speech and deceit to be their wound and stripe c. Was not this a brave resolution a pious petition to tell a lye for God We forbear more instances because we delight not to scrape in such Dung-hills We have done with the Kalendar II. Of the RUBRICKS RVbricks are Directions given in the Common-Prayer-Book how to officiate and read the said Book in the several parts thereof And they are called Rubricks because anciently printed in Red Letters and are as much established by Law as any other part of the Book of Common-Prayer it self I shall instance onely in some of them not medling with those before noted in the inserted Paper of Differences 1. There are many Rubricks wherein the Minister is called Priest which is the old Stile and Title in the Mass-Book from whence it was taken We never finde it in the New Testament but onely in the Old which Title was then given to such of the Levites as were made Priests to sacrifice at the Altar And thence the Papists borrowed that name for their Popish Sacrificers at their Altars It is now then a meer Superstitious and Antichristian Name no way warranted by the Word of God in the Pontifician Sense yet is it used above fifty times in our Liturgy It is true one seeks to excuse it by saying Use hath made this so Popular as it is not safe to remove it yet confesseth it may be altered without prejudice to Religion But why may not the Word Priest be taken away and the word Minister put in the room The Name of Minister is not unknown yea it is as often used in the Rubricks of the same Book as the name Priest Therefore it may without the least danger or offence be wholly obliterated Hence it is that in the Scots Liturgy it is wholly omitted and Presbyter put into the room thereof Whereas this is a more strange and unknown name being borrowed from the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was never used to signifie a Priest but an Elder and thence borrowed to denote a Minister as all the Learned know and none but Papists use the word Priest unless Scoffers at Ministers whom in scorn and derision they call and nick-name Priests 2. In the fifth Rubrick of the Order for reading of the holy Scripture it is said That the Collect Epistle and Gospel appointed for the Sunday shall serve all the week after except there fall some Feast that hath his proper By vertue of this these in Cathedrals were read every day albeit they had no Communions But another Rubrick prefixed to the Epistles and Gospels runs thus The Collects Epistles and Gospels to be used at the celebration of the Lords Supper and holy Communion throughout the year These therefore were never intended to be read but when there is the Sacrament of the Lords Supper administred This was anciently administred every day in the Church of England and so to be used still at least in Cathedrals as appears by the Rubrick after the first Exhortation at the Communion If then upon any reasonable cause there be no Communion there ought at that time to be no Epistle and Gospel read If there be any read it is without warrant So that these two Rubricks fight and which to follow is uncertain And indeed they are both but blind guides that lead into the ditch and make a man obnoxious to the Law 3. The Rubrick before the general Confession at the Communion runs thus Then shall this general Confession be made in the name of all those that are to receive the holy Communion either by one of them or else by one of the Ministers This gives liberty to Lay or private men to officiate in part at least as to this Confession which is a branch of the Office peculiar to the Minister to be the mouth of the people unto God in Prayer especially in the Administration of the Sacraments in the Congregation What is this but to admit a private person to assist and bear a share in administring the Lords Supper Is not this to hit against the 17 Article of Religion which declares it to be unlawful to any but such as be lawfully called and sent to wit Ministers duly ordained In all other parts of the Liturgy all Confessions and Prayers are expresly put upon the Minister alone at least to begin and lead the Congregation therein 4. In the Rubricks before the proper Prefaces at the Communion it is said that upon Christmas day and seven days after upon Easter-day and seven days after upon the Ascention-day and seven days after upon Whitson-day and six days after the same several Prefaces appointed for each of these solemn days shall be read as if every of the seven days following were one and the same with the first and what was done on the first day was done over again every one of the following days which yet was never done but once and but upon one day at all and perhaps upon neither of those days on which it is said there to be done But of this more when we come to speak of the Body of the Book 5. The last Rubrick after the Communion saith Note that every Parishioner shall communicate at the least three times in the year of which Easter to be one and shall also receive the Sacraments and other rites c. But the first Exhortation before the Communion to be used when the people are negligent to come unto it requireth the Minister to say unto the whole Congregation I bid you all that be here present and beseech you for the Lord Jesus Christs sake that ye will not refuse to come thereto being so lovingly called and bidden of God himself Yet the aforesaid Rubrick seems to dispense with Gods own Invitation How rightly let all sober men consider And if thrice communicating will suffice contrary to the Primitive Practise which was for all to Communicate at every solemn meeting why must Easter be one of the three times more then any other Lords Day seeing every Lords Day is celebrated upon the same account that that called Easter-day is viz. in memory of the Resurrection of our Lord But where it is added in that Rubrick He shall also receive the Sacraments and other rites c. this is no other but non-sense or worse For what Sacraments else are there for a Communicant of the Lords Supper to receive Is Baptism to be reiterated are the Popish Sacraments to be recalled And if they were must every Parishioner receive them and that thrice a year And what are the Rites he must receive Be they Ceremonies Humane Inventions Superstitious antique Crossings duckings bowing to the Altar towards the East to Images c If so where are these or any of these enjoyned And if not enjoyned why must they be all received thrice a year or at all But of this more hereafter 6. The last Rubrick before the Catechism in order to Confirmation concludeth thus And that no man shall
de se quem industrium noverint Archidiaconum vocent Constat ergo APOSTOLICA INSTITUTIONE omnes Presbyteros esse Episcopos licet nunc illi majores hoc nomen obtineant Episcopus enim Superintendens dicitur omnis Presbyter debet intendere curam super oves sibi commissas For brevity sake we forbear to English this long allegation The sum of it is that in the Primitive Church Bishops and Presbyters were one in respect of Order however a Bishop chosen by the Presbytery were over them in respect of place and degree 4. Bishops being Consecrated have power by the Stat. of 5.6 Edw. 6. and 8. Eliz. 1. to Ordain both Deacons and Presbyters which the Book incongruously calleth Priests But whereas the Episcopal Party claimeth sole Ordination as if no Minister can be rightly Ordained who is not ordained by a Bishop and under this pretence many of the present Prelatical Party stick not to degrade and unordain such Ministers as are Ordained by Presbyters alone even where no Bishops are allowed to execute that Office and Schismatically to advise and perswade all to withdraw from all Assemblies and Ordinances as being no Ordinances of Christ where such Ministers as are ordained onely by the Presbytery without a Bishop do administer We must give this Answer 1. That there is no Scripture that appropriateth this to Bishops alone 2. There are several warrants in the New Testament to justifie the laying on of hands without a Bishop in their sense When Barnabas and Saul after called Paul were to be sent out to preach the Holy Ghost commanded to separate them for that Work whereupon Simeon sur-named Niger Lucius of Cyrene and Manaen not one of them a Bishop in our Prelatical Advocates sense laid hands on them and sent them forth Acts 13. Thus Timothee was ordained by the laying on of hands of the Presbytery 1 Tim. 4.14 This made him a preaching Presbyter and Bishop although the laying on of Pauls hands made him an Evangelist 2 Tim. 1.6 3. The Book of Ordination it self though it appoint the Bishop to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the president and chief Actor yet it allows him not to act as in Confirmation of Children alone in the Ordaining of Presbyters or Priests But the Bishop with the Priests present shall lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth Orders So the Rubrick therefore no Bishop hath sole power of Ordination nor may he Ordain alone 4. That very Statute of 8. Eliz. 1. which ratifieth the Book of Ordination doth not tye all to that one Form as appears by the Stat. of 13. Eliz. 12. which saith thus Be it Enacted by the Authority of this present Parliament That every person under the degree of a Bishop which doth or shall pretend to be a Priest or Minister of Gods holy Word and Sacraments by reason of any other form of Institution Consecration or Ordering then the form set forth by Parliament in the time of the late King of most worthy memory King Edward the sixth or now used in the Reign of our most gracious Soveraign Lady before the Feast of the Nativity next coming shall in the presence of the Bishop Subscribe to all the Articles of Religion c. Therefore the Law intended not to tye all to the form of Ordination by Bishops but tyeth Bishops to give them Institution if they subscribe the Articles and be otherwise qualified as that Act prescribeth 5. This is to un-un-Church all the Protestant Churches in Christendom where there are no Bishops and to deny them Communion with the Church of England which hitherto hath owned them and held Communion with them as true Churches of Christ Now in sew words we must a little take notice of the necessity of Reforming that Book it self 1. In the Preface For where that saith It is evident unto all men diligently reading the holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there hath been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons it hath been shewed before that however we read of Bishops Presbyters or Elders and Deacons these are not three distinct Orders of the Ministry for that Bishops and Presbyters are of the same Order Nor are Presbyters Priests there being no such name in the New Testament nor any such Office in the Ministry of the Gospel Now seeing this Preface is so much made use of and wrested to prove an untruth