upon him to contradict those Learned men who think the Angels mentioned in the Revel by St. John were Bishops he having granted this is all my desire and therefore all his witty Animadversions which follow are not worth my answering It would be but needless Repetition to say any thing to his following Paragraph in his 14. p. having fully answered it before In his p. 15. he says What do I mean in saying in these Multiplyed Churches there was no Variation and then very disingenuously changes my word for a word very different in signification and asks Was there no variety at all in any Circumstance of Worship and says the contrary may be prov'd even in the Apostles times and instances that which he calls a Scuffle Acts 15. betwixt the believing Jews and Gentiles about Jewish Ceremonies Here were no such different Circumstances as to divide their Communion therein there was no Variation their Unity was preserved the Jewish Ceremonies which the Converted Jews would have imposed on the Christian Gentiles were no Circumstances in the Christian Worship the Council at Jerasalem thought therefore necessary to forbid those Impositions now in this very Case the necessity of Apostolic Jurisdiction doth appear that by a decisive and definitive Sentence of Ecclesiastical Authority it may not be in the power of private Christians to impose their different Sentiments upon one another and that there may be no Variation nor breach of Unity in the public Worship of God So that this Instance is not at all for his purpose He says if I mean there was no variation from Scripture Rules tho we are afraid that will scarce hold yet we wish it had been so still By Scripture Rules here he certainly means the New Testament if this Gent. had any regard to Ecclesiastical Antiquity he would never have talked of Scripture that is New Tâ—â—â—ment Rules before they were written He says We have a Notion of Vnity lâ—yed down in my p. 2. in which we freely concur with him these are my words for he has not transcribed them fairly They are all one with that Church first mentioned at Jerusalem and which he omits all one with one another being all United into one Spiritual Society or Body under one Head Christ Jesus c. and which he has omitted too and are in all things the sune with that first Church United in one Baptism and one Faith and all partakers at the same Eucharist c. That says he is the same for substance for in that they all agreed in the Primitive times in the same Circumstances such a Vnity we hold and doubt not but in our Congregations this Vnity may be found And so he runs on in his 16. p. and endeavours to perswade all men just like the Donatists that these Dissenters are more truly Catholic than we That the Power delegated by our blessed Saviour to his Apostles was to be confer'd upon their Successors is certainly implyed in the promise Mat. 28.20 Lo I am with you alway even to the end of the world The Church of England truly Apostolical That the Church of England was Planted either by some of the Apostles or some of their Successors and that the Succession of Bishops has continued in this Church from that first propagation by as strong proofs as human Authority is capable of viz. by Records and Histories may appear and consequently that the Church of England is as truly an Apostolic and Catholic Church as Jerusalem Alexandria Antioch and those other Churches which were of the first Planting Her Orders then are to be equally obeved Her Unity and Peace as strictly mantained and whatsoever amounted to Schism in any of them must be so in her your Uniting then in a Communion Separate from this Church bears no similitude with Primitive Unity being contrary to their Practice And being that in your Congregations the Divine Authority is wanting there can be no such Unity found among you as Primitive Unity He Says the Eucharist was the same for Substance in the Primitive Congregations and that they all agreed in the same Circumstances It is very true for no difference would be allow'd Christians then durst not entertain so wicked and uncharitable a thought as that of setting up a Separate Congregation as you do They devoted themselves to the Command of their master to have Peace one with another Mark 9.50 Heb. 13.17 They for Conscience sake observ'd the Command of the Apostle Obey them that have the Rule over you If you would tread in their steps you would as Relgiously observe the Unity and Peace of the Established Church wherein you live in all Circumstances as they did All his next Paragraph Pa. 17. is the same in different Phrases He says the description I have given of Church Vnity ruins my whole Book and Cause an hasty Sentence for says he if this be the true proper Vnity of Churches then there may be true Church-Vnity without the Vniting of many particular Churches Ministers and People into one Diocesan Church under the Jurisdiction of a Prelate and his Officers c. Then he is not much against the conveniency of Parochial-Precincts but says according to my Definition it is not De essentia Vnitatis It is plain all that he drives at here is that there may be true Church Unity without Episcopacy I have answer'd this before by shewing that all Presbyters with their Particular Congregations that is Ministers and People now resolved into Parochial Churches within the Dioceses of the Respective Cities were United under the Jurisdiction of the