be holding up of the hand in token of his owning the Church-Covenant c. Now Sir let me suppose as you do suppose that the Pastors of the Independent Churches should baptize several persons but never admit them into their Churches by this ceremony of holding up the hand let them baptize many thousands and these thousands chuse other Pastors who are rightly qualified and ordained by Prayer Fasting and Imposition of hands of the Eldership The Independents cannot charge these Churches with schism and separation from their Churches for they never admitted them by that ceremony and rite of Admission of holding up the hand into their Churches Now Sir apply it for about twenty years there was publick Baptism administred but not by your Liturgy much less with the Cross How many thousands do you think in the space of so many years may be baptized none of these were ever admitted into your Church by those words VVe receive this child c. and sign him with the sign of the cross But of many such do our Congregations consist who were never your members why then do you call them separatists from you Besides Sir your Liturgy admits of private Baptism and then no such admission by the Cross and abundance have been thus baptized without it to my knowledg For my own particular I cannot tell whither I was so admitted my Parents never told me so and for my godly Father I am sure he hated humane inventions in the Worship of God I was born they told me in winter time extream for cold the house half a mile from Church and I being their only Son at that time it 's a question whether they would carry me forth in such an extream cold season so far As for the Church-Register that nor any other that ever I saw specifies nothing of my being admitted into your Church by the Cross but only of my being baptized but that say you and truly is into the Catholick Church No Registers then recording who were so admitted it will be hard matter for these who are ancient to prove their admission into your Church and if we were not I know not how we can now be admitted For this Rite of Admission is used only at Baptism unless we will yield to be Rebaptized and so to be admitted by the Cross this you will not admit no more than we We read of the Apostles admitting of many believers God added to the Church Act. 2. ult but never that they used this rite of admission the sign of the Cross only this is our happiness we are more wife more holy greater lovers of Christ than ever the Apostles were though we profess we are built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets Ephes 2.20 that their examples are too low for us Besides Sir is it not meet that when children come to years of discretion they should then be called before the Church to declare whether they own their Baptismal Covenant and also their admission into the Church they are reputed members of as you say the Independents require their Children to own the Church-Covenant let them now be members of the Church by their own consent Truly Sir if it come to that since we read what your Canons say of the Cross and how it is abused in Popery and how strange this is to the Apostolical admission we should not like it But are not children members of the same Churches with their Parents though we think so yet this is nothing to the practise of your Church For as in your administration of Baptism the Parental Covenant Abraham and his seed which is the ground of the Administration is wholly omitted so the Parent he must stand by as if he were a Heathen the business is only with the God fathers and Godmothers an invention of Higinus Bishop of Rome about 144 years after Christ who first added these to Baptism a person of no great worth of whom it is said Nihil praclari de gubernatione factis ejus commemorari potest So much cause have I to beg pardon for my defects in the education of my own Children that I would not be Sponsor for the child of the best friend I have in England But however this is not it but the sign of the Cross with such words that makes the admission into your Church 2. Q. But if there be a Separation or Schism the question is who is the cause of it A. Schism must needs be theirs whose the cause of it is saith Bishop Land in which you justifie him Ration Account p. 324 325. I humbly conceive that whoever imposes other terms of Communion than Christ hath imposed he or they are the cause of the schism We do not say you necessarily separate from all Churches that have errors or corruptions in them supposing those errors and corruptions be not imposed on us as conditions of communion Ibid. p. 332. I pray do not think that we suppose you impose such gross things upon us as Rome imposed on you No Sir we bless God for that great advance which was made by our first Reformers But whereas you say you retain only such innocent Ceremonies which were in use before the Papal power grew to that height I pray first are you sure that All the Churches did use them 2. Did they use all that are imposed on us I know they used others but did they use to tye up their Ministers to such syllables in prayer or else must not pray Did they kneel at the Lords Supper we know the contrary c. 3. Did they impose these as conditions of Communion But grant there were such Ceremonies and other things as now imposed upon us I will say of them Downh de Antichristo p. 151 what Bishop Downham saith of the opinions and traditions differing from the holy Scriptures which the Pontificians say were received of the Fathers they are to be referred to that Apostasie the Apostle foretold 2 Thes 2.3 when he said the mystery of iniquity already worketh v. 7. And I pray Sir since the examples and practises of those Churches are made so much use of against us let me give you my thoughts in a similitude of your own In your Epistle to your Rational Account c. dedicated to the King you tell his Majesty that the Church of England in the late confusions suffered an Eclipse but since his Majesties Restauration she hath recovered her luster c. Sir we observe when the Sun riseth it doth not suddenly go into an Eclipse but gradually so that common people do not mind it until the light of it be sensibly obscured so nor doth it come out of its Eclipse suddenly at once but gradually but it will not cease its motion till it appears in its glory It is the same with the Gospel-Church it did not presently suddenly fall into that dark Eclipse which it suffered under the Antichristian Papal power but it got into it by degrees the Churches not
