exceed the limits of one particular Congregation yet they never intended it as against the reformed Churches Now you know the saying Authoris aliud agentis parva est authâ—…ritas But shew us where ever the old non-conformists as against the reformed Churches held so It will appeare by Gerson Bucerus and by the practise of the reformed Churches in Geneva and Holland for which Mr Robinson so objects against them in his Apologie that though they were against the government of Bishops and Diocesan Churches that is of a head Church over many Congregations united to it yet not of a particular Church of such a City consisting of many particular Congregations And as for that you take for granted by all that there should be severall Elders in every Congregation it is denied you For some Divines as Danaeus and Cartwright as I remember hold it not necessary for every small Congregation in villages but for Cities and more populous places to which the lesser villages being conjoyned have the benefit and support of all the Elders and Ministers in the exercising of government As for that you say Others of them calling the combination of Churches Ecclesiae ortae but particular Congregations Ecclesiae primae as wherein firstly the power and priviledge of a Church is to be exercised that others was Mr Parker who in his Politia Ecclesiastica gives us this distinction and was the first who brought it up as ever I read of who differing from Mr Baynes and other non-conformists and most Divines of the reformed Churches in the subject of the power of the keyes giving it to the body of the Church agreeing therein too much with you no wonder he called particular Congregations Ecclesiae primae But as he was mistaken in the first receptacle and subject of the power of the keyes so he might be in his distinction of Ecclesiae primae and ortae For the first Churches namely that of Ierusalem Rome Ephesus with others were not particular Congregations but Churches consisting of many Congregations severall meeting places some preaching in one place and others in other places but governed by the Elders in common which City Churches were the first Churches still first planted by the Apostles and particular Congregations in villages were Ecclesiae ortae the City Churches in this sence being the mothers and the particular Congregations rather the daughters the full proofe and demonstration whereof I referre to a tractate I intend about the nature of the visible Church But by what I have answered upon this head the Reader may observe there is not all granted which you tooke for granted from the Reformed Churches and the Non-conformists and what is yeelded slowes from another spring and is upon another ground writing against Diocesan Bishops quite another controversie but otherwise even when Non-conformists have come to write against the separation and upon the nature of a visible Church as Mr Ball a they hold the contrary And for learned men of other Churches even when they writ against Episcopacie yet they were farre from holding that a particular visible Church was only a particular Congregation as Gersom Bucerus in his answer to D â— Downham A particular Church is any companie of beleevers conjoyned in the observation of holy ordinances and united to one Presbyterie keeping their meetings in one or more places For the number of Parishes in which they meet is a thing accidentall being nothing at all to the essence of a particular Church And even the Non-conformists you speake of as it appeares by the wary expressions your selves use of them namely infallibly and necessarily doe even give the cause For that is as you imply the Non-conformists in their answers could not denie but probably the number of beleevers were so numerous as to exceed the limits of one particular Congregation in those first timâ—…s though not infallibly and rationally though not necessarily Now in points of externall order and government which depend upon the story and circumstances of time and place how many things are there practised but of presumption though not of certainty and though they cannot be infallibly and necessarily proved so as to stop all mouthes and all that the wit of man can possibly finde out yet if the things asserted can be but probably proved upon better reasons then the contrary we may encline to that as to the safer part How many practises and tenents have you in your Church-way that cannot be infallibly and necessarily proved but stronger answers may be and are given to the reasons you bring for them then any the Non-conformists could give to that instance of the Church of Ierusalem and yet you hold to your principles for all that and it is a rule hath been pleaded by some of you that in things of that nature where the Scripture is not expresse but holds them out most probably though not infallibly and necessarily yet we ought to encline to that As for Mr Baynes answer though directed against Diocesan Bishops and Diocesan Churches to that instance of the Church of Ierusalem it is no whit satisfactorie nor concluding to any man who is of another judgement as the Reader may reade in the 15. and 16. page of the Dioces Tryall To the 3d particular under the first head namely what you allow and grant about a Church and the Government that you could not but imagine that the first Churches planted by the Apostles were ordinarily of no more in one Citie at the first then might make up one entire Congregation ruled by their owne Elders that also preached to them and that you could not but judge it a safe and an allowed way to retaine the government of your severall Congregations for matter of discipline within themselves to be exercised by their