WHETâ—ER Parish Câ—â—gregations BE TRUE Christian Churches â—â—d the Capable Consenting Incumbents be truly their Pastors or Bishops over their Flocks 〈◊〉 Whether the old Protestants Conformists and Nonconâ—â—rmists or the Brownists were in the right herein And how 〈…〉 our present Case is the same 〈◊〉 by Richard Baxter as an Explication of some Passages in his Forâ—â—â— Writings especially his Treatise of Episcopacy misunderstood and misapplied by some and answering the strongest Objections of some of them especially a Book called R. Baxters Judgment and Reasons against Communicating with the Parish Assemblies as by Law required And another called A Theological Dialogue CATHOLICK COMMUNION once more Defended upon â—â—ns necessitating importunity By RICHARD BAXTER LONDON 〈◊〉 in Parkhurst at the Bible and Three 〈◊〉 near Mercers Chappel 1684. Communion with Parish Churches vindicated In Answer to a Book entituled The Judgment of Mr. Baxter against Communicating c. Mistaking my writings A Church is not formally quid Physiâ—um but quid morale politicum Relativum a political Relative being II. The same name signifieth both the Genus and Species that are divers by use III. The same is true of the name Pastor IV. Diocesan Churches are of three sorts 1. Such as have at present but one fixed Assembly but design to gather more hereafter Such Dr. Hammond thought they were in Scripture times 2. Such as have one Diocesan Governour or Superintendent over many inferior Churches and their Pastors 3. Such as have one only Bishop or Pastor having no other true Pastor Elder Church-Ruler or Presbyter of Christs Institution under him but Chappels which have no such Ruler or Pastor V. The first sort of Diocesans we have now nothing to do with The second sort is controverible some holding it sinful some lawful and some and very many to be of Divine Institution as Successors of the Apostles not in the extraordinaries but in the ordinary parts of their Office Christ having made an imparity or a superiority of some over others they think that to say without proof that he changed that order in one Age is 1. to charge him with mutability and levity 2. And to diminish from his Law which hath a Curse The third sort of Diocesans is either 1. of a Diocess like a great Parish with Chappels so small that one Pastor may possibly oversee it This is tollerable when more cannot be had and when they can it hurts only â—he well-being of the Church Or 2. it is of a Diocess so great as that one man cannot do what is essential to a Pastor and so it is undone This nullifieth that Species of Churches which is of Christs Institution VI. A particular Church of Christs Institution of the lowest political order is A competent number of Neighbour-Christians who by Christs appointment and their own exprest consent are associated with one or more Pastâ—â— for the right worshipping of God in publick and the Edification of the Members by the exercise of the said Pastoral Office and their mutual Duties to God to their Pastors and each others for the welfare of the Society and the pleasing and glorifying of God VII The Pastoral Office as over this first or lowest Church and as it is in unfixed Ministers related yet to no one Church more than another differeth but as the subject matter or object of their charge doth differ and not in the fundamental Power or Order VIII This Pastoral Office is essentially Ministerial to Christ as the Prophet Priest and King of his Church 1. A Power to Teach 2. To Lead in Worship 3. To Guide by the Keys of Reception Admonition Exclusion and Restoration IX It is not Inconsistent with this Pastoral Office to be Governed by Superiors whether Magistrates or Ecclesiasticks as others were by Apostles and by Timothy Titus c. Therefore every limitation restraint rebuke or punishment for Mal-administration nullifieth not the Office nor yet allowing an appeal to Superiors X. To hinder a Pastor from forcible excluding men from Church or Sacrament and allow him only to do it by Application of Gods word is agreeable to his Office XI It is Power and Obligation to exercise and not the present actual Exercise that is essential to the Office in the fundamental Relation But should the Non-exercise be total and stated it would not make up a Church in act No more than a mere Power to Teach will make a School in act XII He that hath the entire Power and statedly exerciseth but one part of it statedly omitting an essential part may be in Order an empowred Minister but his Society is but a half Church But if it be only an Integral part that he omits it may be a true Church tho faulty or if it be an essential part and not statedly but only by some present impedition XIII The name of Church Pastor and Diocesan being formally Relative in signification are really divers things as the Fundamentum Relate Correlate and Terminus are divers They are therefore considerable I. As instituted and described by Christ II. As understood described and consented to by sound Orthodox Pastors and People III. As described by laws and Canons IV. As esteemed and described by many mistaking Bishops Clergy and People some Super-Conformists and some Misjudging that the Law saith as they The word as to these senses is equivocal XIV Christs Institution went before mens Corruption and is to be held to by all Christians who own him to be the Maker and Ruler of his own Church And no man hath Power to null his Institution nor to warrant 〈◊〉 to make his Church another thing XV. By Christs Institution every Ministerial Elder and Pastor hath Power 1. To Teach the People 2. To Lead them in Worship 3. To Receive by Baptism and to Communion or to refuse on just cause tho under Government as aforesaid The whole Office I have copiously described in my Universal Concord 24. years ago XVI The Parishes that have capable Christians and Ministers consented to by their sumbmission are such true Churches their Neighbourhood and Christianity making them capable matter Not that a man is of the Church because he is in the Parish Atheists Infidels Sadduces Hereticks and Refusers may dwell there Its thought that of 60000. that dwell in one London Parish 10000 Communicate not and so 40000 or 50000 are not of that Church but those that are capable Consenters and Communicants XVII This sort of Churches we were in Possession of 166â— and till August 24. 1662. And of 9000 Ministers then 2000 only were put out the other 7000 continuing in And of those that were put out some few gathered part of their old Flock into private Churches renouncing and disswading them from the publick Most gathered no such Churches but help their old People as they could not drawing them from the Parish Churches till the time of the Kings Licences for more open Ministry Many led them to the Parish Churches and took themselves for fellow
ever I knew have not that I know of renounced any thing essential to a Parish-Pastor I before said Ordination and Jurisdiction over Presbyters or other Churches is no part of its essence To be obedient to a Diocesan is no such Renunciation Therefore it is no such Renunciation to promise to obey them in lawful things subordinate to obeying Christ If it prove a mistake in them and that they owe no such Obedience every such mistake doth not degrade them He that said that he that will be greatest shall be servant of all thought not that to obey an equal did null the Ministry Nor he that said Be suâ—ject one to another Christ and Peter paid tribute to avoid offence tho the Children be free But what if a man be in doubt whether such Obedience be not his Duty Is it not the safer side much more if he verily think it his Duty 2. To take Diocesans to be Jure Divino is said by some to be destructive of the Pastoral Office and Churches and a change of the English Church-Government But it 's error For 1. It is not the Destructive Diocesan Government which acknowledg no Church and Pastor under them that those in question consent to but the Governing Diocesan who ruleth subject Pastors and Churches 2. This Question of Divine right is threefold 1. Of that which by Dâ—â—ire right is necessary ad esse 2. Of that which is by Divine right best and mâ—st elegible or needful ad melius esse 3. That which is by right of Divine Concession lawful but not necessary The Church of England never determined which of these was the Diocesans Case All Conformists judged it Lawful multitudes judged it Better than other forms Many judged it necessary when it might be had But no Law determined for any of these alone Unless you will say the Preface to the Book of Ordination doth it by saying It is evident to all men diligently reading holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons Which Offices were evermore had in such Reverend Estimation c. Here some say That the Church of England took not these for three distinct Orders before 1640 but now Therefore by the word these Orders is meant only two Ans At this rate he must have the betteâ— whom the hearer best trusteth whatever he say If these Orders of Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons speak not three Orders I cannot understand them Here note partiality the same that refuse to subscribe them because they speak three Orders yet say they speak but two when they argue that Church-Government is changed 1662 from what it was 1640. Indeed Aelfricks Laws in Spelman make Bishops and Priests the same Order and so do a great part of Schoolmen and other Papists but the English Bishops and Clergy were some of one mind and some of another about it and determined it not Unless this Preface be a Determination the Name Order and Office being both used And to instance in no other Saravia tho no English man yet of the Church of England wrote more strongly almost than any that I ever read for Diocesan Episcopacy against Beza c. and that upon this ground of Divine right that they succeeded the Apostles and such as Timothy Titus c. in the Government of many Churches And the Kings Divines at the Isle of White went all on that Ground To say then that to plead a Divine right for them is new is to contradict large Historical Evidences And were it true that this had been never before Imposed or Subscribed surely it is not an Opinion of the Divine right of governing of many Churches that renounceth the being of those Churches it asserteth them to be by Divine right For that which is not is not governable Non entis non sunt accidentia But where and how hath the Law or Church altered the case since 1640. These words were in the Book of Ordination before and I know of none plainer that way since It s destructive Diocesan Government which renounceth the Government of any subject Churches but of one only and of any Pastors that I argue against and not Governours of such Churches XXXIV But it 's objected That they swear not to endeavour any alteration of Church-Government therefore they renounce the Pastoral Office because the present Government excludeth it Ans 1. This is to dictate and not to prove The Diocesan Government hampered and fettered it by the Canons in the time of Whitgift and Bancroft but null'd it not He that reads the Canons or knows the Church and thinks that it's Government hath no need of Amendment is far from my mind But governing is not nullifying 2. It is not true that ever I heard that they swear what this Objection saith The Ministers do not swear but subscribe it and swear Obedience in licitis honestis And I could never learn what Law commands that Oath And if it should extend to obey all the Canons it 's that which I would be full loath to swear but I know no Canon that utterly nulleth the Parish-Churches and Ministers And a Justice that sweareth to execute the Laws is not supposed thereby to justifie every Law nor to execute any if it should be against Gods Law that exception being still supposed 3. Their Subscription never to endeavour alteration engageth them never to endeavour to destroy the Parish Churches and Ministry and so is for them For that would be a great alteration indeed 4. If you should think otherwise yet if the Subscriber or Swearer think himself that it is not destructive but governing Diocesans that he subscribeth to it is not your Opinion or Exposition that bindeth him against his own No tho you were in the right as to the Imposers sense For Ignorantis non est consensus It 's unjust to face them down that they mean what they profess they do not Ask forty Conformists whether they think the Government which they promise not to alter be that Diocesan form which ruleth Parish Churches and Pastors or that which denieth their being and I think few will profess the latter sense 5. And suppose the worst that any Parish-Priest were of that mind yea and were really no true Pastor as to his own acceptance with God he may yet be a Pastor so far true as is necessary to the Essence of the Church if the People know it not For the Innocent suffer not for the guilties sin If a man be a secret Atheist or Heretick or do counterâ—eit Ordination and Election and really had none and the People be deceived by him and know it not while he possesseth the place and doth the work his Baptisms and Administrations are valid to the Church as a Church tho not to himself and his Ministry The Jews Church was not null when the high Priests had no lawful call but bought the Office of Râ—man
I confess one man may possibly live under so intollerable a Minister as is not to be owned And even some of the high adversaries of Nonconformists seem of this mind and break the Canon and having Pastors who they think do not heartily confâ—rm â—ut plead for Peace and Moderation they revile them as Trimmers and will not Communicate wiâ—h them but go out of their own Parishes and thousands seldom any where Other circumstances also may vary mens cases â—ut some Objectors at last tâ—ll us that the great difference which they mean is differeâ—t light Tâ—e â—ld Martyrs Reformers and Nonconformists had not so much light as we and so it wâ—s not thâ—â—r sin but greater light being now mâ—râ— common it will be a common sin to jâ—yn in the Liturgy Ans 1. It is ordinary and easie for men to magnifie their own understandings but Gods Law was then the same as now and they were bound to know it Their ignorance might make sin less and stripes fewer but could not make it none 2. I have many Reasons to think that it is your light that is lâ—ss and the old Nonconformists and Conformists in this that was greater 1. That is the greater light that most agreeth with Gods Word and thâ— universal churches practice accordingly 2. The writings of the old Nonconformists yet extant give better reasâ—ns than the seperatists did and therefore had clearer light What vast difference is there in the writings of Ball Hildersham Amâ—sius Manuductions Gifford Paget Bradshaw c. on that part and Johnsons Cans Penrys c. on the other 3. The Theological writings and labours of the Nonconformists in all other points shewed that they were men of incomparable more light than the Separatists and is it like that God would give men such rare light only in church communion that had so little comparatively in the rest of Divinity except Ainsworth's skill in Hebrew in other things by Paget laid too naked how few old Separatists have left any considerable fruits of great light unto the church Read the writings of Cartwright Dudley Fenner Hildersham John Reignolds Dod Perkins Baiâ— Parker Ames Bradshaw c. Besides Scots and all Foreigners such as Calvin Beza Zanchy Sadeel and hundreds more and compare these with the Writings of the Separatists and judg who had greater light 4. Since 1660. all the London Ministers and others with them tâ—at offered the King to set up in the parish churches the old Liturgy with some alterations were men except my self who shewed in their Writings and preaching as much light as the Separatists have shewed even Brown or John Goodwin himself that wrote Prelatical Preachers are no Teachers of Christ Where do they now shew greater light than others this boast to me deserveth pity more than confutation Anabaptists and others say the same but I find much less light in them both when I read and hear them tho I truly love and honour all that is good in them If you have so much more light than we and all the Reformed churches shew it us in other excellencies XLI But I must more particularly consider of this Authors Allegation of my own words against me especially my Treatise of Episcopacy And I do heartily thank him for calling me to review it For 1. I profess to write nothing which may not be amended And 2. If mens misunderstanding turn my writings to a snare and scandal it greatly concerneth me to remove it by explication or by retractation of any thing that needeth it And 1. I do find that I have incautelously given some occasion to the mistake for thol entituled my Book not against Diocesan episcopacy but against that sort of Diocesan churches Prelacy and Government which casteth out the Primitive church spâ—cies of â—piscopacy Ministry and Discipline and tho to avoiâ— mistake I said in the Preface I â—ere give notice to the Reader that whenever 〈…〉 me speak as against the English Diocesan Prelacy I mean it as described by Cosins and Dr. Zouch and as relating to the Et câ—tera Oaths and 〈◊〉 and not in opposition to the laws of the Land Yet all this was not enough to avoid misunderstanding Indeed I took the church Government to be described and judged of by the