belonging unto it from the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop and his Successors King Ina's Charter to the Abbey of Glassenbury exemps them from the Bishops Jurisdiction The like did King Offa concerning the Monastry of St. Albans An. 793. Kenulph King of Mercia that at Abington Anno 821. and Knut that at St. Edmvndbury An. 1020. Yea and there are several places at this very time exempt from Episcopal Jurisdiction Whatever our Princes in after Ages might lose as to the Exercise of their just Power 't is certain that Henry 8th reassumed it as appears by his dismembring some Diocesses and by his removing some Churches from one Jurisdiction to another For this Consult Dr. Burnets History of Reformation part 1. lib. 3. page 301. where you 'l find the Complaint of the Roman party beyond the Sea concerning the Kings encroaching on the Jurisdiction of the Church c. to which 't was answered That the Division of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction whether of Patriarchs Primates Metropolitanes or Bishops was according to the Roman Law Regulated by the Emperours Of which the Antient Councils always approv'd And in England when the Bishoprick of Lincoln being judg'd of too great an extent the Bishoprick of Ely was taken out of it it was done only by the King with the consent of his Clergy and Nobles 'T is also evident out of Dr. Burnets Hist of the Ref. part 1. l. 3 p. 267. That this great Prince gave cut such a Commission to Bonner and it may be to others also as makes it most manifest that Diocesan Bishops were not of God's but only of the Magistrate's Institution Hence Bonner in his Commission from the King most gratefully acknowledges that he received it only from the King's bounty and must deliver it up again when it should please his Majesty to call for it even as Justices of the Peace c. whose Commission is ad Pacitum Moreover Lay-men had Ecclesiastical Dignities The E. of Hartford six Prebends promissed him as the Lord Cromwal in H. 8. was made Dean of Wells A thing very ordinary at that time Dr. Burnets Hist of the Refor part 2. Thus a Diocesane Episcopacy at best was judg'd but an humane Creature owing to the Magistrate alone for it's Rise and Conservation Secondly This seems to be the sense of the Reformers in Edward the 6th time who were under the Influence of that great Divine and Blessed Martyr Archbishop Cranmer In Henry 8th days Cranmer did his Utmost for the promoting a Reformation the which he did withal the Speed and Prudence the Ilness of the times would permit further attempt to carry on under King Edward and what he did was so highly approv'd of by all who were hearty for a Reformation that whoever considers how Unanimous the truly Protestans Bishops were in Concurring with this great Prelate Cranmer cannot but encline to think That their Principles in most things about Church Discipline were the same i. e. they were for the Divine Right of Bishops or Presbyters even when they judg'd the Superiority of a Bishop to a Presbyter to be but Humane That this may appear to be the sense of Cranmer I will only beseech my Reader to compare what was done under King Edw. 6th by this great Prelate with his Judgment concerning a Diocesan Episcopacy under Henry the 8th In Henry 8ths time Cranmer in answer to that Question Whether Bishops or Priests were first did assert That the Bishops and Priest were at one time and were no two things but both One Office in the beginning of Christs Religion That in the New Testament he that is appointed to be a BISHOP or PRIEST needeth no Cousecration by the Scripture for ELECTION or APPOINTING thereto is sufficient This was then Cranmers Judgment and I cannot understand that he did at any time in the least vary from it for in the Necessary Erudition which he subscribed there is nothing asserted but what is either Consistent with or an approbation of what was the Archbishops Opinion about these points 'T is true Cranmer was so Zealous an Asserter to the Kings Supremacy that he seem'd to be of that Opinion which doth now appear by the name of Erastianisme for he held That a Bishop or Priest by the Scripture is neither commanded nor forbidden to Excommunicate but where the Laws of any Region give him Authority to Excommunicate there he ought to use the same c. But from this he must be considered to have received because he subscribed the Necessary Erudition where 't is exprest That a part of the Priests or Bishops Office is according to the Scriptures to Excommunicate c. as well as Teach and Administer the Sacraments To all this add the Progress Cranmer made under Edw. 6. in the Reformation how far he went and how much farther he would have gone had not the Iniquity of those times been so exceeding great and the Reign of this worthy Prince so very short 'T is well known that he went so far as to tempt Dr. Heylin to conclude King Edwards death no Infelicity to the Church of England and to provoke Queen Elizabeth to say That they had stript the Church too much of its external Splendour and Magnificence That t was requisite to make some alteration in the Articles to the end a Compliance of the Roman Catholicks might be more easie What I have insisted on in this place about Cranmer is taken out of Dr. Burnets History and a Record in him ex M.SS. D. Stillingfleet 3. Such is the present Prerogative of his Majesty in Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Affairs that the asserting the Divine Right of a Diocesane Episcopacy is inconsistent with it The King is the Supream Head of the Church as well as of the State for which Reason he hath Power to appoint Officers to look after the management of Affairs in the One as in the Other But if the Diocesan Bishops depend not so much on the Prince for their Superiority and Power in making an Authoritative Inspection into Ecclesiasticalal Affairs as the Civil Magistrate who is it that is his Majesties Commissionated Officer about Ecclesiastical affairs T is either the Diocesane or None But if the Diocesane as such receives his Commission from Jesus Christ even as the Apostles did then they are Gods Officers and not the Kings And if so seeing the King doth nothing but by his Officers that is by such as act by a Commission received from him the King hath in this respect lost at least the Ezercise of his Prerogative But if they are the Kings Officers and depend as much on the King as the Civil then their Diocesan Episcopacy is not of Divine 't is but of Humane Right We acknowledge that 't is the sense of the Church of England that Princes are Ordain'd of God to Govern Ecclesiastical as well as other Persons and that therefore if we consider such as are appointed by the King to govern under him Circa Sacra as the
to appear above board and to let us know whether he will set up also for that notion and defend his Defender Mr. Baxter is a man who understood Politicks and stated what he understood but the Doctor was at the present raw and put into his arguing he did not know well what that is the truth on 't and forasmuch as this man hath undertaken to interpose between shame and the Doctor I will tell them both plainly the Doctor may be ashamed to put in a fourth Term into his Argument and this man truly takes the shame on him by bringing in a fifth also That which Mr. Baxter said was this That every proper Political Church must have a Constitutive Head and the Doctor both leaves out the words Proper Political and brings in the term Visible Therefore the Catholick Church says he must have a Constitutive Visible Head The Interposer now to take off this shame from the Doctor hath taken the right course I say for he comes and does worse and that is puts in a fifth term also into the Argument If every Church when he should say every Proper Political Church only if he speaks to Mr. Baxter must have a Visible Subordinate Constitutive Head then must the Catholick Church have such a one But that having no such a one a National Church as well as the Catholick may be without a Constitutive Head This is the Reasoning in the summ I say in the sum for it is no matter for more of his words that puts me and Mr. Baxter as he says at such a loss as is irrecoverable And does he not indeed take off the shame from the Doctor by taking it thus upon himself Suppose another should put a sixth term into the Argument and argue If no Church can be a true Visible Church without a Visible Subordinate Monarchical Constitutive Head then cannot the Catholick Church visible be a true Church without a Visible Subordinate Monarchical Constitutive Head Who could doubt now any longer but Mr. Baxter must yield to a plain Confutation or bring in the Pope presently without remedy But did Mr. Baxter I pray lay down the Proposition from which this Consequence by this means is indeed made unavoidable No you will say this were to wrong Mr. Baxter to put in the term Monarchical and would spoil this mans Goverment by Consent quite I say likewise that this Author wrongs him to put in this term Subordinate and the Doctor by putting in the term Visible Mr. Baxter hath neither of these terms in his Assertion and if you cannot argue from what he hath said that the Pope is Head of the Catholick Church Visible you cnanot argue from him that it hath any Subordinate Head or Visible but a Constitutive Head only whether Visible or Invisible It is nothing else but the Fallacy whereby the Opponent puts in more into the Argument then is granted by the Respondent which I think we called at the University Fallacia plurium interrogationum vel dictionum for whether the diverse things are interrogated or argued the Paralogism is the same that hath made all this pother as this man phrases it which seeing it is on their side I will give over any farther persuit of this Chapter There is one thing only and that is the main thing not to be omitted The Dean in his Determination of this point does hold that Consent is sufficient to the making a National Church understanding by that Consent a Consent to be of it The Deans Defender holds the Church to be a Government by Consent meaning by it the Consent of the Bishops These are two contrary things the one making the Church not Political and the other makes it an Aristocracy and yet intends to justifie the former But neither of them are in the right The Church of England is not a Church by Consent onely without a Head nor a Government by Consent by the Colledge of Bishops but it is a Political Church with a Constitutive Regent part which is the King according to my Papers That the King is the Head of it appears by the Statute that declares him Head of the Church as it is called the Church of England It appears by other Acts that give him the same Supremacy the Pope usurped It appears by the First Fruits and Tenths of all Benefices given him as the Supream Head of the Church It appears by Cromwell who was made Henry the Eigths Vicar General and Vicegerent and sate in the Convocation as Personating the Head of it It appears by this Reason of my Book Where the Rights of Majesty are there must the Headship be placed Legislation and the Last appeal belong to him It is the King gives Authority to the Canons in so much as when a Law cannot pass without a Parliament the Canons becomes valid by the Kings own Ratification And there can be no Appeal in any Ecclesiastical cause from the King Again it appears most unanimously by the Ministers Prayers every Sunday giving him the Title of Supream Head and by the Oaths of Supremacy and Alleigance If the King be not the Head accordingly then must the Clergy generally be both Lyars and Perjured Persons From this truth then which is beyond opposition it follows that a National Church is of Humane appointment and not of Divine right that is indispensible It follows that it belongs not to the Essence of the Church of Christ to be National but that this is a consideration accidental to it It follows that such a Church may receive its Constitution at first and a new form or mould at any time as is most convenient to the State and most conducive to the glory of God in the good of the People It follows that a Reformation of the Government of our Church by the introducing some such new form into it as shall be more conducive to the ends of Holiness and Peace than the present Form does were a most desireable thing and fit to be tendred to the Wisdom of Parliament It follows finally that seeing the model that is hammering by this Author is proposed as strictly of Divine Right which is therefore the most direfull Schismatical Scheme that can be proposed in regard to Dissenters excluding them thereby out of the body of Christ and consequently from salvation besides dangerous to the Supremacy of the Magistrate and unanswerably faulty in many respects so that it cannot be received or indured it is fit that a model more agreeable to the power which is proper to Kings and less exceptionable in regard to the Conscience of the Subject were exhibited in the room of it and if it be such as would make the Prelates onely the Kings Officers to execute under him such Government of the Church as belongeth to Kings as this Author so well expresses it p. 275. so as the Nonconformist and Conformist may share I shall not for the dislike of any one or two men or party who are designing an Antipodes
within their allotted Precincts discharge their Duty not only in leading Godly Lives but in Preaching the word administring the Sacraments and exercising Discipline according to the Rule of the Gospel We are far from pulling down such Bishops for we rather wish that whereas there is now one there might be five nor are we for the alienating Church Land any more than we are for the taking from his Majesties other Civil Officers those Pensions are allowed them for their great services A thing we esteem as necessary and highly expedient as what doth not only conduce very much to the Encouragement of all sorts of Learning the equal Administration of Justice but as what advanceth the Honour and Grandeur of the State But 3. This doth no way Embase his Majesties Prerogative in matters Ecclesiastical It doth rather make it the more Grand and August His Majesty is hereby acknowledged to be the Supream Head of the Church All Officers Circa Sacra depend as much on his Majesties Pleasure for their Places as any other Civil Officers 'T is in the Kings Name they must act by vertue of a Commission received from him whereby the King is Recognized as the sole Governour of the Kingdom and hath no Competitors with him nor is he in danger of Forreign Usurpations To summe up all Let all such Particular Congregational or Parochial Churches that are of Divine Institution according to the sense of the Old and most true Church of England be by Act of Patliament declar'd to be so and taken under the Protection of the Laws and the Dissenters are satisfied The which as hath been prov'd may be done without any wrong to the consciences of the Conformist This is the utmost I shall propose leaving it to the Wisdom of the Nation to Regulate and Order the Constitution so far as it is National and of Humane Make as they Judge most Expedient The States-men know best how to alter correct or amend any thing in the present Frame for which reason Modesty doth best become Divines whonever succeed in any undertakements beyond their Sphere If no encroachments be made on what is of Divine Institution no wrong can be done us I desire the Dean and his Substitute to consider this Proposal which is but a Revival of what was on our first leaving Rome strenuously asserted as the Onely way to break all the Designs of the Papists about Church Discipline From the corruptions of which did proceed all the Popes Tyranous Usurpations Certainly the Establishing this Notion cannot but be of extraordinary use as it Erects a Partition Wall between the Reformation and the Corruptions of the Roman Church as it is adjusted for the silencing all Differences among our selves the healing our Breaches and the fixing a firm and lasting Union among all sound Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational or meer Anabaptist I humbly apprehend this to be enough to evince That the Dissenters are not such Enemies to Union as some have Asserted nor are they for the destroying a National Church Government They are onely against Unaccountable Innovations even such as tend to the Ruine of the Old Protestant National Church which as such is but of Humane Institution and in all ages must be of such a Peculiar Form as is best suited to those great Ends viz. Gods Glory in the Flourishing of particular Parochial or Congregational Churches and the Peace of the State The Dissenters do know that as One Particular Church is not to depend on another as to be Accountable thereunto when at any time she may abuse her Power yet All are accountable unto the Magistrate of that Land in which they Live and that such is the state of things with us that what person soever is griev'd either by a Presbyter or Bishop or by any Inferiour Officer Circa Sacra he may make his Appeal to the Supream Magistrate with whom all Appeals on Earth are finally Lodg'd Whatever the Deans Substitute may assert 't is most undoubtedly true that no Appeal can be justly made from our King unto the Pope or any Colledge of Catholick Bishops whatsoever That herein as our Author dissents from the Church of England we do heartily agree with her That the sound Protestant Party among the Sons of the Church of England do accord with the Dissenters about this great Point is not only evident from what a Conformist hath written in the following Treatise but from what is asserted by the Judicious Dr. Burnet in the History of the Reformation The which I do the more chearfully insist on that the world may see How the Dissenters have been misrepresented and How clear they are from any Seditious or Factious Principles concerning Church Discipline In Dr. Burnets Preface to the History of the Reformation p. 1. for which the whole Kingdom have given the Dr. thanks 't is asserted That in Henry the 8ths time 't was an Establish'd Principle That every National Church is a compleat Body within it self so that the Church of England with the Authority and Concurrence of their Head and King might examine or Reform all Errors or Corruptions whether in Doctrine or Worship Moreover in the Preamble of that Act by which this Principle was fix'd 't is declared That the Crown of England was Imperial and that the Nation was a Compleat Body within it self with a full Power to give Justice in all Cases Spiritual as well as Temporal And that in the Spiritualty as there had been at all times so there were then men of that Sufficiency and Integrity that they might Declare and Determine all Doubts within the Kingdom And that several Kings as Ed. 1. Edw. 3. Ric. 2. and Hen. 4. had by several Laws Preserv'd the Liberties of the Realm both Spiritual and Temporal from the Annoyance of the See of Rome and other Forreign Potentates Hist Ref. p. 1. p. 127. Furthermore the same Judicious Author by an Extract out of the Necessary Erudition and out of the Kings Book de Differentia Regiae Ecclesiasticae Potestatis out of Gardiners de vera Obedientia and Bonners Prefix'd Epistle and out of a Letter written by Stokesly Bishop of London and Tonstall Bishop of Duresm hath made it evident that the Church in Henry 8. did not only assert the Kings Supremacy but as a Truth in Conjunction therewith held That in the Primitive Church the Bishops in their Councels made Rules for Ordering their Diocesses which they only called CANONS or RULES nor had they any Compulsive Authority but what was deriv'd from the Civil Sanction A sufficient evincement that they did not believe General Councils to be by Jesus Christ made the Regent part of the Catholick Church neither did they believe their Determinations or Decrees to lay any Obligation on the Conscience unless Sanction'd by the Magistrates command To this Dr. Burnet speaks excellently well in his Preface to the Second Part of the Hist Refor The Jurisdiction of Synods or Councils is founded either on the Rules
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all Instituted Worship and Discipline as if there could be Church-Members under Government antecedent to the being of Particular Churches even when no one that is not a Member of a Particular Church is a Member of the Universal As if a City that consists of many particular Houses were in order of nature antecedent to every particular House § 3. That the Unity of the Christian Church consists in one Communion Catholique Unity signifies Catholique Communion To have a Right to be a Member of the Christian Church to communicate in all the several Duties and Offices of Religion with all Christians all the World over and to partake in all the Priviledges of Christians and to be admitted to the freedom of their conversation to eat and drink and discourse and trade together So that such as are not Church-Members have no right to trade among Christians A pleasant Insinuation § 4. The Unity of the Christian Sacraments viz. Baptism and the Lords-Supper prove the Unity of Christian Communion This is from p. 193. to p. 208. § 5. Unity of Church-Power and Government doth also prove the Unity of Christian Communion Under this head he maintains 1. That every Bishop Presbyter or Deacon by his Ordination is made a Minister of the Catholique Church though for the better edification of the Church the exercise of his Office is more peculiarly confin'd to some particular place 2. Every Bishop and Presbyter receives into the Catholique Church by Baptism and shuts out of the Catholique Church by Excommunication 3. That the Catholique Church is united and coupled by the cement of Bishops who stick close together for which you produce Cyprian 4. That the Unity and Peace of the Episcopacy is maintained by their governing their Churches by mutual Consent Whence you mention the Collegium Episcopale the Episcopal Colledge which I take to be a Council of Bishops which Bishops have an Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church i.e. the foreign Bishops as those of Alexandria and Rome c. have an Original Power and Right in relation to the whole Church even a Right and Power in relation to England 5. That every part of the Universal Church is under the Government of the Universal Bishops assembled in their Colledge or in Council and what Bishop soever abuse his Power he shall be accountable to those assembled in Council 6. That there is no such thing as the Independency of Bishops their Independency being almost as inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity as the Indpendency of single Congregations Whence the Church of England called either Archi-Episcopal National or Patriarchal is not Independent but accountable unto Foreign Bishops if at any time they abuse their Power 7. That this Council of Forreign Bishops unto which they are accountable must look on the Bishop of Rome as their Primate the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome being acknowledged it seems by our Author himself as well as by Bramhall The Primacy he saith out of Cyprian being given to Peter that it might appear that the Church of Christ was One and the Chair that is the Apostolical Office and Power is One. Thus Cyprian on whom lay all the care of the Churches dispatches Letters to Rome from whence they were sent through all the Catholique Churches All this is to be found from p. 208 to the end of the Chapter Thus you agree with Bramhall though you express not the Notion so well as he doth and should learn it better Before I proceed therefore I cannot but desire you to consider what is become of your Protestant Episcopacy I beseech you Sir consider Is the French Episcopacy a Protestant Episcopacy If not seeing the English Episcopacy as described by you is the same with the French Why call you the one a Popish and the other a Protestant Episcopacy Whether you agree not in these respects with the Papists let the world judge But you go on to assert § 6. That to be in Commuion with any Church is to be a Member of it every Member having equal Right and equal Obligation to all parts of Christian Communion even that Communion which is External and Visible p. 132 c. § 7. All Christians being bound to communicate with that part of the Catholique Church wherein they live are guilty of Schism if they separate whoever separate from such particular Churches as are members of the Catholick Church do separate from the Universal Catholick Church which is Schism For to divide from any part of the Catholick Church is to break Catholick communion i. e. to be a Schismatick Whence 't is concluded 1. That Schism is a separating from the Catholick Church which notion taken singly will stand the Dissenters and all true Christians who must be acknowledged to be members of the Catholick Church in great stead freeing them from the odious sin of Schism The Dissenters divide not themselves from the communion of the Universal Church Ergo not Schismaticks But the mischief is that as this notion of Schism which our Author adheres unto is the same with that of the Papists as is to be seen in Filiucius Azorius c. but in an especial manner in Charity maintain'd by Catholicks even so he closes with the same Popish Faction in asserting 2. That separating from the Church of England is a separating from the Catholick Church as if the Catholick Church had been as much confin'd within the bounds of the Church of England as the Papists says within the limits of Rome Whence whoever separates from the Church of England cuts himself from the Catholick Church puts himself out of a state of salvation He is extra Ecclesiam extra quam nulla salus they are all while Schismaticks in a state of damnation But surely if these men believed so much methinks they should not be at rest until all their unscriptural impositions were removed unless they have greater kindness for such trifles than they have for such immortal souls for whom Christ dyed By this Doctrine we may understand why 't is that some of our Clergy shew greater tenderness towards Drunkards Swearers Papists than towards poor Dissenters The former may hold communion with the Church of England and consequently with the Catholick Church when the others are undoubtedly in a state of damnation as if we were all in the same state with Hereticks I 'le not as easily I might now enlarge in shewing the weakness which the Dean's Substitute hath discovered in the management of this Grotian or Cassandrian Design but only tell him That if he had consulted that excellent Treatise The Grotian Religion discovered by Mr. Baxter he might have seen an unanswerable confutation of a great part of his Book or if he had rather applied himself unto that great Prelate Bishop Bramhall a man of extraordinary worth for his Learning he might have better digested his Notion For there he would have been furnished with such distinctions about Communion that would
