have been for his purpose and rectification In his Defence of the Church of England Tom. 2. Disp 2. c. 2. he saith The Communion of the Christian Catholick Church is partly internal partly external Among many other things in discoursing of internal communion 't is added That it is to judg charitably one of another To exclude none from the Catholick Communion and hope of salvation either Eastern or Western or Southern or Northern Christians which profess the ancient Faith of the Apostles and primitive Fathers established in the first General Councils and comprehended in the Apostolick Nicene and Athanasian Creeds This granted by our Author as describ'd by Bramhall seeing the Faith contain'd in these Creeds is professed by the Dissenters 't is queried Whether or no this Gentleman doth not fall short in this respect of Catholick internal communion by excluding the Dissenters from the Catholick communion and hope of salvation Moreover as to external communion says Bramhall There are degrees of exclusion every one that is excluded is not cut off from the Catholick Church for external communion may sometimes be suspended more or less by the just censures of the Church clave non errante as in the primitive times some were excluded a caetu participantium only from the use of the Sacraments others a caetu procumbentium from Sacraments and Prayers also and others a caetu Audientium from Sacraments Prayers and Sermons and others a caetu Filâ—lium from the society of Christians yea and as it may be suspended it may be waved or withdrawn by particular Churches or persons from their Neighbour Churches or Christians in their Innovations or Errors Nor is there so strict and perpetual an adherence required to a particular Church as to the universal Church This surely is enough to intimate how sudden our Authors thoughts were for had he but deliberated on those things as this great Bishop did he would not assert so confidently That the separating from a particular Church that is in the Universal is a separating from the Universal Leaving therefore our Author to receive further light from this Bishop concerning his own notion I 'le make my address to the Reader beseeching him to apply himself to our Protestant Divines for an answer to what is said against the dependency of the Church of England on Foreign Churches such as Rome c. And as to what he saith concerning Schism from the Universal Church which p. 256. saith he is when any shall separate from that part of the Catholick Church where they dwell and set up any distinct Churches meerly for some greater degree of purity This is so like what the Author of Charity maintain'd by Catholicks insisted on that the Memorandums given by the famous Mr. Chillingworth will be sufficient to enab'e an ordinary capacity to answer the whole he hath asserted about Schism 1. That not every separation but a causless separation from the external communion of any Church is the sin of Schism 2. That imposing upon men under pain of Excommunication a necessity of professing known errors and practising known corruptions is a sufficient and necessary cause of separation and that this is the cause which Protestants alledg to justifie their separation from the Church of Rome To which I must add That this is the cause which Dissenters alledg to justifie their separation from the Church of England it being uncontroulably true That the professing known errors and the practising known corruptions is imposed on Dissenters on pain of Excommunication as hath been proved in Mr. Baxter's first Plea for Peace never answered but only nibled at by some inconsiderate Scriblers The Dissenters are convinc'd in conscience that if they continued in your communion they should sin against God What can be offered against this I know not unless you 'l say unto us thus viz. If this your pretence of conscience may serve what Schismatick in the Church what popular seditious brain in a Kingdom may not alledg the dictamen of conscience to free themselves from Schism or Sedition No man wishes them to do any thing against their conscience but we say that they may and ought to rectifie and depose such a conscience which is easie for them to do This is what hath been frequently urg'd by the Clergy yea by the Dean of Pauls But seeing these words are taken out of the mouth of a Papist the answer shall be no other than what I find in the mouth of a son of the Church the famous Chillingworth who asserts That whoever is convinced in conscience that the Church of Rome errs cannot with a good conscience but forsake her in the profession and practice of her errors and the reason hereof is manifest because otherwise he must profess what he believes not and practice what he approves not which is no more than your self in thesi have divers times affirmed For in one place you say 't is unlawful to speak any the least untruth Now he that professes your Religion and believes it not what else doth he but live in a perpetual lye Again in another you have called them that profess one thing and believe another a damned crew of dissembling Sycophants And therefore in inveighing against Protestants for forsaking the profession of those Errors the belief whereof they had already forsaken what do you but rail at them for not being a damned crew of Sycophants The same may be said as to the Dissenters who are in conscience convinced that they must profess to believe what really they do not should they conform But as to what the wicked may pretend as to conscience take the Author's answer 'T is said that a pretence of conscience will not serve to justifie separation from being Schismatical which is true but little to the purpose saith Mr. Chil. seeing it was but an erroneous persuasion much less an hypocritical pretence but a true and well grounded conviction of conscience And therefore though seditious men in the Church and State may pretend conscience for a cloak of their Rebellion yet this I hope hinders not but that an honest man ought to obey his rightly informed conscience rather than the unjust command of his Tyrannous Superiors Otherwise with what colour can you defend either your own refusing the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy I may add Otherwise with what colour can the Dean and his Substitute defend their so firmly adhering to the present Constitution But to return to the third Memorandum 3. That to leave the Church and to leave the external communion of the Church at least as Dr. Potter understands the words and I think I may safely add as every Protestant but a Grotian understands is not the same thing That being done by ceasing to be a member of it by ceasing to have those requisites which constitute a man a member of it as Faith and Obedience This by refusing to communicate with any Church in her Liturgies and publick Worship of God This little Armour
Church of England detected His notion about the Government of the Catholick Church the same with that of the French Papist THAT our Author entertains notions about the nature of the Visible Church and of the Schismatical very different from what the old Queen Elizabeth Protestants did will appear with the greatest conviction to such as will but consult the famous Mr. Hooker and Dr. Field who do most expresly contradict what is asserted in the Dean's Defence The Dean's Defender doth extremely insist on the Unity of the Universal Church as what doth consist in more than in the Unity of the Faith though in combination of those other graces of Love and Charity and Peace to wit in an external communion Take his own words in answer to a supposed objection P. 183. But though Faith alone is not sufficient to Christian Unity yet Faith in combination with those other graces of Love and Charity and Peace make a firm and lasting union This I readily grant saith he but yet must add this one thing That Christian love and charity and peace in the language of the New Testament and of the ancient Fathers when they signifie Christian Unity signifie also one communion that is the unity of a Body and Society which is external and visible and doth not only signifie the union of souls and affections but the union of an external and visible communion P. 184. By the union of an external and visible communion he means the living in Christian communion and fellowship with each other that is a worshipping God together after one and the same external and visible manner P. 248. Moreover he adds That such as separate themselves from the external communion of any particular Church that is part of the Universal do separate themselves from the Universal visible Church All Schismaticks in his opinion cut themselves off from the visible Catholick Church even as all such as are excommunicated are cut off This is the notion of the Deans Substitute which is as agreeable to the sense of the Papist as 't is in it self grosly absurd and different from the doctrine of sound Church of England Protestants That 't is agreeable to the sense of the Papists you 'l find in a Conference between Dr. Peter Gunning and Dr. Pierson with two Disputants of the Romish Profession All Schismaticks say the Romish Disputants are out of the Church and quite separate from it as a part cut off is separate from the body Schismatick is a term contradistinct to Catholick No Schismaticks can be true members of the Catholick church for Schism as they define it is a voluntary separation of one part from the whole true visible church of Christ The correspondency that there is between the Author of the Deans Defence and those Papists about the formal reason of Schism is as much as if the Defender had fetcht his Definitition of Schism out of their Writings which notion as embrac'd by one that professes himself a Protestant is as grosly absurd as 't is contrary unto Protestant principles I say such a notion entertain'd by a professed Protestant is grosly absurd for it exposeth him to the triumph of the Roman-catholicks it being impossible that the Papists notwithstanding their Schismatical Impositions should be esteemed Schismatical by our Author For all such as are Schismatical are saith he cut off from the visible Catholick Church of which the Church of Rome is acknowledged to be a true part although from it these men as they are Protestants separate and so cut themselves off from the Catholick visible Church for such as separate from any true part of the Catholick church according unto him do cut themselves off from the Catholick church and are Schismaticks Take a view then of the admirable abilities of our Auther who must be considered to assert either that the Church of Rome is Schismatical or not If not Schismatical the church of England must be so or otherwise there may be a separation from the external communion of a particular Church that is a part of the Universal without being guilty of Schism or of separating from the Catholick church But if the Church of Rome be Schismatical 't is either cut off from the visible Catholick church or not if not then Schism consists not in a separating from the visible Catholick church that is a man may be a Schismatick and yet a member of the catholick church a thing that our Author denies But if the church of Rome be cut off from the visible Catholick church then the distressed Papist is in as sad a condition as the Dissenter he is cut off from the church of Christ and must be either damn'd or saved by another Name than that of Jesus Christ If the latter then farewell Christian Religion If the former Where shall we find any part of the Universal Church beside the Church of England All the Protestants beyond the Sea are in the same state with the Dissenter at home The Church of Rome and all such as are in Subjection to that See are cut off from the Visible Catholick Church and it may be all the Eastern Churches in the World too that is the Catholick Visible Church is confin'd within the Pale of the Church of England Pure Prelatical Donatism with a witness Where will not Considence when the attendant of Ignorance lead men Moreover This Notion as 't is grosly absurd in like manner 't is most contrary to the old Protestant Principles Consult Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity lib. 3. and you 'll find nothing more fully asserted than That the Visible Church of Jesus Christ is therefore One in outward Profession of those things which supernaturally appertain to the very essence of Christianity and are necessarily required in every particular Christian man But we speak now of the Visible Church whose Children are signed with this mark One Lord one Faith one Baptifm In whomsoever these things are the Church doth acknowledg them for her Children So far Hooker But you will it may be object That such as are Schismatical or Excommunicate may acknowledge One Lord hold One Faith and receive One Baptism And shall such be consider'd as Members of the Visible Church Take Mr. Hooker's own words for an Answer If by external Profession they be Christians then are they of the Visible Church of Christ and Christians by external Profession are they all whose mark of Recognizance hath in it those things which we have mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hereticks Persons Excommunicable yea and cast out for notorious Improbity Thus 't is evident that Mr. Hooker entertain'd apprehensions quite contrary to those of our Author yea and Mr. Hooker doth consider the very Notion asserted by our Author to be Popish which he doth as such most excellently expose As for the Act of Excommunication saith he it neither shuts out from the Mystical nor clean from the Visible but only from the Fellowship with the Visible in holy Duties
