can be imagined justly to binder us from a ready complyance to this method of Service appointed by them and so live in unity Reply Prayer and Humility are indeed the necessarie means of Peace But if you will let us pray for peace in no words but what are in the Common-Prayer-book their brevitie and unaptness and the customariness that will take off the edge of fervour with humane nature will not give leave or help sufficient to our souls to work towards God upon this Subject with that enlargedness copiousness and freedom as is necessary to due fervour A brief transient touch and away is not enough to warm the heart arigne and cold Prayers are like to have a cold return and therefore even for Peace sake let us pray more copiously and heartily than the Common-Prayer-book will help us to do And whether this be that cause or whether it be that the Common-Prayer-book hath never a Prayer for it self we find that its Prayers prevail not to reconcile many sober serious persons to it that live in faithfull fervent Prayer 2. And for Humility we humbly conceive it would most effectually heal us and by causing the Pastors of the Church to know that they are not to rule the flocks as Lords but as ensamples not by constraint but willingly 1 Pet. 5. 2 3. and it would cause them not to think so highly of themselves and so meanly of their Brethren as to judge no words fit to be used to God in the publick Worship but what they prescribe and put into our mouths and that other men are generally unable to speak sensibly or suitably unless they tell us what to say or that all others are unfit to be trusted with the expressing of their own desires Humilitie would perswade the Pastors of the Church at least to undertake no more than the Apostles did and no more to obtrude or impose their own words upon all others in the publick Worship If they found any unfit to be trusted with the expression of their mindes in publick Prayer they would do what they could to get meeter men in their places and till then they would restrain and help such as need it and not upon that pretence as much restrain all the ablest Ministers as if the whole Church were to be nominated measured or used according to the quality of the most unworthy And it is also true that humility in private persons and inferiors would do much to our peace by keeping them in due submission and obedience and keeping them from all contentions and divisions which proceed from self-conceitedness and pride But yet 1. The humblest surest Subjects may stumble upon the scruple whether Bishops differ not from Presbyters only in degree and not in order or office it being a Controversie and no resolved point of faith even amongst the Papists whose faith is too extensive and favour too Ecclesiastical ambition too great and consequently they may doubt whether men in the same order do by divine appointment owe obedience unto those that gradually go before them 2. And they may scruple whether such making themselves the Governours of their Brethren make not themselves indeed of a different order or office and so incroach not on the authority of Christ who only maketh Officers purely Ecclesiastical and whether it be no disloyalty to Christ to own such Officers 3. And among those Divines that are for a threefold Episcopacy besides that of Presbyters who are Episcopi Gregis viz. General unfixed Bishops like the Evangelists or Apostles in their measure and the fixed Bishops of Parochial Churches that have Presbyters to assist them to whom they do preside and also the Presidents of larger Synods yet is it a matter of very great doubt whether a fixed Diocesan being the Pastor of many hundred Churches having none under him that hath the power of Jurisdiction or Ordination be indeed a Governour of Christs appointment or approbation and whether Christ will give us any more thanks for owning them as such than the King will give us for owning an Usurper Humility alone will not seem to subject these men to such a Government 4. And though their coercive Magistratical power be easily submitted to as being from the King how unfit Subjects soever Church men are of such a power yet he that knoweth his Superiours best doth honour God more and supposeth God more infallible than man and will feel himself most indispensibly bound by Gods commands and bound not to obey man against the Lord. And whereas there is much sayd against the peoples taking on them to judge of the lawfulness of things commanded them by Superiors we add 5. That humble men may believe that their Superiors are fallible that it is no impossibility to command things that God forbids that in such Cases if we have sufficient means to discern the sinfulness of such Commands we must make use of them and must obey God rather than men that when the Apostles acted according to such a Resolution Acts 4. 19. and Daniel and the three Witnesses Dan. 6. and 3. they all exercised a judgement of Discerning upon the matter of their Superiors commands that not to do so at all is to make Subjects Bruits and so no Subjects because not rational free Agents or to make all Governors to be gods And lastly That it will not save us from Hell nor justifie us at Judgement for sinning against God to say that Superiors commanded us nor will it prove all the Martyrs to be sinners and condemned because they judged of their Superiors commands and disobeyed them All which we say to shew the insufficiency of the Remedy hereby you propounded the humility of Inferiors unless you will also add your help without obedience there is no order or lasting concord to be expected And by abasing the eternal God so far as to set him and his Laws below a Creature under pretence of obedience to the Creature no good can be expected because no peace with Heaven without which peace with men is but a Confederacy hastning each party to Destruction And therefore absolute obedience must be given only to God the absolute Sovereign In all this we suppose that we are all agreed And therefore 6. and lastly We must say that the way to make us think the Bishops to be so wise and careful Guides and Fathers to us is not for them to seem wiser than the Apostles and make those things of standing necessity to the Churches unity which the Apostles never made so nor to forbid all to preach the Gospel or to hold Communion with the Church that dare not conform to things unnecessary Love and tenderness are not used to express themselves by hurting and destroying men for nothing And to silence and reject from Church Communion for a Ceremony and in the mean time to perswade men that they love them is but to stab or famish all the sick persons in the Hospital or Family whose stomachs cannot take
The reserving of Confirmation to the Bishop doth argue the Dignity of the Bishop above Presbyters who are not allowed to Confirm but does not argue any excellency in Confirmation above the Sacraments St. Hierom argues the quite contray ad Lucif cap. 4. That because Baptism was allowed to be performed by a Deacon but Confirmation only by a Bishop therefore Baptism was most necessary and of the greatest value The mercy of God allowing the most necessary means of Salvation to be administred by inferiour Orders and restraining the lesse necessary to the higher for the honour of their Order Reply O that we had the Primitive Episcopacy and that Bishops had no more Churches to oversee than in the Primitive times they had and then we would never speak against this reservation of Confirmation to the honour of the Bishop But when that Bishop of one Church is turned into that Bishop of many hundred Churches and when he is now a Bishop of the lowest rank that was an Arch-bishop when Arch-bishops first came up and so we have not really existent any meer Bishops such as the Antients knew at all but only Arch-bishops and their Curates Marvel not if we would not have Confirmation proper to Arch-bishops nor one man undertake more than an hundred can perform But if you will do it there is no remedie we have acquit our selves Prayer after the Imposition of hands is grounded upon the practice of the Apostles Heb. 6. 2. Acts 8. 17. Nor doth 25. Article say that Confirmation is a corrupt imitation of the Apostles practice but that the 5. commonly called Sacraments have ground partly on the corrupt following the Apostles c. which may be applied to some other of those 5 but cannot be applied to Confirmation unless we make the Church speak contradictions Reply But the question is not of Imposition of hands in generall but this Imposition in particular And you have never proved that this sort of Imposition called Confirmation is mentioned in those Texts And the 25. Article cannot more probably be thought to speak of any one of the 5. as proceeding from the corrupt imitation of the Apostles than of Confirmation as a supposed Sacrament We know no harm in speaking the language of holy Scripture Acts 8. 