churches own sentence more than by the â—â—w and I had read the said Et cetera oath and canons with the words that so it â—ught to stand which I think could mean nothing less than that so by Gods Law it ought to stand and I had read the old canons 6 th 7 th and 8 th Which exâ—ommunicate ipso facto all men withâ—ut excepting Lâ—rds or Parliament Mâ—n who affirm that any thing in the church Government by arch-Arch-Bishops Bishops Deans Arch-Deacons and THE REST that bear office therein is repugnant to the Word of God And I read the canons that forbid Ordained Ministers to preach till they are further licensed by Bishops yea and in the church or elsewhere so much as to expound any Doctrine or Matter but only to râ—ad Scripture and Homilies c. with much more like this 3. And then I took the stated restraint of the Ministry with Lay-chancellors and officials decreâ—ive power of Excommunication and absolution and the foresaid Civilians denying all Gâ—venment to Presbyters to have been quoad exercitium quantum 〈◊〉 at least an overthrow of parish churches Rectors and discipline 4. And I thought that the Bishops and Chancellors could never have so long done all this and ruled by these canons if the Law had not been on their side 5. And I thought that the Authors of the canons of 1640 being a câ—nvoâ—aâ—iâ—n it was to be called the Church of England and specially when I found the most highly honoured Doctors pleading there was no Bishop but Dâ—â—cesan and no church without its proper Bishop By all these inducements with long sad experience I oft speak so incautelously calling this the English dâ—â—â—â—san frame that the Reader might easily think that I meant it was that frame that was setled by law whereas having read â—ryn Hâ—ntley Leighâ—â—â— and others that deny the law to be for it and being my self a stranger to that case of Law I should have more fully separated the Law case from the new convocation case and much more from the destructive Innovators case who nullified the foreign churches with whom it was that I disputed and specially considering that the canons and oath of 1640. were aâ—ter cashier'd by Parliament and never since restor'd no not by the Parliament of 1662. Upon all this 1. I retract all words that seem to determine the case in Law if any such be there or that by darkness tend so to the Readers error 2. And all words that make the writings of superconformists and subverâ—ers or changâ—rs of the church government or the canons of the convocation 1640 to be the sense of the Church of England when it is said that before its sence was otherwise and alteration is now abjured
for another yet agreeing in the same ordinary external Communion one part may be called national as well as the other The question is de â—omine the name equivocal from diversity of relations I own 1. A Christian Kingdom 2. I own a national association of Parish Churches and Pastors 3. Tho these submit to Diocesan superiority and be parts of a Diocess but true single Churches I do not therefore separate from them 4 A national Church headed by one constitutive pastoral Head I disown call which you will the national Church But saith he of his approved parish Church P. 14. Such a Church aâ—â—iâ—meth to it self all that pastâ—ral pâ—wer that in pursuance of Canon and Statute Law is fixed in the Bishop Ans Incogitantly spoken Do all Independents assume the power of Ordination Jurisdiction over others Citations Licencing Subspendings Degradings silencings instituting inducting c. which are so fixed on the Bishop If none of this be pastoral power then the appropriating it is no depriving parish Ministers of pastoral power and to be under Magistrates power nulls not the pastors XLIX What he saith about unlawful terms of Communion p 21. c. in the instances of kneeling putting off the hat standing up c. I answer 1. The Author all along seemeth to forget that I am not accusing him not telling every man his duty but only giving the Reasons of my own and such others practice so they make a long ado to vindicate him whose Manuscript I answered and say His question was only whether it be lawful to communicate with the churches as setled by Law and not in other respects When I ever told them I meddle with none of their Questions but my own viz 1. Whether I and such other do well or ill in that communion we hold with the Parish Churches 2. Whether all Protestants in England are bound in conscience to renounce and avoid Communion in the Liturgy with all Parish Churches and Chappels and rather to give over all church worship I only gave my Reasons why that Manuscript divulged and boasted of as unanswerable changed not my Judgment and I answered that in his Arguments which went further than the question put by them and assaulted my own assertions having before in my Christian Directory and cure of Church divisions without naming him fully answered his printed Reasons to prove it unlawful to use an imposed form or Liturgy especially because Ministers must use their own gifts But if any man believe that it is a sin to communicate kneeling or standing or sitting unless he lye down as Christ did or at any time save at a feast or supper or any where save in an Inn or an upper room or with any women or more than twelve or if they think it sin to kneel at prayer or be uncovered or to sing Psalms in our Metre and Tunes whether these men should separate from all the Churches that will not receive them in their own way or how far they do well or ill that will not let every man do what he will is none of the case that I have before me It will not follow that I must separate from a Church that bids me kneel and be uncovered c. because you take it to be sin put not your measures on all others And here because same maketh Mr. Faldo the Author of the Vindication which I answered that I may so far vindicate him as to shew that it 's â—earce likely I ask whether if Mr. Faldo did well as a pastor to keep up a church at Barnâ—â— many years which would not endure the singing of a psalm of praise to God but constantly forbore it tho his Judgment was against them besides that many of them were not only against Infant Baptism but fâ—rther differ'd in other things was this communion more lawful or laudable than with honest parish Ministers in the Liturgy Did he the whole office of a pastor What if the Bishop had forbid him to sing â—salms Is not the Church State more concerned in the whole congregation than in an absent Bishop what greater omission or defect is there in many parish-Parish-Churches I again say that I am so far of the Judgment of Hildersham John Ball c. that I had rather joyn caeteris paribus in a Church that useth the Psalms Chapters and all the Lords-day Prayers in the Liturgy before Sermon than one that only giveth us one Psalm or none and a Pulpit-prayer and a Sermon without all the rest of Church Worship L. I will conclude all with repeating a little of the Explication of my misused writings I. The pastoral Oversight of the Laity by the Elders or Bishops of the several Flocks is of Christs Institution and belongs to all true Presbyters And tho in necessity it may be done by divers transient Ministers pro tempore most regularly every Church should have it s stated Pastors II. Where such Churches are large the work requireth many Ministers where each one hath but part of the Charge III. Reason and Church-consent among these made one a President over the rest and called him the Bishop pecularly if it were in Marks days as Hierom saith it was in John's And tho this be not essential to a Church it is lawful and fit and at last it grew to so great a Reputation and Opinion of necessity that all Churches had such Bishops and gave them a Negative voice and ordained not without them and defined Churches as essentiated by Relation to them Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo adunata If now such men as J.O. Mr. Nye Dr. Goodwin c. should have in one Church six or seven young men of their own training up to be their Assistant-presbyters I do not think an Independent Church would take it for any crime that he should have a Negative voice in acts of Order and Discipline or that they should ordain Ministers therein without his Consent IV. By degrees single Congregations increased to as many as our great Parishes that have Chappels and tho still they communicated in the chief Church at some special times of the year they ordinarily met in divers places and the Presbyters officiated some in one meeting and some in another at first whosoever the Bishop daily sent but after their particular Tyths or Chappels were assigned to each yet all together were esteemed but one Church governed by one Bishop and his Colledg of Presbyters V. When they increased yet more and more fixed Chappels were assigned to fixed Presbyters but not as distinct Churches but parts of the Diocesan Church tho at last they were larger than one Bishop and Colledg could guide according to the first Institution VI. Yet long every Christian City had a Bishop and Church and every incorporate big Town like our Corporations or Market-Towns was called a City not because it had a Market as a reverend Slanderer seigneth me to lay but because Custom the master of Language called all Corporations and great
Diocesans It is their example that sak to them thword of God that the Apostle sets before them And who be those Perhaps it will be said that Fame may tell the Diâ—cess of the example of their Diocesan tho they see him nâ—t I answer 1. But the Text speaketh of those that preach to them Fame may as well tell us of the good works of any other bishop as of the Diocesan Many bishops in London live near us it may tell us of any other good mans life What is this to the Text 1 Pet. 5.3 Neither as being Lords over Gods heritage but being examples to the flock Dr. Hammond VValking Christianly and exemplary before them Q. VVhat Before them that never knew them nor could do Doth the Diocesan or the Incumbent more walk as a known example before the Parish flock for their imitation 4. It is part of a bishops office as a general Minister not only to teach the Church but to preach to those that are yet no Members of the Church Matth 28.19 Go and disciple me all nations 1 Tim. 5.17 They that 〈◊〉 in the word and doctrine Dr. Hammond To preach the Gospel to whom it was nâ—ws Acts 26.17 18. To whom I send thee to â—pâ—n their eyes and turn them from darkness to light and from the pâ—wer of Satan unto God c. Not that fixed Pastors must wander to do this as unâ—ixed Missionaries but within their reach Hence Dr. Hammond noteth out of Clemens Râ—m That they are made Bishops over the Infidels that should after believeâ— And bishop Dâ—wname saith that the City and Territories are their Diocesses when the Christians were but few and as Dr. H. saith But one Congregation whicâ— one bishop only with a Deacon or two served So that either a Diocess was no Church or it was a Diocesan Church of Heathens save that Congregation Our great Parishes that have 70000 or 60000 or 40000 or 20000 souls have not the sixth part that I say not the tenth so many Communicants Who is it that preacheth most for the Conversion of the rest Atheists Sadduces Infidels Hereticks Bruitists and impious ones Is it the Diocesan or the Incumbent Who doth the Law most require it of 5. It is part of the Boshops office to Catechize or Teach the Novices that have need of milk and are as Children in danger of being tost up and down and carried to and fro with every wind of Doctrine See Eph 4.14 15 16 Heb. 5.11 12. With Dr. Hammonds Paraphrase Quest Doth the Law and Church lay more of this on Diocesans or parish Pastors 6. It is the Bishops work to defend the truth against gainsayers and confute adversaries and stop the mouths of Hereticks Infidels and other enemies as is confest by Dr. Hammond on many Texts to Timothy and Titus as 2 Tim. 2.24 25 c. Not by force but by evidence of truth And doth not the Law and Church lay more of this on the Incumbents than the Diocesans who are not Uâ—iquitaries II. The Second part of the Bps. office is Guidance and officiating before the Church in publick worship in subordination to Christs Priesthood 1. By confessing sin and to be the subintercessor or the mouth of the Church in publick prayer thanksgiving and praise to God 2. In Consecrating and Distributing and giving in Christs Name the Sacrament of Communion 3. To bless the Congregation in the name of the Lord c. All these Dr. Hammond maketh the Bps. office and so doth the Scripture and so did Justin Martyr Tertullian c. Citations in a confessed case would but be tedious Quest. And who doth this most in all the Churches Who confesseth sin prayeth for mercy praiseth God administreth the Lords Supper blesseth the people c. The Bp to many hundred Churches or each Incumbent to each Church And on whom doth the Law most impose it And what doth the Diocesan in it more than any one of the rest 2. Dr Hanmond on Acts 2. And Acts 4.33 34 35. Sheweth that it was the Bps. part to receive all the offerings of the Communicants and all the tythes and first fruits c. Who doth this most The Diocesan in all the Parishes of his Diocesse or the Incumbents 3. Dr Hammond and many old Canons before him tells us that the Bp. was out of the Church flock to take care of all the poor orphans widows strangers Deacons were herein but servants under them Dr. Hammond on 1 Cor 12.28 The supreme trust and charge was reserved to the Apostles and Bps. of the Church But the poor will starve if the Incumbent with his assistance do not more in this than the Diocesan 4. It is the Bps. office to visit the sick Jam 5. Call for the elders of the Church and let them pray over him c. Dr. Hammond in v. 14. Because there is no evidence whereby these may appear to have been so early brought into the Church that is Subpresbyters and because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the plural doth as way conclude that thâ—re were mâ—re of these elders than one in each particular Church and because elders of the Church was both in the Scriptures style and in the first writers the title of Bps. and lastly because the visiting of the sick is anciently mentioned as one branch of the office of Bps. therefore it may very reasonably be resolved that the Bps. of the Church one in each particular Church are here meant Quest Is it the Diocesan perhaps 50 Miles off that the sick must send for or that the Law and Church impose this on to visit the sick and pray over them c. or is it the Incumbents III. But the great doubt is who hath the Power of Government and who actually governs not by the sword but with the Ministerial Pastoral Government And here it must still be remembred 1. That this particular power of the Keys or Government is only by the word of God opened and applied as Bp. Bilson hath proved and is commonly confessed some call it Perswasive some Directive some Doctrinial But it is not such meer direction or perswasion as any man may use to another but such as is the part of one commissioned to it as his office An Authoritative perswasion and a Judicial decision as by an intrusted steward of Christ but only on Conscience and on Voluntiers and not by any power to exercise force on body or purse 2. That Governing and unjust restraining this power is not taking it away from the Pastor and laying penalties on men for exercising some part of that which Christ hath given doth but bind men to bear that penalty when the exercise is necessary Now let us consider wherein the Governing Power doth consist 1. It primarily consisteth in judging who is capable of Baptisme and so Baptizing them This is the first and great exercise of the Keys and that 〈◊〉 foro exteriore To judge who shall be taken publâ—ckly for a Christian and in
