particular Congregations to which he gave full Power and Authority to govern themselves distinctly and Independent of all other Churches But where have they Authority for this Opinion Where do they find that Churches were limitted to particular Congregations not in Scripture for there is no tolerable Proof that the Churches planted by the Apostles were of this Nature 'T is possible at first there might have been no more Christians in a City than might meet together in one Congregation But where doth it appear that when they multiply'd into more Congregations they made new and distinct Churches under new Officers with a separate Power of Government of this Dr. Stillingfleet says he is well assur'd there is no mark or Footstep in the New Testament or the whole History of the Primitive Church If they will follow the plain instances of Scripture they may better limit Churches to Private Families than to particular Congregations for of that we have a plain instance in Scripture Rom. 16. 3. 5. Col. 4. 15. in the House of Priscilla and Aquilla but not a word of the other And if they wou'd keep to these plain instances of Scripture they might fully enjoy the Liberty of their Consciences and avoid the Scandal of breaking the Laws But the Scripture is so far from making every Congregation an Independent Church that it plainly shews us the Notion of a Church was then the same with a Diocess or all the Christians of a City which were under the Inspection of one Bishop For if we observe the Language of the Scripture we shall find this Observation not once to fail that when Churches are spoken of they are the Churches of a Province As the Churches of Judaea 1 Thess 2. 14. The Churches of Asia 1 Cor. 16. 19. Of Syria and Cilicia Acts 15. 41. Churches of Galatia 1 Cor. 16. 1. Gal. 1. 2. Churches of Macedonia 2 Cor. 8. 1. But when all the Christians of a City are spoken of it is still call'd the Church of that City as the Church of Antioch the Church at Corinth the Church of Ephesus c. So that it seems plain from the Testimony of Scripture that Churches were not limitted to particular Congregations unless they will say that all the Christians in the largest of these Cities mention'd in Scripture were no more than cou'd conveniently meet in one Congregation which shall be shown to be otherwise hereafter But suppose we shou'd grant that the Apostolick Churches were Congregational as 't is plain they were not what then that might have been from the Circumstances of Times or small number of Christians in those Days must it therefore follow that they must always continue so Why do they not wash one anothers Feet as Christ did and commanded his Apostles to do the same * And if they must keep so precisely to the Practice of those Days why does any of their Ministers marry a Second Wife For St. Paul says plainly Let Bishops and Deacons be the Husbands of one Wife 1 Tim. 3. v. 2. 12. So the first Civil Government was by God's own Institution over Families they may by the same Rule think themselves bound to overthrow Kingdoms to bring things back to God's first Institution From whence it appears how ridiculous that fancy of theirs is That the Scripture is the only Rule of all things pertaining to Discipline and Worship and that we must stick so precisely to the Letter of it and to the practice of those Days as that 't is not lawful to vary from it in any little indifferent Circumstance for the sake of Publick Order or Conveniency But as this notion of Congregational Churches does not agree with the words of the New Testament so neither does it with the Judgment and Practice of the Primitive Church For by the ancient Canons of the Church it appears That the Notion of a Church was the same with that of a Diocess which comprehended many Congregations or Parishes See Canons Nicen. 6 15 16. Constant c. 6. Chalcedon 17. 20. 26. Antioch c. 2. 5. Codex Eccles Africae c. 53. 55. Concil Gangrae c. 6. Concil Carthag c. 10 11. And thus much as to the first Objection against the Constitution of our Church as differing from those of the Congregational way and therefore not of Christ's Institution The Second Objection against the Constitution of our Church is That our Diocesaâ— Churches and Bishops are unlawful For say they 'T is making a new Species of Churches and Church-Government without God's appointment For says Mr. Baxter according to Christ's Institution no Church must be bigger than that the same Bishop may perform the Pastoral Office to them in present Communion And so he will have threâ— sorts of Bishops by Divine Right First General Bishops that in every Nation are over many Churches Secondly Episcopâ— Gregis or Ruling Pastors of Single Congregations which are all true Presbyters Thirdly Episcopi Praesides which are the Presidents of the Presbyters in particular Churches This is Mr. Baxter's Notion of Bishops But others are not of his Mind and will allow of but one kind of Bishop and such they make the Pastor of every Congregation But that both these Notions of Episcopacy are false will appear For that First 't was an inviolable Rule in the Primitive Church that there must be but one Bishop in a City though 't were never so large for our Saviour having left no Rule about Limits the Apostles follow'd the Form of the Empire planting in every City a complete and entire Church whose Bishop as to his Power and Jurisdiction in Ecclesiastical Matters resembled that of the Chief Magistrate of the City the Presbyters that of the Senates and the several Churches the several Corporations So says Dr. Still in his Mischiefs of Separation p. 237. and quotes Origen c. Cels l. 3. and Dr. Maurice in his Def. of Dioces Episcopacy p. 377 c. affirms the same and proves it at large And as far as the Territories of the City extended it self so far did the Diocess of the Bishop extend for the Church and the City had but one Territory But though this be a thing agreed upon by most Learned Men of all Persuasions that there was but one Bishop in a City in the Primitive Church yet because some may be so hardy as to deny this I will appeal to the Practice of the African Church for which Mr. Baxter Dr. Owen and the rest of the Dissenters express an esteem above all other Churches 'T was an inviolable Rule among the African Churches that there must be but one Bishop in a City though never so large and populous See Cod. Eccl. Africae c. 71. And at the famous Conference at Carthage between the Catholick and Donatist Bishops by the Command of Constantine the Emperor who was become Christian the Rule on both sides agreed was but One Bishop in a City or Diocess See Conference of the First Day And if there cou'd have been more than
been and is at this day commended and approved of by all the most Eminent Divines beyond Seas Perhaps some may say if the Government of the Church by Diocesan Bishops be so agreeable to that of the Primitive Church and approved of by other reform'd Churches as we pretend it is how comes it that they all did not follow the pattern of England and become all Diocesan Churches I answer They may as well ask us Why all the Nations of the World that were subject to the Roman Emperors did not upon the decay of the Roman Empire when they resum'd their just Rights of Government to themselves become all Monarchies according to the Pattern of England Some Nations besides England Ireland and Scotland did assume Episcopal Government as Denmark Sweden c. but perhaps it was not consistent with the present Circumstances or Politick Constitution of all places at the time of the Reformation to set up Episcopal Government as indeed it was not And therefore since neither Episcopal nor any other particular kind of Government is so essential to a Church as that a true Church may not be without it in case of indispensible Necessity they put themselves some under one Form of Government some under another as was most agreeable to their present constitution but with this Caution every where That all Protestants of every whole Church be the Government what it will should be oblig'd to Conform to the Establish'd Church in which they liv'd For though every National or whole Church had a Power to chuse what kind of Government they pleased for themselves yet 't was never allow'd that particular scrupulous People among themselves had Power to do so too This Power of subdividing was never pretended to nor practis'd in any other Nation since the Reformation but in England So that though they do all allow the Antiquity and Usefulness of Episcopal Government yet since 't is not Essential to a true Church no more than that of the Presbyterian or Independent nor convenient at this time for all places some may refuse it and yet it does not follow that we in England should do so since 't is convenient for us and more agreeable to the Laws and Constitution of these Kingdoms and comes by much nearer the Practice of the Primitive Churches than any other whatsoever But they say we make Episcopal Government Essential to a true Church for that we will suffer none to execute the Office of a Minister here in England unless they be ordain'd by a Bishop To this I answer 'T is plain we do not make Episcopal Government Essential to a true Church For we allow all the Reform'd Churches to be true Churches and Communicate with them and yet some of them have no Diocesan Bishops 'T is true by the Laws of this Church and Nation none are to be admitted to execute the Office of a Minister in any Cathedral or Parish Church or Chapel nor to hold any Ecclesiastical Benefice within these Kingdoms but such as are willing to submit to the Orders and Government of this Church and the Laws of the Land And therefore since both the Laws of this Church and Nation do require that all Ministers who desire to serve in this Church shall declare publickly that they assent to and approve of our Form 〈◊〉 Worship c. and are willing to use the same as the Church appoints and that they shall receive their Ordination and Licence to execute their Office from the Bishops 'T is but reasonable that such as want these Qualifications shou'd be refus'd the Liberty of executing their Office in these Kingdoms * The Church of England does not say absolutely that all those Ministers who want Episcopal Ordination are no true Ministers but only that none shall be accounted a lawful Bishop Priest or Deacon so as to execute their Function in the Church of England unless they be once Ordain'd by a Bishop as appears by the Preface to the Ordination But the reason we refuse them is not so much because that Presbyterian Ordination does not make them true Ministers according to God's Law as though no instance can be given of Ordination without a Bishop in Scripture or Antiquity but all to the contrary because they stubbornly refuse to submit to our Laws and Constitutions and contemn the lawful Authority under which God has plac'd them and commanded them that they should obey And this is evident from the Statute of 14 Car. 2. In which there is a particular Proviso That all Ministers of Foreign reform'd Churches who come into this Kingdom by the King's Permission are to be excepted out of and excus'd from the Penalties of that Act. And this Custom of requiring Conformity and Subscriptions from all who desire to be admitted to the Office of the Ministry is agreeable to the Practice of every settled Church that has been ever since Christ's days as will appear hereafter The 3d. Objection against the Constitution of our Church is That our * By National Churches are meant the whole Churches of such Nations as upon the decay of the Roman Empire resum'd their just Right of Government to themselves both in Church and State National Church which we call The Church of England has no Foundation and wants Discipline All being incroach'd and swallow'd up in the Bishops and the Pastors of every Parish who ought to have full Power to execute every part of it are depriv'd thereof But this is false for the Presbyters in our Church have as great Power in Ecclesiastical Matters as ever they had in the Primitive Church What Power are they depriv'd of by the Bishops that they had then By the Laws of our Church no Rules of Discipline no Articles of Doctrine no Form of Worship can be introduc'd by the Bishops or impos'd upon any without the consent of the whole Presbytery of the Nation in Convocation who appear either in Person or by Proxy The only Authority that the Bishops of the Church of England have above the Presbyters is Government Ordination and Censures which were all appropriated to the Apostles and Bishops in the Primitive Church St. Cyprian assures us it was so in the African Church in his Third Book Ep. 10. 12. 28. 27. And so it was in St. Augustine's Time See Cod. Eccl. Afr. c. 6 7 9 c. But say they the Power of Ordination is taken away from the Presbyters and lodg'd solely in the Bishops and 't is plain say they in the Apostles days the Presbyters did Ordain for Timothy was ordain'd by laying on the hands of the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4. 14. But Dr. Hammond in his Paraphrase on this Text says That these Presbyters here spoken of who ordain'd Timothy were Apostles That Timothy was ordain'd by St. Paul is most evident for St. Paul in his Second Epistle to Timothy ch 1. v. 6. says I put thee in mind that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee by the