worship God But to divide necessary circumstances of Action from the Action is impossible A thing we no way desire 'T is true as you assert A man who is to remove from London to York is not bound either to go thither on foot or on horseback or in a Coach or in a Waggon each of these ways are in themselves indifferent but yet if he will travel to York he must use one or ether of those ways of Motion not one in particular is necessary yet one or other is But what is this to our purpose What though the Partition-wall between Ceremonies and Circumstances be broken down and they all mingled together and all must be consider'd alike but as Circumstances What will this help you To keep to your pretty Allusion with one necessary Addition viz. One hath not strength to walk on foot from London to York another cannot bear the riding in Coach yet to York they must go If you 'll keep to the point before us you must say to the person that cann't walk to York Some way of Motion is necessary to your going to York if you 'l go thither therefore you shall walk or not go thither And to the other that can't ride in a Coach if you 'll not go thither in a Coach you shall not go at all and yet give him the Strapadâ— for not going thither This is the Case and how easily may they reply unto you on your calling them to hasten to York on these impossible terms or to the Bisliâ—ps Colehouse We would go to York with all our heart on Horseback or in a Waggon but to walk or to ride in a Coach we cannot You can give us leave to go thither on horsback if you will but you will not we would go but go in Coach or walk we cannot Here is a division your will not and our cannot who now is in fault That they cannot is evident because of weakness and Infirmity of body That you can permit 'em to go on Horseback is as unquestionable but yet you will not Thus we have the strength of our Author's Reply You must get into the visible Catholich Church or to prison and you cannot get in but you must either use some external circumstances in some time or in some place c. therefore this time or no time this place or no place Sir by your good favour as you acknowledg this or the other particular circumstance to be indifferent and that other circumstances may be chosen if not this to make either of these indifferent circumstances a necessary tâ—rm of communion is sinful and schismatical To make of a little thing so great a bar to shut thousands out of heaven is what you will never be able to answer when you shall appear before the Tribunal of a righteous God But as to the true state of the Controversie 't is another thing you make that a part of Religion which God hath not made you impose uninstituted ceremonies and in many things recede from the Apostolical Institution and call on us on pain of damnation to comply with you We must comply or be cut off from the Catholick Church even from the body of Christ from all hopes of salvation These things being thus plain I 'le gratisie our Authors desire in considering his Logick If the Dissenters can without sin says he obey their Governours in indifferent that is in lawful things but will not and the Episcopal would be content to part with indifferent things for union but cannot who is the Divider What must be done for Union Must the Dissenters comply in things wherein they can without sin or must the Episcopal sin and lose their peace with God fot Union p. 29. This is called by our Author an Argument but why I cannot imagine however let it be so wherein lies its strength or how comes it to pass that this cannot be answered without a shewing Sophistry to be where 't is not If there be any force in this Argument it must be either in this viz. That the Impositions are in the judgment of the Dissenters Lawful or Indifferent which may be submitted unto without sin Had this suggestion been true we would grant him the whole he desires viz. That the Dissenters refusing to do what is Lawful in their own judgment to be done for Union they are Faulty But 't is notirious That the imposed terms are of such a nature that they cannot be submitted unto by the Dissenter but he must grievously offend the most high God to the wounding his own conscience If its strength lyes not there it must in this That the Episâ—â—pal would be content to part with indifferent things but cannot And why can they not What is the matter that they cannot part with toys and trifles to take many a thousand within the pale of the Church and thereby help 'em to Heaven The things are still supposed indifferent by our Author and therefore a parting with 'em is not contrary to any Law nor sinful Why then can they not without sin part with what they can part with without sin This is surely mysterious They cannot part with that without sin which they can part with without sin and Yet will not part with it though according to their own judgment their not parting with their indifferent things tends to the unavoidable destruction of souls They know the Dissenters unless these indifferent things be past by must be kept out of the Church of England that is out of the Catholick Church say they and remain to the last hour of their life in a state of damnation Whence then did I say What must must be done for Union I may now say What must be done to save the thousands of Souls for whom Christ died Must the Episcopal part with what they can without sin and take the Dissenters into the Catholique Church and thereby save their Souls or must the Dissenters sin that they may be saved What Is there no way to Heaven for English Dissenters but their complying with sinful Impositions T was said in the Apostles days that We must not do evil that good may come thereof Then surely if we will be of the Apostles judgment We must not sin to save our Souls Our Unrighteousness doth not cannot commend the Righteousness of God But Before I dismiss this Point that the Reader may be fully satisfied that I abuse not our Author I must beseech him to consider 1. That our Author hath in a way different from the greatest or rather the better part of the Clergy asserted That our not holding external communion with the Church of England is a cutting our selves off from the Catholick Church a putting our selves out of the Way of Salvation This is the main scope of his discourse A notion concerning which Dr. Stillingfleet's thoughts are desired 2. That notwithstanding the absolute necessity there is of the Dissenters returning to the Church of England that they may become members
Prayer or the present Liturgy Ceremonies and Administration of Religious Offices 't is his own Comment and he is not obliged to confute it Yet thus much I will say on his behalf that upon my knowledg he is in his judgment for a Form of Prayer in Publique-Offices and Administrations and hath a very hearty esteem for that of our Church but I cannot say so of the Ceremonies I think he might be easily perswaded to part with them and if some exceptionable passages in the Liturgy and Rubricks were altered I believe he would make no opposition to it But he charges this admirable Conformist as he is pleased to call him with giving away at once the Episcopal Office and instead of it sets up a Bishop in every Parish and either an Antichristian Bishop of Bishops or an Ecclesiastical Minister of State to govern them How little there is of truth in this charge may be collected from what I have said already The Conformist sets up no more Bishops than the necessities of the Church and the duty and work of the Episcopal-Office requires and I understand not that this is giving away the Episcopal Office And if this Author can free Metropolitan Bishops from Antichristianism which he says some do derive from the very days of the Apostles and that not without some good appearance of Reason I hope the Conformist will defend the Episcopi Episcoporum from that appellation As to what he says of an Ecclesiastical Minister of State the Conformist hath no more to reply than this He hopes this Gentleman will not plead an Exemption for the Clergy from under the Civil Magistrates Power and Government and if this be granted I know not what can be matter of Controversie between him and this Author For he supposes him to exercise no Power over the Bishops but what is inherent in the King and in this Minister of State by Delegation that is in few words to see that they do their own Duty carefully reprove their Negligence and Male-administrations and preserve peace among them And what is there in this Doctrine that our Author should take such offence at I am yet to seek He addes And alters the whole frame of our Worship leaves every man to do as he lists and all this without injury to our present Constitution In these Lines to speak plainly there is not one word of truth as any man may easily collect from what I have said already And this Gentleman himself confesses in the next page That the Conformist will not indeed allow of universal Toleration How this can be reconciled with Leaving all men to do as they list I am not able to tell That the Conformist said That those that hinder the Union of Presbyterians with the Church of England by continuing the Impositions are Factors for the Pope I do easily acknowledg and I believe he is still of the same minde and as I remember he gave some Reasons for it too which this Gentleman takes no notice of When he confutes them perhaps he may hear of a Vindication if there be just reason for it Pag. the 8th he proceeds thus He i.e. the Conform pleads for the Indulgence of others particularly the Independents who he says will be content with their own Congregations and is mightily taken with Mr. Humfreys Project That the tolerated Churches such as Independents be declared parts of the National Church whereof the King to be the Head The Countrey-Conformist is so great a Lover of Peace that I do easily suppose he might be pleased with Mr. H's Project as he calls it and I do assure him that I my self am much more pleased with it since I read his Book than I was before though I had always a value for it For I think the Design of uniting the Dissenting Protestants in this Nation is into one National Church whereof the King to be the Head more laudable than the design of uniting Protestants in a General Council or in a Pope Primate or Metropolitan which seems to be the design of our Author though he hath not Courage or Instruction enough as yet to speak it out For he affirms 1. That the Episcopal Office and Power is but one and not resident in the Bishops of the Universal Church p. 212. 2. That the Independency of Bishops is inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity p. 115. And 3. that although equals have no Authority over one the other yet a Collegue hath Authority over any one of his Collegues p. 213. 4. That the Bonds and Combinations of Churches are of Divine Right though the ordering and determination of them be of Humane Prudence p. 258. 5. That the Unity of the Church is as much of Divine Right as any Form of Government in it and that the whole Church may be divided into greater or lesser parts as may best serve the ends of Peace and Unity And that it seems strange to him that a National or Patriarchal Church should not be thought as much a Divine Institution as any particular Church p. 259. And further he adds When Christ and his Apostles have instituted one Form of Government for all particular Churches and commanded them all to live in Unity Peace Communion and amicable Correspondency with each other the Union and Combination of Churches into one according to this Institution to serve the ends of Catholick Communion must be thought as much a Divine Institution as the bounds of particular Churches For if we will not allow those Churches to be of Divine Institution which have Officers of Divine Appointment and are formed according to the general Directions of Christ and his Apostles so as may serve the ends of Church-Government I know not where to find a Church of Divine Institution in the world pag. 259 260. These are the words of our Author from whence we may collect many things for our Information 1. That the Bishops of the Catholique Church are the regent part thereof in the same sense that the Bishops of any National Church are the regent part of that Church For although there be no Superiority among Bishops their Power and Office being the same yet Independency among them being inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity both in the National and in the Universal Church they are bound to unite for the Government of both and this by Divine Command Authority and Obligation 2. That whatsoever is determined by the Bishops of the Catholick Church doth oblige all particular Bishops and all Christians all the world over provided they determine nothing contrary to the Word of God 3. That whatever Bishop shall refuse their Canons and Determinations and govern his particular Church by other Laws than they shall appoint is a Schismatick and they may Depose and Excommunicate him yea if a whole combination of Bishops do refuse to govern their National Church by their Laws Appointments and Constitutions they are all Schismaticks and if the Nation refuse to forsake such Bishops they are all Schismaticks
