Christs works be saving whose work is it to make so light of mans damnation Is it any wonder if such Principles be called Antichristian I cannot but
about the final Judgment If all these be little tollerable differences why may not we be tollerated If not judg Reader who they be that are intollerable when you hear them plead against tolleration § 3. I. For the first we judg that there is a God who is the Governour of the World by an universal Law which is above all humane Laws or will and that he is the fountain of all power and there is none but what he giveth and limiteth and that no man is above him nor hath true authority against his Laws But Mr. Dodwell saith That it is irreconcileable to Government in this life or to due subordination of subjects to superiours to practice differently and defend it by pretending Divine authority and appealing to writings Scriptures is our word by excellency so called And so God shall be God and be obeyed if the Clergy please § 4. II. As to the second we suppose that the Holy Scriptures are Gods Laws indited and recorded by the Holy Ghost to be the first obliging Rule of Faith and holy living which all men are to be obedient to before and against all contrary Laws of men But Mr. Dodwell as aforesaid alloweth no such prime obligation as will warrant an appeal to the Word of God from the visible Church-Governours that contradict it § 5. III. And for the third we suppose that all humane Powers are derived from God and have no authority but what he giveth them and are more under him and his Laws than the Justices are under the King and his Laws and can oblige no man against the Laws of God But how far Mr. Dodwell thinks otherwise you have heard He saith not indeed that we must break Gods Laws but we must not pretend them or appeal to them against our Governours In charity I hope he meaneth no worse but that we must take our Rulers word or exposition and judg nothing to be in the Scripture contrary to their commands And whether he give them the same dominion also over the Law of Nature let him tell you Paul disclaimed dominion over mens saith and the written Law of God § 6. IV. And for the fourth We take moral good to be a conformity to Gods Law and moral evil or sin to be a breach of it But Mr. Dodwell is for measuring them by the Clergies or Governours will though Gods Law be against theirs § 7. V. And for the fifth we take the Catholick Church to have no Supreme Government but God and our Glorified Redeemer God and man and that there is no such thing as a Catholick-Church of Gods making under any other Supreme Rulers But that as God is the invisible King of this visible world and Kings are subordinate Supremes in their Kingdom but neither one of them or many conjunct in an Aristocracy Supreme over all the earth so Christ is the partly visible and partly invisible supreme Ruler of the visible Church of Christians and each Pastor is under him over his proper flock bound to keep concord and peace but none under him Supreme over all whether Monarch as the Pope or Aristocracy as Councils Cardinals or ' others But Mr. Dodwell is for a visible Society with a visible humane Supreme But who the Supreme is I despair of getting him to acquaint us § 8. VI. And for the sixth we suppose that God sent forth Preachers to convert the world and turn them from darkness to light and the power of Satan to God and that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word preached and that whoever believeth shall be saved and the word of God is powerful to this end and sufficient to make us wise to salvation But Mr. Dodwell thinks that it is not Preaching but the delivering men the Sacraments that giveth them the first true saving grace and title to Salvation And that none in the world have this Sacrament or Covenant-title to life but those that receive it from a hand that had an Ordination by Bishops in his sense of uninterrupted succession from the Apostles by the like Ordination § 8. VII Accordingly we hold that Preaching is for the converting of souls and the means of saving faith and holiness But what he thinks it is good for I know not well nor whether he would send the Indians the Sacraments instead of Preachers § 10. VIII We take it to be our duty though men forbid us to confess Christ and assemble for Gods worship to read and hear the Scripture and to praise God But he thinks we must not practice differently from the ruling Clergies will if they forbid us nor alledg Divine authority for it § 11. IX We suppose that the office of a Prophetical Ministry bringing new Doctrines or Laws from God and the office of the Teachers and Rulers by these Laws are greatly different and must necessarily be distinguished Moses was a Prophetical Mediator in Legislation and he confirmâ—d his Mediation by uncontrouled Miracles The Prophets afterward came but on particular applicatory messages But the Priests and Levites as such were no Prophets nor had power to make any new additions or alterations of the Law but only to teach it the people and as guides apply it to their several cases so Christ and his Apostles commissioned to deliver and record all his Doctrines and Commands to the following ages did by the Holy Ghost Prophetically deliver to the world that body of Doctrine and Law which must rule them to the end and judg them and thus sealed and confirmed all by a multitude of uncontrouled Miracles but all following Bishops and Pastors are not to do the like nor add or alter nor are such Legislators being not Prophets nor workers of Miracles but only to teach and apply the Laws already recorded in Scripture and guide their Congregations in variable circumstances time place translations c. according to the general rules of Gods Law This is the truth But how much Mr. Dodwell equals the Bishops and Apostles and sets their words above the Scripture as to obligation you have seen before § 12. X. And as he giveth Bishops power to silence Presbyters and forbid the Preaching of the Gospel and Gods worship so how little knowledg or godliness or common sobriety or honesty he requireth to a saving Sacramenting Priest who must not be separated from you heard before contrary to Cyprian and many a Councils Canons But we know that Paul had no power to destruction but only to edification And they have no more § 13. XI We suppose that we must love honour and communicate with all such as true Ministers or Churches who have true faith and repentance and sincere obedience to Christs Laws and are able godly willing Pastors chosen or consented to by the flocks approved and ordained by senior Pastors especially in Synods where City-Pastors preside and especially if also authorized by the Christian Magistrate But he thinks if they have not also successivâ— Ordination from the Apostles by Bishops