sort with theirs for ours is of the first sort and if theirs be of the same we are both agreed And that the Lord Jesus Christ should settle one kind of Government de facto during Scripture time and change it for ever after is most improbable 1. Because it intimateth levity or mutability in a Law-giver so suddenly to change his Laws and form of Government either something that he is supposed not to have foreseen or some imperfection is intimated as the cause Or if they say that it was the change of the state of the body Governed viz. the Church I answer 2. There was no change of the state of the Church to necessitate a change of the kind of Officers and Government for as I shall shew anon there was need of more Elders then one in Scripture times and the increase of the Church might require an increase of Officers for Number but not for Kind There was as much need of assisting Presbyters as of Deacons I may well conclude therefore that he that will affirm a Change of the Government so suddenly must be sure to prove it and the rather because this is the Bishops own great and most considerable Argument on the other side when they pâ—ead that the Apostles themselves were Rulers of Presbyters therefore Rulers over Presbyters and many Churches should continue as Gods Ordinance many on the other side answer them though so do not I that this Ordinance was temporary during the Apostles times who had no Successors in Goveâ—nment to whâ—ch the Prelates reply that it s not â—â—agiâ—abâ—e that Christ should settle one sort of Church-Governmeâ—t for the first age and another ever after abolishing that first so soon and thaâ— they who affirm this must prove it For my part I am overcome by this Argument to allow all that the Apostolical pattern can prove laying aside that which depended on their extraordinary gifts and priviledges but then I see no reason but they should acknowledâ—e the â—oâ—ce of their own Mediâ—m and conclude it s not imâ—ginable that if God setâ—led â—ixed Bishops only over particular Congregations without any such order as subject Preâ—byters in the first age he should change this and set up subject Presbyters and many Churches under one man for ever after If they say that this is not a change of the speâ—ies but a growing up of the Church from Infancy to Maturity I answer It is a plain change of the Species of Government when one Congregation is turned into Many and when a new order of Officers viz. subject Presbyters without power of Ordination or Jurisdiction is introduced and the Bishops made Governours of Pastors that before were but Governours of the People this is plainly a new Species Else I say again let them not blame us for being against the right Species 3. The third Reaâ—on is this They that affirm a change not of the Governours but also of the very nature or kind of a particular Governed or Political Church from what it was in Scripture times do affirm a thing so improbable as is 〈◊〉 without very clear proof to be credited But such are they that affirm that Congregational Bishops were turned to Diocesan therefore c. The Church that was the object of the Government of a fixed Bishop in Scripture times was A competent Number of persons in Covenant with Christ or of Christians co-habiting by the appâ—intment of Christ and their mutual expressed consent united or associated under Christs Ministerial Teachers and Guides for the right worshipping of God in publick and the Edification of the Body in Knowledge and Holiness and the maintaining of obedience to Christ among them for the strength beauty and safety of the whole and each part and thereby the Pleasing and Glorifying God the Redeemer and Creator Iâ— would be too long rather then difficult to stand to prove all the parts of this Definition of the first particular Political Church That part which most concerneth our present purpose is the Ends which in Relations must enter the Definition which in one word is The Communion of Saints personally as Associated Churches consisting of many particular Churches are for the Communion of Saints by officers and Delegates And therefore this communion of Saints is put in our Creed next to the Catholick Church as the end of the combination I shall have occasion to prove this by particular Texts of Scripture anon A Diocesan Church is not capable of these Ends. What personal communion can they have that know not nor see not one aonther that live not together nor worship God together There is no more personal communion of Saints among most of the people of this Diocess then is between us and the inhabitants of France or Germany For we know not so much as the names or faces of each other nor ever come together to any holy uses So that to turn a Congregation into a Diocesan Church is to change the very subject of Government Obj. This is meer independency to make a single Congregation the subject of the Government Answ. 1. I am not deterred from any truth by Names I have formerly said that its my opinion that the truth about Church-Government is parcelled out into the hands of each party Episcopal Presbyterian Independents and Erastian And in this point in Question the Independents are most right Yet I do dot affirm nor I think they that this one Congregation may not accidentally be necessitated to meet in several places at once either in case of persecution or the age and weakness of some members or the smalness of the room But I say only that the Church should contain no more then can hold communion when they have opportunity of place and liberty and should not have either several settled Societies or Congregations nor more in one such Society then may consist with the Ends. And that these Assemblies are bound to Associate with other Assemblies and hold communion with them by the mediation of their Officers this as I make no doubt of so I think the Congregational will confess And whereas the common evasion is by distinguishing between a Worshipping Church and a Governed Chuch I desire them to give us any Scripture proof that a Worshipping Church and a Governed Church were not all one supposing that we speak of a settled society or combination I find no such distinction of Churches in Scripture A family I know may perform some worship and accordingly have some Government And an occasional meeting of Christians without any Minister may perform some Worship without Government among them But where was there ever a Society that ordinarily assembled for publick worship such as was performed by the Churches on the Lords dayes and held communion ordinarily in worship and yet had not a Governing Pastor of their own Without a Presbyter they could have no Sacraments and other publike Worship And where was there ever a Presbyter that was not a Chuâ—ch Governour
powers contradicted And certainly all such disuse began with a few and proceeded further we are allowed then to disuse such things § 12. It would grieve a man that loves the Church to hear the name of the Church abused by many dark though confident disputers when they are pleading for their Ceremonies and Holy dayes and laying about them with the names of Schismaticks against all that will not do as they do O say they These men will separate from the Catholick Church and how then can they be the Children of the Church And 1. Which is it that is called by them the Catholick Church Little do I know nor am able to conjecture Did the Catholick Church make the English Common-Prayer Book what were the then Bishops in England that consented in that work the whole Church of Christ on earth God forbid Or did ever any General Council authorize it I think not And if they would tell us what General Council commanded Christmas Day or Kneeling at the Sacrament c they would do us a pleasure but I think they will not § 13. And 2. What if these things had all been commanded by a General Council May not a man disuse them without separating from the Church I think as good as you are you do some things your selves that God himself hath forbidden you to do and yet will be loth to be therefore taken for men that separate either from the Church or God And when you read the Books of Heathen Philosophers when you adore not toward the East or when you pray receive the Sacrament Kneeling on the Lords Dayes would you be taken to separate from the Catholick Church for crossing its ancient customs or Canons But these perverse and factious reasonings we must hear to the dishonour of Christianity and Reason it self and that from men that scorn the supposed meanness of others yea and see poor souls seduced into separation by such empty words And this is one of the present judgements on this land CHAP. X. Prop. 10. If it be not our Lawfull Governours that command us but usurpers we are not formally bound to obey them though the things be lawfull which they command § 1. WE may be bound by some other Obligation perhaps to do the thing which they command us but we are not formally though sometime Materially bound to obey them For it is not formally obedience unless it be done eo nomine because commanded or for the Authority of the Commander If the Pope or any usurper should command me to pray or to give alms I will do it but not because he commandeth me but because God commandeth me and therefore I will not obey him but God But if a Parent or Magistrate or Pastor command it me I will do it both because it is commanded me by God and them and so I will obey both God and them If an usurper command me to do a thing in it self indifferent I will not do it because he commandeth it but yet if accidentally it become my duty by conducing to anothers good or avoiding their offence or hurt or any other accident I will use it for these ends though not for his command § 2. The Pope 1. As the Vice-christ or universall Head is an usurper and therefore hath no authority to command me or any man in that relation the smallest Ceremony 2. The Pope as Patriarch of the West is an humane creature and not of Divine institution and was indeed a sinfull institution from the first of his creation but if it had been otherwise yet since is that Patriarchship become unwarrantable since he hath forfeited it and the world hath found the mischiefs of it So that no man is therefore bound to use one lawfull Ceremony because the Pope as Patriarch of the West commandeth it 3. If this were not so yet Brittain and Ireland were from the beginning none of his Patriarchate nor did at Nice consent to it and therefore have the less appearance of any obligation § 3. The Authority of General Councils cannot be pretended as obliging men in Conscience to the English Ceremonies 1. Because indeed General Councils are not a superiour Power for proper Government of the Church having authority to command particular Bishops or Synods as their subjects but they are only necessary for Union and Communion of Churches and mutual assistance thereby and so their Canons bind but by virtue of the General commands that require us to maintain the Unity and Communion of the Churches § 4. And 2. If it were otherwise there is few if any of these Ceremonies that are commanded by any true General Council They that can prove any such thing let them do it but till we see it we will not be forward to believe it Yea 3. Some of them General Councils have made Canons against as I before shewed in the Case of Kneeling at the Sacrament on the Lords dayes And therefore the neglecters of our Ceremonies sin not against a General Council § 5. The Common plea is that we are bound to use these Ceremonies in obedience to the Church of England and that we are not true sons of this Church if we refuse it But what is it that is called by them The Church of England In a Political sense I know no such thing as a Church of England or of any Nation on earth that is There is no one Society united in any one Ecclesiastical Soveraign that can truly be called the Church of England or of any other Nation The whole Catholick Church is One as united in Christ the Head And every particular Chuâ—ch associated for personal Communion in Gods Worshâ—p is one being a part of the Catholick Church and united in and individuated by their relation to their several Pastors But a National Church under one chief Ecclesiastick Government I find no mention of in Scripture but contrarily the Churches of Judaea Galatia c. or any other Countrey where there were many are alway mentioned in the Plural number and never called one Church § 6. Yet will we quarrel with no men about meer names or words If by a National Church â— be meant any of these following we acknowledge that there is such a thing 1. If all the particular Churches in a Nation do Associate for Communion and mutuall assistance and so use to meet by their officers in one National Assembly I confess the Association usefull if not necessary and the Assemblies to be maintained and for unity sake obeyed in things lawfull And though Scripture call not such National Associations by the name of a Church in the singular number yet we shall leave men to their Liberty in such names If all the Schoolmasters in England should hold General Assemblies to agree what Books to read in their Schools c. if any man would therefore call all the Schools in England in the singular number by the name of the School of England I would not differ with him for a
among them that unchurch our Churches and degrade our Ministers and perswade all people to fly from them as a plague and try their doctrine their spirits their publick worship their private devotion and their whole conversation and when thou hast done come into our Assemblieâ— and spare not if thou be impartial to observe our imperfections judge of our Order and Discipline and Worship together with our Doctrine and our lives and when thou hast done unâ—church us if thou darest and if thou canst We justifie not our selves or our wayes from blemishes but if thou be but heartily a friend to the Bridegroom offer us then if thou darest a bill of divorce or rob him if thou darest of so considerable a portion of his inheritance Surely if thou be his friend thou canst hardly find in thy heart to deliver up so much of his Kingdom to his Enemy and to set the name of the Devil on his doors and say This is the house of Satan and not of Christ. If thou have received but what I have done though alas too little in those Societies and tasted in those Ordinances but that which I have tasted thou wouldst abhor to reproach them and cut them off from the portion of the Lord. Remember it is not Episcopacy nor the old conformity that I am here opposing My judgement of those Causes I have given in the foregoing and following disputation But it is only the New Prelatical Recusants or Separatists that draw their followers from our Churches as no Churches and our Ordinances of Worship as none or worse then none and call them into private houses as the meetest places for their acceptable worship Who would have thought that ever that generation should have come to this that so lately hated the name of separation and called those private meetings Conventicles which were held but in due subordâ—nation to Church meetings and not in opposition to them as theirs are Who would have thought that those that seemed to disown Recusancy and persecuted Separatists should have come to this Yea that those that under Catholick pretences can so far extend their charity to the Papists have yet so little for none of the meanest of their Brethren and for so many Reformed Protestant Churches Yea that they should presume even to censure ut out of the Catholick Church and consequently out of heaven it self I have after here given thee an instance in one Dr. Hide who brandeth the very front of his Book with these Schismatical uncharitable stâ—gmata The sensless Queres of one Dr. Swadling and others run in the same channel or sink If these men be Christians indeed me thinks they should understand that as great that I say not greater blemishes may be found on all the rest of the Churches as those for which the Reformed are by them unchurched and consequently they will deliver up All to Satan and Christ must be deposed And how much doth this come short of Infidelity At least me thinks their hearts should tremble least they hear at last In not loving theâ—e you loved not me in despising and reproaching these you despised and reproached me And yet these men are the greatest pretenders next the Romanists to Catholicisme Vnity and Peace Strange Catholicks that cut off so great and excellent a part of the Catholick Church And a sad kind of Vnity and Peace which all must be banished from that cannot unite in their Prelacy though the Episcopacy which I plead for in the next Disputation they can own The summ of their offer is that if all the Ministers not Ordained by Prelates will confess themselves to be meer Lay-men and no Ministers of Christ and will be Ordained again by them and if the Churches will confess themselves No Churches and receive the essence of Churches from them and the Sacrament and Churh Assemblies to be Null invalid or unlawfull till managed only by Prelatical Ministerâ— then they will have Peace and Communion with us and not till then And indeed must we buy your Communion so deer As the Anabaptists do by us in the point of Baptism so do these Recusants in the point of Ordination You must be Baptized saith one party for your Infant Baptism wat none You must be Ordained saith the other sort for your Ordination by Presbyters was none The upshot is We must be all of their Opinions and parties before we can have their Communion or to be reputed by them the Ministers and Churches of Christ. And on such kind of terms as these we may have Vnity with any Sect. If really we be not as hearty friends to Order and Discipline in the Church as they we shall give them leave to take it for our shame and glory in it as their honour But the question is not whether we must have Church-Order but whether it must be theirs and none but theirs Nor whether we must have Discipline but whether it must be only theirs Nay with me I must profess the question is on the other side whether we must needs have a Name and shew of Discipline that 's next to none or else be no Churches or no Ministers of Christ The main reason that turneth my heart against the English Prelacy is because it did destroy Church Discipline and almost destroy the Church for want of it or by the abuse of it and because it is as then exercised inconsistent with true Discipline The question is not whether we must have Bishops and Episcopal Ordination We all yield to that without contradiction But the doubt is about their Species of Episcopacy Whether we must needs have Ordination by a Bishop that is the sole Governour over an hundred or two hundred or very many particular Churches or whether the Bishops of single Churches may not suffice at least as to the Being of our office I plead not my own cause but the Churches For I was ordained long ago by a Bâ—shop of their own with Presbyters But I do not therefore take my self to be disengaged from Christianity or Catholâ—cism and bound to lay by the Love which I owe to all Christs members or to deny the Communion of the Churches which is both my Duty and I am sure an unvaluable Mercy And I must say that I have seen more of the Ancient Discipline exercised of late without a Prelate in some Parish Church in England than ever I saw or heard of exercised by the Bishops in a thousand such Churches all my dayes And it is not Names that are Essential to the Church nor that will satisfie our expectations We are for Bishops in every Church And for Order sake we would have one to be the chief We dislike those that disobey them in lawful things as well as you But let them have a flock that is capable of their personal Government and then we shall be ready to rebuke all those that separate from them when we can say as Cyprian Epist. 69. ad Pupian Omnis Ecclesiae populus