Pastors with the publick Ministers and lived in Love and Communion with them The People were not by the new Law cast out with the Ministers Most of the people in the 2000 Parishes of the ejected and almost all in the other 7000 who before communicated or were caâ—able of it continuing the Parish Communion And so are Churches if they were so before XVIII The generality of the former Protestant Bishops and Clergy took the Parish Rectors to be true Pastors of the Parish Churcheâ— as Bishop Usher proved them The Church of England is confessed to be of this mind before the Wars It is not certain that Arch-Bishop Laud thought otherwise If he did Heyâ—n names but five that joyned with him in his main cause of whom Mountague if not more were for the contrary cause in this point XIX They then took a Curate to be a Pastor and to have all that is essential to the Presbyters Office And to be a Presbyter and no Pastor is a Contradiâ—tion in the sense of Protestants and Papists except what is said for Lay-Eâ—ders In France they call all their Parish-Pastors Curates the word sigâ—ifieth the Curam animarum XX. No Law since 166â— hath changed any essentials of the Parish-Pastors Oâ—â—nce and so none hath nulled it from what it was in 1640. They that affirm the contrary must prove it The Law before subjected Parish-Pastors to Diocesans It imposed the Oath of Canonical Obedience and a promise of the same in Ordination It was the same to the Ecclesiastical Courts as now If any pretend to such singular skill in Law as to say that there was no Law for the Book of Ordination which made the ordained to Covenant to obey their Ordinaries nor any Law for the Canons I hope he will have more reason than to lay the controversie about Separation on his odd conceit when all the People in England have in the days of the four last Soveraigns been forced to submit to these as Legal and no such pretender could at any time deliver them Books have been written and Pleas used against submitting to the Courts that declared not that they held their Authority from the King but the Judges still over-ruled it against them And they that profest to hold it from the King did many if not most mean but the Liberty of publick exercising it as the Ministry is held under him or the adjunct Cogent Power or the Circa sacra XXI The Law enableth the Parish-Minister to receive into the Church by Baptism tho under canonical Prescripts which Dissenters much dislike and to Catechize Youth and certifie their fiâ—ness for Confirmation before they Communicate It bindeth them to reject all from Communion who are not confirmed or at least are not ready and desirous of it it tells us who is to be taken for ready Those that have learnt the Catechism and solemnly own their Baptismal Covenant The Pastor hereby hath Power to try all the unconfirmed whether they are thus ready or not The Canon requireth him to deny Communion to all that live in any scandalous Sin The Law and Canon bid him to instruct the Congregation to lead them in publick Worship and in the Name of Christ to Reprove Admonish Comfort Administer the Lord Supper Visit the Sick with Instruction and Prayers All which with the aforesaid Power of judging who shall be Communicants is full as much as is Essential to a Parish-Pastor Solemnly to pronounce them Excommunicate beside refusing Communion is not Essential If it were they have Power to do it after the Bishops Sentence If it were Essential to do it as ungoverned or finally or without appeal then Apostolick yea and Magistrates Government would null the Pastors Office XXII The altering some words in Ordination and putting out the name Pastors from most places in the Litturgy where they were applied to Parish-Ministers is no change at all of the Office much less of its essence It takes no Power from them which they had But it was done by the interest of some men who thought that Presbyters who swore the three Kingdoms against Bishops had taken too much upon them and in opposition they endeavoured to keep them under and so would diminish their pretences for Parity But this changeth not the Species of the Office And it s known who these men were And tho some of them are of Opinion that Diocesan Bishops only may regularly confer Ordination and exercise Jurisdiction over the Clergy and that meer Presbyter Ordination with us is null 1. These same men had a chief hand in debating and wording the Kings Declarations October 1661. Concerning Ecclesiastical Affairs and therein the King after debates with Lords and Bishops distinguisheth the meer Pastoral preswasive Power from the Episcopal which is Cogent and alloweth the Rural Deans with the Presbyters of his Deanry to exercise the said Pastoral perswasive Power and the other Pastors also to joyn with the Bishops And the Law still calls them Rectors The Liturgy yet calls them Pastâ—rs the word Pastors being a Metaphor they take to be general Bishâ—ps and Priests being with them two Orders of Pastors Therefore because it doth not distinguish them they usually leave it out and put sometime Bishops and Curates and sometime Bishops Priests and Deacons The common description of a Bishop by them is that he hath the sole Power of presiding and determining in Ordination and Jurisdiction sâ—ne quo non oft alledging Jeroms Quid facit Episcopus quod non facit Presbyter excepta Ordinatione And yet the Law still binds them not to ordain without Presbyters Imposition of hands with them And Arch-Deacons and Presbyters Surrogates c. Excommunicate And in the Ember-week they are every day to pray by the Liturgy So guide and govern the minds of thy Servants the Bishops and Pastors of thy Flâ—ck that they may lay hands suddenly on no man Where Bishops and Pastors cannot be taken for Synonyma whilst they speak of all that lay on hands And they distinguish not Pastors and Curates where they change the words but Bishops and Curates But nothing more proveth what I say than that the Law yet bindeth all Priests to all that is essential to an Episcopus Gregis a Pastor of a particular Church see the Exhort in Ord. of Priests We exhort you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that you have in remembrance into how high a dignity and to how weighty an office and charge ye are called that is to say to be Messengers Watchmen and Stewards of the Lâ—rd to teach and to premonish to feed and provide for the Lords Family to seek for Christs Sheep that are dispersed abroad and for his Children who are in the midst of this naughty world that they may be saved by Christ for ever have always therefore printed in your remembrance how great a treasure is committed to your charge for they are the sheep of Christ which he bought c. The Church and Congregation whom you
must serve is his Spouse and his Body and if it shall happen the same Church or any member thereof to take any hurt or hindrance by reason of your negligence ye know the greatness of the fault and the hâ—rrible punishment that will ensue Wherefore consider with your selves the end of your ministry towards the children of God towards the Spouse and body of Christ and see that you never cease your labour your care and diligâ—nce till you have done all that lieth in you according to your bounden duty to bring all such as are or shall be committed to your charge to that agreement in the faiâ—h and knowledg of God and that ripeness and perfectness of age in Christ that there be no place left among you either for error in Religion or viciousness of life Forasmuch then as your office is both of so great excellency and of so great difficulty ye see with how great care and study ye ought to aâ—ply your selves as well that ye may shew your selves dutiful and thankful to the Lord who hath placed you in so high a dignity as also to beware that neither you your selves offend nor be occasions that others offend And after their Covenant to preach according to the Scripture they promise to give faithful diligence to administer the Doctrine Sacraments and Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded and as this Church and Realm hath received the same according to the Commandments of God So that you may teach the people committed to your care and charge with all diligence to keep and observe the same Here Doctrine Sacraments and Discipline are their Office-works Gods Commandments are their Rule tho on supposition that this Realm hath received them according to his Commandments Next they covenant with all faithful diligence to banish all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to Gods word and to use both PUBLICK and PRIVATE Monitions and Exhortations as well to the sick as to the whole within your cures as need shall require and occasion shall be given And to keep quietness Peace and Love among all Christian people and especially among them that are or shall be committed to their charge All this is setled by Law and all Ministers subscribe to it And is not this enough to the essence of a Pastors office What is the Reason The next promise is Reverently to obey their Ordinary and other chief Ministers to whom is committed the charge and government of them following with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions and submitting themselves to their godly judgments This shews that 1. It is not a strict Divine Right that is meant over them for all Ordinaries and other chief Ministers pretend not to such right 2. If others superiority null their office then none is in office but the King Was Diâ—trepâ—es no Minister because John threatned him as his superior It 's liker he had been none for resisting John of the two Were all degraded that obeyed the Apostles If it should be an error that a Parochial Bishop is a Governor over his junior-Presbyters or a Diocesan over both that nulleth not the Presbyters office The Presbyterians give a Classis or Synod as much power over particular Churches as the Episcopal give to Diocesans or near And yet few Separatists have thence concluded that they have no particular Churches or that this nulleth them contrarily ab est tertii adjecti ad est secundi valet argumentum Parish Churches are govern'd Churches subject to superiors ergo they are Churches And the Law calls them Churches 〈◊〉 it taketh them for Churches while it taketh no essential from them XXIII There are some particular Drs. in England indeed who say that There is no Church without a Bishop of its own and 〈◊〉 Epiâ—câ—pus ibi Ecclesia and that Ecclesia est plâ—â—s Epâ—sâ—â—â— aduâ—ata and that our Parish Ministers are no Bishops and that their sole Ordinations are nullities and consequently it would follow that their Parish Churches are truly but parts of a Church infimae specieâ— And because these men speak against Reordination and yet require those to be ordained again who were here ordained by mere Presbyters therefore it seemeth plain that they take the former for no true Ordination These men I have oft confuted especially in my Treatise of Episcopacy And hence some gather that I charge this error on all the Church of England and take the Law and Clergy to nullifie the Parish-Ministry and Churches Therefore I am specially obliged to answer such misconcluders lest they make my writings a means of deceit against my sence and against my will for so unhappy is the controversal world even of men of Worth and Name that if I do but say that two is less than three and that four is more than three they fear not to say that I contradict my self and R. is against B. and sometimes I speak for and sometimes against the same cause and these being ordinary Disputers and Church-guides What hope have the Christian Flocks of Unity and Peace but by such mens ceasing their disputes Here therefore it must be noted 1. That the men of this opinion are not to be called The Church of England The most of the Bishops and Clergy formerly were against them Dr. Hammond and Bishop Gunning and a few more were almost the first that seemed to go so far 2. And yet even these few do usually except the case of necessity and of the forreign churches as Dr. Sherlock hath lately done at large so that then they cannot take their Episcopal ordination received to be essential to the Priesthood 3. And these men themselves call our Parish societies Parish Churches and deny not the Presbyters to be Episcopi Gregis and to have a pastoral care of the peoples souls for they own the Liturgy Ordination and other writings of the Church which assert it 4. Their opposition to Presbytery hath carried them to appropriate the name Bisâ—op to the Diocesans but by it they mean only a Bishop over Presbyters having the power to ordain and depose them and to â—â— be chief in governing all the flocks But the controversie de nomine and de re are not the same This denieth not all Pastoral Episcopacy in Presbyters over the flocks under them That these men by running into extreams do ill many have written to prove But maiming the Parish Ministry or too much limiting it is not nullifying it 5. Let it be considered that even the Separatists say not that the Power of Ordination is essential to Pastors Some of them take Pastors unordained only elected and received with prayer Some take men ordained by nâ—ighbour Pastors that have no power over them Some take men ordained by Bishops some by Magistrates And Jurisdiction over nâ—ighbour Pastors I am sure the Separatists will say belongs neither to the being or well being of a Pastor If then it be the Power of Ordaining and of Jurisdiction over other Pastors which the Diocesans
deny the Parish Pastors theâ— deny them nothing hereby essential to theiâ— office All that can with any colour be said is that the Law now seems to be on these mens side by requiring Reordination But 1. The Law-makers profess to establish the Church and not to change it to another thing 2. The Law-makers were not all of one mind in the Reasons of their Laws nor had all studied these kind of controversies Many of them and of the Clergy to this day say that it is not a proper ordination that they require but the giving them Authority to exercise their Ministry in England and the decision of a doubtful case Part of the Church taketh them for true Ministers that were ordained by Presbyters and part do not and that the Congregations may not divide they say they require this like Baptizing after a doubtful Baptism If thou art not baptized I baptize thee I am against this But this proveth not that they take a Presbyter for no Pastor Yea tho they should take his ordaining others to be a nullity Ordaining not being essential to him XXIV The Act of Uniformity or the like Law cannot make the Church no Church or of another species than 1. As it is esteemed by God and his Law 2. Or as it is esteemed by the greater part of the Christian Clergy and Laity Tho the Law should speak as the foresaid odd innovators do For 1. All Christians profess that Christ is the only just Institutor of the essentials of his own Churches All Christians profess Communion with them as Churches of Christs making by his Law The present Church of England professeth this in many books it bindeth all Ministers to hold to Scripture sufficiency and use Discipiine as well as Doctrine and Worship as Christ commandeth It openly holdeth all Laws and Canons about Church essentials yea and integrals to be void and null that are against the Sacred Scriptures and Law of God There is no Power but of God God hath given no power to nullifie his institutions 2. All true Christians who consent to a Parish Minister and attend on his Ministry and join in the Assemblies openly profess to own him first as a Minister of Christ and to join in Worship and Communion of the church as prescibed by Christ which no man hath power to overthrow 3. The Parliament and Convocations and Bishops and Clergy all confess that they have no power to overthrow the Church essentials or offices of Christs Institution They have not revoked the Church Writings in which all this is oft professed They confess that if their Laws mistake and do contrary they bind us not They never openly professed a war against God or Jesus Christ What if one Dr. S. Parker make Christ subject to the King in his Kingdom he is not the Kingdom nor the Church of England For all his words they never made any Law to command Christ or to punish him They never cited him to appear before them nor did any penal execution on his Person which Government implieth They bow at his name and profess subjection to him Therefore if the law had by error said any thing inconsistent with the essence of Churches and Ministry it had not been obligatory to Pastors or people but they ought still to take Churches and Pastors to be what Christ hath made them and described them to be XXV Suppose a Law should say All families shall be so under Diocesans as to have no power but from them and all shall subscribe to this This doth not null family-power and society as instituted by God nor make it a sin to live in Families nor dissolve them all But all must continue in Families as instâ—tuted by God And if any subscribe to this it will not make it a sin in all Wives Children and Servants to live in those families If the Law had said All Schools in England shall be essentially subject to Diocesans must we therefore have had no more Schools Or if the School-master subscribe to them is it a sin to be his Scholar If the Law should say All Christians shall choose their own Pastors and meet and pray and preach as they please but only in essential subjection to Diocesans must all therefore give over Church Communion If the Law had said All the Parish-Assemblies in England shall henceforth be essentially subject to the Pope or a forreign Council We must not therefore have forborn all such Assembling but have kept to the state and duty appointed us by Christ XXVI Here the mistaking Opponents say 1. That indeed de jure none can change the Essence of Christs Ministry and Churches but de facto they may and have done Ans What is meant by changing it de facto Have they de facto nulled Christs Power Law or Offices and Churches What Nulled it by a Nullity of pretended Authority and overcome his Power without Power De jure and de facto to be a true Church or Pastor is all one Christ made true ones De facto they cannot unmake them but by destroying matter or form because they cannot do it de jure They have destroyed neither matter or form of such parish churches as I plead for and which Christ instituted for they had not power to do it Indeed they may de facto make other sort of Churches and Ministers to themselves tho not de jure but not to us who stick to Christs institutions XXVII But say they We confess if the Law did bid all assemblies in England meet in dependance on Diocesans private and publick this would not alter the species of our separate Churches because man hath not power and we consent not Ans Very good And I pray you what alters the case as to the Parish-Churches Is it that they have Steeples and Bells or that they have Tythes It 's the Calamity of Dissenters that they either cannot consider or can feel no strength in the plainest truth that is said against them but thoughts and sense run all one way which they think right XXVIII Obj. But say they Constitutive and Declaritive Laws must be distinguished They can but declare our Meetings to be Diocesan which is false 〈…〉 the Parish-Meetings such Ans 1. Remember that declaring the Parish-Churches to be such doth no more constitute them such than yours Why then talk you so much of the words of Bishops and Clergy and Books as if their declarations made them such 2. But how doth a Law constitute one the Parochial to be Diocesan or null more than your separate meetings if by a Law of toleration it should say the same of them The truth is They are such to consenters that judg them such But they constitute them not such to any that consent not to such a constitution but hold to Christs XXIX But it is said that our thoughts alter not constitutions they are our own immanent acts that nihil ponunt in esse and therefore the Pastors and Churches will be
