particular Congregations to which he gave full Power and Authority to govern themselves distinctly and Independent of all other Churches But where have they Authority for this Opinion Where do they find that Churches were limitted to particular Congregations not in Scripture for there is no tolerable Proof that the Churches planted by the Apostles were of this Nature 'T is possible at first there might have been no more Christians in a City than might meet together in one Congregation But where doth it appear that when they multiply'd into more Congregations they made new and distinct Churches under new Officers with a separate Power of Government of this Dr. Stillingfleet says he is well assur'd there is no mark or Footstep in the New Testament or the whole History of the Primitive Church If they will follow the plain instances of Scripture they may better limit Churches to Private Families than to particular Congregations for of that we have a plain instance in Scripture Rom. 16. 3. 5. Col. 4. 15. in the House of Priscilla and Aquilla but not a word of the other And if they wou'd keep to these plain instances of Scripture they might fully enjoy the Liberty of their Consciences and avoid the Scandal of breaking the Laws But the Scripture is so far from making every Congregation an Independent Church that it plainly shews us the Notion of a Church was then the same with a Diocess or all the Christians of a City which were under the Inspection of one Bishop For if we observe the Language of the Scripture we shall find this Observation not once to fail that when Churches are spoken of they are the Churches of a Province As the Churches of Judaea 1 Thess 2. 14. The Churches of Asia 1 Cor. 16. 19. Of Syria and Cilicia Acts 15. 41. Churches of Galatia 1 Cor. 16. 1. Gal. 1. 2. Churches of Macedonia 2 Cor. 8. 1. But when all the Christians of a City are spoken of it is still call'd the Church of that City as the Church of Antioch the Church at Corinth the Church of Ephesus c. So that it seems plain from the Testimony of Scripture that Churches were not limitted to particular Congregations unless they will say that all the Christians in the largest of these Cities mention'd in Scripture were no more than cou'd conveniently meet in one Congregation which shall be shown to be otherwise hereafter But suppose we shou'd grant that the Apostolick Churches were Congregational as 't is plain they were not what then that might have been from the Circumstances of Times or small number of Christians in those Days must it therefore follow that they must always continue so Why do they not wash one anothers Feet as Christ did and commanded his Apostles to do the same * And if they must keep so precisely to the Practice of those Days why does any of their Ministers marry a Second Wife For St. Paul says plainly Let Bishops and Deacons be the Husbands of one Wife 1 Tim. 3. v. 2. 12. So the first Civil Government was by God's own Institution over Families they may by the same Rule think themselves bound to overthrow Kingdoms to bring things back to God's first Institution From whence it appears how ridiculous that fancy of theirs is That the Scripture is the only Rule of all things pertaining to Discipline and Worship and that we must stick so precisely to the Letter of it and to the practice of those Days as that 't is not lawful to vary from it in any little indifferent Circumstance for the sake of Publick Order or Conveniency But as this notion of Congregational Churches does not agree with the words of the New Testament so neither does it with the Judgment and Practice of the Primitive Church For by the ancient Canons of the Church it appears That the Notion of a Church was the same with that of a Diocess which comprehended many Congregations or Parishes See Canons Nicen. 6 15 16. Constant c. 6. Chalcedon 17. 20. 26. Antioch c. 2. 5. Codex Eccles Africae c. 53. 55. Concil Gangrae c. 6. Concil Carthag c. 10 11. And thus much as to the first Objection against the Constitution of our Church as differing from those of the Congregational way and therefore not of Christ's Institution The Second Objection against the Constitution of our Church is That our Diocesaâ— Churches and Bishops are unlawful For say they 'T is making a new Species of Churches and Church-Government without God's appointment For says Mr. Baxter according to Christ's Institution no Church must be bigger than that the same Bishop may perform the Pastoral Office to them in present Communion And so he will have threâ— sorts of Bishops by Divine Right First General Bishops that in every Nation are over many Churches Secondly Episcopâ— Gregis or Ruling Pastors of Single Congregations which are all true Presbyters Thirdly Episcopi Praesides which are the Presidents of the Presbyters in particular Churches This is Mr. Baxter's Notion of Bishops But others are not of his Mind and will allow of but one kind of Bishop and such they make the Pastor of every Congregation But that both these Notions of Episcopacy are false will appear For that First 't was an inviolable Rule in the Primitive Church that there must be but one Bishop in a City though 't were never so large for our Saviour having left no Rule about Limits the Apostles follow'd the Form of the Empire planting in every City a complete and entire Church whose Bishop as to his Power and Jurisdiction in Ecclesiastical Matters resembled that of the Chief Magistrate of the City the Presbyters that of the Senates and the several Churches the several Corporations So says Dr. Still in his Mischiefs of Separation p. 237. and quotes Origen c. Cels l. 3. and Dr. Maurice in his Def. of Dioces Episcopacy p. 377 c. affirms the same and proves it at large And as far as the Territories of the City extended it self so far did the Diocess of the Bishop extend for the Church and the City had but one Territory But though this be a thing agreed upon by most Learned Men of all Persuasions that there was but one Bishop in a City in the Primitive Church yet because some may be so hardy as to deny this I will appeal to the Practice of the African Church for which Mr. Baxter Dr. Owen and the rest of the Dissenters express an esteem above all other Churches 'T was an inviolable Rule among the African Churches that there must be but one Bishop in a City though never so large and populous See Cod. Eccl. Africae c. 71. And at the famous Conference at Carthage between the Catholick and Donatist Bishops by the Command of Constantine the Emperor who was become Christian the Rule on both sides agreed was but One Bishop in a City or Diocess See Conference of the First Day And if there cou'd have been more than
of Alexandria and the Territories belong to it for he says Ap. p. 781 802. Maoretis is a Region belonging to Alexandria and all the Churches there are immediately subject to the Bishop of Alexandria But because Dr. Owen Mr. Baxter Mr. Cotton and the rest have made choice of the Church of Carthage in Africk in St. Cyprian's time to make their appeals to Dr. Stillingfleet to avoid all Cavils as he tells us has chosen that very Church to be decided by as to the Episcopal Government now in dispute between us And therefore first he proves that there were a great number of Presbyters belonging to the Church of Carthage at that time and therefore not likely to be one single Congregation And this he proves out of St. Cyprian's own Epistles in his Banishment Particularly in his 5th Book Ep. 28. he complains that a great number of his Clergy were absent and the few that remain'd were hardly sufficient for their Work And that these Presbyters and the whole Church were under the particular care and government of St. Cyprian as their Bishop appears by his own words Lib. 3. Ep. 10 and 12. to the People of Carthage he complains to them of his Presbyters that they did not reserve to their Bishop that honour due to his place for that they received Penitents to Communion without Imposition of Hands by the Bishop c. And in his Epist 28. he threatens to Excommunicate those Presbyters that should do so for the future And all the other Bishops gave their approbation to St. Cyprian for so doing And the same St. Cyprian in his 3 Book Ep. 65. tells them that a Bishop in the Church is in the place of Christ and that Disobedience to him is the occasion of Schisms and Disorders See more fully concerning this matter in Dr. Stillingfleet's Mischiefs of Separation p. 228 229. c. And now since Dr. Owen Mr. Baxter and the rest have agreed to appeal to the Church of Carthage we must suppose they allow no Deviations in that Church from the Primitive Institution and what that was then any one may judge And St. Augustine was another Bishop in the African Church he was Bishop of Hippo Regia the Diocess of which extended at least Forty Miles as appears by St. Augustine's own Epist 262. 'T is true the African Church came most near the Congregational way of any other the Diocess being smaller by reason of the many Sectaries there the Donatists and many others And that is the Reason Mr. Baxter and the rest express so great an Esteem for it But that their Bishopricks were much too large to serve either the Presbyterians or Independents turn and that they never allowed more than one Bishop in the largest Cities sufficiently appears by what has been said And in the African Code there is a Canon that says expresly no Bishop shall leave his Cathedral Church and go to any other Church in his Diocess to reside there See Codex Eccl. Africae c. 71. Which shows that the Bishops Territories and Jurisdiction extended into distant Places from the City as well in the African Churches as in others I shall only add to this that Calvin look'd upon it as a Thing out of dispute among Learned Men that a Church did not only take in the Christians of a City in the Primitive Times but of the adjacent Country also See Calv. Instit l. 4. c. 4. n. 2. But though there were never more than one Bishop in a City in the Primitive Church * v. Conc. Eph. Part 2. Act. 1. yet some Bishops have had Two or more Cities in their Diocess Timothy was Bishop of Farmissus and Eudocias Athanasius was Bishop of Diveltus and Sozopolis And there have been some Bishopricks that have had no City at all in them but only Villages for there were some Countries that had no Cities in them so have we at this Day Bishops in Ireland and Wales that have no Cities in their Diocess But it cannot be prov'd that the Jurisdiction of the Bishop and the extent of his Diocess was confin'd to any single Village So far from that that by the Canon of Sardica VI. all the Bishops Assembled at Sardica agree That it shall by no means be lawful to Ordain any Bishops in Villages or small Cities that the Dignity of a Bishop may not be contemptible from the meanness of the Place But says Mr. Clarkson and the rest The Apostles Ordain'd Elders in every Church and then Mr. Clarkson names the places to wit Antioch Iconium Lystra and other Villages and these Elders or Presbyters they will have Bishops But first I say That during the Apostle's days the names Bishop and Presbyter were commonly used the one for the other but not after as shall be show'd hereafter and therefore these Elders or Presbyters here spoken of may be as well taken for ordinary Presbyters or Priests as for Bishops But allowing these Presbyters were Bishops what advantage will it be to them for first it does not appear that the Apostles confin'd their Authority to those places but the contrary is evident and unless they can prove this it will not serve their turn But Secondly these Cities over which the Apostles appointed Elders were large Cities at that time by much too great to come together in one Congregation Iconium was then a Metropolitan and had many other Cities under it And the rest were all large Cities But before I conclude this point I must make one Observation and that is That Mr. Clarkson to prove that a Bishop of a City had no more but one Congregation undertakes to shew how small some Cities were but 't is remarkable he quotes for his Authority some Author who speaks of them long before there were any Bishops and because they might have been small places then will needs have them to be so in the days of the Apostles which is very ridiculous for under the Roman Emperours both the Roman and the Grecian Cities were at their height and did very much surpass both for their magnificence and number of people any that have been before or since nor is this to be wonder'd at since our Cities do now stand upon much narrower Foundations as to their constitution our Cities have seldom any Liberties half a mile beyond their Walls and are generally but an Assembly of Trades-men whereas the Roman Cities had each a Territory as it were a County belonging to it which was under the jurisdiction of the City Magistrate and the Citizens were the Lords of the adjacent Country I have now shew'd that the Government of the Church by Diocesan Bishops is agreeable to the practice of the best and purest Ages of the Church and to the Judgment of the wisest and holiest Fathers of it And that their Power and Jurisdiction was as absolute and extended as far or farther than any Bishops this day in England I shall shew hereafter that Episcopal Government as now settled in England has
