that he should study rather how to give no account at all For he is grosly ignorant in other Learning as well as in this as appears by his discourse about Ordination by Presbyters which follows a little after The Friendly Debate gave him no occasion to mention any thing of this nature but he had a mind it seems to give us a taste of his skill in this great Question though it be so small that I know not how to excuse his boldness in medling with it He supposes that the Chorepiscopi which he makes the same with our Rural Deans may lawfully Ordain And next that Suffragans were but such Presbyters so that he who was Ordained by them had not Episcopal Ordination And then thirdly He would have you believe that Archbishop Vsher and other Learned men concurring in judgment with him were of this opinion Every one of which propositions are notoriously false as I will plainly shew you by demonstrating these three things 1. That those called Chorepiscopi Rural or Country Bishops never had the Power of Ordination being not of the Order of Bishops but Presbyters something advanced above the rest 2. On the other side that Suffragans had the power of Ordination being not meer Presbyters but Bishops as those in the City were And lastly That the late Primate saith nothing contrary to this For the first The Country Bishops saith the Council of Neocaesarea n About the year 314. Can. 13. were but of such a degree as the seventy Disciples and appointed after their Type to whom the Antients every body knows make Presbyters to be the Successors as Bishops are to the Apostles And therefore that Council calls them only Assistants to the Bishops in that part of their Diocess which was distant from the City But that they had only a part of the Episcopal Power committed to them not the whole we learn from the Council of Ancyra presently after Can. 13. which decreed that the Chorepiscopi or Country Bishops ought not to ordain either Ppesbyters or Deacons o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To which purpose he that pleases may find many authorities in Justellus his notes upon that place And in the Council of Antioch Can. 10. the same is decreed again that they should know their bounds or measures and appoint Readers Sub-Deacons and Catechists but not dare to proceed further nor to make a Priest or Deacon without the Bishop of the City to which both he and his Region were subject The same Canons were in the Roman Church as appears by the Body of the Decrees p v. part 1. Distinct 63. c. 4. The words of which being abbreviated by Sigebert he calls them Arch-Deacons But afterward the Council of Laodicea decreed Can. 57. that this sort of Officers should be abolished and no Bishops should be appointed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Villages and in the Countries and that they who had been already constituted should do nothing without the consent of the Bishop of the City But instead of them there should be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Visitors that should go about to find out what was amiss and correct mens manners In like manner we find in the Body of the Canon Law q Distinct 68. c. 5. a Decree of Pope Damasus to this purpose That the Chorepiscopi have been prohibited as well by that See as by the Bishops of the whole world One reason of which prohibition might be that they did not r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 know their own bounds as the Council of Antioch determined but ventured to appoint Church Officers without the Bishops Consent Upon which occasion St. Basil wrote a particular Epistle to the Chorepiscopi requiring that no Minister ſ Epist 181. p. 959. Tom. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Readers and such Ministers as those Luke 4.10 whatsoever though of the lower rank should be made without him contrary to the Canons It is a sad thing saith he to see how the Canons of the Fathers are laid aside insomuch that it is to be feared all will come to Confusion The Antient Custom was this That there should be a strict inquiry made into the lives of those who were to be admitted to minister in the Church The care of this lay upon the Presbyters and Deacons who were to report it to the Chorepiscopi and they having received a good testimony of them certified it to the Bishop and so the Minister t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was admitted into Holy Orders But now you Country Bishops would make me stand for a Cypher and take all this Authority to your selves nay you permit the Presbyters and Deacons to put in whom they please according as Kindred or Affection inclines them without regard to their worth But let me saith he have a note of the Ministers of every Village and if any have been brought in by the Presbyters let them be cast out again among the common people And know that he shall be but a Lay-man whoever he is that is received into the Ministry without our consent By this