what Law maketh them whatever we think Ans Are not Churches formally relative societies what maketh them such but thoughts and wills of men expressed Gods mind exprest in his Institutions is his premised consent our consequent obedient consent maketh Christians Pastors and Churches If a Law cannot make the Parish consent to null Christs Officers and Churches it doth not null them to them If a Law say All marriages shall be void unless the Bishop remarry them This maketh them not void to any that consent not but say we stand to the valid marriage we had What doth another mans consent do to constitute me a Christian or Church-member except Parents for Infants And if my thoughts and consent put nothng in esse then the thoughts and consents of the conforming Clergy alters not their Churches and what then is that constituting cause you talk of Is it only the law for shame say not so Gods own Law as commanding us to be Christians Pastors or Churches maketh us not such without consent And can mans Law both null Gods Law and make us of what species it doth but bid us be without our consent XXX But here our Disputants think they expose me to derision What Do I intimate that one and the same Congregation may be two Churches of different species Ans I think to be such by open profession is disorderly and unusual But I think he that denieth this is unfit to deride the ignorance of another 1. If the people in one Kingdom may be in specie two Kingdoms the people of one Assembly may be two Churches but Bishop Bedle in his printed Letter said that Ireland was then two Kingdoms the King being Sovereign to some and the Pope to other And I think Hungary is so now between the Emperor and Turks 2. When Paul ordinarily held his assemblies in the Jewish Synagogues where half were Infidels and half Christians before he separated his Christians from them I think they were two Churches 3. If Independents had leave to meet in the Parish churches where the Parish Minister and their own Minister should preach by turns and the Parish only heard theirs as a lay preacher or none of their Pastor and so they heard the Parish Preachers I doubt not but they would be distinct church If one Parish church have two Pastors and one of them be professedly for an essential subjection to the Pope and the other against it and half the people of one mind and half of the other I think they are two Churches in one place If those Anabaptists who take none but the re-baptized for Church-members should with their Pastors join with Independents in worship tho esteeming them no churches I suppose you think they would be distinct churches in one place But I think none of this is the case of the churches that I join with for I suppose they null not Christs species of Ministers to themselves or me But if they did it to themselves that would not do it to me XXXI Obj. But one and the same Minister cannot be of two species and therefore relation to him cannot constitute distinct Churches Ans 1. One and the same man cannot be a Minister of Christ and no Minister of Christ so much is true nor of any two inconsistent species But if you will call any circumstantial difference a distinct species that will noâ— hinder the consistence The same man may be Christs Minister and the Kings Chaplain or a Dean or Preâ—endary or a Diocesan Bishop or Subject to a Diocesan such Bishops as Chrysostom Augustine Ambrose 〈◊〉 Parkeâ— Grindal Ushâ—r Davenant c and their Chaplains did not cease to be Christs Ministers 2 Relation to one of these men may make two sorts of consistent churcheâ— if the same man have a Parish and a Diocess as the German superintendents have and many other Bishops the warrantableness we are not now disputing 3. Yea one and the same Parish Minister may be Pastor of two Churches in one Assembly If he openly profess himself Orthodox the people that so own him are a church and if he secretly to a party of them profess himself an Anabaptist or a Papist and they unite with him as such they are another church such as it is Vespae habent favos marcionitae ecclesias Tertul. XXXII Obj. But the grand Objection is No man can be a Pastor of Christ against his will The Parish Ministers have all by conforming renounced the essence of the Christian Ministry and subscribed and sworn this renunciatâ—â— by subjecting themselves to Diocesans and swearing never to endeavour any alteration of the Diocesan Government and the Vestries who represent the churches have sworn the same and you have ofâ—en said that the Diocesan form of Government 1. Deposeth the Parish Bishops and maimeth the Ministry 2. Depâ—seth the Parish Churches 3. And maketh Parish Discipline impossible Ans It is impossible to write that which no man can misunderstand and make an ill use of I have oft told you 1. That I am in doubt whether Arch-Bishops as Successors of the Apostles only in the ordinary continued part of their Office be jure divino or not 2. That Congrational Bishops over Presbyters being ejusdem ordinis are an old venerable and lawful humane Institution 3. That Congregational Bishops only over the Laity are all Presbyters as such and of Christs Institution 4. Hereupon I have oft distinguished Diocesans into two sorts 1. Those that are but the Governors of true particular Churches that depose them not but Rule them by the word perswasively These are called Bishops being really arch-Arch-Bishops These I never charged of the Consequents forenamed And if the King make them Cogent Magistrates also I will obey them I take the judgment of the Church of England manifest in Ordination Liturgy Articles c. to be for such Diocesans only tho I vastly dissent from many things in the Canons by which and the Mode in which some exercise their Government 2. The other sort is the Innovators form of Diocesan Government which hold that there is no Church without a Bishop and no Bishop but Diocesans either Bishop of Laity or Presbyters and so that the Parish Churches are no Churches but part of the lowest sort of true Political Churches These I take to be Super-conformists yea Nonconformists and Dissenters from the Church of England tho they may strive to get the name of the Church to themselves Now what I say of these Innovating Nonconformists and their designs and attempts our mistaking Separatists say I speak of the Laegal Church frame and so of all the Bishops and parish-Parish-Churches And I see no hope of delivering the Church of God from the trouble of incogitant confident erroneous Dissenters that are not able to distinguish XXXIII I further answer this great Objection being concerned in Conscâ—ence to do it when men father their mistakes and Separation on me 1. The Parish-Ministers that I joyn with and I think the most that
Heathens XXXV Obj. But the Vestry swears never to endeavour any alteration Ans 1. The Vestry was never empowred to give the sense of the Church herein 2. I never lived where any such things as Vestries were but in London unless you will call the Ministers and Church-Wardens the Vestry And what 's London to all England 3. If they are so sworn it is as a new thing since 1661. But then they are sworn whoever is for it never to end 〈…〉 in Popery nor destroying Dioceâ—ans but only not to alter 〈…〉 I doubt with mâ—re Officers than we wish continued 4. And whereas those that I now deal with say That indeed before 1640. 〈…〉 Churches and Pastors but now it doth by 〈…〉 Let it be considered that the Lawmakers are so far from professing any 〈◊〉 alâ—â—ratâ—n that it is only the Long-Parliament and the 〈◊〉 Alteratiâ—â— that they complain'd of and therefore sweaâ— Corporations Vestries Militia Nonconformists by the Oxford Oath and engage all Conformists never to endeavour any alteration So that they thought that it was the old Government that they setled And now all this great part of the whole Kingdom is sworn as I said against Popery and foreign Jurisdiction against Patriarchs and against putting down parish churches and pastors that they will never endeavour it by consent or execution of any mens commands The alterations made before these oaths were not essential XXXI I add one more argument That owning subjection to governing Diocesans as such nulleth not the suâ—ject Churches and Pastors else by parity of Reason Subjectionâ— to arch-Arch-Bishops would null the Diocesan Churches and Bishops which it doth not do nor do you think it doth yea tho all Diocesans solemnly promise to obey their Arch-Bishops in their Consecration XXXII If you do know of any Minister that is for destructive Diocesans that will not nullifie the Offices of all the rest that never were of that mind or consent Yea if the Law so meant as you say but prove not you know how commonly Conformists say that the meaning of the Subscription and Oaths is only against Seditious or unlawful sorts of endeavour to alter Be this true or false it proveth that those men consent not contrary to their sense of the Subscription and so renounce not their Churches XXXIII Indeed the new Laws have made Ministerial Conformity much harder than it was before 164â— And also Lay Conformity with uâ— the Church-doâ—rs by the aforesaid Oaths and also Lay Conformity within the Church seemeth very hard in some particular Offices especially Baptismal Circumstances But I think the ordinary Communion in the Liturgy is better than it was before For 1. The â—pistles and Gospels are used after the new Translation which were used after the old 2. Divers Collects have some mistakes changed As on this day at Easter Whitsuntide when it was not on that day 3. The Minister is newly enabled and required to keep all from the Sacrament who are not ready to be confirmed that is that are not Catechized and ready understandingly to renew their baptismal Covenant which is a very great addition of power And if any practise it not that 's his fault and a neglect of execution of his power and when he puts scandalous Sinners from the Sacrament he may say As a Minister of Christ and Rector of this Church I judg you unmeet for its Communion and forbid it you And no more is essential to his Church Discipline in Excommunication It 's too true that the Exercise of this it clog'd with further Prosecution by him in the Chancellors Court which I think few will undertake And it 's true that such Ministers are required to publish the Excommunications of Lay-men past in the Bishops names tho it be according to such Canons as the 6 th 7 th 8 th c. But a man in Fetters is a man It changed not the Pastoral Office when Heathen Emperors persecuted it and when such Christian Emperors as Anastasius Zeno Basilicus Theodosius 2d Constantius Valens c. vexed or cast out those that were not of their Opinions It nulleth not the Office in Switzerland to have none but the Magistrates Discipline XXXIV The Objectors grant that If any Parish-Church shall by Minister and People consenting be formed according to the Rules of the Gospel they are true Churches tho the Law should be against them or command the contrary Ans 1. Much more then if the Law be for all that is essential 2. And doth not this say as much as I am pleading for Name me if you can any thing essential which all Ministers promise not at Ordination If any after renounce it the crime is personal Prove it before you say it and forsake him and charge not his fault on others I think you are not of their minds that say The Law bindeth every Subscriber and Swearer to the sense of the Imposers when he took it through mistake in another sense because they refused to explain it especially if he declared his sense Much less doth it bind him to your sense against his own XXXV But then say the Objectors such Churches are Dissenters as such you joyn with them and not as setled by Law and so it is but a Conventicle and is excommunicated by the Canon or you excommunicated for saying it is a Church and joyning with it Ans 1. What if all this be true Doth it follow that I must separate from it Are not your private Churches more unquestionably Excommunicate c. by the Canon and yet you separate not from them Can you see but on one side 2. But your Affirmation proveth not that the Law nulleth such Ministers or Churches as use the Liturgy and subscribe in the favourable sence tho it should prove a mistake It must first be tryed and judged to be a mistaken sense and even where they strangely Excommunicate ipso facto the fact must be proved and declared by the Judg before Priest and people are bound to Execution tho the Law be loco sententiae the 〈◊〉 being proved and declared no man is bound to do Execution on himself 3. I would seriously advise these Brethren to think Whether all good Christian Men and Women are bound to study the Laws of England before they may resolve what Church to â—â—mmuniâ—ate with yea whether they must be all so well skill'd in Law as to decide these Law-controversies that you and I are not agreed in and Lawyers themselves do ordinarily differ in that is Whether by Law the Parish-Churches and Pastors be changed and nâ—lled and Diocesses be made the only Churches â—â—simae species Must all forbear Communion till they are so good Lawyers Why may it not suffice to know Christs Law and to profess to obey it and to do nothing against it willingly He that will promise to Communicate with thâ— Church but as it is established by Law should have more skill in the Law than I have to know how it is established and every
Communicant hath not so much more than I. XXXVI But say they then you are bound to avâ—â—d sâ—andal by professing openly that you Communicate 〈◊〉 a Dissenter and not with the Church as established by Law Ans 1. Then I should falsly say that which I either think is otherwise or am not resolved in I tell you Few can truly say this if any 2. What need this when the open Profession of all Christians is That it is a Church and Worship of Christs making which they own and intend and none that is against them And when the Articles of the Church of England and the Ordination covenant own Scripture-sufficiency and disclaim all that is against Gods word Must we be supposed to renounce Religion when we meet to profess it And surely for disowning any thing which the Nonconformists judg unlawful all the Books written by them and all the notorious sufferings in twenty two years Ejection and Prosecution are no obscure Notification of their Judgments without speaking it at the Church â—oors or before the Assemblies Must I openly protest against Independency Anabaptistry or Presbytery if I dissent before the face of their Congregations if I will Communicate with them 3. But to stop your demand befâ—re I Communicated in the Parish â—hurch where I now am I went to the Incumbent and told him that I would not draw him into danger or intrude against his will I had been â—â—iled by the Kings Commission and after by the Lord Keeper to debate about Alteration in the Liturgy and Worship and Discipline and I thought that thereby I waâ— by 〈◊〉 6 7 8. ipso facto Excommunicate but not bound to do Execution on my self and therefore if I were separated it should not be my act but I left it to his will He took time and upon advice admitted me Obj. But you must tell them that the Parish Church hath no dependance on the Bishops but as the Kings Officers and that it is Independent and then you fall not under our opposition Ans 1. How many Lawyers and Civilians do openly say as Crompton before Cosins Tables that all Church Government floweth from the King And doth that satisfie you 2. And why must the Parish Church and Pastor needs be Independent Will you have no Communion with Presbyterians 3. And what if it be dependent on the Diocesan as governour tho not as destroyer Is it any more destructive of its Essence than to be governed by a Classis or Council XXXVII As for your telling us Wâ—â—m the Canons eâ—câ—mmunicate or 〈◊〉 Lay-chancellors Officials Surrogates Archdeacâ—ns c. excâ—mmunicate what Oaths they impâ—se c. tell them of it and not us who are not responsible for other mens deeds It no more concerneth our cause of Parochial Lay-communion than to tell us how bad men some Ministers are nor so much neither For I that willingly joyn in the Liturgy will not willingly if I know it so much as seem to own the Ministry of any man that is notoriously Insufficient Atheistical Heretical or so Malignant or Wicked as to do more hurt than good Avoid such and spare not XXXVIII Obj. They want the Peoples câ—nsent and so are no Pastâ—rs Ans The People shew their consent by ordinary Submission and Communion