touching the distinction of Orders and gives such a name to Ministers as argues them to be Sacerdotes Sacrificuli sacrificing Priests which is not so but repugnant to their Office it ought to be reformed 2. In the Ordering of Deacons the Bishop alone is to lay on hands whereas it is not so to be done in the Ordering of Priests as they are nick-named or Consecration of Bishops And this also is contrary to the practice of the Apostles themselves expressed in that very Scripture Act. 6. appointed to be one of the Epistles to be read at that time where after choosing the seven Deacons it is said These they set before the Apostles and when they bad prayed THEY not one of them laid their hands on them Now seeing this was so and that at every Ordination of Deacons other Ministers beside the Bishop are present and seeing further it is said in the third Prayer then used after the Letany that God did inspire his Apostles to chuse to this Order St. Stephen with other which directly crosseth the Text which saith The whole multitude chose them and that by order from the Apostles Why should such a practice be continued by a single Bishop so contrary to that of the Apostles themselves and every other Ordination in our own Church 3. In the Ordering of Priests We say as before that Title or name of Priest ought to be changed for the Reasons abovesaid But that which most offendeth is that in the very act of Ordaining the Bishop takes upon him to give that which none but God himself hath power to bestow where it saith Receive the Holy Ghost c. which be the words of Christ himself to his Apostles without any warrant from him to be used by Bishops or any others For however Ordination be necessary yet there can be no reason that a Bishop or other persons should in this assume more in officiating then in all other Ministrations where the words of Institution in Baptisin in the administring the Lords Supper c. are first rehearsed and then at the act of ministring a Prayer is used not a Magisterial use of the very words of Christ himself in the first institution as is obvious to all This therefore savors of presumption not to be admitted in so holy an action especially where a Bishop shall as by report some now do take upon him to breathe upon the person he ordaineth as Christ did upon his Apostles Moreover it being now claimed as peculiar to Episcopacy as a distinct
License from the Bishop under his hand and seal appoint or keep fasts or be present at them either publiquely or in any private Houses other then such as by Law are or by publique Authority shall be appointed he shall for the first offence be suspended for the second excommunicated and for the third deposed from the Ministry Lastly the 73. Canon excommunicateth ipso facto all Ministers and others meeting in any private house or elsewhere * What if in Parliament or in Convocation to consult upon any matter or course to be taken by them or upon their motion or direction by any other which may any way tend to the impeaching or depraving of the Doctrine of the Church of England or of the Book of Common-prayer or of any part of the discipline now established What is that Now this sentence of Excommunication being to be pronounced by a Minister onely and after to be publiquely denounced by other Ministers and the persons excommunicated upon the 2 3 4 5 9 and 11th Canons not to be restored but by the Archbishop and every such person not restored is liable to the Writ De excommunicato capiendo or else the excommunication signifies nothing we appeal to all whether these Canons if executed be not against the Stat. of 5. Eliz. 23. which Enacteth that if in the Significavit of the Ordinary for obtaining a Writ de excom capiend it be not contained that the excommunication doth proceed upon some cause or contempt of some original matter of Heresie or refusing to have his or their child baptized or to receive the holy Communion as it is now commonly used to be received in the Church of England or to come to Divine-service now commonly used in the said Church of England or Errour in matters of Religion or Doctrine now received or allowed in the Church of England Incontinency Vsury Simony Perjury in the Ecclesiastical Court or Idolatry Then all such Writs and Significavits to be void in Law And whether such Ministers as in Court or in Churches pronounce or publish such excommunications or for non-appearance non-payment of Fees c. too too commonly practiced in those late Courts be not liable to be punished by an Action at Law for doing such illegal Acts as are not justifiable by the Laws of the Land Or if such a Writ will lye against any man for Heresie not declared such by Parliament according to 1. Eliz. 1. for not receiving the Communion kneeling or for not coming to the Common-prayer as now used it being already made out that it is not established by Law or for dissenting from any of the Articles of Religion of An. 1562. when it hath been shewed that some of them are doubtful some defective and disagreeing from one another c. is it not high time to Reform these things especially when by the Canons not kneeling not coming to Common-prayer are declared to be Schism and any dissent from those Articles being adjudged errour in doctrine the party shall be punished with excommunication yea with imprisonment by Writ out of Chancery and not be absolved but by the Archbishop Can. 5. nor by him till he shall have repented and openly revoked that his dissent as a wicked errour how just and necessary soever such dissent was Again the 14th Canon appoints Divine service to be said not only on the Holy-days appointed by the Book of Common-prayer but on their Eves Which observation of Eves is taken away by the Books of Common-prayer and so this Canon is herein contrary to the Act of 1. Eliz. 2. Moreover the same Canon enjoyneth Ministers to observe the Orders Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer which by referring to these in 2. Edw. 6. admits of a Surplice only so doth that of 5.6 Edw. 6. yet this enterferes with the 58. Canon of which before And whereas that 14th Canon forbids diminishing any part of Common-prayer in regard of preaching or in any other respect or adding any thing in the matter or form thereof the Book of Common-prayer it self doth warrant us to diminish that is to omit all that men now call the second Service when there is no Communion as hath been also shewed The 17th Canon enjoyneth all Fellows Scholars and Students though Boys as well as Masters of Colleges and Halls upon Sundays Holy-days and their Eves to wear Surplices at Divine service pretending for it the Order of the Church of England and Graduates to wear the Hoods of their degrees Whereas the Order in the Liturgy enjoyns Surplices only to Ministers in the times of their Ministration not to others And this of Boys wearing Surplices doth countenance that fond conceit so much cryed up in Popery that all once entred into Colleges ought to receive primam tonsuram and therefore to wear Surplices * Ham. le Strange in Affin of Div. Serv. The 24 Canon enjoyneth Copes which are forbidden in the Rubrick before Common-prayer in 5.6 Edw. 6. of which before The 27th Canon requireth Ministers not to administer the Communion to any but such as kneel under pain of Suspension whereas we have before demonstrated out of 2. Edw. 6. that kneeling is left arbitrary And if any person not kneeling be refused the Communion with what justice can he be punished with Excommunication which may end in imprisonment upon a Writ De excom cap. by vertue of the forementioned Statute of 5. Eliz. 23. even when he desireth to communicate with that Liberty in gesture which the Law alloweth him Yet both Minister Church-Wardens and Quest-men the Office and duty of which last in Ecclesiasticals we know not must take notice whether every Parishioner come so often to the Communion as the Law requireth Can. 28. which if he do not he is to be presented c. which makes way to Excommunication and imprisonment as aforesaid albeit it be not his fault that he received not unless it be an offence to claim and make use of the liberty which the Law affordeth him The Explanation of the lawful use of the Cross in Baptism undertaken in Can. 30. is very defective for whereas it undertakes to remove all scruples of Conscience therein it produceth not one Scripture nor Father to that end but only indefinitely talks of both which without better arguments and more distinct proofs can never in common reason quiet much less satisfie any mans Conscience that maketh scruple thereof Nor can we submit thereto till we see it proved as well as affirmed The 31. Canon forbiddeth the making of any Deacons or Ministers save only on the four Sundays after the Ember-Weeks appointed for prayer and fasting and so continued in England by what Law when the Stat. of 5.6 Edw. 6.3 declares the contrary and this to be done in the Cathedral or Parish-church where the Bishop resideth in presence not onely of the Archdeacon but of the Dean and two Prebendaries at least if not by any lawful cause let or hindred or of
REASONS SHEWING the Necessity of Reformation of the Publick 1. Doctrine 2. Worship 3. Rites and Ceremonies 4. Church-Government and Discipline Reputed to be but indeed not Established by LAW Humbly offered to the Serious Consideration of this present PARLIAMENT By divers Ministers of sundry Counties in ENGLAND 2 COR. 13.8 For we can do nothing against the truth but for the truth LONDON Printed by JA COTTREL MDCLX TO THE RIGHT HONORABLE THE Lords and Commons ASSEMBLED in PARLIAMENT IT is far from our thoughts to oppose or disparage Orthodox Doctrine a well-composed Liturgy Rites for decency and order Ordination of Ministers Apostolical Episcopacie or due Rules of Discipline We are for all these with Truth and against rigid Impositions which may debar a Christian of any liberty allowed him by Christ. Nor do we offer any Polemical Discourse or Theological Debates proper for a Divinity-School or Synod but onely what we humbly conceive more suitable to a Parliament Our work chiefly is out of those Laws which we as Ministers are bound to take special notice of and out of those Books said to be by those Laws settled to make out these two things First that so far as we can apprehend neither the Articles of Religion the Books of Com. Prayer or Ordination the Jurisdiction of Bishops claimed before 17 Car. 1. nor so much as their Being as Bishops sithence nor those Canons so much contended for are indeed established by Law Secondly that none of these as they now stand ought to be confirmed and setled But all with submission And this we trust shall not be censured as Eccentrick For albeit we acknowledge the learned in the Law to be far more able in matter of Law touching these things yet seeing every Subject is to inform himself of all such Laws as more especially concern