Switzerland during the Persecution of Queen Mary By which Letters it appears that several of the Clergy who had been beyond Seas upon their return Home did endeavour to Perswade Queen Elizabeth to let the Matters of the Habits for the Clergy c. fall Particularly Sands afterwards Archbishop of York Horn afterwards Bishop of Winchester Jewel and Grindal But Grindal in one of his Letters to Bullinger says They were all resolved to submit to the Laws and to wait for a fit opportunity to reverse them And he laments the ill Effects of the Opposition that some had made to them He also thanks Bullinger for the Letter he wrote to justifie the lawful Use of the Habits c. And in fine they all allow'd the lawfulness but not the fitness of them and that they ought to submit to the Law till it shou'd please God to reverse it lawfully See Burnet's Travels p. 51 52. But though the wiser sort among them did not think fit to proceed to actual Separation from the Church upon the account of those indifferent things yet some there were of a more fierce and turbulent Spirit who had not Patience to wait God's leisure but either a Reformation must be made presently according to their wild Notions and the Queen and Parliament must tack about immediately to their Pleasures or else to your Tents O Israel They will set up Churches of their own and forsake us utterly as a Superstitious and Idolatrous Church not fit to be communicated with And thus began our unhappy Divisions in the Church of England I shall not trouble my self to trace this Matter through the Reigns of Queen Elizabeth King James the First and King Charles the First nor to show how they daily increas'd and grew wider Nor the many Sub-Divisions and Scandalous Breaches that were daily made among themselves ever since the beginning of Separation As between Brown and Barrow Brown and Harrison Barrow and Johnson Johnson and Ainsworth who all left England to gather Separate Churches to themselves in the Low-Countries But scarce had been well there till they fell out all among themselves one Man and his Company being accurs'd and avoided by the other and his Followers and the one Church receiving the Persons excommunicated by the other till they became ridiculous to Spectators and at last some of them were glad to return into England This Matter has been so fully related by Dr. Stillingfleet in his Mischiefs of Separation p. 51 52 c. that 't were needless here to repeat it I shall only take notice that ever since King James the Second's Accession to the Crown the Church of England had laid aside all thoughts of Controversie with the Dissenters in hopes that they wou'd have joyn'd for their common Safety with them in stopping the Inundation of Popery that was ready to break in upon these Nations and swallow them both up But while most of our Eminent Divines of the Church of England as Dr. Tillotson Dr. Stillingfleet Dr. Burnet Dr. Comber Dr. Sherlock and the rest were imploy'd in writing against the Incendiaries of Rome the Dissenters our Brethren instead of assisting us were making themselves ready for War with us as appear'd soon after For when God Almighty had happily plac'd King William in the Throne a Convocation was immediately call'd in hopes that some Terms of Accommodation might have been Agreed upon between us And which in all probability wou'd have taken Effect if the Dissenting Ministers had been as forward as we for how much inclin'd our Clergy were to a Reconciliation notwithstanding the Aspersion laid on them by the Dissenters of their having no such Design does sufficiently appear by several of their Writings See Dr. Tillotson's Sermon Preached at the Yorkshire Feast Anno 1679. Pag. 28. And Dr. Sherlock's Sermon before the Lord Mayor Nov. 1688. See likewise the Petition of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other Bishops for which they were committed to the Tower And see the Articles recommended by the Archbishop of Canterbury to all the Bishops within his Province And Dr. Stillingfleet's Preface to his Mischiefs of Separation By all which it sufficiently appears how desirous they were for a Reconciliation But instead of listning to any such thing does our Dissenters break forth into open Acts of Hostility and at that very time when we were actually Treating of Accommodation with them do they Publish several of their Books one upon the back of another in which they endeavour nothing less than the total Overthrow of our Church by pretending to prove That the Constitution of our Church is New and Unlawful and that our Worship is Idolatrous and Sinful Had this been at a Time when their way of Worship was not tolerated or ours impos'd on them with Penalties they had been the more excusable Or had we began to expose their Extempore way of Praying as we might easily have done but at such a time as that was to become the Aggressors was ungrateful as well as unseasonable But now since the Dissenters have thought fit to revive the Controversie between us I hope they cannot take it unkindly of us if we endeavour to Vindicate our Church and to remove those Aspersions that they have groundlesly cast upon her But this has been done so learnedly and fully by so many of our Learned Divines already that I will not pretend to do it better or to say much more than what they have said before me I shall only here lay down briefly the Substance of what I have Collected out of the best Authors on both sides that have writ lately on this Subject For there may be some who wou'd be willing to be satisfied in this Matter and yet can neither bestow the Time nor Pains to read all the Books of Controversie over which have been writ on this Subject First then We will examine the Pleas which the Dissenters use for Separation and show the insufficiency of them and that they do not justifie Separation according to their own Principles All the Pleas at this time made use of for Separation may be reduced to these Three Heads First Such as relate to the Constitution of our Church Second To the terms of Communion with it Third To the Consciences of Dissenters As to the First to wit such as relate to the Constitution of our Churches They say First That our Parochial Churches are not according to Christ's Institution as being different from those of the Congregational way Secondly That our Diocesan Bishops are Unlawful Thirdly That our National Church has no Foundation and wants Discipline all being swallowed up in the Bishops And the Pastors of every Parish who ought to have full Power to execute every part of it are depriv'd thereof And Fourthly That the People are depriv'd of their right of chusing their own Pastors First say they Our Parochial Churches are not according to Christ's Institution For Christ they say instituted no other kind of Churches than
been and is at this day commended and approved of by all the most Eminent Divines beyond Seas Perhaps some may say if the Government of the Church by Diocesan Bishops be so agreeable to that of the Primitive Church and approved of by other reform'd Churches as we pretend it is how comes it that they all did not follow the pattern of England and become all Diocesan Churches I answer They may as well ask us Why all the Nations of the World that were subject to the Roman Emperors did not upon the decay of the Roman Empire when they resum'd their just Rights of Government to themselves become all Monarchies according to the Pattern of England Some Nations besides England Ireland and Scotland did assume Episcopal Government as Denmark Sweden c. but perhaps it was not consistent with the present Circumstances or Politick Constitution of all places at the time of the Reformation to set up Episcopal Government as indeed it was not And therefore since neither Episcopal nor any other particular kind of Government is so essential to a Church as that a true Church may not be without it in case of indispensible Necessity they put themselves some under one Form of Government some under another as was most agreeable to their present constitution but with this Caution every where That all Protestants of every whole Church be the Government what it will should be oblig'd to Conform to the Establish'd Church in which they liv'd For though every National or whole Church had a Power to chuse what kind of Government they pleased for themselves yet 't was never allow'd that particular scrupulous People among themselves had Power to do so too This Power of subdividing was never pretended to nor practis'd in any other Nation since the Reformation but in England So that though they do all allow the Antiquity and Usefulness of Episcopal Government yet since 't is not Essential to a true Church no more than that of the Presbyterian or Independent nor convenient at this time for all places some may refuse it and yet it does not follow that we in England should do so since 't is convenient for us and more agreeable to the Laws and Constitution of these Kingdoms and comes by much nearer the Practice of the Primitive Churches than any other whatsoever But they say we make Episcopal Government Essential to a true Church for that we will suffer none to execute the Office of a Minister here in England unless they be ordain'd by a Bishop To this I answer 'T is plain we do not make Episcopal Government Essential to a true Church For we allow all the Reform'd Churches to be true Churches and Communicate with them and yet some of them have no Diocesan Bishops 'T is true by the Laws of this Church and Nation none are to be admitted to execute the Office of a Minister in any Cathedral or Parish Church or Chapel nor to hold any Ecclesiastical Benefice within these Kingdoms but such as are willing to submit to the Orders and Government of this Church and the Laws of the Land And therefore since both the Laws of this Church and Nation do require that all Ministers who desire to serve in this Church shall declare publickly that they assent to and approve of our Form 〈◊〉 Worship c. and are willing to use the same as the Church appoints and that they shall receive their Ordination and Licence to execute their Office from the Bishops 'T is but reasonable that such as want these Qualifications shou'd be refus'd the Liberty of executing their Office in these Kingdoms * The Church of England does not say absolutely that all those Ministers who want Episcopal Ordination are no true Ministers but only that none shall be accounted a lawful Bishop Priest or Deacon so as to execute their Function in the Church of England unless they be once Ordain'd by a Bishop as appears by the Preface to the Ordination But the reason we refuse them is not so much because that Presbyterian Ordination does not make them true Ministers according to God's Law as though no instance can be given of Ordination without a Bishop in Scripture or Antiquity but all to the contrary because they stubbornly refuse to submit to our Laws and Constitutions and contemn the lawful Authority under which God has plac'd them and commanded them that they should obey And this is evident from the Statute of 14 Car. 2. In which there is a particular Proviso That all Ministers of Foreign reform'd Churches who come into this Kingdom by the King's Permission are to be excepted out of and excus'd from the Penalties of that Act. And this Custom of requiring Conformity and Subscriptions from all who desire to be admitted to the Office of the Ministry is agreeable to the Practice of every settled Church that has been ever since Christ's days as will appear hereafter The 3d. Objection against the Constitution of our Church is That our * By National Churches are meant the whole Churches of such Nations as upon the decay of the Roman Empire resum'd their just Right of Government to themselves both in Church and State National Church which we call The Church of England has no Foundation and wants Discipline All being incroach'd and swallow'd up in the Bishops and the Pastors of every Parish who ought to have full Power to execute every part of it are depriv'd thereof But this is false for the Presbyters in our Church have as great Power in Ecclesiastical Matters as ever they had in the Primitive Church What Power are they depriv'd of by the Bishops that they had then By the Laws of our Church no Rules of Discipline no Articles of Doctrine no Form of Worship can be introduc'd by the Bishops or impos'd upon any without the consent of the whole Presbytery of the Nation in Convocation who appear either in Person or by Proxy The only Authority that the Bishops of the Church of England have above the Presbyters is Government Ordination and Censures which were all appropriated to the Apostles and Bishops in the Primitive Church St. Cyprian assures us it was so in the African Church in his Third Book Ep. 10. 12. 28. 27. And so it was in St. Augustine's Time See Cod. Eccl. Afr. c. 6 7 9 c. But say they the Power of Ordination is taken away from the Presbyters and lodg'd solely in the Bishops and 't is plain say they in the Apostles days the Presbyters did Ordain for Timothy was ordain'd by laying on the hands of the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. 14. But Dr. Hammond in his Paraphrase on this Text says That these Presbyters here spoken of who ordain'd Timothy were Apostles That Timothy was ordain'd by St. Paul is most evident for St. Paul in his Second Epistle to Timothy ch 1. v. 6. says I put thee in mind that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the
