because they prefer those Pastors who teach his Doctrine and administer his Sacraments and discipline according to the Rules of the Gospel before those who grossly corrupt them and impose those corruptions He must have a very odd understanding that can assent to so senseless not to say so wicked an assertion For this were no better than to set up a point of meer human Order in opposition to the interest of Truth and Holiness I might here instance again in the Arrian Bishops who had not only the countenance of the Emperors but got Imperial Councils call'd General as that of Armini and Syrmium on their side and according to this Principle they were the only lawful Pastors and those that separated from them were no part of the Catholick Church I know not how Mr. K. will like these consequences But he cannot avoid them unless he will say That where there are in a Nation two divided parties of Christians fixt under different Pastors those are the only lawful Pastors who are on the side of Truth in the Points controverted betwixt them whether they have the Civil Magistrates countenance or no. And if he say this 't will follow on the other hand that in those Popish Kingdoms where there are any Protestant Ministers they are the only lawful Pastors and the Popish Churches that live not under them no part of the Catholick Church Nay in those parts of Germany where there are Lutherans and Calvinists if the Calvinists be in the right the Lutherans for separating from the Calvinist Ministers forfeit all relation to the Catholick Church And to add no more if the Non-Conformists be in the right in the matters debated betwix them and the Conformists about Church-Government c. they are the only lawful Pastors and the Prelatical Churches no part of the Catholick Church Or lastly Must the Laws of Christ determine who are lawful Pastors then those are the only lawful spiritual Governors in his Church whose Office he has instituted who have all the Qualifications requir'd 1 Tim. 3. ch 1 Tit. Who are ordain'd to their Office by such as he has entrusted the power of Ordination to where such Ordination can be had and who have the consent of that Flock they take the oversight of If these be the laws of Christ as it were easy to prove if that were deny'd then all Diocesan Prelates must be cashier'd from the number of lawful Pastors unless they can prove their Office instituted by Christ and so must all the Parish-Ministers who want the Qualifications mention'd 1 Tim. 3. or who are impos'd on the people without their consent nay too often against it And if Mr. K's Notion of the Catholick Church be true then all the Churches that live under Diocesan Prelates as their spiritual Governors or such unqualifi'd obtruded Parish-Ministers are no part of the Catholick Church So that if he retract not this new description of the Catholick Church 't is like to fall heavy on his own Party and because I would not be so uncharitable to the Church of England as he is to the Churches of Dissenters I advise him the next time he undertakes to define the Catholick Church to leave out this dangerous mark of it At least he ought to apply this mark to the Papists as well as Dissenters whereas among the Latin Questions The 14th is Whether that be a true Church which has not lawful Pastors And Mr. K. thus answers It may be a true Church witness the Church of Rome which has had so many haeretical schismatical simoniacal ones who were not all lawful Pastors But did there therefore cease to be a Chureh at Rome But I perceive this is a true mark when he would vent his spleen against the Presbyterian Churches at home and abroad but a false or uncertain one when it would unchurch the Papists The best of it is if it be a true mark the Papal and Diocesan Churches are most concern'd in the dangerous consequences of it All therefore I shall add on this Head is a brief Answer to Mr. M's Question What that Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church is which we profess to believe in the Creed Answ We need go no farther for the resolution of this Question than the Text quoted by Mr. K. 4 Eph. 3 4 5. Only I must premise that the Catholick Church in its true extent includes the Church Triumphant as well as the Church Militant nay all the Saints that have been are or shall be on earth to the end of the world see Mr. Claud's Reponse au livre de Mon sr l' Evesque de Meaux c. p. 7 8 9 c. But if we speak of the Catholick Church as militant on earth it must be considered either as measured by the judgment of God which discerns the truth of things from all hypocritical disguises or as measur'd by the judgment of humane Charity As measur'd by the judgment of God 't is according to the fore-quoted Text One body or society animated by one holy Spirit having one heavenly hope subjected to one Lord Jesus believing the same revealed Doctrine as to all necessary Articles and devoted by one Baptismal Covenant to one heavenly Father This Body is call'd Invisible or Mystical from that internal Faith and Holiness which are invisible and 't is also Visible by the external profession of that true Faith and Holiness And this is that Church which we profess to believe in the Creed in which alone we can expect to find the true Communion of Saints And to this Church alone all promises of saving Blessings are made in the holy Scriptures * The judgment of several Fathers to this purpose and particularly St Aug see quoted in that forecited discourse of Mr Claud from p 45 to 68 But the Catholick Church as measur'd by the judgment of human Charity comprizes all that make a credible profession of Christian Faith and Holiness For we are incapable to distinguish the true and living members of the Church from those that only appear to be so And therefore the Catholick Church as estimated by our charity is more large and comprehensive than the real Body of Christ For Hypocrites are no true members of his Body tho mixt with them in the same external Society by their external Profession or as St. John distinguishes they are among them but not of them 1 Joh. 2. v. 19. They are but blasted Ears not the true Wheat they are members of the Church Catholick in appearance not in reality The Church Catholick as measur'd by our charitable judgment is I know commonly call'd the Church-Catholickâ— Visible i. e. the Church Catholick as estimated by an external or visible profession But I wou'd choose rather for avoiding confusion to call it the Visible Church Catholick mixt For the Church Catholick in the proper sense as constituted of its living or as the Schools speak its univocal members real Saints is also Visible because its members not only
method 't is capable of and only take notice of those Answers wherein Mr. K's either Judgment or Charity seems to fail him The 1st Quest proposed by D. M. in his Preface is What is meant by the Catholick Church Mr. K's Answer is 'T is the whole body of men professing the Religion of Christ and living under their lawful spiritual Governors p. 4. There is no doubt he intends this for the description of the Catholick Church here on earth as measured by a judgment of charity and comprising all credible professors of the Christian Religion Here are two characters to distinguish the Members of it Professing the Religion of Christ and Living under lawful spiritual Governors Now that which I chiefly dislike in this description is that this latter mark of the Catholick Church Living under lawful spiritual Governors gives us a Notion of it not only very obscure but too narrow Nor does he find any such mark assign'd either in that Text he quotes 4 Eph. 3 4 5. or in that passage he cites out of St. Augustin And 't is the more necessary to insist on this because every Notion of the Catholick Church which is too narrow is so far schismatical for it cuts off those from their relation to the Catholick Church who are members of it and Mr. K. himself does afterwards apply it to that ill purpose That this Notion of the Catholick Church is too narrow on supposition Mr. K. mean no better than he speaks is hence evident because there are many who are true members of the Catholick Church who live under no Pastors or spiritual Governors at all nor indeed have the opportunity to do so What does he think of many Christians that live in some forreign Plantations where they are not furnish'd with them Nay to propose an Instance much more considerable What does Mr. K. think of all the Protestants who are yet in France and because they will not change their Religion are confin'd to Galleys Prisons or Convents Are all