to be accounted the same thing not to be and not to appear and if they had appeared their appearance might perhaps make those Presbyters who gave orders without them Schismaticks it could not possible make their orders null for as formerly where our Church thought that Baptisme administred by a Midwife was valid and allowed and enjoyned her in Case of necessity to baptize the Midwife had offended if she had baptized where there was no true necessity yet this offence notwithstanding her baptisme would have been reputed valid so here if our Presbyters could confer a valid Ordination when Bishops were not at hand their Ordination must needs be valid though Bishops were at hand therefore all the dust that is raised by Mr. D. to shew some difference between the Presbyters of our own and other Churches could be designed to no other end but to blind his own and his Readers Eyes that so no notice might be taken how he got off this controversie it may be he may come nearer the mark in the point of Episcopacy it self but of that also we shall find that his Arrows fall Heavenly wide For the Non-Conformist has again and again professed in conference and writing that he can and would for peace-sake receive a Bishop that should have as great a superintendence over Presbyters as ever Cyprian had over his but they say that by assenting and consenting to the present Book of Ordination they must acknowledge a Bishop to be by divine Institution of a superiour order to a Presbyter and for this they say they can find no Foundation in Scripture and less then none in any writings of modern reformed Divines If they are mistaken either in setting our Bishops higher then they have set themselves or in making a Bishop when set to such a heighth to be an Officer unknown to Primitive or Modern Churches Mr. Durell had done a very Christian work if he had taken pains in the Spirit of meekness to shew them their mistake but he cannot sure think that he hath endeavoured any such thing He tells us page 4th and the 5th that all the Lutheran Churches have a subordination of Pastours and that those who are in them called Superintendents or Bishops have the power of Ordination as the Bishops of the Church of England have But does he believe what he himself writes does he not know that they all found their Superintendency on a human and not on a divine institution does he not know that some Lutheran Divines of eminent note do with full mouth declaim against us here in England because we so much appropriate the power of Ordination unto Bishops Tobias Major I am sure on this very score calls us Angli Papizantes let all Scholars consult Chemnitius Gerard Brockmand or any other Lutheran that writes common places or if they be too many to consult let them consult Hunnius's demonstration of the Lutheran Ministry in which they shall find him though himself a Superintendent making a Bishop in Ordination to act only as the Churches instrument and averring that if the Church should delegate her power to a Presbyter or to a Layman the Ordination would be as valid as if performed by a Bishop The Non-Conformists have no quarrel against the name either of Superintendent or Bishop nor will it be any satisfaction to them to shew them Ecclesiastical Persons in the Lutheran Churches dignified by the name of Superintendents or Episcopi unless it could also be shewed that they claim that dignity by divine right and are received by the Elders as an Order of men superiour to them the which will never be shewed nay it will easily be proved that meer Presbyters have ordained those who in Germany and Denmark go by the name of Bishops and Super-intendents Nicholas Amsdorft as appears in his Life written by Melchior Adam was created Bishop but by whom was he created by Martin Luther the Pastour of the place where the Ordination was solemnized and two Pastours more Now did these set this Bishop into an order superiour to their own if they did who gave them authority so to do if they did not then his Title notwithstanding he was still of the Order of Presbyters and those that were afterwards ordained by him were ordained but by a Presbyter Likewise in Denmark when Reformation there first began seven Bishops of the Kingdome being cast out there were seven Super-intendents ordained who were to do the work of the expelled Bishops and to be Executors of the whole Ecclesiastical Ordination but by whom were these seven ordained even by John Bugenhagh who was but a Presbyter as may be seen in his Life written by the forementioned Author so that such Episcopacy as is scrupled by the English Non-Conformist has no place in any Lutheran Churches and if not in the Lutheran I am sure not in the reformed Churches Yet Mr. Durell in many places of his Book makes shew as if the Episcopacy quarrelled against here in England had place in some reformed Churches and that those very Churches among whose Ministers there is an equality do not condemn Episcopal Government the French Churches he is certain page 13. are so far from averseness to it that they rather wish they were in a condition to enjoy that sacred order Now what means he by that sacred Order if he do not mean an Order by Divine appointment superiour to the order of Presbytery he doth most egregiously trifle If he do mean such an Order I say that as many French Divines as do desire such an Order are manifestly fallen off from the confession exhibited to Charles 9th 1561. the 30th Article whereof is this We believe that all true Pastours in what place so ever they are set are all endued with the same and equal power among themselves under that one head and chief and sole universal Bishop Jesus Christ And if any Ministers of the Belgick Churches do either desire or could approve of the English Hierarchy they also must fall off from the Belgick Confession which in the Synod of Dort was reviewed and approved for if that Confession had no inimicous aspect upon the Church Government in Britain why did our Divines of England approve only that part of it which related to Doctrine not that which related to Discipline Our Prelates and their Friends in England do very much build their Hierarchy upon Ignatius his Epistles If the French Churches did not dislike the building why do the most Learned of them take so much pains to ruine and pull up the Foundation why have Blondel Salmasius Dally so long employed their Pens to prove the Epistles even in the best Edition to be spurious I know Mr. Durell tells a story concerning Blondel that in his Apology for the opinion of Hierom he had inserted a passage which some Scotch Ministers prevailed with him to blot out in which he declares himself to be no Enemy unto Primitive Episcopacy if that be true he did not sure
Reverence and Obeysance towards the East at our coming in or going out of the Church that the Rule of Charity prescribed by the Apostle may be observed i. e. That they which use this Rite despise not them who use it not and that they who use it not condemn not those that use it And how will the Presbyterians rejoyce to read those high commendations of the Bohemian Churches 'T is said page 64. That they are the first that Reformed Religion from Popery to True and Primitive Christianity and page 99. 