great question about the Ruling Elder but I am not to meddle with it now Our Brethren of the Presbyterian judgment I suppose yield the question they may and ought to unite to make up one Governing Church but I do not fully understand their meaning Suppose twenty Parishes and Congregations that meet together to worship God and twenty Ministers belonging to them are these twenty Parishes distinct Churches as to Word and Sacraments so that he that is Pastor in one Church hath nothing to do in another Parish as to feeding them with Word and Sacraments but as to Government and Jurisdiction one Minister with the rest of the Classis have power over them all if this be the meaning I am not satisfied in it Dr. Stilling fleet hath declared his judgment they may unite I wish he had pleased to have opened his mind fully about it If he will yield but this That constitution of a Church wherein a Pastor cannot possibly feed with Word and Sacraments watch over and govern his flock according to Christ be it Diocesan or Parochial that constitution is not according to Christ and consequently unlawful as Scripture-light and nature's light will prove it I should it may be come up to him to perform our duty by Substitutes this may please them who make their own brains not Gods word their rule and such we little regard God hath now brought me to old age in my Pilgrimage divers disputes about Church-work and Government I have read absurd unscriptural practices in Churches I have seen woful disorders and wretched effects I have heard and known great scandal but so circumstanced that a single Pastor could not proceed by Mat. 18.15 c. to remove it I have met with one of the ablest Divines in England and exercised in Government was of the same opinion with me all arising from this notion of a single Pastor with such a people making a Church and all which mischiefs might be avoided if the uniting of several particular Congregations into one particular Church were admitted which Scripture-examples and Scripture-reasons will sufficiently justifie CHAP. IV. Of SCHISM THere remains yet one thing to be spoken to viz. the great crime of Schism with which we are charged by the Fr. Deb. in his first and second Book very deeply thus also Dr. Goodman and this is the common language of them all both in Pulpit and Press To which I would take liberty to speak more largely That Schism in the Church is a great crime is readily yielded by understanding men of all parties and no party will own it though they be guilty enough of it At this day all but Conformists are Schismaticks but to the Prelatical party this sin is a stranger yea in the time of our troubles when they were in France and refused Communion with the French Protestant Churches yet a Prelatical person was not then nor can be guilty of Schism but they were Schismaticks in France What is Schism Dr. Goodman tells us p. 112 113. Schism is a voluntary separation of ones self without cause given from that Christian Church whereof once he was a member He opens his Definition p. 113 114. First It is a separation c. i. e. When a man shall refuse to join in the acts and exercises of Religion used by such a society and to submit to its authority So he that refuseth Baptism the Lords-Supper or to submit to the censures of the Church Thus he But what he means by non-submission to the censures of the Church I know not for I know but few Nonconformists that are under the Censures of their Church nor how it will agree with his second which is 2ly It must be voluntary separation So that Excommunicate persons are no Schismaticks 3ly It is separation from a particular Church 4ly Of which Church he was once a member because Schism imports division making two of that which was but one before But according to this opening of his definition I pray Sir tell us how you will prove us Schismaticks For take up your third head 1. I pray tell us what is that particular Church you mean National Diocesan Parochial As for the National I know not how you understand a National Church for as I understand it you cannot prove us Schismaticks For the Diocesan you cannot prove us Schismaticks unless the refusing to submit to Prelatical Government be Schism For the Sacraments belong not to a Diocesan Church quâ sic I suppose Dr. Goodman's judgment to be the same with the Doctor that kept the Act at the Commencement at Cambridg I heard so much of one question that I laboured much to get a view of it but could not in our parts A Conformist told me it was to this purpose Recessio a regimine Episcopali est mortale schisma he told me Damnabile schisma as it was told him I say only this to it As God gives up some men to monstrous lusts in practise so he doth others to as monstrous opinions in judgment in these days So that it must be meant the Parochial Church But 2ly I pray prove that we were members once of that particular Church you mean For the Diocesan we deny any such Church especially as your constitution is to be according to Christs Institution and therefore were not are not members of it For the Parochial Churches I pray how are we members of them 1. Not by our Baptism if that were your meaning I would soon give arguments to confute it 2. Not by my dwelling within such a Parish-bounds though I am for the Vicinity of Church-members yet I was not so simple when I was in my Place to think that all the people that dwelt within the bounds of the Parish where I was Minister must own me for their Minister as if a spot of ground measured out by a Civil constitution must make a man a member of a Church which as such is a spiritual and free society I wish Dr. Goodman could convince all the Papists that dwell within these Parishes that therefore they are members of the Church of England or Schismaticks 3. I know nothing but consent that constitutes any man a member of a Church but that we never gave either to the Priests imposed upon us by a Patron and a Prelate nor to the Parochial Church as you take Parochial Wherefore upon Dr. Goodman's definition I argue where there was no union there can be no Schism But between us and your Church there was no union Ergo no Schism why then doth he charge us with it 3ly Suppose we were members yet still you are to prove there was no cause given for our separation which though you attempt to do yet Sir you must bring other manner of arguments than Rhetorical flourishes and humane stories to convince us But one thing more Why doth he tye up his definition to a particular Church I think a man may hold Communion with that particular Church of which he is a member and yet both he and that particular Church too may be guilty of Schism So
Quia haec scissio maximè perficitur apparet in debita communione Ecclesiastica recusanda id circo illa separatio per appropriationem singularem recto vocatur Schisma Ames Consc Having opened our description for finding out the true Schismatical Church or Persons let me give the Reader my mind under several Propositions First I reassume that which I mentioned before viz. the body of Christ is but one and that Schism is found in the visible body 2ly This body being but one hence then that this one body comes to be divided into so many particular Churches and meeting in so many particular places to celebrate the Sacrament and the other Institutions of Christ it is is but accidental and not essential to this body it being the consequent of that vast number which makes up this one body 3ly Such yet ought to be the Conformity of all these particular Churches unto the Gospel pattern the Law and Rule of their Head in their Faith and Doctrine in their Worship and Discipline in their conversation and practise I may add and constitutions that where-ever the members of this body come they may manifest their Vnity and Christian Ecclesiastical love to and with those particular Churches without any just scruple or doubt It being not in the power of any particular Church to vary in the least from that Rule and Pattern their Lord and Head hath given them for in so doing they deny him to be the Head and make themselves the Head The Head is to direct 4ly If any particular Church shall vary from that Pattern and shall impose upon the members of this body conditions of communion which our Head hath not imposed and such as from the light