Respective Bishop of each City So that the Vniting of many particular Churches Ministers People into one Diocesan Church under the jurisdiction of a Prelate is true Church Vnity as used in Primitive times by which it appears that this Gent. Doctrine viz. 1 Cor. 11.16 that there may be true Church Vnity without Episcopacy is a mere Innovation there being no such custom in the Churches of God as the Apostle speaks As for their Officers they have the Sanction of our Laws to Authorize them an Authority far greater than can be shewed for Lay Elders Officers subserviant to the Minister of every Congregation and thô generally ignorant and many of them cannot write their Names yet are made judges of their fellow Christians sufficiency in faith a novelty created by Calvin and how reasonable let the impartial judge He says so a man may plead to the jurisdiction of a Diocessan Prelate may step over Parish bounds c. So did Korah and his Congregation against Moses and Aaron Nam 16.2 10. their Controversie being the very same with yours against the Church they were for leveling the Priest-hood so are you they were for setting up a new model'd Congregation so are you God shewed his displeasure against their Pride and Disobedience by a most terrible destruction and the Apostle saith Rom. 15.4 Whatsoever things were written aforetimes were written for
A little further he saith For some in â—eed there are who own the Bishop in name but do all things without him such men appear to me to â—e men of no good Conference because they hold Meetings not established by Commandment c. I could heap up many more Instances but that would be tedious I will therefore conclude with the Council of I aodicea Can. 55. which I find by an eminent Doctor in our Church thus Translated The Presbyters must do nothing without the Consent of the Bishop That the Authority I have brought to prove that the ancient Goverment of the Christian Church was by Bishops and that it was an Order Superior and had power of Jurisdiction over the Presbyters and Deacons should be undeniably and firmly receiv'd and Submitted to by all Christians I offer these Reasons 1 First It was this same Authority which gather'd all the writings of the Evangelists and Apostles and declar'd them to be the word of God the dictates of the Holy Ghost and all Christians have so receiv'd them and do hold them to be Canonical and use them and reverence them as such to this very day 2 It was by the same Authority that the first day of the week was Declared to be the Lords Day there being no Precept Commanding it in Scripture and all Christians have yeilded Obedience to it and do set apart that Day to Celebrate the Worship of God in a most Solemn manner as if Commanded by Holy Scripture 3 And lastly this Authority of the Ancient Fathers and first General Councils which affirm the Government of the Church to be Episcopacy is one great means by which the Pious and Learned Divines of our Church if this Gent. will give me leave to call 'em so have clearly evinced and discoverd the Innovations and Corruptions imposed by the Church of Rome on all in her Communion to be fictitious and no way agreeing with the practice of the Primitive Church Now if upon the Authority of the Primitive Fathers and Councils Obedience was universally given to acknowledge and receive the New Testament as the Word of God and the Lords day celebrated as if commanded by Divine Precept which is infallibly true Is it reasonable now to dispute their Writings and Decrees their practice and usage concerning the nature of the Government of the Church which they were fully assured was established by the Apostles themselves And now I return to wait upon this unknown Gentleman In his 2. p. he says Some have fancied the severe Execution of Penal Laws by Fines Imprisonment Exile c. would have put an end to that Separation c. but Experience hath convinced them of a quite contrary effect This Gent. will carry all before him if credited I could certainly procure a Certificate under some hundreds of Hands of very Honest and Good men in Chester that the Penal Laws when executed there had brought all the Presbyterians except a very small inconsiderable number to Conformity ay and one of the oldest and stoutest of them acknowledged to the Rector of the Parish he liv'd in that he viz. the Rector had so throughly satisfied him that he did not partake at the Eucharist out of fear of the Law but for the satisfaction of his Conscience and that he would continue to do so but no sooner came the Indulgence out but this old Puritan and pretended Convert set the Church at defiance and with many more of that Tribe returned to their Separation and thus it was said to be in most part of England it 's certain that had not that Indulgence come out in King Charles the Second's time which was procured by the Duke of York for some special Service designed by him for the Romish Church there had been but a few in Conventicles except Anabaptists and Quakers who are incorriâ—aâ—le and above all others hardned almost beyond hope and yet this Gent. so confidently affirms that the Penal I aâ—s by experience had a quite contrary Espect which is much more bold than true In his 2 pag. he says further Others have persâ—aded themselves when ever such enforcements were laid â—â—â—e the controverted Ceremonies would of course fall into Contempt for being by acknowledgment things