laying on of my hands And the Apostles might then have been likely enough call'd Presbyters for that during the Apostles time Bishops and Presbyters were the same and sometimes us'd the one for the other as appears plainly by comparing 1 Tim. 4. 14. with 2 Tim. 1. 6. In the former Verse St. Paul bids Timothy Neglect not the gift that is in him by laying on the hands of the Presbyters And in the latter he bids him Stir up the gift of God which is in you by the laying on of my hands For while the Apostles liv'd they manag'd the Affairs of Government in the Church themselves and therefore there were few or no Bishops in their days but as they withdrew they committed the Care and Government of Churches to such Persons as they appointed thereto of which we have an uncontroulable Evidence in Timothy and Titus So that although the Apostles left no Successors in Eodem gradu as to those things that were extraordinary in them as the Infallibility of their Doctrine and the writing New Gospels the Extent of their Power c. yet to other parts of their Apostolick Office they had Successors as in Teaching and Governing and such like things that were not extraordinary Which Power of Governing Ordaining c. being given to such particular Presbyters as the Apostles thought fit for it was properly the Episcopal Power And thus these who were but Presbyters in the Apostles days by the accession of this governing and ordaining Power became Bishops after their Decease or Departure And thus will all those seeming Differences between the words Presbyter and Bishop spoken of in Antiquity be reconcil'd And herewith agrees the Opinion of Archbishop Whitgift and Bishop Bilson and Dr. Stillingfleet in his Mischiefs of Separation p. 270. and many others See King Charles I. his Debates about Episcopacy more fully concerning this Matter But 't is plain that since the Apostles days Presbyters were not Bishops but a distinct Order from them And this is agreed by most Ancient and Modern Writers See among others Ignatius his Epistle ad Trall where he says That without Bishops Priests and Deacons it cannot be call'd a Church And Aerius who declar'd that there was no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter was represented by Epiphanius as a Prodigy and his opinion Madness See Epiph. Haer. 74. n. 1. 3. So Ischyrus pretended to be a Presbyter because Coluthus had ordain'd him but Athanasius represents it as a Monster that one shou'd esteem himself a Presbyter who was ordain'd by one who died himself a Presbyter See Dr. Maur. Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy p. 451. And in the Primitive Church if a Bishop himself did Ordain any one against the Canons and Establish'd Discipline of the Church they did not stick at declaring such Ordination void and in some Cases to re-ordain See Can. Nicen. 9 10. 16. 19. and Can. Antioch 73. 10 c. What Sentence shall we think then they wou'd have pronounc'd against our Presbyterian Ordination as practis'd here in England contrary both to the Canons of the Church and the Laws of the Land too But besides all this the Plea which our Dissenters make for Separation upon this account that the Presbyters are totally depriv'd of their Power of Ordaining is false For by the Canons of the Church of England Four Presbyters are to assist the Bishop in giving Orders and after Examination to joyn in laying on of hands on the Person ordain'd See Can. 31. and 35. But another Objection which they make to the Church of England for want of Discipline is for that the Power of Excommunicating Notorious Offenders is taken away from the Parochial Minister and lodg'd only in the Bishop But sure they who make this Objection never read the 26th Canon which is one of them acknowledg'd to be the Authentick Church Canons For that Canon says expresly That no Minister shall admit any of his Flock to the Lord's Supper who is known to be guilty of any Scandalous Sin until he hath openly declar'd that he has truly repented And in case the Offender continue obstinate he must give an account to the Ordnary within 14 Days who is then to proceed to greater Excommunication for the other is call'd a Penitential Excommunication So then it seems the Pastors are not totally depriv'd of the Power of censuring for Scandalous offences nay they have a greater and more absolute Power than is allow'd them in many other Reform'd Churches for indeed the exercise of Discipline is a Work of so much Prudence and Difficulty that the greatest Zealots for it have not thought fit to trust it in the Hands of every Parochial Minister and his particular Congregation Calvin himself says to do so is contrary to the Apostolick Practice See Calv. Ep. 136. And Beza speaking of the Discipline of Geneva in his Ep. 20. says The Parochial Ministers proceed no farther than Admonition but in case of Contumacy they certifie the Presbytery of the City who sit at certain times to hear all Censures relating to Discipline But allowing a Church wants true Discipline does it therefore lose its Being or justify Separation No sure if so there were few Presbyterian Churches to be found in the late times many of them having no Discipline at all among them for many years nor so much as the Lord's Supper administred in some parts of this Kingdom for ten or a dozen years together But now we come to the 4th Objection against the Constitution of our Church which is That the People are depriv'd of their right of choosing their own Ministers Pray let me ask them how this Original and inherent Right as Mr. Baxter calls it of choosing their own Ministers came to be lodg'd in the People Was there not a Church to be form'd in the beginning Did not Christ appoint Apostles and give them Authority for that end Where was the Church Power then lodg'd Was it not in the Apostles Did not they in all places as they planted Churches appoint Officers to teach and govern them And were not then the Pastors invested with a Power superior to that of the People How came they then to lose it or how came the People to pretend an original Right thereto Besides How cou'd the People make choice of Men for their fitness and abilities when at that time their abilities depended so much on the Apostles laying on of their hands for then the Holy Ghost was given to them It seems then that this original and inherent Right was not in the People in the Apostles days nor in the first Ages of the Church for if it had St. Clement St. Cyprian St. Chrysostom c. could not have been ignorant of it St. Clement says in his Ep. 54 55 56 57. the Apostles thought fit to reserve this Power of appointing Officers in the Church to themselves to prevent the Contentions that might happen about it And that all the People had to do was to give
fairly in his Answer to a certain Letter p. 18. where he says he has seldom heard any but very good and well studied Sermons in our Churches and on the other side complains publickly of the weakness and injudiciousness and self-conceitedness of too many of the Non-conformist Preachers in his Sacral Desert p. 86. yet they will tell us they deceive the People and keep them all in ignorance for their own Interests least they should lose their Church Preferments This is a very severe Censure to say that so many Thousand godly Ministers as have been of the Church of England since the Reformation and who have many of them died Martyrs for the sake of it should be such Villains as to deceive the People and damn their own Souls for the sake of their Church Preferments But how can self-interest oblige the Clergy to defend the Church of England as now establish'd if they thought it not agreeable to the Word of God It must be either Pride or Covetousness that must move them to it If it were Pride doubtless the Presbyterian or Independant way would answer that end much better for whereas now the Parsons Vicars and Curates of all the Parishes in England are subject to their respective Bishops c. and can do nothing as to matters of Discipline or Government c. not even in their own Parishes without the consent of the Diocesan Bishop Were the Constitution of the Church changed to that of the Presbyterian or Independant way every Pastor would become an absolute Bishop and accountable to none for what he did If it were Covetousness that moved them to it I suppose that were all the Parsons of every Parish in England made the Pastor of that Church or Parish according to the Presbyterian or Independant Notion of a Pastor and all the Diocesan and Metropolitan Bishopricks and their Deans and Chapters dissolved and their Revenue super-added to the present in-come of every Parish Minister or Pastor their Church Livings would be no less but more valuable than now they are Why do they not then set about this change of Church Government as fast as they can if they think in their Consciences 'twere more agreeable to God's will so to do 't is plain 't would better answer their Covetousness and Ambition to pull down Episcopacy than to live in this poor subjection that now they do Here they will tell us the reason is plain because the Bishops who are the Governours of the Church will not let them they know the sweet of a fat Bishoprick too well to part with it I warrant them But the Thousandth part of the Clergy of England are not Bishops nor perhaps never think to be so Every one of these have a Vote in the Convocation and doubtless may carry it against so small a number of Bishops as 27. were they not perswaded in their Consciences that the Church of England as now establish'd is as agreeable to the Will of God as any other whatsoever Therefore since the Divines of the Church of England are more Numerous and generally more Learned and can have no design upon the account of Self-interest to deceive the People 't is safer sure in a doubtful case to take their words and trust to their judgments than to those among the Dissenters whose Interest it is to deceive the People and make the breach between us as wide as they can many of them being Men of no Fortune and such as have no other way to get a Living and Men who must needs be losers by an Union between us be the Conformity of which side it will whether they Conform to us or we to them for be the Government of the Church of England either Episcopal or Presbyterian or Independant 't is but reasonable that the Ministers who are lawfully put into the Cures should continue therein still as Pastors of their own Churches so that the greatest part of the Non-conformist Preachers must be laid aside for 't were not reasonable that others who are as deserving as they and lawfully settled in their Cures should be turn'd out to make room for them nor that Parishes should be divided all over the Kingdom to furnish them with Churches 'T is likely that some of the Non-conformist Ministers who are better qualified than ordinary might be provided for should it please God that there were an Union between us But many of them I doubt could not so that 't is evident their Interest obliges the most of them to deceive the People and keep open the breach as wide as they can And that they really do so is plain by their making the Differences between us seem greater than really they are and than they themselves have own'd them to be in their Writings as I have all along shewed And also by their pretending to quote Authority for what they say and either not mentioning the Chapter or Page where the Words are to be found or else altering the very Words and Sence of the Author to serve their turn If any one think I do them wrong let them look into Dr. Maurice his Defence of Diocesan Episc p. 237. 335. 353. 377. 396. 442. 