't is said Happy had been all the Christian word if as the said Churches were the first that Reformed themselves from Popery the way of their Reformation had been followed by all others who Reformed after them This his high Opinion he confirms by the Testimony of Learned Zaâ—chy and might also have confirmed it by the Testimony of Luther Well! this being supposed must not the Presbyterians carry the day they think they must and therefore one of them not many years since Translated Comenius into English as making very much for that Plat-form they aimed at Indeed in the Order of those Churches I find Lay-Presbyters and which is more Lay-Presbytresses and Eleemosynaries answering to the Presbyterians Deacons Officers I know they have called by the name of Antistites which may be rendered Bishops but every one of them to submit himself to the judgment not only of his Colleagues but also of the Conseniours and to admit admonition Counsels and reproof from them and these Conseniours are together with their Antistites to exercise Discipline upon Ministers The Lords day those Churches keep as strictly as the Presbyterians contend to have them kept Baptisme they administer without the sign of the Cross with them none are thought to belong to the Pastoral Cure of Ministers but those who do with good will submit themselves to that Unity and Order whereas among us every one must be a Church Member or else go to the Common Goal and that which answers unto Confirmation amongst them is performed only by the Minister and before every Sacrament the Master of a Family and his Household come to the Minister and are by him examined some few Holy-dayes indeed are kept in these Churches but so that when Divine Service is ended people go to their work as upon other dayes There is no order among them to abstain from the works of their Calling on the Saints day or to keep the Evening before Fast so that these Churches are as Presbyterian as Presbyterians themselves can desire what was it then that moved Mr. Durell so transcendently to extol them page 46. He tells us That those Churches that first Reformed from Popery receive the Communion kneeling and it is true they do so but they did not do so from the beginning In the year 1494. they received the Communion standing but were forced to leave off that gesture because their Persecutors were the more bitter upon that account and would not this be a goodly Argument think you the Bohemian Church to avoid persecution receives the Sacrament kneeling therefore it is conformable with the English Church that persecutes all who do not receive the Sacrament kneeling I but when these Churches did joyn with those of Major Polonia and Lithuania it was unanimously forbidden to receive that blessed Sacrament sitting because among other Reasons that unmannerly and irreverent gesture was peculiar to those Miscreants the Arrians amongst them and they made this observation That the custome of sitting at the Lords Table was first brought into some of their Churches by those who most miserably falling from their Communion did renounce the Lord who redeemed them wherefore they intreat and exhort all their Company and Bretheren that they would change sitting into standing or kneeling For this Mr. Durell refers us to a general Synod celebrated 1583. But every one that looks into the Harmony of Confessions will see that Mr. Durell hath not dealt fairly for first He leaves out a Parenthesis of the Synod in the which it is expresly said That that gesture of Session with others is free Secondly Whereas the Synod saies that Session was brought in potissimum malo Auspicio This Mr. Durell Translates was first brought in I grant indeed that in another Synod to which this Synod doth refer celebrated 1578. it is expresly said That they who fell off to Arrianisme were the first Authors of sitting in their Churches but that Synods words Mr. Durell does not Translate and therefore has Translated either ignorantly or dishonestly Let it also be observed that this Synod does pray and beseech people to leave off sitting not command them under the pain of Excommunication yea this Synod by allowing what was done in the former Synod does determine That it is unlawful to smite Godly men with Ecclesiastical Descipline because of external Rites Let me also add that the Fathers of this Synod were under a mistake when they said That no Church in Europe anno 1583. did use sitting at the Lords Table and Mr. Durell is much more mistaken if he thinks that any Socinians first brought up the custome of sitting amongst us here in England for what if Dr. Owen said truly when he confuted the Socinians That Socinianisme had generally spread it self into the Nation yet sitting had been used before Socinianisme so spread it self I never heard that there was a Socinian either in the Assembly or in the two Houses untill that one Mr. Free got among the Commons who for his Blasphemies was cashiered that House as I have somewhere read Had Mr. Durell pleased he might have consulted a Catechisme made by Thomas Beacon Prebend of Canterbury and Printed cum Privilegio 1563. in which Catechisme the Learned Divine and Godly Confessour saith That if sitting at the Lords Table which was then used in certain Reformed Churches were recived by publick Authority and common Consent and might be conveniently used in our Churches he could allow that gesture best And Mr. Robert Nicholls in a Discourse of kneeling in the act of Receiving long since presented to Bishop Morton but not printed till 1660 would have informed him That in the beginning of Queen Elizabeths Raign standing was Ordained at Coventry and Northampton by her Majesties Commission and kneeling abolished But there was another thing perhaps that might move Mr. Durell to be so superlative in the commendation of the Bohemian Churches namely a Crotchet got into his head of calling an Assembly of forreign Divines that should all give their suffrage for the Discipline and Rites of the English Church which Crotchet did so please him that he begins to call that Assembly page 200 and Comenius the only surviving Bishop of the Bohemian Churches he will give the Honour to speak first and accordingly doth bring him in pag. 202 203 204 205. with a long Harangue of words in the commendation of Unity or Order but is so uncivil to the aged Bishop as not to allow him
he hath said Episcopi he adds seu Doctores which renders it very uncertain what kind of men he means by Bishops And Mr. Petoy a late Historian hath adventured to say That our Church as well as the Scottish Church was at first planted and Governed without Bishops till Bishops were sent to us from Rome But be this as it will certain I am our great Kingdome could not be said to honour and reverence Bishops till by the Preaching of Augustine and his Associates the Nation ceased to be Pagan since which time Bishops have not alwaies been so reverenced and honoured as the Reverend Author of this Epistle pretends Their disloyalty and pride rendred them so odious in the Reigns of many Kings that had it been put to the Vote whether there should have been Bishops or no Bishops it is easy enough to see how it would have been carried Nor is it truly said page 133. That we owe our Reformation to the Care and Zeal of our Bishops who did so wonderfully well repurge the Church of England an hundred years ago The first dawnings of Reformation we owe under God to Wickliff who was no Bishop nor friend to Bishops as Bishops signifie men of a superior Order to Presbyters those who sealed the Truth with their Bloud in King Henry the eighths dayes were none of them Bishops We can prove from the writings they have left behind them that they were against Bishops Seeing this Letter is so well penned Mr. Durells anger will not wax hot if I dwell upon it a little longer The Author of it tells us page 139 That he fears not to say if the French had kept Bishops and as many Ceremonies as would serve to fix the attention of the people without Superstition they should have seen for certain far greater progresses of Reformation and the resistance of a great many persons overcome who are frighttd from their Communion by the irregularity of their Government and the bareness of their Service I design not to put this Reverend Pastor into any fright because of any thing that he hath said but really I do not understand what he means by the Reformed French keeping their Bishops for I never heard that they had any Bishops of their Religion to part with much less do I understand upon what he founds his certain asseverations that more Papists would have come over to them if they had had Bishops and more Ceremonies We had before the Wars Bishops in our Nation and Ceremonies enough yet did we not find any great additions made to our Churches by the coming in of Recusants I hope they in France can reckon up more Converts from Popery than we can here in England or else Conversions have been but rare I also hope that so many have not apostatized among them as have apostatized among us If they have Rome hath more to boast of than I could wish But there is one thing more marvellous than all this The Author of the Letter thinks That if the English Dissentors have any Charity they would consent to the Re-establishment of the Episcopal Government though there were something in it they could not approve of if it were but for the sake of those that follow the Confession of Aspurg For can this learned man think that