strangers to the most of them These are so paâ—pable impossibilities as to an unbyast considerer are instead of a thousand Arguments that the Bishops or Elders which these Texts speak of were not Diocesan Bishops i. e. they were not the Overseers or Rulers of many score or hundreds of Churches as their Flocks to whom they were to perform all these Pastoral works and the Flocks to pay them the forementioned Duties But the Pastors of such a number of people as they could thus personally oversee teach rule watch over visit c. and such a number as could pay them that love submission imitation c. prescrib'd in the forequoted Texts Especially when 't is so expresly asserted Acts 14. v. 23. That such Elders were ordained in every Church which Titus is also appointed to do in every City 1 Tit. 5. And 't is well known every Town equal to our usual Market-Towns in England was then called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or City and but a few comparatively of the inhabitants at first converted to Christianity I grant that soon after the Apostles time the name of Bishop and Presbyter or Elder begun to be distinguisht and that of Bishop apply'd to a stated Praeses or Moderator of a Presbytery or certain number of Elders But 't is as evident That the Bishop and his Presbyters in the Primitive Church were but the Rulers of one Single Congregation capable of personal communion not of many Score or hundred Churches How plain to this purpose is that known passage of Ignatius whose Authority the Defenders of Prelates have so vainly boasted of who in his Epistle to the Philadelphians gives this certain mark of every Churches individuation viz. There is to every Church one Altar and one Bishop together with the Presbytery or Eldership and the Deacons my fellow servants 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c The same Author in his Epistle to Polycarp advises that good Bishop to have frâ—quent Churhc-Assemblies and to enquire after all by name and not to despise servants and maids So in his Epistle to the Smyrnenses Fellow all of you the Bishop as Jesus Christ does the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c and the Presbyteâ—y as the Apostles and reverence the Deacons as the appointment of God. Let none without the Bishop transact the affairs of the Church Let that be accounted a valid communion which is in his presence or by his permission for where the Bâ—shop is there let the multitude be 'T is not lawful without the Bishop to Baptize or make a Love-Feast Nothing can more fully evidence that the Church of Smyrna had their B shop Presbyters and Deacons and 't were ridiculous to apply those passâ—ges to a modern Bishop and his Diocess Justin Martyr's known account of Church = Assembâ—ies evinces the truth of this which the learned Mr. Jos Mede in his Discourse of Churches quotes p. 48 49 50. and from thence acknowledges They had then but one Altar or place of Communion to a Church taken for the company or coporation of the faithful as united under one Bishop Tertullian's account of particular Church-assemblies assures us Apol. cap. that Church-discipline was exercis'd in them and that by the probati seniores or approved Elders among whom we own the Preses was called Bishop Even in Cyprian's time his famous Church of Carthage was not so great but that he frequently professes he would do nothing in Church-affairs without the consent of his Presbyters and all the people especially in the censuring of Offendors As in his Ep. 3.6 10 11 13 14 26 27 28 c. Edit Goul And Ep 68. as he there declares the people have the chiefest power of choosing worthy Priests and refusing the unworthy so when he relates the manner of the Ordination of a Bishop he tells us All the next Bishops of the same Province do come together to that people over whom the Bishop is set and the Bishop is appointed tâ—e people being present who fulliest know the life of every one and have thoroughly seen the Act of every one's conversation Which also we saw done with you in the Ordination of Sabinus our Colleague that the office of a Bishop was given him and hands imposed on him in the place of Basilides by the suffrage of the whole Fraternity and by the judgment of the Bishops that had met together c. We may easily gather what the Bishops Church was when all the people must be present and judge of his life and are supposed to be thoroughly acquainted with it A Diocess of the modâ—rn extent would be hard put to it to meet together for this purpose and pass their judgment concerning the life of their Bishop The Constitutions and Canons called Apostolical assign such duties to the Bishop as plainly imply his relation to a Congregation capable of personal Communion as his Charge or Flock And to give a brief summary of those proofs which it would require a large volume to insist fully on if we consider impartially all the duties which the most ancient Christian Writers describe as belonging to the office of a Bishop viz. To be the ordinary publick Teacher of his Flock a and Baptizer of those that were received into his Church b To confirm the Baptized to reconcile and absolve all penitents to administer the Lords Supper c To receive all oblations c. and distribute them To take care of the poor and sick and strangers as their Overseer and Curator d To try all causes about scandal in his Church with his Presbyters in the presence of his Flock e To Ordain other Bishops and Elders To keep Synods among his neighbour Bishops To grant communicatory Letters f c. And to how great a flock one man is capable to perform them If we consider further that the Bishop and his Presbyters liv'd usually in the same House and in Common at least near the Church and that in the distribution of their maintenance one half of it was destin'd to repair the Fabrick or Temple and maintain the poor the other half to the Bishop and his Clergy or Presbyters g That it was the common custom for the Presbyters to sit in the same Seat with the Bishop in a semicircle and the Deacons below them h That the Deacons are always mentioned as Officers in the same Church with the Bishop i That the Love-feasts were not to be kept without the Bishops permission and he was to have his share sent him if absent k That the way of strangers communicating was by communicatory Letters or Certificates which were to be shewed to the Bishop of the Church where they desir'd to communicate l That a Schism was describ'd by setting up Altar against Altar every communicating Church having its Altar or Table for celebrating the Lords-Supper and Bâ—shop m a Constit Apost c. 26. Just Mart. Apol 2 b Tertull. de Cor Mil. c. 3. c Ignat. Ep. ad Smyrn p 4. Just Mart Apol 2. d
Treatise There are few considerable defenders of Prelacy whose writings he has not animadverted on And t is strange to observe how farr the most of them mistake the true state of the controversie Some go about to prove a sort of general superintendents arch-Arch-Bishops or Metropolitans who had some inspection over the Bishops of particular Churches within their Province and presided in their Synods but did not put down the Government and exercise of Church-Discipline in those particular Churches as if this were a proof of those Diocesan Bishops that do cast out all Government and exercise of Discipline by the Bishops or Pastors of particular Churches and pretend to be the sole Pastors of the Diocess And yet the jurisdiction of such Metropolitans is of no very ancient date and quite contrary to the judgment of Cyprian who disowns any Bishop of Bishops and owns only Bishops or Overseers of Flocks or Churches Others take a great deal of pains to prove the stated presidency of one by the name of Bishop in a Consessus or Bench of Presbyters who had but all one Communicating Church under their charge which is not deny'd to have begun early in the Church as a Remedy of Schism But that difference of Bishop and Presbyters when both were but joynt-rulers of a Congregation is so far from being a proof of modern prelacy that such Diocesan Bishops have put down the primitive parish-Parish-Bishops and monopoliz'd the power of many score or hundreds of such Bishops to themselves and thereby rendred true Church-government impracticable Nay that very difference betwixt the Bishop and Presbyters of a particular Church seems to have had it's rise wholly in the notorious disparity of his gifts learning age c. above the rest but was never esteemed by them a difference in office or power nor is it ascrib'd to any higher Original â—hen Human Constitution by Jerome Auâ—â—in Ambâ—ose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostom Theodoret c. not to mention â—â—der writers If then Ordination belong to Scripturall Bishops and such be the Pastors of particular Churches 〈◊〉 none else diâ— orâ—â—â—â— in the Primitive Church in its purest Ages Then a l suâ—h Bâ—shops have that power Nor indeed have any power to orâ—â—â— but on the account of their being such Scriptural Bishâ—â—s â—hâ— office of Diocesan Prelates being a manifest Usurpation in thâ— Church which had it's rise in human Ambition That Uâ—u pation cannot rightfully deprive the true Bishops or Pastors oâ— that power of Church-government which is as essential to their office as the power of teaching or being guides in worship And whatever may be said for parish-Parish-Bishops submitting for peace sake to the usurpation of a Diocesan ex gr when he claims the sole power of Ordination where the true ends of it are attain'd yet they have no reason to submit to it when Diocesan Bishops shall so abuse that usurped power as to corrupt and deprave the Ministry by imposing sinful terms and hazard the ruin of Souls by neglecting to provide a number of faithful Pastors suitable to their real necessities The Ordination therefore of the Pastors or Bishops of particular Churchâ—s is more agreeable to the holy Scripture and primitive Antiquity and consequently more unexceptionably Valid then that of a single Diocesan From whence it follows That the ordination of Pastors in the Presbyterian Churches is Valid because either they are ordain'd by Diocesan Bishops who had power to ordain on the account of that office they have in common with scriptural Bishops tho they have none as Diocesan or they are ordain'd by a concurrence of scriptural Bishops to whose office the power of Ordination was annext by divine Institution and and cannot be alienated by any humane usurpation For Christ has given none power to change his Institutions Nor can the will of the Ordainers debar his Officers from any part of that Authority which his Charter conveys to them And if the validity of Ordination by such scriptural Bishops be deny'd the Church had no ordained Ministers for a Century or two at least Having laid down these Notions about Mission I come to examine D M's Quest's Quest 1 What priesthood or holy Orders had the first Reformers but what they received from the hands of Roman Catholick Bishops Answ If D M mean that their priesthood or ministerial office was convey'd to them by the Bishops as the Givers of it they receiv'd it from none at all nor has any that power to give 't is given by Christ in his Charter But if he mean that the Roman Catholick or Popish Bishops did invest them in that office 'T is own'd that most of the Reformed Ministers were ordain'd by them and 't is not material whether they were R man Catholick Bishops of the same rigid stamp as those of the present Age or no for the validity of their Ordination depends on the Essentials of the Pastoral office retain'd and not on their horrid corruption of it And as Mr. K. well observes they ordain'd as Christian not as Roman Bishops But what if some of the Reformers became Pastors to the people upon their necessities and call who durst not comply with the sinful terms of Ordination in the Church of Rome and yet could have no other They would not be in this case destitute of a true Mission For the evident necessities of the peoples souls who earnestly desir'd to have the Truths of the Gospel purely preach'd and divine Worship purely celebrated and who could not with a safe conscience continue in the Communion of the Roman Church and their Qualifications for so necessary a work were a sufficient signification of the will of Christ that they should undertake it For the precept about the ordinary regular way of Admission to the Ministry did not oblige where it cou'd not be lawfully observed and where there was a far greater necessity of a pure untainted Ministry then of that positive point of Order For else on supposition no Pasâ—oâ—s had embraced the Reformation The people who did woud have been obliged to have lived like Aâ—heists without publick worship 2 Q Who authorized the first Reformers to preach their Protestant Doctrine and administer their Protestant Sac aments Answ It does not belong to the Ordainers to determine what Doctrine the person ordained shall preach but to Christ who has determined that matter already And therefore if the Doctrine which our first Reformers preacht and the Sacraments they administred be Christ's as Mr. K. well argues 't is ridiculous to ask who authoriz'd them to preach the one or administer the other Christ did and no men can authorize any to preach any other Doctrine or administer any other Sacraments The Bishops or Priests in the Roman Church had no right or Mission from Christ to preach Popish Doctrine or administer Popish Sacraments or celebrate Popish Woâ—shâ—p so far as these are contrary to the Doctrine Sacraments and Worship contain'd in the Gospel These were gross corruptions of their office
