submit to all unsinful conditions of the Episcopal communion where they live if imposed by the Ecclesiastical Government thereof This proved by these two degrees 1. That the supposition of their being less secure of salvation out of this Episcopal communion than in it is sufficient to prove them obliged to submit to all terms not directly sinful however unexpedient rather than separate themselves or suffer themselves to be excluded from this communion chap. 1. § 7 8 9 10. 2. That there is indeed less security of salvation to be had even on performance of the Moral conditions of salvation out of this Episcopal communion than in it This proved from two things 1. That they cannot be so well assured of their salvation in the use of extraordinary as of ordinary means nay that they being left to extraordinaries is a condition either very hazardous or at least very uncomfortable at present whatever it may prove hereafter Ch. II. 2. That these ordinary means of salvation are in respect of every particular person confined to the Episcopal communion of the place he lives in as long as he lives in it This proved from Two things 1. That these ordinary means of salvation are confined to the external Communion of the visible Church This proved from Four things 1. We cannot be assured that God will do for us what is necessary for our salvation on his part otherwise than by his express promises that he will do it Chap. III. § 1 2. 2. The ordinary means how we may assure our selves of our interest in his promises is by our interest in his Covenant by which they are conveyed to us Chap. III. from § 5. to the end 3. The ordinary means by which we may assure our selves of our interest in this Covenant with him is by our partaking in these external solemnities by which this Covenant is transacted and maintained Chap. IV V VI VII 4. The participation in these external solemnities with any legal validity is only to be had in the external Communion of the visible Church Chap. VIII B. II. That this visible Church to whose external Communion these ordinary means of salvation are confined is no other than the Episcopal Communion of the place where any one lives whilest he lives there This proved in Two parts a 1. That the visible Church to whose external Communion these ordinary means of salvation are consined is the Episcopal Communion This proved by these degrees A. 1. That salvation is not ordinarily to be expected without an external participation of the Sacraments 1. Negatively Not by those other popular means which ordinary persons are apt to trust in to the neglect of the Sacraments that is 1. Not by hearing the Word Preached Chap. IX 2. Not by private Prayer nor indeed by any out of the Communion of the Church Chap. X XI XII XIII XIV 2. Positively That salvation is ordinarily to be expected only by this external participation of the Sacraments 1. Proved concerning Baptism Chap. XV. 2. Concerning the Lords Supper Chap. XVI XVII II. That the validity of the Sacraments depends on the Authority of the persons by whom they are administred Chap. XVIII III. No other Ministers have the Authority of Administring the Sacraments but only they who receive their Orders in Episcopal Communion This proved by Four degrees 1. That the Authority of Administring the Sacraments must be derived from God Chap. XIX 2. That though it be derived from God yet it is not so derived without the mediation of those men to whom it was at first committed Chap. XX. 3. That it cannot be so derived from those men to whom it was first committed without a continued succession of persons orderly receiving Authority from those who had Authority to give it them from those first times of the Apostles to ours at present Chap. XXI 4. That this Authority is not now to be expected any where but in the Episcopal Communion Chap. XXII XXIII XXIV XXV b. 2. That the Episcopal Communion to which every particular person is obliged to joyn himself as he would enjoy the ordinary means of his own particular salvation is the Episcopal Communion of the place wherein he lives whilest he lives in it Chap. XXVI b. II. That the nature of this obligation to unsinful conditions of their Episcopal Communion is such as will make them guilty of the sin of SCHISM who rather than they will submit to such Conditions either separate themselves or suffer themselves to be excluded from Communion by their respective Diocesan Ordinaries Chap. XXVII Here is Episcopal Communion talkt of without telling what is the Episcopacy or what the Communion which he means and how both are known Confusion 1. There are usurping Bishops not truly called or chosen 2. There are Heretical Bishops 3. There may be divers Bishops in one City or County which of these mean you 4. He may be one fit for others and not for me nor am I to take him for my Pastor As the Greek Bishop in London and many Latine Bishops that spake not English heretofore or his faultiness may make it my duty to chuse a better 5. What if the King and Law command the contrary 6. All this is nothing for submitting to sinful conditions 2. As it is a duty to refuse sinful conditions so of many particular Churches to chuse the fittest for our communion The French and Dutch and Greeks in London are not Schismaticks for not being subject to this Bishop or locally communicating with him 2. You tell us not how a man shall know he is of the Bishops communion among a thousand Parish-Churches that differ in many things and own the Bishop in some things and not in others 3. Few of the Diocess ever locally communicate with our Bishops and mentally the Nonconformists communicate in Essentials at least 4. Most Christians on earth are guilty of Schism and yet are not prevalently Schismaticks but still members of the Catholick Church 5. The Bishops e. g. in France are more guilty of the Schism than the Protestants See Dr. Stillingfleet's Defence of Laud. 1. This is false in the fore-excepted cases 1. If he be a Bishop to others and not to me unless communion include not subjection for so we communicate with many other Bishops 2. If the condition imposed be a thing which a Superior Power forbiddeth King or in some cases Parents The matter and consequences are so weighty as tell us it is not well done to abuse dull Readers thus with the deceitful unexplained nature of Episcopacy and Communion The love of truth and souls forbid such deceit 1. If some receive only Parish-bishops of the old sort and others also their Archbishops and others such Diocesans as put down all Parish-bishops which of these have Episcopal communion 2. When of old many Ages Voting and Fighting could not tell men which was the true Bishop among many competitors and when at Rome there were oft two or three at once and when
a true Bishop by vertue of Gods Law and if he have better Qualification and Election and Ordination to be of surer Authority than the Diocesan it 's his Communion that we must prefer 4. But indeed Baptism and Salvation are ordinarily given before Episcopal Communion of any sort 5. They that thought the Pope Antichrist as most Protestant Bishops long did thought it a duty to reject the Communion of the Bishops of the places where they lived And Denmark and other Countries set up others against them that were ordained by Bugenhagius and other Prsbyters 6. Parochial and Diocesan bounds are humane mutable institutions 7. If the Bishop of the place be a Schismatick the Communion of a better near is better b. II. 1. All causleless separation from any Christians or causleless disobedience to any Pastor or neglect of any Christian duty needful to the Churches peace and concord and every opinion and practice that is against them doth make a man guilty of sinful Division or Schism in some degree And while every Christian hath many errors and sins which all tend to some sinful breach as the least sore is solutio continui I cannot see but every man living hath some guilt of Schism nor that there is any Church on earth that hath not some such guilt But every degree of guilt denominateth not the man or Church a Schismatick in a predominant or mortal sense And in Charity I hope that even some of those heinous Schismaticks may be saved that divide the Churches by their usurpation obtrusion sinful impositions and worldly domination yea some that in blind zeal put down Parish-Bishops and smite and silence the Pastors and scatter the Flocks And if I must have Communion with none that 's guilty of Schism with what Church or Bishop should I joyn And if their Sacraments be invalid what a case is Italy Spain France yea and England in Must all be baptized again that they baptized 2. But it 's no schism but a duty for the people as far to forsake a sinful Bishop much more an usurper as Cyprian and that Council advised them to do in the case of Martial and Basilides 3. And after all this deceitful confusion note Reader that he denieth not our disobedience to be lawful in case of sinful conditions imposed And if we fully prove not this to be our case let our accusers silence us and let our guilt be our shame 4. And if people that had Parish-Bishops on the place where they lived lawfully called shall forsake them to obey a Diocesan that is not on the place but perhaps Forty or Fifty or Sixty Miles off and never saw them and was obtruded contrary to the ancient Canons which nullifie such and sets himself to silence faithful Pastors and persecute them and other godly Christians for not sinning heinously upon deliberate choice and covenant doth not even this man conclude such to be Schismaticks that are out of the ordinary way and hope of salvation CHAP. III. The consequence of Mr. Dodwell's foresaid doctrine 1. THOSE that live under the Popish Bishops in Italy Spain France c. must live in their communion and under their command in all unsinful things 2. The Protestant Churches that have not Episcopal Ordination are no true Churches and have no true Ministers or Sacraments nor any Covenant-right to salvation 3. The Protestant Churches are in the same unchurched damnable case that have Bishops if they have not an uninterrupted succession of such from the Apostles canonically ordained 4. Therefore the Churches of Denmark Germany c. that have Superintendents ordained at the Reformation by Bugenhagius Pomeranus a Presbyter and all the rest whose succession was interrupted are in the same case 5. It is Schism and rejecting Sacraments and Covenant-right to salvation in all the people that continue in such Protestant Churches and communicate with them 6. It is better for the Protestants in France to joyn with the Papists than to live as they do without Sacraments or Church-communion 7. Yet by self contradiction it will follow that certainly the Church of Rome and all that derive their ordination from that Church have