Answ 1 I answer 1. Those things which are really innovations and imposed and not required by Law surely we are not bound to obey nor do I know any that affirms we should sin if we submit not to them nor will it be charged upon those that deny them but upon such as impose them if the peace of the Church be violated Yet let it be considered also Sect. 38 Answ 2 2. Though such and such particular Rites may not be specially ordained by a positive Law for them yet if there be a general Law impowring the Bishops to order appoint and require what shall be for the peace of the Church and order in it what shall be for the conveniencies solemnity and decency of Administration and of all this leave them to be the judges what they now do so require they cannot be said to require without or against Law And if these particulars which they require be not manifestly against the Word of God I cannot see how we can be excused from sin if we disobey considering that establishment which by Law they have among us Sect. 39 Answ 3 3. But may we do nothing but what we are bound to do yea are we not bound for peace sake to do all that we lawfully may do Suppose our Governours should lay the peace of the Church upon such slight matters as are of no consideration in comparison with it and this be indeed their imprudence and possibly their sin Yet when this is done if we submit not supposing the things to be lawful in themselves I see not but that the violation of the Churches peace will be laid upon us as well as upon them nor will their imprudence excuse our sin There may perhaps be some kind of sin in them requiring but I am sure when the things required are not materially evil there can be no sin in us in obeying Let us not therefore so much consider what they must or may require but what we may and should do when it is required and we shall have peace Sect. 40 Except Partic. 5 5. The next great Exception is The Bishops claim to be Spiritual Lords contrary to the Royal Prerogative of Jesus Christ the only Lord and King of the Church The same which Johnson the Separatist made against our Churches See Unreason of Separat p. 47 48. and expressly contrary to that rule of the (b) 1 Pet. 5.2 3. Apostle where they if those Elders be supposed to be Bishops are only to oversee the Flock and not as Lords over Gods heritage but as ensamples to the Flock Yea contrary to the Royal dignity of the King and temporal Magistrate both in civil and ecclesiastical causes For they have their voices and authority in Parliament for enacting Laws for the Common-wealth They are Rulers of Provinces and Diocesses in ecclesiastical causes in civil State and dignity some of them above all all of them above some of the Nobles Justices and other Magistrates of the Land They and their Courts handle and determine civil causes and affairs that appertain to the Magistracy they inflict civil mulcts and penalties give Licences in several cases all the Priests and Deacons are exempt from the Magistrates Jurisdiction in divers things and answerable only or chiefly to the Prelates and their Officers Sect. 41 For Answer Here is a great charge indeed but it signifies nothing as to the business before us viz. our submission for Peace sake For Answ 1 1. Should they claim to be what they are not for there is a vast difference between to be and to claim to be may we yet not lawfully obey them in things honest though we own not their claim I judge we may The claim may be unjust in them and yet the things which they require of us may be fit to be done by us Sect. 42 Answ 2 2. Though they should claim more than belongs to them yet this makes not a nullity of that authority which is their due What they may justly require as Bishops and Governours of the Church they may require had they not those Titles of Spiritual Lords and then the addition of that Title destroyes not their power of Bishops Sect. 43 Answ 3 3. But They neither are nor claim to be such Spiritual Lords as the Objection implyeth as even the (c) Bradsh unreas of Separ p. 65. learned Non-conformists have acknowledged and which their Canons and practice shew For those things which are antecedently necessary by the Law of God they do command and press not as their own but as the Laws of Christ. And for things which are of another nature the practice whereof is made necessary pro Hic Nunc by their constitutions they prescribe them not so as to bind the conscience of any to the acknowledgement and approbation thereof as necessary things but only to obey them in practice and for external order and as things indifferent in themselves which we are no longer obliged to than they are commanded And therefore they cannot be said to arrogate such an Office of Spiritual Lords as the Apostle condemns nor in that sense wherein Christ alone is Lord of his Church They never attempting to introduce a new worship of God or enjoyning subscription to new Articles of Faith But requiring only the same Articles to be believed which Christ hath revealed and ordering only the external mode and circumstances of worship the substance of which is only from Christ as to decency order and edification of which they as the Governours of the Church here must be in a very great measure acknowledged the Judges and which are by Christ left free to the Church to order according to the condition of Time and Place and other Circumstances Sect. 44 Answ 4 4. And as they encroach not upon the Prerogative Royal of Jesus Christ so neither do they infringe the Authority of the King and Civil Magistrate And to evidence this I need say no more than that which the forecited (d) Unreas of Separ p. 47. Mr. Bradshaw though no friend to the Bishop hath said in answer to this very objection 1. That the Prelates claim their voyces in Parliament not as Divine Ordinances appertaining to their Prelateships but as an honour annexed to the same by the Civil Magistrate 2. Their Authority in causes ecclesiastical over Provinvinces c. is either such as the Magistrate himself may execute and administer in his own person if he please or such as is not for Him as a Magistrate to execute The first sort The Bishops administer only by vertue of the Magistrates own Commission and therein they impair not either his dignity or supremacy much less in the other part of their authority which belongeth not to the Magistrate himself to execute especially when they use not this neither without his consent licence and approbation 3. That all are above some some above all the Nobles Justices c. is a free and voluntary honour
Sacrifices are a broken spirit a broken and contrite heart thou wilt not despise Thus are Prayers and Supplications a Sacrifice such did Christ (a) Heb. 5.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 offer up with strong cries and tears in the dayes of his flesh Praise and Thanksgiving is another Sacrifice yea a Sacrifice (b) Psal 69 30 31. that doth please the Lord better than an Oxe or Bullock that hath horns and hoofs And so the Apostle accounteth it when he exhorts to it in this phrase (c) Heb. 13.15 alluding to that of Hoâ— 14.2 Let us offer the Sacrifice of praises to God that is the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his Name Again Love is a Sacrifice which is intimated by the Apostles Argument pressing us (d) Eph. 5.2 to love one another by the Sacrifice of Christ whereby he evidenced his love to us Acts of charity and mercy a free communication and bounty to matters of charity and piety are Sacrifices also and placamina too they are an (e) Phil. 4.18 odour of a sweet smell a Sacrifice well-pleasing to God And upon this account urged so earnestly (f) Heb. 13.16 to do good and to communicate forget not for with such Sacrifices God is well-pleased In a word our bodies our own selves must be a Sacrifice (g) Rom. 15.12 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a living Sacrifice are we in rendring to God our reasonable service And as through the Apostles Ministration there was h an acceptable offering up or Sacrifice of the Gentiles So still through the blessing of God on our Ministries there is a Sacrifice of the same nature now though possibly short of those perfections offered up to God The Gentiles did the Apostles then and the Ministers of the Gospel do still bring us an offering when through their Ministry they are consecrated an holy people to God according to that Prophecy (i) Isa 66.91 20. They i. e. those that shall be sent abroad to the Nations Tarshish Pul and Lud The Gentiles and