1â— Quis non his pollicitationibus non alliceretur praesertim adolescentis animus cupidus veri Who would not have been inveigled with these promises especially the mind of a young man thirsty for truth As Austin once of himself in refeference unto the Manichees SECT IV. Of the Contents of Independency and in particular of the second and third of them viz. congregation and non subjection The Ingredients of Indep coll g ble out of the Apologetic Narration of the 5. Br. BUt to come neerer and to particulars There are three things in Independency especially First separation viz. from full and constant fellowship and communion with the Parochial Assemblies Secondly Congregation or collecting and constituting themselves into another body Lastly Independency and assuming or usurping of intire Ecclesiastical power into that body so as to be judicially and of right subject unto none other which is the esse and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Independency Of the two latter viz. Congregation and non subjection I shall speak here because I shall have occasion of much more large Discourse about the former namely separation And now for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that they do so congregate that is visible for they do by a certain covenant constitute themselves into a distinct body And that they arrogate an Independency also Apologet. Narrat pag. 23. although in words they reject the name saying That proud and insolent title of Independency was affixed unto us yet in as much as they do in terminis affirm first that any other particular Church hath only power to declare non communion with an offending Church pag. 19. Secondly that a Classis or combination of Churches have no juridical power over any particular one Pag. 15. pag. 17. Thirdly that the Magistrates power is of another nature though of use over the Church doth it not follow They also rightly denying a Catholick visible Church unavoidably that as a Church and as to Ecclesiastical jurisdiction they depend on none and therefore are Independent That therefore such they are as to congregating and Independing is beyond all contradiction Now then for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and their grounds why they are so to shew the unsufficiency of them or which is all one that they ought not so to do is the next thing to be evidenced And 't is not so hard nor needs so long a proof if we consider their own grounds already yeilded and the unlawfulness of separation which shall the Lord assisting be cleared in the consequent and which themselves also seem to damn For we had likewise the fatal miscarriages and shipwâ—aâ—ks of the separation say they as Land-marks to forewarn us of those rocks and shelves they ran upon Apologetic Narrat pag. 5. And would God it had done it for the Independents have split upon the very same divisions First then for their concessions If it be true that all that conscience of the defilements say they we conceived to cleave to the true worship of God in them pag. 6. Concessions of Independents against Independency or of the unwarranted power in Church Governours exercised therein did never work in us any other thought much less opinion but that multitudes of the Assemblies and Parochial Congregations thereof were the true Churches and body of Christ and the Ministry thereof a true Ministry Then doubtless first their habitual Separation from such though in some acts rarely they did communicate with some of them was ipso facto unlawful and a Schisme evident This the foundation falling their superstructure of congregating into a body and binding themselves to that society which implies a constant renunciation of the former Churches is as drunkenness to thirst and their arrogating of a self-sufficient and independent power is as the fastening their iniquity with cords of vanity So that there seems no more needful for this place then that ex ore tuo serve nequam Matth. 25. out of thy own mouth thou shalt be judged Dost thou confess that notwithstanding any defilements in the worship any usurpation in the Church-Governours any pag. 6. mixture in the Congregations that yet multitudes of them were the true Churches and body of Christ and wilt thou separate thy self constantly and draw others from the true body of Christ Joh. 15. Are not the branches when broken off from the true Vine cut off from the * Quicquid à matrice discesserit seorsim vivere spirari non poterit substantian salutis amittit Cypr. de Simplic prolator p. edit Erasm 1520. 