444. how Mr. Clarkson to prove Episcopacy in the Primitive Church to be agreeable to the congregational or Independant way has misrepresented the very Words and Sence of his Authors You may find more Instances of this kind in the Preface to Dr. Comber's Defence of Liturgies 1st part And see how falsly Mr. Baxter has translated Theodoret's Epistle to serve his Hypothesis Dr. Stillingfleet his Mischiefs of Separation p. 261. And how he has misrepresented the Doctor 's own words ib. 131. 132 and 126. Many more Instances of this kind may be given were it necessary but what has been said is sufficient to show that in Matters of Religion where the case seems doubtful and all the Divines of the Church of England agree on one side and the Non-conformists only on the other 't is much safer to take the Opinion of those of the Church of England than of the others because they are more numerous and generally more learned and seem to have less reason to deceive us To all that has been said I shall only add this That I have taken all the pains that possibly I could to inform my self truly of the Matters in Controversy between the Church of England and the Dissenters and did really believe the things Scrupled to be of much greater moment than I now find them to be And tho' I for my own part am satisfied in my Conscience that there is nothing at all injoin'd by the Church of England but what is agreeable to God's Word and the Opinion of the wisest Men of the Church in all Ages and what the most tender Consciences may satisfie themselves in if they would but make use of the proper means yet I could heartily wish that many things were laid aside if that would purchase an Union between us If things which are allow'd to be in themselves indifferent as Postures and Ceremonies and such like were neither impos'd nor abolish'd but left to the Discretion of every Christian to use or not to use as he thinks best and as the Ceremony of Bowing towards the Altar is and some other alterations made such as you may see in the Proposals offer'd to the Parliament for the Uniting of Protestant Dissenters by Dr. S. Dean of St. Pauls there could then be no reasonable Pretence left for Separation But if nothing else must purchase our Peace but the overthrowing the whole Constitution of this Church 't is too dear a purchase till we have found another to exchange for more agreeable to God's Word and more consistent with the Peace and Tranquility of this Nation but that we have not found yet I am sure as is sufficiently evident by a plain experimental Proof which these Nations lately had 't is very well known that in the late unhappy times when the Church of England Liturgy c. was taken away the Presbyterians Independants and other Parties pray'd one against the other and against establishing that way of Government which others of them pray'd for divers Persons made their own Passions singular Opinions and Errors great part of their Prayers others rejected all Confessions of sins as no part of their Devotions in many places of England the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper was laid aside for 12 or 15 Years together so was Infant Baptism some would Pray for the King one way some another others not at all And in that time that the Church of England way of Worship was laid aside there were more Errors Sects Heresies and Blasphemies broach'd and vented than ever before or since This is acknowledged by the Dissenters themselves see a Book call'd Gangrena part 1st p. 175. writ about the Year 1646. where many of them do acknowledge That we say they in these four last Years for so long had Presbytery been uppermost have overpassed the Deeds of the Prelates in whose time never so great nor so many Errors were heard of much less such Blasphemies and Confusions we have worse things among us more corrupt Doctrines and Practices than in 80. Years before c. So that if nothing must purchase Peace between us but the parting with our Religion and overthrowing our whole Constitution to set up another which Experience has taught us is neither so consistent with God's Glory nor the Peace of these Nations they must excuse us Besides let me tell them Their late Carriage in Scotland has given us great reason to fear that the Religion they so much boast of and with so much Zeal endeavour to set up in this Nation in the place of that which by God's good Providence is now Establish'd is not the true Religion of Christ for that never taught any to Affront and Revile his lawful Ministers and to burn the Holy Scriptures as they have done now more than once I pray God open their Eyes and soften their Hearts and give them Grace to Repent FINIS
An End to the CONTROVERSIE Between the CHURCH of ENGLAND AND DISSENTERS IN WHICH All their Pleas for Separation from the CHVRCH of ENGLAND are proved to be Insufficient from the Writings of the most Eminent among the Dissenters themselves And their Separation condemn'd by the Reformed Churches LONDON Printed for Richard Wellington at the Lute in St. Paul's Church-Yard 1697. TO THE READER THere are some 't is like who may think it an Vseless and Impertinent Piece of Work to write a Book on this Subject that has been lately so ingeniously handled by such Eminent and Learned Men as the Bishop of Worcester Dr. Comber Dr. Maurice c. But though no Man that I know will pretend to write better than they have done yet there are several things in this Book that have not been taken Notice of by any who have yet written on this Subject And since Mens Notions and Apprehensions are so different 't is like some may be mov'd with one Argument some with another according as it suits their several Judgments and Capacities But besides there are several Persons who desire to be satisfied concerning the Matters in Controversie between the Church of England and the Dissenters but are unwilling to bestow the Time or Pains to read over all the Books at large that have been written on this Subject For the Satisfaction chiefly of these sort of Men I have here as briefly as I cou'd set down the true state of the Controversie between us and the Arguments used on both Sides by the most Eminent Men that have written on this Subject From all which it does appear that the Church of England is as true a Part of the Catholick Church as any this day in the World and that all the Objections which the Dissenters make to her do arise from Ignorance and Mistaken Notions That all the Reform'd Churches beyond Seas do own her as a true Reform'd Church and do highly Condemn all those who Separate from her and declare them to be guilty of downright Schism And that the Dissenters in Condemning the Church of England do Condemn all the Reform'd Churches as well as this Church I cou'd have brought many more Authorities for the Proof of all this Matter but I purposely omit them because these which I have brought are sufficient and are such as the Dissenters never did nor I think never will Pretend to Answer Another Reason why I omit them is in hopes that the smallness of the Book may Invite some to the Reading of it that 't is like might be discourag'd at a larger Volume A SHORT ACCOUNT OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN The Church of ENGLAND AND The DISSENTERS WHEN God Almighty first created Man he gave him no other Law to walk by but that of Nature or Reason under which alone he liv'd for the first 2000 Years But at last this Law of Reason being greatly lett and blinded by Evil Customs it became necessary to give Men more Positive Laws and Rules to walk by Therefore God Almighty commanded Moses to write a Law for his People which we call the Mosaical Law and sometimes the Moral Law and is contained in the Old Testament And this Law God Almighty reveal'd to Men by the Mediation of an Angel but it being for a great part Typical and Ceremonial and therefore not so plain and easie to be understood as that of the New Testament God did then often appear to his People himself and teach them more immediately what he would have them do what not And under this Law of the Old Testament superadded to the Law of Reason or Nature which is the same in reasonable Creatures Men liv'd till God was pleas'd to reveal his Will to us after a more full and excellent manner by the Mediation of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Holy Ghost in the New Testament And this Law of the New Testament is that under which we live at this Day a great part of the Old being hereby abolish'd See Galat. 4. And as this Law of the New Testament was reveal'd to us after a more excellent Manner than that of the Old so the Matter of it is most extraordinary containing nothing in it superfluous nor wanting any thing necessary to the directing all Men to Heaven on very easie terms It is so adapted and fitted to all Conditions of Men that the very meanest Capacities may easily understand every thing contain'd in it which is necessary to their Salvation And this Evangelical Law Christ and his Apostles have left as a Rule for all succeeding Ages to walk by But notwithstanding that our Saviour and his Apostles had left the World such Plain and Positive Rules to walk by that none that were not wilfully so cou'd be mistaken in them yet such has been the unhappiness of the Christian Church that it never wanted some within it of such restless and peevish Spirits as to disturb its Peace and Quiet by making Divisions and Schisms in it which St. Paul foresaw when he told the Elders Acts 20. 30. Also of your selves shall Men arise speaking perverse things to draw Disciples after them But though there have been always some Divisions in the Church ever since the first Planting of it yet for the first Three or Four Hundred Years they were much fewer than what have been since and those that were were much more discountenanc'd and oppos'd by the generality of Christians than they were afterwards In the Church of Africa a little before St. Augustine's Days there arose the Schism of the Donatists who separated upon the account that the Bishopricks were too Large and the Power of the Bishops too Great And because the Ministers were not so Able and Holy Men as they should be and because they dislik'd the Liturgies and Publick Prayers of the Church and for such-like Reasons And a little before in the Third Century began the Novatian Schism at Rome for that Novatus thinking the Bishopricks too Large would needs be chosen Bishop in the same City where Cornelius was chosen before But both these Schisms were condemned This by the Council of Carth. and the Council of Constantinople and by St. Cyprian Ep. 52. N. 4 c. And That of the Donatists by all the Catholick Bishops at the Conference at Carth. See Conference of the Third Day Chap. 4. And by St. Augustine in his Books against Permenian Petilian and the other Donatist Bishops But not long after about the Fifth and Sixth Century the Errors and Corruptions in the Church began to Increase more abundantly and appear more bare-fac'd and openly than formerly they had done for that as the Roman Empire began to decline there follow'd a general decay of Learning and gross Ignorance had over-spread the Earth insomuch that many of the Priests themselves cou'd not read Latin and then it was no difficult Matter to bring in what Heresies and Schisms Men wou'd And this was the time that most of the Errors and Corruptions of the