Obj. The People must be supposed to consent to the Law which maketh them no Pastors but the Bishops Curates Ans Both the Suppositions are before confuted both that the People are supposed to consent to any Law against Gods and that the Law maketh Curates to be no Pastors XXXIX To conclude the Objections about the Essence of Parish Churches 1. The question is not Whether there be not a sort of Diocesan Prelacy which nulleth them 2. Nor whâ—ther there be not some men in England that write and plead for such Diocesan Churches as have no true Episcopâ—s pregis much less Episcopus 〈◊〉 under them but are 〈◊〉 Bishops in that Diocess Nor of what number power or interest these men are of against whom I have oft written 3. But whether the Law be on their side or against them for the old Diocesan Government of subordinate Pastors and Churches is to me nâ—w uncertain I did once incline most to the fiâ—â—t sense of the Law but on secâ—nd thoughts hope better of it and am not Lawyer good enough to be certain 4. But if it should be so I verily think â—â—e main 〈◊〉 of the 〈…〉 and therefore 〈◊〉 not to renounce their Pâ—rish â—overnment â—ut only to use it in subordination to the Bishop 5. And I am pâ—st doubt that all the Communicants of England are neither â—ound to decide this Law-doubt nor to understand it nor to believe that the Law hath altered the Government 6. And if they did believe it they ought to keep on in Church Assemblies according to Christs Law taking all that 's against it as void as long as they are put â—n no sin themselves nor the Church notoriously renounceth its â—ssentials 7. And if they were stated Members of other Churches e.g. the Greâ—k the Dutch the French they might â—ccasionally Communicate in our Parishes transiently without examining the Pastors call and discipline but judging by possession and practice 8. And if they should prove no lawfully called Ministers their Office would be valid to those that blamelesly were deceived and knew it not 9. And if they were sure that they were no true Ministers they may joyn with them in all Worship belonging to Lay-Christians 10. But if they prove able godly Ministers of Christ tho faulty setled by Law to the advantage of Religion in a Christian Kingdom where all are commanded thus to maintain national Concord and the upholding those Churches is the very National possession of the Protestant Religion and it goeth for publick Disobedience and Scandal to forsake them and that at a time when many forsake them too for unjust grounds and by suffering for it stand to unwarrantable Accusations of them and sharply Censure those that do not as they and oppugne Peacemakers and all this after the old Nonconformists full Confutation of the Separatists unwarrantable way and the doleful experience of Subversion of all sorts of Government by the Prosecution of such mistakes I say If all this should be the case it is deeply to be considered XL. But the most effectual hindrance is the opinion of unlawfulness in jâ—yning in the Liturgy yet my last Objectors confess that It is lawful to some and that it is nâ—t Communion in it much less in all forms which they call unlawful tâ— all And the sober sort are loth to say tâ—at the Millions of Christians in England and Scotland who live where they can be in no other Churches should rather like Atheists live without all Church-Worship and local Communion And in gaining this I have gained the better half of what I pleaded for And they confess and so do I that publick Communion may be one mens duty and anotâ—â—rs sin as circumstances vary
or disowned by most of the Land and conformists usually profess another sense Upon this very reason I write this short Debate to avoid the injuring of the Reâ—ders of my Writings about the English Diocesan frame XLII The Book I animadvert on is called Mr. Baxters Judgment and Reasons against câ—mmunicating with the Parish Assemblies as by Law râ—quâ—red Ans I am for communicating with them in the essentials of Christianity and Communion as the Law requireth if I understand it because the Law of Christ requireth it But in whatever circumstances any law shall â—e against Christs Law I communicate not according to such a Law XLIII All that he citeth out of my writings p. 2 3 is against his cause which he thought was for it as I have proved What he citeth § â— the first is unproved the second I own and is nothing for him XLIV P. 5. And oft throughout he alledgeth that I make the Parâ—shes not compleat particular Churches Ans No wonder those may be true churches that are not compleat in integrity or degree will you separate from all churches that are not so compleat I know not of any strictly compleat on earth many true churches are incompleat as to integrals much more as to ornament order and strength And all particular churches are less compleat than the universal and that on earth alas how far from compleat Believe him not Reader that R.B. is against your joining with all churches which he proveth to be not compleat yea or to be very faulty and defective in point of â—oliness Love or Order of Ministers or people But they are true churches in essentiality tho parts of a Diocess as that is of a Nation not meer parts of the lowest single Church P. 6. § 2. What I say of suspending the power is not nulling it in the office and what I say of practice by canons and visitation Articles is not said of Law much less of all the Churches and Pastors consent to them and what I say of misgoverning in exercise is not said of a national profession that so it ought to bâ— P. 7. He citeth my words further against restraint of the Ministers power But 1. That nulleth not Christs Institution of it 2. More Power is given As 1. To deny the Sacrament as is said to all that are not ready to be confirmed 2. To deny absolution to all the sick who do not humbly and earnestly desire it c. And the Power of doing it by Ministerial Application of Gods Word is all that is properly ministerial though they take all cogent power from us Mans taking away our power is but hindring the exercise quantum in se but the Power is of Christ which they cannot take away P. 8. They cannot suspend our commanded act but only our doing it with liberty and advantage I can refuse the Sacrament to the unfit tho it be to my trouble P. 9. I say there are many additions to the old conformity that make the case harder to Clergy and Laity than of old But I there maintain that none of these additions do make Parochial Communion now pleaded for unlâ—wful XLV P. 10. He saith If we might not endeavour to restore the old Prelacy then not to give strength to it being restored And say others lest we be perjured having sworn and covenanted against it Ans This needeth impartial Consideration They say That our covenant engagement maketh that unlawful to us which was lawful to the old Nonconformists But 1. Did not Gods Law make it unlawful to them or to us before Then you think we covenanted to do somewhat thâ—t â—ods law bound us not to if so it was superstition and is not adding our self-made vows and duties as bad as adding Ceremonies 2. Yea they then thought Brownism a sin and if they mistook not we cannot by covenanting turn sin into duty 3. Ad hominem the Author professeth Independency And I suppose he knoweth that the chief of that way did some write to prove that the Covenant bound not at last and some likened it to an Almanack out of date and some said it was a League which was dissolved and so bound not and how great a party thought that it bound them not from pulling down both King and many Parliaments and conquering Scotland res ipsâ— loqunta â—st And even King and Parliament Lord Spiritual Temporal and Commons have declared it their judgment in the Corporation Act and Declaration which bindeth all the Corporation Officers to declare without exception that there is no obligation on them or any other from the Oath called the solemn League and Covenant It 's true indeed that the Presbyterian Ministers and Soldiers and People thought that this Covenant bound them to restore the King and said Let us keep our covenant and trust God with the issue and G. Monks Army Officers in their address to him glory in it not doubting but the King would find such his best subjects but the Law that bindeth men to declare that there is no obligation on them or any other tells them they did err when they thought it bound them to restore the King Whether this be true or not I meddle not with but by this you see that there are few in the land of any party save Presbyterians that can charge us with Covenant breaking herein for going to the Parish Churches without contradicting themselves or guides but this is but ad Hominem 4. But what words be they in the Covenant that we violate did it mean If power restore the Liturgy and Bishops and will suffer no other Churches we will rather all give over all worship of God in churches than we will join with them This were a wicked Oath and could no more oblige us than to give over all family worship I hope few sober men ever so sware 5. I so little consent to the corporation declaration that I do believe that I was bound by that vow to do as I have done in going to the Parish Churches For 1. I am bound by it against Prophaneness and all that 's câ—ntrary to sound Doctrine and Godliness But to forsake all publick Worship of God without necessity is prophaneness and câ—ntrary to Godliness 2. I am bound in my place and calling to oppose Popery But to tell all the Protestants in England that they sin if they forsake not all the Parish Churches is to preâ—are them for the reception of Popery seeing that will be the National Religion which possesseth those Parish Churches By deserting our Garisons we shall deliver them up 3. I am bound by it against Schism and I am not able to excuse it from being Schism if under all the obligations that now lye upon us I should by my constant avoiding the Parish Churches even unto sufferings declare that I take their Communion for absolutely unlawful and so slander so many Churches of Christ and seduce others with me into the same error and sin This would be
Schism and Covenant-breaking in me whatever it is in others XLVI Obj. But you swore against Prelacy and Liturgy and now you strengthen them Ans 1. As the Covenant was made the terms or test of national Church Union excluding all the Episcopal who were half the Kingdom and more I think it was a rash sinful Engine of unavoidable division But when I took it it was not so imposed but offered to them that were of that mind and I saw not then that snare 2. I never swore against the Common-Prayer nor against the Englsh frame of Prelacy much less all Episcopacy any further than in my place and calling to endeavour Reformation according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed churches And this I have endeavoured to the utmost of my power perhaps more than my accusers And 3. There is much good in the Liturgy Parish Order and Government I never did covenant against that and therefore the Ministers who laboured for Reformation and Concord 1660 and 1661 thought they kept their covenant by craving some amendments and not an abolition and if we did think any thing to be bad that was good we must not be obstinate in that error forsaking the good which is our duty is not the way to amend any sin or error avoiding Gods publick Worship and living like Atheists save in private is not the way to amend the faults of publick Worship or Government Praying to God for what we want and owning the Scriptures and Christian Religion and communicating with Christians on lawful terms is not encouraging any sin in church Priests or Prelates unless men by our duty will be encouraged to sin and we must not forsake duty to avoid such mens encouragement the sons of the Coal are most angry with those that come nearest to them in all things save their sin and error and say those that stand afar off cannot hurt them I do not justâ—fie all that is in every Assembly that I join with must I needs renounce Local communion with every Independent Presbyterian or Anabaptist church that I dissent from for fear of strengthning them I covenanted as much against Schism as faulty Prelacy and yet if I must join with no church that is guilty of Schism alas whither shall I go 4. I humbly desire you to examine whether your way be not a breach of the covenant you plead not only as it advantageth Prophaneness Popery and Schism but as it strengtheneth that which you say I strengthen he knoweth not England who knoweth not that perceiving the error of unwarrantable separation and the unjust accusations of the Liturgy and churches used by very many besides some failings in some private churches hath been and is a grand cause of encouraging too great a number even to superconformity and to the fierce opposition of us and to the utmost confidence in their own way and as you charge me more than others as drawing more to the communion of Godly Protestant Parish Ministers that is to christian catholick love peace and communion So do the Sons of the Coal the superconformists more fiercely revile me as stopping more than you have done from their extremities Gods Word is a sufficient rule keep to that and fear not breaking any self-made laws XLVII Obj. But by this latitude you may join with Papists and say you judg of them according to Christs description Ans I answered this in the former book When I joyn with any church as a church I join with them as meeting to profess and practice christian faith and worship their by faults I own not But if they openly profess Idolatry or Heresie instead of Worship and Faith or if they meet to practice any sin which renders the whole church or worship rejected by God I must not assemble with them but avoid them which I must not do for tolerable failings lest I avoid all the world I say again I will cast away my Wine or Broth for Poyson in it which I will not do for a fly If the church renounce Christs description in the essentials notoriously I will not call it a church against their own consent But if they do it only in some Accident or Integrals I will only disown those faults XLVIII Obj. But say they p. 13.14 It is impossible there should be two national churches at least in one nation therefore by joining with a Parish you can be no part of the national church tho we confess that if you join with a Parish Assembly that forms it self into a compleat single church and the people â—onsent to take the Parish Minister for their Pastor and the Minister should exercise the whole power of a Pastor in this Parish church Mr. B. may hold communion with this Parish church and not own the Diocesan constitution Ans Of two churches in one assembly I spake before 1. Doth this Author think that exercise of power is as essential to a Minister as Power Yea that it must be the whole power that is exercised and so that no one is a true Pastor among the Presbyterians when the Classis exerciseth the highest part of the Power nor in Helvetia where Discipline is unexercised nor in England from the first Reformation Were all the Conformists that submitted to Diocesans no Church-Pastors nor no Independents whose Churches having many Pastors and Elders no one exerciseth no nor hath more than part of the power Integrity and essentiality office and exercise are not all one 2. All good Ministers that I know in the Parish Assemblies do consent to the Pastoral Office and the people love them and shew their consent by ordinary Communion and they exercise all essential to the office tho under the restraints of Government not owning in consent destructive but governing Diocesans some as de jure divino lawful some as best some as necessary many as merely impowered to a cogent Government by the King and doth not your concession imply that these are true Churches of intolerable men I speak not 3. What you confidently deny is certainly true There may be two national churches in one nation if not three that is the word is equivocal and hath divers sences and it is not called national because all persons in the nation are of it but because that the diffused parts of the Nation own it formally in a publick national relation 1. A Christian Kingdom as such is by many called a national Church thus England is such 2. A coalition of the most or all the publick Ministers in a Nation in Synodical Agreements for Communion as such is called a National Church such also is England 3. The subjection of the most of the Clergy in a nation by consent to some Ecclesiastical Primate Patriarch or other constitutive governing Head as a Bishop is in his Diocess may make a national Church in another sence The same men may be of divers of these equivocal Churches or if part be for one form and part