believe with the heart but confess with the mouth to salvation as the Apostle Paul speaks Rom. 10. v. 10. But these real Saints do not make up one distinct external society by themselves but as mixt with a crowd of Hypocrites who joyn with them in the same external profession of Christianity Nor are they exactly distinguishable from Hypocrites in our Judgment which cannot pierce into the hearts of men and only looks at the credibility of their external profession If therefore it be enquir'd what is the true Catholick Church We must answer All sincere Christians who are one body or society by their belief of and subjection to Jesus Christ their common Head and center of Unity If it be enquir'd whom should we in charity judge to be members of the Catholick Church the Answer is obvious All that make a credible profession of that Faith and that subjection If it be askt further what is a credible profession 't is answer'd A profession not contradicted by notorious ignorance of the essentials of Christianity by fundamental Errors or by notorious wickedness And he that would prove any particular Church or Churches that call themselves Christian to be no parts of the Catholick Church must prove that they deny or at least do not profess some essential Article of the Christian Faith or are notoriously ungodly I add notoriously ungodly because subjection to the laws of Christ is as necessary to our being the true members of his Church as belief of his Doctrine and consequently a credible profession of that subjection as requisite to our being esteemed such And therefore D. M. has very little reason to value himself upon this Question And the Church of Rome has so little reason to arrogate to her self the Title of the Church Catholick that a man must be very charitable to allow her to be a part of it but no wise man will allow her to be any other than the most corrupt and unsound part of it For that Church has gone so near towards the subverting the essential truths and laws of Christianity by their dangerous corruptions in Doctrine Worship and Practice that it wou'd be the best service D. M. can do her to demonstrate clearly that there is a credible profession of Christianity left amongst those that practically hold all the Decisions of the Council of Trent exagr To reconcile that Doctrine of their Council that imperfect Contrition or Attrition is sufficient to dispose a man for Absolution in the Sacrament of Penance Council of Trent Sess 4. cap. 4. with that necessary Doctrine of the Gospel Wihout Repentance there is no Remission of Sins To reconcile the worship of the Church of Rome with the second Commandment is a task well worthy of D. M's pains But I hope in many that live in the communion of the Church of Rome the common principles of Christianity which they retain prevail against the poysonous additions of Popery and all the Doctrines of that and other Councils are not practically held by them But their claim to be a part of the Church Catholick is not near so clear and indisputable as that of the Reformed Churches whose Doctrine and Worship compar'd with the holy Scriptures evidence them to be an incomparably sounder part of it tho even all the Reformed Churches are not equal in their soundness and purity This Catholick Church hath only one universal Head Jesus Christ and is one Body only on the account of its union with and subjection to him Nor is there any Vicarious universal Head under Christ to which the Government of the Church Catholick is committed whether Pope General Council or Colledge of Prelates Nor can any such humane Head make Laws obligatory to the universal Church For any to pretend to it is an usurpation of Christ's Legislative power and 't is chiefly on the account of that Vsurpation and employing that usurped power to deprave the Church and destroy its soundest members that the Protestants have call'd the Pope Antichrist Particular Churches are the chief integrating parts of the Church Catholick I speak of it here as measur'd by the judgment of charity As to any of these particular Churches if the Quest be Are they a part of the Catholick Church It must be resolâ—'d by the credibility of their Christian Profession If thâ— Question be Are they Churches regularly constituted or organiz'd 'T is in the resoâ—ution of this Quest We must consider whether they be a society of Christians united under one or more such Pastors as Christ has appointed for personal communion in Faith Worship and holy living and whether their Pastors were in a regular manner set over them And here the dispute about lawful spiritual Governors must come in Fâ—r that a particular Church have a lawful Pastor is not absolutely necessary to its being a true Church and consequently a true part of the Catholick Church as Mr. K. himself acknowledges in the fore-quoted place p. 90. tho how he will reconcile that Concession with his description of the Catholick Church I do not understand 'T is only necessary to its being a Church regularly constituted And who are such lawful Pastors there will be occasion to discuss in answer to the 4th Quest The sâ—cond Quest is Whether by the Church Catholick be meant the Church of England alone or the Church of England in communion with other Churches Mr. K. well replys The Church of England is no more the Catholick Church than the British Seas are the whole Ocean But he does ill to found its being a part of the Catholick Church on its subjection to Catholick Bishops I suppose he means Diocesan Bishops For it wou'd not cease to be a part of the catholick Church if it shou'd disown Diocesan Prelacy And if Mr. K. think otherwise he has these two difficult Propositions to prove First that Jesus Christ has instituted the Office of Diocesan Prelates in his church and secondly that he has made such Prelates the center of catholick Unity and subjection to them necessary to our being members of the catholick church Now if Mr. K. will undertake the defence of these two Propositions he not only unchurches all the Reformed Churches that want Diocesan Prelacy but even the Catholick Church it self for a Century or two at least as I offer to evince if Mr. K. please to demand it For communion with other Churches it must be understood in the essentials of Christian Religion for it can scarce be expected in all its integrals in this imperfect state but much less in unnecessary humane additions to Christianity And we must not confound communion with subjection the former may be due where the latter is not The third Quest is With what other Church does the Church of England communicate in Sacraments and Liturgy Mr. K. well answers That Vnity in Liturgy is no part of communion of Churches and that the Church of England and had his charity been wide enough he might safely have added
founded on the supposition of some vicarious Head of Unity to the Catholick Church which we condemn the Church of Rome for setting up and Mr. K. himself seems to disown p. 55. Nor wou'd that Hypothesis it self justify the distinction because if Christ have made any Vicarious Head or center of Unity to the Catholick Church we cou'd not be united to him as his members without union with that Vicarious Head. So that to be Catholick members of the Church and members of the Catholick Church are the same thing And if Mr K. use that expression in this sense let us consider a little the description he gives of those who are Catholick members of the Church Here are three characters to know them by Their embracing the catholick Faith their making no separation from their lawful Governors their living in charity with their neighbour churches The first is Embracing the Catholick Faith and he shou'd have added Professing catholick holiness of life For this character 't is undeniable and I hope Mr. K. will not exclude any of the forementioned Protestant Churches from being Catholick members of the Church on this score The two latter Mr. K. himself will find too dangerous and too schismatical to own upon second thoughts For from the third viz. living in charity with their neighbour churches I infer 1st That this character does exclude all the Papists from being catholick members of the Church for they are so far from living in charity with their neighbour Churches that their Trent-creed does assert its Articles to be that catholick Faith without which no man can be saved and consequently damns all the Churches in the world besides their own 2. On supposition the Reformed Churches abroad which have not Diocesan Bishops be true Churches this character excludes all those of the Church of England from being catholick memâ—ers of the Church who do with Mr. Dodwell unchurch all those Reformed Churches that want Prelatical Ordination For to unchurch them is not to live in charity with them 3. If the Churches of the Presbyt and Indep here be true Churches as I shall in this Paper evince they are then Mr. K. and all that are of his mind are no catholick members of the Church because they live not in charity with their neighbour Churches And I hope there is not the less charity due to them for being of the same countrey or Nation for Mr. K. makes subjection to lawful Pastors a mark of the members of the catholick Church p. 4. and declares the Presbyt c. destitute of that mark p. 6. And consequently denys them to be members of the catholick church which is the highest breach of charity imaginable And what if the Presbyt shou d treat Mr. K. according to his own principle and declare him no catholick member because he lives not in charity with them They would but use his own weapons against himself But however they have been misrepresented they are not of that schismatical humour as some are who have long made a loud outcry against Schism 4. Nay if this character be true then in all those contentions that have happen'd in the Church where the contending Parties have been so uncharitable as to excommunicate one another ' tho sometimes about meer trifles the one Party or both have ceast to be catholick members of the church And so when Pope Victor excommunicated the Eastern churches for not keeping Easter on the same day with him He and all that joyn'd with him ceast to be catholick members of the church And if to be catholick members of the Church and members of the catholick Church be the same what a vast part of the christian worâ—d has been unchurch'd in every age by the uncharitable censures of proud contentious Prelates I suppose Mr. K. never considered these consequences or else he would never have made living in charity with neighbour Churches a necessary mark of the catholick members of the Church As if the legitimate children of the same Father might not in an angry mood call one another Bastards or the subjects of the same King in a pievish humour nickname their fellow subjects Rebells without any just cause I am sure the Presbyterian Churches both at home and abroad are the least concern'd in this character for they have never unchurcht the Prelatical Churches even when they have met with the most harsh and unreasonable treatment from them But Mr. K. has given us another character to distinguish the Catholick members of the Church by which he imagines will exclude all the Presbyterians Independents c from that number viz. That they are such as make no separation from their lawful Governors All this is founded on his schismatical mark of the catholick Church viz. That its members live under their lawful spiritual Governors Here therefore all those difficulties occur about the meaning of lawful spiritual Governors which were propos'd p 3 4 5 6 7. And which sense soever Mr. K. chooses he will find it does oblige him to unchurch a great part of the Catholick Church i. e. to be a schismatick of the worst sort And if the laws of Christ must determine the debate he will give the Dissenters such an Argument against Prelatical Churches being members of the Catholick as he will never be able to answer And Mr. Baxter's Treatise which proves the unlawfulness of Diocesan Prelacy has according to Mr. K. done what that charitable man never intended unchurcht all our Diocesan Churches and cashierd them from being any part of the Church-Catholick There is no doubt but unjust separation from any lawful spiritual Governors is a sinful practice And particular Churches gather'd by such a sinful separation are not gather'd in a regular way And therefore an unjust violation of due Order is all that Mr. K. can justly pretend to charge the Presbyterians and Independents with and perhaps will find it a more difficult task than he imagines to make good that charge And therefore to clear this matter let me premise Particular Churches are the chief integrating parts of the Church Catholick These Churches consist of one or more Pastors and a Christian Flock associated under his or their oversight for personal communion in Faith Worship and holy living These Churches are obliged by the very dictates of the light of nature and general rules of the holy Scripture to endeavour the preservation of all necessary Unity by the amicable consultations of their associated Pastors The judgment of such associated Pastors should be submitted to by the people under their care when 't is not repugnant to the Word of God and contrary to the interest of Religion But the people do not owe them a blind obedience nor have such Pastors any power but for edification Much less can such Bishops pretend to an higher power whose very Office Christ never instituted whose pretended relation to their Diocess is not founded on the peoples consent to it and if such Bishops should claim