his own calling we hope it will not be judged an extravagancie or presumption in us to produce those Laws which more nearly concern all of our Function Of this we apprehend some necessity 1. Because it is already too obvious that too many notwithstanding all pretences of Moderation do already fly higher than ever some in asserting Arminianisme to be the Doctrine of the Church of England thinking thereby to force all to imbrace it some in stickling for the Liturgy commonly used some still holding up sole Ordination by and sole Jurisdiction of Bishops and all Canons not onely made in England but in Rome it self if not repugnant to our Laws labouring to possess the people that all these are settled by Law and therefore to be continued and imposed without alteration and that all who seek a Reformation of them do oppose and violate the established Laws 2. Because if men go on in such ways and prevail therein it is to be feared that in short time every Minister of different judgement how able godly and useful soever will be put not onely out of his present place but out of the Ministry also as it hath already too often happened And indeed it can hardly be found in any age since the Conquest that where Kings have not curbed the violence of Bishops they have ever sharply persecuted all that threw off Popery which Persecutions usually produced Confusions in the Common-wealth For prevention whereof we humbly beseech all Noble Spirits and faithful prudent Patriots to look back upon the Mutinies Insurrections Rebellions in Edw. 6. his time occasioned by fomenting and not moderating the furious Zeal even of those that were most countenanced by that pious King which notwithstanding the Act of 1. Edw. 6.1 made many to flee so high as exasperated the other side so far as that it put several parts of the Kingdom into Combustion Nor will those rivers of blood shed in Q. Maries days by recalling the Bishops and others formerly deprived and giving way to their wonted tyranny in the height thereof be forgotten while ought of Protestant Religion remaineth Nor will it be unseasonable to reflect upon the throwing out of many worthy Ministers in Q. Elizabeths reign and of many moe under K. James For that Noble King immediately after his coming to the Crown was so plyed by Bishops that notwithstanding the Conference at Hampton Court the Prelatical Party prevailed so far that the Liturgy then much complained of remained in greatest part and in the most material points unreformed to which they all were compelled to subscribe which had never been required before and many Illegal Canons were made and inforced so far that within the space of two years as was credibly reported 70 Ministers were deprived 113 not suffered to preach and about 94 more were under Canonical Admonition the next door to Deprivation The carrying on of all which together with the countenancing of Arminianism formerly declared against by that Learned King James witness his promoting of the Synod of Dort did so much and so generally offend and exasperate that after many thousands were compelled to leave their native Countries to dwell in Mesech and to take up their habitations in the tents of Kedar others were drawn on to engage so deeply in the publick differences which as to matters of Religion were occasioned by the continuing of the former corruptions and by those Canons of 1639. as produced all those horrid and bloody effects which we abhor to mention and tremble to remember May it therefore please your Wisdoms Piety and Goodness to procure a review of all these things after the example of the Parliament in 3.4 Edw. 6. and to call some of the most moderate and able persons of every different party to assist therein and thereupon to settle all the things of God in a solid and moderate way that all Ordinances of Christ may be restored to their pristine Purity all Christians reduced to the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace and in the mean time nothing to be imposed which may grieve or offend those who shall be careful not to disturb the Publick Peace In order to which ends we humbly recommend to your Noble and Pious thoughts that of the Apostle Let your moderation be known to all men the LORD is at hand For this and for your Honours Your humble Servants shall ever pray REASONS SHEWING The Necessity of Reformation c. I. Of DOCTRINE THe Publick Doctrine of the Church of England as it is commonly received and insisted upon is said to be contained in the 39 Articles agreed upon by the Archbishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year 1562. Those Articles are taken to be ratified and confirmed by Act of Parliament in 13 Eliz. cap. 12. Which Act provideth That no person shall be admitted to any Benefice with Cure except he shall first have subscribed the said Articles in presence of the Ordinary and publickly read the same in the Parish Church of that Benefice whereof he shall have Cure with declaration of his unfeigned assent thereunto
within two moneths after his Induction c. upon default hereof to be ipsofacto immediately deprived And if any Ecclesiastical Person shall advisedly maintain or affirm any Doctrine contrary or repugnant to any of the said Articles and being convented shall persist therein or not revoke his errour or after revocation return again to it he shall be deprived of his Ecclesiastical Promotions This is the effect of that Statute as to this Point But these Articles are both Doubtful and Defective 1. Doubtful 1. Because it appears not that they were all or any of them confirmed by Parliament in the 13 Eliz. for as much as they are not therein in expresly inserted nor so much as their number but onely the Title-Page of them mentioned Nor is it known where the Original is enrolled 2. Of those 39 Articles there were 36 of them set forth yet not ratified by Parliament in Edw. 6. his reign the other were added by the Convocation in An. 1562. 3. In the Books of Articles now printed and ever since 10 Caroli 1. there is a Declaration of that his late Majesty prefixed thereunto by the advice and procurement of the then Bishops after Arminianism began to perk and to be openly preached by the rising Party to this effect viz. 1. That those Articles contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to Gods Word all therefore are required to continue in the Vniform Profession thereof and the least difference from them prohibited 2. That the Bishops and Clergy from time to time in Convocation upon their humble desire should have licence under the Broad * This shews who did pen it Seal to deliberate of and to do all such things as being made plain by them and assented unto by his then Majesty shall concern the setled continuance of the said Doctrine as well as Discipline then established from which no variying or deparing in the least degree should be endured 3. That all curious search and disputes touching any points contained therein be laid aside and shut up in Gods Promises as generally set forth and in the general meaning of these Articles And that no man shall either print or preach to draw any Article aside any way nor put his own sense or Comment upon it but shall take it in the Literal and Grammatical sense of it This Declaration is published with the said Articles by Command If this be still continued and confirmed then all these sad Consequences must needs follow 1. That no Minister shall have so much liberty to interpret any one of those Articles as is not onely allowed but required of him in his Ordination to expound the Word of God it self But this is a notorious truth that after that Declaration was printed and published as also a Proclamation to the same effect issued those of the Prelatical Party had their Spies every where to see who durst to preach a word against any Arminian Tenet or to explain any one Article as not making for but against any of those Opinions If any were found so to do he was sure to be Convented for breach of the Kings Declaration and Proclamation yea some have been brought into the High Commission-Court for this very cause While in the mean time that other Party took liberty to vent and preach up those points without controul Which no Anti-Arminians durst call into question for that the then Bishops of greatest power who might by that Declaration obtain licence to explain all things as they thought fit favoured those Advocates of Arminianism and must have been their Judges if they had been complained of 2. That where in Art 16. it is said Not every deadly sin willingly committed after Baptism is a sin against the Holy Ghost We may not dare to open the nature of deadly sin nor to say that all sins are deadly contrary to the Popish distinction of sins into mortal and venial Nor may we presume to explain the next part of that Article viz. After we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart from grace given c. which Clause Bishop Montacute and after him others allege to prove falling from grace and thereby pretend that this is the Doctrine of the Church of England which is contrary not onely to Art 17. but to 1 John 3.9 1 Pet. 1.5 3. That it being said Art 20. The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies and Authority in Controversies of Faith we may not enquire what is meant by the Church whether the Church Catholick or of England nor what the Church of England is what Rites or Ceremonies it may ordain or how far her Authority extendeth in Controversies of Faith And if she do happen to ordain ought contrary to Gods Word or expound one place of Scripture repugnant to another or to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of salvation that is beside the Word no man may question it but we must if a Convocation once declare for it assent and subscribe unto it in the Literal and Grammatical sense of it or be deprived of all Ecclesiastical Promotions 4. That whereas the 34 Article treateth of the Traditions of the Church we must not curiously search what is here meant by Traditions and whether it be meant of the Traditions of the Church of Rome or of any other Church But we must rest in this General That whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained by common Authority ought to be rebuked openly as offending against the common Order of the Church hurting the Authority of the Magistrate and wounding the weak Whereas this Church hath no where set forth what she meaneth by Traditions whether distinct from Ceremonies or the same with them how a Tradition may be said to be ordained and what is meant by common Authority Yea if power be given to the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation when and so often as they shall desire it to ordain any more Traditions which seems to be a strange Expression and new Ceremonies and the Royal Assent pass thereupon all Ministers must subscribe thereunto before they know what they be yea before they be ordained after which it will be too late to dispute them or to vary from them in the least degree upon any pretence whatsoever It will be too late then for any man to say They are repugnant to the Word of God 5. That all being by Art 35. to admit both Books of Homilies to contain a godly and wholesome Doctrine necessary for these times and therefore to be read in Churches by the Ministers diligently men must subscribe to false Doctrines or assertions Take instance in but one or two particulars for brevities sake Par. 2. Hom. 2. Of the place and time of Prayer pag. 147. Pluralities of wives was by special Prerogative suffered to the Fathers of the Old Testament not for