15. they laid their hands upon them and they received the Holy Ghost and though Impositions of hands be not a Sacrament yet it is a very fit sign to certifie the persons what is then done for them as the Prayer speaks Reply It is fit to speak the Scripture language in Scripture sense But if those that have no such power to give the Holy Ghost will say Receive the Holy Ghost it were better for them to abuse other language than Scripture language After Confirmation There is no inconvenience that Confirmation should be required before the Communion when it may be ordinarily obtained that which you here fault you elsewhere desire Reply We desire that the credible approved profession of Faith and repentance be made necessaries But not that all the thousands in England that never yet came under the Bishops hands as not one of many ever did even when they were at the highest may be kept from the Lords Supper for some cannot have that Imposition and others will not that yet are fit for Communion with the Church The Ring is a significant sign only of humane institution and was alwayes given as a pledge of fidelity and constant love and here is no reason given why it should be taken away nor are the reasons mentioned in the Roman Ritualits given in our Common-Prayer-Book Repl. We crave not your own forbearance of the Ring but the indifferencie in our use of a thing so mis-used and unnecessary These words in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost if they seem to make Matrimony a Sacrament may as well make all sacred yea civil actions of weight to be Sacraments they being usual at the beginning and ending of all such It was never heard before now that those words make a Sacrament Reply Is there no force in an argument drawn from the appearance of evil the offence and the danger of abuses when other words enow may serve turn They go to the Lords Table because the Communion is to follow Reply They must go to the Table whether there be a Communion or not Consecrated the estate of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery c. Though the institution of Marriage was before the Fall yet it may be now and is consecrated by God to such an excellent mystery as the representation of the spiritual marriage between Christ and his Church Eph. 5. 23. We are sorry that the words of Scripture will not please The Church in the 25. Article hath taken away the fear of making it for a Sacrament Reply When was Marriage thus consecrated If all things used to set forth Christs offices or benefits by way of similitude be consecrated then a Judge a Father a Friend a Vine a Door a Way c. are all consecrated things Scripture phrase pleaseth us in Scripture sense The new married persons the same day of their marriage must receive the Holy Communion This inforces none to forbear Marriage but presumes as well it may that all persons marriageable ought to be also fit to receive the Holy Sacrament And marriage being so solemn a Covenant of God they that undertake it in the fear of God will not stick to seal it by receiving the Holy Communion and accordingly prepare themselves for it Is were more Christian to desire that those licentious Festivities might be supprest and the Communion more generally used by those that marry the happiness would be greater then can easily be exprest Unde sufficiat ad enarrandum felicitatem ejus Matrimonii quod Ecclesia conciliat confirmat oblatio Tertul. lib. 2. ad Uxorem Reply Indeed will you phrase and modify your administrations upon such a supposition that all men are such as they ought to be and do what they ought to do Then take all the World for Saints and use them accordingly and blot out the doctrine of Reproof excommunication and damnation from your Bibles Is it not most certain that very many married persons are unfit for the Lords Supper and will be when you and we have done our best And is it fit then to compell them to it But the more unexpected the more welcom is your motion of that more Christian course of suppressing of licentious festivities When shall we see such Reformation undertaken Visitation of the Sick FOr as much as the condition c. All which is here desired is already presumed namely that the Minister shall apply himself to the particular condition of the person but this must be done according to the Rule of prudence and justice and not according to his pleasure therefore if the sick person shew himself truly penitent it ought not to be left
THE GRAND DEBATE BETWEEN The most Reverend the BISHOPS AND The PRESBYTERIAN Divines Appointed by His Sacred MAJESTY AS COMMISSIONERS FOR The Review and Alteration OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER c. BEING An Exact Account of their whole Proceedings The most perfect Copy London Printed 1661. A Copy of His Majesties Commission CHARLES the second by the Grace of God King of England Scotland France Ireland Defender of the Faith c. To our Trusty and wel-beloved the most Reverend Father in God Accepted Arch-bishop of York The right reverend Fathers in God Gilbert Bishop of London John Bishop of Durham John Bishop of Rochester Humphrey Bishop of Sarum George Bishop of Worcester Robert Bishop of Lincoln Benjamin Bishop of Peterborough Brian Bishop of Chester Richard Bishop of Carlile John Bishop of Exeter Edward Bishop of Norwich to our trusty and wel-beloved the Reverend Anthony Tuckney D. D. John Conant D. D. William Spurstow D. D. John Wallis D. D. Thomas Manton D. D. Edmund Calamy B. D. Richard Baxter Clerke Arthur Juckson Tho. Case Samuel Clarke Matthew Newcomen Clerkes and to our trusty and wel-beloved Dr. Earle Dean of Westminster Peter Heylin D. D. Joh. Hacket D. D. Joh. Berwick D. D. Peter Gunning D. D. John Pearson D. D. Tho. Pierce D. D. Anthony Sparrow Herbert Thorndike D. D. Thomas Horton D. D. Thomas Jacomb D. D. William Bate John Rawlinson William Cooper Clerkes D. John Light foot D. John Collings D. Benjamin Woodbridg and VVilliam Drake Clerke Greeting Whereas by our Declaration of the 25 of October last concerning Ecclesiasticall affaires we did amongst other things express our esteem of the Liturgy of the Church of England contained in the Book of Common prayer and yet since we find exceptions made against several things therein we did by our said Declaration declare we would appoint an equal number of learned Divines of both perswasions to review the same we therefore in accomplishment of our said wil and intent and of our continued and constant care and study for the peace and unity of the Churches within our dominions for removal of all exceptions and differences and the occasions of such differences and exceptions from among our good subjects for or concerning the said Book of Common prayer or any thing therein contained doe by these our Letters patents require authorize constitute and appoint you the said c. to advise upon and review the said Book of Common prayer comparing the same with the most ancient Liturgies which have been used in the Church in the primitive and purest times And to that end to assemble and meet together from time to time and at such time within the space of foure Calendar moneths now next ensuing in the Masters lodging in the Savoy in the Strand in the County of Middlesex or in such other place or places as to you shall be thought fit and convenient to take into your serious and grave considerations the several directions and rules forms of prayer and things in the said Book of Common prayer contained and to advise consult upon and about the same and the several objections and exceptions which shall now be raised against the same and if occasion be to make such reasonable and necessary alterations corrections and amendments therein as by and between you the said Arch-bishop Bishops Doctors and Persons hereby required and authorized to meet and advise as aforesaid shall be agreed upon to be needfull and expedient for the giving satisfaction to tender consciences and the restoring and continuance of peace and unity in the Churches under our protection and Government but avoyding as much as may be all unnecessary abreviations of the Forms and Liturgy wherewith the people are altogether acquainted and have so long received in the Church of England And our will and pleasure is that when you the said Arch-bishop Bishops Doctours and persons authorized and appointed by these our Letters patents to meet advise and consult upon and about the premises as aforesaid shall have drawn your consultations to any resolution and determination which you shall agree upon as needfull or expedient to be done for the altering diminishing or inlarging the said Book of Common prayer or any part thereof that then forthwith you certifie and present to us in writing under your severall hands the matters and things whereupon you shall so determine for our approbation and to the end the same or so much thereof as shall be approved by us may be established and for as much as the said Archbishop Bishops have severall great Charges to attend which we would not dispense with or that the same should be neglected upon any great occasion whatsoever and some of them being of great age and infirmities may not be able constantly to attend the execution of the service and authority hereby given and required by us in the meeting and consultation aforesaid We will therefore and hereby require you the said Dr. Earles c. to supply the place and places of such of the Arch-bishop and Bishops