the Ordination of that Ministery which he had in England because Imposition of hands was in the Church of Rome from the times of â—he Apostles is there continued to this day although much mixed with many pollutions of their own Obj. But if those that separate from us will throw away all that comes through Rome what course will they take when they have denied all the Ordinances that have been administred for these ninety years in England for if no Ministery then certainly no Authoritative Preaching no Sacraments and thus they have renounced their baptisme which they had by these Ministers What Method then will they take in their Reformation Ans. How will they come to be rebaptized They will tell us peradventure that they will Covenant together and then Elect and ordain a Minister and he shall baptize 1. Reply Will they Covenant together supposing themselves to be Saints first say they so Are they Saints by a calling How came they to be so What did God call them immediately No They must say many if not all of them who have any truth of grace by the preaching of the word they were called What from those Ministers from whom they separate as no Ministers because of their Ordination Hath the Lord so far owned his despised Members as to make them the instruments to bring these to be visible Saints fit to imbody or Covenant And are these now no Ministers Are these the effect of their Ministerial labours and they no Ministers 1. Ans. But they say They will Elect and Ordain one Minister and then he shall rebaptize 2. Reply But since he did renounce his own baptisme also who shall baptize him first There must be a Minister to do that to be sure he cannot do it himself nor none of them for they are private persons To administer the Lords Supper before they be baptized is contrary to the Scripture-rules as Iustinus Martyr defends But how can they Ordain this Minister not being themselves baptized Where doth it appear in Scripture that an unbaptized people did ever Elect or Ordain a Minister These absurdities would necessarily follow such a reformation of this whole Land by denying thâ— Ministers to be true Ministers and by annulling their Ordination because it came through the Church of Rome 2. Ans. But secondly I answer to the main Objection of our Ordination passing through Rome to us That the Churches of England had not their first beginning from Rome as some fondly and ignorantly conceive but rather from Ierusalem Yea Baronius a great stickler for Romes priviledges yet acknowledgeth the Antiquity of the Church of England before Rome it self observing the conversion of England to Christianity to have been the five and thirtieth year after the Ascension of Christ and the Conversion of Rome to have been ten years after in the year 45. So that the Churches of England were at first rightly gathered and constituted the instruments of gathering being from Ierusalem Apostles or Apostolical men as is evident from Mr. Fox Neither is it to be doubted but that they did Ordain Officers in the Churches for we read of Ministers and Bishops The Land falling to the possession of the Saxons about the year 568. the History saith p. 147. that by them all the Clergy and the Christian Ministers of the Britains were then utterly driven out in so much that the Archbishops of London York went into Wales Thus long then it seems that the Ministers of England had no Ordination from Româ— This appears also by Austin the Monk who came inâ—o England in the year 598 it is observed by Mr. Fox p. 153. that about the year 600. Aâ—stâ—n assembled the Bishops and Doctors of Britain so that still here were Ministers and charged them for to preach the Gospel to the English men and also that they should among themselves reform certain Rites in their Church especially for Easter-tide and for baptizing after the manner of Rome to which the Scots and Briâ—tains would not agree which shews that they did not neither would they depend upon Rome Since then there were so many Ministers and Bishops in England who had their Ordination by Succession from those Apostolical men and not from Rome and opposed Austin the Monk indeavouring to settle Rites Ceremonies and Superstitions according to the practise of Rome why may not we suppose that these again might preach the Gospel to the English maintaining Baptisme and Ordination in that purity wherewith they were Instituted by IesusChrist Moreover It is very observable from Mr. Selden and Mr. Speeds Historie of great Britain that in the Church of England the corruptions which the Church of Rome would have introduced about Ordination of Ministers and other Ecclesiastical affairs were withstood and opposed by the Kings of England Nor do we read of any Ministers in England that were ordained by any Agents sent from Rome but onely of some idle Ceremonies of Confirmation of them that were ordained by the Pall and the Ring brought thence into England So that if the whole be well considered it will puzzle those of the Separation to prove that the Church of England was beholding to the Church of Rome for either the first plantation after Reformation or continuation of the Gospel Church and Ministery therein from the first beginning even to this very day 3. Ans. But thirdly I answer that in case it be granted that our Ordination have passed through Rome so that it have been formerly corrupted with some Romish Rites Ceremonies as Baptisme also was and that stubble have been built upon Gold and upon the true Institution of Christ for the ordaining rightly the Gospel-Ministers Yet neither this scruple nor the Objection of Bishops ordaining formerly is sufficient to null our Ordination and make void the true Ministery of England nor any warrantable Plea to separate from us and from our Congregations A stream of water that springs from a clear Fountain may in the first Reach run like the Fountain clear in the second Reach by reason of a muddy and soul bottom it may run also muddy and in the third Reach it may come out again clear and run as at the first And yet none will deny it in the third Reach to have streamed from a clear Fountain neither any loath to drink of it because immediatly before it ran through a muddy Reach Even so our ordination hath sprung from a clear Fountain from Christ our Head and in the first Reach of the Primitive times ran very clear without corruptions or innovations of sinfull men and Prelates In the second Reach of corrupt and Popish times it ran more muddy by reason of pollutions and filthy inventions and Ceremonies Superstitiously added to it by the Popes But now in the third Reach of Reformation from Popery it runs again clear as at the first And therefore who with conscience can deny it to come from a clear Fountain and ought to loath it because more immediatly it