satisfying their carnal and fleshly lusts but to have many children because every one of them hoped and begged oft-times of God in their Prayers that that blessed seed which God promised should come into the world to break the Serpents head might come and be born of his stock and kindred As if all did not know out of what Tribe Christ was to issue Par. 2. Hom. 2. of Alms pag. 160. The same lesson doth the Holy Ghost teach us in sundry places of the Scripture saying Mercifulness and alms-giving purgeth from all sins delivereth from death and suffereth not the soul to come into darkness For this is alledged Tob. 4. ver 10. Then there is added The wise Preacher the son of Sirach confirmeth the same when he saith That as water quencheth burningfire even so mercy and alms resisteth and reconcileth sins Excellent sense For this Ecclus. 5. is quoted in the margent But it is cap. 3.30 where the words in the New Translation are Alms maketh an atonement for sins Of which words however a charitable construction may be wyre-drawn yet those expressions the same lesson doth the Holy Ghost teach us in sundry places of the Scripture evidently admit of these two gross Errours 1. That the Book of Tobit is to be taken for Holy Scripture 2. That it was indited by the Holy Ghost The former of these is contrary to Art 6. in which only the Canonical Books there named are owned for the Scripture of the Old Testament And that of Tobit is there numbred among the Apoeryphals which the Article saith out of Hierom the Church doth not apply to establish Doctrine yet this Homily applies these Apocryphal passages to confirm the Doctrine of Alms deeds And as touching the Holy Ghosts teaching of this in those places alledged out of Tobit and Siracides this is denyed by all who receive not those Books as Canonical Take but one witness instead of many King James who in his Book directed to his Eldest son and called Basilicon Doren having spoken to him of reading of the Holy Scriptures saith thus As to the Apocrypha Books I omit them because I am no Papist and indeed some of them are no way like the ditement of the Spirit of God 6. That by the 37th Article as it is still printed and may not be altered where it is said The Queens Majesty hath the chief power in the Realm of England c. meaning Queen Elizabeth who is after named therein all Ministers are bound to read those very words unto this day and may not say The Kings Majesty hath the chief power for the Articles must be read every word of them as they are printed with the Kings Declaration before them or the Minister must be deprived if he alter any word or shall not take it in the sense of the very Letter of it And if he keep not to all the very words of the Articles who can swear that he did read them after his Induction if put unto it 7. That by this means we shall have no setled or fixed Doctrine of the Church of England at all if so often as the Bishops and Clergy in Convocation shall obtain License to deliberate of all such things as they shall think fit to explain and shall obtain thereto the Royal Assent they may put what sense they please upon the Doctrine established which by the Declaration prefixed to the Articles is promised to be from time to time granted unto them If it be said There is an easie Cure for all this The Declaration before the 39 Articles was never confirmed by any Act of Parliament nor is now in force or if it be it is but the taking of that away and causing the Books to be printed without it So will the subscribers to the Articles be at as much liberty as by the Act of 13 Eliz. was allowed them To this it is Answered that this will signifie nothing if Ministers be still tyed to subscription For 1. It hath been already declared yea adjudged that by that Statute there is no liberty for any man to subscribe the Articles with any limitation or explication if any credit be given to Sir Edward Cook who saith * Instit 4.47 p. 324. edit 1658. that he hath heard Wray chief Justice in the Kings Bench Pasch 23 Eliz. quoting Dier 23 Eliz. 377. lib. 6. fol. 69. Grenes Case Smiths Case report that where one Smith subscribed to the said 39 Articles of Religion with this addition so far forth as the same were agreeable to the Word of God that it was resolved by him and all the Judges of England that this subscription was not according to the Statute of 13 Eliz. Because the Statute required an absolute subscription and this subscription made it conditional and that this Act was made for avoiding diversities of opinions c. And by this Addition the party might by his own private opinion take some of them to be against the Word of God and by this means diversities of opinions should not be avoided which was the scope of the Statute and the very Act it self made touching subscription hereby of none effect Thus He. 2. This shews a necessity of repealing that branch of the Act so far as it concerneth subscription because 1. if we may not subscribe with such an addition so far forth as the same Articles are agreeable to Gods Word it must needs be granted that the Composers of them are admitted to be infallible and their Articles of equal Authority with Canonical Scripture or else that the Statute intended to tyrannize over the Consciences of men which is not to be imagined 2. There is no more necessity for Ministers to subscribe those Articles which that Act confirmes then there is for others to subscribe to all other Acts of Parliament which do concern them If an Act once confirm and ratifie a thing under a penalty it will take place and keep all in as much obedience as if all the Subscriptions in the world were made to it It is not particular Subscriptions but publique Legislative Authority that makes it a binding Law 3. This Subscription is for the most part required of men while they be young and have not time or solidity throughly to ponder and weigh all the Articles in the balance of the Sanctuary or in the scaies of the Laws so that hereby they are cast into a snare ere they be aware and by their own inconsiderate and rash act bound as men are apt to make them believe if they afterwards upon never so just grounds begin to hesitate to maintain every of those Articles although contrary to the Word of God which is expresly contrary to the very Letter of the 20th Article which saith It is not lawful to ordain any thing that is contrary to Gods Word written And afterwards As it ought not to decree any thing against the same that is the Word so beside the same ought it not to enforce any thing
to be believed for necessity of Salvation But the Statute doth require belief of every one of these Articles when it enjoyns not only subscription but an assent unto them punishing all with Deprivation that shall affirm and maintain any Doctrine repugnant to them which every man must do if they be found contrariant to the Word or he must be false to God 4. If subscription to these or any other Articles be still continued How can any just liberty be granted to tender Consciences But that they must swallow all that is enjoyned although beside yea contrary to the Word or be persecuted and ruined Thus much of the Doubtfulness of the Articles and of the inconvenience and mischief of subscribing them Which inconvenience and mischief will be greater if we should be tyed to those Articles alone though never so sound as shall now appear in the Defectiveness of them 2. The Articles are Defective Because 1. The sixth Article speaking of the Holy Scripture saith In the name of the holy Scripture we do understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church Nevertheless albeit it enumerate the Canonical Books of the Old Testament yea and all the Apocrypha too yet it nameth not any of the New Testament but only concludeth thus All the Books of the New Testament as they are commonly received we do receive and account Canonical Now it being not unknown that there hath been doubts in the Church of some of them insomuch as the Epistle of St. James the second Epistle of St. Peter and several other books and passages in the New Testament have been not only doubted but refused the Article is defective in the not enumerating all the Books of the New Testament 2. There are no Articles for discovering and condemning sundry points of Popery in Doctrine which being first the Tenets of Arminius the first Protestant Writer that was not a professed Lutheran that ever openly maintained them are too commonly suckt in and cryed up by some as the Doctrine of the Church of England which since the Reformation never own'd them but are all maintained by Bellarmine and generally by all Franciscans and Jesuites but confuted by all approved Writers of the Protestant Reformed party that have written against Bellarmine and others of that crew as likewise by the learned Whitgift Whitaker Junius Zanchius Pareus Chamier Dr. Prideaux and many others The learned King James also took so much notice of and distaste at those Arminian-Popish Opinions touching Predestination abused universal Redemption universal Grace the manner of conversion and falling from grace that his Majesty was the chief procurer and promoter of the late Synode of Dort to which he sent Bishop Carlton Dr. Davenant Dr. Hall afterwards Bishops Dr. Goad and Dr. Balcanqual to assist in that Synode whose judgements touching all those points were given in to the said Council subscribed with their hands and afterwards printed and published Agreeable whereunto in the main hath the late Assembly of Divines sitting at Westminster declared their judgements in the Confession of Faith afterwards ratified by both Houses of the late Long Parliment for which reason is that Assembly so much slighted reviled and opposed 3. Those Articles contain nothing of the Creation of Providence Fall of man of Sin of the Punishment of sin of Gods Covenants Effectual Calling Adoption Sanctification Faith Repentance Perseverance of the Law of God Christian liberty and Liberty of conscience Religious Worship of the Sabbath or Lords day of Marriage and Divorce the Communion of Saints Church-government and Discipline of the Resurrection or of the last Judgement all which