one Bishop in a City the two great Schisms of the Donatists in Africa and the Novatian at Rome might have been avoided but instead hereof see how St. Cyprian among others aggravates the Schism of Novatius for being chosen Bishop in the same City where Cornelius was chosen before For says he since there cannot be a second after the first whosoever is made Bishop where one is made already is not another Bishop but none at all Cypr. Epist 52. n. 4. And the same St. Cyprian in his Epistle 55. n. 6. 9. declares That to have only one Bishop in a City was the best means to prevent Schism See St. Cypr. de Vnitate Eccles n. 3 4. And St. Augustine in his Epistle 162. to the same purpose But now that 't is so plainly prov'd that there was never allow'd but one Bishop in a City in the Primitive Church they have no way to reconcile this to their Hypothesis but by endeavouring to prove that either the Cities were very small in those days or else the number of Christians in them were so few as that they might all conveniently meet in one Congregation And this they are not satisfied to do in the ordinary Cities which Mr. Clarkson in his Book of Primitive Episcopacy affirms were no larger than our ordinary Market-Towns in England But even in the very largest and most populous Cities they will not allow that there were more Christians than cou'd conveniently meet together in one Church to serve God as in Rome Alexandria Constantinople Carthage and the rest All which far exceeded any now in the World both for largeness and number of People This seems to be very strange Old Rome was at that time a City so large and populous that it excell'd London as it is at this day as far as London now does New Rome and had by Computation at that time above 1000000 Inhabitants as Dr. Maurice shows in his Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy p. 340. And seems indeed to be very probable if one considers those vast and mighty Pieces of Workmanship that appear to have been done there the Ruins of which are to be seen at this day as Dr. Burnet in his Travels tells us who gathers from thence That that City must have been vastly populous about that time And it was in Aurclius his days 50 Miles in Circumference Dr. M. p. 212. And yet will Mr. Clarkson allow no more Christians in this great City than cou'd meet in one Congregation So of Alexandria which was 1â— Miles in Circumference according to Pliny l. 5. 9. and the rest all greater far than London now is But to serve their turn they will reduce them all to the narrow limits of a single Congregation and by consequence give all the rest to the Devil by making them Unchristian Hereticks Schismaticks c. 'T is strange that Christianity shou'd make no better a Progress considering the largeness of the Cities and Multitude of People in them and considering the Care and Industry of the Apostles and Learned Fathers of those Ages and their extraordinary Gifts that in so large and populous a City as Rome Christianity shou'd gain no more Proselytes in 300 Years than cou'd meet all in one Church notwithstanding St. Paul himself had Preach'd there for many Years The very Quakers in London which is not comparable to Old Rome have made more Proselytes already than the Apostles in much longer time for were all the Quakers in London assembled in one Congregation I doubt that never a Church in the Kingdom wou'd be found large enough to contain them But besides if the number of Christians were so few as these Dissenters wou'd make them how was it possible for them to possess themselves of the whole Roman Empire in less than 300 Years They had no Interest at Court nor in the Army but were persecuted by the Emperors all that time unless in two Reigns so that there can be no other Human Cause assign'd for it but their great Numbers But farther 't is plain that there were some great Cities entirely Christian from the Apostles days as Cesaria and Lydda Acts 9. 35. and others So that in the first 300 Years whole Cities and Countries being become Christian as Eusebius affirms Praep. Evang. l. 1. p. 12 13. ' t was impossible for a single Congregation to contain a quarter of the Christians of a City much less of a whole Diocess For besides the large and populous City every Bishop had a Territory within his Diocess which extended it self for several Miles round the City For every City had a large Territory as it were a County round about it which was under the Jurisdiction of the Civil Magistrate who govern'd the City and as far as the Jurisdiction of the Magistrate reach'd in Civil Matters so far did the Jurisdiction of the Bishop reach in Ecclesiastical Matters See Can. Apostolic 34. by which a Bishop is forbid to do any thing without the consent of his Metropolitan or Archbishop but what relates to his own Diocess and the Territories under it And see Can. Antioch 9. 10. But that the Bishops Territories and Jurisdiction extended far beyond the Walls or Bounds of the City is most evident for Theodoret who was Bishop of Cyrus had a Diocess 40 Miles square and yet he reckon'd his Episcopacy of Divine Institution See his Epist 42. And he had within his Diocess 800 Parish Churches as appears by his Epist 113. to Leo. This is an Instance so clear against our Dissenters that Mr. Baxter and Mr. Clarkson and the rest have no way to Answer it but first that it came from the Vatican Library which Objection is fully removed by Dr. Stillingfleet in his Mischief of Separation p. 256. and by Dr. Maur. Def. of Dioc. Episc p. 396. and this Epist of Theod. prov'd to be his own by comparing it with his other Writings and also by the clear Testimony of Liberatus who infallibly knew Theodoret's Stile and Writings Neither does it follow that because it came from the Vatican Library therefore it must not be Authentick But when People are Drowning rather than sink they will catch hold of a Bull-rush The other Exception they take to this Testimony of Theodoret is That he was not Bishop of a single Diocess but of a Province and that Theodoret was an Archbishop but that Cyprus of which he was then Bishop was no Metropolis at that time nor Theodoret Primate of a Province but under a Metropolitan appears by his 16 Ep. and by his 81 82 34 94 and 161. Alexander was then his Metropolitan But Theodoret was not the only Bishop that had such a large Diocess for St. Chrysostom had one full as large and which contained as many Parishes he was Bishop of Constantinople and all the Territories thereto belonging and did not think it in his Conscience too large for if he did so good a Man as he would either have divided or quitted it And Athanasius was Bishop
testimony of the Person chosen And to that end 't is true the People were to be present at the nomination of a new Bishop for since they were to be Men blameless and of good report 't was but fit that the People that best knew his Life and Conversation should be present to testify the same And herewith agrees St. Cyprian Ep. 68. whom Mr. Baxter vouches for the contrary says he The Bishop shou'd be chosen in the presence of the People that by their presence their Faults may be publish'd or their good Actions commended but says not a word of the Peoples Power of Electing him All our Ordinations must be done in the publick view of the People who are demanded of the Bishop whether any of them can or will except against the Persons to be admitted See the Form of Ordination in the Book of Common Prayer As to the Elections of Deacons 't is to be noted that 't was properly no Church Power which they had but they were Stewards of the Common Stock and therefore 't was but reasonable the Community should be satisfied in the choice of them St. Chrysostom in his Book de Sacerdotio complains much of the unfitness of the People to judge in such matters So does St. Augustine Ep. 110. And indeed were there no other Reasons against the Peoples choosing their own Ministers but the mischiefs that would necessarily attend it 't were sufficient for when ever the People assum'd this Power of choosing it caus'd so great Disturbances in the Church that at Antioch the Divisions of the People about the choice of a Bishop in the time of Constantine had kindled such a Flame as had almost destroy'd both Church and City The like at Rome upon the choice of Damascus And if the People have the Power of choosing their own Ministers what shou'd hinder but there may be a Presbyterian Independant Anabaptist Quaker and Papist teacher all in one Parish and so this would set open a door to infinite Divisions And therefore to avoid the great Evils and inconveniences of popular Elections the Power of choosing their own Ministers was taken away from the People by several Councils as 12. and 13. Can. Conc. Laodicea Conc. Antioch c. 18. c. Conc. 2d of Nice c. 3. The Reason that first gave Lay-men a title to the nomination of Ministers was when Christian Princes and others had given large Endowments to the Church 't was thought but just that they should have the nomination of the Ministers for those Churches that they had built and indow'd And this was a Prerogative in the Kings of England ever since the first foundation of a Christian Church here and long before any freedom of Elections was pretended to See Stat. 25. Edw. 3. and the Case of the King 's Ecclesiastical Power in Lord Cook 's 8th Rep. and the Case of Praemunire in Sir John Davenant's Reports Case ult And this title of Patronage has been confirmed to Lay-men by several Councils as 1st Coun. of Orange Anno Dom. 441. 2d Counc of Arles Anno 452. 9th Counc of Toledo c. And this Right of presentation is not only us'd in England but in other reform'd Churches In Denmark the Archbishops and Bishops are appointed by the King so they are in Swedeland So in other Lutheran Churches the Superintendants are appointed by the several Princes and the Patrons present before Ordination The Synod of Dort hath a Salvo for the right of Patronage In France the Ministers are chosen by Ministers at Geneva by the Council of State who have Power likewise to depose them And Beza in his Ep. 83. declares against the Peoples choosing their Ministers as a thing without any ground in Scripture Grotius Ep. ad Boatslaer Ep. 62. p. 21. agrees herein How comes then our English Dissenters to make this a ground of Separation to wit The depriving the People of their Right of choosing their own Ministers when 't is evident they never had any such Right but when they got it by Usurpation And 't is contrary to the general practice of the Church in all Ages and even to the practice of other reform'd Churches at this day But besides the unwarrantableness of the Peoples choosing their Ministers and the great mischiefs that attend it by making the People run into Divisions and Factions 't is a thing very unreasonable in it self that such an ignorant proud unpeaceable sort of People as Mr. Baxter himself confesses in his Sacrilegiae Dissert p. 102. c. the ordinary sort of Christians to be should be made judges of their Ministers abilities and soundness of Doctrines who are most apt to revile the best and gravest Ministers as the same Mr. Baxter says himself in his Cure of Divis p. 393. Sure 't is more likely that the King and Parliament and the Governours of the Church shou'd provide able and fit Ministers for us than such sort of People as these unless any will be so ridiculous as to suppose that the Magistrates and Clergy are all bad men and the ignorant common People the only incouragers of Vertue They may say 't is as unreasonable on the other hand that all the People of a Parish shou'd be oblig'd to take a Minister put into the Cure by some young raw extravagant Heir that had the good Fortune to be born to an Estate to which the Advowson did belong but perhaps is as ignorant and unfit to judge of the abilities of a Minister as the meanest in the Parish To this I answer That though such ignorant Persons may sometimes have the right of Presentation yet they have not the Power of putting into the Cure any Minister they please for the Patron has only the right of presenting his Clerk who must be admitted and instituted by the Bishop before the Cure is said to be full and if the Bishop with the rest of his Clergy after examination had c. do think him any way unqualified for the Cure of Souls he may reject him and put the Patron to present another qualify'd for the Office which if he neglect to do within six Months from the time the Church became void he shall lose his presentation for that turn and the Bishop shall present So that the Patron it seems cannot put whom he will on the People for their Pastor but is bound to find Personam idoneam a fit Person And now before we pass from this matter let us see whether the Civil Magistrate has Power to silence Ministers or not Doubtless he has otherwise 't is impossible that any Kingdom should be safe for since the generality of the People are so apt to be led by their Spiritual Guides and take their Notions of Loyalty and Obedience from them 't is strange to imagine that Ministers shall be allow'd to Preach up Sedition Heresy or what Doctrine they please and it shall not be in the Power of the Magistrate to silence them But say our Dissenters we are