terms of the Ministry as Christ's own Laws forbid his Ministers to obey If all ought not to forbear their Ministry who are forbidden by an unjust Law What is there in the case of the silenc'd Ministers that shâ—uld oblige them to it I know nothing can be imagin'd but this That obedience to that Law tho unjust would in their circumstances tend more to the good of the Church and sou s than all their ministerial labours And if any can make this good I doubt not but they will forbear For proof of the contrary see p. 27 28. under the former Head. All the Quest therefore will be concerning the conditions of the Ministry that by the foresaid Law were impos'd upon them For the first mentioned the Declaration of Assent and Consent c. Are there not many thousands of sincere and upright Chrâ—stians in these Kingdoms who do really judge kneeling at the Sacrament unlawful because they account it a symbo izing with the Church of Rome in a ceremony abus'd to Idolatry who judge the Cross in Baptism unlawful because 't is a new Tessera or symbol of our Christian Profession of humâ—ne Institution to which those very duties and blessings of â—he Gospel are annext which our Lord has annext to Baptism â—specialâ—y when the words of the Canon are To dedicate them â—y that badge the sign of the Cross to the service of Christ whose benefits â—â—stow'd on th m in Baptism the name of the Cross does represent Or whâ— scruple the use of Sponsors in Baptism to undertake that work which â—s the Parents duty and not theirs unless the Parent be incapable and the more because the 29â—h Canon of the Church saâ—th No Parent shall be urged to be present nor be admitted to answer as Godfather for his â—wn child He that knows not there are many thousands who judge â—hese things unlawful and yet are persons as eminent for their piety as those that are otherwiâ—e minded is either a stranger to these Nations or has very little charity left Whether these persons be mistaken in these scrupâ—es or no I do not now dispute nor is it necessary to my Argument to suppose them in the right But I wou'd hope it will be granted me that their credible profession of Religion gives them a right to all the seals of the Covenant and that 't is not lawful to debar them from the Lords-Supper or their children from Baptism on the account of these scruples To say otherwise were to make it lawful for the Ministers of Christ to reject those whom they have all imaginable reason to beâ—ieve that their Lord receives nay whom he has commanded them to receive Rom. 14.1 Whereas to reject sâ—ch is a heinous degree of Schism and opposite to the great law of Charity and Christian forbearance which Pastors as well as people are concerned in 'T is the very sin Diotrephes is charg'd with 3 Ep. Joh. v. 10. Now if it be unâ—awful to deprive such of external Church-priviledges as in the judgment of rational Charity have a right to them then 't is unlawful to profess our Assent and Consent to a Book which obliges us to thâ—s Uncharitable and Schismatical practice For the Book obliges us to administer the Sacraments only in the manner there prescribed and by the Canons of the Church those Ministers incur the danger of Suspension that do otherwise So that we cannot be Ministers without approving thâ—se Schismatical Conditions of Church-Communion and perhaps excluding the most sober part of a Parish on the account of them Whereas Christian Love forbids us to Exclude such and much more forbids us to Assent and Consent to their Exclusion For the 2d Condâ—tion of the Ministry That Clause in the Oxford Oath wherein we must swear never to endeavour any Alteration of Government in the Church Do's Mr. K think there are no Corruptions in the Government of the Church which if alter'd and reform'd wou'd greatly conduce to the advancement of real Religion Is the exercise of Church-Government by a Lay-Chancellor and the manner of their process in the Spiritual Courts no corruption that needs amendment What when so solemn a thing as the Censures of the Church is manag'd more like a dâ—sign to correct mens purses then either the Errors of their Judgment or disorders of their Practâ—ce and as Dr. Burnet in the life of Bishop Bedel complains That Excommunication had lost all its force as a Spiritual Censuâ—e and was dreaded only on the account of the effects it produc't in Law. And these matters are not since chang'd for the better Is that Discipline by which every particular Church shou'd be as much as possible preserv'd from the infecti n and scandal of notoriously wicked members possible to be exercised by a Bishop or his Lay-Chancellor for a whole Diocess containing 3 or 4 hundred or perhaps as many more particular Churches For Instance Is the Bishop of Lincoln whose Diocess contains in it 1000 or 1100 parish-Parish-Churches capable to calâ— all the scandalous sinners within that vast Precinct to Repentance to examine the crimes alledg'd against them use all the admonitions and reproofs that tend to reclaim them and after due evidence of their impenitency cast them out of Church Communion How many thousands must he have at once in his Court if he exercised Church Discipline as strictly as the H. Scriptures enjoyn or as the Common-Prayer-Book owns it was practised in the primitive Church See Pref to the Commination used in Lent. And does there need any plainer Argument of the impossibility of it then that this Discipline was never actualâ—y exe câ—sed by the Bâ—shops to any purpose nor one scandalous siâ—ner of a thousand in a Diocess ever call'd to Repentance for his notorious crimes or censured for his continuing in them unless it were some scrupulous Nonconformist And does Mr. K. think these things need no alteration If he doth so I would gladly know What Church-Government or Discipline signifies To what purpose then is all this stir about an Empty Name when there is no use to be made of the Thing to the great purposes it 's intended for when 't is not exercised to preserve the honour of Religion by a credible profession of it in particular Churches and to secure those Churches from the pernicious influence of such whom their Haeresies or their scandalous crimes render unfit for Christian Society If these things be gross abuses If the present Church-Government render Discipline impracticable and deprive Parish-Ministers of an essential part of their Office Is it lawful to swear We will never endeavour an alteration of this and that without any limitation signified as in an irregular manner or beyond our particular Sphoere Is it lawful for those who know these to be corruptions which have greatly depraved the Church and dishonoured Christianity to swear they will never eâ—deavour to amend them They might as well bind themselves by oath never to Repent nor Promote the
Just Mart. ibid Constit Apost c. 27. Apost Can. 5 e See Cypr Ep. passim Tertull. Apol. c. 39. and many more in Blondel de Jure plebis c. f See Albasp Observ p. 254 255. g See Tolet de sacerd lib. 5. cap. 4. n. 15. and Pad Paul Sarpi's Tract of Church-benefices translated by Dr. Denton h Constit Apost c. 57. Counc Carth. 4 Can 35 i 1 Phil. v. 1. Clem. Rom Ep ad Cor p 54 55 Pius in Ep Justo Episc Biblioth Patr Tom 3 p 15 Constit Apost c 30 44. k Ignat Ep. ad Smyrn forequoted Constit Apost c. 28 l Albasp Observ p. 254 255. m Ignat. Ep ad Philad forecited Cypr. Ep 40 72 73. The ancient description of a Church is well known Plebs Episcopo coadunata See Dr. Still Iren. p. 416. That the Bishop was chosen by the Suffrages or Votes of the people he took the charge of n and as was said before administred Church-censures in the presence of his Flock whose judgment he consulted o That Presbyters did but sedom preach publickly in the two or three first Ages except in Alexandria or some few Churches that had Presbyters of more than ordinary Learning and Abilities Chrysostom's preaching at Antioch and Austin's at Hippo while Presbyters are noted as unusual That every City had its Bishop is granted by all and Dr. Hammond and Grotius own many had two nay some had more as might appear by many instances were it needful And every Town of any bigness was then called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or City and the number of Christians did not of a long time even in the larger Cities exceed that of our larger Parishes Nor were Bishops confin'd to Cities or Towns for the Countrey Villageâ— where three were any tolerable number of Christians to mâ—ke a Church or Congregation had long their Bishops also who were not put down till Ambition had begun to deprave the Church and for a reason agreeable to the humour of those that did it ne vilescat nomen Episcopi p If we consider the nearness of Episcopal See's of which we read many that were much nearer one another than our Market-Towns perhaps one two or a few more miles distant q If we observe all the small inconsiderable pâ—aces that were the See's of many famous ancient Bishops not half so big as our lesser sort of Perishes r If we consider the vast number of Bishops mentioned within a narrow compass of ground n See Cypr. Ep. 68 forecited and many more testimonies in Baxter's Church-History Answer to Stillingfl from p. 128 to 133. and in Blondel de Jure plebis c. a See Blondel ibid. p Concil Laod. Can. 57. q To give a few instances In Palestine Diospolis or Lydda was but six miles from Joppa Joppa four miles from Janmia Rhinccoruca four miles from Anthedon and Anthedon not three miles from Gaza and Gaza twenty furlongs from Constantia anciently called Majuma So in Egypt Nicopolis was twenty furlongs from Alexandria and Taposiris Canopus Heraclia and Naucratis not much farther from one another and yet all these Episcopal See's r Mr. Thorndike Right of Churches reviewed tells us p. 53. that in Africa Bishops were so plentiful that every good Village must needs be the Seat of an Episcopal Church and the African Church as Dr. Stillingfleet tells us Iren. p. 373. longest retain'd the primitive simplicity and humility Binnius tells us of Sylvester calling together 284 Bishops of which 139 were out of Rome or not far from it A Council of Donatists at Carthage had 270 Bishops as Austin tells us Ep. 68 about the year 308 and yet they were the smaller number and complain'd of Persecution Victor Vtic in Persec Vand. acquaints us that in that part of Africa 660 Bishops fled besides the great number murdered and imprisoned and many toâ—erated The 6th Provincial Council of Carthage had 217 Bishops And to give an instance of later date which we are more capabâ—e to judge of even Patrick is said to have founded here in Ireland 365 â—hurches ordain'd so many Bishops besides 3000 Presbyters Vsher de Eccles Brit. Primord p. 950. If we add hereto the late date of Parâ—hâ—s as distinguished from the Bishops Church The Government of the Cathedrall by the Bishop with the Dean and chapters being a Relict of the ancient Episcopal Government From these evidencies and many more might be added duly weigh'd Wee may easily judge what the ancient Churches and Bishops were A primitive Bishop had no more then one Church or assembly capable of personal Communion under his Charge which he rul d with the joynt concurrence of his Presbyters or Elders The first that set up more Assemblies under one Bishop were Rome and Alexandria and no other Church can be prov'd to have done so for near 300 years nor many Churches for 4 or 5 hundred And even those Assemblies did but long make up one communicating Church and were but to the Bishops Church as Chappels of ease are to our larger Parish Churches But for Diocesan Churches and Bishops 't is evident from these few remarks That they are entire strangers to the primitive Church in its first and purest Ages 'T was only Ambition striving to modell the Ecclesiastical Government by the Civil that first gave rise to them and from the same ambition in the Empire sprung up Metropolitans Patriarks and Popes The last of these long claiming only a Primacy of order among the rest of the Bishops in the Empire for which Constantinople long vy'd with them 't is but of late they have emprov'd their pretensions into a claim of Supremacy over the Catholick Church as the Vicars of Christ And 't is too observable in Church History that as the Seats of Bishops swell'd and their power encreast by engrossing to themselves that work which a score or hundred Bishops cou'd hardly discharge so all true Discipline was gradually disus'd and lost and the Church miserably deprav'd by the corruption of it as well as divided by the Contentions of aspiring Bishops about their primacy and usurped power If you dâ—sire further satisfaction on this head I referr you to Mr. Baxters Treatise of Episcopacy who in the 2d part 5 6 7 ch has given as Satisfactory an account of the ancient Episcopacy as can be expâ—cted of any matter of fact at that distance The few slender exceptions produc't by Dr. Stillingfl in his Vnreason of Seper which yet do not reach the two first Centuries are so clearly invalidated and expos'd by Mr. Baxters Answer to Dr St. p. 100 101 c. and by Mr. Clerkson in his No evidence of Diocesan Churches in Antiq c that I shall take it for granted that Diocesan Bishops and Churches are Strangers to Antiquity and shall look on that cause as desperate and lost unless some of its Patrons cou'd disprove that full stream of evidence he has brought against it from the most ancient Christian writers in the foremention'd
Vindiciae Calvinisticae OR SOME IMPARTIAL REFLECTIONS ON THE DEAN of LONDONDEREYS CONSIDERATIONS That Obliged him to come over to the Communion OF THE Church of Rome AND Mr. Chancellor KING's Answer thereto IN WHICH He no less Unjustly than Impertinently Reflects on the Protestant Dissenters In a Letter to a Friend By W.B. D.D. 3 Ep. Joh. 9 10. But Diotrephes who loveth to have the Preeminence among them receives us not Neither doth he himsâ—lf receive the Brethren and forbiddeth them that would and casteth them out of the Church DVBLIN Printed by A. Crook and S. Helsham Printers to the Kings most Excellent Majesty on Ormond-Key and sold by the Booksellers of London and Westminster 1688. TO THE READER THOV wilt find the worthy Author of this ensuing Tract opposing two persons of a very different Character M M. whose scruâ—les are so mean and so often answered that as they could have little influence in his Change so they deserved no new Consideration The most material of his Questions may be reduced to this Being that the Church of Rome by her usurping shifts propagated her Apostacy to her neighbour Churches how can any of those belong to the Catholick Church if they ceas that Apostacy and regain their former state The answer is easie unl sâ— infection do for ever subject a Church to that Church which infected it Can any man doubt whether the British Churches had equal authority to reform themselves for Christ's sake as they had to admit these corruptions for the Popes sake The other Person is M K who hath needlesly yea to the apparent dammage of his cause bitterly censured the whole body af Nonconformists Whether his novel notions or the unseasonable publication of matters of debates among us be most culpable it 's hard determining The sad consequences were so obvious that great importunity fail'd to encline my undertaking our vindication though the charge against us is great and the proof attempted from mistaken principles But seeing the Author with others judged a reply needful and represented our silence as turned to our reproach I am perswaded to preface the ensuing Book wherin thou wilt find both evidence and candor I shall only hint at what the Book is concerned in and insist on some Criminations the Author overlooks Mr K's excluding us from the Catholick Church can harm us little when he gives us a discription of this Church so entirely Popish and opposite to the joynt testimony of Protestants S. 68 of the Church in a controversy betwixt the Romanists and us The Articles of the Church of Ireland define the Catholick Church in the Creed 4. Bell de Eccl milit lib 3 Cap 2. to be the invisible body of Elected Saints in heaven and earth But all of M K ' s. description is Bellarmines own who strangely confounds a particular Church with