Church of England detected His notion about the Government of the Catholick Church the same with that of the French Papist THAT our Author entertains notions about the nature of the Visible Church and of the Schismatical very different from what the old Queen Elizabeth Protestants did will appear with the greatest conviction to such as will but consult the famous Mr. Hooker and Dr. Field who do most expresly contradict what is asserted in the Dean's Defence The Dean's Defender doth extremely insist on the Unity of the Universal Church as what doth consist in more than in the Unity of the Faith though in combination of those other graces of Love and Charity and Peace to wit in an external communion Take his own words in answer to a supposed objection P. 183. But though Faith alone is not sufficient to Christian Unity yet Faith in combination with those other graces of Love and Charity and Peace make a firm and lasting union This I readily grant saith he but yet must add this one thing That Christian love and charity and peace in the language of the New Testament and of the ancient Fathers when they signifie Christian Unity signifie also one communion that is the unity of a Body and Society which is external and visible and doth not only signifie the union of souls and affections but the union of an external and visible communion P. 184. By the union of an external and visible communion he means the living in Christian communion and fellowship with each other that is a worshipping God together after one and the same external and visible manner P. 248. Moreover he adds That such as separate themselves from the external communion of any particular Church that is part of the Universal do separate themselves from the Universal visible Church All Schismaticks in his opinion cut themselves off from the visible Catholick Church even as all such as are excommunicated are cut off This is the notion of the Deans Substitute which is as agreeable to the sense of the Papist as 't is in it self grosly absurd and different from the doctrine of sound Church of England Protestants That 't is agreeable to the sense of the Papists you 'l find in a Conference between Dr. Peter Gunning and Dr. Pierson with two Disputants of the Romish Profession All Schismaticks say the Romish Disputants are out of the Church and quite separate from it as a part cut off is separate from the body Schismatick is a term contradistinct to Catholick No Schismaticks can be true members of the Catholick church for Schism as they define it is a voluntary separation of one part from the whole true visible church of Christ The correspondency that there is between the Author of the Deans Defence and those Papists about the formal reason of Schism is as much as if the Defender had fetcht his Definitition of Schism out of their Writings which notion as embrac'd by one that professes himself a Protestant is as grosly absurd as 't is contrary unto Protestant principles I say such a notion entertain'd by a professed Protestant is grosly absurd for it exposeth him to the triumph of the Roman-catholicks it being impossible that the Papists notwithstanding their Schismatical Impositions should be esteemed Schismatical by our Author For all such as are Schismatical are saith he cut off from the visible Catholick Church of which the Church of Rome is acknowledged to be a true part although from it these men as they are Protestants separate and so cut themselves off from the Catholick visible Church for such as separate from any true part of the Catholick church according unto him do cut themselves off from the Catholick church and are Schismaticks Take a view then of the admirable abilities of our Auther who must be considered to assert either that the Church of Rome is Schismatical or not If not Schismatical the church of England must be so or otherwise there may be a separation from the external communion of a particular Church that is a part of the Universal without being guilty of Schism or of separating from the Catholick church But if the Church of Rome be Schismatical 't is either cut off from the visible Catholick church or not if not then Schism consists not in a separating from the visible Catholick church that is a man may be a Schismatick and yet a member of the catholick church a thing that our Author denies But if the church of Rome be cut off from the visible Catholick church then the distressed Papist is in as sad a condition as the Dissenter he is cut off from the church of Christ and must be either damn'd or saved by another Name than that of Jesus Christ If the latter then farewell Christian Religion If the former Where shall we find any part of the Universal Church beside the Church of England All the Protestants beyond the Sea are in the same state with the Dissenter at home The Church of Rome and all such as are in Subjection to that See are cut off from the Visible Catholick Church and it may be all the Eastern Churches in the World too that is the Catholick Visible Church is confin'd within the Pale of the Church of England Pure Prelatical Donatism with a witness Where will not Considence when the attendant of Ignorance lead men Moreover This Notion as 't is grosly absurd in like manner 't is most contrary to the old Protestant Principles Consult Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity lib. 3. and you 'll find nothing more fully asserted than That the Visible Church of Jesus Christ is therefore One in outward Profession of those things which supernaturally appertain to the very essence of Christianity and are necessarily required in every particular Christian man But we speak now of the Visible Church whose Children are signed with this mark One Lord one Faith one Baptifm In whomsoever these things are the Church doth acknowledg them for her Children So far Hooker But you will it may be object That such as are Schismatical or Excommunicate may acknowledge One Lord hold One Faith and receive One Baptism And shall such be consider'd as Members of the Visible Church Take Mr. Hooker's own words for an Answer If by external Profession they be Christians then are they of the Visible Church of Christ and Christians by external Profession are they all whose mark of Recognizance hath in it those things which we have mentioned yea although they be impious Idolaters wicked Hereticks Persons Excommunicable yea and cast out for notorious Improbity Thus 't is evident that Mr. Hooker entertain'd apprehensions quite contrary to those of our Author yea and Mr. Hooker doth consider the very Notion asserted by our Author to be Popish which he doth as such most excellently expose As for the Act of Excommunication saith he it neither shuts out from the Mystical nor clean from the Visible but only from the Fellowship with the Visible in holy Duties
included within the confines of a particular Church who in the management of their discourses concerning it give too great an advantage unto the Papacy 2. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from some of the Congregational concerning the nature of Discipline the Congregational being esteemed as espousers of a Democracy or Populacy the other against it 3. The Episcopal differs from the Presbyterian in that the Episcopal are for a Monarchy the Presbyterian for an Aristocracy § 8. All Protestants generally agree in asserting the Independency of particular Churches 'T is notorious that the Church of England established by Law is a particular National Church independent on any Foreign Power whatsoever Such is the constitution of our Church that what Bishop soever is found an abuser of his Power he is not accountable to any Colledg of Bishops but such as are conven'd by his Majesties Authority and that what apprehensions soever he may have of his being griev'd through any undue procedure he cannot make any Appeal to any Foreign Power from the King 'T is the King who is the Supreme Head of the Church of England there is no Power on earth equal unto or above his in Ecclesiastical Affairs To appeal unto any Foreign Power whether unto one Bishop singly or unto many by consent assembled 't is to do what tends to the subverting the present Constitution yea 't is to subvert the very foundation of our Government as 't is opposite unto a French or an Italian Papacy Whoever consults the many Laws made in Henry the 8th's time Edward the 6th's and Queen Elizabeths cannot but be fully satisfied that the Appeal of any Bishop or any other person from the King unto any other Foreign Power is contrary unto the ancient Laws of this Realm and that such as shall venture the doing so run themselves into a Praemunire For 't is most apparent that our National Church of England is a particular Independent Church That neither the Pope of Rome nor the Bishop of Paris nor any other Foreign Bishops have any Original Right or Power in relation to England and that therefore their assuming any such power is a sinful Usurpation All this is undoubtedly true Yet § 9. The Deans Substitute exposeth the Independency of Episcopal particular Churches as what is inconsistent with Catholick Union and asserts That if any Bishops abuse their Power they are accountable unto a General Council that is unto a Foreign Power whereby he doth his utmost to tare up the Church of England by the Roots to subvert his Majesties Supremacy as if all the Laws of the Land concerning it had not been of any force All this by Dr. Stilling fleet 's Defender That this is so I 'le evince from our Authors own words which are as follow And now I cannot but wonder saith he to find some Learned men very zealous assertors of the Independency of Bishops and to alledg St. Cyprians Authority for it for what ever difficulty there may be in giving an account of every particular saying in St. Cyprian certainly he would never be of this opinion who asserts but One Chair One Apostolical Office and Power which now resides in the Bishops of the Universal Church for when the same Power is in ten thousand hands it can be but One only by Unity of consent in the exercise of it and 't is very wild to imagine that any one of these persons who abuse this Power shall not be accountable to the rest for it i. e. to the Colledg of Bishops for saith he soon after if we consider the practise of the ancient Church we shall find that they never thought every Bishop to be Independent but as liable to the censure of their Colleagues as Presbyters and Deacons were to the censure of their Bishops P. 212. So far our Author who doth as it were expresly assert That the Archbishop of Canterbury though Metropolitan and Primate of England if he abuses his Power is accountable unto the General Council when by consent assembled that is the Archbishop who is not in power above any other Bishops as is by the Deans Substitute asserted abusing his Power is accountable to some Court above any in this Realm to a General Council a Colledg of Bishops § 10. Although the Papists generally assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all Church-Government as hath been already intimated yet there 's a difference between the French and Italian Papist about the kind of the Government the one insisting on an Aristocracy the other on a Monarchy i. e. the French holds That the pars Regens of the Universal Church is a General Council the Italian That it is one single person viz. the Bishop of Rome There hath been in the Church of Rome for some hundred years a great contest concerning the Supreme Regent part of the Universal Church Whether it be a General Council or the Pope Whether a General Council be above the Pope or the Pope above a General Council About which the Church of Rome is fallen into three parts as Bellarmine asserts 1. That the Pâ—pe is the Supreme Head of the Church and so much above a General Council that he cannot subject himself thereunto The Government of the Universal Church though mixt being composed of a Democracy Aristocracy and Monarchy yet principally 't is Monarchical The Supreme Power being immediately lodg'd in the Monarch who is the Bishop of Râ—me Christs Vicar and Peter's Successor he is above a General Council and not accountable to any on earth for any abuse he may be guilty of Of this opinion saith Bellarmine are all the Schoolmen generally especially Sanctus Antonius Jeannes de Turrecremata Alvarus Pelagius Dominicus Jacobatius Cajetan Pighius Ferrariensis Augustinus de Aneena Petrus de Monte c. Yea this is the sense of the Jesuits generally and of all such as are engag'd to support the Court of Rome as are the Italian Bishops for which reason I call it Italian Popery 2. There are some among the Canonists who assert That the Pope is above a General Council but yet may subject himself hereunto 3. There are others who assert That a General Council is above the Pope that the Supreme Governing-power over the whole Catholick Church is given them immediately that the Pope as every other Bishop is accountable to the General Council This is what hath been asserted by the Council at Constance Anno 1315. and by that of Basil Anno 1431. and by many Learned Divines in the Church of Rome viz. Cardinal Cameracensis Jeannes Gerson Jacobus Almain Nicolas Cusanus Panormitanus and his Master Cardinal Florentinus as also by Abulensis Gerson being a Chancellor at Paris had many followers among the French who at this very day assert That the Supreme Regent part of the Universal Church is a General Council for which reason I conclude that such as assert That a General Council is the Political Head or Regent part of the
days the very same with that of the first Reformation from Popery beginning in Henry the 8th's time and Sealed after with the Blood of our Martyrs THE Deans Substitute doth at last apply himself to the Defence of the Doctor in doing which he considers the Reasons I collected out of the Dean's Preface which the Dean urges to engage the Reader to believe that the Dissenters are a people carrying on the Popish Designs 1. The Dissenters have embraced the Jesuits Principles about Spiritual Prayer and a more pure way of Worship This is what I observ'd out of Dr. Still But our Author who hath read over the Doctors Preface very carefully can find no such thing urged against the Dissenters and adds All that Mr. Lobb founds this Accusation on is That the Dean says It is not improbable that the Jesuits were the first setters up of Spiritual Prayer in England And then goes on to a very decent Censure saying That this is mighty falsely and imperfectly represented Sir If I had insisted on no more than what you here mention as the foundation of my Charge I must acknowledg that 't would not only be imperfectly but impertinently related For what connexion is there between the Jesuits Practises and their Principles Is it not well known that the Principles they profess the Doctrines they embrace concerning many a point in Divinity are one thing even when their Practice is another May they not then in order to the carrying on a further Design set on Practices contrary to their Doctrines Yea surely they may and this is the whole Defence you make in behalf of the Dean with which after an unnecessary Harangue you dismiss the Subject But is this fair to misrepresent an Adversary and then confute what needs no Confutation Doth this redound to the Honour of a Presbyter of the Church of England Was this all on which Mr. Lobb founded his Accusation Did he not add somewhat more than what you relate You say all that Mr. Lobb founds this accusation on is that the Dean says It is not improbable that the Jesuits were the first setters up of Spiritual Prayer in England which is mighty falsely and imperfectly repesented p. 6. Yet whoever will consult the Enguiry will find that I do out of the Dean add That there is no improbality of the thing if we consider the Dissenters pretences about Spiritual Prayer to the Doctrine and Practice of the Jesuits The Dean suggests that Spiritual and Free Prayer even that Spiritual and Free Prayer about which there is such a Pother is suited to the Doctrines of the Jesuits to the Doctrine that is to their Principles What difference is there between the Doctrine and the Principles of the Church of England In like manner I Query What difference is there between the Doctrines and Principles of the Jesuits Doth the Dean then assert such an Agreement to be between the Pretences of the Dissenter about Spiritual Prayer and the Doctrines or Principles of the Jesuits not only the Practices but Doctrines of the Jesuits Who then is the impersect or mistaken Reporter The Dean's Charge against Dissenters is That the Dissenters pretences about Spiritual Prayer are suited with the Doctrines of the Jesuits And 't is our concern to enquire after the truth of this Charge I say of this charge to wit about the Agreeableness that is between our Pretences and their Doctrines For it is no way momentous to enquire after the practice of a company of Villains who can transform themselves into a thousand shapes whenever their Interest obliges them to do so Was it never known that a Papist crept into some great Preferment in the Church of England at which time they did both Assent and Consent to the doctrines of the Church of England What think you of a quondam Bishop of Glocester to mention no more did he not speak well of the Church of England yea even of the Protestant Religion Is it therefore Popery For this Reafon it concerns me not to enquire after those Stories insisted on by the Doctor or to be found in that Pamphlet called Foxes and Firebrands The great Enquiry must be after the Doctrines of the Jesuit whether there is any suitableness between the Dissenters pretences and the Jesuits Doctrines For which Reason the Jesuits Writings were consulted and the Doctor 's Charge found untrue the Dr. being mistaken as to matter of fact He represented the Jesuits Doctrines to be other than indeed they are which to speak softly was a Mistake If the Deans Defender would have spoke to the purpose He should have searched those places I insisted on in Azorius Filiucius and Bellarmine and have shewed wherein I had either made a false report of their sayings or misinterpreted ' em But this was impossible There being nothing else of moment in the Reply to what I offered against the Dean about Spiritual Prayer I might fairly without saying any thing more proceed to the next particular But seeing some have spoken contemptibly of the Spirit of prayer which is said to assist such as use free or extempore prayer as if those who spake of receiv'd help from the Spirit in prayer were Enthusiastical c. and because our Author talks as if the Jesuits had the first hand in the Separation of the old Nonconformists from the Church of England crying down the Common-prayers as a dull formal superstitious Worship and the setting up free prayer in the room of it I will shew 1. The sense of the first Reformers about the aid of the Spirit And 2. What was the great and chief ground of the First Separation § 1. Concerning the Aid of the Holy Spirit by which many are enabled to pray freely or spiritually it hath been by some of the conforming Ministers asserted That such as pretend to receive the aid of the Spirit may as well pretend to inspiration c. That then they 'l believe that persons can pray by the Spirit when they hear the unlearned can pray in Latin Greek or in some other unknown language as if the aids the Spirit affords unto such as pray freely had been extraordinary c. This I cannot but consider as what doth very much reflect on the Dispensation of the Spirit to the great dishonour of true Christian Religion For such is the present state of true Religion that whoever speaks contemptibly of the Spirits Aid must be esteemed not only a Despiser of the first Reformers but of that part of the present Constitution to which our Clergy on their entrance into their Function are principally concern'd 1. T is well known that what the first Reformers did in the Reforming the Liturgy was by the Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons assembled in Parliament recorded to have been done by the Aid of the Holy Ghost The Parliament in K. Edward's days passing an Act for the confirmation of the Publick Liturgy in the preamble thereof declare That those who drew up that Order
enlighten the Reader concerning some momentous Instances I would have pass'd it by as deserving no farther Consideration 1. Every thing is said to be Misrepresented But how the Doctor 's own words should misrepresent his own sense is not overeasie to apprehend However Whether there be any Misreport I 'll leave it to the Impartial Reader and consider what Reply is made to what I offer'd in Answer to the Doctor 's Uncomely Accusation 2. He grants p. 38. That the Papists do not so much Envy and Malign the Episcopal Government Neither is it their Principle nor Interest to destroy it Why then should they be brought to act so contrary to their Principle and Interest as to destroy what they so much endeavour to preserve strengthen and establish But 3. He adds Though they are for Episcopacy yet they may design the destruction of a Protestant Episcopacy c. Reply I said That 't was not the Destruction of Episcopacy but the possessing themselves of our Bishopricks that they would be at which may be without any alteration of the Episcopal Constitution so far as 't is Episcopal His running then unto France is nothing to the purpose unless it may be looked on as an intimation of his good will to the Arbitrary proceedings of that Country However I 'le desire our Author to consider That a change of Persons without any alteration of the Episcopal Constitution may most effectually answer the end of the Jesuit For hereby they would be capacitated if ever a Popish Prince should come to the Crown to argue with the common people concerning the Unreasonableness of a separating from Rome from the same Topicks with the â—ean thus The Episcopacy is not pull'd down nor destroyed 't is rather strengthened and more firmly established There is not so vast a deference between the Church of England and the Church I do not say the Court of Râ—me as there is between the Romanist and the Factious Presbyterean behold you have your Bishops still in all their Glorious Vestments a Surpliced Clâ—rgy an Excellent English Liturgy for the Papists in Dublin have their Mass in English which is exactly correspondent to the terms the Papists made the English in the days of Archbishop Laud If you submit to the one when Authority command you why will you not to the other What is the difference For this reason I cannot but be pretty confident that the Jesuits acting according to their own Principles and Interest receive greatest satisfaction from such as are most deeply engag'd to represent the Episcopal Constitution as one most Excellent and Admirable Do not the whole Land know what 't is that gives life unto Jesuitical hopes What are their designs and expectations from a Popish Successor and consequently how mischievous the Destruction of Episcopacy would prove unto that sort of People especially at this Juncture But I must not insist on this lest I be censur'd as an Addresser to the Lords and Commons to pull down Episcopacy a thing the Jesuit would not be at he being more unwilling than by argument unable to oppose it for which reason as our learned Author says Episcopacy is most easily defended against a Roman Catholick i. e. against one that hath no heart to oppose it But 4. Our Author would by all means perswade the world that the Dissenters cast the greatest Reproaches on the first Reformation because they manifest some dissatisfaction with such as impede a further Reformation as if a good work was as soon consummated as begun or as if it had been either impossible in it self or contrary to the design of the first Reformers to carry on the Reformation or as if the present Constitution of Episcopacy had been in every momentous respect as excellent as that begun in King Edwards days whereas 't is well known unto wise men and fully prov'd in my Epistle to the Reverend Dean that 't was impossible the Reformation should be finished as soon as 't was entred on and that the first Reformers in King Edwards days did more in six years than all their successors have since done in almost six-score All which is prudently past over by our Author 5. They stick much on that great Agreement there is between the Present and King Edwards Reformation as if we could not complain on the latter without reproaching the former But this is so weakly urg'd that any Reader of an ordinary capacity may see the vanity of this way of arguing for there is a great difference between that and this time what was almost impossible then might since be easily done But 2. 't is easie to demonstrate that the begun Reformation in King Edward the 6ths days was more excellent than the Present and that instead of carrying on the Reformation it hath been carried back to the great grief of sound Protestants This hath been in part prov'd when I did shew the Propension of Queen Elizabeth to favour Popery out of Dr. Burnet and Dr. Heylin two Sons of the Church though I fear the mentioning of the latter in Conjunction with the former may not be so meet the former being a through Protestant a man of great Worth but the heart of the latter towards Rome for which reason as their Principles are vastly different so should they be kept at a distance by me if Heylin had not acknowledged that to be a truth which I rather believe because found in the incomparable Dr. Burnet He now take notice of another considerable difference between the very Constitution of Episcopacy in King Edward the 6th's time and that in Queen Elizabeths The former was such as was inconsistent with the Popes Supremacy for they were to hold all their Courts in the Kings Name but the latter such as is most easily reduc'd to the exalting the Court of Rome The Government of the Church being taken from the Prince 't is not so difficult to fix it on the Pope Thus there is a difference between King Edwards and Queen Elizabeths Episcopacies I may also add That there is a great difference between the present Constitution and that in Queen Elizabeths if we may believe the Lord Treasurer Cecil who suggests that the Bishops did not look on their Superiority above their Brethren to be of Divine Right as the Dean of Pauls and his Substitute now do For this I will give you an account we have of the Speeches used in the Parliament by Sir Francis Knolles and after Written to my Lord Treasurer Sir William Cecil as I find it in the end of the Assertion To the end I may inform your Lordship of my dealing in this Parliament-time against the undue claimed Superiority of the Bishops over their Inferior Brethren Thus it was Because I was in the Parliament-time in the 25th year of King Henry the 8th in which time first all the Clergy as well Bishops as others made an humble Submission to King Henry the 8th acknowledging his Supremacy and detesting the Usurpation of the Bishop
this Extrinsecal Consideration sufficient to occasion a Difference that is Intrinsecal Moreover to return to his French Monarch Hath not the Experience of many a year assured us That when Monarchs design not the enlarging their own Monarchies they have done all they could to preserve other Monarchies An Aristocracy or a Democracy being things detestable in their eye 7. His answering the Letter of the Council by transcribing part of Sir Francis Walsingham's Letter as recorded in Dr. Burnet bing little to the purpose might have escaped my Consideration had it not been very necessary to suggest How prudently he overlook'd the great Principles on which the Queen grounded her proceedings the one being That Consciences cannot be forced but to be won and reduced by force of Truth with the aid of time and use of all good means of Instruction and Perswasion A Principle unto which if our Clergy would adhere it might have conduced very much to the Peace of the Church This I suppose is a sufficient Reply to the Dean's Substitute The Dissenters oppose Episcopacy and Ceremonies notwithstanding their Antiquity c. The Doctor 's Argument was here set forth to the greatest advantage of his Cause in his own words To which I reply'd That our not embracing Episcopacy c. does not advantage the Papist neither doth our rejecting it even when it pretends to so much Antiquity I having shewn that there was no such strength in their Argument of Antiquity if it fell short of an Absolutely Primitive or an Apostolical Antiquity as theirs really doth they not being able to shew in what part of the Scriptures their Dioâ—san Episcopacy is found it being consider'd as a Creature of Human make by many a Son of the Church yea and once by our great Doctor himself and it hath been prov'd by other hands unanswerably That there is no evidence for such an Episcopacy in the Church the first two hundred years for which reason Mr. Chillingworth's Argument shewing the vanity of such mens pretences about Antiquity that can ascend no higher than the fifth or fourth or third or second Age is it may be as pertinently urg'd as the little intimation of Mr. Ch's sense of the Antiquity of Episcopacy 'T is pleasant then to see with what pertness our Author hopes that our Enquirer will now grow so modest as not to cite Mr. Chil. any more against an Argument from Antiquity The other part of his Reply is as little to the purpose unless a declaiming against Protestant Arguments such as are too strong to receive an Answer be the most effectual way to ruine Popery 'T is true we reject the Popish pretences about Antiquity as futilous many Protestants in the number of which some Nonconformists may be listed having unanswerably proved Popery to be a Novelty However If Popery or Episcopacy be not agreeable to the Scriptures whatever their pretences are to Antiquity they will be found unworthy the consideration of a solid Divine and therefore because he sends me to Bishop Jâ—wel Part 1. p. mihi 539 c. I 'll give the Reader an account of his sense against Harding The Truth of God saith the Bishop is neither further'd by the Face of Antiquity nor hinder'd by the Opinion of Novelty For oftentimes the thing that is New is condemned as Old and the thing that is indeed Old is condemned as New If Newness in Religion in all respects and every way were ill Christ would not have resembled his Doctrine to New Wine c. Arnobius saith The Authority of Religion must be weighed by God and not by Time It behoveth us to consider not upon what day but what things we begin to Worship The thing that is true is never too late Saint Augustine saies The Heathen say The Religion that was First cannot be False as if Antiquity and old Custom could prevail against the Truth The old Learned Father Tertullian saies Whatsoever thing savoureth against the Truth the same is an Heresie yea although it be a Custom never so Old c. This surely is the Protestant Doctrine whence to talk of Antiquity in order to the countenancing that in Religion which finds no favour from the Scriptures is but to advance the Papal Interest who have but little beside the pretence of Antiquity to support their Abominations SECT III. A search for the Schismatick A true state of the Difference between the Church of England and the Protestant Dissenter The Dissenter according to our Author's Notion clear'd from Schisme The Church of England found Guilty Some Remarks on several other passages in the Dean's Defence An Account of some of the Dean's Mistakes The Dissenter no friend to Popery The Conclusion 1. THAT our Divisions advance the Popish Designs is acknowledged But the 2. Enquiry is Who is the Faulty Divider It being the Faulty Divider alone who gives the Papist the advantage The great Enquiry then must be after the Faulty Divider Whether the Conformist or the Nonconformist be the Divider The state of the Case was given in the Enquiry p. 23. where the Principle on which the Dissenters proceed was laid down and improv'd this should have been consider'd by our Author but he was so prudent as to pass it by For which Reason without any Reflections on my Learned Adversary I must mind him of the state of the Controversie and shew wherein he hath exercised his Wisdom in leaping over what he could not handsomly remove out of the way In the Enquiry after the Faulty Divider I shewed wherein the Parties at variance agreed and wherein they differ'd 1. They agreed in those Points commonly called Docirinal or Substantial in contradistinction to lesser things about Worship and Church-Discipline c. They differ'd about what was in the Judgment of the Dissenter Sinful but in the Opinion of the Episcopal only Indifferent 'T is true the Episcopal represent us as a weak People whose Consciences as to those particulars are Erreneous that therefore we must cast off these erring Consciences and submit Our Reply is We seek Heaven for Counsel we study hard for the Truth read with the greatest Impartiality and Freedom the Discourses the Episcopal have written For we can solemnly and with much sincerity declare as in the presence of an Heart-searching God We would with the greatest chearfulness Conform to all the Impositions if we thought we could do it without sin That we are so peevish as to lose the Comforts of a good Benefice merely to gratifie an obstinate Humour if we are in danger of being biass'd one way more than another by carnal considerations 't is towards Conformity For if we conform we are freed from the reproaches and contempt of many from the continued fear of Imprisonment and other uncomfortable severities and in a fair way of abounding with the good things of this life for the supporting our selves and Families But if we conform not we are represented as Factious and Seditious expos'd to the Rage of every vile