purely indifferent c. without any native worth or strength they cannot be rationally supposed to stand any longer than they had those external props to bear them up And erâ—in they have not been altogether disapoâ—nted for they hear of five or six of the Clergy and those not of the me â—â—est sort that have châ—sen to quit their preserments 〈…〉 ease of their Consciences c. To he 〈…〉 he says some had I shall again oppose matter of Fact the 〈…〉 times of â—â—â—rpa son which 〈◊〉 â—ed more than Twelve years all which 〈…〉 â—afâ—rcâ—â—â—aâ—s were laid and and the external props were 〈◊〉 and yet even â—â—en the far greater 〈◊〉 of the best people 〈…〉 persevere in their Affection and Communion with the Church of 〈◊〉 man are the great care taken by the then Rulers the 〈…〉 Parliament as then call'd required that no person should have a 〈…〉 Book found in Custody upon pain of being Indicted and Fâ—â—â—d at the pleasure of the then Judges who were their implacable Enemies here the Enforcements were thought necessary on the other fide and the vast numbers of these who retain'd Communion with the Church notwithstanding the Enforcements to the contrary appear'd with hearts full of Joy and Gratitude upon the Restâ—â—ration As for the Five or Six of the Clerâ—â— who he says are gone from us and are none of the meanist I know not who he means had they been Eminent men we should have heard of 'em this is trifling or I can tell him of Dr. Dillinghâ—m Vice Chancellor Dr. Connant Rector of Exeter Colledge Vice Chancellor and Regis Protessor of Divinity and many more thô he perhaps is asham'd to name our Diserters of th' other party who Conform'd notwithstanding the Indulgence In p. 3. he saith That since neither Disputing nor Penal Laws have hitherto brought English Protestants to an exact Vniformity it is worth every honest mans Enquiry how under these different Modes of Worship all men may be induced to live quiet and peaceable lives c. The Apostles Rule is 1 Cor. 1 10. Now I beseech you Brethren in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ that 〈◊〉 all speak the same things and that there be no Divisions among you different Mâ—des of Worship are here forbidden and an exact Vniformity in the Church of Corinth requir'd and I hope that this Gent. will not deny that this Rule is in force in the Church of 〈◊〉 lanâ— and if this Gent. would press this Doctrin he needs not puzzle men with any farther Enâ—â—â—ry how they may be induc'd to live quiet and peaceable lives And I presume here to tell him that against such who will not live quiet and peaceable lives there are Penal Laws still in force And this answers his
one another that can make them Catholics but Agreement with the Primitive Catholic Church In the truly Primitive Church all true Christians did make a formal Profession of Faith by distinctly repeating the Creeds with an audible voice as we do in our Churches at this day which practice seems to be intimated in St. Paul's Injuction to Timothy Hold fast the Form of sound Words which thou hast heard of me c. 2 Tim. 1. v. 13. What ever the Faith of these Separate Congregations may be is unknown to us the formal profession of Faith which was constantly used by the Primitive Christians as the badge of Christianity being in the Congregations of our Dissenters laid aside Now that they in this respect agree with the truly Primitive Church must be denied He says I have not proved that they differ from the Catholic Church in the Essentials or integral parts of Gods Worship or in any considerable Circumstance 2. In the truly Primitive Churches they held strict Communion with their Bishops who were the Apostles Successors and the Presbyters set over them by Episcopal Ordination and Institution not only in Essential but in all Circumstances in the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church also as in the having all things Common to this they yielded Conformity The Love Feasts and the Holy-kiss mere Ceremonies no Essentials of Worship yet enjoyned by the Apostles as significative of the ardent Love and Christian Charity which Christians had for one another and continued for some time after the Apostles days till thrô Corruption grown to be Scandal and then thô Instituted by the Apostles were abolished by the Authority of the Church Now our Dissenters denying all Communion with our Bishops who are the Apostles Successors and the Presbyters set over us by Episcopal Ordination and Institution this together with their Usurping the Priestly Office without Episcopal Ordination sufficiently demonstrates that our Dissenters differ from the Primitive Catholie Church in Essential and considerable Circumstances without any further trial In p. 34. he further saith And that this Divine Worship and Service is Visible and External this Gent. is but too sensible and t is a very great Eye-sore to such as he that it is so much more visible than formerly it hath been That it is visible is true but that it is Separate and out of the visible Catholic Church is as true He is pleased to call it Divine Worship and Service which it cannot be I suppose but only in respect of the Object when they have a lawful Spiritual Authority that is Episcopal Ordination and Institution without which there can be no true Ministry which I have prov'd and consequently no true Ordinances it may be called Divine Worship and Service but till then let they who