therefore they who differ in these Circumstances do not differ in the act of Worship but in the manner See the Harmony of Confessions where you will find what the Opinions of other Reformed Churches are concerning the Lawfulness and Usefulness of Ceremonies The latter Helvetian Confession saith That there are different Rites and Ceremonies found in the Churches let no Man judge hereby that the Churches dissent And the Confession of Bohemia hath Wherefore those Rites and those good Ceremonies ought only to be kept which among the People of Christ do Edifie therefore whether they be extent or brought in by the Bishops or by the Councils Ecclesiastical or by other Authors whatsoever the simpler sort are not to trouble themselves about that but must use them to that which is good And a little after Although our Men do not equally observe all Ceremonies with other Churches which is not a thing necessary to be done yet are they not so minded as to move any Dissentions for the cause of Ceremonies although they be not judged to be altogether necessary so that they be not found contrary to God's Word And the Augustine Confession has Some Men then may ask whether we would have this life of Man to be without Order without Ceremonies In no wise But we teach That the true Pastors in their Churches may Ordain Publick Rites or Ceremonies And Beza in his 24th Epist agrees herein as has been said before And Calvin in his Book of the True way of Reformation Ch. 16. says He would not contend about Ceremonies not only those which are for decency but those which are Symbolical Let all things be done decently and in order says the Scripture And St. Paul tell us 1 Cor. 14. 33. God is not the author of confusion but of peace as in all the Churches of the Saints But to come home to our Dissenters Mr. Baxter in his Poor Man's Family Book p. 337. speaking of our publick Worship in our Parish Churches says In all the lawful Orders Gestures and Manners of behaviour in God's Worship affect not to differ from the rest but conform your self to the use of the Church for in the Church singularity is a Discord c. See Vines on the Sacrament to the same purpose p. 39. and many more Instances of this kind might be given but what has been said is sufficient to shew that such Ceremonies as serve for Order or Edification and are not directly contrary to God's Law are to be used according to the Opinion of all the Reformed Churches and most Eminent Men both at home and abroad Now How shall we know what Ceremonies are lawful and what not It is to be noted That the nature of Ceremonies is to be taken from the Doctrine which goes along with it and may be lawful and not lawful as that is If a Ceremony be made a substantial part of God's Worship and unalterable or be suppos'd so necessary as that the doing of it would be a thing meritorious or pleasing to God and the not doing of it sinful tho' there were no human Law which requir'd the doing of it Then it becomes sinful because it makes the Scriptures insufficient And this it was that made the Jewish Ceremony of washing before Meat sinful And so it is in many of the Ceremonies of the Church of Rome But when Ceremonies are injoin'd for the sake of Order and Uniformity in God's Worship according to the general Rules of the Scripture and to prevent the great Mischiefs which we should inevitably fall into if every Pastor and People were suffered to follow their several different judgments in the manner of God's Worship then they are lawful and good But say they If these Ceremonies do not bind the Consciences of Men Why does the Discipline and Censures of the Church force Men to use them I answer The Church does not oblige Men to the observance of these Ceremonies as things that bind the Conscience or which are necessary to be done or not done in themselves but the Reason why Men are forced to observe them and punish'd if they refuse is because they are appointed by the Church and disobedience to the Laws of Church or State made not contrary to the Law of God is sinful Rom. 13. 5. and 2. And for this they are punish'd and also for disturbing the publick Peace And thus we justify our bowing at the name of Jesus at seasonable times and all our Ceremonies since the Church has appointed them we ought to obey unless we can prove them to be sinful which no Man can do so long as the Worship is directed to a true Object to wit the Person of Christ As for the Ceremony of Bowing towards the Altar Note the Canon that appointed it did not oblige any to the observance of it but left them to their liberty As to the posture appointed by the Church of England for receiving the Lord's Supper to wit Kneeling 'T is a Circumstance which may be varied according to the Discretion of the Church In the Primitive Church it was always taken in the posture of Adoration which posture varied according to the Customs of Countries Now Kneeling being the posture of Adoration in these Kingdoms the Church of England has therefore appointed that it be taken kneeling And indeed 't is but very reasonable that so Sacred an Ordinance and so great a Benefit should be received in the most thankful and humble posture that may be and that surely is on our Knees which is also the fittest posture for those high strains of Devotion with which so Sacred a Work ought to be attended at the very instant of taking it The only Objection that I know is made against this posture of Kneeling at the Sacrament is because it is Idolatrous and contrary to Christ's own Practice 'T is strange that they will make us and the greatest part of the Reform'd Churches all Idolaters whether we will or no Does not our Book of Common Prayer at the end of the Communion Service tell them as plain as words can express it That we pay no Adoration to any thing in the Sacrament but Christ himself which is in Heaven and yet will they make us Idolaters for all this Has any of them ever writ so strong against Idolizing the Elements of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper as our Divines of the Church of England have done And yet will they perswade us we are Idolaters They may as well believe that we Worship the Stones in the Church-Walls when we kneel down to Pray in them And truly I fear many of them do so which makes them use that posture so seldom in their publick Meetings For you shall seldom see in any of their Meetings scarce one of the whole Congregation on their Knees not even at repeating the Lord's Prayer if it happen to be said which is not often Their usual postures of Praying in their publick Congregations are either
and recommended by Christ himself in the New And that both Forms of Prayer and Liturgies were Composed by the Fathers and appointed to be used in the Church ever since Christ's days And that even the most Eminent of our own Non-Conformists have heretofore declared their liking thereto And that all the Reformed Churches do use and approve of prescribed Forms in their publick Worship at this Day And lastly I will shew That our English Common-Prayer Book has been particularly Commended and Approved by the most Learned and Eminent Men of the Reformed Churches beyond Seas And when this is done if any will be so hardy as to affirm That Forms of Prayer are so Sinful as to cause a necessity of Separation he is incorrigible and not to be Convinced by Reasons First then Forms of Prayer c. were used by God's People in the time of the Old Testament for the Lord prescribed a Form of Blessing to Aaron saying On this wise ye shall bless the Children of Israel saying c. Numb vi 23. And again Deut. xxvi he prescribed a Form of Prayer which he commanded the People to use And the xxij Psalm is a Prayer which the People were commanded to sing or say every Morning so are several of the other Psalms Forms of Prayers as lxxxvi xc cij c. See Origen Cint Cels l. 4. p. 178. And here observe That the Dissenters will allow these Psalms to be Prayers and that they ought to be Sung to God yet they will not allow that a Man should Pray Singing For say they When they are Sung they are not Prayer See now what an absurdity they will run into rather than forsake their own Opinion For here they affirm That a Man may say the Words of Prayer to God devoutly and yet not pray Secondly Christ himself used a Form of Prayer though doubtless he had a power of praying Extempore much beyond what our Dissenters or any that ever was on Earth can pretend to when he was in the Garden a little before his Suffering he prayed twice or thrice in the same Words Matth. xxvi 44. Mark xiv 39. and that too at a time when he was in so great Extremity and Sorrow That he sweated drops of Blood and at such a time one usually prays after the most prevailing and fervent manner And to assure us that our Saviour thought Forms of Prayer very necessary to help our Infirmities we have not only his Example but his Precept for it too For our Saviour taught his Disciples a Form of Prayer Matth. vi 9. and bid them use it And the occasion of our Saviour's giving his Disciples this Form of Prayer was to obviate the inconveniencies which he saw did usually attend Extempore Prayers to wit the using Vain Repetitions c. which he tells them are not pleasing to God and therefore he first bids them beware of that and then immediately after he gives them a short and perfect Form of Prayer as the best way to prevent that evil Whether our Dissenters have not as much reason to use Forms of Prayer for that very reason as Christ's Disciples had let the World judge that hears their tedious extempore Prayers fill'd with as many vain Repetitions and bald and sometimes sensless Expressions as any of theirs But say the Dissenters When our Saviour taught his Disciples to pray he did not design that they should use any certain Form of Prayer For he bad them Luke 11. 2. When ye pray say thus and thus being an adverb of Similitude does shew that our Saviour did not intend they should use the same words but some other such like To this I answer In the 3d. chap. of Exod. v. 14 15. The Lord said unto Moses thus shalt thou say to the Children of Israel EHEIE hath sent me unto you And again the God of your Fathers the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto you Here Moses by this Rule must not say these words not EHEIE hath sent me unto you not the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto you but the like And by the same reason the Scripture is not the very Word of God but the Words of the Prophets for all along when the Prophet says Thus saith the Lord they do not tell the very Words of God but the like From what has been said 't is evident that we have Scripture on our side both Old and New Testament for using prescribed Forms of Prayer We will in the next place enquire what Authority we have for it in the first and purest Ages of the Church First then That Forms of Prayer were us'd in the Church in the first Century I gather from Ignatius who was Bishop of Antioch Anno Dom. 99. in his Epist to those at Magnesia he bids 'em Do nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters nor to make tryal of things agreeable to their own private Fancy p. 34. And Socrates in his History l. 6. c. 8. says That Ignatius first brought the usage of singing alternately as we use in our Choirs into the Church of Antioch Photius affirms the same of him And Theodoret says Hist lib. 2. c. 24. That this Custom of singing alternately began at Antioch and was soon received all the World over In the second Century Tertull. de Orat. c. 1. and c. 9. tells us They us'd Forms of Prayer then in the African Church He calls the Lord's Prayer the lawful and ordinary Prayer and that the Christians daily repeated that very Form And he shews they sang Hymns c. then in the Church alternately as we do now Tertull. ad Vxor l. 2. p. 172. And Calvin in his Instit l. 4. c. 1. affirms the same That the Christians did use to repeat the Lord's Prayer daily and that they did it by Christ's Command How will our Dissenters reconcile this to their seldom or never using of it even on the Lord's Day every young Preacher yea and every perhaps drunken Cobler preferring their own rash and indeliberate Prayers before it In the third Century St. Cyprian who lived then affirms the same that the Lord's Prayer was us'd daily for says he The Father will know the words of his own Son see Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 309. And the same Cyprian in his Ep. 8. ad Cler. Pleb p. 24. says Christ commanded us to pray for all men in a common Prayer wherein all agreed It appears also that the Priest and People pray'd by way of Responses as when the Priest said Lift up your hearts the People answer'd We lift them up unto the Lord. See Cypr. de Orat. Dom. § 22. See more for this interchangable way of praying between Priest and People B. Bils of Christian Subjection part 4. p. 435. In the same Century Origen says They who served God through Jesus in the Christian way use frequently night and day the injoined Prayers See Orig. in