the Isles afar off fulfilled in the Apostles and Evangelists sent abroad from the Jewes to the Gentiles shall bring all your Brethren even those Gentiles by faith made the children of Abraham and so Brethren to the Jewes out of all Nations a gift or * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an oblation to the Lord. Thus are we in a sound sense Priests even in the Evangelical Ministry to offer men viz. by the power of the Word subduing them to the Gospel and bringing them (k) Rom. 1.5 16.26 to the obedience of faith The Sacrifices of the Levitical Priesthood were slain Beasts but the Sacrifices of the Evangelical Ministry is a (l) Heb. 4.12 ripping up of the hearts a mortifying and destroying the brutish lusts and beastly affections of men (m) Eph. 6.17 by the Sword of the Spirit the Word of God Such Sacrifices as these God will accept and these he doth expect from men in return of his mercies viz. That we praise him that we be humble penitent and obedient before him that we mortifie our unruly lusts our pride passions envy ambition c. That we worship God with sincerity and humble devotion that we love one another with a pure heart and unstained charity that we follow peace with all earnest affections These are the Sacrifices with which God is well-pleased These are they which now are most proper to be offered for Sect. 9 Whence come those inundations of misery upon us (n) Jam. 4.1 Those wars and fightings which swept away our peace and happiness as with a flood Came they not hence even from our lusts that war in our members Pride Envy Covetousness and Ambition these were the Engines which the Devil used to fill us with hatred and malice emulations and wrath discontent and murmuring strife and sedition and by these he overthrew the best foundations of our peace and unhinged the whole frame of our Government both in Church and State We cannot forget how ambitious and self-seeking men made no difficulty to sacrifice even Religion it self to their Rebellion and the peace of the most flourishing Church and State to their own lusts And now can we do less than sacrifice those lusts again to peace We will do nothing and are unworthy of those glorious mercies which the Lord hath through so many wonders brought home to us if we yet are unwilling to mortifie our own inordinate affections and unruly passions yea if we cannot be content in a great measure to sacrifice our own private judgments and perswasions to the peace of the Church We have been divided long enough sides and parties have appeared high to the devouring one of another (o) Mat 10.20 21. Brother hath betrayed the brother to death and the father the child children have risen up against their Parents It is now high time that we study how to be at unity Sect. 10 The Greek Historian (p) Thucyd. l. 1â— telleth us of Lacedemonia That before Lycuâ—gus his time it was (q) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a long while abounding in factions and shaken with seditions Another gives this reason of it viz. because (r) Plut. in vit Lyâ—â—g Eurytion one of their Kings being vainly ambitious of popular applauses (s) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 did too much loosen and relax the Rains of Government and the power of a Monarch Hence the people grew fierce and insolent to despise their Kings and the City was still full of commotions and seditions And the Sacred History informs us of the abounding of sin and commotions in Israel from another ground We find (t) Judg. 17.8 13. Idolatry in the house of Micah and a young man of Judah consecrated a Priest to his Idol (u) Jude 18.2 The children of Dan by force seeking themselves an inheritance because none gave them a legal possession (x) Jude 19.2 A Concubine continuing in whoredoms and not punished A sad War between (y) Jude 20. Israel and Benjamin almost fatal to the house of Benjamin And all these troubles recorded in such a time (z) Jude 17.6.18.1.19 1.21.25 when there was no King in Israel but every one did that which seemed right in his own eyes Sect. 11 But was this also the ground of our miseries Had we no King or did He encourage popular insolencies Nothing less nay we had a King in Israel and one also who was to His Power zealous to maintain the Church in her Splendor the People in Peace and who rather than let loose those golden Rains of Government whereby He might rule and preserve them He was content to be sacrificed a Martyr for both But we were factious and seditious covetous and ambitious and unwilling to be kept in order we were resolved that we would do every one what pleased our own fancies and then raised up fears and jealousies and concluded We would have no King among us that
mal-administration of the power in their hands so far as their charge extends They judge their charge to be no more than to oversee the Churches to take care that able Pastors be provided for the particular cure and inspection of the several Flocks and that these do their duties in their places and that the people yield their due obedience to them and to their Superiors Sect. 11 Answ 2 2. It is granted That the bounds of the Episcopal charge were not so large in the Primitive times as they are now no not generally in many centuries of years But withall it must be not denied that this consideration makes not a nullity of the Office nor doth the lessening or inlarging the bounds of their charge at all make a change or alteration in the charge it self For in those little Bishopricks either there was an imparity or superiority or there was noâ— The Bishop had Presbyters under him or he had not If now ye say that he had not ye say something indeed to the purpose but it remains to be proved and the stream of Antiquity speaks the contrary For to omit the mention of the third and fourth Ages whereof none that I know ever doubted when Ignatius of Antioch in those Epistles which were never yet denied to be his and are by Videlius Vossius and our learned Vsher acknowledged to be genuine doth expresly make this distinction and requires the Obedience of the Presbytâ—r to the Bishop as those who have read Ignatius know so well that it would be lost labour to produce particular passages when it is the main design and argument of some of those Epistles as particularly that ad Trallenses which is wholly Hortatory ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Vnity in Doctrine and Sanctity of Life For the preserving of this unity and purity of Doctrine he exhorteth as to avoid all Hereticks against whom he solidly proves the Deity and Incarnation of Christ so to yield a due obedience to their Pastors both the Bishops because they watch for their souls and to the Presbyters and Deacons because they are Ministers of the Church of God and there have the place of Jesus Christ Particularly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reverence the Bishop and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as ye reverence Christ and adds As the Apostles have commanded So again in that ad Magnesianos which is Paraenetical and Hortatory also and the designe of it is to exhort obedience to the Bishop yea though he be young which he presseth by several arguments as That we are in this case not so much to look to Age as ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The oldest are not always the wisest And farther urgeth the examples of a young Daniel and a young Samuel reproving an old Eli and Jeremy Solomon Josiah Timothy And again that it is a terrible thing to contemn the Bishop for in him is God also contemned And saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is fit to obey the Bishop and in nothing to oppose him And again 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As the Lord Christ did nothing without the Father so must you do nothing without your Bishop I need cite no more though I might add much to this purpose out of those Epistles ad Philadelphenses ad Smyrnenses where he disputes of the power and authority of the Bishop I know that even these are said also to be so interpolated that it is hard to know Ignatius in Ignatius But that is a strange interpolation which shall leave nothing genuine and it would be scarce parallelled that the main design of a genuine Epistle should be spurious Grant them interpolated must it needs be the hard hap of poor Episcopacy to be principally guilty and wheresoever that is mentioned or urged though it be so often so professedly must that Epistle for the Bishops sake be either rejected