no true Bishops Ministers Sacraments Churches nor Covenant-right to salvation for it 's certain their true succession hath been oft interrupted 1. By such utterly uncapable persons as all History describeth and even Baronius calleth Apostaticos non Apostolicos and such as divers General Councils judged Hereticks Infidels Simoniaks c. e g. Eugenius 4. who yet kept in 2. By such whose false ordination the Canons expresly null 3. By many Schisms two or three Popes at once of whom none can tell who had the right or whether any 4 By the Popes taking on him to be Christs Universal Vicar an Office in specie usurpt which he maketh his Episcopacy and as such giveth his orders And all his Presbyters have turned the true Ministry into the false one of Mass-Priests and being no true Ministers can give no true Sacraments by his rule 8. Yea it is certain that few if any Churches on earth can prove such an uninterrupted succession as he and the Papists describe and most it s known have no such thing 9. Therefore if any have such a succession they cannot know it it being a thing that cannot be proved and so cannot be sure that they are true Churches c. 10. For the certainty of any true Ministry Church Sacraments and Salvation dependeth on such knowledg of History as is not in the world viz. To know that this Bishop and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and so up to the Apostles were every one true Bishops and truly Ordained which no mortal man can know 11. Men that by a Prince against even the Nullifying Canons can but get possession of Patriarchal and Diocesan Churches without the Clergy or peoples choice have thereby the power of damning men that fear God at their pleasure For 1. they must pass for the Bishops of the place 2. They may command any unsinful thing and excommunicate him that doth not obey 3. He is a Schismatick that suffers himself so to be Excommunicate and so is in a damnable state 4. He cannot hinder it not knowing the thing to be unsinful 12. For by this whoever will escape damnable schism must be one that knoweth the unsinfulness as he speaks of all things in the world that are such which a Prelate may command or else he must do any thing which he judgeth sin if a Prelate command it But that is wicked Idolizing man 13. And therefore by this rule no man living can be saved that a Prelate hath a mind to damn or from his damning impositions For no man living knoweth the lawfulness of all lawful things and therefore may take a commanded thing for sin that is not and then if he wilfully do that which he judgeth sin he rebelleth against God if he do it not the Prelate may excommunicate him and unresistibly make
Clergy will but forbid them See I beseech you worthy Country-men what sort of men and Doctrine you have to do with § 52. And why doth the man talk only against different practice Doth he not know that Government commandeth duty as well as forbiddeth the contrary Is not Omission against Government as well as Commission If the King command Taxes Military service c. may we disobey and call it Passive obedience What if the Bishops only forbid us to confess Christ to come to Church to Pray to give Alms to do any good May we forbear sobeit we do not the contrary Doubtless if Gods Word and Authority may not be pleaded for any duty which God commandeth and the Prelates forbid neither may it be pleaded for the Omission of any Villany commanded by Prelates no not Inquisition Torments or Massacres which God forbids But this man hath the Gramatical skill to call Omissive obedience by the name of Passive § 53. It 's like he will next say that I make odious suppositions That the supreme Church-power may command any Villanies and forbid Christian duties Ans. 1. I despair of getting any of these designers to tell me which is the Supreme Universal Church-power so as to be well understood I never heard of any pretenders but Pope and General Councils and as Bishop Guning holds the Colledg of all the Bishops in the world And certainly Pope and Councils have set up Heresies and decreed even the exterminating of all that will not dis-believe all their senses and deny Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine They have decreed deposing Kings absolving Subjects from their Allegiance adoring Images c. And what is it that yet they may not do If they say with Peter If all men deny thee I will not how shall I know that they say true Doth not the Church of England tell us that Councils have erred c § 54. And be not these very honest Sons of the Church of England that affirm it irreconcilable to Government to alledg Divine Authority of any different practices without exception and at the same time to Subscribe to Art 21.19.6.18 of the sufficiency of Scripture That the Churches of Jerusalem Alexandria Antioch Rome have erred in matters of Faith That the Church may not Ordain any thing contrary to Gods Written Word That General Councils may err and have erred and that things Ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they are taken out of the holy Scripture And those are accursed that presume to say that every man may be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth And why not if he must do all that the Governours require or nothing divers to them § 55. My Reason forbids me to trace such a Writer as this any further To tell men of every vain Harangue and confident discourse that 's full of gross error or false report is work unworthy of time and labour but I will a little more open the Coar of his deceit CHAP. V. Wherein Mr. Dodwell's deceits and the danger of them do consist § 1. AS to his Method of disputing that you may detect his fallacies he hath got this absurd ptetence p. 90. That there is but one sense of all Terms which Causes oblige men to mean and that every one ought to know who pretends to have skill in Causes Ans. Would you have thought that ever a man should publickly use such a Cothurnus among the Learned What a man is obliged to mean is one thing and what he doth mean is another And is there any one that knoweth what humane Language is that knoweth not that almost all words have various significations Doth he not know by how good reason the Schools oblige Disputants first to explain their Terms And what need there is of Definition to explain them He instanceth in the words Bishops and the Church of England And might have added the Catholick Church And doth he not know that it is the species of Bishops that we differ about and will the general name here explain each parties sense When we are for one sort of Bishops and against another And is it not such fraud as souls should not be abused by to refuse wilfully to define the Episcopacy that he meaneth and then plead that all should understand him And why is it not as much ignorance in him not to understand me as in me not to understand him when I use distinct explication which he obstinately refuseth And doth not Dr. Stillingfleet's case shame what he saith of the Church of England who was hardly brought to explain it and at last denieth the very being of the Church in Mr. Dodwell's sense which of you was to blame to meddle with the Word till you had skill in Causes to understand it without a Definition And doth not Dr. Stillingfleet take it as the Introduction of Popery to hold a Constitutive Regent Church-Government National or Catholick and so he and Mr. Dodwell mean not the same thing by the Church Catholick nor Bishop Guning Mr. Thorndike or the Church of Rome who are all for an Universal humane Supreme power And who is he that hath read Dr. Challoners Credo Eccles. Cathol Chillingworth Bishop Mortons Grand Imposture Bishop Bilson Dr. White Dr. Whitaker Dr. Sutliffe Bishop Andrews Bishop Carlton c. Chamier Sadeel Melancthon Bucer c. who knoweth not that the Papists and Prorestants by the name of the Catholick Church do mean several things and that we deny the very being of any such Church as they call the Catholick And is this the bold and happy Disputant that will save the Schools and World the labour of explaining Terms and foreagreeing of the sense and put men on disputing where the Subjâ—ct is denied and fill a Book with tedious confident Harangues and then hide all the fraud by saying that there is but one sense of all Terms which Causes oblige mâ—n to mean and that every one ought to know who pretend to have skill in Causes When the Cause disputed is only managed by words as they signifie the minds of the Speakers about the real matters § 2. And as to the material fundamental difference between Mr. Dodwell's party and us it lyeth in these following things I. We totally differ about the nature of Gods Government of man II. And about the use of the Holy Scripture and Gods Laws III. About the nature and extent of all humane Government IV. About the form of moral good and evil V. About the essential form of the Catholick Church VI. About Gods ordinary means of saving Grace VII About the use of Preaching VIII About the duty of worshipping God in Sacred Assemblies or the Communion of Saints IX About the difference of Apostles and the office of the Bishops X. About the office of a Presbyter or Parish-Pastor XI About the Necessaries to Ministry Churches Christianity and ordinary title to Salvation XII And