other then the said Edward Bishop of Norwich as shall by age sickness infirmity or other occasion be hindred from attending the said meeting or consultation that is to say that one of you the said Dr. Earles c. shall from time to time supply the place of each one of them the said Arch-bishop and Bishops other then the said Edward Bishop of Norwich which shall happen to be hindred or to be absent from the said meetings or consultations and shall and may advise consult and determine and also certifie and execute all and singular the powers and authorities before mentioned in and about the premises as fully and absolutely as such Arch-bishop and Bishops which shal so happen to be absent should or might doe by vertue of these our Letters patents or any thing herein contained in case he or they were personally present And whereas in regard of the distance of some the infirmity of others the multitude of constant imployment and other incidental impediments some of you the said Edward Bishop of Norwich c. may be hindred from the constant attendance in the execution of the service aforesaid We therefore wil and doe hereby require and authorize you the said Thomas Horton c. to supply the place or places of such the Commissioners last before mentioned as shal by the means aforesaid or any other occasion be hindred from the said meeting and consultations that one of you the said Thomas Horton c. shal from time to time supply the places of each one of the said Commissioners last mentioned which shal happen to be hindered or absent from the said meeting and consultations and shal and may advise consult and determine and also certifie and execute all and singular the powers and authorities before mentioned in and about the premises as fully and absolutely as such of the said last mentioned Commissioners which shall so happen to be absent should
or might doe by vertue of these our Letters patents or any thing therein contained in case he or they were personally present In witness whereof we have caused these our Letters to be made patents witness our self at VVestminster the 25 day of March in the thirteenth year of our Reign Per ipsum Regem Barker THE EXCEPTIONS OF THE PRESBYTERIAN Brethren Against some passages in the present LITURGY ACknowledging with all humility and thankfulness His Majesties most Princely condescention and indulgence to very many of his Loyall subjects as well in his Majesties most gracious Declaration as particularly in this present Commission issued forth in pursuance thereof we doubt not but the Right Reverend Bishops and all the rest of His Majesties Commissioners intrusted in this work will in imitation of His Majesties most prudent and Christian Moderation and Clemency judge it their duty that we find to be the Apostles own practice in a speciall manner to be tender to the Churches peace to bear with the infirmities of the weak and not to please themselves nor to measure the Consciences of other men by the light and latitude of their own but seriously and readily to consider and advise of such Expedients as may most conduce to the healing of our breaches and uniting those that differ And albeit we have an high and honourable esteem of those Godly and Learned Bishops and others who were the first Compilers of the publick Liturgy and doe look upon it as an excellent and worthy Work for that time when the Church of England made her first step out of such a mist of Popish Ignorance and Superstition wherein it formerly was involved yet considering that all humane Works do gradually arrive at their maturity and perfection and this in particular being a Work of that nature hath already admitted several emendations since the first compiling thereof It cannot be thought any disparagement or derogation either to the Work it self or to the Compilers of it or to those who have hitherto used it if after more than one hundred years since its first composure such further emendations be now made therein as may be judged necessary for satisfying the scruples of a multitude of sober persons who cannot at all or very hardly comply with the use of it as now it is and may best suit with the present times after so long an enjoyment of the glorious light of the Gospel and so happy a Reformations especially considering that many godly and learned men have from the beginning all along desired the alteration of many things therein and very many of his Majesty's pious peaceable and loyal Subjects after so long a discontinuance of it are more averse from it than heretofore the satisfying of whom as far as may be will very much conduce to that Peace and Unity which is so much desired by all good men and so much endeavoured by His most Excellent Majesty And therefore in pursuance of this His Majesty's most gracious Commission for the satisfying of tender Consciences and the procuring of Peace and Unity amongst our selves we judge meet to propose I. That all the Prayers and other Materials of the Liturgy may consist of nothing doubtful or questioned amongst Pious Learned and Orthodox Persons inasmuch as the professed end of composing them is for the declaring of Unity and consent of all who joyn in the Publick Worship it being too evident that the limiting Church-Communion to things of doubtful disputation hath been in all Ages the ground of Schism and separation according to the saying of a Learned Man To load our Publick Forms with the private Fancies upon which we differ is the most Sovereign way to perpetuate Schism to the Worlds end Prayer Confession Thanksgiving reading of the Scriptures and administration of the Sacraments in the plainest and simplest manner were matter enough to furnish out a sufficient Liturgy though nothing either of private Opinion or of Church pomp of Garments or prescribed Gestures of Imagery of Musick of matter concerning the dead of many superfluities which creep into the Church under the name of Order and Decency did interpose it self To charge Churches or Litnrgies with things unnecessary was the first beginning of all Superstition and when scruple of Conscience began to be made or pretended then Schisme began to break in If the speciall Guides and Fathers of the Church would be a little sparing of incumbring Churches with Superfluities or not over-rigid either in reviving obsolete Customs or imposing new there would be far less cause of Schism or Superstition and all the Inconvenience likely to ensue would be but this they should in so doing yield a little to the imbecility of their Inferiours a thing which S. Paul would never have rrefused to doe mean while wheresoever false or suspected Opinions are made a piece of Church-Liturgy he that separates is not the Schismatick for it is alike unlawful to make profession of known or suspected falshood as to put in practice unlawful or suspected actions II. Further we humbly desire that it may be seriously considered that as our first Reformers out of their great wisdome did at that time so compose the Liturgy as to win upon the Papists and to draw them into their Church-Communion by varying as little as well they could from the Romish forms before in use so whether in the present constitution and state of things amongst us we should not according to the same rule of Prudence and Charity have our Liturgy so composed as to gain upon the judgement and affections of all those who in the substantials of the Protestant Religion are of the same perswasions with our selves In as much as a more firm union and consent of all such as well in Woship as in Doctrine would greatly strengthen the Protestant Interest against all those dangers and temptations which our intestine Divisions and Animosities do expose us unto from the common Adversary III. That the Repetitions and Responsals of the Clerk and People and the alternate Reading of the Psalms and Hymns with a confused murmure in the Congregation whereby what is read is less intelligible and therefore unedifying may be omitted the Minister being appointed for the People in all Publick Services appertaining unto God and the holy Scriptures both of the old and new Testament intimating the peoples part in publick Prayer to be only with silence and reverence to attend thereunto and to declare their consent in the close by saying Amon. IV. That in regard the Letany though otherwise containing in it many holy Petitions is so framed that the Petitions for a great part are uttered onely by the People which we think not to be so consonant to Scripture which makes the Minister the Mouth of the People to God in Prayer the particulars thereof may be composed into one solemn Prayer to be offered by the Minister unto God for the People V. That there may be nothing in the Liturgy which may seem to countenance