173. juice sap and life of the tree must they not needs wither and in the end be gathered to be burned I end this with that knock of the Hammer of this headless Schism for they are Independent St. Austin Hoc ergo Tichoâ—ius cùm vehementer copioseque dissereret ora contradicentium multis magnis ac manifestis sanctarum scripturarum testimoniis oppilaret non vidit quod consequenter videndum fuit Parmenianus autem ceterique Donatistae viderunt hoc esse consequens maluerunt suscipere obstinatissimum animum adversus apertissimam veritatem quam eâ concessâ superari ab Africanus Ecclesiis Aug. contr Ep. Parm. l. 1. c. 1. Independents This that the Church was not in Africk onely 1. their Inconsiderateness but diffused through the whole world when as Ticonius had earnestly and copiously discoursed and by many weighty and evident arguments of the holy Scriptures stopt the mouthes of the gain-sayers yet did not see that which by consequence did clearly follow 2. Or their Obstinacy On the other side Parmenian and the rest of the Donatists the separation saw the consequence and would rather assume a most stubborn resolution against manifest truth than by yielding to it be overcome of the African I may add in reference to those we speak of the English Churches But secondly toward satisfaction unto others if not to them What kind of Independency is here condemned I must explain my self All Independency of Churches is not denyed For then we must condemn the Church of England and other reformed who do not act as acknowledging any superior body on whom they do depend But according to the confession of this Church every particular or National Church Artic. 34. hath authority to ordain change and abolish Ceremonies or rites of the Church ordain'd onely by mans authority so that all things be done to edifying So Article 57 The Queens Majesty hath the chief power unto whom the chief government of all estates of of this Realm in all causes doth appertain and ought not to be subject to any foreign jurisdiction It speaks of causes Ecclesiastical Vindiciae Catholicae or the Rights of particular Christian Churches asserted Which kind of Independency I have elsewhere sufficiently if I mistake not vindicated But the Independency here opposed is that whereby Christians being before incorporated as members
their general exception The next is against the Ceremonies of this Church and of the Common-prayer Book in particular Of the Ceremonies in partic Against which they except these things First that they are not established by Law Secondly that they are superstitious Thirdly that they are scandalous Fourthly that they have been occasions of persecution Fifthly they are burdensom for their number And lastly even by the consequence of the Article 34. of the 2. Homilie of the time and place of Prayer by the very Preface of the Common-prayer Book it self and also the practice of the Bishops they ought to be removed Touching the first that they are not established they endeavour to prove first generally in that the Common-prayer Book is not established secondly particularly because of the Book of 2. and 5 6 Ed. 6. and the Act of Uniformity of Common-prayer Touching the first that they are not established In the Answ to the sixth gen Except because the Common-prayer Book is not established hath been answered above Touching the particular proof here the Brethren do prevaricate not unpalpably and very undutifully traduce Qu. Eliz. and the Parliament that established the Book of Common Prayer P. 34. For first they say that However the Rubrick before the Book of Common-prayer printed in 1 Eliz. directeth to use such Ornaments as were in use in 2 Edw. 6. Ornaments of service yet that is no part of the Book of Common-prayer which the Parliament of 1 Eliz. established because the Book of 5. 6 Edw. 6. hath no such Rubrick or direction and that Act of 1 Eliz. for Uniformity of Common-prayer injoyns all things to be done according to the Book of 5 6 Edw. 6. and none other nor otherwise therefore nothing according to the Book of 2 Edw. 6. which yet * P. 39. afterward they say is good Law So that they make that Parliament very weak and inconsiderate men Answ and indeed meer C. Combs if that word might be used in reference to so awfull an Assembly that what they appointed in the very entrance of the Book by Rubr. they would establish they did by the Act immediately overthrow They appoint such Ornaments in the Book unto the Minister in Divine Service as was in use by Act of Parliament in the second year of Ed. 6. And in the Act they conform the Prayer-book unto that of 5 6. Ed. 6. and none other or otherwise As if the former were not an Exception and a Provâ—so also in the Act it self Act for Uniformity prope sinem Provided alwayes sayes the Act and be it enacted that such Ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof shall be received and be in use as were in the Church of England by the Authority of Parliament in the second year of the Reign of King Edw. 6. untill other order shall be therein taken note by the Authority of the Queens Majesty Note with the advice of her Commissioners appointed and authorised under the Great Seal of England for Causes Ecclesiastical or of the Metropolitane of this Realm Which latter clause of the Act yields a farther Answer to the Breth viz. that if those Ornaments were not otherwise established either by the Act or by the Liturgie yet by this Act Other Ceremonies if they be established by the Queen and her Commissioners and so by the following Princes Q. hath power to ordain Ceremon