perceive from whom they come when the damnation of poor people must be so easily submitted to if the Bishop do but command the means Methinks you wrong the Bishops by such odious Suppositions and Assertions as if you would make men believe that they are the Grievous Wolves that spare not the flock and the thorns and thistles that are made to prick and rend the people But I believe that the Bishops faultiness in mens damnation would be no exeuse to me if I be accessory 4. And I doubt not but if you unjustly ipso facto Excommunicate men it neither depriveth them of the right nor absolveth them from the duty of publick Worship and church-Church-Communion And I am ashamed to read and hear Preachers publickly reproaching them for not holding constant Communion with the parish-Parish-Churches when it 's notorious that the Canon hath thus Excommunicated them yea though it were their duty sometime to intrude And I beseech you judg as a Christian or a man whether you can think such Arguments should draw the people themselves to be of your mind Go to them and speak out Neighbours I confess that while you live in ignorance and sin for want of teaching and publick worship you are in the way to damnation but it is the Bishop and not the silenced Preacher that shall answer for it Will they not reply And shall not the Bishop then he damned instead of us as well as instead of the silenced Preacher VIII Your doubt about mens power to change Christs setled form of Church-government is but a consequent of your first of mens absolute power But 1. if they change Gods Laws or instituted Church-forms or Government may they not change their own And if so there is some hope of a Reformation But why then did the Canons of 1640. in the Et caetera Oath swear the Clergy never to consent to change And why are we now to swear in the Oxford Oath That we will never endeavour any alteration of Church-Government tho' the keys be in the power of Lay-Chancellors and tho' the King may command us to endeavour it must the Nation or Clergy swear never in their own places to endeavour any alteration of the Bishops Institutions as you take them and yet may the Bishops alter the very Form of Government and Churches made by our Universal King 2. What an uncertain mutable thing may Christs Laws or Church-Government prove while mutable men may change it at their pleasure 3. To what purpose is Antiquity and Tradition so much pleaded by Hierarchical Divines as if that were the Test to know the right Government and Church if the Bishops may alter it 4. If thus much of Christs Laws and Institutions may be altered by Prelates how shall we be sure that all the rest is not also at their will and mercy or which is it that they may alter and which not 5. Doth not this set man so far above God or equal with him as will still tempt men to think that more are Antichristian than the Pope If you say that it is by Gods own grant I wait for your proof that God granteth power to any man above his Laws Those that he made but Local or Temporary himself are not abrogated or changed by man where they bind not for they never bound any but their proper subjects e. g. The Iewish Laws as such never bound the Gentile world and the command of washing feet bound only thâ—se where the use of going bare-leg'd with Sandals in a hot Country made it an office of kindness and so of other Temporary precepts 6. How contrary is this to the common Christian Doctrine that we must obey none that command us to sin against God For by the first assertion and this it seemeth that it cannot be a sin which the Bishops command 7. I pray you put in an exception for the Power and Lives of Kings and the Laws of the Land and the Property and Liberty of the Subjects and one word for the Protestant Religion For we English-men think God to be greater than the King or St. Patrick and Gods Laws to be firmer than the Statutes of King and Parliament And yet I doubt that the King and some Parliament will be angry if you do but say that the Bishops by consent may change their Statutes or lawful Officers and Powers And Bishops if you say that Episcopacy may be changed IX Baptism as such entereth not the Baptized into any particular Church but only into the Vniversal headed by Christ yet a man may at the same time be entered into the Vniversal and into a particular Church but that is by a double consent and not by Baptism as such In this I know none that agree with you but some few of the Independents in New-England and some of the Papists I confess Bellarmine saith That by Baptism we are virtually obliged to the Pope being baptized by a Ministry and into a Church of which he is the Head But the contrary is proved 1. From the express form of the Baptismal Covenant which only tyeth us to Christ and his Universal Church and maketh us Christians But to be a Christian dedicated to the Father Son and Holy Ghost is one thing and to be a part of the Pastoral Charge of A. B. or N. N. is another thing 2. What particular Church was the Eunuch Act. 8. baptized into Not that of Ierusalem for he was going from it never like to see it more Not that in Ethiopia for there was none till he began it If you say of Philips Church 1. I pray you where was that 2. And how prove you it 3. Specially if it was Philip the Deacon that had no Church being no Bishop 3. May not men be baptized in Turkey or among other Infidels or Indians where there is no Church And is the first baptized man among them a Church himself Paul thanketh God that he baptized no more of the Corinthians lest they should think that he baptized into his own name And doth every Baptizer baptize to himself or to his Bishop A man may baptize out of all Diocesses or in another's X. As to your next Assertion I grant that when a Bishop or a beggar speaketh the Commands of God and a King speaketh against it we must follow that Bishop or beggar rather than the King because this is but obeying God before men But supposing that it is a thing indifferent and but circa sacra and not a proper part of the Agent Pastors Office I confess to you I will obey the King before the Bishop 1. Because it is a thing that is under the Power of the King to command and if so the King is the Supreme and not the Bishop 2. Bishops themselves are Subjects of the King and owe him obedience Therefore rule not over or before him in matters belonging to his Office 3. Bishops are chosen by the King for I suppose no man takes the Dean and Chapters choice for
of his species they are no Ministers or Churches and have no Sacrament and Covenant title to Salvation but are Schismaticks and by their Ministry sin against the Holy Ghost And so destroyeth all certainty of title to Salvation and of Church-communion Ministry and Sacraments to all the Christian World § 14 XII Lastly we think that men shall be judged by their keeping or breaking Gods Law and according to what they did in the body But he would have us obey the Supreme Clergy and not plead Scripture or Divine authority for our different practice because the Government that lasteth but for this life ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice § 15. I conclude with a request to him to resolve me these doubts 1. Whether Prophets having immediate messages from Heaven were not differenced from the teaching Priests and Pastors 2. Whether false Prophets were not grievously threatened among the Iews and whether Christ did not command us to beware of false Prophets 3. Whether he be not a false Prophet worse than a false teacher that falsely pretendeth to that which is proper to a Prophet 4. Whether it be not proper to a Prophet to deliver as immediately from God new Laws to the universal Church yea or to any Church which are not in the Scripture nor are revealed by it as Gods means besides the determination of circumstances left to humane prudence variable pro re nata if Moses and the Apostles in Legislation acted as Prophets do not they so that pretend to do the like 5. Whether the General Councils of Bishops and the Pope have not done the work proper to the Prophetical office when they have made Laws for the unversal Church and this as by Divine authority and undertaken to give all the Church the sense of Scripture which only shall be obligatory to them thereby For it is the maker of the sense that is the maker of the Law especially when they pretend to Infallibility or to be secured from erring in faith by Divine inspiration how ignorant or bad soever they be singly Is not this pretended authority and inspiration that of Prophets as different from meer Teachers and Guides by Gods Law already made 6. If it be so how many such Papal Councils arrogating such power have been false Prophets 7. But if they pretend not Inspiration nor Prophetical authority from God nor yet authority given them by the Scriptures or Laws of God already made or falsly pretend such then is not this to usurp Christs own authority and so instead of being false Prophets to be partly Vice-Christs or Law-givers to his universal Church called commonly Antichrists I would willingly have things so cleared that men may be freed from all such suspicions But if you are still confident that the universal Church hath a visible supreme Government besides Christs I should be glad 1. To see it proved 2. To know whose it is and how we may know them 3. And to know its true extent If you intend no fraud you cannot refuse me this when I promise you if performed I will let fall the suit and no more trouble you with lesser Controversies I have no Copy of my first Letter to Mr. Dodwell upon a Book which he sent me This is his Answer Reverend and Worthy Sir I Have received your very kind Letter wherein I hardly know whether I should be more thankful for your approbation or your reproof both of them being in their kind so useful and both of them being by you performed with so great civility I am confident that if our modern disputes had been moderated with that candor men would certainly have been more peaceful and very Orthodox than now we find them I could very heartily have wished that the opinions wherein we differ had not been of that nature as to sâ—parate Communion for this I look upon as the only circumstance that can make such differences grievous to a pious person for as for those others which exasperate many that Dissenters are not so wise to discern the truth or so fortunate in avoiding prejudices or lighting on faithful informations in a time when they are capâ—ble of receiving them or that they are not so submissive as themselves expect to that Pope which Luther has long since observed in every mans â—eart c. are reasons either sinful or at least insufficient to excuse the sin of uncharitableness upon such an account but as they aâ—e considering them as tempered with that piety and moderation which may expiate their other malignities that they are rather alledged as Apologies for your selves than as obligations on others rather to excuse your deformity in assisting at our Altars than erecting others in opposition to them that you are still iâ—quisitive and desirous of further information and ready to lay down your mistakes where you are convinced that they are such that still you preserve a pâ—aceable mind and embrace our Communion it sâ—lf in voto though perhaps not actually these are so valuable considerations even before God as well as man for excusing from the guilt of error as that whatever I may think of your opâ—nions I hope it shall not hinder me from a cordial respect and veneration for your person As I do very much esteem the good opinion of so great a lover of pâ—â—ce and piety as your self and should have been sorry to have given any juâ—t occasion of offence to you so I am not a little glad that upon a review of the particulars mentioned in your Letter I find my self so very innocent For as for my Preface the main parts of it wherein the disrepect of the Clergy is shewn to have been an Introductory to the Atheism of the age we live in and that the Conformable Clergy that is such as would answer the design of the Church not only as to their exterior demeanor in publick solemn Assemblies but also as to the qualifications of their persons and the conduct of their whole lives could not prove either trifling in their Preaching or scandalous in their examples and therefore that the Church is not responsible for their misdemeanors where they prove otherwise and that the Laity are in their proportion obliged to the same duties with the Clergy and therefore may make use of the advices there prescribed or where the errors of our modern School-Divinity are touched and some Proposals made for their reformation in these things I say I can see no occasion of offence but rather some preservatives against it The only thing I suppose you aim at is my taxing some opinions of Nonconformists and that with as little personal reflection as I was able which I conceived prejudicial to Church-authority which because you seem to disown I do not see why you should apprehend your self as particularly concerned especially there being nothing in the discourse whereby you could conclude either your self or any of your moderate temper to have been intended I will assure