would not be said to be void and forfeited because in part he renounceth that which hath troubled his Conscience in the performing of it Even so the first Reforming Presbyters Priests or Bishops who had received power by the Commission of their Ordination to Preach and to Pray and to administer the Sacraments and also to say Mass and in the Mass to offer up a Sacrifice when the true light of the Gospel and Reformation began to shine upon their Consciences were by the Spirit moved to renounce some part of their power as not belonging to them to wit the Mass and Sacrifiâ—e and to continue and keep the other part of their power and Commission to wit Preaching Praying and Administring the Sacraments as belonging to them by their Commission from Christ when by Ordination the power of the Keyes was committed unto them And who will say that because they renounced unlawfull power therefore their lawfull power was forfeited and made void and null either in themselves to practise it or towards others to communicate it to others by right true and lawfull imposition of hands as Christ ordained Object But this Objection against our Ministery and our lawfull succession is much like to that of Rome against us saying that the Ministers of the Reformed Churches had no Commission or lawfull calling being under the Pope and Popish Prelates to reform the Church and so think and judge our Separatists that our Commission being void and all power to ordain and to Reform the Church is fallen to the people Ans. To whom I answer with Morneus his answer to the Papists Objection against our Reformers at the first beginning of Reformation That the calling of our first Ministers which reformed the Church in these last times was the same vocation and succession wâ—ereof they themselves do brag but the same vocation which they abused have our men indeavoured to use well and to that vain succession wherewith they decked themselves they have added the succession of true Doctrine which they had corrupted without which all succession is nothing else but a continuing of abuse and errour Wickliff Ion Hus Luther Zwinglius Oecolampadius Bucer and others of that School from whence the Ministers which have gathered Churches from under Antichrist are descended were Priests as they call them and Doctors in Divinity As Priests and Pastours they had charge to preach the truth unto the people and to Administer the Sacraments unto them according to the Institution of our Lord. As Doctors they were called to expound Divinity in their readings and in their books and they were bound by the ordinary Oath of all Universities to declare the truth unto the Church to confute all Doctrines repugnant against the word of God and with all their might to expell it Now in their time they sound that the word of God was hid unto the people that the honour which was due to God alone was turned to men and to images that the bloud of Christ was trodden under foot that the Sacrament of the Supper was partly turned into Idolatry and partly denied unto the poor people To be short that all the holy Scripture was prophaned and poysoned with the Popes gloss and Popish interpretations And when they shewed these things to the Bishops and Metropolitans according to the order of their Church they made no reckoning of them they were the first that persecuted them because they themselves were the infected part of the Church I ask therefore if their vocation commanded them not to go farther to wit to preach the truth unto the people and purely to administer the Sacraments And if they had done otherwise whither they had not been forsakers of their calling contemners of their Oath made unto God and abusers of the people Both two therefore our Popish Adversaries and our first Ministers had one and the same ordinary and outward calling But herein is the difference that that which ours have followed the others have forsaken that which ours have done of duty by reason of their charge the other have concealed Ours have led their sheep upon the Mountains of Israel into good pastures Ezek. 34. the others have devoured them or else left them for a prey to the beasts of the field or else driven them to the Fens Marishes where they have starved A Magistrate shall be called to the Government of a Common-wealth where he shall finde the good Laws corrupted by the negligence or malice of those that went before his Courts full of injustice the Officers subject to factions briberies and corruptions and he would reform all this and bring it to the censure of the Laws He that will further now ask him by what right he doth this should he not make himself a laughing-stock because he follows step by step his calling He hath not sworn to maintain abuses but rather to maintain the Laws and to provide every way that he can for the good and preservation of the Common-wealth But what an absurdity would it be to say that this Magistrate hath forfeited his Commission and power because he thus reforms the Courts and the Common-wealth to wâ—ich he is sworn and to judge his power now lapsed