of Scripture we cannot but apprehend as sinful and yet will force them to subject to such conditions or else no communion that imposing Church is the schimatical Church and the guilt of Schism lyes at their door Let this Imposition be in Faith Worship Discipline or Manners Let the Church be Papal if that be a Church Episcopal Presbyterian Independent Anabaptistical Lutheran Calvinist no matter what the Imposing party is the Schismatick Why do you how dare you if you be members of that Head impose that upon the members of his Body which himself hath not we will not we must not admit any other wisdom or will in things which concern him but his own if we may admit three things which vary from his Rule we may admit three hundred and turn him out from being Head A great stir there is about the power of the Church in circumstances of worship If you mean inseparable circumstances ordering them according to the general Rule our Head hath given for the edification of the Church I know no Nonconformist such a block as to deny it but that the things imposed upon us as conditions of Communion in the Church of England as you call it are such the former discourse hath sufficiently proved the contrary Hence the Church-men of England are the Schismaticks 5ly It is an irrational thing that the Imposers of Conditions in things belonging to God should be the sole Judges of the lawfulness of their Impositions First Because there is but one word or Rule given to which the Imposers and Imposed are strictly bound and the Imposed may understand that Rule as well and better than the Imposfers else how the Protestant party will defend themselves against Rome the Imposer I know not they suppose they understood it better than Rome and so do you now think 2ly The Imposers have sin in them and may sin they are not Infallible therefore their Impositions must be judged by others 3ly If Imposers must be sole Judges and we must obey because they impose then never must the people of God obey the call to come out of Babylon Apoc. 18.4 for Imposing Babylon being the sole Judg will tell you her Impositions are all lawful and therefore you must obey 6ly Christ our Head no where requires but rather forbids our holding Communion with that Church which Imposeth such things as conditions of Communion which his members cannot subject to but with a doubtful conscience Rom. 14 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that doubteth is damned if he eat but not if because of doubting he dare not eat That there are some such giddy Christians who will find such exceptions against any Church that they cannot communicate with a clear conscience though there be no humane invention imposed but only what Christ himself hath appointed I do not deny but then let the guilt of Schism lye at their door But as to your Humane Injunctions we cannot submit to them but with a doubtful conscience at least 7ly There is great difference between a Church in which there are some corruptions but no Imposition and a Church where there is Impösition of Humane Inventions not agreeable to the Word with the first we would not doubt to communicate but not with the second Hence for the examples brought against us out of the Scripture where were corrupt Churches but no command for separation as under the Old Testament It 's very true how could they make a separation there from the Temple and the Levitical Priesthood without going expresly against the Word Might they erect another Temple Is there any such Temple under the Gospel For those in the New Testament 1st Their Churches were rightly constituted 2ly Their Pastors were rightly called 3ly Their Pastors sound in Doctrine we do not read they were charged with unsoundness 4ly For outward scandalous sins we read of none in their Pastors 5ly Their members for the major part sound though some particular members were unsound in Doctrine and conversation yet they were but few 6ly They had Christs Order and Discipline as he appointed to help themselves against those unsound and corrupt members Hence what cause was here for separation what understanding man would scruple communion with these Churches though there were some corruptions Compare yours and these But 1st Where was this Imposition of Humane Inventions in the Worship of God unless some few Schismaticks in the Church of Corinth we do not find the Churches charged with mixing any thing of theirs in the Worship of God 2ly Which of those Churches had sworn to the Great God to reform what was amiss in Doctrine Worship and Discipline and then return to their vomit again 8ly Christ our Head may hold communion with his members living in corrupt Imposing Churches and yet others of his members that see and know these corruptions must not hold communion with them still the Schism lyes upon the Imposer 1st Your Spiritual Courts having Excommunicated many gracious and sincere-hearted Christians for what cause we know a sad thing that such a solemn Ordinance should be so abused But with these gracious Christians Christ holds communion we are sure and will not your Church therefore hold Communion with them 2ly Christ holds Communion with his people in Babylon Apoc. 18.4 how were they made and kept his people else must we therefore hold Communion with Babylon 3ly Christ holds Communion with his people in the Lutheran Churches I
doubt not but if they impose upon you the Doctrine of the Ubiquity of Christs Humane Nature as a condition of Communion will you hold Communion with them 9ly Persecution joined to Imposition upon the members of Christs body what Christ never imposed renders the sin of the imposing-Imposing-Church much greater and refusing Communion with such a Persecuting Imposing Church is no Schism If Christ doth give us leave to flee from one Persecuting City to another where there is no Persecution then if a City be a Persecuting City by reason of a Persecuting Church surely he doth not bind us to hold Communion with that Persecuting Church 10ly Though one particular Church cannot communicate with another particular Church because of their corrupt Impositions yet if that Church which cannot communicate with the other will admit of those members of that Church who walk as become Christians in all other points excepting those Imposed corruptions which at present they cannot see being blinded with those deluding notions of indifferency and circumstances that Church cannot be charged with Schism though they refuse communion with the Imposing Church for we give communion to their members only exclude their imposed corruptions I do not mean such members as voluntarily took that solemn Oath c. of reforming those corruptions and now return to them again I look on this as a greater sin but for others I know several of our Churches would give them communion I do not say all will but then how are we Schismaticks 11ly Particular Churches may be so corrupt both in Doctrine Worship and Conversation that the sounder members not only may but ought to separate from them to save their own souls from infection and this is not Schism but Duty 12ly The case of those who are actual members of those Churches where these corruptions are is different from those who are no members of such Churches they have something else to do before they may separate 13ly If it be our sin to communicate with such as we know to be notoriously wicked unless we follow the rule of Christ Mat. 18.15 16 c. to seek the removal of them or do not our duty to reform the Pastor Cure of Church-Division pag. 100. or remove him as Mr. Baxtar tells us How we shall communicate without sin though we had nothing else to trouble us I know not that many such come to the Sacraments and who more boldly than they we know which way shall we reform them the Curate hath no Juridical power To the Spiritual Court must we go To the Diocesan must we go we are like to mend it carry Witnesses how many miles when yet the power we cannot own to be of Christ When all is done have a Writ upon our backs to bring us to the common Law and what then Whence to conclude they have dealt unworthily by us who bring the old Nonconformists against us to condemn us as if the state of this Church were the same with the true Church of England POSTSCRIPT AFTER I had finished I met with a Pamphlet Entituled The reason of Episcopal Inspection asserted in a Sermon at a Vesitation in Cambridg by John Templer D. D. The scope of the Sermon is to prove the Divine Right of Prelacy over Elders and Congregations And that the Author might shew himself to be a true Son of the Church he hath given sufficient proof in every particular For the Liturgy that is so perfect that he saith the most accuminated Intellect is not able with justice to charge it with any error p. 18. All then the old Nonconformists Parker Ames Bradshaw Cartwright Richardson Didoclavius c. together with the latter Nonconformists who were appointed with others by the Kings command to review the Liturgy and have given an account what things in it were to be corrected Calvin also for saying he found in it some Tolerabiles Ineptiae are all by this accuminated Doctor dub'd for so many Dunces They must be men of higher Acumens than these that can find any just cause against it these have said nothing considerable But whatever be the opinion of this Author yet Mr. Jeans a man of an acute Intellect one of their own and as great a Zealot once as he can be confesseth when he intended to write in defence of the Discipline and Ceremonies when he read these mens Books he found such arguments in them as were never answered and thereupon layed by his Pen his judgment being quickly altered but if you be a person of a more accuminated Intellect why did you not answer those dull fellows and therein do us a kindness that we might have conformed as well as you He tells the Reader p. 17. If this order of Prelacy had a period the Dissenters would never pitch upon any one way A. 1. The same saith the old Gentleman at Rome these Dissenting Protestants cannot pitch upon one way Hence no period must be put to the Papal Government 2ly You were very cunning Sir to pitch upon the warm side of the hedg thereby to save your selves from persecution and keep your fat Livings then cry up obedience to Governours pity the Martyrs had no better Intellects to have taken this course too and so have saved their stakes 3. If men would lay by their self-interests we might sooner pitch upon one way but so long as he sits at Rome and the Jews are uncalled I look but for little of this unity in the Gentile-Churches But to the main scope of his Sermon Had it been to prove the Divine Right of an Episcopus Praeses or Primus Presbyter as Ambrose calls a Bishop with the Presbytery or Ecclesiastical Senate I should not have been his opposer but it is an Episcopus Princeps and that not with but over the Presbytery superiour in power which he contends for how strongly proved we shall see His Text was Act. 15.36 Paul said to Barnabas Let us go again and visit our Brethren c. That the Doctor intended out of this Text to prove such a Visitation as was then when he Preached and so in England when Bishops visit I presume else he deceived him to whom he dedicates it and the four Doctors that Licensed it See how the Text will force it The Proposition or Antecedent is this Paul and Barnabas two Apostles Act. 14.14 Persons of extraordinary mission commission and qualifications for the office having by their Preaching converted many people from Heathenism to the Faith of Christ gathered them into Churches and set Elders over them These Elders and Churches being but all young Converts and through the relicts of corruption in them and the malice of Satan and his Emissaries without them being in danger to miscarry in Doctrine or manners these two Apostles go to visit the Churches which they had planted
discerning it the mystery of iniquity wrought it is no fancy of mine but the Apostles express words The subtil serpent he wrought among the Churches under fair pretences in the second Century some addition made to Worship and Government of the Church in the third Century more in the fourth Century more so increased the Eclipse still under fair reasons till the Serpent had got the man of sin into his Throne and the Prediction fulfilled So hath the Churches coming out of the Eclipse been but gradual in Doctrine Government Worship by our worthy Reformers but as the evil spirit deceived then by Gods permission to bring about the Prophesie so the Spirit of Christ in the hearts of our first Reformers wrought powerfully and so doth the same Spirit still work and will work till the Church be quite out of her Eclipse and comes to be satisfied with the Soveraignty and Wisdom of Christ declared in the simplicity of the Gospel let men call it schism fanaticism or what they please But Sir you tell us of Mr. Ball Mr. Hildersham Mr. Giffard c. worthy men I grant they were so and honour them much and Nonconformists who condemned Separation from your Church and no more was imposed than in their time and this takes up a great part of your Book Sir while some excellent men at home conformed but groaned under the burden as I remember Mr. John Rogers of Dedham an eminent Saint though he did conform I never saw him wear a Surplice nor heard him use but a few prayers and those I think he said Memoriter not read them but this he would do in his Preaching draw his finger about his throat and say Let them take me and hang me up so they will but remove these stumbling-blocks out of the Church How many thousands of choice Christians plucked up their stakes here forsook their dear friends and native Country shut up themselves in Ships to whom a prison for the time had been more elegible went remote into a howling Wilderness there underwent great hardships water was their common drink and glad if they might have had but that which they had given at their doors here many of them and all this suffering was to avoid your Impositions and that they might dwell in the House of God and enjoy all things therein according to his own appointment But what cared your Church for this let Gods people groan at home suffer abroad they shall do it rather than your Church will part with a few trifles as your own Mr. Carre calls the ceremonies Sir is this the spirit of the true Spouse of Christ But as I said the same Spirit will work which acted those holy men till the Church be totally out of her Eclipse what ever those worthy men you mention have said But to speak more close I deny that the state of your Church now is the same it was then when these worthy men condemned Separation from it For 1. There are many thousands now in England who were never admitted into your Church were never members of it then they could not condemn these as Separatists from it This I have proved before from your Interpretation of the sign of the Cross It was not so in their time 2 The Liturgy and the Homilies were then brought in out of necessity because of the want of gifts now it is imposed in scorn and opposition of gifts By what some of your Arch-deacons have spoken in your Courts and others we can conclude no other than it was composed to bring over the Papists to your Church and for several years the Papists did frequent your Divine Service but now it was imposed with such words as in my next that it was made an engine to turn Protestants out of your Church A Member of that Parliament that made the Act for Vniformity visiting his Sister a Lady who told it me related to her what they were about she disliked their Act and told him I see then you are laying a snare in the gate Ay said he if we can find any way to catch the Rogues we will have them 3. Then they were not required to assent and consent c. but now it is imposed with these terms and I am confident that divers who have subscribed with these terms do but lye 4. 