Informer in constant danger of Fines c. and of more miseries than I can with delight reherse However though there are considerations enough from the world to byas our minds in a seeking for the Truth to lean towards Conformity yet desiring to approve our selves sincere towards God we find That we cannot without sin conform we cannot without sinning deliberately and knowingly comply with the Episcopal Impositions and if we should notwithstanding conform to live and die Conformists we should knowingly and deliberately sin yea and die under the guilt thereof which is a thing so hazardous to the soul that we durst not touch with Conformity lest we die lest we die eternally We censure not such as do conform because they not lying under the same convictions of Conscience as we do may not by their Conformity run that hazard which we unavoidably must should we against the light of our Consciences comply There is a great difference between those that act according to the directions of their Consciences and such as act contrary thereunto For which reason I wonder that our great Church-men should say that Mr. Baxter represented all Conformists as a company of Perjured Villains meerly because he shew'd that if the Nonconformists should contrary to the Dictates of their Conscience conform they should be guilty of Perjury and several other great sins But though this be the truth yet there are some who will not believe it who say we do we what we can for their satisfaction will count us a pack of Hypocrites For which reason that I might anticipate the censure I laid down the Principle unto which Dissenters do most firmly adhere the discussing which is what they do most sincerely desire The Principle is this That the word of God contained in Scripture is the only Rule of the Whole and of every part of true Religion As for external circumstances as time and place c. being no part of though necessary appendages unto our Religion From this Principle I proceed to this Conclusion That whatever part of the Service of the Church of England is impos'd on us as so necessary a part of our Religion as to be a term of Communion if not agreeable to the word of God in Scripture that Imposition is sinful Our Adversary considers that such as live in England and yet are not of the Church of England do not belong unto the Catholick Church that is they are all in a state of damnation Hence 't is we must according unto him be a member of the Church of England or be damned We are willing with all our hearts to be members of the same Church with them i. e. to be members of the Catholick Church is what we desire But this say they we cannot be but by complying with their imposed terms To which we reply Let their terms be as Catholick as they pretend their Church is and we 'l comply i. e. Let them keep to a few certain and necessary things let them not impose as terms of Union any thing but what is according to the Word of God in Scripture we are satisfied the Controversie is at an end But if they will take on 'em to make that a part of true Religion yea so necessary a part as to make it a term of our communion with the Catholick Church 't is a sinful encroachment on the Prerogative of the Lord Jesus Christ with which we dare not complâ— If they expeâ—t our compliance why do they not shew the Scriptures that declare the things they impose to be so necessary a part of true Religion as to be a form of our communion with the Catholick Church They must not only shew that those things are aâ—reeable to true Religion but moreover that they are so necessary a part thereof that whoever conforms not to them when impos'd is â—pso â—â—sact cut off from the Catholick Church This they can never do and therefore can never clear themselves from being the Faulty dividers When we provoke 'em to shew us what Scriptures direct them to their Impositions we are turn'd off with Where is it forbidden as if they had acted exactly to the Rule * Si objiciant in sacris literis non haberi Invocandos esse Sanctos venerandas Imagines abstinendum à Carnibus in t aliquid ejâ—sâ—nodi non ergo ista esse facienda nos contra objiciamus quidem Efficacius Hâ—c Sacris Literis non Prohiberi atque sine piccato fieri posse quia â—â—hi non est Lex ibi nec prâ—evaricatio Cosâ— Irstit Chriâ—t l. 2. c. 1. Costerus the Jesuit gave his young Scholars If any object Where are those points viz. The Invocation of Saints The worshipping of Images The abstaining from flesh and the like found in Scripture and because not found in Scripture therefore to be rejected To which saith the Jesuit answer thus Ask where 't is forbidden in Scripture if not forbidden in Scripture 't is no sin to observe 'em for where there is no Law there is no transgression So far Costerus To whom we rejoyn That the holy Scriptures being the only Rule of the Whole and of Every part of true Religion if these things be not according to the Scripture 't is because there is no truth in ' em There must be an exact correspondency and agreeableness between the Rule and its Regulate The Regulate must be brought to the Rule and if it doth not agree with it 't is because the Regulate is not Right The word of God in Scripture is the Rule what Religion soever varies from the Rule 't is a false Religion Rectum est Index sui obliqui There are some Religions are larger than the Rule There are other Religions that fall short of the Rule They who embrace any Notion as a part of their Religion which is not to be found in Scripture is too large for the Scripture and such as reject what the Scripture injoins have a Religion too short The one puts the Scripture on the Rack to stretch it to their Religion but the other pares off a considerable part of Scripture that the Rule may not exceed their Religion But such as keep exactly to the word of God in Scripture who neither go beyond nor fall short of it are in the right To make that a part of our Religion which is not to be found in Scripture is to take that for a part of our Religion which God hath not made a part thereof which is sinful How much more so is the making it a term of communion That the things in controversie between the Church and the Dissenter are not to be found in Scripture and consequently are no part of true Religion is evident not only because we can't understand where 't is to be found nor because the Church-men cannot direct us where to find it but because they themselves look on 'em as indifferent i. e. as what is not injoin'd us in the word of God
q. d. as what is not according to the word of God All this being most plain and obvious to an ordinary Capacity that is not biassed by Prejudice c. Let the world judge who is in the FAULT They who keep close to Scripture or they who recede therefrom They who will do any thing but Sin for Peace Or they who will exercise their Authority and impose unnecessary things with the greatest Violence imaginable I say with the greatest Violence imaginable for they are impos'd with such a severe Threatning anrex'd that whoever refuses a compliance is cut off from the Catholick Church and given over to the Devil Hence 't is that they imposing Indifferent things as necessary to Salvation do according to Dr. Stillingfleet's own Rule declare themselves to be the Schismatical Dividers I say according to Dr. Stillingfleet's own Rule compar'd with his Substitutes Notion In the Doctor 's Unreasonableness of Separation p. 213. he saith That there are three Cases wheren the Scripture allow of Separation The last of which is When men make things Indifferent Necessary to Salvation and divide the Church upon that account and this was the Case of the false Apostles who urged the Ceremonies of the Law as necessary to Salvation Now although St. Paul himself complied sometimes with the practice of them Yet when these false Apostles came to enforce the Observation of them as necessary to Salvation then he bids the Christians at Philippi to beware of them i. e. To fly their Communion and have nothing to do with chem From this Rule of Dr. Stillingfleet it must follow That if the Church of England make things Indifferent Necessary to Salvation our Separation from the Church is allowed by the Scriptures yea commanded and enjoyned We must beware of 'em i. e. to fly their Communnion and have nothing to do with them But that things Indifferent are made necessary by the Church of England according to his Doctrine doth appear irrefragably That which is Necessary to our Communion with the Catholick Church is according to his Doctrine necessary to Salvation But Indifferent things are Necessary to our Communion with the Church of England which is One with the Communion with the Catholick Church in that according to him they are made necessary to our Communion with the Church of England which is One with the Communion with the Catholique Church according to his constant Judgment Ergo. Or in other Terms Whatever is made necessary to our being Members of the Catholique Church is made necessary to Savation for to be Members of the Catholick Church and to be in a state of Salvation is the same and to be Members of the particular Church of England and Members of the Catholick Church is one and the same with our Author p. 248. As if it had been said To be Members of the Church of England is to be in a state of Salvation but not to be Members of the Church of England is to be out of a state of Salvation Whence what is made necessary to our being Members of the Church of England is made necessary to our Salvation that is The many indifferent Ceremonies impos'd as terms of our Communion with the Church of England are made necessary for Salvation according to our Author For which reason the Scripture allows our Separation yea the Scripture bids us beware of her that is to fly her Communion and have nothing to do with her Thus the Doctor in conjunction with his Substitute furnishes us with an unanswerable Argument to clear the Dissenter from the odious Sin of Schism which in short is this From such as make Indifferent things Necessary to Salvation we must Separate This is Dr. Stillingfleet's But the Church of England makes Indifferent things necessary to Salvation This is the Dr's Substitutes Notion Ergo We may yea we must Separate that is 'T is the Will of God we should Separate or 't is our Duty and therefore not our Sin to separate i. e. We are not the Schismaticks This is Argumentum ad Hominem and either this Author must quit his Doctrine or acquit us of Schisme But to treat our Author with the greater Civility we 'll suppose him to be so tenacious of his own Doctrine that he 'll rather discharge us of Schisme than abandon his beloved Notions for which reason seeing 't is on all sides acknowledged that there is a Faulty Division among us and consequently a Faulty Divider who is the Schismatick He must be either the Dissenter or the Conformist but not the Dissenter as we have already prov'd from our Author 's own Topicks Ergo the Conformist Here we might have put an end to this Discourse and would do so had not our Author 's fertil Brain furnish'd us with another Argument that doth as fully evince the Conformist to be the Schismatick as the former clear'd the Dissenter In the management of this Argument we 'll consider the Netion of Dr. Peter Gunning and Peirson as compared with our Author The I earned G. and P. in a Conference with the Papists assert That a Superiours unjust casting any out of the Church is Schismatical If the Governours of the Church do by sinful Impositions or unjust Excommunications cast any out of the Church they are Schismatical This our Author won't deny But according to his Notion The Church of England are guilty of such Impositions and do unjustly Excommunicate Dissenters 1. That the Impositions are sinful is evident in that Indifferent things as has been prov'd are made necessary to Salvation The making any indifferent thing Necessary to Salvation is sinful But the imposing indifferent things as terms of Catholique Communion is the making such things Necessary to Salvation Ergo Sinful Ergo The Imposer is Schismatical But 2. Whoever doth unjustly Excommunicate any are Schismatical This is Dr. Gunning's sense But the Church of England if they agree with our Author Excommunicates the Dissenter unjustly Ergo c. That the Church of England Excommunicates unjustly according to the Doctrine of our Author is demonstrable even in that the Church doth as he would have it by Excommunication cast thousands out of a state of Salvation for not complying with little uncommanded things Whence I argue thus To Excommunicate or cast us out of a state of Salvation merely because we cannot comply with what God never commanded us is to Excommunicate unjustly But so doth the Church of England if we may pass a censure on her as our Author provokes us to do for the Church according unto him doth Excommunicate that is shut Heaven-gates against such to whom our Lord Jesus Christ hath promised the opening them To illustrate this with the greater clearness I beseech the Reader to consider That Salvation is promised by Jesus Christ unto all such as do sincerely Believe truly Repent and lead an Holy Life in all Godliness and Honesty Though a man may be daily guilty of lesser Evils yet if he believe in Christ
and renders sincere Obedience to the known Will of God he shall be saved All which may be even with those who being verily perswaded that their compliances with the present Impositions are sinful durst not Conform that is The Promise of Salvation is made by Christ to many who do not conform to the Impâ—sitions of the Church of England But Salvation by our Author is denied unto such their Non-compliance is enough to make 'em Schismatical to cut them off from Christ and the hopes of Salvation which being no ways justifiable in the Conscience of any sober man the Dissenters are unjustly Excommunicated and he that so Excommunicates is Schismatical 'T is most certain That many good Christians cannot conform to the imposed terms of Communion with the Church and that for this single Reason they are Excommunicable if not actually Excommunicated from the Church that is put out of a state of Salvation The which being so 't will unavoidably follow That either the Excommunication is unjust or That the Church hath greater Power than he that is the Lord of it to open and shut the gates of Heaven If the latter then the Church sets itself up above all that is called God in this world and Christ in the other For whereas Repentance towards God and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ is sufficient for our Salvation these add somwhat more to wit an Obedience to new Impositions threatning the neglect with Damnation But if the former if the Excommunication is unjust then according to Dr. Gunning with the addition of our Author Our Ecclesiastical Governours are the Schismaticks The Argument here in short is this He that doth unjustly Excommunicate any out of the Catholick Church is a Schismatick This is Dr. Gunning's But the Church of England shutting those out of Salvation to whom Christ hath promised it Excommunicates unjustly This is our Authors Therefore the Church of England according to the Position of our Author is the Schismatick Hereby we may easily perceive what an admirable Defender the Church of England hath in the Defender of the Dean and how little the true Protestant Clergy of the Church are beholding to this man who insists on such Notions as do necessarily lead judicious men to conclude the Church of England Schismatical But to return to our Author who leaping over all the difficulties though but hinted in the Enquiry runs unto another Question viz. From Ceremonies to Circumstances form the Parts of their Religion to the external Appendages thereunto confounding the one with the other and then runs triumphantly assuring his Reader That 't is impossible to worship God or exercise any act of Religion but it must be in some time or in some place it must be done in some circumstances therefore we may make some things a part of our Religion which God has not At this rate he fills up a great part of his Second Chapter Insisting on nothing but what had its answer in that Enquiry he attempted to confute Therefore if I should say no more than what I have in giving the true state of the Controversie it would be sufficient For it lies on him either to prove to our Conviction that We may without sin comply with their Impositions i. e. He must so far effectually enlighten our Conscience as to help us to see that the Impositions are not sinful and that we may lawfully Conform or shew That we must Conform contrary to the Convictions of our Consciences and render a blind Obedience unto their Commands Believing as the Church believes or they ought to remove the Impositions or acknowledge that our Compliances are not sinful One of these must be done Let him do either and the Controversie will be ended and the Dissenters freed from Schisme But if he cannot enlighten us to see the Lawfulness of their Impositions nor perswade us to render a blind Obedience nor remove the Impositions but plead for their continuance 't will appear That they by imposing what in their Judgments is but Indifferent as things necessary to our Salvation are the Schismaticks This might suffice as a full Answer But that nothing may escape consideration that our Author may think deserves it I le reflect a little on his main strength If there be any force in this Argument says he it consists in these two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with And secondly That the Opinion of Dissenters That indifferent things are unlawful in the worship of God is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of some indifferent things cannot meerly upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks and if the opinion of Dissenters that all indifferent things are unlawful be not a sufficient reason for parting with them then there may be no fault in the Episcopals will not nor a sufficient justification or excuse in the Dissenters cannot p. 9. First saith he If there be any force in this Argument it consists in two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with This is his mistake he should have said That if there be any strength in the Enquiry it lyes in this viz. No one indifferent Ceremony must be made so necessary a part of Religion as to be a term of Communion 'T is this he should have considered For you sin by insisting on any one or more indifferent things so zealously as to make 'em terms of Communion with your Church and consequently with the Church Catholick so as to deny us a right to Christ and Salvation for a mere non-compliance You can part with your indifferent Ceremonies without sin and open the door of Salvation to the wretched Dissenter if you will even when they cannot without sin comply with your intolerable Impositions The indifferent things you impose you impose as terms of our Communion with you which you make to be the same with Catholick Communion that is of Salvation 2. You add the second thing viz. That the Opinion of Dissenters That Indifferent things are unlawful is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not say you lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of Indifferent things cannot merely upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks c. You should remember that I distinguished between Ceremonies and Circumstances between what is a part of Religion and Intrinsecal thereunto and what is Extrinsecal only But you run to external Circumstances that are necessary in Thesi which is off from the point in hand You run from what is Indifferent to what is Necessary as if we called you to part with any necessary thing whereas there is never any indifferent Ceremony that is grievous to our Consciences but you may part with or cease to impose 'em and yet
worship God But to divide necessary circumstances of Action from the Action is impossible A thing we no way desire 'T is true as you assert A man who is to remove from London to York is not bound either to go thither on foot or on horseback or in a Coach or in a Waggon each of these ways are in themselves indifferent but yet if he will travel to York he must use one or ether of those ways of Motion not one in particular is necessary yet one or other is But what is this to our purpose What though the Partition-wall between Ceremonies and Circumstances be broken down and they all mingled together and all must be consider'd alike but as Circumstances What will this help you To keep to your pretty Allusion with one necessary Addition viz. One hath not strength to walk on foot from London to York another cannot bear the riding in Coach yet to York they must go If you 'll keep to the point before us you must say to the person that cann't walk to York Some way of Motion is necessary to your going to York if you 'l go thither therefore you shall walk or not go thither And to the other that can't ride in a Coach if you 'll not go thither in a Coach you shall not go at all and yet give him the Strapadâ— for not going thither This is the Case and how easily may they reply unto you on your calling them to hasten to York on these impossible terms or to the Bisliâ—ps Colehouse We would go to York with all our heart on Horseback or in a Waggon but to walk or to ride in a Coach we cannot You can give us leave to go thither on horsback if you will but you will not we would go but go in Coach or walk we cannot Here is a division your will not and our cannot who now is in fault That they cannot is evident because of weakness and Infirmity of body That you can permit 'em to go on Horseback is as unquestionable but yet you will not Thus we have the strength of our Author's Reply You must get into the visible Catholich Church or to prison and you cannot get in but you must either use some external circumstances in some time or in some place c. therefore this time or no time this place or no place Sir by your good favour as you acknowledg this or the other particular circumstance to be indifferent and that other circumstances may be chosen if not this to make either of these indifferent circumstances a necessary tâ—rm of communion is sinful and schismatical To make of a little thing so great a bar to shut thousands out of heaven is what you will never be able to answer when you shall appear before the Tribunal of a righteous God But as to the true state of the Controversie 't is another thing you make that a part of Religion which God hath not made you impose uninstituted ceremonies and in many things recede from the Apostolical Institution and call on us on pain of damnation to comply with you We must comply or be cut off from the Catholick Church even from the body of Christ from all hopes of salvation These things being thus plain I 'le gratisie our Authors desire in considering his Logick If the Dissenters can without sin says he obey their Governours in indifferent that is in lawful things but will not and the Episcopal would be content to part with indifferent things for union but cannot who is the Divider What must be done for Union Must the Dissenters comply in things wherein they can without sin or must the Episcopal sin and lose their peace with God fot Union p. 29. This is called by our Author an Argument but why I cannot imagine however let it be so wherein lies its strength or how comes it to pass that this cannot be answered without a shewing Sophistry to be where 't is not If there be any force in this Argument it must be either in this viz. That the Impositions are in the judgment of the Dissenters Lawful or Indifferent which may be submitted unto without sin Had this suggestion been true we would grant him the whole he desires viz. That the Dissenters refusing to do what is Lawful in their own judgment to be done for Union they are Faulty But 't is notirious That the imposed terms are of such a nature that they cannot be submitted unto by the Dissenter but he must grievously offend the most high God to the wounding his own conscience If its strength lyes not there it must in this That the Episâ—â—pal would be content to part with indifferent things but cannot And why can they not What is the matter that they cannot part with toys and trifles to take many a thousand within the pale of the Church and thereby help 'em to Heaven The things are still supposed indifferent by our Author and therefore a parting with 'em is not contrary to any Law nor sinful Why then can they not without sin part with what they can part with without sin This is surely mysterious They cannot part with that without sin which they can part with without sin and Yet will not part with it though according to their own judgment their not parting with their indifferent things tends to the unavoidable destruction of souls They know the Dissenters unless these indifferent things be past by must be kept out of the Church of England that is out of the Catholick Church say they and remain to the last hour of their life in a state of damnation Whence then did I say What must must be done for Union I may now say What must be done to save the thousands of Souls for whom Christ died Must the Episcopal part with what they can without sin and take the Dissenters into the Catholique Church and thereby save their Souls or must the Dissenters sin that they may be saved What Is there no way to Heaven for English Dissenters but their complying with sinful Impositions T was said in the Apostles days that We must not do evil that good may come thereof Then surely if we will be of the Apostles judgment We must not sin to save our Souls Our Unrighteousness doth not cannot commend the Righteousness of God But Before I dismiss this Point that the Reader may be fully satisfied that I abuse not our Author I must beseech him to consider 1. That our Author hath in a way different from the greatest or rather the better part of the Clergy asserted That our not holding external communion with the Church of England is a cutting our selves off from the Catholick Church a putting our selves out of the Way of Salvation This is the main scope of his discourse A notion concerning which Dr. Stillingfleet's thoughts are desired 2. That notwithstanding the absolute necessity there is of the Dissenters returning to the Church of England that they may become members
