Deacons therefore to the intent these Orders should be continued and reverently used and esteemed in the Church of England it is requisite that no Man shall execute any of them excep the be called tryed examined and admitted according to the Form hereafter following and I hope it is evident from that form that a Bishop is necessary to Ordination He goes on and affirms That the French Belgick and Helvetick Churches besides many others are of his Judgment All the other Protestant Churches excepting only Geneva have Episoopal Government and that they allow Ordination by Presbyters in opposition to it is an Assertion that may well be thought incredible till it be sufficiently proved and as for the Churches he mentions their Divines account the Non-Conformists Ordinations Schismatical and the best defence of their own is necessity But he needs not name the Church of Scotland for Scotland says he hath justified all our Non-Conformity By Scotland he means the Presbyterian party of that Kingdom * See the Letters about the Persecution Scotland p. 58. the lesser part for the whole but however if Scotland justifies them it is the only Church in the world that do so Lastly He adds our Diocesan Bishops may glory over us as the Kings Bishops or Bishops of the State which is just the Raillery of the Papists Parliament Bishops and Nags-head Bishops But are our Bishops ordained by the King and State are they not Christ's Bishops and Scripture Bishops No for this new Apostle of Patmos does Peremptorily tell them that they must not pretend to be so near in Blood to the Scripture Bishops of the first Two hundred years as the Pastors of single Congregations But with Submission to his Apostleship I reply that the * Jus Divin Minis Aug. 71. Presbyterian Assembly have granted that Timothy and Titus had super out Authority over Presbyters and therefore our Bishops having the same Authority may pretend to Kindred with them 2. * Ibid. p. 140. They acknowledge also after Blondel that above 140 years after Christ Bishops were set over Presbyters so that they grant them to be introduced within 40 or 50 years after the decease of all the Apostles 3. The Epistles of Ignatius who was Contemporary with the Apostles and suffered Martyrdom within nine years after the decease of St. John do manifestly shew that the superiour Authority of Bishops was then established in the Church and therefore certainly by Apostolical Institution And the Authority of these Epistles has been so demonstratively cleared from all Exceptions by Bishop Pearson that there is now no Contreversie about it 4. Mr. Chillingworth at the end of his Book has plainly demonstrated the Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy and he Sums up his Demonstration in these Words Episcopal Government is acknowledged to have been received universally in the Church presently after the Apostles times Between the Apostles times and this presently after there was not time enough for nor possibility of so great an Alteration And therefore there was no such Alterat on as is pretended And therefore Episcopacy being * By Peter du Moulin Beza Chamier Nic. vedetius whom he cites as Confessing it confessed to be so Antient and Catholick must be granted also to be Apostolick Quod erat Demonstrandum And I hope this Minister will condescend to answer this Demonstration when he writes again or however be so modest as not to conclude so confidently when he has proved nothing But behold the Chair of Infallibility Wherefore I say that Ordination by the hands of the Pastors of Churches filled with the Holy Ghost is much more elegible than by Diocesan Bishops a very peremptory Decree but we must not question it for Pythagoras hath said so yet thus much I presume to Answer that Diocesan Bishops are filled with the Holy Ghost as well as parochal Pastors and that Schismaticks have no Title to it We come now to his Third Reason of Non-Conformity the Declaration of Assent and Consent required in the Act of Vniformity to the Book of Common-Prayes And 〈◊〉 He can't Assent to that passage in the Athanasian Creed where it is said that every one that doth not keep that Faith whole shall without doubt perish Everlastingly Now it is certain the Athanasian Creed is entirely * The Judgment of Foreign Reformed Churches p. 32 33. received and approved by all the protestant Churches in the World excepting only the Antitrinitarians as hath been lately observed and therefore this Minister is herein a Non-Conformist to all Protestant Churches as well as to the Church of England and they are all Condemned together as practising a point of Popery in damning all that differ from them Let us see now the Reason upon which all Protestant Churches are condemned by him One Article says he of that Creed is about the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son which the Greek Churches did not believe nor receive and supposing them in an Error he adds I must be very bold if I leap into the Throne of Judgment and pronounce them damned I am as much afraid as he is of invading Christ's Tribunal and pronouncing any one damned much more a whole Church and such a Church as comprehends so many Millions of Christians But 1. The Differences between the Greek and Latine Church about the Article of Procession is by Mr. Field of the Church lib. 3. c. 1. Loads Conf. p. 16. Pearson on the Creed p. 324. Learned men affirmed to be only verbal because the Greeks acknowledged under another Scripture Expression in the same thing which the Latines understand by Procession viz. that the Spirit is of or from the Son as he is of and from the Father That as the Son is God of God by being of the Father so the Holy Ghost is God of God by being of the Father and the Son as receiving that infinite and eternal Essence from them both Thus Bishop Pearson upon the Article and if so it be then there is no difference about the Doctrine it self but only about the word Procession But says this Minister The Procession of the Holy 〈◊〉 Ghost is a most profound Mystery and very much obscured by bringing in word Procession and is not this a most profound Objection Is it not rather profound Non Sense to say that the Procession is obscured by the word Procession And how does the expressing that Mystery by Procession any more obscure it than the infinite Duration of God is obscured by calling it Eternity But the Scripture on that occasion never uses the word In relation to the Father it is used * John 15.26 expresly and in Relation to the Son it is contained virtually in Scripture where the Holy Ghost is often said to be the Spirit of the Son and that is all which is understood by proceeding from him and if no words are to be admitted that are not found in Scripture the old-Subtersuge of the Arrians we