them not to have but we hope you speak not the publick sense As the Apostles desired as aforesaid that all would speak the same things without giving them that ever was proved a form of words to speak them in so might we propose to you that uncertain opinions be made no part of our Liturgie without putting all their words into their mouths in which their desires must be uttered Your heartie desire and the reason of it makes not only against extemporarie Prayer but all prepared or written forms or Liturgies that were indited only by one man and have not the consent antecedently of others And do you think this was the course of the Primitive times Basil thus used his private Conceptions at Caesarea and Greg. Thaumaturgus before him at Neocesarea and all Pastors in Justin Martyrs and Tertullians daies And how injurious is it to the publick Officers of Christ the Bishops and Pastors of the Churches to be called private men who are publick persons in the Church if they be not every single person is not a private person else Kings and Judges would be so And have you not better means to shut out private opinions than the forbidding Ministers praying in the Pulpit according to the varietie of subjects and occasions You have first the Examination of persons to be ordained and may see that they be able to speak sense and fit to mannage their proper works with judgement and discretion before you ordain them And some confidence may be put in a man in his proper calling and work to which he is admitted with so great care as we hope or desire you will admit them If you are necessitated to admit some few that are injudicious or unmeet we beseech you not only to restore the many hundred worthy men laid by to a capacity but that you will not so dishonour the whole Church as to suppose all such and to use all as such but restrain those that deserve restraint and not all others for their sakes And next you have a publick Rule the Holy Scripture for these men to pray by and if any of them be intollerably guiltie of weaknesses or rashness or other miscarriages the words being spoken in publick you have witnesse enow and sure there is power enough in Magistrates and Bishops to punish them and if they prove incorrigible to cast them out In all other professions these means are thought sufficient to regulate the Professors His Majestie thinks it enough to regulate his Judges that he may choose able men and fit to be trusted in their proper work and that they are responsible for all their maladministrations without prescribing them forms beyond which they may not speak any thing in their Charge Physitians being first tried and responsible for their doings are constantly trusted with the lives of high and low without tying them to give no counsel or medicine but by the prescript of a Book or determination of a Colledge And it is so undeniable that your reason makes more against Preaching and for only reading Homilies as that we must like it the worse if not fear what will become of Preaching also For 1. It is known that in Preaching a man hath far greater opportunity and liberty to vent a false or private opinion than in Prayer 2. It is known de eventu that it is much more ordinary And if you say that he speaks not the words of the Church but his own nor unto God but man and therefore it is less matter We answer it is as considerable if not much more from whom he speaks than to whom he speaks as the Minister of Christ in his stead and name 2 Cor. 5. 19 20. And it is as a higher so a more Reverend thing to speak in Gods name to the people than in the peoples name to God and to speak that which we call Gods word or truth or message than that which we call but our own desire We make God a lyer or corrupt in his words if we speak a falshood in his name we make but our selves lyers if we speak a falshood to him in our own names The former therefore is the more heynous and dreadfull abuse and more to be avoided or if but equally it shews the tendency of your reason for we will not say of your design as hoping you intend not to make us Russians We do therefore for the sake of the poor threatened Church beseech you that you will be pleased to repent of these desires and not to prosecute them considering that to avoid a lesser evil avoidable by safer means you will bring a far greater evil on the Churches and such as is like to strip these Nations of the glory in which they have excelled the rest of the world even a learned able holy Ministry and a people sincere and serious and understanding in the matters of their Salvation For 1. As it is well known that an ignorant man may read a Prayer and Homily as distinctly and laudably as a Learned Divine and so may do the work of a Minister if this be it so it is known that mans nature is so addicted to ease and sensual diversions as that multitudes will make no better preparations when they find that no more is necessary when they are as capable of their places and maintenance if they can but read and are forced upon no exercise of their parts which may detect and shame their ignorance but the same words are to be read by the ablest and ignorantest man it is certain that this will make multitudes idle in their Academical Studies and multitudes to spend their time idly all the year in the course of their Ministry and when they have no necessity that they are sensible of of diligent studies it will let loose their fleshly voluptuous inclinations and they will spend their time in sports and drinking and prating and idlenesse and this will be a Seminary of Lust or they will follow the world and drown themselves in Covetousnesse and Ambition and their hearts will be like their studies As its the way to have a holy able Ministry to engage them to holy studies to meditate on Gods Law day and night so it s the way to have an ignorant prophane and scandalous Ministry and consequently Enemies to serious Godlinesse in others to impose upon them but such a work as in ignorance and idlenesse they may perform as well as the judicious and the diligent If it be said that their parts may be tried and exercised some other way we answer where should a Ministers parts be exercised if not in the Pulpit or the Church and in Catechising in private Baptism and Communion and in the visitation of the sick their work also is such as a School-boy may do as well as they their ignorance having the same Cloak as in publick If it be said that a Ministers work is not to shew his parts we answer but his Ministerial work is to shew men
we desire no other rule to decide the Controversie by As to your Citation 1 Socrat. there tells us of the alternate singing of the Aruians in the reproach of the Orthodox and that Chrysostome not a Synod compiled Hymnes to be sung in opposition to them in the streets which came in the end to a Tumult and Bloodshed And hereupon he tells us of the original of alternate singing viz. a pretended vision of Ignatius that heard Angels sing in that order And what is all this to alternate reading and praying or to a Divine Institution when here is no mention of reading or praying but of singing Hymnes And that not upon pretence of Apostolical Tradition but a vision of uncertain credit Theodor. also speaketh only of singing Psalmes alternately and not a word of reading or praying so And he fetcheth that way of singing also as Socrat. doth but from the Church at Antioch and not from any pretended doctrine or practise of the Apostles And neither of them speaks a word of the necessitie of it or of forcing any to it so that all these your Citations speaking not a word so much as of the very Subjects in question are marvellously impertinent The words their Worship seem to intimate that singing Psalms is part of our Worship and not of yours we hope you disown it not for our parts we are not ashamed of it your distinction between Hopkin's and David's Psalms as if the Meetre allowed by Authority to be sung in Churches made them to be no more David's Psalms seemeth to us a very hard saying If it be because it is a Translation then the Prose should be none of David's Psalms neither nor any Translation be the Scripture If it be because it is in Meetre then the exactest Translation in Meetre should be none of the Scripture If because it 's done imperfectly then the old Translation of the Bible used by the Common-Prayer-book should not be Scripture As to your reason for the supposed priority 1. Scripture examples telling us that the People had more part in the Psalms than in the Prayers or Readings satisfie us that God and his Church then saw a disparity of Reason 2. Common observation tells us that there is more Order and less hindrance of Edification in the Peoples singing than in their Reading and Praying together vocally It is desired that nothing should be in the Liturgy which so much us seems to countenance the observation of Lent as a religious Fast and this as an expedient to Peace which is in effect to desire that this our Church may be contentious for Peace sake and to divide from the Church Catholick that we may live at unity among our selves For Saint Paul reckons them amongst the lovers of Contention who shall oppose themselves against the Custome of the Churches of God that the religious observation of Lent was a Custome of the Churches of God appeares by the Testimonies following Chrysost Ser. 11. in Heb. 10. Cyrill Catec myst 5. St. August Ep. 119. ut 40. dies ante Pascha observetur Ecclesiae consuetudo roboravit and St. Hierom ad Marcell saies it was secundum traditionem Apostolorum This Demand then tends not to Peace but Dissention The fasting Forty