owne Elders c. In way of answer I must first complaine of your old fault the slippery and uncertaine expressions used in the relation of what you owne and allow about a Church in those phrases the first Churches ordinarily and at first I demand the reason of you why you put in ordinarily and at first was it not because you fore-saw the Church of Ierusalem and some few others recorded in the New Testament though not in the first Chapter of the Acts and at the beginning yet would at last by the 8. of the Acts and Acts 21. amount to more then could meet in one Congregation and therefore you exprest it so Is this faire dealing or what other reason can you give for using such doubtfull expressions the question is not betweene you and us whether all the Churches and most of the Churches or whether at first and in the beginning of them they consisted of no more in one City then to make up one Congregation but whether the Scriptures in the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles be it first or last sooner or later gives any patterne or example of
Churches allow particular Congregations such an entire and compleate power to be exercised by the Elders within themselves and wherein not such a particular Narration would have carried in the face of it some ground for the defference of their practise and allowance might have served to have pointed out the differences between your way and theirs But secondly As you relate the way and discipline of the reformed Churches it sounds somewhat harsh and strange that their practise should be one way and their judgements another their practise to governe each particular Congregation by a combined Presbyterie of the Elders of severall Congregations united in one for government and yet in their judgements to allow especially in some cases a particular Congregation and entire and compleate power of jurisdiction within it selfe Doe they practise one way and allow another way or doe they hold both wayes the wayes of God or what is it you meane in this Narration of those Churches or can it be meant in the same sense and acception to practise one thing and yet allow another or will you make the lesser matters practised in their particular Churches by their own Elders to be the same with some cases wherein they allow particular Congregations an entire and compleate power of jurisdiction within themselves Now the latter namely in some cases cannot be meant for then this last part is no more then the first neither can your words of an entire compleate power of jurisdiction in the particular Congregations be meant of smaller matters but of the greatest matters in some cases You shall doe well in your reply to english these lines about the difference of the reformed Churches practises in greater matters and their different judgements in some cases and shew us in what sense they meane it and whether it can be properly and truly alledged for your case of entire and compleate power in your Congregations Thirdly This which you here relate of the reformed Churches practise and allowance is fallaciously set downe and for your own advantage meerely to make out this third principle that you still chose to practise safely namely what the reformed Churches allowed and acknowledged warrantable onely they superadded Presbyteriall combinations whereas the reformed Churches doe not as you well know in the case and question controverted between them and you allow particular Congregations in a Kingdome and nation conceiving the reformed Religion to have an entire and compleate power of jurisdiction within themselves what may be in some of their books in extraordinary or speciall cases where there is but one particular Congregation in a Countrey or the like that is nothing to the point in hand it being laid for a common ground by them all that every particular Church in a Nation or Kingdom is not to be left to it selfe but that there is a necessity of a common nationall government to preserve all the Churches in unity and peace And to cleare the reformed Churches of France Holland Scotland from what you say they allow I doe not find in their books of discipline and platformes of Church government by which we must judge of their judgements nor in their practises that they doe allow an entire and compleate power to be exercised by the Elders of every Congregation alone either in the making or ordaining of Ministers or in deposing their Ministers or in drawing up a forme of doctrine worship and discipline for themselves they allow power of admonition suspension from the Lords Supper and of taking up lesser differences by the particular Eldership and if I forget not the Churches of France only practise excommunication by the Elders in particular Congregations without carrying it at first higher but then if we consider that in those Churches of France their Elderships goe upon certaine fixed rules in there excommunications laid down in their books of discipline who if they proceed otherwise are liable to censure themselves and their being appeales to Synods and Assemblies and all being carried in reference and dependance to Assemblies the case is very different now if the Churches of your way and communion in old England and in New would yeeld to have a government fixt and setled by Synods and Assemblies establisht also by the Magistrates upon which Rules and Orders they should proceed in the way of making Ministers and that such errors in doctrine and such evill manners ought to be the subject of excommunication and then agree upon appeales to Synods and Assemblies then there would be lesse dangâ—…r in such an entire and compleate power in particular Congregations To the second