AN ANSWER TO THE Call to Humiliation OR A VINDICATION OF THE Church of England From the Reproaches and Objections of W. Woodward in Two Fast Sermons Preach'd in his Conventicle at Lemster in the County of Hereford and afterwards Published by him Printed for Edward Robinson Junior Bookseller in Ludlow 1691. AN ANSWER TO THE Call to HVMILIATION OR A Vindication of the Church of England WHEN I first met with this importunate Call to Humiliation I wonder'd how it came into the Head of that Minister to call upon the Church of England in a Conventicle he might as well have call'd upon the Socinian Church in Poland or the Quakers in Pensylvania How absurd was it to summon the Church of England to the Stool of Repentance in a Presbyterian Assembly at Lemster and to proclaim a Fast for Persecution to those whom he pretends were persecuted by her But thô the Church was out of his Audience yet it was matter of great Edification to his Hearers to calumniate and reproach her and I presume at the next gathering he was well rewarded for it See how this Minister keeps his Days of Humiliation he Fasts notoriously for Strife and Debate instead of healing our Wounds he enlarges and enflames them he sets forth the Sufferings of his Dissenters with Hyperbole's and lying aggravations to what purpose but to exulcerate and enrage them as if he were sent in the Spirit of Elijah he calls in effect for Fire from Heaven upon us The Prophanation of our Fast Day was not enough for his Invectives withal he could find but little work of Humiliation for his own Sectaries but with loads of Sackcloth and Ashes he overwhelms our Church and in a word he has laid out his whole Gift of Calling and Clamouring and Railing upon it The best Apology against such a Libel would be Patience and Silence and the best Answer that which Mr. Hooker made to certain Reasons and Raileries of the Puritans to his Reasons No and to his Raileries Nothing But there is sometimes a necessity of answering some Persons according to their folly the applause and triumph with which this Pamphlet has been cried up by his followers the Confidence wherewith they pronounce every thing unanswerable that is not answer'd and the Complement of * p. 27. Dumb Dogs which this Holy Rabshakeh has bestowed upon us do make it necessary to say something in our vindication and to shew how easie it is to defend our Church against the feeble Assaults of a Lemster Conventicle In answer to his Two Sermons as he calls them I will consider 1. His Declamations about Persecution 2. The Reasons and Objections which he pleads for his Non-conformity Days of Humiliation are at all times necessary to the Church of Christ which while it is Militant will be never so far without Spot and Blemish as not to stand in need of publick Explations but when the Judgments of God are either imminent or present and the unbounded wickedness of a Nation do force them down from Heaven then certainly is the time to weep to Sanctify a Fast and to call all the Inhabitants of the Land to a Publick Repentance Our Church on such occasions hath contented her Self to follow the example of Religious Men in Scripture and to prescribe such general Confessions as are universally true of all and particularly applicable to the Case of every one there is a Confession in that last Office so full and comprehensive that no one who is not much in love with Cavil can accuse the insufficiency of it But this Minister is dissatisfied with it he hath searched among * See p. 10 11. the accursed stuff as he stiles it of Ecclesiastical Affairs and after much pains in rummaging * See p. 10 11. he finds that the accursed thing * See p. 10 11. lies hid under the covering of Decency and Order Penal Laws Laws for Vniformity Subscriptions Declarations Liturgies Articles Laws for Ceremonies and Forms of Prayer Thus one whole Constitution is accursed in his Opinion even the Articles of our Religion are not excepted thô approv'd by all the Protestant Churches and Seal'd with the Blood of Martyrs and the Prayers of all Churches for at least 1â—00 Years together have been nothing but Curses and as Achan's Sacriledge an Abomination to the Lord. But Persecution is the great Rock of Offence and he is very angry at the Compilers of the Office because they have not mention'd it in the Confession he cannot forgive a certain * The Bishop of Sarum Bishop in particular who he thinks assisted in composing the Form and had before Declar'd that Persecution had not a little contributed to fill up the measures of the sins of a Church See his Ep. Ded. and p. 11. and that they who were guilty ought seriously to profess their Repentance of it But he observes That he said this before he was a Bishop which is to insinuate that it is no wonder he should now prevaricate and that he was fall'n from Grace by taking a Bishoprick on him But here he had an occasion of shewing his Spight at the Order and even a Reconciling Bishop could have no Quarter from him Now for once let Persecution be as heinous a Sin as he can make it and let it be granted that many Church men have been guilty of it Yet Why must it be particularly confess'd in a general Humiliation Why more than Drunkenness Perjury Blasphemy or Whoredom Would he have every individual Confess that he has been a Persecutor a Drunkard a Blasphemer and a Whoremaster If many are innocent of these Crimes so they are of Persecution There are thousands of Congregations that never persecuted any one and yet this Vnjust Judge would force them to plead Guilty of it Be the Sin never so Epidemical yet why should I confess it if I am not Guilty And as for those that are let him read over the Confessions and he will find they are in general Expressions included in it and general Confessions are sufficient because no others can be accommodated to so many millions of Christians but nothing will please that Minister unless the whole Church lye prostrate at his Feet and submit to the Discipline he imposes and then perhaps he would think her sufficiently humbled and condescend to pardon her Let us now reflect a little on the extremity of their Sufferings as he is pleas'd to represent them and one single Paragraph out of all his Tragical Aggravations will be sufficient He assures us * p. 4. That it is as clear as the Sun that for near 30 years last past 1600 Ministers of the Gospel have suffer'd very hard things upon the account of Conscience by reason of great Fines and long Imprisonments At the Restauration there were many Mininsters ejected who had either intruded themselves into the Freeholds of others or had Vsurp'd their Benefices in the times of Schism and Rebellion without lawful Qualisications