Christian world Let us have but such Churches and such Bishops with Presbyters and Deacons as were in the Churches of Corinth Jâ—râ—â—lem and Antioch in the days of Clemens James and Ignatius and the Countrey Conformist is satisfied and so would Mr. B. and most Nonconformists in England besides Whether this kind of Episcopacy be a new name for Presbytery and whether this Author have proved it I leave to such Readers to judg as can consider as well as read his Book But how comes this Gentleman to know that the Countrey Conformist is such a one as those that raised a Civil War some years ago and pulled down Church and State to set up a Presbytery Can a man oppose nothing that is defended by some Church-men but he must immediately be reported a secret Traytor or Rebel Is this becoming Christianity or the Preachers of it Do these men believe the Gospel that dare slander and traduce their brethren in such a villanous manner 'T is a word I received from him I hope he will take it agen Tho' it should be granted the Miter supports the Crown yet surely the Errors and Vices of Church-men give no support unto it and I am of opinion that a man may speak for peace and against the opinions and corruption of Churches and Church-men and yet be a very good subject to his Prince notwithstanding that perpetual buz of Rebellion that is suggested by some Huffs in the prejudice of such men and their discourses But why did I enquire how this Monsieur came to know that the Countrey Conformist was such another as those that raised the Rebellion in forty three The nature of the assertion betrays the Author of the Information and there needs no great skill in Magick to find him yet lest he should be ignorant of him I will be so kind as to tell his name he is called Beclzebub the Father of lyes and I hope when he writes agen he will beware of him and hold better correspondencies for his information Pag. 7. he adds Our Conformist doth plainly deride the Dean for thinking he can justifie our present Episcopacy and then quotes his words as followeth But the Dr. makes no question but he shall confute this fanciful man and make it appear that our present Episcopacy which Mr. B. opposes is agreeable to the institution of Christ and the best and most flourishing Churches And easily he may if Mr. B. be such a pitiful Antagonist But what is there in these words that savour of derision I have read and considered them agen and agen and I cannot find it by all the search that I can make The Learned Dr. had pitied Mr. B. and given sufficient evidence of the mean opinion he had of his performances in his late Books and particularly in his Treatise of Episcopacy and is it to deride the Dean to say he may easily confute so contemptible an Adversary This I confess I cannot understand And yet after all I am not satisfied that the Learned Dr. or his Defender hath confuted what Mr. B. hath said in prejudice to our present Diocesan Episcopacy he says that the enlargement of Diocesses hath varied the species of Episcopacy and gives many arguments for the proof of it which neither the Dr. nor this Gentleman hath attempted to answer I know the latter of them says that the enlargement of Diocesses doth not vary the species of Bishops and that a great and a little King are specifically the same Governours But I can by no means believe this to be true of Bishops whatever it be of Kings For the Diocess of the Pope is only bigger than that of the Bishop of London or Worcester or Lincoln and yet I think they are Governours specifically distinct and I hope this Gentleman thinks so too Yea give me leave to suppose that there were but two Bishops in England there would be only a gradual difference in their Diocess and yet I suspect some men would think that the Government were specifically altered but let not our Author infer that this supposition is my desire for he is apt to pervert mens words for I will assure him that I do not desire it but would have many more Bishops not less In fine 't is my opinion that the needs of the Church and the abilities of Bishops to perform the work of the Episcopal Office ought to determine the extent of their Diocess Let their Diocesses be as big as they can manage and no bugger and if so I am sure they must be reduced to smaller limits than now they are No Bishop can discharge the proper work of his Office in a thousand or five hundred Parishes nay I will say That there are many single Parishes in England that will employ the most industrious Bishops on earth If it be said that they do perform the proper work of their Office in many Parishes I utterly deny it that the work is not done and thence proceeds the prophaness and wickedness of particular Churches and thence follows the Schisms and Separations that have and do vex this Church at this day Pag. ib. Our Author proceeds He pleads i. e. the Countrey Conformist for taking off the Impositions in general without any limitation to receive the Presbyterians again into our Church which before he told us were Subscriptions Declarations c. and some few Alterations besides That is faith our Commentator either a form of Prayer or at least our present Liturgy Ceremonies and Administration of religious Offices Now he is an admirable Conformist indeed who at once grants away the Episcopal Office and instead of it setteth up a Bishop in every Parish or either an Anti-Christian Bishop of Bishops or an Ecclesiastical Minister of State to head and govern them and alters the whole frame of our Worship and into the bargain leaves every man to do as he saith and all this without injuring our present Constitution Nay he concludes That all those that hinder the Union of Presbyterians with this Church by continuing the Impositions are Factors for the Pope In this paragraph are a great many falshoods He charges the Countrey Conformist with pleading for the Admission of the Presbyterians into the Church without any Impositions Subscriptions or Declarations This was very ill done of him if it be true which I do a little suspect because this Gentleman is so apt to misunderstand and misrepresent the words and meaning of his Adversaries The Country Conformist hath declared in several places of his Books That he pleads the Cause of none but tolerable Dissenters and for the Admission of none into the Church but such as can Officiate in our Parochial Assemblies but how this difference can be made without Impositions or Subscriptions is not imaginable And therefore to say no more I think this Author hath injur'd and wronged him in this report of his judgment And wheras by those few Alterations besides that the Country-Conformist speaks of he understands either a Form of
afraid this is all that is attainaable in this Nation yea and in the Christian world whatever our Author may say to the contrary and that those that will have more shall have less 'T is with Christian Churches as 't is with some weakly constituted bodies if no violent remedies be used they may drill out for many years but if you will be tampering and nothing will satisfie you but a perfect health you will soon destroy them If Churches that have some defects may be endured God may have some worship and we may see some peace among Christians but if like Ecclesiastical Mountebanks we will be perpetually trying experiments upon sickly and diseased Churches we may disturb the peace of Christians destroy the Churches and leave few to call upon the name of God in the world What I have discoursed I think may with some probability be expected from Mr. H.'s design But can we expect so much from the design of this Gentleman Or is there the least shadow for it For my part I can see no such thing he must have better eyes or worse than I have that can see any advantage like to betide Protestants by uniting in a General Council or in a Patriarch or Pope ruling by the Canons thereof And yet I think this is that our Author would be at For he affirms That it is not enough or sufficient to Christian Unity that the Christians of one Nation or one Congregation be united among themselves unless they be united to the Catholique Church For if there be but one Church a whole Nation may be Schismatical as well as single persons c. Well then I am past all doubt that Protestants will never agree to the Canons of a General Council nor to the Government of a Patriarch or Pope according to those Canons and then they are all Schismaticks and if the Princes in whose Dominions they live can be prevailed withal to do it they are to be Proscribed Banished sent to the Galleys and Mines or be chastised at home by Axes and Halters And I think this is a very pious and charitable Design and becoming a Protestant Doctor and Son of the Church of England But by the way give me leave to add that whereas this Gentleman hath undertaken to vindicate the Learned Dean of St. Pauls from what Mr. Humfrey hath said against him concerning the Constitutive Head of this National Church I am shrewdly afraid that he has given up the Doctor 's Cause and left it to shift for it self as well as it can or rather asserted that of his Adversary The Doctor had said That we deny any need of a Constitutive Regent part or one Formal Ecclesiastical Head as essential to a National Church This Mr. H. confutes and this Author affirms and defends but grants a pars imperans subdita or a ruling and ruled part p. 567. Church-Governours united and governing by consent says he are the governing part Christian people in obedience to the Laws of our Saviour submitting to such Government are the ruled part and all this is true without a Constitutive Regent Head pag. ibid. This methinks looks strange That the Bishops by consent which consent they are obliged to by the Laws of Christ should be the pars imperans and yet not the Constitutive Regent Head is in my opinion a Paradox For I would fain learn what it is that makes a Constitutive Regent Head to any Body Is it not Right and Obligation to Rule Doth not this make Kings and Princes Constitutive Heads of their Principalities and Kingdoms And doth not this make Aristocracies and Democracies the essential Regent part of those Commonwealths over which they do preside Have the Bishops of this Nation Right and Obligation to rule all the Christian People in it This I think our Author will grant And how he will deny them to be the Constitutive Head of the National Church with any consistency of Reason I do not yet understand This Gentleman indeed says That though a National Church be one body yet ' t is not such a body as he Mr. B. describes nor can be according to its Original Constitution which differs from Secular Forms of Government by that ancient Church-Canon of our Saviour It shall not be so among you And then adds A National Church as governed by consent may be one body in an Ecclesiastical though not in a Civil Political sense That it cannot be a Body consisting of Head and Members in a Political sense according to Mr. B's description I do not find proved by that Church-Canon of our Saviour That the Ecclesiastical and Civil Forms of Government do differ I readily grant but are there no other Differences but such as are essential A Regent formal Head and Members is of the essence of political bodies and that is no body that is without them whatever ever this Gentleman says to the contrary Many other defects are consistent with the being of Political bodies but if they want a Head they are no Body The Church differs in many things from Civil Political bodies and particularly in this that it is not armed with civil power and jurisdiction p. 566. by which I suppose this Author means Coercive power But what then Hath the Church no Constitutive Head because it hath no Coercive power or because it cannot imprison fine and destroy its members Masters and Parents and Tutors can't do these things and yet most men think they are the Regent formal Heads of their Families children and pupils Well then against that marvellous Oracle of our Author That a National Church governed by consent may be a body in an Ecclesiastical tho' not in a civil political sense i. e. tho' it may be a Church yet it cannot be a Commonwealth or Kingdom I will advance this proposition That a National Church is a body in a political sense as well as in an Ecclesiastical or else it is no body at all and that according to his own doctrine And if he will defend the Deans cause he must write a book in his own confutation which I think he ought to do in revenge on himself that he hath hitherunto betrayed it as the Dr. has the Church of England's Our Author I remember somewhere calls Mr. Humfrey Mr. Baxter's Eccho when yet Mr. Humfrey's Answer to the Drs. Book came out before Mr. Baxter's When the Eccho now can be proved to go before the Voice or the Voice to follow the Eccho then shall the Deans determination of the question between him and them concerning the Constitutive Head of the National Church be held as unanswerable as this Gentleman affirms it in one place and as admirable as he cryes it up in another Having said thus much on the behalf of Mr. H. I shall add a few lines more before I return to the vindication of the Countrey Conformist The learned D. of St. Pauls had charged the Nonconformists with joining with the Papists for a general Toleration and
summe or substance of the Apostle in his Epistles altogether I say also that this is manifestly here destitute of reason The Apostle requires that all Christians should walk by the same rule in things whereto they have attained Therefore they must walk by the same rule in things whereto they have not attained Such is his force This walking by the same rule I am perswaded is a phrase or expression onely signifying the doing as others doe Now because they that had the knowledg of their liberty might doe as others did and were to use it must those that had not that knowledg do so likewise The contrary is apparent for they shall sin against their consciences if they doe The like case is here The Conformist among us looks upon all and every of those things that are injoyned about Uniformity in the Church to be lawfull and he values himself for perfect in this discerning indifferent things but the Nonconformist thinks these things unlawfull and that he shall sin if he yields to them and what if herein he be weak must the weak and perfect must both these here now walk by the same rule or do as one another do Nay must there be a Rule made on purpose by Authority about these very things wherein the difference lies to force them to act both alike when one of them if they do cannot possibly act in faith and so must needs sin Nothing more contrary to what I have laid down Nothing more contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostle I will add if by this Rule there be more meant then a Phrase and some Rule he will account there must be I would fain know why this Rule should be any other then that of the same Apostle otherwhere As many as walk according to this rule peace be upon them and the Israel of God And what is that Rule but Christianity it self the great Rule of the Christian Religion or Doctrine of the Gospel And what then will follow from thence The Doctor I remember reflects upon my Peaceable Design for being called an Answer to his Sermon I will undertake now upon this Supposition that that Title was as fit for my Book as this Text was for his Sermon Because we must walk according to the general rule of the Christian Religion in all things that are required of us as we attain to the knowledg thereof Therefore we must Conform to the Canons and Liturgy of the Church of England This is the Doctors Sermon upon that Text and I will tell you the Inference now of his Defender upon that Sermon Therefore must all that Conform not in the excluding themselves from Communion with the Church of England be excluded also out of the Catholick Church and consequently out of the Kingdome of Heaven By the way since I wrote this I was reading Doctor Owen and I find that he falls in with the last Interpretation of the Rule and he hath these words upon it Let the Apostles rule be produced says he with any probability of proof to be his and we are ready to subscribe and conform to it To which Doctor Stillingfleet Replies This is the Apostles rule to go as far as they can and if they can go no farther to sit down and not to break the peace of the Church Unto this Dr. Owen Answers The Apostles rule is not that we should go as far as we can but that so far as we have attained we must walk by the same rule I interpose here and say to the Doctor This is this must be the rule of the Apostle supposing that rule be meant as he understands it that is of the great rule of faith and love or law of the Gospel For this is part of that Rule It is part of that love we owe the Magistrate and our Conforming Brethren to go as far as we can or to come as near as we can to them But I answer then to the Dean It is part also of the same Rule to go no farther then we can Our duty of love requires the one Our duty of faith requires the other We may not doe any thing which we cannot doe in faith but we break the rule as it is the rule of faith as well as if we do not doe what we can we shall break the rule as it is the rule of love Whatsoever is not of faith is sin Now when the Dean hereupon goes on and teaches us that we must sit down and not break the peace of the Church when we can go no farther I Reply there is a breaking the peace of the Church in his sense or in òurs If we understand breaking the peace of the Church in his sense which is going from the Church to our Meetings I say he is out and that we must break the peace of the Church if this be the breaking it for this is that which is required of us in that branch of the Rule that we must go no farther then we can But when we go to private Meetings and leave the Church in this case where we suppose a man cannot act in faith or with perswasion in his conscience that it is lawful for him to go thither it is no breaking the peace of the Church in our sense but a part of our duty wee say of going no farther then we can We go as far as we can with them in holding the same Doctrine and Sacraments in acknowledging them as true Churches maintaining a Communion in love with them and doing all the good offices we can to them and when we can go no farther in this lyes our duty of going no farther then we can that we meet for worship otherwhere To assemble I say for worship is one part of the rule Not to assemble but to forbear any thing when we cannot act in faith is another part of the rule Put them both together and it comes to this that To go to other meetings when we cannot go to Church must be walking by the rule if this rule be the great rule of faith and of love out of question This I speak in the person of Doctor Owen who can and do go to Church my self but there is one eminent thing said by that eminent great man and very much accomplished Doctor We do and shall abide by this Principle p. 250. that Communion in faith and love with the administration of the same Sacraments is sufficient to preserve all Christians from the guilt of Schism though they cannot communicate together in some rites and rules of Worship and Order If the Doctor makes good this he does our work and till the Dean debates this he says nothing To return I observe in the fourth place for the Digression it self does but lead me hither that this Authour does industriously endeavour to bring the Controversie between Conformist and Nonconformist to this issue If the Church requires of us any things as necessary to her Communion which are sinful the schism is
Officers of God Fundamentally and not Formally it may be granted But when we speak of the Officers of Christ in Contradistinction to the Officers of the King we mean such whose Authority is from God and remains good though the Prince should oppose it as in the case of the Primitive Officers of Divine Institution who being forbidden to Preach in Christs name could reply Whether we shall obey God or Man Judge ye The Office of a Presbyter or Congregational Bishop is so much of God that what right soever the Magistrate may have concerning Nomination Election or Presentation or Appointing of any such Ecclesiastical Ministers his Prohibition cannot make void that Commission he hath received from Jesus Christ But such as are Officers of the King whether about the matters of the Lord or about the King i. e. whether Circa sacra or about Civil Affairs 't is in the Power of the Supream Magistrate to give or take his Commission as it pleaseth him yea to direct to the Number of such Officers appointing them their peculiar work and to alter and change as the necessity of Affairs and State of the National Constitution shall require There must be a regard had unto the present temper and state of the Kingdom in which the Church is and a suiting the Ecclesiastical Affairs so far as they may have an influence on the State after such a manner as is most conducive to the more firm establishment of the Fundamental Constitution and consequently Peace of the State to which end the Civil Magistrate must still firmly adhere to that known Rule by which King Henry professed to walk which is expressed in the necessary Erudition viz. The Scripture doth teach That all Christian People as well as Priests and Bishops as all other should be obedient unto Princes and Potestates of the World For the Truth is that God Constituted and Ordained the Authority of Christian Kings and Princes to be the most High and Supream above all other Powers and Officers in this World in the Regiment and Government of their People and committed to them as unto the chief leads of their Commonwealths the Cure and Oversight of all the People which be in their Realms and Dominions without any exception and to them of Right and by Gods Commandment belongeth not only to prohibit Unlawfull Violence to correct Offenders by Corporal Death or other punishment to Censure Moral Honesty among their Subjects according to the Laws of their Realms to defend Justice and to procure the Publick Weal and Common Peace and Tranquility in Outward and Earthly things But Especially and Principally to Defend the Faith of Christ and his Religion to conserve and maintain the true Doctrine of Christ and all such as be true Preachers and Setters forth thereof and to abolish all Abuses Heresies and Idolatries and to punish with Corporal Pain such as of malice be the occasion of the same And Finally to Oversee and cause that the said Bishops and Priests do execute their Pastoral Office truly and faithfully and especially in those points which by Christ and his Apostles were given and committed unto them and in case they shall be negligent in any part thereof or would not diligently execute the same to cause them to redouble and supply their lack And if they obstinately withstand their Princes kind monition and will not mend their Faults then and in such case to put others in their rooms and places And God hath also commanded the said Bishops and Priests to obey with all humbleness and Reverence both Kings and Princes and Governours and all their Laws not being contrary to the Laws of God whatsoever they be and that not only propter iram but also propter Conscientiam that is to say not only for fear of punishment but also for discharge of Conscience Thus the Power of the Magistrate over all Persons to wit Ecclesiastical and Civil is according to the Ordinance of God and that 't is a Part of the Magistrates Office to Defend the Faith of Christ to maintain the true Doctrine and the Preachers thereof and to Abolish all Abuses c. the which must be done not only by keeping to the Rule of the Gospel but in conjunction therewith by taking a special care that no unnecessary thing be suffered that in its Tendency is destructive of the Peace of the State If the present constitution of the Government of the Church as it is National and of humane Right onely be in any Respects Inconsistent with the Publick Weal of the Kingdom t is necessary that it be alter'd especially when an Alteration in some little things may abundantly contribute unto the Lasting Peace both of Church and State But if the Church Government as Diocesane or National be of Divine Right there can be no Alteration of it and consequently seeing the setting up any of the Kings Officers to Inspect Ecclesiastical Affairs is an Altering the Diocesan Constitution the Prince durst not though encouraged by an Act of Parliament enter on it What is of Divine Right is Sacred and must not be touch'd 't is dangerous to come too near that Mount For which Reason how mischeivous soever the Ecclesiastical-National-Government may in Process of time be unto the Civil the Civil not the Ecclesiastical must be Altered That there may be an Adjusting matters in debate between the Diocesane and the State the State must submit unto the Diocesane For the King according to this Hypothesis hath nothing to do with Church Affairs which are wholly by the word of God confined to Churchmen among whose number the King cannot be justly mention'd neither may the King take any Cognizance of what is done among them nor may they hold their Courts in his but only in their own Name or rather in Jesus Christs A Notion so inconsistent with his Majesties just Prerogative and the Powers of Parliaments that as it doth destroy the Former in like manner it doth so very much limit the Latter as to Alter the Fundamental Constitution of our Government By this time I presume it may appear with some Conviction to the Reader 1. That a Parochial or Congregational Church Government is according to the Church of England Jure Divino 2. That the Diocesane or National Government as such is Jure Humano and for its particular Form must be such in all ages as our Civil Governours Judge most meet as a Means for the Preservation of Parochial Discipline and the great Ends of the Civil Constitution These things being so A Declaring this true Church of England Principle to be still according to the Sentiments of our Governours will Relieve tender Consciences among Dissenters and sufficiently gratifie any moderate Conformist to the Ending all our Divisions without an Embasing his Majesties Prerogative 1. The Establishing a Parochial or Congregational-Church-Discipline by Law is the great thing the Dissenters desire and what may be done consistently with the Antient Constitution of the Government of this