it is apparent that Presbyters had not power so much as to make the lowest Officers in the Church and that the Chorepiscopi though above the rest of the Presbyters in Office yet were not so high as Bishops but were a middle sort of men between both An image of whom was remaining in the late Bohemian Church as I learn from Comenius who in his Book concerning the Discipline and Order among them tells us that beside the Seniors or Bishops u For they had Episcopal Ordination after they had been made Presbyters and Epicopal Jurisdiction and Succession from the Bishops of the Waldenses and Ministers or Presbyters they had certain Ecclesiastical Persons called Conseniors who were between the other two For they were chosen out of the Ministers presented by them to the Bishop and then solemnly ordained by him to the Office of Conseniors by a new imposition of hands But at the same time these Conseniors promised Obedience to the Bishop x Ratio Discipl Ord. Eccl. cap. 2. p. 37. as the Ministers when they were Ordained promised Obedience to them as well as to the Bishop z Ib. p. 33. Their Office therefore was among other things as we are told Chap. 1. page 23 24. to keep good Order to observe what was worthy of correction to inform the Bishop of it to provide fit persons for the Ministry to exercise Discipline with the Bishop and visit with him or without him if he required it to examine those that were to be ordained Ministers or Deacons to give them testimonials to the Bishop and in short To supply the place of the Bishop in businesses of lesser moment So it appears by the Book and by Comenius his Annotations upon that Chapter a page 92. Minoribus in negotiis Episcopi vices obirent Thus much may suffice for the Chorepiscopi who had not such
Church before the Reformed transmarine Churches Arminius before St. Austin who judge Aerius a greater Heretick than Arius who have more charity for those that deny the Deity of our Saviour than for those that scruple the strict Jus Divinum of Episcopacy and who can with more patience bear a dispute against the very being of a Deity than about the taking away of a Ceremony c. This is the language not of the bold blades but of a modest Presbyterian of one that uses hard reasons and soft words if you will believe himself in the very leaf before-going q Preface p 9. Whatsoever charity they have for us their good words shall never be wanting to themselves They will call themselves humble and modest whatsoever they say or do Though they blush not to defend themselves by injuring any body nor fear to cast reproaches on whomsoever that for defence of the truth stand in their way For every part of this Charge is a vile slander and some of it is confuted you shall see by himself Which that I may demonstrate let me tell you In the first place that it is no Hectorism to assert the Divine Right of Episcopacy in the strictest sense This is no upstart opinion broached by some swaggering hot-brain'd men who love to rant and vapour beyond other Folk which is the proper quality of a Hector but hath been antiently believed in this Church from the very beginning of the Reformation and maintained by the soberest men in it I know they would have you to think otherwise and have endeavoured to perswade the World that it is a novel Doctrine advanced of later times by some proud and haughty Divines Mr. Robert Baily made bold to say that before Bishop Bancrofts time the Bishops did unanimously deny Episcopacy to be of Divine Right r Reply to fair warning p. 49. Printed at Delf 1649 And the Letter to Dr. Samuel Turner Printed 1647. will not allow it to be so Antient but affirms p. 3. that it is an opinion but lately countenanced in England and that by some of the more Lordly Clergy He means I think Archbishop Laud as some since have explained it But both the one and the other of these talk'd at random out of their own imaginations not from Historical observation Archbishop Whitgift and Bishop Bilson as the Answer to that Letter suggests were both of a contrary perswasion And I can name a Divine of their Opinion elder than either and much reverenced even by the Presbyterians who was offered a Bishoprick also but refused it And that is Old Bernard Gilpin who left the World that very year in which Bishop Whitgift was advanced to the See of Canterbury 1583. For when Mr. Cartwrights book was newly come forth a certain Cambridge man who seemed a very great Scholar came to this famous Preacher and dealt very earnestly with him about the Discipline and Reformation of the Church But Mr. Gilpins answer was That he could not allow that any Humane invention should take place in the Church in stead of a Divine Institution How said the man do you think that this Form of Discipline is an Humane Invention I am said Mr. Gilpin altogether of that mind And as many as diligently turn over the Writings of the Fathers will be of my opinion O but the later men replied the Disciplinarian see many things which those antient Fathers saw not and the present Church seems better provided of many ingenious and industrious men At which Mr. Gilpin saith my Author Å¿ Life of Bernard Gilpin Edit 4. 