so that they were ejected not for Conscience but Intrusion whether they were just 1600 is not worth enquiry but that they all suffer'd for Conscience cannot be so clear as he pretends for I suppose neither he nor we can know the Consciences of 1600 without something of Omniscience but that all the 1600 did suffer by long Imprisonment is an unconscionable overlashing and 't is as clear as the Sun that it is a notorious Falshood He adds That many of them have dyed for want of natural Bread and that both the Shepheards and the Flocks have been starved What! Have their Ministers died with Famine Have whole Congregations perished for want of Bread This is certainly all Fiction and Romance or if you will the Rhetorick of common beggars who with doleful Complaints of Starving cheat the People into Compassion I Grant That many Families of Dissenters have been distress'd by Penal Laws thô I think he can never make it out that they were many thousands But the conclusion of this Tragedy is beyond measure extravagant If says be the Sufferings of our Brethren were written at large as the Sufferings of the Saints at other times have been Mr. Fox his Book of Martyrs would be but an Enchiridion in comparison of it That Work is an account of the Sufferings of Christians from the Crucisixion of our Saviour to the Reign of Queen Elizabeth and as Voluminous as it is it has not bulk enough for the Dissenters Sufferings since the Restauration nay it is but a little Epitome in comparison They alas have suffered more in 30 years than the whole Church in 1600 and the Martyrologies of the whole Catholick Church may be infinitely exceeded by the Acts and Monuments of a few little Conventicles One would think that many Myriads of Dissenters had suffered Martyrdom That every individual Church of England-man had destroyed as many as Dioclesian and that all England had been a Sea of Blood for 30 years together when in the mean time not one of them suffered death for his Religion not many of them were ruined in their Estates and pecuniary punishments were the only persecution of almost all of them Yet he has the Confidence to say * P. 11. That the Church of England had taken into her hand the Bloody Club of Cain to Martyr the Dissenters that his Weapon was a Club is revealed to him by * P. 4. Bucheltzerus to whom the Cabala was deriv'd but that the Church of England has used it against the Dissenters is the revelation of Beelzebub for the Father of Lyes can be his only Author for it Let him name but one Dissenter that has been martyr'd by the Church and he shall have my Licence to revile her with all the odious Names from Coin to the Apocalyptick Whore in Scripture But if that be impossible he may still revile if he please but I think he will be no where believed but in his Conventicle and his Patmos so the place of his retreat is * Ep. Ded. called by the fifth Evangelist that he may be paralell'd to one of the former But this magnifying of Sufferings is an old Artifice of Dissenters so did their Ancestors the Donatists as may be seen in St. Austin and so did the Popish Priests their late Brethren and Allies in the time of Queen Elizabeth as may be seen in Creswell's Philopater and the Books of Parsons Behold how one of them exclaimeth Where are now the old Tyrants of the World Nero Decius Dioclesian Maxentius and the rest of the great Persecutors of the Christious Where is Genserick and Hunricus with their Arrian Hereticks Alluding to the Persecutions of the State here as infinitely beyond them This was just such another Outcry about Persecution as this Ministers And how did the States-men of those Times apologize for their Severity * See a Treatise of the Lord Burluigh Entitled The Execution of Justice in England for Maintenance of publick Peace The sum of thier defence was this That what they did was necessary to the Preservation of the State and that their Treasons and Seditions occasion'd the hard Laws against them And Will not the same defence serve to justifie the Laws against the Dissenters The severest * As the 1 Eliz. c. 2.23 Eliz. c. 1.35 Eliz. c. 1. Laws and the severest Proceedings against them were in the Time of Queen Elizabeth they were then suspended deprived imprison'd banish'd and some of them even * Barrow and Greenwood executed for their scandalous Writings and the ground of these Proceedings may be learnt from the Queen her self in the Speech of the Lord Keeper Puckering to the Parliament * Transeribed by Dr. Pierce from his own hand Writing and Published in his Discovery against Mr. Baxter an 1659. p. 109. which was delivered by her Command and Direction There he tells them That they were commanded by her Majesty to give no ear to the Sollicitations of the Puritans of whom he declares It may be doubted whether they or the Jesuits do offer more danger or be more speedily to be repressed and this Reason is there given for it because they publish in their Books and teach in all their Conventicles sundry Opinions not only dangerous to the Realm but also Derogatory to her sacred Majesty and her Crown and by Separation of themselves from the Vnity of their fellow Subjects and by abusing the sacred Authority of their Prince they do joyn with the Jesuits in opening the Door and preparing the Way to the Spanish Invasion that is threatned against the Realm Thus far the Queen her self by the Mouth of her Lord Keeper and so effectual was this Speech that the Parliament then passed the Act of the 35 Eliz. the severest against the Dissenters in the whole Body of our Laws But a larger account of the true Reasons of those hard Laws against the Papists and Dissenters may be seen in a * It is printed at large in Dr. Burnet's Hist of the Reform par 2 lib. 3. p. 420. Letter of Sir Francis Walsingham her Secretary to Monsieur Chiroy a Frenchman The Preservation of the State against their Seditious Practices is there assign'd as the true Cause of those Severities And as to the Puritans he concludes that after they had been a great while tolerated When they desended into that vile and base Means of Defacing the Government of the Church by ridiculous Pasquils when they began to make many Subjects in doubt to take Oaths which is one of the fundamental Points of Justice in all Places when they began both to vaunt of their Strength and Number of their Partizans and to use Comminations that their Cause would prevail through uproar and violence then it appeared to be no more Deal no more Canscience but meer Faction and Division and therefore though the State were compell'd to hold somewhat a harder hand to restrain them than before yet was it with as great a moderation as