into the peoples hands because he reforms abuses Even so likewise have our fiâ—st Ministers done first requiring reformation and afterwards putting too their hands according to their duty And if we could ask the Apostles who are their true succâ—ssours They would not tell us such as have a Triple Crown or such a Cope or such a Miter but those that preach the word of God after our example At the preaching of these first men the Pastour of the Churches were awakened in England in Bohemia in Germany in Scotland in Denmark in Swedenland and afterwards many in France and these were sent to bethink them of their duty Consequently some whole Realms were reformed the very Bishops themselves that there had preached lies preached the truth in the self-same Church and Pulpit and they with their reformed Presbyters ordained others to preach and pray to Administer the Sacraments according to Christ his word truely revealed to these Pastours and fiâ—st Reformers And now for their good and Godly indeavours shall our Separatists like Papists question their calling Judge their power and Commission void null our succession from them and preach our Ordination down as lost and ruined either in time of Popery or by these our first Reformers It is an opinion or errour with laughing to be exploded But to draw to an end I shall briefly answer to that part of our Adversaries Argument and Objection against our Ministers They were Ordained by Bishops say they Ergo They are Babylonish First by way of answer I desire to know what these men think of Mr. Bradford and the rest of those holy Ministers and Martyrs ordained by Bishops in those dayes Were they Antichristian and Babylonish Ministers But secondly The Bishops which ordained our Ministers since the Reformation were not
many Councels before as the Popes Supremacy denied and decreed against by the Councel of Calcedon Africk Milevi Constantinople and Basil The second Councel of Ethesus approving Eutyches and the Councel of Calcedon condemning him The second Councel of Nice maintaining the worshipping of Images and that of Franck Ford assembled about the same time by CHARLES the Great pulling them down The first Councel of Nice permitting the marriage of Ministers according to the use of the Primitive Church and the Councel of Neocesaâ—ea and Mentz and the second of Carthage forbidding it and particularly in England having shewed a party dissenting from the Pope almost three hundred years ago in the very height of Popery here in the Raign of Edward the third in whose time God raised up Iohn Wickliff a Professour at Oxâ—ord to hold out the light of the Gospel so as many in those dayes were much enlightned thereby For among other Principles wherein he instructed the people then these were some directly against the Church of Rome 1. The Eucharist after Consecration is not the very body of Christ but figuratively 2. The Church of Rome is not the head of all Churches more than any Church is Nor hath Peter any more power given of Christ than any other Apostle hath 3. The Pope of Rome hath no more in the Keyes of the Church than any other within the order of Priest-hood 4. The Gospel is a rule sufficient of it self to rule the life of every Christian here without any other rule 5. All other rules under whose observances divers Religious persons be governed do add no more perfection to the Gospel than doth the white colour to the wall Having I say thus shewed him the height of Popery in and out of England and still a party dissenting from the gross errours of Rome and in them a light of a Church and people of God he aiming at those abominations brought in and setled as he imagined without any party dissenting from the Councel of Trent as from other Councels would needs frame his Argument from Queen Maries dayes thus 1. Object In Queen Maries dayes there were no Churches in England Ergo Now Parochial Churches are Babylonish The Argument beloved concludes nothing in the consequence for suppose there had been no Church or people professing the truth doth it therefore follow Ergo now there can be no Parochial Churches He might as well have argued thus People in Queen Maries dayes believed not Ergo People now do not believe Or People then were Papists in England Ergo now they are not Protestants and then what shall we say of Mr. Nichols his believing people Even such is this Argument In Queen Maries dayes there were no Churches Ergo now Parochial Churches are Babylonish But to let my Opponent go on with more such Enthymema's I denied his Antecedent shewing him that in Queen Maries dayes there was a glorious Church of believers who witnessed their Faith with the bloud of Martyrdom as the Stories tell us of Cranmer Brad-ford Taylor Yea some tell us of eight hundred innocents whose lives in the space of less than four years that cruel Popish Queen sacrificed unto her idols Yea such was the abundance of true believers and Protestants in those dayes that as a fruitfull Vine they were spread abroad also into Germany Sweden Denmark and a Church of English true believers was apparent at Frankford from whence came Godly Bishops that setled our Churches in Queen Elizabeths time But then he went on a little more Schollar like in suiting his consequent with his Antecedent though still fallaciously thus 2. Object In Queen Maries dayes Parochial Churches were Babylonish Ergo Now Parochial Churches are Babylonish I might well have granted here his Antecedent for ought any true illation from it to these times it proving nothing but that we must needs be now as our Fathers were in those dayes which is a false illation for though there were no Churches then there may be Churches now though Parochial Churches then were Babylonish yet Parochial Churches now may not be Babylonish neither qua as Churches neither qua as Parochial As Churches the people being converted As Parochial it having been already shewed that Parishes as Parishes