1636. p. 106 107 c. seemed somewhat moved and answered I for my part do not hold the virtues of the later men to be compared to the Infirmities of the Fathers Which words he used on purpose because he perceived this young man had a strong conceit of I know not what rare virtues in himself which opinion the good old man was desirous to root out of him But there is an Authority ancienter than all these viz. The Form and Order of making and consecrating Bishops c. confirmed by Act of Parliament In which three things are considerable The very first words of the Preface are That it is evident to all men reading the holy Scriptures and antient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons Then secondly the Prayer after the Letany at the Consecration of a Bishop begins in this manner Almighty God giver of all good things which by thy holy Spirit hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in thy Church c. which must needs be understood of those before named And lastly the first question to the person to be Consecrated is Are you perswaded that you be called to this Ministration according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ To which the Answer is I am so perswaded Put now all these together and you will not be able to conceive as the Answer to the Letter t page 12 13. observes how these words should fall from any men not possessed with this Tenet that Episcopacy is of Divine Right in the strictest sense For if God by his holy Spirit hath appointed divers Orders of Ministers in the Church and we may find evidently by Scripture and antient Writers that there are three Orders whereof Bishops the highest and this is made the ground of praying for the Bishop to be Consecrated and he must profess he is perswaded that he is called to that Ministration according to Christs will then Episcopacy in the opinion of those who composed and confirmed this Book is in such a manner according to Christs Will that it is grounded in Scripture and appointed by the Spirit of God and all this hath not been said only of late nor countenanced only by some few and those of the more Lordly Clergy 2. For which cause no man ought to be disgraced with any odious name much less be called an Hector who is now of the same Perswasion The most illustrious persons that have been in our Church men far from that boisterous humour have declared themselves for this Doctrine and doubted not but they could maintain it I need instance in no more than two Bishop Andrews whose mind is well known from his three Letters to Peter du Moulin 1618. u Translated and Printed 1647. to which I refer you and the late Bishop Sanderson whom the best of you have spoken of with honour and reverence He declares his opinion to be that Episcopal Government is not to be derived merely from Apostolical Practice or Institution but that it is originally founded in the Person and Office of the Messias our blessed Lord Christ x Postscript to Episcopacy not prejudicial to Regal Power who being sent by his Father afterward sent his Apostles to execute the same Apostolical Episcopal Pastoral Office for the Ordering and Governing of his Church till his coming again and so the
lowdly against them And all this serves to convince our Apologist of unskilfulness in these matters who pronounces roundly that Mr. Gataker k p. 13. of his Book never had any Episcopal Ordination because he was Ordained by a Suffragan of one of those places mentioned in the Statute viz. the Suffragan of Colchester Suppose he were * As Mr. Clark tells us he was Collect. of Lives of ten Divines p. 131. he had notwithstanding Episcopal Ordination as I have demonstrated and as good as if he had been Ordained by the greatest Bishop in the World But he did not understand I see by this what those Suffragans were and contrary to what became an humble and modest man and the Title likewise of his Book wrote about things which he had not studied or considered Which made him also confound these with the Rural Deans alledging the Primate of Armaghs judgment concerning the power of Suffragans to prove it to be his Judgment that the Chorepiscopi or Rural Deans might lawfully ordain In which he hath done him a notorious injury for there is not such a word in his Book as that the Rural Deans may lawfully ordain But only that the number of Suffragans which was 26 might well be conformed to the number of the several Rural Deanries and supplying the place of those who in the Antient Church were called Chorepiscopi might every month assemble a Synod of the Rectors within the Precinct and conclude all matters brought before them by the major part of voices These are his words which do not signifie that Suffragans were the same with Rural Deans or Chorepiscopi