particular under this first head namely what some of the old non-conformists grant placing the power of excommunication in the Eldership of each particular Church untill they doe miscarry and then indeed subjâ—…cting them to Presbytâ—…riall and Provinciall Assemblies and that it could not be infallibly prooved that any of the Churches recorded in the new Testament were so numerous as necessarily to exceed the limits of one particular Congregatïon And that both the Ministers of the reformed Churches and our non-conformists all granted that there should be severall Elders in every Congregation who had power over them in the Lord I answer as followes For Mr Cartwright you not quoting which of his books you have reference to and so not knowing which to turne to to find out what you assert of him I shall not deny it but as for Mr Baynes Diocesans Tryall which is the only booke I ever heard of wherein he handles these points he doth in the third question give the Ecclesiasticall power and the exercise of it to a united multitude of Presbyters in which booke howsoever as intending his booke against Diocesan Bishops and Diocesan Churches to whom all Presbyters and Churches stand in subjection and subordination he pleads against them for the power of the particular Elders in the severall Congregations yet as against the reformed Churches practise namely of a Presbyteriall Church consisting of many particular Congregations and ruled by the Elders of severall Congregations combined he pleadeth not but expressely in answer made to those two objections from the Churches and Elders where there is a co-ordination and a communiâ—…y in government as in the Low Countries and at Géneva he grants the thing contended for against your Congregationall way even before miscarrying and shewes thâ—… great difference between the Diocesan government and the Presbyteriall in severall particulars and answers your objections which you commonly make of a forraigne extrinsicall power And for your better satisfaction reade and compare together the passages in these pages of Mr Baynes Diocesans Tryall page 21 page 11. What is meant by a Diocesan Church and in the 12th page two first conclusions agreed in and in the 16th page And for the non-conformists in their writings against the Episcopall government and Diocesan Churches though they put the Bishops their adversaries all they could to it to make them proove infallibly and necessarily a particular Church to
by what I have answered already both of the weakenesse of that ground a sudden and unexpected noyse of confused exclamations and that in all reason you could not but expect exclamations that you were not enforced by that to make this Apologie and to anticipate the discovery of your selves Being schollers and understanding men you may blush to write that such poore things should inforce you against your resolutions but you were willing and desirous to make such an Anticipation and so you would make and find some ground for it judging a sorry excuse better then none at all but however you were not inforced to anticipate yet I must tell you this Aoplogie is an Anticipation with a witnesse such an Anticipation both for the unseasonablenesse of it and for the manner and way of it as I judge no story nor age can paralell it That you could not stay a little longer but in such a time when we need so much the assistance of our brethren of Scotland and the help of all other Reformed Churches in the face of the Parliament Assembly and Kingdome to put out such a peece and to doe such an act as this is beyond all example and I will but represent to your selves and the reader in a third person what you have done in making this Apologeticall Narration and then leave you to give sentence Suppose any other five Members of the Assembly men as considerable as your selves every way both for piety and learning nay any twenty Members of the Assembly had at the same time when you put forth this Apologeticall Narration only presented a bare Narration of a Government different both from the Government by Arch-bishops Bishops c. and from the Presbyteriall to both Houses of Parliament and that without reciting their doings and sufferings or pleading their great merits or without casting any aspertions on Presbyteriall government and the Reformed Churches and should have peremptorily concluded as you doe in two severall pages viz. 22 and 24. That we doe here publikely professe the true Government to stand and consist in the middle way betwixt that which is called Episcopall and Presbyteriall What would you five have thought of this and how think you would this have been taken by the Houses of Parliament and by the Assembly Whether would not you five and some others of you have cry'd out of this as a most strange fact and have strongly moov'd and aggravated it with all your might that this affront both to the Parliament and the Assembly so contrary to the nature and end of this meeting to pre-judge and pre-determine a Governement might be censured with a suspension from the Assembly at least if not an utter expulsion As for the discovering of your selves by this Apologeticall Narration which otherwise you should have left to time and experience This booke is not only a little discovery of your selves but a mighty discoverer of your wayes and spirits and shewes us what we may judge of you who will put out in publike a piece so fallacious and untrue as this will appeare to be But how ever this is the first discovery of your selves in this way with all your hands subscribed yet we have had a discovery of you for some yeeres past both in your practises of withdrawing from our Publike Assemblies and in gathering