Hierarchy as an Order superiour to Presbytery and as founded upon a Divine Institution would be an Offering well pleasing to the Lutheran Divines he is not so unacquainted with their Writings as that he can so think If Episcopacy upholds the Lutheran Churches as he tells us page 138. I am sure it is not such an Episcopacy as we have here in England for such an Episcopacy hath no place among them And oh that it could be said That they in Denmarke Norway Sweden and Germany were very quiet under the Episcopal Government seldom seen to slander and tear one another We know they have their differences and that none are more molested than the moderate party among them so far was Episcopal Government from keeping us quiet in England that the Divisions and Animosities did arise and grow to a great height among the Bishops themselves Some were told that nothing but their Bishopricks kept them from being Puritans Others were told that nothing but their Wives kept them from being Papists Sundry Parliaments complained to the King of the growth of Arminianisme and what did the Church do to prevent or take away the ground and cause such Complaints truly Dr. Heylin in his History of Laud tells us that there was a Consultation whether it were meet to bring the thing to a Convocation but it was concluded that it was not safe so to do because there were too many Members of the Convocation inclined to Calvinisme though there were some that were as strangly inclined to Arminianisme our Pulpits had not failed to ring with Declamations against Pelagianisme in some places and against Stoicall Fatality in others had not the King by a Proclamation put some stop to those Controversies so that the quietness which the Church enjoyed was rather due to Monarchy than Epispacy Now of late indeeed Arnold Polenberg in his preface to the second Tome of Episcopius his works gives us to understand that he designed to dedicate that great Folio to our English Clergy and particularly to both our Universities promising himself that almost all the Bishops of our Churches do defend that Opinion concerning Predestination which was condemned in the Synod of Dort Whether he be out in his account 't is not for me to enquire who have work enough to do at home but it seems even in this Gentlemans account all our Bishops are not become Episcopian and therfore preserve Unity among themselves by having their knowledge in those matters unto themselves Now if it be found necessary to tolerate difference of Judgment among the Bishops themselves in Doctrines of so high concernment it may be worth the Consideration of those who are in Authority whether they also may not be suffered to enjoy Ecclesiastical preferment who differ from their Bretheren only in some few points of Discipline I say in a few points of Discipline for as to the essentials of Discipline I am not so quick-sighted as to find that we disagree The things that breed discord among us are said by those who are the chief causes of their imposition to be Adiaphorous i. e. such things as are therefore good because imposed rather than imposed because good On the other hand those who suffer for not yeilding to the Impositions do judge there is some evil in the things imposed and desire they may be indulged not to Practise them A Bookish man who is not much versed in the Intrigues of Ecclesiasticall Pollicy would think no bigger a breach than this might easily be stopped up I shall dismiss this Letter only adding That I would not have Mounsieur Le-Moyn estimated by it having certain knowledge that he hath both with his tongue and pen
Caluminator Bishop Carleton hath written an examination of Mountagues appeal And pag. 111. gives us to understand That instead of yielding his consent to that strange conceit of the parity of Ministers to be instituted by Christ which was inserted into the Belgick Confession he openly protested his dissent thereunto And I believe that such protestation was by him made in his own name and the name of those sent out of England with him But I would willingly be satisfied why the Divines of other Churches did not make such protestation also Did they think the parity of Ministers a strange conceit If they did not down falls the whole structure of Mr. Durells Book if they did why did they enter no dissent to this strange conceit And I would also be satisfied what might move our Reverend and Learned Carleton to say That the cause of all the troubles in the Belgick Church was this That they had not Bishops amongst them who by their Authority might repress those who brought in novelties Sure I am that not long after the sitting of that Synod the Arminian novelties were broached to purpose in England and yet we who wanted not Bishops either would not or could not repress the broachers of them This Reverend Prelate was Diocesan to Mr. Mountague who made it his business to infect us with Arminianism If his Episcopal power were so soveraign an Antidote against the spreading of this infection why did he never make use of it or how came it to have so little success Oh that it were not too manifest that errours may grow in a Reformed Church where Hierarchy is established I have one thing more to add which it may not be amiss here to relate The Ministers of the Palatinate being brought into a great deal of distress his late Majesty thought meet under the Broad Seal to grant them a Collection here in England for their Relief The Letters Patents being Sealed Archbishop Laud thought meet to have an Alteration made in the form of the Letters and obtained of the King to have it made It had been said that the Ministers extream miseries fell upon them for their sincerity and constancy in the true Religion which we together with them profess and because they would not submit themselves to the Antichristian yoke our most Reverend Primate thought not meet to have Popery call'd the Antichristian Yoke though it had been so called here in England by Persons as great as himself Nor did it relish with him that the Religion of the Palatinate Churches should be called the same with ours Dr. Heylin in the History of his Life pag. 306. gives the reason Because by the Religion of those Churches the Calvinian rigors about Predestination c. are received as Orthodox and because they maintain a parity of Ministers directly contrary both to the Doctrine and Government of the Church of England Either therefore what Mr. Durell saith from the Palatinate Ministers in favour of our English Hierarchy is a meer falsity or else there is some such Alteration made in the Judgment of those men of late as the world formerly knew not of or else the Archbishop and his Second laid to the charge of the Palatinate Ministers what they were not truly to be charged with I have insisted too long on this point and shall conclude it with a profession of my perswasion that if a Synod should be called made up of the most sober forreign Divines they would advise his Majesty to establish a moderated limited Episcopacy as more suited to the Generality of our English tempers than that Presbytery which the two Houses to satisfie the importunities of the Sects rather made a shew they would establish then did establish but I can as soon believe they would publish to the whole world their own Hypocrisie as advise to settle a Government by Bishops pretending to be Jure Divino superiour to the Presbyters claiming sole power of Order and Jurisdiction and exercising their Jurisdiction by Lay-Chancellors and if they would not advise this much less would they advise to silence every one that should not assent to and approve of such a Government If you can think that Mr. Durells Testimonies prove they would I beseech you then make use of your Logick reduce his Testimonies into the form of a Syllogism and if the conclusion follow from every one of his premises or from any one of them I will then humbly beg your pardon and his too Indeed some of his Testimonies are such as I much doubt whether he brought them in jest or in earnest Peter Martyr and Bogerman are made to approve the English Hierarchy pag. 252 268. Because the one did write the other speak to English Bishops by those names and titles by which they are commonly notified here in England But is not this to affront us as if we were quite void of Learning may we not as well argue from Mr. Prynn's un-Bishoping of