laying on of my hands And the Apostles might then have been likely enough call'd Presbyters for that during the Apostles time Bishops and Presbyters were the same and sometimes us'd the one for the other as appears plainly by comparing 1 Tim. 4. 14. with 2 Tim. 1. 6. In the former Verse St. Paul bids Timothy Neglect not the gift that is in him by laying on the hands of the Presbyters And in the latter he bids him Stir up the gift of God which is in you by the laying on of my hands For while the Apostles liv'd they manag'd the Affairs of Government in the Church themselves and therefore there were few or no Bishops in their days but as they withdrew they committed the Care and Government of Churches to such Persons as they appointed thereto of which we have an uncontroulable Evidence in Timothy and Titus So that although the Apostles left no Successors in Eodem gradu as to those things that were extraordinary in them as the Infallibility of their Doctrine and the writing New Gospels the Extent of their Power c. yet to other parts of their Apostolick Office they had Successors as in Teaching and Governing and such like things that were not extraordinary Which Power of Governing Ordaining c. being given to such particular Presbyters as the Apostles thought fit for it was properly the Episcopal Power And thus these who were but Presbyters in the Apostles days by the accession of this governing and ordaining Power became Bishops after their Decease or Departure And thus will all those seeming Differences between the words Presbyter and Bishop spoken of in Antiquity be reconcil'd And herewith agrees the Opinion of Archbishop Whitgift and Bishop Bilson and Dr. Stillingfleet in his Mischiefs of Separation p. 270. and many others See King Charles I. his Debates about Episcopacy more fully concerning this Matter But 't is plain that since the Apostles days Presbyters were not Bishops but a distinct Order from them And this is agreed by most Ancient and Modern Writers See among others Ignatius his Epistle ad Trall where he says That without Bishops Priests and Deacons it cannot be call'd a Church And Aerius who declar'd that there was no difference between a Bishop and a Presbyter was represented by Epiphanius as a Prodigy and his opinion Madness See Epiph. Haer. 74. n. 1. 3. So Ischyrus pretended to be a Presbyter because Coluthus had ordain'd him but Athanasius represents it as a Monster that one shou'd esteem himself a Presbyter who was ordain'd by one who died himself a Presbyter See Dr. Maur. Defence of Diocesan Episcopacy p. 451. And in the Primitive Church if a Bishop himself did Ordain any one against the Canons and Establish'd Discipline of the Church they did not stick at declaring such Ordination void and in some Cases to re-ordain See Can. Nicen. 9 10. 16. 19. and Can. Antioch 73. 10 c. What Sentence shall we think then they wou'd have pronounc'd against our Presbyterian Ordination as practis'd here in England contrary both to the Canons of the Church and the Laws of the Land too But besides all this the Plea which our Dissenters make for Separation upon this account that the Presbyters are totally depriv'd of their Power of Ordaining is false For by the Canons of the Church of England Four Presbyters are to assist the Bishop in giving Orders and after Examination to joyn in laying on of hands on the Person ordain'd See Can. 31. and 35. But another Objection which they make to the Church of England for want of Discipline is for that the Power of Excommunicating Notorious Offenders is taken away from the Parochial Minister and lodg'd only in the Bishop But sure they who make this Objection never read the 26th Canon which is one of them acknowledg'd to be the Authentick Church Canons For that Canon says expresly That no Minister shall admit any of his Flock to the Lord's Supper who is known to be guilty of any Scandalous Sin until he hath openly declar'd that he has truly repented And in case the Offender continue obstinate he must give an account to the Ordnary within 14 Days who is then to proceed to greater Excommunication for the other is call'd a Penitential Excommunication So then it seems the Pastors are not totally depriv'd of the Power of censuring for Scandalous offences nay they have a greater and more absolute Power than is allow'd them in many other Reform'd Churches for indeed the exercise of Discipline is a Work of so much Prudence and Difficulty that the greatest Zealots for it have not thought fit to trust it in the Hands of every Parochial Minister and his particular Congregation Calvin himself says to do so is contrary to the Apostolick Practice See Calv. Ep. 136. And Beza speaking of the Discipline of Geneva in his Ep. 20. says The Parochial Ministers proceed no farther than Admonition but in case of Contumacy they certifie the Presbytery of the City who sit at certain times to hear all Censures relating to Discipline But allowing a Church wants true Discipline does it therefore lose its Being or justify Separation No sure if so there were few Presbyterian Churches to be found in the late times many of them having no Discipline at all among them for many years nor so much as the Lord's Supper administred in some parts of this Kingdom for ten or a dozen years together But now we come to the 4th Objection against the Constitution of our Church which is That the People are depriv'd of their right of choosing their own Ministers Pray let me ask them how this Original and inherent Right as Mr. Baxter calls it of choosing their own Ministers came to be lodg'd in the People Was there not a Church to be form'd in the beginning Did not Christ appoint Apostles and give them Authority for that end Where was the Church Power then lodg'd Was it not in the Apostles Did not they in all places as they planted Churches appoint Officers to teach and govern them And were not then the Pastors invested with a Power superior to that of the People How came they then to lose it or how came the People to pretend an original Right thereto Besides How cou'd the People make choice of Men for their fitness and abilities when at that time their abilities depended so much on the Apostles laying on of their hands for then the Holy Ghost was given to them It seems then that this original and inherent Right was not in the People in the Apostles days nor in the first Ages of the Church for if it had St. Clement St. Cyprian St. Chrysostom c. could not have been ignorant of it St. Clement says in his Ep. 54 55 56 57. the Apostles thought fit to reserve this Power of appointing Officers in the Church to themselves to prevent the Contentions that might happen about it And that all the People had to do was to give
time of Constantine the Great which is near 1400 years Constantine by his Edict suppress'd all separate Meetings and among the rest the Novatians and silenc'd their Preachers though their Ordination was as good as any among our Nonconformists See Eusebius Vita Const lib. 3. cap. 63 64 65 66. And St. Augustine did very much commend the Emperour for so doing See Aug. Ep. 48. and see also his 4th Book against Cresconius a Donatist ch 51. All the Reform'd Churches in the World do at this day silence such Ministers as refuse to submit to the Orders and Government of their Church and believe they have Power so to do At Geneva their Council of State has the sole Power of Electing and Deposing Ministers Nay farther by the Constitution of Geneva they have Power not only to silence but to excommunicate such Ministers as shall contemn the Authority of the Church or by their obstinacy disturb the Order of it In the French Church if any refuse to subscribe to the Orders of their Church he is to be declared a Schismatick And Calvin himself Ep. Olevian pag. 311 and 122. says Let him that will not submit to the Orders of a Society be cast out But what need we go so far from home for Instances of this kind Let us see what the Opinion of our own Dissenters heretofore was in this matter First then in the great Dispute between the Brownists and the Non-conformists about the Ministers preaching c. against the Will of the Prince the Non conformists all agreed That the Apostles had Power immediately from God to set up his Kingdom but their Power was extraordinary and under Heathen Magistrates But our Ministers have no such extraordinary Power And our Magistrates being Christian are much more to be respected See Gifford a Non-conformist Minister his Answer to Barrow And see the Confutation of the Brownists by several Non-conformists who join'd together for that purpose publish'd by one Rathband by their command p. 51. And see Mr. Bradshaw his Answer to Johnson to the same purpose where he says That the Magistrate had no Power to silence the Apostles for that 't was manifest by the silencing of them was intended the utter extirpation of Christianity But the case is alter'd among us for the intent of a Christian Magistrate is not to silence all Christian Ministers but some particular men only so that the Question is not whether Minister or no but whether this or that Minister of Christ And doubtless every Christian Prince has Power to chuse what Men he thinks fittest for publick Offices in Church or State so long as they be equally qualified according to God's Law But to go on The Opinion and Practice of the Dissenters in the late unhappy Times are not yet forgotten they were all then of an opinion that Christ's Ministers may be silenc'd and accordingly put it in practice every Party as it serv'd their turn See their Solemn League and Covenant all who would not enter into it and solemnly swear to doe their utmost endeavour to abolish Episcopacy and set up Presbytery were immediately not only silenc'd but sequester'd though their Ministry was as much of Divine Right as any of theirs now Conscience then was no Plea for not taking this solemn Oath They would not suffer one of the old Clergy to teach a School Nay they would not allow their own Independent Brethren to preach though they had all taken Presbyterian Orders as they themselves See the Letter from the Presbyterian Ministers of London to the Assembly of Divines at Westminster Ann. 1645. Jan. 1. And the grand Debate c. And in New-England where the Independents have the Power they are all of the same Mind none is to preach publickly by their Laws where any two organick Churches Council of State or general Court shall declare their dissatisfaction thereat See their Body of Statutes which they have lately printed Nay they are not satisfied to silence such Ministers as will not conform but they banish them too as they did Mr. Willams and others And is it not very strange then that the silencing of such Ministers by the King and Governours of the Church who positively refuse to submit to the Orders of the Church or to give their Governours such a Test of their Obedience and Conformity to the Laws of the Church and State as they in their Discretion have thought fit to require of them that this should be a thing so unlawful and wicked now that has been practised in the purest Ages of the Church and by the Dissenters themselves when they were in Power and by all the Churches in the World at this day And indeed if the Tests which the Laws require of their Obedience and Loyalty be too severe and rigid they may blame themselves for it for Governours cannot be too cautious in securing the Peace and Safety of the Kingdom against a Faction that has once already