'T is true we have the same 39 Articles that was before and those Articles were assented to and assent required in that Church Rational Account p. 54 55. But now you have told the world that Bishop Bramhall gives the sense of the Church of England thus viz. She does not define any of these Questions as necessary to be believed c. Neither do we look upon them as Essentials of saving faith c. Neither do we oblige any man to believe them but only not to contradict them And this is the opinion of the Grandees in this your Church this would have been abhor'd before 5. As those 39 Articles were believed by that Clergy so they did defend them and Preached them but this Clergy can both print and preach against them I mean the great and sound Doctrines in them I do not say all of them I put the question to one of your Clergy and asked him in earnest what he thought of this Clergy as to the Doctrine of the Church of England contained in these Articles he answered me Divide them into three parts he thought two of the three were fallen from it 6. In that Church there were abundance of godly plain-hearted Ministers whose Religion was not confined to a Pulpit but walked among their people as became Ministers seeking the good of their souls I deny not but God hath some such now but for the generality of them I say nothing my self only I can tell you what others have said A learned and pious Divine so far a friend to Conformity that I doubt not but he hath subscribed he told me Though your Church would give him a Living he would not take it because he would not have such an occasion to bring him among your Clergy And discoursing with another of your Clergy whom for learning wit and piety I do honour about Mr. A's Book and his Dialect which you call uncomely writing said he Truly we have such a frothy vain Clergy gone off from that solidity and gravity that become Divine things that if Books come not out in this dress they will but scorn them but in that Book besides wit there is good matter Pridentem dicere verum c. This was his sense of Mr. A's Book But. Sir if such as these be thrust upon us must we own them for our Ministers What Sir will you deny the peoples power of Election which the Papists grant the people had till Charles the Great or till Lewis his Son about 830 years See I pray Pamelius his Annotations upon these words of Cyprian Epist 68. Quando ipsa plebs maxime habeat potestatem vel eligendi dignos
sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi How could a man write plainer for the peoples power of Election But our Protestants tell us that only from the time of Frederick the second who died Ann. 1250 or there about were the people excluded from the power of chusing Pastors and it was the deed of Gregory the ninth as Krantzius reporteth 7. That Church did believe and prove the Pope c. to be the Antichrist Rome-christian to be the Whore Apoc. 17. thus the Bishops and our Professors of Divinity c. but I can meet but with very few of this Church of that opinion Dr. Hammond the Oracle of this new Edition of the Clergy cannot find him in the 2 Thes 2. nor in Apoc. 17. the Pope is an honest man with him Bishop Bramhall tells us Our contest is not with the Church of Rome but the Court of Rome I find that you have declared 1. That the Church of Rome is a true Church 2. That they retain the fundamentals of Religion 3. That salsation is to be had in the Church of Rome Lay all together here is a fair Bridg laid to go over to Rome To say that God hath his people under the Jurisdiction of Rome is one thing Apoc. 18.4 but to say the Church of Rome is a true Church is another thing a Wife and a Whore differ 8. In that Church Re-ordination to the same office was never heard of but exploded as it is in all Churches else but in this Church it is imposed 9. There was no Oath taken nor Covenant made with the great God to reform the House of God in Doctrine Worship and Discipline according to the word of God this ought to be though the Covenant had not been made had the things imposed been according to the Word of God this Covenant had bound us to them that Covenant will not be beaten out of the hearts of them who know God and fear an Oath what ever other persons make of it the least then men can do is to abstain from those things which were once cast out as being unconformable to the word of God and shall those people have no Ordinances for fear of a separation 10. In that Church Quakers were not known but under this Church they swarm that raze the foundation and destroy all Gospel-ordinances And many people being offenced with your imposition and disgusted with your Clergy lay in great danger of being carried away with them and I doubt not abundance had gone but that by our Preaching and administring all Ordinances they have been kept close to Gospel truths Gospel-ordinances and Gospel-ministry The Quakers and Papists are not so hated by your Clergy as we are From all which I conclude the Cause is not the same and had Mr. Ball Mr. Hildersham c. been living in our days they would I doubt not have done as we do But then we are charged with bringing in of Popery and this takes up several leafs of your Preface Heylin one of yours tells us indeed I perswade my self Geograp in Quarto Edit pag 470. had the Reformed party abroad continued an allowable correspondence in some circumstances with the Romish Church as the Church of England doth now it had been far greater and less stomacked and this was the censure of Monsieur de Rhosny when he observed the Majesty and decency of our Church-service in our Cathedrals On the other side Harding Bristow and Carrier seducing Jesuits assured themselves that they might yet convert England to the Catholick Church whose Service and Ceremonies she yet retained Nor do I see any such alteration made in this Edition but if Pope Pius the 4th and Gregory the 13th offered to confirm the former and the Council of Trent affirmed they might do it then the Pope may do this for ought I know But how do we bring in Popery Pref. p 7. you tell us out of Bishop Sanderson the first way is by pulling down Episcopacy c. But Sir Bishops are restored and you tell the King the Church of England is out of her Eclipse that she shines in a firmament above her Adversaries I pray Sir what is the matter that now Popery is coming in as a flood upon us