Timothy and Titus that he also approved the English Hierarchy because he dedicates a Book with that name to the two Arch-Bishops by the Titles of Right Reverend Fathers in God Primates and Metropolitanes of all England Is not this to lay a stumbling block in the way of the blind Quakers and to make that silly Generation yet more averse from giving men those names by which they are dignified in the places where they live To suggest that a man cannot call one by the name commonly given him but he must be interpreted to approve his office and the way of coming to his office and the claim he makes to his office But it is also said of Peter Martyr that he submitted to the Bishops whilst he was in England pag. 252. Did he so In what I wonder Had they any power over the Kings Professor Could they either visit him or silence him And what if he had submitted to them must he needs submit to them as to an order of men superior by Divine Law to that Order of which he himself was Cranmer most familiar with Martyr never claim'd to be of such an Order as his Manuscript kept by Dr. Stillingfleet will witness much less did he desire Martyr or Bucer or Fagius to be reordain'd by him that they might be capable of Ecclesiastical preferments so as submission then was quite another thing to what it is now Yet even the Non-Conformists of that age thought they had wherewith to justifie their Non-Conformity and to speak as softly as is possible they did as much credit the cause of the Protestants by suffering as did any of the Conformists And if I might make comparisons none of them ever recanted for a time as Cranmer did none of them during the time of imprisonment went to Mass as Ridley had begun to do and probably had continued so to do had he not been recalled from that abomination by the Letter of his Nonconforming Friend Mr. Bradford And the exemplary courage and constancy of our Protomartyr
that the Corps should be brought into the Church though now I find one or two Psalms appointed to be read after the Minister and people are come into the Church and by Comparing the old and new Liturgy together I find where in the old was the word Minister in the new there is constantly the word Priest so that whereas a Deacon may preach to us and Baptize our Children he may not bury our dead which seems to be a Mystery worthy Mr. Durells unridling Our Clergy men themselves seem Strangers to this mystery for nothing is more usual among them than to set Deacons to bury their dead nor can I in that old Liturgy which I follow find any notice given that the office for the burial of the dead is not to be used at the burial of such as die unbaptized in the new Liturgy such notice is given the reason whereof I am not so happy at present as to know why should Infants that die unbaptized through no fault of their Parents be denied such a burial as Baptized Infants have Mr. Durell is a knowing man and can satisfie us about these matters and brings us no question many Reformed Churches where the same usage obtains but why did he bring in his Friend Mr. Drelincourt saying pag. 49. That he should account the Custome of the Ministers of the Reformed Churches in France being silent at dead mens burial unsufferable were it not for their present condition That learned worthy Divine knows that the Reformed Churches in Holland are under no such condition as the French Churches and yet their Ministers are perpetually silent at the burials of dead men Is their Custome unsufferable I believe he will not so pronounce and therefore will scarce think himself civilly dealt with to have a Fragment of a private Epistle thus published especially seeing it reflects disgrace upon the Ministers of his own nation who are Pastors in Holland I have been too tedious in examining this impertinence The Communion also he tells us pag. 44. Is constantly celebrated at certain set times in all Reformed Churches And is there any thing in the Directory against the celebrating of it at certain set times Does it not say that it is frequently to be celebrated And take order that notice shall be given before hand of its celebration nor does the Directory any where forbid the Administring of the Communion unto those that are sick in private houses though if it had so done it might have justified it self by the Example of many of the best Reformed Churches Let Mr. Durell when he is at leisure enquire whether one of the Assembly of Divines did not Administer the Sacrament to Captain Hotham when he was just going to be Beheaded or whether he was ever censured for so doing I will enlarge my Catalogue no farther by the instances already produced it appears that Mr. Durell may well be called Mr. Impertinent But I shall now by sundry instances make it evident also that he hath thrust sundry things into his book that are like enough if they fall into the hands of a weak Reader to be prejudicial and pernicious and to alienate him from our Church He tells us page 8. the Hungarian and Transilvanian Churches are as Pure and Reformed as any whatsoever but page 10 11. he spoils all and takes a great deal of pains so to do borrowing a book very rare and scarce and out of it acquainting us That in those Churches Ministers swear obedience Canonical unto Presbyters as well as Bishops and That Ministers are to be governed by certain Laws by an eminent sort of Presbyters called Elders as well as by Bishops Then which what can be more derogatory to the Episcopal Power Place Juriisdiction and Ordination in Presbyters as well as Bishops and what Eminence will there then be left for Bishops what will there be left to a Bishop more than what the Presbyterians have a thousand times over acknowledged themselves ready to yield him It may be he thought he should heal his wound by saying as he does page 8. That these Elders are indeed Bishops and the Bishops Archbishops But I say they are indeed but a more Eminent sort of Presbyters so they are expresly called and they can be no other because they were never by Ordination put into an Office or Order superior to that of Presbyters and observable it is vid. pag. praedict That the Minister acknowledgeth himself in his Oath to receive the function of the sacred Ministry from the there present Ministers of God and most Faithful dispensers of his Mysteries Which are Phrases agreeing unto all that are entrusted with the word of Reconciliation So that this Testimony looks with a very evil eye upon Episcopacy and so does much more the Testimony of the Bohemian Churches related pag. 11 12 13. for in that we have Presbyters Ordaining Bohemian Bishops a thing that sounds dreadful to an Episcopal ear This story will strengthen the Presbyterians and be a second unto that with which they are wont so much to confirme themselves I mean the History of Pelagius Bishop of Rome being ordained by two Bishops and one Presbyter These Histories do at least prove that Presbyters and Bishops were of the same Order and that Presbyters as well as Bishops may lay hands upon Bishops and confer the power of making Ministers Indeed the man makes himself ridiculous who goes about to look for any Bishop properly so called among the Waldenses and he does gratifie the Presbyterians not a little page 38. whilst he tells them That the French Churches sing at the end of the Commandments these four verses which answer to our Lord have mercy upon us and incline c. for this is the very thing that Presbyterians desire that these words might be uttered at the end of the Commandments and not at the end of every particular Commandment pag. 45 46. he takes Mr. Calvins pen and drops a very foul blot upon our Church for the custome of Receiving thrice a year which is known to be our custome for no man is bound to Receive oftner is by him the called vitiosus mos i. e. a vitious custome at least if not a custome full of vice But page 53. he calls us all Fools by Craft for these are his words That every National Church ought to have Vniformity within it self hath alwaies been the judgment of all sober and wise Christians and is at this day the good example of all the Reformed Churches in the world I assume that there ought to be Uniformity in every National Church hath not alwaies been nor yet is the Judgment of the Church of England what Conclusion hence arises every one seeth but the Conclusion is so horrid that I will not form it My Assumption I prove from the Canons of 1640. which are so far from determining that there ought to be an Uniformity that they expresly allow a Difformity desiring in reference to the Rite of doing