work that God hath â—ade Officers to do already And then we need not say â—that Orders are Iure Divino if the Bishop may make more at his pleasure but quo jure and what shall set his bounds and end This seemeth more in kind than the Italians at Trent would have given to the Pope over Bishops Anâ— if they do not themselves also that same Essential part of their Office which they give to others they degrade themselves For the ceasing or alienation of an Essential part changeth the specieâ— But I suppose you will say 〈◊〉 is Preâ—byters to whom they may delegate this work And 〈◊〉 either it is a worâ— which God hath made part of the Presbyters Office or not If it be then that Presbyter doth his ow◠〈◊〉 appointed him by God and not another 〈…〉 not 〈◊〉 he maketh a new Officer who is â—either 〈…〉 But the 〈…〉 the Office 〈◊〉 that it may not be 〈◊〉 thoâ—gh Bishop may Ordain men to an Office of 〈…〉 the King or Church may make new Officers 〈…〉 Clock keepers Ostiaries c. 〈…〉 and obligation to personal duty to be done 〈◊〉 personâ—l abiâ—â—ty as is the Office of a Physician a Judg a School 〈…〉 a Pilot c where he that Authorâ—zeth and obligâ—th another statedly to do his work doth thereby make that other a Physician Judg School-Master Pilot c. This is but Ordinâ—tioâ— And if a Bishop be but one that may appoint others to do the Episcopal work then 1. Why is not every King a Bishop for he may appoint men to do a Bishops work And why is he not also a Physician Musician Pilot c. because he may do the like by them 2. And then the Bishop appointed by the King is no more a Bishop indeed than one appointed by a Bishop is But this delegation that I speak against is a smaller sin than such men choose To depute others to exercise Discipline whom God appointed not de specie thereto is but Sacriledg and Usurpation by alienating it from the true office and setting up a false one But yet the thing might some how be done if any were to do it But the almost total deposition and destruction of the Discipline it self and letting none do it by pretending the sole authority of doing it is another kind of sin Now to your answer from the similitude of Civil Monarchs I reply It is no wonder if we never agree about Church-offices if we no better agree of the general nature of them and their work Of which if you will please to read a sheet or two which I wrote the last year to Ludov. Molinaeus of the difference of Magistracy and Church-power and also read the Lord Bacons Considerations you will excuse me for here passing by what is there said I. The standing of the Magistrates Office is by the Law of Nature which therefore alloweth variety and mutations of inferior Orders as there is cause But the standing of the Clergy is by Supernatural Institution Our Book of Ordination saith there are three Orders c. Therefore man may not alter them or make more of that same kind II. Kingly power requireth not ad dispositionem materiae such Personal ability as the Pastoral-office doth A child may be a King and it may serve turn if he be but the head of power and give others commission to do all the rest of the Governing work But it is not so with a Judg a Physician an Orator or a Bishop who is not subjectum capax of the essence of the office without personal aptitude III. God hath described the Bishops office in Scripture as consisting of three parts viz. Teaching Priestly or about Worship and Sacraments and ruling as under Christs Prophetical Priestly and Kingly Office And he hath no where made one more proper to a Bishop than another nor said this is Essential and that is but Integral Therefore the Bishop may as well allow a Layman to administer the Sacraments c. as one not appointed to it by God to Rule by the Keys IV. The Bishops Pastoral Rule is only by Gods word upon the Conscience as Bishop Bilson of Obed. sheweth at large and all Protestants agree and not by any mulcts or corporal force If he use the sword or constraint it is not as a Bishop but as a Magistrate But the Kings is by the sword And will it follow that because the King may appoint another to apprehend men and carry them to prison c. that therefore a Bishop appointed by God to Preach Worship and Rule and therein to draw the Impenitent to Repentance by patient exhortations and reproofs c. may commit this to another never appointed to it of God V. Either it is the Bishops work as was said that is delegated by him or some other If properly his own than either he maketh more Bishops and that 's all we plead for or else a Presbyter or Layman may do a Bishops proper work And then what need of a Bishop to pass by the contradiction VI. But my chief answer to you is the King as Supreme Magistrate doth appoint and rule by others that are truly Magistrates They have every one a Judicial power in their several places under him even every Justice of Peace But you suppose the Bishop to set up no Bishops nor no Church-Governours under him at all A King can rule a Kingdom by Supremo Judgment when he hath hundreds of Judges under him who do it by his authority And if this had been all our dispute whether a Patriarch or Archbishop can rule a thousand Churches by a thousand Inferior Bishops or Church-rulers you had said something But doth it follow that your Church Monarch can over-see them all himself without any sub-oversees or rule them by Gods word on the Conscience without any sub-rulers You appropriate the Decretory Power to your Monarch and communicate only the executive Hold to that The whole Government is but Legislatio Iudicium Legislation now we meddle not with yet our Bishops allow it to the Presbyters in Convocation for they take Canons to be Church-Laws It is a lower power that is denied to them that they grant the higher to Bare execution is no Government A Hangman is no Governour A Governour may also be Executioner but a meer Executioner is no Governour The People are Executioners of Excommunications while they withdraw from the Excommunicate and with such do not eat c. as 1 Cor. 5. And the Parish-Priest is an Executioner while he as a Cryer proclaimeth or readeth the Chancellors Excommunication in the Church and when he denieth the Sacrament to those that he is bid deny it to I grant you that this is Communicated But it is the Judicial power it self which I have been proving the Bishop uncapable of Exploration is part of the Judicial work I know you include not that in execution which follows it If you did it would be a sad office for a Bishop to
Word and Sacraments which worketh by the senses of hearing seeing and tasting upon the Conscience that is on the Understanding and Will and by these reformeth practice The word is thus deâ—ivered either Generally by common Doctrine which is historical assertive precepts prohibitions promises or threatnings or by personal application of these 1. By meer words as in personal instruction precept threatning c. and by declaration that this person proved and judged guilty of impenitency in such and such sin is uncapable of Church-communion therefore by auâ—hority from Christ I command him to forbear and you to avoid him And such a one being proved innocent or penitent hath by Gods Law right to Communion with his Church therefore I absolve him invite him receive him and command you in Christs name to hold loving Communion with him 2. Or it is the application of words and Sacramental signs togetâ—er by solemn tradition and investiture or the denying of such Sacraments Briefly Magistrates by mulcts prisons exile 〈◊〉 c. work on the body Pastors have no such power bâ—t by General Doctrine and personal application by words and Sacraments given or denied work on the mind or conscience 〈◊〉 which some call a Perswasive power distinguishing as Camero 〈◊〉 between private perswasion of an equal c. and Doctâ—ral Pastoral Official Perswasion whose force is by the Divine authority of the perswader used in Teaching Disciplinary judging and Sacraments If you will call this last coercive or by any other name you have your liberty I will do my part that you may understand me if I may not understand you 2. Now ad rem can we disagree how far this constraineth the unwilling Not without some great neglect or culpable defect I may suppose then that we are agreed of all these particulars 1. That Gods Laws have told us who must or must not have Sacramental Communion which we must obey whatever be the effects 2. That Excommunication is not only nor alway chiefly to bring the person Excommunicated to obedience no more than hanging but to keep the purity and reputation of the Church and the safety of the members and to warn others 3. That the way by which it is to affect the offender is 1. By shaming him 2. By striking his Conscience with the sense of Gods displeasure declared thus by his Ministers 4. So far as the Sacrament is a means of conveying grace to deny it is not to reform but to destroy But when the person hath made himself uncapable of the benefit of the Sacrament and apt to receive it abusively to his hurt then it may possibly humble him to be denied it 5. If the denial of the Sacrament work not on a mans Conscience morally as threatnings do it no way compelleth him to his duty nor saveth him from sin 6. De facto many hundred thousands of ignorant wicked members of Episcopal Churches are so far from being constrained to goodness by being without the Sacrament that they are content to be without it and loth to be forced to it 7. The more sin and wickedness any man hath the less true conscience and the less conscience the less doth he regard a due Excommunication 8. The Bishops themselves are conscious of the insufficiency of their Excommunications alone to compel any to obedience while they confess that without the Secular power of the sword to back it they would be but laught at and despised by the most Nor durst they ever try to govern by their Church Keys alone among us without the enforcement of the sword And