overthrown this Monarchy and Church And give us all the Reason in the World to believe That they are ready to do the same again especially the latter as soon as ever it is in their Power The bitter Spirit they show in Scotland already and their Unchristian like behaviour to all those that differ from them in Opinion shews us plainly what we may expect here when ever they are able And thus much for the Pleas which the Dissenters use for Separation which relate to the Constitution of our Church The second sort are against the terms of Communion with it They say our terms of Communion are unlawful for that the Church of England injoins some things in God's Worship which are not expresly commanded in Scripture and so makes the Scriptures insufficient And these things are our Ceremonies and prescribed Forms of Prayer c. First as to our Ceremonies The Church of England uses no Ceremonies but such as were us'd in the purest Ages of the Church as Dr. Stillingfleet has prov'd in his Mischiefs of Separation And such as are now us'd by the greatest part of the Reform'd Churches beyond Seas The Lutheran Churches have the same and more Ceremonies than we have And yet these Churches have been thought fit to be united to the best Reform'd Churches by the best and wisest Protestants as appears by a Synod of the Reform'd Churches at Chareton in France Anno 1631. And indeed there is no Christian Church in the World but what do make Laws and Canons in Matters of Circumstance and compel both Ministers and People to obey the same They do not believe that every variation in Circumstance in God's Worship is setting up new parts of Worship as our Dissenters seem to do when they charge us with setting up new parts of Worship and making the Scriptures insufficient Adoration we all agree is a substantial and proper act of Divine Worship but whether this Adoration is perform'd by prostration or by bowing or by kneeling is a Circumstance in it self indifferent And
Church of Rome were introduced as Dr. Comber observes in his Advice to the Roman Catholicks of England Under this Cloud of Ignorance and Darkness did the Church lie hid for many Hundreds of Years till about the Year 1510. when it pleased God to open the Eyes of some of his People and to let them see those great Abuses with which the World had been so long abus'd and under the Burden of which the Church had groan'd for so many Hundred Years And though here in England there has been for many Years before the Reformation a strong Disposition that way as may appear by the several Acts of Parliament made since the Conquest to lessen and take away the Pope's Power and Authority as well in Ecclesiastical as Civil Matters within these Kingdoms See Coke's 5th Rep. De jure Regis Ecclesiastico Yet the Pope had always so great an Interest at Court and the Clergy in the Nation having got most of the Lands into their own Hands that this glorious Design cou'd never be accomplish'd till it pleased God to make an open breach between King H. 8. and the Pope upon which he totally rejected the Pope's Supremacy and assum'd to himself the stile of Supream Head of the Church in these Nations and Defender of the Faith And thus the Pope being quite forsaken 't was likely Popery wou'd not live long having lost its Infallible Head And so indeed it prov'd For in King Edw. 6. days Popery was quite turn'd out of Doors by the general consent of the whole Nation whose Example many of the Churches beyond Seas follow'd And thus the general Reformation was happily begun and the Christian Church being stript of all its antick Disguises began to appear again and shine forth in its natural Form and Brightness But because 't was impossible to bring the People clearly off from what they and their Ancestors had been bred up in and accustom'd to for so many Ages or to make them capable of distinguishing on a sudden between things hurtful in Religion and things Indifferent therefore 't was thought convenient that no Alterations shou'd be made in things Indifferent nor any Scruples rais'd about them which wou'd at that time have hinder'd much the Reformation since many were with difficulty enough brought to things necessary So that for this Reason as also to let our Enemies see that we did not break Communion with them for Indifferent things many things were retain'd at the beginning of the Reformation that were afterwards Reform'd In the days of Edw. VI. the Liturgy and Publick Service of the Church was Corrected and Amended And this was done with all the Care and Deliberation imaginable and the King and Parliament took the best Advice in the doing of it that cou'd be had either at home or abroad Which makes me indeed admire to hear every illiterate Dissenter find so many Faults in the Liturgies and Worship of the Church of England that was so well approv'd of then by all those Holy Bishops and Martyrs that were our first Reformers and by Calvin Bucer and all the Eminent Divines beyond Seas 'T is very strange to think that such Excellent Men and Men of such indefatigable Pains and great Integrity as Cranmer Ridly Latimer and Bradford c. were after all their diligent Enquiry and fervent Prayers to God that he would direct them in the Performance and Management of so great a Work cou'd not after all spy so much as a mote of Unlawfulness in those things that now every Dissenting Preacher though never so raw or illiterate yea and the very meanest of the People can see such Beams in 'T is certain that our terms of Communion are the same or rather easier now than they were then as most of the Dissenters will allow and as Dr. Stillingfleet has prov'd at large in his Mischiefs of Separation During all the Reign of King Edward VI. there were no Divisions in this Church about these Matters There might have been some in those Days that might have wish'd for a farther Reformation as no Church ever yet wanted such But there was no such thing as Separation from the Church and going to separate Meetings upon that account No 't was so far from that that when actual Separation was first begun in Queen Elizabeth's Days those who practis'd it were severely Condemned by most of those who were very desirous of a farther Reformation The time when Separation first began in the Church of England was about the Beginning of Queen Elizabeth's Reign For after Queen Mary's Death the Ministers and others who were Banished and Fled in her time began to flock back again into England but the Impressions which were made on some of our Divines during their Banishment especially those who continued at Geneva a place always inveterate against Ceremonies did not wear off at their return home but after a little while they began to insinuate into the People who are ever fond of Novelties a hatred to the Livery of Antichrist as they call'd the Vestments and Ceremonies upon which some of the People began to Separate and this was the first occasion of pressing Uniformity with Laws and Penalties The Queen and Parliament now began to see it Necessary for the Quiet of the Church and Nation and for the avoiding farther Divisions upon this account that all the Clergy shou'd give some assurance of their Conformity and Obedience to the Laws of this Land and the Religion Establish'd by Law and to the Orders and Discipline of the Church agreeable to Law And accordingly certain Articles and Subscriptions were agreed on and such of the Clergy as would not Subscribe thereto were Suspended They who were Suspended writ to their Oracle at Geneva Beza who was a Man of greatest Authority with them to know what they shou'd do Beza advises them That if they cannot otherwise be continued in their Offices but by wronging their Consciences that they should submit and live quietly but by no means to exercise their Function against the Will of their Queen and Bishops for says he We tremble at the thoughts of that * See Dr. Stillingfleet's Mischief of Separation Pag. 20 21 c. But he tells them farther That though he does not approve of the Ceremonies yet being not Evil in themselves he does not think them of that moment as that the Ministers shou'd leave their Functions for them or the People forsake the Ordinances rather than hear those who did Conform And it seems indeed that the more Serious and Learned of those Divines who in their Banishment had suck'd in a Dislike to the Church of England way of Worship did not think fit to Separate from it upon that account or to endeavour too hastily the Reforming of it for Dr. Burnet in his Book of Travels tells us That in Switzerland he met with several Letters from some of our English Clergy to Bullinger who had procur'd a kind Reception to be given to several of them in
of Alexandria and the Territories belong to it for he says Ap. p. 781 802. Maoretis is a Region belonging to Alexandria and all the Churches there are immediately subject to the Bishop of Alexandria But because Dr. Owen Mr. Baxter Mr. Cotton and the rest have made choice of the Church of Carthage in Africk in St. Cyprian's time to make their appeals to Dr. Stillingfleet to avoid all Cavils as he tells us has chosen that very Church to be decided by as to the Episcopal Government now in dispute between us And therefore first he proves that there were a great number of Presbyters belonging to the Church of Carthage at that time and therefore not likely to be one single Congregation And this he proves out of St. Cyprian's own Epistles in his Banishment Particularly in his 5th Book Ep. 28. he complains that a great number of his Clergy were absent and the few that remain'd were hardly sufficient for their Work And that these Presbyters and the whole Church were under the particular care and government of St. Cyprian as their Bishop appears by his own words Lib. 3. Ep. 10 and 12. to the People of Carthage he complains to them of his Presbyters that they did not reserve to their Bishop that honour due to his place for that they received Penitents to Communion without Imposition of Hands by the Bishop c. And in his Epist 28. he threatens to Excommunicate those Presbyters that should do so for the future And all the other Bishops gave their approbation to St. Cyprian for so doing And the same St. Cyprian in his 3 Book Ep. 65. tells them that a Bishop in the Church is in the place of Christ and that Disobedience to him is the occasion of Schisms and Disorders See more fully concerning this matter in Dr. Stillingfleet's Mischiefs of Separation p. 228 229. c. And now since Dr. Owen Mr. Baxter and the rest have agreed to appeal to the Church of Carthage we must suppose they allow no Deviations in that Church from the Primitive Institution and what that was then any one may judge And St. Augustine was another Bishop in the African Church he was Bishop of Hippo Regia the Diocess of which extended at least Forty Miles as appears by St. Augustine's own Epist 262. 