as spurious or this particular be concluded the interpolation Nothing of antient records then shall have any credit with us when we have a mind to charge them with corruptions Therefore until these be proved spurious passages we shall account them genuine Ignatius Ignatius I say doing this as it proves this Imparity and Superiority as antient as his time which was the very next age to the Apostles so it hath some force to perswade us that it was so even in the Apostles days both because he was so near them and so more likely to know the practice of the time but just before him and also because he was for a good season contemporary and coetaneous with some of the Apostles particularly S. John who would certainly have contradicted him had he pleaded for a power which Christ never approved nor the Apostles owned Sect. 12 And if this Imparity or Superiority be granted to have been in those narrower limits it must not it cannot with any shadow of reason be denied where the bounds are farther extended If one two or three Presbyters may be under a Bishop then may also ten twenty an hundred More or fewer alter not the nature of the office Kings and Princes are as perfectly and justly such now when of larger Empires and Dominious as those of old who were Kings but of some single Cities or petty Territories They are not to be cast out because their Dominions are conceived too large but to be obeyed because they are Kings So neither are our Diocesans therefore less Bishops because their Bishopricks are greater than those in the Antient Ages For if any were they fewer or more were to obey the Bishop then so are we though more if by the Establishment here we are put under his jurisdiction to obey him still Sect. 13 Answ 3 3. Nor is it yet proved that Even then their bounds were so streight as to be limited to one Parish or single Congregation For if there were many of these Churches in association joined in one and so One Church for acts of Government to which particular Churches were subordinate as the (p) See Assemblies answ to Reas of Dissent Brethr. and Vindicat. of Presbyt Govern by the Province of Lond. Presbyterian Brethren not only grant but challenge and lay it a foundation of their Classical and Provincial and National Assemblies as The Church of Jerusalem Ephesus c. with other City Churches which say they consisted of more single Congregations than one Then if there were a Bishop as it appears there was either He must be yielded to be over all this association or if a distinct Bishop to every particular Congregation then those several Bishops must be under and subordinate to the Colledge of Presbyters which I have not yet seen affirmed So that here was a larger charge than of one single Parish And in after ages it is most evident that their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 had not that strict sense which now it hath but the Parish was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consisting of more Parishes than one as
granted to them by the Civil Magistrate and held in tenure from him and not claimed as pertaining to the Episcopal function by Divine right 4. Their Courts determine no other civil causes than the Civil Magistrate and his Laws do permit or if any do the fault is not in the Prelateship but in the persons Further they inflict civil punishments give licences exact oaths c. by authority from the Magistrate whose substitutes therein they are And therefore the Prelates neither in this nor in any of the former instances can be said to impair the dignity authority or supremacy of the Civil Magistrate but herein do all things in and by the protection of his authority 5. If all our Ministers be exempt from the Magistrates Jurisdiction in some things appertaining to them but in what things I know not this very exemption it self is an act of the Magistrates Jurisdiction and depends upon his pleasure and how can it then any wayes impair the same Sect. 45 These things may satisfie in answer to this exception The Honours and Lordships given to the Bishops is a civil additament which we have no reason to envy them neither doth that Title or their rule and dominion infringe the Prerogative of Christ or the Power and Authority of the King And how their Honours and power in the Church should discharge us of our obedience or be a ground of our contentions I must profess I see not how any rational account can be given to any considering man Sect. 46 Except partic 6 6. But if they have a power themselves yet how can they set up and substitute and require our obedience to other officers which in the Church are confessedly not of divine institution for this also is an exception against our Episcopacy and thus did the Presbyterian Divines give it in in their (e) 1. Pap. of Propos except 2. against Bishops Proposals to His Majesty That by reason of the disability to discharge their duties and trusts personally The Bishops did depute the Administration of much of their trust even in matters of Spiritual Cognizance to Commissaries Chancellors and Officials whereof some are meer secular persons and could not administer that power which originally pertaineth to the Officers of the Church And again in their Second paper to His Majesty presented in reference to His Majesties Declaration communicated to them before its publication they say The Prelacy which we disclaim is That of Diocesans upon the claim of a superior order to a Presbyter assuming the sole power of Ordination and of Publick admonition of particular offendors enjoyning Penitence excommunicating and absolving besides Confirmation over so many Churches as necessitated the corruption of Discipline and using of Humane officers as Chancellors Surrogates Officials Commissaries Arch-deacons while the undoubted officers of Christ the Pastors of particular Churches were hindred from the exercise of their office Sect. 47 Answ 1 Answ 1. How much these things may signifie towards the design for which they were urged by these Brethren petitioning for an alteration of the establishment which here I meddle not with sure I am should all these things be granted they signifie nothing as to the exemption of us from a peaceable submission to these officers being established And this is all that I here aim at As to the Diocesses and Superior Order I have already spoken to them the matter of Ordination I shall examine under the next exception Sect. 48 Answ 2 2. As to Publick admonition Penances Excommunication and Absolving c. I say that such censures as these are to be executed in the Church none that knows the nature of a Church and is acquainted with the Scriptures did ever or do now question The censures are necessary the ends great To preserve the Church in Purity and Peace To keep men from Scandal and Schism To recover the lapsed sinner To restore the Penitent To strengthen the weak To confirm and establish the doubtful to make the Church (f) Cant. 6.4 10 comely and beautiful in her self and terrible to her enemies as a well marshalled Army Now when we acknowledge the Censures of Divine institution and of so great necessity why should we quarrel at the Administrators which yet are not so uncapable of this trust as some may conceive The Bishops on all hands are granted an interest in the power of the Keyes even by those who will not acknowledge them above the Presbyters Now if they exercise this power alone or with others yet excluding some whom we judge to have an interest with them yet what they do they do by vertue of that authority which they have The taking too much upon them or any male-administration may be personal faults but no ground for us to refuse obedience Sect. 49 Answ 3 3. Neither do these inferior officers pass these Censures alone but with others nor do any according to our constitutions keep Courts in affairs of this nature but with someone or more Presbyters there with them Sect. 50 Answ 4 4. But grant that these Officers have not a Divine institution but substitute under the Bishop by an authority meerly humane though some conceive some footsteps of an Archdeacon in Scripture in Silas and Mark to Paul and Barnabas although not under the same name Yet 1. The Lay-Elders beyond all doubt are as much secular persons as any of these and have as little a foundation in Scripture as these as to the being Ecclesiastical officers and the passing of Church-censures and then methinks these men that could admit them may admit these If their being secular persons be an argument against these sure I am it is as strong against them and with us more for they never had any legal establishment in this Church as these have But 2. The legal establishment of these Officers by the Laws of the Kingdom is enough to engage our submission to those Laws and upon this account may even those men with a good conscience obey them who yet acknowledge not a Divine institution of them nor a Divine right in Episcopacy it self For 1. Sect. 51 I think there is very much truth in those words of Archbishop Whitgift which I find cited but miserably misapplied by Johnson the Separatist viz. The substance and nature of Government must be taken out of the Word of God and consisteth in these parts That the Word be truly taught the Sacraments rightly administred Vertue furthered Vice repressed and the Church kept in quietness and order All this is certainly of Divine institution and this we may and must submit to And this is all which the Bishops and Officers under them are impowered to do But saith he the Officers of the Church whereby this Government is wrought be not namely and particularly expressed in Scripture but in some points left to the discretion and liberty of the Church to be disposed according to the state of times persons and places Now if there be a truth in this which
