Order or call it what you please For the Presbyters Minister unto the People as effectually as the Bishops in all the Offices and Conveyances of Divine Grace And on this account are the Successors of the Apostles as much as the Bishops are The Presbyters Administer the Sacraments Preach the Word interpret Scripture reprove exhort incourage and comfort publish and declare Authoritatively and Ministerially the promise of the Remission of Sin and Eternal Life by Jesus Christ not only in the Sermons but after Solemn Confession of Sin and in the Visitation of the Sick and of such as have been troubled in Mind and Conscience In short to them in the 〈◊〉 Administrations appertains that Principal Gift and Commission Receive the Holy Ghost Whose Sins ye remit they are remitted c. Thus far Bishops and Presbyters are the same or as St. Jerom has it pene Idem gradus This is not to be doubted of For so they the Presbyters are the same with the Apostles But the peculiar and distinguishing Character and Office of the Bishop is to inspect Govern and Ordain Presbyters and succeeding Bishops On this account the Presbyter as Jerom also speaks is secundus gradus Thus much we own and freely confess let our Adversaries make the best of it they can I do suppose the difference and Preeminence and Superiority of Bishops from and over Prebyters and their Ordaining Power is sufficiently cleared to have been the Doctrine of the reformed Church of England from the beginning though Blondel would pick out of this Treatise something to the Contrary which is not my business here to take to task Lastly I shall only produce the Testimony of the English Divines in the Synod of Dort held 1618. 1619. The Bishop of Landaff Joseph Hall afterwards Bishop of Norwich John Davenant and Samuel Ward having approv'd all the Doctrines in the Belgick confession except Three Heads concerning Ecclesiastical Orders protested That the Government of the English Churches by Bishops Priests and Deacons was of Apostolical Institution Particularly Landaff in a Speech ran through the three Heads or Chapters and then entred this Protestation that there was not in the Apostles Times nor ever had been in the Church an Equality of Ministers From the whole I gather 1. That it has ever been the Judgment of the Protestant Church of England from the Reformation that there was by the Scripture and ought to be an inequality of Ministers and that Bishops are distinct from and Superiour to Presbyters 2. That the Presbyterians and Particularly Mr. O. do a great injury unto the Memory of that Great Man Archbishop Laud and through his sides unjustly Wound all that defend and assert Divine right of Episcopacy impeaching them of Novelty and altering the Doctrine of the Church That Renowned Prelate came into Play and became a Leader in this Church not till after all the Instances which I have alledged in proof of the Divine Right of Bishops Even the Bishop of Landaff and his English Collegues at the Synod of Dort were not Inferior to him nor was it in Laud's Power to Influence their Opinions He was not Archbishop of Canterbury till the Year 1633. not of St. Davids till 1621. two Years after the Synod was broken up It cannot therefore with Reason 〈◊〉 thought that these excellent Persons who assisted at that Assembly were led by the Nose or aw'd by the Authority of Dr. Laud. Nor do I find that he was any ways interested in their Deliberations or that he sent to them any Letters or Dispatches upon that or indeed any other subject It can hardly be believed since so many of the Calvinistical Points were then established doubtless to the regret of this Prelate Besides Dr. Andrews had before Laud written a Book to prove the Divine Right of Bishops surely not sway'd thereto by Laud who was or had been his Chaplain But to remove all the invidious Calumnies and Reproaches that have been falsly laid upon that unfortunate Prelate and the rest who before and after him have maintained the Divine Right of Bishops it were sufficient to call to remembrance that it was the Doctrine of Ignatius whose Testimonies 't is needless to repeat any more also of St. Cyprian Jâm pridem per omnes Provincias Urbes Ordinati sunt Episcopi and what he means by his jam pridem he explains elsewhere Sciam Episcopos plurimos Ecclesiis Dominicis in toto Mundo Divina dignatione praepositos Once more I read Cum hoc igitur omnis Actus Ecclesiae per eosdem Praepositos gubernetur divina 〈◊〉 fundamentum sit Lastly of Jerom himself Constituit Christus in omnibus finibus Mundi Principes Ecclesiae which also he calls Traditionem Apostolicam writing to Evagrius which have been remembred before Now if some of Laud's immediate Predecessors or Contemporaries can be produced granting this as being of another Mind not seeing or not openly confessing and contesting the Truth 't was surely for want of Understanding Courage or Integrity But why these failings and defects should be laid in the balance with the undoubted Testimonies of the Fathers or prejudice the Wisdom and Faithfulness of others yea the Publick and Authoritative Declarations of our Church too is beyond my Capacity to comprehend This is out of question I judge that Presbyterian Ordination the Identity and Parity of Bishops and Presbyters has never yet been pronounced lawful much less of Divine Right by any Publick and AuthentickSentence of the Church of England since the Reformation except haply by that pack't Assembly of Divines not one of whom were Legally chose to sit at Westminster Some private Writers may haply be found inclining to the Opinion whereby Presbyters are equal'd unto Bishops and thought to be of the same Degree but I make no reckoning of such private Authorities though they were otherwise Persons of singular Learning Wisdom and Piety And some Passages favouring the Presbyterian Pretences may possibly be found in the publick Deliberations and Conclusions whilst Hen. VIII was Vindicating this Church from the Tyranny of the Pope and in his stead assuming it to himself Thus far we chang'd our Rider not our Burthen but it ought to be considered that as in those difficult times the Episcopal Power was subjected to the will of the Prince and to the Law of the Land and so may be thought not by Divine Right but Humane Constitution even so was the Power and Office of Parsons Vicars and Priests or Presbyters and from thence also it 〈◊〉 with equal Force that these also are but by Humane Law and thence derive their Authority Let us for example but look back unto Cranmer's Answer to the King 's 9th Query and we may be convinced hereof The substance of it is That the whole care of the Church is immediately committed to the Prince That Parsons Vicars and other Priests were to be appointed by His Highness to their Ministrations To the 10 th Query