'T is true the African Church came most near the Congregational way of any other the Diocess being smaller by reason of the many Sectaries there the Donatists and many others And that is the Reason Mr. Baxter and the rest express so great an Esteem for it But that their Bishopricks were much too large to serve either the Presbyterians or Independents turn and that they never allowed more than one Bishop in the largest Cities sufficiently appears by what has been said And in the African Code there is a Canon that says expresly no Bishop shall leave his Cathedral Church and go to any other Church in his Diocess to reside there See Codex Eccl. Africae c. 71. Which shows that the Bishops Territories and Jurisdiction extended into distant Places from the City as well in the African Churches as in others I shall only add to this that Calvin look'd upon it as a Thing out of dispute among Learned Men that a Church did not only take in the Christians of a City in the Primitive Times but of the adjacent Country also See Calv. Instit l. 4. c. 4. n. 2. But though there were never more than one Bishop in a City in the Primitive Church * v. Conc. Eph. Part 2. Act. 1. yet some Bishops have had Two or more Cities in their Diocess Timothy was Bishop of Farmissus and Eudocias Athanasius was Bishop of Diveltus and Sozopolis And there have been some Bishopricks that have had no City at all in them but only Villages for there were some Countries that had no Cities in them so have we at this Day Bishops in Ireland and Wales that have no Cities in their Diocess But it cannot be prov'd that the Jurisdiction of the Bishop and the extent of his Diocess was confin'd to any single Village So far from that that by the Canon of Sardica VI. all the Bishops Assembled at Sardica agree That it shall by no means be lawful to Ordain any Bishops in Villages or small Cities that the Dignity of a Bishop may not be contemptible from the meanness of the Place But says Mr. Clarkson and the rest The Apostles Ordain'd Elders in every Church and then Mr. Clarkson names the places to wit Antioch Iconium Lystra and other Villages and these Elders or Presbyters they will have Bishops But first I say That during the Apostle's days the names Bishop and Presbyter were commonly used the one for the other but not after as shall be show'd hereafter and therefore these Elders or Presbyters here spoken of may be as well taken for ordinary Presbyters or Priests as for Bishops But allowing these Presbyters were Bishops what advantage will it be to them for first it does not appear that the Apostles confin'd their Authority to those places but the contrary is evident and unless they can prove this it will not serve their turn But Secondly these Cities over which the Apostles appointed Elders were large Cities at that time by much too great to come together in one Congregation Iconium was then a Metropolitan and had many other Cities under it And the rest were all large Cities But before I conclude this point I must make one Observation and that is That Mr. Clarkson to prove that a Bishop of a City had no more but one Congregation undertakes to shew how small some Cities were but 't is remarkable he quotes for his Authority some Author who speaks of them long before there were any Bishops and because they might have been small places then will needs have them to be so in the days of the Apostles which is very ridiculous for under the Roman Emperours both the Roman and the Grecian Cities were at their height and did very much surpass both for their magnificence and number of people any that have been before or since nor is this to be wonder'd at since our Cities do now stand upon much narrower Foundations as to their constitution our Cities have seldom any Liberties half a mile beyond their Walls and are generally but an Assembly of Trades-men whereas the Roman Cities had each a Territory as it were a County belonging to it which was under the jurisdiction of the City Magistrate and the Citizens were the Lords of the adjacent Country I have now shew'd that the Government of the Church by Diocesan Bishops is agreeable to the practice of the best and purest Ages of the Church and to the Judgment of the wisest and holiest Fathers of it And that their Power and Jurisdiction was as absolute and extended as far or farther than any Bishops this day in England I shall shew hereafter that Episcopal Government as now settled in England has
therefore they who differ in these Circumstances do not differ in the act of Worship but in the manner See the Harmony of Confessions where you will find what the Opinions of other Reformed Churches are concerning the Lawfulness and Usefulness of Ceremonies The latter Helvetian Confession saith That there are different Rites and Ceremonies found in the Churches let no Man judge hereby that the Churches dissent And the Confession of Bohemia hath Wherefore those Rites and those good Ceremonies ought only to be kept which among the People of Christ do Edifie therefore whether they be extent or brought in by the Bishops or by the Councils Ecclesiastical or by other Authors whatsoever the simpler sort are not to trouble themselves about that but must use them to that which is good And a little after Although our Men do not equally observe all Ceremonies with other Churches which is not a thing necessary to be done yet are they not so minded as to move any Dissentions for the cause of Ceremonies although they be not judged to be altogether necessary so that they be not found contrary to God's Word And the Augustine Confession has Some Men then may ask whether we would have this life of Man to be without Order without Ceremonies In no wise But we teach That the true Pastors in their Churches may Ordain Publick Rites or Ceremonies And Beza in his 24th Epist agrees herein as has been said before And Calvin in his Book of the True way of Reformation Ch. 16. says He would not contend about Ceremonies not only those which are for decency but those which are Symbolical Let all things be done decently and in order says the Scripture And St. Paul tell us 1 Cor. 14. 33. God is not the author of confusion but of peace as in all the Churches of the Saints But to come home to our Dissenters Mr. Baxter in his Poor Man's Family Book p. 337. speaking of our publick Worship in our Parish Churches says In all the lawful Orders Gestures and Manners of behaviour in God's Worship affect not to differ from the rest but conform your self to the use of the Church for in the Church singularity is a Discord c. See Vines on the Sacrament to the same purpose p. 39. and many more Instances of this kind might be given but what has been said is sufficient to shew that such Ceremonies as serve for Order or Edification and are not directly contrary to God's Law are to be used according to the Opinion of all the Reformed Churches and most Eminent Men both at home and abroad Now How shall we know what Ceremonies are lawful and what not It is to be noted That the nature of Ceremonies is to be taken from the Doctrine which goes along with it and may be lawful and not lawful as that is If a Ceremony be made a substantial part of God's Worship and unalterable or be suppos'd so necessary as that the doing of it would be a thing meritorious or pleasing to God and the not doing of it sinful tho' there were no human Law which requir'd the doing of it Then it becomes sinful because it makes the Scriptures insufficient And this it was that made the Jewish Ceremony of washing before Meat sinful And so it is in many of the Ceremonies of the Church of Rome But when Ceremonies are injoin'd for the sake of Order and Uniformity in God's Worship according to the general Rules of the Scripture and to prevent the great Mischiefs which we should inevitably fall into if every Pastor and People were suffered to follow their several different judgments in the manner of God's Worship then they are lawful and good But say they If these Ceremonies do not bind the Consciences of Men Why does the Discipline and Censures of the Church force Men to use them I answer The Church does not oblige Men to the observance of these Ceremonies as things that bind the Conscience or which are necessary to be done or not done in themselves but the Reason why Men are forced to observe them and punish'd if they refuse is because they are appointed by the Church and disobedience to the Laws of Church or State made not contrary to the Law of God is sinful Rom. 13. 5. and 2. And for this they are punish'd and also for disturbing the publick Peace And thus we justify our bowing at the name of Jesus at seasonable times and all our Ceremonies since the Church has appointed them we ought to obey unless we can prove them to be sinful which no Man can do so long as the Worship is directed to a true Object to wit the Person of Christ As for the Ceremony of Bowing towards the Altar Note the Canon that appointed it did not oblige any to the observance of it but left them to their liberty As to the posture appointed by the Church of England for receiving the Lord's Supper to wit Kneeling 'T is a Circumstance which may be varied according to the Discretion of the Church In the Primitive Church it was always taken in the posture of Adoration which posture varied according to the Customs of Countries Now Kneeling being the posture of Adoration in these Kingdoms the Church of England has therefore appointed that it be taken kneeling And indeed 't is but very reasonable that so Sacred an Ordinance and so great a Benefit should be received in the most thankful and humble posture that may be and that surely is on our Knees which is also the fittest posture for those high strains of Devotion with which so Sacred a Work ought to be attended at the very instant of taking it The only Objection that I know is made against this posture of Kneeling at the Sacrament is because it is Idolatrous and contrary to Christ's own Practice 'T is strange that they will make us and the greatest part of the Reform'd Churches all Idolaters whether we will or no Does not our Book of Common Prayer at the end of the Communion Service tell them as plain as words can express it That we pay no Adoration to any thing in the Sacrament but Christ himself which is in Heaven and yet will they make us Idolaters for all this Has any of them ever writ so strong against Idolizing the Elements of Bread and Wine in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper as our Divines of the Church of England have done And yet will they perswade us we are Idolaters They may as well believe that we Worship the Stones in the Church-Walls when we kneel down to Pray in them And truly I fear many of them do so which makes them use that posture so seldom in their publick Meetings For you shall seldom see in any of their Meetings scarce one of the whole Congregation on their Knees not even at repeating the Lord's Prayer if it happen to be said which is not often Their usual postures of Praying in their publick Congregations are either
standing or lolling on their Elbows And at the Reading of the Holy Scriptures nay even of the Psalms themselves tho' they are the very highest strains of Devotion you shall see them all sitting on their Breeches and many of them with their Hats on But pray How comes the posture of sitting to be the only fit posture for receiving the Lord's Supper Was that the posture Christ us'd No if we will believe most learned Men they will tell us Christ gave it leaning which perhaps he might have done on purpose to let us see that he did not require any one set posture for leaning is a mean as it were between kneeling and standing and seems to incline equally to both Why do they not take it leaning as Christ did and after Supper and in an upper Room Why do they not observe all these Circumstances If one may be dispens'd with without sin Why not another If they will not be so civil as to Conform to the Church of England Why will they not follow the Example of other Reformed Churches the Churches of France and most of the Reformed Churches take it either standing or kneeling as being postures of Adoration But because they do our English Dissenters will take it in no other but that which is most irreverent and farthest from Adoration in the World to wit sitting on their Breeches 'T is a Feast say they and therefore sitting being a posture of ease is most suitable to it We own 't is a Feast but not a common but Spiritual Feast and therefore we ought to take it not in the posture we use at our common Tables but in a more decent and reverent Posture To conclude this Point I shall give you the words of one of the most Eminent of the Non-conformist Preachers in this Matter Vines in his Book on the Sacrament p. 39. says 'T is no corruption to vary in occasional Circumstances in administring the Lord's Supper such as time and place and posture c. Mr. Baxter has several times declar'd the same and so has most of the Non-conformist Ministers And herewith agrees Hooker in his Eccles Polity lib. 5. p. 366. As to the Sign of the Cross in Baptism 'T is us'd only as a Solemn Rite or Ceremony of admission into the Church of England as 't is usual in admissions into Societies to use some particular Ceremonies Therefore as Baptism besides its Sacramental Efficacy is a Rite of admission into Christ's Catholick Church so the Sign of the Cross is into our Church of England We do not use it as 't is used in the Church of Rome for they use it as a dedicative Sign to God we only as a Token or declarative Sign to Men they use it before Baptism and make it part of it we after and make it no part of Baptism but allow the Baptism to be good without it and it to be omitted in Private Baptism if it be scrupled If it be said that since these Ceremonies are allowed to be things indifferent in themselves by the Church of England and are scrupled by the Dissenters why will the Church of England impose them I answer First 