were no invention of Antichrist which distinction Mr. Nichols all along his Arguments and answers seems much to mistake or forget varying these terms as he pleaseth sometimes insisting upon the word Churches as when the Argument of the ancient Coustitution of Parishes before Antichrist convinced him he then falls to the word Churches qua as mixed Congregations So here from Churches in Queen Maries dayes he falls to Parishes in Queen Maries dayes But to try further what this Monster would bring forth In Queen Maries dayes Parochial Churches were Babylonish Ergo now Parochial Churches are Babylonish I distinguished the Antecedent to that word Churches supposing what was left behinde as Parishes they were not Babylonish They were Babylonish or Popish generally I denied the Antecedent They were Babylonish or Popish as the whole Land wherein were some Protestants in all corners dissenting from Babylonish and Popish principles I granted the Antecedent And this beloved I doubt not but it will appear unto you most true that where eight hundred in less than four years suffered Martyrdom they were not all taken out of one Parish but out of several Parishes in the Land and secoâ—dly that where so much bloud of holy Protestant Martyrs was shed it would prove as Cyprian saith Sanguis Martyrum semen Ecclesiae The bloud of Martyrs is the seed of the Church by whose sufferings the Professours of the true Gospel grew and increased more and more and so not the whole Parishes or Parochial Churches would be infected with Papacie but as was the Land and Kingdom not generally or in all but in the major part at most Thus I can further prove unto you Protestants to have been then in Parishes from the instance of a Parish not far from us in this part of Kent where I am informed by a Neighbour of this Parish that he often heard his own Father relate from his Grand Fathers mouth that in Queen Maries dayes there lived in that Parish a Priest named Stacie and that many times his Father and his Fathers Brothers going to Church and observing M. Stacy his superstitious ceremonies in the Church and at the Altar would go home to their Father telling relating to him Father Mr. Stacie in the Church doth sprinkle his face with water makes crosses with his fingers upon his fore-head knocketh his breast and prayes kneeling before the pictures and the like To whom his Granâ—-father would reply My Children though Mr. Stâ—cie do such things you must beware of them you must not do the like you must not pray to images but to God neither must you learn such Ceremonies and Superstitions of Mr. Staciâ— Whereby beloved you may perceive that in those Marian dayes all were not infected with Papacie but
confess among them that were it not for that rack of the Inquisition they would oppose many practises among them and many Canous of Trent as truly I have heard many of their Priests and Divines say which now for fear they dare not do But secondly doth not Mr. Nichols say the like when first he calls Bâ—bylonish Churches Churches And why not rather Confused Synagogues Mr. Nichols if there were no substantials of a Church amongst us Secondly when he saâ—th that we are Babylonish because mixed good and bad together But we cannot thus be called Babylonish except there be amongst us in this respect what is also in Babylon or Rome to wit good and bad together Ergo he acknowledgeth that in Romish Babylon there are good and bad together Then further thus I reason Good people are Gods people and Gods Church But by him in Rome there are good people Ergo By his own Assertion in Rome or Babylon there is a people and Church of God Then further yet thus if there be good people amongst them as he implies in his Assertion I argue then from the Philosopher Verum bonum convertunâ—ur True and good are Convertible and mutually predicable one of the othâ—r so that where true is good is also But good people are â—ound among them Ergo True people found also among them Then thus Good people are a good Church in that respect wherein they are good and true people are a true Church in that respect wherein they are true Ergo In Rome the good and true people in that respect wherein they are good and true are in that same respect a good and true Church of God Then further in my judgement laying aside Mr. Nichols his ground for their goodness they are good and true in no other respect but in respect of some substantials of truth in respect they believe in Christ born dead risen and ascended into Heaven in respect they acknowledge the Gospel as from him Baptisme as his Ordinance Ordination by imposition of hands by the Prâ—sbytery as his institution Ergo in respect of some substantials they are a good and true Church But thirdly I confess I cannot tell how to uphold a lawfull succession of Ordination from the â—imes of Popery in England and a lawfull Ministery at present in England except it be by acknowledging in the height of Popery in England a Church and a true Church in some substantials of truth especially of Ordination and Baptism For had not Ordination then been held in iâ—s substance as from Christ and Baptism in its substance as an Ordinance from Christ neither our former Ministers had been rightly ordained neither had our Forefathers been rightly and lawfully Baptized For a true and lawfull and right effect must proceed from a true lawfull and right cause Eâ—go if your Ministers ordination and our Forefathers baptisme were a true lawfull right effect it proceeded from a true lawfull right cause Then thus But such as were formerly the immediate cause of the effect of our Reformed Ministers Ordination and the immediate cause of our first reforming Fore-fathers Baptisme were such as lived before them in Popery Ergo in time of Popery there was a true lawfull and right cause of the effect of Ordination and Baptism Then further The Bishops and Priests in time of Popery were not true lawfull and right