also both they and their Bishops are liable to the same Censure 4. That the external Union of the Catholick Church consists in their Union to and with the Bishops thereof that is with a General Council See pag. 595. where he makes Catholick Communion to consist in two things 1. In the Agreement and Concord of the Bishops of the Catholick Church among themselves 2. In the Communion of particular Churches and Christians with each other And he adds That Catholick Communion is no arbitrary thing but essential to the Church and whoever violates it by an unreasonable Dissent he is a Schismatick whoever he be and no Member of the Catholick Church pag. 601. 5. That Metrapolitan Patriarchal Churches are of Divine Appointment as much as any other Churches must govern their Churches by such Laws as are advised by a General Council or by the Bishops of the Church Universal For although they be not founded on any express Divine Law yet they are warranted by our obligations to Catholick Unity p. 293. And for my part I am not able to see any reason why the same obligations to Unity may not warrant one Papal Church as well as three or four Patriarchal Churches in all the Christian world For the Papists think it the most effectual way to preserve Unity and for ought that I know they may think as wisely as this Gentleman I envy neither him nor them the pleasure of their Dreams but I hope there are but few Church-of England-men that do think the same thoughts with him these were the thoughts of Hugo Grotius whom Bishop Bramhal commends and defends Unitas antistuis optimum est adversus Schisma remedium quod Christus monstravit Experientia comprobavit Vid. Annot. In consultat de Religione ad Art Sept. I have quoted the words of this Author and I am not conscious to my self that I have perverted them or made any ill deductions from them and if it be his design to unite all Pretestants in the Decrees of General Councils and in the Intervals of Councils in the Pope or three or four Patriarchs who are to govern according to their Canons I do assure him that I prefer Mr. Humfry's design far before it For I am of opinion 't is a more Christian Design to untie Protestants together and among themselves than to unite them with the Papists Mr. Humfry's Design I will transcribe from his Book that those that shall read these few Sheets may compare it with that of our Author Archbishop Usher hath left us his Model for an Accommodation And it hath been upon the hearts generally of all moderate persons that a reduction of such a Government into our Church as was in the Primitive Times when there was a Consessus Presbyterorum joyn'd with the Bishop in all his Acts of Ordination and Jurisdiction were the way and only effectual way to our true Happiness and Reformation Unto which if one thing more might be added that is If the Common-Prayer might be new cast it being fit that such a vessel for the Sanctuary should be all of pure Gold so as the whole of it were composed of Scripture-Phrase altogether leaving nothing at all liable any more to exception unless the Imposition of a Form only which I doubt not but is also justifiable by Scripture-Instances as well as sound Reason it might go near to put an end to all Dissention among the Sober and Peaceable of the Nation It is this I know is apt to recur into the Imaginations of good men and forasmuch as there was lately two Bills prepared for Comprehension or Uniting the Pootestants and for Indulgence or repealing the Penal Statutes I shall not I hope incur any blame if I apprehend that such men who are most considerate and intent upon the Interest of God in what they seek do or did look upon either of such Bills as no other than an English Interim preparative to this higher Concord and Union of the Bishop with his Presbyters according to the Primitive Pattern mentioned assoon as more mellow Opportunity and well-advised Piety should administer unto such farther Perâ—ection Nevertheless in regard there is no Uniting of a Nation can be supposed by any Model but such as is of Human Contrivance and there are multitudes of Holy and Learned Men in this Kingdom that do believe the way of their Gathered Congregations is after a higher Pattern than this of Primitive Episcopacy it self if there were any hope of the return of it it is manifest that there is no Society which is National in England could be formed on these terms because these Congregational-men can never recede from that which is of Divine Appointment for the sake of any Antiquity whatsoever They do hold Particular Churches to be of Christ's Institution and Diocesan of Ecclesiastical Consent only and under the Notion of Divine Right it is Sin to them to submit to any Bishop There is another Notion then that must be advanced to take in these good Men of This Way as well as those of the Parochial and Diocesan Way into one Political Body for the making up the National Church of England whereof the King is Head as I have been speaking and that is by an Act of Parliament Legitimating these Meetings of the Nonconformists so as to become thereby immediately Parts of the Church as National no less than Parochial Assemblies It was a good thing in the House of Commons that they were about to free many Innocent Men from the danger of the Penal Statutes but the making such Meetings to be Legal is a Design of another Nature of a far greater nobler and vast Importance See page 28 29 30 31. To which add what he says pag. 36. ' If these Separate Assemblies were made Legal the Schism presently in reference to the National Church were at an end Schism in a Separation from that Church whereof we ought or are bound to be Members If the Supreme Authority then loose our Obligation to the Parish-Meeting so that we are bound no longer the Iniquity upon that account is not to be found and the Schism gone It is one Act of Parliament would give a full Answer to all mens Arguments Mr. H.'s design may be easily gathered from these words which I have thus largely transcribed and should our Superiors favour and promote it it would restore peace and quiet to a Church and State almost broken to pieces by divisions animosities fears and jealousies By this means the sons of the Church might enjoy their Dignities Preferments and Livings and believe their Government and Discipline to be of Divine right and exercise it on all that are of the same apprehension and judgment The Separate Congregations may enjoy their own opinions concerning their own Government and Churches and all might live together in love and every one sit under his vine and fig-tree and none make him afraid A closer union I do easily grant were desirable but I am
to it be at all out of love with it And seeing there is a draught to this purpose which he alludes to and whatsoever the humor be does style an ingenious proposal I advise that it be preserved and inserted therefore at the end of the Book if you Print it The Paper you know was prepared against the Sitting of the last Parliament at Oxford and Entituled Materials for Union And now I have done about my self you may expect from me some more general censure of the Author and his Book which I was willing to decline For the Author whatsoever he else be I take him to be a man of Ability that requires our regard By his Stile and Undertaking I guess him to be a man of younger age so I hear and believe though by his reading and compass he fetches for the making good his Notion he may be some graver Person In the small game he plays with me I perceive he hath hit me and I ought not to like him the worse for that It is where I lay open to him and left him a blot But for the defence he makes of the Doctor against me I think he hath failed in his cast and thrown out He is a â—â—â—n I count hath a Proud Pen and I am not moved at that but the Doctor whose Pen is more Prudential seemed to me to have his contempt within and that moved me do what I could and made me write as I did There are many I believe will think that this man hath despised me so much that it should move me but I do not think it so much The man is a bold insolent man and it is I think the taking a ferocious liberty rather then shewing disdain He hath used Mr. Baxter like a very dog and when I methinks am but something rightly served why should I care how he uses me I will do nothing more to deserve it and if he despises me I know then how to be even with him I wont care if he does For the Book I think the Bookseller hath done his part The Paper and Print is to be like't but for the matter I think it to dear at the price Five Shillings I must tell him with some displeasure is too unreasonable much for such Controversie There are three or four things more particularly I have observed in the Reading it In the first place I observe the Design which appears to be in hand A design which seems specious being for Union but that Union is of the Church of England with the Church of Rome in the French and Cassandrian way not a Union of Protestant Dissenters and the Conformists with one another On the contrary this Gentleman thus discourses The Christian Church throughout the whole world is One The Unity of this Church Catholick lies in One Communion This Communion is exercised in Particular Churches There are no true Particular Churches of Christs Institution and parts of that Catholick but they must have Bishops Every man consequently that is not in Communion with his Bishop is out of the true Catholick Church which consists of such parts and so not only a Schismatick but cut off from Salvation Either this Author now is aware of this Doctrine or not If not as soon as he comes to be he will be ashamed of it if he already be he may be ashamed to own such Doctrine as this is In the next place I observe a little how consistent he is in this Doctrine For when he hath bestowed a whole Chapter p. 164. to tell us that the Unity of the Universal Christian Church consists in one Communion and descends to explain that Communion by a Communication of the same Divine Service for when Dr. Owen is speaking of a Communion between the Churches in Faith and Love He ought to have added says he in Religious Worship for without this there is no Christian Communion p 446. which he also urges so far as to make a forsaking Communion with the Church of England to be a cutting a man quite off from the Church of Christ and yet if you turn to p. 305. you shall find these words The Nature and Essence of the Church does not consist in Religious Assemblies but it is a Covenant Relation to Christ which Constitutes the Church Here then we have sounder Doctrine for these two are different things If an entring into Covenant with Christ is that really which Constitues a man a member and unites him to the Body then is it not this One Communion wherein the Unity of that Body does consist A man may give himself up to Christ I hope who yet does not and cannot communicate with the Church of England and though he own not the Bishops may be a Christian for all that In the third place I observe this that when he hath said some things well about the Text which the Doctor chose for his Sermon p. 447 448. yet is he very unsatisfactory in bringing off the Doctor or vindicating his judgment in his choice of it for his purpose There were some in the Apostles time that thought the Jewish Law still obligatory and that they should sin against God if they did not keep it and there were others understood the liberty they had from it by the Gospel The first of these are called the weak brother the last the perfect The advice the Apostles gives to the perfect is to use and enjoy that liberty which the Gospel brought them The advice he gives the weak is to wait till God should reveal to them the knowledg of this liberty And in the mean while that they should forbear seeing To them who esteem any thing to be sin it is sin and this he presses still so far and with such exceeding caution that the strong Christian himself must refrain his liberty for their sakes in case that by his example he shall give them occasion to doe the same thing which in regard to their not yet sufficiently informed formed consciences would be sin and destroy their souls This is the certain sense and diffusive doctrine of St. Paul in his Epistles I will come then to the Doctors Text Whereto we have attained let us walk by the same rule let us mind the same thing and I must ask his Defender whether the weak and perfect Christian as before explained be here both included I mean whether both of these are alike required in the Text to walk by the same rule This Author does hold it and he frames such an interpretation of the words as he must hold it but I deny it and that interpretation therefore must be counterfeit By walking by the same rule he understands the maintaining Church Communion and this Communion with the Church he counts must be held howsoever it be we differ This is therefore a fictitious and certain false application or explication of the Text for it is directly contrary to the scope of that Doctrine which I have but now delivered as the