cannot these Bishops the English Banks keep it out I say nothing how strongly they act in Parliament against it the Kingdom talk enough of it I pray Sir tell us what have you Conformists done more against Popery than the Dissenters have done 1. Have you prayed earnestly against it so have we 2. Have you Preached against it so have we 3. Have you Printed against it as you have done excellently and we thank you for it so have ours The first Book I saw was Fiat Lux. I saw a second Impression and wondered I heard of no answer from your Church Dr. Owen was the man that answered it Ann. 1662. so long ours have appeared 4. Have your Clergy kept their monthly Fasts four or five years foreseeing what now is coming upon us if God prevent it not so have several of our Ministers with the hazard of our Estates and Persons by Informers from whom you were free 5. Did you the last year at least for the chief part of the year beside your family-prayers set a part sometime between fix and seven in the morning one day in the week to pray purposely that God would deliver this Nation from these bloody Papists and their cursed Idolatry and Doctrines c. so have we in several Counties and layed the same charge on our people 6. Do you think you shall be put to defend our Legal right to the Protestant Religion by what I am loth to mention the sword since the Lollards-Tower the Bishops Cole-house c. are out of date they are too thirsty and must have larger draughts I believe there will be no distinction then between a true Protestant Conformist and us therefore we must join with you Why then do you charge us with bringing in of Popery I desire your Church would not put us upon temptation we wrong them not in their Tythes but charge our people to pay them exactly and do not grudg us the little that we have to bring us in bread I thank God I am not very lazy in my place but if you will give me twelve pound per Annum for my stipend you shall have it and thank you too But I bless God I may work for so good a Master A little more as to our Communion with your Church Sir some of us have lived in Gods House where we saw the Government hath been carried on by Officers of his own appointment according to his own Rule and what a majesty have we beheld in it Admonitions first privately then publickly by the Elders continuing in this course of admonishing to try if they could bring to repentance sometimes longer sometimes shorter as the sin hath been and they in prudence saw reasons I have known them waste half a year
Form then I hope they will not blame us though we refuse to subject unto it as we would refuse subjection to one in the Commonwealth who is not an Officer according to Law Professing withal for my self and I dare say for all the Nonconformists in England that if it can be made good that Christ hath appointed such a Government in his Church we will most willingly subject unto it being glad we are eased of such a burden Pride shall never hinder us though that be so much charged upon us For the first the Doctor meets with several arguments that some have produced to prove there must be a Form appointed and he answers them but his answers do not satisfie I had prepared a reply to his answers but lay it by To their Arguments I would add one or two more First if Christ hath determined no form of Government in his Church then the Form may be Monarchical and Bellarmine's argument to prove it for the prevention of Schism will carry it a simili saith he c. de Rom. Pontif. l. 1. c. 9. Dr. Stillingfleet might have spared the seventh Chapter of his Rational Account wherein he labours to disprove the Jesuit arguing for the Monarchical Form Kings are supream in all cases Ecclesiastical says the Church of England the supream Magistrate may determine the Form says Doctor Stillingfleet then the Ten Kings may give their power to the Beast without any error A Pastor and a Deacon may serve at first while believers are few but when the Church is enlarged to a whole Nation there must be another Form of Government saith the Doctor p. 180. Irenic Go on Sir when the Church is enlarged to many Nations there may be another Form and why not then Monarchical Christ having determined none as the Doctor saith Above one thousand Presbyters in a Diocess may devolve the exercise of that power which Christ hath committed to them actu primo to one person according to Dr. Stillingfleet so may ten thousand as well for ought I know to one Bishop and he may exercise it by his Arch-deacon Chancellor Commissaries as well as now 2ly If God determine a Form of Government in the Jewish Church then Christ in the Christian Church Christs Kingly-Government in the heart is secret none can see that his visible Government by which he is made known to the world is known by his Ordinances Government of his House as our Courts at Westminster Sessions and Assizes shew our Kings Government with the Profession of the Christian Faith and conversation of Christians accordingly He is faithful in his house Heb. 3.6 that House is his Church which he builds not the Commonwealth qua sic 3ly To determine a Form of Government argues more Soveraignty more Perfection more Wisdom in the supream Governour than to appoint only an unformed Government as it were a meer materiae prima If a Prince give a Charter to a Corporation a Patent to a Colony he appoints the form of their Government He that gives the form in other things gives the perfection of the thing Christs Form in the Church carries authority and hath an awe upon the hearts of Believers this notion brings Christ in his wisdom and Soveraignty below an earthly Prince 4ly Dr. Stillingfleet hath affirmed Christ hath appointed a form of Government in his Church for whereas the Jesuit is pleading for the Monarchical form of the Church-Government because wise men have thought that to be best the Doctor answers What is this to the proving what Government Christ hath appointed in his Church for that is the best Government of the Church not which Philosophers and Politicians have thought best but which our Saviour hath appointed in his word Ration Account p. 464. then Christ hath appointed a form in his word and I hope that is Jure Divino else the Jesuit is not answered We need no more proof 2. For the second Quest What then is that form A. I shall lay several Propositions and clear them by Scripture First Prop. In all Churches in the New Testament where we read of Elders we read of several Elders in one Church we never read but of one Elder in a Church that I call to mind 1. In the Church of Jerusalem one Church but divers Elders Act. 15.6 23 v. 16. ch 4. 