the Catholick Church visible out of which particular Churches are formed unless you admit Infidels for Members and into which they are resolved unlâ—ss they cease to be Catholick Members when their Pastors dy or remove Wheras M K. might have known that the Catholick visible Church as entitive is made up of professing Christians and particular Churches are but secondary members of this body as Organical by Aggregation But the Dissenters will deny his charge by further proving that they are subjects to their lawfull Pastors that such are not their Pastors whom he chargeth them with separation from And they can justify their Seperation to be a duty and so no bar to their Catholick priviledg if they had some times been subject to such Yea it 's manifest the Church of England account us within the Pale of the Church by her calling us Brethren departed in the Faith when dead and too oft Excommunicating us when alive His charge of Ecclesiastical Rebellion cannot yet affect us when we think that we justly deny the Convocation to be a fit Representative of all the Pastors in England and not a supreme power over all our Churches yea and suspect a definition of the Catholick Church by such regent Officers as what favours the Vniversal Headship and may well end in the Pope as principium unitatis His positiveness in our duty to be silent when suspended without regard to justice of the ground of it imports he hath forgotten that Casuists generally determin that an unjust sentence bindes not before God or the Church and that Pastors power in the church is not of the same extent as a Kings in the State but under the limits of many more instituted laws But these matters being debated in the book I proceed M K 's Sarcasm against our cant from M M ' s. allusion to a plain scripture p. 13 may call him to suspect what spirit himself is of Luke 9 55. and others of his sort who redicule scripture passages though used in the sence of the spirit that inspired the writers of the scriptures and condemn in us those principles which were the common sence of Protestant Bishops but yet these must be the only Protestant Successors because they keep up the ceremonies tho they despise many important doctrines which they more vallued themselves by Reader thou maist wonder how M K. that affirmeth no ministers may reform no nor preach against the Establisht Church can publish these thoughts of his so repugnant to the sence of the Church and undertake to reform the very Catholick Church by a definition of it so opposite to that his Church hath published He Reproacheth us with the favours we new recieve from men of M M 's perswasion M K. P 39. Reply We thankfully own the Kings Favours without ungrateful enquiries into the grounds of it nor yet doubting but we shall take care not to forfeit what he thinks meet to grant But why should you that dislike an Inquisition grudg us a little ease I believe you are not for blaming the Magistrate when the Rods and Axes are disused Are not the miseries great enough which we have endured at your hands for refusing to sin in doing things which you had nothing but the bare authority of the imposer to plead for But I heartily wish all our hardships so forgoten by us as that they neither abate charity nor prevent union on Christian Catholick terms I confess it 's no small amazement to hear the Prelatists reflect on the present liberty of Dissenters Are we blameable for meeting now we do it with safty when we suffered so much rather than forbear it Can they that have refused Preferments endured prisons reproach and loss of estates for their principles be suspected apt to renounce or betray them for a smile How can these men that t' other day resolved all law into the Kings meer will now brand our meetings as unlawful But this will convince the world that that party will allways Skrew up the point of Loyalty whose Interest the Government pâ—omotes and yet may challenge their own sentiments when the Throne is
method 't is capable of and only take notice of those Answers wherein Mr. K's either Judgment or Charity seems to fail him The 1st Quest proposed by D. M. in his Preface is What is meant by the Catholick Church Mr. K's Answer is 'T is the whole body of men professing the Religion of Christ and living under their lawful spiritual Governors p. 4. There is no doubt he intends this for the description of the Catholick Church here on earth as measured by a judgment of charity and comprising all credible professors of the Christian Religion Here are two characters to distinguish the Members of it Professing the Religion of Christ and Living under lawful spiritual Governors Now that which I chiefly dislike in this description is that this latter mark of the Catholick Church Living under lawful spiritual Governors gives us a Notion of it not only very obscure but too narrow Nor does he find any such mark assign'd either in that Text he quotes 4 Eph. 3 4 5. or in that passage he cites out of St. Augustin And 't is the more necessary to insist on this because every Notion of the Catholick Church which is too narrow is so far schismatical for it cuts off those from their relation to the Catholick Church who are members of it and Mr. K. himself does afterwards apply it to that ill purpose That this Notion of the Catholick Church is too narrow on supposition Mr. K. mean no better than he speaks is hence evident because there are many who are true members of the Catholick Church who live under no Pastors or spiritual Governors at all nor indeed have the opportunity to do so What does he think of many Christians that live in some forreign Plantations where they are not furnish'd with them Nay to propose an Instance much more considerable What does Mr. K. think of all the Protestants who are yet in France and because they will not change their Religion are confin'd to Galleys Prisons or Convents Are all these by the banishment of their Ministers excâ—uded from the Catholick Church Has the French King's Edict so malignant an influence as to cut them off from the body of Christ by depriving them of their lawfâ—l Pastors If so Popish Princes have a very formidable power and Protestants may well dread their Edicts upon a Spiritual as well as Temporal account more than all the Thunders of the Vatican But I fear Mr. K. would scarce allow the Reformed Churches in France to be any part of the Catholick Church if they had their Pastors again if we compare this description of it with other passages in his Answer For this description is very obscure and if I conjecture right Mr. K's Notion of lawful spiritual Governors much more narrow What does he mean by Lawful Spiritual Governors Are they to be estimated such by the Law of the Land or by the Laws of the Church or by the Law of Christ Does he mean such spiritual Governors as are establisht in every Nation by the Authority of the Civil Magistrate If so then the Arrian Bishops when establisht by the Emperors of their opinion were the only lawful Pastors and all that part of the people that adher'd to their Orthodox Pastors ceast to be members of the Catholick Church Then the Popish Clergy in France are the only lawful Spiritual Governors and the Protestants there are no part of the Catholick Church because they separate from them And shou'd the Popish Clergy be establisht in these Kingdoms by Law all that shou'd adhere to their Protestant Pastors even those whom Mr. K. now thinks their only lawful ones wou'd cease to be members of the body of Christ So that the supreme Magistrate might make Pastors lawful or unlawful at his pleasure and make those that are this month members of the Catholick Church cease to be so the next But this is a Principle I wou'd hope fitter for Mr. Hobbs than for Mr. K. to defend Is it then the Laws of the Church that must determine who are the lawful Pastors If this be his Notion of them as his following discourse wou'd incline one to think What Church does he mean whose Laws must determine this great debate If the Vniversal Church I know none can make Laws to oblige all the members of it but Christ himself whom Mr. K. grants to be the only Head of it p. 55. And how shou'd we know the sense of the universal Church in this matter when there has been no General Council these many hundred years nay when there never was any such thing at all The largest Councils that Church-History records being summon'd by the Roman Emâ—erors whose Mandates cou'd not reach the extra-Imperial Churches What is this Church then whose Laws or Judgment must determine who are lawful Pastors Is it every National Church If so 't is a difficult matter to know what that is For unless Mr. K wou'd give such a schismatical Notion of it as the Papists give of the Catholick Church it must include all the particular Christians and particular Societies of such within the bounds of that Nation who profess the true Christian Religion in all its essentials for all true Churches do not profess it in equal purity Such a National Church is not of divine Institution and is indeed only a combination of Churches as united under one Civil Sovereign It s true Notion lyes not in any combination purely Ecclesiastical and Intrinsecal but Civil and Extrinsecal As the true National Church of England unless we will confine the name to a Sect or Party denotes all the Churches in England as united under one King that has a civil Supremacy over them But what if in the same Nation there be a division about some disputable Doctrine as betwixt Lutherans and Calvinists in the dominions of several German Princes or about Church-Government and modes of Worship c. as in these Nations What if the several particular Churches according to these differences in their judgment fix under different Pastors Who are the Church whose Laws must decide this debate about lawful Pastors Is it such an Assembly of the Clergy as our Convocation But what if both Parties have such Assemblys Is it that Party of the Clergy which the Civil Magistrate does establish and not the other then the Civil Magistrate may in Germany make both the Lutherans and Calvinists lawful Pastors and here both the Conformists and the Nonconformists nay and unmake them at his pleasure and so make their Churches a part or no part of the Catholick Church Nay if this be true then in France the general Assembly of the Popish Clergy must determine who are lawful Pastors and were the Protestant Ministers there now for the people to adhere to them wou'd not only be unlawful but what is worse such a Sin as would cut them off from the Catholick Church And does Mr. K. really think so What wou'd they cease to be the subjects of Christ
because they prefer those Pastors who teach his Doctrine and administer his Sacraments and discipline according to the Rules of the Gospel before those who grossly corrupt them and impose those corruptions He must have a very odd understanding that can assent to so senseless not to say so wicked an assertion For this were no better than to set up a point of meer human Order in opposition to the interest of Truth and Holiness I might here instance again in the Arrian Bishops who had not only the countenance of the Emperors but got Imperial Councils call'd General as that of Armini and Syrmium on their side and according to this Principle they were the only lawful Pastors and those that separated from them were no part of the Catholick Church I know not how Mr. K. will like these consequences But he cannot avoid them unless he will say That where there are in a Nation two divided parties of Christians fixt under different Pastors those are the only lawful Pastors who are on the side of Truth in the Points controverted betwixt them whether they have the Civil Magistrates countenance or no. And if he say this 't will follow on the other hand that in those Popish Kingdoms where there are any Protestant Ministers they are the only lawful Pastors and the Popish Churches that live not under them no part of the Catholick Church Nay in those parts of Germany where there are Lutherans and Calvinists if the Calvinists be in the right the Lutherans for separating from the Calvinist Ministers forfeit all relation to the Catholick Church And to add no more if the Non-Conformists be in the right in the matters debated betwix them and the Conformists about Church-Government c. they are the only lawful Pastors and the Prelatical Churches no part of the Catholick Church Or lastly Must the Laws of Christ determine who are lawful Pastors then those are the only lawful spiritual Governors in his Church whose Office he has instituted who have all the Qualifications requir'd 1 Tim. 3. ch 1 Tit. Who are ordain'd to their Office by such as he has entrusted the power of Ordination to where such Ordination can be had and who have the consent of that Flock they take the oversight of If these be the laws of Christ as it were easy to prove if that were deny'd then all Diocesan Prelates must be cashier'd from the number of lawful Pastors unless they can prove their Office instituted by Christ and so must all the Parish-Ministers who want the Qualifications mention'd 1 Tim. 3. or who are impos'd on the people without their consent nay too often against it And if Mr. K's Notion of the Catholick Church be true then all the Churches that live under Diocesan Prelates as their spiritual Governors or such unqualifi'd obtruded Parish-Ministers are no part of the Catholick Church So that if he retract not this new description of the Catholick Church 't is like to fall heavy on his own Party and because I would not be so uncharitable to the Church of England as he is to the Churches of Dissenters I advise him the next time he undertakes to define the Catholick Church to leave out this dangerous mark of it At least he ought to apply this mark to the Papists as well as Dissenters whereas among the Latin Questions The 14th is Whether that be a true Church which has not lawful Pastors And Mr. K. thus answers It may be a true Church witness the Church of Rome which has had so many haeretical schismatical simoniacal ones who were not all lawful Pastors But did there therefore cease to be a Chureh at Rome But I perceive this is a true mark when he would vent his spleen against the Presbyterian Churches at home and abroad but a false or uncertain one when it would unchurch the Papists The best of it is if it be a true mark the Papal and Diocesan Churches are most concern'd in the dangerous consequences of it All therefore I