Towns by that nameâ— But at last the Bishops being loath to diminish their Jurisdiction decreed that very small Cities should have no Bishops ne viâ—câ—eat nomen Episcâ—pi And in process of time in some Countries the name 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or City was appropriated at the Princes pleasure to some very few Corporations peculiarly priviledged above the rest So that a King that would have had but one Bishop in his Kingdom as it 's said that all the Abaâ—â—ian Empire hath had but one might have done it by calling but one Town a City VII Yet the People and Bishops being sensible that there was more work For a Bishop in a City-Diocess than one could do in many Countries they had Rural Bishops set over Pâ—pulâ—ns country Churches And tho these were subject to the Diocesans yet hereby the Churches were multiplied But the Bishops soon grew jealous and weary of these Rural-Bishops and most places put them down and set up instead of them a kind of Itinerant visiting Presbyters empowring all Arch-Bishops and Ach Deacons till at last to save themselves the labour and yet not diminish their Dominion they set up the Courts of Lay-Chancellors Officials and many such Offices besides the Arch-Deacons Surrogates c. VIII In England as is agreed by most Historians at first one Bishop had but one Church or Temple And at Luindisfarne saith Bede It was so poâ—â— a thing that it was a house thatcht with reeds The Pastor of this one Church was to convert as many as he could in all the Countrey about him The Heathen Country might be his Diocess but not his Church The converted Christians got into several Monasteries and not into Parish-Churches These Monasteries were partly for Society in Religious Exercise and partly for Studies like Schools to Educate Youth for the Ministry So that long a Diocess was only the Bishops Church with divers Monasteries At last Gentlemen for their convenience built and endowed Parish-Churches the Bishops old single Churches being called the Cathedrals And finally by the help of Princes all the Land was divided into Parishes subject to the cathedral-Cathedral-Bishops to whom Deans and Chapters were added in imitation of the old Bishops Colledg of Presbyters in every single Church IX When the Rural-Bishops were put down the Presbyters power in their several Parishes was somewhat enlarged And the Diocesses at last became so great that the Bishops were sain to commit more of the oversight to the Presbyters Tho they kept them under by severe Canons Lay-Deputies and the Cogent Sword X. It grew then a controversie among the Papists themselves whether the Parish Incumbents were proper Pastors and had any Power of Government and how much And my Objectors confess that they were reputed Pastors among the Papists and that Linwood calleth them Pastors and the Laity Oves I have cited in Treat of Epis â—ilesaâ—us and many more that prove it Ant. de Dom. Spalatensis is large and full in it Spâ—lman in R. Aâ—lâ—ricks Law shews that the Bishop and Presbyter made but one of their seven Orders A great sort of the Schoolmen say the same Most Drs. say That the Presbyters essentially as Sacredetes have the power of the Keys infâ—ro interiâ—re by which they mean not a power that must be kept secret but that which consisteth in the perswasâ—vâ— use of Gods word on Câ—nferâ—nâ—e privately or publickly as distinct from Magisterial and Câ—gent Power And if they â—e of one Order then if one be a Pastâ—r the other is so also That they are taken but in partem curae is nothing against it but for it For equal Presbyters in one Church have each but partem curae The Reformation finding thâ—ngs in this case determined none of the disputes de nomine Whether Parish Rectors shall be called â—pisâ—opâ—s Gregis or Pastors or Rectors or Iâ—cumbâ—nts but use these names promiscuously Nor did they dispute whether the Parishes are Political Churches But the Definition and not the Name is the thing now before us in debate God hath given every such Minister the essence of a Pastoral oversight of his Flock Men may hinder the Exercise but can no more alter the Christian Office Power than they can deprive a Husband of the power over his Wife And the Diocesans at last have been necessitated to permit the essential Pastoral power by the word to the Incumbents having none else to use it by But Lawyers have taught many to call nothing Government that is not Cogent on the unwilling and so to say that Government is not in the Presbyters but the Bishops and that all is derived from the King which is all true of Cogent Government by the Sword in fâ—ro exteriore but not as to Pastoral Government of the Flock by Gods wâ—rd As Bishop Bilson of Obedience hath distinguished and applied well at large XI Now to come nearer our Case Diocesan Bishops have put down the ranks of Bishops which of old was setled as Presidents over the Presbyters in every Church in Cities and of the lowest Order described by Ignatius and Cyprian and others Every lowest Church hath not now a Bishop over the Presbyters as it had for divers hundred years And by this they have unchurched all the old sort of Churches in the sense of them that say There is no Church where there is no Bishop over Preâ—byters And they have set up a Diocesan Church and Bishop only wâ—â—re should be many Churches and Bishops and thus 〈◊〉 homâ—â—â—m I argued with them c. But indeed this Parochial Episcopacy or Prâ—sidâ—ncy being wrongfully said to be Essential to the Church being at most bâ—t useful to peace ad melius esse and the Epicopacy or Pastoral care of the Laity without any power over the Clergy being it that is essential to single Church Pastors In truth no man can alter this In Consent and â—â—putatiâ—n it is altered by those that think Parish Curates no Pastors and deny any Essential power over their Flocks But it is not in Consent and Reputation destroyed by them that acknowledg their Essential power and subject only themselves as Pastors to the oversight of Diocesans and Magistrates They do but destroy the 〈…〉 of Episcopacy of humane Institution which was over Presbyters in 〈◊〉 Châ—rchâ—â— but not the Episcopacy over the Flock which is of Christs Insâ—iâ—utioâ— XII 〈◊〉 whether most in England are of this Opinion or of that for 〈◊〉 or for meer gâ—verning Episcopacy and which way the Laws go and 〈◊〉 may be called the sense of the Church when Convocations and Bishops seem to differ and men change their Opinions with the Age and Interest it is impossible for me to be sure But I know how they govern by what Canons and by what Courts and as all their Cogent power is from the King it is no wonder if they be chosen by him But the old sort of Bishops that had no forcing power was so constantly otherwise chosen that their Canons nulled the Magistrates
choice And our present Canons since 1604 tho they null not the Parochial Pastorship do so far restrain it as I hope my Conscience shall never approve But yet for that I will not forsake what is of God nor make mans failings a pretence against my duty to God and Man to the Violation of Love Unity and Peace Yet I will try by distinct speaking to make both the Case and my meaining plainer if I can And thereby to shew that our case differeth but gradually from the old Nonconformists as to Lay-mens Parochial Communion where there are honest Ministers And that the old Nonconformists had better Evidence Scripture and Reason on their side than either those Innovators who make Parish-Pastors to be but de specie of humane Institution made by Bishops and changeable by them having just so much power as they please to give them or the Brownists that are so much of the same Principles as to think that mens Laws or Canons can change the form of the Office or that judg it nullified by tollerable Imperfections and Communion made unlawful by such faults as are found in almost all the Churches on Earth Qu. Whether according to the description of the Scripture and the exposition of Dr. Hammond himself all qualified Parish Ministers be not true Pastors and Bishops of the Flocks and with their consenting Christian Communicants true particular Churches and de facto all be not in the power given them by God which is essential hereto and in the power generally acknowledged by the legal Church Ans I have spoken to this so largely in my Treatise of Episcopacy and there added the testimonies of Writers old and new Protestants and Papists that I will give but a breviate of it here The essence of the Church Ministry consisteth in POWER and OBLIGATION FROM CHRIST to teach to guide in Worship and to oversee and guide the Conversation and Communion of the Flocks If it were not of Christ they were but officers of men de specie even of an office of mans making Dr. Hammond saith that Christ gave the Keys only to the Apostles and they only to their Successors That there is no evidence that there were any of a second order of Presbyters in Scripture time that this order was after made by Man Mr. Dodwell sheweth how and why and more fully than Dr. Hammond asserteth that such Presbyters have no more power than the ordaining Bishops intended to give them Or saith Dr. H. If they have a first power it is such as may not be exercised without a second so that it is indeed no true power to act And the Dr. plainly tells the London Ministers p. 80 81. There is no manner of incongruity in assigning of one Bishop to one Church and so one Bishop in the Church of Jerusalem because it is A. CHURCH not Churches being forced to acknowledg that where there were more Churches there were more Bishops And he denied our Presbyters that were not Diocesans to be Bishops both City and Country Presbyters And consequently that our Parishes were no Churches And on these grounds he and Bishop Gunning and such others judged Presbyters Ordination null because they were no Bishops And the said Dr. tho I thought he had been next Petavius one of the first that had expounded the new Testament Elders to be all Bishops of several Diocesses yet tells us that he thought most of his brethren were of his mind herein And when we in Worcestershire formed a Pacificatory Association of the Epicopal Presbyterians Indepâ—ndents and Peace-makers agreeing lovingly to practice so much in Doctrine Worship and Discipline as we were for according to our several principles forbearing each other in the rest and Dr. Warmstâ—â—â— and Dr. Tho. Good being for Bishops subscribed to it Dr. Peter Gunnâ—â—g wroâ—e largely against so doing to Dr. Warmstrie and took him off upon these aforesaid principles and they then called their Judgment the Judgment of the Church of England and wrote as if the Church had been of their mind and gone their way I wrote â—large Answer to Dr Gunning's Paper not printed and proved that the old Protestant Bishops and Doctors were of another mind largely citing their testimonies in my Christian Câ—ncâ—rd and plainly warned English Protestâ—nts to take heed of these Innovators and that the name of the Church and Episcopacy deceive them not against the Church and Protestant Cauâ—e many â—ose against me for this with great indignâ—tion especially Arch-Bishop Bramhall and two or three learned Writers and would make the world believe that it was the Church of England which I sought to defame and bring under suspition and which owned Grâ—tius and his way of Reconciliation with Rome when as it was for departing from the professed principles of the reformed Bishops and Doctors and from the book of Ordination and other writings of the Church that I blamed them Yet would they needs claim the name of the Church of England And it is not here seasonable for me to tell how many and how great men in 1661 and 1662 seemed by their wâ—rds and doings to be full at least as high as they nor how they expressed it nor how many strongly conceited by the Act thâ—â— requireth reordination of men ordained by Presbyters and by the number rejected who refused it That the Parliament had been of thâ—ir mind and much more the â—â—nvâ—cation called the church-reprâ—sentative especiâ—lly when they heard men call the old Bishops and Arch-Bishops such as â—sher Downame 〈◊〉 c. in Iâ—eland and G. Abbot Rob. Aâ—bâ—t Grindal and many such in England Puritans and Presbyterians And when Pâ—â— Hâ—lâ—â— maketh Arch bishop Abbot and the Bishops and Clergy in his days to â—e of one mind vilified by him and Arch-bishop Laud and his Clergy after of another In this case I gave the name of the present Diocesans to those that thus claimed it and pretended so confidently to the present possession of it but I thought not their claim just And when I sometimes used the name of English Diâ—cesans for this sort who nullifie the Parish Churches and Pastorship it was but to notifie them that so claimed it supposing I had oft sufficiently opened my sense and usually added that they nullifie them not effectively but quantum in se and by their consequences But I again now tell the Reader that I think the Judgment of the church of England considered as humanely constituted by publick professions and by Law much less as divinely constituted is not to be measured or named from any innovators or any that most confidently claim it or think they are uppermost at the present and thereby have that right but as Divine by Gods word whose sufficiency we all profess and as humane by the published Church professions that is the Liturgy the book of Ordination the 39 Articles of Religion the Apology of the Church of England the Defence of that Apology set in all Churches the book of Hâ—milies Nowels
Catechism the Râ—fâ—rmatio Legum Ecâ—les the Canons and the licenced books of the Protestant Bishops and Doctors such as Arch-bp Cranmers Bp. Hâ—â—pers Arch-bp â—arkers Arch-bp Grinâ—als Arch-bp Abbots Arch-bp Edward Sandys Arch-bp Whitgift Bp. Pilkâ—nton Bp. Jewel Bp. Ally Bp. Babingtâ—n Bp. Mâ—rtâ—n â—p Hall Bp. Davenant Bp. â—rideaux Bp. Brâ—wnâ—ig B. â—otter Bp. Miles Smith Bp. Carlâ—on Bp Bayly Bp. Parry Bp. Câ—wper and many more such besides those in Irâ—land aforesaid And such â—rs as Dr. Whâ—taker Dr Field Dr. Crakenthâ—â—pe Dr. Sutlive Dr. Masâ—n Dr. VVhite Dr. â—iâ—y Dr. Chaloner Dr. VVard Dr. VVillet Dr. Holland and abundance more besides all other old licenced Writers I think that all these do fitlier notify and denominate the Church of Englands Judgment than the Writings of one Irish Arch-Bp and Dr. Hammond and Dr. Gunning since Bp. and a few more such in the points wherein they differ from the rest tho Grotius and their Chaplains be added to the number And now I will add this further evidence in the conclusion besides that as I said before the present Laws put us to abjure alterations and therefore sure they never thought that they so altered the Government themselves that even while they say that the Parishes are no Churches but parcels of Churches and the Priests are no Bps. of the Flock most really acknowledg them the thing that deny the Name And the argument from the definition is stronger than from the Name And here I will but name first the Scripture descriptions of a Bp. and 2. Dr. Hammonds exposition of those Texts 3. And the matter of fact among us The first part of the Bps. office is teaching the flock Under this teaching part 1. the Bishops office is to preach to them 1 Pet. 5.2 3. Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the oversight Or Episcopacy thereof c. Dr. Hammond The Bps. of your several Churches I exhort Take care of your several Churches and Govern them c. Qust Whom doth the Law require to do more in feeding and guiding the flock The Incubment that preacheth daily or the Bp. that never seeth the most nor ever preacheth to one Flock of many Who are they that are among the Flock the Incumbent that dwells with them or the Bp. that is a stranger to them 1 Thes 5.12 We beseech you brethren to know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you and to esteem them very highly in love for their work sake and be at peace among your selves Dr. Hammond Pay your Bps. as great a respect as is possible for the pains they have taken among you Qust Who Laboureth among them most in the several parishes publickly and privately The Bp. that never saw them or the Incumbent that layeth out all his Study and Time on them Who are most among them Who most admonisheth them What is meant by among themselves Is it that Lincoln shire Leicester-shire Northamton-shire Buckingham-shire be at peace among themselves from Gainsborough to Oxford-shire or is it not rather that neighbour Christians that see each other so live in peace 1 Tim. 5.17 The elders that rule well are worthy of double honour especially they thaâ— labour in the word and doctrine Dr. Hammond Let the Bps. that have discharged that function well receive for their reward twice as much as others have especially those that preach the Gospel to whom it was news and continue to instruct congregatons of Christians in setled Churches Quest On whom doth the law impose most preaching On Bps. or on parish Priests And who doth most of that work Heb. 13. Remember them who have the rule over you who have spoken to you the word of God Dr. Hammond Set before your eyes the Bps. and governours who have been in your Church and preached the Gospel to you Quest Ask the parishes who those be 2 Tim. 4.2 I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ who shall judg the quiâ—k and the dead at his appearing and his Kingdom preach the word be instant in season out of season reprove rebuke exhort with all long suffering and dâ—â—â—rine Not only Dr. Hammond but all that are for Prelacy expound this of a Bps office Quest Ask the people who most performs it 2. The Bps Office is also to watch over all the Flock personally by conference instruction counsel admonition exhortation reproof comfort as every one shall need Saith Bp. Jer. Taylâ—r Pref. to Treat of Rep. No man can give account of thâ—se that he knoweth not Acts 20.10 28 31. I taught you publickly and from house to house Take heed tâ— your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bps to â—eed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own Blood Therefore watch and remember that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears Dr. Hammond Instructing both in the Synagogues and the private Schools and in your several houses whither I also came Wherefore ye that are Bps. or governors of the several Churches Look to your selves and the Churches committed to your trust to Rule and order all the faithful under you Quest Is this done more by the Diocesans or by the Incumbents Do Diocesans teach from house to house from Southwark to Christ-Church from Nâ—wark to Alesbury or Tame Who doth the law appoint to warn every one in the Church from house to house and night and day c. Col. 1.28 Whom we preach warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus Heb. 13.17 Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls as those that must give account Dr. Hammâ—nd Obey those that are set to rule over your several Churches the Bps. whose whole care is spent among you as being to give account of your proficiency in the Gospel Qâ—st Is it the Diocesan or the Incumbent that the law requireth to preach to and warn every man c. And that watch for their Souls as those that must give account Is not the incumbent of this or that parish fitter to watch and give account of each Soul than the Diocesan for a whole Country or many Counties who never saw them Can he do as Ignatius's Bishops that must take notice of all the Church even Servants and Maids 3. The bishops office is to be a visible example to all the flock of Humility Meekness Patience Holiness Charity and good Works Heb. 13.7 Remember them who have the rule over you who have spoken to you the word of God whose faith follow considering the end of their conversations Dr. Hammond Set before your eyes the Bishops observe their manner of living Quest VVho can observe his example whom he never saw nor know Or who can make an unknown man his pattern Do the flâ—cks see more the Incumbents example or the