the Scripture teacheth and that as necessary as appears by the comprizing most of them in the Apostles Creed and therefore necessary to be explained and held forth unto all as the Doctrine of this Church especially considering the differences and Controversies about many of them Upon this reason it was that the late Assembly of Divines have taken so much pains to compose several Articles which they call Chapters wherein both those of the 39 Articles which are held to be indeed fit to be retained are more fully cleared and explained and the rest added with pertinent proofs of Scripture to make it manifest that they are all evidently grounded upon the Word of God But all proofs are wanting in the 39 Articles no text of Scripture being produced to make cut any one of them II. Of WORSHIP THe Form of Publick Worship in England except Preaching is set down in the Liturgy or Book of Common-Prayer established by Law in 1 Eliz. 2. intituled An Act for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer and Service in the Church and the Administration of the Sacraments This Act repealeth another made in 1 Mar. 2. which had repealed a former Statute made in 5.6 Edw. 6. for the Vniformity of Common-Prayer c. and re-established that Common-Prayer-Book which the said last mentioned Act of Edw. 6. had ratified and confirmed But yet the Act of 1 Eliz. which authorizeth and enjoyneth the use of that Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. doth it with allowance of one alteration or addition of certain Lessons to be used on every Sunday in the year and the form of the Letany altered and corrected and two sentences onely added in the delivery of the Sacrament to the Communicants but none other or otherwise Now it is here to be observed that in the Act of 5.6 Edw. 6. for confirming that Book it is said that The Kings most Excellent Majesty with th' assent of the Lords and Commons in that Parliament assembled and by the Authority of the same had caused the aforesaid Order of common service intituled The Book of Common-Prayer to be faithfully and godly perused explained and made fully perfect and by the foresaid Authority annexed and enjoyned it so explained and perfected to that present Statute So that the same was enrolled together with the Act it self Which being repealed by Queen Mary the Original Book was taken off from the Parliament-Roll and so lost But in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. there is no mention at all of joyning the Book then revived and re-confirmed to the said Act nor doth it appear that ever it was again enrolled whereby by having recourse to any Record or Parliament-Roll it may be proved that that Book of Common-Prayer printed in the year 1559. the first of Qâ—een Eliz. is confirmed by Law or that any man is bound to use it as the onely form now established by Parliament or to be punished for not using it at all And albeit the Act of 1 Eliz. Quere therefore whether he that either useth them not or useth other be punishaable taketh notice of some alterations above mentioned to be made in the Book then ratified yet it doth not name nor express what those alterations were So that all men are lest in a blind touching the same if put to prove that those
to be sinners Accordingly he took three Verses out of Psal 14. one out of Psal 140. another out of Psal 10. another out of Isa 59. All which the Old Translators unadvisedly thrust into the 14. Psalm as parts of that one Scripture I forbear to mention other Psalms wherein sometimes words sometimes whole verses are left out and much of the rest is very improperly and impertinently translated which in the Leiturgy provided for Scotland was redressed yet the Book for sundry other defects impertinencies and redundances was refused This makes sport for Papists and Atheists to find how much our Translations publickly used do enterfere and jar and how corrupt some of them be Thus of the differences between the old Common-prayer-books confirmed by Law and the present Common-prayer-books so much magnified and adored not only by the common sort but by too many of those who pretend to learning and skill in the Publike Offices of the Church of England but abuse the people yea Magistracy and God himself therein For still the Preface of the Book runs thus That nothing is enjoyned to be read but that which is the pure word of God or that which is evidently grounded thereupon which as our bold Masters have ordered the matter is false and a meer cheat put upon the people of God Having thus given a taste of the Differences between the Old and New Books I hold it needful to shew how unsafe it might be hereupon to conclude no more but this Then let the present Book of Common-prayer be compared with the old that was established and be reformed by it For even in the Book that was established by Parliament there are sundry incongruous and uncomely expressions unwarrantable passages and some gross mistakes of the Scripture it self especially in the Translations of the Epistles and Gospels Which Translation used in the Book of Common-prayer is as antient as the 35. of Hen. 8. and used first in private Primmars being translated out of the Mass books and other Offices of the Romish Church for want of a better Translation in the Reign of Edward the sixth For Example Gâ—sp The old Translation on 2 Sund. after Epiph. When men be drunk But in the new When men have well drunk Epist Indeed Dr. Prideaux saith all these are amended in the Kings New Transtation of the Bible But what is this to the Service-book in which these corrupt passages are still printed and pressed to be read in Divine Service on 4 Sund. in Lent Mount Sinai is Agar in Arabia and hordereth upon the City which is now called Jerusalem a gross mistake both of Scripture and Topography The new Translation therefore renders it thus This Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia and answereth to Hierusalem which now is He saith not Mount Sinai is Agar for that is not so But Hagar is mount Sinai that is a representation or figure of it Nor doth the Apostle say that mount Sinai in Arabia bordered upon Hierusalem For that is false Arabia being many hundred miles distant from Hierusalem And the Mount whereof St. Paul speaks was a type of it not bordering on it Epist on Palm-Sunday He was found in his apparel as a man In the new He was found in fashion as a man The word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which imports not apparel but the form or figure which includeth the real substance and true nature of the thing whereof it is a form Epist on 16 Sun after Trin. Which is Father of all that is called father in heaven and in earth Then the Father must needs be Father to himself The new Translation therefore renders it Of whom the whole family of heaven and earth is named So the Original 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Much more might be added not only against the present unestablished Leiturgy but against that which was confirmed But this shall suffice For my intention neither is nor ever was to destroy or cast off all Forms but only to shew some grounds of exception against this And seeing this is so much cried up that the most place all their Devotion and Religion in it and come little short of the Israelites in abusing of the brazen Serpent which by Gods own command was erected in the Wilderness Authority may consider whether it be not honourable safe and necessary to deal with both Books as Hezekiah did with that Idolized Serpent and carefully to provide a better in the room as that good King did in reforming the whole Publick Service of God there being now far better means and fairer opportunities of so doing than in the times of compiling the Antient Leiturgy by those Reverend and Renowned Bishops and Matyrs that did compose it ROM 10.22 Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he alloweth Having reprinted the foregoing Sheet we must now go on in the same Order and Method as was before promised to observe some more incongruous and unworthy passages all which call for a New Form of Liturgy in the rest of the Kalendar Rubricks and Body of the Book it self I. In the KALENDAR THe Kalendar is either that which appoints Proper Lessons for Sundays and Holy-days to speak in the Common-prayer-book Language or that which in each Month sheweth what Chapters are to be daily read on week-days according to the days of the month and is prefixed in all Editions to the Book it self In the Proper Lessons appointed for Holy-days The Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. omitteth proper Lessons for the Conversion of Paul because that was then no Holy-day but abrogated by the Act of 5.6 Edw. 6. ca. 3. Therefore in the Common Kalendar then established the first Lessons for that day being Jan. 25. as being a Common-day of the Week were Gen. 46. and Gen. 47. But in the Book of 1 Eliz. these two Chapters are laid by and Wisd 5 and 6. put in the room This however toucht upon in the printed Sheet is here again taken notice of to shew by this among other arguments that the Book then printed was not confirmed by 1. Eliz. 2. because that Act admits of no alterations of Lessons on Holy-days or other days save only on Sundays Yet is this also thrust into the New Scotish Leiturgy and that day made an Holy-day again And whereas in all the proper Lessons for Holy-days in 5.6 Edw. 6. only All Saints day had for those Lessons Wisd 3 and 5. and all other Holy-day Lessons were Lessons out of the Canonical Books the Kalendar of 1 Eliz. hath appointed 20. more Apocryphal Chapters for Holy-days and thrust out so many Canonical Chapters that by the Kalendar of 5.6 Edw. 6. were appointed for those very days as for instance  Kalendar 5.6 Edw. Kal. of 1 Eliz. On the Purification None yet on Feb. 1 which is the Day Exod. 12. Exod. 13. Wisd 9. Wisd 12. On St. Mathias None yet on Feb. 25. which is the Day Numb 33. Numb 34. Wisd 19. Ecclus. 3. On the