prove It hath been usual for Princes to decase bad Priests and heretical or contentious Bishops and to correct disorders and restrain usurpations of Prelates among themselves And if any such thing be now done by our present Governours I know not any thing of that necessity in the English Species of Prelacy as will warrant us to dâ—sobey them Sect. 8. And it is a thing that is inconsistent with the Peace and Unity of these Churches Which is another reason For 1. We have seen the ill effects of it which I am not willing to open to the worst 2. And the multitude of the most conscientious people are against it 3. And the generality of the most conscionable faithful Ministers are against it So that it could not be restored without the apparent ruine of these Churches 4. And a Learned Reverend Assembly of Divines chosen out of the several Counties by a Parliament were against it 5. And many Parliaments have been against it 5. And the generality of their adherents in the two Nations that then lived in their Power have taken a Solemn Covenant against it Not against all Episcopacy but against the English sort of Prelacie So that it cannot be restored without incomparably much more hurt then the continuance of it would have done good and without setting all these Churches on a flame So far is it now from being a likely means of Unity or Peace among us Sect. 9. And if yet they plead the obligation of the ancient Laws which is most insisted on by many I must by way of just excuse remember them of one thing which its like they do not forget that if those Laws are still in force to oblige us to seek Ordination from the Prelates and to Authorize the Prelates to Ordain notwithstanding the Laws of later Powers that have repealed them then it must needs follow that those later Powers are taken for no Powers and consequently that the same Laws do oblige the Prelates to put the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy as to some other Power upon the Oâ—dained before they lay hands upon them and oblige the Ordained to take those Oaths as well as to be so Ordained For if they be yet of force in one they are of 〈◊〉 in both And so no man can be Ordained by you 〈…〉 guilty of that which the present Lawes make 〈…〉 forfeiting his life which I know nothing in the 〈…〉 him to do 〈…〉 think I may conclude that it is your own judgement that men should rather forbear your Ordination then hazard their lives or violate the present Laws because when a Declaration or Order came forth not long ago prohibiting men of your perswasion that had been sequestred to Preach or Administer Sacraments the generality of you presently obeyed it and some wrote for the forbearance that they practised And if an Ordained man should obey the present power by forbearing to preach and administer Sacraments or may forbear these to escape a temporal danger much more may men do so about your sort of Ordination Sect. 11. Moreover 4. We shall be guilty of a fixed Schism among the Refoâ—â—ed Churchâ—s and of making the healing of our breaches impossible if by our compliance we own your dividing Principle that No other are true Ministers or Churches but such as have your Manner of Ordination For by this Rule all the Ministers in these and other Protestant Nations must be degraded or taken for no Ministers and all the Churches for no true Churches though perhaps they may be confessed Christian Communities Nor the Ordinances and administrations true And do you think these are likely terms for Peace Will they ever be yielded to by so many Churches Or is it a desirable thing Should Rome be so much gratified And our Churches ruined and the souls of millions cast away and sacrificed to your opinions or Peace While your Prelacy pretended to no more but to be the best sort of Government and your Church to be the best of Churches we could submit to you in all things that were not flatly sinful But when you will be the only Churches and unchurch all others even the most flourishing Churches for knowledge and holiness and when you must be the only Ministers and others must be none unless they will be Ordained by you this is enough to put a sober man to a stand whether he shall not be guilty of notorious schism by complying with so schismatical a principle if he subject himself voluntarily to a Prelacy that hath such principles and pretences and to an Ordination that is administred on these grounds and terms This was not the ground nor these the principles of the former English Prelates and therefore we were more capable of subjection to them or Communion with them We could have lived in their Communion and in the Communion of the rest of the Protestant Churches that have no Prelacy But if by innovation you have made such a change as that we must separate from all the Reformed Churches and Ministers that have not your kind of Ordination if we will be your subjects or be Ordained by you according to your grounds its time for us to look about us that we escape that separation and schism that you would lead us into and engage us in by your way of Ordination Sect. 12. Among your selves there are many that affirm that if the Pope would have been content with his old Patriarchal Power and principium unitatis or primacy of Order and wave his last four hundred years determinations or at least not obtrude them on other Churches as Bishop Bromhall speaks they could have held communion with him that now cannot If Rome would have been content to be a Member of the Catholick Church though pretendedly the noblest they could have owned it But when it will be The Catholick Church and separate it self from all the rest unchurching all that are not subject to them and united in their Government they then drive us further from Communion with them Imitate them not in any degree in this Notorious schiâ—m and separation Be contented to be Ministers and Churches and tell not Christ he hath none but you and such as you and tell not Satan that the Kingdom of Christ is thus cut short to the honour or rejoycing of his adversary Sect. 13. It was not so ridiculous as sad to me to read in Mr. T. Ps. Self-revenger against Mr. Barlee pag. 37. and Ordination called a Notorious Comoe Tragedie equally sad and ridiculous which he and others lately acted in Daintry Church intituled by the Actors An Ordination of Ministers but by many of the Spectators An Ordination of Lay-Preachers to be Lay-preachers still and without repentance for ever uncapable of the Priesthood by being Ordained by such Priests as were uncapable of Ordaining Thus Mr. P. Sect. 14. And it seems he was of the same judgement whoever he was that would have abused Bishop Vsher by giving out that he told him that as
sort of Bishops it is that they mean And most of them are unable to give me a rational answer to either of the Questions But some that are wiser though they know no more sorts of Bishops but one yet they can say that by a Bishop they mean an Ecclesiastick Governour of Presbyters and the people And if so then why do they vilifie Bishops under the name of Presbyters I have here shewed you that if this be all then every Parish hath a Bishop where there is a Pastor that hath Chappels and Curates under him Or any two Ministers that will subject themselves to a third do make a Bishop You delude your selves and others while you plead only in general for Bishops We are all for Bâ—shops as well as you All the Question is What sort of Bishops they must be Whether only Episcopi gregis or also Episcopi Episcoporum gregis and if so Whether they must be Bishops of single Churches as our Parishes are or a multitude of Churches as Diocessâ—s are And if the last were granted Whether these be not properly Archbishops In all other parts of the Controversie I find that the followers of each party go much in the dark and take much upon trust from the Teachers whom they value and little understand the true state of our differences So that it is more by that common providence commonly called Good luck that some of them are Protestants or Christians then from any saving grace within them Had Papists or Mahometans but as much interest in them as the Bishops it is like they would have been as much for them As for those of you that know your own Opinions and the Reasons of them you must needs knâ—w that the Divines called Episcopal in England are of two sorts that very much differ from one another And therefore supposing you to be the followers of these differing Divines I shall accordingly furtheâ— speak to you as you are I. The Bishops of England and their followers from the first Reformation begun by King Edward the sixt and revived by Queen Elizabeth were sâ—und in Doctrine adhering to the Augustinian Method expressed now in the Articles and Homilies They differed not in any considerable points from those whom they called Puritans But it was in the form of Government and Liturgy and Ceremonies that the difference lay II. But of late years a new strain of Bishops were introduced differing much from the old yet pretending to adhere to the Articles and Homilies and to be Fathers of the same Church of England as the rest I know of none before B p Mountague of their way and but few that followed him till many years after And at the demolishing of the Prelacy they were existent of both sorts Would you know the difference If you have read the writings of B p Jewel Pilkington Alley Parry Babbington Baily Abbot Carlton Morton Usher Hall Davenant with such like on one side and the writings of the New Episcopal Divines that are now most followed on the other side I need not tell you the difference And if you will not be at the labour to know it by their writings its like that you will not believe it if I tell you For if you will take all on trust I must suspect that you will put your trust in them to whom you are addicted The New party of Episcopal Divines are also subdivided some of them are if their Defence of Grotius and Grotius his own Profession may be believed of Grotius his Religion that is Papists Others of them though they draw as neer the Grotians as Protestants may do yet own not Popery it self So that we have three notable parties of Episcopal Divines among us 1. The old Orthodox Protestant Bishops and their followers 2. The New Reconciling Protestant party 3. The New Reconciling Papists or Grotians A brief taste of the difference I will give you 1. The Old Episcopal party as I said in Doctrine agreed with the Non-conformist and held that Doctrine that now we find in the Articles and Homilies and in the Synod of Dort where B p Carlton B p Hall B p Davenant and three more Divines of this Nation were and had a great hand in the framing of those Canons and by consenting did as much to make them obligatory to us in England as commonly is done in General Councils by the Delegates of most Nations But the New Episcopal Divines both Protestants and Papists do renounce the Synod of Dort and the Doctrine of our Articles and Homilies so far as it is conform thereto in the points of Predestination Redemption Free-will Effectual Grace Perseverance and Assurance of Salvation following that Doctrine which is commonly maintained by the Iesuites and Arminians in these points 2. The Old Episcopal Divines did renounce the Pope as Antichrist and thought it the duty of the Transmarine Churches to renounce him and avoid communion with his Church as leprous and unfit for their communion But the New Episcopal Divines do not only hold that the Pope is not Antichrist but one part of them the Protestants hold that he may be obeyed by the Transmarine Western Churches as the Patriarch of the West and be taken by us all to be the Principium unitatis to the Catholick Church and the Roman Determinations still may stand except those of the last four hundred years and those if they obtrude them not on others So B p Bramhall and many more And M r Dow and others tell us that the Canon Law is still in force in England except some parts of it which the Laws af the Land have cast out And the Grotians teach that the Church of Rome is the Mistris of other Churches and the Pope to stand as the Head of the Vniversal Church and to Govern it according to the Canons and Decrees of Councils and they receive the Trent-Creed and Council and all other Councils which the Pope receives excepting only against some School-points and abuse of manners among the Papists which their Canons and Decrees condemn 3. The old Episcopal Divines did take Episcopacy to be better then Presbyterian Equality but not necâ—ssary to the Being of a Church but to the Better being where it may be had But the New Prelatical Divines of both sorts unchurch those Churches that are not Prelatical 4. The Old Episcopal Divines thought that Ordination by Presbyters without Prelates was valid and not to be done again though irregular But the New ones take it to be No Ordination nor those so ordained to be any Ministers but Lay-men 5. And accordingly the Old Episcopal Divines did hold the Forrein Protestant Churches of France Savoy Holland Geneva Helvetia c. that had no Prelates as true Churches and their Pastors as true Ministers of Christ and highly valued and honoured them as Brethren But the New sort do disown them all as no true Churches though they acknowledge the Church of Rome to be a true Church and their Ordination
with the Neighbour Ministers in Essex And I have had Letters from many of that way with whom I Correspond full of Christian Love and Piety and hatred of calumny and separations But verily I must tell you that when we find any of you in your writings and Sermons making it your work to vilifie the Ministry and with the Quakers to make them odious to the people and making your jeers and railing and uncharitableness the life of your Sermons we cannot but suspect that you are Popish Emissaries while we find you in their work or else that you are Malignant Enemies and of the sâ—â—pentine brood whose heads shall shortly be bruised by the Lord. 4. And if it be the disuse of your Common Prayer that you separate from us for I would know of you whâ—ther you would have denyed Communion with all that lived before it had a being If this be your Religion I may ask you where was your Religion before Luther before King Edwards daies If you say in the Mass book and what else can you say I ask you then where was it before the Mass book had a being Would you have denyed Communion to the Apostles and all the Primitive Church for some hundreds of years that never used your Book of Common Prayer will you still make things indifferent necessary 2. One word to those of you that follow Grotius I have shewed that he professeth himself a Papist even in that Discussion which M r Pierce so magnifieth as excellent I hear Mr. Thorndike and others defend him and some think I injure him by calling him a Papist Wonderful what will not be a Controversie among learned men Are we faln among such that deny him to be a Papist that professeth expresly to be satisfied if evil manners be but corrected and school-opinions not imposed which are contrary to Tradition and all Councils and that professeth to own the Creed and Council of Trent and all the Popish Councils whatsoever and the Mistriship of Rome and the Catholick Mastership of the Pope governing the Catholick Church according to these Councils What is a Papist if this be none I refer you to my Evidence in the Discovery of the Grotian Religion and the first Chap. of the second Part of my Catholick Key replying to Mr. Pierce Confute it rationally if you can I shall now only desire you when you have read Rivet to read a Book called Grotius Papizans and to hearken to the testimony of an honest learned Senator of Paris that admired Grotius and tells you what he is from his own mouth and that is Claud. Sarravius who saith in his Epistol pag. 52 53. ad Gronov. De ejus libro libello postremis interrogatus respondit plane Milleterio Consona Romanam fidem esse veram sinceram solosqâ—e Clericorum mores degeneres schismati dedisse locum adferebatque plura in hanc sententiam Quid dicam Merito quod falso olim Paulo Agrippa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deploro veris lachrymis tantam jacturam Here you have a credible witness that from his own mouth reporteth it that our Reformation was to Grotius a schism and nothing but the ill manners of the Clergy gave us the opportunity And pag. 190. Epist. ad Salmas Vis ergo me exerte dicere quid sentiam de postremo Grotii libro an omnia mihi in eo probentur Rem rogas non magnam nec adeo difficilem quemque expedire promptum est Tantum abest ut omnia probem ut vix aliquid in eo reperiam cui sine conditione calculum apponam meum Verissime dixit ille qui primus dixit Grotium Papizare Vix tamen in isto scripto aliquid legi quod mirarer quodve 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 occurreret Nunquid enim omnes istiusmodi ejusdem authoris lucubrationes erga Papistarum errores perpetuam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erga Jesuitas amorem erga nos plus quam Vatinianum odium produnt clamant In Voto quod ejus nomen praeferebat an veritus est haec 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 profiteri Had none of you owned Grotius his Popery I would never have charged it on you But when Grotius himself glorieth of his adherents in England and so many of you plainly defend him and profess your owning of those books and those doctrines in which his Popery is contained if ever Popery were known in the world I must then crave your pardon if I think somewhat the worse of Popery because they that hold it are ashamed of it For I abhor that Religion which a man hath cause to be ashamed of and will not save him from being a loser by it that owneth it and standeth to it to the last And I think that man hath no Religion who hath none which he will openly profess and stand to I have at this time but these few requests to make to you which I beseech you to answer without partiality 1. That you will seriously consider whether it be truly Catholick to unchurch us and so many Churches of Christ as are of our mind as your partakers do Because Catholicism is your pretense consider whether you be not further from it then most people in the world 2. Because I conceive this Book is not suited to your great objections I desire your perusal of another that comes out with it called A Key for Catholicks especially the second Part and if you cannot answer them take heed how you continue Papists 3. While you hold us for no Ministers or Churches or Capable of your Communion it is in vain for us to hope for Communion with you but we desire that you will consider of those terms of a more distant sort of Communion which there I have propounded in the End of the first and second Part and deny us not that much 4. At least we beseech you that while you are Papists you will deal openly and no worse with us then sober Papists that speak according to their Consciences use to do Do not let it as the Lord Falkland speaks be in the Power of so much per annum nor of your factious interest to keep you from professing your selves to be what you are and do not make the Protestant name a meer cloak to secure you in the opposing of the Protestant Cause and follow not the example of Spalatensis and the Counsel of Campian and Parsons in feigning a sort of Doctrinal Puritans and railing at Protestants under that name Deal with us but as sober Papists do and we shall take it thankfully How highly doth Bodin a Learned Papist extol the Presbyterian Discipline at Genevah from its effects when among many of you it hath as odious titles as if it were some blasphemous damning thing What sober Papist would talk as Mr. Pierce doth p. 30. of the great abomination of the Presbyterian Directory and not be able to name one thing in it that is abominable Is it a great