daies may be in imitation of our Saviour for all that is here said to the contrary for though we cannot arrive to his perfection abstaining wholly from meat so long yet we may fast forty daies together either Cornelius his Fast till three of the Clock afternoon or Saint Peter 's fast till noon or at least Daniel 's fast abstaining from Meats and Drinks of delight and thus far imitate our Lord. Reply If we had said that the Church is contentious if it adore God in kneeling on the Lords daies or use not the White Garment Milk and Honey after baptism which had more pretence of Apostolical tradition and were generally used more anciently than Lent would you not have thought we wronged the Church if the purer times of the Church have one Custome and later times a contrary which must we follow or must we necessarily be contentious for not following both or rather may we not by the example of the Church that changeth them be allowed to take such things to be matters of Liberty and not necessity If we must needs conform to the Custome of other Churches in such things or be contentious it is either because God hath so commanded or because he hath given those Churches Authority to command it If the former then what Churches or what Ages must we conforme to If all must concurr to be our patterne it will be hard for us to be acquainted with them so far as to know of such Concurrences And in our Case we know that many do it not If it must be the most we would know where God commandeth us to imitate the greater number though the worse or hath secured us that they shall not be the worst or why we are not tied rather to imitate the purer Ages than the more corrupt If it be said that the Church hath Authority to command us we desire to know what Church that is and where to be found and heard that may command England and all the Churches of his Majesty's Dominions If it be said to be a General Council 1. No General Council can pretend to more Authority than that of Nice whose 20th Canon back'd with Tradition and common pratice now bindes not us and was laid by without any Repeal by following Councils 2. We know of no such things as General Councils at least that have bound us to the religious observation of Lent The Bishops of one Empire could not make a General Council 3. Nor do we know of any such power that they have ever the universal Church there being no visible head of it or Governours to make universal Laws but Christ as Rogers on the 20. Article fore-cited shews our 21. Article saith that General Councils may not be gathered together without the Commandment and Will of Princes and doubtless all the Heathen and Mahomitans and all the contending Christian Princes will never agree together nor never did to let all their Christian Subjects concurre to hold a General Council It saith also and when they be gathered together forasmuch as they be an Assembly of men whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and Word of God they may erre and sometimes have erred even in things pertaining unto God therefore things ordained by them as necessary to Salvation have neither strength nor authority unlesse it may be declared that they be taken out of the Holy Scriptures And if they may erre in things pertaining unto God and ordained by them as necessary to Salvation much more in lesser things And are we contentious if we erre not with them Our 39. Article determineth this Controversie saying It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly like for at all times they have
note of distinction or notice given to the people that they are not Canonical Scripture they being also bound with our Bibles is such a temptation to the vulgar to take them for Gods Word as doth much prevail and is like to do so still And when Papists second it with their confident affirmations that the Apocriphal Bookes are Canonical well refelled by one of you the R. Reverend Bishop of Durham we should not needlesly help on their successe If you cite the Apocripha as you do other humane writings or read them as Homilies when and where there is reason to read such we speak not against it to say that the people are secured by the Churches calling them Apocripha is of no force till experience be proved to be dis-regardable and till you have proved that the Ministers is to tell the people at the reading of every such Chapter that it is but Apocriphal and that the people all understand Greek so well as to know what Apocripha signifieth The more sacred and honourable are these Dictates of the holy Ghost recorded in Scripture the greater is the sin by reading the Apocripha without sufficient distinction to make the people believe that the writings of man are the Revelation and Laws of God And also we speak against the reading of the Apocripha as it excludeth much of the Canonical Scriptures and taketh in such Books in their stead as are commonly reputed fabulous By this much you may see how you lost your Answer by mistaking us and how much you will sin against God and the Church by denying our desire That the Minister should not read the Communion Service at the Communion Table is not reasonable to demand since all the Primitive Church used it and if we do not observe that golden Rule of the venerable Council of Nice Let antient customes prevail till reason plainly requires the contrary We shall give offence to sober Christians by a causelesse departure from Catholick usage and a great advantage to enemies of our Church than our Brethren I hope would willingly grant The Priest standing at the Communion Table seemeth to give us an invitation to the holy Sacrament and minds us of our duty viz. To receive the holy Communion some at least every Sunday and though we neglect our duty it is fit the Church should keep her standing Repl. We doubt not but one place in it self is as lawful as another but when you make such differences as have misleading intimations we desire it may be forborn That all the Primitive Church used when there was no Communion in the Sacrament to say Service at the Communion Table is a crude assertion that must have better proof before we take it for convincing and it is not probable because they had a Communion every Lords day And if this be not your meaning you say nothing to the purpose To prove that they used it when there was none And you your selves devise many things more universally practised than this can at all be fairly pretended to have been The Council of Nice gives no such golden Rule as you mention A Rule is a general applyable to particular Cases the Council only speaks of one particular Let the antient Custom continue in Aegypt Lybia and Pentapolis that the Bishop of Alexandria have the power of them all The Council here confirmeth this particular Custom but doth not determine in general of the Authority of Custom That this should be called a Catholic usage shews us how partially the word Catholick is sometimes taken And that this much cannot be granted as least we advantage the enemies of the Church doth make us wonder whom you take for its enemies and what is that advantage which this will give them But we thank you that here we find our selves called Brethren when before we are not so much as spoken to but your speech is directed to some other we know not whom concerning us your reason is that which is our reason to the contrary you say The Priest standing at the Communion Table seems to give us an Invitation to the holy Communion c. what when there is no Sacrament by himself or us intended no warning of any given no Bread and Wine prepared Be not deceived God is not mocked Therefore we desire that there may be no such service at the Table when no Communion is intended because we would not have such grosse dissimulation used in so holy things as thereby to seem as you say to invite Guests when the Feast is not prepared and if they came we would turn them empty away Indeed if it were to be a private Mass and the Priest were to receive alone for want of Company and it were really desired that the people should come it were another matter Moreover there is no Rubrick requiring this service at the Table It is not reasonable that the word Minister should be only used in the Liturgy for since some parts of the Liturgy may be performed by a Deacon others by none under the Order of a Priest viz. Absolution Consecration it is fit that some such word as Priest should be used for those Offices and not Minister which signifies at large every one that ministers in that holy Office of what Order soever he be The word Curate signifying properly all those who are trusted by the Bishops with Cure of Souls as antiently it signified is a very fit word to be used and can offend no sober person The word Sunday is antient Just Mart. Ap. 2. And therefore not to be left off Repl. The word Minister may well be used in stead of Priest and Curates though the word Deacon for necessary distinction stand yet we doubt not but Priest as it is but the English of Presbyter is lawful But it is from the common danger of mistake and abuse that we argue That all Pastors else are but the Bishops Curates is a Doctrine that declares the heavy charge and account of the Bishops and tends much to the ease of the Presbyters minds if it could be proved If by Curates you mean such as have not directly by divine Obligation the Cure of Souls but only by the Bishops Delegation But if the Office of a Presbyter be not of divine Right and so if they be not the Curates of Christ and Pastors of the Church none are And for the antient use of it we find not that it was so from the beginning And as there 's difference between the antient Bishops of one single Church and a Diocesan that hath many hundred so is there between their Curates But why will you not yield so much as to change the word Sunday into the Lords Day when you know that the latter is the name used by the Holy Ghost in Scripture and commonly by the antient Writers of the Church and more becoming Christians Just Mart. speaking to Infidels tells how they called the Day and not how Christians called it All he saith is