and constituting separated Churches preaching also often on the points concerning your Church-way as also writing Letters and other Manuscripts about â—…ose matters with other wayes wherein time and experiâ—…ce of 7 or 8 yeares last past hath been sufficient discoverers and sure judges of you and your actions And now we shall begin to make some appearance into publike light unto whose view and judgements should we that have hitherto laine under so darkâ—… a cloud of manifold mis-apprehensions at first present our selves but to the Supreame judicatory of this Kingdome which is and hath beene in all times the most just and severe tribunall for guiltinesse to appeare before much more to dare to appeale unto and yet withall the most sacred refuge ánd Asylum for mistaken and mis-judged innocence 'T is strange that having kept out of publike light as you say all this three yeares space you could not forbeare a little longer from telling fine stories of your selves and publishing your particular private opinions in print Especially considering there was an Assembly of Learned Divines of which you are Members to declare unto and with whom you might debate the points in difference where also you know you have all freedome and just respect And I must tell you 't is the judgement of some of your good friends that you were much mistaken in the time now and that you had been farre more excusable if you had put out this Apologeticall Narration a yeare or two agoe they interpreting it a violation of the Orâ—…nce by which you are Members a high affront and contempt to the Assembly in pre-judging of it and such a preingaging of your selves and party as you cannot retreat so easily and with that honour as you might before As also a ground of much disturbance and prejudice with the people against what shall be determined by the Assembly As to that you say we now begin to make some appearance into publike light In a sense'tis true for all the time that you have beene in your Church way both in Holland and England you have carried things closely and conceal'd all that you could possibly your opinions and practises with the grounds of them from your brethren the Ministers who studied and understood the points But for tender conscienced and weake Christians especially such whom you had any interest in any wayes and you had any probability to gaine to you you have not been wanting either in letters of Invitation or cominending some books of the Church-way to them as also by preaching and conference to draw them to you As for that quere Unto whose view and judgement should we at first present our selves but to the Supreame judicatory of this Kingdome I answer 1. To any rather then to the two Houses of Parliament to present before them such a darke covert doubtfull un-true Relation 2. In these points of difference about Church-government and worship you should have presented your selves rather to the Assembly than the Parliament and if you consult the Ordinance by vertue of which you are Members you will find it more conformable to have first propounded your doubts to the Assembly and if the Assembly could not have satisfied you then afterwards you had an allowance of giving in your Dissents with the grounds of them to both Houses As to that passage Your having hitherto laine under so darke a cloud of manifold misapprehensions which you make the ground of first presenting your selves to the Parliament by this Apologie How does this agree with what you write in page 24 And we found many of those mists that had gathered about us or were rather cast
halfe slight late and partiall remedy to the offences and scandall relate the story more at large and then make some queries upon it and your solemne practise thereupon and then I shall leave it to the Reader to judge whether your principle of submission be comparable to the way of the combined classicall Presbyteriall government The Church in which this offence fell out was at Roterdam of which Mr Bridge and Mr Ward of Norwich old loving friends and both flying upon the same cause Bishop Wrens Innovations were the Ministers and the Minister deposed by the Church was this Mr Ward who for appearing and siding against Mr Bridge in some particulars and for his preaching of Sermons in the Church at Roterdam which he had preacht before in his Church at Norwich and for his giving too much heed to the reports of simple people and old wives tales was thus deposed but I cannot so fully cause the Reader to understand matters without relating the first difference between Mr Bridge and Mr Simpson the true ground and rise of this latter offence Mr Simpson one of the Authours of this Apologeticall Narration after some time of beholding the order and way of this Church at Rotterdam desired to be admitted a member and was upon his confession c. received in but not long after what were the true reasons he best knows he disliked some persons and things in that Church and he stood for the ordinance of prophesying to be exercised in that Church that the people on the Lords dayes should have lâ—…berty after the Sermons ended to put doubts and questions to the Ministers c. and he was troubled at a ruling Elder in that Church brought in by Mr Bridge which belike had more power and bore more sway then himselfe who as Mr Simpson in a Letter to a Minister in London complaining of the difference between him and Mr Bridge writ how that Elder was in that Church over all persons and over all causes but Mr Bridge opposed Mr Simpsons prophesying upon so the rationall grounds of inconveniencits as himselfe told me the story which were too long to relate yet he yeelded so farre that the Church should meet