these by the banishment of their Ministers excâ—uded from the Catholick Church Has the French King's Edict so malignant an influence as to cut them off from the body of Christ by depriving them of their lawfâ—l Pastors If so Popish Princes have a very formidable power and Protestants may well dread their Edicts upon a Spiritual as well as Temporal account more than all the Thunders of the Vatican But I fear Mr. K. would scarce allow the Reformed Churches in France to be any part of the Catholick Church if they had their Pastors again if we compare this description of it with other passages in his Answer For this description is very obscure and if I conjecture right Mr. K's Notion of lawful spiritual Governors much more narrow What does he mean by Lawful Spiritual Governors Are they to be estimated such by the Law of the Land or by the Laws of the Church or by the Law of Christ Does he mean such spiritual Governors as are establisht in every Nation by the Authority of the Civil Magistrate If so then the Arrian Bishops when establisht by the Emperors of their opinion were the only lawful Pastors and all that part of the people that adher'd to their Orthodox Pastors ceast to be members of the Catholick Church Then the Popish Clergy in France are the only lawful Spiritual Governors and the Protestants there are no part of the Catholick Church because they separate from them And shou'd the Popish Clergy be establisht in these Kingdoms by Law all that shou'd adhere to their Protestant Pastors even those whom Mr. K. now thinks their only lawful ones wou'd cease to be members of the body of Christ So that the supreme Magistrate might make Pastors lawful or unlawful at his pleasure and make those that are this month members of the Catholick Church cease to be so the next But this is a Principle I wou'd hope fitter for Mr. Hobbs than for Mr. K. to defend Is it then the Laws of the Church that must determine who are the lawful Pastors If this be his Notion of them as his following discourse wou'd incline one to think What Church does he mean whose Laws must determine this great debate If the Vniversal Church I know none can make Laws to oblige all the members of it but Christ himself whom Mr. K. grants to be the only Head of it p. 55. And how shou'd we know the sense of the universal Church in this matter when there has been no General Council these many hundred years nay when there never was any such thing at all The largest Councils that Church-History records being summon'd by the Roman Emâ—erors whose Mandates cou'd not reach the extra-Imperial Churches What is this Church then whose Laws or Judgment must determine who are lawful Pastors Is it every National Church If so 't is a difficult matter to know what that is For unless Mr. K wou'd give such a schismatical Notion of it as the Papists give of the Catholick Church it must include all the particular Christians and particular Societies of such within the bounds of that Nation who profess the true Christian Religion in all its essentials for all true Churches do not profess it in equal purity Such a National Church is not of divine Institution and is indeed only a combination of Churches as united under one Civil Sovereign It s true Notion lyes not in any combination purely Ecclesiastical and Intrinsecal but Civil and Extrinsecal As the true National Church of England unless we will confine the name to a Sect or Party denotes all the Churches in England as united under one King that has a civil Supremacy over them But what if in the same Nation there be a division about some disputable Doctrine as betwixt Lutherans and Calvinists in the dominions of several German Princes or about Church-Government and modes of Worship c. as in these Nations What if the several particular Churches according to these differences in their judgment fix under different Pastors Who are the Church whose Laws must decide this debate about lawful Pastors Is it such an Assembly of the Clergy as our Convocation But what if both Parties have such Assemblys Is it that Party of the Clergy which the Civil Magistrate does establish and not the other then the Civil Magistrate may in Germany make both the Lutherans and Calvinists lawful Pastors and here both the Conformists and the Nonconformists nay and unmake them at his pleasure and so make their Churches a part or no part of the Catholick Church Nay if this be true then in France the general Assembly of the Popish Clergy must determine who are lawful Pastors and were the Protestant Ministers there now for the people to adhere to them wou'd not only be unlawful but what is worse such a Sin as would cut them off from the Catholick Church And does Mr. K. really think so What wou'd they cease to be the subjects of Christ
believe with the heart but confess with the mouth to salvation as the Apostle Paul speaks Rom. 10. v. 10. But these real Saints do not make up one distinct external society by themselves but as mixt with a crowd of Hypocrites who joyn with them in the same external profession of Christianity Nor are they exactly distinguishable from Hypocrites in our Judgment which cannot pierce into the hearts of men and only looks at the credibility of their external profession If therefore it be enquir'd what is the true Catholick Church We must answer All sincere Christians who are one body or society by their belief of and subjection to Jesus Christ their common Head and center of Unity If it be enquir'd whom should we in charity judge to be members of the Catholick Church the Answer is obvious All that make a credible profession of that Faith and that subjection If it be askt further what is a credible profession 't is answer'd A profession not contradicted by notorious ignorance of the essentials of Christianity by fundamental Errors or by notorious wickedness And he that would prove any particular Church or Churches that call themselves Christian to be no parts of the Catholick Church must prove that they deny or at least do not profess some essential Article of the Christian Faith or are notoriously ungodly I add notoriously ungodly because subjection to the laws of Christ is as necessary to our being the true members of his Church as belief of his Doctrine and consequently a credible profession of that subjection as requisite to our being esteemed such And therefore D. M. has very little reason to value himself upon this Question And the Church of Rome has so little reason to arrogate to her self the Title of the Church Catholick that a man must be very charitable to allow her to be a part of it but no wise man will allow her to be any other than the most corrupt and unsound part of it For that Church has gone so near towards the subverting the essential truths and laws of Christianity by their dangerous corruptions in Doctrine Worship and Practice that it wou'd be the best service D. M. can do her to demonstrate clearly that there is a credible profession of Christianity left amongst those that practically hold all the Decisions of the Council of Trent exagr To reconcile that Doctrine of their Council that imperfect Contrition or Attrition is sufficient to dispose a man for Absolution in the Sacrament of Penance Council of Trent Sess 4. cap. 4. with that necessary Doctrine of the Gospel Wihout Repentance there is no Remission of Sins To reconcile the worship of the Church of Rome with the second Commandment is a task well worthy of D. M's pains But I hope in many that live in the communion of the Church of Rome the common principles of Christianity which they retain prevail against the poysonous additions of Popery and all the Doctrines of that and other Councils are not practically held by them But their claim to be a part of the Church Catholick is not near so clear and indisputable as that of the Reformed Churches whose Doctrine and Worship compar'd with the holy Scriptures evidence them to be an incomparably sounder part of it tho even all the Reformed Churches are not equal in their soundness and purity This Catholick Church hath only one universal Head Jesus Christ and is one Body only on the account of its union with and subjection to him Nor is there any Vicarious universal Head under Christ to which the Government of the Church Catholick is committed whether Pope General Council or Colledge of Prelates Nor can any such humane Head make Laws obligatory to the universal Church For any to pretend to it is an usurpation of Christ's Legislative power and 't is chiefly on the account of that Vsurpation and employing that usurped power to deprave the Church