destroy it but their sin may consist with the true office that is hindred If we cannot pray without penalty we are yet bound to pray And if any such penalties should prevail with any Ministers to cast off so much of Discipline as is indeed their duty their office is so far destroyed as to its exercise But it is not every ill Council Canon Bishop or Priest of old when they began to be corrupted that changed and nullified the Pastoral Power and Office as from Christ I have repeated things over and over here because I would not be misunderstood nor leave a snare behind me to mislead men The sum again is 1. The Pastoral Office in specie is instituted by Christ and his Spirit therefore the essence of it is unchangeably fixed by him and no Bishops or Churches may change it by pretending they may give Presbyters as their servants what degree or kind of power they please or make the office another thing II. The said office in mutable accidents or circumstances may be altered by Princes Laws or the several Churches Agreements and thus far it is humane Of the Divine sort was the Apostolick and other extraordinary Prophetick offices And the ordinary Presbytery commonly called Priesthood and Elders setled over particular Churches were Episcâ—pi Gregis Bishops over the flock And of the humane sort is the Presidency of one in every single Church over the rest of the Presbyters who was the Episcopus Presbyterorum a Bishop over the Presbyters of one single Church as well as over the people This was the old Episcopacy of the first three Centuries this is it which I say our Diocesans have put down and we that would have them restored and would have such a Bishop and Assistant Elders in every Church are by the heighth of impudency said to be against Bishops because we would have them restored to each Church tho not as essential to it as hath been thought of old yet as a way of peace to comply with Antâ—quity and avoid singularity and they that put down many score or hundred Bishops and instead of them would have but one call themselves Episcopal III. Whether Arch-bps Diocesans as successors of the Apostles in the ministerial care of many Churches by the word and not the sword be of Divine or Human Institution I am in doubt IV. The cogent Power by the Sword is only the Magistrates and if Diocesans appropriate this only they are Magistrates and thereby take none of our office from us V. The â—ssence of the Parish ministerial oversight being of God de specie and the accidents that are mutable from man the existence of the office in individual persons is not without consent of the Pastors so that no man can be a Pastor against or without his will nor yet without a capacity in qualifiâ—atiâ—n so that if you prove any person to be uncapablâ— or else to have truly disclaimed and renounced the essentials of his office I am not about to perswade you that such a man is a true Pastor VI. But then we must know that indeed it is such an incapacity or renunciation and not a tollerable defect nor subscriptions and Oaths which by unseen consequences may seem to renounce it when the man took them in a sense which renounced it not For tho such a man may greatly sin by taking Oaths or subscriptions in a forced sense which plainly taken would infer worse yet his sin is not a renunciation of the office if he declare that he meant it in a better sence and took it on such mistake for we must not for bare words against mens meaning quibble or dispute our selves into unwarrantable separations out of Christian Communion especially when it is specially necessary VII And if any lay-men or men unauthorized will usurp the Keys or any Councils will make hurtful Canons and hinder men in the work appointed by God we must be faithful and patient and God in due time will judg and decide all causes justly VIII The office-power is essentially related to the work so far as Parochial Incumbents are allowed the work as of Christ they are acknowledged to be Pastors and Bishops of the flocks tho the name were denied them and so far as the Bishops office may be delegated to Lay-men or to Clergy-men of another Order so far it is Humane and not proper to them by Gods Institution They therefore that say All Diocesans Jurisdiction may be so delegated to them that are no Bishops but that the Pastoral Rectorship by Word Sacraments and Keys cannot be delegated to any men that are not of the same office do thereby say as much as that the Diocesan government is of men and may be changed by men but the Pastoral Incumbency is of Christ and cannot be changed The Lord that instituted it protect it and save it from Satans most dangerous assault which is by getting his own servants into it by error and malignity and strife and cruelty to do his work as the Ministers of Righteousness and as by Christs Authority and in his name London Aug. 13. 1684. POSTSCRIPT Aug. 25. 1684. HE that gave me notice of this Book which I answer did withall send me a Manuscript to be privately answered containing the very same things but somewhat enlarged His displeasure against my former mention of his private Writings to me and the Contents made me confident that he would not have any thing Published which I should answer to his last By which I found my self in a notable strait For if he at once privately sent me his reasons and also in another Book Printed them if I should answer his private papers which reason forbad me doing in my condition for his use alone I should judg my self forestalled from answering the Printed Book because the matter being the very same and 't is likely by the same man I should be supposed to have broken the Laws of Civility to have answered his private papers But having no Amanuensis or Scribe to take any Copy of his papers or my own I thought it the best way to return his unanswered they being Written for my use which Reading will as fully serve as answering them but supposing the Printed papers must be answered I inserted also an answer to the strength of all his additionals in the Manuscript And at last he giveth me some notice of his thoughts of publishing the Manuscript or a vindication of it Which falls well for the Readers use that I have answered that Manuscript before it is Published without taking notice of it and sâ— avoiding wordy altercations The Author professeth himself my great acquaintance Who he is I know not but he seemeth to be a very rational sober man God forbid that I should ever contribute unless duty do it accidentally to the grievance of such men I doubt not but he speaketh as he thinketh And I doubt I have given him occasions by some uncautelous words in my writings I
truly thank God and him that I am called to review them and to clear my sence before I die And I adjure the tearing persecuting sect to think no more strangely and odiously of our differences in this case than of the sharp contention of Paul and Barnabas or that men should scramble if Gold and Pearls were scattered in the streets where dogs and swine would never strive about them Gods servants would please him we are all of weak understandings The Wisest best know their weakness The rest are nearest the state of the Fool who rageth and is confident It is impossible but offence must come Luke 17.1 But wo wo wo to any who will make canons so extreme hard for men to agree in as terms of their Union and Communion and excommunicate all that say a word against any word ceremony circumstances or office of their train and when they have done cry out against men for not agreeing to every syllable which a thousand to one are uncapable of understanding and the better men understand them the more they dislike them A Short Answer to the Chief Objections in a Book ENTITULED A Theological Dialogue c. THE chief matter of this Book is already answered by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 1.10 1 Cor. 3. Rom. 16.16 17. Eph. 4.4 to the 17. Phil. 2.1 2 3. 1 Thes 5.12 13. John 17.22 23 24. And 1 Cor. 12. And Acts 20.30 The Spirit and Stile of it is answered in the third Chapter of James throughout I have nothing then to do but to answer the pretended argumentation of it For the Author shall not draw me from my Defensive part to play the part of a plaintif against others or to wast my time in altercations and spend many sheets to tell the world that another man hath not skill to speak sence and that he seduceth others by ambiguous words and by confusions Obj. 1. To prove us sinful for being members of the Church of England he saith Pag. 15. Is he not by Communion in the Sacarment of Baptisme made a member Page 13. Is not Baptisme according to the Liturgy a symbol of incorporation into the Church of England Confirmation another receiving the Lords Supper another symbol c. Ans 1. Baptism as such incorporateth no man into any particular Church but only into the universal as it did the Eunuch Acts 8. 2. The ceremonies or circumstantials of Baptism only shew what men submit to rather than to be unbaptized and not what particular Church they are of 3. This objection would insinuate that all that are Baptized in the publick manner in England were thereby incorporated into an unlawful Church which they must by being rebaptized or by open renunciation disclaim And so that it is not Lawful to Communicate with any that were Baptized in the Parish Church till they have repented it or are Rebaptized or Penitent openly And if you must have all in England renounce their Baptism before you will take their Communion for lawful the same reason will hold against your Communion with all the rest of the Churches on Earth And when you cut off your self from all saving a shred are you a Member of the undivided Body of Christ 4. If our Baptism in England doth incorporate into their Church which you suppose is no Church being a false Church doth not Baptism into your Church incorporate Persons into yours And what then if your Schism prove a Sin What if Rebaptizing prove a Sin What if the Covenant descriâ—ed by your Client to obey none but Christ in matters belonging to Worship prove a Sin are they all guilty of all these and such others Obj. II. All that are liable to a Church Excommunication when they have offended are declared Members of the Church But all Communicants and Native Inhabitants are so Therefore the Law hath excepted none How comes it to pass that the Church hath power of excommunicating any Person but by vertue of Incorporation which she hath by the same Law He that is not in the Church how comes he to be cast out Is he not by Communion in the Sacrament of baptism made a Member Ans 1. Doth their esteeming you a Member prove that you are so 2. You know that they excommunicate Papists and Atheists who deride them for it and say It 's a strange Church that will cast us out because they cannot compel us to come in 3. If this be a good argument that all are of their Church that are excommunicate then you are either safe from Excommunication or of their Church whether you will or not If to make good your argument you will aver that no Separatist Independent Presbyterian Anabaptist or Quaker was ever excommunicate or imprisoned as such you will change the Current of Intelligence and comfort many that can believe you and teach them how to escape a Prison for the time to come But if not you make your self and all these parties incorporate Members of the Church of England as well as me 4. Do you think a Lay Civilian by Excommunicating can prove or make a man a member of any Church against his will Then mens Argument against Parish Churches for want of consent is void They may be made such against their wills 5. But tho few men dâ—slâ—ke the Lay-Excommunicators and Absolvers more than I do nor grudge more at the Bishops and Deans who use them and let them put their names to the Excommunications especially of the poor Church-Wardens for not swearing c. yet let us not render them causelesly ridiculouâ— I imagine that they excommunicate not known Papists Anabaptists and such like out of their Church who they know were never in it but out of the Universal Church If this be not their sense let them give it you themselves for I am not bound to be their Interpreter And yet to moderate our Censures of them I 'le tell you a wonder Within this hour I received a Letter of credible Intelligence of a Chancellor who hearing of a Conventicle not presented by the Church-Wardens and being told that they met to repeat the publick Sermon said God forbid that they should be hindered Obj. III. Page 8. A Church in a sense is a Christian Kingdom that is a Royal Nation under Christ their King But there is no such Gospel-Church in your sense for there was neither Christian Kingdom nor King in the Apâ—stlâ—s days Ans The Institution may be in the Gospel before the existence Christian Kings and Kingdoms are neither unlawful nor needless because there were none then The Prophets not only foretel that Nations shall come in to Christ and serve him but that all Nations that do it not shall perish And Christs Commission to his Apostles was To go and Disciple all Nations as much as in them lay baptizing them Nations as such were first to be discipled and then baptized Infants are part of Nations And Matth. 23. Christ would have gathered Jerusalems Children all the Jewish