at the same time while they Excommunicate them from the Sacrament they have a Law to lay them in Gaol and utterly ruin them if they will not receive it How loth are the Bishops to lose this compelling Law 9. I think few of my acquaintance in England do believe that any great number are brought to holy reformation no nor to Episcopal obedience by the fear of being kept from the Sacrament but that which they fear is the Corporal penalty that followeth lay by that and you may try 10. If you will trust to that spiritual power alone valeat quantum valere potest without corporal force few that I know of will resist you but many thousands will despise you as the Bishops well foresee bring as many to obedience by it as you can But if you mean that you must needs have the Magistrate to second you as your Lictor or Executioner and to imprison fine banish burn c. it would be too gross hypocrisie to call the effects of this coercive power the effects of Excommunication and to call it coercive power to deny a man the Sacrament because he feareth the sword 11. De facto there are supposed to be in the Parish that you dwell in above 60000 souls suppose 10000 of these yearly receive the Sacrament though some say it is not 5000. Are the other 40000 compelled to obedience by not communicating 12. All those forbear your Sacrament without any sense of coercion or loss 1. Who believe as you do that Sacramental Communion is a sin where it cannot lawfully be had that is say you where the Bishops forbid it say they where Gods Laws forbid it by reason of adherent sin 2. And that take the Bishops who forbid it them to be Usurpers that have no true calling as all the Papists do of our Bishops and many others 3. Who take it to be more eligible yea a necessary duty to hold Communion with purer societies 4. Besides all those Sectaries that make light of Sacraments in general What Papists Quakers Anabaptist Separatists c. are compelled to any good by the Bishops denying them the Sacrament 13. Nothing but Ignorance or Impudence can deny that the difficulty of knowing whose Excommunication it is that is to be dreaded as owned by God hath encouraged professed Christians so confusedly to Excommunicate one another as that this Excommunication hath been so far from constraining most to repentance that it hath made Christianity a horrid scandal to Infidels and Heathens by setting the Christian World in the odious confusion of Excommunicating one another To give some instances how far Excommunication is not coercive 1. Who but the Devil was the gainer of Pope Victor's Excommunicating the Asians about Easter-day Did it compel them to obedience 2. When the Orthodox Excommunicated the Arrians did it force them to obey When they got almost all the Bishops for them and Excommunicated and destroyed their Excommunicators 3. When the Cecilians or Orthodox and the Donatists for so many ages Excommunicated one another meerly upon the difference which party had the true Ordained Bishops did Excommunications force them to obedience 4. To pass forty other Sects when Rome Excommunicated yea and prosecuted the Novatians did it compel them to obey And did not Atticus Sisinnius and Proclus win more by allowing them their own Communion and living with them in love and peace Chrysostome since threatned
the Antecedent True Pastors have but the power to promote and order Gods worship but not to exclude or forbid it to any much less to all or 1000. without necessary cause 2. And then if Preaching and Hearing and Sacraments be ordinarily necessary to mens salvation then God hath left it to the will or power of the Bishops whether any of the people shall be ordinarily saved But that is not so 3. And then if the King should license or command us to Preach Pray and Communicate and the Bishop forbid it it were sin But that I will not believe unless the Cause more than the Authority make the difference To cooclude I hold that just use of the Keys is very necessary and that it is the great sin of England to reject it But that a false usurped use of excomunication hath been the incendiary of the Christian world which hath broken it to pieces caused horrid Schisms Rebellions Treasons Murders and bloody Wars I. The just use is 1. When a scandalous or great sinner is with convincing evidence told of his error and with seriousness yet with love and compassion intreated to repent and either prevailed with and so absolved or after due patience Authoritatively pronounced uncapable of Church-Communion and bound over to answer it at the Bar of Christ in terror if he repent not and this by the Pastor of that particular Church which either statedly or pro tempore he belongeth to 2. And when this is duly notified to such Neighbour-Pastors as he may seek Communion with and they agree not to receive any justly cast out by others but to receive and relieve the injured and falsly condemned 3. And when the King and his Justices permit not the ejected violently to intrude and take the Sacrament or joyn with the Church by force but preserveth forcibly the Peace and Priviledges of the Churches II. The excommunication that hath turned the Church into Factions and undone almost East and West is 1. When a Bishop because of his humane Superiory as Patriark Primate or Pope claimeth the power of excommunicating other Bishops as his Subjects whose Sentence must stand because of his Regent power 2. Or at least gathering a Council where he shall preside and that Council shall take themselves to have a Governing power of the Keys over the particular Bishop not only to renounce Communion with them themselves but to oblige all others to stand to their judicial Sentence 3. When Bishops shall meddle causelesly in other Bishops Churches and make themseves Judges either of distant unknown persons and cases or of such as they have nothing to do to try Yea judg men of other Countries or so distant as the Witnesses and Causes cannot without oppression be brought to their Bar. 4. When they disgrace Gods universal Laws of Communion as insâ—fficiâ—nt and make a multitude of unnecessary ensnaring dividing Laws of their own according to which they must be mens Judges 5. When these Laws are not made only for their own flocks and selves but for all the Christian world or for absent or dissenting persons 6. When men excommunicate others for hard words not understood that deserve it not as to real matter 7. Or do it to keep up an unlawful usurped power over those Churches that never consented to take them for their Pastors and to rule where they have no true Authority but such as standeth on a forcing strength 8. When Lay-Chancellors use the Keys of the Church 9. When men excommunicate others wickedly for doing their duty to God and man or unjustly without sufficient Cause 10. When unjust excommunicators force Ministers against their Consciences to publish their condemnations against those that they know to be not worthy of that Sentence if not the best of their flocks 11. And when they damn all as Hereticks Schismaticks c. that communicate with any that they thus unjustly damn 12. When they dishonour Kings and higher Pwers by disgracing excommunications much more when they depose them 13. When they tell Princes that it is their duty to banish imprison or destroy men because excommunicate and not reconciled and make Kings their Executioners And so of old when a Bishop was excommunicate he must presently be banished And they say the Scots horning is of the same nature If all had been either banished or imprisoned that were excommunicate aâ—d unreconciled in the pursuit of the General Councils of old how great a diminution would it have made of the free Subjects of the Empire And if Princes must strike with the Sword all that stand excommunicate without trying and judging the persons themselves it is no wonder if such Prelates as can first so debase them to be their Lictors can next depose them He is like to be a great Persecuter that will imprison or banish all that a proud contentious Clergy will excommunicate As corruptio optimi est pessima I doubt not but a wise humble holy spiritual loving heavenly zealous patient exemplary sort of Pastors is the means of continuing Christs Kingdom in the World and such are the Pillars and Basis of Truth in the House of God as it is said of Timothy not of the Church as is commonly mistaken So an ignorant worldly carnal proud usurping domineering hypocritical sort of Pastors have been the great plagues and causes of Schism confusion and common calamity And that when Satan can be the chuser of Pastors for Christs Church he will and too oft hath ever chuse such as shall most succesfully serve him in Christs Name And I doubt not but such holy Discipline as shall keep clean the Church of Christ and keep off the reproach of wickedness and uncleanness from the Christian Religion and manifest duly to the flock the difference between the precious and the vile is a great Ordinance of God which one man cannot exercise over many hundred Parishes and unknown people But an usurped domineering use of excommunication to subdue Kings Princes Nobles and people to the Jurisdiction Opinions and Canons of Popes Patriarchs Prelates or their Councils I think hath done not the least part of Satans work in the world And I must tell you that I have lived now near 62. now near 66. years and I never saw one man or woman reformed or converted by excommunication and I hope I have known thousands converted from their sin by Preaching even by some that are now forbidden to Preach All that ever I knew excommunicate were of two sorts 1. Dissenters from the Opinions of the Bishops or conscientious refusers of their commands And these all rejoice in their sufferings applying Blessed are ye when they cast out your names c. say all evil of you falsly c. or they take their censure for wicked persecution The Papists laugh at their Excommunicators and say What an odd conditioned Church have you that will cast us out that never came in and because we will not come in 2. Ungodly impenitent sinners And these hate