and destroy its soundest members that the Protestants have call'd the Pope Antichrist Particular Churches are the chief integrating parts of the Church Catholick I speak of it here as measur'd by the judgment of charity As to any of these particular Churches if the Quest be Are they a part of the Catholick Church It must be resolâ—'d by the credibility of their Christian Profession If thâ— Question be Are they Churches regularly constituted or organiz'd 'T is in the resoâ—ution of this Quest We must consider whether they be a society of Christians united under one or more such Pastors as Christ has appointed for personal communion in Faith Worship and holy living and whether their Pastors were in a regular manner set over them And here the dispute about lawful spiritual Governors must come in Fâ—r that a particular Church have a lawful Pastor is not absolutely necessary to its being a true Church and consequently a true part of the Catholick Church as Mr. K. himself acknowledges in the fore-quoted place p. 90. tho how he will reconcile that Concession with his description of the Catholick Church I do not understand 'T is only necessary to its being a Church regularly constituted And who are such lawful Pastors there will be occasion to discuss in answer to the 4th Quest The sâ—cond Quest is Whether by the Church Catholick be meant the Church of England alone or the Church of England in communion with other Churches Mr. K. well replys The Church of England is no more the Catholick Church than the British Seas are the whole Ocean But he does ill to found its being a part of the Catholick Church on its subjection to Catholick Bishops I suppose he means Diocesan Bishops For it wou'd not cease to be a part of the catholick Church if it shou'd disown Diocesan Prelacy And if Mr. K. think otherwise he has these two difficult Propositions to prove First that Jesus Christ has instituted the Office of Diocesan Prelates in his church and secondly that he has made such Prelates the center of catholick Unity and subjection to them necessary to our being members of the catholick church Now if Mr. K. will undertake the defence of these two Propositions he not only unchurches all the Reformed Churches that want Diocesan Prelacy but even the Catholick Church it self for a Century or two at least as I offer to evince if Mr. K. please to demand it For communion with other Churches it must be understood in the essentials of Christian Religion for it can scarce be expected in all its integrals in this imperfect state but much less in unnecessary humane additions to Christianity And we must not confound communion with subjection the former may be due where the latter is not The third Quest is With what other Church does the Church of England communicate in Sacraments and Liturgy Mr. K. well answers That Vnity in Liturgy is no part of communion of Churches and that the Church of England and had his charity been wide enough he might safely have added
and therefore when any of them embrac'd the Reformation when they begun to preach the Gospel more purely and to celebrate divine Worship more free from the idoâ—atrous and superstitious mixtures that had prevail'd in the Roman Church they restor'd their Ministry to its true use and so far purg'd it from that wretched depravation And in this debate Mr. K need not be asham'd to defend either Luthâ—r or Calvin or Zuinglius For S cinus or hâ—s followers they can produce no Mission to preach against the Divinity and satisfaction of the Son of God no more than D. M. to preach uâ— the worship of Images or Invocation of Angels and Saints or Adoration of the Host c. For the 3d and 4th Qu. I shall joyn them Whether Cranmer and his Associates could condemn the Church of Rome by pretence of the Mission they received from her Bishops If so whether a Presbyterian Minister having â—eceived Orders from a Protestant Bâ—shop can by vertue of such Orders pronounce the Church of England a corrupt Church 'T is evident both these Questions are founded on this ridiculous fancy that the person Ordained is obliged to conform his Ministrations to the judgment or humour of the Ordainers 'T is true indeed if in any Church the Ministers that are Ordained be obliged to subscribe a Confession of Faith or observe any publick Rules in their Worship they ought not to be Ordain'd on these terms if they think any thing in the Doctrine of that Church or the Ruâ—es of its worship contrary to the Doctrine of Christ or the Gospel Rule of Worship Much less should they enter into that obligation with a design to break it afterwards This were odious dissimulation But if any have been Ordain'd in a Church that has obliged them to subscribe certain Articles of Faith and Rules of Worship which at their Ordination they had no scruple against and shall upon deeper study find many of those Articâ—es were gross and dangerous Errors and those Rules of Worship idolatrous or superstitious they are not obliged to preach those Errors or practice those Rules against the dictates of their own conâ—cience Nay if those errors and corruptions endanger the salvation of their Flock they ought to preach against them and warn souls of their danger And not to do this is to betray those souls to desert the cause and testimony of Christ and fail of that fidelity he expects in the discharge of their office They ought to do all in their sphere towards a Reformation and if they should be suspended for the doing that which Christ has made their duty the suspension is unjust and null as being opposite to the laws and interest of Christ and is indeed a Rebellion against him If therefore the Doctrines and Worship of the Roman Church were pernicious and endangered the salvation of souls and our Reformers had just ground to account them such they were bound by the laws of Christ to preach against them and warn the people of them and in their sphere attempt a Reformation Nor would any suspension or excommunication of those Popish Bishops that Ordain'd them justify their deserting their Ministry and betraying the interest of Christ and souls And they might do this without assuming any Authority over the Church of Rome they only refused subjection to her unjust impositions And so may Presbyterian Ministers refuse subjection to the sinful impositions of those Prelates that Ordain'd them and are not obliged to lay down their Office when ever their Ordainers shall unjustly silence them as we proved before But Mr. K. I perceive likes not this Answer and therefore chooses to justify the Church of Engl. upon narrower grounds And therefore in his Reply to these Questions 1. He grants that A Presbyter or Bishop ought not to preach against the Constitution of the Church whereof they are Members 2. He asserts This was not the Reformers Case and therefore he founds the lawfulness of the Reformation entirely upon its being made by the Convocation in whom he supposes the supreme Church-Government lodged in this Nation Had Mr K. only argued that the Reformation in England was not only lawful but effected in the most regular way with the concurrence of the Civil Magistrate upon the advice of so considerable a part of the Clergy none could have blam'd him for taking in all the considerations that prove the Reformation in England to have been the most unexceptionably regular and orderly But that in his eager zeal to defend the Prelates of the Church of England in silencing their brethren he should make such a Concession to the Papists as may be used against the Reformation elsewhere with so great advantage was not ingenuous But we must excuse him that he had rather wound the Reformed Churches abroad than not gratify his spleen against the Presbyterians at home and car'd not whom he made Schismaticks provided he fastned that character on his Brethren Let us therefore examine this Concession of his p. 27. A Presbyter or Bishop ought not to preach against the Constitution of that Church of which they are members The reason he gives is Because there is a regular way wherein they may endeavour a Reformation viz. If they find any thing amiss in her Doctrine or Discipline they may make their application for the redress of it to those that have power to reform it but must not presume being subjects to uâ—urp their Governors power But what if their Governors refuse to reform and silence those that desire or in their own sphere attempt it All the answer is But if such a Bishop or Presbyter be censur'd and suspended he is thereby discharg'd from the execution of his Office and he must no more make a Schism to regain it than one must make a Rebellion in the State to regain a Civil Office. This we urge and I think with reason against the Presbyterians and other Sects among us that either have no Ordination or appointment to their Offices from the Church of England or Ireland or else abuse the power against her which was once given them by her and from which they are again legally suspended And as we urge this against them so likewise against D. M. c. Let us briefly consider the Consequences of this Concession and the grounds of it 1. Its Consequences The first Protestant Pastors in France and most other parts of Europe were before the Reformation members of those Churches where they lived and subject to their Governors they had received Ordination by the hands of Popish Prelates God was pleased so to bless their studies and search after truth that they begun to discover abundance of gross and pernicious errors in the Doctrine and a wretched mixture of Idolatry and Superstition in the worship of the Church they lived in What should they do they were but particular Presbyters and therefore should not according to Mr. K's principle preach against the Constitution of the Church which gave