Realm to the fixing the desired Firm and lasting Union among all sorts of sound Protestants These Assemblies once established as so many Compleat Particular Churches whose Pastors have full Power for the Administring all Ordinances and the exercising Discipline over those who do freely and of choice submit thereunto may notwithstanding lesser Differences be considered as United unto one another in that they Profess the same Faith Preach the same Word and Administer the same Sacraments For the Proof hereof consult the Necessary Erudition where t is said That the Unity of the Holy Church of Christ is not divided by Distance of Place nor by Diversity of Traditions and Ceremonies diversesly observed in divers Churches for good Order of the same And though in Traditions Opinions and Policies there was some Diversity among them i.e. the Churches of Corinth of Ephese c. likewise as the Church of England Spain Italy Pole be not separate from the Unity but be one Church in God notwithstanding that among them there is great distance of Place Diversity of Traditions not in all things Unity of Opinions Alteration in Rites Ceremonies and Ordinances or Estimation of the same such Diversity in Opinions and other outward Manners and Customes of Policy doth not dissolve and break the Unity which is in One God One Faith One Doctrine of Christ and his Sacraments preserv'd and kept in these several Churches without any Superiority or Preheminence that one Church by Gods Law may or ought to Challenge over another Thus Particular Parochial or Congregational Churches may be United in One God One Faith One Doctrine of Christ and his Sacraments even where there is some difference between them in lesser matters What though in one Parish there is a Liturgy in another a Directory shall this hinder Union Don't even the Papists themselves acknowledge that the Church of England was very closely United even among themselves notwithstanding the several different Offices there were in use among us in the times of Popery One Office after the use of Sarum another after the use of York of Bangor c. and yet all United Moreover what more common than to observe many little differences in Civil Corporations even where they are all United in one head A consideration sufficient to evince the Union of Parochial Churches to be Possible notwithstanding some Remaining Differences in Customs c. In these Kingdoms there are a multitude of Particular Corporations and little Policies whose Customs and modes of Government within themselves are very Different The particular Laws by which they are govern'd as a Particular Body Corporate are of as many different kinds as there are Cities Towns or Parishes but yet All United in that they swear Alleigance to his Majesty and submit themselves to the General Laws of the Land The different Customs of different places do not in the least break the Union of the Nation And why may it not be so in the Church What Reason can there be given why the Union of many a Civil Society or Association may be notwithstanding the different Customes are among them but the Union of many Particular-Parochial-Churches cannot be unless they all agree in every little thing Methinks it is as Reasonable to plead for a destroying the Particular Customes and Charters of Burroughs Corporations and Cities as the only way to Union in the Civil Government as 't is to assert That nothing but an Uniformity among every Parochial or Congregational Church can Unite us in the Ecclesiastical What though there are some differences among Parochial Churches as to their Customes and modes of Worship so long as they agree in One Faith One Lord One Baptism So long as they all Profess the same Faith Preach the same Word Administer the same Sacraments and submit unto the same Civil Government So long as they all Swear Allegiance to to their Prince and Subscribe any Test to assure the World they are sound Protestants the which being so what hinders a firm and lasting Union Certainly This is enough to shew that their Union if no more is as much as that between One City and another One Corporation and another and that their differences are no greater if so great than those between one City and another The which being so An Altering the Present Laws about Conformity and an Establishing such New ones as shall be Judged necessary by our Governours for the defence and safety of a Parochial or Congregational Church-Discipline as well as for the Regulating his Majesties Officers Circa Sacra will Unite us and put an end to that Horrid sin of Schism that hath these many years abounded in the midst of us Let the Dissenters be permitted to Embrace the Laws and Customes of their Fore-fathers in the Apostles days about Church-Discipline and the Mode of Worship and they are Relieved the which may be done without any Injury to the Conscience of any sound Protestant of the Episcopal Perswasion I say 2. This cannot but satisfie any moderate Episcoparian who may if he please firmly abide by those Ceremonies he now doth He may still Read the same Prayers among such as are of his own Opinion He may wear the same Vestments and address himself to his Majesties Officer the Lord Bishop as unto his Ordinary for Councel and Advice And if his Ordinary or Diocesan be an Elder for that is left to the Supream Magistrate to appoint he may look on him though in truth as such he being only the Kings Officer Circa Sacra as a Bishop who is of an Order Superiour to that of a Presbyter and so exercise Disciplene as he Receives Encouragement from him If there be any entring on the Ministry who think a Diocesane Episcopacy to be Jure Divino and is called unto a Parish or Congregation of the same Judgment This Candidate may if the Kings Officer be an Elder and of the same mind with him apply himself unto him as unto his Diocesane and receive Orders from him and do all things as now unless our Governours Judge meet to make any Alteration as to the use of some Ceremonies Only let none be by Law compelled to do so Let those that are so weak as to think a Diocesane Episcopacy to be of Divine Right enjoy the Liberty of their Consciences the which being attended but with the vouchsafing the like Liberty unto others I know not why they may not be satisfied We are not for the Pulling down Lord Bishops nor for an Alienating Church Lands If it seem good to our Governours to continue them we only desire that the Nature of their Office be declared to be no other than what it was Antiently in this Kingdom which is That they are meerly the Kings Creatures That all they do must be in the Kings Name and by vertue of a Commission receiv'd from him That as such they are only the Kings Magistrates that act Circa Sacra That their work is only to see that the Bishops or Presbyters
of Expediency or Brotherly Correspondence or on the force of Civil Laws For when the Christian Belief had not the support of Law Every Bishop taught his own Flock the best he could and gave his Neighbours such an account of his Faith at or soon after his Consecration as satisfied them and so maintain'd the Unity of the Church The Formality of Synods grew up in the Church from the Division of the Roman Empire and the Dignity of the several Cities which is a thing so well known and so plainly acknowledged by the Writers of all sides that it were a needless Imposing on the Readers Patience to spend time to prove it Such as would understand it more perfectly will find it in de Marca the late Archbishop of Paris's Books de Concordia Imperii Sacerdotii and in Blondels works de La Primaute de l'Englise None can Imagine there is a Divine Authority in that which sprang from such a Beginning The Major part of Synods cannot be supposed to be in matters of Faith so assisted from Heaven that the lesser part must necessarily Acquiesce in their Decrees or that the Civil powers must always measure their Laws by their Votes especially where intrest doth visibly turn the Scales so far Dr. Burnet The contrary unto which being asserted by the Deans Substitute 't is Apparent that he doth abundantly recede from the true Church of England not only to the Reproach of his Profession but of the first Reformation and grief of the sober and moderate Conformist This I thought necessary to suggest that I might engage the Reader to consider with what Injustice this Author treats not only those who dissent from the Church in some things but the Sober Conformist also who is a through Church man by Reprsenting us all as Enemies both to Church and State as if the adhereing unto Old Protestant Principles about Church Discipline had been the Overt Act of a Spirit Seditious and Phanatical Having thus so fully shewn How easy t is to put an end to the mischevous Divisions which have for some years past prov'd very dangerous to this Kingdome I will not inlarge on every little thing that our Authour may think deserves our Animadversions The Rude and slovenly methods he hath taken to asperse his Adversaries are such as do rather evince the Feebleness of his cause than deserve the the Regard of any sober Person His talk about the Impossibility of Union between the Church of England and the Dissenter because of the many Important Differences there are among our selves is confuted by the Present Union of the Authours of the Ensuing Treatices who though they differ in little things as much as any the One being a Confor the other a Nonconformist the third of a Uniting Spirit in the middle between us both yet are we all heartily agreed in the things that would Unite us Moreover it were easy to make it appear that the differences among the Dissenters in General about Worship and Discipline are rather Nominal than Real and that their Union is in a manner already accomplish'd The Notions we insist on in opposing the Deans Substitute are truly Protestant such as are owned and embraced by the Famous Hooker Dr. Feild Mr. Chilliggworth and Dr. Burnet and after a Signal manner by the Country Conformist who hath exprest himself in these Sheets with Gravity and Candor He is aware of the design of this Author as well as we as its Tendencie is towards Rome and is sensible that the methods taken in the opposition some of the Clergy make against the Peaceable Dissenter do Justifie the French in their Rigorous and most cruel Persecutions There is to the letter of Mr. Humfrey to me at the end his late Paper added Entitled Materials for Union which together with this Preface if we offer'd no more will prove the things I have said to be Feasible and alone serve to that Firm and Lasting Union which is chiefly aim'd at in these our joint endeavours To conclude The peace of the Church of England and the Greatness of the King who is head of it being things most desireable to every good Protestant and true Subject we have in these Papers shewn our good will to doe something towards the advance thereof Which being submitted to the Superiour thoughts of some one who is in a higher Sphere of Ability for the cultivation of it and of place for the representing it without prejudice to our Sovereign we do hope it may both be well accepted by him and take with every body else who do truly honour the King seek Concord and love good men Sep. 16. 1681. Stephen Lobb The Author not being able to attend the Press desires the Candid Reader before be peruses the ensuing Discourse to Correct these momentous Errata Pag. 11. l. 9. r. is to have a Right p 17. l. 14. dele them p. 29. l. 38. for chain r. chair p. 36. l. 37. for Catholick Colledge r. Supream Governing Heads p. 74. before l. 18. r. I 'le now consider the Deans third Argument which is p. 76. before l. 4. r. The Deans fourth Argument which at this time only deserves Animadversions is our Divisions give great Advantage to the Papists and the Dissenters by their Separation have caused the Devision Rep. p. ib. l. 5. for the 2. r. 2d the l. 7. r. not p. 78. l. 28. for Form r. Term. A Reply to the Defence of Dr. Stillingfleet's Unreasonableness c. CHAP. I. A Reply to the Reflections on the Title of the Enquiry SECT I. The Introduction The Acts of the Enquirers pretended Immodesty Examined The Dissenter vindicated from the Reproach of ruining King and Kingdom The Civil War the product of Jesuitical Councels as is confess'd by Dr. Heylin The VVar begun by the Episcopal on both sides The tendency of the Deans Defence towards Popery as 't is a revival of the Grotian Design THE Defence of the Reverend Dean of Pauls Unreasonableness of Separation containing little in it of Argument more than what we find in the Dean's own Treatise might pass unanswered had not the Author by a fuller Discovery of the Design of his Party which are but a few made it necessary to shew to the world whither it leads For in this Defence there are hints enough given to tempt an Unprejudiced and Impartial Reader to fear he hath engag'd himself too deeply in that Design that was seemingly but begun by the Dean For which Reason I will in this with as much modesty as the subject-matter will admit and this Author will let me enjoy shew That as I did not abuse the Dean of Pauls when in the Modest and peaceable Enquiry I detected some of his Mistakes even so if we must pass a Judgment on the Doctor answerable to the Character that is to be found of his Substitute in the Defence 't is apparent that they are conspiring in a Design which the Learned and Conformable Clergy will give him little
thanks for The Doctor 's Substitute as hereafter I will from his own words prove doth sufficiently declare what his party would be at which is a point I 'm sure that will meet with opposition from such as are true Sons of the Church whereby the Controversie if closely followed must cease to be between Conformist and Noncormist it must be between Conformist and Conformist It looks as if there were among our Church-men some resolv'd to revive Laud's Design as 't is well known there are many others among them who highly value the Principles and Temper of that great Protestant Prelate Abbot Laud's Predecessor in the See of Canterbury between whom the Scussle must at last end That this may with the greater Conviction be evinc'd I will in this Reply to the Defence of the Dean c. confine my self to the Author 's own words as compared with what is more than suggested in the Writings of Bishop Bramhall and some other Sons of the Church of England the which with due clearness I shall not be able to compass if I follow our Author in his disorderly way of Writing For which reason I must keep to the Method I took in the Modest and Peaceable Enquiry and bring what calls for my observation into its proper place The whole then he hath offered in Answer to the Enquiry may be reduced to these Heads 1. His Reflections on the Title of the Enquiry 2. His Censure of the Author's Design 3. The Defence of the Dean I 'll begin with the First The Author reflects on the Title as if the Discourse notwithstanding the specious pretences of the Title had not been as Modest nor as Peaceable as suggested in doing which he spends one whole Chapter it may be not fâ—nding matter enough in the Discourse it self to enlarge so far as to write any thing that might deserve the name of an Answer or countenance the Title given his Great Book I could very easily therefore as one unconcern'd pass by this first Chapter if there had not been more in it than the representing me as a person who deserve not the Character of being either Modest or Peaceable But the Overt acts of Immodesty which are insisted on by this Author being such as cannot but be of an ill Tendency I must consider ' em The first instance of Immodesty is thus express'd He begins his Epistle to the Dean with observing how industrious the Papists have been ever since the Reformation to ruine England and the Churches of Christ in it which he sufficiently proves from their Rebellions and Insurrections in King Edward's days the Spanish Armado in Queen Elizabeths the Gun-Powder Treason in King James's c. and the late Hellish Conspiracy which was designed for the utter Extirpation of the Protestant Religion and the universal Destruction of all the Professors thereof whether Episcopal or Dissenter But this modest man saies our Author takes no notice That King and Kingdom Church and State have been once ruined already by such Modest Dissenters and may be in a fair way for it again if we suffer our selves to be Charmed and Lulled asleep by such modest Inquirers We are aware Sir what a Popish Zeal would do and what a Factious Zeal has done and think our selves concern'd as much as we can to countermine the Designs of both But however I confess it was very modestly done to pass over this that while men are zealous against Popery they may fear no danger from any other quarter Rep. Whether the mentioning the Rebellions and Insurrections of the Papists in King Edw. the 6th days the Spanish Armado in Queen Elizabeths the Gunpowder-Treason in King James's the Hellish Plot of late discovered be an extraordinary act of Immodesty or Unpeaceableness let any temperate man among the Church of England judge that please Is it an Act of Immodesty to relate such notorious Truths or of Unpeaceableness to mention the Dangers we are in on the account of Popish bloody Plots This it may be is not the Crime but what follows which is This modest man saith our Author takes no notice That King and Kingdom Church and State have been once ruin'd already by such modest Dissenters and may be in a fair way for it again if we suffer our selves to be Charm'd and Lull'd asleep by such Modest Inquirers Rep. Hereby we know what the Authour would be at 't is as if he had said This Modest Enquirer is very immodest and quarrelsome for not imitating the Jesuitical Clubs who are contrary to the Act of Oblivion raking in old sores calling us to the remembrance of 41. to make us look back on the actings of Archb. Laud and his Faction the steps they made towards Rome the bones of contention they cast in between a Protestant Prince and a Church of England Parliament the Civil War begun by the Episcâ—pal who were Chief in each Army 'T was this the Enquirer indeed past over in silence wishing with his very Soul that the Episcopal Clergy had been either so wise or honest as to have done their utmost to have prevented those Ruins which their own Divisions brought on these Nations For 't is well known to many hundreds now alive who they were that had an Influence on those Unnatural Broils and Intestine Quarrels and whoever will consult Mr. Baxter against Hinekley or rather Mr. Rushworth and Dr. Heylin will see That the Sons of the Church of England more on both sides the active persons concern'd in the very beginning of those Troubles But those things the Inquirer was loath to mention it being as Unnecessary as Unsuitable to his Peaceable Design However seeing our Author will not be satisfied unless some notice be taken of those that once already Ruin'd King and Kingdom c. I will out of Dr. Heylin's Life of Laud a good Record at least in the sense of the Dean's Defender shew who they were that did it In a perusal of which 't will appear That 't was the Papists who had a sole hand in the Plot no Protestant I verily believe ever design'd what was the unhappy product of the Hellish Conspiracies of the bloody Papist This hath been long ago discover'd by Dr. Du Moulm and since by Dr. Oates and here most exactly related by Dr. Heylin a Son of the Church in these words viz. A Confederacy was formed amongst them i. e. the Papists consisting of some of the most subtle heads in the whole fesuitical Party by whom it was concluded to foment the Broils began in Scotland and to heighten the Combustions there that the King being drawn into a War might give them the opportunity to effect their Enterprize for sending Him and the Archbishop to the other World Which being by one of the party on Compunction of Conscience made known to Andreas ab Habernsfield who had been Chaplain as some said to the Queen of Bohemia they both together gave intimation of it to Sir William Boswell his Majesties Resident at
have been for his purpose and rectification In his Defence of the Church of England Tom. 2. Disp 2. c. 2. he saith The Communion of the Christian Catholick Church is partly internal partly external Among many other things in discoursing of internal communion 't is added That it is to judg charitably one of another To exclude none from the Catholick Communion and hope of salvation either Eastern or Western or Southern or Northern Christians which profess the ancient Faith of the Apostles and primitive Fathers established in the first General Councils and comprehended in the Apostolick Nicene and Athanasian Creeds This granted by our Author as describ'd by Bramhall seeing the Faith contain'd in these Creeds is professed by the Dissenters 't is queried Whether or no this Gentleman doth not fall short in this respect of Catholick internal communion by excluding the Dissenters from the Catholick communion and hope of salvation Moreover as to external communion says Bramhall There are degrees of exclusion every one that is excluded is not cut off from the Catholick Church for external communion may sometimes be suspended more or less by the just censures of the Church clave non errante as in the primitive times some were excluded a caetu participantium only from the use of the Sacraments others a caetu procumbentium from Sacraments and Prayers also and others a caetu Audientium from Sacraments Prayers and Sermons and others a caetu Filâ—lium from the society of Christians yea and as it may be suspended it may be waved or withdrawn by particular Churches or persons from their Neighbour Churches or Christians in their Innovations or Errors Nor is there so strict and perpetual an adherence required to a particular Church as to the universal Church This surely is enough to intimate how sudden our Authors thoughts were for had he but deliberated on those things as this great Bishop did he would not assert so confidently That the separating from a particular Church that is in the Universal is a separating from the Universal Leaving therefore our Author to receive further light from this Bishop concerning his own notion I 'le make my address to the Reader beseeching him to apply himself to our Protestant Divines for an answer to what is said against the dependency of the Church of England on Foreign Churches such as Rome c. And as to what he saith concerning Schism from the Universal Church which p. 256. saith he is when any shall separate from that part of the Catholick Church where they dwell and set up any distinct Churches meerly for some greater degree of purity This is so like what the Author of Charity maintain'd by Catholicks insisted on that the Memorandums given by the famous Mr. Chillingworth will be sufficient to enab'e an ordinary capacity to answer the whole he hath asserted about Schism 1. That not every separation but a causless separation from the external communion of any Church is the sin of Schism 2. That imposing upon men under pain of Excommunication a necessity of professing known errors and practising known corruptions is a sufficient and necessary cause of separation and that this is the cause which Protestants alledg to justifie their separation from the Church of Rome To which I must add That this is the cause which Dissenters alledg to justifie their separation from the Church of England it being uncontroulably true That the professing known errors and the practising known corruptions is imposed on Dissenters on pain of Excommunication as hath been proved in Mr. Baxter's first Plea for Peace never answered but only nibled at by some inconsiderate Scriblers The Dissenters are convinc'd in conscience that if they continued in your communion they should sin against God What can be offered against this I know not unless you 'l say unto us thus viz. If this your pretence of conscience may serve what Schismatick in the Church what popular seditious brain in a Kingdom may not alledg the dictamen of conscience to free themselves from Schism or Sedition No man wishes them to do any thing against their conscience but we say that they may and ought to rectifie and depose such a conscience which is easie for them to do This is what hath been frequently urg'd by the Clergy yea by the Dean of Pauls But seeing these words are taken out of the mouth of a Papist the answer shall be no other than what I find in the mouth of a son of the Church the famous Chillingworth who asserts That whoever is convinced in conscience that the Church of Rome errs cannot with a good conscience but forsake her in the profession and practice of her errors and the reason hereof is manifest because otherwise he must profess what he believes not and practice what he approves not which is no more than your self in thesi have divers times affirmed For in one place you say 't is unlawful to speak any the least untruth Now he that professes your Religion and believes it not what else doth he but live in a perpetual lye Again in another you have called them that profess one thing and believe another a damned crew of dissembling Sycophants And therefore in inveighing against Protestants for forsaking the profession of those Errors the belief whereof they had already forsaken what do you but rail at them for not being a damned crew of Sycophants The same may be said as to the Dissenters who are in conscience convinced that they must profess to believe what really they do not should they conform But as to what the wicked may pretend as to conscience take the Author's answer 'T is said that a pretence of conscience will not serve to justifie separation from being Schismatical which is true but little to the purpose saith Mr. Chil. seeing it was but an erroneous persuasion much less an hypocritical pretence but a true and well grounded conviction of conscience And therefore though seditious men in the Church and State may pretend conscience for a cloak of their Rebellion yet this I hope hinders not but that an honest man ought to obey his rightly informed conscience rather than the unjust command of his Tyrannous Superiors Otherwise with what colour can you defend either your own refusing the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy I may add Otherwise with what colour can the Dean and his Substitute defend their so firmly adhering to the present Constitution But to return to the third Memorandum 3. That to leave the Church and to leave the external communion of the Church at least as Dr. Potter understands the words and I think I may safely add as every Protestant but a Grotian understands is not the same thing That being done by ceasing to be a member of it by ceasing to have those requisites which constitute a man a member of it as Faith and Obedience This by refusing to communicate with any Church in her Liturgies and publick Worship of God This little Armour
if it he rightly placed I am persuaded will repel all those batteries which you threaten shall be so furious To use the words of Mr. Chil. And for this reason I will now shew the Reader That the Model the Deans Substitu â—â—aâ—h given us is what is not only in it self admirably adjusted to accommodate the difference between one Faction of the Church of England and the Church not the Court of Rome for that is their Distinction but moreover 't is very like that of Archb. Laud for which he was censur'd as a Favourer of Popery This I will attempt to perform by giving you an account of the Charge that was brought in against Laud in the House of Commons by the Lord Faulkland a true Son of the Church and the Reply is made thereunto by Dr. Heylin whereby 't will appear that as there is an agreement between Laud's Design and our Authors even so this as well as that was to bring the Church of Rome and England together § 1. Take My Lord Fauklkland's Speech made in the House of Commons as represented by Dr. Heylin in the Life of Archbishop Laud p. 383. A little search saith he will find them to have been the Destruction of Unity under pretence of Uniformity To have brought in Superstition and Scandal under titles of Reverence and Decency to have defiled our Church by adorning our Churches to have slackned the strictness of that Union which was formerly between us and those of our Religion beyond the Seas an Action as unpolitick as ungodly Or we shall find them to have resembled the Dog in the Manger to have neither Preached themselves nor suffered those that would to have brought in Catechising only to thrust out Preaching and cried down Lecturers by the names of Factions either because their Industry in that Duty appeared a reproof to their neglect of it or with intention to have brought in Darkness that they might the easier sow their Tares while it was Night And by that introduction of Ignorance introduce the better that Religion which accounts it the Mother of Devotion In which saith he they have abused his Majesty as well as his people For when he had with great wisdom silenced on both parts those Opinions which have often tormented the Church and have and always will trouble the Schools they made use of this Declaration to tye up one side and to let the other loose Whereas they ought either in discretion to have been equally restrained or in Justice to have been equally tolerated And 't is observable that the party to which they gave this Licence was that whose Doctrine though it was not contrary to Law was contrary to Custom and for a long time in this Kingdom was no oftner Preached than recanted c. We find them introducing such Doctrines as admitting them to be true the truth could not recompence the Scandal or such as were so far false as Sir Thomas Moore says of the Casuists their business was not to keep men from sinning but to inform them Quà propè ad peccatum sine peccato liceat accedere So it seemed their work was to try how much of a Papist might be brought in without Popery and to destroy as much of the Gospel without bringing themselves into danger of being destroyed by Law To go yet further some of them have so industriously laboured to deduce themseves from Rome that they have given great suspicion that in Gratitude they desire to return thither or at least to meet it half way Some have evidently laboured to bring in an English though not a Roman Popery I mean not only the out side and dress of it but equally absolute a blind dependence of the People upon the Clergy and of the Clergy upon themselves And have opposed the Papacy beyond the Seas that they might settle one beyond the Water § 2. I 'll now proceed to the Reply Dr. Heylin makes to this Speech of the Lord Faulkland 1. He produces the several Protestations of the Archbishop made in the Starchamber p. 389 390 c. and at his Tryal before the Lords and on the Scaffold just before his going out of this world of his Innocency as to this Besides Dr. Heylin doth insist on his Conference with Fisher the Jesuit the enlarging that Conference as an Argument that the Archbishop was no Papist 2. Touching the Design of working a Reconciliation betwixt us and Rome 't is acknowledged by Heylin and the Design applauded Take his own words I thought when our Saviour said Beati Pacifici it had been sufficient warrant to any man to endeavour Peace to build up the Breaches in the Church and to make Jerusalem like a City which is at Unity in it self especially where it may be done not only Salvâ Charitate without breach of Charity but Salvâ Fide too without wrong to Faith The greatest part of the Controversies between us and the Church of Rome not being in the Fundamentals or in any Essential point in the Christian Religion I cannot but look upon it as a most pious work to endeavour an Attonement in the Superstructures So far Heylin goes to shew both the Lawfulness of the endeavours of a Reconciliation and then the Possibility of obtaining of it The which Dr. Heylin no sooner evinces but he admits that such a Reconciliation was endeavoured betwixt the Agents for both Churches and gives an hint upon what terms the Agreement was to have been made and how far they proceeded on it 3. As to Reconciliation saith he out of a Book entituled the Pope's Nuncio affirmed to have been written by a Venetian Ambassador at his being in England between the Churches of England and Rome there were made some General Propositions and Overtures by the Archbishops Agents they assuring that his Grace was very much disposed thereunto And that if it was not accomplish'd in his Life-time it would prove a work of more difficulty after his Death That in very truth for the last three years the Archbishop had introduced some Innovations approaching near the Rites and Forms of Rome That the Bishop of Chichester a great Confident of his Grace the Lord Treasurer and eight other Bishops of his Grace's party did most passionately desire a Reconciliation with the Church of Rome that they did day by day recede from their antient Tenents to accommodate with the Church of Rome that therefore the Pope ought on his part to make some steps to meet them and the Court of Rome remit something of its Rigour in Doctrine or otherwise no accord will be The Composition on both sides was in so good a forwardness before Panzany left the Kingdom that the Archbishop and Bishop of Chichester had often said That there were but two sorts of people likely to impede and hinder the Reconciliation to wit the Puritans amongst the Protestants and the Jesuits amongst the Catholiques Let us next see the judgment and relation of another Author in a Gloss or