in Afrâ—ca and call the rest Cecilians and let the Papists reduce it to the subscribers to their Trent confession or to them only that believe in the Popes universal Headship and Government and call all others Hereticks yet will all true Catholicks imitate Augustine and the Councils that were called against the Donatists who still described the Catholike Church to be that which was dispersed over the world having begun at Ierusalem and though to Gods praise we dare rejoycingly affirm that the most illustrious and the soundest part of it is in Europe among the Reformed yet dare we not say that it is all or the greatest part here Nay we confess that we are but a small part of Christs Church And therefore common sobriety may tell us that the Peace of so great a part of Christs Church as is in all the rest of the world is highly to be valued and sought with all our might in righteousness Moreover even among the reformed Churches there are many for some Episcopacy or Superintendency As the Church of England and Ireland was lately for Diocesan Episcopacy so the Churches in Denmark Sweden Saxionie and other parts of Germany Transilvania c. are for a lower sort of Episcopacy called Superintendency among them 3. And the quality of many of the Divines of that way is such as bespeaks our greatest reverence to them and should move us to thirst after Unity and Reconciliation with them Many of them are men of eminent Learning and Godliness and sound in the faith I know that it is commonly objected that they are generally ungodly men that are that way and though some of them are Learned men yet they are all or almost all of careless and carnal lives or meerly formal and superstitious and therefore their Communion is not much to be desired To which I answer 1. The plain undenyable truth is that it was so here with the most of them in the Bishops dayes where ever I was acquainted There were more Ministers in many places that would have scorned threatned or troubled a man for a godly diligent life then that would lead him that way by a good example We must speak that truth that cannot be hid whoever be displeased To this day too many of that way are careless and scandalous But then Consider withall 2. That it is but too common for the common sort even of Ministers as well as people to be careless and bad what ever opinions they are of Especially if the times do discountenance practical Religiousness the greater part are likely to follow the times being that way also so strongly enclined by nature 3. Consider also that we have had and have men of that Judgement that have been excellent Instruments of the Churches good and so eminent for Gods graces and gifts that their names will be pretious whilest Christ hath in England a Reformed Church were there in all England but one such man dissenting from us as Hooper Farrar Latimer Cranmer Ridley Iewel Abbot Davenant Vsher Hall c. what sober Godly man would not be exceeding solicitous for a reconciliation I am sure besides the godliness of their lives and painful preaching One Iewel One Vsher One Davenant hath done so much against the Roman Usurpers as they will never well claw it off them to the last Moreover who knoweth not that most of the Godly able Ministers of England since the Reformation did judge Episcopacy some of them Lawful and some of them most fit for the Non-conformists were but few and that even before this late trouble and war the most even almost all of those that were of the late Assembly at Westminster and most through the land did subscribe and conform to Episcopal Government as a thing not contrary to the word of God so that it is evident that it is very consistent with a Godly life to judge Episcopacy lawful and fit or else we should not have had so many hundred learned and godly men of that mind And I am not altogether unapt to believe that many of them yet are so far reconcileable to it moderated that if it were again established they would submit to it as they did For I hear but of few that have made any recantation of their former conformity but contrarily have known divers of them profess a reconcilableness as aforesaid as Mr. Gataker doth in one of his books express his own Judgement If I have proved this preparatory proposition which I think needeth but litle proof then have I also proved 1. That they have sinned much who have hitherto forborn the use of any means for Peace which was in their power 2. And that we are bound our selves to desire and seek after a peace with such men and that we cannot discharge a good conscience while we neglect such means as is within our reach and fit for us to use The second Proposition is that A Certain Episcopacy may be yielded to for the peace if not also for the right order of the Church In the declaration of my judgement concerning this I make no doubt but I shall displease both sides the one for yielding so much the other for yielding no more But jacta est alea I live not upon mens favour nor the air of their applause That truth which displeaseth at present may tend to peace and produce it at the last when the angry humour is allayed or at least when the angry age is gone For the clearer determination of this and the main Question following it is necessary that I here stay 1. To open the nature of Church-Government in general 2. To open the sence of the word Episcopacy and the several sorts of Bishops And then 3. I shall tell you what sort of Episcopacy it is that I could yield to for the Churches peace 1. I must confess I think that the greatest part of the controversie by far is in this first question of the nature of Ecclesiastical Government strictly so called which is only in the hands of Christs Ministers Bishops or whomsoever commonly called Clergy men Aâ—d concerning this having written my thoughts more largely elâ—ewhere I shall now lay down these few Propositions Prop. 1. All this power Ecclesiastical is Jure divino given from God himself and that either immediately or by the mediation only of the Apâ—stles I mean as to the determination in specie what it shall be and the constitution of that order and power in the Church though perhaps some other causes at least sine quibus non may intervene for the reception of this power by an individual person These therefore that plead only the Laws of the Land or only Canons of former Bishops for their standing or authority do say nothing that as to our controversie is regardable Whâ—t men do they may undo if there be reason for it and if it depend on their authority we must submit to their reason Prop. 2. This Divine Constitution of the Species of Church-Power
to one that is only the Overseer or Ruler of the People of one particular Church and not of any Church-rulers themselves That ruleth the flock but not any Shepherds 2. Those also may be called Bishops who only are Ioint-Rulers with others of a particular Church and Presidents among the Elders of that one Church for Vnity and order sake without assuming any Government over those Elders 3. A third sort there are that are Presidents in such an Eldership and withal do take a Negative voice in the Government so that nothing shall be done without them in such affairs 4 A fourth sort are the sole Pastors of such a particular Church that have many Ministers under them as their Curates who are properly to be Ruled by them alone so that the Pastor is the sole Ruler of that Church and the Curates do only teach and otherwise officiate in obedience to him Which is the case of divers Ministers of great Parishes that keep one Curate at their Parish Church and others at their Chappels Yet it s one thing to be the sole Ruler of the Parish and another to Rule the rest of the Elders 5. A fifth sort of Bishops are those that are the fixed Presidents of a Classis of the Pastors of many particular Churches who hold the title durante vitâ or quà m diu bene se gesserint though they are in use only while the Classis sitteth and have only a power of Moderating and ordering things as the foreman of a Jury or a double or casting voice as the Bayliff in Elections in most Corporations or as the President in some Colledges but no Negative voice which maketh a Power equal with all the rest 6. A sixth sort are the heads of such Classes having a Negative voice so that the rest can do nothing without them 7. A seventh sort are the Presidents of Provinces or Diocesses containing many Classes which have only a Moderating Power but no Negative voice 8. An eighth sort are the Bishops of particular Cities with all the Rural parts that are near it containing many Churches who assume the Power of Governing that Diocess to themselves alone without the Presbyters of the particular Churches either not using them at all in matter of Government or only consulting with them in Assemblies but giving them no determining votes 9. A ninth sort is a Diocesan Bishop of such a City who doth not take upon him the Rule of the people of the Diocess beyond his own Congregation but only of the Pastors supposing that the several Pastors or Presbyters have power to Rule the several Congregations but withall that they themselves are to be ruled by him 10. A tenth sort are such Bishops as assume the Government of these Diocesan Bishops which are commonâ—y called Archbishops to which also we adjoyn Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs who assume the Power of Governing all below them as under the seventh rank I do also for brevity comprehend Metropolitans Primates and Patriarchs who assume no Governing Power over other Bishops but only the primam sedem and the moderating Power in Councils 11. The eleventh sort are unfixed general Pastors called Ambulatory or Itinerant that have a care of all the Churches and are no further tyed to any particulars then aâ— the necessary defect of their natural capacity seeing they cannot be in all places at once or else the dispatch of that work which they there meet with before they go further and some such occasion doth require and being excluded out of no part of the Church further then by consent for the common good they shall exclude themselves such I mean as the Apostles were 12. The twelfth and last sort is the Judas that goes under the name of St. Peters Successor and Christs Vicar General or the Vice-Christ who claimeth a power of Governing the whole universal Church as its Head having Infallible power of determiâ—ing Controversies and matters of Faith and whose Office must enter the definition of the Catholick Church and those that separate from him are no Catholikes or true Christians This is he that beareth the bag and maketh the twelfth sort 3. I Come now in the third place to tell you how many and which of these sorts of Episcopacy I think may be admitted for the Peace of the Church And 1. Of the first sort â—here is no Controversie among us few will deny the Ius Divinum of Presbyters as having the Rule of the people of a particular Church and the sole Rule supposing that there is no other Pastor over that Church but himself 2. Of the second sort of Parish Bishops who are meer Presidents over the whole Eldership of that particular Church and that continually or fixedly I think there is little question will be made by any but they also will easily be admitted 3. The third sort A Parochial Bishop having a Negative voice in a Parish Eldership I should be content to admit for the Peace of the Church but whether of it self it be desirable I do not dispute for if one Pastor even in a Parish may have a Negative voice among two or three Curates it will follow that the thing it self is not unlawful viz. for one Minister to have a Negative vote among many and so among an hundred if there be nothing else to forbid 4. The fourth sort for brevity Comprehendeth two sorts 1. Such Pastors of a single Congregation which having diverse Curates under them who are Presbyters do yet themselves take upon them the sole Government of the people and of their Curates I think this is intolerable and indeed a Contradiction or a Nulling of the Presbyters office for it is essential to the Presbyter of any Church to be a Guide or Ruler of that Church to put them out of all Rule therefore is to Null or suspend the exercise of their office which cannot statedly be done without destroying it But then 2. if we speak of the second sort that is such Pastors of particular Churches as have Curats who are Presbâ—ters and they govern their Curates but take the Curates as true Governors of the flock these as I dare not simply defend for if it be lawful for one Pastor to Rule two or three in a Parish then why not twenty or an hundred if nothing else forbid so I confess I should be ready to admit of them if it might attain the Churches peace for I see many godly Divines that are against Episcopacy yet practice this and will have no Curates in their Parish that will not be Ruled by them And there is a certain Obedience which Juniors and men of weaker parts do owe to their Seniors and men of far greater knowledge though the Office be the same And the Nature of the Government being not Compulsive and Coercive but only upon the voluntary whose judgements approve and their wills consent its considerable how far even a Ruler of others may voluntarily consent and so oblige himself to be Ruled
acres of Land and not by the number of souls whereas they should have done as the Bee-hives do when they are ready to swarm so that the old hive cannot contain them all the swarm removes and seeks them another habitation and makes them a New hive of their own So when a Church grows big enough for two Churches one part should remove to another meeting place and they should become two Churches and the later be of the same sort as the former and as free and not become subject to the former as if men had right to be Rulers of others because they were Converted before them or because they dwell in a walled City and others in the Villages This Error therefore was no contrived or suddain thing but crept on by degrees as Countries were Converted and Churches enlarged we are agreed therefore de facto that it was otherwise in the Apostles daies and that soon after in some places it came to that pass as the Prelates would have it in some degree But whether the Apostles were willing of the change is the Question between us we deny it and expect their better proof And till they prove it we must needs take it for our duty to imitate that Government which themselves confess was only practised in Scripture times supposing this the safest way BUt yet though the proof lye on their part who affirm the Apostles to have had such Intentions that Pastors of single Congregations should afterward become the Pastors of many I shall ex super abundanti give them some Reasons for the Negative 1. And first we are most certain that the holyest Pastors of the Church had so much Pride and Ambition that might possibly make them guilty of such a mistake as tended to the â—ncrease of their own power and rule We find even the twelve Apostles contending in Christs own presence for the Primacy till he is put sharpâ—ly to rebuke them and tell them the Necessity of humility and teach them better the state of his Kingdom Paul met with many that contended against him for a preheminence and put him upon all those defences of the dignity of his Apostleshipâ— which we find him using Peter found it necessary to warn the Pastors that they should not Lord it over Gods Heritage And Iohn did meet with a Lording Diotrephes that loved to have the preheminence While they lay under the Cross the Bishops were aspiring and usurping authority over one another or else Victor of Rome had not presumed to Excommunicate the Asian Bishops for not conforming to his opinion What abundance of unworthy contentions did the Bishops of the first ages fill the Churches with and much about superiority who should be greatest what should be the priviledges of their several Seas c. Their pride no doubt was a great cause of their contention and those contentions necessitated the interposition of Emperors to reconcile them that could not agree of themselves If the Emperors called a Council to that end even the Council it self would fall to pieces and make all worse if the Magistrate did not moderate them Had not Constantine burnt the Nicene Schedules and done much to maintain an Union among them the success of that Council might have been such as would have been no great encouragement to succeeding ages to seek for more What bitter quarrels are there between the most eminent of all the Fathers and Bishops of the Church between Chrysostom and Epiphanius Chrysostom and Theophilus Alexandrinus Hierom and Iohn of Ierusalem Ierome and Ruffinus besides his quarrels with Chrysostom and Augustine I open not the concealed nakedness of the Saints but mention those publike doleful tragedies which made the Church an amazement to it self and a scorn to the Heathens that lived about them witness the well known censure of Ammianus Marcellinus when so many people shall be murdered at once in contention for a Bishoprick as were at the choice of Damasus ambition was too predominant The mentioning of the contentions of those most excellent Bishops and the first four general Councils makes Luther break out into so many admiring exclamations in his Treatise de Conciliis that ever such men should so ambitiously quarrel about toyes and trifles and childish things and that even to the disturbing of all the Churches and setting the Christian world on a flame Of the two Churches of Rome and Constantinople he saith Ita hae â—uae Ecclesiae ambitiose râ—â—atae sunt de re nihili vanissimis nugacissimis naeniis doneâ—â—â—ndem utraque horribiliter vastata deleta est pag. 175. This caused Nazianzen who complaineth so much himself of the â—dium or displeasure of his fellow Bishops to profess himself to be so affected that he would avoid all Assemblies of Bishops because he had never seen a good end of any Synod and which did not rather increase the evils than remove them and his reason is not as Bâ—llarmine feigneth only because they were all Arrians but because The desire of contending and of preheminency or principality and their emulation did overcome reason which Luther mentioning ib. pag. 225. wondereth that for these words he was not excommunicated as an arrant heretick Who knoweth not that knoweth any thing of Church history how the Church hath been torn in pieces in all ages except the first by the dissention of the Bishops till the Pope drew part of them to unite in him And who knoweth not that knoweth any thing of the present state of the Christian world into how many fractions it is broken at this day and almost all through the Division of these Guides If therefore we shall imagine that the Pastors of the Church could not be tainted with so much ambition as to inlarge their own Diocesses and gather the new Chuches under themselves when they should have formed them into the same order and freedom as were the first we shall shut our eyes against the most full experience of the Christian world especially when the change was made by degrees 2. The second Reason that perswadeth me to stick to the sole practised Government in Scripture times and not to alter it upon pretended Intentions of the Apostles is this Nothing that intimateth temerity or mutability is to be charged upon the Holy Ghost but to institute one frame or species of Church-government for Scripture times and to change it presently into another species to all succeeding ages doth intimate temerity or mutability or at least is so like it that therefore without good proof it is not to be charged on the Holy Ghost That they are two distinct species of Government is plain one is the Government of a Particular Congregation without any other Congregations or Elders under that Government the other is the Governing of many Elders and Churches by one supereminent Prelate and if these be not two differing sorts of Government then let the Prelates confess that the Government which we would continue is of the same