any persons be produc'd who told the Reformed Churches any such tales Mr. Durell must be content to be thought a spreader of false informations if he can produce any such by my consent let him have the whetstone and keep it untill he can find Mr. Durell telling something that will make him deserve to have it returned But he shall not need to keep it very long For Seventhly Pag. 86. he tells us That the Bishops in England are to rule by the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical and by the Laws of the Land and no otherwise calling alwaies to joyn with them in imposition of hands and other matters of weighty concernment some of the Prebends of their Cathedralls or other graâ—â— Ministers of the Diocess Where was shame when this was pen'd do the Canons require any Bishop to call any one Minister to join with him in imposition of hands upon a Deacon or in the Confirmation of persons before they are admitted to the Lords Supper or doth the Bishop offend against any Law or Canon if he call none of his Ministers to joyn with him when a Presbyter is Excommunicated or is it so much as necessary that the Bishop himself should be present when Excommunication is decreed Is any thing more usual then for Lay-Chancellors to decree Excommunication calling only some Minister for fashion sake to pronounce the sentence I would Mr. Durell would shew us any Reformed Church that hath any such custom and I wish also he would tell us what those Canons and Constitutions are according to which our Bishops are to rule us For some tell us that they are to proceed not only according to the Canons of 1603. but also according to sundry other Canons that ordinary people know not nor ever had an opportunity to read of provided they be not repugnant to the Laws and Statutes of the Nation Mr. Durell 't is like hath all the 77. Legatine Canons as also the 212 Provincial Canons at his fingers ends If he can find any Canon among them all commanding our Bishops to call in some of the Presbyters to joyn with them in imposition of hands and all other weighty matters let him discharge it in their faces yet taking heed left it recoyle and do himself some mischief For Bishops do not love to have their power limited or the Canons relating to it expounded by any but themselves I hope no Canons are in force but those of 1603. and by them I am sure the Bishop is not required to call in Presbyters to joyn with him in every imposition of hands In the 31 Canon indeed he is appointed to celebrate Ordinations on the four Sundays after the Ember weeks and in the Cathedral or Parish Church where the Bishop resideth and in the time of Divine Service in the presence not only of the Archdeacon but of the Dean and two Prebendaries at the least or if they be let or hindred in the presence of four Grave persons Masters of Art and allowed Preachers The 35 Canon also saith That the Bishop shall diligently examine him that is to be admitted to Holy Orders in the presence of those that shall assist him at the imposition of hands or else cause the said Ministers carefully to examine every such person All this doth not amount to the calling in of Presbyters to joyn with him in the imposition of hands The Book of ordering Priests and Deacons doth indeed require that the Priests that are present with the Bishop shall together with him lay on their hands when a Priest is ordained but how if no Priest should lay on his hand the Ordination is valid however as is again and again determined by Bishop Taylor in his Episcopacy asserted Yea he saith pag. 197 198. That it was declared Heresie to communicate the power of giving Orders to Presbyters either alone or in conjunction with Bishops What he saith concerning the Decree of the 4th Council of Carthage pag. 189. I leave to others to examine confessing that I innocently thought that when our Presbyters laid on hands together with the Bishop they as well as he had conferred Orders Dr. Heylin in his History of Episcopacy pag. 162. hath undeceiv'd me for these are his words The conjunction of the Presbyters in the solemnities of this Act was more for the honour of the Priesthood than for the essence of the work Nor did the laying on of the Presbyters hands conferr upon the party that was ordained any power or order but only testified their consent unto the business and approbation of the man I must also confess that I did not apprehend things aright in reference to the Bishop and his Presbyters untill lately I read in the foresaid Bishop Taylor p. 257 258. That to the Bishop is committed the care of the whole Diocess He it is who is appointed by peculiar designation to feed the flock The Presbyters are admitted in partem sollicitudinis but still the Jurisdiction of the whole Diocess is in the Bishop and without the Bishops admission to a part of it per tracit onem subditorum although the Presbyter by his Ordination have a capacity of Preaching and Administring Sacraments yet he cannot exercise this without designation of a particular charge either temporary or fixed and p. 262. after he had muster'd up many Testimonies he tells us They shew that the Presbyters in their several charges whether of temporary mission or fixed residence be but Delegates and Vicars of the Bishop to assist the Bishop in his great charge of the whole Diocess And p. 282 283. he hath these words As I have shewn that the Bishop of every Dss did give Laws to his own Church for particulars so it is evident that the Laws of Provinces and of the Catholick Church were made by Conventions of Bishops without the intervening or concurrence of Presbyters or any else for sentence and decision The instances of these are just so many as there are Councils and more plainly 287. Till the Council of Basil the Church never admitted Presbyters as in their own right to voice in Councils and that Council we know savor'd too much of the Schismatick Nay Mr. Jeans tells me That in the Convocation which was the last before the late wars Bishop Pierce told the Ministers of his Diocess that it was an unquestionable Priviledge due unto his See for him to propound unto them the Clerks that they should choose unto which he expected their Conformity part 2. pag. 131. Now if all this should be true it might be a kind of a Quodlibetical Question whether in our Convocations any do sit and vote beside the Bishops for they that sit not in their own rights but in the right of others and as they are Delegates and Substitutes are scarce said to sit And so the men whom Mr. Durell so much condemns for false accusations will be found rather to have spoken incautelously than falsly As for the other false accusation relating to Archbishop Laud
Chapters ia both that are never agpointed to be read Whether the Church do well to appoint above an hundred of Apocryphal Chapters to be read and about an hundred eighty eight Canonical Chapters never to be read is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 certainly he that would adventure in a Sermon to say de facto That the Church had appointed the whole Bible to be read over once a year had taught his tongue not much to regard Truth So had he also who adventured to say pag. 23. That it is required of the people that they repeat aloud the Confession of sins No such thing is required of the people rather it is required that they should repeat the Confession of sins with a lowly and submiss voice Should all lift up their voyces aloud there might be more confusion then Mr. D. is aware of But though I am confident Mr. D. is mistaken about the two last mentioned particulars yet I must profess I am not clear about the Churches meaning in either of them After order taken for the reading of the Psalms we are thus directed Then shall be read distinctly with an audible voice the first Lesson taken out of the Old Testament as is appointed in the Kalendar except c. Any man by this would think that the first Lesson were alway by the Kalendar appointed to be taken out of the Canonical Scriptures of the Old Testament yet the Kalendar appoints many Apocryphal Chapters to be read for the first Lesson Is Apocrypha become a part of the Old Testament I know