't is not fit nor convenient that such things as are thought necessary by the Governours of a Church to preserve the Order and Unity of it should be cast aside to humour some over scrupulous and restless Minds and who 't is like would not be satisfied were that granted Secondly It is more safe for the Church of England to follow the Example of the greatest part of the Reformed Churches which do allow and practise them than such a handful of People as the Dissenters of England c. And Thirdly There were as insignificant Ceremonies injoyn'd by the Apostles themselves as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ours are now notwithstanding some 〈◊〉 scruples concerning them as the Love Feasts and Holy Kiss c. till abolish'd by general consent And the Assembly of their own Divines at Westminster tell us The Apostles say they notwithstanding the difference of Men's Judgments did prescribe Rules of Vniformity See Papers for Accomodation p. 111. The next great Objection which the Dissenters make to the terms of our Communion is For that we tie up our Ministers to prescribed Forms of Prayer which is a stinting of the Spirit and hinders them from exercising their Gifts and is contrary to Scripture and the practice of the Primitive Church The Arguments which they commonly use against written Forms of Prayer are First They say that nothing but the Canonical Scripture and the lively Voice of God's Graces which they call Preaching and Extempore Prayer are to be brought into the Publick Worship of God and nothing that is Humane because subject to Infirmities and Errors But if so then must we exclude not only all written Prayers but the whole Bible too unless in the Original Tongue for all Translations of it are Humane and subject to Errors And also the Prayers and Preaching of the Pastors must be excluded for the Errors in the Sermons and Prayers of the Pastors cannot be said to be the lively Voices of God's own Graces And the Psalms in Metre must be also excluded Another Argument is That we must not make use of any outward helps in the action of Prayer for the Spirit they say helpeth our Infirmities and therefore written Forms and all other outward helps are sinful But let me ask them whether the Voice of another that Prayeth or Fasting or the lifting up of the Hands and Eyes 1 Tim. 2. 8. or Kneeling be Prayer it self or only outward helps to Prayer it self or make it more fervent Sure they are outward helps only and yet they are used in the very action of Prayer Again they say Reading a Prayer cannot be Praying for Prayer is the pouring forth Supplications to God the other a receiving in of such things as we Read But when one hears a Prayer pronounced by another his hearing does receive it into his Soul but yet at the same instant he doth power it forth as a Prayer to God Why then may not this be done as well when 't is read as when 't is pronounced by another But then they tell us That all Forms of Prayer are a stinting of the Spirit If so Why will they hear the Extempore Prayer of another Man is not this as much a Form of Prayer to all the Hearers as any written Form can be Doubtless it is How comes it then that the Spirit of the Hearers is not as much stinted when they joyn in this Form as if they had joyn'd in a written Form But since our Dissenters have the confidence to affirm That Forms of Prayer are sinful and were never used among Christians till lately in the time of Popery and Superstition and are supported only by the Ignorance and Lazyness of our Clergy I will shew That Forms of Prayer and Praises have been used by God's People in the time of the Old Testament and have been practised
and recommended by Christ himself in the New And that both Forms of Prayer and Liturgies were Composed by the Fathers and appointed to be used in the Church ever since Christ's days And that even the most Eminent of our own Non-Conformists have heretofore declared their liking thereto And that all the Reformed Churches do use and approve of prescribed Forms in their publick Worship at this Day And lastly I will shew That our English Common-Prayer Book has been particularly Commended and Approved by the most Learned and Eminent Men of the Reformed Churches beyond Seas And when this is done if any will be so hardy as to affirm That Forms of Prayer are so Sinful as to cause a necessity of Separation he is incorrigible and not to be Convinced by Reasons First then Forms of Prayer c. were used by God's People in the time of the Old Testament for the Lord prescribed a Form of Blessing to Aaron saying On this wise ye shall bless the Children of Israel saying c. Numb vi 23. And again Deut. xxvi he prescribed a Form of Prayer which he commanded the People to use And the xxij Psalm is a Prayer which the People were commanded to sing or say every Morning so are several of the other Psalms Forms of Prayers as lxxxvi xc cij c. See Origen Cint Cels l. 4. p. 178. And here observe That the Dissenters will allow these Psalms to be Prayers and that they ought to be Sung to God yet they will not allow that a Man should Pray Singing For say they When they are Sung they are not Prayer See now what an absurdity they will run into rather than forsake their own Opinion For here they affirm That a Man may say the Words of Prayer to God devoutly and yet not pray Secondly Christ himself used a Form of Prayer though doubtless he had a power of praying Extempore much beyond what our Dissenters or any that ever was on Earth can pretend to when he was in the Garden a little before his Suffering he prayed twice or thrice in the same Words Matth. xxvi 44. Mark xiv 39. and that too at a time when he was in so great Extremity and Sorrow That he sweated drops of Blood and at such a time one usually prays after the most prevailing and fervent manner And to assure us that our Saviour thought Forms of Prayer very necessary to help our Infirmities we have not only his Example but his Precept for it too For our Saviour taught his Disciples a Form of Prayer Matth. vi 9. and bid them use it And the occasion of our Saviour's giving his Disciples this Form of Prayer was to obviate the inconveniencies which he saw did usually attend Extempore Prayers to wit the using Vain Repetitions c. which he tells them are not pleasing to God and therefore he first bids them beware of that and then immediately after he gives them a short and perfect Form of Prayer as the best way to prevent that evil Whether our Dissenters have not as much reason to use Forms of Prayer for that very reason as Christ's Disciples had let the World judge that hears their tedious extempore Prayers fill'd with as many vain Repetitions and bald and sometimes sensless Expressions as any of theirs But say the Dissenters When our Saviour taught his Disciples to pray he did not design that they should use any certain Form of Prayer For he bad them Luke 11. 2. When ye pray say thus and thus being an adverb of Similitude does shew that our Saviour did not intend they should use the same words but some other such like To this I answer In the 3d. chap. of Exod. v. 14 15. The Lord said unto Moses thus shalt thou say to the Children of Israel EHEIE hath sent me unto you And again the God of your Fathers the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto you Here Moses by this Rule must not say these words not EHEIE hath sent me unto you not the God of Abraham the God of Isaac and the God of Jacob hath sent me unto you but the like And by the same reason the Scripture is not the very Word of God but the Words of the Prophets for all along when the Prophet says Thus saith the Lord they do not tell the very Words of God but the like From what has been said 't is evident that we have Scripture on our side both Old and New Testament for using prescribed Forms of Prayer We will in the next place enquire what Authority we have for it in the first and purest Ages of the Church First then That Forms of Prayer were us'd in the Church in the first Century I gather from Ignatius who was Bishop of Antioch Anno Dom. 99. in his Epist to those at Magnesia he bids 'em Do nothing without the Bishop and Presbyters nor to make tryal of things agreeable to their own private Fancy p. 34. And Socrates in his History l. 6. c. 8. says That Ignatius first brought the usage of singing alternately as we use in our Choirs into the Church of Antioch Photius affirms the same of him And Theodoret says Hist lib. 2. c. 24. That this Custom of singing alternately began at Antioch and was soon received all the World over In the second Century Tertull. de Orat. c. 1. and c. 9. tells us They us'd Forms of Prayer then in the African Church He calls the Lord's Prayer the lawful and ordinary Prayer and that the Christians daily repeated that very Form And he shews they sang Hymns c. then in the Church alternately as we do now Tertull. ad Vxor l. 2. p. 172. And Calvin in his Instit l. 4. c. 1. affirms the same That the Christians did use to repeat the Lord's Prayer daily and that they did it by Christ's Command How will our Dissenters reconcile this to their seldom or never using of it even on the Lord's Day every young Preacher yea and every perhaps drunken Cobler preferring their own rash and indeliberate Prayers before it In the third Century St. Cyprian who lived then affirms the same that the Lord's Prayer was us'd daily for says he The Father will know the words of his own Son see Cypr. de Orat. Dom. p. 309. And the same Cyprian in his Ep. 8. ad Cler. Pleb p. 24. says Christ commanded us to pray for all men in a common Prayer wherein all agreed It appears also that the Priest and People pray'd by way of Responses as when the Priest said Lift up your hearts the People answer'd We lift them up unto the Lord. See Cypr. de Orat. Dom. § 22. See more for this interchangable way of praying between Priest and People B. Bils of Christian Subjection part 4. p. 435. In the same Century Origen says They who served God through Jesus in the Christian way use frequently night and day the injoined Prayers See Orig. in
Supra and Monsieur Durell his View of the Government and publick Worship of God in the Reformed Churches beyond Seas Printed London 1662. Now for the Churches Reform'd by Calvin and others as Geneva France Helvetia Holland c. Calvin compos'd a Form of Divine Service which is us'd in the Church of Geneva and those of France at this day and their Ministers are bound to use them And see Calvin's Letter to the Protector of England during the Minority of King Ed. 6. the Protector at that time when the Common-Prayer Book was to be settled by Act of Parliament thought fit first to Advice with so Eminent a Man as Calvin was about it He writes to Calvin to know his Opinion therein Calvin returns him this answer For so much as concerns the Prayers and Ecclesiastical Rites I much approve that they be determined so that it may not be lawful for the Ministers to very from it that it may be a help to the weakness of some That it may be a Testimony of the Churches consent And that it may put a stop to the levity of such as are for new things See Calv. Ep. p. 165. Ep. 87. to the Protector And see his Letter to Cox a Church of England Divine upon his Arrival at Franckford among his Epistles 164 165. See Beza his Approbation of Forms of Prayer Tom. 2. p. 229. In the French Church Mornay Lord Du-Plessis in his Book of the Mass allows of the Use and Antiquity of prescribed Forms See at large Dr. Comber of Liturgies 2d Part p. 313. And see there the famous Monsieur Daille agreeing herewith In the Church of Helvetia Bullinger tells us they used prescribed Forms keep Fasts and Holy-Days c. Bulling Decod 2. Serm. 1. p. 38. The Churches of Holland use Forms of Prayer for Baptism the Lord's Supper and all occasional Offices and also Liturgies c. which are all put into a Book of Common-Prayer And even in Scotland they have had a Common-Prayer Book for there are some of them now extant which were Printed Ann. 1594. supposed to be writ by Mr. Knox for the use of the Kirk of Scotland See the latter end of Dr. Comber his Defence of Liturgies 2d Part. And the Leyden Professors say That Forms of Prayer are not only lawful but very advantageous because every Christian cannot fitly conceive new Prayers and the attention of Auditors are not a little help'd in great assemblies by usual Forms See Dr. Falkner his Libertas Ecclesiastica p. 121. Thus much for Forms of Prayer