in this Church and Nation occasioning sad divisions betwixt Minister Minister betwixt Minister and People exposing many Orthodox Preachers to the displeasure of Rulers And no other fruits than these can be looked for from the retaining these Ceremonies Repl. We had rather you had taken our Reasons as we laid them down than to have so altered them Ergo having told you that some hold them unlawful and others inconvenient c. and desired that they may not be imposed on such who judge such Impositions a violation of the Royalty of Christ c. You seem to take this as our own sense and that of all the Ceremonies of which we there made no mention You referre us to Hooker since whose writings Ames in his fresh suit and Bradshaw and Parker and many others have written that against the Ceremonies that never was answered that we know of but deserve your Consideration Before we give particular Answer to these several Reasons it will not be unnecessary to lay down some certain general premises or rules which will be useful in our whole discourse 1. That God hath not given a power only but a command also of imposing whatsoever should be truly decent and becomming his publick Service 1 Cor. 14. After St Paul had ordered some particular Rules for Praying Praising Prophesying c. He concludes with this general Canon Let all things be done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in a fit Scheme Habit or Fashion decently and that there may be uniformity in those decent performances let there be a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rule or Canon for that purpose Repl. As to your first rule we answer 1. It is one thing to impose in general that all be done decently and in order This God himself hath imposed by his Apostle And it s another thing to impose in particular that this or that be used as decent and orderly Concerning this we adde it is in the Text said Let it be done but not let it be imposed yet from other Scriptures we doubt not but Circumstances of meer decency order as determined time place utensils c. which are common to things civil and sacred though not the Symbolical Ceremonies which afterwards we confute may be imposed with the necessary cautions and limitations afterward laid down But 1. that if any Usurpers will pretend a power from Christ to impose such things on the Church though the things be lawful we must take heed how we acknowledge an usurped power by formal obedience 2. A just power may impose them but to just ends as the preservation and successe of the modified Worship or Ordinances And if they really conduce not to those ends they sin in imposing them 3. Yet the Subjects are bound to obey a true Authority in such impositions where the matter belongs to the Cognizance and Office of the Ruler and where the mistake is not so great as to bring greater mischiefs to the Church than the suspending of our active obedience would do 4. But if these things be determined under pretence of order and decency to the plain destruction of the ordinances modified and of the intended end they cease to be means and we must not use them 5. Or if under the names of things decent and of order men will meddle with things that belong not to their Office as to institute a new Worship for God new Sacraments or any thing forbidden in the general Prohibition of adding or diminishing this is a Usurpation and not an act of Authority and we are bound in obedience to God to disobey them 6. Where Governours may command at set times and by proportionable penalties enforce if they command when it will destroy the end or enforce by such penalties as destroy or crosse it they greatly sin by such commands Thus we have more distinctly given you our sense about the matter of your first rule Not Inferiours but Superiours must iudge what is convenient and decent They who must order that all be done decently must of necessity first judge what is convenient and decent to be ordered Repl. Your second Rule also is too crudely delivered and therefore we must adde 1. A Judgement is a Sentence in order to some Execution and Judgements are specified from the ends to which they are such means When the question is either what Law shall be made or what penalty shall be exercised the Magistrate is the only Judge and not the Bishop or other Subject In the first he exercises his judicium discretionis in order to a publick Act. In the second he exerciseth a publick judgement When the question is what order pro tempore is fittest in Circumstantials for this present Congregation the proper Presbyters or Pastors of that Congregation are the directive Judges by Gods appointment 3. The Magistrate is Ruler of these Pastors as he is of Physicians Pailosophers and other Subjects He may make them such general Rules especially for restraint to go by as may not destroy the exercise of their own Pastoral power As he may forbid a Physician to use some dangerous Medicine on his Subjects and may punish him when he wilfully killeth any of them But may not on that presence appoint him what and how and when and to whom he shall administer and so become Phisician himself alone 4. When the question is who shall be excluded from the Communion of a particular Church The Pastors of the Church or Congregation are the first proper Judges 5. When the question is who shall be excluded from or received into the Communion of all the associated Churches of which we are naturally capable of Communion The associated Pastors or Bishops of these Churches in Synods are Judgâ—â— Beyond this there are no Judges 6. When the question is whether the Laws of Magistrates or Canons of Bishops are agreeable or not to the Word of God and so the obedience is lawful or unlawful the Conscience of each individual Subject is the Judge per judicium discretionis as to his own practise And if men had not this judgement of discerning but must act upon absolute implicite obedience then first man were ruled as unreasonable Secondly the magistrate were made a God or such a Leviathan as Hobbs describeth him Thirdly And then all sin might lawfully be committed if commanded But we are assured none of this your sense These Rules and Canons for decency made and urged by Superiours are to be obeyed by Inferiours till it be made as clear that now they are not bound to obey as it is evident in general that they ought to obey Superiours for if the exemption from obedience be not as evident as the Command to obey it must needs be sin not to obey Repl. To your third Rule we adde It is first considerable what the thing is and then how it is apprehended if it be really lawful and well commanded and to be obeyed it is no ignorance doubt or errour of the
diversity of Liturgies and Ceremonies be allowed where they allowed it May we but have love and peace on the Terms as the ancient Church enjoyed them we shall then hope we may yet escape the hands of uncharitable destroying Zeal we therefore humbly recommend to your observation the concurrent Testimony of the best Histories of the Church concerning the diversity of Liturgies Ceremonies and modal observances in the several Churches under one and the same civil Government and how they then took it to be their duty to forbear each other in these matters and how they made them not the test of their Communion or center of their peace Concerning the observation of Easter it self when other Holy dayes and Ceremonies were urged were lesse stood upon you have the judgement of Irenaeus and the French Bishops in whose name he wrote in Euseb Hist Eccl. l. 5. c 23. Where they reprehend Victor for breaking peace with the Churches that differed about the day and the antecedent time of fasting and tell him that the variety began before their times when yet they neverthelesse retained peace and yet retain it and the discord in their fasting declared or commended the concord of their faith that no man was rejected from Communion by Victor's predecessors on that account but they gave them the Sacrament and maintained peace with them and particularly Polycarp and Anicetus held Communion in the Eucharist notwithstanding this difference Basil Epist 63 doth plead his cause with the Presbyters and whole Clergy of Neocaesarea that were offended at his new Psalmodie and his new order of Monasticks