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all Instituted Worship and Discipline as if there could be Church-Members under Government antecedent to the being of Particular Churches even when no one that is not a Member of a Particular Church is a Member of the Universal As if a City that consists of many particular Houses were in order of nature antecedent to every particular House § 3. That the Unity of the Christian Church consists in one Communion Catholique Unity signifies Catholique Communion To have a Right to be a Member of the Christian Church to communicate in all the several Duties and Offices of Religion with all Christians all the World over and to partake in all the Priviledges of Christians and to be admitted to the freedom of their conversation to eat and drink and discourse and trade together So that such as are not Church-Members have no right to trade among Christians A pleasant Insinuation § 4. The Unity of the Christian Sacraments viz. Baptism and the Lords-Supper prove the Unity of Christian Communion This is from p. 193. to p. 208. § 5. Unity of Church-Power and Government doth also prove the Unity of Christian Communion Under this head he maintains 1. That every Bishop Presbyter or Deacon by his Ordination is made a Minister of the Catholique Church though for the better edification of the Church the exercise of his Office is more peculiarly confin'd to some particular place 2. Every Bishop and Presbyter receives into the Catholique Church by Baptism and shuts out of the Catholique Church by Excommunication 3. That the Catholique Church is united and coupled by the cement of Bishops who stick close together for which you produce Cyprian 4. That the Unity and Peace of the Episcopacy is maintained by their governing their Churches by mutual Consent Whence you mention the Collegium Episcopale the Episcopal Colledge which I take to be a Council of Bishops which Bishops have an Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church i.e. the foreign Bishops as those of Alexandria and Rome c. have an Original Power and Right in relation to the whole Church even a Right and Power in relation to England 5. That every part of the Universal Church is under the Government of the Universal Bishops assembled in their Colledge or in Council and what Bishop soever abuse his Power he shall be accountable to those assembled in Council 6. That there is no such thing as the Independency of Bishops their Independency being almost as inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity as the Indpendency of single Congregations Whence the Church of England called either Archi-Episcopal National or Patriarchal is not Independent but accountable unto Foreign Bishops if at any time they abuse their Power 7. That this Council of Forreign Bishops unto which they are accountable must look on the Bishop of Rome as their Primate the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome being acknowledged it seems by our Author himself as well as by Bramhall The Primacy he saith out of Cyprian being given to Peter that it might appear that the Church of Christ was One and the Chair that is the Apostolical Office and Power is One. Thus Cyprian on whom lay all the care of the Churches dispatches Letters to Rome from whence they were sent through all the Catholique Churches All this is to be found from p. 208 to the end of the Chapter Thus you agree with Bramhall though you express not the Notion so well as he doth and should learn it better Before I proceed therefore I cannot but desire you to consider what is become of your Protestant Episcopacy I beseech you Sir consider Is the French Episcopacy a Protestant Episcopacy If not seeing the English Episcopacy as described by you is the same with the French Why call you the one a Popish and the other a Protestant Episcopacy Whether you agree not in these respects with the Papists let the world judge But you go on to assert § 6. That to be in Commuion with any Church is to be a Member of it every Member having equal Right and equal Obligation to all parts of Christian Communion even that Communion which is External and Visible p. 132 c. § 7. All Christians being bound to communicate with that part of the Catholique Church wherein they live are guilty of Schism if they separate whoever separate from such particular Churches as are members of the Catholick Church do separate from the Universal Catholick Church which is Schism For to divide from any part of the Catholick Church is to break Catholick communion i. e. to be a Schismatick Whence 't is concluded 1. That Schism is a separating from the Catholick Church which notion taken singly will stand the Dissenters and all true Christians who must be acknowledged to be members of the Catholick Church in great stead freeing them from the odious sin of Schism The Dissenters divide not themselves from the communion of the Universal Church Ergo not Schismaticks But the mischief is that as this notion of Schism which our Author adheres unto is the same with that of the Papists as is to be seen in Filiucius Azorius c. but in an especial manner in Charity maintain'd by Catholicks even so he closes with the same Popish Faction in asserting 2. That separating from the Church of England is a separating from the Catholick Church as if the Catholick Church had been as much confin'd within the bounds of the Church of England as the Papists says within the limits of Rome Whence whoever separates from the Church of England cuts himself from the Catholick Church puts himself out of a state of salvation He is extra Ecclesiam extra quam nulla salus they are all while Schismaticks in a state of damnation But surely if these men believed so much methinks they should not be at rest until all their unscriptural impositions were removed unless they have greater kindness for such trifles than they have for such immortal souls for whom Christ dyed By this Doctrine we may understand why 't is that some of our Clergy shew greater tenderness towards Drunkards Swearers Papists than towards poor Dissenters The former may hold communion with the Church of England and consequently with the Catholick Church when the others are undoubtedly in a state of damnation as if we were all in the same state with Hereticks I 'le not as easily I might now enlarge in shewing the weakness which the Dean's Substitute hath discovered in the management of this Grotian or Cassandrian Design but only tell him That if he had consulted that excellent Treatise The Grotian Religion discovered by Mr. Baxter he might have seen an unanswerable confutation of a great part of his Book or if he had rather applied himself unto that great Prelate Bishop Bramhall a man of extraordinary worth for his Learning he might have better digested his Notion For there he would have been furnished with such distinctions about Communion that would
Comment on the former entituled The English Pope Printed at London in the same Year 1643 and he will tell us That after Con had undertook the managing of the Affairs matters began to grow to some Agreement The King Required saith he such a Dispensation from the then Pope as that his Catholique Subjects might resort to the Protestant Churches and to take the Oaths of Supremacy and Fidelity and that the Pope's Jurisdiction here should be declared to be but of Humane Right And so far had the Pope consented that whatever did concern the King therein should have been really performed so far as other Catholick Princes usually enjoy and expect as their due And so far as the Bishops were to be Independent both from King and Pope there was no fear of breach on the Pope's part So that upon the point the Pope was to content himself amongst us in England with a Priority instead of a Superiority over other Bishops and with a Primacy instead of a Supremacy in these Parts of Christendom which I conceive no man of Learning and Sobriety would have grudged to grant him It was also condescended to in the name of the Pope that Marriage might be permitted to Priests that the Communion might be administred sub utraque specie and that the Liturgy might be officiated in the English Tongue And though the Author adds not long after that it was to be suspected That so far as the Inferiour Clergy and the People were concerned the after performance was to be left to the Popes discretion yet this was but his own Suspicion without ground at all And to obtain a Reconciliation upon these advantages the Archbishop had all the reason in the world to do as he did in ordering the Lords-Table to be placed where the Altar stood and making the accustomed Reverence in all approaches towards it and accesses to it In beautifying and adorning Churches and celebrating the Divine Service with all due Selemnities in taking care that all offensive and exasperating passages should be expunged out of such Books as were brought to the Press and for reducing the extravagancy of some Opinions to an evener temper His Majesty had the like Reason also for Tolerating lawful Recreations on Sundays and Holydays But the Doctor goes on If you would know how far they had proceeded towards this happy Reconciliation the Popes Nuncio will assure us thus That the Universities Bishops and Divines of this Realm did daily embrace Catholick Opinions though they professed not so much with Pen or Mouth for fear of the Puritans For example They hold that the Church of Rome is a true Church That the Pope is Superiour to all Bishops That to him it appertains to call General Councils That 't is lawful to pray for the Souls of the departed That Altars ought to be erected of Stone In sum That they believe all that is taught by the Church but not by the Court of Rome Another of their Authors tells us as was elsewhere noted That those amongst us of greatest Worth Learning and Authority began to love Temper and Moderation That their Doctrines began to be altered in many things for which their Progenitors forsook the Visible Church of Christ As for example The Pope not Antichrist Prayers for the Dead Limbus Patrum Pictures That the Church hath Authority in determining Controversies of Faith and to interpret Scriptures about Free-will Predestination Universal Grace That all our Works are not Sins Merit of good Works Inherent Justice Faith alone doth justifie Charity to be preferr'd before Knowledg the Authority of Traditions Commandments possible to be kept That in Exposition of the Scripture they are by Canon bound to follow the Fathers And that the once fearful names of Priests and Altars are used willingly in their Talk and Writings In which compliances so far forth as they speak the Truth saies Heylin for in some points through the Ignorance of the One and the Malice of the Other they are much mistaken there is scarce any thing which may not very well consist with the established though for a time discontinued Doctrine of the Church of England The Articles whereof as the same Jesuit hath observed seem patient or ambitious rather of some sense wherein they may seem Catholick And such a sense is put upon them by him that calls himself Franciscus â Sancta Clara as before was said So far Heylir Thus to carry on this Recenciling Design all the care imaginable must be taken to humour the Papist not only by prosecuting the Puritan with the greatest severity but the Pope must not any longer be stigmatized with the name of Antichrist all exasperating passages in any Book brought to the Press must be expung'd not one word of the Gunpowder-Treason for said Baker the Bishop of London's chaplain We are not now so angry with the Papists as we were twenty years ago and that there was no need to exasperate them and therefore the Book concerning the Gunpowder-Treason must by no means be reprinted the Divine Service must be in some respects altered that whereas the Reformers in Queen Elizabeth's time had a greater kindness for the Pope than those in H. 8. and Ed. 6. manifested by expunging a clause against the Pope viz. From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormities Good Lord deliver us Even so in imitation Archbishop Land changes some phrases in the Book of Prayers for the fifth of November So far a Church of England Dr. To which I might add several other instances but I wish there had not been the woful occasion of insisting on so much By this time the Reader may see cause to suspect at least the Deans Substitute who in the Defence of the Dr. gives us the scheme of the old Grotian model so much esteemed by the Archbishop Laud who in his walking towards Rome kept most exactly thereunto But notwithstanding this caution must be had that we reproach not all the Church of England as if they had been such as this Author for I do verily believe there are very few this day in England among the Conforming Clergy who will approve of this mans notion but probably may judg themselves as much concerned to oppose it as any among the Dissenters I 'm sure Abbot Archbishop of Canterbury and Usher Primate of Ireland were persons of quite another principle and temper And not only Abbot and Usher but if we may judg of a Queen Elizabeth Protestant by the Writings of the famous Hooker and Dr. Field we may be sure that this man to say nothing of the Dean hath notwithstanding the great talk of the glory of the first Reformation forsaken the notion the old church of England had of the church and of such as are judged Schismatical falling in with the French Papacy about Church-Government as I will evince in the next Section SECT II. The Deans Substitutes agreement with the Papists about Schism even when he differs from the