but that there might be as many of the one as there are of the other and Suffragans do all that which those antient Officers did though they had power to do a great deal more For I have proved a plain distinction between them The Chorepiscopi were made by one single Bishop viz. the Bishop of the City to whom they belonged as the Council of Antioch tells us Can. 10. But the Suffragans being real Bishops were made as other Bishops are by three at the least according to the fourth Canon of the first Council at Nice And so they had power to Ordain Presbyters and joyn in the Consecration of other Bishops which the Chorepiscopi had not Nor did our Church ever acknowledge any such power residing in the Rural Deans or any meer Presbyters subject to the Jurisdiction of our Bishops to ordain Priests But as Hadrianus Saravia tells the Ministers of Guernsey l See Clavi Trabales p. 142. in his Letter to them As many Ministers as were naturally of the Country being not made Ministers of the Church by their Bishop or his Demissories nor any others according to the Order of the English Church were not true and lawful Ministers Where by Demissories I think he means the Suffragans of the Bishop of Winchester to whose jurisdiction they belonged Yes may some say our Bishops have sometimes declared otherwise For this Apologist m Pag. 13. out of Archbish Spotswood alledges the story of the three Scots Bishops who never had been ordained but by Presbyters and yet Bishop Bancrofts opinion was that they need not be ordained again which hath often been alledged heretofore by others particularly by the Lancashire Ministers of the first Classis at Manchester in whom he might have found a great deal more than this amounts unto For they fly to a Letter of the late Primate of Ireland with the Animadversions of Dr. Bernard upon it n The judgment of the late Archb. of Armagh c. 1658. in which this Story is cited and the judgment of many other learned Divines but nothing at all to the business For as the Gentlemen to whom the Lancashire Ministers wrote their Letter well observe o Excommunicatio excommunicata p. the Primate did not make void the Ordination by Presbyters but it was with a special restriction to such places where Bishops could not be had Which are the very words also of Archbishop Bancroft in the case of the Scottish Bishops As for the Ordinations made by our Presbyters the Primate declared himself against them in the very same Letter which they craftily concealed as you may read p. 112. of Dr. Bernards Book The words are these You may easily judge that the Ordination made by such Presbyters as have severed themselves from those Bishops unto whom they had sworn Canonical Obedience cannot possibly by me be excused from being Schismatical Which I find cited again in another Book of of his called Clavi Trabales p. 56. And both in that and the former Book p Judgment of the Archb. p. 122 c. Clavi Tiab p. 55. he tells us the Primate thought their Ordination void upon another score Because at the imposition of hands they neither used those antient words Receive thou the Holy Ghost c. nor the next Be thou a faithful dispenser c. nor any other words to that sense at least there is no order or direction for it And they also wholly omitted those words at the solemn delivery of the Bible inro the hands of the person ordained Take thou Authority to preach the Word of God c. So that there being no express transmission of Ministerial Power he was wont to say that such Imposition of hands by some called the Seal of Ordination without a Commission annexed seemed to him to be as the putting of a Seal to a Blank And if a Bishop had been present and done no more than they did he thought the same quere might have been of the validity of such Ordinations As for other Reformed Churches their case is widely different from that of these men as he might have learnt from another Bishop whom he cites now and then to no purpose viz. Bishop Bramhall * Replication to the Bishop of Chalcedon p. 71 72. who rells you that he knew many learned persons among them who did passionately affect Episcopacy and some of them acknowledged to him that their Church would never be rightly settled till it was new moulded And others he tells you though they did not long for Episcopacy yet they approve it and want it only out of invincible necessity And that their principal learned men were of this mind appears from hence that Dr. Carlton afterward Bishop of Chichester protesting in open Synod which then sate at Dort that Christ instituted no parity but made twelve Apostles the chief and under them seventy Disciples that Bishops succeeded to the Twelve and Presbyters of inferiour rank to the Seventy and challenging the judgment of any learned men that could speak to the contrary Their answer was silence which was approbation enough And after saith he discoursing with divers of the best learned in the Synod and telling them how necessary Bishops were to suppress their Schisms then rising their answer was That they did much honour and reverence the good