in general But some perhaps may object against our Common-Prayer in particular To clear that I think 't were sufficient to tell them that it has been approv'd of by all the learned and godly Divines of the Church of England ever since the Reformation and confirm'd by several Parliaments And it cannot reasonably be suppos'd that God Almighty shou'd conceal his will from the greatest number of the most learned pious and judicious People of a Nation notwithstanding their frequent Prayers to God that he would direct them and their great Care and Study which they take to come to the knowledge of the truth and reveal it only to a few and those of the rawer injudicious sort who have had least time and study and means to come to greater Knowledge such as our Dissenters generally are This alone were sufficient to recommend our particular Common-Prayer But since our Dissenters will not allow so many several Parliaments and so many Successions of Learned Divines to be competent judges in this matter we are willing to stand to the judgment of our Neighbour Churches of the Reformed Religion concerning our Common-Prayer and the other Matters in controversy between us In King Edward 6th his days Archbishop Cranmer did request the famous Bucer to peruse the whole Book of Common-Prayer in order to his censuring what he thought was to be amended Bucer accordingly did so and declares his judgment of it thus In the prescript Form for the Communion and the daily Prayers I see nothing written in this Book which is not taken out of the Word of God if not in express words as the Psalms and Lessons yet in sence as the Collects And also the order of these Lessons and Prayers and the time when they are to be used are very agreeable to the Word of God and the Practice of the ancient Church See Bucer's Censure upon the Book of Common-Prayer c. 1. p. 457. And note this was before the Common-Prayer was amended as now it is Some things 't is true Bucer did wish to be amended which has been since done and most of them according to his Advice there Next the Archbishop of Spalato in his Book against Suarez p. 340. says That the English Liturgy contains nothing in it which is not Holy which is not Pious and truly Christian as well as Catholick Causabon in his Epistle to King James the first affirms the same And says farther That none at this day comes nearer the Form of the Ancient Church following a middle way between those who have offended both in excess and defect The next Authority for us is the learned Grotius who 't is certain had no Obligation to the Church of England but rather the contrary He says I am sure the English Liturgy the Rite of laying on of Hands on Children in memory of Baptism the Authority of Bishops of Synods consiting of none but the Clergy c. do sufficiently agree to the Orders of the Ancient Church from which we cannot deny but we have departed both in France and Holland See Grotius ad Boatslaer Ep. 62. p. 21. The next is the famous Lud. Capellus who was a famous French Divine of the Reformed Church and Divinity Professor in a famous Protestant University This Man lived to hear of our Independent Sect in England and writ most Learnedly against ' em Says he When miraculous Gifts ceased there was a necessity for Liturgies which were used in the First IV. Ages uncorrupted but afterwards Corruptions were introduced by the following Popes But upon the Reformation the Liturgy was purged from all its Corruptions and has been happily used in the several Reform'd Churches and with good success until very lately says he there arose a sort of morose scrupulous not to say downright superstitious Men who for many trifling Reasons of no moment not only dislike the Liturgy hitherto used in that Church but would have both it and the whole Order of Bishops to be utterly abolished in place whereof they would substitute that which they call their Directory c. and so goes on And then he proves at large That Forms of Prayer are not only necessary for the unlearned but the learned also and shews the insufficiency of their Directory And how ridiculous it is to suppose That we have that extraordinary Gift of Prayer that they had in the Apostles days and some little time after 'T were too long to put it all down here
I will referr you to Dr. Comber's Defence of Liturgies II. Part pag. 325. and will go on to shew the Opinion of some of the most Eminent of our own Dissenters concerning our Common-Prayer Mr. Baxter in his Poor Man's Family Book pag. 336. says Do not peevishly pick quarrels with the Prayers of the Church nor come to them with humoursome prejudice c. And in his Preface to the same Book he says he mightily approves of Forms of Prayer See Dr. Owen to the same purpose his Evangelical Love pag. 54. And Mr. Baxter in his Dispute of Liturgies Prop. 10. says farther That the constant disuse of Forms is apt to breed a giddiness in Religion and may make Men Hypocrites who delude themselves with conceits that they delight in God when 't is but in those Novelties and variety of Expressions that they are delighted See also Gifford a Non-Conformist his Answer to Greenwood he writ a whole Treatise proving the lawfulness of read Prayer And now I have shew'd that Praying by Forms has been used by the Saints in the Old Testament enjoyned by Christ in the New practised by all the Holy Fathers and Devout Christians who lived ever since the first setling of the Church and is now allowed and practised in all the regular Protestant Churches and approved by some of the most Eminent of our own Dissenters Let any Man now in his right Reason judge whether praying by Forms be so wicked and abominable a thing as most of our Dissenters make it One of the Non-Conformist Ministers in a Book which he Publish'd not many Years since speaking of Forms of Prayer calls it That pitiful contemptible thing called Vniformity in Words and Syllables and Phrases which was never desired of God nor ever entered into his or his Son's heart Let the World judge now whether using Forms of Prayer c. be this pitiful contemptible thing they are pleased to make it or the Books that contain them deserve no better usage from Christians than to be burnt in the Streets by the Common Hangman In the days of Julian there was never any thing done more wicked than to burn the Holy Bible But even to that height are those who call themselves Christians arrived already in our Neighbouring Kingdom if these things be suffered what must we think will follow But the main Text of Scripture which our Dissenters rely on for to defend their Extempore Prayers is Rom. viij 26. where St. Paul says The Spirit helpeth your Infirmities and therefore they conclude they ought to use no outward helps But I have shew'd before That outward helps are to be used as Kneeling lifting up the Hands and Eyes c. So that 't is plain they mistake this Text of Scripture And 't is evident they do so for that all the Fathers and the most Eminent Men of the Church as Calvin Luther c. whenever they recommended the use of Liturgies they gave this Reason for it among others To prevent the inconveniences which some Mens folly would betray them to in their using rash and unpremeditated Prayers Now if the Spirit helpeth our Infirmities in the sence that our Dissenters will have it How come all these learned Men yea and Mr. Baxter himself c. to recommend Forms as necessary for the helping of our Infirmities and so make the Holy Spirit insufficient Shall we believe that all these learned Men did not understand the meaning of that Text so well as some of our Dissenters do 'T is very likely that St. Augustine and St. Chrysostom who liv'd nearer the Apostles days by above Twelve Hundred Years than any of our Non-conformists might have understood the Apostles meaning better than any of them Now let us hear what their sence was of these words of St. Paul We know not what to pray for as we ought but the Spirit helpeth our Infirmities St. Aug. ad Prob. Ep. 121. p. 129. will not grant that any Christians wanted the Spirit to help them with words and expressions For he says It is not credible that the Apostle or they to whom he wrote were ignorant of the Lord's Prayer And therefore they must necessarily have known what to have pyra'd for therefore these words The Spirit helpeth our Infirmities he tells us must be expounded of the Spirit 's giving us patience not to pray absolutely to be delivered out of our afflictions but in God's due time And St. Chrysostom in his Hom. 14. in 8. Rom. p. 120. says That there was a miraculous gift of Prayer in the Apostles days to which St. Paul alluded in those words The Spirit helpeth our Infirmities But he tells us there that 't was ceas'd long since that is before his days tho' he liv'd in the fourth Century so that whatever the Apostles meaning was then it can no ways be taken in the sence our Dissenters would have it nor does it condemn prescribed Forms now that that miraculous gift of Prayer is ceased But were there no other Argument against the use of extempore Prayers in publick Assemblies than the inconveniency of them 't were sufficient to reject them 'T is impossible that Order or Unity can be preserv'd in any Church where every Congregation hath liberty to Worship God in a different way from all the rest one Minister praying for one thing and another perhaps for the quite contrary at the same time according to their different judgments and interests as was usual in the late times when that extempore way was us'd Besides in great Congregations 't is impossible that all the People should keep their attention so well fixt on an extempore Prayer to which they are utter strangers as on a Prayer to which they have been accustom'd For how can they join with the Minister in every Petition as they ought to do till they have reflected a little upon what it was he said for when the Minister is left to his own Fancy in his Prayer 't is very like he may either through mistake or wilfully come out with some Petition that all his hearers cannot join with him in So that 't is necessary for every one of the Congregation to watch every expression and reflect a little on it before he consent to it In the mean time the eloquent Pastor to shew his extraordinary Gift of Prayer runs away with the business as if his Tongue was indeed the Pen of a ready writer Thus the poor People must either be left behind or join with him at random Another inconveniency which attends extempore Prayer is That 't is impossible for a Man who trusts to his own Memory to retain all his wants and the wants and necessities of the People so in his Mind but that something or other will very oft be forgotten which may be avoided by using of a well compos'd Form But again Can we reasonably imagine that God Almighty can be pleas'd with vain repetitions and with bald and unproper and too often nonsensical expressions such
