acknowledgement of that speciall exhibition Christ makes of himselfe there and in sense of his own unworthiness what Christian that understands himself could accuse these of superstition and Popery or not rather approve them as significant and seemly expressions of Christian devotion There is a Custom of uncovering the head at the coming in of light if this be done with thankfulnesse of soul for the light of the Gospel and desire of enjoying the light of heaven what harm Is it not lawfull yea Christian-like to glorify God on all occasions for the comming in of the light is but an occasional remembrance Let me put it to them farther should a Papist when he uncovers the head or bows the body at the sight of a Crosse doe it out of hearty thankfulness to God for redemption by Christ Crucified making the Crosse no object of the Worship but only the sight of it an occasionall remembrance and motive would there be any thing in this unbeseeming a Christian I cannot but say it concerns a Christian often to remember and thankfully to acknowledge Gods mercies upon any occasion and if the inward worship which stands in such due acknowledgments of the heart may upon occasionall remembrances be given then may the outward expression also by uncovering the head or bowing the body unlesse prudence out of respect of time or place forbid it for Religion will not And to come a little more home to those that are so ready to cry superstition should any one of them escape a shipwrack or hazard of battail or be redeemed out of Turkish slavery and so oft as he hears of other mens suffering in any of these kindes or so oft as he sees a ship safe in harbour or lookes on the Armour he wore in that battel or on the Chain he bore in Captivity should be so oft uncovering his head lift up his heart to God in thankfull acknowledgement of the blessing and desire of farther Protection would there be any thing in this but what beseems a good Christian when as neither words heard nor things seen are made any object of the worship but accasionall remembrances and motives How much rather may this be done when we hear that name which carries salvation in it see those things which minde us of the greatest mercies and therefore may move us and all this the more if the Prudence and Authority of the Ch has so determined I have enlarged this discourse to instances beyond the enjoyned Rites and practises of this Church to meet with that vain plea of superstition and Popery charged upon it for the better countenancing of the Schism made and the sacriledge committed in these our dayes §. XXII Cause of their several Error that have divided from this Church To winde up all By that which has been said it may appear what is the Cause of this Error which carries so many such severall wayes from the Communion of this Church and what the Issue of it The Cause is their misunderstanding of the Rule by which they should be guided First of the supreme Rule the Scripture which for faith and substance of worship is a set and punctuall Rule not so for other matters of practice Secondly of the next and as I may say Secundary Rule the witnesse of Vniversall Custome practice or Tradition which as unfolded above 2. 13. is the best externall proof of Scripture so also the best expositor of it bringing down nothing as of the substance of Faith and Worship but what is clearly grounded on Scripture and giving clear light to those darker passages in scripture which concern the beginnings of some Practises which were to continue in the Church as Infant◠baptism Observation of Lords day Easter Pentecost Episcopal Government Thirdly thein misunderstanding of the Authority of the present Church defining in matters of faith and worship according to direct Scripture and decreeing in other matters according to prudence but in both having respect to and in a due sort guided by Vniversal consent or Tradition of the Catholique Church viz. the Doctrines that have been always taught and the Customes or Practices alwayes observed therein For let men forsake the guidance of these Rules and what remains but the extravagancie of a private judgement and what can follow but error upon error and what can be the issue of that but remedilesse consasion Hence have we so many private interpretations of Scripture broached instead of Catholick doctrine Circumstantials of Worship taken for Substance and thereupon the lawfull Worship of the Church ignorantly charged with Superstition And for matters of Practice some will have all practices observed they meet with in Scrip Some not all but not any else save what is there Lastly upon the like mis-understanding they cast out the perpetuall government of the Church but cannot agree what to set up in this as in many other things following their private judgement destitute of the guidance of the former Rules and therefore upon necessity disagreeing one destroying what the other would build yet all pretending for Satan is here an Angel of light to set up the Discipline Scepter and Kingdome of Christ and to advance Purity of Religion This was the pretence of all Schismaticks and it is the Master-piece of Satans cunning as above noted 8. to set men on work under that pretence but with mis-guided zeal to purge reform refine a Church and to out-strip others in that zeal till they have brought all to confusion But we should not be ignorant of his devices as the Apostle warns them in a case not much unlike 2 Cor. 2. 