less auspicious Finally why will these persons thus clamor as if they bewailed they had lost an opportunity to inflict the same evils by the interposal of a power we might well have expected less kindness from Have we any thing but immunity from punishment Do we enjoy your preferments or places Is it no favour you reap whilst you enjoy your Revenues and publick opportunities of service you will esteem it so and more pitty others if ever you come to endure the penury hazard and contempt of other faithful Ministers which tho I suggest in order to a more sober judgment yet I desire never to behold M K p 72. Reply M K. Brands us as friends to the Popish Party Through the weakness of the Clergy this silly reproach is propagated among the people the faâ—shood wherof time may discover more than a present flash of heat for low interests can do But whâ—rin â—yeth this friendship unless thâ—t you will not suffer us to be friends with you and therfore you conclude we must needs be one with them â— heartily wish all could acquit themselves of culpabâ—e friendship with them as we can I am sure we agree not in principles with them in any thing wâ—erin we differ from you and we blame you for nothing but wherin you agree with them Let us reform your Church and We promise we wi l remove nothing but what is Popish Let them reform your Church and I 'le engage they 'l take away nothing but what is Presbyterian Do you condemn us for any thing but that which Popery would relieve us in is it we that bow to the East and to the Altar do we use vain pageantry in Consecrating of Churches and utensiâ—s baptiseing them with saints names Do we frisk from place to place in reading our Service use the sign of the Cross kneel at the Sacrament which never obtained in the Church before Transubstantiation Have we Absolution of sins to the uncensured Is private Communion our manner Have we Organs Singing-boys unscriptural Confirmation preaching Deacons Reading over the Dead Holy days Surpluses Responsa's and twenty more appendants to worship The Romish Church hath all these wheras we worship God without all this stuff added to Gospel institutions and are content with that that for decency the contrary wherto is indecent by natural light or common usage Further whether most countenanceth the universal Headship your Diocessans or our plain Presbyter Have we Deans and Chapters Chancellors of Bishops-Courts the prime managers of Discipline Pluralities c. What common interest can we have with them unless as subjects to the same King how little some of the N. Conformists befriended their interest these very men lately reproacht us with and its Christian and Generous in his Majesty to overlook Few considering men will think that we who have endured so much under you for dislike to the remains of Popery will espouse that Church Form where we must meet with all your fauâ—t and much greater Nor is it probable we should do any thing unbecoming sinceer and discerning Protestants though we profess due Loyalty both from Conscience and from Grateful Resentments What then can be the matter that whiles the Hind commends you as next of kin your worship practices Costitutions yea Doctrines of late do so exceed in Harmony with the Popish party abovâ— Us while Mr M. tells you their Flowers are your ornament yea the world knoweth they love most of you your wayes better than us and many of your own proclaim they would be Papists rather than Presbyterians that yet we must sti l in taâ—k Sermons and Print have this character of great friendship fastned on us It seemeth to have its rise from this you had cast us out of all places and possessed them your selves whereby you apprehend us now less envied and so less exposed to the first attack of Covetousness or ambition in your rivals But is it fair in you first to set us below envy and then fret that we are not made a sacrifice to preserve your grandure I shall conclude these remarks I have made on M. K's unseasonable provocations with my hearty prayers to God that he would discover to the Church of England and to us whatever our mistakes have been that by his present dealings he would dispose us to true repentance for our foolish as well as sinful heats and our valuing any interest above Christs and that he would give all a more truly Catholick spirit which will be found the serviceable as well as Christian temper and is so needful to revive the bleeding interest of Religion among us That I may contribute my mite to this and the peace which would result therefrom permit me to hint 1. The terms imposed on the Nonconformists were amazingly severe and certain to make the number of the scrupulous considerable No Church under heaven except the popish ever imposed assent and Consent to so many disputable things We must solemnly assent to many Doctrines we cannot own and to many practices which we always scrupled and much more their revival after they were once removed We must be reordained we must solemnly declare the covenant bound no man when as a vow it must bind to all that was lawful in it and we know some who were sui juris when they took it we must swear never to endeavour alteration in the Church as established whereas it owns in its preface to the curses in the liturgy that its Discipline is defective and we believe the same of many other things to say nothing of the many disorders apparent in it The Presbyterians on the Kings return proposed to use the Liturgy with some amendments and to submit to the Model of Episcopacy drawen up by the peaceable Bishop Vsher but availed not 2. The Consequences of the divisions produced by these severe terms have been dismal How much of mens Ministry hath been wasted on these matters which might have been employed to more edifying purposes the prophane have had an engine to exert their inbred emnity against the serious Was it not come to that pass that one was jeered as a Phanatick if he dared not to be prophane Yea under the shaddow of zeal against Nonconformists men became light in their gravest employs Heterodox in their notions and too many did ridicule all Religion in the most probable evidences of it as Cant and Hypocrisy What need I enlarge any more Were the things contended for by the imposer valuable so as to countervail the least of these mischiefs 3. It is necessary for Church and State that the union of Ministers and communion of Sts. be provided for on more comprehensive terms All our study and prayers back'd with sore hardships have not nor ever can bring us to comply with these the Churches strongest arguments for them be that they are indifferent and surely the Churches necessity will at last convince her that 's a poor Plea Religion must decay and the