on a weeke day and then they should have that liberty but this would no way satisfie Mr Simpson whereupon the difference increased and there were sidings but Mr Bridges power was the greater to carry things in the Church and so Mr Simpson would abide no longer but quitted that Church though he had no Letters of dismission from that Church and with the help of a woman whom Mr Bridge called telling me the story of things between them the foundresse of Mr Simpsons Church set up a Church against a Church consisting but of five persons at the most in the beginning whereof the woman and her husband were two but this Church of Mr Simpsons increased as being extolled for a purer Church and for more ordinances but Mr Bridges Church was cried downe for ould rotten members and for the want of prophecie and so the fire of contention and difference grew more and more between Mr Bridge and Mr Simpson and their Churches Now Mr Ward Mr Bridges colleague sided with Mr Simpson stood for prophesying and though Mr Simpson had left that Church yet Mr Ward in that Church was for Mr Simpsons way whereupon by occasion of that and for exercising his gifts no better but to preach his old Sermons he had formerly preacht at Norwich and believing of tales giving so much way to reports he was deposed by that Church Amongst 17 or 18 Reasons of Mr Wards deposition a godly learned Minister who had seen them in writing told me these were the most materiall And now upon Mr Simpsons rending from the Church and setting up a Church against a Church under Mr Bridges nose and upon Mr Wards deposition from his Ministery and Mr Simpsons Church increasing in fame and number but Mr Bridges decreasing and some others rending themselves away and upon wicked reports raised about Mr Bridge there grew that bitternesse evill speakings deep censurings deadly feauds amongst these Ministers and their Churches as never was more betwixt the Iews and the Samaritans Mr Bridge confessed to me there were no such sharpe tongues nor bitter divisions as these Letters from all three were sent into England both into City and Countrey against each other Mr Simpson dispacht many Letters into England against Mr Bridge as to Mr M. Mr B. Mr H. Mr R. c. and Mr Bridge against Mr Simpson Mr Bridge and Mr Ward writ many Letters one against the other particularly to Norwich and among other many sharpe Letters were sent to a D of Physick about the differences and upon their comming over into England they told sad stories for themselves and each against other Mâ—… Bridge laid these bitter differences and reports so to heart that they were a great meanes of her death and whether Mr Bridges weaknesses and distempers were not occasioned by the divisions and the wicked scandalls unjustly I beleeve raised upon him as well as by the aire of Rotterdam Mr Bridge knowes best And thus much for the particular relation of the scandall and offence that fell out in that Church of Rotterdam as it hath been related to me from good hands from some who have lived in Holland and as I had part of it from Mr Bridges own mouth and some of it from Letters of Mr Simpsons written into England and from other men of credit who have seen Letters and relations written from thence Now from the relation of this story and your practise upon it I shall propound these queries which will give some light to judge whether there was any sufficiency in your course to remedy and redresse things amisse in Churches and betwixt persons offending 1. Whether your Churches did agree upon and tye your selves to this principle of submission and the sentence of non-communion at your first setting up and comming into that place of exile or did you first acknowledge it and were willing to submit upon the occasion of the scandall of Mr Wards deposing and that great clamour upon it both in Holland and England 2. Whether did you then or doe you now acknowledge that principle of submission to all other neighbour Churches as well as to them of your own way as namely to the Presbyterian Churches those English Churches at Amsterdam Hague Utrich c. and would you have submitted to those Churches to have so proceeded upon offences and differences amongst you 3. How long was it was it not for the space of betweene a yeare and two that Mr Ward stood deposed and laid aside from his Ministery and maintenance before he was restored and if so was not this a late remedie and iâ—… it so in Presbyteriall government 4. When and at what time was this principle of sâ—…bmission and your solemne practise both of â—…equiring the Church offending to give an account with their châ—…arfull submitting
your brethren being of two distinct Churches and communions you setting up new because you cannot continue in the old with them and certainely men of one and the same Church and communion differ lesse among themselves then persons of a Church and communion set up against that Church but least from this passage your followers should make use to tax the Ministers of our Church who have desired Reformation with inconstancie and going according to the times and your selves make use of it to defend your running so farre in your way the Ministers differing farre more from themselves within this three yeares past then you doe from them I must propound this to prevent those consequences namely that most of your brethren both of the Assembly and of other parts of the Kingdome differ little from themselves in judgement from what they held three yeares past or many yeares past namely might they have had their desire and could their votes have carried it they would have voted out Ceremonies government by Arch-bishops Bishops c. this Lyturgie and Service-book