11. for Satan was there playing his part as an Angel of light under the pretence and covert of severity and strictnesse against the Incestuous person as he did after in the Novation Schismaticks These his devices we might indeed have seen in those Ancient Schismaticks Montanists Novatians Donatists and in those more irregular of the last Age Anabaptists Libertines Familists and the like whose Errors and Follies were well silenced by Learned Protestant Writers but now broken out again when that which did let the Civil and Ecclesiastical Authority was taken away or so weakned that it could not stop the inundation of former Errors and exorbitant phansies flowing back upon us from every corner into which they had retired and working apparently to confusion to a levelling upon levelling as in the State so in the Church-government and affairs The consideration of the first is not to my present purpose but as for the businesse of the Church and Religion I cannot but note How they who first pretended to Reformation by Covenant obliging themselves and others and conceiving that Cov. in such generall terms as might engage men of all sects and perswasions to joyn with them in pulling down what was establisht invading the means and revenues belonging to Cathedral Churches did not or would not I pray God they may yet see Satans device by like principles
pretending only to private or selfe-reformation Such was the Schism of former Separatists whilest this Church stood free from violence They went their way and it remained where it was This incurrs the guilt aforesaid of high disobedience and breach of Charity but not in so high a degree as that which followes A Schism that not only divides from the Communion but also offers violence to the destruction of the Church pulls down what was not only persons and Governours to set themselves in their places but also the form and government it selfe to set up their own in stead of it This is higher and farther than ever any of the Ancient Schismatikes went which changed not the form of Government alwayes used in the Church and this will be considerable in the violence of our modern Schism But before we charge them according to the premises let us clear the Case as it stands between the Church of England and that of Rome charging us with Schisme upon the Reformation §. IV. Our Defence against the Church of Rome Our Defence in generall comes to this as it was touched Tr. 1. c. 4. 5 6. This Church had Cause for such Reformation and Authority for the doing it sufficient both For when such Errors prevail in a Church and come to such generall practice it is high time by due Reformation to cast them out and when they are in Authority be convinced and doe it then is the Reformation just and lawfull First there was sufficient Cause by reason of Error and corruption in belief and Worship such as we could not continue in without gross dissembling and wrong to our consciences and Gods honour The truth and evidence of this stands upon the examination of those doctrines touching Faith and Worship wherewith the English Church was generally tainted according to the Romish infection The tryall whereof was in part made Tr. 1. c. 30. to shew that the points wherein they and we differ cannot be as they would impose upon the world Catholick doctrines i. e. the beliefe and practice of the Church in all ages since the Apostles or as S. Jude ver. 3. calls it the faith once delivered But farther to the end that they which cannot examine all the Romish doctrines whether they be Catholick or professed in all Ages may briefly and more neer at hand see so far into that Church as to perceive it is not such a Church that they who have means to know better can safely or conscionably communicate with We will make a brief tryall or estimate of a Church by the Faith Worship Sacraments professed practiced administred therein for these the Romanists will not deny to belong immediately to the constitution of the Church and therefore fit to give us direction for holding or not holding Communion As for example If we finde any Church or Congregation of Men calling themselves Christians deny directly and peremptorily any Article of the Creed or Belief into which all Christians are baptized as professed Arrians and Socinians doe it is evident their Error is immediately against the foundation they doe not deserve the name of Christian Churches We doe not so charge the Church of Rome But albeit she holds the Foundation yet finde we her superstructures in no less matters than of Faith and Worship to be such as the Foundation will not safely bear nor any good Christian coming to the knowledge of them conscionably endure For when any Church propounds any thing as matter of Faith Worship without manifesting the truth thereof to mens consciences by clear consequence from those prime Fundamentals into which they are baptized or from Scripture it selfe it is intolerable For this Rule is just and reasonable Whatever the Church propounds so to be believed and practiced it stands bound so to manifest the same else it sets it selfe in Gods stead taking an immediate dominion over mens faith and consciences but in all other things which the Church propounds and enjoynes as matters of Order Ceremony discipline for the more significant profession of that Faith or the more decent performance of that Worship every Member of the Church is to obey or to bring as expresse warrant from Gods word against the particular he refuses to doe as the command is expresse