Mr. K. is Vpon what grounds does he assert that the Presbyterians Independents c. have made a separation from their lawful spiritual Governors This Quest relates to the regular constitution of their Churches Who then are the lawful Pastors of these Presbyterians c. from whom they have separated Does he mean the Bishops or the Parish Ministers If the Bishops they must be consider'd either as the King's Officers to execute that civil power which he has circa sacra And so the Presbyterians submit to them and separate not from them Or they must be consider'd as Christs Officers to exercise that spiritual power which his Charter gives and as such the Presbyterians are very ready to submit to them when they have prov'd the divine Right of their Office Or they must be consider'd as the Churches Officers and if so 't is requisie that Church should obey them who assign them their Office or consent to be their subjects not those who account their Office a sinful usurpation and are the more unwilâ—ing to become their Subjects because they cannot be so without complying with sinful Impositions and even approving their usurpation And that any Church may lawfully constitute new Officers whom Christ never appointed and suâ—ject his undoubted Officers to their Authority especially such as Diocesan Prelates who by engrossing the power of the Keys render Church-discipline impracticable is a proposition Mr. K. will hardly prove If the Parish-Ministers be the lawful Governors they separate from I would willingly know how they come to be the lawful Governors or Pastors to those that consent not to their Pastoral relation and have sufficient reasons why they do not Will Mr. K. say that all persons ought to commit the conduct of their Souls to that Minister whom the Bishops or Patron chooses and that 't is sinful separation not to do so I wou'd then enquire What does he think of those Parishes that are so large that scarce the tenth part of the people can enjoy the labours of the Parish-Ministers as Stepney Giles Martins and Cripplegate Parishes in London which have one with another 30000 or 40000 souls in each of them Does he think it an unlawful separation for that part of the people that cannot have room in the Parish Churches to attend the Ministrations of other pious and judicious Pastors Is this such a separation too as will exclude them from the Cathoâ—ick Church To assert tâ—is is to prefer a point of humane order or rather disorder about Parish-bounds bâ—â—ore the salvation of souls and in effect to say that 't were better all those peop e should want the ordinary means of salvation and live like Pagans or Atheists without any publick worship of God than such a point of Church-ordeâ— be violated And if any can believe all this 't is very much to be doubted whether they know what souls and their salvation are Again What does Mr. K. think of such Parish-Ministers as want the necessary quaâ—ifications such as are notoriously ignorant or scandalously wicked Do those in their Parishes who after having sought redress in vain choose other Ministers of eminent leaâ—ning and hoâ—iness make a sinful separation even such as will argue them no Catholick members of the Church If he say this he still prefers a meer point of humane order before the end of it the edification of souls and had rather hazâ—rd their damnation than have a scandalous Parish Minister disown'd whose Life is more likely to debauch than his Doctrine to reform his Hearers I might insâ—st on many such Questions as these but because Mr. K. has not thought fit to give us any reason why he takes the Parish-Ministers for the only lawful Governors even to those Nonconformists that consent not to their pastoral relation I shaâ—l fâ—r their vindication offer this argument to prove that the Nonconformists live under their lawful spiritual Governors or Past rs and consequently make no separation from them I instance in the Presbyterians Those are the lawful spiritual Governors of particular Christian Flocks or Churches who have all the qualifications requisite a valid Ordination the consent of those Churches and who in taking the oversight of them violate no law of God nor any just law of man. But such are the Pastors of the Presbyterian Churches in these Kingdoms E. they are the lawful Pastors of those Churches The minor Prop. alone needs proof viz. That the Pastors of the Presbyt Churches are such as are here describ'd For their Qualifications and the consent of the people that is matter of fact concerning which they may safely appeal to those that know them â—nly I would here suggest that a considerable number of Ministers who prescribe various difficult exercises to a Candidate for the trial of his abilities are as likely to judge of them as one single Bishop who usually commits the examination of them to his Chaplain For the validity of their Ordination I undertake to make that good in answer to the Questions about Mission The only doubt then remaining is Whether these Pastors in taking the oversight of their Flocks do violate any law of God or any just law of Man 1. For the laws of God I cannot understand any that they should be supposed to violate but either that law that enjoyns us to obey Superiors or such as enjoyn the preservation of the Churches peace For the former it falls in with what doubt may arise concerning the laws of men For the latter the precepts of God which concern the Churches peace I need only say these two things to clear them from the suspicion of violating them 1. That the great duties recommended in the holy Scriptures in order to the preservation of the Churches peace are a mutual forbearance in things indifferent and a charitable judgment of each other in lesser differences This is evident from the 14th Chapt. of the Ep. to the Rom. to the 17th ver of the 15th where these duties are at large prest from great variety of Topicks and urg'd on those that had Pastors among them And to say this great Rule on y oblig'd Christians to these duties till the Clergy had determin'd those indifferent things and by their imposing them cast out all Dissenters is too like the confidence of those Gentlemen who own Christ instituted the Communion in both kinds But teâ—l us his Institution obliges not now the Church has pleas'd to command it shall be otherwise And I do appeal to any impartial judg whether the Convocation or the Presbyterians have better observ'd this great Rule that concerns the Churches peace But 2. No Law of God enjoyns us to do any thing sinful for the Churches peace But for the Pastors of the presbyterian churches to desert their ministerial Office when never justâ—y forbidden and when their labours were highly conducive to the Interest of Religion and the Salvation of souls were sinful Methinks those Men that are so zealous to exclaim against all alienation of
in the Preface I come to examine the first sett of those in the Pamphlet it self which concern the Mission of the first Reformers and they are by Mr K. reduc'd to these five 1. What Priesthood or Holy Orders had the first Reformers but what they receiv'd from the hands of Roman-Catholick Bishops 2 Who authoriz'd the first Reformers to preach their Protestant Doctrine and administer their Protestant Sacraments 3. Whether Cranmer and his Associates could condemn the Church of Rome by pretence of the Mission they received from her Bishops 4. Whether a Presbyterian Minister having received Orders from a Protestant Bishop can by virtue of such Orders pronounce the Church of England a corrupt Church 5. Whether an Act of Parliament in France Spain or Germany be not as good an Authority for Popery there as in England for Protestancy These are Questions one would think too ridiculous to be seriously propos'd But I am heartily sorry Mr. K. can find no better Answer to them than what he has given which in several passages runs too much on the same wretched mistakâ—s that led D. Manby to offer them with so much confidence And therefore I need say little more to expose them than first state the Controversy about Mission and then apply the true Notion of it to these Questions There is a twofold Mission Immediate or Mediate 1. Immediate Which those had whom God sent to deliver some extraordinary message or some new revelation of his will to men Such a Mission had the extraordinary Prophets under the old Testament the Apostles and Evangelists under the new And these brought some Credentials of their Mission to convince men of the truth of it That immediate Mission is now ceas'd the revelation of the Divine Will being compleated in the holy Scriptures and directions given for the continuance of a Ministry in the Church There is therefore 2. A Mediate Mission or Call to the Pastoral Office. For we are not here concern'd with the office of Deacons I mean that office of Bishops or Elders or Ministers for they are but several names to import the same thing so often describ'd in the holy Scriptures The office contains in it many great and laborious works To teach the Flock committed to their charge be their Guides in publick Worship and rule them by Evangelical Discipline A Call to this Office gives the person call'd authority to do those works and lays on him a personal obligation to do them 'T