would not lay too great a stress upon any forms or modes which may be altered or diversified Let the Church have but such a Number of souls as may be consistent with the ends and so the essence of a particular Church that they may held personal holy communion and then I will not quarrel about the name of one or two Congregations nor whether they must needs all meet together for all ordinances nor the like Yea I think a full number so they be not so full or distant as to be uncapâ—ble of that communion are desireable for the strength and beauty of the Church and too smal Churches if it may be to be avoided So that all the premises being considered out difference appears to be but small in these matters between the Congregational and Presbyterian way among them that are moderate I shall not presume more particularly to enter into that debate which hath been so far proceeded in already by such Reverend men but shall return to the rest of the task before promised against the Diocesan Churches as the supposed subject of the Bishops Government As for Scripture times and the next succeeding together I shall before I look into other testimonies propound these two Arguments 1. From the Bishops office which was before mentioned If the office of a Bishop in those times was to do so much work as could not be done by him for a Church any greater than our Parishes then were the Churches of those times no greater then our Parishes But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the consequent The works are before mentioned Preaching Praying administring the Lords Supper visiting the sick reducing hereticks reproving censuring absolving to which they quickly added too much more of their own The impossibility of a faithful performance of this to more is so undenyable that I cannot suppose any other answer but this that they might ordain Presbyters to assist them in the work and so do much of it by others But 1. I before desired to see it proved by what authority they might do this 2. Their office and work are so inseparable that they cannot depute others to do their work their proper work without deputing them also to their office For what is an office but the state of one Obliged and Authorized to do such or such a work A Presbyter may not authorize another to preach as the Teacher of a Congregation and to administer the Sacraments without making him a Presbyter also Nor can a Bishop authorize any to do the work of a Bishop in whole or by halves without making him a Presbyter or half a Bishop And he is not authorized either to make new officers in the Church or to do his work by deputies or substitutes 2. I argue also from the Identity of that Church to whâ—ch the Bishops and Deacons were appointed for ministration It was not a Church of many stated Congregations or any larger than our Parishes for number of souls that the Deacons were made Ministers to therefore it was no other or bigger which the Bishops were set oveâ— The consequence is good because where ever Deacons are mentioned in Scripture or any Writer that I remember neer to Scripture times they are still mentioned with the Bishops or Presbyters as Ministers to the same Church with them as is apparent bâ—th in the seven chosen for the Church at Ierusalem and in Phil. 1.1 2. and in the Direction of Paul to Timothy for ordaining them And the Antecedent is proved from the nature of their work For they being to attend on the tables at the Love feasts and the Lords Supper and to look to the poor they could not do this for any greater number of people then we mention Whether they had those feasts in one house or many at once I determine not but for the number of people it was as much as a Deacon could do at the utmost to attend a thousand people I shall proceed a little further towards the times next following and first I shall take in my way the confession of one or two learned men that are for Prelacy Grotius in his Annotat. on 1 Tim. 5.17 saith Sed notandum est in una Vrbe magna sicut plures Synagogas ita plures fuisse Ecclesias id est conventus Christianorum Et cuique Ecclesiae fuisse suum praesidem qui populum alloqueretur Presbyteros ordinaret Alexandriae tantum eum fuisse morem ut unus esset in tota urbe praeses qui ad docendum Presbyteros per urbem distribueret docet nos Sozomenus 1.14 Epiphanius ubi de Ario agit dicitque Alexandriae nunquam duos fuisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 voce â—a sumpta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ita ut significat jus illud quod habebat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So that Grotius affirmeth that Bishops had not then so much as all the converted persons of a great City under their care but the Churches and Assemblies were the same and each Assembly had a Prelate and in the great Cities there were many of these Churches and Prelates and that only the City of Alexandria had the custom of having but one such Bishop in the whole City 2. Those learned men also must grant this cause who maintain that Peter and Paul were both of them Bishops of Rome at once there being two Churches one of the Circumcision under Peter the other of the uncircumcision under Paul and that one of them had Linus and the other Cletus for his Successor and that this Church was first united under Clemens and the like they say of two Churches also at Antioch and elswhere If this be so then there is no Law of God that Bishops should be numbred by Cities but more Bishops then one may be in one City and were even when Christians comparatively were a small part of them 3. Also Mr. Thorndike and others affirm that it was then the custome for the Bishops and Presbyters to sit in a semicircle and the Bishop highest in a Chair and the Deacons to stand behind them This he gathereth from the Apost Constitut. Ignatius Dionysius Arcop and the Jews Constitutions in his Apost form page 71. and Right of the Church c. p. 93.94 95. And if this were so it seems that Bishops Presbyters and Deacons were all the Officers of one such stated Congregation and had not many such Congregations under them For the Bishop could be but in one place at once and therefore this could be the custome but of one Church in his Diocess if he had many whereas it is made the form of the ordinary Christian Assemblies The same learned man Right of Church p. 65. saith that About Saint Cyprians time and not afâ—re he finds menâ—ion of setled Congregations in the Country By which it may be well conjectured what a small addition the Bishops had out of the Countreys to their City Chuâ—ches and how many Congregations they Governed in the Apostle
Vna enim est caro Domini nostri Iesu Christi unus illius sanguis qui pro nobis effusus est unus calix qui pro omnâ—bus nobiâ— distributus est unus panis qui omnibus fractus est unum altare omni Ecclesiae unus Episcopus cum presbyterorum Collegio Diaconis conservis meis Here it is manifest that the particular Church which in those dayes was governed by a Bishop Presbytery and Deacons was but one Congregation for every such Church had but one Altar Object But some Greek Copies leave out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Answ. 1. The corrupt vulgar translation might occasion the change of the text saith Bishop Vsher Annot. in loc page 40. intermedia illa ex interpretatione hâc excidisse videantur 2. The old translation of Bishop Vsher which leaves it out yet hath Vnum Altare unus Episcopus c. and the sence is â—he same if the other words were out 3. Ignatius hath the like in other places as we shall see anon which forbiddeth such quarrels here Object But saith the Learned and Godly Bishop Downame Def. li. 2. cap. 6. page 109. the word Altar being expounded for the Communion table is not likely aâ—d too much savoureth of Popery but by one Altar is meant Christ who sanctifieth all our Sacrifices and Oblations and maketh them acceptable to God as Ignatius expoundeth himself in hâ—s Epistle to the Magnesians All as one run together into the Temple of God unto one Iesus Christ as it were unto one Altar To this I answer that it is some confirmation to me that the words are so express that so learned a man hath no more to say by way of evasion For doubtless this is too gross and palpable to satisfie the judicious impartial reader 1. That the very text which he citeth of the Epistle to the Magnesians doth make fully against him I shall shew anon 2. That it is not Christ that is meant here by the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is evident 1. In that Christ his flesh and blood are before distinctly mentioned 2. In that the word is put in order among the external Ordinances 3. In that it is so usual with other ancient writers and Ignatius himself to use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sence as we now take it that it will be plain violence to imagine that it is Christ that was meant by it And for Popery there is no such matter of danger in using a word Metaphorically Otherwise we we must make the Ancients commonly to be friends to Popery for they ordinarily call the Lords Table and the place where it stood 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I say The Table and the Sacrarium or place of its standing for this seems plainly the meaning of Ignatius so saith Bishop Vsher Annot. in loc ubi sup Altare apud Patres mensam Dominicam passim denotat apud Ignatium Polycarpum Sacrarium quoque So H. Stephens Altarium Sacrarium See what Learned Mr. Thorndike himself in his Right of the Church c. page 116. saith to this purpose more largely where concerning Ignatius his use of the same word to the Ephesians he saith Where it is manifest that the Church is called a Sanctuary or place of sacrificing Mr. Mead in his Discourse of the name Altar page 14. sheweth that Ignatius by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 means the Lords Table and takes Videlius his concession as of a thing that could not be denyed In the Epistle of Ignatius or whoever else to Polycarp Bishop of Smyrna he saith Crebrius celebrantur conventus Synodique Nominatim omnes inquire Servos ancillas ne fastidias as Vairlenius translateth or as Bishop Vshers old Translation Saepe Congregationes fiâ—nt Ex nomine omnes quaere Servos ancillas ne despicias Whether this were Ignatius or not all 's one to me as long as I use it but historically to prove the matter of fact in those times But surely no man should marvail if I hence gather that great Polycarp was Bishop but of one Congregation when he must enquire or take notice of every one of his Congregation by name even as much as servants and maids I would every Parish Minister were so exactly acquainted with his flock Another passage there is in Ignatius to the same purpose Epist. ad Magnes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Omnes adunati ad Templum Dei concurrite sicut ad unum Altare sicut ad unum Iesum Christum as the vulgar translation Or as Vairlâ—nius Omnes velut unus quispiam in templum Dei concurriâ—â— velut ad utum Alnare ad unum Iesum Christum So the old Latine in Vsher to the same purpose And in the words before going he bids them Come all to one place for prayer Here is no room for Bishop Downams conceit that its Christ that 's meant by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For they are plainly put as distinct things as if he should say come all to one Altar as to one Christ. i. e because it is but one Christ that is there to be partaked of All this doth so evidently prove that in those dayes a Bishop with his Presbytery and Deacons had but one Congregation meeting at one Altar for Church Communion in the Eucharist that it caused Mr. Mead in his Discourse of Churches pag. 48 49 50. Cent. 2. to say as followeth having cited these words of Ignatius Loe here a Temple with an Altar in it whether the Magnesians are exhorted to gather themselves together to pray To come together in one place c. For it is to be observed that in these Primitive times they had but one Altar in a Church as a Symbole both that they worshipped but one God through one Mediator Iesus Christ and also of the Vnity the Church ought to have in it self Whence Ignatius not only here but also in his Epistle to the Philadelphians urgeth the unity of the Altar for a motive to the Congregation to agree together in one For unum Altare saiâ—h he omni Ecclesiae unus Episcopus cum Presbyterio Diaconis conservis meis This custome of one Altar is still retained by the Greek Church The contrary use is a transgression of the Latines not only Symbolically implying but really introducing a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Nay more then this it should seem that in those first times before Diocesses were divided into those lesser and subâ—rdinate Churches we caâ—l now Parishes and Presbyters assigned to them they had not only one Altar in one Church or Dominicum but one Altar to a Church taking Church for the company or Corporation of the faithfull united under one Bishop or Pastor and that was in the City or place where the Bishop had his See and Residence like as the Iews had but one Altar and Tempâ—e for the whole Nation united under one high Priest And yet as the Iews had their Synagogues so perhaps might they have more
undertake more fully to wipe off this reproach for the learned adversaries are tall Cedars in knowledge in comparison of many of us and if men of parts do not grapple with them herein they will easily carry the vote in many mens judgements for they judge that the greater Schollars by far certainly have the better in the contest Sir We beseech you that you would improve your acquaintance in Antiquity for our help in this case Not that we would engage you in wrangling with particular men by name who will not want words but however you would evidence it that our Ordination by Presbyters is not void and of no effect I have this reason ready to give for this request for besides what I had formerly heard I was lately with some of those not of the meanest influence who urged Episcopacy as of absolute necessity affirming that this order the Church of God ever observed and that it was doubtless of Apostolical institution being a thing of Catholick tradition and that 's the best standard to intepret Scripture by What then are we arrived at that have forsaken the whole Church herein Though I am little versed in the Ancients yet I tell them we acknowledge that soon after the Apostles times the name Bishop came up as distinct fâ—om the Presbyters but then I call for their proof that the Primitive Bishops had the power of jurisdiction over Presbyters or that to him only ordination was appropriated I tell them also that we have certain evidence that in some Churches these Bishops were made by Presbyters so was the custom in Alexandria and when did ever the Church judge them to be no Bishops or Ministers And also of Tertullians Praesident probati quique Seniores and of Cyprians Salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo and that doubtless if Cyprian be to be believed the Church was then ruled by the joint consent of its Pastors of whom one was indeed the President or Moderator who yet called himself compresbyter and the Presbyters sâ—atres not filios as it was of lâ—te This answer I have had from some of them that the Church in those times was much under the cloâ—d being persecuted and had not that liberty to settle Diocesan Episcopacy in that Glory which the Apostolical institution aimed at and that the Church was then what it could be and not what it would be Do you judge of its weight For my part I am most stumbled at the reading of Ignatius whom Dr. H. so strenuously dâ—fends and cannot tell how to evade that Testimony in the behalf of Episcopacy if it be indeed the testimony of the true Ignatius But methinks his phrase is much unlike either that of Clemens or of Cyprian in this case It s great pity that Dr. Bloudel wants his eyes and so we are hindred of enjoying of more of his labours in this point His Notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a very pretty on and it were well if we had fuller evidence added to that which he hath endeavoured after in his Preface to his Apology for Hierom. Or if your judgement about the power of every single Pastor were fully improved it would conduce much to the clearing of these controversies I could methinks be glad of the practice of those proposals which Bishop Usher hath made in a late printed sheet But these angry Brethren who now oppose us are of a higher strain But I run out too far and forget whom I am writing to Truly I am deeply sensible what mischief those seeds which are as yet but thin-sown as I may say may grow up to in time I know not how it is with yoâ— but with us I fear 〈◊〉 for one at least would be easiâ—y drawn to â—uch an opinion of us if the temptation were but somewhat stronger multitudes observing how câ—vil transactions have 〈◊〉 in a round begin also to think we shall also arive at our old Church-customs again now â—f thâ—se Episcopal 〈◊〉 judgement should but be dispersed moâ—e abroad how easily would it make these people think that we have dâ—luded them all this whiâ—â— and so will not regard us Alas that a sad thought is it if I should study and preach and pray for mens souls and yet be reâ—ected as one that had no chaâ—ge of them as a Mâ—nister laid on me for God We thank you for what you said in your Christian Concord and 〈◊〉 you would enlarge further on this Subject as you see convenient That the striplings in the Ministry may be furnished with arguments against our 〈…〉 such able hands as yours are I have doâ—e only I shall desire your pardon for my interrupting you in your other business and if I shall hereafter crave your assistance and direction iâ— some cases I pray you excuse me if uncivil and vouchsafe to let me hear from you for I am about to settle where the charge is great The Lord continue you 〈◊〉 us that you may be further an instrument of good I rest Ian. 8. 1657. Your Affectionate friend and weak Brother M. E. Assert Those who nullifie our present Ministry and Churches which have not the Prelatical Ordination and teach the people to do the like do incur the guilt of grievous sin CHAP. I. Sect. 1. FOR the making good this Assertion 1. I shall prove that they groundlesly deny our Ministry and Churches and 2. I shall shew thâ— greatness of their sin In preparation to the first I must 1. Take some notice of the true Nature of the Ministerial function and 2. Of the Nature and Reasons of Ordination Sect. 2. We are agreed ore tenus at least that the Power and Honour of the Ministry is for the Work and the Work for the Ends which are the revelation of the Gospel the application or conveyance of the benefits to men the right worshiping of God and right Governing of his Church to the saving of our selves and our people and the Glorifying and Pleasing God Sect. 3. So that A Minister of the Gospel is an Officer of Iesus Christ set apart or separated to preach the Gospel and thereby to convert men to Christianity and by Baptism to receive Disciples into his Church to congregate Disciples and to be the Teachers Overseers and Governours of the particular Churches and to go before them in publick worship and administer to them the special Ordinances of Christ according to the word of God that in the Communion of Saints the members may be edified preserved and be fruitful and obedient to Christ and the Societies well ordered beautified and strengthened and both Ministers and People saved and the Sanctifier Redeemer and the Father Glorified and Pleased in his People now and for ever Sect. 4. In this Definition of a Minister 1. It is supposed that he be competently qualified for these works For if the Matter be not so far Disposed as to be capable of the Form it will not be informed thereby There are some Qualifications necessary