the Government Apostolical and necessary or only Prudential brought in by the Church and not repugnant to the Holy rule or only as the Bishops are impowered and Commissioned under the King being here established I see not how we can without sin refuse a peaceable compliance with it Sect. 56 And I have reason to hope such a compliance in a good measure because those learned Brethren who though in their Proposals to His Majesty they desire that Chancellors Arch-deacons Commissaries c. as such may not pass any censures purely Spiritual yet when they say only as such it may intimate they would not deny them under another notion as Commissioned under His Majesty to do so These Brethren I say add this But for the exercise of Civil Government and this by their words there may seem to include the acts of Government in the Church and ecclesiastical Causes so far as the Censures are not purely Spiritual coercively by Mulcts or corporal penalties by power derived from Your Majesty as Supreme over persons and things ecclesiastical we presume not at all to interpose but shall submit to any that act by Your Majesties Commission Were indeed these Considerations well weighed they would do much to a peaceable obedience Sect. 57 Except Partic. 7 7. I know but one material exception more referring to this charge that The Bishops take too much upon them And that is The matter of Ordination and now the Re-ordination for thus it is excepted The Bishops some of them do assume sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction to themselves And now it is farther urged as unsufferable that upon their re-establishment they require a Re-ordination of all those who during the late Confusions were ordained only by a Presbytery Sect. 58 In answer to the business of a Superior ordo c. enough is already said But to the matter of Ordination and Re-ordination I say Answ 1 1. The Question is not what some challenge to themselves but how far we may yield in the thing that is challenged without sin If some challenge too much let them answer that but if we may without sin take from their hands that which we can legally have from no others I see not why we should in the least scruple to take it That Their hands are Necessary and that none can be regularly ordained without them is the Judgement of none of the least or lowest in the Church who think the Scripture speaks clearest on their side also For Though Timothy had the (h) 1 Tim. 4 14. Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery yet it is expressly said that he had (i) 2 Tim. 1.6 Pauls too and he not acting as one of them but under a distinct notion as the words if well weighed do more than intimate for whatsoever that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was which was given by that Laying on of Hands whether the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit usually in those dayes by the (k) Act. 8.17 18. Apostles hands or the Gift i. e. Authority of Ministery whether of a Bishop or Evangelist it matters not whatsoever I say the gift was it seems to be conferred (l) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chiefly by the hands of Paul and referred to the hands of the Presbytery (m) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but as assistants or associates with him But those texts seem to be more express where not only the Deacons were made by (n) Act 6.6 the sole hands of the Apostles but also in the ordaining of Presbyters we read that Barnabas and Paul those Apostles (o) Act. 14.23 did ordain Elders in every Church as they went we read not of any other hands with them St. Paul also layes this charge on Timothy (p) 1 Tim. 5.22 Lay thou hands suddenly on none intimating an act wherein he only was concerned for if there were other Presbyters or a Presbytery at Ephesus and they necessarily to joyn with him in every Ordination why is the charge only given to him why not the same caution urged on them And in that clause (q) T it 1. ◠For this cause left I thee in Creet that Thou shouldest ordain Elders in every City we see Titus infallibly left with authority to do this but we read not of any others appointed with him If any object He was an extraordinary Officer and Evangelist This signifies little for whatever he was he was an Apostolical person and for that time at least seated at that place for the particular Government of that church to perform not an extraordinary but a work of standing use in the Church the administration of an ordinary and perpetual Ordinance And why then in such a work he may not be conceived to act as a settled ordinary Officer I see not This we are sure of That Ordination was not given in those dayes without the hands of an Apostle or an Apostolical person We are not sure that it was not sometimes without the hands of the Presbytery Upon these grounds these learned and conscientious men judge a Necessity of the Episcopal or Apostolical hands though not excluding yet withal not necessarily requiring the hands of other Presbyters Sect. 59 On the other side that The Hands of Bishops are lawful in this work is granted so far by those who urge the greatest necessity of the Presbyterial Ordination yet excude not the Bishop See Jus Divin Minist Evang. 2. part who on their judgements ceaseth not to be at least a Presbyter and the Name of a Bishop doth not with them take away his interest of a Presbyter in Ordination nor nullifie the Orders because his Hands were in them Now then if we may but lawfully take it at the Bishops hands if it be required to be had from them alone though it should be supposed somewhat irregular and we can have it no other way without the violation of the Laws in being suppose they should sin in assuming that only to themselves which should be done joyntly with others yet we should not sin in taking it of them because they unquestionably have a power though possibly not the sole power Sect. 60 2. It is objected only Some Bishops challenge to themselves c. Now the matter is not what some particular men challenge but what the established constitution is It concerns not us to be of the same judgement with every particular Bishop but to obey them in that place where the Laws have set them and in that authority wherein the Constitutions of this Church have invested them Now the Laws of our Church give no such power of sole ordination nor doth any Bishop that I know or have heard practice it The Dean and Prebends were of old I doubt not accounted a standing Presbytery to the Bishop and the (r) Can. 31. Presence of four of these are expressly required to every Ordination viz. The Dean Arch-Deacon and two Prebendaries at least or in the necessary absence of them four other