if by subjection you mean but joyning in their Churches as Christian and Protestant for doctrine and worship notwithstanding the defect which they cannot help yea which they disclaim bare accusation will not prove this a sin but by this we see how much of Christs Church you are for separating from 2. For my part I have oft published That it is not the least part of my charge against Popery that they unchurch almost all the Christian World save themselves But yet they are about a 4th or 3d part of professed Christians themselves and divers of them do not unchurch the Greeks But to unchurch or forbid Communion with all that are as faulty as the Helvetians and all other Protestant Churches that have Liturgies or partial faults is that which I dare not be guilty of I think that to say That a thousand parts to one of Christs Church are none of his Churches is next to deposing him from his Kingdom Much like as it would be to say no part of London is the Kings but Amen Corner nor any part of England but Barnet or Brentford 3. And is it not one of our just accusations of the Papists That they say all the Protestant Churches are no true Churches and the Ministers no true Pastors and that Communion with them is unlawful and shall we now justifie them and say as they tho not on the same Reason but for a far smaller difference Is this our running from Popery 4. Yea is it not the great thing that we accuse the superconformists for That they make us to be no true Ministers or Churches and are we indeed of the same mind One side saith We are no true Ministers for want of Bps. Ordination c. Another side saith You are no true Ministers for having Communion with the Bishops and Churches c. VII I mentioned the Judgment and Practise of the old Nonconformists and Presbyterians not as a rule but as a comparative example To this he saith p. 11. You and they might as well own the Church of England in the form and constitution as it is established as the Parish churches to be particular Gospel churches c. P. 12. To say you join with a quatenus and own not the very constitution and standing of the church with which you join in the sense the church asserts it is the greatest equivocation in practice that is The old Nonconformists nor you are to be no presidents to us in this case So far as the old Nonconformists and the old reforming conformists went forward with Reformation to bring the church out of the wilderness we honour them but when they turn back again and entice the people so to do we are afraid to tempt God in that manner P. 14. Those â—ld Nonconformists that did so are no presidents to 〈◊〉 If they halted and were lame must we be so such communicants are not acceptable to any Church and I know what Church would never admit them were it not to punish and expose them and their profession as ridiculous and inconsistent with its self And as for FRENCH and DUTCH what are they to us c. P. 16 He calls Mr. Fenns joining in the Liturgy with exception of some part The sulâ—en practice of a half-paced doting Noncâ—nformist Ans First to the Cause and secondly to the Persons 1. To call any practice Equivocation or by any ill name is no proof that it is so nor is here a word of true proof given us I ask the Considerate Is it in the power of a Law-maker to make all Worship and Duty to God unlawful by commanding to do it for an unlawful end or upon false principles What if a Law said All people shall worship God not because the Scripture commandeth it but because the State commands it Would this make it unlawful to worship God I would disown the Principle and go on What if the Law should say The Pastoral Office is not of Divine Right but humane must the office therefore be renounced And why can such a Law any more bind me to judg of Church-constitutions by the Lawmakers words rather than by Gods Word Suppose that the Anabaptists say That rebaptizing is the true way of Church-gathering Is it a sin to communicate with them if they will receive me when I profess the contrary I am against the Covenant which you defend as making an Independent Church Is it therefore a sin to communicate with them because it is not as constituted by that Covenant What do Parties more differ in of late than Forms Orders Modes and Circumstances of Church Government and if they be of many contrary minds were it twenty there can be but one of them in the right And is it unlawful to join with all the rest Must we needs be sure which of these is in the right Almost all the Churches that I hear of in the world have their agreed professions published the Protestants are gathered in the Corpus confessionum the English Church Principles and Orders are expressed in the Book of Canons the Liturgy Ordination the 39 Articles the Homilies the Apology c. Must every one stay from their Churches till he hath read and understood all these Books and be sure that there is no fault or error in them What if it be poor men or women that cannot buy all these books and what if they cannot read whom shall they get to read them all and how shall they have time to study them or capacity to understand them when we can hardly get them to learn a Catechism and anderstand it You will say That is their crime that make all these Confessions and Books They will answer but that 's none of our fault We made them not and yet must we not communicate with any Church that maketh such The old Separatists called Brownists published their confession and therein owned many Parish Churches in England and Communion with them I recited their words in my Reasons c. But you are gone beyond them The New England churches printed their confession and all there agreed not to it The English Independents published their Principles and Confessions And the Presbyterians and they agreed in the Westminster Synods confession catechism and Directory Is every poor Man and Woman bound to stay from all their churches when for 14 years they had no other till they understand all these and know that they are faultless Or if there be any fault in any one of all these books is every one guilty of them that cometh to the churches The Anabaptists published their confession The Dutch have theirs Many churches agreed with them in the Synod of Dort The French have theirs the Saxons the Helvetians Geneva the Bohemians the Protestants in general had the Augustane and many more have theirs Reader See with whom these Writers will hold communion who make it unlawful to join with any church that have any fault in their constitutions or agreed Doctrines or Orders
meritorious cause but Christs righteousness but that righteousness justifieth not Infidels nor any but qualified Receivers and Faith is that qualification Is not this true And is it not enough If you would preach or write censurious disputes whether it be the Physitian or the Medicine or the Patients taking it that cureth him or the Meat or the Giver or the eating it that feedeth men take your course I had rather answer that and most of your Books wâ—th groans and tears than with disputing XV. As for his threatning to open my faults as fast as I discover them I may save him the labour and lament them my self Two I will confess now besides all heretofore 1. I fear I did sometime by connivence and by too oft preaching against the faults of the Bishops about 1640 encourage some that were set upon accusing and separating over much Tho I ever disliked and opposed that Spirit and foreâ—â—w what Divisions and Sins attended 2. Tho when I took the League and Covâ—nant it was not imposed but offered to Volunteers and I never gave iâ— but to one and kept the Countrie from taking it yet seeing now what I saw not then I repent that I took it Tho being taken I dare not say that it bindeth not as a secondary Self-Obligation to that which God bound me to before My reasons are 1. Because as after imposed no knowing man can believe that the thousands of ignorant people that took it who never understood the controversies of Prelacy could take it in Truth Judgment and Righteousness and so must sin 2. Because it cut the Nation in two parts on pretence of Union and engaged us against such excellent Persons as Vsher Davenant and against the greatest half of the Land when we should have united on the terms of the Bâ—ptismal Covenant 3. Because being before by God and our Allegiance sufficiently â—lliged to the King by a further Vow of mens own making against his will they entangled the consciences of the people about the meaning and the obligation of it some thinking it bound them not to him and other that it bound them to fight for him and yet to oppose the Prelacy that he was for And now the Law for Corporations binds men to declare that there is no obâ—igation at all from that Oâ—th either for the King or against any sin XVI There are also more than one of my Opponents who tell me That because I live in prosperity my self and suffer not therefore I am insensible of the case of sufferâ—rs and add affliction to the afflicted and have not due compassion on them Ans If this be true it is a great sin But 1. why do the same men accuse me for perswading men to avoid sufferings as they think by ill means It is indeed to save men from suffering by mistake for that which was their duty to the injury of others and to reserve their patience for better uses being like enough to have need of it all 2. I thank God I am so far from being insensible of the sufferings of the church of Christ throughout the world that I may say with Paul Rom. 9.1 I have continual sorrow in my heart for the wars blood câ—uelties exercised on them and much more for their own sin And sure all the wrath that is agaiâ—st me for labouring to save this Land from division self-destroying and suffering 1661. and since might have been avoided had I been so self-saving as the accusers feign me 3. I thank God my suffâ—rings have been far less than I expected or deserved of God and not worthy to be called sufferings in comparison of thousands in foreign Lands And I humbly thank the King that they have been no greater but if they had all had been now almost at an end I am not willing to name them lest it seem to savour of impatience but remembring Pauls example to such accusers to the Corinthians I will briefly say 1. From 1639. to 1660. I suffered more assaults and oppositiâ—n than some of them by divers penalties for divers duties against iniquity 2. I think I was the first silenced since the bishops return And the hot displeasure against me for my pacâ—ficatory labour 1660. and 1661. is not unknown 3. Enquire whether there be more virulent and voluminous accusations printed against me or any one of them 4 I have had no Pâ—storal maintenance these 23 years and no Church to maintain me nor any stipendary Lecture and for about 15. years I received no gift of money from any but one man which I could not without incivility refuse 5. When I went twice a day to their Church at Acton I was sent to the common Gaol accused for a Sermon for meekness and obedience and submission to Government and when I built a Chappel it cost me about 20 l. to get a Minister out of the prison that had formerly been imprisoned for the Kings service for preaching but one Sermon there when I was twenty miles off 6. All that I had was distrained on and taken from me all my books and the very bed I lay on for preaching after though bona fide they had been on just considerations given or made over to another and were not mine but the present use of them only reserved to me and this by many warrants as convict by the oaths of I know not whom nor when nor could ever know my accuser or witness nor was ever summoned to speak for my self much less to examine the witnesses 7. I have been put in city and countrey to remove my habitation about twelve times and my person twenty in the midst of my pains to my great cost and trouble 8. How many thousand pounds my conscience hath cost me in the loss of a bishoprick by the Lord Chancellor offered since 1661. besides all other losses and charges I leave you to compute and ask you which of you hath lost more tho I acknowledg with thankfulness to God that I never wanted food or raiment 9. And while I am now writing for Parochial churches and communion and know no Law of the land that I break I am hated and while I keep my bed in pain or my couch there are new assaults which I think not fit to publish 10. And all this is but as a flea-biting in comparison of the sufferings which I carry about me by continual pain or langour through age and many uncurable diseases And under the expectations of death how small a matter is it to me whether I dye in a Gaol for my duty to God or in my hired house out of which I have very few times gone these two years but it hath been a prison to me What difference but conceit and consent If our Rulers think it for the interest of any cause or party that I dye in prison I shall acknowledg Gods will in the effect of theirs and it shall not be in their power to make me suffer for any thing but
against all malignity that would charge these errors on the innocent for a cloak of hatred and cruelty and oppression that I know not one meer Nonconformist that holdeth any of these errors and I verily believe that the Independents that I am acquainted with are true servants of Christ and many called Anabaptists sober godly Christians and that some called Separatists retain Christian charity and meerly for fear of sinning flye too far from others And as for all the rest it is not mens calling them all Dissenters nor their suffering together that can make the innocent responsible for the faulty who perhaps do more against their mistakes than ever such Accusers did to cure them And I must tell the Abaddons that the opposition that hath been raised against them among those that I was acquainted with before 1641 and 1642 was caused chiefly by the badness of those that made it their trade to preach against strict and serious obedience to God as Puritanism and Hypocrisie and made it the Ladder of their aspiring Ambition to make such odious and to hunt with jealous severity those that used for mutual help in the ways of Salvation to pray together especially if they fasted or consulted how to obey Gods Law Justacting over the part of the Bps that Martin separated from described by Sulpitius Severus rendering all suspected of Priscillianism that were more than others in reading the Scripture Fasting and Praying and clapping on the back with encouragement the Drunkards and prophane ignorant rabble who in every Town were the haters of the godly Conformists and Nonconformists and making these the instruments of their malice and praising them and the multitude of ignorant reading Priests as more worthy Subjects than men fearing God Ri. Hooker in his Preface describeth these and he that readeth his Europae Speculum may know that it was no better Conformists that his most beloved Pupâ—l Sir Edwin Sandys was against while he was one of the zealous Parliamentarians It 's true that many were very hot against Bishop Laud and the Arminians and against Dr. Heylin and Dr. Pockington for proving Sunday no Sabbath and calling the Table an Altar and the Ministers Priests and the Sacrament a Sacrifice Blame not men that had read of their principles and practice how Rome is a Leech that must live on blood and cannot stand without it if they were afraid of coming thither again or drawing too near it Upon my knowledg the debauchery and malignity of many that hunted them and would not let them stay at home in peace and the terror of two hundred thousand murdered in Ireland was it that drove most that ever I knew into the Parliaments Army And fear doth often drive men to seek for self-defence to that which seemeth next at hand Had those whom they feared been such as their functions obliged them to be men of Holiness Love and Peace they would have been less prejudiced against the rest they bore easily with Dr. Chappel Mr. Mayâ—en and some other godly charitable men that were reputed Arminians I here adjoin it to my confessions 1. That I thought worse of that called Arminianism than I should have done and have proved in my Catholick Theology not yet writ against by any that I know of that the difference is not in any great and intolerable error on either side 2. That the practice of them that prophaned the Lords day and the malignity of their abettors made me too much offended at the books that called the Lords day no Sabbath and the Ministers Priests and the Table an Altar and the Sacrament a Sacrifice For I now know that these allegorical Names were usual with the best of the ancient Churches without contradiction And that the Lords Day is indeed never called the Sabbath in the New Testament and that the word Sabbath in the Bible signifieth a day of ceremonial Rest which was a Jewish Ceremony and that all such are by Paul said to be put down and that the Lords Day is a day of holy Assemblies and rejoicing in spiritual Evangelical Worship Ignorance and prejudice in these controversies prevailed not from argument but from the experience of the quality of too many that opposed them They thought it a most improbable thing that God should illuminate vicious worldly haters of Godliness and desert those that most desired to please him And of late times what abundance have been driven from the publick Churches by those that rail at them when they come there and would get the Birds into their Net by throwing stones and bawling at them and would get the fish to take the bait by beating the Waters The Bishop of Worcesters silencing me and preaching as he did and the imprisonment of many of the people after affected my old hearers with so much distast of that sort of men that all the Writings and perswasions I could use would not reconcile them nor scarce keep them from falling out with me for my perswasions And now they have a Worthy Pious preaching Bishop a Man of Love and Peace and a good Minister they all crowd the Church and are like to fall in love with such Bishops And I must testifie that with the generality of the Nonconforming Laity I never found but it was good preaching and good living that won their Love And they will honour and follow such men whether Bishops Conformists or Nonconformists XV. Since the writing of this I understand that some timerous persons have been afraid to communicate in publick or joyn with the Liturgy by hearing that some that have done it have been so troubled in Conscience that they have fallen into despair and a doleful state of trouble To this I answer 1. You shall never prove that I have perswaded any Minister to give Christs body and blood as a Drench to the unwilling or to make the Sacrament of Love the Instrument of Malice or Cruelty or a snare to strangle Souls It must be that Offence must come but wo to them by whom it cometh The old Church made men beg for Church-Communion if any withdraw from it and excommunicate themselves they did not send them to Goal for their Conversion to force them to say that they repent and to force them to Communion 2. But I must say that these Ministers or people that have so ill taught these troubled Souls by Doctrine or Example as to tempt them to take their Duty or a lawful thing for so deadly a sin are far from being guiltless of their Trouble Distraction or Destruction If any should make them believe that it were such a dangerous thing to pray by a Book to sing Davids Psalms to Communicatie with Presbyterians not to be rebaptized not to keep the Saturday Sabbath c. And then when he hath affrighted one to make away himself in melancholy despair should use this instance as an argument to affright away others also from their duty I should think that he were too blame This were