our Church had no intention to make it so yet the Phrase used by her in a Complex Notion sounds as if she did I suppose therefore she calls all Books preceding the New Testament whether Canonical or Apocryphal by the name of the Old Testament If this supposition hold than the admonition to all Ministers Ecclesiastical prefixed to the Second Book of Homilies will warrant them to change all the Chapters Apocryphal that shall fall in course to be read on every Sunday or Holiday into a Chapter of the New Testament for in that Admonition such Liberty is granted or rather such course is prescribed in reference to the less edifying Chapters of the Old Testament But perhaps by assenting and consenting to all and any thing Ministers have given away their liberty to make any such exchange Let those whom it concerns consider Where I live I have little opportunity to hear Apocrypha read publickly and if in my Family I make choice of Divinely inspired Writings to read I hope I am no transgressour of the Law Nor really do I know what is meant in our Liturgy by a loud voice In the old Common Prayer Book after the absolution the Minister was appointed to begin the Lords Prayer with a loud voice In the new loud is changed into audible and we are also required at that time to repeat it after the Minister which was not required in the old But now coming to look upon our directions for the rehearsing of the Lords Prayer after the repeating of the Creed I find that not only the Minister but Clerks and people are appointed to say it with a loud voice I cannot think the phrase is meerly varied by Chance nor yet do I see the Reason of the variation nor do I observe any either Priests or people thus to vary by straining their voice higher at one time than another Perhaps our last Amenders of the Liturgy did put audible instead of loud in some places that we might know that voice was loud enough on the Ministers part which the people could hear but what shall be called either an audible or loud voice on the peoples part Are those people that kneel at one end of the Church to speak so loud as they may be heard of those who kneel at the other end or loud enough to be heard of the Minister or only loud enough to be heard of those who are next to them Mr. D. hath had many occasions and opportunities to assent and consent to all and every thing contained and prescribed and therefore is ignorant of none of these things Let him be him be intreated to help us poor Ingrams for our Countrey Priests are as unable to untie these knots as our selves All this I have written not out of any dislike to those who put out their Books in the defence of the English Liturgy for I should be right glad of the pains of any who would justifie it against all the Objections with which it is pressed provided he would do it like a Scholar and like a Christian grounding whatever he writes upon such Reasons as are apt to move those who have Consciences and do remember that God will bring them to a strict account for all that they do in his Worship but Mr. D. evidently is no meet person to make our Churches defence for he has been so highly rewarded is so overwhelmed with Ecclesiastical Preferments and Dignities that the World will hardly think any thing put him upon writing besides filthy lucre If he would have done our Church service be should have contented himself with some one Ecclesiastical Preferment spending himself in that going to his people from house to house perswading them to credit the Liturgy by excelling all those in Virtue that used no Liturgy he should have conjur'd them to deny all ungodliness and worldly lusts and to use their best wisdom so to order their affairs as that they might have leisure to come Morning and Evening every day and receive the benefit of their Churches Liturgy but as the Apostle said That they who themselves were circumcised kept not the Law so we say that they who have assented and consented do not observe the Orders and Rules to which they have given assent and consent nor yield that Obedience which they have sworn to yield How few be they that Catechise half an hour every Sunday and Holiday How few be they that have called and advertised notorious evil-livers not to approach the Lords Table until they have truly repented and amended their naughty lives How many have subscribed the Articles who never so much as read the Homilies that by the Articles they are to approve I once happened into the Company of the Rectour of a Parish who signifying to me that he had lately been with the Bishop to receive Orders from him I asked what things were required of him in order to Ordination He told me among other things he had subscribed the three Articles in the 36 Canon but when I demanded of him what those Articles were he confessed he knew not what they were nor had he ever seen them but followed his Leader and not long since one had confidence enough to come to a Reverend Minister of my acquaintance with a purpose to perswade him to Conformity but my Friend arguing for his Non-conformity from a very plain passage in the Liturgy he denied that there was any such passage
both the High-Commission Court and Star-Chamber were taken downa nd the High-Commission Court was taken down in words so general as were interpreted to reach all other Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and coercive power of Church Consistories by these two Statutes Dr. Heylin sayes That the two great Bulwarks of the Church were beaten down In the same Parliament also passed an Act disabling the Bishops to sit as Members in the House of Peers in this condition stood things until an unhappy War was begun betwixt the King and the two Houses during the beat of which War the two Houses Voted away the Episcopal Government established in the Nation and Bishops in the places where their Forces prevailed either were not at all or shewed not themselves Divine Providence so ord'red it that the Kings Forces were at last quite overcome and with them Bishops also were overcome so as they no where publickly and solemnly own'd either their Power of order or Jurisdiction so stood affairs until that his Majesty was restored but in the mean time young men that had applied themselves to the study of Divinity were under necessity either by the Statutes of Colledges or by accepting of Livings to enter into Holy Orders and to receive those Holy Orders from meer Presbyters by which Orders they acted for many Years the Lord accompanying their Ministry with great success the people every where receiving the Eucharist at their hands and bringing their Children also to be baptized by them the Parliament which had the happiness to bring in the King confirming them in their Livings but the present Parliament hath thought meet to en-act that all should be uncapable of Cure of Souls that had not Episcopal Ordination so as they finding themselves under this Dilemma that either they must nullifie their former Orders by Re-ordination or else quit their Livings chose to relinquish their Benefices so made way to the preferment of many every way of Mr. Ds own mind He himself perhaps he had not had so many Ecclesiastical Benefices and Dignities could they have satisfied themselves to keep their stations this is the Schisme of a great many of those with whom he is so angry And can be not forgive them such a Schism which proved so beneficial to himself and others It will be more difficult to forgive Mr. D. the Schisme that he himself endeavours to make contrary to the Intent of the Act of Indemnity and Oblivion by which we are commanded to bury the Actings of those that were indemnified in the Grave so as not to mention them to the disparagement of any but leave them wholly to the Judgment of the Great day but this bitter man as if he envied Church and State the Peace and Quietness they both enjoy will needs open the Grave of Oblivion rake into the dust and bring all old Stories and Transactions upon the Stage again Would any man be like minded how easie were it to recriminate Who knows not that a Primate of England and Metropolitan took up Arms in the Cause of the two Houses and had Money Voted him for his good Service Was not the Author of Politica Sacra Civilia an Episcopal Divine Doth he not at present Conform Is he out of his Living who writ the Jus Divinum Regiminis Ecclesiastici If we