Informer in constant danger of Fines c. and of more miseries than I can with delight reherse However though there are considerations enough from the world to byas our minds in a seeking for the Truth to lean towards Conformity yet desiring to approve our selves sincere towards God we find That we cannot without sin conform we cannot without sinning deliberately and knowingly comply with the Episcopal Impositions and if we should notwithstanding conform to live and die Conformists we should knowingly and deliberately sin yea and die under the guilt thereof which is a thing so hazardous to the soul that we durst not touch with Conformity lest we die lest we die eternally We censure not such as do conform because they not lying under the same convictions of Conscience as we do may not by their Conformity run that hazard which we unavoidably must should we against the light of our Consciences comply There is a great difference between those that act according to the directions of their Consciences and such as act contrary thereunto For which reason I wonder that our great Church-men should say that Mr. Baxter represented all Conformists as a company of Perjured Villains meerly because he shew'd that if the Nonconformists should contrary to the Dictates of their Conscience conform they should be guilty of Perjury and several other great sins But though this be the truth yet there are some who will not believe it who say we do we what we can for their satisfaction will count us a pack of Hypocrites For which reason that I might anticipate the censure I laid down the Principle unto which Dissenters do most firmly adhere the discussing which is what they do most sincerely desire The Principle is this That the word of God contained in Scripture is the only Rule of the Whole and of every part of true Religion As for external circumstances as time and place c. being no part of though necessary appendages unto our Religion From this Principle I proceed to this Conclusion That whatever part of the Service of the Church of England is impos'd on us as so necessary a part of our Religion as to be a term of Communion if not agreeable to the word of God in Scripture that Imposition is sinful Our Adversary considers that such as live in England and yet are not of the Church of England do not belong unto the Catholick Church that is they are all in a state of damnation Hence 't is we must according unto him be a member of the Church of England or be damned We are willing with all our hearts to be members of the same Church with them i. e. to be members of the Catholick Church is what we desire But this say they we cannot be but by complying with their imposed terms To which we reply Let their terms be as Catholick as they pretend their Church is and we 'l comply i. e. Let them keep to a few certain and necessary things let them not impose as terms of Union any thing but what is according to the Word of God in Scripture we are satisfied the Controversie is at an end But if they will take on 'em to make that a part of true Religion yea so necessary a part as to make it a term of our communion with the Catholick Church 't is a sinful encroachment on the Prerogative of the Lord Jesus Christ with which we dare not complâ— If they expeâ—t our compliance why do they not shew the Scriptures that declare the things they impose to be so necessary a part of true Religion as to be a form of our communion with the Catholick Church They must not only shew that those things are aâ—reeable to true Religion but moreover that they are so necessary a part thereof that whoever conforms not to them when impos'd is â—pso â—â—sact cut off from the Catholick Church This they can never do and therefore can never clear themselves from being the Faulty dividers When we provoke 'em to shew us what Scriptures direct them to their Impositions we are turn'd off with Where is it forbidden as if they had acted exactly to the Rule * Si objiciant in sacris literis non haberi Invocandos esse Sanctos venerandas Imagines abstinendum à Carnibus in t aliquid ejâ—sâ—nodi non ergo ista esse facienda nos contra objiciamus quidem Efficacius Hâ—c Sacris Literis non Prohiberi atque sine piccato fieri posse quia â—â—hi non est Lex ibi nec prâ—evaricatio Cosâ— Irstit Chriâ—t l. 2. c. 1. Costerus the Jesuit gave his young Scholars If any object Where are those points viz. The Invocation of Saints The worshipping of Images The abstaining from flesh and the like found in Scripture and because not found in Scripture therefore to be rejected To which saith the Jesuit answer thus Ask where 't is forbidden in Scripture if not forbidden in Scripture 't is no sin to observe 'em for where there is no Law there is no transgression So far Costerus To whom we rejoyn That the holy Scriptures being the only Rule of the Whole and of Every part of true Religion if these things be not according to the Scripture 't is because there is no truth in ' em There must be an exact correspondency and agreeableness between the Rule and its Regulate The Regulate must be brought to the Rule and if it doth not agree with it 't is because the Regulate is not Right The word of God in Scripture is the Rule what Religion soever varies from the Rule 't is a false Religion Rectum est Index sui obliqui There are some Religions are larger than the Rule There are other Religions that fall short of the Rule They who embrace any Notion as a part of their Religion which is not to be found in Scripture is too large for the Scripture and such as reject what the Scripture injoins have a Religion too short The one puts the Scripture on the Rack to stretch it to their Religion but the other pares off a considerable part of Scripture that the Rule may not exceed their Religion But such as keep exactly to the word of God in Scripture who neither go beyond nor fall short of it are in the right To make that a part of our Religion which is not to be found in Scripture is to take that for a part of our Religion which God hath not made a part thereof which is sinful How much more so is the making it a term of communion That the things in controversie between the Church and the Dissenter are not to be found in Scripture and consequently are no part of true Religion is evident not only because we can't understand where 't is to be found nor because the Church-men cannot direct us where to find it but because they themselves look on 'em as indifferent i. e. as what is not injoin'd us in the word of God
q. d. as what is not according to the word of God All this being most plain and obvious to an ordinary Capacity that is not biassed by Prejudice c. Let the world judge who is in the FAULT They who keep close to Scripture or they who recede therefrom They who will do any thing but Sin for Peace Or they who will exercise their Authority and impose unnecessary things with the greatest Violence imaginable I say with the greatest Violence imaginable for they are impos'd with such a severe Threatning anrex'd that whoever refuses a compliance is cut off from the Catholick Church and given over to the Devil Hence 't is that they imposing Indifferent things as necessary to Salvation do according to Dr. Stillingfleet's own Rule declare themselves to be the Schismatical Dividers I say according to Dr. Stillingfleet's own Rule compar'd with his Substitutes Notion In the Doctor 's Unreasonableness of Separation p. 213. he saith That there are three Cases wheren the Scripture allow of Separation The last of which is When men make things Indifferent Necessary to Salvation and divide the Church upon that account and this was the Case of the false Apostles who urged the Ceremonies of the Law as necessary to Salvation Now although St. Paul himself complied sometimes with the practice of them Yet when these false Apostles came to enforce the Observation of them as necessary to Salvation then he bids the Christians at Philippi to beware of them i. e. To fly their Communion and have nothing to do with chem From this Rule of Dr. Stillingfleet it must follow That if the Church of England make things Indifferent Necessary to Salvation our Separation from the Church is allowed by the Scriptures yea commanded and enjoyned We must beware of 'em i. e. to fly their Communnion and have nothing to do with them But that things Indifferent are made necessary by the Church of England according to his Doctrine doth appear irrefragably That which is Necessary to our Communion with the Catholick Church is according to his Doctrine necessary to Salvation But Indifferent things are Necessary to our Communion with the Church of England which is One with the Communion with the Catholick Church in that according to him they are made necessary to our Communion with the Church of England which is One with the Communion with the Catholique Church according to his constant Judgment Ergo. Or in other Terms Whatever is made necessary to our being Members of the Catholique Church is made necessary to Savation for to be Members of the Catholick Church and to be in a state of Salvation is the same and to be Members of the particular Church of England and Members of the Catholick Church is one and the same with our Author p. 248. As if it had been said To be Members of the Church of England is to be in a state of Salvation but not to be Members of the Church of England is to be out of a state of Salvation Whence what is made necessary to our being Members of the Church of England is made necessary to our Salvation that is The many indifferent Ceremonies impos'd as terms of our Communion with the Church of England are made necessary for Salvation according to our Author For which reason the Scripture allows our Separation yea the Scripture bids us beware of her that is to fly her Communion and have nothing to do with her Thus the Doctor in conjunction with his Substitute furnishes us with an unanswerable Argument to clear the Dissenter from the odious Sin of Schism which in short is this From such as make Indifferent things Necessary to Salvation we must Separate This is Dr. Stillingfleet's But the Church of England makes Indifferent things necessary to Salvation This is the Dr's Substitutes Notion Ergo We may yea we must Separate that is 'T is the Will of God we should Separate or 't is our Duty and therefore not our Sin to separate i. e. We are not the Schismaticks This is Argumentum ad Hominem and either this Author must quit his Doctrine or acquit us of Schisme But to treat our Author with the greater Civility we 'll suppose him to be so tenacious of his own Doctrine that he 'll rather discharge us of Schisme than abandon his beloved Notions for which reason seeing 't is on all sides acknowledged that there is a Faulty Division among us and consequently a Faulty Divider who is the Schismatick He must be either the Dissenter or the Conformist but not the Dissenter as we have already prov'd from our Author 's own Topicks Ergo the Conformist Here we might have put an end to this Discourse and would do so had not our Author 's fertil Brain furnish'd us with another Argument that doth as fully evince the Conformist to be the Schismatick as the former clear'd the Dissenter In the management of this Argument we 'll consider the Netion of Dr. Peter Gunning and Peirson as compared with our Author The I earned G. and P. in a Conference with the Papists assert That a Superiours unjust casting any out of the Church is Schismatical If the Governours of the Church do by sinful Impositions or unjust Excommunications cast any out of the Church they are Schismatical This our Author won't deny But according to his Notion The Church of England are guilty of such Impositions and do unjustly Excommunicate Dissenters 1. That the Impositions are sinful is evident in that Indifferent things as has been prov'd are made necessary to Salvation The making any indifferent thing Necessary to Salvation is sinful But the imposing indifferent things as terms of Catholique Communion is the making such things Necessary to Salvation Ergo Sinful Ergo The Imposer is Schismatical But 2. Whoever doth unjustly Excommunicate any are Schismatical This is Dr. Gunning's sense But the Church of England if they agree with our Author Excommunicates the Dissenter unjustly Ergo c. That the Church of England Excommunicates unjustly according to the Doctrine of our Author is demonstrable even in that the Church doth as he would have it by Excommunication cast thousands out of a state of Salvation for not complying with little uncommanded things Whence I argue thus To Excommunicate or cast us out of a state of Salvation merely because we cannot comply with what God never commanded us is to Excommunicate unjustly But so doth the Church of England if we may pass a censure on her as our Author provokes us to do for the Church according unto him doth Excommunicate that is shut Heaven-gates against such to whom our Lord Jesus Christ hath promised the opening them To illustrate this with the greater clearness I beseech the Reader to consider That Salvation is promised by Jesus Christ unto all such as do sincerely Believe truly Repent and lead an Holy Life in all Godliness and Honesty Though a man may be daily guilty of lesser Evils yet if he believe in Christ