in their History written by Jo. Aventinus Edit Basil. 1580. that from the earliest times of their embracing Christianity they had Bishops aud long before they submitted their Necks to the Yoke of the Roman Pontifs I have made some Collections and Remarks out of the fore-mentioned Historian but will not trouble my self or Reader with them He that is curious and has a mind to search into the Principles and Practice of this People may take Aventinus into his Hands and satisfie himself whether ever there was a time when the Boiarians were without Bishops and governed by Presbyters only It is not indeed the design of this History to treat of this Argument directly but however as he goes along he still occasionally mentions the Boiarian Bishops even before they were brought into subjection to Rome CHAP. XIX Of the Doctrine of the Church of England at and since the Reformation THE Controversy at last is brought to our own Doors and continued down to our own Times This Doctrine says Mr. O. meaning the Identity of Priest and Bishop hath been maintained also by the Church of England both Popish and Protestant Hereunto belong the Testimonies which he has in dvers 〈◊〉 of his Plea drawn from the publick Acts of the Church and State and the 〈◊〉 Sentiments of private Doctors both of the Roman and Protestant Communion both of the Established and Dissenting Party among us All I am concerned for is to consider whether the Identity of Presbyter and Bishop has been declared in any publick Act of this Kingdom to be found or produced by Mr. O. out of the National Records at or since the Reformation For 't is nothing to me if the Popish Church of England was of the same Opinion with our Dissenters as perhaps many Papists were for advancing the Power and Supremacy of their Pontiff Nor is it my business to account for every casual Expression that has dropt from the Pen of any Episcopal Writer much less of the Dissenters whose Golden Sayings make up a great part of those numerous Quotations wherewith he hath 〈◊〉 his Plea My design is upon Mr. O. himself and the Authorities he has gathered out of the publick Transactions or such as were directed and confirmed by the Government Mr. O. has alledged three against us the little Treatise commonly called The Bishops Book another called The Institution of a Christian Man and a third is that Celebrated MS. 〈◊〉 Published by Mr. Stillingfleet the late Lord Bishop of Worcester in his Irenicum all which as I shall prove belong unto the Reign of Hen. VIII and whatever Opinions are there to be met with are not to be imputed to our first Reformers at least not as their fixed and settled Judgment for I reckon that in Hen. VIII's Days the Reformation was but an Embryo in the Womb newly conceived not brought forth that in Edward VI.'s time 't was an Infant new Born and in its Swadling Cloths and in Queen Elizabeth's Reign arrived to the best degree of Perfection and Maturity that it has yet been able to attain unto during which Queens Government something also is objected to us which shall be examined in its Order The Bishop's Book was an Explanation of the Ten Commandments the Creed and the Grounds of Religion fitted for the Common Peoples Instruction 'T was composed by sundry Bishops of whom Cranmer was chief by vertue of a Commission issued out by Henry VIII in the Year 1537. established by Parliament and Printed by Tho. Barthelet with this Title The Godly and Pious Institution of a Christian Man Out of this Book Fox has furnished us with this following Passage That there is no mention made neither in the Scripture nor in the Writings of any Authentick Doctor or Author of the Church being within the Times of the Apostles that Christ did ever make or constitute any Distinction or Difference to be in the preeminence of Power Order or Jurisdiction between the Apostles themselves and the Bishops themselves but that they were all equal in power c. and that there is now and since the time of the Apostles any such diversity It was devised by the ancient Fathers of the Primitive Church for the Conservation of good Order and Unity in the Catholick Church From hence Mr. O. has gathered for he refers to Fox's Martyrology that these Bishops the Authors of that Book affirm'd the difference of Bishops and Presbyters was a Device of the Ancient Fathers and not mentioned in Scripture Ans. This Deduction is downright false and directly against the obvious Meaning of the Words The design of that Prince at that time was to throw off the Pope and his Jurisdiction over the Church and Bishops of England to this end in the Bishops Book 't is affirmed that as the Apostles were equal among themselves so were the Bishops equal among themselves in the Apostollcal Times or according to Jerom that the Bishop of Rome was not by Divine Right Superior to the Bishop of Eugubium That therefore as I anon observe out of The King's Book Patriarchs Primates Metropolitans and Archbishops and particularly the Pope of Rome had originally no Preeminence and Authority over other Bishops particularly not over the English only that it was a voluntury Agreement among themselvs for Orders sake But from the beginning it was not so Here is not one word of Presbyters or exempting them from Subjection unto Bishops Now that I have not done the least wrong unto this Book I appeal to what I find elsewhere taken thence by Mr. Strype How that the Church of England is in no Subjection to the Pope but to the King's Laws That Priests and Bishops never had any Authority by the Gospel in matters Civil and Moral but by Grant and Gift of Princes that it was always and ever shall be Lawful unto Kings and Princes with the Consent of their Parliaments to revoke and call again into their Hands or otherwise to restrain all the Power and Jurisdiction given and permitted by their Authority and Assent and Sufferance without which if the Bishop of Rome or any other Bishop whatsoever should take upon them any Authority or Jurisdiction in such matters as 〈◊〉 Civil that Bishop is not worthy the Name is an Usurper and Subverter of the Kingdom That the Church of England is a Catholick and Apostolick Church as well as that of Rome That there is no difference in Superiority Preeminence or Authority of one Bishop over another But they be all of equal Power and Dignity and that all Churches be free from the Subjection and 〈◊〉 of the Church of Rome The Equality here spoken of in the beginning and in the latter end of this Period is not between Bishops and Presbyters in the same Church but between Bishop and Bishop Church and Church and particularly that no Church that of England especially is subject to Rome And though in the beginning he names Priests and Bishops such Priests
Archbishop of Canterbury so after he was King the Ambition still prevailed in him and was not we see easily removed 6. Early in the Reign of Edw. VI. and when the Reformation was going on prosperously Cranmer and the Protestant Bishops understanding matters better and having freedom to speak their Minds delivered themselves more clearly in the point as may be inferred from sundry Observations belonging to that Time and upon Record As 1. It is declared in the Preface before the Form of Ordination drawn up and agreed upon in Edw. VI's Reign That it is 〈◊〉 unto all Men diligently reading the Holy Scriptures and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church Bishops Priests and Deacons by publick Prayer and with Imposition of Hands approved and admitted thereunto Cranmer it seems was now come over to Dr. Leighton's Opinion declared in the days of Hen. VIII 2. Cranmer set forth a Catechism in the first Year of Edw. VI. Anno 1548. wherein the three Orders are taught as of Divine Right from whence says the Historian It appears that he had changed the Opinion he formerly held against the Divine Institution of those Ecclesiastical Orders 3 In the Days of Edward VI. Cranmer suspended Heath Bishop of Worcester for refusing to subscribe the fore-mentioned Form of Ordination 4. In the same Reign John Alasco a Noble Polonian was by Cranmer's means made a Superintendant over all the Churches of the Foreigners yet newly planted in and about London the Germans Italians and the French And Superintendant is but another Word for Bishop Whoever