2ly In the Church of the Romans one Church but several Elders as Rom. 12.6 c. 3ly In the Church at Antioch one Church but more Elders Act. 13.1 4ly In the Church of Corinth there were divers Elders witness the Schism 5ly In the Church of Ephesus divers Elders Act. 20.17 6ly In the Church of Philippi were several Elders Phil. 1.1 So Polycarpus's Epistle to the Church declares 7ly In the Church of the Colossians several Elders Col. 1.7 4.17 Epaphras and Archippus we are sure of the Dutch say Onesimus also from Ch. 4.9 8ly In the Church of the Thessalonians were several Elders 1 Thes 5.12 Let any man that opposes me produce one Church where there was but one single Pastor though if it were so it will not save us for the Churches then had the Apostles living among them and could help that single Pastor if the Church were but new planted 9ly In Act 14.24 The Apostles ordained them Elders not an Elder in every Church Mr. Thorndike one of your own joining this Text with Tit. 1.5 crosses Dr. Stillingfleet's gloss on the Text i. e. saith the Doctor no Church wanted an Elder not that every Church had more Elders but Mr. Thorndike thus not meaning one Elder in a place but Presbyteries Colledg of Presbyters with common advice to order the Churches planted in those cities This agrees with the plain Gramar of the Text 2. with eight examples I gave before 3ly The Syriack is full for our sense The Doctor while he labours to darken this Text forgets himself strangely for p. 239. He lays this for a foundation to clear the Apostolical practise viz. that the Apostles in framing Churches did observe the customs of the Jewish Synagogues And p. 248. Having cleared that there was a peculiar form of Government in the Synagogues and that the Apostles copied out the Government of the Christian Churches by them Now p. 429. he tells us there were divers Rulers in a Synagogue is evident from Act. 13.15 he supposes Ten wise men did jointly concur for ruling the affairs of the Synagogue p. 250. so many Elders to make a Bench. Strange the Doctor should forget his foundation For Act. 20.17 Dr. Stillingfleet Dr. Hammond with Irenaeus darken that Text. I might have shown how cross Dr. Hammond and Irenaeus are one to another Forsooth the Bishops of Asia not only the Elders of Ephesus were sent for according to Hammond Grotius is clear against Hammond de Imper. p. 343 393. But I should answer thus 1. Consider how many miles Philippi was distant from Jerusalem the way Paul sailed c. according to Bunting who gives an account of
that his definition is too strait I will give him more advantage and let him take it I shall then give a description of Schism and open it Then I will lay down several Propositions tending to the clearing of the Question who are the true Schismaticks Schism is a renting or dissolving that Vnion which Christ our Head requireth in his visible body To open it I shall be short 1st That Christ hath a Body Natural and Mystical or a body in a mystery which is to him as his natural body is known to all Christians Ephes 1.22 speaking of Christ He is the head over all to the Church v. 23. which is his body This Head and this Body make up one Christ mystical 1 Cor. 12.12 so is Christ 2ly This Body of Christ is but one two Bodies joined to one Head much more thousands were monstrous All the believers in all the particular Churches of the world make up but this one Body of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ehes 4 4. one body So Rom. 12.4 5. 1 Cor. 12.12 so Revel 19. ch 21. one Bride one Wife 3ly This body hath its bands or ligaments whereby the body is tyed to the Head and the members one to another For those to the Head I omit the other concern me in this place how the members are tyed one to another Now these ligaments are first Internal secondly are External 1. Internal and they 1. The blessed Spirit of Christ Ephes 4.4 One body and one spirit so 1 Cor. 12.13 The second is love Col. 3.14 Eph. 5.16 2. The External bands are the Sacraments or Seals of the New Covenant whether Government be any thing I shall touch afterwards But for the Sacraments they are the bands of this visible body they belong only to the members of this body one Baptism Ephes 4.5 belong only to that one body v. 4. 1 Cor. 11.17 We being many are one bread and one body for we are all partakers of that one bread Hence Excommunication in which men are cut off the Body and rendered durante hoc statu as Heathens and Publicans not visible members of Christ is by casting them out of Communion with their Body in these Ordinances In these Ordinances the visible members of the body declare that unity and internal band of love one to another Panis igitur fractio est unitatis dilectionis symbolum Virtute hujus Sacramenti con a lescimus in unum corpus invicem cum Christo Par. in loc Paraeus in loc who quotes Chrysostom and the practise of the old Christian Churches how Christians in this Ordinance did manifest their unity and love A Christians love I speak to the business in hand is twofold 1. There is a Christian love common to all 2. There is a Christian Ecclesiastical love proper to some as for Christian love I am bound to manifest that to the bodies and souls of all though Heathens I will pray with Heathens a silly thing to turn Excommunicated persons from Prayer which is Natural Worship I will Preach to Heathens I will exhort reprove encourage Heathens privately to comfort a Heathen as a Christian I cannot else I call not to mind what effects of love I manifest to a Christian but I will to a Heathen But for Christian Ecclesiastical love manifested by Communion in these Symbols or signs I will not manifest that to one Heathen only to the members of this visible body being one with them As for Episcopal Government which Dr. Goodman and this late Commencer adds First I would thank either of them if they would give us a stout piece against Erastus and his followers 2ly If by Episcopal Government they mean such as now is among us let them first prove it is of Divine Institution which all the Commencers in Cambridg or Oxford shall never be able to do so long as there is a Bible and if they cannot do that then where is the schism It 's rather our duty to separate from what is not of Christs planting in his house 3ly But let the Government be of Christs Institution yet wherein doth that Government shew it self among other things in letting in or casting out of this body by admitting or casting out from these Ordinances of the Sacraments but that refusing or separation from such Episcopal-Government meerly as Episcopal should be Mortale schisma this is but the figment of the delirant-brain of a Prelatical Zealot 2ly This Schism is in the visible body of Christ I hear there are schisms among you 1 Cor. 11.8 the house of Cloe 1 Cor. 1.11 saw them who informed Paul Schism it seems comes under the senses then it must be in the visible body when this body visibly met together By the visible body of Christ I understand all that make profession of their Faith in the Lord Jesus and the Doctrine of the Gospel soundly and do in their conversation visibly walk according to his Rules in his Gospel so that their conversation do not openly beâ—ly and deny their profession Tit. 1.16 That the one body of Christ mentioned 1 Cor. 12.12 in which there ought to be no schism v. 25. is meant the visible body of Christ I think none will deny So Rom. 12. Ephes 4. 1. It is such a body in which the Lord had set Apostles Evangelists 1 Cor. 12.18 Ephes 4.11 such a body to which extraordinary gifts were given But these were Apostles not to one particular Church but the Catholick Church visible 2. One member is to suffer or rejoice with another 1 Cor. 12.26 Ay if it be a member and real member of our particular Church of Corinth but for other Churches and unless we are sure they are invisible members let them go Is this the meaning 3. Are we baptized into a particular or the Catholick Church 1 Cor. 12.13 and Baptism belongs to the visible Church Other things I might mention but I think it will not be denied 3ly When then that union our Lord and Head requireth in this his visible body is rent dissolved when Communion is denied among the members of it contrary to his appointment Now Schism appears when the internal band Love is broken there is something of the nature the root of the sin is in it but that is hid Men can hypocritically and vilely meet together and hold communion in that Ordinance which holds forth unity and love and have their hearts wretchedly divided one from another this may be hid as I said But Schism properly so called is when the external band is broken when communion in those symbols or signs is denied on one side or refused on the other side without warrant from Christ so that the members do not meet and hold their communion as they ought but split into several pieces opposite one to another as if they were not members of that one body Now Schism is apparent