Rites and Orders Ecclesiastical it is sufficient The like may be said for Ceremonies Rites and Orders appointed by the Book That Act immediately after the former words subjoyning And also that if there shall happen any contempt or irreverence to be used in the Ceremonies or Rites of the Church by the misusing of the Orders appointed in this Book the Queens Majesty may by the like advice of the said Commissioners or Metropolitane ordain and publish such further Ceremonies or Rites as may be most for the advancement of Gods glory the edifying of his Church and the due reverence of Christs holy Mysteries and Sacraments So that here is establishment enough Next they would prove that the Ceremonies in the Common-prayer Book for of those they are speaking are not established by Law Pag. 38. because the Common-prayer Book of 2 Edw. 6. is in some things referred to And particularly as to Ornaments and Rites both by the Rubrick before Common-prayer in the present Liturgy and by the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. So that as to this point vâ—z of Ornaments and Rites which they named and as to Ceremonies for of those they are speaking and instance in them presently so much of that Book is still in force by Law But that Book hath expresly given a liberty in some of the things here desired to be no further imposed where in the last page thereof called Certain Notes for the more plain Explication and decent Ministration of things contained therein it saith As touching kneeling crossing holding up of hands knocking upon the breast and other gestures they may be used or left as every mans devotion serveth without blame This say the Brethren is still good Law c. wherein they do as well falsifie as prevaricate for neither the Rubrick before the Common-prayer nor the Act for Uniformity do name Ornaments and Rites as the Brethren recite the words but Ornaments only Now the word Rites comprehends the Ceremonies also which are not referred to in this Act but bounded in the Book it self and further liberty given to the Queen about them as we saw above out of the Act. Again they prevaricate for they know it was far from the meaning of that Rubrick they quote in 2 Ed. 6. when it names kneeling crossing and other gestures as things indifferent to be done or left according to every mans devotion Far it was from them to intend the Crosse in Baptism or the kneeling at the Communion or other gesturâ—s establisht in that very Book and by Act of Parliament and the latter whereof they explain by Rubrick in the Book of 5 6. Edw. 6. But the Brethren know they meant these words of such other Crossings and Kneelings and gestures which were many in those times not appointed by the Book So much for the â—stablishment The next is they are superstitious Superstitious Thirdly scandalous Both which have been replyed to above to which I referre for brevities sake only because this Tract is growen farre beyond what I intended The fourth is they have been occasions of persecution to manâ— able and godly peaceable Miniâ—teâ—s and sober Christians With reference to what hath been said above I add Pâ—â—â—â—â—ble Ministâ—â—s first Touching the Ministers that peacâ—â—ble they are not if like the Brethren Who first endâ—avour to enflame the people as well as Parliament and then to cast questions of difference between the King and Parliament â—ag â—â—â— â—â—â—r â— about Prerogative â— as they not obscurely do by quarrellâ—ng the validity of the
Scripture This refers especially to the seventh Article touching Predestination c. whose words in the latter part they are Lastly Ministers are not prohibited absolutely from searching but from that which is curious Answ 5 and beyond sobriety This for the doubtfulness of the Articles The second exception is their erroneousness 2. Error for on this the Brethren insist though under the other covered head of doubtfulness First because it is said Not every deadly sin committed willingly after Baptism Artic. 16. is a sin against the holy Ghost they infer that the Church holds the distinction of venial and deadly sin which is Popish What if the Article speak in the then received language and according to such distinction not owning of it therefore in the sense held by the adversary but using it for the purpose they had in hand viz. that though all sins be deadly of themselves yet seeing some are greater than other grant the worst which they call deadly sin as we usually express a great evil by that word that it is a deadly one as a deadly grief a deadly mischief yet is not every such a sin against the holy Ghost especially when the Church hath in other places so plainly declared her self to the people as in the Homilies Catechism and Common-prayer-book in the last whereof it prescribeth confession of sins to be made twice every day by all the Congregation Now it is not to be thought that every one is guilty of deadly sin every day in the sense expressed so that the people are in no great danger by that expression And the Articles declaring Artic. 11. Artic. 