therefore will impartially weigh the darkness of the times in Henry VIII's Reign where the above mentioned King's and Bishop's Books were written and the Answers made unto the King's Questions by Cranmer and some others the stifness of that Prince his fondness of being Head of the Church and the awe which the Archbishop and his Associates in the Reformation stood in towards him the earnest desire they had at any Rate and on any Terms to be rid of the Pope's Tyranny the falseness uncertainty and absurdity of many Opinions delivered by the Bishops and their repugnancy to each other he will be forc'd to confess that no stress can be laid upon any of their Conclusions much less that they were the first and steady Sentiments of the Protestant Church of England For even the Popish Clergy also generally subscribed them But the sudden alteration of the Bishops minds as to this present Point in debate in Edward VI's days puts it out of all question that the MS. of my late Lord of Worcester belongs to King Henry VIII's days and that our first Reformers their mature and setled Judgment was that there were from the beginning of the Christian Church three Orders of Ecclesiastical Ministers by Divine Right Bishops Priests and Deacons Let us hear the Reflections of the Learned Prelate the now Lord Bishop of Salisbury In Cranmer's Papers some singular Opinions of his about the nature of 〈◊〉 Offices will be found but as they are delivered by him with all possible Modesty so they were not established as the Doctrine of the Church but laid aside as particular Conceits of his own And it seems that afterwards he changed his Opinion for he subscribed the Book that was soon after set forth which is directly contrary to those Opinions set down in this Paper viz. Mr. Stillingfleet's MS. In the next Reign 't is no matter to us what became of the Divine Right of Episcopacy The Protestant Church of England suffered an Eclipse in Queen Mary's days but soon recovering it self under the Auspicious Government of Queen Elizabeth shin'd so much the brighter and in a short time came to that Settlement which it enjoys to this day without any considerable Alteration And to our present point 〈◊〉 1. That the Form of Ordination of Deacons Priests and Bishops with the Preface before spoken of were confirmed in the 4th of Eliz. 1562. and again in her 13th Year Anno 1571. and which to make short work of it continues in force unto this Day 2. In the general Apology of the Protestants the 5th Article of the English Confession is inserted and was drawn up in that Queen's time Anno 1562. and runs in the words following Farthermore we believe that there be divers Degrees of Ministers in the Church Deacons Priests and Bishops to whom is committed the Office to instruct the People and setting forth of Religion But Mr. O. Objects unto us the 13th of Eliz. c. 12. pretending to prove thereby that Ordination by Presbyters was then allowed here in England The Clause he refers to is more at length thus All Persons under Bishops who pretend to be Priests or Ministers of God's Holy Word and Sacraments by reason of any other Form of Institution or Consecration or Ordering than the Form set forth by Parliament in Edw. VI. or now used shall in the presence of the Bishop declare their Assent and subscribe to all the 〈◊〉 of Religion which only concern the Confession of the true Christian Faith and the Doctrine of the Sacraments comprized in a Book Entituled Articles agreed to by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in Convocation Anno 1562. for avoiding diversities of Opinions c and 〈◊〉 c. From hence Mr. O. infers That the Statute respects not Popish Ordinations only if at all but gave Indulgence to those that were not satisfied to subscribe all the Articles absolutely among which was the Book of Consecration and that the Statute requires Subscription only to the Doctrine of true Christian Faith and of the Sacraments which he would prove in that the Statute speaks of Ministers of God's Holy Word and Sacraments and the Title of Ministers is rarely used among the Papists and is common among the Reformed Churches the Ministry among the Papists being a real Priest-hood and therefore they call their Presbyters Priests Ans. The Statute doubtless speaks of all Priests and Ministers whether Papists or Dissenters All were to Assent and Subscribe in case they would continue in or be let into any Ecclesiastical Promotion But chiefly the Papists 〈◊〉 first I assert this upon Mr. O's own words The Ministry of the Papists says he was a real Priest hood and therefore they call their Presbyters Priests On the contrary I do not remember that Dissenting Ministers have ever been stiled Priests in any publick Instrument of Church or State Now as for the word Ministers even that also it may be points at the Popish Priests for it had lately been used among the Papists I meet with it in Smith's Recantation in the necessary Doctrine and other publick Records But chiefly I consider that at the time of this Act of Parliament the Popish Priests herded themselves among the 〈◊〉 and went by the name and under the disguise of Dissenting Ministers For the more effectual discovery
Elders at Miletus all was still well among ' em The Apostle makes no complaint to the contrary nor had he any reason for it Why then 〈◊〉 Timothy be put unto such an unreasonable Fatigue when there was nothing for him to do at Ephesus And yet 3. As we read in the first Epistle to Tim. there was much Business and more than he could dispatch in that little time allowed for his stay there by Mr. O. There is the more force in this Argument because the Apostle at his Writing the first Epistle to Timothy soon after from Macedonia hopes to be with him at Ephesus shortly 1 Ep. 3. 14. Was Timothy left at Ephesus in the Apostle's room to discharge so many important Matters as are reckoned up in that Epistle and yet the Apostle intend to return unto Ephesus shortly and serve him with a Writ of Ease It is incredible 4. Paul's hopes of returning shortly from Macedonia unto Timothy at Ephesus 1 Tim. 3. 14. according to Mr. O's Hypothesis are wholly Inconsistent with his former Purposes of going from Ephesus to Macedonia so to Achaia and thence to Syria by Sea and so to Jerusalem For we read that he still continued in that mind after Winter Act. 20. 3. which shews plainly that the Apostle after his leaving Ephesus neither intended nor hoped to see it any more at this time He did not then write his 1st Epistle to Tim. whilst he was now in Macedonia newly come from Ephesus because he could not then think of returning to Ephesus shortly his Journey to Jerusalem being then laid quite another way and by Consequence he did not leave nor beseech Timothy to abide at Ephesus at this his departure thence into Macedonia 5. Paul was in great hast to gather the Collections in Macedonia and Achaia that he might bring them to Jerusalem by the next Pentecost if it were possible Act. 20. 16. In so great hast that being at Troas in his way to Macedonia though a Door was opened unto him that is though he had a Prospect of Converting many Souls unto God yet he refused to 〈◊〉 But set forward immediately unto Macedonia 2 〈◊〉 2. 12 13. How then can it be imagined that he designed or hoped to return shortly unto Timothy at Ephesus when he would not tarry a while at Troas no not though he saw his Preaching would have effect among those People and at the same time aimed to pass unto Jerusalem through syria by Sea as before is noted 6. It Timothy as Mr. O. Imagines returned unto Paul at Ephesus before his Departure thence for Macedonia about Pentecost the Apostle had had no Occasion of being restless at Troas 2 Cor. 2. 