so inhumane as to deny him the attendance of so much as one Chaplain for the performance of Divine offices thô the Good King did often and earnestly Request it which as himself observes in his * In his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Meditations on it was a piece of Rigor and Barbarisme greater than is ever us'd by Christians to the meanest prisoners and greatest malefactors Thus it was that they dealt with their Sovereign and the whole Houshold were Treated no better than the Master of it It is known to all the World how the Episcopal Party were plundred Sequestred Decimated Imprisoned and totally Ruin'd by them With what rigor their rebellious Oaths Covenants Engagements and Abjurations were impos'd and that they were all ejected out of the Churches Colledges Schools and Universities The Lord * Survey of the Leviathan p. 305 Clarendon tells us That the Reverend Bishops who were left alive and out of prison being strip'd of all that was their own preserved themselves from Famine by stooping to the lowest Offices of Teaching Schools and Officiating in private Families for their Bread which together with the Alms of Charitable Persous was the only portion of the poor Bishops and all the faithful Clergy of the Church of England * His Preface to Bishop Mortons defence of Episcopacy p. 39. Sir Henry Yelverton computes and he thought that he was not mistaken that there were 8000 who forsook all for the Covenant and of an 729 Parishes within the Bills of Mortality in Londom 15 were ejected besides the Prebends of St. Pauls and Westminster And now it will not be improper to add the Reply of Arch-Bishop Bramhal to Mr. Baxter's Complaint That the most Learned Godly Painful and Peaceable Men were ejected because they durst not use the Ceremonies Let Mr. B. says he * P. 643. of his Works sum up into one Catalogue all the Nonconformists throughout the Kingdom of England ever since the beginning of the Reformation who have been cast aside at any time because they durst not use the Ceremonies I dare abate him all the rest of the Kingdom and only exhibit the Martyrologies of London and the Two Vniversities or a List of those who in these late intestine Wars have been imprison'd and banish'd by his Party in these three places alone or left to the merciless World to beg their Bread for no other Crime but Loyalty and because they stood affectod to the Ancient Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England and they shall double them for Number and for Learning Piety Industry and the love of Peace exceed them incomparably This is an assertion that shall stand unconfuted for ever and let every one now judge between the Church of England and the Separatists which have been the greatest Persecutors Thus have I been forced to retort the accusation and to make it good by undeniable Proofs against them that I might silence if possible their Hypocritical Clamours and convince their Followers that they are inexcusable in Judging that in others which they do themselves and that of all men they are the unsittest to pull the Mote out of the Churches Eye when the Beam is in their own If Persecution be the accursed Thing why have not the Dissenters themseves appointed Days of Humiliation for it Why do they not give it a Place in their Confessions Is it not strange that in 40 years time they should not express their Repentance And to use this Ministers Expression is it not fit that for one Tear of the Church of England they should drop ten nay an hundred for one It will be objected that some of them of late years have condemn'd all Persecution for Religion but have they ever kept a Day of Humiliation for it Do they not think themselves bound by Covenant to extirpate the whole Government of the Church of England And notwithstanding the Clamours of that Party against Persecution is it not evident that where-ever they get Power they immediately persecute We have two Books already of the History of their Persecutions in Scotland and when to the extirpation of all the Bishops the ruin of Six hundred Ministers and the Desolation of four Universities they shall add the Destruction of the miserable Reliques of that Church I will not say their Story will be much greater than Fox's Martyrology but I think the Dissenters Sufferings will be but an Enchiridion to it In the mean time we have a fair Specimen however of the moderation of that Party whose tender Mercies have been always cruel and a clear Demonstration of what may be expected by us if GOD in His just Judgments should deliver up our Church unto their Fury And yet these are the men that exclaim against Persecution and cry out against the Church of England as cruel and tyrannical but let them remember that Reflection which was long since extorted by their Clamours * Dr. St. Serm. on the Mischief of Separ p. 55. That they want the Ingenuity of Adonibezek to reflect on the Thumbs and Toes which they have cut off from others and think themselves bound to do it again if it were in their Power But after all this Minister though he furiously declaims against Persecution and with so much Malice and Acrimony arraigns the Church of England for it yet if his invectives be well considered one shall find that he no where declares for Liberty of Conscience and that no one ought to be perfecuted for his Religion When he condemns Persecution he adds always * See p. 3 4 6 8 11. for the Truth which is a plain Intimation that Persecution for Error he accounts Lawful if he really does not to what purpose is that Limitation Why did he not openly condemn all Punishments for Conscience but then he would have condemned the constant Doctrine of his Party and though he was too wary to do that yet it would have spoyl'd the design his Sermons if he had spoke out honestly and asserted the Lawfulness of persecuting men for their Errors But if this be his Judgment and that Limitation is a strong Presumption of it then the sum of all is this That the Presbyterians may lawfully persecute all other Churches but must never be persecuted themselves by any because all other Churches are erroneous and the whole Inelosure of Truth is theirs and it is only the Persecution of Truth that is condemned by them It is evident that he himself founds the Iniquity of the severe Proceedings against them upon this ground alone that they suffered for the Truth For to this Objection * p. 11. that the Nonconformists have been buffeted for their Faults his only Reply is this Let 's have a fair Hearing before we be judged the Persecution of Truth is a great Sin wherever 't is found then he immediately proposes the Reasons of their Nonconformity and concludes at last * p. 24. That if in all these Things the Nonconformists are in