Comment on the former entituled The English Pope Printed at London in the same Year 1643 and he will tell us That after Con had undertook the managing of the Affairs matters began to grow to some Agreement The King Required saith he such a Dispensation from the then Pope as that his Catholique Subjects might resort to the Protestant Churches and to take the Oaths of Supremacy and Fidelity and that the Pope's Jurisdiction here should be declared to be but of Humane Right And so far had the Pope consented that whatever did concern the King therein should have been really performed so far as other Catholick Princes usually enjoy and expect as their due And so far as the Bishops were to be Independent both from King and Pope there was no fear of breach on the Pope's part So that upon the point the Pope was to content himself amongst us in England with a Priority instead of a Superiority over other Bishops and with a Primacy instead of a Supremacy in these Parts of Christendom which I conceive no man of Learning and Sobriety would have grudged to grant him It was also condescended to in the name of the Pope that Marriage might be permitted to Priests that the Communion might be administred sub utraque specie and that the Liturgy might be officiated in the English Tongue And though the Author adds not long after that it was to be suspected That so far as the Inferiour Clergy and the People were concerned the after performance was to be left to the Popes discretion yet this was but his own Suspicion without ground at all And to obtain a Reconciliation upon these advantages the Archbishop had all the reason in the world to do as he did in ordering the Lords-Table to be placed where the Altar stood and making the accustomed Reverence in all approaches towards it and accesses to it In beautifying and adorning Churches and celebrating the Divine Service with all due Selemnities in taking care that all offensive and exasperating passages should be expunged out of such Books as were brought to the Press and for reducing the extravagancy of some Opinions to an evener temper His Majesty had the like Reason also for Tolerating lawful Recreations on Sundays and Holydays But the Doctor goes on If you would know how far they had proceeded towards this happy Reconciliation the Popes Nuncio will assure us thus That the Universities Bishops and Divines of this Realm did daily embrace Catholick Opinions though they professed not so much with Pen or Mouth for fear of the Puritans For example They hold that the Church of Rome is a true Church That the Pope is Superiour to all Bishops That to him it appertains to call General Councils That 't is lawful to pray for the Souls of the departed That Altars ought to be erected of Stone In sum That they believe all that is taught by the Church but not by the Court of Rome Another of their Authors tells us as was elsewhere noted That those amongst us of greatest Worth Learning and Authority began to love Temper and Moderation That their Doctrines began to be altered in many things for which their Progenitors forsook the Visible Church of Christ As for example The Pope not Antichrist Prayers for the Dead Limbus Patrum Pictures That the Church hath Authority in determining Controversies of Faith and to interpret Scriptures about Free-will Predestination Universal Grace That all our Works are not Sins Merit of good Works Inherent Justice Faith alone doth justifie Charity to be preferr'd before Knowledg the Authority of Traditions Commandments possible to be kept That in Exposition of the Scripture they are by Canon bound to follow the Fathers And that the once fearful names of Priests and Altars are used willingly in their Talk and Writings In which compliances so far forth as they speak the Truth saies Heylin for in some points through the Ignorance of the One and the Malice of the Other they are much mistaken there is scarce any thing which may not very well consist with the established though for a time discontinued Doctrine of the Church of England The Articles whereof as the same Jesuit hath observed seem patient or ambitious rather of some sense wherein they may seem Catholick And such a sense is put upon them by him that calls himself Franciscus â Sancta Clara as before was said So far Heylir Thus to carry on this Recenciling Design all the care imaginable must be taken to humour the Papist not only by prosecuting the Puritan with the greatest severity but the Pope must not any longer be stigmatized with the name of Antichrist all exasperating passages in any Book brought to the Press must be expung'd not one word of the Gunpowder-Treason for said Baker the Bishop of London's chaplain We are not now so angry with the Papists as we were twenty years ago and that there was no need to exasperate them and therefore the Book concerning the Gunpowder-Treason must by no means be reprinted the Divine Service must be in some respects altered that whereas the Reformers in Queen Elizabeth's time had a greater kindness for the Pope than those in H. 8. and Ed. 6. manifested by expunging a clause against the Pope viz. From the tyranny of the Bishop of Rome and all his detestable enormities Good Lord deliver us Even so in imitation Archbishop Land changes some phrases in the Book of Prayers for the fifth of November So far a Church of England Dr. To which I might add several other instances but I wish there had not been the woful occasion of insisting on so much By this time the Reader may see cause to suspect at least the Deans Substitute who in the Defence of the Dr. gives us the scheme of the old Grotian model so much esteemed by the Archbishop Laud who in his walking towards Rome kept most exactly thereunto But notwithstanding this caution must be had that we reproach not all the Church of England as if they had been such as this Author for I do verily believe there are very few this day in England among the Conforming Clergy who will approve of this mans notion but probably may judg themselves as much concerned to oppose it as any among the Dissenters I 'm sure Abbot Archbishop of Canterbury and Usher Primate of Ireland were persons of quite another principle and temper And not only Abbot and Usher but if we may judg of a Queen Elizabeth Protestant by the Writings of the famous Hooker and Dr. Field we may be sure that this man to say nothing of the Dean hath notwithstanding the great talk of the glory of the first Reformation forsaken the notion the old church of England had of the church and of such as are judged Schismatical falling in with the French Papacy about Church-Government as I will evince in the next Section SECT II. The Deans Substitutes agreement with the Papists about Schism even when he differs from the
In contradiction to which the Dean's Substitute's Assertion is p. 226. That Excommunication casts a man out of the visible Society of Christ's Church not of this or that particular Church only but of the Whole Christian Church He that is cast out of one Church is thereby cast out of all and separated from the Body of Christ which is but One. And therefore such are out of a state of Salvation As if it had been said in opposition to Mr. Hooker Such as are Excommunicate are shut out clean from the Visible Church yea and from the Mystical Church A Notion that Mr. Hooker considers as held by none but Papists for he immediatly addresseth himself to the Church of Rome thus With what congruity then saith he doth the Church of Rome deny that her enemies whom she holds always for Hereticks do at all appertain to the Church of Christ How exclude they us from being any part of the Church of Christ under the colour and pretence of Heresie when they cannot but grant it possible even for him i. e. the Pope to be as touching his own personal perswasion Heretical who in their opinion not only is of the Church but holdeth the chief place of Authority over the same The like may be said by way of Answer unto our Author Moreover the Learned and Judicious Dr. Field Son of the Church is as full in contradicting what is asserted by our Author For this Dr. of the Church discoursing about the Schismatick says lib. 1. c. 13. That their departure is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remain parts of the Church of God Schismaticks notwithstanding their Separation remain still conjoyn'd with the rest of God's people in respect of the profession of the whole saving Truth of God all outward acts of Religion and Divine Worship Power of Order and Holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remain parts of the Church of God The like is asserted of such as are cast out by Excommunication c. 15. But I 'll not enlarge any further having sufficiently evinc'd that the Opinions of this man who treats the Dissenters with so much scorn and contempt are such as were antiently by Queen Elizabeths Protestants exploded as Popish and at this very time I verily believe rejected by the greatest part of the Episcopal Clergy and that the Contest now is not so much between Dissenters and the Church of England as between a few under the name of the Church of England on the one part and the greater number of the Church of England with the Dissenter on the other The former under the notion of running down Dissenters are preparing materials to meet the Papist The other to the end they may the more effectually prevent the Designs of Rome have sent forth their Plea for the Nonconformist finding themselves concern'd to check the Insolence of those who in this day of common Calamity would ruine the conscientious Protestant Dissenter This being so I must beseech the Reader not to misapprehend me in what follows as if I had been speaking reproachfully of the Church of England because I cannot but discover how agreeable the Sentunents of the Deans Substitute about Church-Government are unto those embrac'd by the French Papist That I may the more clearly shew what are the mischievous Tendencies of our Author's Notion about Church-Government I will give in short the most distinct and truest state of the Controversie I can shewing what is granted by sound Protestants and what not What are the Doctrines of the Papists How far the French and Italian Papist agree and wherein they differ and in what respects the Dean's Substitute concurs with the French § 1. All are so far agreed as to conclude That God hath had a Church at all times in every Age of the World We might be very particular in considering the divers Denominations under which the Church falls answerable to the divers capacities of the Members thereof and the divers states in which it is and hath been which I shall at this time pass by § 2. That the Church is but One one Body united to one Head § 3. That this One Church must be considered as the Members thereof are scattered up and down the World c. and as they are joyned together in particular Societies The former is call'd the Church Universal the other a Particular Church The Papists themselves do acknowledge That the Church must be considered as Universal and as Particular though they look'd on the Universal to be such whose whole existence was in Particulars as Universale est unum in multis singularibus Whence it follows That such as are not members of a Particular Church they belong not unto the Catholick Visible Church This very Notion hath been embrac'd by some to wit the Old Independents but of late it hath been generally exploded by Divines of that name they leaving it to entertain such as the Dean's Substitute § 4. That the Church of Christ is under Government There is such a thing as Church-Government Jure divino The Papists both French and Italian The Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational or Anabaptist heartily agree in Thesi about this § 5. The great difference is concerning what that Church-Government is which is of Divine Institution Where 't is seated whether in a Particular or in the Universal Church and whether it be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical or mixt § 6. The Papists with whom the Doctor 's Substitute doth agree assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government That all Church-Officers belong to the Universal Church and have an Original Right to govern the whole Universal Church Take the notion as found in the Defence We must saith he consider that all the Apostles had relation to the whole Church and therefore though being finite creatures they could not be every where at a time but betook themselves to different places and planted Churches in several Countreys and did more peculiarly apply themselves to the government of those Churches which they themselves had planted and ordained Bishops to succeed them in their care and charge yet their Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church did still remain which they might re-assume when they saw occasion for it and which did oblige them to take care as far as possibly they could that the Church of Christ suffer'd no injury by the heresie or evil practises of any of their Colleagues P. 212. § 7. The Protestants excepting some obscure Writers assert particular Churches to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government among whom there are these differences 1. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from the Congregational and Anabaptistical about the extent of particular Churches e. g. the latter concluding that their number must be no more than are capable of personal communion the former contrarily judg That a company of a greater extent may be
Universal Church are in the number of French Papists Thus Cassander yea and Grotius as to Church-Government were for a French Papacy Whether the Dean's Substitute be or be not I 'le leave to the impartial censure of the judicious Râ—â—der who is desired to consider his notion as compared with that of the Parisians 1. The Dean's Substitute doth suggest That the Universal Church is the first Seat of Government 't is a political organiz'd Body in which there is a Pars Imperans Subdita the Bishops in their Colledg being the Governours or Pars Imperans and all others of the Universal Church the subdite part It may be our Author to gratifie the Dean will deny the Universal Church to be a political organiz'd body as indeed he doth but 't is even when he 's resolv'd to assert That the Universal church is the Seat of Government and Discipline as if there could be any Government in any Society without a governing and governed parts But so it is as a National even so the Universal church with him is not a political body that is 't is not such a body unto whose constitution a pars Imperans and subdita is necessary even when its constitution is such that it cannot be but there must be in it some Governours and other Governed Therâ— is not a Regent part in the Catholick Church but there is a Governing part that is there are Governours viz. the Catholick Bishops in their Colledg who are the Governours of the Catholick church Thus our Learned Gentleman in one place endeavouring to fetch the Dean off from that difficulty Mr. Humphreys had driven him unto concerning the constitutive Regent part of the church of England as National doth say The Dean answers in my poor opinion with great judgment and consideration We deny any necessity of such a constitutive Regent part For though a National church be one body yet it is not such a political body as Mr. B. describes i. e. there is no such Government as cannot be without a Pars Regens Subdita p. 562. And yet he grants That Church-Governours united and governing by consent are the pars Imperans and christian peoplo in obedience to the Laws of our Saviour submitting to such government are the pars subdita p. 565. All which is true saith he without a Constitutive Regent Head i. e. There is a Governing part or a pars Regens or to speak English a Constitutive Regent part or Head without a Constitutive Regent Head The like is asserted of the Universal Church namely That it is a Church governed by the Colledge of Bishops which Colledge of Bishops are the Pars Imperans though not the constitutive Regent part For we must allow him to wallow in his contradictions But a Governing part there is in the Universal Church which Governing part is compos'd of Bishops II. The Governours of the Universal Church are Catholick Bishops in Council who though they are equals and as such have no Superiority over one another p. 213. yet the Colledge or these Bishops assembled have Authority and command over any of its collegues that is every single Bishop is under the Authority and command of this Foreign Council III. The Catholick Church is One when it is not rent and divided but united and coupled by the cement of Bishops who stick câ—ose together p. 596. The result of all is That the Catholick Church of Christ being one Visible Political Body it is a compleatly Organiz'd body on Earth hath its Governing and Governed parts The Visible Governing part being a Terrestrial Numerical Head though collective viz. A Colledge of Bishops a General Council A Notion that doth not only subvert the present constitution of the Church of England that thinks not it self accountable to any such Forreign Power but moreover in it self as grosly absurd as 't is suited to the French the Cassandrian or the Grotian Model leading us all to Unite with all the other parts of the Catholick Church by rendring an unwarrantable Obedience unto such a Governing Power as is seldom in being and when so as dangerous and of as destructive a tendency to the Government of Jesus Christ as that of the Italian Papacy But whether our Author had a clear prospect of this Intreague when at first he was put on it I 'll not venture to determine it being sufficient that I have fully proved That the New-Modell'd Episcopacy of this Gentleman is the same with that of the French which is as inconsistent with the old-establish'd Episcopacy of our Church as is the Italian Papacy For if our Author may safely exceed the bounds of those Laws that do with the greatest Severity forbid our Appeal to any Forreign Power by addressing himself unto a Forreign Colledge Why may not another presume to make his Appeal to the Court of Rome What Reason can be given for the One which will not prove cogent for the Other especially to such who living where they have constant experiences of the excellency of a Monarchical Government in the State may be easily induced to conclude Monarchy as admirable in the Church and then farewel Impossibilities viz. General Councils a Roman Monarch in the Church being much more desirable Having thus given a true state of the Controversie whereby we find our Author to agree exactly with the French Papist about Gâ—vernment asserting the Universal Church as such to be a Governed Body in which there is a Governour and the Governed 't will be requisite that as I have shewn what are some of the Absurdities which flow from it that I do moreover evince it to be in it self unsound and false That this may the more clearly and with the greater conviction be performed I will be so just as to do our Author all the right imaginable by taking notice what he seems to assert and what he 's resolv'd to deny and accordingly proceed to the strictest disquisition after the Truth Our Author asserts That the Universal Church as such is the Seat of Government 't is a Body under Government as much as if it had been said There must be in it a Governing and a Governed part It being impossible that Government should be without Order which Order is secundum sub Supra Wherever there is Government there must be a Superiour part Governing and an Inferiour Governed There must be Dominus Subditus This our Author seems to grant when he doth to this Assertion of the Government of the Universal Church add his thoughts about the Governours thereof which he saies are the Universal Bishops assembled in Council But alrhough this is what our Author doth assert he doth notwithstanding resolutely deny the Universal Church to be a Political Body what he saith of a National that he asserts of the Universal Church both which are Govern'd Societies but neither a Political Body p. 564 565. All which is to fetch off the Dean from Mr. Humphrey's and Mr. B's unanswerable Queries
relief if such as our Author could prevent They must do all you exact or else no peace to be expected they must comply with every iota or no Union Moreover when they have conformed to every impos'd iota they must also separate themselves from all the good Christians in the Land that are not of their persuasion in every thing or be still Schismatical yea though a man conforms if he be more of a Câ—ristiaâ— temper than our hot and fiery Author that is if he be but compassi nate towards Dissenters shewing a tenderness to their Consciences 't is enough to make him the object of their rage Witness he Countrey Conformist who notwithstanding the greatness of his Learning and the excellency of his temper discovered in his Remarks is treated by the Dean's Substitute Pref. p. 6. as one who is for raising a Civil War for the pulling down Church and State to set up a Presbyterian Parity Thus they deal with such as are for Peace and yet would be thought to be for great Abatements for peace sake as men sincerely dispos'd to unite with us that is they are so if it may be without parting with one iota for Union The High-flown Conformists with whom only our present Controversie is are very much for Union even when 't is most obvious that the utmost they are for is the exposing the Dissenter Let the Dissenters do what they can these men will not be pleased There are several sizes among the Dissenters some can Conscientiously do more for Union than others can but they that do the most are not freer from the lash of their Tongues and Pens nor from the execution of their Laws than the other If they come not to Church then they are Disobedient Seditious Factions and what not If they do go to the Church they are Judasses Catalines Protean Religionists Hobbists c. These things consider'd Let any moderate man judge what 't is they 'll part with for Union what are those Iota's Not that I accuse all Conformists but a few even those only who are of the same stamp with our Author who seem to raze the foundations of the present Constitution For I am confident that there are many of the very Clergy who desire nothing so much as the Peace of the Church and the relieving tender Consciences And as for the Magistracy 't is evident that as few or none delight to execute the Laws against Dissenters even so 't is in the heart of our Sovereign the House of Lords and of the Commons of England that an Expedient be found out for the uniting Protestants and the easing those burdens that have so long lain on Dissenters so that through God's Grace we may see a happy Union among Protestants even when the Dean and his Substitute will not part with an Iota for it But you 'll say the Dr. makes Proposals for Union in the very Preface against which I write Answ 1. If the Doctor contradicts himself whose fault is that But 2. 'T is true the Dean made a Proposal of some Abatements in order unto Union but unto whom Let our skilful Interpreter the Dean's Substitute declare The Dean saith We do heartily and sincerely desire Union c. The meaning of which is saith our Dean's Interpreter that we are sincerely willing to make any Condescensions for Peace-sake which will not overthrow the Church of England nor insinuate a false and scandalous Accusation of the Unlawfulness of our Constitution and Rites of Worship which we cannot do with a safe Conscience because we believe the contrary c. And we are not so charitable to give ease to other mens Consciences to injure our own and thereby condemn the Reformation c. In answer unto this I must say what I did unto the Dean Enquiry p. 33. It must be observed That Dissenters not Conforming to Episcopacy and Ceremonies is a judging them Unlawful which is in the Opinion of our Churchmen a casting a Reproach and Dishonour on the Reformation of the Church of England c. To which I add That the Churches parting with any of those Rites of Worship which the Dissenters cannot conscienciously comply with may insinuate into the minds of some men the Notion of their Unlawfulness Whence if there must be no Abatements made but such as do not insinuate an Unlawfulness in the Episcopal Constitution nor in the Rites of Worship what manner of Abatements can there be made 'T is evident then that the Doctor 's Proposal made with such Restrictions and Limitations for Union is but a more plausible way of denying it But what is the great Reason why there must be no such compliance as may be attended with such Insinuations but this 'T is inconsistent with the Honour of the Reformation or rather of the Reformers For I remember that when the talk was about blasting the Honour of the first Reformation the meaning was the casting a reproach upon Cramner Ridley c. the first Reformers And why may we not understand it now in the same sense in this place And if so How is the Charge untrue or how comes it to be either Impudent or Malicious But here is the Talk of Conscience They cannot do it with safe Conscience this surprizeth me What! Is the Dean and his Defender falâ— into such an hot fit of Fanaticisme as to talk of their not being able to make any Abatements in the fore-described sense with a safe Conscience How comes this about I am hereby inclin'd to think That they make the Scripture the Rule not only of their Doctrines but Worship and Discipline a Presâ—yterian Principle And that 't is the Opinion of their Consciences that Episcopacy is of Divine Right and consequently Unalterable For they must not admit of any thing contrary to the Opinion of their Consciences still Fanaticisme a justifying the Dissenter who cannot Consciencously Conform Only there is an untoward Insinuation in 't on the Doctor 's part namely That the Episcopal Constitution is of Divine Right and that our Church-men are not overmuch owing to our Governours for its Establishment That if our Governours should go about to make any Alteration in the present Constitution they offend God For which our Governours won't give them any great thanks But sure a mans Conscience may permit another whom he cannot change to do that which it will not permit himself to do Thus having considered the Overt acts of the Enquirers pretended Immodesty let our Author make the most on 't and let the Reader judge Whether there was not somewhat more than the Reflection on the Enquirer that brought forth his first Chapter Whether his propensions to favour our Common Enemy the Papist were not stronger than his Aversions to the Enquirers Immodesty Here I would have put an end unto this Chapter had it not been requisite to take some notice of the like Treatment which he affords Mr. Baxter Mr. Humfrey the Country-Conformist and Doctor Owen Not that