among the Churches in Europe on their grounds hath any proof and therefore must not pretend to the Ministry Churches or Ordinances but we must all turn Seekers to day and Infidels to morrow by this device Sect. 30. Argument 8. The Ministry of the Priests and Levities before the incarnation of Christ and in his time was not Null though they wanted as much or more then such a succession of right Ordination therefore it is so still with the Gospel Ministery The Antecedent I shall more fully manifest neerer to the end Only now observe that when Abiathar was put out by Solomâ—n and when such as were not of the line or Genealogie of the Priests were put as polluted persons from the Priesthood Neh. 7.64 65. and 13 29 30. Ezra 2.62 yet were not any of their administrations taken to have been Null Sect. 31. Argument 9. If the Ministration or Governing acts of Vsurping Princes may be Valid and there need no proof of an uninterrupted succession to prove the validity then is it so also in the Ministry But the Antecedent is certain therefore c. The Validity of the consequence from the parity of Reason I shall manifest anon Sect. 32. Argument 10 If an uninterrupted Succession of Canonical or true Ordination be Necessary to the Being of the Church Ministry and Ordinances then Rome and England have lost their Ministry Churches and Ordinances But the Consequent will be denyed by the adversaries therefore so also must the Antecedent if they regard their standing Sect. 33. Though this be the Argument that I have the greatest advantage to press the adversary with yet because I have made it good already in two or three other writings in my Key for Catholicks and my Safe Religion and Christian Concord I shall say but little of it now But briefly this may suffice 1. For the Church of Rome if either Heresie Infidelity Sodomie Adultery Murder Simony violent intrusion ignorance impiety want of due election or of due consecration or plurality of Popes at once can prove an interruption of their succession I have shewed them already where it s proved But if none of these prove it we are safe our selves Sect. 34 But Grotius in Discus Apolog. Rivet pleads for them that if any intercision have been made at Rome it hath been made up from other Churches Answ. 1. That is not proved but nakedly affirmed 2. Nor will it serve the Papists turn that must have all Churches hold from Rome and her succession and Rome from none nor to be patcht up from their succession 3. De facto the contrary is certain For 1. Those other held their Ministry as from the universal Headship of the Pope and therefore had themselves their interruptions in the former interruptions of Rome as being but her members and therefore were not capable themselves of repairing of her breaches 2. The successors of the illegitimate Popes such as deposed Eugenius c. and men as bad as they have continued the succession And tâ—e Bishops that were consecrated by power received from the illegitimate Popes were the only persons that were the repairers of the breach And yet the Pope will hardly yield that he receiveth his power from any of these 3 There have been greater defects in the succession then this of Consecration even of due Election Capacity yea of an office it self which Christ will own The Vicechristship of the Pope is no office of Christs planting Sect. 35. And 2 For the English Prelates as they are unable to prove their uninterrupted succession so the interruption is proved in that they derived and held their Power from the Vicechrist of Rome and that qua talis for so many ages This was their own profession and all that they did was as his Ministers by his Authority which was none Sect. 36. Object But this nulled not the true Authority which they received from the Pope or Prelates as Prelates Answ. The Pope was uncapable of giving them Authority and whether the Prelates as such were so too we shall enquire anon And though I grant that where the person was fit there was yet a Ministry Valid to the Church and perhaps to themselves in the main yet that is because Canonical Ordination is not of Necessity to the Being of the Ministry but by other means they might be then Ministers though this corruption was conjunct that they received their Power imaginarily from Râ—me but that the said Canonical succession was interrupted by this Papal tenure and many a delinquency is nevertheless sure and sufficient to inforce the Argument as to them that now are our adversaries But so much shall suffice for the Non-necessity of this succession of a true and Regular Ordination CHAP. V. Ordination by such as the English Prelates not Necessary to the Being of the Ministry Sect. 1. I Have made this work unnecessary by the two former Chapters For if no Ordination be of Necessity to the Being of the Ministry nor an uninterrupted Succession Necessary then doubtless an Ordination by these Prelates in Specie is not Necessary at present or as to succession But yet ex abundati I add Sect. 2. Argument 1. Ad hominem I may well argue from the Concession of the English Prelates themselves and their most zealous adherents And their judgements were 1. That such a succession as aforesaid of right Ordination was not of Necessity And for this they that write against the Papists do commonly and confidently dispute Sect. 3. And 2. They maintained that the Protestant Churches that had no Bishops were true Churches and their Ministers true Ministers and so of their administrations This was so common with them that I do not think a dissenting vote can be found from the first Reformation till about the preparations for the Spanish match or little before Sect. 4. I have in my Christian Concord cited at large the words of many and the places of the writings of more as 1. Dr. Field 2. Bishop Downam 3. Bishop Iewel 4. Saravia 5. Bishop Alley 6. Bishop Pilkinton 7. Bishop Bridges 8. Bishop Bilson 9. Alexander Nowel 10. Grotius their friend then 11 Mr. Chysenhal 12. The Lord Digby 13. Bishop Davenant 14. Bishop Prideaux 15. Bishop Andrews 16. Chillingworth 17. To which I now add Bishop Bromâ—all of Schism 18. Dr. Fern 19. Dr. Steward in his answer to Fountains letter these of the later or present sort 20. And Bishop Vsher whose judgement of it is lately published by Dr. Bernard at his own desire 21. And Mr. Mason in a Book of of purpose for justification of the Reformed Churches hath largely pleaded this cause 22. And Dr. Bernard saith that Dr. Overall was judged not only to consent to that Book but to have a hand in it 23. And no wonder when even Bancroft himself the violentest of all the enemies of them called Puritans in those times is said by Spotswood there recited by Dr. Bernard to be of the same mind and to give it
true Churches or have true Ministers But the Consequent is false therefore so is the Antecedent Of this I shall say more anon Sect. 33. If none of the Protestants Churches that have not such Bishops are true Churches and have not a true Ministry then neither Roman Greek Armenian Aethiopian c. or almost any through the world are true Churches For they are defective in some greater matters and chargeable with greater errors then these But the Consequent is false therefore so is the Antecedent He that denyeth all these to be true Churches denyeth the Catholick Church And he that denyeth the Catholick Church is next to the denying of Christ. Sect. 34. Having thus proved that there is no necessity of Ordination by such as the English Prelates I have withall proved that men are not therefore ever the less Ministers because they have not their Ordination nor our Churches or Ordinances ever the more to be disowned Sect. 35. Yet where there is no other Ordination to be had it may be a duty to submit to theirs Not as they are Episcopi exortes as even Grotius calls them or of this species but as they are Pastors of the Church notwithstanding such superfluities and usurpations Sect. 36. It is not the duty therefore but the sin of any man that was Ordained by such Prelates to a lawful office to disclaim and renounce that Ordination as some do For it is not every irregularity that nullifieth it There may be many modal circumstantials or accidental miscarriages that may not Null the the substance of the Ordination it self Sect. 37. Yet it must be concluded that we may not be wilfully guilty of any sin in the modes or accidents But that may be a sin in the Ordainer which the Ordained may not be guilty of as doing nothing that signifieth an approbation of it but perhaps disowning it Sect. 38. If we have been guilty of submitting to a corrupt ordination as to the accidents we must disown and repent of the sinfull mode and accidents though not of the Ordination it self in substance As we must bewail the errours and infirmities of our preaching prayer and other holy duties without renouncing the duty it self which is of God and to be owned Sect. 39. As to the Question of some Whether a man may be twice Ordained in case he suspect his first Ordination I answer 1. You must distinguish between a General Ordination to the office of the Ministry and a special Ordination to a particular Church As the licensing of a Physitian and the setling him over a City or Hospital The first may be done but once in case it be truely done but the second may be done as oft as we remove to particular Churches Though yet both may be done at once at our first Ordination they are still two things Even as Baptizing a man into Member-ship of the universal Church and taking him into a particular Church It s not like that the separation and Imposition of hands on Paul and Barnabas Act. 13.2 3. was to their first Apostleship Sect. 40. If a man have weighty reasons to doubt of his first Ordination his safest way is to renew it as is usuall in Baptim with a Si non Baptizatus es Baptizo te If thou be not Ordained I Ordain thee This can have no danger in such a case CHAP. VI. Ordination at this time by English Prelates especially is unnecessary Sect. 1. BEsides what is said against the Necessity of such Prelatical Ordination in it self I conceive that more may be said against it as things now stand from several accidental reasons which make it not only unnecessary but sinful to the most Sect. 2 As 1. The Obligation that was upon us from the Law of the Land is taken off which with the Prelates themselves is no small argument when it was for them So that we are no further now obliged then they can prove us so from Scripâ—uâ—e Evidence and how little that is I have shewed before The English Prelâ—cy is taken down by the Law of the Land we are left at Liberty â—rom humane Obligations at least Sect. 3. If any man say that it is an unlawful power that hath made those Laws by which Prelaâ—ical Government is taken down I aâ—swer 1. It is such a Power as they obey themselves and therefore they may permit others to obey it They hold their estateâ— and lives under it and are protected and ruled by it and profeâ—s submission and obedience for the generality of them And when another Species of Government was up that commanded 〈◊〉 to â—ake an engagement to be true to the Government as 〈◊〉 without a King and House of Lords when our 〈◊〉 refused that Engagement as unlawful the generality of the contrary minded took it even all that I was acquainted with that were put upon it So that I may take it for granted that they judge the power which they obey themselves to be obeyed by others Sect. 4. And 2. I would be glad to hear from them any regardable proof that those that Governed when Paul wrote the 13th Chapter to the Romans had any better Title to their Government Let them review their own late writings on that subject and they may have arguments enough that are Valid ad hominem at least Sect. 5. The Laws of the Land do make the Acts even of an Usurper Valid while he is in possession and make it treason to them that do against him that which is treason if it were against a lawfull Prince and therefore if we granted them what they here affirm it would be no advantage to their cause Subjects must look at the present Governours with peaceable subjection For if they be left to try their Princes titles and suspend obedience upon their single opinions you know what will follow Sect. 6. And 3. It will be hard to prove that many a Prince that hath ruled in England had a better Title It s known that many of their Titles were naught And yet their Lawes are Valid still or were so to Posterity And how can they convey a better title to their Heirs then they had themselves If you say that the Consent of the People gave them a better I must return that if that will serve the people in Parliaments more then one and in their real subjection have consented to this But this is a subject that requireth much more to be said of it or nothing at all and therefore I shall take up here with this little which he present cause makes necessary Sect. 7. And I may add a further Reason that we are not only disobliged by the Laws from former Prelacy but we are obliged against it The Rulers have deposed and forbidden it And in lawful things it is a duty to obey our Governours And that the demolishing of the Prelacy is a lawful thing in it self considered For I meddle not with the manner at this time I have said enough before to
If the Ordination of Papist Bishops be valid much more is the Ordination of English Preâ—byters so but the Antecedent is true in the judgement of those against whom we dispute therefore the Consequent must be granted by them on that supposition Sect. 33. The reason of the Consequence is because the Popish Bishops are more unlike to the Scripture Bishops and more uâ—capable of ordaining then the Presbyters of the Reformed Churches are For 1. The Papist Prelates profess to receive their Power from a Vice-christ at least quoad exercitium media conserendi which Protestant Presbyters do not 2. The Papist Bishops profess themselves Pastors of a new Catholick Church which is headed by the Papacy as an essential part and which Christ will not own as such But so do not the Protestant Presbyters 3. The Papist Prelates Ordain men to the false Office of turning Bread into the Body of Christ by the way of Transubstantiation in their Consecration and offering it as a Sacrifice for the quick and dead and delivering this as the very Body of Christ and not Bread to the Communicants and perswading them that it is such and holding and carrying it to be Worshipped by them with Divine Worship and the like But the Protestant Presbyters are Ordained and do Ordain others to that true Office of a Presbyter or Pastor or Bishop which Christ hath instituted 4. The Papist Prelates have abundance of false doctrines and practices in Worship which the Protestant Presbyters have not 5. And they have no more to shew for a Power of Ordination then our Presbyters have so that these with many the like considerations will prove that if the Papists Ordination be Valid that of the Protestant Churches by Presbyters is so much more And doubtless they that plead for a succession from the Papist Prelates do hold their Ordination Valid Sect. 34. Argument 13. If the Protestant Churches that have no Prelates be true Churches in a Political sense and the Ordinances among them valid and to be owned and received then are the Pastors of those Churches true Pastors though they have no Ordination but by Presbyters But the Antecedent is true therefore so is the Consequent The reason of the Consequence is clear and granted by them that we have now to do with Because the Pastors are essential to the Church as Political and the said Ordinances of Publike worship as the Lords Supper and Government cannot be allowable without them nor such as the people should submit to or receive This therefore we may take as granted Sect. 35. And for the Minor that the Protestant Churches are true Churches that have no Prelates 1. There are so few of them that have Prelates that he that will unchurch all the rest I suppose when he playes his game above board would take it for an injury to be accounted a Protestant himself 2. If the Churches of the West called Papists and the Churches of Africa Asia and America be true Churches of Christ and have true administrations then much more confidently may we affirm that the Protestants are so too But the Antecedent is maintained by those that we now dispute against excepting the Papists who yet maintain it as of their own Church therefore c. Sect. 36. The reason of the Consequence is because the Papists Greeks Armenians Georgians Syrians Aegyptians Abasines c. have much more to be said against them then we have And if the lesser or supposed imperfection of the Protestant Churches do unchurch them for wanting Prelates then the many great and real defects of the other Churches will unchurch them much more Especially this holds as to the Church of Rome which yet is taken by the Dissenters to be a true Church and by some of them at least denyed to be the seat of Antichrist Their Vicechrist and usurping head and all the Ministry that hold by him afford us other kind of Arguments against their Church then want of Prelates can afford them or others against our Churches Sect 37. And if any will deny the Antecedent so far as to unchurch all the Churches in the world that are more defective then the Protestants he will blot out of his Creed the Article of the Catholick Church and being a Seeker or next one to day is like to be an Infidel ere long as I shall further shew when I speak of the sinfulness of such Sect. 38. Argument 14. If the Administrations of a Usurping Presbyter to an innocent people are Valid and not Nullities then the Ordination of an Usurping Ordainer to an Innocent expectant is Valid and consequently the Ordination of Presbyters is Valid if they were Usurpers as they are unjustly said to be But the administrations of usurping Presbyters to an Innocent people are Valid therefore c. Sect. 39. The Antecedent is granted by Bellarmine himself in the place before cited who saith that no more is required to oblige the people to obey him and submit then that he be reputed a Pastor And all must say so 1. That will not rob the Innocent of the Benefit of Gods Ordinances because of an usurpers fault 2. And that will not leave the people almost commonly in an utter uncertainty whom they should take for a Pastor and obey and when the Ordinances are Valid for their good Sect. 40. The Consequence is made good by the Parity of Reason that is in the two cases If usurpation cause not a Nullity invalidity or unprofitableness in one case to the innocent receiver no nor make it his sin to receive no more will it in the other For there is no Reason for any such difference Nay iâ— it be a duty to submit to an unknown usurper in several cases in receiving the Sacraments hearing praying c. so is it a duty in such cases to receive Ordination Sect. 41. Object But the usurping Presbyter doth nothing but what belongeth to the office of a Presbyter but the usurping Ordainer doth that which belongs not to the office of a Presbyter and therefore his action is a Nullity as being extra proprium forum Sect. 42. Answ. 1. It is proved before to belong to the office of a Presbyter to Ordain 2. But suppose it were not yet the objection is vain because it is the office of a Bishop that the Ordaining Presbyter doth pretend to and which you imagine that he doth usurp They say that subject Presbyters quoad ordinem vel Officium are no creatures of Gods appointment and therefore they renounce that Office and claim that office which you call Episcopacy and hath the Power of Ordination The quarrel between us is not about meer Bishops such as Dr. H. H. describeth as aforesaid These are not denyed but the Parish Ministers profess themselves such Bishops But it is about the other sort of Presbyters subject to Bishops that the quarrel is For they say that the Church should have none such and Dr. H. H. saith there is no Evidence that any such
great reluctancy obey my Conscience in the performance of this task but my intent is if it be the will of God to give success so far to these endeavours 1. To humble them for their great and hainous sin and save them from it 2. And to save the Church from the divisions and disturbances that is already caused by them and their opinion 3. However to discharge my Conscience and tell them plainly what frightneth me from their way Sect. 2. And 1. It seems to me upon the grounds before expressed that those men that would Nullifie all the Protestant Ministry Churches and administrations that have not Prelates are guilty of schism and are plain Separatists They depart from truly Catholick principles That man hath not the just Principles and Spirit of a Catholick that can on such a pretence as this degrade or nullifie so many Learned Godly Ministers and unchurch so many excellent Churches of Christ they make a plain Schism and separate from us on as weak grounds as the ancient Separatists did whom yet they account an odious generation And the writings of Paget Ball Bradshaw Hildersham Bernard and the rest that defend our Ministry and Churches against the old Separatists will serve in the main to defend them against these new ones which therefore I refer the Reader to peruse Many of the same Arguments are as forcible against this adversary Sect. 3. 2. And by this means they condemn themselves that have spoken so much against the Separatists calling them Brownists Schismaticks and the like and now take up the cause in the name that in them they so condemned Will they turn Schismaticks that have spoken against Schismaticks so much Sect. 4. 3. By this means also they exceedingly wrong the Lord Jesus Christ by seeking to rob him of his inheritance by telling him that his Churches are none of his Churches and his Ministers are none of his Ministers and his Ordinances are not his Ordinances indeed Let them first prove that Christ hath renounced these Ministers or unchurched or denied these Churches or given them a bill of divorce and then let them speak their pleasure But till then they were best take heed what they do lest they have not the thanks from Christ which they expect Sect. 5. 4. They go against the plain commands of Christ and examples of his servants Christ himself bid concerning such as cast out Devils in his name but followed him not Forbid him not for there is no man that shall do a Miracle in my name that can lightly speak evil of me for he that is not against us is on our part Mark 9.37 38 39. He liked not their humour that would have the substance of so good a work forbidden for want of a due circumstance mode or accident He commandeth us to Pray the Lord of the Harvest to send Labourers into his Harvest because the Harvest is great and the Labourers are few And these men would have multitudes of Labourers thrust out in the Necessity of the Churches Paul rejoyced that Christ was Preached even by them that did it in strife and envy thinking to add affliction to his bonds But these men would silence them that preach in sincere compassion of mens souls Moses would not forbid Edlad and Medad prophecying but wisht that all the Lords people were Prophets While men do good and not harm or more good then harm in the Church I should see very good grounds yea and Necessity for it before I should silence them or be guilty of silencing them Sect. 6. 5. They manifest a great deal of selfishness and pride that dare thus consent to the injury of Christ and the Church and souls of men because they may not bear that Rule which is according to their principles and spirits Self-denial would do much to cure this Sect. 7. 6. And yet they do as self-seekers commonly do even seek after misery and destruction to themselves While they look its like at the honour and forget the work they plead for such a load and burden as is enough to break the backs of many even for the doing of a work that is so far beyond their strength that its a meer impossiblity How can one man do the works which Scripture layeth on a Bishop for a hundred or two hundred Churches and for thousands that he never sees or hears of Sect. 8. 7. And above all I admire how the heart of a considerate Christian can be guilty of so great cruelty to the souls of men as these men would be if they had their will in the practice of their principles What if all the Churches that have no Prelates were unchurched the Ministers cast out as no true Ministers or the people all prevailed with to forsake them what would be done for the thousands of the poor ignorant careless souls that are among us when all that all of us can do is too little what would be done if so many and such were laid aside How many thousands were like to be damned for want of the means that according to the ordinary way of God might have procured their conversion and Salvation Sect. 9. If they say that others as good as they should possess the places I answer they speak not to men of another world but to their neighbours that well know that there are few to be had of tolerable worth to possess one place of very many if all that they oppose were cast out or forsaken Do we not know who and what men they are that you have to supply the room with Sect. 10. If they say that more obedient men would soon spring up or many of these would change their minds if they were forced to it I answer 1. So many would be unchanged as would be a greater loss to the Church if it were deprived of them then ever Prelacy was like to repair 2. And what should become of poor souls the while your young ones are a training up 3. And in all ages after the Church must lose all those that should dissent from your opinion Sect. 11. If you say that It is not your desire to silence all these Preachers that you disown I answer How can that stand with your doctrine or your practice Your Doctrine is that they are Lay-men and no true Ministers nor to be heard and submitted to as Ministers nor Sacraments to be received from them And would you not have them then cast out 2. Your practice is to disswade the people especially the Gentry that are neer you to separate and disown them accordingly and it is done in many places And would you not cast them out whom you would have forsaken Sect. 12. If you say It is your desire that they should forsake their error and obey you and so be continued and not cast out I answer 1. But that is not in your power to accomplish nor have you reason to expect it They are willing to know the mind of God as well as