Cels l. 6 p. 302. And St. Basil in his Book de Spirit Sanct. c. 29. p. 221. tells us That Gregory Thaumaturgus who was his Predecessor in the Bishoprick of Neocaesarea and cotemporary with St. Cyprian composed a Liturgy and appointed Ceremonies for that Church And that too in an age when miraculous Gifts lasted In the beginning of the fourth Century Ann. Dom. 312. the first Christian Emperor Constantine as Eusebius tells us in his Life of Constantine lib. 4. c. 17. p. 395. order'd his Palace after the manner of a Church and would take the Books himself into his hands either for explaining the Holy Scripture or repeating the prescrib'd Prayers in his Royal Family In the same Century Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria shews us that the Priests and People pray'd by way of Responses in that Church for in his Epist to Solitar p. 239. he says The People mourned and groaned to God in the Church all of them crying to the Lord and saying Spare thy People good Lord spare them c. By which it seems the Church did not think it enough then for the People to say Amen but appointed them distinct and intelligent answers In the same Century the Council of Laodicea Can. 15. Bev. Tom. 1. p. 459. appointed Canonical Singers who sang out of Books and none but they were allow'd to begin the Hymns And the same Council Can. 18. Bev. Tom. 1. p. 461. Ordained that the very same Liturgy of Prayers should be used always both at three in the Afternoon and in the Evening And now because this Council is so plain evidence against the Dissenters that they have no way to answer it they fly again to their last refuge which is to deny the Authority of this Council for they say this Council of Laodicea was but a Provincial Synod or Council But tho' we grant 't was no more but a Provincial Synod yet I hope a Provincial Council of Orthodox Bishops were Good Authority But besides this very Canon concerning Liturgies was taken into the Code of the universal Church and confirmed by the Council of Chalcedon which was a general Council And that they us'd Forms of Prayer and Responses and Alternate way of Singing in the African Church appears by St. Cyprian before And by Optatus Malevianus l. 2. p. 47. for there he blames the Donatists for shutting the mouth of all the People and forcing them to be silent See also St. Augustine do Eccles Dog c. 30. Tom. 3. p. 46. Many more Instances and Authorities may be given to the same purpose as St. Basil Ep. 63. p. 843. and Ep. 68. p. 856. where he says That a Prayer wherein there are not conjoin'd voices is not half so strong as otherwise it would be Conc. Carthag Can. 106. Bev. Tom. 1. p. 640. But I will referr the Reader to Dr. Comber of Liturgies and Dr. Falkner his Defence of Liturgies Our Dissenters object against our alternate way of praying as in our Litany where the Priest says half the Sentence and the People the rest for that neither Priest nor People speak a complete Sentence and therefore our Prayer is imperfect and we do but mock God But by what has been said it appears that this praying by way of Responses was us'd in the purest Ages of the Church and by the Holiest Men. But pray Why may not the words make as perfect a Prayer when they are pronounced by two Mouths as when only by one Prayer is not the pronouncing of words but the joining the desire and consent thereto and this they may do as well when they are pronounced by several Mouths as by one They may as well say That when a Tune is play'd by a Consort of Musick and the Trebles rest and let the Tenors and Bases go on as sometimes they do that the Tune is not a compleat and perfect Tune for if you take either part singly it is not but altogether it is too great Advantage The Advantage of this way of Praying by Responses is That we can give our hearty Consent to each Petition after a more lively manner than by barely saying Amen And also by our frequent answering of whole Sentences our Fancies are the more stirr'd up and enliven'd by shaking off that dulness and drowsiness that otherwise would be apt to seize upon our Spirits in barely listening to one long continued Prayer And in the Primitive Church they had certain Prayers for certain Times and Occasions as Easter-Eve c. See Leo in Vit. Chrysost Tom. 8. p. 288. c. Thus much for the practice of the Primitive Church Now let us come a little nearer our own time and see what the Opinion of other Reformed Churches is concerning prescrib'd Forms of Prayers and Liturgies and this we do the rather because the Dissenters are perpetually calling upon us to reform our selves to the example of other Reform'd Churches Tho' I think under favour we of England have no more reason to follow the pattern of other Nations as to the Reforming and Governing of our Church than we have to do so in Matters of State since we have as absolute and independent Power of Reforming our selves as any of them and God be thank'd as able and godly Ministers both in Church and State to direct us therein They may as well quarrel with us because we do not depose our King and reduce our Government from that of a limited and mixt Monarchy to a Common-wealth like that of Geneva But since they insist so must upon this I will make it appear that the Church of England comes nearer to the judgment and practice of all the Reformed Churches in using prescribed Forms of Prayer than the Dissenters do in rejecting them I will begin with the Lutheran Churches which I shew'd before are acknowledged to be true Churches and which far exceed in number the Churches that follow Calvin's method Luther himself compos'd a Form of Common-Prayer for the Church of Wittemburg taken out of the Mass Book See Luther's Epist Tom. 2. p. 384. And all the Churches of his Communion at this day do use a Liturgy containing Collects Epistles Gospels for every Sunday Prayers and Litanies together with all other parts of Ecclesiastical Ministration as our Common-Prayer Book does and which agrees with ours almost verbatim especially in the Litany And these are impos'd on the Churches as particularly the Churches of Denmark and the Churches in Upper Hungary which are all Lutheran And the Lutheran Churches do chant their publick Prayers as we do in our Cathedrals And they observe Holy Days See all this proved at large from their own writers by Dr. Comber his Defence of Liturgies 2d Part p. 305 c. Next for the Churches of Poland and Lithuania in 2 Synods held there Ann. Dom. 1633. and 1634. one certain Liturgy is injoin'd to be us'd in all those Dominions Certain prescrib'd Liturgies are also us'd in Transilvania Hungary Bohemia c. See at large Dr. Comb. ubi
Supra and Monsieur Durell his View of the Government and publick Worship of God in the Reformed Churches beyond Seas Printed London 1662. Now for the Churches Reform'd by Calvin and others as Geneva France Helvetia Holland c. Calvin compos'd a Form of Divine Service which is us'd in the Church of Geneva and those of France at this day and their Ministers are bound to use them And see Calvin's Letter to the Protector of England during the Minority of King Ed. 6. the Protector at that time when the Common-Prayer Book was to be settled by Act of Parliament thought fit first to Advice with so Eminent a Man as Calvin was about it He writes to Calvin to know his Opinion therein Calvin returns him this answer For so much as concerns the Prayers and Ecclesiastical Rites I much approve that they be determined so that it may not be lawful for the Ministers to very from it that it may be a help to the weakness of some That it may be a Testimony of the Churches consent And that it may put a stop to the levity of such as are for new things See Calv. Ep. p. 165. Ep. 87. to the Protector And see his Letter to Cox a Church of England Divine upon his Arrival at Franckford among his Epistles 164 165. See Beza his Approbation of Forms of Prayer Tom. 2. p. 229. In the French Church Mornay Lord Du-Plessis in his Book of the Mass allows of the Use and Antiquity of prescribed Forms See at large Dr. Comber of Liturgies 2d Part p. 313. And see there the famous Monsieur Daille agreeing herewith In the Church of Helvetia Bullinger tells us they used prescribed Forms keep Fasts and Holy-Days c. Bulling Decod 2. Serm. 1. p. 38. The Churches of Holland use Forms of Prayer for Baptism the Lord's Supper and all occasional Offices and also Liturgies c. which are all put into a Book of Common-Prayer And even in Scotland they have had a Common-Prayer Book for there are some of them now extant which were Printed Ann. 1594. supposed to be writ by Mr. Knox for the use of the Kirk of Scotland See the latter end of Dr. Comber his Defence of Liturgies 2d Part. And the Leyden Professors say That Forms of Prayer are not only lawful but very advantageous because every Christian cannot fitly conceive new Prayers and the attention of Auditors are not a little help'd in great assemblies by usual Forms See Dr. Falkner his Libertas Ecclesiastica p. 121. Thus much for Forms of Prayer in general But some perhaps may object against our Common-Prayer in particular To clear that I think 't were sufficient to tell them that it has been approv'd of by all the learned and godly Divines of the Church of England ever since the Reformation and confirm'd by several Parliaments And it cannot reasonably be suppos'd that God Almighty shou'd conceal his will from the greatest number of the most learned pious and judicious People of a Nation notwithstanding their frequent Prayers to God that he would direct them and their great Care and Study which they take to come to the knowledge of the truth and reveal it only to a few and those of the rawer injudicious sort who have had least time and study and means to come to greater Knowledge such as our Dissenters generally are This alone were sufficient to recommend our particular Common-Prayer But since our Dissenters will not allow so many several Parliaments and so many Successions of Learned Divines to be competent judges in this matter we are willing to stand to the judgment of our Neighbour Churches of the Reformed Religion concerning our Common-Prayer and the other Matters in controversy between us In King Edward 6th his days Archbishop Cranmer did request the famous Bucer to peruse the whole Book of Common-Prayer in order to his censuring what he thought was to be amended Bucer accordingly did so and declares his judgment of it thus In the prescript Form for the Communion and the daily Prayers I see nothing written in this Book which is not taken out of the Word of God if not in express words as the Psalms and Lessons yet in sence as the Collects And also the order of these Lessons and Prayers and the time when they are to be used are very agreeable to the Word of God and the Practice of the ancient Church See Bucer's Censure upon the Book of Common-Prayer c. 1. p. 457. And note this was before the Common-Prayer was amended as now it is Some things 't is true Bucer did wish to be amended which has been since done and most of them according to his Advice there Next the Archbishop of Spalato in his Book against Suarez p. 340. says That the English Liturgy contains nothing in it which is not Holy which is not Pious and truly Christian as well as Catholick Causabon in his Epistle to King James the first affirms the same And says farther That none at this day comes nearer the Form of the Ancient Church following a middle way between those who have offended both in excess and defect The next Authority for us is the learned Grotius who 't is certain had no Obligation to the Church of England but rather the contrary He says I am sure the English Liturgy the Rite of laying on of Hands on Children in memory of Baptism the Authority of Bishops of Synods consiting of none but the Clergy c. do sufficiently agree to the Orders of the Ancient Church from which we cannot deny but we have departed both in France and Holland See Grotius ad Boatslaer Ep. 62. p. 21. The next is the famous Lud. Capellus who was a famous French Divine of the Reformed Church and Divinity Professor in a famous Protestant University This Man lived to hear of our Independent Sect in England and writ most Learnedly against ' em Says he When miraculous Gifts ceased there was a necessity for Liturgies which were used in the First IV. Ages uncorrupted but afterwards Corruptions were introduced by the following Popes But upon the Reformation the Liturgy was purged from all its Corruptions and has been happily used in the several Reform'd Churches and with good success until very lately says he there arose a sort of morose scrupulous not to say downright superstitious Men who for many trifling Reasons of no moment not only dislike the Liturgy hitherto used in that Church but would have both it and the whole Order of Bishops to be utterly abolished in place whereof they would substitute that which they call their Directory c. and so goes on And then he proves at large That Forms of Prayer are not only necessary for the unlearned but the learned also and shews the insufficiency of their Directory And how ridiculous it is to suppose That we have that extraordinary Gift of Prayer that they had in the Apostles days and some little time after 'T were too long to put it all down here