Doctrine Worship and Discipline this is essential to a partiicular Church primi ordinis of Divine Institution of which I now treat III. 1. As Christians must gather into particular Churches under their proper Bishops so these Churches must hold a certain Communion among themselves so much as is necessary to their mutual Edification and Preservation of which Synods and Communicatory Letters and Messengers are the means 2. An association of several Churches for Communion of Churches doth tota specie differ from an association of individual Christians into one Church primae speciei And it differeth in the matter end and kind of Communion 3. If these several Churches agree in the same Baptismal Covenant in the same ancient Creed or Articles of Faith and in the same love and holy desires summed up by Christ in the Lords-prayer and in taking the commands of Christ for the Rule of their conversation and receiving Gods Revelations recorded in the holy Scriptures so far as they understand them renouncing all contraries to any of this so soon as they perceive them so to be this should suffice to their loving and comfortable communion without any desires of Domination or Government over one another And though I will not do any thing unpeaceably against Patriarchs Metropolitans Archbishops or Diocesans if they govern according to the Laws of God yet I know no Divine right that any of them have to be the Rulers of the particular Bishops and Churches Though a humane presidency for order we deny not nor that junior Bishops do owe some respect and submission to the Seniors 4. Though the General Laws of Christ for concord edification c. do enable Magistrates by command or Pastors by contract to chuse and make new Officers of their own which God never particularly instituted for the determining and executing such circumstantials as God hath left to humane prudence as Presidents Moderators Churchwardens Summoners c. yet I deny 1. That any Officer of meer humane Institution hath a superior proper Ecclesiastical Power of the Keys to be a Bishop of Bishops and to govern the Governouâ—s of the particular Churches by Excommunications Depositions and Absolutions seeing ex ratione rei it belongeth to the same Legislator who instituted the inferiour order to have instituted the Superiour if he would have had it 2. And I peremptorily deny that any such pretended Superiour Patriarch Primate Metropolitan Archbishop c. hath any power save Diabolical to deprive any particular Churches Bishops or Christians of any of the Priviledges setled on them by Christs Vniversal Laws or to disoblige them from any duties required by Christ. IV. It belongeth to the Office of Princes and Magistrates only to Rule all both Clergy and Laity by the sword or force even to drive Ministers to do their certain duty and to punish them for sin And they are to keep peace among the Churches and as bad as the Secular Powers have been had they not kept peace better than the Bishops have done I am possest with horrour to think what a field of blood the Churches had been throughout the world since the Exaltation of the Clergy V. Christ only is as the Universal Legislator so the Universal final judg from whom there is no appeal VI. Every Christian as a Rational Agent hath a Judgment of discerning by which he must judg whether his Rulers commands be according to Christs commands or not And if they be must obey Christ in them If not must not obey them against Christ but appeal to him And if any do this erroneously it is his sin if justly it is his duty These six Particulars I take to be the sufficient means which Christ hath appointed for the concord of the Church and that the seven points of Concord mentioned by the Apostle should satisfie us herein viz. 1. One body 2. One Spirit 3. One hope of our calling 4 One Lord. 5. One Faith 6. One Baptism 7. One God and Father of all And they that agree in these are bound to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace as knowing that the Kingdom of God consisteth not in meats and dâ—inks but in Righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost And he that in these serveth Christ is acceptable to God and should be approved of men Rom. 14.17 18. Ephes. 4.6 7 c. Nor is it lawful for any to hate persecute silence or Excommunicate their Brethren that agree in these or to divide distract or confound the Churches for the interest of their several Preeminences or Provinces which have no higher than humane authority perhaps questionable at least unquestionably below the authority of God and null when it is against it I am sure by the Church-History of all ages since Christ the great divider of the Christian World hath been the Pride of a worldly too ignorant Clergy 1. Striving who should be greatest 2. Striving about ambiguous words 3. Imposing unnecessary things by their Authority upon the Churches to be ignorant of this is impossible to me when once I have read the History of the Church which warneth me what to suspect as the causes of our distractions for the things that had been are And how unexcusable these three evils are and how contrary to Christ these Texts do tell me I. Luk 22.24 25 26 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3 4. 1 Cor. 3.5 6 7 22. 2 Cor. 1.24 II. 2 Tim. 2.14 16 23 24 25. 1 Tim. 1.4 5 6. III. 2 Cor. 11.3 Act. 15.28 Revel 2.24 25 Mat. 15.8 9. Rom. 14 15 throughout To tell you that I am not only as you say on the destructive part I have thus told you briefly what I assert as the way to peace And now I shall destructively tell you why I differ from your Principles as truly destructive of truth unity and peace Some of the Principles which I have heard from your mouth which I dissent from are these I. That the Church must have some Ecclesiastical Governours that are absolute from whom no man may appeal to an invisible Power II. That Diocesan Churches are the first in order of Divine Institution III. That Diocesan-Bishops by consent may make other Church-forms as National Patriarchal c. And that such Churches are not made by Princes but by the consent of Prelates IV. That these Church-forms of mans making stand in a Governing Superiority over those of Gods making V. That where by such consent of Diocesans such superior Jurisdictions are once setled it is a sin for any to gather Assemblies within the local bounds of their Jurisdiction without their consent VI. That you cannot see how those that do so can be saved VII That if I preach on the account of my Ministerial office and the peoples necessity to such as else would have no Preaching nor any publick worship of God e. g. in a Parish where there are 40000 more than can hear in the parish-Parish-Church though I must conclude that according to the ordinary way
understood II. But if it be a priority of Existence in order of execution that you mean it disproveth it self For 1. It is contrary to the nature of production that two or twenty or an hundred stated Congregations should be before on t as it is that I should write a page before a line and a line before a word and a word before a letter 2. It is contrary to the Scripture-History which telleth us that Christ called his Disciples by degrees a few first and more after and that the Apostles accordingly converted men from the number of 120 they rose to 3000 more and after to 5000 c. And that ordinarily the Churches in Scripture-times were such as could and often did meet in one place though that be nâ—t necessary as I said before hath so copious evidence as that I will not here trouble you with it 3. Either the Apostles Ordained Bishops before subject Presbyters or such Presbyters before Bishops or both at once If both at once as two Orders it 's strange that they called both Orders promiscuously by the same names sometimes Bishops sometimes Presbyters and sometimes Pastors and Teachers without any distinguishing Epithete or notice And it 's strange that we never find any mention of the two sorts of Congregations one the Bishops Cathedral and the other the Parish Presbyters Congregation If you say that they were the Bishops themselves and first Ordained only subject-Presbyters under them that cannot hold For doubtless there were more than twelve or thirteen Churches the number of Apostles in their times nor were they fixed Bishops but indefinite gatherers and edifiers of the Churches And either those Elders first Ordained by the Apostles were Bishops or else there were Churches without Bishops for they Ordained Elders in every City and in every Church And either the Elders first Ordained by the Apostles had the power of Ordaining others or not If they had then either they were Bishops or else subject-Presbyters were Ordained to be Ordainers yea to Ordain Bishops if such were to be after ordained And so indeed it would be suitable to your conceiâ— that the inferiour order of Diocesans do by consent make superior Metropolitans Provincials Nationals and Patriarchs to rule them and with Hieromes report ad Evagr. that the Alexandrian Presbyters made the Bishops as the Army doth a General But this making of Children to beget Fathers is so commonly denied that I need not more dispute against it 3 But I think most of the Hierarchical way will say that the Apostles first Ordained Bishops that those Bishops might Ordain subject-Presbyters And if so the Churches could be but single Congregation at the first till the subject-Presbyters were Ordained Yea Dr. Hammond as aforesaid asserteth in Act. 11. and in Dissert c. that there is no proof there were any of the Order of subject-Presbyters in Scripture-times and he thinketh that most of his party were of his mind and that the name Bishop Elder and Pastor in Scripture signifie only those that we now call Bishops And in this he followeth Dion Petavius and Fr. a Sancta Clara de Episcop who saith that it came from Scotus And if this be so then in all Scripture-times there was no Church of more than one worshipping Congregation For we are agreed that Church-meetings were for the publick Worship of God and celebration of Sacraments and exercise of Discipline which no meer Lay-man might lawfully guide the people in and perform as such assemblies did require And one Bishop could be but in one place at once And if there were many Bishops there were many Churches So that according to Dr. Hammond and all of his mind there was no Church in Scripture-times of more than one stated ordinary Worshipping Congregation because there were no subject-Presbyters If you say that yet this was a Diocesan Church because it had a Diocesan Bishop I answer why is he called a Diocesan Bishop if he had not a Diocesan Church If you mean that he was designed to turn his single Congregation into many by increase 1. That must not be said only but proved 2. And that supposeth that his one congregation was first before the many And I hope you â—ake not Infidels for parts of the Church because they are to be converted hereafter Those that are no members of the Church make not the Church and so make it not to be Diocesan One Congregation is not an hundred or a thousand because so many will be hereafter If you mean that such a space of ground was assigned to the Bishops to gather and govern Churches in I answer 1. Gathering Churches is a work antecedent to Episcopacy 2. The Ground is no part of the Church It is a Church of men and not of soil and houses that we speak of 3. Nor indeed will you ever prove that the Apostles measured out or distinguished Churches by the space of ground So that the