be used but onely at the celebration of the Lords Supper the setting up of Tapers of wax Candlesticks Basons and Ewres upon the high Altar and ducking to them every time a man comes into the Church or goes out or stirs while he is in it Whereas Cups Pots and Basons for Alms were never since 5. Edw. 6. to be set there but at the Communion nor then to be bowed unto though the Bread and Wine were on the Table The wearing of Hoods of degrees and many other such like devices all which were laid aside in 5.6 Edw. 6. as appears by the Rubricks and the Act for Uniformity in 1. Eliz. 2. compared together which allows nothing but what was in the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. save onely the alterations mentioned in the said Act as hath been before shewed And however the Rubrick before the Book printed in 1. Eliz. directeth to use such Ornaments as were in use in 2. Edw. 6. yet that is no part of the Book established because the Book of 5.6 Edw. 6. hath no such Rubrick and the Act enjoyns all to be done according to that Book and none other or otherwise However afterwards another Statute of Q. Eliz. did so appoint Now the same Preface before the Common-prayer touching Ceremonies giveth all men to understand that the most weighty cause of the abolishing of certain Ceremonies was that they were so far abused partly by the Superstitious blindness of the rude and unlearned and partly by the unsatiable avarice of such as sought more their own luere then the glory of God that the abuses could not well be taken away the thing remaining still Upon which grounds there was a removal of them in 5.6 Edw. 6. For then was that Preface of Ceremonies first prefixed to the Book of Common-prayer But so great is the itch of mans corrupt nature after Humane inventions in Divine Worship and so natural are Popish Gue-gaws and outward pompous toyes that please the senses that many of these who had been laid aside as abovesaid in 5.6 Edw. 6. and that at the Conference at Hampton-court it was desired that those Ceremonies and Rites of the Cross in Baptism kneeling at the Communion the Surplice c. might be put away yet such was the violence of the prevailing party at that time that having obtained License under the Great Seal they in Convocation An. 1603. recalled sundry of those rejected Ceremonies again and enjoyned all Students in Colleges to wear Surplices in time of Divine service Can. 17. Copes by him that Ministreth the Sacrament Epistolers and Gospelers according to 7. Eliz. there being no such Statute nor Parliament in 7. Eliz. and sundry other things under colour whereof by degrees most of those things before cast out viz. bowing to the East and to the Altar with the rest before named were retroduced and now devoutly or rather superstitiously observed without any shew or colour of warrant but ancient custom which being duly examined will appear to all to be first used in the Popish Churches as too palpably appeareth by the Preface touching Ceremonies before alledged Yea those very men who are so much for these and not onely urge the 18th Canon of 1603. but the Queens Injunctions * 52 Injunct for bowing at the Name of Jesus which no Common-prayer-book or Statute hath enjoyned yet in other things regard not those Injunctions nor the Book of Homilies no nor the Act for Vniformity it self touching such Ceremonies as they have a mind to recal and advance witness their setting up Candles in Candlesticks on the High Altar as they call it and such like superstitions which the third Injunction of Eliz. reckons among those things which tend to Idolatry and Superstition which of all other offences God doth most detest and abhor They must have their Antiphonies Responds c. which the Preface to the Common-prayer-book tells us are laid aside c. Not content with this they must have all except Candles lighted that are upon the Popish Altars where Mass is used upon their high Altars yea piping on divers Instruments singing so as none can understand the matter but onely be tickled with the musick playing upon Organs c. all which were laid aside in Edw. 6. and even by the 2 Hom. of the Place and time of Prayer which is by vertue of Art 35. subscribed unto by every Minister in England that ever was admitted to any Ecclesiastical Promotion according to the Act of 13. Eliz. 12. are censured and declared openly to all to be displeasing unto God and sore and filthily to defile his holy House and Place of Prayer All which are here mentioned to shew how far they deviate and whither they are tending and posting amain who under colour of upholding and practising of the laudable Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England do recal and retroduce many Popish Rites cast out of this Church and despise all Laws and Constitutions made against them and are thereby lyable to Inditements every time they use them upon the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. We shall forbear to insist longer upon this but leave it to others to judge what sad and dangerous effects these things if they be suffered and countenanced are likely to produce That which we chiefly aim at is to shew a necessity of reforming those Rites and Ceremonies contained in the Book of Common-Prayer or enjoyned by the Canons of 1603. Such are the Surplice Copes c. enjoyned to be used by Ministers the Cross in Baptism Kneeling at the Communion Marriage with the Ring Bowing at the Name of Jesus and such like imposed upon all as established by Law But such Establishment we do and must deny until we see a Record produced by which that Book now in use or printed in 1 Eliz. is by Act of Parliament ratified and confirmed For if either there be no Record of that to which an Act referreth or that there be more alterations in the Book said to be established than the Act mentioneth can that Book be properly said to be established by Law and not rather made void thereby In all other things nothing is admitted for Law or as being of force by Law but what is expresly contained in verbis in the Act it self especially if the Act refer to any thing to be confirmed by it of which no Record can be produced and which differs from ought else that is said to be ratified by it And this is the case of the present Liturgy which neither is Recorded nor agreeth with but hath sundry alterations from and additions to that of 5.6 Edw. 6. besides those hinted in the Act of 1 Eliz. 2. And if any Deed or Bond be rased or altered after sealing or if rased or altered before sealing and that not witnessed will such a Deed or Bond be admitted as good evidence at Law or in Equity if produced and pleaded We therefore cannot understand how the present Service-Book can be established by
Law it being no where Recorded and in sundry things beside those mentioned in the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. varying from that which was once Recorded as hath been before demonstrated To say the Book in what remaineth still bindeth in tanto at least is but a mistake for any Record or Deed vitiated in any one part makes void the whole in Law And as for those Rites enjoyned in the Book of Canons we shall forbear to speak of the Legality of them till we come to shew the necessity of Reformation in Discipline a great part whereof is contained in that Book Nor is it our purpose to insist upon the unlawfulness of those Ceremonies so as to make any dispute thereupon nor to justifie or condemn those who hold them simply unlawful in themselves But we taking it for granted that they are in themselves 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or things indifferent do humbly pray that these things may be duely considered in the general 1. That being such they ought not to be imposed on those who cannot be fully perswaded in their own minds and Consciences that they are lawful and therefore must sin if they use them This is St. Paul's own Doctrine and Practise touching things of this nature notwithstanding his own judgement of the lawfulness of them In his days many godly Christians both in Rome Corinth and elsewhere made scruple of sundry meats forbidden in the Levitical Law and of omitting days enjoyned by it Others satisfied of the lawfulness of both did eat those meats and omit those days at which others were scandalized some by adventuring through other mens example to do the like albeit they were not fully satisfied of the lawfulness thereof and thereby sinned others took offence and were grieved and thereupon censured all that used their Christian Liberty in those things of which they that used it were fully satisfied and hereupon the weak for censuring sinned also and by both these the weak were in danger to be destroyed Rom. 14.15 Now what was our Apostles Doctrine and Practise herein His Doctrine was this I know and am perswaded by the Lord Jesus that there is nothing unclean of it self but to him that esteemeth any thing unclean to him it is unclean Rom. 14.15 And All things indeed are pure but it is evil for that man who eateth with offence It is good neither to eat flesh nor to drink wine nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth or is made weak vers 20 21. His Practise was this 1. Touching himself If meat make my brother to offend I will eat no flesh while the world standeth lest I make my brother to offend 1 Cor. 8.13 And as toward others he straitly chargeth on all these two things 1. To take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling block to them that are weak ibid. vers 9. that is by using that Liberty before others not satisfied in the lawfulness of it 2. If the one will yet use this liberty and the other will take offence then his charge is Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not and let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth Rom. 14.3 But as for enjoyning the eating of what himself held to be lawful on those that doubted the lawfulness of it although he had more Authority then all our Bishops and Clergy in Convocation to make Canons we never find that he did it but warned and forbade all the very use of it before any that through weakness took offence at it If then Authority will follow the Apostles rule they will find a necessity not onely of taking off all Impositions already made but the taking away of all the things so imposed at which so many able and godly peaceable Ministers and People do take offence and for which so many thousands have deeply suffered to avoid sinning against God by conforming to them For whatsoever is not of faith is sin 2. If it be said The instances last given concern onely private things and private practises what is this to Publick Order in the House of God where the Service and Worship of Almighty God by the Hedge of Ceremonies is preserved from lying open to all profaneness as a confident stickler for Ceremonies groundlesly pretendeth To this it is answered That Ceremonies are no such Hedge unless to keep out such as have as good right to the Ordinances as they who do impose them for which they must one day give a sad account and that it is much more dangerous and sinful to enjoyn things of this nature for Publick use in the Administration of Publick Ordinances Because those private meats c. may be avoided by such as take offence at them for what necessity to be present at the use of them But there is a necessity of being present at the other which he that neglecteth is lyable to punishment by the Law The Law tyeth all to come to the Common Service every Sunday and Holy-day to receive the Holy Communion thrice at least in every year and imposeth a sharp penalty for neglect hereof So that while these are imposed or used where weak Christians take offence at them many godly men are forced to offend either against God by submitting to that they are not satisfied in the lawfulness of it or against the Laws of the Land by not conforming to them which they cannot do without sin So that the imposing of them upon all or the using of them before all who cannot without sin submit to them is the abusing of Authority and the making it to sin against Christ by putting it upon the forcing those for whom Christ died to sin against their own Consciences and to drive them on to destruction in Hell as a man would force a Beast into the water or fire that will surely devour him It is then a groundless put off to say that such things being commanded by just Authority the indifference by that command determineth and they become necessary which is quite contrary to the Apostles rule 3. If these be retained in some places where no offence is taken at them yet there is no reason to impose or use them in other places where any are offended at them For 1. to plead Imposition for order and unity in the Church of England is to no purpose because there is no necessity of the same in all places no more then of all the same Orders and Practises in all Corporations in England and of every Company within those Corporations who all have different Orders and Rules to preserve Order and Unity in the Civil Government of the Kingdom 2. Our very Articles of Religion as hath been shewed say Art 34. That it is not necessary that Ceremonies be in all places one or utterly like for at all times they have been divers and may be changed according to the diversities of Countries times and mens manners 3. If it be said These refer to different Countries not