Presbyters Nor may we understand this of a naked presence only but by the order for the Practick they are to assist in the act too they are (s) See Rubr. in Form of Order Priests with the Bishop to lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth Orders And this Ordination I never knew questioned by any that allowed any Ordination by Ecclesiastical persons at all And the (t) Jus Divin Minist Evang. Part 2. London Divines have justified even in their judgements the validity of it Sect 61 3. The great and only thing that I know which affrights men from this Episcopal Ordination is the subscription by the Canon required and the Promise which they are to make of obedience to the Bishop To this I shall only say 1. Sect. 62 To omit what was (v) Sect. 18 19. said before as to the Promise of obedience We are required no more than those Reverend Brethren of the Presbyterian perswasion have declared to be their avowed principles (x) Account to the King of the confer p. 4. We are remembred say they that in things no way against the Law of God The Commands of our Governours not only may but Must be obeyed but if they command which God forbids we must patiently submit to suffering and every soul must be subject to the higher powers for Conscience sake and not resist The publick judgement Civil or Ecclesiastical belongeth only to publick persons and not to any private man That no man must be causlesly and pragmatically inquisitive into the reasons of his Superiors commands nor by pride and self-conceitedness exalt his own understanding above its worth and office but all to be modestly and humbly self-suspicious That none must erroneously pretend to Gods Law against the just commands of his Superiors nor pretend the doing of his duty to be sin That he who suspects his Superiors commands to be against Gods Laws must use all means for full information before he setteth in a course of disobeying them And that he who discovers indeed any thing commanded to be a sin though he must not do it must manage his opinion with very great tenderness and care of the publick peace and the Honour of his Governours These are our principles Now then when their avowed principles yield so much as indeed all sober Christians do and must and The Bishops require no more nor are those who are to be ordained to promise any more why may there not be a full compliance here why may we not promise that which we acknowledge we are obliged to perform But 2. Sect 63 The Subscription (y) Can. 36. required is only to these three Articles 1. That the Kings Majesty under God is the only Supreme Governour of this Realm and of all other His Highness Dominions and Countries as well in all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical things and causes as Temporal and that no Forrein Prince Person Prelate State or Potentate hath or ought to have any jurisdiction Power Superiority Preeminence or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within His Majesties said Realms Dominions or Countries 2. That the Book of Common Prayer and of ordering Bishops Priests and Deacons containeth in it nothing contrary to the Word of God and that it may lawfully be used and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed in all Publick Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments and none other 3. That He alloweth the Articles of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops and Bishops of both Provinces and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord God One thousand five hundred sixty and two and that he acknowledgeth all and every the Articles therein contained being in number 39. besides the Ratification to be agreeable to the Word of Grd. Now in reference to this Subscription required let me but propound these things to be seriously considered and duly weighed Viz. 1. Sect. 64 That this is not an Arbitrary imposition of the Bishops But they are obliged by the same Law to require it as others are to do it They may not ordain or give Licence to any which refuse to subscribe upon pain of their own suspension So that we can neither impute this to the Bishops nor deny it our selves without opposing the standing Laws which do equally oblige both them and us 2. Sect. 65 Nor are the Articles of such a nature as to startle a sober conscientious person as such as may not be subscribed without sin For the First The Kings Supremacy none denies but the Papists and some few Sectaries All conscientious Protestants make no doubt or scruple of it and can clearly prove it For the last The Doctrine of the Church of England in the 39. Articles even those Brethren who dissent from the Government never charged them with any material error The scruple only is about the second The Common Prayer-book c. Sect. 66 Here by the way let me but observe how far those Divines of the Presbyterian perswasion even there where they desire a liberty from this Subscription do yet acknowledge how far they can and do consent to the things to be subscribed Their words are (z) 2d Pap. of Propos to His Majesty p. 24. We Humbly acquaint Your Majesty that we do not dissent from the Doctrine of the Church of England expressed in the Articles and Homilies But it is the controverted passages about Government Liturgy and Ceremonies and some by-passages and phrases in the Doctrinal part which are scrupled by those whose liberty is desired Not that we are against subscribing the proper rule of our Religion or any meet Confession of Faith Nor do we scruple the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy Nor would we have the door left open for Papists and Hereticks to come in Now I humbly propose this to be considered Whether upon this grant there may not be a cheerful subscription as is required for I cannot see more required to be subscribed than upon the point is here yielded and consented to for 1. Sect. 67 Here is professed No dissent from the Doctrine exprest in the 39. Articles and Homilies and That They are ready to subscribe any meet Confession of Faith or Rule of our Religion which those Articles are and must be esteemed to be in their judgements who profess they dissent not from them And this is the whole third Article to be subscribed For that which is objected concerning Some by-passages and phrases in the Doctrinal part This is nothing that should be of any force to hinder this Subscription which is not that we acknowledge the propriety of every phrase which is a thing below the consideration of serious men in matter of such weight Were such a thing as a Confession of Faith put under the curious censures of Criticks and Grammarians there would still be matter of dispute but the thing required is of an higher nature Be the By-Passages or Phrases what
reason to prove that the authority of this Septuag is more authentick then the Hodierne Hebrew Copies this will sufficiently justifie the practice of our Church there where they follow that Translation though not agreeable to the Hebrew now extant And this as it abetteth the Cainan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 (d) Luk. 3.36 in S. Luke making the computation of the time à mundo condito more then the present Hebrew reckons so it excellently clears that particular Translation of the 14th Psalm (e) Psal 14. v. 5 6 7. Whence inserted into the old Translation where three whole verses are inserted which are not in the Hebrew there though in other places they are viz. Their throâ—t is an open sepulchre with their tongues have they used deceit the poison of Asps is under their lips Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness their feet are swift to shed blood Destruction and unhappiness are in their wayes and the way of peace have they not known there is no fear of God before their eyes which are all in the Greek and thence taken out and so written by S. Paul f Rom. 3.13 19. himself who must not be charged either in this or any other to follow a corrupt Version against the Holy Text Sed haec obiter Only here let me mind the Reader how many considerations might induce the minds of peaceable men to studie rather how to salve then impair the credit of the Church and not to contend about such things as these Sect. 13 6. To close this Chapter I shall add the judgment and acknowledgment of one whom we all know to be no friend to our Liturgie g Baxt. five Disputat Disp 5. cap. 2. Sect. 12. p. 402. When there are saith he divers Translations of the Scripture in the same language as in England here are the Old Version the New England Version Mr. Rous his first and second Mr. Whites Bishop Kings Sand 's Mr. Bartons c. God hath not told us which of all these we shall use but given general directions according to which our own reason or our Governours should make choice Now our Governors have made choice of this Version to be used in this place and have so prescribed it to us Which by this confession they may do and if they may do so we may yea we ought to obey and use it according to their prescriptions Thus have we considered this Old Translation of the