shall add on this Head is a brief Answer to Mr. M's Question What that Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church is which we profess to believe in the Creed Answ We need go no farther for the resolution of this Question than the Text quoted by Mr. K. 4 Eph. 3 4 5. Only I must premise that the Catholick Church in its true extent includes the Church Triumphant as well as the Church Militant nay all the Saints that have been are or shall be on earth to the end of the world see Mr. Claud's Reponse au livre de Mon sr l' Evesque de Meaux c. p. 7 8 9 c. But if we speak of the Catholick Church as militant on earth it must be considered either as measured by the judgment of God which discerns the truth of things from all hypocritical disguises or as measur'd by the judgment of humane Charity As measur'd by the judgment of God 't is according to the fore-quoted Text One body or society animated by one holy Spirit having one heavenly hope subjected to one Lord Jesus believing the same revealed Doctrine as to all necessary Articles and devoted by one Baptismal Covenant to one heavenly Father This Body is call'd Invisible or Mystical from that internal Faith and Holiness which are invisible and 't is also Visible by the external profession of that true Faith and Holiness And this is that Church which we profess to believe in the Creed in which alone we can expect to find the true Communion of Saints And to this Church alone all promises of saving Blessings are made in the holy Scriptures * The judgment of several Fathers to this purpose and particularly St Aug see quoted in that forecited discourse of Mr Claud from p 45 to 68 But the Catholick Church as measur'd by the judgment of human Charity comprizes all that make a credible profession of Christian Faith and Holiness For we are incapable to distinguish the true and living members of the Church from those that only appear to be so And therefore the Catholick Church as estimated by our charity is more large and comprehensive than the real Body of Christ For Hypocrites are no true members of his Body tho mixt with them in the same external Society by their external Profession or as St. John distinguishes they are among them but not of them 1 Joh. 2. v. 19. They are but blasted Ears not the true Wheat they are members of the Church Catholick in appearance not in reality The Church Catholick as measur'd by our charitable judgment is I know commonly call'd the Church-Catholickâ— Visible i. e. the Church Catholick as estimated by an external or visible profession But I wou'd choose rather for avoiding confusion to call it the Visible Church Catholick mixt For the Church Catholick in the proper sense as constituted of its living or as the Schools speak its univocal members real Saints is also Visible because its members not only
the sole power of Church-Government in a Nation and exercise it against the will of Christ to the nâ—torious detriment of souls as by unjust silencing of faithful Pastors when their labours are highly conducive to the Churches good by imposing on the people sinful conditions of Church-communion by obtruding unqualifi'd Pastors on the people against their consent c. To separate from such Bishops so far as to disobey these unjust commands is no separation from our lawful Governors and is no more a Rebellâ—on in the Church than 't is a Rebellion in the State to disobey one that usurps a Power he never receiv'd from the King and which he exercises against the laws and interest of the Kingdom And therefore I would propose these two Questions to Mr. K. in reference to this Head. Q. 1. On supposition the Presbyt's and Indep's have made an unjust separation from their lawful Governors whom they should have submâ—tted to Whether â—his be such a crime as will exclude them from being Catholiâ—k members of the Church To resolve that We must consider the nature of their separation Their Ministers separate from the Bishops i. e. they are not willing to obey them in what they account a sinful and dangerous usurpation viz. the assuming the sole power of Church-Government and depriving the Pastors of particular Churches of an essential part of their Office and suspending them unjustly Their people separate from the Parish-Ministers but 't is not by disowning them as no true Ministers but by refusing to receive them as theirs because they judge they have a right to choose a Physician for their Souls as well as for their Bodies and therefore think not themselves bound to acquiesce in the Patrons or Bishops choice when contrary to their own edification especially when there are terms of Parish-communion impos'd to some unlawful to others greatly suspected and all true Church-discipline is cast out or neglected They separate not from the conforming Churches as no true Churches but as preferring the ordinary communion of purer because they judge the laws about Parish-order do not oblige when injurious to the interest of Religion and Souls Now suppose them mistaken in these matters through the weakness of their judgment will this sort of separation make them cease to be Catholick membeâ—s of the Church 'T is not a separation from any thing Christ has made necessary to the unity of his Church 't is only a separation from some humane order which they dare not comply with because they apprehend it contrary to the laws of Christ And is this to be compar'd to a Rebellion in the State as he is pleas'd to do p. 6. Is the convocation Christ or their Canons equally obligatory as his laws or do those that disobey the Canons of the Convocation because they judge them opposite to the laws of Christ renounce their Allegiance to him as the Head of his Church Are their Canons even about things they call indifferent as necessary to be obey'd as the undoubted Rules of the Gospel by all that wou'd be Catholick members of the Church when those that are requir'd to obey them fear the things commanded are unlawful When I read such expressions as this about Church-Rebellion I cannot but lament the effects of humane ignorance and pride and observe in such as Mr. K. some degrees of that spirit that has acted Papal Councils who made no scruple of treating all that would not pay them a blind obedience with such characters as these And I know no better way to convince Mr. K. of the folly of this Principle I am opposing than by shewing him how pernicious the consequences of it are to his own Party For if this sort of Schism which he supposes the Dissenters guilty of prove them to be no Catholick members of the Church then sure more heinous Schism will prove those to be in the same condition who are guiâ—ty of it Greater Schism is more opposite to Catholick Vnity than lesser But the Prelates are guilty of more heinous Schism than this of the Dissenters supposing it to be Schism and consequently if Mr. K's principle be true are no Catholick members of the Church That the Prelates are guiâ—ty of more heinous Schism I offer this Argument to evince Those who impose unnecessary and and doubtful terms of Church-Communâ—on nay who declare many thousands of true Christians ipso facto excommunicated are greater Schismaticks than those who only scruple those terms tho through mistake and who unchâ—rch not those Churches which they are thus forc'd to separate from For the Schism of the Imposers is more voluntary and curable by forbearing to prescribe such terms of Communion as are more likely to prove engines of Division The Schism of the Refusers is more involuntary and in doubtful cases often incurable And 't is more opposite to Christian Love to excommunicate thousands of sincere Christians than 't is to prefer those Churches which we upon the best enquiry judge more pure before those that seem more corrupt without unchurching them even tho in so doing we should be guilty of some breach of the Churches peace by vâ—olating a tolerable humane order So that all Mr. K. will gain by excluding Dissenters from the Catholick Church on the account of their Schism will be That by the same reason our Convocation were no Catholick members of it and if so I am sure they are no lawful Governors in it For what I have here asserted that the Convocation have excommunicated thousands of sincere Christians and that ipso facto I appeal to their Canons and to the consciences of any that peruse them and know the Nonconformists in these Kingdoms few whereof are not by some of these Canons ipso facto excommunicated See Mr. Baxter's English Schismatick detected who from p. 42. to the 50th recites the particular Canons Nay if all that are guilty of equal Schism with that of the Dissenters supposing them guilty be no Catholick members of the Church I fear there are few such in the World. Sure the Schism of the Papists is of a more monstrous nature who unchurch aâ—l the Churches on earth besides themselves And the Greeks pay them in the same coyn And if other of the Eastern Churches do not unchurch one another they have lost their old wont What dreadful work Councils have made in hereticating and unchurching one another upon very unjustifiable grounds fills up both pages in Church-History And as such were more heinous Schismaticks than those that are guilty only of passive separation i. e. separation occasion'd by mens scrupling the lawfulness of some humane Canons so according to this notion they were no Catholick members of the Church And at this senseless rate we may soon reduce the Catholick Church to a small compass And what would become even of the Christian World if the compassions of our blessed Lord were as narrow as the charity of such censorious Christians The 2d Quest I wou'd propose to
Repentance of others If any say the meaning of the Oath is only that they will never endeavour this by any sinful means or beyond their private sphere Why could not these necessary words be put in And that this dangerous sense was never intended by the Convocation is evident from the 7th Canon where they thus speak Whosoever shall hereafter affirm that the Government of the Church of England under his Majesty by Archbishops Bishops Deans Archdeacons and the rest that bear Office in the same is Antichristian or repugnant to the word of God let him be â—xcommunicate ipso facto and so continue till he repent and revoke such his wicked error They that thus suppos'd nothing in their Government repugnant to the word of God did without doubt intend to bind the inferiour Clergy from all attempts to alter it and so contriv'd this Oath that an Allegiance might be in these Nations sworn to the Bishops as well as the King. For the 3d. viz. Reordination The Divines of the Church of England generally own it unlawful and consequently the imposition of it supposes Ordination by Presbyters a Nullity For such therefore as were so ordain'd to consent to Reordination is to own the Nullity of their former Administrations and cast the basest slurr on a great part of the Reformed Ministry And this reminds me of a passage in the Preface to the Book of Ordination which acquaints us with the judgment of those that compos'd it Viz. And to this intent that these Orders be reverently esteem'd No man shall be accounted or taken for a lawful Priest in the Ch. of Engl. or be suffer'd to execute the Function except he be called according to this form or hath had formerly Episcopal Ordination And this we must profess our Assent and Consent to which he that can do and makes conscience of declaring nothing but what he really believes has either a large stock of ignorance or very little charity as will appear by what is said on the Head about Mission The Authors of that Preface cou'd not but foresee that such Declarations would effâ—ctually choke a great part of the Ministers in England and Ireland and 't is hard to imagine what other design they could have in requiring their Assent and Consent to such passages as these For the Oath of Canonical obedience viz. That the Priests or Deacons will reverently obey their Ordinary and other chief Ministers to whom is committed the Charge and Government over them I suppose 'T is meant of obedience to their Ordinary in what he prescribes agreably to the Canons which are the known Rule he governs by And so we should be obliged to read the sentence of excommunication against all that the Bishop or his Chancellor may according to those Canons excommunicate now he may excommunicate all Nonconformists And we that know them to be men of holy and blameless lives must swear to obey the Bishop by publishing his schismatical sentence I might have added several things more on this Head were it necessary I know some have told the world â—reely that in their Declaration of Assent c. they intend no more than to receive those Books as an Instrument of peace so that they will not preach against any thing contain'd in them as some subscribe even the Articles themselves To which I need only answer 1. It us'd to be acknowledg'd by Prot. Casuists as 't is largely asserted by Bishop Sanderson de Juram That to stretch the words of Laws Oaths and Promisâ—s to meanings different from their common use is sinful and a practice fitter for those that own the Doctrine of Equivocations c. than sincere Christians or good subjects Now if to Assent and Consent to all things contain'd in and prescrib'd by a Book be not an Assent to them as true and Consent to them as good or lawful 't is impossible to understand the sense of those two words And what might not a man in this lax sense declare his Assent and Consent to tho never so much against his judgment provided he did not think himself oblig'd to speak publickly against it That the Parliament never intended that lax sense appears hence That when the House of Lords added a Proviso that the Declaration in the Act of Uniformity should be understood but as obliging men to the use of the Book the House of Commons refus'd it at a Conference about it and gave such reasons against that sense and Proviso to the Lords upon which they acquiesc'd and cast it out 2. Whatever meaning be put on the forementioned declarations and oaths None can exercise his Ministry in the Church of England without denying the priviledges of Christianity to those that have a right to them and without quiting an essential part of his office as Pastor of a particular Church or incurring the danger of suspension for doing otherwise And the Ministers of Christ must not put themselves under such a necâ—ssity of acting uncharitably and schismatically towards his true Members nor thus wiâ—fully maim and deprave their Pastoral office I appeal then to the Judgment of all Whether if these conditions of the Ministry be sinful That Law be just that shall enjoyn them and make mens forswearing themselves necessary to the preaching of the Gospel I am very sorry Mr. K. and some of his Coat should so often necessitate their Brethren to harp on this ungrateful string They pay too great a deference to the Laws of the Land to cast any needâ—ess Reflections on them But men ought not to bear silently the charge of Schism and Church Rebellion who are no way guilty of it Especially when their silence and neglect to vindicate themselves may tempt others who are not acquainted with their case to censure and hate them wrongfully as cloth'd with these odious characters I hope the precedent discourse has evidenc'd the charge to be undeserved and false And therefore whatever expressions seem to grate on the Laws must be imputed to the unhappy necessity put upon them to give a true representation of their case by the virulent accusations of their brethren from whom one wou'd think they might rather expect some pitty I doubt not but the moderate and charitable part of the Conforming Clergy have other apprehensions of their brethren and are asham'd of these passages in M. K's Answer But for those that approve the silencing Laws arraign their Brethren as Church-Rebels for not obeying them and condemn those societies that need and embrace their help meerly on that score as no parts of the Catholick Church even when they exclude not the Popish Churches It will appear I think from this Paper that their Arguments are not so strong as their Passion and a little more charity wou'd advance the reputation of their Intellectuals as well as Morals Such men may long exclaim against our divisions but their own principles and temper are the most insuperable obstacle to the healing of them Having considered the Questions