same Office to continue in them and their Successors to the end of the World But suppose all our Church-men had been silent or that they are of no esteem with our Adversaries yet since this Opinion of the Divine Right of Episcopacy hath been asserted by other Divines whom they respect it ought not to have been reproached Bucer declares in his Book of the Kingdom of Christ as I find him cited above 60 years ago y Regiment of the Church by Mr. Tho. Bell chap. 9. just as our Book of Consecration doth that it seemed good to the Holy Ghost that one to whom the name of Bishop was peculiarly attributed should take the care of the Churches and preside over all the Presbyters And nearer still to the very words of our Book in his Treatise of the power and use of the Ministry as he is alledged by Saravia These Orders of Ministers have been perpetual in the Church and were presently in the beginning appointed by the Holy Ghost of Bishops Priests and Deacons He that will see more to this purpose may read Bishop Mortons Episcopacy Asserted Chap. 5. Sect. 4. Nay this is the Language of Antiquity and they may as well call St. Gregory of Nazianzum a Hector as any of us For he sticks not to tell his Auditors in plain words that he held his Office by the Law of Christ You may find the passage in his seventeenth Oration z page 271. where after he had exhorted all the People to obedience he turns his speech more particularly to the Rulers and Magistrates asking them if they will give him leave to speak freely As truly saith he I think I may since the Law of Christ hath made you subject to my Power and to my Tribunal 3. This you may think is very high but I must let you know they who seem to lay their claim lower and speak in a more humble stile as some love to call it differ but in a verbal nicety in the different manner of expressing the same thing rather than in their different judgment upon the substance of the matter So that excellent Bishop lately mentioned Dr. Sanderson hath clearly resolved a Episcopacy not prejudicial to Regal Power p. 12 13. For sometimes this term Divine Right imports a Divine Precept which is the first and most proper signification when it appeareth by some clear express and peremptory Command of God in his Word to be the Will of God that the thing so commanded should be perpetually and universally observed And that the Government of the Church by Bishops is of Divine Right in this stricter sense is an Opinion saith he at least of great probability and such as may more easily and on better grounds be defended than confuted But they that chuse to speak otherwise understand by Divine Right an Authority for a thing from the Institution Example or Approbation either of Christ or of his Apostles c. which is a secondary meaning of the term but not much distant from the former For the Observation of the Lords Day depends on this Divine Right and there is as much to shew as he saith p. 19. if not more for such a Divine Right of Episcopacy as for the Divine Right of that day So that whosoever they be that either wave the term Divine Right or else so expound it as not of necessity to import any more than an Apostolical Institution Yet the Apostles Authority b Ib. page 39 40. in the Institution of Episcopacy being warranted by the Example and as they doubt not by the direction of their Master Jesus Christ they worthily esteem to be so reverend and obligatory as that they would not for a world have any hand in or willingly and deliberately contribute the least assistance towards the extirpation of that Government but rather hold themselves obliged in their Consciences to the utmost of their power to endeavour the preservation and continuance of it in these Churches and do heartily wish the restitution and establishment of the same wheresoever it is not c Now that Episcopacy is of such institution and so of Divine Right he further adds c v. Ib. p. 18. is in truth a part of the established Doctrine of the Church of England and hath been constantly and uniformly maintain'd by our best Writers mark these words and by all the Sober Orderly and Orthodox Sons of the Church This is sufficient to shew that there ought to be no such distinction made as we find in this man between high and low Conformists since all have spoken to the same effect and yet were no Swashbucklers but in this great persons opinion the Sober Orderly and Orthodox Sons of the Church 4. But let us suppose there is some difference yet they that have spoken the highest words of Episcopacy never thought Aerius a greater Heretick than Arius nor had more Charity for those that deny our Saviour's Deity than for those that scruple the strict Jus Divinum of Episcopacy No this is a suggestion from the Father of lyes the Calumniator of the Brethren and seem to me to be the words of one whose tongue