are best able to judge say what kind of Worship and Service it is 〈◊〉 Sâ— lenatius will resolve him in his Ep to the Sâ—â—rn He saith 〈…〉 That its being more viâ—ble than formerly is a great â—ye â—â—re to such aâ— I am is a mistake I have known it more visible than now it is when all the Churches in the Kingdom were Usurped into the possession of the Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists c. those were evil days to see the Noble debased the base and the vile made Rulers over us Religion the pretence of Rebellion the Church buried in Disgrace and Calumny call'd the Scariet Whore c. He was admired for the Hâ—liâ—â— man the greatest Saint who was most improved in the Art of Revâ—â—ing and Speaking evil of Dignities the quitting Communion with a truly Catnoâ—â—c Church the taking of a Rebellious Covenant see his p. 54. or human Composure with significant Ceremonies submitting to Lay Elders a Novelty not formerly known in the Christian Church these with many other Miseries and Calamities endured in those days were great 〈…〉 to me and such as I am But we have learned by the Doctrin which our Church Teacheth Acquiescence and Submission to the Legislative Power a Lesson which out Dissenters could never yet put in practice Tâ—â—y have granted you a Toleration and we are so far from envying it that we Acquiess and submit so as to me and such as I am it is no otherwise an â—â—eâ—oâ—e than in Christian Charity to pity your mistakes and heartily wish that in your practice you would be more conformable to the Gospel of Peace and that there be Peace in the end In his last Parag. p. 34. he says my asserting the Succession of Bishops from the Aposiles c. is inconsistent with other parts of my loâ—k and savâ— he supposeth he hath sufficiently made it manâ—â—â— and in p. 35. he calls my affirmations in my former paper Crude and Coâ—â—â—â— apprehension he is so kind as to plead my capacity to excuse me for my Blunders as he calls 'em but says it will by no means lesseâ— the fault my Oâ—â—â—ious and Confident iâ—â—â—â—râ—â—enâ—y in meddleing with things I so little understand This is but Condemning me by the lump and being past his skill to shew such â—â—â—â—sistency in my Book it is false and those which he calls my Blunders I have proved to be undeniable Truths all the ill is that what ever these men speak or write be it ever so repreachful or false their Disciples believe and swallow it for truth But with Impartial men Railing will never pass for Conviction nor morose uncharitable Censures for true Judgment nor can the Imperious Language he so liberally bestows upon me add one mite to their Cause nor one mite lessen that esteem how undeserved soever I have among many good men but I have learned to forgive him should be offend Seventy times seven Having made the Episcopacy Established in the Church of England appear to be an exact paralel with the Catholic Churches in the Primitive times what I mentioned of the Fathers in my p. 7. holds good against my Adversary by his own Allowance as you may see in his p. 35. at the bottom his words are these We are no way concerned iâ— the Citation of the Fathers â—roâ—â—ht in against us till he has proved that Episcopacy then was the same thing it is mâ—â— and that the Terms of Communion we scruple were ever impesed 〈◊〉 them The former part that the Episcopacy in our Church is the same as it was then is proved That the having all things common the Love-feasts and the Holy-kiss mere Ceremonies no Essentials in Religion yet were Terms of Communion in the Apostles time being very plain That the Ceremonies appointed by our Church tho they are not specifically the same which this man seems to insist upon yet being in Nature the same with those above mentioned and being enjoyn'd by the same power and Authority derivatively which the Apostles had this Gent. or any other ought no more to scruple the Terms of Communion imposed by our Church than the Primitive Christians did scruple the Terms of Commanion imposedâ—â— the Apostles In the
bottom of his 35 p. he says Ignatius charges the Bishop to take Coâ—â—nizance of every Member of his Church not excepting the very Servants and that it was the Custom then in every Congregation to receive the Sacrament every Lords day and that they never received it but from the Hand of the Bishop Hence he concludes that such Bishops must be the Pastors of single Congrezations and adds that this Argument has been copiously mannaged by Blundel Baxter Owen Clarkson and others This Gent. as in all other Quotations leaves me to find this I have met with the passage in St. Ignatius's Ep. to Polycarp Bishop of the Smyrmans where he saith Converse with all man by man as God shall enaâ—â—e thee he saith further Let nothing be done without thy Sentence c. A little farther he saith Let Congregations be gather'd more frequently and take the names of all Persons Let neither Men nor Maid Servants be despised by thee And in the same Ep. he saith Be mindful of the Bishop that God may be mindful of you I could give my Life for those persons who are Subject to the Bishop Presbyters and Deacons Let the Reader consider all the parts together and then Judge how reasonably Congregational Bishops can be hence inferr'd 1. It is evident that Polycarp was not Bishop of one Single Congregation only by these words call the Congregations together c. in the Plural Number 2. His