the right and have witnessed to the Truth then ought the Church of England to hang down her head c. And thus as he states the case himself if the Dissenters have not witnessed to the Truth the Church of England is not guilty and all their Outcries about Persecution must pass for nothing Here then lies the stress of the dispute Whether the Nonconformists have Truth on their side and were therefore really persecuted for Righteousness-sake I proceed therefore to examine Q. The Reasons and Objections which he pleads for his Non conformity His first Stumbling block is the Subscription in the Act of Vniformity with the Oath in the Oxford Act in which are these Words I. A. B. do declare That it is unlawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take Arms against the King Again I do swear That it is not lawful c. He adds we refused thus to declare and swear and he requires three Things to be observed First A man may believe a Proposition to be true but would not be willing to swear it and this Objection is a perfect Cavil He that asserts a Proposition to be true does mean only that he is convinced of its Truth and he that swears it is true does only call God to witness that he is convinced of it Nothing is more obvious than that in all assertory Oaths when we swear to the Truth of Things we are understood to declare no more than our own Belief and Knowledge concerning them and thus when I swear that it is unlawful to resist nothing more can be understood than that I am fully satisfied of it if I believe it unlawful I may subscribe and declare that it is so and if I cam do that I may also swear it since in this Case an Oath superadded to a Declaration must follow the nature of the Principal and can be nothing else but a Sacred Confirmation of my sincerity in declaring and I am morally certain that no Magistrate in England would have refused to administer the Oath with this Interpretation Secondly he objects that Barclay Grotius and others who have written in favour of Kings do yet allow some Cases in which it is lawful to resist them and if a King does govern by his Will and not by Law he doth excidere de jure that is he forfeits his Right to Govern I answer that an Arbitrary King does forfeit his Right is affirmed by neither of these Authors but is contradicted by them and though it be true that Barelay Grotius and others whether Republicans Jesuits or Presbyterians have allowed Exceptions for resisting yet I am sure the Holy Ghost has made none in Scripture they that resist shall receive Damnation is denounced without any Limitation and how shall we limit where GOD hath not limited or distinguish where He hath not distinguished So was the Rule understood and practiced by the first and best of Christians so was it taught by the first Reformers of our Church and some of them with their Blood bore witness to it The Popes were the first Christians that taught Resistance but though an Augel from Heaven had taught it we have received another Doctrine and could not have departed from it Thirdly he adds That all the Nobility and Gentry of England and Scotland and all the Protestant Princes beyond Sea in their Proceedings against King James have justified the Nonconformists in refusing the Oath Now I have no Correspondence with all these Princes Nobility and Gentry and therefore know not their minds about it but I am sure he cannot make good his all without taking Sanctuary in Hyperbole There be many that think those Proceedings may be justified without justifying Resistance but I believe there are no Princes that will allow it against themselves and if the Majority of the Nobility and Gentry do justifie what they once condemn'd their Authority can be urged on neither side and though there he a Revolution of Opinions as well as Governments yet the nature of Things is immutable and Truth the same yesterday to day and for ever His Second scruple is about Reordination as tho' Ordination by Presbyters were not sufficient without the laying on of the hands of those we now call Bishops But first since this Minister hath now undertaken to argue he should have prov'd that Reordination implys a Nullity of their former Orders But as no Declaration of their insufficiency is requir'd so neither is it imply'd in the nature of the thing nor understood to be so by Construction of the Fact as appears from the Reordination of many French Ministers whose Orders have never been condemned by our Church who never intended to renource them by that Action nor are supposed to do so Secondly tho' the Ordination of Presbyters be granted to be sufficient yet this will not justify the Nonconformists Ordinations There is all evidnet difference betwixt the Case of these Ministers and the Presbyters of some Foreign Churches 1. Those Foreign Divines tho' their Churches are not under Episcopal Government yet they do not separate from Episcopal Communion but have all own'd Commun on with the Church of England Blondel their best Advocate for Presbyterian Parity does yet condemn Separation from Bishop as Schismatical and expresly * Praef. ad Apol. p. 59. declares that Aerius was therefore an Heretick because he asserted That separation was to be made from those who admitted any difference between Bishops and Presbyters But their approving of Episcopal Government and coadmning Separation from it as Schismatical has been so often so irrefragably * Ibid p. 47 and Bramhall's Replication to affirm the Bishop of Chalcedon p. 164 of his Works proved that there can be no longer any Controversie about it But on the other side the present Nonconformists do make Episcopal Government the chief reason of their Separation and condemn it as unlawful and Antichristian which no Resormed Church or Divine that we know did ever before them and this is certainly a very material difference between them 2. The Ordination of Presbyters withou Bishops in those Foreign Churches has been generally defended by the plea of Necessity thus it has been defended by some of the Foreign †Bishop Hall's and Mortons Bcoks in defence of Eiscopacy Archbishop Bramhall in his Sup. Dr. Durell's Church Government Saywell's Evangelical and Catholick Unity and lately in the Judgment of Foreign reformed Divines Divines themselves and thus by many * As Downham Mason Field Andrews and leately by Dr. Sherlock in his Vindication of the defence of Dr. Still Divines of our own Church As their circumstances were it was impossible for them to have Bishops and therefore they wanted them out of invincible necessity whereas our Presbyterians are uncapal le of that Plea they reject the Authority of Bishops and Ordain in opposition to them and therefore it is evident they are under no necessity and consequently their Orders may be thought in ufficient without impeaching the