Psalmes which now doth I hope clearly appear not to be so corrupt as by some is pretended and whatsoever it be there is nothing in it of such a nature as for the sake thereof to make the Liturgy unlawful to be used where this Translation is retained I proceed now to consider the other exceptions that follow 3. Another Exception is Except 3. Apocrypha Sect. 14. That this Liturgy prescribeth Apochryphal books and chapters to be read for Lessons which yet are as to Doctrines to be believed and duties to be praâ—ised of dubious and uncertain credit This hath been of old one constant exception and many particulars cited out of the chapters thence to be read which carry a repugnancy to the Authentick Canon At the least These being read as Lessons the peace appointed for reading the Scriptures this seems to give them the authority of Scripture which ought not to be done For answer 1. Answ This to me I confesse is the most material exception Sect. 15 as to this part the Matter of the Liturgy and I shall freely acknowledge 1. That in that little reading which I have in Ecclesiastical History and the practice of the Ancient Church I am not able to give an account when these books first began to be read In the highest records we find the Reading of the Prophets Gospels and Apostles yea I find the reading of the lives of Martyrs as high as the 3 d. Councel of Carthage and there is some ground to think that as they so these Apocrypha were then read for instruction as other Homilies and Exhortations and might by degrees come into the place of Lessons but in this I am not peremptory And I must also confesse 2. That I am not able shall be willing to acknowledge it my weaknesse to reconcile many passages in these books with the Doctrine of the Holy Scripture and the sacred History that as yet I find not any thing to convince me of the reality of the story of Judith nor how to reconcile her [h] Judeth 9.2 commendation of the [i] Gen. 34. Fact of Simeon with the [k] Gen. 49.5 Condemnation of it by the Holy Ghost nor know how to justifie her prayer to God [l] Iudeth 9.10 to prosper her in her lies nor can â— see how Baruch wrote his book in (m) Bar. 1.1 Babylon and yet in the (n) Ier. 43.6 Holy Story was with Jeremy at Jerusalem and went not from him nor do I well understand his (o) Bar. 1.8 10. offerings and Vessels when the Temple was before that time burnt nor know I how to bring the account of his (p) Bar. 6.3 seven generations to Jeremies (q) Ie. 29.10 70 years of captivity Not to mention in Tobit the Angels lie the unchaste Devil Asmodeus the 7 Angels presenting the prayers of the Saints the Magical businesses of the Fishes heart liver and gall to drive away Devils and restore sight to all which I know what answers have been offered which yet have not satisfied me And 3. therefore I confesse it my hearty wish that they may not and my hope that these things being under the eye of the Right Reverend Bishops and Clergy in the present Convocation at least these Chapters will not be prescribed for Lessons 2. Sect. 16 But though I judge thus for alas what am I the meanest of the thousands of Israel possibly they may see reasons to retain them still I am sure I am not to prescribe to them and they may see reason not to admit this alteration I am now onely to enquire whether we may submit in this Is the reading of these of such a nature as to involve us in sin if we do it or is the requiring of these such a crime as to make the use of the Liturgy unlawful for the sake of these I think not and that when commanded we may lawfully obey in this I judge for these reasons Sect. 17 1. Though I find not when they were first brought in yet I find them read very early in the Church In Eusebius (r) Euseb Hist l. 4. c. 13. we read that not onely the Apocrypha but Clements Epistles were read as by the Councel of Carthage (s) Conc. Carth. 3. Can. 47. the lives of Martyrs yea Eusebins (t) Euseb l. 6. c. 18. citing the Testimony of Origen to it who was yet earlier The Ancient Councels indeed ordered nothing to be read in the Church (u) Conc. Laod. Can. 15.16 59.
no transgression if no Law commanded them we were not bound to use them and to what purpose then should we make a stir and raise Disputes about them But 2. Suppose no particular Law or Act of Parliament to establish these in specie yet we cannot properly say they were forced if forced without Law for there was a standing Law an Act of Parliament in force untill 17. Car. 1. impowering the King to call together and commissionate the Bishops and Clergy to consult and determine about the affairs of the Church and this confirmed by the Royal Assent to be valid and binding So that if these things were Imposed by the Bishops so assembled with the Authority of the King we cannot call them illegal because they are clearly founded in the Law This therefore was no ground of dislike where the things Imposed are confessed not to be simply evil But § 6 2. They were disliked also saith he because the way of those things did cause men to suspect that somewhat worse was intended to be brought in by such preparations Here I cannot but take notice of the much want of Christian Charity that should be in men who study the interest of the Gospel and Religion It is not the property of Charity to be suspicious for as it c 1 Cor. 13.5 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thinketh i.e. plotteth or casteth no evil so it suspecteth none causelesly d Vers 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it believeth all things hopeth all things it believeth all good hopeth all good of our neighbour untill it evidently see the contrary It could not be well done to be suspicious of worse when the things enjoyned were confessed not bad Object But the way of those times did give ground of suspicion § 7 Sol. But what was the way of those times was it not in these very disliked things the Name and Form of an Altar the Rails Adoration c and these all acknowledged not evil in se and how then were they the cause of suspicion of worse of these we have this full expression e Baxt. ibid. For the Name and Form of an Altar no doubt it is a thing indifferent and the Primitive Churches used the names of Sacrifice Altar and Priest and I think lawfully for my part but Metaphorically as the Scripture doth 2. §. 8. Adoration and Bowing towards the East As to Adoration or Bowing towards the East c. hear again the same Mr Baxter f Baxt. ibid. §. 17. God who hath commanded us to express our minds in several cases about his worship as Profession of Faith Confession of Sins c. hath by that means made it our duty to signifie our consent by some convenient sign And the special sign is left to our own or our Governours Determination g Id. ibid. §. 18. And to this end and on these terms saith he among some other things there mentioned was Adoring with their faces toward the East used heretofore by Christians as a signification of their own mind instead of words This then also is lawfull in his judgment 3. As to Organs and Church-Musick §. 9. Organs and Musick the same Author speaks as much as is desired and thus far consonant to truth h Baxt. ibid. §. 22. He that hath commanded us chearfully to sing his Praises hath not told us whether we shall use the Meeter or any melodious tune to help us or whether we shall use or not use a Musical Instrument or the help of more artificial Singers and Choristers These are left to our reason to determine c. And again i Id. ibid. §. 45. The Organs or other Instruments of Musick in Gods Worship being an help partly natural and partly artificial to the exhilerating our spirits for the Praise of God I know no Argument to prove them simply unlawfull but what would prove a Cup of Wine unlawful so the Tune and Meeter and Melodie of Singing unlawfull But these things are but the particular practises of some certain places and if enjoyned yet not generally only in Cathedral and Collegiate Churches and Chappels We need not therefore busie our selves in Disputes of this nature when they are not nor are like to be matters of general imposition § 10 2. But the main of our enquiry is into those Ceremonies which are generally Imposed and by the Law required in all our Assemblies and these are of two sorts 1. One purely Civil though used in a sacred Action §. 11. Of the Ring in Marriage this is the Ring in Marriage What imaginable scruple can be in this I cannot divine Hear by Mr Baxter himself k Baxt. ibid. §. 