should make search into our Bishops Deans Prebends Priests might we not finde such as took the Covenant themselves and perswaded others to take it Nay might we not among them even among them find those that took the Engagement and came into the Livings of those that were outed for not taking the Engagement Nay if a man would make enquiry for Bradshaw's Chaplains are they not among the the Conformists Be they not also among them who justified the Murthering of the King And if it were allowable to Glory how many Non-conformists had suffered deeply in the Kings Cause before Mr. D. in the Isle of Jersy was either banished or molested but these are things wholly Heterogeneous to Conformity and Non-conformity So is also the whole series of the late War It hath been my hap as yet to know but of four meer Non-conformists that were aged experienced Divines at the beginning of the Warrs and they four so far as I can learn were all in their Judgments unsatisfied in the Parliament War It is like enough that there were many others that were satisfied in their Cause and acted for it But what need Mr. D. or I be sollicitous about this Does not the King understand his Supremacie Has not the Parlialiament declared it unlawful upon any pretence whatsoever to take up Arms against him After such Declaration who is he that will dare to call the thing in Question I do not know that since his Majesties Return any Book has been printed asserting the Lawfulness of Subjects taking up Arms against a King unless that which was published as Mr. Hookers by Dr. Gawden dedicated to the King himselfe nor do I find any English Divine whose testimony the Writers for the Parliaments Cause did more build upon than Bishop Bilson the Great Propugner of Hierarchy whose words it would be Treason now to transcribe Mr. D. knows where to find them let him take them into his consideration and see how he can qualifie them for my part I do not love to exercise my self in things too high for me this I must take leave to say That Mr. D. hath manifested himself very grosly to be a respecter of persons for whereas he pours out contempt upon some now alive for expressions that fell from them in a time of trouble and confusion there is scarce one of his beyond-Sea Divines whom he does not quote with much Honour and Respect though they did in their Systems of Divinity and Comments on Scripture lay down the same Doctrine quarrell'd at in Mr. Baxter Doth he not know what pains David Owen hath taken to make his honest Calvin and his Learned Beza and Danaeus c. as guilty of delivering Trayterous Doctrine as the Jesuites themselves At least he knows that Paraeus his Book was appointed to be burnt at Oxford and yet him he makes use of Pag. 8th and pag. 337. c. Andrew Rivet also he chooseth as a man fit to be of the Synod and yet this Rivet in his Exposition on the 68 Psal determines very peremptorily for the lawfulness of defensive Arms and to the Ephori he allowes a liberty to take up offensive Arms. Peter Du Moylin and Spanhemius he would also have Chieftains in his Synod And yet these two the one in his Anatomy of Arminianisme the other in his Dubia Evangelica on Matthew 5th do make the Right of Civil things to belong only to the Godly or to the Elect then which nothing could be said more dangerous to greater or lesser Societies I know they both distinguish of a Right in respect of men and of a Right in respect of God denying onely the later unto the wicked
BONASVS VAPVLANS OR Some Castigations given to Mr. John Durell for fouling himself and others in his English and Latin Book By a Country Scholar LONDON Printed in the Year 1672. ERRATA Page 3. l. 25. r. reproved p. 12. l. 15. r. bear p. 13. l. 16. r. hasp 16 l. 7. r. whether p. 21. l. 18. r. nor should have p. 26. l. 26. r. Phrases In on s p. 28. l. 21. r. Salmurienses p. 30. l. 17. r. operous p. 39 l. 25. 41. l. 10. r. Nonconformist p. 44. l. 22. r. That l. ult r. there is p. 49. l. antepen r. the more p. 53 l. 11. 〈◊〉 Tithes p. 59. l. ult r. bring us p. 63. l. 25. r. there called p. 64. l 26. r. world p 72. l. 21. r. was l. 25. r. Aquila p 79. l. 1. r. of such l. 9. r. strongly l. 17. r. Episcopacy p. 94. l. 26. r. Consecration though p. 114. l. 7. r. there p. 119. l. 3. r. all p 128. l. 3. r. in p. 136. l. 20. r. Ecclesiae p. 138. l. 20. r. down and p. 145. l. 13. r. will find p. ult l. 10. r. in the behalf of l. 11. r. done you will SIR I â—â—ve of late so wholly addicted my self to practical Theology and taken so huge a pleasure in reading those Authors that never espoused the petty interest of the Times that next to wishing for Mr. Durell's sake his Eristical volume had never been written I wish for my own sake you had never sent it me or at least sent it me under such circumstances that I might have laid it down assoon as it had given me enough of it i. e. as soon as I had read the Title page Certainly if you had left me to pay the Stationer for it if I had not returned it it should only have stood in my Library to encrease the number of my Books nor should I have ever taken it down unless when I take down Bonarscius his Amphitheatrum i. e. when I have a mind to discover unto my self or others unto what a height of bitterness corrupt nature not restrained by Grace will transport men even in controversies relating to Religion which of all others require to be managed with exemplary moderation and meekness but seeing you have thought meet to be so bountiful as to bestow a Book on me which must needs cost you sundry shillings and seeing you have desired of me for a requital of your cost and charges to throw away some time upon it I should be extreamly uncivil and unthankful if I should not bestow a few hours in reading of it or so much of it as may be sufficient to pass a judgement upon the whole the which yet I cannot so well do until I have first given my censure of that English Treatise printed 1662 the answering whereof in a Latin Apology for the Nonconformists has produced these voluminous Vindiciae and of that Treatise my censure in brief is this that a Noncomformist cannot better secure himself against it then by standing at the mark at the which its Author pretends to shoot all his Arrows The controversies betwixt Conformists and Non-Conformists being brought to their true State it will appear that Mr. Durell either never knew them or was afraid to come near them To instance in a few particulars of many Several hundreds of Ministers during the late distractions were ordained by meer Presbyters they only having courage enough to confer orders publickly and solemnly with Fasting Prayer and imposition of hands None of these would the Bishops admit to Ecclesiastical employment unless they would submit to be re-ordained with and by that very form of Ordination which is used for the Translating of Laicks into the state of Clergymen Here two Questions arise first Whether a valid Ordination may be repeated and that the far greater part as well of Conformists as Non-Conformists deny the second therefore and only remaining Question is Whether an Ordination by meer Presbyters be valid if it be not we nullifie the most famous Churches beyond the Seas whom God has so remarkably owned and supported amid all the troubles and persecutions of their Popish Adversaries if it be valid then by the judgement even of the very Conformists no other Ordination can be received Mr. Durell was unwilling to annihilate those Churches in which he was baptized and yet was as unwilling to justifie the English Presbyterians in not submitting to Re-ordination and therefore wisely passed over these Questions in silence but being by the Latin Apologist reprove for omitting so Capital a controversie he grows more hardy and adventures to affirm the Case of the Presbyterians beyond the Sea and those in England is not the same because among them there are no Bishops as among ours there were and so they are defended by necessity which ours cannnot plead How much better had it been to have left this sore naked and exposed to the Eyes of all than to have used a Plaister that can neither Cure nor cover it Is the Case of Transmarine and English Presbyterians so vastly different Why is the same hard measure meeted out to both How comes it to pass that if a man ordained at Rome could obtain leave of himself to assent and consent he were capable of the highest