Churches by the Example of the Apostolical Churches And ibid. Sect. 10. he says That the Lord esteem'd him a runnagade and forsaker of Religion whosoever he be that separated frowardly from any Christian Society which imbraceth but the true Ministry of the Word and Sacraments And ibid. Sect. 12. he says That though something that is faulty may creep in either in the Administration of the Word or of the Sacraments yet we ought not to separate us from the Communion of that Church For says he there are principles of Religion without which we cannot be saved and there are other points in which Men may differ and yet the Vnity of the Faith be kept And ibid. Sect. 13. he says It is not for every private Man to separate from the Communion of a Church tho' faulty in some things c. Beza in his Epist 24. p. 148. agrees herein so does Monsieur Daille and several other of the Foreign Divines See Dr. Still Misch of Separ 23. and 97. so does the Assembly of Divines as I have just now shewn and Papers for Accommodation p. 52. they declare farther That they look upon Separation from a true Church tho' somethings may be amiss in it not as a sin of mere humane Infirmity but as a wilful and dangerous sin And Mr. Baxter in his Poor Man's Family Book p. 347. tells us Many Churches were blam'd in Scripture but none are requir'd to Separate from them See the Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet's Sermon by several Non-conformists where they all acknowledge our Worship in the nature of it to be intrinsecally good and a total Separation from it sinful ibid. p. 31. So then it seems so long as a Church retains the Marks and Signs of a true Church tho' there be many things amiss in such a Church Separation from it is sinful But what if open sinners be admitted to the Communion before they have made publick Confession of their Faults as is too frequent in the Church of England must I be obliged to communicate with such May I not Separate in such case The Apostle 1 Cor. 5. 11 12 13. bids us If any that is call'd a brother be a Fornicator an Idolater or Covetous c. with such see that ye eat not I answer That this very reason did the Donatists in St. Augustine's days give among others for their Separation and quoted the same Texts of Scripture but they were condemn'd for Schismaticks as I shewed before And St. Augustine and all the Catholick Bishops did then agree that these Texts were meant only of Separation in heart not in body And therefore they say When such a multitude offends as that the casting of them out would be in danger to cause a Schism there they ought to be tolerated least while ye go about to pull up the tares ye pull up the wheat also therefore let them both grow together say they till the harvest But when only a few are guilty of scandalous sins there they say Let not the severity of Discipline cease but it must not be so severe as to root up but to amend See Aug. lib. 3. against Permenian a Donatist Bishop ch 3. lib. 2. c. 18. And herewith agrees Calv. lib. 4. Instit c. 1. sect 13. where he says That tho' sinners be admitted to Communion we ought to keep our selves from their followship but not to Separate from the Church Mr. Baxter says the same in his Poor Man's Family Book p. 347. and Vines on the Sacrament p. 39. But suppose the Parson of the Parish be weak or a Man of a loose Conversation and I can hear a better Preacher elsewhere and a Man of a more exemplary Holy Life and Conversation May not I go to that Church or Meeting where I find most Edification No For this still makes way for Schisms and Divisions in the Church and therefore was never allow'd in any regular Church provided the Parson of the Parish be tolerable The Followers of Estathius-Sebastenus who separated upon this account in Paphlagonia were condemned of Schism by the Council at Gangrae and see Calvin's Instit lib. 4. c. 1. sect 13. to the same purpose And indeed it is not reasonable that so ignorant and proud unpeaceable sort of People as Mr. Baxter himself in his Sacraleg Disert p. 102. c. confesses the ordinary sort of zealous Professors of Religion to be shou'd be at liberty to rend and tear a Church to pieces out of a conceit of a puere way of Worship as if they knew what was better for their Edification than the Wisdom of the whole Nation in Parliament and the Governors of the Church do The pretence of greater Edification was never allow'd by the Dissenters themselves heretofore as a sufficient cause for Separation as appears by the Papers for Accommodation and the Grand Debate both Printed when the Assembly of Divines sat at Westminster Nor did Mr. Baxter ever allow of this to be a sufficient cause for Separation as appears by his Cure of Divisions p. 393. where he sets forth the pernicious Consequences of complying with the ungovernable and factious Humours of the ordinary sort of People who are ever apt to revile the best and gravest Ministers and follow the more conceited and such as are of most fierce and bitter Spirits And in his Poor Man's Family Book p. 280. he says For want of understanding the right Terms of Church Communion how woful are our Divisions you must have Vnion and Communion in Faith and Love with all Christians Let your usual Meeting be with the purest Churches if you lawfully may and still respect the publick good But sometimes occasionally Communicate with defective faulty Churches so be it they are true Churches and put you not upon sin Think not that your presence makes all the faults of Ministry Worship or People to be yours for then I would join with no Church in the World Division is wounding and tends to Death abhor it as you love the Churches welfare or your own c. And again ib. p. 330. If your Minister says he be intolerable through Ignorance Heresy or Malignity forsake him utterly but if he be tolerable though weak and cold and if you cannot remove your dwelling then publick Order and your Soul's Edification must be joined as well as you can In London or other Cities you may go ordinarily to another Parish Church but in the Country and where 't would be a great offence you may one part of the day hear in one Parish and another in the next if there be a Man much fitter but notwithstanding you must communicate with the Church you dwell in And a little after he says I advise you if there be Parish Churches orderly settled under the Magistrates Countenance whose teachers are sound tho' an abler Minister should gather a separate Congregation in the same place out of that and other neighbouring Parishes and should have stricter Communicants and Discipline be not too forward to
so clear I have already shew'd that there lies no Obligation upon any Non-Conformist Minister to Preach in England and consequently there can be no necessity for the People to hear them The Oaths and Subscriptions are required only of the Clergy and is no more than what other Reformed Churches require of all theirs By the Constitution of the French Church every Minister that will not subscribe to the Orders among them is to be declared a Schismatick And by the Constitution of Geneva any Minister that contemns the Authority of their Church or by his obstinacy disturbs the Order of it shall be first summon'd before the Magistrate and if that will not do he shall be Excommunicated but no Separation allow'd And Calvin says Ep. Olevian pag. 311 122. Let him that will not submit to the Orders of a Society be cast out Our Dissenters themselves did oblige all to Swear Solemnly to their Covenant under pain of Sequestration But say the Dissenters What if the Church of England Excommunicates us may we not then lawfully Separate and set up Meetings of our own I Answer 't is true the Laws of the Church do say that in some cases Men are Excommunicated ipso facto yet this does not oblige any to separate from Communion till Sentence be duly and judicially pronounced in a Church For by the Civil Law notwithstanding Excommunication ipso facto a Declaratory Sentence of the Judge is necessary before a Man shall be deny'd the benefit of Communion And the saying a Man is Excommunicated ipso facto signifies no more than that the Judge may give Sentence without any new judicial Process But though our Dissenters were actually Excommunicated for their Disobedience this this would not excuse them from Schism as Dr. Stillingfleet has proved at large Misch of Separ p. 370. Thus I have shew'd that none of those Pleas which are commonly used by the Dissenters for their Separation from us are sufficient to justifie Separation from a True Church Now if I can prove That the Church of England is a True Reform'd Church they must either Renounce their Principles of Separation or their Reason The only Argument I shall here make use of to prove that the Church of England is a True Reform'd Church is That it is so acknowledged by all the Reform'd Churches in the World who do all own her as a Sister and also by the most Eminent of our own Dissenters themselves All the Reform'd Churches beyond Seas do own the Church of England as a True Reform'd Church and yet they know what her Faults be in her Assemblies in her Worship in her Ministry and Government And this appears by the Harmony of Confessions of the Churches Collected and set forth by the Churches of France and of the Low-Countries They do receive and approve of the Confession of the Church of England and call it one of the True Reform'd Churches Calvin has acknowledged the same in his writings against the Brownists and condemns them for Schismaticks for separating from it See his Instit lib. 4. c. 1. And the famous Causabon in his Epistle to King James I. declares plainly That none at this day comes nearer the form of the Ancient Church than the Church of England does Grotius ad Boatslaer Ep. 62. acknowledges the same To which I shall add the Opinion of Two of the most Eminent Reform'd Divines at this day beyond Seas The one is Monsieur L'Moyn Professor of Divinity at Leyden in his Letter to the Bishop of London Anno Dom. 1680. who wrote to him to know his Judgment concerning our present Divisions in England L'Moyn writes him a long Letter which you may see at large at the latter end of Dr. Stillingfleet's Mischief of Separation I shall only repeat some of it Where was it ever seen says he after he had been highly condemning our Dissenters for Separation that the Salvation of Men was concern'd for Articles of Discipline and things which regard but the out-side and Order of the Church Truly these are never accounted in the number of essential Truths And as there is nothing but these that can save so there is nothing but these that can exclude from Salvation For the Episcopal Government what is there in it that is dangerous and may reasonably alarm Men's Consciences And if this be capable of depriving Men of Eternal Glory and shutting the Gates of Heaven who was there that entred there for the space of 1500. Years since that for all that time all the Churches of the World had no other kind of Government If it were contrary to the Truth is it credible that God had so highly approved it and permitted his Church to be tyrannized over by it for so many Hundred Years c. Therefore since all the Reformed Churches do look upon the Church of England not only as a Sister but as an elder Sister how comes it to pass that some English-men themselves have so ill an Opinion of her at present as to separate rashly from her For to speak the Truth I do not see their separate Meetings are of any great use or that one may be more Comforted there than in the Episcopal Churches When I was at London almost Five Years ago I went to several of their Meetings to see what way they took for the Instruction of their Hearers but I profess I was not at all Edified by it I heard one of the most famous Non-Conformists he Preached in a place where there were about Fourscore Women and a few Men He had chosen a Text about the Building up the Ruines of Jerusalem and for Explication of it he cited Pliny and Vitruvius I believe an Hundred times And did not forget to mention a Proverb in Italian Duro con duro non fa muro All this seem'd to me nothing to the purpose and very improper for his Auditory To Cantonize themselves and make a Schism to have the liberty to vent such Vanities seems very ill Conduct And the People seem very weak to quit their mutual Assemblies for things that so little deserve their esteem and preference I do not think that any one is obliged to suffer such Irregularity c. The other Authority I promised to cite is Monsieur Claud to whom the Bishop of London wrote about the same time desiring his Opinion as aforesaid Monsieur Claud returns him this answer All Reform'd Churches do acknowledge the Church of England as a true Church and I shall not be afraid to give that name to the holding of Assemblies apart and separating from the publick Assemblies and withdrawing themselves from under the Government of the Church 'T is real Schism We do not enter into a comparison of your order with that under which we live all are subject to inconveniencies ours have hers as well as yours It is enough for us to know that the same Divine Providence which by an indispensible necessity and by conjuncture of Affairs did at the beginning of