in the superstitions of Oyâ— Chrisme Unction Spittle and other Rites and Ceremonies which against the word of God they had added to Ordination and Baptisme Ergo They were true lawfull and right onely in substantials in the substance of Ordination and Baptisme Eâ—go Then there was a Church quoad substantiam or in some substantial maiâ—taining for substanâ—ials such Ordinances as were left by Châ—ist unto his Church thougâ— in â—ites and Superstitions false and erroneous Object But if it be objected that all this might be before the Councel of Trent but since that cursed Councel Rome having heighâ—ened and multiplied her damnable errours and drawn all the poison into one entire monster and body of sin and errour the lâ—ke câ—nnot be said now that Rome is a true Church or Church at aâ—l in any suâ—stantialâ— I answer that Antichrist hath been working these many years by degrees and although in the Councel of Trent he wrought more than in any Councel ever before Yet still he may if God will permit him to tâ—y his Elect further work more iâ—iquity than hitherto he hath done It would yet be a worse work iâ— he should prevail with all dissenting parties to yield to his supremacy and to his Arbitrary power and Command and worser yet if he should deny that Jesus Christ is come in the â—lesh or if he should deny the words and Gospel to be from Christ and to be a means for the working of Faith or if he should ruine all substantials from which as yet he hath not wholy apostatized Secondly If now there be no Church in Rome quoad substantiam or in any substantials since the Councel of Trent I demand then of Mr. Nichols whether if ever he converted any Papist to his Church he did baptize him again or no Or whether in case he should convert any such he would baptize him again or no If he say he would baptize him again I say that others far more learned and wiser than he whom in these latter dayes long since the Councel of Trent have converted from Popery more Souls than ever he hath converted neither would nor have baptized such again That most Reverend Divine Doctor in Divinity and Cantabrigian Light and Lustre Bishop formerly of Exeter a Star to me at my fiâ—st coming out of the darkness of Popery my first Father in this Religion my Ananias who â—oundly and faithfully instructed me and guided me in the way of my salvation wherein I walk at present even Doctour Brounrigge one of our Churches pillars a strong supporter of Truth never baptized me again when I opened unto him my â—all from God to the Reformed Church of England But if Mr. Nichols do say with the wiser and more learned that he would not baptize such an one again I demand then of Mr. Nichols why he is baptized already or not baptized If not baptized he ought to baptize him again if baptizâ—d then his baptism is a true effect of some true cauâ—e But this cause was no true cause in the use of superstitious Oyls Unctions and other unlawfull Ceremonies Ergo he was a true cause of the effect of that mans bapâ—isme onely in the substantials Ergo There are in Rome such as by virtue of the substantials in Ordination do truely administer some Ordinances in their substantials But fourthly Yet in Rome the name of Christ and Châ—istians is set forth and held up in despight of Ieâ—s Turks and Inâ—idels and for the name of Christ they are hated and enslâ—ved by â—urks as well as we Ergo in a substantial acknowledgement of Christ they are true Or
he in his private discourse brought no such Scripture to prove somewhat though nothing denied by me while I asseâ—t single Parishes to be true Churches and herein I hope I dissent not from the Reverend Presbyters whose Zeal in these troublous dayes I admire whose Godliness and profund Learning I cordially acknowledge and with reverence respect But secondly what from the word Angel I observe is that not many Angels are written unto in so many single Congregations but one onely Angel is named to one onely Angel the writing was directed though in several Churches of that Citie according to the number of them there were several Pastours also from whence I gather that the Discipline in that Citie was so Presbyterial that over all the single Congregations there was some one overâ—seeing power whether by the name of Bishop or Superintendent as to this day in Swedland and Denmark or some chief Provincial Classis wherein was some chief Moderatour governing with Presbyters Officers Teaching and Ruling Elders to whom in particular Iohn is commanded to write concerning all the other Churches making up as integral parts that one Church of Ephesus But thirdly the holy Spirit of Christ is pleased to stile also single Congregations Churches which my Caviller seems to deny as you may observe in these places Let your Women keep silence in the Churches 1 Cor. 14. vers 34. where note that several single meetings Societies and Congregations making up one Church of Corinth are called Churches and oftentimes mention is made of the Church that is in such or such a House as Rom. 16. vers 5. 1 Cor. 16. vers 19. Coloss. 