But 2. If such an Office can be proved I despair of seeing it proved from Scripture that they have authority to Ordain 3. And how can they have Authority when most of them have not Ability And I think it is supposed that they have not Ability to Preach in them that deny them Authority and if they want Ability to Preach it s two to one but they want Ability to Try and Approve of Preachers 4. And how come they to have Power to Ordain others that are not Ordained themselves but are admitted upon bare Election 5. And this course would prostitute the Churches to unworthy men as aforesaid Sect. 45. And 4. It is not a contemptible Consideration that the chief Pastor of every particular Church hath ever since the second Century at least been Ordained by the Pastors of other Churches And how it was before we have but very defective Evidence except so much as is left us in the Holy Scriptures of which we have spoke before Sect 46. And 5. The Church of Christ is a Chain of many links a Society united in Christ the Head consisting as a Republike of many Corporations or as an Acâ—demy of many Colledges and a greater Union and Communion is requisite among them then among the parts of any other Society in the world And therefore seeing it is the duty of Neighbour Pastors and Churches according to their Capacity to hold Communion with that particular Church and its Pastors it seems reasonable that they have some antecedent Cognisance and Approbation of the persons that they are to hold Communion with Sect. 47. And 6. It is considerable also that whoever is according to Christs institution Ordained a Minister of a particular Church is withall if not before Ordained a Minister simply that is one that may as a separated Messenger of Christ both preach for the Conversion of those without and gather Churches where there are none and pro tempore do the Office of a Minister to any part of the Catholike Church where he cometh and hath a Call And therefore as he is simply a Minister and the Unconverted world or the Universal Church are the Objects of his Ministry the Pastors or Members of that particular Church where he is settled have no more to do in Ordaining him then any other As a Corporation may choose their own Physitian Schoolmaster c. but cannot do any more then other men in Licensing a man to be in general a Physitian Schoolmaster c. So may a Church choose who shall be their Teacher but not who shall be simply a Teacher or Minister of Christ any more then an other Church may do that 's further from him Sect. 48. And 7. It is also considerable that it is the safest and most satisfactory way to the Church and to the Minister himself to have the Approbation of many And it may leave more scruple concerning our Call when one or two or a particular Church only do Approve us Sect. 49. And 8. It is granted in their writings by those that are for Ordination by a particular Church only that the Concurrence of more is Lawful and if Lawful I leave it to Consideration whether all the forementioned accidents make it not so far convenient as to be ordinarily a plain duty and to be preferred where it may be had Sect. 50. Yet do I not plead for Ordination by Neighbour Pastoâ—â— as from a Governing Authority over that particular Church but as from an interest in the Church Universal and all its Officers within their reach and from an interest of Communion with Neighbour Churches Sect. 51. And it is observable in Scripture that the Itinerant Ministers that were fixed and appropriated to no particular Church for continuance such as the Apostles and Evangelists were and Titus Timothy and such others had a Principal hand in the work of Ordination whereever they came It was they that Ordained Elders in every City in every Church Sect. 52. Prop. 3. If any shall cull out two or three or more of the weakest injudicious facile Ministers and procure them to Ordain him his course is irregular and his call unsatisfactory though the formal part be obtained to the full For it is not for meer formality but to satsfie the person called and the Church and to secure the Ministry and sacred works and souls of men from injury by Usurpers that God hath appointed the way of Ordination And therefore it is fraud and not obedience for any man so to use it as to cheat himsef and the Church with a formality and frustrate the Ordinance and miss its ends Sect. 53. Prop. 4. If any man avoiding the Orthodox and Unanimous Ministry shall apply himself for Ordination to some divided schismatical or heretical persons that will Approve him and Ordain him when the others would reject him this also as the former is fraud and self-deceit and not obedience upon the last mentioned grounds It is the basest treacherous kind of sinning to turn Gods Ordinances against himself and to sin under the shelter and pretence of an institution By using the means in opposition to its end they make it no means and use it not as a means at all Though Pastors must Ordain yet is it not all kind of Pastors Ordination that should satisfie an honest meaning man but that which hath the qualifications suited to the Rule and end Sect. 54. In such cases of unjust entrance if the People sinfully comply and the man have possession it may be the duty of some particular persons that cannot help it having done their own parts in disowning it to submit and not therefore to separate from the Church except in desperate extraordinary cases not now to be enumerated And all the administrations of such a man shall be not only Valid to the innocent but without any scruple of conscience may be used and received with expectation of a promised blessing Sect. 55. But yet quoad debitum it is the Churches duty except in Cases of Necessity to disown such intruders and to suspect and suspend obedience to those that indirectly enter by a few ignorant or schismatical Ordainers refusing the tryal of the unanimous abler Orthodox Ministry till they have either perswaded the man to procure their Approbation or have themselves sought the Judgement of the said United Ministers concerning him And seeing all the Churches of Christ should be linkt and jointed together and hold communion and correspondency according to their capacities the Members of a particular Church are bound in reason and to those ends to advise in such suspicious cases with neighbour Churches and not to receive a Pastor that comes in by way of Discord or that neglecteth or refuseth the concordant way For he that entreth in a divisive way is like to govern them accordingly and still to shun the Communion of the Brethren Sect. 56. This Cyprian fully shews in the fore-mentioned Ep. 68. p 201. perswading the people to shun the
people may do good to thousands even to many Countries and more then multitudeâ— of others could do And God doth not set up such lights to put under a bushell nor warrant any man to hide his talents nor doth he bestow extraordinary gifts for ordinary sevice only but would have them used to the utmost advantage of his cause and for the greatest good of souls § 15. 4. And it is not the taking up of another calling or Species of Ministerial Office For the Ministry is one office distinct from that inferiour sort of Ministry of Deacons and containeth the power and obligation of doing all this when we have particular Cals It is but the exercise of the same office which we had before We do but lay out our selves more in some parts or acts of that office then more retired Pastors do § 16. And 5. It belongeth to the Magistrates to take care of the Church and the right exercise of the gifts of their subject Ministers and therefore if they command one man more labour then another even the Planting or Visiting of Churches it is our Duty to obey them § 17. More particularly 1. That a fixed Pastor may preach abroad among the unconverted I hope none will deny It was the ancient custom of the fixed Bishops besides the feeding of their flocks to labour the Conversion of all the Countries about them that were unconverted The example of Gregory of Neâ—cesarea may suffice who found but seventeen Christians in the City but converted not only all that City except seventeen but also most of the Countries about and planted Churches and ordained them Bishops And so have abundance others done to the increase of the Church § 18. And 2. That fixed Bishops may congregate new Churches where there are none of such as they or others do convert is in the foresaid constant practice of the Pastors of the ancient Churches put past doubt But so as that they ought not to Congregate those Churches to themselves and make themselves the Bishops or Archbishops of them when they have a special charge already but only settle them under Bishops of their own And this is but by directing them in their duties and trying the person and investing him that is to be their Pastor Whether one or more must do this work I have spoken already in the former Disputation § 19. 3. And that such as thus convert a people or Congregate them may according to the fore-mentioned Rules Ordain them Pastors by the peoples suffrages or Consent is also sufficiently proved in that foregoing disputation and therefore may be here past by § 20. 4. And that such may take care of all the Churches within their reach so far as to do them what good they can is plain in the Lâ—w of Nature that requireth it and in the general commands of the Gospel seconding the Law of Nature while we have time we must do good to all men Especially to the houshold of faith And its plain in the Nature of the Catholick Church and of its members and in the nature of the work of Grace upon the soul. We are taught of God to love one another and the End of the Catholick Society is as of all Societies the common good and the Glory of God and the Nature of true members is to have the same care one for another that so there may be no schism in the body and that they all suffer and rejoice with one another in their hurts and in their welfare 1 Cor. 12.25 26. It is therefore lawfull for Pastors to improve their talents upon these common grounds § 21. 5. That such settled Pastors may Teach or Preach to one another is a thing not doubted of among us For we commonly practice it at Lectures and other meetings of Ministers as formerly was usual at visitations and Convocations And if it be lawful to teach Ministers then also to do those lesser things before and after mentioned Yet do we not preach to one another as Rulers over our Brethren but as Ministers of Christ and Helpers of them in the work of grace As when one Physitian healeth another he doth it as a Physitian helping and advising a Brother in necessity but when he cureth one of his Hospital he doth it as a Physitian performing his trust to one of his charge So when a Pastor preacheth to Pastors he doth it not as a private man but as a Pastor obliged to help his Brethren But when he preacheth to his People he doth it as one that hath the charge of their souls and is their guide to life everlasting § 22. 6. And that Pastors may exercise acts of Discipline and administer the Sacraments to other Congregations upon a sufficient Call is evident from what is said already If they may Preach to the Pastors themselves they may help to Rule the flock For as is said they cease not their Relation to the Church of Christ in general by being engaged to one Church in particular If general Ministers such as Apostles Evangelists c. might administer the Sacraments where they came in Churches that were not any of their special charge above others then may other Ministers of Christ do it upon a sufficient Invitation though the Congregation be none of their special charge And in so doing they act not as private men nor yet as the stated Pastors of that flock but as Pastors Assistant to the stated Pastors and Ruling pro tempore the people under them in that Assisting way Even as a Physitian helpeth another in his Hospital when he is desired and the neither as a Private Ordinary man nor as Superiour to the Physitian of the Hospital nor as the stated Physitian of it himself but as the temporary assistant Physitian of it Or as a Schoolmaster helpeth another in his School for a few dayes in Necessity as his temporary assistant § 23. 7. And upon the same grounds it will follow that one Church or Pastor on just occasion may avoid Communion with another and declare that they so resolve to do and this without usurping any Jurisdiction over them it being not the casting out or Excommunicating of a member of our charge as the Rulers of that Church but the obeying of a plain command of the Holy Ghost which requireth us to Avoid such and have no company or Communion with them and with such no not to eat And therefore it is a fond Argumentation of the Papists that would conclude their Pope to be Head and Governour as far as they find he ever did excommunicate § 24. He that doubteth of any of this must not first enquire Whether a Minister have so much Power but first Whether he may be obliged to so much work and suffering as his duty And then he shall find that if there were no special examples or commands yet the general commands which require us to do good while we have time to all to be the servants of all and seek
do more hurt by breaking the Churches peace then they do good by converting souls But who was it that laid these snares in their way Who laid the Churches peace upon your inventions Had not the Church a sure Rule and an happy order and unity and peace before your Common prayer Book or Ceremonies were born Why must the Church have no peace but upon such terms Who made this Necessity that all men must be taken for intolerable schismaticks that dare not stint themselves in the publick worship by your impositions Will you not be confounded before God when these Questions must be answered The Church might have kept both Peace and her Pastors if you had let all alone as the Apostles left it and had not turned the forms of your Devotions to be a snare for others 9. And it is great unmercifulness to the Souls of particular men when you will drive them into such snares and câ—mpell them to go against their consciences in indifferent things what ever is not of faith is sin And whether they believe it good or bad you will compell them to practise all that you impose Have you not Consciences your selves Do you not know what it is for a man to be driven against his Conscience If not you are no Christians and then no wonder if you want the Charity and compassion of Christians and so easily for nothing abuse and injure the Christian cause 10. And in thus doing you deal unjustly and do not as you would be done by You would have Liberty your selves now to use a Liturgy And why should not others have Liberty to disuse it Either you take it for a thing Necessary in it self or for Indifferent If as Necessary then you are so much the more arrogant and injurious to the Churches and your usurpation is the more intolerable and you do much to Justifie them that deprive you of your own liberty For I know no Liberty that you should have to make universal Laws for the Church or to make new duties by your own meer wills or turn Indifferent things into Necessary and so to multiply our work and burden and danger and to silence suspend or excommunicate all that dare not submit to your usurped Dominion But if you take it for a thing in it self Indifferent whether we pray in a Form of prescribed words or not then as we are content that you have your Liberty on one part you have as just cause to allow us our liberty on the other and to do as you would be done by 11. And by these Impositions you set up a New Office or Power in the Church Consisting of a New Legislation and a Government of the Church by such new humane Laws We know no Law-giver but 1. Christ as to universal Laws of standing necessity to the Churches in the matters of Salvation And 2. Magistrates to make by-laws under Christ for a just determination of those mutable circumstances that ought to be determined by humane Prudence and 3. The Ministers or Pastors of particular Churches to direct and guide the people as there is cause As for Bishops or Councils we know of no Legislative Power that they have over their Brethren though Agreements they may make which may be obligatory 1. by consent as other contracts 2. and in order to unity where the case requireth such Agreements But to set up a New sort of Jurisdiction in the Church by Legislation to make Forms and Ceremonies obligatory and by Executions to punish Pastors that will not practise them is a dangerous device 12. Lastly by this means you will harden the Papists that by their Inventions and Impositions have divided the Church and been guilty of so much usurpation and tyrannie For how can we condemn that in them that is practised by our selves And though in number of Inventions and Impositions they exceed yet it is not well to concur with them in the kind of unnecessary Impositions and so far to Justifie them in their injury to the Church If none of these or other Reasons will alloy the Imperious distemper of the Proud but they must needs by a usurped Legislation be making Indifferent things become necessary to others and domineer over mens Consciences and the Church of God we must leave them to him that being the Lord and Lawgiver of the Church is Jealous of his Prerogative and abhorreth Idols and will not give his glory to another and that delighteth to pull down the Proud and humble them that exalt themselves But yet how far an Agreement or voluntary Consent of the Churches is desirable as to a Liturgy I shall shew more anon Prop. 7. THE safest way of composing a stinted Liturgie is to take it all or as much as may be for words as well as matter out of the Holy Scriptures Reas. 1. This way is least lyable to scruple because all are satisfied of the infallible Truth of Scripture and the fitness of its expressions that are not like to be satisfied with mans And it is a laudable disposition in the Creature to prefer the words of God before all other and therefore not to be discouraged in any Reas. 2. This way tends most to the peace of the Church All will unite in the words of God that will not unite in the forms and words of men If they understand not a word of God yet knowing it to be true they will not quarrel with it but submit But if they understand not the words of men they will be ready to suspect them and so to quarrel with them and so the Churches peace will be broken Besides the judgements of men being fallible many will suspect that its possible there may be some error in their forms though we see them not and God should be worshiped in the surest way Reas. 3. There is no other words that may be preferred before the words of God or stand in Competition with them and therefore me thinks this should easily be decided Object But the Scripture hath not forms enough for all the Churches uses Answ. It hath matter and words for such Forms Without any additions save only terms of Connection the sentences of holy Scripture may suffice the Church for all its uses as to forms Object But men may speak untruths in Scripture words if they will and by misplacing and misapplying them may make them speak what was never meant in them Answ. But 1. When they use no expository terms of their own but meerly recite the words of Scripture the perverting them will not be so easie or common And 2. When they have placed them how they please the people are left at liberty 〈…〉 to the sence they have in the 〈…〉 to what mens misplacing 〈…〉 put upon them when we professedly make our forms out of Gods word we do as it were tell the people that they must give each sentence its proper interpretation as it s meant in Scripture because we pretend not to change it