23. In Civil Actions that are Religious only finally and by participation it is lawfull to use Symbolical Rites that are in their kind near of kin to Sacraments in their kind and may be called Civil Sacraments such as the sealing and delivering of Indentures or other Covenant-Writings the delivery of Possession of an House by a Key of the Temple by a Book and Bellrope of Land by a Turfe or Twig and of Civil Government by a Crown Scepter or Sword c. And again l Id. ibid. §. 43. For the Ring in Marriage I see no reason to scruple the lawfullnesse of it for though the Papists make a Sacrament of Marriage yet we have no reason to take it for an Ordinance of Divine Worship any more than the solemnizing of a Contract between Prince and People The Ceremonies of a Kings Coronation might as well be scrupled as those of Marriage c. The truth is I could never yet see any thing that had a shadow of reason against this use nor can I imagine what any sober Christian who hath not a mind to quarrel can have to say against the use of such a Symbolical Rite as the use of a Ring in such a businesse as Marriage I passe this therefore as not worth a Dispute But § 12 2. Other Rites there are enjoyned to be used in Actions purely Religious prescribed in the offices and parts of Divine Worship These are they which are the matters of most doubt and made the Subjects of the sharpest contentions and they are The Surplice Kneeling at the Lords Supper and the Crosse in Baptism For two of these we have enough yielded but the third stiffely opposed Let us examine them severally 1. §. 13. The Surplice justified For the Surplice I cannot but wonder what any rational man should in this make a matter of scruple when any garment of any colour is a thing perfectly indifferent by the confession of all and perfectly lawfull in genere to be worne and therefore if a particular garment in specie be determined and prescribed to some persons in some actions how should the use of that become unlawfull when the constant practice and custome of all times persons and places hath justified in some cases such a determination We never scruple the use
of particular and distinctive Habits or Ornaments used for the solemnity of other publick Actions none ever questioned the Royal Robes of the King on the Throne The Robes of Nobles in Parliament of Judges on their Tribunals of Professors in the Chaire in the Schooles Why should we quarrel at the Robes of Bishops in their Consistories or of Ministers in the solemnity of Religious Worship But in this we have enough acknowledged by our Brethren in their account of the Conference Those say m Account of proceed Reply to Answ §. 13. they that scruple the Surplice do it not as it is an habit determined of as decent but as they think it made an holy Vestment and so a part of external worship as Aarons Vestments were Well then it is allowed as determined of as decent Our Church determines no more requires no more Why shall we Dispute against it as an holy Vestment as Aarons was which was never so Imposed when by such a Dispute we must either violate the Laws of Charity by affixing an imputation upon our Church as if she did teach us to Judaize which she doth not or break the Peace of the Church by setting up a man of straw of our own framing and fighting against that which none maintains that we may find our selves matter of Dispute and contention And how this agrees with the Rules of Piety and sentiments of the Gospel let the world judge But if not required as an holy Vestment §. 14. Object yet it is as a Symbolical Sign to signifie purity and beauty to which nothing more suitable than white Linnen wherein the n Rev. 15.6 Angels have appeared as the Bishops o Account of proceed Ans to §. 13. say in their Answer They say so indeed but what then let it be considered 1. Whatsoever those Reverend Fathers §. 15. Sol. or any else may rationally conceive as the Reason of the Law or may in Dispute use as a Medium to prove the decency or conveniency of such an Habit yet this proves not that it is Imposed on us under such a notion or for such an end or signification nor indeed doth the Law prescribe it as such but at most as decent yea it only requires the use or wearing of it Which if we may do as it is confessed we may as accounted decent I see not how we can be acquitted of Sedition and Disobedience in contending and raising Disputes against it in such a notion as the Law mentions not § 16 2. But suppose it used and ordered to be used as a symbolical or teaching Sign to resemble purity and beauty may we not wear it Let even Mr Baxter be judge who telleth us p Baxt. five Disput disp 5. c. 2. §. 40. 1. If the Magistrate do Impose the Surplice who is a lawfull Governour as a decent Habit for a Minister in Gods service though he there passeth a hard censure upon the Magistrate for so doing for which let himself be accountable yet he acknowledgeth that he medleth with nothing but what is within the reach of his own power then he lawfully may do it Some decent Habit saith he is necessary either the Magistrate or Minister himself or associated Pastors must determine what by the same reason may the Bishop or a Synod legally Convened and acting by the Authority of the King If the Magistrate or Synod saith he again tye all to one habit suppose it indecent yet this is but an imprudent use of Power it is a thing within their reach they do not an alian work but their own work amisse and therefore the thing it self being lawfull I would obey and use that Garment 2. Yea though secondarily the whitenesse be to signifie purity and so it be made a teaching sign yet would I obey for secondarily we may lawfully and piously make teaching-signes of our food and raiment and every thing we see I know not what need be added more to justifie this use we have here enough acknowledged to engage a full compliance with and a peaceable submission to Authority in this case For what is added of the unlawfull use of it if the Magistrate make the Primary-reason thereof to be an Instituted Sacramental sign to work grace on the soul or to engage us to God is nothing at all to the purpose but to seek knots in a Bullrush or to raise Disputes and trouble the waters that are quiet when we know the Surplice is not Imposed on us nor pretended to be so on any such account or to any such end § 17 3. For the lawfullnesse and expediency of the wearing a Surplice I shall onely adde this one Argument which that truly Pious and eminently learned Mr Gataker sometimes used to one who came to him for resolution in this very case which I had from his own mouth it is this To wear the Surplice if it be unlawfull it is so either as a thing sinfull in it self and so sinfully evil or only as inconvenient or inexpedient But it is neither evil in it self nor inconvenient or inexpedient Therefore Vpon no account unlawfull And if neither sinnefull nor inconvenient what should hinder any from obeying the Law that enjoyns it 1. It was granted and it must be confessed that it cannot be said to be sinnefull or evil in it self for all Garments are equally lawfull 2. If the doubt be about the inconvenience or inexpediency of it the best way is to compare things and cases and so judge And thus did that Learned man resolve it We are called to the Ministry and enjoyned to Preach the Gospel q 1 Cor. 9.16 Woe unto us if we do it not viz. where we may have liberty to do it Now the Laws enjoyn us in our sacred Ministrations to wear this Habit if we Conforme and wear it we have leave and liberty in our places to exercise our Ministery if not it is denied Now let any sober and rational man judge which of these two is more convenient or expedient To wear a Surplice which is not evil and then to exercise our Ministry which is our necessary duty or to lay aside our Ministry and deprive the Church of the benefit of those parts and abilities which God hath given us and we are necessarily bound to employ for their edification rather than comply in the circumstance of an Habit which beyond all dispute may be worn without sin So that in the matter of the Surplice there is no such matter of scruple to a serious man as to interrupt our peace 2. And as little ground of scruple or contention is there in the gesture of Kneeling at the Communion §. 18. Kneeling at the Communion if men would seriously consider the nature of the Action and what is required For there are that I know but these three things considerable objected against it 1. Excepted against It was not used by Christ and his Apostles at the first Institution 2.