in the Preface I come to examine the first sett of those in the Pamphlet it self which concern the Mission of the first Reformers and they are by Mr K. reduc'd to these five 1. What Priesthood or Holy Orders had the first Reformers but what they receiv'd from the hands of Roman-Catholick Bishops 2 Who authoriz'd the first Reformers to preach their Protestant Doctrine and administer their Protestant Sacraments 3. Whether Cranmer and his Associates could condemn the Church of Rome by pretence of the Mission they received from her Bishops 4. Whether a Presbyterian Minister having received Orders from a Protestant Bishop can by virtue of such Orders pronounce the Church of England a corrupt Church 5. Whether an Act of Parliament in France Spain or Germany be not as good an Authority for Popery there as in England for Protestancy These are Questions one would think too ridiculous to be seriously propos'd But I am heartily sorry Mr. K. can find no better Answer to them than what he has given which in several passages runs too much on the same wretched mistakâ—s that led D. Manby to offer them with so much confidence And therefore I need say little more to expose them than first state the Controversy about Mission and then apply the true Notion of it to these Questions There is a twofold Mission Immediate or Mediate 1. Immediate Which those had whom God sent to deliver some extraordinary message or some new revelation of his will to men Such a Mission had the extraordinary Prophets under the old Testament the Apostles and Evangelists under the new And these brought some Credentials of their Mission to convince men of the truth of it That immediate Mission is now ceas'd the revelation of the Divine Will being compleated in the holy Scriptures and directions given for the continuance of a Ministry in the Church There is therefore 2. A Mediate Mission or Call to the Pastoral Office. For we are not here concern'd with the office of Deacons I mean that office of Bishops or Elders or Ministers for they are but several names to import the same thing so often describ'd in the holy Scriptures The office contains in it many great and laborious works To teach the Flock committed to their charge be their Guides in publick Worship and rule them by Evangelical Discipline A Call to this Office gives the person call'd authority to do those works and lays on him a personal obligation to do them 'T is from Christ alone that power is deriv'd by which men are authoriz'd and oblig'd 'T is his will exprest in the Gospel-Charter constitutes men his Ministers And all that 's further requisite is to know how he signifies his will concerning this or that particular person being one of his Ministers To that purpose we must consider what Christ has done already in the Gospel-Charter and what he has left for men to do Christ has already determined in the Gospel that there shall be a Ministry in his Church to the end of the World He has describ'd their Office and all the particular works of it as what Doctrine they shall preach what Worship they shall celebrate how they shall rule the Church they oversee and what Discipline they shall administer in it He has left them sufficient rules in all matters of universal constant necessity for performing these works He has describ'd the duties which Christian Flocks owe to such Pastors He has assign'd the qualifications of such Pastors He has made it the duty of people that need the labours of such qualified persons to seek their help and of Ministers to call them out approve and invest them in that Office and of the Civil Magistrate to protect the Worthy It belongs not therefore to any men to appoint any new office in the Church of Christ or maim that Office he has instituted or impose sinful conditions in order to its exercise or impose any other duties on the people than he has done much less does it belong to them to determine whether the Gospel shall be preach'd or the necessities of souls who want such Pastors supply'd All therefore that the Gospel has left to the Ordainers is the Designation of the person to whom Christ's Charter shall convey the power the approbation of his qualifications and the Investiture of him or solemnizing his admittance The Ordainers therefore do not give the power to others as from themselves nor does it pass hrough their hands nor can they diminish it as ex gr should the Ordainers say Receive thou power to preach and admâ—nister the Sacraments but not to rule the Flock Thâ—s restraint or diminution is null as being contrary to the Charter of Christ They are but Instruments of Inauguration as a Recorder that invests a Mayor in that office which the King's Charter gives him And the great design of the Interposition of Pastors in this matter is to secure to the Church a succession of abâ—e and blameless Pastors of which they are supposed most fit to judge Ordination by Pastors is God's ordinary regular way of admittance to prevent the Churches being deprav'd and injur'd by the intrusion of unqualified pâ—rsons And therefore it should not be neglected where-ever it may be had Only it must be added that the law of Christ which determines that the Gospel shall be preach'd by persons so qualified is founded on the necessity of souls and the great law of Charity and therefore is of constant and indispensible necessity in the Church But the command of their being Ordain'd by Pastors is but subservient to the former and relates only to the ordinary regular execution of it and does not oblige where there is a physical or moral impossibility of observing it and yet a necessity of the Ministry For Ordination by Pastors is not of absolute necessity to the being of the Ministry There have been and may be extraordinary cases wherein a man may be obliged to be a Minister without it To instance in two cases What if many Christians should be cast on the shore of some Pagan Nation where they are forc'd to stay a considerable time and one among them be more eminently qualified than the rest to be their Minister the rest entreat his help and will any say that the Providence of God which has given him such abilities does not sufficiently authorise him to exercise them in this case of necessity When the work of the Ministry is of so much greater importance and necessity than that positive precept about the ordering of it Nay to propose a Case far more considerable What if all the preâ—ent Pastors in a Nation should corrupt the Christian Doctrine and Worship and impose those corruptions on the people as terms of Church-Communion What if they refuse to ordain any that will not joyn with them herein The people dare not comply with those terms and because they would not live without the advantages of the publick Ministry and Worship they
invite such to take the Pastoral care of their Souls as are duly qualified that such qualified persons should not accept Ordination on such wicked terms is past doubt But what if they live so remote from any other Christian Kingdom that they cannot have Ministerial Ordination elsewhere Wiâ—l any say that in this case those qualified persons for want of this Ordination ought not to â—â—ke on them the Pastoral charge of those people which God hâ—s given them such abilities for and such a Call by his providence 〈◊〉 To say this were to set up the Rule about the regular ordeâ—ing the Ministry above the ends of the Ministry it self and o◠〈◊〉 circumstances of the Duty to the substance of it Wher◠〈◊〉 â—sitive precepts must always yield to moral and matters or 〈◊〉 order to the end of the Duty ordered and the former must nâ— be pleaded against the latter Ordination by Pastors is noâ— therefore there necessary where it cannot be had without sin and yet without a Ministry the interest of the Gospel and the salvation of Souls are like to suffer the most visible prejudice and detriment For these are matters infinitely more precious and valuable than any Rules of external order and the very end those Rules aim at and are subservient to And if this be not granted it must be left to the pleasure of such corrupt Pastors whether the people who cannot joyn in communion with them shall enjoy the means of their salvation or be obliged to live like Atheists without any publick worship of God. And he that asserts this may next assert that God has left it to their pleasure whether the people shall be saved or damn'd and that 't is better they should be canonically damn'd than uncanonically sav'd I propose these Cases to shew the vanity and falsehood of that Notion some make such a noise about viz The necessity of an uninterrupted succession of Ordination And if that principle be false much more is theirs who assert the necessity of Successive prelatical ordination But tho in such extraordinary Cases The extraordinary call of God's providence is sufficient to authorize a man to the sacred â—ffice and supâ—lies the defect of Ministerial Ordination Yet the command of God which enjoyns such Ordination does oblige where it may be had and the neglect of it wou'd bring great confusion and disorder into the Church and expose it to the danger of being corrupted and divided by unqualâ—fied Intruders The only thing that remains to be consider'd under this Head is Who are entrusted with the power of ordination Or whom has Christ appointed to approve and invest others in the Ministerial office Answ Those are entrusted with this power and appointed to this woâ—k Who are themselves such Bishops or Elders or Pastors as the holy Scriptures describe He that denies this is oblig'd to acquaint us what other Officers the Apostles left in the Church to whom this sole power of ordination was entrusted then or what other officers claimed and exercised it in the primitive Church Which none that I know of ever pretended to do But now those whom the holy Scriptures call Bishops or Elders were the stated pastors of particular Congregations That the same persons are in Scripture call'd Bishops and Elders is too palpable to be denied However the Authors of the Preface to the Book of Ordination are pleased to say the contrary viz. That 't is evident to all men diligently reading the holy Scriptures and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these orders in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons as several offices and even this palpable mistake among the rest we are required to declare our assent to Those who are 20 Acts. 17. called the Elders of the Church of Ephesus are commanded v. 28. to take heed to all the Flock over whom the holy Ghost had made them overseers or Bishops The description of a Bishop 1 Tim 3 ch and of an Elder 1 Tit. are the same And Titus when directed to ordain Elders must see that they be blameless for a Bishop must be blameless as the Steward of God v. 6 7. That these Bishops or Elders were Pastors of single congregations is evident from the Duties enjoyned them towards those under their care and from the Duties which the Flocks are required to pay them They are to labour among the people and admonish them And the people were to know and esteem them highly in love for their works sake 1 Thess 5 12 13. They were to rule their Flock speak the word of God to them and to watch over their Souls as those that must give an account 13 Hebr. 7 17 24. They were to take heed to all the Flock over whom the Holy Ghost had made them overseers 20 Acts 28. Wherein the Apostle proposes his own practice while he stay'd among them as their temporary pastor for their imitation viz That he taught them publickly and from house to house and ceased not to warn every one with tears day and night 20 Acts 20 31. v. They were to bee ensamples to the Flock who were to follow their Faith considering the end of their Conversation 1 Pet. 5. v. 3 compar'd with Heb 13.7 They were to visit the sick and pray for them James 5 14. see Dr. Hammond's Annotations on these places applying them to Bishops Now let us consider whether these mutual duties betwixt Pastor and Flock were to be performed betwixt the Pastor or Pastors of a single congregation and the congregation committed to their care or betwixt a Diocesan Bishop and so vast a Flock as his Diocess That one or more Pastors of a single congregation associated for personall communion are capable of performing these duties to their Flock and their Flock to them is past all doubt But can these mutual Duties be perform'd betwixt a Diocesan Bishop and his Diocess Is he capabâ—e of labouring amongst them in word and being esteem'd of them highly for his Works sake when very few comparatively of his Diocess ever saw him or heard him preach Can he watch over the souls of all in his Diocess as his Flock and warn them of their evil courses when he knows not one of them in many score thousands Can the Diocess follow the Faith of such Bishops and consider the end of their conversation and propose them as their patterns when not one in many thousands know any more of the life of their Bishop than if he lived at the other end of the World Are such Bishops obliged to visit the sick of their Diocess Can they rule them by the exercise of Church-discipline against the notoriously scandalous when perhaps there are forty or fifty thousand such in their Diocess Can they use all the due process of serious reproofs and perswasions that are requisite to be uâ—ed for reclaiming such sinâ—ers when there is so vast a number of them and those so remote in their habitations and the Bishops wholly