13. Nor in Macedonia Ch. 7. 5 6. because of Titus coming not to him from Corinth Was St. Paul troubled about Titus whether he was Well and in Health or earnest to know how the Contributions at Corinth went on or curious to hear what Effect his First Chiding Letter had on the Corinthians Timothy if he had reached Paul at Ephesus had certainly satisfy'd his Curiosity in all these things But seeing he was restless and uneasy both at Troas and in Macedonia upon some or all the foresaid Accounts after he had left Ephesus 't is certain Timothy came not to him at Ephesus and by consequence he left not Timothy at Ephesus when he went to Macedonia at that time nor then besought him to abide there 7. If Paul left Timothy at Ephesus now at his departure thence unto Macedonia 't is Plain Timothy abode there but a very small while For he was presently with Paul in Macedonia again which is not at all agreeable to the Business St. Paul afterward in his Letter committed to Timothy's Charge The Case between them stood thus Paul desired Timothy to abide at Ephesus hoping doubtless and designing to be back with him in a little time But because the Apostle had not yet given Timothy all the necessary Orders nor sufficient Instructions how he should behave himself in the Administration of the Ecclesiastical Government at Ephesus and because he foresaw it might however happen to be long e'er he came to Timothy there he therefore sends unto him this Epistle full of Directions how he should behave himself in the House of God the Church These things manifestly shew that Timothy was intended to tarry a good while at Ephesus and till Paul came to him 1 Epist. 4. 13. although it should happen to be long And likewise to continue there though Paul had come to him shortly If Paul had been certain of his returning shortly to Timothy at Ephesus He had not sent him this Epistle For so 't is intimated 1 Tim. 3. 14 15. These things write I unto thee hoping to come unto thee shortly But because they had been needless or might have been thought so if Paul had been certain of his going unto him shortly He therefore adds 〈◊〉 way of excuse But if I tarry long as perhaps I may I therefore write these things unto th e that thou may'st know how thou oughtest to behave thy self in the 〈◊〉 which I have committed unto thee This is not at all consistent with Timothy's being suddenly after with Paul in Macedonia 2 Cor. 1. 1. If so why should the Apostle talk of coming to him at 〈◊〉 shortly and if it happen'd otherwise write to him concerning his Behaviour in the Government of the Church But let us descend unto 〈◊〉 In the first of Tim. and 5 th Chapter the Apostle instructs him to reward the Elders that Rule well with double honour especially if they 〈◊〉 labour'd in the Word and Doctrine v. 17. to hear Complaints made against Elders and examine Witnesses v. 19. to rebuke offending Blders openly as he found Cause or to acquit 'em if the Accusation was not sufficiently proved against 'em v. 20. and to Ordain Elders as need required v. 22. All which implies that Timothy was designed to continue at Ephesus some considerable time whereas according to Mr. O's Hypothesis Timothy tarryed not at Ephesus till Paul came to him but went to Paul in Macedouia soon after the receipt of this Epistle which is incredible and as I said inconsistent with the Instructions aforesaid contained in the Epistle 8 Timothy accordingly did abide at Ephesus a considerable time as appears from the Apostles second Epistle which is very agreeable to my Hypothesis but not at all to Mr. O's Nay but Mr. O. will say the second Epistle was sent to Timothy from Rome in the time of Paul's first Imprisonment The Apostle 〈◊〉 from Miletus to Jerusalem had left him there or thereabouts in Asia and therefore this second Epistle proves not that Timothy continued at Ephesus a good while after Paul left him there Paul sending for him to Rome Ans. It shall e'er I make an end once more be Demonstrated under Mr. O's favour I say Demonstrated that the second Epistle was wrote in Paul's second Bonds at Rome
say they intended to commute and Punish the Offenders Purses instead of bringing them to the Stool of Repentance But Oliver it seems 〈◊〉 in their way and forbade the Bans and so the honest Men adjourned to fresh Quarters at Bolton Thus poor John Redfern was wronged and no satisfaction could be had by fair means But being ask'd why would he not sue 'em he reply'd No the Remedy is worse than the Disease and Justice is not to be had Here then we have an Example of at least designed Commutation or which is worse of as Errant a piece of Roguery as can Ordinarily be met with in History Here we have a Bevy of Presbyterian Saints of the first Rate Painful Preachers and Zealous Lay-Elders gathered together in the fear of God so doubtless they were willing it should be believed to Reform the Country hereabouts and yet giving an Example of the most scandalous Knavery such as a good Heathen or Turk would have been ashamed of I hope there is no Precedent in the Gospel for this kind of Discipline 〈◊〉 any questions the matter of Fact as 't is here related I am able to prove it when reasonably required thereunto Mr. O. The Rector supposes that some in the Church may Rule well who don't labour in the Word and Doctrine Ans. I do so But then at the same time I suppose 'em Ordained not Lay-Elders Mr. O. When I alledged Heb. 12. 15. in proof that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not an Artificial Word as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is and observed that Believers are there exhorted To look diligently c. Mr. O. asks Are all Believers bid 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to look diligently to the Flock as the Pastors of it Ans. No. But because it hence appears that the verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is used in a common sense applicable to any Man therefore I conclude that nothing of certainty can be argued from it concerning the Power of Government And I further say that as Believers are not directed to play the Bishops or to look diligently unto the Flock as Pastors of it so neither can it be proved by this verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that Elders were to look diligently unto the Flock as the Supreme Pastors of it or as Timothy and Titus who were Commissioned to do so Mr. O. Who so bold as blind Bayard Ans. Whether Mr. O. exposes the Rector or his own Wit and good Breeding by such a rude and trivial Diverb I leave to the Reader to decide Such a Clownish expression shews him to have convers'd rather among rude Carters and Dray-Men than Men of Polite Learning or Celebrated Authors that 〈◊〉 boasts so much of and pretends to be so wonderfully 〈◊〉 in Now the occasion of this Elegant and spruce Questionis this The Rector in T. N. represented his Hypothesis borrowed from Bishop Pearson as an Argument which no Papist had ever thought on before But Mr. O. belike has chop'd upon something to that purpose as he thought in the Rhemish Testament for which cause I am here compared to a Blind Tit. 