signifies only fervency of Spirit when it is appled to the People but he thinks it a very plain Case that a Minister cannot properly be said to pray to the utmost of his Ability when he doth not pray to the utmost of his Ablity and may not the same thing be said of the People also If the Minister use a Form may he not likewise pray with all his might or as well as he is able and is not this a plain Equivocating upon the word Ability take it first for fervency and then for a faculty of composing and the Contradiction is solved and the Fallacy Transparent The other Proof is out of Tert. Apol. cap. 1. Tertullian sine Monitore quia de pectore oramus we pray without a Monitor because we pray out of the Heart But this can be no Proof against a Form of Prayer sor 1. They who joyn with a Minister that prays Extempore do pray as much with a Monitor and have a Prayer dictated to them as much as if they joyned in a prescribed Liturgy And 2. Praying out of the Heart Schol. Hist part 1. â—p 46. c. may signifie either saying a Prayer by Heart or secret mental Prayer without words or praying heartily sincerely and affectionately de anima innocenti de Spiritis Sancto as Tertullian a little after with a prayer proceeding from an innocent Soul and the Holy Spirit moving and exciting it These interpretations are probable and consistent with the use of Liturgies and consequently from this passage no Argument can be drawn against them Yet from thence this Minister takes occasion to vent his Malice against Liturgies and to reproach them as an heathenish way of Praying Now if our Saviour prescribed a Form to his Disciples and it is impossible for him to prove the the contray then this reproach is Blasphemy might not an Atheist say as well That Prayer it self is an Heathenish practice or a Quietest Comment in Entychium p. 55. taht vocal Prayer is a Heathenish way of praying Mr. Selden thought it probable that the Heathens learnt to use set Forms from the Example of the Jewish Church and he cites Authorities to prove it and View of the Directory Dr. Hammond produces out of Plato and Alexander ab Alex. these two Reasons of that practice which he thinks may pass Christian least evil things should be asked in stead of good and least any thing should be said Preposterously in their Prayers and therefore the practice of the Heathens is so far from being a prejudice to Liturgies that it is a solid Argument for them Whether either or both the Example of Gods Church or the Catholick reason of mankind were the Original of it the universal use of them among Jews and Christians and Heathens is an impregnable Proof of their expediency and can be ascribed to no other cause but the voice of God or Nature 3. He transcribes this Objection after Mr. Clarkson when the Christians were so numerous in Constantinople that it was thought necessaryto dispose of them in several Churche the Emperour Constantine Euseb de vita Const lib. 4. c. 35. 〈◊〉 to Eusebius for 50 Bibles for the use of those Churches but there is no mention of any one common Prayer Book Eusebius commends Constantine for observing in his Court the manner of the publick Service in the Church he first imoplyed his mind in the Meditation of the Scriptures and then with those who dwelt in his Palace he repeated Ibid cap. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the authorized Prayers and it is known that he himself composed a Prayer which he Ibid cap. 19 20. prescribed to his Army And after such convincing Proofs can a Negative Argument be thought considerable enough to Ballance them Is it imaginable that Eusebius intended to give an exact Inventory of all that was provided for those Churches Constantine sends to Eusebius in Palastine for 50 Bibles probably because the best Copies might be there most easily procured does it therefore follow that no prayer Books were provided at Constantinople where it was easie to procure them and if we should send to Holland for Bibles when we want them would it not be as plain a Demonstration that we have no prayer Books in England Sue Schol. Hist part 2d p. 48. c. He pretends That when Forms of Prayer began to be used ever Church made use of what Forms they pleased and for this he cites Socrates Scholas lib. 5. the passage he intends is in Chap. 22. In which the Historian reflecting upon a division among the Novatians about the time of keeping Easter and shewing that antiently in different Churches it was observed at different times without breach of Communion does pass from thence to observe the diversity of other different usages in the Christan Chruches as the different Customs of keeping the Fasts before Easter the Marriages of the Clergy and the different Rites and times of Prayer and interpreting Scripture in many Provinces and Countreys The he tells us that the Novations in the Hollespont did not observe the same manner of praying with those of Constantinople and concludes that upon the whole every where and in all the Worships or Rites of Prayers you cannot find that they agree together two in the same thing and this is the passage they insist on But 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie Ceremonies and Rites of Prayer for of different Ceremonies he was before Discoursing and then the Passage will be no proof of different Forms 2. Admitting that he speaks of different Prayers this diversity is not spoken of single Congregations but of several Nations and Dioceses such as for instance Jerusalem Cyprus Constantinople 3. A little after we have the reason fo this variety I judge says Socrates that the Bishops who presided in several Gages were the cause of it and how They transmitted their own Vsage as a Law to those who should come after them thus the cause of this diversity was not Liberty but Law and Prescription 4. Immediately after he vindicates the Nicene Council which had determined the Controversie about Easter and prescribed a certain time to keep it But diversity in praying and the different times of Easter are by this Historian proposed as things alike indifferent and if Church Authority may determine and prescribe in one case so it may also in the other Thus we have the great Example of the Nicene Fathers for prescribing and in stead of the Liberty they pretend to the Prescription of set Forms or Rights of Prayer to whole Dioceses and Nations In short the design of the Historian is to shew that there were divers Customs in the Church in Things indifferent and that the Communion of the Church ought not to be divided for them Now Custom is a Law introduced by Practice and Law is a restraint upon Liberty And if indifferent things may be prescribed by Custom they may be prescribed by