so clear I have already shew'd that there lies no Obligation upon any Non-Conformist Minister to Preach in England and consequently there can be no necessity for the People to hear them The Oaths and Subscriptions are required only of the Clergy and is no more than what other Reformed Churches require of all theirs By the Constitution of the French Church every Minister that will not subscribe to the Orders among them is to be declared a Schismatick And by the Constitution of Geneva any Minister that contemns the Authority of their Church or by his obstinacy disturbs the Order of it shall be first summon'd before the Magistrate and if that will not do he shall be Excommunicated but no Separation allow'd And Calvin says Ep. Olevian pag. 311 122. Let him that will not submit to the Orders of a Society be cast out Our Dissenters themselves did oblige all to Swear Solemnly to their Covenant under pain of Sequestration But say the Dissenters What if the Church of England Excommunicates us may we not then lawfully Separate and set up Meetings of our own I Answer 't is true the Laws of the Church do say that in some cases Men are Excommunicated ipso facto yet this does not oblige any to separate from Communion till Sentence be duly and judicially pronounced in a Church For by the Civil Law notwithstanding Excommunication ipso facto a Declaratory Sentence of the Judge is necessary before a Man shall be deny'd the benefit of Communion And the saying a Man is Excommunicated ipso facto signifies no more than that the Judge may give Sentence without any new judicial Process But though our Dissenters were actually Excommunicated for their Disobedience this this would not excuse them from Schism as Dr. Stillingfleet has proved at large Misch of Separ p. 370. Thus I have shew'd that none of those Pleas which are commonly used by the Dissenters for their Separation from us are sufficient to justifie Separation from a True Church Now if I can prove That the Church of England is a True Reform'd Church they must either Renounce their Principles of Separation or their Reason The only Argument I shall here make use of to prove that the Church of England is a True Reform'd Church is That it is so acknowledged by all the Reform'd Churches in the World who do all own her as a Sister and also by the most Eminent of our own Dissenters themselves All the Reform'd Churches beyond Seas do own the Church of England as a True Reform'd Church and yet they know what her Faults be in her Assemblies in her Worship in her Ministry and Government And this appears by the Harmony of Confessions of the Churches Collected and set forth by the Churches of France and of the Low-Countries They do receive and approve of the Confession of the Church of England and call it one of the True Reform'd Churches Calvin has acknowledged the same in his writings against the Brownists and condemns them for Schismaticks for separating from it See his Instit lib. 4. c. 1. And the famous Causabon in his Epistle to King James I. declares plainly That none at this day comes nearer the form of the Ancient Church than the Church of England does Grotius ad Boatslaer Ep. 62. acknowledges the same To which I shall add the Opinion of Two of the most Eminent Reform'd Divines at this day beyond Seas The one is Monsieur L'Moyn Professor of Divinity at Leyden in his Letter to the Bishop of London Anno Dom. 1680. who wrote to him to know his Judgment concerning our present Divisions in England L'Moyn writes him a long Letter which you may see at large at the latter end of Dr. Stillingfleet's Mischief of Separation I shall only repeat some of it Where was it ever seen says he after he had been highly condemning our Dissenters for Separation that the Salvation of Men was concern'd for Articles of Discipline and things which regard but the out-side and Order of the Church Truly these are never accounted in the number of essential Truths And as there is nothing but these that can save so there is nothing but these that can exclude from Salvation For the Episcopal Government what is there in it that is dangerous and may reasonably alarm Men's Consciences And if this be capable of depriving Men of Eternal Glory and shutting the Gates of Heaven who was there that entred there for the space of 1500. Years since that for all that time all the Churches of the World had no other kind of Government If it were contrary to the Truth is it credible that God had so highly approved it and permitted his Church to be tyrannized over by it for so many Hundred Years c. Therefore since all the Reformed Churches do look upon the Church of England not only as a Sister but as an elder Sister how comes it to pass that some English-men themselves have so ill an Opinion of her at present as to separate rashly from her For to speak the Truth I do not see their separate Meetings are of any great use or that one may be more Comforted there than in the Episcopal Churches When I was at London almost Five Years ago I went to several of their Meetings to see what way they took for the Instruction of their Hearers but I profess I was not at all Edified by it I heard one of the most famous Non-Conformists he Preached in a place where there were about Fourscore Women and a few Men He had chosen a Text about the Building up the Ruines of Jerusalem and for Explication of it he cited Pliny and Vitruvius I believe an Hundred times And did not forget to mention a Proverb in Italian Duro con duro non fa muro All this seem'd to me nothing to the purpose and very improper for his Auditory To Cantonize themselves and make a Schism to have the liberty to vent such Vanities seems very ill Conduct And the People seem very weak to quit their mutual Assemblies for things that so little deserve their esteem and preference I do not think that any one is obliged to suffer such Irregularity c. The other Authority I promised to cite is Monsieur Claud to whom the Bishop of London wrote about the same time desiring his Opinion as aforesaid Monsieur Claud returns him this answer All Reform'd Churches do acknowledge the Church of England as a true Church and I shall not be afraid to give that name to the holding of Assemblies apart and separating from the publick Assemblies and withdrawing themselves from under the Government of the Church 'T is real Schism We do not enter into a comparison of your order with that under which we live all are subject to inconveniencies ours have hers as well as yours It is enough for us to know that the same Divine Providence which by an indispensible necessity and by conjuncture of Affairs did at the beginning of
Separation from a true Church to be sinful who can help that The great number that have liv'd and dy'd in that Opinion does not make the thing less sinful The Donatists in the African Church were more numerous that our English Dissenters are and had 't is likely as many sober and learned Divines among ' em For at the Conference at Carthage they had 400 Bishops yet these were condemn'd for Schismaticks by St. Austin and all the Catholick Bishops And the things that these Donatists separated from the Church for were for the most part the very same that our present Dissenters make the cause of their separation from the Church of England They thought the Bishopricks too large and the Power of the Bishops too great They refus'd to join in Communion with the Catholicks because sinners were admitted there They forsook the Ministers because they were not so agreeable to their humour as they would have them * Optatus Malevianus lib. 2. p. 47. They would not suffer any to speak in the Churches but the Ministers and stopt the mouths of all the People They held that the Civil Magistrate had no Power to Reform the Church They made a shew of greater Zeal for the Purity of Religion than other People and by their stiff rigorous severity which they shew'd and the vehement out-crys which they made that Discipline was not duly executed Many of the People not well grounded in the truth were terrified and turned unto them believing them to be the most zealous holy Men and the only true Church in the World Finally they condemn'd all other Churches as not true Churches See all this in Gifford a Non-conformist Minister his Book against the Brownists 2. part These are the very pretences that our present Dissenters make for their separating from this Church Our Bishopricks are too large our Churches not according to Christ's Institution our Ministers unable and ungodly our way of Worship false our Magistrates assume an unwarranted Power in Church Matters Yea and in their over pretending to Purity and Godliness they are exact Donatists and by that very means do draw the more ignorant and zealous sort of People to them as the Brownists did No People pretend so much to Purity and Religion as they do In all places where they have their publick Meetings they are sure to begin before the Parish Churches and end after be they as long as they will But yet go in to one of their Meetings and you shall see as little signs of Devotion and as many of the People asleep as in any Parish Church in the Kingdom for the number So in their common Discourse many of them will scarce allow themselves so much liberty as to make them good company for fear they should happen to tell a lye but yet in their Dealings they will over-reach a Customer in a Bargain and use as many equivocations to deceive him as any other People shall But least you think I do them wrong let us hear what the learned Mr. Baxter says of them you won't believe that he would wrong them In his Poor Man's Family Book p. 221. speaking of such who run into Parties by Divisions says he Those injudicious sort of Christians having an over high esteem of their own Vnderstandings and Godliness and desiring to be made conspicuous for their Godliness in the World separate from ordinary Christians as below them and unworthy of their Communion these Sects have ever been the Nests of Errors And again ib. p. 331. he bids us beware of joining our selves to Separate Meetings who pretend to stricter Discipline and greater Purity who set themselves up Factiously and Contentiously against the Concordant Churches on pretence of greater Purity whose Meetings are imployed in Reviling others and Condemning other Churches and puffing themselves up with Pride as if they were the only Churches of Christ But our Dissenters will say This is a scandalous abuse to say that they condemn all other Reformed Churches in the World But I doubt they agree with the Donatists even in this For I suppose they will condemn all those that account them Schismaticks And this do all the Reformed Churches for they all hold that Separation from a true Church is Schism and own the Church of England for a true Church and consequently make them Schismaticks and so have expresly declared them as appears before Again I suppose they will condemn all Churches that communicate with an Idolatrous Anti-Christian Church knowing her faults some of them declare the Church of England to be such a Church and then they must condemn all the Reformed Churches which communicate with her Well say the Dissenters You of the Church of England have a great deal to say for your selves and if all be true that you have told us our Separation from you is sinful and unreasonable But what reason have we to believe you we have a great many able and godly Ministers of our own who tell us the quite contrary 't is certain they can't both be in the right why may we not then believe your Ministers may be deceived as well as ours I answer 'T is not so likely that all the Divines of the Church of England that have been since the Reformation should be deceived in a thing of this nature as that those of the Non-conformists should First Because they are much more numerous and 't is not so likely that a great many good Men should be deceived as a few 'T is a Rule in Logick Quod plures sapentiores testantur credibile est esse verum And Secondly Because they have much better means to come to the knowledge of the Truth than those of the Non-conformists can pretend to as will plainly appear by considering the Method taken on both sides for the breeding up of Divines Those who are design'd for the Study of Divinity in the Church of England are kept at the best Schools that can conveniently be had till they understand Latin and Greek very well then they are admitted into one of the Universities where they are put under the Care of a particular Tutor who is always one of the Fellows of the College and consequently a Man well approved of by the whole College for his Learning and Sobriety for by the Statutes of every College none but such are qualified for Fellowships This Tutor has seldom above 20. Students under his Care at a time and many of them not half that number every Student comes twice a day to his Tutor's Chamber to be instructed by him And besides this the College appoints other Tutors or publick Lecturers who are to teach and instruct them in the publick Halls some for Philosophy some for Disputations and other Exercises These publick Tutors are changed every year which is a great Advantage to the Students by acquainting them with the several Methods and Opinions of such variety of Learned Men. Thus they spend the first four Years and then after very strict