of the Universal Church and be sav'd they will not part with any of those things that are in their own judgment little though it be to save the Dissenters souls If they would remove what is in their own judgment but little and what may be done without their sin but what cannot be complied with by the Dissenter without his great sin the Controversie is ended the Schisâ—â— lost and the Dissenter restor'd to the Catholick Church and may be sav'd Let the World judg then who is in the fault There remaineth nothing more that is worthy our consideration unless the many slips of our Author may be esteem'd as such by the Authors insisting on my parallelling Dr. Stillingfleet and Bellarmine not only in their Dividing Principles but also in that even when by their Impositions they make the greatest rents in the Church imaginable they speak well of Union but this is only an overt-act of his inadvertency For the reason why I mentioned this was to obviate a common Objection viz. How can you parallel the Doctor and Bellarmine in this seeing the Doctor cries up Union so much as the designe of his great Book as well as of his Sermon To which I reply That though the Principles of Bellarmine were Dividing yet he cries up Union for which reason though the Doctor applauds Union yet in doing so doth no more than Bellarmine and therefore may be as much a Divider as Bellarmine notwithstanding those many plausible Discourses concerning the excellency of Union for Union is a lovely name in the judgment of such as will do nothing to obtain the thing His passing over the most momentous parts of the Enquiry without saying any thing considerable unto 'em makes a further Defence at present unnecessary I say for the present because he seems to threaten as if I should hear more of it in DUE TIME To close then this discourse it only remains that in Charity to our Author whose Affections to Dr. Stillingfleet have so abundantly blinded his Judgment that he cannot though in searching till he hath wearied himself find out any Mistake in the Dr's Preface I 'll give him an Account of a few among many and then shew what little Reason such of the Church of England who are for the Grotian or Bishop Laud's Model have to reproach Dissenters as a People carrying on Popish Designs in blasting the honour of the first Reformation § 1. An Account of some of those Mistakes which are found in Dr. Stilling fleet 's Preface to his Unreasonableness of Separation not to mention any thing of the Parallel between the Dean and the Jesuit so much insisted on in the Enquiry 1. THE Dean asserted p. 14. a suitableness between the Dissenters Pretences and the Jesuits Doctrines about Spiritual Prayer whereas I have evinced the contrary 2. That the Grounds and Reasons of the first Separation of the old Nonconformist from the Church of England are said to be the Jesuits crying down all Forms of Prayer and setting up Spiritual Prayer in the room thereof But I have proved that the first who separated did keep to a Form of Prayer 3. That the Dissenters do blast the honour of the first Reformation but they so far countenance it as to endeavour the carrying it on 4. That the Dissenters are the best Proctors the Papists could meet with their fittest and aptest Instruments that they were made the Engins of the Roman Conclave p. 16. All which the Doctor takes out of Archbishop Whitgift But an unjust Censure if not a great Mistake 5. That the Episcopacy now and in King Edward's days was the same whereas in King Edward's days they held all their Courts in the King's name but now in their own 6. That there is no considerable difference between the Reformation begun in Edward the 6ths and that carried on in Queen Elizabeths time Whereas 't is most apparent that in King Edward's time they judged the Pope to be Antichrist but in Queen Elizabeths not a word of it and many other differences All which relate unto matter of fact and therefore may be rightly called Historical Mistakes Many more might be insisted on but these are sufficient to help our Author to see that if his eyes had been good he needed not to weary himself in making a search after them without effect If this will not satisfie our Author if he will call for a larger list of the Dean's Mistakes I do assure him 't is easie enough to add a multitude more although I delight not in a detecting the Weaknesses of any § 2. Thus having given an hint of some of Dr. Stillingfleet's Mistakes found in his Preface I shall conclude by shewing what little Reason such as our Author have to make such a prodigious noise about the Dissenters subserviency to Popish Designs in blasting the honour of the Reformation Sir If the case be narrowly searched into you will find that in all times since the first Reformation those call'd Puritans were a block in the way to the Church of Englands passing over towards Rome Had it not been for the Industry of the Nonconformist as all the forreign Protestant Churches beyond the Seas are Unchurched by our high-flown Episcopal men even so they should have been abandon'd as Heretical but that the Dissenter makes such a clamour on all occasions about Popery You have very ingeniously distinguish'd between the Church and the Court of Rome and have taken the most effectual care to endeavour that favour might be shewn the Church of Rome even when you cry down Popery as if the common People had understood by Popery no more than your self namely the Court of Rome whereas they think that when you cry down Popery you are enemies to the Church of Rome A pretty juggle Popery is an odious thing even when to be a Roman Catholick is worthy of all applause Laud was no Papist he was an enemy to Popery when a cordial Friend to the Church of Rome Popery is detestable when all the care imaginable must be taken that nothing be done to the disgust of the Roman Church Consult Bramhall and Heylin to mention no more to see whether these be not their Sentiments You boast strangely of King Edwards Reformaton not considering how short of it in some things you are fall'n You represent us as blasters of the Reformation begun in his days not duely minding what one of your own Faction Dr. Heylin hath said on 't in his Preface to the History of the Reformation Take the Character he gives of Edward the 6th and make the most of it 't is this Scarce had they saith he brought it viz. the Reformation to pass when Edward died whose death I cannot reckon for an Infelicity to the Church of England For being ill-principled in himself and easily inclin'd to embrace such Counsels as were offered to him it is not to be thought but that the rest of the Bishopricks before sufficiently impoverished must have followed Durham
also both they and their Bishops are liable to the same Censure 4. That the external Union of the Catholick Church consists in their Union to and with the Bishops thereof that is with a General Council See pag. 595. where he makes Catholick Communion to consist in two things 1. In the Agreement and Concord of the Bishops of the Catholick Church among themselves 2. In the Communion of particular Churches and Christians with each other And he adds That Catholick Communion is no arbitrary thing but essential to the Church and whoever violates it by an unreasonable Dissent he is a Schismatick whoever he be and no Member of the Catholick Church pag. 601. 5. That Metrapolitan Patriarchal Churches are of Divine Appointment as much as any other Churches must govern their Churches by such Laws as are advised by a General Council or by the Bishops of the Church Universal For although they be not founded on any express Divine Law yet they are warranted by our obligations to Catholick Unity p. 293. And for my part I am not able to see any reason why the same obligations to Unity may not warrant one Papal Church as well as three or four Patriarchal Churches in all the Christian world For the Papists think it the most effectual way to preserve Unity and for ought that I know they may think as wisely as this Gentleman I envy neither him nor them the pleasure of their Dreams but I hope there are but few Church-of England-men that do think the same thoughts with him these were the thoughts of Hugo Grotius whom Bishop Bramhal commends and defends Unitas antistuis optimum est adversus Schisma remedium quod Christus monstravit Experientia comprobavit Vid. Annot. In consultat de Religione ad Art Sept. I have quoted the words of this Author and I am not conscious to my self that I have perverted them or made any ill deductions from them and if it be his design to unite all Pretestants in the Decrees of General Councils and in the Intervals of Councils in the Pope or three or four Patriarchs who are to govern according to their Canons I do assure him that I prefer Mr. Humfry's design far before it For I am of opinion 't is a more Christian Design to untie Protestants together and among themselves than to unite them with the Papists Mr. Humfry's Design I will transcribe from his Book that those that shall read these few Sheets may compare it with that of our Author Archbishop Usher hath left us his Model for an Accommodation And it hath been upon the hearts generally of all moderate persons that a reduction of such a Government into our Church as was in the Primitive Times when there was a Consessus Presbyterorum joyn'd with the Bishop in all his Acts of Ordination and Jurisdiction were the way and only effectual way to our true Happiness and Reformation Unto which if one thing more might be added that is If the Common-Prayer might be new cast it being fit that such a vessel for the Sanctuary should be all of pure Gold so as the whole of it were composed of Scripture-Phrase altogether leaving nothing at all liable any more to exception unless the Imposition of a Form only which I doubt not but is also justifiable by Scripture-Instances as well as sound Reason it might go near to put an end to all Dissention among the Sober and Peaceable of the Nation It is this I know is apt to recur into the Imaginations of good men and forasmuch as there was lately two Bills prepared for Comprehension or Uniting the Pootestants and for Indulgence or repealing the Penal Statutes I shall not I hope incur any blame if I apprehend that such men who are most considerate and intent upon the Interest of God in what they seek do or did look upon either of such Bills as no other than an English Interim preparative to this higher Concord and Union of the Bishop with his Presbyters according to the Primitive Pattern mentioned assoon as more mellow Opportunity and well-advised Piety should administer unto such farther Perâ—ection Nevertheless in regard there is no Uniting of a Nation can be supposed by any Model but such as is of Human Contrivance and there are multitudes of Holy and Learned Men in this Kingdom that do believe the way of their Gathered Congregations is after a higher Pattern than this of Primitive Episcopacy it self if there were any hope of the return of it it is manifest that there is no Society which is National in England could be formed on these terms because these Congregational-men can never recede from that which is of Divine Appointment for the sake of any Antiquity whatsoever They do hold Particular Churches to be of Christ's Institution and Diocesan of Ecclesiastical Consent only and under the Notion of Divine Right it is Sin to them to submit to any Bishop There is another Notion then that must be advanced to take in these good Men of This Way as well as those of the Parochial and Diocesan Way into one Political Body for the making up the National Church of England whereof the King is Head as I have been speaking and that is by an Act of Parliament Legitimating these Meetings of the Nonconformists so as to become thereby immediately Parts of the Church as National no less than Parochial Assemblies It was a good thing in the House of Commons that they were about to free many Innocent Men from the danger of the Penal Statutes but the making such Meetings to be Legal is a Design of another Nature of a far greater nobler and vast Importance See page 28 29 30 31. To which add what he says pag. 36. ' If these Separate Assemblies were made Legal the Schism presently in reference to the National Church were at an end Schism in a Separation from that Church whereof we ought or are bound to be Members If the Supreme Authority then loose our Obligation to the Parish-Meeting so that we are bound no longer the Iniquity upon that account is not to be found and the Schism gone It is one Act of Parliament would give a full Answer to all mens Arguments Mr. H.'s design may be easily gathered from these words which I have thus largely transcribed and should our Superiors favour and promote it it would restore peace and quiet to a Church and State almost broken to pieces by divisions animosities fears and jealousies By this means the sons of the Church might enjoy their Dignities Preferments and Livings and believe their Government and Discipline to be of Divine right and exercise it on all that are of the same apprehension and judgment The Separate Congregations may enjoy their own opinions concerning their own Government and Churches and all might live together in love and every one sit under his vine and fig-tree and none make him afraid A closer union I do easily grant were desirable but I am
said of particular persons I say of Churches Optimus est qui minimis urgetur vitiis He is the best man that hath least faults and there are none without them Those are the best Churches which have the least of defects and imperfections such as are without fault are not to be found out of Heaven And as among men the strong must bear the Infirmities of the weak so among Churches the strongest and most perfect must bear the Weakness and Infirmities of those that are more defective and imperfect If our Author should say that those that I plead for and call Churches are no Churches but acompany of Schismatical Conventicles I answer I am of opinion that they are as truly Churches and parts of this National Church or may be easily so made as the Churches of France Holland Geneva Switzerland c. are of the Universal But if our Author shall please to cut them off from the Catholique as I think according to his own Doctrine he must do I shall permit him the liberty for I know not how to hinder it to cut off these from the National Church having no mind at this time to debate the Justice of his Sentence Only I will beg leave to tell him that I can by no means believe that what he doth on Earth will be ratified in Heaven or that God will damn all that he gives up to the Devil If what hath been said doth not satisfie our Gentleman give me leave to suppose him a Minister of the Reformed Church in France be it at Charenton Caen Saumur or where you please and let me suppose that some Gentlemen of the Roman Catholick Religion address themselves to him after this manner Sir We pity your state and condition and have a kindness for you for though you be an Heretick you are one of human race the King our Master will have but one Religion in his Kingdom and you must comply with him or else you are undone your Estate your Liberty and peradventure your Life must all be sacrificed to him for he is resolved and peremptory in that resolution all must serve God the same way or they must bear the punishment of refusing it Here are the Subscriptions that are made by the Catholick Clergy do but set your hand to them and you 're safe and may share with them in the Preferments of the Church To this our Author answers Gentlemen I bear an honour to our Puissant and Invincible Monarch and am very ready to obey all his just commands but in this particular I pray you have me excused God is a King superiour to our Prince and must be obeyed before him I fear His Majesties Displeasure and Vengeance but I am much more afraid of that of God the one may hang or break me upon the wheel but the other will damn me for evermore I beseech you therefore interpose with his Majesty on the behalf of me and my Brethren that we may have the same liberty of worshipping God as for many years past we have enjoyed under him and his Royal Predecessors We vow all Duty and Allegiance to his Person and Government we will defend them with our Lives and Fortunes and we have nothing so dear to us unless it be our Consciences which we are not willing to sacrifice for his just Honour and Advantage The Subscription you propose I cannot make without the offence of God and my Conscience And I must beg his Majesties Pardon if I chuse to obey the God of Heaven before his Vicegerent here on earth The Catholick Gentlemen replies His Majesty is willing and resolved to put an end to all Differences and Controversies in Religion he is weary of those eternal Squabbles that are managed by Divines of different perswasions The Temple of Janus shall be shut he will have no more Religious Wars among his Subjects To grant you the Liberty of serving God after your own Way is not a method of ending Differences but of perpetuating them For when you are pleased others may succeed to you and under pretence of Conscience carry on Differences as high as ever Let our Author answer the Argument of these Catholick Messieurs and I do humbly conceive I may be able from his own words to answer that of the Doctor if it be not sufficiently done already but let him not misunderstand or pervert my words I do not affirm that the Impositions in the Church of England and those of the Church of Rome are equally wicked burdensome and offensive all that I say is they are both unlawful in the judgment of those that do refuse them and the Arguments against relaxing those Impositions or granting Liberty to those that do refuse them are the same and must receive the same Answers Pag. 9. The Conformist had said That he hoped our Governours would distinguish between those that subvert the Christian Faith and those that err in small things Our Gentleman answers Thus our Governours have distinguished already and yet it hath not put an end to our Controversies nor is he the Conformist sure that once more distinguishing will do it To which I reply That when and where our Governours have made this distinction I confess the Countrey Conformist is as ignorant as our Author will needs have him in the Constitution of our Church p. 10. What particular persons may have done I do not enquire but what the Governours of our Church have done They have determined the conditions of Communion and upon what terms the Clergy may minister at the Altar but where by any publick act they have distinguished between the great essentials of the Christian Religion which must be believed and lesser errors that may be tolerated I do not know and cannot find If this Gentleman thinks that all things imposed as conditions of Communion either upon Laity or Clergy in England are of the essence of Christianity and that all who have other apprehensions concerning them are damnable Hereticks let him enjoy his Faith to himself I am not like to become his proselyte nor I think many others P. 10. Our Author proceeds Will not the excluded parties cry as loud for Liberty of Conscience and complain of persecution as they do now Either these are good arguments or they are not If they be they will hold good in all cases that men must not suffer for their consciences but be allowed the free exercise of their Religion according to their own persuasions If they be not let them leave off the pretences of scruples and tender consciences with that liberty and freedom in exercising their Religion which they challenge as their natural birthright and demand no more of that than what the merit of their Cause requires In this discourse there are more strange things than one 1. He declares that if those arguments that are brought for free exercise of Religion from scruple and tenderness of Conscience be good they must be good in all cases The meaning is this One
are some of Mr H's expressions and of Mr. B's Character and which in my opinion are weighed as well as written I shall only add on mine own part those few words of the Apostle This witness is true And seeing I have quoted so much of that Learned mans words in point of equal judging I will not forbear the end of his Book in point of upright dealing The Dr. had no need to lay out his parts upon such a Design as that he hath under his hands nor hath he reason to despise or scorn no nor to slight or neglect the meanest person For I must confess 't is matter of real offence to me that a person who is so learned a man so honoured a man throughout the Nation should prove a proud man a disdainful person which temper if it be indulged is so unendurable by God and man that it will hurl any man into the dust And I cannot do any better service in the earth to this otherwise very much worthy and excellent Doctor than to contribute the best I can to my utmost for the bringing him to some ingenuous sense and Amendment of it Thou shalt not hate thy Brother in thy heart but thou shalt in any wise rebuke him and not suffer sin upon him Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet so far as concerns the Peaceable Design I should now follow our Author to p. 20. where he returns to the Countrey Conformist and there were some sheets done but because it is indeed but endless and it will turn to no account but to ease my self I desist Existimat ejus Majestas Rex Jacobus nullum ad in enndam Concordiam breviorem fore viam quam si diligenter separentur necessaria a non necessariis ut de necessariis conveniat omnis ope insumatur in non necessariis libertati Christianae locus detur Ep. Causaboni ad Card Perroniam p. 31. Author of the Reflections C. Conf. THE END Mr. Lob I cannot tell whether it be best to meddle with this Book or let it alone The wise may says Answer a man and Answer not a man There may be reasons to doe it and reasons to forbear Nevertheless if you determine upon it as to your part I have fetcht the Book and taken my pen and lookt it over as to mine There is but one Chapter wherein I am concern'd and I have no mind to meddle with any more though when I am writing I may point at some few things besides Of all the Books that came out against Dr. Stillingfleet's there are those few sheets called Additional Remarks which are some of the least taken notice of and of the most value Not I count for the merits of the Controversie which is not to be expected from a Conformist but for the ingenuity of Spirit which he hath shewn in so singular exemplary a charity towards the Dissenter and what I count more peculiar in such a true candid respect to the Doctor even while he takes so natural a freedom as he does with him that the fawning for so is applause to the rising of this Authour is but alchimy to his reprehension I am beholding I must confess to the Gentleman for my own part for his Reflections but I must commend his Additional Remarks I will commend them particularly to the Deans Defender not for an Answer but for his imitation I do apprehend that in the writing his first sheets he was not so well aware of their being Printed as he was of the other and that that was the reason of the difference of the style in regard to the Doctor It is a kindness this worthy good man hath done me by laying in a censure of my sheets before hand and so prevented the sugillations of this Author As I need not therefore so I shall forbear any retortions of that kind and address my self to my little task before me It begins page 557. To State this matter and to lay a foundation for an Answer to the Question what the Church of England is and who is the Constitutive Regent part of it he distinguishes between a National Church considered as a Church and as incorporated in the State p. 558. and then speaks to both For this distinction if he had said the Church of Christ may be considered in its self and as incorporated in the State it had been a good distinction but to say the National Church may have this double consideration it is not good because the Church is National onely under the last consideration The Church of Christ considered in its self is either Universal or Particular but it must be considered as incorporated in the State to make it National This quick Antagonist hath the sagacity to perceive this and therefore cites these words of mine page 559. To be Particular or Universal is Essential to Christs Church but to be National is of Accidental consideration If this be true now says he then is my distinction that is this distinction quite out of doors for it is a Church that is a National Church as it is the State as it is in the State he should say and Headed by the Civil Magistrate This is well and what hath he then to object against me and to say for himself Against me he says There are two things p. 560. supposed in my Argument which he hath candidly delivered as necessary to the being of a National Church that are not necessary That all the people that is the generality of the Nation should be Christian and that the King should be so also These two things I had said were Accidental to the Church of Christ and yet goe to the making our Church National and consequently the Church of Christ is National onely under an Accidental consideration But these two things he Objects are not to be supposed necessary to a National Church I answer when we speak of a National Church our owne is always to be understood about which the dispute is and our Church is a National Political Church no otherwise but upon this account and the supposition hereof is necessary to it For himself he says There were great Combinations before Constantine's days Patriarchal Metropolitan which are of the same nature with what we call National Churches I Answer A Patriarchal Church and a Metropolitan Church is not a Church National A Patriarchate may contain in it the Christians of many Nations A Metropolitan but half the Christians of one and so the one is too big and the other too little to be a National Church and a Diocesan much less By a National Church we commonly understand I apprehend a Political Church wherein all the particular Christians and Churches in a Nation and these only are combined under one Government through the Supream Magistrate to Church purposes A Metropolitan Church is no combination of them all and a Patriarchal a combination of more then all The one and the other may be called Churches but neither one or other a National