and therefore when any of them embrac'd the Reformation when they begun to preach the Gospel more purely and to celebrate divine Worship more free from the idoâ—atrous and superstitious mixtures that had prevail'd in the Roman Church they restor'd their Ministry to its true use and so far purg'd it from that wretched depravation And in this debate Mr. K need not be asham'd to defend either Luthâ—r or Calvin or Zuinglius For S cinus or hâ—s followers they can produce no Mission to preach against the Divinity and satisfaction of the Son of God no more than D. M. to preach uâ— the worship of Images or Invocation of Angels and Saints or Adoration of the Host c. For the 3d and 4th Qu. I shall joyn them Whether Cranmer and his Associates could condemn the Church of Rome by pretence of the Mission they received from her Bishops If so whether a Presbyterian Minister having â—eceived Orders from a Protestant Bâ—shop can by vertue of such Orders pronounce the Church of England a corrupt Church 'T is evident both these Questions are founded on this ridiculous fancy that the person Ordained is obliged to conform his Ministrations to the judgment or humour of the Ordainers 'T is true indeed if in any Church the Ministers that are Ordained be obliged to subscribe a Confession of Faith or observe any publick Rules in their Worship they ought not to be Ordain'd on these terms if they think any thing in the Doctrine of that Church or the Ruâ—es of its worship contrary to the Doctrine of Christ or the Gospel Rule of Worship Much less should they enter into that obligation with a design to break it afterwards This were odious dissimulation But if any have been Ordain'd in a Church that has obliged them to subscribe certain Articles of Faith and Rules of Worship which at their Ordination they had no scruple against and shall upon deeper study find many of those Articâ—es were gross and dangerous Errors and those Rules of Worship idolatrous or superstitious they are not obliged to preach those Errors or practice those Rules against the dictates of their own conâ—cience Nay if those errors and corruptions endanger the salvation of their Flock they ought to preach against them and warn souls of their danger And not to do this is to betray those souls to desert the cause and testimony of Christ and fail of that fidelity he expects in the discharge of their office They ought to do all in their sphere towards a Reformation and if they should be suspended for the doing that which Christ has made their duty the suspension is unjust and null as being opposite to the laws and interest of Christ and is indeed a Rebellion against him If therefore the Doctrines and Worship of the Roman Church were pernicious and endangered the salvation of souls and our Reformers had just ground to account them such they were bound by the laws of Christ to preach against them and warn the people of them and in their sphere attempt a Reformation Nor would any suspension or excommunication of those Popish Bishops that Ordain'd them justify their deserting their Ministry and betraying the interest of Christ and souls And they might do this without assuming any Authority over the Church of Rome they only refused subjection to her unjust impositions And so may Presbyterian Ministers refuse subjection to the sinful impositions of those Prelates that Ordain'd them and are not obliged to lay down their Office when ever their Ordainers shall unjustly silence them as we proved before But Mr. K. I perceive likes not this Answer and therefore chooses to justify the Church of Engl. upon narrower grounds And therefore in his Reply to these Questions 1. He grants that A Presbyter or Bishop ought not to preach against the Constitution of the Church whereof they are Members 2. He asserts This was not the Reformers Case and therefore he founds the lawfulness of the Reformation entirely upon its being made by the Convocation in whom he supposes the supreme Church-Government lodged in this Nation Had Mr K. only argued that the Reformation in England was not only lawful but effected in the most regular way with the concurrence of the Civil Magistrate upon the advice of so considerable a part of the Clergy none could have blam'd him for taking in all the considerations that prove the Reformation in England to have been the most unexceptionably regular and orderly But that in his eager zeal to defend the Prelates of the Church of England in silencing their brethren he should make such a Concession to the Papists as may be used against the Reformation elsewhere with so great advantage was not ingenuous But we must excuse him that he had rather wound the Reformed Churches abroad than not gratify his spleen against the Presbyterians at home and car'd not whom he made Schismaticks provided he fastned that character on his Brethren Let us therefore examine this Concession of his p. 27. A Presbyter or Bishop ought not to preach against the Constitution of that Church of which they are members The reason he gives is Because there is a regular way wherein they may endeavour a Reformation viz. If they find any thing amiss in her Doctrine or Discipline they may make their application for the redress of it to those that have power to reform it but must not presume being subjects to uâ—urp their Governors power But what if their Governors refuse to reform and silence those that desire or in their own sphere attempt it All the answer is But if such a Bishop or Presbyter be censur'd and suspended he is thereby discharg'd from the execution of his Office and he must no more make a Schism to regain it than one must make a Rebellion in the State to regain a Civil Office. This we urge and I think with reason against the Presbyterians and other Sects among us that either have no Ordination or appointment to their Offices from the Church of England or Ireland or else abuse the power against her which was once given them by her and from which they are again legally suspended And as we urge this against them so likewise against D. M. c. Let us briefly consider the Consequences of this Concession and the grounds of it 1. Its Consequences The first Protestant Pastors in France and most other parts of Europe were before the Reformation members of those Churches where they lived and subject to their Governors they had received Ordination by the hands of Popish Prelates God was pleased so to bless their studies and search after truth that they begun to discover abundance of gross and pernicious errors in the Doctrine and a wretched mixture of Idolatry and Superstition in the worship of the Church they lived in What should they do they were but particular Presbyters and therefore should not according to Mr. K's principle preach against the Constitution of the Church which gave
them their Office. Many of them try'd his remedy they represented these things to their Ecclesiastical Superiors as Luther to the Archbishop of Mentz and the Bishop of Brandenburg and the Pope himself But they soon learnt by dear experience how averse the Court of Rome was to any Reformation and how little it was to be expected from the Prelates who either had no will or no courage to attempt a Reformation against the will of the Pope Luther and all his followers in stead of prevailing with those that had the conduct of the Church were excommunicated as Hereticks Now according to Mr. K's principle these Reformers being censured and suspended by the Prelates to whom they were subject were discharged from the execution of their Office and should no more have made a Schism in the Church to regain it than one must make a Rebellion in the State to regain a Civil Office. And since they did not desert their Office but went on to preach against the Constitution of the Romish Church and the will of their Superiors the Popish Prelates they were no better than Schismaticks and Church-Rebels Nay if his Notion of the Catholick Church be true the people that separated from the Popish Prelates and adher'd to their excommunicated Pastors ceast to be members of the body of Christ And how great a part of the Reformed Churches and their Pastors fall under this heavy charge And will Mr. K. own all these unavoidable consequences upon mature deliberation What if we should once more have a Popish Convocation in England and these should restore the Romish Religion and suspend aâ—l the present Parish-Ministers whom Mr. K. thinks now lawful Pastors According to his Principle they being but Presbyters and the Bishops Subjects must not preach against the Constitution of the Church of England declaring her judgment by a Convocation in whom the supreme Government of the Church is lodg'd they must therefore cease their Ministry and no more make a Schism by the exercise of it than they must make a Rebellion in the State to regain a Civil Office. Nay to separate from such Governors of the Church of England will prove those that do it no Catholick members of the Church The same principles may be apply'd to the Arrians who got Imperial Councils and consequently the Government of the Imperial Church into their hands and for such Pastors as Athanasius to preach against Arrianism which was then the Doctrine of the Church was Schism and Church-Rebellion In a word According to these Principles 'T is in the power of a Convocation to damn many thousand souls by suspending an Orthodox and substituting a corrupt Ministry and for those Orthodox Pastors when suspended to endeavour their salvation by the exercise of their Ministry is to be Schismaticks and Church-Rebels And what is this less than to set up the will of such Church-Governors above the will and laws of Christ above the Salvation of Souls and above the Interest of Truth and Holiness Therefore 3. Let us examine the Grounds of this strange Assertion viz. Because there is a regular way for reforming abuses And for particular Presbyters to do it against the will of the Bishops whose Subjects they are is like reforming abuses in the state in spight of the King a remedy generally worse then the disease c. Answ 1. All that these reasons prove is that Reformation shou'd be first sought by humble addressing to our Superiors But Mr. K. plainly leaves it impossible if they refuse 2. They are founded on this wretched mistake that the Authority of Bishops in the Church does resemble that of a King in the State and so to reform abuses in the Church against their will is like reforming abuses in the State in spight of the King. Whereas t is Christ's Authority in the Church that does resemble the King 's in the State. And therefore if he wou'd rightly state the comparison it runs thus Christ the King of his Church requires all his Officers to preach the pure Doctrine and administer the pure institutions deliver'd in his Gospel which is his universal law Let us suppose there are in this or that particular part of the Church dangerous corruptions crept in The law of Christ obliges these his officers to disown them and reform them but the Major part of these will not but presume to silence those that do it according to his command Now the Quest is whether those that obey the command of Christ be the Rebells against him or those that neither will obey his commands themselves nor allow others to do so One wou'd think that such as refuse to reform and silence all that in their own place attempt it according to the tenour of their Commission are like to prove the Church Rebells But no doubt the Pastors of a Church may disown and excommunicate one that abuses his office to the perverting the Church and for him to continue to p rvert the Church by such male-administration is to Rebell against Christ and his laws The charge of Rebellion therefore must arise from the vioâ—ation of Christ's Authority not mens which the Major part of Pastors may be guilty of in a Nation as well as the lesser 3 He seems to confound a private and a publick Reformation 4. The Reason given why a Bishop or Presbyter when censur'd is discharg'd from his Office viz. Because to regain it is like making a Rebellion to regain a Civil Office does suppose two great mistakes 1. That the Ordainers give a Spiritual office in the Church as the King gives a Civil office in the State And this is no less a mistake then to set the Ordainers in the place of Christ T is his Charter gives the sacred office as the King 's does the Civil and the Ordainers do but for orders sake approve and ceremonially invest the person as the Recorder does the Mayor of a Town whom the Burghesses choose And herein Mr. K. seems to own that very error which is the ground of all Mr. M's impertinent Questions 2. He supposes that the Bishops who ordain Presbyters have equal power to depose them from their Ministerial office as the King has to take away a Civill Commission And thus p 27. he teâ—ls us That the present Dissenters were the Bishops subject accountable to them as their Superiors and liable to be discharg'd from their office and the benefits of the Communion of the Church by their Censure Whereas T is plain that it is the Charter of Christ gives the sacred office as the King 's does the Civil And as none can take a Civil Commission given by the King to any Subject but by the King's orders and Command So none can take away that spiritual Commission Christ has given any officer in his Church but by his orders But now he has given none leave or Authority to depose his officers but for evident Male-administration as preaching Heresie gross scandal c. And if in any part