'T is confest though there 's no need to confess it as will appear presently I was not aware of that Passage of the Rhemists and I am certain 〈◊〉 Pearson makes no mention of 'em or of any other Author which drew me into this mistake if it will prove one at last but what if it should It does not in the least affect me that Mr. O. is able to find me once in an Errour I pretend not to be infallible or Omniscient I have somewhat a better Proverb to excuse my self with than Mr. O. had to revile me Aliquando bonus dormitat Homerus The good Old Man Homer himself was not only blind but asleep too sometimes Nor would I trouble my self to make more Words on this slight Occasion were it not that I think my self obliged to vindicate Bishop Pearson least any one should surmise that he was beholden to the Rhemists for his New Chronology about the time when Paul besought Timothy to abide at Ephesus and yet had not the Ingenuity to acknowledge it Let us then in the first place produce the Rhemists Words which are as follows This Epistle was written as it seems after Paul's first Imprisonment in Rome when he was dismissed and set at Liberty and thereupon it is that he might say here I hope to come to thee quickly 1 Tim. 3. 14 That 's to say at Ephesus where he had desired him to remain Ans. But though the Rhemists here stumbled upon a small part of the Truth they offer'd nothing in Confirmation of it neither in the Argument nor in their Observations upon the Epistle it self Nor which is to be noted did they in the least make use of their Opinion in proof of Episcopacy But Bishop Pearson did both without being beholden to the Rhemists for one Syllable towards the Establishment of this New Chronology Moreover the Rhemists speak only of the Time of Paul's writing this Epistle not of his Beseeching Timothy to abide at Ephesus at his going into Macedonia concerning which they have not given the least intimation but left that part of the Old Chronology as they found it Only they seem to think that Paul having long before his Imprisonment besought Timothy to abide at Ephesus did now after he was Dismissed and set at Liberty viz. about the time that he wrote to the Hebrews and immediately after his Enlargement send this Letter unto Timothy which is an Hypothesis quite different from that of Bishop Pearson's as any one that understands and remembers what has already been offered upon the Argument will readily confess So that the Learned Prelate was not in the least beholden unto the Seminary at Rhemes for the Discovery and proof of this New Chronology the Time of Paul ' s beseeching Timothy to abide at Ephesus There was then little Occasion for Mr. O's challenging me with Boldness and giving me that undeserv'd Character That when I am remotest from Truth I am then most consident I leave it to my Adversaries themselves the Dissenters to determine which of the two is in the point of Time now debated guilty of most Confidence Well but Mr. O. Thought of this Argument before the Rector published it Ans. Haply so but the Question is whether he ever thought of it before Bishop Pearson brought it to Light And if he has been so long acquainted with it as he would have us think or has prepared a Dissertation to vindicate the Old Chronology as he boasts I hope 't will be better put together than his Defence and that one time or other we shall be blest with a sight of so Elaborate a piece of Work in the mean while I am of Opinion that if Mr. O. had been so long acquainted with this New Chronology and had prepared a Dissertation to vindicate the Old one his Defence would have been more tight and correct than
deceived us We have taken a long and chargeable Journey to the Waldenses but have brought no thing back worthy our pains but a Word and Empty Title Thus the whole Action was meer Pageantry a Scene of Imposture and an Intrigue carried on by Hypocrites on both sides This must be confessed if the Waldensian Bishops were meerly Titular as Mr. O. is pleased to say On the other Hand the History assures us that the fratres Bohemi were exceedingly comforted and encouraged at the return of their Presbyters now created Bishops and deriving their Orders in an uninterrupted Succession from the Apostles as they believ'd But at length my Adversary seems to melt a litle and to come half way over to us He professes thus in his own and Brethren's Name We dislke not that for Orders sake the Exercise of this Power should be Ordinarily restrained to the Graver Ministers provided they assume it not as proper to them by Divine Right nor clog it with unscriptural Impositions From this Conclusion of Mr. O. it follows 1. That in Mr. O's Judgment the Church may restrain the Power of Ordaining taking the Exercise of it from some of the Yonnger Fry and lodging it in the Hands of the Graver sort But the mischief is the Younger sort will presently cry our against the Usurpation they will plead That they are Presbyters as well as others and have an Inherent Power to Ordain that it can't be taken from them by Ecclesiastical Constitutions that they can't in Conscience part with that Power and Right which the Scripture gives them And in short will turn all Mr. O's Battering Rams against the Graver Ministers which he has planted against our Bishops and with more Reason too For St. Paul when he restrained the Power of Ordination he had not respect to Age but to Ability 〈◊〉 by was but a Young Man when Paul set him over the Church of 〈◊〉 and I have reason to think 〈◊〉 was so too For he admonishes him to take care that 〈◊〉 Man despise him c. 2. 15. where I suppose it is to be understood that Titus also was but young And Demas Bishop of Magnesia in Ignatius was a Young Man also 2. If Mr. O. would be pleased to give me leave to suppose St. Paul as Wise as himself 't is all I ask I will suppose then that the said Apostle for Orders sake did restrain the exercise of the Ordaining Power to some Persons by Him made Choice of and for the prevention of Schism did prescribe the same Rule unto the Churches which Mr. O. sees some reason for now doubtless then St. Paul left not the Power of Ordaining promiscuously unto all Presbyters but limited it unto a few I will not say the Graver or Older sort but the Wiser and most Holy If Mr. O. would nourish this Principle and make such Deductions from it as 't is capable of he would soon see that Episcopal Ordination is Apostolical But I believe his own Party will conn him no Thanks for this Liberal Concession Mr. O. adds and not clog it with unscriptural Impositions If there be any Order in a Church some few things must of necessity be imposed But this is what the Dissenters aim at that every one may be left at Liberty to say and do what is right in his own Eyes The Impositions laid upon the Ordained among us are not such as the Bishops themselves alone devised but the Whole Church consented unto and though they be not prescrib'd in Scripture they are not Antiscriptural nor introduc'd into the place of any thing required by the Word of God In short did not the Presbyterians when they were in the Saddle clog their Ordinations with unscriptural Impositions I mean that of taking the Covenant But this is to carry the Controversy into another Quarter I shall therefore let it pass Of the Lollards 〈◊〉 has it is 〈◊〉 fastned that Practice on the Lollards that their Presbyters after the manner of Bishops did create new Presbyters and that every Priest or Presbyter has as good a Power to bind and loose and to Minister in all other things belonging to the Church as the Pope himself gives or can give But to this it may be reply'd that 't is only the report of an Adversary and perhaps may be a Scandal It may again be answered that these Lollards came too late to prescribe unto the Church in any thing by them practised It may yet further be