Ecclesiastical dignities but if a man were ordained at Geneva the most unfeigned assent and consent will not qualify him for Ecclesiastical dignities unless he will also receive new Orders Was it so from the beginning either of our first or second Reformations were any of those that either in the persecutions of King Henry the eight or Queen Mary fled beyond the Seas and received orders in reformed Churches looked upon at their return as meer Lay-men our Histories tell us they were not nor would the right Reverend and Learned Bishop Morton so far scandalize the Neighbour Churches as to re-ordain one of their Ministers though strongly importuned so to do by a Letter of the dissembling Archbishop of Spalato Nor could Bishop Báncroft be induced to give way that the Scotch Divines should first be made Priests before they were Bishops although it was alleadged that they had never been made Priests but by Presbyters So as this custom of Presbyterifying de novo those that before had received the gift of Presbytery must needs be an innovation here in England of the which I wish I could give a more fair and plausible account unto Forreigners then for the present I am able For it would greatly dishearten those renowned Ministers abroad who live under a King of a different Religion from them to come over to our Nation for a Sanctuary if they must when come hither break the Seal that God hath set to their Ministry before they be admitted to any cure of Souls 2. I say this pretended difference is no difference at all for what though there were Bishops in England yet did they not appear to magnifie their offices And it hath been wont
liberty to speak all he had to speak I must therefore out of the Reverence I have for his gray haires and the respect that all Christian Churches bear to him for his Learning and Piety doe him so much right as to let him speak farther about the Controversies agitated among us he hath a Paraeness to the Churches and by name the English Church in that page 146. he tells us what he would have taken from Episcopacy Secular Dominion Terrene Riches or Wealth and the Pompe of Ceremonies and in the next page brings in the Papists laughing and jearing at us for the Ceremonies that we retained here in England since our Reformation so that I may well conclude that it had been more for the interest of the Church to have passed over the Bohemian Churches in silence and it had been well also if the Consensus Poloniae had never been mentioned for in that we shall find a Synod at Cracovia anno 1573. disputing de Choreis and when some had alledged that there were honest as well as dishonest dancings it was at last concluded by the suffrage of all as well Seculars as Clergy that they were to be condemned according to the Scripture and to be forbidden unto all that profess true Piety Will it much please some of our Governours that young Students are by Mr. Durell directed to read the Determinations of this Synod but this is one of the least of the mischiefs that he doth us pag. 93. being surprised with a pang of vain glory and designing to acquaint us with his own Sufferings he doth not stick to deliver that which involves the farre greater part of his present Conforming Brethren under the guilt of Rebellion and Schisme for these are his words pag. 93. It is known how great the Persecution was against all Ministers who adhered to the King and Church of England during the late troubles those who were more gently dealt with were onely plundered turned out of their Livings or imprisoned there were others whom it was thought fitter to cast out of the Land c. Out of these words supposing what is manifest that they who adhered not to the King and to the Church are Traytors and Schismaticks thus I argue All that adhered to King and Church suffered either to Deprivation or Banishment most of the present Conformists neither suffered to Deprivation nor Banishment therefore most of the present Conformists neither adhered to King nor Church and by Consequence were Traytors and Schismaticks The Major is Mr. Durells own The Minor is known to all the Nation most of the present Conformists either enjoyed their own Livings during the late troubles or were put into new Livings If Mr. Durell had enquired of him who Licensed his Book he would have told him that he enjoyed a very good Fellowship in All-Souls during the late confusions but it is usual with Mr. Durell where he thinks any Presbyterian is within his reach to lay about him though he must needs strike through the love of most of his own Friends So pag. 44 〈◊〉 telâ—â— us That those who profess themselves to be Orthodox had either altogether neglected the Sacrament in most Parishes of these three Kingdomes or else had ministred it onely to some few choice persons Which is to throw dirt into the faces of his Epispopal Brethren for they possessed most of the Parishes in this Kingdome to be sure and as for the Kingdome of Scotland there war no neglect of the Sacrament untill that our English Armies had made it impossible for them to exercise their Discipline But Aquilla non capit muscas it is a small thing with Mr. Durell thus to scratch our English Clergy unless he also wound the whole English Nation and that we find him doing for after he had told us that he would set down out of Monsieur Le Moyne's Letter as much as fitted his purpose he sets down this pag. 136. The English have a Natural fierceness and withall a natural inclination to Superstition Doth this Character of our Nation fit Mr. Durell's purpose then certainly it is a wicked purpose which cannot be managed but by the causless aspersion of a whole Nation Usually Superstition dwells in the timerous and dastardly Nature We unhappy Mortalls that we be are naturally fierce and yet naturally Superstitious he that had observed this concerning us should have been so friendly as to tell us what kind of Superstition it is that we are so naturally inclined to that so we might have known how to have watched and prepared Antidotes against it if there be any Antidotes strong enough to expell that which is naturall The Author of this Letter whom Mr. Durell calls one of the ordinary Preachers to the Reformed Congregation of Roan which certainly is a Phrase of disparagement to English ears thinkes that upon account of our Natural fierceness and superstition We stand in need of a Government somewhat Despoticall that is of a Government by Bishops but I would query what kind of Bishops we must have Nature teacheth us to desire some of our own Nation and if they be of our own Nation are not they Naturally Fierce and Superstitious too if they be what Despoticall power shall we have to cure them if they be not then it seems the Episcopal Character expells the Natural Fierceness and Superstition that dwells in English Natures but we never yet had any experience that a mans being made a Bishop in England did work any cure of his Natural Fierceness and Superstition Some men have thought that divers after they were advanced to Episcopal Dignity grew more fierce and more superstitious but this I neither affirm nor deny In the same Letter pag. 134. it is said That it cannot enter into a Rational Mans Imagination that a great Kingdome should come by custome to be content to see its Bishops no more having honoured and reverenced them for the space of one thousand four hundred years This is good news to the Bishops and if they can believe it they may in utramque aurem indormire for Episcopacy it seems as well as Superstition is grafted into the Natures of the members of this great Kingdome and they can neither suddenly nor by custome be brought so much as to a contentedness to want their Hierarchy The Author of this Epistle is famed to be a great Historian and I doubt not but he is so but methinks he is mistaken in his Chronology whilest he makes this great Kingdome to have reverenced and honoured Bishops for one thousand four hundred years I find not any good evidence that there were any Bishops among us till Augustine the Monk was sent to us from Rome and it is not one thousand four hundred years since Augustine came hither I say there is no good evidence of Bishops till then for Venerable Bede the onely Author to be regarded concerning matters Ecclesiastical preceding Augustins mission from the Pope tells us indeed of Brittish Bishops but after