but he only defendeth himself and urgeth none of them to imitate him but telleth him also of the novelty of their own Liturgy that it was not known in the time of their own late renowned Bp. Greg Thaumaturgus telling them that they had kept nothing unchanged to that day of all that he was used to so great alterations in 40. years were made in the same Congregation as he professeth to pardon all such things so be it the principal things be kept safe Socrat. Hist Eccl. l. 5◠c. 21. about the Easter difference saith that neither the Apostles nor the Gospels do impose a yoke of bondage on those that betake themselves to the doctrine of Christ but left the Feast of Easter and other Festivals to the observation of the free and equal judgement of them that had received the benefits And therefore because men use to keep some Festivals for the relaxing themselves from labours several persons in several places do celebrate of custom the memorials of Christs passion arbitrarily or at their own choice For neither our Saviour nor the Apostles commanded the keeping of them by any Law nor threaten any mulct or penalty c. It was the purpose of the Apostles not to make Laws for the keeping of Festivals but to be Authours to us of the reason of right living and of piety And having shewed that it came up by private custom and not by Law and having cited Irenaeus as before he addeth that those that agree in the same faith do differ in point of Rites and Ceremonies and instancing in divers he concludeth that because no man can shew in the monuments of writings any Command concerning this it is plain that the Apostles herein permitted free power to every ones mind and will that every man might do that which was good without being induced by fear or by necessity And having spoken of the diversity of customes about the Assemblies Marriage Baptism c. He tells us that even among the Novatians themselves there is a diversity in their manner of their praying and that among all the forms of Religions and parties you can no where find two that consent among themselves in the manner of their praying And repeating the decree of the Holy Ghost Acts 15. To impose no other burden but things necessary he reprehendeth them that neglecting this will take Fornication as a thing indifferent but strive about Festivals as if it were a matter of life overturning Gods Laws and making Laws to themselves c. And Sozomen Hist Eccles l. 7. c. 18. and 19. speaketh to the same purpose and tells us that the Novatians themselves determined in a Synod at Sangar in Bythinia that the difference about Easter being not a sufficient Cause for breach of Communion all should abide in the same concord and in the same Assembly and every one should celebrate this Feast as pleased himself and this Canon they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and c. 19. He saith of Victor and Polycarp that they deservedly judged it frivolous or absur'd that those should be separated on the account of a custom that consented in the principal heads of Religion For you cannot find the same traditions in all things alike in all Churches though they agree among themselves and instancing in some Countries where there is but one Bishop in many Cities and in other Bishops are ordained in the Villages After many other instances he adds that they use not the same prayers singings or readings nor observe the same time of using them And what Liturgy was imposed upon Constantine the Emperour or what Bishops or Synods were then the makers of Lyturgies when he himself made publick prayers for himself and auditory and for his Souldiers Euseb de vit Constantini l. 4. c. 18. 20 c. But the diversity liberty and change of Lyturgies in the Churches under the same Prince are things so well known as that we may suppose any further proof of it to be needless In the conclusion therefore we humbly beseech you that as Antiquity and the custom of the Churches in the first ages is that which is most commonly and confidently pleaded against us that your mistake of Antiquity may not be to our Cost or paid so dear for as the loss of our Freedom for the serving of God in the work of the Ministery to which we are called we beseech you let us not be silenced or cast out of the Ministery or Church for not using the Liturgy Cross Surplice kneeling at the Sacrament till ye have either shewed the world that the practice or Canons of the Catholick Church hav◠led you the way as doing it or requiring it to be done And make not that to necessary as to force men to it on such dreadful terms which the ancient Churches used with diversity and indifferency of liberty we beseech you shew the world some proof that the ancient Churches did ever use to force or require Ministers to subscribe to their Liturgies as having nothing in them contrary to the word of God or to swear obedience to their Bishops before you impose such things on us while yet you pretend to imitate Antiquity And have but that moderation towards your brethren as in suffering or at death or judgement you would most appear Remember how unpleasing the remembrance of such differences about Ceremonies was to Bp. Ridley as
the contrary then you have here given us for what you thus affirm We might set Epiphanius against Augustine and all the Greek Church till in the midst of Chrysostom's time when they changed their opinion And in our time the judgment of the famous Chronologers Scaliger Beroaldus Broughton Capellus Clopenburgius with many others are not contemptible as set against such an unproved Assertion as this Sect. 8. That our sinful Bodies c. It can no more be said those words do give greater efficacy to the blood then to the body of Christ then when our Lord saith This is my blood which is shed for you and for many for the remission of sins c. And saith not so explicitly of the Body Reply Sure Christ there intimateth no such distinction as is here intimated there his body is said to be broken for us and not only for our bodies Sect. 9. 20. Com. Kneel It is most requisite that the Minister deliver the Bread and Wine into every particular Communicant's band and repeat the words in the singular number for so much as it is the propriety of Sacraments to make particular obsignation to each Believer and it is our visible profession that by the Grace of God Christ tasted death for every man Reply 1. Did not Christ know the propriety of Sacraments better than we and yet he delivered it in the plural number to all at once with a take ye eat ye drink ye all of it we had rather study to be obedient to our Master than to be wiser than he 2. As God maketh the general Offer which giveth to no man a personal interest till his own acceptance first appropriate it so it is fit that the Minister that is Gods Agent imitate him when his example and the reason of it so concern to ingage us to it Clemens Alexandr Stromat lib. 1. Prope In it giveth a reason as we understand him for the contrary that man being a free Agent must be the chooser or refuser for himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quemadmodum eucharistiam cum quidam ut mos est diviserint permittunt unicuique ex populo ejus partem sumere and after rendreth this reason 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad accuratè enim perfecteque eligendum ac fugiendum optima est conscientia And that thing is so agreeable to your own doctrinal principles that we fear you dis-relish it because it comes from us Sect. 10. Kneel at Sacra Concerning Kneeling at the Sacrament we have given account already only thus much we adde that we conceive it an errour to say that the Scripture affirms the Apostles to have received not-kneeling The posture of the Paschal Supper we know but the institution of the holy Sacrament was after Supper and what posture was then used the Scripture is silent The Rubr. at the end of the 1. Ed. C. that leaves kneeling crossing c. indifferent is meant only at such times as they are not prescribed and required But at the Eucharist kneeling is expresly required in the Rubr. following Reply Doubtless when Matthew and Mark say it was as they did eat to which before it is said that they sate down and when Interpreters generally agree upon it this would easily have satisfied you if you had been as willing to believe it as to believe the contrary Matth. 26. 