said that when People grope their way in a Dark Night it is no wonder if they now and then stumble They are to be both pittied and pardoned For lastly 't is manifest if the Testimony of their Adversaries concerning them be admitted that the Lollards look'd upon even Presbyters as an Order no ways approv'd of by God It was one of their Maxims Presbyteratus non est 〈◊〉 approbatus a Deo So that Presbyters as well as Bishops are by the same Authority utterly 〈◊〉 the Church It was another of their Opinions 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 566. that no Day is Holy not the Lord's-Day or Sabbath Day as People will call it but that on every Day Men may work eat and drink c. If then the Lollards erred thus grosly in these points it is no wonder that they were mistaken in that of the Government of the Church by Bishops But if their Authority be 〈◊〉 to establish Presbyters in the Power of Ordaining by the same Authority it may be proved the Lords-Day is not Holy Yea rather 〈◊〉 the Order of Presbyters be not approved of by God 't is in vain for Mr O. to equal them unto Bishops because the Lollards brought them down as low as the People and utterly Cancelled their Office at least denyed it to be of Divine Institution In short I think they were a well meaning but ignorant People who had 〈◊〉 and Knowledge enough to discover the gross Superstition Idolatry and Corruptions of the Romish Church but not to define the true Doctrine of the Gospel about Government and Discipline Finally note here that this Instance of the Lollards who appeared at soonest about the end of the 14th Century is by Mr O. brought in proof of this Proposition that Ordination by Presbyters was valid in the Primitive Church Now I don't believe that there is one other Author extant that pretends such Familiar Acquaintance with the Fathers and Councils as Mr. O. does especially not among the Protestants that ever reckoned the Practice of the 14th Century for Primitive The 4th or 5th Age are the latest we are wont to appeal to at least under the Title of the Primitive Church But what all are Fathers with Mr. O. that favour his Opinion and the Primitive Church will never have an end so long as any thing can be found conformable to the Presbyterian Discipline Concerning the Boiarians or Bavarians who as Mr. O. would have us believe were once Presbyterians I will only say thus much in short I find
haply were meant as took upon them to Act here in England in Subordination to and by the Popes Authority not a Syllable of the Equality of Bishops and Priests is here to be found only that both depend upon the Civil Magistrate and that in Civil and Moral Matters only The second Testimony alledged by Mr. O. is another if haply it be another Book entituled The Institution of a Christian Man drawn up by the whole Clergy in a Provincial Synod Anno 1537. set forth by the Authority of King Henry VIII and the Parliament and commanded to be Preached Out of this Book afterwards Translated into Latin as I guess Mr. O. cites as follows in Novo Testamento nulla mentio facta est aliorum graduum 〈◊〉 Distinctionum in Ordinibus sed Diaconorum vel Ministrorum Presbyterorum sive Episcoporum Which Words it must be confessed look pretty fair and favourable towards Mr. O. at first sight Ans. In the first place I will here present the Reader with what the Author of the Memorials has delivered concerning this and some other Books of the same nature and written with the same design The Bishops Book otherwise called The Godly and Pious Institution of a Christian Man of which before came forth again two Years after sc. in the Year 1540. but bearing another Name viz. A necessary Doctrine and Erudition for a Christian Man Printed also by Barthelet That this also was once more Published in Engglish and dated Anno 1543. as at the end of the said Book according to the Custom of those Times though at the bottom of the Title Page I find it dated also 1534. This was composed by Cranmer but called The King's Book because Hen VIII recommended it to the People by Proclamation added to it by way of Preface and assumed to himself the being the Author of it Mr. Strype farther acquaints me that in the Year 1536. had been published a Book Entituled The Bishops Book because framed by them I guess it the same with that I first spoke of and that it was written by the Bishops Anno 1636. but Printed 1637. and he yet tells us of another which came forth in the Year 1633. also commonly called The King's Book but Entituled The Difference between the Kingly and Ecclesiastical Power I have procured a sight also of a Latin Book going under this Title Christiani Hominis Institutio Edit 1544. in the Preface whereof 't is said to have been at first writ in English and then Translated into Latin by whom or by what Authority I find not and whether this be the same with Mr. O's I know not but this is sure Mr. O's was Printed 1537. as himfelf confesses mine 1544. and the passage cited by Mr. O. is no where to be read in mine And since nothing like it is to be met with in any of the other Books and all the Controversy in those times was between the Pope and the English Bishops not about the superiority or the distinction of Bishops and Presbyters in the same Church I am apt to fear some foul play But concerning the Testimony its self as allowed of I shall speak more by and by Mean while let us search for what may be had to the purpose in The King's Book Entituled A necessary Doctrine and Erudition of a Christian Man If it shall be said that Mr. O's Deduction before spoken of was borrowed not out of the Kings's Book but the Bishops Book yet I hope the one will be allowed to explain the other Thus then I read in the King's Book That the Sacrament of Order is a Gift or Grace of Ministration in Christ's Church given of God to Christian Men by the Consecration and Imposition of the Bishops Hands That this Sacrament was conferred and given at the beginning by the Apostles unto Priests and Bishops That St. Paul Ordered and Consecrated Timothy Priest That the Apostles appointed and willed the other Bishops after them to do the like as is manifest from Tit. 1. 5. 1 Tim. 5. 22. That there is no certain Rule prescribed or limited by the Word of God for the nomination election presentation or appointing of any such Ecclesiastical Ministers but the same is left unto the positive Laws and Ordinances of every Christian Region provided made or to be made c. He afterwards enumerates in particular the Common Offices and Ministries both of Priests and Bishops sc. Teaching Preaching Ministring the Sacraments Consecrating and Offering the Blessed Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar loosing and assoiling from Sin Excommunicating and finally Praying for the whole Church and their own Flock in special That they may not Exercise nor Execute those Offices but with such sort and such Limitations as the Laws permit and suffer That the Apostles Ordained Deacons also Acts. 6. That of these two Orders only that is Priests and Deacons Scripture maketh express mention and how they were conferred of the Apostles by Prayer and Imposition of Hands That Patriarchs Primates Archbishops and Metropolitans have not now nor heretofore at any time had justly and lawfully Authority Power and Jurisdiction over other Bishops given them by God in Holy Scripture That all Powers and Authorities of any one Bishop over another were and be given unto them by the consent Ordinance and Positive Laws of Men only c. In the Christiani hominis