and renders sincere Obedience to the known Will of God he shall be saved All which may be even with those who being verily perswaded that their compliances with the present Impositions are sinful durst not Conform that is The Promise of Salvation is made by Christ to many who do not conform to the Impâ—sitions of the Church of England But Salvation by our Author is denied unto such their Non-compliance is enough to make 'em Schismatical to cut them off from Christ and the hopes of Salvation which being no ways justifiable in the Conscience of any sober man the Dissenters are unjustly Excommunicated and he that so Excommunicates is Schismatical 'T is most certain That many good Christians cannot conform to the imposed terms of Communion with the Church and that for this single Reason they are Excommunicable if not actually Excommunicated from the Church that is put out of a state of Salvation The which being so 't will unavoidably follow That either the Excommunication is unjust or That the Church hath greater Power than he that is the Lord of it to open and shut the gates of Heaven If the latter then the Church sets itself up above all that is called God in this world and Christ in the other For whereas Repentance towards God and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ is sufficient for our Salvation these add somwhat more to wit an Obedience to new Impositions threatning the neglect with Damnation But if the former if the Excommunication is unjust then according to Dr. Gunning with the addition of our Author Our Ecclesiastical Governours are the Schismaticks The Argument here in short is this He that doth unjustly Excommunicate any out of the Catholick Church is a Schismatick This is Dr. Gunning's But the Church of England shutting those out of Salvation to whom Christ hath promised it Excommunicates unjustly This is our Authors Therefore the Church of England according to the Position of our Author is the Schismatick Hereby we may easily perceive what an admirable Defender the Church of England hath in the Defender of the Dean and how little the true Protestant Clergy of the Church are beholding to this man who insists on such Notions as do necessarily lead judicious men to conclude the Church of England Schismatical But to return to our Author who leaping over all the difficulties though but hinted in the Enquiry runs unto another Question viz. From Ceremonies to Circumstances form the Parts of their Religion to the external Appendages thereunto confounding the one with the other and then runs triumphantly assuring his Reader That 't is impossible to worship God or exercise any act of Religion but it must be in some time or in some place it must be done in some circumstances therefore we may make some things a part of our Religion which God has not At this rate he fills up a great part of his Second Chapter Insisting on nothing but what had its answer in that Enquiry he attempted to confute Therefore if I should say no more than what I have in giving the true state of the Controversie it would be sufficient For it lies on him either to prove to our Conviction that We may without sin comply with their Impositions i. e. He must so far effectually enlighten our Conscience as to help us to see that the Impositions are not sinful and that we may lawfully Conform or shew That we must Conform contrary to the Convictions of our Consciences and render a blind Obedience unto their Commands Believing as the Church believes or they ought to remove the Impositions or acknowledge that our Compliances are not sinful One of these must be done Let him do either and the Controversie will be ended and the Dissenters freed from Schisme But if he cannot enlighten us to see the Lawfulness of their Impositions nor perswade us to render a blind Obedience nor remove the Impositions but plead for their continuance 't will appear That they by imposing what in their Judgments is but Indifferent as things necessary to our Salvation are the Schismaticks This might suffice as a full Answer But that nothing may escape consideration that our Author may think deserves it I le reflect a little on his main strength If there be any force in this Argument says he it consists in these two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with And secondly That the Opinion of Dissenters That indifferent things are unlawful in the worship of God is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of some indifferent things cannot meerly upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks and if the opinion of Dissenters that all indifferent things are unlawful be not a sufficient reason for parting with them then there may be no fault in the Episcopals will not nor a sufficient justification or excuse in the Dissenters cannot p. 9. First saith he If there be any force in this Argument it consists in two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with This is his mistake he should have said That if there be any strength in the Enquiry it lyes in this viz. No one indifferent Ceremony must be made so necessary a part of Religion as to be a term of Communion 'T is this he should have considered For you sin by insisting on any one or more indifferent things so zealously as to make 'em terms of Communion with your Church and consequently with the Church Catholick so as to deny us a right to Christ and Salvation for a mere non-compliance You can part with your indifferent Ceremonies without sin and open the door of Salvation to the wretched Dissenter if you will even when they cannot without sin comply with your intolerable Impositions The indifferent things you impose you impose as terms of our Communion with you which you make to be the same with Catholick Communion that is of Salvation 2. You add the second thing viz. That the Opinion of Dissenters That Indifferent things are unlawful is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not say you lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of Indifferent things cannot merely upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks c. You should remember that I distinguished between Ceremonies and Circumstances between what is a part of Religion and Intrinsecal thereunto and what is Extrinsecal only But you run to external Circumstances that are necessary in Thesi which is off from the point in hand You run from what is Indifferent to what is Necessary as if we called you to part with any necessary thing whereas there is never any indifferent Ceremony that is grievous to our Consciences but you may part with or cease to impose 'em and yet
Church which he himself takes to be such a Union But he cannot tell he says p. 561. why it is Accidental to the Church of Christ to be National any more then to be Universal or Patriarchal and Metropolitical any more then Universal but when I tell him that the Body of Christ which is his Church may subsist though there were never a Patriarch or Metropolitan in the Earth I hope he can see if he will how the consideration of the Church as Patriarchal or Metropolitical and so National must be Accidental to it And as for Christs command of planting Churches p. 16. in the whole world and so in Nations and Cities and Towns requiring Unity and Communion every where among Christians it may warrant the Combinations of Patriarchal Metropolitical National Diocesan and Parochial Churches to this end if he please provided only that these forms be held Accidental forms according to humane prudence and not the Essential form of the Church of Christ according to divine institution To the question whether a National Church be Political he offers something p. 562. and says the Dean in his Opinion hath answered with great Judgment in his denying any necessity of a Constitutive Regent part to be Essential to a National Church But I will make it appear that either the Dean or his Defender do speak here with little Judgment It is the Notion this Author hath proposed to publick consideration that the Bishops in every Nation are to Govern the Church by consent that is as Colleagues per litteras formatas when they convene not and when they do by their Canons in a Convocation This he makes throughout his Book to be of Christs appointment holding Episcopacy to be Jure Divino with others of his party If this then be true this Author hath found out a Constitutive Regent part yea an Ecclesiastical Constitutive Regent part of the Church in every Nation where there are Christians and Bishops And when he hath found out a Head for the Doctor how can he thus applaud the Doctors answer that denies the Church to have one or sayes there is no necessity of any When he does prove it to be a Church Political and the Doctors answer includes a denyal of it to be so how comes this man to be so full of reverence here with these words in his mouth To this the Dean answers in my poor Opinion with great Judgment and Consideration It is with great Judgment indeed is it not that the Dean hath given up the Cause of the Bishops And with great Judgment is it not that this man hath assumed the Prerogative of the King to their Colledge Let him take heed least he bring himself into question Many Churches Associated for mutual help and concord are a Church only in a loose sense but those that are constituted of one Regent and subdite part are Churches in a Political proper sense It is no body Political without one common Governour Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical Thus says Mr. Baxter p. 563. Unto which says this Author Herein does his strength p. 564. consist Answ I acknowledge it does and what hath he to weaken it I will Transcribe what he says If we deny this that though a National Church be one body yet it is not such a Political body as he describes which differs from secular forms of Government by that ancient Canon of our Saviour It shall not be so among you the controversie may be at an end and a National Church may be one body in an Ecclesiastical though not in a Civil Political sense This is the help the Dean must expect from his Defender and if the Doctor be not ashamed of his own answer for this desense sake I know not what should put any man to shame This man tells me in his Preface he will interpose between the Dean and shame in this Controversie Upon this account therefore I will take leave to tell him that he does here manifestly betray a raw ignorance which ought to shame him He understands the term Political to be Commensurate with Civil as if a Government Ecclesiastical could not be Political as well as a Government Civil that is as if a Church could not be Political as well as other Societies He does yet discover the same more then by words for he hath found out a Head for the Church which is Aristocratical and yet thinks the Church cannot be Political unless it have some Head that is Personal or as if a Head Collective were not One Head as vvell as one that is Monarchical This man vvho hath interposed betvveen shame and the Doctor must take shame upon him seeing he calls upon me to do my part honestly in the same place I say this man hath found an Ecclesiastical Constitutive Head of the Church and that of Christs own Institution if he understands what he drives at and yet he and the Doctor will not allow the Church of England to be Political I will advise him to consult with Bishop Gunning and the excellently learned and yet humble Mr. Dodwell who are living seeing he hath not taken his Notions from Bramhal or any other who are dead as I conjecture that he may be instructed better before we hear any more from him Mr. Baxter indeed understands himself throughly and tells us Association of Churches for Concord gratia Unitatis are no proper Churches But an United Colledg of Bishops for government gratia Regiminis is a formal Ecclesiastical Head about which was the Original Question And this this bold and herein but half informed Author who will interpose between shame and the Doctor doth not understand neither and as soon as he hath read this will he own the shame he hath taken upon him Above all is there any man unless so forward a one would ever have produced that saying of our Saviour If shall not be so among you for the proving a National Church to have no Head or that the Churches of Christ must not therefore be Political I shall not be blamed I hope therefore if I say now again what I said to the Doctor That if this man be not ashamed for himself and the Doctor I must be ashamed for them both If we deny this says he the Controversie were at an end Well but when it cannot be denyed we must look farther P. 565. We grant says he a National Church is a Political Society for Government by consent without Superiority is Government I grant too Church Governours united and governing by consent are the Pars Imperans and the people submitting to such Government in obedience to the Commands of our Saviour are the Pars Subdita and all this is true without a constitutive Kegent Head I Answer if he grants or rather asserts thus much a Government by consent understanding by it the Episcopal Colledg or Cyprians One Episcopacy as the Governing part and the People by the Law of Christ subdite to it then hath he found