20 21 26. the same phrase is used v. 26. As In vers 21. where it sheweth they were still sitting For the sense of the Rubr. if you prove that the makers so interpret it we shall not deny it but the reason of both seems the same Sect. 11. Com. three times a Year This desire to have the Parishioners at liberty whether they will ever receive the Communion or not savours of too much neglect and coldness of affection towards the holy Sacrament It is more fitting that order should be taken to bring it into more frequent use as it was in the first and best times Our Rubr. is directly according to the ancient Council of Eliberis C. 81. Gratian. de Consecrat no man is to be accounted a good Catholick Christian that does not receive three times in the year The distempers which indispose men to it must be corrected not the receiving of the Sacrament therefore omitted It is a pitifull pretence to say they are not fit and make their sin their excuse Formerly our Church was quarrelled at for not compelling men to the Communion now for urging men how should she please Reply We confess it is desireable that all our distempers and unfitnesses should be healed and we desire with you that Sacraments may be oftner But that every person in the Parish that is unfit be forced to receive is that which we cannot concurre with you to be guilty of Two sorts we think unfit to be so forced at least First abundance of people grossely ignorant and scandalous that will eat and drink judgment to themselves not discerning the Lords Body Secondly many melancholy and otherwise troubled doubting Souls that if they should receive the Sacrament before they find themselves more fit would be in danger to go out of their wits with fear lest it would seal them to destruction and as the Liturgy saith lest the Devil enter into them as into Judas or at least it would grievously deject them As formerly so now there is great reason at once to desire that the unprepared be not forced to the Sacrament and yet that so great a part of the body of the Church may not be let alone in your Communion without due admonition and discipline that ordinarily neglect or refuse the Churches Communion in this Sacrament those that are so prophane should be kept away but withall they should be proceeded with by discipline till they repent or are cast out of the Church Sect. 12. This Rubr. is not in the Liturgy of Queen Elizabeth nor confirmed by Law nor is there any great need of restoring it the World being now in more danger of profanation then of Idolatry besides the sense of it is declared sufficiently in the 28. Article of the Church of England The time appointed we conceive sufficient Reply Can there be any hurt or danger in the people's being taught to understand the Church aright Hath not Bishop Hall taught you in his life of a Romanist that would have faced him down That the Church of England is for Transubstantiation because of Kneeling p. 20. And the same Bishop greatly differing from you saith in the same Book p 294. But to put all scruples out of the mind of any Reader concerning this point let that serve for the upshot of all which is expresly set down in the fifth Rubrick in the end of the Communion set forth as the judgment of the Church of England both in King Edward and Queen Elizabeth's times note that though lately upon negligence note upon negligence omitted in the Impression and so recites the words Where you say there is no great need
Baptism do depend on all the necessary con-causes on Gods mercy or Christs merits on the Institution and on Baptism it self according to its use as a delivering investing Sign and Seal and they depend upon the promise sealed by Baptism and the promise supposeth the qualified subject or requisite Condition in him that shall have the benefit of it To tell us therefore of a common Cause on which the effect depends viz. the Institution of Baptism it self when we are inquiring after the special condition that proveth the person to be the due subject to whom both Promise and Baptism doth belong This is but to seem to make an Answer Either all baptized absolutely are justified and saved or not If yea then Christianity is another kind of thing than Peter or Paul understood that thought it was not the Washing of water but the Answer of a good Conscience to God Then let us catch Heathens and dip them and save them in despite of them But if any condition be requisite as we are sure there is our Question is What it is and you tell us of Baptism it self Did ever August jure vel injuria was to be esteemed a Believer We grant with Austin that Infants of Believers propter Sacramentum fidei are visibly and professedly to be numbred with Believers but neither Austin nor we will ever grant you that this is true of all that you can catch and use this form of Baptism over The Seal will not save them that have no part in the Promise The Catechism is not intended as a whole Body of Divinity but as a Comprehension of the Articles of Faith and other Doctrines most necessary to Salvation and being short is fittest for Children and Common people and as it was thought sufficient upon mature deliberation and so is by us Repl. The Creed the Decalogue and the Lords Prayer contain all that is absolutely necessary to Salvation at least If you intended no more What need you make a Catechism If you intend more Why have you no more But except in the verie words of the Creed the essentials of Christianity are left out If no explication be necessary trouble them with no more than the Text of the Creed c. If explication be necessary let them have it At least in a larger Catechism fitter for the riper CONFIRMATION It is evident that the meaning of these words is that Children Baptized and dying before they commit actual Sin are undoubtedly Saved though they be not Confirmed wherein we see not what danger there can be of misleading the vulgar by teaching them truth But there may be danger in this desire of having these words expunged as if they were false for St. Austin saies He is an Infidel that desires them to be true Ep. 23. ad Bonifac. Repl. What all Children Saved whether they be Children of the Promise or no Or can you shew us a Text that saith Whoever is Baptized shall be Saved The Common-Prayer-Book plainly speaks of the non-necessity of Unction Confirmation and other Popish Ceremonies and Sacraments and meaneth that ex parte Ecclesiae they have all things necessary to Salvation and are undoubtedly Saved supposing them the due Subjects and that nothing be wanting ex parte sui which certainly is not the case of such as are not Children of the Promise and Covenant The Child of an Heathen doth not ponere obicem actually quo minus baptizetur and yet being baptized is not saved on your own reckoning as we understand you therefore the Parent can ponere obicem and either hinder the Baptism or effect to his Infant Austin speaks not there of all Children whatever but those that are offered per aliorum spiritualem voluntatem by the Parents usually or by those that own them after the Parents be dead or they exposed or become theirs He speaks also of what may be done de eo quod fieri non posse arbitratur But our question is What is done and not What God can do Our great Question is What Children they be that Baptism belongeth to After the Catechism we conceive that it is not a sufficient qualification c. We conceive that this qualification is required rather as necessary than as sufficient and therefore it is the duty of the Minister of the place Can. 61. to prepare Children in the best manner to be presented to the Bishop for Confirmation and to inform the Bishop of their fitnesse but submitting the judgement to the Bishop both of this and other qualifications and not that the Bishop should be tyed to the Ministers consent Compare this Rubr. to the second Rubr. before the Catechism and there is required what is further necessary and sufficient Repl. 1. If we have all necessary ordinarily we have that which is sufficient ad esse there is more ordinarily necessary than to say those words 2. Do you owe the King no more obedience Already do you contradict His Declaration which saith Confirmation shall be performed by the information and with the consent of the Minister of the place But if the Ministers consent shall not be necessary take all the charge upon your own souls and let your souls be answerable for all They see no need of Godf. here The Compilers of the Liturgie did and so doth the Church that there may be a witnesse of the Confirmation Repl. It is like to be your own work as you will use it and we cannot hinder you from doing it in your own way But are Godfathers no more than witnesses c. This supposeth that all children c. It supposeth and that truly that all children were at their Baptism regenerate by Water and the Holy Ghost and had given unto them the forgivenesse of all their Sins and it is charitably presumed that notwithstanding the frailties and slips of their Childhood they have not totally lost what was in Baptism conferred upon them and therefore addes Strengthen them we beseech thee O Lord with the Holy Ghost the Comforter and daily encrease in them their manifold gifts of Grace c. None that lives in open sin ought to be Confirmed Repl. 1. Children baptized without right cannot be presumed to be really regenerate and pardoned 2. We speak only of those that by living in open sin do shew themselves to be unjustified and these you confesse should not be Confirmed O that you would but practise that If not this Confession will witnesse against you Before the imposition of hands c. Confirmation is reserved to the Bishop in honorem Ordinis To blesse being an Act of Authority so was it of old St. Hierom Dialog Adv. Lucifer saies it was totius orbis consensio in hanc partem And St. Cyprian to the same purpose Ep. 73. And our Church doth every where professe as she ought to conform to the Catholick usages of the Primitive times from which causelesly to depart argues rather love of contention than of peace