is set on fire of Hell For though our best Divines have called it the Heresie of Arius d Doctor Crackenthorp Defens Eccl. Anglicanae p. 241 242 to affirm that there ought to be no imparity in the Church or distinction between Bishops and Presbyters and determined that this imparity was instituted and approved by the Apostles yet they have declared withal that they who think as Aerius did are so far from being in a worse case than Arius was that they are not in so bad Let but obstinacy and perverseness be wanting it will be no Heresie and if it be Heresie being about a point of Discipline it will not be among those which St. Peter calls damnable Heresies e Bishop Andrews 3. Letter p. 56 57. These are the words of one who was as vehement an Assertor of the Divine Right of Episcopacy as any hath been and there are none among us but will subscribe to them who is so far you see from making Aerius a greater Heretick than Arius that his words plainly make him less 5. But these perhaps are such Hectorly Divines you may think that they mind not what they say so belike if it be true which he says just before that they prefer Arminius before St. Austin A very strange humour that these high Episcopal men should set a Presbyterian Divine above a great Bishop But suppose upon other scores they should be so phantastical yet this part of his accusation will contradict the calumny next before it namely that they prefer the Romish Church before the Reformed Transmarine Churches How can that be when the Arminians are among those Reformed Churches for whom it seems they have such a great affection and when the Pope himself as every one knows that understands these matters is against the Divine Right of Bishops nay
Beasts as these I shall easily believe the worst that he or his Complices can say of them But the truth is he is only disgorging his stomach all this while and now as I said is come to the last strain which brings up the foulest stuff of all For the highest words that the highest Sons or Fathers of this Church to use his phrase have spoken concerning Ceremonies are these t Bishop Bramhall 〈◊〉 his Romphaea chap. 11. p. 234. That they are advancements of Order Decency Modesty and Gravity in the Service of God expressions of those heavenly desires and dispositions which we ought to bring along with us to Gods House adjuments of Attention and Devotion furtherances of Edification visible Instructors helps of Memory exercises of Faith the shell that preserves the kernel of Religion from contempt the leaves that defend the blossoms and the fruit But the very same person who wrote all this immediately adds that if they grow over thick and ranck they hinder the fruit from coming to maturity and then the Gardener plucks them off When Ceremonies become burdensome by excessive superfluity or unlawful Ceremonies are obtruded or the substance of Divine Worship is placed in Circumstances or the Service of God is more respected for Humane Ornaments than for the Divine Ordinance it is high time to pare away excesses and reduce things to the antient mean So our Church hath done between whom and the Roman Church there is as wide a difference in this regard as between the hearty expressions of a faithful friend and the mimical gestures of a fawning flatterer or between the unaffected comeliness of a grave Matron and the fantastical paintings and patchings and powdering of a garish Curtesan And whereas this man would have you believe that there are those who are so enamoured of these few Ceremonies that they even dote upon them nay have set their hearts upon them more than upon Almighty God himself Another great Prelate u Bishop Sandersons Preface to the first Volume of Serm. sect 12. An. 1657. hath declared That he knew no true Son of the Church of England that doteth upon any Ceremony whatsoever opinion they have of the decency or expediency of some of them Nor doth this Gentleman I have reason to believe know such an one at this day For they have been told a thousand times over as that Bishop proceeds x Ib. sect 13. in the Sermons and Writings of private men as well as in the Publick Declaration of our Church that we place no necessity at all in these things but hold them to be merely indifferent 2. That when for Decency Order or Uniformity sake any constitutions are made there is the same necessity of obeying such constitutions as of obeying other Laws made for the good of the Commonwealth concerning any other indifferent thing And 3. That this necessity whether of the one or of the other arises not properly from the Authority of the immediate Law-giver but from the Ordinance of God who hath commanded us to obey the Ordinances of men for his sake And to add no more 4. That such necessity of Obedience notwithstanding the things remain in the same indifferency as before every way as to their Nature and even in respect of us thus far That there is a liberty left for men upon extraordinary and