imposed and thence foresee the effects or consequents that are like to follow § 11. Dist. 9. We must distinguish between the Commanding of such Ceremonies and the Obeying of such Commands It s one thing to ask whether it be necessary profitable or lawfull to Impose them and another whether it be necessary or lawfull to use them when commanded § 12. Dist. 10. We must distinguish between that which is Necessary or Profitable to the order or Peace of one Church or Nation and that which is necessary or profitable to the order peace or unity of many Churches or Nations among themselves or supposed to be so § 13. These Distinctions premised to remove ambiguity I lay down that which I conceive to be the truth in these Propositions following which having mentioned I shall re-assume and confirm such of them as seem of neerest concernment to the Question § 14. Prop. 1. Such Ceremonies as God hath wholly exempted from humane power to determine of or institute or hath given man no power to institute are not necessary or profitable to the Church nor may they lawfully be instituted by man § 15. Prop. 2. In such unlawfull Impositions it is a great aggravation of the sin if men pretend that they are the Institutions of God or that they have a Commission from God to institute or impose them when it is no such matter and so pretend them to be Divine § 16. Prop. 3. If things unlawfull either forbidden or that want authority are commanded as indifferent it is a sinfull command but if commanded as parts of Gods Worship or necessary to the Being or well being of the Church it is an aggravation of the sin § 17. Prop. 4. Things indifferent lawfull and convenient are sinfully Commanded when they are pretended to be more necessary then they are and as such imposed § 18. Prop. 5. A thing convenient and profitable is sinfully commanded when it is commanded on a greater penalty then the nature and use of it doth require and the common good will bear § 19. Prop. 6. It is not lawfull to make any thing the subjects Duty by a command that is meerly Indifferent antecedently both in it self and as cloathed with all accidents § 20. Prop. 7. Some things may be lawfully and profitably commanded at one time and place and to one sort of People that may not be lawfully commanded at another time or to another people no nor obeyed if so commanded § 21. Prop. 8. Those Orders may be Profitable for the Peace of the Churches in one Nation or under the Government of one Prince that are not necessary or profitable in order to the unity or Peace of the Churches under divers Princes § 22. Prop. 9. There is no meer humane Vniversal Soveraign Civil or Ecclesiastical over the Catholick Church and therefore there is no power given to any from God to make Laws that shall universally bind the Catholick Church § 23. Prop. 10. If it be not our own Lawfull Governors Civil or Ecclesiastical but Vsurpers that command us we are not therefore bâ—und to obey them though the things be lawfull § 24. Prop. 11. The Commands of lawfull Governors about lawfull Ceremonies are ordinarily to be understood with exceptions though there be none exprest as that in certain cases it is not their will that such commands should bind us § 25. Prop. 12. It may be very sinful to command some Ceremonies which may lawfully yea must in duty be used by the subject when they are commanded § 26. Prop. 13. Though they are not Commanded nor called Necessary but professed to be indifferent yet constantly to use Indifferent things doth breed that custome which maketh them to be taken as necessary by the people and usually doth very much hurt § 27. Prop. 14. Yet certain things that are commonly called Ceremonies may lawfully be used in the Church upon humane imposition and when it is not against the Law of God no person should disobey the commands of their lawfull Governors in such things § 28. Having laid together these Propositions I shall review them in a very short explication and confirmation and insist more largely on those of chief concernment CHAP. II. Such Ceremonies as God hath forbidden or given man no Power to institute are not to be imposed on the Church as profitable or lawfull § 1. THAT some Ceremonies things commonly so called may Lawfully be commanded and some not me thinks should easily be yielded I meet with none tâ—at are against all indeed though some think the name Ceremony unfitly applyed to those Circumstances which they consent to And that any should think that the wit and will of Ceremonie-makers hath no bounds imposed by God is most unreasonable All the business therefore is to know what God hath authorized Governors to institute and what not § 2. And here they that claim a Power of introducing new Institutions must produce their Commission and Prove their power if they expect obedience For we are not bound to obey every man that will tell us he hath such Power § 3. For the right understanding of this it must be supposed as a Truth that all Protestants are agreed in that the written word of God is his law for the government of the universal Church to the end of the world and consequently that it is sufficient in its kind and to its use and consequently that nothing is to be introduced that shall accuse that law of imperfection or which did belong to God himself to have imposed by his law If we once forsake the Scripture sufficiency what ever the Papists or Infidels vainly say against it we have nothing left in which we may agree § 4. God hath already in his written Laws instituted his publick worship-ordinances and therefore he hath done it perfectly and therefore he hath not left it unto man to come after him and mend his work by making other ordinances of worship as to the substance of them He hath given us one faith and no man may preach another and one Baptism and no man may institute another and so of the like If any one bring another Gospel though an Angel he is to be accursed Gal. 1.7 8. § 5. Yet is it in the Power of man to determine of such Modes and Circumstances as are necessary to the prrformance of that worship which God hath instituted in his word And therefore lawfull Governors may in such cases bind us by their commands § 6. The things that are committed to humane determination are such as are commanded in general by God himself either in Scripture or nature but are left undetermined in specie vel individuo so that it is not a thing indifferent whether a choice or determination be made or not but only whether it be this or the other that is chosen by the determination But where the thing it self in genere is not necessary or no humane election or determination necessary because God himself hath determined
what hath been said you may see which of the late English Controverted Ceremonies I take to have been Lawful and which unlawfull Too many years did I spend long agoe about these controversies and the judgement that then I arrived at I could never find reason since to change notwithstanding all the changes of the times and the helps I that have since had And it was and is as followeth § 39. 1. About Episcopacy which was the principal point concomitant with the Ceremonial Controversie I have given you my thoughts before 2. The ceremonies controverted among us were especially The surplice the gesture of Kneeling in Receiving the Lords supper the ring in Marriage Laying the hand on the Book in taking aâ— Oath the Organs and Church musick Holy daies Altars Rails and the Cross in Baptism To say nothing of the matter or form of the Prayers § 40. And 1. If the surplice be Imposed by the Magistrate as it was who is a lawfull Governor and that directly but as a Decent Habit for a Minister in Gods service I think he needlesly strained his Power and sinfully made an engine to divide the Church by making such a needless law and laying the Peace of the Church upon it But yet he medled with nothing but was within the reach of his Power in the general Some Decent Habit is Necessary Either the Magistrate or the Minister himself or the Associated Pastors must determine what I think neither Magistrate nor Synod should do any more then hinder undecency But yet if they do more and tye all to one Habit and suppose it were an undecent Habit yet this is but an imprudent use of Power It is a thing within the Magistrates reach He doth not an aliene work but his own work amiss and therefore the thing in it self being lawfull I would obey him and use that garment if I could not be dispensed with Yea though Secondarily the Whiteness be to signifie Purity and so it be made a teaching sign yet would I obey For secondarily we may lawfully and piously make Teaching signs of our food and rayment and every thing we see But if the Magistrate had said that the Primary reason or use of the Surplice was to be an instituted sacramental sign to work gâ—ace on my soul and engage me to God then I durst not have used it though secondarily it had been commanded as a decent garment New Sacraments I durst not use though a secondary use were lawfull § 41. 2. And for Kneeling at the Sacrament I doubt not at all but the imposing it and that on such rigorous terms tying all to it and casting all out of the communion of the Church or from the participation of the Sacrament that durst not use it was a very grievous sin and tended to persecution injustice and Church-dividing It is certainly in a doubtful case the safest way to do as Christ and his Apostles and the universal Church did for many hundred years That none should Kneel in publick worship on the Lords day no not in Prayer much less in receiving the Eucharist was a Custome so ancient and Universal in the Church that it was everywhere observed before general Councils were made use of and in the first general Council of Nice it was made the last Canon and other general Councils afterward renewed it so that I know not how any Ceremony can possibly pretend to greater Ecclesiastical Authority then this had And to cast out all from Church Communion in Sacraments that dare not go against the examples of Christ and his Apostles and all the Primitive Church who long received the Eucharist in another gesture and against the Canons of the first and most famous and other succeeding general Councils this is a most inhumane part Either the gesture is indifferent in it self or not If it be how dare they thus divide the Church by it and cast out Christians that scruple it when they have these and many other reasons of their scruples which for brevity I omit If they say that Kneeling is of it self Necessary and not Indifferent because it is Reverent c. then 1. They make Christ an â—mperfect Law-giver 2. They make himself or his Apostles or both to have been sinners 3. They condemn the Catholick Church of sin 4. They condemn the Canons of the Chief general Councils 5. And then if the Bishops themselves in Council should change the gesture it were unlawfull to obey them All which are consequents that I suppose they will disown What a perverse preposterous Reverence is this when they have leave to lie in the dust before and after the very act of receiving through all their confessions and prayers yet they will at other times stand and many of them sit at prayer and sit at singing Psalms of Prayer and Praise to God and yet when Christ doth invite them to a feast they dare not imitate his Apostles and universal Church in their gesture lest they should be sinfully unreverent § 42. But yet as sinfully as this Gesture was imposed for my part I did obey the imposerâ—â—nd would do if it were to do again rather then disturb the Peace of the Church or be deprived of its Communion For God having made some Gesture necessary and confined me to none but left it to humane Determination I shall submit to Magistrates in their proper work even when they miss it in the manner I am not sure that Christ intended the example of himself and his Apostles as obligatory to us that shall succeed I am sure it proves sitting lawful but I am not sure that it proves it necessary though very convenient But I am sure he hath commanded me obedience and peace § 43. 3. And for the Ring in Marriage I see no reason to scruple the lawfulness of it For though the Papists make a Sacrament of Marriage yet we have no reason to take it for any ordinance of Divine worship any more then the solemnizing of a contract between a Prince and People All things are sanctified and pure to the Pure but that doth not confound the two Tables nor make all things to be parts of Worship that are sanctified The Coronation of a King is sanctified as well as Marriage and is as much a Sacrament as Marriage and the Ceremonies of it might as well be scrupled especially when God doth seem to go before them by the example of Anointing as if he would confine them to that Ceremonie which yet was none of his intent nor is it much scrupled § 44. 4. And though the taking of an Oath be a sort of worship yet not the natural worship of the first Commandment nor the Instituted of the second but the Reverent use of his name in the third so that it is not primarily an act of worship but Reductively and Consequentially It being the principal use of an Oath to Confirm the Truth and End strife by appealing to God which appellation is indeed an acknowledgment
of his Government and Justice And the laying the hand upon the Book or Kissing it is but a Professing sign of my own Intentions such as my words themselves are and therefore is left to humane choice and a lawfull thing And I have met but with very few among all our Ceremonies that questioned this § 45. 5. And for Organs or other instruments of Musick in Gods worship they being a Help partly natural and partly artificial to the exhilarating of the spirits for the praise of God I know no argument to prove 〈◊〉 simply unlawfull but what would prove a cup of wine unlawful or the tune and meeter and melodie of singing unlawful But yet if any would abuse it by turning Gods worship into carnal Pomp and levity especially by such non-intelligible singing or bleating as some of our Choristers used the Common people would have very great reason to be weary of it aâ— accidentally evil § 46. 6. And as for Holy daies there is great difference between them Those are lyable to most question that are obtruded on the Church with the greatest confidence As for such daies as are appointed upon some emergent occasions that arose since Scripture was indited and are not common to all times and places of the Church there is no more question whether the Magistrate may command them or the Pastors agree upon them then whether a Lecture-day or fast-day or thansgiving-day may be commanded or agreed on some time for Gods worship besides the Lords Day must be appointed And God having not told us which the Magistrate may on fit occasions And this is no derogation from the sufficiency of Scripture For the occasion of the day was not exâ—stent when the Scripture was written such occasions are various according to the various state of the Church in several ages and Countries And therefore to keep an Anniversary day of Thanksgiving such as we keep on the fifth of November for our deliverance from the Papists powder plot is no more questionable then to keep a â—ecture Nor for my part do I make any scruple to Keep a Day in Remembrance of any eminent servant of Christ or Martyr to praise God for their doctrine or example and honour their Memorial But the hardest part of the Question is whether it be lawfull to keep daies as holy in celebrating the memorial of Christs Nativity Circumcision Fasting Transfiguration Ascention and such like And the great reasons of the doubt are 1. Because the occasions of these holy daies was existent in the Apostles daies and therefore if God would have had such daies observed he could as easily and fitly have done it by his Apostles in the Scripture as he did other the like thingâ— 2. And this is a business that if it were Necessary would be Equally necâ—ssary to all Ages and Parts of the Catholick Church And therefore it cannot be necessary but it must be the Matter of an universal Law And God hath made no such Law in Scripture And â—o Scripture sufficiency as the Catholick Rule of faith and universal Divine obediâ—nce is utterly overthrown which if we grant and turn Papists to day we shall have as strong temptations to make us turn Infidels to morrow so poor is their evidence for the supplemental Traditional Law of God 3. And God himself hath already appointed a day for the same purposes as these are pretended for For the Lords Day is to commemorate the Resurrection as the great Triumphant act of the Redeemer implying all the rest of his works so that though it be principally for the Resurrectiâ—n above any single work of Christ yet also for all the work of Redemption And the whole is on that day to be commemoraâ—ed with holy Joy and Praise Now when God himself hath set apart one day in every week to commemorate the whole work of Redemption it seems an accusing of his Institutions of insufficiency to come after him to mend them and say we must have an anniversary day for this or that part of the work 4. The fourth Commandment being one of the Decalogue seems to be of so high a nature that man is not to presume to make the like Else why may we not turn the ten commandments into twenty or a hundred But it seems a doing the same or of like nature to what God hath done in the fourth commandment if any will make a necessary staâ—ed holy day to the universal Church 5. And it seems also that these Holy daies excepting Easter and Whitsontide and other Lords daies are but of later iâ—troduction Many passages of Antiquity seem to intimate that Christmas Day it self was not of many hundred years after Christ. I remember not any before Gregory Nâ—zianzene that seem to speak of it The allegations out of spurious authors and that of later date such as the counterfeit Clement Dionysius Cyprian c. are brought to deceive and not to convince 6. Yea more the time was a matter of controversie among the Churches of the East and West for many â—undred years after Christ Epiphanius and the Churches of Iudaea and all those Eastern parts took the sixth of Ianuary to be the day see Casaubones Exercitat on this and Cloppenburgius more fully in Thâ—s Chrysostome saith it was but ten years before he wrote that Homilie that the Church at Constantinople was perswaded by them at Rome to change their account of the day And is it possible that when for about four hundred years or more the Churches were utterly disagreed of the day that it was then Commonly kept as an Holy day The keeping oâ— it would sure have kepâ— a common knowledge of the day Or at least the difference of observation would have raised conâ—ention as the difference about Easter did can any believe that the famous Council of Nice and the vigilant Emperour that were so exceeding impatient of a diversity of observations of Easter would have let a diverse observation of Christmas alone without once thinking or speaking of it when they were gathered about the like work if the Church had commonly observed it then as a Holy day Or was the Church of Iudaea where Christ arose in any likelyhood to have lost the true account of the day if it had been observed by Apostolical Tradition from the beginning 7. And it seems that God did purposely deny us the observation of this Day in that he hath certainly kept the time unknown to the world The confidence of some bewrayes but their ignorance Chronologers are never like to be agreed of the year much less of the moneth or day some think we are four years too late some two years c. Many think that Christ was born about October as Scaliger Broughton Beroaldus c. and many still hold to the old Eastern opinion for the Epiphany being the Nativity on Ian. 6. and others are for other times but none are certain of the time 8. Sure we are where there is no Law there is