the Reformation put our Churches under that of the Presbytery has put yours under that of the Episcopacy and as we are assured that you do not despise our simplicity so neither ought we to oppose our selves against your Preheminence See both these Letters and a third from Monsieur L'Angle to the same purpose at large in the latter end of Dr. Stillingfleet's Misch of Separ Thus much for the foreign Divines Now we will come nearer home and see what our Dissenters themselves have thought of the Church of England from which they separate First then Several of the Dissenters to avoid the imputation of Brownism do sincerely profess before God and all the World That they hold the Church of England to be a true Church of Christ with which they did and would hold Communion notwithstanding any defilement or unwarranted Power of Church Government exercised therein See the Apologetical Narrative p. 5 6. Again They own that our Parochial Churches are true Churches and that they can find no fault with the Doctrine of our Church and that 't is lawful and * If occasional Communion be lawful constant is a Duty See Papers for Accomm p. 47 51 56. sometimes a Duty to communicate with us Baxter's Defence of his Cure p. 38. and 64. Corbet of Schism p. 41. Peace-offering in the name of the Congreg party Anno Dom. 1667. p. 10. True way of Conc. part 3. c. 1. sect 40. and Mr. Baxter in his last Answer to Bagshaw p. 30 31. has these words You little know what pernicious design the Devil has upon you in perswading you to desire and indeavour to pull down the interest of Christ and Religion which is upheld in the Parish Churches of this Land and to think that 't is best to bring them as low in reality and reputation as you can and contract the Religious Interest all into private Meetings And see also Mr. Baxter's Plea for Peace p. 240. to the same purpose And lastly Dr. Owen in his Book of Evangelical Love p. 54. acknowledges That they look upon the Church of England measuring it by the Doctrine received since the Reformation to be as sound and healthful a part of the Catholick Church as any in the World I have now prov'd that Separation from a true Church is sinful and schismatical I have proved the Church of England to be a true Church and all this I have proved from their own Writings How will they now justify their Separation or clear themselves from the imputation of Schism What will they say to this Is Schism not a sin Or is their Separation from us not Schism If they say it is not Schism Why then our Non-conformist Ministers know better what is Schism than all the Learned Divines of the Church of England and the most Eminent Men of all the Reformed Churches beyond Seas do For I have shewed from their own words That they do acknowledge the Church of England to be as true and sound a part of the Reform'd Church as any in the whole World and condemn all those that separate from her as guilty of Schism Doubtless these Men are as competent judges of Matters of Religion as any of our Dissenting Ministers And I am sure we have not the least reason to believe they would flatter us for they are strangers who have no dependance upon us and Men of more Piety and Honesty than to indulge us in any thing that is sinful But it may be they will say that all these Learned Divines beyond Seas who have acknowledged the Church of England to be a true Church are ignorant of the Errors and Corruptions in her But let me tell them They might have a little more civility than to suppose that so many godly upright Men would rashly give their judgment of Matters of so great moment as those are which relate to Religion before they were truly acquainted with the nature and circumstances of the thing And besides They ought not to judge of other Men by themselves Because the most of their own Divines are utter stangers to the practice and Constitution of other Churches as appears sufficiently by their Principles of Separation must they believe others to be so too No throughly accomplish'd Divine can be supposed to be ignorant of the true state and condition of any Reformed National Church much less of so great and considerable an one as the Church of England But to put this out of dispute it appears before that several of the most Eminent Men before-mentioned were in England for some years and frequented both the Churches and Meetings on purpose to acquaint themselves with both in order to giving their judgment of them Since therefore the Doctrine of the Church of England is sound and the Worship true and Government and Constitution of it as agreeable to that of the best and purest Ages of the Church as any now in the World let us in the name of God lay aside all those fears and jealousies that have possess'd the minds of too many of us concerning it and let us remember that not only the Peace and Prosperity of this Church and Nation and of every particular Member of it depends upon our Union but of the Protestant Religion all over the World Tho' there may be some things amiss in the Church of England it is not the business of private Men to Reform the Church or dispute the fitness or unfitness of every little imposition Their Duty is to Conform at least in the outward action and submit the fitness of such things to the Wisdom of those to whom God Almighty has intrusted the Government of the Church and Nation they may reasonably be thought more competent judges of what is convenient and fit to be done or not to be done than private Men can be And if any thing be amiss in the Government of the Church or the manner of God's Worship they are to answer for it not the People God will call them to an account for imposing upon his People things not agreeable to his Will But will never condemn us for doing our Duty in submitting to such Governors as he has placed over us 'T is true there are some things in Religion which are essential to it without which Men cannot be saved Now in case our Governours command us to act contrary to these we ought not to obey for we must obey God rather than Men But 't is agreed on all sides That the Church of England enjoins no such things and that they who live godly sober lives according to the Doctrine of this Church are in a safe and ready way to Heaven But 't is a difficult Matter for Men to forsake what they have been all their lives accustomed to they cannot believe that Separation is so great a sin as we seem to make it And that so many honest good People and godly Ministers did live and die in sin If they are resolv'd they will not believe
Examination by all the Fellows of the College to which they belong in the publick Hall for six days together if they be found qualified they commence Batchelors of Arts if not they are laid aside till the next Year After they have taken their Batchelors Degree they begin to apply themselves more particularly to the Study of Divinity but are still obliged to publick Lectures for Hebrew Greek and other parts of Learning necessary for that Study and to publick Disputations And thus they spend three Years more and then after a strict and publick Examination as before if they be found qualified they commence Masters of Arts or Doctors of Philosophy And here observe That no Man can hope to take his Degrees in any of the Universities unless he be throughly qualified for it No such thing as Favour in the case because the Examinations are publick before all the Fellows and the President of the College And besides that every Man that is to take any Degree in any of the Colleges is obliged by the Laws of the College to ask the Consent of every Man particularly who has ever taken the Degree of Master of Arts in that College if they be at that time any where in or about the Town and any one of these if he can shew Reason for it as that he is a Man of a scandalous Life and Conversation or of not sufficient Learning or such like may stop him of his Degree After they have taken their Master of Arts Degree then is the time they usually enter into Holy Orders Some few there are who are admitted into Deacons Orders after they have commenced Batchelors of Arts but these are few and are look'd upon but as young raw Fellows so that generally those who are admitted to the Office of the Ministry in the Church of England are Men who have spent at least seven Years in the Study of University Learning in one of the two most Famous Universities in the World with all the Helps and Advantages that are necessary for the perfecting of them in their Studies For besides those aforesaid they have the constant Conversation of so many Learned Ingenious Men the use of Great and Noble Libraries Famous all over the World besides the particular Libraries belonging to each College In which are to be found many Pieces of Antiquity and Ancient Manuscripts c. not to be met with any where else and which give great Light into Antiquity And in each University they have Divinity Professors who are chosen out of the most Eminent Divines they have whose business it is to hear Divinity Lectures read and Points of Divinity disputed on in the publick Divinity-Schools to which all those who design for that Study are after some few Years obliged to attend Neither do these Learned Men trust only to their own Knowledge but they have carefully settled a Correspondence with all the most Eminent Men beyond Seas These and many more are the Advantages of Education which the Divines of the Church of England have above those of the Non-conformists who are generally bred after this manner A Non-conformist Minister perhaps or some such Person who lives obscurely in some remote part of the Country gets 30 or 40 Boys together and there he teaches them common School-Learning till they come to be towards 20 years of age and then instead of entring them into the University he enters 'em in another Chamber perhaps 5 or 6 at a time and there he teaches them University Learning as they call it for 2 or 3 years it may be without the help of any Libraries but the good Man's Closet or any Conversation more than with one another and with the Master if he will honour them so far and his assistant if he chance to have one And so after 2 or 3 years Study at this rate they are qualified for the Office of a Minister among them and are thought fit to be intrusted with the Care of Souls and Government of a Church I own there are some few among them who have had better Education than this is but these are the general Methods taken for breeding up of Divines on both sides which is so well known that none will have the Confidence to deny it And now let any Man of reason judge whether in Matters that depend so much upon Antiquity and the Practice and Judgment of the Primitive Church as the Controversies between us and the Dissenters do whether I say are more likely to be mistaken all the Divines of the Church of England or those of the Dissenters It is not so likely says Mr. Baxter in his Poor Man's Family Book p. 222. that God should reveal his Mind to a few good Men and those of the rawer injudicious sort and such as are most infected with proud overvaluing their own Wisdom and Godliness and such as have had least Time and Study and means to come to great Vnderstanding and such who shew themselves the proudest Censurers of others and least tender of the Church's Peace and such as are apt to break all to pieces among themselves I say 'T is not so likely that these are in the right as the main Body of agreeing humble godly peaceable studious Ministers who have had longer time and better means to know the Truth And the Body of Christians even the Church hath more promises from Christ than particular dividing Persons have See all this and more to the same purpose in this Book aforesaid writ by Mr. Baxter himself So that had we no other Authority on our side than that of the Church of England 't were much safer to rely upon their judgments in this Matter than on the judgment of the Non-conformists but it appears before that we have the Opinion of all the Reformed Churches in the World on our side and if that won't turn the Scales God Almighty must work a Miracle for their Conversion as he did for St. Paul's 'T is so evident that the Ministers of the Church of England have much the Advantage of those among the Dissenters as to Learning and Knowledge that they have no way left to obviate this but by down right disclaiming at the University Learning and calling them Sophistical Divines who are bred up in vain and curious Arts. * His Book of the life and manners of Christians note all the Brownists say the same So did the Donatists in St. Augustine's time conâ—emâ— human Learning but St. â—â—â—ustine condemns their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his â—st Book 〈◊〉 Cresconius ch 14. See Brown in his Preface to his Book And Mr. Baxter in his Defence of his Cure p. 124. tells us of a Church in New England that separated from a Church on the account of their Preachers having human Learning But perhaps some of our Dissenters will own that our Divines of the Church of England are generally more learned than those among them one of the most competent judges among them Mr. Baxter has own'd it