summe or substance of the Apostle in his Epistles altogether I say also that this is manifestly here destitute of reason The Apostle requires that all Christians should walk by the same rule in things whereto they have attained Therefore they must walk by the same rule in things whereto they have not attained Such is his force This walking by the same rule I am perswaded is a phrase or expression onely signifying the doing as others doe Now because they that had the knowledg of their liberty might doe as others did and were to use it must those that had not that knowledg do so likewise The contrary is apparent for they shall sin against their consciences if they doe The like case is here The Conformist among us looks upon all and every of those things that are injoyned about Uniformity in the Church to be lawfull and he values himself for perfect in this discerning indifferent things but the Nonconformist thinks these things unlawfull and that he shall sin if he yields to them and what if herein he be weak must the weak and perfect must both these here now walk by the same rule or do as one another do Nay must there be a Rule made on purpose by Authority about these very things wherein the difference lies to force them to act both alike when one of them if they do cannot possibly act in faith and so must needs sin Nothing more contrary to what I have laid down Nothing more contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostle I will add if by this Rule there be more meant then a Phrase and some Rule he will account there must be I would fain know why this Rule should be any other then that of the same Apostle otherwhere As many as walk according to this rule peace be upon them and the Israel of God And what is that Rule but Christianity it self the great Rule of the Christian Religion or Doctrine of the Gospel And what then will follow from thence The Doctor I remember reflects upon my Peaceable Design for being called an Answer to his Sermon I will undertake now upon this Supposition that that Title was as fit for my Book as this Text was for his Sermon Because we must walk according to the general rule of the Christian Religion in all things that are required of us as we attain to the knowledg thereof Therefore we must Conform to the Canons and Liturgy of the Church of England This is the Doctors Sermon upon that Text and I will tell you the Inference now of his Defender upon that Sermon Therefore must all that Conform not in the excluding themselves from Communion with the Church of England be excluded also out of the Catholick Church and consequently out of the Kingdome of Heaven By the way since I wrote this I was reading Doctor Owen and I find that he falls in with the last Interpretation of the Rule and he hath these words upon it Let the Apostles rule be produced says he with any probability of proof to be his and we are ready to subscribe and conform to it To which Doctor Stillingfleet Replies This is the Apostles rule to go as far as they can and if they can go no farther to sit down and not to break the peace of the Church Unto this Dr. Owen Answers The Apostles rule is not that we should go as far as we can but that so far as we have attained we must walk by the same rule I interpose here and say to the Doctor This is this must be the rule of the Apostle supposing that rule be meant as he understands it that is of the great rule of faith and love or law of the Gospel For this is part of that Rule It is part of that love we owe the Magistrate and our Conforming Brethren to go as far as we can or to come as near as we can to them But I answer then to the Dean It is part also of the same Rule to go no farther then we can Our duty of love requires the one Our duty of faith requires the other We may not doe any thing which we cannot doe in faith but we break the rule as it is the rule of faith as well as if we do not doe what we can we shall break the rule as it is the rule of love Whatsoever is not of faith is sin Now when the Dean hereupon goes on and teaches us that we must sit down and not break the peace of the Church when we can go no farther I Reply there is a breaking the peace of the Church in his sense or in òurs If we understand breaking the peace of the Church in his sense which is going from the Church to our Meetings I say he is out and that we must break the peace of the Church if this be the breaking it for this is that which is required of us in that branch of the Rule that we must go no farther then we can But when we go to private Meetings and leave the Church in this case where we suppose a man cannot act in faith or with perswasion in his conscience that it is lawful for him to go thither it is no breaking the peace of the Church in our sense but a part of our duty wee say of going no farther then we can We go as far as we can with them in holding the same Doctrine and Sacraments in acknowledging them as true Churches maintaining a Communion in love with them and doing all the good offices we can to them and when we can go no farther in this lyes our duty of going no farther then we can that we meet for worship otherwhere To assemble I say for worship is one part of the rule Not to assemble but to forbear any thing when we cannot act in faith is another part of the rule Put them both together and it comes to this that To go to other meetings when we cannot go to Church must be walking by the rule if this rule be the great rule of faith and of love out of question This I speak in the person of Doctor Owen who can and do go to Church my self but there is one eminent thing said by that eminent great man and very much accomplished Doctor We do and shall abide by this Principle p. 250. that Communion in faith and love with the administration of the same Sacraments is sufficient to preserve all Christians from the guilt of Schism though they cannot communicate together in some rites and rules of Worship and Order If the Doctor makes good this he does our work and till the Dean debates this he says nothing To return I observe in the fourth place for the Digression it self does but lead me hither that this Authour does industriously endeavour to bring the Controversie between Conformist and Nonconformist to this issue If the Church requires of us any things as necessary to her Communion which are sinful the schism is
formed of an Independent National Church Political but not to be held as the Congregationalist supposes his Particular Independent One and They their Catholick to be of Divine but of Humane Institution for it is manifestly a thing Accidental to the Church of Christ that the Supream Magistrate and the whole Body of a Nation are Christian It should be declared then in such a Bill of Act of Parliament that the Church of England consists of the King as the Head and all the several Assemblies of the Protestants as the Body A Discrimination between the Tolerable and Intolerable is never to be gain-said by any Wise Man It is not for me or any One persons but a Convocation or Parliament to prescribe the Terms of National Communion but I would have all our Assemblies that are Tolerable to be made Legal by such an Act and thereby parts of the National Church as well as the Parochial Congregations That the Bishops should be declared Ecclesiastical Officers under the KING acting Circa Sacra only by Vertue of His Authority and Commission As Jehoshophat appointed Officers for Government in the Matters of God and the Kings Matters So should the Bishops be in Our Ecclesiastical as the Judges are in Civil Matters the Substitutes of his Majesty and Execute His Jurisdiction Upon this Account if any of the Eminent among the Non-conformists were Chosen to be Bishops they could not refuse it Let two or three the most fit of those Parties be the next that are called to this Function upon such an Act an commanded to Hold it and then would UNION indeed Commence Their Work in general should be to Supervise the Churches of both sorts in their Diocesses that they all Walk according to their own Order agreeable to the Gospel and the Peace of one another I am sensible unto what Distress a Congregational Minister may be brought in the exercise of Discipline over some potent turbulent and refractory Members and what Relief he might find in such a 〈…〉 al Ecclesiastical Officer as this I am sensible how the many inconveniences supposed of Congregational Episcopacy by this one onely means may be salved This shall Advance and not Lessen the outward Power and Honour of the Bishops I humbly Motion a Third Clerk for the Convocation to be added to the Two in every Diocess and chose out of the Non-conformists for the Unanimous prosecution of Holiness and Concord throughout all the Churches And the two Provinces of Canterbury and York should Unite in this Convocation for the making them one National Church and not two Provincial ones in a diverse Assembly By this means should one Organ more be added to this great Political Society for deriving an influence from this Head to these parts of the Body as well as Others which now seem neglected and to have no care taken of them It were the part of such a Convocation to Decree that neither Church should Unchurch one another That no members of Either should depart from One Church to the Other without a sufficient peaceable reason That when a man hath his choice to be of One Church which he will in regard to Fixed Communion he should Occasionally come also to the Other for maintaining this National Union There are these and other things of such a nature as these I should expect then would be moulded into Canons that kindly preventing all our scruples would render the Nation happy in the satisfaction of both Parties An Act of Parliament to this purpose would make the Church of England to be in Earnest such a Church as the Church-men would have us still think it the Best Constituted the most Exemplary and the most Glorious of any that is or indeed that well can be in this World But is not all this at last too Erastian I answer No. We suppose that every Parish where there is a Pastor and a Flock does contain in it such a Particular Church as is of Christs Institution That Christ committed to every such Church a compleat power of Doctrine Worship and Discipline That what Christ hath committed to his Church cannot be taken away by any That the Authority of the Magistrate is for care and oversight and so to protect and maintain this power but not to destroy it That the Church as National and Diocesan as part of the National and Parochial qua Parochial as part of the Diocesan are of Humane institution and owe their power and preservation of it to the Supream Magistrate That as the Magistrate does not take away or invade but preserve the power of the Keys invested in the Miinster but given with the Pastor himself to the Church No more can the Diocesans that Derive from him assume it to themselves and deprive the Particular Churches of it That so long as this Power is preserved there is no Erastianism maintained as to a Particular Church and as to the National there is no danger of it And thus I have offered my Mite to the Sanctuary that is so much as I have and what I think fit for Cultivation by Others whom GOD shall make Wise-hearted and Concern'd for the Welfare of Sion There is Room also here left for the farther Invention of Such in regard to many the like things as or greater then these For they that will may see something more in a few Sheets in part Entituled Animadversions upon the Debate between Dr. Stillingfleet and Mr. Baxter Concerning the National Church and Head of it J. H. THE END