is from Christ alone that power is deriv'd by which men are authoriz'd and oblig'd 'T is his will exprest in the Gospel-Charter constitutes men his Ministers And all that 's further requisite is to know how he signifies his will concerning this or that particular person being one of his Ministers To that purpose we must consider what Christ has done already in the Gospel-Charter and what he has left for men to do Christ has already determined in the Gospel that there shall be a Ministry in his Church to the end of the World He has describ'd their Office and all the particular works of it as what Doctrine they shall preach what Worship they shall celebrate how they shall rule the Church they oversee and what Discipline they shall administer in it He has left them sufficient rules in all matters of universal constant necessity for performing these works He has describ'd the duties which Christian Flocks owe to such Pastors He has assign'd the qualifications of such Pastors He has made it the duty of people that need the labours of such qualified persons to seek their help and of Ministers to call them out approve and invest them in that Office and of the Civil Magistrate to protect the Worthy It belongs not therefore to any men to appoint any new office in the Church of Christ or maim that Office he has instituted or impose sinful conditions in order to its exercise or impose any other duties on the people than he has done much less does it belong to them to determine whether the Gospel shall be preach'd or the necessities of souls who want such Pastors supply'd All therefore that the Gospel has left to the Ordainers is the Designation of the person to whom Christ's Charter shall convey the power the approbation of his qualifications and the Investiture of him or solemnizing his admittance The Ordainers therefore do not give the power to others as from themselves nor does it pass hrough their hands nor can they diminish it as ex gr should the Ordainers say Receive thou power to preach and admâ—nister the Sacraments but not to rule the Flock Thâ—s restraint or diminution is null as being contrary to the Charter of Christ They are but Instruments of Inauguration as a Recorder that invests a Mayor in that office which the King's Charter gives him And the great design of the Interposition of Pastors in this matter is to secure to the Church a succession of abâ—e and blameless Pastors of which they are supposed most fit to judge Ordination by Pastors is God's ordinary regular way of admittance to prevent the Churches being deprav'd and injur'd by the intrusion of unqualified pâ—rsons And therefore it should not be neglected where-ever it may be had Only it must be added that the law of Christ which determines that the Gospel shall be preach'd by persons so qualified is founded on the necessity of souls and the great law of Charity and therefore is of constant and indispensible necessity in the Church But the command of their being Ordain'd by Pastors is but subservient to the former and relates only to the ordinary regular execution of it and does not oblige where there is a physical or moral impossibility of observing it and yet a necessity of the Ministry For Ordination by Pastors is not of absolute necessity to the being of the Ministry There have been and may be extraordinary cases wherein a man may be obliged to be a Minister without it To instance in two cases What if many Christians should be cast on the shore of some Pagan Nation where they are forc'd to stay a considerable time and one among them be more eminently qualified than the rest to be their Minister the rest entreat his help and will any say that the Providence of God which has given him such abilities does not sufficiently authorise him to exercise them in this case of necessity When the work of the Ministry is of so much greater importance and necessity than that positive precept about the ordering of it Nay to propose a Case far more considerable What if all the preâ—ent Pastors in a Nation should corrupt the Christian Doctrine and Worship and impose those corruptions on the people as terms of Church-Communion What if they refuse to ordain any that will not joyn with them herein The people dare not comply with those terms and because they would not live without the advantages of the publick Ministry and Worship they
Treatise There are few considerable defenders of Prelacy whose writings he has not animadverted on And t is strange to observe how farr the most of them mistake the true state of the controversie Some go about to prove a sort of general superintendents Arch-Bishops or Metropolitans who had some inspection over the Bishops of particular Churches within their Province and presided in their Synods but did not put down the Government and exercise of Church-Discipline in those particular Churches as if this were a proof of those Diocesan Bishops that do cast out all Government and exercise of Discipline by the Bishops or Pastors of particular Churches and pretend to be the sole Pastors of the Diocess And yet the jurisdiction of such Metropolitans is of no very ancient date and quite contrary to the judgment of Cyprian who disowns any Bishop of Bishops and owns only Bishops or Overseers of Flocks or Churches Others take a great deal of pains to prove the stated presidency of one by the name of Bishop in a Consessus or Bench of Presbyters who had but all one Communicating Church under their charge which is not deny'd to have begun early in the Church as a Remedy of Schism But that difference of Bishop and Presbyters when both were but joynt-rulers of a Congregation is so far from being a proof of modern prelacy that such Diocesan Bishops have put down the primitive Parish-Bishops and monopoliz'd the power of many score or hundreds of such Bishops to themselves and thereby rendred true Church-government impracticable Nay that very difference betwixt the Bishop and Presbyters of a particular Church seems to have had it's rise wholly in the notorious disparity of his gifts learning age c. above the rest but was never esteemed by them a difference in office or power nor is it ascrib'd to any higher Original â—hen Human Constitution by Jerome Auâ—â—in Ambâ—ose Sedulius Primasius Chrysostom Theodoret c. not to mention â—â—der writers If then Ordination belong to Scripturall Bishops and such be the Pastors of particular Churches 〈◊〉 none else diâ— orâ—â—â—â— in the Primitive Church in its purest Ages Then a l suâ—h Bâ—shops have that power Nor indeed have any power to orâ—â—â— but on the account of their being such Scriptural Bishâ—â—s â—hâ— office of Diocesan Prelates being a manifest Usurpation in thâ— Church which had it's rise in human Ambition That Uâ—u pation cannot rightfully deprive the true Bishops or Pastors oâ— that power of Church-government which is as essential to their office as the power of teaching or being guides in worship And whatever may be said for Parish-Bishops submitting for peace sake to the usurpation of a Diocesan ex gr when he claims the sole power of Ordination where the true ends of it are attain'd yet they have no reason to submit to it when Diocesan Bishops shall so abuse that usurped power as to corrupt and deprave the Ministry by imposing sinful terms and hazard the ruin of Souls by neglecting to provide a number of faithful Pastors suitable to their real necessities The Ordination therefore of the Pastors or Bishops of particular Churchâ—s is more agreeable to the holy Scripture and primitive Antiquity and consequently more unexceptionably Valid then that of a single Diocesan From whence it follows That the ordination of Pastors in the Presbyterian Churches is Valid because either they are ordain'd by Diocesan Bishops who had power to ordain on the account of that office they have in common with scriptural Bishops tho they have none as Diocesan or they are ordain'd by a concurrence of scriptural Bishops to whose office the power of Ordination was annext by divine Institution and and cannot be alienated by any humane usurpation For Christ has given none power to change his Institutions Nor can the will of the Ordainers debar his Officers from any part of that Authority which his Charter conveys to them And if the validity of Ordination by such scriptural Bishops be deny'd the Church had no ordained Ministers for a Century or two at least Having laid down these Notions about Mission I come to examine D M's Quest's Quest 1 What priesthood or holy Orders had the first Reformers but what they received from the hands of Roman Catholick Bishops