other just occasions sometimes to do otherwise than the constitution requires when there is no scandal nor contempt in the case A liberty which we dare not either take our selves or allow to others in things properly and absolutely necessary Upon which very account I mean the consideration of the indifferency of the things in themselves and upon this alone it was that those who did most sadly resent the voting down of Liturgy Festivals and the Ceremonies of the Church did yet so far yield to the sway of the times as to forbear the use thereof in publick Worship Which is a direct answer to that which this Apologist talks of about our omission of things required by Law in the late times p. 128. And he may find more full satisfaction if he be disposed in the same Bishops seventh Sermon to the people y First Volume of Sermons in Folio page 390. where he shews that since the obligation to those doth not spring from the things themselves nor immediately and by its proper virtue from the constitution of the Magistrate but by consequence only and by virtue of that Law of God which commands to obey them thereby a liberty is left in cases extraordinary and of some pressing necessity not otherwise well to be avoided to do sometimes otherwise these two things provided First that a man be driven thereto by a true real and not by a pretended necessity only and secondly that in the manner of doing he use such Godly discretion as neither to shew the least contempt of the Law in himself nor to give ill example to others to despise Government or Governours 7. This is the sum of what our Church-men high and low as he is pleased to distinguish them have declared about Ceremonies O but saith the Apologist why then will you not consent to a change nay a laying aside all those Ceremonies since you do not make them necessary in themselves Let them be removed whether nocent or innocent as they have been out of other Reformed Churches page 18. This he is at again page 131. and propounds this as a good means to keep the people from grieving and vexing the Magistrate by the breach of his Laws Remove the Law saith he and where there is no Law there is no Transgression p. 133. very right nor is there any obedience He hath found out a rare way for the Magistrate to ease himself wholly of his Office by letting the people do as they will and govern him For when they please to scruple any other Laws he must repeal them too according to this wise advice unless he will be vexed and grieved with the clamours and disobedience of his people who will not be contented unless in effect they make Laws for themselves King James indeed in his Proclamation in the first year of his Reign March 5. admonishes all men hereafter not to expect nor attempt so much as any further change in the common and publick Form of Gods Service from that which was then established For which he there gives such substantial reasons that my Lord Bacon z Cahala page 42. makes it his request to the Duke of Buckingham to read that excellent Proclamation as he calls it And if at any time there should be the least motion made for innovation to put the King in mind to read it himself for it is most dangerous in a state to give ear to the least alteration in Government But it is all one for that no matter what the King said or any one else they have been ever since and are not merely for alterations but for abolishings
declared when time was f Letter to his Legate in the Council of Trent See p. 646. Engl. Edit 1629. that the opinion which makes them hold by that Title is false and erroneous But not to leave the least speck of his dirt sticking on us which he blushes not to throw in our faces once more p. 34. you may know that the very same Bishop newly mentioned wipes it all off himself by clearing and excusing the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas from sinning against the Divine Right though they had no Bishops whom he thought to be of Divine Right in the strictest sense I said no such thing as his words are g Bishop Andrews Letter to du Moulin Ib. but only this that your Churches wanted something that is of Divine Right Wanted not by your fault but by the iniquity of the times for that your France had not your Kings so propitious at the Reformation of your Church as our England had In like manner the late Primate of Ireland Bishop Bramhall excuses those in the Reformed Churches who as I told you either had a desire or but an esteem of Episcopacy though they could not enjoy it And as for a third sort who were so far from either of those that they condemned it as an Antichristian Innovation and a rag of Popery whereby they became guilty he thought of most gross Schism materially he saith thus much may be alledged to mitigate their fault That they do it ignorantly h Replication to the Bishop of Chalcedon p. 71 72. as they have been mis-taught and mis-informed and I hope that many of them are free from obstinacy and hold