to different places within the same Country It is answered that times and mens manners must produce a Change where ever a removal of those in being is necessary as appears by the Article And where things of this nature that at first were of godly intent and purpose devised but at length turned into vanity and superstition by the Preface touching Ceremonies before cited they are adjudged worthy to be cut away and clean rejected and so many of them have already been as was the Brasen Altar by Hezekiah And it further telleth us that as those be taken away which were most abused and burdened mens consciences without any cause so the other that remain may upon just causes be altered and changed So that here is nothing desired in the taking away the imposition yea all use of them but according to Law 4. The Book of Common-Prayer of 2 Edw. 6. is in some things referred to and particularly as to Ornaments and Rites both by the Rubrick before Morning-Prayer in the present Liturgy and by the Stat. of 1 Eliz. 2. So that as to this point so much of that first Book is still in force by Law But that Book hath expresly given a liberty in some of the things here desired to be no further imposed where in the last Page thereof called Certain Notes for the more plain Explication and decent Ministration of things contained therein it saith As touching kneeling crossing holding up of hands knocking upon the breast and other gestures they may be used or left as every mans devotion serveth without blame This is still good Law So that whatever is enjoyned in the Canons for the imposing this is void in Law by the Stat. of 25. H. 8.19 although made by the Kings Licence and Assent because contrary to that Law of 1 Eliz. 2. in this particular Now if the Law it self give a Liberty in some we trust that upon the foregoing Reasons our Law-givers will take off the imposition of the rest if not wholly remove them 5. The Bishops themselves take Liberty to omit one Ornament imposed on them to be used namely the Pastoral Staff which in the same place of the Book of 2. Edw. 6. he is enjoyned to have in his hand or to have it born by his Chaplain and this is not left Arbitrary as the Rites last before named are yet the Bishops herein can dispense for themselves is there not reason then to dispense with Ministers in the rest Having thus pleaded the necessity of Reformation in Rites and Ceremonies but especially of providing against the Imposition of any of them in general we shall not enter into any debate of the particulars for of that there is no need in this place But because we are subject to be upbraided that many of us have both subscribed to use all those contained in the Liturgy and some of us have accordingly used them and that therefore we are Revolters from our Subscription and thereby lyable to the penalty of Excommunication by the sixth Canon It behoves us to make this Apology for our selves 1. That albeit some of us have unadvisedly subscribed to use them and perhaps have used them sometimes yet finding that many sober Christians are scandalized at them we hold our selves bound to imitate the Apostle and what he did in the Case of meat which he held to be lawful we must do in the Case of Ceremonies to use them no more while the world standeth rather then make our brother to offend 2. As to the danger incurred thereby we must not so much stand upon that as to chuse iniquity rather then affliction 3. And as touching the validity and force of the Canon we fear it not it being void in Law of which we shall speak more under the head of Discipline IIII. Of CHURCH-GOVERNMENT BY Church-Government is meant the Ecclesiastcal Government of the Church of England said and commonly reputed to be established by the Laws of the Realm For however some have of late pretended to a Jus Divinum or Divine Institution of Episcopacy of late years used in England yet the Laws of the Kingdom would never own any such thing nor suffer them to exercise any power but what the Municipal Laws Authorize them unto Yea the Statute of Provisors 25th of Edw. 3. An. 1350. Declareth plainly that Prelacy it self was erected in England by the Kings of England and not by any other Authority For that Statute begins thus Whereas late in the Parliament of good memory of Edward King of England Grandfather to our Lord the King that now is the five and twentieth year of his Reign holden at Carlile the Petition heard put before the said Grandfather and his Counsel in his said Parliament by the Comminalty of the said Realm containing That whereas the Holy Church of England was FOUNDED IN THE ESTATE OF PRELACIE within the Realm of England by the said Grandfather and his Progenitors and the Earls and other Nobles of his said Realm and their Ancestors to inform them and the people of the Law of God c. Therefore we cannot look upon such Bishops in any other Capacity in England And according hereunto take notice under this Head of Church-government 1. Of their Constitution by Consecration 2. Of their Jurisdiction by Delegation of his Majesty according to his Laws 3. Of their Execution of Discipline accordingly By their Consecration they have a power of Ordination By their Jurisdiction they have a power to Govern And by their Execution of that Office they have a power of Discipline But all these according to the Laws of the Land and none other or otherwise We shall therefore speak somewhat to each of these and humbly offer Reasons of the necessity of reforming Episcopacy and Church-government in every one of these I. Of the Consecration of Bishops and their power of Ordination thereupon 1. BY the Laws of the Land after the death of any Bishop Dr. Heylin Advertisâ—oâ— Hist of K. Charles p. 193. his Majesty useth to send out his Writ of Conge d' Eslier to the Dean and Chapter to Elect another Which Election being made signified under the Chapter-Seal and confirmed by the Royal Assent the King sendeth out his Mandate to the Archbishop of the Province to proceed to Consecration of the person so elected or Confirmation if consecrated before and now but Translated from one See to another as the case may vary So is it acknowledged by one that takes on him to know more than many others of this particular But whereas he addeth that thereupon it must needs be that when the Church comes to such a condition that is to be without Archbishops and Deans and Chapters of both which the same Author saith the late King was content in the Confer at the Isle of Wight to grant an abolition that this was acknowledged on all sides that where there is no Dean and Chapter to Elect and no Archbishop to Consecrate and Confirm the Person
inrollment of that Charter until 2 Ric. 2. will not admit of so great Antiquity thereof And the same Sir Edw. Cook there alledgeth the Red Book of Hen. 1. De general Placitis Comitatuum Cap. 8. extant in the Office of the Kings Rememb in the Exchequer wherein in the Sheriffs Tourne Court is said Ibi agantur primo debita verè Christianitatis jura Secundo Regis placita postremo causae singulorum dignis satisfactionibus expleantur There let be handled first all due Laws of Christianity or Court-Christian Secondly Pleas of the King Lastly Causes of particular persons c. Whereupon they that is others conclude that Ecclesiastical causes were handled in the Tourn in H. 1. long after the said supposed Charter Then he addeth And certain it is the Bishops Consistories were erected and causes Ecclesiastical removed from the Tourn to the Consistory after the making of the said Red Book But let the Antiquity thereof be what it will it is most certain that however the Popes and their Agents did often intrude and usurp Authority within this Realm yet the King and Parliament ever held the Bishops and Clergy of England within the verge of the Laws of the Land never permitting them either by colour of Magna Charta or otherwise to exercise any Authority but with submission to the Municipal Laws So that whoever shall endeavour to put them into any further power in case they have a mind to restore them to former Jurisdictions doth put to his hand to make them so many Popes which this Realm even in times of Popish Religion here would never endure And whereas some are pleased to affirm that by the Statute of 25. Hen. 8. cap. 19. there was a stricter restraint laid upon the Bishops and Clergy than in the times before when they sate in Convocation viz. No Canons should be made and put in exercise that were contrariant or repugnant to the Laws of the Land it is manifest that the same limitation was long before set upon them For Sir Edw. Cook ibid cap. 74. pag. 323. saith That the King did often appoint Commissioners by Writ to sit with them at the Convecation and to have cognizance of such things as they meant to establish that nothing should be done in prejudice c. and for this he citeth 51. Ed. 3. nu 42.46 Edw. 3. prem 8.21 Ed. 4.45 Rot. Parl. 1 Ric. 2. nu 114. from which he concludeth that the Statute of 25. H. 8.19 is but Declaratory of the old Common Law And so strict were the Kings anciently over Bishops and Archbishops too that when the Clergy petitioned in Parliament 51. Edw. 3. 