4. vers 15. Philem. vers 2. whether this be interpreted of the Church made up onely of the Members of that Family or of the Church that ordinarily did meet in such houses with a particular Teacher in that place it implies however a single Congregation and to my purpose such a single Congregation is called Church which it seems is the main point that my Caviller stumbles at who further told me that I could not maintain Parishes to be Churches nor any single Congregations to be Churches but in an Independent way the contrary whereof I shall prove thus briefly in a Presbyterial way The Presbytery grants that many single Congregations as parts make up one Classis or one Provincial Church Ergo Those many single Congregations are true Churches which thus I prove If any thing oppose their true being of Churches it must be according to my Caviller because they are but parts of a Church or body made up by them But their being parts of a Church or body made up by them doth not oppose their true being of Churches Ergo single Congregations are true Churches The Minor proposition I prove thus They are such parts of the whole Church or body made up by them as do partake the nature of the whole But the whole body made up by them is a true Church Ergo The parts and single Congregations making up that whole body are also true Churches The Major or first Proposition I prove thus They are not Heterogeneal parts but Homogeneal parts making up the whole partake the nature of the whole Ergo They are such parts of the whole as do partake the nature of the whole And then But the whole is a true Church Ergo Parishes and single Congregations as Homogeneal parts partaking of the nature of the whole which is a true Church are also true Churches Which beloved that you may the better understand I shall clear it with an instance of Heterogeneal and Homogeneal parts First In mans body the parts making up a compleat body of man are the Head the Shoulders the Arms Hands Leggs and the like Of these parts we cannot say The head is truely the body the Arm is the body the Legg is the body because they are Heterogeneal parts of several natures not partaking the nature of the whole nor of the body But secondly in the Sea or Ocean the parts making up the whole Sea or Ocean are many drops of water which are called Homogeneal parts parting the nature of the whole whose nature is water and every drop of water is as true water as the whole Ocean and of every part or drop it may be said It is water as of the whole it may be said It is water For Homogeneal parts are parts of the same kinde and nature But such parts are single Congregations or single Churches and Parishes making up a Classis or Provincial Church for it cannot be said of many of them that the one is a part as the Head the other as the Arm the other as the Hand or Legg making up that body as Heterogeneal parts of several and distinct natures Ergo They are Homogeneal parts and as the nature of the whole is to be a Church so likewise the true being and nature of these is to be Churches But further This whole Church or Provincial body made up of many single Congregations is Predicable of many inferiours it being as Generical or Specifical in respect of many particulars But such Generical or Specifical Predicates are predicable of inferiours of their own kinde Ergo The inferiour and subordinate Congregations to to this Provincial body are of the same kinde and nature of the whole and of the superiour which being a true Church the inferiours are also true Churches As Man Specificable is Predicable of this Individual of that Individual Man and the other Individual all which Individuals and particular Inferiours agree with the Superiour and common Species in the kinde nature and self-same being of Man Thus having answered this scruple and having fully laid down my judgement against Mr. Nichols his first erroneous Assertion That Parochial Churches are Babylonish and having proved that they are neither Babylonish in their Constitution as Parishes nor in the end of their Constitution or division into Parishes nor in their mixture of good and bad nor to be denied to be true Churches as subordinate to higher Classes I shall hereafter commit to the Press and publick vieu of the World this my judgement delivered here unto you as not ashamed of the Gospel of Iesus Christ nor of any truth belonging unto it And I shall desire Mr Nichols if in case he shall reply that he will answer positively first to my grounds and Arguments in form as I have here laid them down by Syllogismes granting denying distinguishing taking notice of the Authority of the Scriptures expounding them if he can better than my self have done and then to make use of his fair Speeches and Orations by adding what he can to disprove my judgement and to clear his own better than upon the day of our Dispute he did otherwise to expect no second reply from me In the mean while I shall pass on to his second Assertion in the which he affirms that his Congregation is the house of God First I shall lay down and repeat unto
and have denied my Minor which immediately I proved thus from St. Paul to the Hebrews 4. Argument St. Paul in Hebr. 6. Chap. vers 1 2. sets down with Baptisme Imposition of hands to be a Principle of thâ— Doctrine of Christ. But Baptisme because it is a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ â—ught never by any Churches to be omitted to the end of the World Ergo Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination also ought never by any Churches to be omitted to the end of the World Here Mr. Nichols began to perceive his errour and want of knowledge in the Scriptures when he denied the Minor and that Imposition of hands by the Presbytery was a Doctrine of the Principles of Christ which being made clear unto him he could give no answer to it and so my Syllogisme was in the discretion and sound judgement unanswerable and unanswered But Mr. Nichols his Moderatour perceiving the unresistible force of the Arment and seeing his friends mouth almost shut up spoke a word to this purpose that it was doubted by some Authours whether that place of Paul Hâ—br 6. vers 1 2. did intend Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination or some other end in Imposition of hands in that place To whom I â—ad replied had not Mr. Nichols his mouth begun to open again for my beloved some of the Authours which understand that place of Paul not of Imposition of hands in Ordination but to some other end intend that end to be Imposition of hands by the Byshop in Confirmation whose judgement I cannot follow neither will Mr. Nichols or his Moderatour dare to follow that Opinion unless they will acknowledge Bishops again amongst us to Confirm and Bishop our Children that such