out a Constitutive Head and an Ecclesiastical Constitutive Head by Christs Institution and to say that all this is true without one is to me a perfect contradiction When he goes on then p. 566. to prove that this is all that is or can be required to make a National Church One by two Arguments I answer If there be so much as this indeed required his two Arguments must prove it not onely to be One but one Political proper Church with an Ecclesiastical Constitutive Regent part to it The Bishops he says have equal power by Christs appointment and rule not by Superiority but by Consent that is not by Superiority over one another but they do rule by a Superiority I hope over the people and that is an Aristocratical Government and when the People do consent to Unite in Communion with them this makes them Members he says of that Political body And these are his two reasons p. 566 and 567. which need no other Animadversion but this notice of them The great questions onely are whether this indeed be the will of Christ that the Catholick and so every National Church as he states the matter should be ruled by these Bishops as Colleagues that is by a Government as he calls it by consent and if it be how it should come to pass that we have not in England such a Government where there is for certain no such Rule by consent of the Colledg without a Superiority but by a Superiority or a Supremacy of the King who is the Head of these Bishops themselves as well as the Nation This I make not my Province P. 568. He hath four things for the strengthning the Government of his Mintage and then concludes that if Mr. Baxter can give him one reason why this may not be called one Church or Ecclesiastical Body Politick without a Constitutive Regent part he will think farther of it To which I answer and tell him presently why this cannot be called one Church or Ecclesiastical Body Politick without a Constitutive Regent part the reason is because it is a Body Politick Ecclesiastical with a Constitutive Regent part and so he need think no farther of it And this Answer being of another nature then that which he fancies like to be made him in the next page p. 569. I need say nothing to that nor the next p. 570. but come on to p. 571. for now he hath prepared the way as he says to justify the Doctor Well where there is a Political Church says Mr. Baxter there must be a Constitutive Head The Doctor answers there may be the true notion of a Church without one I Reply This is a coming off but the question indeed at the bottome is whether it be the true notion of the Church of England The Doctor argues If it be necessary that every Church must have a Constitutive Regent part as essential to it then it unavoidably follows that there must be a Catholick Visible Head to the Church Catholick Visible This Argument the Deans Defender thinks unanswerable But we reply the Argument is such as needs no Answer and it may easily be Answered In the first place it needs no Answer because the thing it would prove is but what we can grant him that is a Visible Head to the Catholick Church Christ is that Head we say and he is Visible When he was on earth he gave Laws for his Church and Commissionated Officers which are Rights of a Head He after appeared to Paul and Commissionated him and is now Visible in Heaven This is plain proof in Reason Sense and Scripture and not to be jeered off and therefore in the first place the Doctors Argument needs no Answer In the next place we say farther it is easily Answered for we deny the Argument If it be necessary for a Church to have a Constitutive Head it follows that the Catholick Church must have a Constitutive one but it follows not that it must have a Catholick Visible Head or that that Constitutive Head must be Visible This in truth is introducing four Terms into the Argument which we know is false Arguing When there is put more into the thing Asserted in the Consequence then there is to prove it in the Antecedent in an Hypothetical Syllogisme it is all one as to argue with four terms in a Syllogism that is Categorical But the Doctor says he puts more strength in it The question is about the Catholick Church whereof particular Churches are parts and they being Visible do require the Constitutive Regent part to be Visible I Answer though here be more words here is no more strength put into the Argument I still deny the Consequence For though the Catholick Church consists of Particular Churches which are Visible it consists also of that society in heaven which is not Visible Christs Body is but one Body whereof part is in Heaven and part on Earth and while the Head is in Heaven it follows not that because part of the Body is Visible therefore the Head must be Visible It is all one as if he should argue thus Particular Churches are on Earth and if Christ be Head of the Catholick Church whereof they are parts he must not be in Heaven And when indeed this is one and the same Argument and we know it to be false we do justly deny the Doctors Argument Suppose a man so high as that his head reached above the clouds will you argue that this person hath no head because his head is not visible I deny the Argument There is really nothing hard in the Doctors Argument but to understand why his Defender whom I value for his Parts should come to think it unanswerable It may be the Doctors confident word at first it undenyably follows drew on this apprehension and he hath fetcht the Argument over so long till he hath put enough in it to make himself believe it We are far says he from asserting that the Universal Head must be Visible if the Subordinate be so he should be as far from asserting the Head to be Visible because Particular Churches or the Members are so but this we assert that if no Church can be a true Visible Church without a Subordinate Visible Head then the Universal Church cannot be a Visible Church without a Subordinate Catholick Visible Head p. 574 575 576. This he takes to be the Doctors Argument and he will make the consequence hold before he has done with it But against whom does the Doctor and this man argue Is it not against Mr. Bexter and did Mr. Baxter ever say this that there can be no true Church without a Subordinate Head under Christ Is not Mr. Baxter a Protestant as well as the Doctor and do they not both maintain the Catholick Church to have one onely Supreme Head and no Subordinate one in Earth If his Defender hath found out one who is not the Pope but the Colledge of Bishops I desire Doctor Stillingfleet
to it be at all out of love with it And seeing there is a draught to this purpose which he alludes to and whatsoever the humor be does style an ingenious proposal I advise that it be preserved and inserted therefore at the end of the Book if you Print it The Paper you know was prepared against the Sitting of the last Parliament at Oxford and Entituled Materials for Union And now I have done about my self you may expect from me some more general censure of the Author and his Book which I was willing to decline For the Author whatsoever he else be I take him to be a man of Ability that requires our regard By his Stile and Undertaking I guess him to be a man of younger age so I hear and believe though by his reading and compass he fetches for the making good his Notion he may be some graver Person In the small game he plays with me I perceive he hath hit me and I ought not to like him the worse for that It is where I lay open to him and left him a blot But for the defence he makes of the Doctor against me I think he hath failed in his cast and thrown out He is a â—â—â—n I count hath a Proud Pen and I am not moved at that but the Doctor whose Pen is more Prudential seemed to me to have his contempt within and that moved me do what I could and made me write as I did There are many I believe will think that this man hath despised me so much that it should move me but I do not think it so much The man is a bold insolent man and it is I think the taking a ferocious liberty rather then shewing disdain He hath used Mr. Baxter like a very dog and when I methinks am but something rightly served why should I care how he uses me I will do nothing more to deserve it and if he despises me I know then how to be even with him I wont care if he does For the Book I think the Bookseller hath done his part The Paper and Print is to be like't but for the matter I think it to dear at the price Five Shillings I must tell him with some displeasure is too unreasonable much for such Controversie There are three or four things more particularly I have observed in the Reading it In the first place I observe the Design which appears to be in hand A design which seems specious being for Union but that Union is of the Church of England with the Church of Rome in the French and Cassandrian way not a Union of Protestant Dissenters and the Conformists with one another On the contrary this Gentleman thus discourses The Christian Church throughout the whole world is One The Unity of this Church Catholick lies in One Communion This Communion is exercised in Particular Churches There are no true Particular Churches of Christs Institution and parts of that Catholick but they must have Bishops Every man consequently that is not in Communion with his Bishop is out of the true Catholick Church which consists of such parts and so not only a Schismatick but cut off from Salvation Either this Author now is aware of this Doctrine or not If not as soon as he comes to be he will be ashamed of it if he already be he may be ashamed to own such Doctrine as this is In the next place I observe a little how consistent he is in this Doctrine For when he hath bestowed a whole Chapter p. 164. to tell us that the Unity of the Universal Christian Church consists in one Communion and descends to explain that Communion by a Communication of the same Divine Service for when Dr. Owen is speaking of a Communion between the Churches in Faith and Love He ought to have added says he in Religious Worship for without this there is no Christian Communion p 446. which he also urges so far as to make a forsaking Communion with the Church of England to be a cutting a man quite off from the Church of Christ and yet if you turn to p. 305. you shall find these words The Nature and Essence of the Church does not consist in Religious Assemblies but it is a Covenant Relation to Christ which Constitutes the Church Here then we have sounder Doctrine for these two are different things If an entring into Covenant with Christ is that really which Constitues a man a member and unites him to the Body then is it not this One Communion wherein the Unity of that Body does consist A man may give himself up to Christ I hope who yet does not and cannot communicate with the Church of England and though he own not the Bishops may be a Christian for all that In the third place I observe this that when he hath said some things well about the Text which the Doctor chose for his Sermon p. 447 448. yet is he very unsatisfactory in bringing off the Doctor or vindicating his judgment in his choice of it for his purpose There were some in the Apostles time that thought the Jewish Law still obligatory and that they should sin against God if they did not keep it and there were others understood the liberty they had from it by the Gospel The first of these are called the weak brother the last the perfect The advice the Apostles gives to the perfect is to use and enjoy that liberty which the Gospel brought them The advice he gives the weak is to wait till God should reveal to them the knowledg of this liberty And in the mean while that they should forbear seeing To them who esteem any thing to be sin it is sin and this he presses still so far and with such exceeding caution that the strong Christian himself must refrain his liberty for their sakes in case that by his example he shall give them occasion to doe the same thing which in regard to their not yet sufficiently informed formed consciences would be sin and destroy their souls This is the certain sense and diffusive doctrine of St. Paul in his Epistles I will come then to the Doctors Text Whereto we have attained let us walk by the same rule let us mind the same thing and I must ask his Defender whether the weak and perfect Christian as before explained be here both included I mean whether both of these are alike required in the Text to walk by the same rule This Author does hold it and he frames such an interpretation of the words as he must hold it but I deny it and that interpretation therefore must be counterfeit By walking by the same rule he understands the maintaining Church Communion and this Communion with the Church he counts must be held howsoever it be we differ This is therefore a fictitious and certain false application or explication of the Text for it is directly contrary to the scope of that Doctrine which I have but now delivered as the
on her part If not the schism is on ours To what end he does this unless there be some body else entertaining the task which the Doctor ought I cannot tell but if this be supposed the true case between us then should the business here that Doctor Stillingfleet had to doe have been this To see what things are alledged by the Nonconformists as Unlawful in the point of Conformity whereof there was a tast first in the Peaceable Design and a fuller measure after in Mr. Baxters Plea and then to have answered those Allegations If the Doctor was able sincerely and substantially to have done this then hath he declined his work if indeed he cannot at least on the Ministers part he cannot then hath he yielded the Nonconformist his Cause The Doctors Defender seeing this does endeavour to supply his defect and speaks to many of these things but I must tell him he has done it in such an overly way with such misrepresentation of Mr. Baxter such incidental mistakes such slight and perfunctory answers that I do not apprehend he believes in his heart that what he hath said can give satisfaction I will content my self with one instance to shew him this It is in the matter of Assent and Consent to all and every thing contained in and prescribed by the two Books of the Liturgy and Orders 'T is plain by these words that whatsoever is Asserted in these Books we must give our assent to the truth of it as whatsoever is prescribed we must consent to the use of it How vast a Field then have we here for our Objections against this Declaration and yet does this Author come off thus We do not give our assent to every saying in the Common Prayer Book but to every thing contained in and prescribed by it that is what we are bound to use p. 105. And does this man now think indeed this enough to satisfie a Conscientious man in any thing which he scruples upon this account Is this distinction enough to salve the matter We do not assent to the Sayings of the Book but to the Things as if whatsoever is said in the Book were not something that is contained in it Or as if there was nothing to be assented to as true but what is prescribed to be used Good Lord what Healers are we like to have of such men as these be They should set themselves to satisfie us in such Solutions of our Objections as our Consciences being convinced of the Solidity might acquiess in them but their care is only to satisfie themselves and no matter so long as they come off with any Evasion In the last place there remains some passages this Author hath here and there in his Book and more industriously in his Preface on set purpose to expose me in an ill representing some of my expressions without regard to the matter between us whether it be any thing or nothing which though it can hardly be well as to me to asperse a man for the aspersion sake when as to Mr. Baxter it is I Judge even irreligiously ill yet do I readily forgive it him upon this double account The one is because when I wrote these sheets I think I was to blame that having written them foul I could not abide to be at the pains to write them over fair which yet I thought to have done and then I should have castigated such expressions that now in his exposing them again to me do not like me some of them as indeed not cautious enough for my self or respectful enough for the Doctor I am ready to crave the Doctors pardon which is my best satisfaction for that The other is because the Author does it out of respect to so worthy a person as him he vindicates not out of malice to me and one may think it but a friendly Office for him to do so But I do think also that Dr. Stillingfleet himself ought not to pass it so lightly who hath the more cause to be aware of him and to say the rather Get thee behind me Sherlock thou art one that wouldst foment my pride when others I am to believe have more honestly endeavoured to let me see it that I may be humbled to God for it If it was meerly for peace sake and out of tenderness to the Nonconformists seeking their good at his heart as in the sight of God that Dr. Stillingfleet Preached his Sermon and writ his Book the good Lord pardon every man that hath had but one hard thought or spake one hard word of so good and learned a man but if it was really otherwise if it was to appear some body to seek himself and in lifting himself up against his Brethren without regard to the consequence the righteous God is ready to take the least hurt he does them to be all one as done to himself then the good Lord pardon him for he hath sinned much and bring him to see though at last unto whom he is indeed more beholding or from whom he is indeed like to receive most good either him that licketh up his spittle or him that hath rebuked his fault The Author of the Peaceable Design Materials forVnion WHereas there are three Parties of Protestants in the Nation the Episcopalian the Presbyterian and the Independent or Congregational-Men which are of diverse sorts who do and will ever differ in their Opinions about the Church and Discipline of it in the Question which is of Christ's Institution or Whether the One or the Other is most consonant to Scripture it is not our Disputes about the Church as Particular which are rather to be mutually forborn and every Party left herein to their own Perswasion but a Common Agreement in what we Can Agree and that is in the Church as National must Heal our Divisions It is here we must lay the Foundation-Stone of Vnion When the Parliament then shall set about this business to purpose A Bill should be brought in for Declaring the Constitution of Our Church of England A Parliament is the Representative of the whole People of England and I doubt not but by Consent and Agreement they might Make a New Constitution of the CHURCH as it is National and much more may they Declare the Constitution of it The Papists are for one Universal Organical Church throughout the world whereof the Pope is Head by Christ's Appintment and whosoever consequently is not of this Roman Catholick-Church and Governed by him must be damned There are some of our late Prelatists are for the same Church but under the Diocesan Bishops of the whole Earth who being Convened in a General Council are the Head that must give laws to it and whosoever refuse to be Govern'd by the Laws of these General Counsels are Schismaticks I am much rather therefore in my mind for the Notion which is that in the Embryo the Reverend Dean of St. Pauls seems to me to aim at if it could be once well
formed of an Independent National Church Political but not to be held as the Congregationalist supposes his Particular Independent One and They their Catholick to be of Divine but of Humane Institution for it is manifestly a thing Accidental to the Church of Christ that the Supream Magistrate and the whole Body of a Nation are Christian It should be declared then in such a Bill of Act of Parliament that the Church of England consists of the King as the Head and all the several Assemblies of the Protestants as the Body A Discrimination between the Tolerable and Intolerable is never to be gain-said by any Wise Man It is not for me or any One persons but a Convocation or Parliament to prescribe the Terms of National Communion but I would have all our Assemblies that are Tolerable to be made Legal by such an Act and thereby parts of the National Church as well as the Parochial Congregations That the Bishops should be declared Ecclesiastical Officers under the KING acting Circa Sacra only by Vertue of His Authority and Commission As Jehoshophat appointed Officers for Government in the Matters of God and the Kings Matters So should the Bishops be in Our Ecclesiastical as the Judges are in Civil Matters the Substitutes of his Majesty and Execute His Jurisdiction Upon this Account if any of the Eminent among the Non-conformists were Chosen to be Bishops they could not refuse it Let two or three the most fit of those Parties be the next that are called to this Function upon such an Act an commanded to Hold it and then would UNION indeed Commence Their Work in general should be to Supervise the Churches of both sorts in their Diocesses that they all Walk according to their own Order agreeable to the Gospel and the Peace of one another I am sensible unto what Distress a Congregational Minister may be brought in the exercise of Discipline over some potent turbulent and refractory Members and what Relief he might find in such a 〈…〉 al Ecclesiastical Officer as this I am sensible how the many inconveniences supposed of Congregational Episcopacy by this one onely means may be salved This shall Advance and not Lessen the outward Power and Honour of the Bishops I humbly Motion a Third Clerk for the Convocation to be added to the Two in every Diocess and chose out of the Non-conformists for the Unanimous prosecution of Holiness and Concord throughout all the Churches And the two Provinces of Canterbury and York should Unite in this Convocation for the making them one National Church and not two Provincial ones in a diverse Assembly By this means should one Organ more be added to this great Political Society for deriving an influence from this Head to these parts of the Body as well as Others which now seem neglected and to have no care taken of them It were the part of such a Convocation to Decree that neither Church should Unchurch one another That no members of Either should depart from One Church to the Other without a sufficient peaceable reason That when a man hath his choice to be of One Church which he will in regard to Fixed Communion he should Occasionally come also to the Other for maintaining this National Union There are these and other things of such a nature as these I should expect then would be moulded into Canons that kindly preventing all our scruples would render the Nation happy in the satisfaction of both Parties An Act of Parliament to this purpose would make the Church of England to be in Earnest such a Church as the Church-men would have us still think it the Best Constituted the most Exemplary and the most Glorious of any that is or indeed that well can be in this World But is not all this at last too Erastian I answer No. We suppose that every Parish where there is a Pastor and a Flock does contain in it such a Particular Church as is of Christs Institution That Christ committed to every such Church a compleat power of Doctrine Worship and Discipline That what Christ hath committed to his Church cannot be taken away by any That the Authority of the Magistrate is for care and oversight and so to protect and maintain this power but not to destroy it That the Church as National and Diocesan as part of the National and Parochial qua Parochial as part of the Diocesan are of Humane institution and owe their power and preservation of it to the Supream Magistrate That as the Magistrate does not take away or invade but preserve the power of the Keys invested in the Miinster but given with the Pastor himself to the Church No more can the Diocesans that Derive from him assume it to themselves and deprive the Particular Churches of it That so long as this Power is preserved there is no Erastianism maintained as to a Particular Church and as to the National there is no danger of it And thus I have offered my Mite to the Sanctuary that is so much as I have and what I think fit for Cultivation by Others whom GOD shall make Wise-hearted and Concern'd for the Welfare of Sion There is Room also here left for the farther Invention of Such in regard to many the like things as or greater then these For they that will may see something more in a few Sheets in part Entituled Animadversions upon the Debate between Dr. Stillingfleet and Mr. Baxter Concerning the National Church and Head of it J. H. THE END
and the poor Church be left as destitute of Lands and Ornaments as when she came into the world in her natural Nakedness From these words of Heylin 't is evident That such as are of this Grotian Faction do reflect sufficiently on the Reformation then begun and also plainly enough suggest That if K. Edward had lived longer the Reformation had gone on further than you or your party desire it may be they would have gone on so far as those you now call Schismaticks If so how comes it to pass that the Dissenters by acting so agreeably to what King Edwards Protestants would have done cast any reproach on that so happily begun Reformation In fine It cannot but amuse wise men to observe how prudently Dr. Stilling fleet and his Substitute insist on the Dissenters subserviency to the Popish Interest Whereas 't is most manifest that the Papists themselves do with the greatest confidence conclude none more opposite nor more injurious to their Designs than the Dissenter However seeing one Dissenter spake but a word for the forbearance of a meer conscientious Papist this is enough to animate those Gentlemen to load the whole Party with the reproach of being great friends to Popery The which is the more remarkable because all this cry is even when a Son of the Church yea a Reverend Divine of that name hath written a Volume in favour of the Church though not of the Court of Rome without any notice taken of it And the Dean himself in that very Preface in which he so much declaims against the Dissenter doth speak much more in favour of the Papists than any Dissenter ever did for he himself asserts That it will be thought great hardship when mens heats are ever for them only viz. the Papists to be deprived of the liberty of their Consciences when the wildest Fanaticks are allow'd it p. 79. Moreover what is matter of greater surprise is That all this stir is rais'd from one word out of a Dissenters mouth even when great things have been done by some who pretend to be sons of the Church in favour of the Papist to the turning the edg of those Laws that were made against Papists on Protestant Dissenters without any remark as if it had been highly meritorious in a Church-man to act for all Papists in the general tho' an unpardonable crime in a Dissenter to speak but one word for the supposed conscientious only That some of the Church of England have acted in favour of all sorts of Papists to the advancing Popery is notorious as hath been observed by Sir Francis Winnington at the Trial of the Lord Stafford Another encouragement my Lord faith Sir Fr. W. which the Papists had was That by the means of those Ministers who were secretly of their Faction whenever his Majesty was pleased to command the Laws made against them in the Reign of Q. Elizabeth and K. James to be put in due execution his good intentions were frustrated and the severity of those Laws was turn'd upon the Protestant Dissenters This was a Master piece of Rome not only to divert from themselves the edg of those Laws which were design'd against them but to turn them upon the Protestants and to make them useful to advance the Romish Interest The same is also the sense of the Commons assembled in Parliament as is to be seen in their Address unto his Majesty November 29.1680 Where they declare unto his Majesty in these words At home if your Majesty did at any time by the advice of your Privy Council or of your Two Houses of Parliament command the Laws to be put in execution against Papists even from thence they gain'd advantage to their Party while the edg of those Laws was turned against Protestant Dissenters and the Papists escap'd in a manner untouch'd Thus many a Son of the Church have heretofore taken an especial care to turn the edg of Laws against Popery on the Dissenter But this is not speaking for a forbearance 't is but an actual affording forbearance to 'em all in general Of which one word must not be spoke As if such men as our Author would that all the Respects which are had for Papists must be confin'd to them who alone without offence may shew it ' em But 't is pretty evident that there are other Conformists of another mind as may appear by the Countrey-Conformists further Reply to this Defence or Vindication which we have received from him in these Sheets following and to which I refer my Reader FINIS Mr. PARK HURST HAVING information that you are Printing som Papers of others in Answer to the Defence of Dr. Stilling fleet I have thought fit upon advice to send you these three or four sheets to put in as one concern'd among the rest The young Hero that hath written this Defence hath treated his Antagonists with no less a supercilious contempt than the Dr. but he hath not written his Book with the like judgment and sense I cannot say that he hath in any thing confuted them but he doth grosly pervert their words and give them a meaning which is contrary to their intention and then drolls upon it and mightily pleases himself in his Victory and Success And this he hath done almost throughout his Book He that reads the Book and doth nor compare it with the Authors whom he pretends to Answer may perhaps think there is something in it But if he shall diligently do this he will alter his opinion I will instance in one particular Mr. Baxter among other things objects the renunciation of the Covenant for our selves and others when we know not their sense These last words he interprets of the Takers of that Covenant when Mr. B. meant it of the Imposers and no wonder then if he makes fine work of it The Author of the Reflections hath reason to take notice of these his dealings in this kind and I do foresee how he is like to fare again yet being one for whom I have so near a concern I cannot refuse a sheet or two having this intimation in his behalf especially seeing he is a Son of the Church and 't is convenient his Brethren should rightly understand him It is in the Preface I am engaged and p. 3. thus he begins The Countrey Conformist in his Reflections on Dr. Stilling fleet endeavours to excuse Mr. B. from intending the D. of St. Pauls in that lewd character that he gave of a mâ—st unskilful proud partial obstinate impertinent Adversary by making it the description of such Substitutes as had neither the Candor nor Learning of the Doctor He did so and how doth this Gentleman prove that he endeavoured it to no purpose Why even thus However any impartial Reader will see cause to believe that Mr. B. had the Dean in his eye tho' he had not courage enough to apply every thing to him but left his Readers to apply as much as they pleased To which I reply There