4 Instit ca. 74. of Archdeacons p. 339. num 83. that of every Consultation conditional the Ordinary may of himself take upon him the true understanding thereof and therein proceed accordingly that is without appeal to the King whereupon Delegates by Commission under the Great Seal might hear and determine the same The Kings answer was that the King cannot depart with his right but to yeeld to his Subjects according to Law To which Sir Edw. Cook subjoyns an Item to all his Readers Nota hoc stude bene Nay this is not all For so far did the Kings of England engage in the over-ruling of Bishops that they did not onely limit their Jurisdiction but allowed them not liberty to make a Will without licence from the King till they made composition with him as the same Author telleth us saying Ibid. p. 338 It appears by many Records in the reigns of H. 3. Edw. 1. as taking some one or two examples for many that by the Law and custome of England no Bishop could make his Will of his Goods or Chattels coming of his Bishoprick c. without the Kings licence The Bishops that they might freely make their Wills yeelded to give to the King after their deceases respectively for ever six things 1. Their best Horse or Palfrrce with Bridle and Saddle 2. A Cloke with a Cape 3. One Cup with a Cover 4. One Bason and Ewre 5. One Ring of Gold 6. His Kennel of Hounds For these a Writ issueth out of the Exchequer after the decease of every Bishop Whether this be still in use we meddle not but mention it onely to shew what a strict eye our Kings have ever had upon Bishops so as the Law allows them not power so much as of their own personal Estates much less of Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction without the King What power they had in the High Commission Court is needless to mention the Court being happily laid aside by the Statute of 17 Car. 1. cap. 11. But whereas they insisted upon sole Jurisdiction and now begin to exercise it or at least to renew their claim thereunto it is very well known that by the Statute of 1. Edw. 6.2 they could hold no Courts but in the Kings name nor that without Commission under the Great Seal which power was indeed revived and re-established by the Act of 1. Eliz. after it had been repealed 1. Mar. 2. Howbeit all that power is again repealed and made void for ever by the same Act of 17. Car. 1. and now no Commissions to be granted them any more To make this out we shall rehearse the words of both those Acts of Parliament which run thus 1. The Act of 1. Eliz. cap. 1. having first united and annexed all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Imperial Crown of this Kingdom it after addeth what power shall be given by Commission under the Great Seal to exercise the same in this following Clause onely viz. And that your Highness your Heirs and Successors Kings or Queens of this Realm shall have full Power and Authority by vertue of this Act by Letters patents under the Great Seal of England to assigne name and authorize when and as often as your Highness your Heirs or Successors shall think meet and convenient and for such and so long time as shall please your Highness your Heirs or Successors such person or persons being natural born Subjects to your Highness your Heirs or Successors as your Majesty your Heirs or Successors shall think meet to exercise and use occupy and execute under your Highness your Heirs and Successors all manner of Jurisdictions Priviledges and Preheminencies in any wise touching or concerning any Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction within these your Realms of England and Ireland or any other your Highnesses Dominions and Countries And to visit reform redress order correct and amend all such Errors Heresies Schisms Abuses Offences Contempts and Enormities whatsoever which by any manner Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Power Authority or Jurisdiction can or may lawfully be reformed ordered redressed corrected restrained or amended to the pleasure of Almighty God the increase of Vertue and the Conservation of the Peace and Vnity of this Realm And that such person or persons so to be named assigned authorized and appointed by your Highness your Heirs or Successours after
here which the same Doctor confesseth they did although the want of the Kings Assent made it not valid in Law For the Proviso doth not say the old Canons shall be used till the King Assent but onely till such time as they be viewed searched or otherwise ordered and determined by them or the more part of them Nor doth that Act in any Clause mention any other Canons or Constitutions but such as are Provincial or called by other names always presumed and mentioned to be made in Convocations in England not in the Popes Conclave And to the end it may yet further appear that he who so confidently taketh upon him to improve his knowledge to whom he wrote that Epistle hath mis-informed him and wrested the Laws also take notice that the Canon-Laws of England are onely such as are or have been made in England These are of two sorts legatine or Provincial The Legatine were 77 Canons and Constitutions whereof 26 were made by Otho the Popes Legate President of a Synod here in England the other 51. in another Synod after holden under Othobone Legate of the Pope in 32. Hen. 3. An. 1248. The Provincial Constitutions were such as in several places of England were made under the Archbishops of Canterbury in all 212. whereof the first 48. were made under Stephen Langhton in the reign of King John and the last three were made under Henry Chichley in the reign of Hen. 5. These Provincial Constitutions about the year 1422. were digested into a Body by William Lindwood who also wrote a Commentary upon them the other by Johannes de Aton Canon of Lincoln who likewise Commented upon them all which are yet extant Now we must understand the Act of 25. H. 8.19 speaks onely of Canons Constitutions Ordinances Provincial or other or by whatsoever name they be called in their CONVOCATION These and no other were to be reviewed and out of these such as by the thirty two persons chosen by Hen. 8. or Edw. 6. should be viewed ordered and determined to stand were onely to be in force as is evident to every impartial eye that shall consult the Statute And these having been in 4. Edw. 6. viewed and thereupon by Gualter Haddon under Archbishop Cranmer and four Classes into which the said thirty two persons were divided that Book called Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum saith the Preface thereunto were compiled And these being so composed and published that all might object what they could if they had ought against them before Confirmation the King died before his Royal Assent was given and so they never were confirmed But yet the very viewing ordering and determining of those old Constitutions be they what they could were by the closing Proviso forementioned in 25. H. 8. all void and of none effect And albeit divers Canons or Constitutions were made in Q. Elizabeths reign beside those Injunctions and Articles for Visitations in her first year yet none of them being for ought we know confirmed by the Royal Assent under the Great Seal are now by any reputed Obligatory It be then onely the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical treated upon by the Bishop of London President of the Convocation for the Province of Canterbury and the rest of the Bishops and Clergy of the said Province and agreed upon with the Kings Majesties licence in that Synod begun at London An. Dom. 1603. in the first year of King James his reign over England and after published by his said Majesties Authority under the Great Seal of England which can now be so much as pretended to be of any force And here we shall not dispute their validity after that Kings death ' they being not after re-established by King Charles the first but we shall onely speak to the Legality of them as they were once ratified and as they are any of them contrariant and repugnant to the Laws or Customes of the Land As for Customes which the Statute of 25. H. 8.19 referreth to as well as to the Laws we shall say little because this is more proper for Lawyers upon Prohibitions granted out of his Majesties Civil Courts to confider and debate We therefore consider of the Canons or such of them onely as are repugnant to any of the Laws in force This is a large Field Those Canons being no less than 141. in number which are more then heretofore were ever made in any three Synods by whomsoever held in England We shall therefore keep onely to such as we find most contrariant to those Laws which we are in duty bound chiefly to take notice of As for instance Of those twelve Canons under the first Head or Title viz. Of the Church of England there be eleven of them the breach of any of which is to be punished with Excommunication ipso facto not to be revoked till such as breake them after repent and publickly revoke their wicked errours The persons to be excommunicated are I. Impugners of the Kings Supremacy Can. 2. II. All that affirm the Church of England is not a true and Apostolical Church teaching and maintaining the Doctrine of the Apostles Can. 3. where it is not defined what the Church of England is III. Impugners of the publick Worship of God established Can. 4. which few know to be established IV. Impugners of the Articles of Religion agreed upon 1562. Can. 5. the establishment whereof is doubtful V. Impugners of the Rites and Ceremonies established Can. 6. of which there is no certainty VI. Impugners of the Government of the Church of England by Archbishops Bishops c. Can. 7. there being none such VII Impugners of the form of consecrating and ordering Archbishops Bishops c. or that any thing in it is repugnant to the Word of God Can. 8. there being in the form no such Words as ordering of Archbishops and Bishops and it having been made out that there be contradictions in it one of which is repugnant to the Word VIII Authors of Schism Can. 9. IX Maintainers of such as the Canons call Schismaticks that is who affirm such Ministers as refuse to subscribe to the Book of Common-prayer c. Can. 10. which is hard to prove X. Maintainers of Conventicles Can. 11. that is of such as maintain that there are in England other Meetings Assemblies or Congregations of the Kings born Subjects then such as by the Laws are allowed which may rightly claim the name of true and lawful Churches XI Maintainers of Constitutions made in Conventicles without the Kings Authority and submit to them Can. 12. So all the Rules confirmed by Parliament for Church-Government make the Parliament lyable to Excommunication and the Assemby too and all the Presbyterians in England Besides these there is Can. 59. for excommunicating Ministers refusing to Catechise every Sunday after a third offence herein complained of So Can. 68. decreeth Ministers refusing to Christen or Bury to be excommunicated Majori Excommunicatione And Canon 72. ordaineth that if a Minister without