Canons and Separation for them is alike unlawful He observes further that there were several Liturgies allowed even in the Roman Communion and that this Branch of the Churches Liberty was taken away by the Council of Trent and here in England by the Reformation And what was that Liberty which was thus abridged Not an Arbitrary Liberty in every Pastor of a Parish to use what Form he pleased but the use of different Rules of Prayer that were before prescribed and practiced in different National Churches and Dioceses The different Offices in England as those for instance after the use of Sarum and York did agree in Substance they had the same Forms of Prayer and differed for the most part in Rubricks and Ritualities only and when our first Reformers established an uniform Order it was not esteemed an Encroachment upon Christian Liberty neither are Unity Order and Uniformity the less valuable because Councils and Popes were for them 5. His next Reason is an Invective against the Introducers of Liturgies and in the midst of it he defines ex Cathedrd That the Liturgies which bear the great Names of S. James Peter Mark Basil and Chrysostome are known Forgeries That they are ent rely genuine as they are now extant is affirmed by no one but that they are Forgeries quite throughout and especially the Liturgy ascribed to St. James is so far from being known that we may safely affirm that it is impossible to know it And the contrary opinion of so Learned men as See Falkners Vindication p. 149. Baronius Ddurantus Leo Allatius Sixtus Senensis Possevinus Pamelius and others among the Romanists Dr. Hammond Thorudike Falkner Casaubon Salmotius Durel and some other Protestants will bear me out in affirming it But behold the Modesty Charity and Humility of this Minister 'T was the Ignorance Carnality Sloth and Laziness of the Clergy together with their Pride which first brought in and imposed Service-Books on the Churches When the Church began to be an Harlot when Bishops were not Silver Trumpets but tinkling Cymbals c. when in Councils as of Ephesus and Chalcedon they profest they did literas ignorare and could not write their own Names to confirm their Canons then came in our Liturgies Thus far the Son of Thunder but I take heart again for find it is brutum fulmen and our Prayer-Books are in no danger from it The Falshood and weakness of this Raillery is Schol. Hist part 2d p. 276. sufficiently exposed already and it is impossible such stuff should impose upon any but the greatest Bigots of Fanaticism Ignorance Carnality Pride and Laziness brought in Liturgies he might as well have said that Burglary or Vsury did introduce them if Pride and Ignorance brought in Liturgies why are they not read in Conventicles for In his Cure of Divisions Mr. Baxter hath complained to all the World that the People who frequent them for their Ignorance Injudiciousness Pride and Self-conceitedness are their Grief and their Shaine and certainly we may believe him But if Pride and Ignorance brought in Litugies we remember well then Entbusiasm Sacriledge and Rebellion did eject them We have Preface to Dr. Still Vnreasonableness of Separation had convincing Proofs that the Jesuits first brought extempore Prayers into England those Missionaries of Antichristian were the first Teachers of them and when Presbyterian Ministers were Trumpets to Rebellion when their Sermons and their Arms brought the best of Kings to the Scaffold when the Church was rent in pieces with damnable Doctrines when Jeroroham's Priests profaned the Pulpits and the Altars when the Stalls and the Shambles were the chief Schools of the Prophets when all Religion was vanished into Cant and Blasphemy and Nonsense were entitled to the Holy Spirit then were Liturgies first abolished and extempore Prayers first universally practised in any Christian Nation in the World But Liturgies he says were brought in when the Church began to be an Harlot Smectymnius * Answer to Remonst p. 7. derived their Pedigree from Three Canons of the Laodicean Carthaginian and Milevitan Councils and thus they are allowed to be in use about 1300 years since and has the Church been a Whore for so many Ages has she forsaken her Spouse so long has she renounced Christ Jesus for 13 Centuries together Yes and much longer too when we dispute about Episcopacy for when we come to that Controversie the Mystery of iniquity was working even in the times of the Apostles and the Church did then begin to be an Harlot also so little do some men care how they wound our common Christianity and condemn the whole Catholick Church of Christ so they may but vent their Malice against Liturgies and Bishops But because he cannot deny that Liturgies were introduced in the 4th and 5th Centuries he particularly Rallies upon the Ignorance of the Bishops of those Ages And were those ever reputed ignorant Ages when was the Church better enlightned with Learning than when Chrysostome Basil Nyssene Nahianhen Epiphanius the two Cyrills Lactantius Ambrose Jerome Augustine Isidore Pelus Theodoret Vincentius Gennadius and many others were the Luminaries of it But among these Gnosticks even the Mechanicks and the Women have been thought more able Divines than the Fathers and indeed if Ability is to be measured by the Gift of Prayer as they call it they may vye Learning even with their own Teachers for their most ignorant Zealots do often pray with as much fluency of words with as much pretence to the Spirit and which is the main Gift with as much Confidence as the ablest Ministers among them But the Bishops of Ephesus and Chalcedon could not write their Names and Mr. Clarkson indeed produces the Subscriptions of Three or four to prove it And to * Schol. Hist pt 2. p. 300. this it is replied That those Subscriptions are of no credit as being suspected of Forgery but suppose there were four Bishops among 830 in those Councils who were so illiterate is it not a very impudent Calumny to say indefinitely as he does That the Bishops of Ephesus and Chalcedon could not write their Names to confirm their Canons might it not as well be said that the Assembly of Divines at Westminster were Independants because there were Five of that Sect among them or that the Nonconformists Ministers of this Age have generally died as Traitors because Two or three were executed for being in Monmouths Rebellion His last Reason concerns the imposing of Liturgies and here he denies not the Lawfulness of them but after he has begged the belief of his Followers That they were not used in the Primitive times for many Hundred of years he pretends to prove the unlawfulness of imposing them Now one would think it a very plain Case that things lawful in themselves may be lawfully enjoyned by lawful Authority but this Minister is of another opinion and the only Reason he gives for the unlawfulness of prescribing Forms is this