Answ If D M mean that their priesthood or ministerial office was convey'd to them by the Bishops as the Givers of it they receiv'd it from none at all nor has any that power to give 't is given by Christ in his Charter But if he mean that the Roman Catholick or Popish Bishops did invest them in that office 'T is own'd that most of the Reformed Ministers were ordain'd by them and 't is not material whether they were R man Catholick Bishops of the same rigid stamp as those of the present Age or no for the validity of their Ordination depends on the Essentials of the Pastoral office retain'd and not on their horrid corruption of it And as Mr. K. well observes they ordain'd as Christian not as Roman Bishops But what if some of the Reformers became Pastors to the people upon their necessities and call who durst not comply with the sinful terms of Ordination in the Church of Rome and yet could have no other They would not be in this case destitute of a true Mission For the evident necessities of the peoples souls who earnestly desir'd to have the Truths of the Gospel purely preach'd and divine Worship purely celebrated and who could not with a safe conscience continue in the Communion of the Roman Church and their Qualifications for so necessary a work were a sufficient signification of the will of Christ that they should undertake it For the precept about the ordinary regular way of Admission to the Ministry did not oblige where it cou'd not be lawfully observed and where there was a far greater necessity of a pure untainted Ministry then of that positive point of Order For else on supposition no Pasâ—oâ—s had embraced the Reformation The people who did woud have been obliged to have lived like Aâ—heists without publick worship 2 Q Who authorized the first Reformers to preach their Protestant Doctrine and administer their Protestant Sac aments Answ It does not belong to the Ordainers to determine what Doctrine the person ordained shall preach but to Christ who has determined that matter already And therefore if the Doctrine which our first Reformers preacht and the Sacraments they administred be Christ's as Mr. K. well argues 't is ridiculous to ask who authoriz'd them to preach the one or administer the other Christ did and no men can authorize any to preach any other Doctrine or administer any other Sacraments The Bishops or Priests in the Roman Church had no right or Mission from Christ to preach Popish Doctrine or administer Popish Sacraments or celebrate Popish Woâ—shâ—p so far as these are contrary to the Doctrine Sacraments and Worship contain'd in the Gospel These were gross corruptions of their office
them their Office. Many of them try'd his remedy they represented these things to their Ecclesiastical Superiors as Luther to the Archbishop of Mentz and the Bishop of Brandenburg and the Pope himself But they soon learnt by dear experience how averse the Court of Rome was to any Reformation and how little it was to be expected from the Prelates who either had no will or no courage to attempt a Reformation against the will of the Pope Luther and all his followers in stead of prevailing with those that had the conduct of the Church were excommunicated as Hereticks Now according to Mr. K's principle these Reformers being censured and suspended by the Prelates to whom they were subject were discharged from the execution of their Office and should no more have made a Schism in the Church to regain it than one must make a Rebellion in the State to regain a Civil Office. And since they did not desert their Office but went on to preach against the Constitution of the Romish Church and the will of their Superiors the Popish Prelates they were no better than Schismaticks and Church-Rebels Nay if his Notion of the Catholick Church be true the people that separated from the Popish Prelates and adher'd to their excommunicated Pastors ceast to be members of the body of Christ And how great a part of the Reformed Churches and their Pastors fall under this heavy charge And will Mr. K. own all these unavoidable consequences upon mature deliberation What if we should once more have a Popish Convocation in England and these should restore the Romish Religion and suspend aâ—l the present Parish-Ministers whom Mr. K. thinks now lawful Pastors According to his Principle they being but Presbyters and the Bishops Subjects must not preach against the Constitution of the Church of England declaring her judgment by a Convocation in whom the supreme Government of the Church is lodg'd they must therefore cease their Ministry and no more make a Schism by the exercise of it than they must make a Rebellion in the State to regain a Civil Office. Nay to separate from such Governors of the Church of England will prove those that do it no Catholick members of the Church The same principles may be apply'd to the Arrians who got Imperial Councils and consequently the Government of the Imperial Church into their hands and for such Pastors as Athanasius to preach against Arrianism which was then the Doctrine of the Church was Schism and Church-Rebellion In a word According to these Principles 'T is in the power of a Convocation to damn many thousand souls by suspending an Orthodox and substituting a corrupt Ministry and for those Orthodox Pastors when suspended to endeavour their salvation by the exercise of their Ministry is to be Schismaticks and Church-Rebels And what is this less than to set up the will of such Church-Governors above the will and laws of Christ above the Salvation of Souls and above the Interest of Truth and Holiness Therefore 3. Let us examine the Grounds of this strange Assertion viz. Because there is a regular way for reforming abuses And for particular Presbyters to do it against the will of the Bishops whose Subjects they are is like reforming abuses in the state in spight of the King a remedy generally worse then the disease c. Answ 1. All that these reasons prove is that Reformation shou'd be first sought by humble addressing to our Superiors But Mr. K. plainly leaves it impossible if they refuse 2. They are founded on this wretched mistake that the Authority of Bishops in the Church does resemble that of a King in the State and so to reform abuses in the Church against their will is like reforming abuses in the State in spight of the King. Whereas t is Christ's Authority in the Church that does resemble the King 's in the State. And therefore if he wou'd rightly state the comparison it runs thus Christ the King of his Church requires all his Officers to preach the pure Doctrine and administer the pure institutions deliver'd in his Gospel which is his universal law Let us suppose there are in this or that particular part of the Church dangerous corruptions crept in The law of Christ obliges these his officers to disown them and reform them but the Major part of these will not but presume to silence those that do it according to his command Now the Quest is whether those that obey the command of Christ be the Rebells against him or those that neither will obey his commands themselves nor allow others to do so One wou'd think that such as refuse to reform and silence all that in their own place attempt it according to the tenour of their Commission are like to prove the Church Rebells But no doubt the Pastors of a Church may disown and excommunicate one that abuses his office to the perverting the Church and for him to continue to p rvert the Church by such male-administration is to Rebell against Christ and his laws The charge of Rebellion therefore must arise from the vioâ—ation of Christ's Authority not mens which the Major part of Pastors may be guilty of in a Nation as well as the lesser 3 He seems to confound a private and a publick Reformation 4. The Reason given why a Bishop or Presbyter when censur'd is discharg'd from his Office viz. Because to regain it is like making a Rebellion to regain a Civil Office does suppose two great mistakes 1. That the Ordainers give a Spiritual office in the Church as the King gives a Civil office in the State And this is no less a mistake then to set the Ordainers in the place of Christ T is his Charter gives the sacred office as the King 's does the Civil and the Ordainers do but for orders sake approve and ceremonially invest the person as the Recorder does the Mayor of a Town whom the Burghesses choose And herein Mr. K. seems to own that very error which is the ground of all Mr. M's impertinent Questions 2. He supposes that the Bishops who ordain Presbyters have equal power to depose them from their Ministerial office as the King has to take away a Civill Commission And thus p 27. he teâ—ls us That the present Dissenters were the Bishops subject accountable to them as their Superiors and liable to be discharg'd from their office and the benefits of the Communion of the Church by their Censure Whereas T is plain that it is the Charter of Christ gives the sacred office as the King 's does the Civil And as none can take a Civil Commission given by the King to any Subject but by the King's orders and Command So none can take away that spiritual Commission Christ has given any officer in his Church but by his orders But now he has given none leave or Authority to depose his officers but for evident Male-administration as preaching Heresie gross scandal c. And if in any part