the truth implicitely in the preparation of their minds because ready to receive it when God shall reveal it to them Nay Dr. Heylin himself whom this man thinks so fierce makes an Apology for their Ministers not being Ordained by Bishops at the first Reformation there being he thinks a necessity for it as you may read in his History of Episcopacy p. 164. And lastly a famous person now alive this Apologist cites afterward against his own self Master Thorndike I mean who he acknowledges i page 10. hath a charity for the Churches beyond the Seas though wanting Bishops whom he doubts not to be of Divine Right But he might have had recourse to a better place of his works for this purpose than that which he hath produced For he handles this question at large in his Book of the Rights of the Church k p. 194 198. where he excuses their necessity and concludes at last out of the abundance of his Charity that some excuse is to be made for those who have created this necessity to themselves by their own false perswasion Let this man therefore do open penance for his sin in laying such foul things to the charge of the men of the high Prelacy as he in scorn calls them p. 35. And let him forbear if he can to say hereafter That there is just cause to fear that some among us have a greater Charity for the Church of Rome than the Presbyterians l page 34. And to intimate that the high Conformists are warping from the Doctrine of the Church of England and lean more to that of Trent m p 80 81. For these are only old Calumnies now revived I wish it be not to serve the Good Old Cause We were told before the War that the Bishops were leaned toward Popery nay were driving fast toward Popery And no sooner was it begun but our neighbours were born in hand that we had a company of half Papish Bishops n Dialogue between an Englishman a Neatherlander written in Low-Dutch and translated into English 1643. p. 7. nay that they were altogether Papists one and the same brood with the Jesuits o p. 8. 16. and intended to bring Popery into England all which they affirmed was as clear as the bright noon-day p page 10. For to this end saith this impudent Libel they had stript all the Assemblies of their faithfullest Preachers and used many other means to banish wholly all saving knowledge out of the Kingdom that so they might the better draw the people to Popery From which considerations the Author desires the Lords and Inhabitants of the Vnited Netherlands q In the Dedicatory Epistle not to assist the King for if he prevailed the Government would be altered Religion suppressed the Bishops restored and put in force their Popish Canons And all this I must tell you was writ by a Presbyterian a modest Gentleman no doubt otherwise called a shameless lyar as appears by this passage p. 37. where he saith Our whole Nation is by the coming in of the Scots before the War yet more confirmed that they were led by Gods Spirit What was the woful issue of those suggestions we all know though there was nothing of truth in them as appeared by the stout opposition against the common enemy which some of those very men made who besides their other sufferings had layen as deep under the suspicion of being Popishly affected as any other of their Brethren whosoever r See Bishop Sandersons preface to 1. Volume of Serm. Sect 17. And what they now intend that begin again to buzze the same tale in the peoples ears we are not so doltish as not to understand and when opportunity shall serve they will more openly declare Then you may hear the complaints renewed which he remembers out of Mr. Fuller his Church-History of Popery Arminianism Socinianism and what not You may hear an Accusation against a Minister as the same Historian tells us there was on his own knowledge Å¿ Book the 11. page 224. merely for using the Gloria Patri though in all things else he conformed to the Directory 6. In which case truly there might have been some colour to charge the Accusers as more zealous for their Directory than for our Saviours Deity But to impeach any of us as more concerned for the Divine Right of Bishops than for the Divine Nature of our Lord the great Bishop of our souls is a bold-fac'd calumny for which there is no pretence at all And yet he thinks he hath not said enough for he tells you further that these High Conformists or Hectors can with more patience hear a Dispute against the very being of a Deity than about the taking away of a Ceremony Which is the very highest strain of railing that the wit of a modest Presbyterian can invent But to what pitch the more impudent may reach who can tell They may say that these Conformists are perfect Atheists since they are already it seems such Fools as to bear more meekly with those who go about to Dethrone the object of all worship than with those who only pluck away a Ceremony of it Dull Asses how should their Ceremonies stand if the very sense of a Deity fall down If he can find me any such