no Transgression but here is no Law of God commanding Christmas day or the other Holy daies therefore there is no transgression in not keeping them And then 9. it is not so sure that there is no transgression in keeping them therefore the surer side is to be taken 10. And it seems strange that we find not so much as any ancient general Council making any mention of Christmas or such daies though of the Martyrs daies some do All these reasons which I run over hastily and many more which for brevity I pretermit do seem to make it a very hard question whether the keeping of this sort of Holy daies be lawfull § 47. And it is not to be much stuck at that a Day to Christ doth seem more necessary and pious then a Day in commemoration of a Martyr or a particular Mercy For in the highest parts of Gods worship God hath left man least to do as to Legislation and Decisions and usurpations here are far most dangerous A weekly Day is somewhat more then an Annâ—versary And yet I think there is few of the contrary minded but would doubt whether man might impose on the Church the observation of another weekly Holy day in commemoration of Christs Nativity The worship of God is a more excellent and necessary thing then the veneration due to a worthy person And yet we have not so much liberty to make new waies of worshiping God as of veneration to men So is it here though even the Daies that are for the memorial of the Saints are ultimately for the honour of God yet those that are set apart directly and immediately to commemorate the work of Redemption are Relatively much higher and therefore seem to be more exempted from the Determination of humane laws § 48. By this and much more I am fully satisfied 1. That the keeping of these daies is a thing of it self unnecessary 2. And that there being none on earth that can justly pretend to a power of universal Government over the whole Catholick Church it is certain that none on earth can bind the Catholick Church to such observances The Canons of Pastors are Authoritative Directions to their own flocks that are bound to obey them so it be in lawful things but to other Churches or to their fellow Pastors they are but Agreements and how far they bind I shall shew anon 3. And even in a single Church or a Province or Nation I am satisfied that it is a great sin for Magistrates or Pastors to force all that scruple it to the observation of these daies and to lay the unity or Peace of their Churches on it and to cast out censure reproach or punish them that dare not obey such impositions for fear of sining against God And it is a most dsingenuous thing to insinuate and put into the minds of men accusations of the Impiety of the dissenters and to perswade the world that it is irreligiousness or humorous singularity when it is so known a thing to all that know them that the persons that scruple or disown these daies do ordinarily walk in uprightness and the fear of God in other matters and profess that it is only a fear of breaking the Laws of God that keeps them from conformity to the will of others and that they are reproached by the multitude of the observers of these daies for their spending the Lords Day in Holy exercises which the reproachers spend too much in idleness sensuality or prophaness and it is not long since many of them were cast out of the Ministerial service or suspended for not reading a Book authorizing Dancing and other recreations on the Lords day In a word to reproach them as Precisians and Puritans for the strictness of their lives and yet at the same time to perswade men that they are ungodly for not keeping Holy daies or not kneeling at the Sacrament is not ingenuous dealing and draws too neer the Manners of the Pagans who called the Christians ungodly because they durst not offer their sacrifices and when they dragd them to the judgement-seats they cryd Tollite impios as iâ— themselves were the Godly men I compare not the matter of the causes here but only the temper of the persons and manner and justice of proceedings § 49. And yet for all this I am resolved if I live where such Holy daies as these are observed to censure no man for observing them nor would I deny them liberty to follow their judgements if I had the power of their Liberties provided they use not reproach and violence to others and seek not to deprive them of their Liberties Paul hath so long agoe decided these cases Rom. 14. 15. that if men would be Ruled by the word of God the controversie were as to the troublesome part of it at an end They that through weakness observe a Day to the Lord that is not commanded them of God should not judge their brethren that observe it not and they that observe it not should not despise or set at naught their weaker though censorious brethren that observe it but every one should be fully perswaded in his own mind The Holy Ghost hath decided the case that we should here bear with one another § 50. Yea more I would not only give men their Liberty in this but if I lived under a Government that peremptorily commanded it I would observe the outward rest of such a Holy day and I would preach on it and joyn with the Assemblies in Gods worship on it Yea I would thus observe the Day rather then offend a weak brother or hinder any mans salvation much more rather then I would make any division in the Church I think in as great matters as this did Paul condescend when he circumcised Timothy and resolved to eat no flesh while he lived rather then offend his brother and to become all things to all men for their good Where a thing is evil but by accident the greatest Accidents must weigh down the less I may lawfully obey and use the day when another doth unlawfully command it And I think this is the true case § 51. 7. And for the next ceremony the Name and form of an Altar no doubt it is a thing indifferent whether the Table stand this way or that way and the Primitive Churches used commonly the names of Sacrifice and Altar and Priest and I think lawfully for my part I will not be he that shall condemn them But they used them but metaphorically as Scripture it self doth Heb. 13.10 15 16. Rom. 12.1 Ephes. 5.2 Phil. 2.17 4.18 All believers are called Priests and their service Sacrifices 1 Pet. 2.5 9. Rev. 1.6 5.10 20.6 I conceive that the dislike of these things in England the form and name of an Altar and the Rails about it was not as if they were simply evil But 1. because they were illegal innovations forced on the Churches without Law or any just authority
the Magistrates persecution No means can be justly pleaded against the end and least of all a bare ceremony For it is no Means when it destroyeth the end § 10. On this account it is that it hath alwaies by wise men been reckoned a tyrannical unreasonable thing to impose all the same ceremonies and circumstances upon all places as upon some and it hath been judged necessary that every Church have their liberty to â—iffer in such indifferent things and that it hath been taken for a wise mans duty to conform his practice in such indifferent circumstances to the several Churches with which he shall have communion as Ambrose professeth he would do and would have others do the same § 11. If any think as too many do that such a diversity of circumstances is a disorder and confusion and not to be endured I shall further tell these men anon that their opinion for an hypocritical unity and uniformity is the true bane of Christian unity and uniformity and that which hath brought the confusion and bloody wars into the Christian world and that our eyes have seen and our ears have heard of And it were as wise an objection for them if they should charge us in Britanie with Confusion and drive us to a separation or division because the Scots wear blew caps and the English hats or because some English wear white hats and some black and so of other circumstances § 12. Did I live in France or other Popish Countries or had lived in England at the abolition of Popery I should have thought it my duty in many indifferent circumstances to accommodate my self to the good of those with whom I did converse which yet in another Countrey or at another time when those things were as offensive as then they were esteemed I durst not have so done And therefore our Common Prayer-Book it self with its Ceremonies might be then commendable in many particulars which now are reformable And so in Ethiopia Greece or Spain those things would be very laudable that are now in England deservedly vituperable And several Ceremonies in the primitive times had such occasions and concomitants that made them tolerable that now seem less tolerable The case is not the same though the Materials be the same CHAP. VIII Prop. 8. Those orders may be profitable for the Peace of the Churches in one Nation that are not necessary to the Peace of the Churches in many Nations § 1. I mention this 1. Because the Romanists are so peremptory for the Necessity of their ceremonies through all the world as if the unity peace or well being of the Church at least did hang on these And yet sometimes they could dispence with the different rites of the Greeks if they could but have got them under their power by it § 2. Also 2. Because the Protestants called Lutherans stick so rigidly on their ceremonies as Private Confession Exorcism Images Vestments c. as if these had been necessary to the unity of the Churches And the Pacifiers find a difficulty in reconciling the Churches of several nations because these expect an uniformity in ceremonies § 3. And so necessary doth it seem in the judgement of some deluded souls that all Churches be one in a visible Policy and uniformity of Rites that upon this very account they forsake the Protestant Churches and turn Papists As if Christ were not a sufficient Head and Center for Catholick union and his Laws and waies sufficient for our terms of uniformity unless we are all of a mind and practice in every custome or variable circumstance that God hath left indifferent § 4. I need no other Instance then 1. what Grotius hath given of himself in his Discuss Apologet. Rivet who professeth that he turned off upon that account because the Protestants had no such unity And 2. What he said before of others by whom he took no warning but did imitate them in his Epist. to Mr. Dury cited by Mr. Barksdale in his Memorials of Grotius life where he saith Many do every day forsake the Protestants and joyn with the Romanists for no other Reason but because they are not one Body but distracted parties separated Congregations having every one a peculiar Communion and 〈◊〉 And they that will turn Papists on such an inducement deserve to take what they gâ—t by their folly § 5. Did not these men know that the Church hath alwaies allowed diversity of Rites Did not the Churches differ till the Nâ—cene Council about Easter day and one half went one way and another half the other way and yet Polycarp and the Bâ—shop of Rome held communion for all their differences and Ireneus pleads this against Victors temerity in excommunicating the Asian Churches Dâ—d they not know that the Greek and Armenian and Romane Churches differ in many Rites that yet may be parts of the Catholick Church notwithstanding such differences Yea the Romanists themselves would have allowed the Greeks and Abassines and other Churches a difference of ceremonies and customes so they could but have subjugated them to the Pope § 6. Yea more the several orders of Fryars and other Religious men among the Papists themselves are allowed their differences in Rites and Ceremonies and the exercise of this allowed Difference doth make no great breach among them because they have the liberty for this variety from one Pope in whom they are all united What abundance of observations do the Iesuites Franciscans Dominicans Benedictines Carthâ—sians and others differ in And must men needs turn Papists because of the different Rites of Protestants when they must find more variety among them that they turn to The matter 's well amended with them when among us one countrey useth three or four Ceremonies which others do disuse and among the Papists one order of Fryars useth twice as many different from the rest yea in habit and diet and other observances they many waies differ What hypocrisie is this to judge this tolerable yea laudable in them and much less so intolerable in us as that it must remove them from our Communion § 7. And how sad a case is it that the Reconciliation between the Lutherans and other Protestants should in any measure stick at such Ceremonies what if one countrey will have Images to adorn their Temples and will have exorcism and other Ceremonies which others do disallow and desire to be freed from may we not yet give each other the right hand of fellowship and take each other for the Churches of Christ and maintain brotherly Charity and such a correspondency as may conduce to our mutual preservation and edification § 8. Yea in the sâ—me Nation why may not several congregations have the liberty of differing in a few indifferent ceremonies If one part think them lawfull and the other think that God forbids them must we be forced to go against our Consciences for a thing of no necessity If we profess ouâ— Resolution to live peceably with them that
use them and only desire a toleration our selves because we dare not wilfully sin against our light will charity deny us this If men forbear a thing suppose indifferent for fear of Gods displeasure and damnation and profess that were it not for this they would conform to the wills of others are those Christians or men that will come behind them and drive them into hell without compassion and that for things indifferent CHAP. IX Prop. 9. There is no meer Humane Vniversal Soveraign Civil or Ecclesiastical over the whole Church and therefore none to make Laws Obligatory to the whole § 1. I ADD this because of the specious pretences of some that say we are bound to an uniformity in Ceremonies by the Church and call all Schismaticks and such as separate from the Catholick Church that disown and disuse such Ceremonies as on these pretences they obtrude And by the Church that thus obligeth us they mean either some Universal Soveraign Power or else an universal Consent of the Church essential as they call it And that Soveraign must be the Pope or a General Council § 2. If it be Universal Consent of all Believers that they suppose to be the obliging power I shall answer them 1. That Believers are not Governours and Law-givers to the Universal Church no nor to a particular Church If that point of the Separatists be so odious that asserteth the multitude of Believers to be the Governours of a particular Church and to have the power of the Keyes what then shall we think of them that give them even to such as they call the Laity themselves the Government yea in the highest point even Legislation over the Universal Church it self § 3. And 2. I add that the Dissent of those Churches that refuse your Ceremonies doth prove that there is no Universal consent If all must consent we must consent our selves before we be obliged We are as free as others we gave none power to oblige us by their consent If we had it had been Null because we had no authority so to do and could not have obliged our selves by a universal Law or perpetual contract Or if we had we had also power on just occasion to reverse a self-obligation But no such thing de facto can be pretended against us § 4. And if such an obligation by consent should be pretended 3. I would know whether it was by this or by some former generation Not by this as is certain Nor by any former For former ages had no power to bind all their successors in Ceremonies about the worship of God Shew whence they had such a power and prove it if you can we are born as free men as our ancestors were in this § 5. And 4. I would be satisfied whether every mans consent in the world be necessary to the Vniversality or not If it be then there are no Dissenters or no obligation because no Universal consent If not then how many must consent before we are obliged you have nothing to say but a Major part where you can with any shew of reason rest And 1. How shall we know in every Parish in England what mind the Major part of the Christians through the world are of in point of such or such a Ceremony 2. Yea by this rule we have reason to think that both Papists and Protestants must change their Ceremonies because the greater part of Christians in East and South and some in the West are against very many of them § 6. But if it be the Authority of a Soveraign Head that is pleaded as obliging the universal Church to an uniformity in Rites and Ceremonies we must know who that Soveraign is None that we know pretend to it but the Pope and a General Council And for the Pope we have by many volumes proved him an Usurper and no authorized Head of the Church Universal The pretended Vice-Christ is a false Christ. The first usurpers pretended but to a Soveraignty in the Roman world but had never any shew of Government over the Churches in Ethiopia India and the many Churches that were without the verge of the Roman Empâ—re § 7. And as for General Councils 1. They are no more the Visible Head and Soveraign of the Church then the Pope is This I have proved in another Disputation by it self 2. There neither is nor can be any Council truly universal as I have there also shewed It s but a delusory name 3. There never was any such in the world since the Church which before was confined to a narrow room was spread over the world Even at Nice there was no proper representative of almost any but the Churches under the Roman Emperours power Few out of the West even in the Empire and none out of almost any of the Churches without the Empire For what 's one Bishop of Persia or such another of another Countrey and perhaps those prove the Roman subjects too that are so called If there was but one from Spain and only two Presbyters of Rome from Italy and one from France if any and none from many another Countrey in the Empire no wonder if there was none from England Scotland or Ireland c. And therefore there can be no universal obligation on this account § 8. Councils are for Concord by Consultation and consent and not a Soveraign or superiour sort of Governing power And therefore we that consented not are not obliged and if we had consented we might on weighty reasons have withdrawn our consent § 9. The Orders established by General Councils have been laid aside by almost all and that without the repeal of a Council Yes such Orders are seemed to presuppose the custom of the Universal Church if not Apostolical Tradition to have been their ground § 10. Among many others let us instance only in the last Canon of the Nicene Council that forbidding Kneeling commandeth all to pray only standing on the Lords Dayes c. And this was the common use of the Church before as Tertullian and others shew and was afterwards confirmed again in a General Council And yet even the Church of Rome hath cast it off much more the Protestant Churches No General Council hath been of more authority then this of Nice No Ceremony of more common use then this standing in prayer on the Lords dayes So that it might as much as any be called the constitution and custom of the Catholick Church And yet we suppose not these now to bind us to it but have cast it off without the repeal of any other General Council And why are we more bound then by the same authority to other Ceremonies then to this And if to any then to which and to how many and where shall our consciences find rest § 11. Even the Jesuites themselves say that the General disuse of a practice established by Pope and Council is equall to an abrogation without any other repeal so it be not by the said