of his Church The Major number of Pastors shou'd depose the Minor for doing their duty or without a just cause their doing so is a bold and wicked usurpation for which they may expect their Lord will call them to an account as he threatens the evil servant who unmindfull of his Lord 's coming begun to smite his fellow servants 24. Matth. 48 49 But for the innocent Pastors thus wrongfully deposed to disobey their usurping deposers is to obey Christ who never warranted them to desert their office and bâ—tray Souls because they are unjustly forbidden to do what his charter has made their duty 'T is therefore the unjust deposers are the Rebells against Christ and their usurpation is as if the Mayor of a County town shou'd without any orders from the King presume to turn out all the Mayors of the particular Corporations in that County at his own pleasure and I imagine the King wou'd in all probability take him for the Rebell who wou'd thus under pretence of his Authority usurp a power never given him and exercise it to the violation of his Charter and the Laws of the Land. This is the true state of the Case and Mr. K's mistakes about it are so palpable that 't is a wonder how a man of his judgment cou'd fall into them And I must needs add here that as the Dissenters were never the Bishops Subjects as they are any officers of Christ and Mr. K will never prove them to be so So they will be more afraid of submitting to their usurpation if they arrogate to themselves such an unlimited power of deposing his undoubted officers particular Church Bishops and claim a blind obedience to their deposing Sentence be it right or wrong And 't is but fidelity to our Lord to disown such palpable and dangerous usurpation The grounds then of Mr. K's principles being false they will not serve him to condemn the Presbyterian Ministers as either Schismaticks or Church-Rebels and the charge is likelier to faâ—l heavy on those that presum'd to suspend them against the known laws of Christ from whom they received their Commission Mr. K. very gravely takes for granted what he will never prove 1. That the Convocation are by the laws of Christ the Supreme Governours of all the Christians in England 2. That either the Convocation did justly according to the laws of Christ suspend the Nonconfâ—rming Ministers or that an absolute obedience was due to their Censure whether just or unjust 1. He takes it for granted That the Convocation are by the Laws of Christ the supreme Governours of all the Christians in England Does not Mr. K. know that the Divines of his own Church are not agrâ—ed about this matter The Reverend Dr. Stilling when posed by Mr. Baxter about this Quest Who was the Ecclesiastiâ—al governing Head of the Church of England as one body politick Uureas of Seper p 127 128. does very fairly deny that the Church of England has any such Head or Regent part nay denies the necessity of such an Head. So that according to him the Church of England can be no Politicall Church made up of a Governing and a governed part And consequently all the noise of it's Government Constitutions and Laws as such a politicall Church is at an end But now Mr. K. comes and tells us without Scruple That the supreme Government of our Church has always been in a National Councel or convocation of our Clergy If so I wou'd gladly know whether Mr. K does think that the laws or Canons of a Convocation wou'd obâ—ige the Consciences of all the Christians in England tho they were not enacted and ratified by the civill Authority If they wou'd nor 't is evident that the Church of England has no Ecclesiastical Head of Government because none that can make laws obligatory to all the Christians in England And so the Convocation are but the King 's Ecclesiastical Council which is indeed the true Notion of them to advise him what Laws he shall establish by civil Authority relating to Church Government If he say the Canons of the Coâ—vocation wou'd oblige whether the civil Authority ratified them or no I ask Quo jure All obligation to obey any Church-governors as such must arise from the command of Chrisâ— Now where has he commanded that in every Nation such a small part of the Clergy as our Convocation consists of shall be supreme Governours of all the rest When perhaps they are as unfit to represent the judgment of all the Pastors not to mention the people in England as â—he Council of Trent all the Churches in Euroâ—e I am confident besides the 2000 silenced Ministers the far greater part of the Conforming Clergy would never have consented to all the late excommunicating Canons had thâ—ir Vote been requir'd And the chief members of the Convocation are so far from being Christ's Officers that I despâ—ir thâ—ir ever defending the lawfulness and much more the divine r ghâ— of their Office against Mr. Baxter's Arguments in his forâ—said Treatise of Episcopacy Neither the light of nature nor general laws of Scripture wou d suggest such an Assâ—mbly as the governing Head of the Church of England A duly â—l cted Synod of Pastors in a Nation to endeavour the nearest Unity and Concord of the particular Churches as far as 't is to be expected on earth by their amicable consultations we grant to be most desirable and eligible wherever it may be had and the judgment of such a Synod should be comply'd with in all things not râ—pugnant to the word of God. But we cannot say so of an Assembly compos'd chiefly of men whose Office is not only an Usurpation but such as renders true Church-government impossible and whose interest and grandure inclines them to keep up the divisions and corruptions which they have made And to such a Convocation's being entrusted by Christ with the National Church-government which Mr. K. is pleased to assert I oppose the judgment of the truly learned Archbishop Vsher which he often profest to Mr. Baxter viz. That Church-Councils are not for Government but for Vnity Not as being in order of Government over the several Bishops but that by consultation they may know their duty more clearly and by agreement maintain Vnity and to that end they were anciently celebrated 2. Mr. K. takes it for granted also That either the Convocation did justly according to the laws of Christ suspend the Non-conforming Ministers or that those Ministers were bound however to obey their sentence whether right or wrong For the first If he will indeed prove their silencing to have been just i. e. that the Non-conforming Ministers were guilty of such male-administration as forfeited their office and warranted the Prelates by the laws of Christ to depose them I will assure him they will quit their office rather than rebel against Christ or any just deposing sentence of men But I have already prov'd the sentence to be unjust And
these debates with deep regret that I am put on so unhappy necessity not only of opposing Mr. K. but saying so much against the present Church-Goverment in order to the Vindication of the Reformed Churches both at home and abroad and the Truth it self But as these principles I have here reflected on have been the fatal Engines of Church Tyranny and divisions these many Ages and belong to the Roman Arsenall so t is the necessary work of a Peacemaker who proposes a Catholick Unity and Love as his great aim to batter them down I had not so long delay'd the sending this paper but that I still hoped some abler pen would have undertaken what mine is so unfit for However I hope I have asserted nothing contrary either to Truth or Peace or if I have I am willing to receive better Information I am Sir. Your most humble c. A POSTSCRIPT THe person to whom the Letter was address'd desiring me to publish it I thought it requisite upon a review of it to add a few things relating to some passages in it The opposition of Mr. K's Notion of the Catholick Church to the Articles of the Church of Ireland and the agreeableness of mine to them is observ'd in the Preface To what is said about Mr. K's mark of the Catholick Church viz. living under lawful spiritual Governors I add that this renders the relation of all true Christians to our blessed Lord as his members as questionable as the title of the Pastor under whom they live and consequently exposes their right to all the benefits of the Gospel even to the Kingdom of Heaven it self to the same uncertainties and doubts as the regularity of his Admission to his Office. And if those ancient Canons repeated in so many Councils be of any force which declare all Elections of the Clergy by Magistrates or without the consent of the people void what a desperate case has almost all the Christian world been in ever since the old way of Elections was alter'd Nay the Church of England it self where the Bishops are chosen by the King and Parsons by Patrons is in a miserable plight So severe is this mark of the Catholick Church on those for whose secular interest Mr. K. seems to have calculated it and so over-favourable to those whom he design'd to exclude from the Catholick Church by it For what is said on behalf of all the Reformed Churches p. 11 c. It is not intended to include the Socinians who deny an essential Article of the Christian Faith the Deity of Christ and all the Doctrines of his Satisfaction c. that depend on it Against Mr. K's Notion of the Supreme Government over all the Christians in England being lodg'd in the Convocation touch'd on p. 57th I add this Argument ad hominem The General-Assembly in Scotland have equal pretensions to the Supreme Government of all Christians in that Nation as the Convocation has in England Now if the laws of the Convocation would oblige the Consciences of all the Christians in England as the laws of the Church whether ratified by the Civil Authority or no then the Acts of the General Assembly in Scotland have the same force there Now that General Assembly which sat there in the year 1639. whose Acts were also ratified afterwards by King Ch. the First in person present in his Parliament there abolisht Prelacy and set up the Presbyterian Government there The Prelates were according to Mr. K's Principles discharg'd from their Office and since they regain'd it not only without the allowance of any General Assembly but against the Acts or Laws of all that sat there since they were therein guilty of Schism or Church Rebellion Mr. K's Notions are as unmerciful to the Bishops there as to Presbyters here So little does he regard where those envenom'd darts may fall which he levels against his Dissenting Brethren The Contents of the Letter MR. M's 1 Quest in the Preface What is meant by the Catholick Church Mr. K's Answer consider'd and evidenc'd to be obscure narrow and consequently schismatical and dangerous from p. 2 to p. 7. The true Answer to that Question p. 7 8 9 10. Mr. M's 2d and 3d Questions Mr. K's Answer enlarg'd to make it more Catholick and comprehensive p. 10 11. Mr. M's 4th Quest Whether by the Catholick Church be meant the variety of all Protestants since they deny her essential mark Vnity The true Catholick Answer proposed p. 11 12 13. Mr. K's Answer to that Question consider'd His three marks of the Catholick members of the Church examin'd His first Embracing the Catholick Faith allow'd His second Living in Charity with their neighbour Churches excludes the Papists Mr. Dodwel and himself and a great part of the Christian world in the present and former Ages His third mark Making no separation from their lawful Governors founded on his schismatical Notion of the Catholick Church Two Questions propos'd on that Head. 1. Whether the separation of the Presbyterians c. supposing it to be sinful will exclude them from being Catholick members of the Church That it does not prov'd from the nature of their separation being only a breach of humane Vnity The contrary Assertion excludes the English Convocation the Papists and the greatest part of the Christian Church in every Age from being Catholick members c from p. 16. to p. 20 2 Vpon what grounds does Mr K assert that the Presbyterians have made a sinful separation from their lawful Governors Some difficulties propos'd on that Head That the Presbyt Ministers are lawful Pastors to the Churches under their oversight prov'd from p 21 to p. 30 The Q's in the Pamphlet about Mission The true Notion of Mission stated The Authority and Obligation of Pastors to the duties of their Office derived from Christ's Charter The use of Pastoral Ordination It s absolute necessity to the being of the Ministry disprov'd The power of Ordination belongs to scriptural Bishops Such Bishops prov'd to be the Pastors of single Congregations not Diocesses from Scripture and Antiquity The Ordination of Presbyt Ministers at home and abroad hence vindicated from p. 38. to p 48 These promis'd Mr. M's 1 Qu. What Priesthood or holy Orders had the first Reformers but what they received from Rom. Cath. Bishops Answered p 48 49 His 2 Q. Who authorized the first Reformers to Preach their Protestant Doctrine and administer their Protestant Sacraments Answered and retorted on the Church of Rome p. 49 His 3d and 4th Q's Whether Cranmer and his Associates could condemn the Church of Rome by vertue of the Mission derived from her Bishops If so whether a Presbyt Minister having received Orders from a Protestant Bishop can by vertue of such Orders pronounce the Church of England a corrupt Church Answered p 50 51 Mr. K's Answer examined His Concession to D. M. That a Bishop or Presbyter ought not to preach against the Constitution of the Church he is a member of and if he be censured or suspended he is discharg'd c. consider'd The consequences of it pernicious to a great part of the Reformed Churches and to our own had we a Popish Convocation The grounds of it absurd and false The silenc'd NC Ministers not chargeable with Schism or Church-Rebellion the charge more likely to fall heavy on the unjust silencers unless Mr K. can prove both the divine right of the Convocation to be the Ecclesiastical Head of the Church of England and the equity of their silencing sentence from p 51 to p. 59 5 Q Whether an Act of Parl c Answered p 59 60 Some general Remarks on the rest of Mr K's Answer p. 60 61 62 Reflections on the whole from p 62 to the end A Postscript FINIS ERRATA PAge 7 l 21 r Arimini To line 24 add And not the Catholick Church as visible or as measur'd by a Judgment of Charity as the Papists assert and Mr K with them contrary to the stream of protestant writers on that Controversie p 9 l 15 after commandment add an c p 23 l 30 r 7th v p 40 l ult r prelacy p 59 l 28 r 5th Q p 63 l 17 blot out a