In contradiction to which the Dean's Substitute's Assertion is p. 226. That Excommunication casts a man out of the visible Society of Christ's Church not of this or that particular Church only but of the Whole Christian Church He that is cast out of one Church is thereby cast out of all and separated from the Body of Christ which is but One. And therefore such are out of a state of Salvation As if it had been said in opposition to Mr. Hooker Such as are Excommunicate are shut out clean from the Visible Church yea and from the Mystical Church A Notion that Mr. Hooker considers as held by none but Papists for he immediatly addresseth himself to the Church of Rome thus With what congruity then saith he doth the Church of Rome deny that her enemies whom she holds always for Hereticks do at all appertain to the Church of Christ How exclude they us from being any part of the Church of Christ under the colour and pretence of Heresie when they cannot but grant it possible even for him i. e. the Pope to be as touching his own personal perswasion Heretical who in their opinion not only is of the Church but holdeth the chief place of Authority over the same The like may be said by way of Answer unto our Author Moreover the Learned and Judicious Dr. Field Son of the Church is as full in contradicting what is asserted by our Author For this Dr. of the Church discoursing about the Schismatick says lib. 1. c. 13. That their departure is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remain parts of the Church of God Schismaticks notwithstanding their Separation remain still conjoyn'd with the rest of God's people in respect of the profession of the whole saving Truth of God all outward acts of Religion and Divine Worship Power of Order and Holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remain parts of the Church of God The like is asserted of such as are cast out by Excommunication c. 15. But I 'll not enlarge any further having sufficiently evinc'd that the Opinions of this man who treats the Dissenters with so much scorn and contempt are such as were antiently by Queen Elizabeths Protestants exploded as Popish and at this very time I verily believe rejected by the greatest part of the Episcopal Clergy and that the Contest now is not so much between Dissenters and the Church of England as between a few under the name of the Church of England on the one part and the greater number of the Church of England with the Dissenter on the other The former under the notion of running down Dissenters are preparing materials to meet the Papist The other to the end they may the more effectually prevent the Designs of Rome have sent forth their Plea for the Nonconformist finding themselves concern'd to check the Insolence of those who in this day of common Calamity would ruine the conscientious Protestant Dissenter This being so I must beseech the Reader not to misapprehend me in what follows as if I had been speaking reproachfully of the Church of England because I cannot but discover how agreeable the Sentunents of the Deans Substitute about Church-Government are unto those embrac'd by the French Papist That I may the more clearly shew what are the mischievous Tendencies of our Author's Notion about Church-Government I will give in short the most distinct and truest state of the Controversie I can shewing what is granted by sound Protestants and what not What are the Doctrines of the Papists How far the French and Italian Papist agree and wherein they differ and in what respects the Dean's Substitute concurs with the French § 1. All are so far agreed as to conclude That God hath had a Church at all times in every Age of the World We might be very particular in considering the divers Denominations under which the Church falls answerable to the divers capacities of the Members thereof and the divers states in which it is and hath been which I shall at this time pass by § 2. That the Church is but One one Body united to one Head § 3. That this One Church must be considered as the Members thereof are scattered up and down the World c. and as they are joyned together in particular Societies The former is call'd the Church Universal the other a Particular Church The Papists themselves do acknowledge That the Church must be considered as Universal and as Particular though they look'd on the Universal to be such whose whole existence was in Particulars as Universale est unum in multis singularibus Whence it follows That such as are not members of a Particular Church they belong not unto the Catholick Visible Church This very Notion hath been embrac'd by some to wit the Old Independents but of late it hath been generally exploded by Divines of that name they leaving it to entertain such as the Dean's Substitute § 4. That the Church of Christ is under Government There is such a thing as Church-Government Jure divino The Papists both French and Italian The Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational or Anabaptist heartily agree in Thesi about this § 5. The great difference is concerning what that Church-Government is which is of Divine Institution Where 't is seated whether in a Particular or in the Universal Church and whether it be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical or mixt § 6. The Papists with whom the Doctor 's Substitute doth agree assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government That all Church-Officers belong to the Universal Church and have an Original Right to govern the whole Universal Church Take the notion as found in the Defence We must saith he consider that all the Apostles had relation to the whole Church and therefore though being finite creatures they could not be every where at a time but betook themselves to different places and planted Churches in several Countreys and did more peculiarly apply themselves to the government of those Churches which they themselves had planted and ordained Bishops to succeed them in their care and charge yet their Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church did still remain which they might re-assume when they saw occasion for it and which did oblige them to take care as far as possibly they could that the Church of Christ suffer'd no injury by the heresie or evil practises of any of their Colleagues P. 212. § 7. The Protestants excepting some obscure Writers assert particular Churches to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government among whom there are these differences 1. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from the Congregational and Anabaptistical about the extent of particular Churches e. g. the latter concluding that their number must be no more than are capable of personal communion the former contrarily judg That a company of a greater extent may be
included within the confines of a particular Church who in the management of their discourses concerning it give too great an advantage unto the Papacy 2. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from some of the Congregational concerning the nature of Discipline the Congregational being esteemed as espousers of a Democracy or Populacy the other against it 3. The Episcopal differs from the Presbyterian in that the Episcopal are for a Monarchy the Presbyterian for an Aristocracy § 8. All Protestants generally agree in asserting the Independency of particular Churches 'T is notorious that the Church of England established by Law is a particular National Church independent on any Foreign Power whatsoever Such is the constitution of our Church that what Bishop soever is found an abuser of his Power he is not accountable to any Colledg of Bishops but such as are conven'd by his Majesties Authority and that what apprehensions soever he may have of his being griev'd through any undue procedure he cannot make any Appeal to any Foreign Power from the King 'T is the King who is the Supreme Head of the Church of England there is no Power on earth equal unto or above his in Ecclesiastical Affairs To appeal unto any Foreign Power whether unto one Bishop singly or unto many by consent assembled 't is to do what tends to the subverting the present Constitution yea 't is to subvert the very foundation of our Government as 't is opposite unto a French or an Italian Papacy Whoever consults the many Laws made in Henry the 8th's time Edward the 6th's and Queen Elizabeths cannot but be fully satisfied that the Appeal of any Bishop or any other person from the King unto any other Foreign Power is contrary unto the ancient Laws of this Realm and that such as shall venture the doing so run themselves into a Praemunire For 't is most apparent that our National Church of England is a particular Independent Church That neither the Pope of Rome nor the Bishop of Paris nor any other Foreign Bishops have any Original Right or Power in relation to England and that therefore their assuming any such power is a sinful Usurpation All this is undoubtedly true Yet § 9. The Deans Substitute exposeth the Independency of Episcopal particular Churches as what is inconsistent with Catholick Union and asserts That if any Bishops abuse their Power they are accountable unto a General Council that is unto a Foreign Power whereby he doth his utmost to tare up the Church of England by the Roots to subvert his Majesties Supremacy as if all the Laws of the Land concerning it had not been of any force All this by Dr. Stilling fleet 's Defender That this is so I 'le evince from our Authors own words which are as follow And now I cannot but wonder saith he to find some Learned men very zealous assertors of the Independency of Bishops and to alledg St. Cyprians Authority for it for what ever difficulty there may be in giving an account of every particular saying in St. Cyprian certainly he would never be of this opinion who asserts but One Chair One Apostolical Office and Power which now resides in the Bishops of the Universal Church for when the same Power is in ten thousand hands it can be but One only by Unity of consent in the exercise of it and 't is very wild to imagine that any one of these persons who abuse this Power shall not be accountable to the rest for it i. e. to the Colledg of Bishops for saith he soon after if we consider the practise of the ancient Church we shall find that they never thought every Bishop to be Independent but as liable to the censure of their Colleagues as Presbyters and Deacons were to the censure of their Bishops P. 212. So far our Author who doth as it were expresly assert That the Archbishop of Canterbury though Metropolitan and Primate of England if he abuses his Power is accountable unto the General Council when by consent assembled that is the Archbishop who is not in power above any other Bishops as is by the Deans Substitute asserted abusing his Power is accountable to some Court above any in this Realm to a General Council a Colledg of Bishops § 10. Although the Papists generally assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all Church-Government as hath been already intimated yet there 's a difference between the French and Italian Papist about the kind of the Government the one insisting on an Aristocracy the other on a Monarchy i. e. the French holds That the pars Regens of the Universal Church is a General Council the Italian That it is one single person viz. the Bishop of Rome There hath been in the Church of Rome for some hundred years a great contest concerning the Supreme Regent part of the Universal Church Whether it be a General Council or the Pope Whether a General Council be above the Pope or the Pope above a General Council About which the Church of Rome is fallen into three parts as Bellarmine asserts 1. That the Pâ—pe is the Supreme Head of the Church and so much above a General Council that he cannot subject himself thereunto The Government of the Universal Church though mixt being composed of a Democracy Aristocracy and Monarchy yet principally 't is Monarchical The Supreme Power being immediately lodg'd in the Monarch who is the Bishop of Râ—me Christs Vicar and Peter's Successor he is above a General Council and not accountable to any on earth for any abuse he may be guilty of Of this opinion saith Bellarmine are all the Schoolmen generally especially Sanctus Antonius Jeannes de Turrecremata Alvarus Pelagius Dominicus Jacobatius Cajetan Pighius Ferrariensis Augustinus de Aneena Petrus de Monte c. Yea this is the sense of the Jesuits generally and of all such as are engag'd to support the Court of Rome as are the Italian Bishops for which reason I call it Italian Popery 2. There are some among the Canonists who assert That the Pope is above a General Council but yet may subject himself hereunto 3. There are others who assert That a General Council is above the Pope that the Supreme Governing-power over the whole Catholick Church is given them immediately that the Pope as every other Bishop is accountable to the General Council This is what hath been asserted by the Council at Constance Anno 1315. and by that of Basil Anno 1431. and by many Learned Divines in the Church of Rome viz. Cardinal Cameracensis Jeannes Gerson Jacobus Almain Nicolas Cusanus Panormitanus and his Master Cardinal Florentinus as also by Abulensis Gerson being a Chancellor at Paris had many followers among the French who at this very day assert That the Supreme Regent part of the Universal Church is a General Council for which reason I conclude that such as assert That a General Council is the Political Head or Regent part of the