which binds him to obey those that are over him in the Lord Were this Rule well held to there would have been more peace in the Church It was necessary for peaceable subjection Tr. 2. c. 1. will be useful below against those that causelesly divide from this Church And as to the present Case we did not quarrell at the Church of Rome for matters of Rite Order or the like but of Faith and Worship The superadded Articles being so farre from a manifestation by clear consequence as above said that they proved clearly inconsistent with the Word and the worship then in an unknown tongue against the Apostle plainly 1. Cor. 14. against the reason of a reasonable serving of God beside that Worship which was given to Images against the express words of the second commandment Lastly examine a Church by the Sacraments in it administred Those two which confessedly are of Christs appointment Where we finde the Cup denyed to the Cummunicants we see a direct breach of Institution a defrauding the People of God of that part of the Sacrament which affords and makes them partakers of Christs blood-shed also where we finde a daily propitiatory Sacrifice established we plainly see a depravation of the Sacrament and a derogation to the One oblation upon the Cross Thus to say nothing of Primitive Antiquity it is cleer to every one that sees any thing there is just Cause of Reformation where such Errors and Corruptions have prevailed and of ceasing to communicate at least as to those Errors and Practises with that Church which will not being admonished reform them so that if the Question be put to any man whether he will be of the English Church as it was corrupted together with the Romish or as it was after reformed it amounts to this Whether he would be a sick and diseased man or whole and healthfull Whether keep company with persons infected or with those that are cleare and sound The choice is easie to a man in his wits §. V. Iust and sufficient Authority for publick Reformation But to cast those Errors and Corruptions out of a Church by publick Reformation is required Sufficient Authority That also was not here wanting both the Civill and the Ecclesiasticall Both these were seen in the Ancient lawful Synods gathered and held for the same purpose of Reformation And therefore every Nationall Church having within it self the whole subordination of Ecclesiasticall Power or Government the Permission and Authority of the Supreme Civill Power concurring may reform it self i. e. make a publick nationall Reformation The Antient Council of Arles in France the severall Councils of Carthage in Africa of Toledo in Spaine did so and that not
all the Members thereof how much more Vniversall practise This the Adversaries of Episcopall-government whether they be of the Classicall or Congregationall way turn off with a light finger as if it had no weight in it or as if the Apostle had said nothing in alledging the Customes of the Church Scripture is the onely thing they will be tryed by We refuse not to meet them there but let them consider that they come against the Established authority of their own Nationall Church against the custome and practise not onely of that but of all the Churches of God and there are bound to bring plain and expresse Scripture to demonstrate that Episcopacy or such a superiority over other inferiour Pastors or meere Presbyters is directly unlawfull for else the Custome and Practise of the Churches by the Apostles rule must be observed so long as in force i. e. till due Authority change them supposing they are changeable and that it is in the power of the present Church to change them It were well the Adversaries of the Episcopall Function would yeild more Authority to Universall Practise or Tradition of the Churches of God at least in their respect to some points they will acknowledge themselves bound to maintaine As first That Scripture is the Word of God I do not ask upon what grounds they finally believe this themselves but how they would maintaine it against Heathen or Jew and perswade them to it but upon the witnesse of universall Tradition which speaks to the conviction of all men upon the ground of common Sense or Reason as abovesaid 2. or Secondly That the observation of the Lords day comes from the Apostles How would they convince such a one as Mr. Trask was by the places of Scripture mentioning the Apostles meeting upon the first day of the week or that place which names the Lords day Rev. 1. which might be on Easter day the annuall Lords day He according to the doctrine of these men slighting the Witnesse of Universall Tradition or Practise found nothing in Scripture expresse but the Commandement for the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath so obstinately held for that till he was reclaimed by the labour and travail of our learned Bishops and made to see how the continued and undeniable practise of the whole Church did clearely shew those passages in Scripture were intimations of this practise then beginning and that their observing of the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath for they observed that too as occasion served was but in complyance with the Jewes for a time while the Temple stood In like manner the Universall practice of the Church the best interpreter of Scripture where there is not any place of it so plaine as to take away all gainsaying tells us those passages we shew in Scripture for this Government contain so many intimations and sometimes