Institutio which I have seen there is some disagreement to be found For whereas the Necessary Doctrine and Erudition c. seems to speak of two Orders only i. e. Priests and Deacons the Christiani hominis Institutio expresseth it thus de his tantum Ordinationibus Presbyterorum Diaconorum Scriptura expresse meminit c. meaning as I suppose not two Ranks and Degrees of Church Officers but two Ordinations or Consecrations of Persons appointed to the Ministry sc. of Presbyters and Deacons That is the Consecration of Presbyters and Deacons is only expresly mentioned in Scripture and that Bishops received not any New distinct Imposition of Hands And so Orders in the necessary Doctrine c. is to be understood as I conceive not of Persons but of the Ordination of them as 't is often used unto this Day It is not then affirm'd in either that there was in the Church but two Ranks or Degrees of Ecclesiastical Offices that is Priests and Deacons and not Bishops according to the Scripture But that two Consecrations only were expresly mentioned there nevertheless a superiour Rank might be found in the Scripture tho' not separated thereto by a new Imposition of Hands MrO's quotation seems indeed to sound quite to another Sense and to his purpose rather sc. that in the New Testament no mention is made of other degrees and distinctions in Ordinibus but of Deacons or Ministers and of Presbyters or Bishops How Ministers and Bishops crept in here I 'll not say But they are capable still of the same Sence sc. that
of these Foxes and to unkennel them for the security of the Flock as well as to curb the Dissenters themselves Ministers was thought a fit Word to be added unto the Act to the end none might escape subscribing Mr. O's 〈◊〉 here turns upon himself whilst he distinguishes where the Law does not contrary to that wise rule of Interpreting Laws Besides these Words in the Statute Who pretend to be Priests or Ministers by reason of any other form of Institution or Consecration or ordering than the English then in force do in my Opinion plainly and more openly strike at the Popish Ordinations the Great Design of that Reign especially in the beginning being to extirpate the Romish Priests It may be urg'd That the Dissenting Ministers by subscribing those Articles which only belong unto the Confession of the true Christian Faith were to be admited or continued in their Benefices and by consequence their Ordinations allowed though they did not declare their Assent unto the Ceremonies and Traditions nor to the 20th and 36th Article of Religion Ans. This cannot be For I shall shew anon that they were oblig'd to subscribe those two Articles which if they did ex animo they must of necessity forth with enter into Episcopal Orders and approve of and use Church Ceremonies which was what the Statute aim'd at Nor as Mr. O. argues does the subscription seem to intend those only who scrupled Traditions and Ceremonies and not the other Doctrines in the 39 Articles which was the case of the Dissenters alone For the Papists scruple many other of the 39 Articles which also were to be assented unto but were not scrupled by the Presbyterian Dissenters though other Dissenting Ministers haply did and though the Papists scruple not Ceremonies and Traditions in General yet they scruple ours in particular By consequence were intended in the Act as much and more then the Dissenters Mr. O. Because the Assent and Subscription was only to the Articles of Religion concerning the Confession of the true Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments therefore an Indulgence was intended the Dissenting Ministers who scrupled nothing else but Ceremonies and the Book of Consecration which belonging not to the Christian Faith are not required to be subscribed and assented to and by consequence Ordination by Presbyters was here allowed Ans. All I have to do is to prove that the 20th and 36th Articles among the 39 were by this Statute required to be subscribed and assented to And thus I prove it 'T is manifest that the 39 Articles are meant in this Statute viz. from these Words in the Act Articles agreed to by the Archbishops and 〈◊〉 of both Provinces and the Whole Clergy in Convocation Anno 1562. for avoiding diversities of Opinions in Religion Oh! but cries Mr. O. 't is meant of such Articles only as concerned the Confession of the true Christian Faith which the two aforesaid Articles did not all the rest being opposed it seems unto the 20th and 36th Articles Ans. It is very absur'd in my Judgment to Interpret Acts of Parliament in so loose a manner which are wont to speak more correctly and with greater exactness and if this had been intended the Statute would certainly have excepted the two Articles I rather believe the Articles of Religion here mentioned are opposed to other Articles of the Queen's setting forth in the 6th of her Raign Anno 1564. and to be seen in the Collection of Dr. Sparrow called Articles 〈◊〉 Doctrine and Preaching for Administration of Prayer and 〈◊〉 for certain Orders in Ecclesiastical Politie Apparel or Persons Ecclesiastical and Sundry other Protestations All which were injoined by the Queens Letters and Authority only unto which this Statute did not direct an Assent and Subscription but to the 39 only which for Distinctions sake are entituled Articles of Religion and in Allusion thereto are so called in the Statute To all these 39 Articles called 〈◊〉 of Religion all Priests and Ministers were to subscribe And this was enacted as well for the avoiding diversity of Opinions as establishing of Consent touching true Religion Moreover by Ceremonies we commonly understand things of meer Humane or Ecclesiastical Institution These indeed considered every one singly by it self belong not to the true Christian Faith Right But the 20th Article which in general defines and declares it to be in the Power of the Church to appoint some decent Ceremonies 〈◊〉 a Principle or Proposition which belongs unto the true Christian Faith as being founded on the Word of God and therefore with the rest was to be subscrib'd The Book of Consecration confirmed in the 36th Article contains the Scripture Rule of Ordination by Bishops and so concerns the true Christian Faith It was then to be assented unto Finally that I have not mistaken the Sense of the Statute or the Lawgivers Intendment I will support my Interpretation by the Judgment of the great Oracle of the Law and other Reverend Judges before him Subscription required of the Clergy is twofold One by force of an Act of Parliament confirming and Establishing the 39 Articles of Religion agreed upon at a Convocation of the Church of England and ratify'd by Queen Eliz. c. 12. referring to Canons made by the Clergy of England at a Convocation holden at London 1562. containing 39 Articles of Religion and ratify'd as aforesaid He adds that in Smith's Case who subscribed the 39 Articles of Religion with this Addition So far forth as the same were agreeable to the Word of God it was resolved by Wray Chief Justice and all the Judges of England that this subscription was not according to the Statute of the 13 Eliz. because the Statute required an absolute subscription that this Statute was made for avoiding Diversity of Opinions which was the scope of the Act but by this Addition the Party might by his own private Opinion take some of them to be against the Word of God Contrary to the design of the Statute and the 39 Articles themselves Belike Smith intended to decline subscribing unto the 20th and 36th Articles Hereby then 't is apparent that this Act intended no indulgence unto the Dissenters nor allowance of Presbyterian Orders In King James the first 's Reign was publish'd a Book entituled Tractatus de Politia Ecclesiae Anglicanae by Dr. Mocket the then Archbishop's Chaplain whereunto the Author annex'd Jewels Apology the greater and less Catechisms the Publick Liturgy the 39 Articles of Religion and the Homilies Now because Blondel builds upon these I ought at least to examine the Treatise and the Catechisms The latter I cannot get a sight of and shall at present only look into the former from whence it may be Collected That the Office of a Bishop is twofold The first has respect unto all the Faithful of the Whole Flock The second unto the Ministers of the Church As to the former it is acknowledged that Bishop and Presbyter are the same Degree of Office or