first Churches were not Diocesan III. As to your Third Opinion 1. Officers are denominated from the work which they are to do There are works to be done circa sacra about the holy Ministerial works as Accidental as to 〈◊〉 to Church buildings Utensils and Lands to Summon Synods and Register their Acts to moderate in disputations and to take votes c. These the Magistrate may appoint Officers to peâ—â—orm and if he do not the Churches by his permission may do it by consent And there are works proper to the Magistrate viz. to force men to their duty by mulcts or corporal penalties I deny none of these But the works of Ordination Pastoral Guidance Excommunication and Absolution by the power of the Keys are proper to the sacred Office which Christ hath instituted And I shall not believe till I see it proved that any men have power to make any new Order or Office of this sort which Christ never made by himseelf or his Spirit in his Apostles much less that Inferiors may make Superior Offices For 1. It belongeth to the same power to make one especially the Superior Church-Office which made the other of the same General nature If without Christs institution no man could be Episcopus gregis and have the power of the Keys over the people then by parity of Reason without his institution no man can be Episcopus Episcoporum and have the power of the Keys over the Bishops 2. Dr. Hammond's argument against Presbyters Ordination is Nemo dat quod non habet which though it serve not his turn on several accounts both because 1. They have the Order which they confer 2. Because Ordination is not giving but Ministerial delivery by Investiture yet in this case it will hold For 1. This is supposed to be a new institution of an Office 2. And that of an higher power than ever the Institutors had themselves The King giveth all his Officers their power but all of them cannot give the King his power The Patriarch cannot make a Pope nor the
the ruin of their worldly Estates and the hazard of their lives in the Common Goals endeavour nothing but to Preach Christs Gospel to save mens souls from ignorance unbelief sensuality worldliness c. in case of the peoples undeniable necessity I say when such meet with men of the same profession who think not the Common Goals among Rogues and the forfeiture of Forty pound a Sermon as Enacted by Law to be enough to restrain them but also as in the name of Christ they will charge us with heinous sin unless we will perfidiously break our obligations to Christ and sacrilegiously alienate our selves from the work which we are devoted to many of us under the Bishops hands and unless we will be cruel to miserable souls and shut up the bowels of our compassion from them while we see them in need and in danger of damnation what fortitude do we need against such kind of Tempters and such Temptations If Drunkards and boys in the street only scorn'd me as a Puritan or Precisian it were less If Turkish Rulers did persecute me for my Preaching Christ it were less If mistaken Christian Rulers made me the scorn of the Nation and stript me of all my worldly maintenance and laid me with Malefactors in Prisons it were a less temptation than for a man to come in the name of Christ to tell me that I sin against him unless I will forsake my Calling break my Vows cease Preaching his Gospel betray thousands of souls to Satan and damnation and encourage all that endeavour it by yielding to all their temptations and giving them success But as Christ must be accused of sin as well as crucified and not allowed the honour of suffering as innocent so must his servants I will venture upon one argument on the by that may be somewhat by others though nothing to you for the invalidating of your accusation I saw from the hands of a Noble Lord an excellent truly Learned Manuscript said by him to be the Bishop of Lincolns to satisfie you who are said to judg it unlawful to subscribe to Athanasius's Creed What else you refuse I know not but by that much I perceive you are a strange kind of Nonconformist Now if it be unlawful for you to subscribe and conform or unlawful for me which I here undertake to prove before any equal competent Judges then it is unlawful for all the Ministers of England for none of them may do evil that good may come by it And then all the Ministers in England ought to cease Preaching if I ought to cease when they are forbidden The consequence will be denied by others though not by you And by the way How can you take the Bishops for Absolute from whom there is no appeal to an invisible power and yet disobey them if they bid you subscribe Athanasius Creed If it be a sin in me not to cease Preaching when I am silenced for Nonconformity and yet Nonconformity be a duty then it is a sin in all the Ministers of England not to be Nonformists and so not to cease Preaching But the latter part of the consequent is false Ergo so is the Antecedent 2. Yea directly your assertion puts it in the power of one superior to put down the Preaching of the Gospel and all Gods publick Worship in whole Countries or Kingdoms if not in the world and so Christ must be at their mercy whether he shall have any Church and so whether he shall be Christ and God whether he shall have any publick Worship In Ethiopia though Brierwood saith that yet after the decay of the Abassine Empire it is as big as Italy Germany France and Spain they have but one Bishop called their Abuna And if he forbad all Preaching or publick Worship in the Empire it is a sin to obey him And it is a great duty to gather Churches within his Church It is a sin in the Empire of Muscovie that all their Clergy obey their Patriarch and Prince in forbearing to Preach If all the Bishops of England should agree to reduce the Kingdom to one only Bishoprick and one Church and turn all the rest into Parish-Chappels it were a duty to disobey them and gather Churches in that one Church If the Patriarch of Alexandria Antioch or Constantinople had forbidden all in their limits to Preach and worship God publickly it had been a wickedness to obey them When Severus Antioch the Eutychian forbad the Orthodox to Preach in his Patriarchate it had been their sin to obey him yea or if Theodosius or Anastasius the Emperours had done it yea though a General Council of Ephes. 2. if not Ephes. 1. was on his side If the Pope whether as Pope or as Patriarch of the West Interdict all the Preachers and Churches in Venice or in Britain it were a sin to obey him The reasons are because their power is derived and limited to pass by the no power of Usurpers the greatest have it for edification and not for destruction None of them have power to make void the least continued Law of God by their Doctrines Precepts or Traditions All men must take heed of the leven of their false Doctrine and must beware of false Prophets and must prove all things and hold fast that which is good There is no true power but of God and therefore none against him It is better to obey God than men But of this you may in season have larger proof if you desire it VI. Your excluding us from Salvation that will not cease Preaching the Gospel of Salvation and worshipping God remembreth us 1. What a mercy it is that neither Pope nor any such condemner is made our final Judg. 2. How most Sects agree Papists Quakers c. in damning those that dance not after their Pipe 3. What various wiles of temptations Satan useth to hinder Christs Gospel and mens Salvation At once I have 1. A backward flesh that is the worst of all that saith Favour thy self and expose not thy self to all this labour obloquie hatred suffering loss and danger of death for nothing but that work which thy superiours think needless and forbid 2. I feel Satan setting in with the flesh and saying the same 3. Carnal and worldly friends say the same as Peter to Christ Mat. 16. 4. Displeased Sinners and Sectaries wish me silent 5. What Superiors say and do I need not mention 6. And to perfect all some Preachers in Press and Pulpit and you in Discourse declare us in danger of damnation as Schismaticks unless we will give over Preaching the Gospel O how easie were it to me to avoid that damnation And if I incur it how dearly do I purchase it It is a sad case that such poor souls as we are in that would fain know Gods will whatever study or suffering it cost us and after our most earnest search and prayers believe that if we forsook our trust and office and the peoples souls we
should be judged as sacrilegious perfidious hypocrites and yet we are told by wiser and greater men that our labours and sufferings do but damn us may not a man be damned at a cheaper rate than Forty pound a Sermon or the loss of all his worldly Estate and lying with malefactors and perhaps dying in a Goal under the published sacred infamy of being Schismaticks and enemies of the publick Government and peace c But this also we must be fortified against For Satan is sometime utterly impudent and will say Damn your selves by perfidiousness and let the people be damned quietly or else you shall be damned for Schismaticks But the long noise of damning Papists and Quakers have somewhat hardned or emboldened us It was an early trick Act. 15. Except ye be circumcised and keep the Law of Moses ye cannot be saved When lands and livings will not prevail when profit pleasure and honour fail when poverty reproach and prisons will not serve then comes You cannot else be saved How many Sects say Say as we say and do as we do and follow us or you cannot be saved But saith St. Paul It is a small thing with me to be judged of man or at mans day I have one that judgeth me even the Lord to whom we will appeal whatever you say against it But you must give me leave to think that to draw men from their great duty and the saving souls to heinous sin as in the name of Christ and to frighten men into Hell with the fear of damnation and the abused Word of God hath heinous aggravations which enticing men by sensuality to drunkenness whoredom or theft hath not VII To the next the matter of fact and antecedent Suppositions cannot be denied viz. 1. That it is probably supposed that there are inhabitants more than can hear the Preachers voice in the Parish-Churches in Martins Parish about 40000 in Stepney Parish near as many in Giles Cripplegate 30000 in Giles in the Fields near 20000 in Sepulchres Algate White-chappel Andrews Holborn and many other Out-Parishes very many thousands The last Bill of Mortality that I saw saith there died in Stepney Parish as many wanting one as in all the Ninety-seven Parishes of London and in Martins as many within six and in Giles Cripplegate as many within eight or thereabout 2. How shall they call on him in whom they have not believed and how shall they believe if they hear not and how shall they hear without