these debates with deep regret that I am put on so unhappy necessity not only of opposing Mr. K. but saying so much against the present Church-Goverment in order to the Vindication of the Reformed Churches both at home and abroad and the Truth it self But as these principles I have here reflected on have been the fatal Engines of Church Tyranny and divisions these many Ages and belong to the Roman Arsenall so t is the necessary work of a Peacemaker who proposes a Catholick Unity and Love as his great aim to batter them down I had not so long delay'd the sending this paper but that I still hoped some abler pen would have undertaken what mine is so unfit for However I hope I have asserted nothing contrary either to Truth or Peace or if I have I am willing to receive better Information I am Sir. Your most humble c. A POSTSCRIPT THe person to whom the Letter was address'd desiring me to publish it I thought it requisite upon a review of it to add a few things relating to some passages in it The opposition of Mr. K's Notion of the Catholick Church to the Articles of the Church of Ireland and the agreeableness of mine to them is observ'd in the Preface To what is said about Mr. K's mark of the Catholick Church viz. living under lawful spiritual Governors I add that this renders the relation of all true Christians to our blessed Lord as his members as questionable as the title of the Pastor under whom they live and consequently exposes their right to all the benefits of the Gospel even to the Kingdom of Heaven it self to the same uncertainties and doubts as the regularity of his Admission to his Office. And if those ancient Canons repeated in so many Councils be of any force which declare all Elections of the Clergy by Magistrates or without the consent of the people void what a desperate case has almost all the Christian world been in ever since the old way of Elections was alter'd Nay the Church of England it self where the Bishops are chosen by the King and Parsons by Patrons is in a miserable plight So severe is this mark of the Catholick Church on those for whose secular interest Mr. K. seems to have calculated it and so over-favourable to those whom he design'd to exclude from the Catholick Church by it For what is said on behalf of all the Reformed Churches p. 11 c. It is not intended to include the Socinians who deny an essential Article of the Christian Faith the Deity of Christ and all the Doctrines of his Satisfaction c. that depend on it Against Mr. K's Notion of the Supreme Government over all the Christians in England being lodg'd in the Convocation touch'd on p. 57th I add this Argument ad hominem The General-Assembly in Scotland have equal pretensions to the Supreme Government of all Christians in that Nation as the Convocation has in England Now if the laws of the Convocation would oblige the Consciences of all the Christians in England as the laws of the Church whether ratified by the Civil Authority or no then the Acts of the General Assembly in Scotland have the same force there Now that General Assembly which sat there in the year 1639. whose Acts were also ratified afterwards by King Ch. the First in person present in his Parliament there abolisht Prelacy and set up the Presbyterian Government there The Prelates were according to Mr. K's Principles discharg'd from their Office and since they regain'd it not only without the allowance of any General Assembly but against the Acts or Laws of all that sat there since they were therein guilty of Schism or Church Rebellion Mr. K's Notions are as unmerciful to the Bishops there as to Presbyters here So little does he regard where those envenom'd darts may fall which he levels against his Dissenting Brethren The Contents of the Letter MR. M's 1 Quest in the Preface What is meant by the Catholick Church Mr. K's Answer consider'd and evidenc'd to be obscure narrow and consequently schismatical and dangerous from p. 2 to p. 7. The true Answer to that Question p. 7 8 9 10. Mr. M's 2d and 3d Questions Mr. K's Answer enlarg'd to make it more Catholick and comprehensive p. 10 11. Mr. M's 4th Quest Whether by the Catholick Church be meant the variety of all Protestants since they deny her essential mark Vnity The true Catholick Answer proposed p. 11 12 13. Mr. K's Answer to that Question consider'd His three marks of the Catholick members of the Church examin'd His first Embracing the Catholick Faith allow'd His second Living in Charity with their neighbour Churches excludes the Papists Mr. Dodwel and himself and a great part of the Christian world in the present and former Ages His third mark Making no separation from their lawful Governors founded on his schismatical Notion of the Catholick Church Two Questions propos'd on that Head. 1. Whether the separation of the Presbyterians c. supposing it to be sinful will exclude them from being Catholick members of the Church That it does not prov'd from the nature of their separation being only a breach of humane Vnity The contrary Assertion excludes the English Convocation the Papists and the greatest part of the Christian Church in every Age from being Catholick members c from p. 16. to p. 20 2 Vpon what grounds does Mr K assert that the Presbyterians have made a sinful separation from their lawful Governors Some difficulties propos'd on that Head That the Presbyt Ministers are lawful Pastors to the Churches under their oversight prov'd from p 21 to p. 30 The Q's in the Pamphlet about Mission The true Notion of Mission stated The Authority and Obligation of Pastors to the duties of their Office derived from Christ's Charter The use of Pastoral Ordination It s absolute necessity to the being of the Ministry disprov'd The power of Ordination belongs to scriptural Bishops Such Bishops prov'd to be the Pastors of single Congregations not Diocesses from Scripture and Antiquity The Ordination of Presbyt Ministers at home and abroad hence vindicated from p. 38. to p 48 These promis'd Mr. M's 1 Qu. What Priesthood or holy Orders had the first Reformers but what they received from Rom. Cath. Bishops Answered p 48 49 His 2 Q. Who authorized the first Reformers to Preach their Protestant Doctrine and administer their Protestant Sacraments Answered and retorted on the Church of Rome p. 49 His 3d and 4th Q's Whether Cranmer and his Associates could condemn the Church of Rome by vertue of the Mission derived from her Bishops If so whether a Presbyt Minister having received Orders from a Protestant Bishop can by vertue of such Orders pronounce the Church of England a corrupt Church Answered p 50 51 Mr. K's Answer examined His Concession to D. M. That a Bishop or Presbyter ought not to preach against the Constitution of the Church he is a member of and if he be censured or suspended he is discharg'd c. consider'd The consequences of it pernicious to a great part of the Reformed Churches and to our own had we a Popish Convocation The grounds of it absurd and false The silenc'd NC Ministers not chargeable with Schism or Church-Rebellion the charge more likely to fall heavy on the unjust silencers unless Mr K. can prove both the divine right of the Convocation to be the Ecclesiastical Head of the Church of England and the equity of their silencing sentence from p 51 to p. 59 5 Q Whether an Act of Parl c Answered p 59 60 Some general Remarks on the rest of Mr K's Answer p. 60 61 62 Reflections on the whole from p 62 to the end A Postscript FINIS ERRATA PAge 7 l 21 r Arimini To line 24 add And not the Catholick Church as visible or as measur'd by a Judgment of Charity as the Papists assert and Mr K with them contrary to the stream of protestant writers on that Controversie p 9 l 15 after commandment add an c p 23 l 30 r 7th v p 40 l ult r prelacy p 59 l 28 r 5th Q p 63 l 17 blot out a