I think few will deny if the Church have such a liberty And she hath made use of this liberty to appoint such persons for such ministrations agreeable to the general rules of the Word and answering the general end of Discipline and Government We may then submit to that Discipline and Government notwithstanding the supposed or real personal faults of the Administrators yea though we judge no Divine institution of the particular Officers But 2. Sect. 52 It is needless as to the main designe of these papers which is onely to perswade to unity and a peaceable obedience to spend time and words in the full defence of the Calling of Bishops farther than the necessity of this argument requires Many whom it would be highly uncharitable and unchristian to deny to be holy and faithful men do cordially believe the Calling of Bishops to be Apostolical and by Divine appointment And there needs no argument to perswade such to obedience And for those whether Ministers or others who approve not of nor are satisfied in the Calling of the Bishops and their subordinate Officers as such yet that they not only may but considering the establishment ought in conscience to submit in peace and with cheerfulness too may be fully cleared by these following Considerations 1. Sect. 53 If they will not own a National or Provincial Church or any Church larger than the limits of one Congregation which yet the (g) Jus Divin Minister Evang part 2. cap. 1. p. 12 13 14. London Divines of the Presbyterian perswasion have owned and proved and therefore I judge they do so still yet they must acknowledge that This Kingdom is a Kingdom of Christians or a Christian Nation and this is indeed tantamount to a National Church then consider 2. That the state of a Christian Common-wealth cannot be perfect without some general Visitors and Overseers of the several particular Churches 3. That though a particular Church or Congregation may be compleat without them yet for the necessary union and agreement of the several particular Churches in Christian Provinces and Kingdoms it is fit and agreeable to reason and no wayes repugnant to the Word of God that under the Supreme Magistrate there should be other Governours to protect and encourage those Ministers and Churches which do their duty and to punish those which shall offend Wherein if either through want of humane Laws or some personal corruption they shall in some things pass their bounds they do no more than any other officers either Civil or Ecclesiastical through frailty and infirmity may do 4. Sect. 54 Therefore I offer these few particulars unto all serious sober considering Christians to be advisedly weighed some whereof the forecited Mr. Bradshaw (h) Unreas of Separ p. 65. used against the Separatists and may upon those grounds if they will admit no more with equal force of reason engage all peaceably to submit to and live contentedly under the Government and Discipline established by Law 1. Whether the Supreme Magistrate have not power to oversee and govern all the several Churches within his Dominions yea whether he be not bound so to do Without doubt he is 2. Whether for his further help and assistance herein he may not make choice of some grave learned and Reverend man to assist him in the same Government This I think is so rational that no considering man will deny it 3. Whether by vertue of this power these persons thus called may not lawfully try the abilities of all the several Ministers within that Dominion and give publick approbation of the worthy and inhibit those who are unworthy from the execution of their Ministery and whether may they not visit these several Ministers and Churches convent them before them and examine how they have behaved themselves in their places and punish the blameworthy 4. Whether for the more easie and orderly government of the said Churches so far forth as it appeartains to him he may not divide his Kingdom as ours is into Provinces assigning over each of them under himself some special Magistrate though we call not the Arch-Bishop or Bishop by that title but in a large sense it may pass and I know no Solaecism in an Ecclesiastical Magistrate And if we own him but so far this is enough to engage a peaceable obedience fit for learning and experience to oversee and govern all the general and particular Churches there and whether may he not also subdivide those Provinces into Diocesses assigning also unto them other more inferior officers under him and his Provincial officers to oversee the several Churches within such and such a precinct none doubts but he may 5. Whether it destroy the nature of a Ministerial or true particular visible Church that many of them should appertain to one Provincial or Diocesan government though in that respect they should be held or reputed for one Provincial or Diocesan Church That it doth hath been said by those of the separation but never proved but I am sure according to the Presbyterian principles it doth not whose Classical Provincial and National Church must be built upon the same foundation with the Diocesan Sect. 55 These things were proposed by that learned Non-conformist and thought sufficient even according to the principles of those Ministers who were not satisfied with the Bishops power without farther proaese as being clear by their own light to stop the mouth of that bold Separatist And those very things which were then accounted Arguments of force enough to prove a lawfulness of Communion in those Churches which are under this government have the same force to prove the lawfulness of the peaceable exercise of our Ministery under the same For whether we grant their Jurisdiction in the Church to have been ab initio and an Apostolical constitution or no as indeed now that I know plead it is as exercised in all the subordinate officers hands nor is it needful we should yet this we must grant that they are Commissionated under His Majesty for the exercise of this power whom we acknowledge over all persons and in all causes even Ecclesiastical Supreme Governour And upon this ground are we bound to obey them in all lawful things though we should deny their Apostolical standing And this is enough to preserve our peace for it is not essential to Peace that we are in all circumstances of the same judgement but it is essential that we for the main walk in the same way practice the same things and perform the same duties And it is not strange that divers men should agree in one necessary practice though they agree not in the reason of that necessity Neither do the established Laws require us nor were ever the Bishops so rigorous as to require that we should profess the Divine right of that constitution in manner and form as it is established but that we obey in our places in all things not contrary to the Word of God And whether we judge