a Preacher If the Gospel be hid it is hid to them that are lost Where Vision faileth the people perish even for lack of knowledg 3. Yet people by our Church Laws must be presented and prosecuted as Recusants if they come not to Church and so 40000 or 30000 should be presented and punished for want of room but it is a greater punishment to be strangers unto the Gospel 4. The Canon forbiddeth them going to and communicating in other Parishes and forbiddeth the Ministers to receive them 5. The Children of Christians are born with no more knowledg than the children of Heathens and need teaching as well as theirs to bring them to knowledg when they grow up 6. God will not save any adult person that is an Infidel impenitent unsanctified because he is bred up among Christians and Churches or born of Christians and Baptized but it will go worse with such unholy persons in the day of Judgment that have had the greatest means 7. If you can cast the fault on the people and say that they might remove their dwellings or break the Law and go to other Parishes or read at home c. that excuseth us not For the worse they are the more need they have of help If they were faultless what need had they of us 8. As to my own case whom you condemn I have told you that I have the Ordination of a Bishop and the License of the Bishop of this Diocess not nulled or recalled which by your principles one would think might serve if it had been against Gods own Laws And yet Gods Law and the Bishops License will not serve 9. Some other may say What 's your case to many others I answer To pass by a great deal not now to be said Let it be understood that the case is this Men are first silenced and excommunicated and so forbidden the publick Churches and all publick worship of God and then the Excommunicate are prosecuted and accused for not coming to Church Divers Canons do ipso facto that is sine sententiâ excommunicate all that do but say that any thing in the Liturgy or Discipline is unlawful or may not be done with a good conscience which all Nonconformists hold And it is not possible for us to repent of that as a wicked Error which after all means that we can possibly use appeareth unto us an undoubted truth that so our Excommunication may be taken off Now these silenced men are assured that God disobligeth them not from the duty of Preaching and these excommunicate men are assured that God doth not disoblige them from the duty of publick worship and church-Church-communion Therefore they must use it as they can when they may not use it as they would Men say the Papists should not call us Schismaticks because they cast us out and went from us and will you silence and excommunicate men as they undertake to prove for obeying God and then call them Schismaticks for not communicating with you or for worshipping God in such Church-communion as they can Indeed many of us communicate with you because we think not our selves bound tho' you excommunicate us ipso facto to do execution on our selves or to go further from you than necessity compelleth us tho' I must profess that Cyprians 68. Epistle p. 200. and St. Martin's Separation from the Bishops confirmed by Miracle sometimes sticks in my stomack But I cannot make so light as you do 1. Of such Texts as 2 Tim. 4.1 2. I chaâ—gâ— thee before God and the Lord Iesus Christ who shall judg the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom preach the word be instant in season out of season reprove rebuke exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine 2. Nor of the murderous famishing of thousands of souls when to murder one child by famine deserveth death and hell 3. Nor of Christs Law of preferring Mercy before Sacrifice necessary Morals before Rituals Circumstantials or Ordinals which are all but propter rem ordinatam I remember you have told me That if the Bishop forbad all Gods publick worship in the Assemblies we must forbear Such sayings and this That I must let so many souls be untaught though they be damned because it is the Bishops fault and not mine do make me ready to tremble to think of them If Christs works be saving whose work is it to make so light of mans damnation Is it any wonder if such Principles be called Antichristian I cannot but
of Salvation such could not be brought to Faith Holiness and Salvation for want of teaching it is yet my sin to preach to them and my duty to let them rather be damned if I have not the Bishops consent to teach them and that because it is the Bishop and not I that shall answer for their damnation VIII That it is disputable with you whether those to whom Church power is given viz. Diocesans may not change not only the local temporary circumstances but the very Church-forms and suspend Laws of Christ. IX That Baptism entreth the Baptized into some particular Church and consequently under this fore-described Church-Government X. That in the case of Preaching the Gospel Ministers may in many cases do it though Emperours and Kings forbid them as in the days of Constantius Valens yea and better men but not if the Bishop forbid them or consent not XI That circa Sacra if the King command the Churches for Uniformity one Translation of the Bible one Version or Meter of the Psalms one Liturgy one Time or Place of Worship c. and the Bishop another we ought to obey the Bishop against the command of the King XII That the required Subscriptions Declarations Rubricks and Canons are primarily the Laws of the Church which the King and Parliament do confirm by their Sanction and therefore the Church is the Expounder of them These are some of your Assertions which I cannot yet receive I. My Reasons against the first are these 1. Because this maketh Gods of men and so is Idolatry giving them Gods proper Power and Prerogative 2. Yea it taketh down God or his Laws and setteth them above him For there cannot be two Absolute Governors that have not one Will. If I must not appeal from them to God then I must appeal from God to them that is I must break his Law if they bid me or else they are not Absolute 3. This maketh all Gods Laws at the will of maâ— as alterable or dispensible Man may forbid all that God commandeth and I must obey 4. Then all Villanies may be made Virtues or Duties at the will of man If they command us to curse God or Blaspheme or be perjured or commit Fornication Murder or Idolatry it would become a Duty 5. Then the Power and Lives of Kings would be at the Clergies mercy For if their power be Absolute they may make Treason and Rebellion a Duty 6. And all Family-Societies and Civil Converse migbt be overthrown while an Absolute Clergy may disoblige men from all duty to one another 7. Then the Council at Lateran which you have excellently proved in your Considerations to be the Author of its Canons doth or did oblige Princes to exterminate their Reformed Subjects and disoblige Subjects from their Allegiance to Princes that obey not the Pope herein and are excommunicate So of Greg. 7 th's Council Rom. 8. Then did the Church or Kingdom of England well to disobey or forsake the Roman Power that was over them 9. Were not our Martyrs rather Rebels that died for disobeying an Absolute Power 10. How should two contradicting Absolute Powers viz. General Councils be both obeyed E. g Nicen. 1. and Arimini Sirm. and Tyr. or Ephes. 2 and Calced 11. How will this stand with the Judgment and practice of the Apostles that said Whether it be meet that we obey God or man judg ye 12. How will it stand with Conformity to the Church of England that in the Articles saith that General Councils may err and have erred in matter of Faith c. 13. Is it not against the sense of all mankind even the common Light of Nature where utter Atheism hath not prevailed Say not that I wrong you by laying all this odium on your self I lay it but on your words And I doubt not but though disputing Interest draw such words from you on consideration you will re-call them by some limitations II. My Reasons against your second must pre-suppose that we understand one another as to the sense of the word Diocesan Church which being your â—erm had I been with you I must have desired you first to explain The word Diocess of old you know signified a part of the Empire larger than a Province and that had many Metropolitans in it I suppose that is not your sense Sometimes now it is taken for that space of ground which we call a Diocess sometimes for all the people in that space And with us a Diocesan Church is a Church of the lowest Order containing in it a multitude of fixed Parochial Congregations which have every one their stated Presbyter who is no Bishop and Vnum altare and are no Churches but parts of a Church and which is individuated by one Bishop and the measuring-space of ground whose inhabitants are its Members Till you tell me the contrary I must take this for your sense For you profess to me that you speak of such Diocesan Churches as ours and they have some above a thousand others many hundred Parishes and you say our Parishes are not Churches but Parts of a Church and so Families are 2. Either you mean that a Diocesan Church is the first in order of Execution and Existence or else in order of Intention and so last in Existence and Execution I know not your meaning and therefore must speak to both I. That a Diocesan Church is first in Intention is denied by me and disproved though it belong to you to prove it 1. Intentions no where declared of God in mature or supernatural Revelations are not to be asserted of him as Truths But a prime intention of a Diocesan Church is no where declared of God Ergo not to be asserted of him as truth 2. It is the end or ultimum rei complementum which is first in intention where there is ordo intentionis But a Diocesan Church is not the end or ultimum rei complementum Ergo not first intended The Major is not deniable The Minor hath the consent as far I as know of all the world For they are all either for the Hierarchy or against it They that are for it say that a Metropolitan is above a Diocesan and a Provincial above a Metropolitan and a Patriarchal above a Provincial and a National which hath Patriarchs as the Empire had above that and â—ay the new Catholicks an humane universal above a National Church as the complement or perfection and therefore must be first intended But those that are against the Hierarchy think that all these are Church-corruptions or humane policies set up by Usurpation and therefore not of prime Divine Intention 3. If you should go this way I would first debate the question with you how far there is such a thing as ordo intentionis to be ascribed to God For though St. Thomas as you use to call him assert such intentions it is with many limitations and others deny it and all confess that it needeth much Explication to be