Jurisdiction and Authority over the Congregations is manifest in these words Let nothing be done without thy Sentence 3. The Subjection 〈◊〉 to the Bishop from these Congragations contain'd in this Exhortation to them Be mindful of the Bishop that God may be mindful of you 4. The Distinction of the three Sacred Orders in the Church about which these men have made such a bussle in the world are plainly set down and overthrows all their pretentions to Congregational Bishops for saith he J could give my life for these persons who are Subject to the Bishop Pres yters and Deacons Here is a plurality of Congregations and a plurality of Presbyters and Deacons and but one Bishop From his not reading or concealing the most material parts in this Ep. wherein lye the true Sentiments of St. Ignatius how Triumphantly does he conclude for Congregational Bishops whereas the whole is altogether against it Then he glories in the copious management of this Argument by Blundel Baxter Owen Clarkson and others Alass all these have been judiciously Answered by Bramhal Hammond Morris Stillingfleet Dodwell c. In his 36. p. saith he It is observable in the passage cited out of Irenaeus the Presbyters are said to have their Succession from the Apostles and infers from thence that the Presbyters are the Apostles Successors as well as Bishops and must conseq ently have the same power How frequently in the writings of the Fathers and in Scripture are Bishops called Presbyters as that word signifies Seniority or Dignity and are not they sometimes called Deacons too but as it would be very absur'd to infer from hence an Equality of Bishops and Deacons so would it be unreasonable to conclude concerning Bishop and Presbyter That our Author is mistaken in St. Irenaeus's sense of the word Presbyter appears by the words immediately subjoyned which are these Qui cum Episcopatus Successione Charisma veritatis certum Secundum placitum Patris acceserâ—nt L. 4. C. 43. Who that is the Presbyters above mentioned with the Succession of Episcopacy have received the Infallible Gift of Truth according to the Will of the Father It is plain that no other can be here ment but those of the highest Order in the Church Bishops My Author p. 37. accuseth me that I designed not fair dealing with Mr. H-ry it was a great omission in me I therefore take his thô very sharp Rebuke very kindly Mr. H-ry in his 19 p. Parag. 6. very Orthodoxly saith Separation from Communion with those that we have joyned our selves to without a Cause give me leave to call it Separation for Separation sake without any regard had to any think amiss in the Church we Separate from or any thing better in that we joyn our selves to is Schism Then he proves the truth of this Proposition from his own description of Schism and then concludes When we quite cast off Communion with our Brethren out of Ambition Animosity to their persons affectation of Novelty and Singularity and the like Now our Author lest this truth so plainly set down by Mr. H-ry should carry too sharp an edge upon 'em in p. 37. brings in his Insinuation as he in vain supposeth to guard them from the stroke they must naturally receive from the applying of it to them For says he We all grant that for persons wilfully to with-draw themselves from such particular Churches as are framed according to Scripture Rules and impose no new and needless Terms is to act Schismatically because such wilfull Separation cannot be without the breach of Charity The difficulties which my Author which indeed are none at all would put lyes in Churches framed according to Scripture Rules c. It is Schism in Mr. H-ry's Judgment to Separate from a Church without any regard had to any thing amiss Let it be Examined if in our Church there be any thing amiss Are not all the Arcicles of saving Faith truly taught No just cause of Separation the Holy Sacraments duly Administred the Moral precepts and all the Rules of the Christian Religion plainly and constantly recommended unto us and prest upon us for our Excercise in the whole Course of our lives in the Sermons of our Clergy in all our Churches are not all things pertaining to a Godly Life and Salvation by our Church fully exhibited to us so as that no man can miscarry but by his own fault Here then sure can be nothing amâ—ss Can these men maintain and justifie then the truth of their Doctrine and separate themselves from us without pronounceing themselves Schismatics either their Doctrin is not true or these men are Schismatics in practice by their own shewing All the false and shiftless pretence they have is that the Church of England is not framed according to Scripture Rules and imposeth new and needless terms and therefore Separation from such a Church is no Schism That our Church is truly Apostolical and as truly framed as Jerusalem Antioch Alexandria and all other Primitive Churches according to Scripture Rules according to Christ Jesus's own Institution is fully proved in these papers So that that Objection is clearly Answered and is indeed vain and frivolous Now let his other as vain and frivolous Objection be considered viz. the Imposing new and needless Terms by which is I suppose meant Geremonies I must here crave leave to mention what I have before viz. the Love-â—cast the Holy kiss had no intrinsic vertue in them were no Essentials of Religion see his p. 2. mere Ceremonies and as this Gent. calls our