and though they now practise not many things they did before but forbare yet some things are forborne as being matter of offence among the people and other things as having been an occasion of much hurt in the Church and now there being so open a dore for a full Reformation they doe labour after the best and follow what they judge most for edification now not condemning all their former practises especially considering those times unlawfull and sinfull And withall to consider us as those who in these former times for many yeares suffered even to exile for what the Kingdome it selfe now suffers in the endeavour to cast out and who in these present times and since the change of them have endured that which to our spirits is no lesse grievous the opposition and reproach of good men even to the threatning of another banishment and have been through the grace of God upon us the same men in both in the midst of these varieties And finally as those that doe pursue no other interest or designe but a subsistance be it the poorest and meanest in our own Land where we have and may doe further service and which is our birth-right as we are men with the enjoyment of the ordinances of Christ which are our portion as we are Christians with the allowance of a latitude to some lesser differences with peaceablenesse as not knowing where else with safety health and livelihood to set our feet on earth For my part I wonder with what face you can write this And withall to consider us as those who in these former times for many yeares suffered even to exile and bring it as an argument to the Parliament to consider you the more namely to grant you a toleration All the answer I shall returne is that the Parliament and Kingdome shall and may doe well to looke upon you and consider you instead of many yeares suffering even to exile as men who voluntarily went into another Countrey nigh at hand to live safely out of gun-shot and there lived richly plentifully and freely whilest other godly Ministers lived here in continuall feares dangers tossings suspensions attachments and consumptions of their estates It is strange that men should be so farre partiall as to frame an argument and make account the more to be considered and favoured for flying away and deserting the Cause in the open field Suppose some Captaines and Souldiers in the Parliaments service should put up a petition to the Houses forasmuch as they left the rest of the Army in distresse and withdrew in the day of battaile and never returned till the enemy was put to the worst and the battaile turned therefore they would be pleased to afford them an exemption from common taxes c. and vouchsafe them some speciall priviledge what would you think of such a motion the application is obvious you deserted the Cause and in as much as in you lay hazarded all and yet are not content with this to come in upon the victory and divide the spoiles with those who helped to winne the field to enjoy the prime Lectures and places in and neare the City both of note and profit with all respect and countenance from Parliament and City but you would have Peculiars and enjoy such a way as should shut out all in comparison an unreasonable request and a strange instance for all posterity if it should be granted For our parts many of us who bore the heate of the day stood to it and ventured breaking and undoing many times over request no such favour nor exemption but to take our lot in common with the Kingdome and Ministers in things established and I know no reason that upon any considerations either extrinsicall or intrinsicall you should be considered above the godly Ministers of the Church of England I know and could give many to the contrary but besides that I have before fully spoken more then once how little there is in this argument of yours so often inculcated of exile and suffering to exile the cause here rendred by you of your suffering even to exile namely for what the Kingdome it selfe now suffers in the endeavour to cast out is not true nor proper For however the Kingdome now suffers for casting out the Hierarchie and some corruptions in worship and for a Reformation according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches yet your suffering unto exile was not for that for which the non-conformists more forward then you suffered but your leaving the Kingdome was to enjoy the Church way without which we suppose you will not be contented though Ceremonies Episcopacie and Lyturgie be now cast out by the Kingdome as the fruit of all their sufferings but if Presbyterie be setled and Independencie may not be tolerated you will goe away the second time and may be call that exile and banishment too As for your enduring in these present times and since the change of them that which to your spirits is no lesse grievous the opposition and reproach of good men by which you would further perswade and move the Parliament to allow you a Toleration let me minde you that I beleeve in no age five men practising and acting as you have done contrary to the Judgement of all the Churches and of the Ministers your brethren and that to the sensible disadvantage of the publique Reformation ever met with lesse opposition and contradiction of good men and as for reproach none at all I will not reiterate what I have formerly expressed in pag. 226 227. but it is beyond all president the silence compliance respects faire carriage you have been entertained with from the Ministers and good men neither Luther that eminent servant of God and excellent Instrument nor others could finde the like in their time from the Ministers differing from them and therefore the complaint is very groundlesse and to