exercises of that Episcopall power which should continue in the Church after the Apostles and assures us those other instances brought by the Adversaries against that Function cannot inferre any other way of Government And therefore we had good cause to say above Episcopall Government was conformable to Gods Word which is our second consideration §. XIV Episcopall government conformable to the word Secondly then take we a briefe survey of the Grounds on both sides which yet I cannot in reason enter upon without asking leave to suppose it possible which never was seen in any particular that Universall Tradition or Practise can be contrary unto Scripture but yeilding that as possible to the Adversaries it is cleare they are bound as abovesaid to demonstrate this Practise or Government is against Scripture and that their way is peremptorily there prescribed How impossible it is for them to do this appeares at first sight by their severall judgements upon the passages of Scripture concerning Church-government Some of them look upon these passages and think they see a Classicall or Presbyterian others of them look upon them and are as strongly perswaded they see a Congregationall or Independent way Where 's the clear Evidence then which they pretend against Episcopall Government To examine their chiefe Instances briefly and plainly for the satisfaction of ordinary Capacities make the triall of those that are alledged for the Classicall way because that pretends to more regularity and to a better foundation than the other Their Instances are from the mention made in Scripture of Presbytery and Presbyters or Elders and the name of Bishop applyed to them We read 1 Tim. 4. 14. the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery But what evidence is there in this to demonstrate that the power of ordination was put into the hands of meer Presbyters For first it is a question whether this laying on of hands was for ordination here or for some other purpose Secondly when that is granted it is a question whether the word Presbytery here implies the office to which Timothy was ordained or the Persons ordaining him for both interpretations are admitted Thirdly admit the Persons ordaining are meant yet never can it be proved they were meer Presbyters for besides that the word Presbytery or Eldership included the Apostles and all the chief Rulers of the Church 1 Pet. 5. 1. who am also an Elder and John Ep. 2. v. 1. Ep. 3. v. 1. the Elder St. Paul saith expresly he laid hands on Timothy 2 Tim. 1. 6. Neither can they in all Scripture give one instance of Imposition of hands for Ordination permitted to meere Presbyters alone So for the places alledged by them mentioning Bishops and Deacons onely as the Ministers of the Church Phil. 1. 1. or calling them first Elders and then presently Bishops Tit. 1. 5. 8. Acts 20. 17. 28. If we say that in these and the like places those first Elders set in the Churches newly planted were Bishops properly or that the Elders or Bishops there mentioned were of both sorts some Bishops properly some inferiour Presbyters the Adversaries could disprove neither part evidently or if in the third place we should grant them what they aime at that these were onely Presbyters it would be nothing to the purpose unlesse they could directly shew the power of Ordination and Government over those Churches fully committed to them For supposing those Elders to be such Presbyters the name Bishop might be appliable to any of them in as much as he had over-sight of any flock which Name was appropriated after to the more Generall Pastor who had oversight of the Presbyters and particular Flocks or Congregations within such Precincts And what marvail is it if the distinction of these two sorts of Elders or Bishops did not nay could not appeare so clearly in the beginning of the new planted Churches and whilst the Apostles were on earth governing the Churches as it did after the Churches were enlarged and the Apostles gone off Then clearly appeared who succeeded them and how far in that ordinary power which was to continue
onely in matters of Discipline but Doctrine also as that of Arles for rebaptizing them which came from Hereticks denying the Trinity can. 8. The Melivetan Council determined against the Pelagean Heresie The third Council of Toledo gathered for extinguishing the Reliques of that Heresie which had long infected the Gothick Nation and hindered the meeting and benefit of such Councils as King Riccared who called that nationall Synod complaines in his speech to the Bishops then assembled Againe these Councils were gathered and held and did conclude independently on Rome or without acknowledgement of any such Jurisdiction as was after challenged by the Bishop of Rome Faire respect indeed was had to that Bishop in a fraternall way of Communion and sometimes of communicating to him what they had done and concluded as that first Council of Arles Fratri Sylvestro and charitativè significamus In the third Council of Carthage Can. 47. for reading nothing in the Church but Canonicall Scripture it is added Hoc innotescat fratri con-sacerdoti Bonifacio I suppose they mean Boniface Bishop of Rome vel aliis earum partium Episcopis to the end this Canon might be received and practised in those parts But presently after in the fourth Council in which S. Augustine was when the Liberty of their Church seemed to be infringed through a kinde of Jurisdiction challenged by the same Boniface in