Therefore one Prelate but of ordinary mission commission and qualification that never converted one Church may be not one person in truth shall have power over many Elders and Congregations where he never Preached over so many that if he Preached every Lords-day he could not preach once in a year to them yea so many that if he Preached every day in the year he could not preach once in a year to them some Diocesses are so large This consequent from such an Antecedent my dull Intellect cannot reach I deny the Consequence What might be said I foresee and would have prevented it but I am in a Postscript and so can only touch things as I pass Arguments he fetches from three Topicks to prove the superiority of one single person over other Elders 1. From Reason p. 23. Though the Vniversal Church be built upon a Rock yet particular Churches are subject to Dilapidations c. Ergo. A. In matters belonging to the House of God I thought the will of him that built the House and is Lord over it should first have been consulted His will hath reason in it we are sure but for our reasons they will put no end to the debate for one thinks his reason is as good as another Quot capita tot sententiae It is Instituted worship we are upon depending upon the positive command of the Law giver But however I deny your consequence And that 1st Mr. Baxter Church-History gives sufficient proof From the woful experience the Church hath found of your Repairers these having been as great causes of the Dilapidations as any other That Bishops have been both great Schismaticks and Hereticks Bellarmine will tell you What woful work these have made in the Church of England in our time we do still remember but I will spare names let them alone in their graves Musculus not an English Nonconformist from the experience the Church had found of the mischiefs it suffered by these Repairers Musc loc Commun p. 195. sound out to prevent and heal Schism as Hierom tells us saith Had Hierom lived to these days to see how this counsel of setting up the Bishop above the Presbyter hath profited the Church he would have acknowledged it was not the counsel of the Holy Ghost to take away Schism as was pretended but the counsel of the Devil c. Thus he with much more he adds 2ly There are other means to repair without such Prelacy as experience hath proved in several Churches where Heresie and Schism have either been kept out or healed when crept in Profaneness suppressed better than ever it was in England by Prelacy 3ly That one Prelate is as subject to corruption in Doctrine and conversation as other Ministers and who shall repair him the Presbyters being inferior to him they must not be so sawcy that kind of Creature whom you call the Metropolitan is as subject to corruption as the other Prelate As to the proof you give p. 26 27. There is a greater probability of an union of judgments when all within a certain precinct lye under an obligation to be determined by the reason of one c. A. I thank you for this saith the now Pope Innocent this helps to strengthen my old worm-eaten Chair weak in the joints and ready to crack Heresie and Schism must be avoided in the Vniversal Church as well as in the Church in your Precinct but if the Bishops in your several Precincts differ in their Judgments about Heresie and Schism as they have done and will do now what more probable way for union of Judgments than to have them lye under an obligation to be determined by the reason of one and who should that one be but my self this is but the same reason that Bellarmine hath given for Pontifex Maximus 2ly In one Diocess are some hundreds of Elders all having the power of Jurisdiction ex aquo from Christ as the Learned Dr. Stillingfleet hath proved but however if this Doctor deny it among these there may be many as godly men of as solid reason and judgment as is this one Prelate yea it may be excel him in all and in years his Elder too yet all these must have their reasons and judgments subject to the determination of the reason of that one Prelate I shall not applaud him for a man of an accuminated Intellect that shall assert such an irrational Proposition 2. His second Topick is Gods Declaration for the perpetuity of Apostolical Government which was over other Elders and Congregations p. 28. Yea Sir this is of moment if you can carry it First Text Mat. 28.20 Teach baptize instruct all Nations to observe whatsoever was commanded them I pray add this And he commanded them to teach That one Prelate while the Church stands should have superior power over other Elders and Congregations then you do something Because you mention commands for Government name two or three Texts to stop the mouths of these Erastians But to the Text. It is not for nothing that our Lord while he mention Teaching Baptizing and under this the Lords Supper yet saith nothing of Government Surely he had a reason for it 2. I yield from the Apostles and other Elders Government recorded in the Scripture that Government belongs to the Eldership with the Erastians leave but from hence to infer that because the Apostles did exercise power over other Elders Ergo now one Prelate over other Elders I shall deny the Consequence For 1. you tell us p. 25. It 's true the Vnction whereby they were qualified for it was not of the vulgar composition But say I the Unction these Prelates have is but of the vulgar composition Hence to argue from extraordinary to ordinary is a kind of fallacy a kin to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They that exercise Government over other Governours as all Elders are had need be in Wisdom Learning Holiness and fitness for Government as Saul among his brethren higher by head and shoulders so were the Apostles and Evangelists above those Elders over whom they exercised Authority We find no such things amongst the men of the vulgar Vnction 2. Those Elders as well as the people were the Aposties Converts these being but newly brought home to the Faith well may their Fathers have power over them and cause enough to visit them the case is not so here 3ly When the Apostles come to deal with the ordinary Elders there is no intimation left of any such power of one Prelate over the rest You tell us p. 45. that Timothy was Ordained Bishop of Ephesus about the 13th year of Claudius I hope you will not force it from 1 Tim. 1.3 As I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus He must have an illuminated Intellect indeed who can force the ordination of a Bishop out of these words Besides certainly had he been Bishop there Paul need not have besought him to be resident there but however sure I am he must be