that the Prince may make a Priest He that will infer hence that according to the Doctrine of the Church of England at that time Bishops were not Jure Divino but by the Law of the Land must be also forced to conclude that Priests and Ministers hold by the same Tenure and no other And from the whole it will follow that Mr. Hobbs was in the right when he affirms the Will and Laws of the Prince to be the Standard of the Peoples Religion Furthermore we are often confronted with the Doctrine and Practice of the 〈◊〉 Protestant Churches and called upon to have a more favourable charitable and just Opinion of them and their Ministry Hereunto it will suffice me only to answer with St. Paul What have I to do to judge them that are without But I farther consider with what Difficulties they at first struggled and still labour under and am apt to think that the same good God that would have Mercy and not Sacrifice and so dispensed with his own appointed Sabbath may and I hope will accept their Sacrifices though they be not prepared according to the purification of the sanctuary I also consider that the Foreign Protestants are by this time many of them even the most Learned quite Captivated by a long Prejudice which the continuance of the Presbyterian Government among them for so many Years since the Reformation has now perhaps rendred unconquerable and that therefore God may and I hope does wink at this Ignorance for such I reckon an inveterate Prejudice to be Besides though many of the Foreign Protestant Ministers have Zealously defended the Presbyterian Government and seem not at all willing or inclined to Model themselves into the Episcopal Platform though it were in their power and opportunity served yet others of them have been contrary minded and even in the 〈◊〉 of that darkness wherein they lay have been able do discover the Truth which shined through the Clouds of their Hardships and Prepossessions I will not here mention the French Letters written unto the present Honourable and Right Reverend Bishop of London Mr. O. has most maliciously Suggested as if the Authors were Brib'd or by some indirect means induc'd to write as they did I do not know upon what Authority he has published this scandalous surmize and if it had been fit to take up Reports by Conjecture or uncertain Fame meerly to blast the Credit of a Writer I could have told him 〈◊〉 now what I have heard from one who was no stranger to the Presbyterian Intregues in 1640. and so on and may be presumed to speak what he had 〈◊〉 to know sc. that Mounsieur Blondel came into England with hopes to be preferred in our Church by Archbishop 〈◊〉 but it seems mist his aim That he was afterwards hired by the Presbyterians to write for them against Episcopacy Thus Revenge and the Love of Money were the Parents of that Celebrated Book entituled Apologia pro Hieronymi Sententia And Lastly that even in the Apology its self some things were intermixed which undid and overthrew all he seemed to have advanced in defence of Presbytery Which therefore he was forced to expunge before he recovered the Promised Reward of his Labour But after this let us now hear what a Learned Protestant a Foreign Divine has written upon this Subject I mean Peter Du Moulin in a Letter to a Scotch Man Anno 1640. He says That the French Protestant Church never put down Bishops p. 6. nor encouraged others to do it That necessity not Choice keeps 'em from setting up Episcopal Order That at Geneva where Episcopacy was changed into the Presbyterian Form necessity bore more sway than Council and Policie than Divinity That the Reformation in France began among the People in Scotland and England at Court No wonder then that due Regard was not had unto the Primitive Government in the one as well as the other that the French Protestants have much ado to maintain their Ministers by reason of their Poverty That if they should establish Bishops it would provoke their Adversaries and raise them to Jealousy and 〈◊〉 would look more like direct Schism two Bishops being at the same time in oneSee That they are a Body prepar'd for Bishops when Bishops will reform He gives an Instance that somewhere the Bishop in his Cathedral preach'd the pure Word of God and the Protestants submitted to him He farther Apologizes that their King will not suffer them to have Bishops I only add hereunto Bishop Hall's Observation how that when our Bishop of Landaff at the Synod of Dort charg'd the Divisions there in Holland upon their want of Episcopacy he received this only in Answer Domine nos non sumus adeo faelices Whether this was spoken by way of Modest excuse and a tacit approbation of Bishops I know not of certaitny but believe so at least I look upon it as a shifting off the Question about Episcopacy the President not caring to enter into the Lists with the Bishop upon that Argument But if he intended it as perhaps Mr. O. will think for a Scoff I will take the Liberty to say that as the High-Priest prophesied a great Truth but intended it not neither understood it so might the President too stumble upon a great Truth and intimate Episcopacy to be the Happiness of a Church tho' at the same time he was otherwise perswaded or did not discern it For there are a sort of Creatures which cannot endure the Light and by how much clearer the Sun shines see so much the worse Like Saul going to Damascus before his Conversion are struck blind with the Glory and Lustre of Truth which surrounds them This we are assured of by manifold and woful Experience and therefore need not wonder at it The Eyes of the Understanding labour under the same natural Weakness as those of the Body do When we have continued long in the dark or have shut our Eyes for somewhile we are not able to behold the Objects of Sense though placed at their proper distance and in a Medium duly fitted for their Reception Thus when Pride 〈◊〉 and Prepossession when Passion Sturdiness and Secular Interest when contentiousness Opposition and Hatred have for some time drawn a veil over the Understanding it is not easy for these Men to admit any Notions that thwart and contradict those which they have for a long time before entertained let the Evidence brought for their Conviction be never so bright and clear For instance Mr. O. as has been noted in the former Chapter has frankly acknowledged it as fit and warrantable that some Grave Divines be set over the Churches for Peace and Order sake whilst the Younger sort are for the present to be excluded or suspended from the exercise of their Inherent Power Now Mr. O. is not able I perceive to see that this very reasonable Concession of his if rightly pursu'd and improved as it ought puts an end unto