22. that we are accounted righteous before God onely for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ And that there is none other satisfaction for sin but that offering of Christ alone and damning of all Purgatory Pardons worshipping of Images and Reliques and invocation of Saints do declare they count no sin in it self venial but by the blood of Christ Again Artic. 20. where because 't is said The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith Because the Kings declaration and the Act before that say That the Articles must be taken in the literal and grammatical sense they infer ' That if a Convocation declare any thing in the premises they must assent and subscribe in the literal sense or be deprived But I it is not forbidden either by that Act or the Kings Declaration to enquire the literal sense and so to examine them nor 2 are they required by that declaration to subscribe to what a Synod shall conclude in the literal and grammatical sense of such conclusions or Canons but onely to the literal and grammatical sense of the Articles This therefore is a captious inference upon the Declaration and the Act. And so much more are their exceptions against the 34 Article That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant unto the Word of God and be ordained by common authority c. But are there not three or four Cautions in it that should defend it from all calumny 1. That these Traditions and Rites must not be repugnant to the Word of God 2. That they be established by common Authority 3. That a man do transgress of his own private judgment And 4. willingly purposely Yea and 5. openly This exception taketh away the obedience to all Church-Laws yea to all Civill Laws they may as well except against subscribing if any such Act were to the sense of this Article applyed to the Laws of the Kingdom As suppose they should be enjoyned to subscribe That whosoever shall through his private judgment willingly and purposely openly break the Laws of the Land which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained by common Authority and to take these words of the Act in the literal and grammatical sense without putting their own private or new sense upon it c. Would not such persons be thought unworthy to have any place in any Common-wealth that should refuse And why then in the Church surely they must be both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men without yoke and without use and that per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is pernitious unto all Societies and men of Belial 3. Artic. 35. Their third exception is against Artic. 35. wherein is required the subscribing to the Book of Homilies as a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for these times Against this they object that there are false doctrines or assertions in them First in general subscription to the Homilies is intended by the Church The Homilies how to be understood in Subscription not in so punctual and verbal a degree as is required unto the Articles as appears because the Articles are to be distinctly and severally read and the expressions in them every one assented to the Homilies not so but onely as they agree with the Articles which are the superior rule unto them Not therefore to every expression or sentence no nor doctrine nor assertion if any were contrary to the definitive doctrine of the Articles All men know that there is a greater latitude of expression allowed to popular Sermons as the Homilies are than to Articles And the Brethren would have their Sermons to contain necessary and wholesome doctrine yet perhaps will not be so hardy as to affirm that they may not have uttered some sentences not so true or congruous if exactly scanned or that nullnm unquam verbum emisit eorum quisque quod revocare vellet as he said above And lest there should any inconvenience arise to the people though now the danger is little the Homilies being so much if not too much laid aside the Common-prayer and reading of the Scripture publickly together with preaching according to the Articles are provided as a remedy Yea which is more if one Homily speak less warily in any material point it is corrected in another as in the Homily of Alms-deeds seeming in one passage or so to ascribe some kind of merit unto them though it doth not taking the word properly yet it explaineth it before-hand in another namely in the Homily of Salvation or Justification wherein that doctrine is excellently set forth as also in the Homily of Faith So when in the Homily of Alms Tobith is cited as Scripture not onely the Article doth regulate that expression but every ones Bible also Instructions to Preachers Artic. 1. Ann. 1622. Besides every exhortatory expression must not be called a doctrine or an assertion but that which as a point is purposely insisted on to be maintained of which sort I believe verily the Brethren will never be able to instance in any one out of the Homilies And indeed had they observed the instructions of King James above mentioned viz. That no preacher