the point of Appeals they utterly rejected his Plea which he made by the generall Council of Nice but could not prove it So he that looks into the severall Councils of Toledo will finde no signification of a dependance on Rome but great acknowledgement of the religious care of their severall Kings by whose permission they assembled The Church of England therefore being such a Nationall Church and having like power might lawfully reform it self without asking the Bishop of Rome any leave or without staying for a free generall Councill for albeit such a Councill was in agitation yet could not be expected either a generall one because of the Division of the East or Westerne Churches or a free one because of the Popes exorbitant power as Tr. 1. cap. 4. And as it might so it did justly reforme casting off in the first place that Papall usurpation which hindered all Reformation but desining nothing against the definitions of known and approved Generall Councils within the compasse of which time Cardinall Perroun thinks it reasonable the triall of a Church be restreined as Tr. 1. c. ult unlesse some will quarrel at something of Discipline not retained in our church according to the ancient constitutions which being a matter of prudentiall Provision admits variation according to the Exigence of the Times Also it is cleare that Nationall Synods have not held themselves alwayes bound to all things determined formerly in that kinde but have put the receptions of such Canons to the vote as we see in the beginning of the first of Toledo Statuta Concilii Niceni The Statutes of the Council of Nice about Ordinations before not used among them are voted there to be observed Also we finde they frequently make relaxation of former rigour as in the injunctions of penance Lastly it is evident there are many constitutions of this kinde not reteined or observed by the Church of Rome Such as concern the exercise of publique Penance such as forbid the translating of a Bishop from City to City and Ordinations without a Title things determined in generall Councils Of this as to the point of single life of Clergy men T. 2 c. 1. of the whole point of the warrantableness of our Reformation Tr. 2. c. 2. §. VI Answer to the Romish Plea Upon these Grounds it is easie to answer what they object or pretend against us which that it may have the better impression upon the unwary they represent the Church of England before Reformation wholly Romish professing their Doctrine ever since the receiving of the Faith in this Land under Gregory the first Bishop of Rome acknowledging that jurisdiction and accordingly yeilding Obedience to that See yea and owing it as Duty upon the conversion of this Land From these premises their Inference is and they think it will take with the unwary That the Church of England by her Reformation has cast off the Faith received and so fallen into Heresie and by denying subjection to that See has incurred the guilt of Schisme But as there is some truth apparent in the Premises so as much Falshood supposed and taken for granted which renders the Inferences inconsequent and invalid First it is a Truth that the Nationall Church of England before the Reformation was generally Romish both for Doctrine professed in it and for Obedience yielded to the Bishop of Rome but then the Inference they make therefore the Protestant Church of England is a New Church or Hereticall is invalid because it rests upon this untruth supposed and taken by them for granted viz. that the Romish Church was alwaies such teaching such Doctrine and that the profession of such Doctrine makes a Church to be Catholique and the denyall of it renders it Hereticall all which they must prove to make good that Inference where as it is evident that the Catholique Christian Faith once delivered Jude 5. Christ alwaies professed in all ages and into which they and we baptise makes a Christian Church and the holding that Faith undefiled and free from Errours and Corruptions in Belief and Worship makes a pure and Orthodox Church So did the ancient Church of Rome hold the Faith so does the reformed Church of England hold and professe it freed from the mixture of Errour which had crept into the later Romish Church to the infecting of the English so that this National Church is so farre from being Hereticall by ceasing to be Romish that it is therefore the more pure and Orthodox Upon the like supposals false and impertinent they give pretence plausible to the unwary for that demand Shew such a Protestant Church in England before the Reformation as if every Nationall Church did alwaies teach the same Doctrine without mixture of such Errour generally prevailing or as if it were reasonably required of us to shew the Church of England alwaies Protestant i.e. protesting against Errors whereas the Errours were not alwaies nor at first known or to shew a Reformed Church before the Reformation made For though Truth be alwaies before Errour yet Errour is before Reformation which protests against it and casts it out So the English Church as corrupted with Romish Errours must needs be so before it could be Protestant or Reformed but the Catholick Truths it alwaies held made it a Christian Church even under that mixture of Errours so when by Reformation it had cast them off it remained the same Christian Church but a more pure and sound one holding still the same Catholick Truths without that mixture of Errour like as the ancient Christian Church did before Popery