them to take it tho they were morally certain they did not understand it And Lastly why is not this Objection now considered by the Virgin Daughter of Scotland as he Phrases it There they force the Clergy to swear that W. and M. are lawful King and Queen by Laws of that Kingdom and is this reasonable when they are utterly unacquainted with those Laws and many Learned Preachers have never read the Civil not Statute Law nor Craig nor Skine nor the Original Contract but it is always to be observed that the Presbyterians never do condemn what they do not practice 2. The Substance of his next Reason is this That the Covenant was taken by the People of Two or three Kingdoms and a man had need be a good Casuist that can declare understandingly that no one man is bound by that Oath which almost every man took Now I believe this Covenant was not taken by the Majority of these Kingdoms in England I am sure it was generally refused by the Clergy the Universities and the greatest part of the Nobility and Gentry But admit the Majority took it the force of his Reason depends upon this Proposition That an Oath taken by a vast munitude must needs be Obligatory and is it necessary to read all the Casnistical Books of Divinity to confute so manifest a Falshood in Popish Countries many Millions do take Monastick Vows and all the Clergy swear obedience to the Pope and may not an ordinary Casuist declare understandingly that none of them are bound by those Vows and Oaths which all of them have taken The Holy League in France was sworn by more than the Solemn League in England was it therefore Obligatory and is it not a sufficient Humiliation to which this Minister has called me to be bound to answer such Absurdities 3. He urges that by the Covenant all Persons were bound in their places to endeavour a Reformation of the Church according to the Scriptures and the Examples of the best reformed Churches and he asks is this an unlawful Oath I answer the Question is deceitful a man hinds himself by Oath to serve God and the Devil and he asks is it not lawful to serve God is this an unlawful Oath Thus the Covenanters did swear to endeavour Reformation Art 1. and to extirpate Episcopacy Art 2. But this Minister mentions Reformation only and then impertinently demands is this Oath unlawful I am ready to maintain against him that an Oath to serve the Devil is not more unlawful than an Oath to destroy Episcopacy and that upon this ground because it is of Apostolical Institution There are many other things unlawful in that Covenant as any one may be satisfied by the unanswerable Reasons of the University of Oxford against it and therefore if this Minister will prove it lawful let him justifie it throughout and not fly to such Methods as may serve to justifie the most execrable Oaths that can be by producing one single Passage that may seem justifiable in them But thus he proceeds If a man should swear that in his Place and Calling he would endeavour to cast every Idol out of the World and what is the consequence of this terrible If Why truly nothing at all but he filly adds that in Scotland they have cast off Prelacy and established Presbytery i. e. they have cast out the Idol and set up the true God among them but if this be his meaning that Episcopacy is Idolatry I account of him as one of the incurable Fanatical Roul that call every thing Idol or Antichrist that displeases them and I am not obliged to answer Bigotry and Frenzy The last Point he insists on is a Passage out of the Commination Office in the Liturgy wherein the Church declares her Desire that the Godly Discipline used in the Primitive Church may be again restored and says it is much to be wished for It is wonderful to consider what work he makes with this Passage but I am willing to believe he never read it in the Liturgy It was long since an old conceit of the Nonconformists * Vid. Hooker p. 331. that the Primitive Discipline which was so much wished for by the Compilers of our Liturgy was the Presbyterian Discipline and from them I presume he borrowed the Objection But in the Liturgy it self there is no Foundation for it as will appear from a view of the Passage it self in the Preface to the Commination Brethren in the Primitive Church there was a Godly Discipline that at the beginning of Lent such Persons as stood convicted of Notorious Sins were put to open Penance and punished in this World In stead whereof until the said Discipline may be restored again which is much to be wished for it is thought good c. and is Presbytery the Discipline here desired undoubtedly as much as Popery or Mahumetanism It not that Discipline expresly declared to be the Discipline of publick Penance which in the ancient Church was inflicted upon such as stood convicted of Notorious Sins at the beginning of Lent in order to their Absolution and Admission to the Holy Sacrament at Easter What can be more express and evident than that the Ancient Leut Discipline is there alone intended And have the Non conformists as he pretends ever written for preached for and suffered for the Restoration of this Discipline Have they ever wish'd or desired it Have they not always written and preach'd against it Do they not still exclaim at it as Popery and Superstition But this Minister pronounces considently that this Expression stands in the Liturgy as well for the Justification of the Nonconformists as for a Testimony against the Prelates Thus the Godly Discipline is a Condemnation to them who have always desired it and Justification to them who have always opposed it and if Nonconformists must needs be justified by Blunder and Contradiction this Minister I confess is a fit Apologist for them But behold the Reflections he makes on this Passage First The Reformers and Compilers of this Book of Common Prayer had no full Satisfaction with what was then done What Were they not fully satisfied with the Liturgy The first Liturgy of Edward the 6th was applauded by the whole * 2 3 Ed. 6. c. 1. Parliament as composed by the Special Aid of the Holy Ghost and * Acts and Monuments Tom. 3. p. 171. Doctor Taylor the Martyr publickly declared that the whole Church-Service in King Edward's Second Liturgy was so fully perfected according to the Rules of our Christian Religion that no Christian Conscience could be offended with any thing therein contained The Papists were the only Persons in those Times that were dissatisfied with it and therefore in Queen Mary's days a Challenge was made by * Ibid. Tom. 3. p. 18. Cranmer that with P. Martyr and four or five more they would enter the Lists with any Papists living and defend the Common Prayer Book to be perfectly agreeable