a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ in that sense may not be omitted in our Churches Which I am sure Mr. Nichols his Moderatour whom I respect as a Divine of sound judgement doth not allow but onely to strengthen his friend in his weakness and that in the mean time he might recollect himâ—elf for some better answer was pleased to make such a motion and put in such a Caâ—â—at Some other Authours understand that place of Paul Hebr. 6. vers 1.2 to mean laying on of hands on the sick which the Church of Rome continues to this day superstitiously maintaining extream Unction and anointing the sick with Oyl hallowed by their Bishops Either of which Opinions had Mr. Niâ—hâ—â—â— insisted on I should soon have shewed him his errour and such a second trouble to have befallen him as the Poet speaketh off saying Incidit in Scyllam cupiens vitare Charybdin and as the Iews spake to Pilate So the last errour shall be worse than the first Matth. 27. vers 64. This beloved I do mention but to call you to minde to remember it that you may take notice how with the strength yea evidence of my Argument which truely to me is undeniable Mr. Nichols was put to his shifts And so indeed after a while he betook himself to another shift saying that Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination had been so abused and corrupted by the Bishops and by the Church of Rome that now by the Godly it was thought fit to be omitted and laid aside Ah beloved and can this answer perswade any sound Conscience to slight a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ Must Bishops or Romes corruptions make us more corrupt Must their corruptions make us deny our Principles Might not Mr. Nichols as well have answered that because the Church of Rome hath corrupted baptisme with Rites and Superstitious Ceremonies therefore we ought utterly to forsake to forget slight and omit baptism which also is a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ Surely for all this his answer you will be unwilling to deprive your Children of baptisme so purely and rightly administred in England because in Rome it is corrupted And so shall I for all this poor shift of Mr. Nichols be as unwilling to deny Imposition of hands by the Presbytery in Ordination as a Principle of the Doctrine of Christ because in Rome it is corrupted with anointing with Oyl the thumbs and fore-fingers of the Priests and with other foolish superstitious needless Rites and Ceremonies never practised by the Apostles But yet to shew Mr. Nichols his folly in this answer I demanded of him why then if he made such scruple of us Ministers who had been ordained by Bishops formerly with their Presbyters and of those Reverend Presbyters who in some places of this Land did still ordain without Bishops why then had he not the Imposition of hands by some Ministers nearer in judgement unto himself who had been beyond the Seas in Holland and doubtless there were ordained by some purer Presbyters who never succeeded Bishops These at least might better have ordained him than the people who have no power to ordain nor any power of the Keyes But this last Mr. Nichols denying and affirming the power of the Keyes to be in the people I replied against it thus 5. Argument The power of the Keyes wheresoever it is must be in that Subject which Christ hath ordained But Christ ordained not the people to be the Subject of the Keyes Ergo The people are not the Subject of the power of the Keyes The Major Proposition he granted and the Minor without any distinction at all he denied To which I replied If Christ ordained the people to be the subject of the power of the Keyes then the people must needs be the proper subject of the power of the Keyes But the people are not the proper subject of the power of the Keyes Ergo Christ ordained not the people to be the subject of the power of the Keyes The Major was granted and the Minor was yet denied to the which I replied with another Syllogisme If the people are the proper subject of the power of the Keyes than they are thâ— first subject of the power of the Keyes But the people â—re not the first subject of the power of the Keyes Ergo The people are not the proper subject of the power of the Keyes This Minor also he denied that the people were not the first subject of the power of tâ—â— Keyes till a friend whispering him in the ear made him to see and â—â—flect upon his oversight and better to consider what he had denied But I forthwith replied against him thus If the people were the first subject of the power of the Keyes then the power of the Keyes was in them first and before it was in the Apostles converting and baptizing them But the power of the Keyes was not in the people first and before it was in the Apostles converting and baptizing them Ergo The people are not the first subject of the power of the Keyes Here beloved Mr. Nichols finding himself by this Syllogisme quite cast upon his back followed his whispering friends as is supposed good counsel and though
Antichristian or Babylonish which I prove thus Those who by their life and Doctrine have witnessed against Antichrist could not be Antichristian But our Bishops since the Reformation have witnessed against Antichrist Ergo They were not Antichristian The Minor is clear in Cranmer Ridlâ—y Hooper Latimer Farrar Iewel Pilkington Sands Babington Abbot Davenant Hall Morton Usher and Dr. Brownrigge in his sound and Orthodox Divinity taught and professed publickly in Trinity Colledge in Cambridge against the unsound and corrupt Divinity taughâ— and professed in Rome But thirdly I answer that they did indeed Ordain our Ministers not qua Lord Bishops but qua Presbyteâ—s and had other Presbyters to joyn with them so that our Ordination from them is valid and may in no wise be disclaimed more than thoâ—e Ministers who were ordained in the Pâ—imitive Churches They were ordained in Cyperians time by Bishops and Presbyters The fourth Councel of Carthage ordered that no Bishops should ordain without the Counsel of his Clergie Antichrist was not then got in his feaâ— A Bishop if we consider him meerly as a Bishop was but a Minister and set apart to do the work of a Minister And so Ordinaâ—ion from them was bâ—t as from Ministers who have Commission fâ—om Christ to ordain and therefore the Argument proves nothing against us to null our lawfull succâ—ssion and Ordination Thus beloved having made a large progress through Mr. Nichols his three Erroneous Propositions having by Syllogistâ—cal Reasons and by Scriptures shewed unto you what is Babylonish and Antichristian and what not to wit that which is agreeable with the word of God with the express Command of Christ and with practise and example of the Apostles or that which crosseth the word the Command of Christ the practise and example of the Apostles have cleared our Churches and shewed unto you that as Parochial they are not Babylonish neither in their first Constitution Parishes having been constituted before Antichrist was discovered nor in the end of their Constitution that being for the better and more convenient feeding of many Souls by many Pastours nor in their mixture of good and bad together which mixture I have proved in all those Churches to whom Paul in his Epistles did write having shewed also unto you what practises against the word the express command of Christ the examples of the Apostles and according to the Iesuites examples are practized in Mr. Nichols his Congregation which he calls â—he House of God and finally having vindicated our Parochial Pastours and Parish Officiating-Ministers from Mr. Nichols his false aspersion and uncharitable censure of them branding them with the infamous Title of Babylonish I shall draw nearer to an end and conclude wiâ—h a use of Exhortation to some few duties 2. Vse of Exhortation I have beloved these three Lords dayes carried you about the bounds of Zion and Babylon I have shewed you at large what people what Churches are the Zion of God and what practises are Babylonish and how free our meetings and our Ministers are from such practises and in these three dayes surveying these bounds I have blown my Rams horns that the Walls of Babylon might fall as did the Walls of cursed Iericho formerly at the blowing of them I shall yet cause the sound of them to be heard all the Nation over committing what I have here spoken unto you to the Press that so whatsoever practises are Babylonish in the Land and Nation may be discovered Babylons strength and walls may be more ruâ—ned while Zâ—on shâ—ll stand as a Rock unmoveable and Hell-Gates Councels and practises shall never I hope prevail against her I have found in my search and Survey of Zions Walls and Bulwarks that yet she stands amongst us Our Churches I have found by the light and truth of Scripture â—o be Gods spirituâ—l Zion I have found their Antiquity as Parishes to be â—â—om the fiâ—st Pâ—imitive times and that it belongeth to the Decency and good Order of Zâ—on that in so stately great a House there be many Chambers and several distinct Tables where the Ordinances of God may be dispensed and the mulâ—itude of Souls belonging to Zion may be more conveniently fed I have found also out of Scripture that our Parish Officiating-Ministers are true Shepheards with the true properties of Shepheards and true Pastours Ordained by Christ his own Commission to feed the Souls in Zion having the lawfull power of the Keyes by Imposition of the hands of â—he Presbytery without which all Commission given by the people is subreptitious and false and against the Institution of Christ and consequently Babylonish and Antichristian And finally I have found Mr. Niâ—hâ—ls his three Assertions against us to be false not enduring the Trial and Touchstone of the Holy Scriptures and nothing by him truely Objected to prove us Babylonish but that we are a mixt multitude with many corâ—upt persons and sinners amongst us which he might as well have Objected against all the Churches mentioned in the several Epistles of Paul to prove Paul false in calling them Saints and Churches and against the Churches of Asia and yet not have unchurched them â—s upon this ground he hath not been able to unchurch us Yet because our sins onely are the great block and beam in his eye which hindreth his sight that he cannot see where a true Church is nor see that we are true Churches yea truer than his I beseech you let it be your care and indeavour for the time to come to give him no further offence by your sins but to live so religiously that this block and beam being removed from his eye he may see that we of Deal as well as those of other Parishes are a Church he may be won and recalled by your Godly walking and Conversation to come back to us and to send back again unto our Churches those whom he hath caused to separate from us Which that ye may perform the better give me leave to conclude this large discourse with an Exhortation to these duties following 1. Duty First Let us humble our selves for our sins which have been such Offences and Scandals to our Friends and Neighbours which have brought such destructions and divisions amongst us which have stirred up forraign Enemies against us which threaten us yet with greater miseries than those which hitherto we have suffered which make us as unclean as Lepers and cause others to loath us yea to separate from us Oh Let us read our sins in our miseries in our wars in our divisions which are amongst us We have nourished Malignant lusts Babylonish and Antichristian Brats within us which rebâ—l against the Spirit and fight against the Soul we have made sport and pass-time with those sins which shed the bloud of the Lord Jesus Oh Let those sins draw tears from us which drew bloud from Christ. We have grieved the holy Spirit and therefore well may the Spirit refuse to comfort us who have grieved him Well may