〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all Instituted Worship and Discipline as if there could be Church-Members under Government antecedent to the being of Particular Churches even when no one that is not a Member of a Particular Church is a Member of the Universal As if a City that consists of many particular Houses were in order of nature antecedent to every particular House § 3. That the Unity of the Christian Church consists in one Communion Catholique Unity signifies Catholique Communion To have a Right to be a Member of the Christian Church to communicate in all the several Duties and Offices of Religion with all Christians all the World over and to partake in all the Priviledges of Christians and to be admitted to the freedom of their conversation to eat and drink and discourse and trade together So that such as are not Church-Members have no right to trade among Christians A pleasant Insinuation § 4. The Unity of the Christian Sacraments viz. Baptism and the Lords-Supper prove the Unity of Christian Communion This is from p. 193. to p. 208. § 5. Unity of church-Church-Power and Government doth also prove the Unity of Christian Communion Under this head he maintains 1. That every Bishop Presbyter or Deacon by his Ordination is made a Minister of the Catholique Church though for the better edification of the Church the exercise of his Office is more peculiarly confin'd to some particular place 2. Every Bishop and Presbyter receives into the Catholique Church by Baptism and shuts out of the Catholique Church by Excommunication 3. That the Catholique Church is united and coupled by the cement of Bishops who stick close together for which you produce Cyprian 4. That the Unity and Peace of the Episcopacy is maintained by their governing their Churches by mutual Consent Whence you mention the Collegium Episcopale the Episcopal Colledge which I take to be a Council of Bishops which Bishops have an Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church i.e. the foreign Bishops as those of Alexandria and Rome c. have an Original Power and Right in relation to the whole Church even a Right and Power in relation to England 5. That every part of the Universal Church is under the Government of the Universal Bishops assembled in their Colledge or in Council and what Bishop soever abuse his Power he shall be accountable to those assembled in Council 6. That there is no such thing as the Independency of Bishops their Independency being almost as inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity as the Indpendency of single Congregations Whence the Church of England called either Archi-Episcopal National or Patriarchal is not Independent but accountable unto Foreign Bishops if at any time they abuse their Power 7. That this Council of Forreign Bishops unto which they are accountable must look on the Bishop of Rome as their Primate the Primacy of the Bishop of Rome being acknowledged it seems by our Author himself as well as by Bramhall The Primacy he saith out of Cyprian being given to Peter that it might appear that the Church of Christ was One and the Chair that is the Apostolical Office and Power is One. Thus Cyprian on whom lay all the care of the Churches dispatches Letters to Rome from whence they were sent through all the Catholique Churches All this is to be found from p. 208 to the end of the Chapter Thus you agree with Bramhall though you express not the Notion so well as he doth and should learn it better Before I proceed therefore I cannot but desire you to consider what is become of your Protestant Episcopacy I beseech you Sir consider Is the French Episcopacy a Protestant Episcopacy If not seeing the English Episcopacy as described by you is the same with the French Why call you the one a Popish and the other a Protestant Episcopacy Whether you agree not in these respects with the Papists let the world judge But you go on to assert § 6. That to be in Commuion with any Church is to be a Member of it every Member having equal Right and equal Obligation to all parts of Christian Communion even that Communion which is External and Visible p. 132 c. § 7. All Christians being bound to communicate with that part of the Catholique Church wherein they live are guilty of Schism if they separate whoever separate from such particular Churches as are members of the Catholick Church do separate from the Universal Catholick Church which is Schism For to divide from any part of the Catholick Church is to break Catholick communion i. e. to be a Schismatick Whence 't is concluded 1. That Schism is a separating from the Catholick Church which notion taken singly will stand the Dissenters and all true Christians who must be acknowledged to be members of the Catholick Church in great stead freeing them from the odious sin of Schism The Dissenters divide not themselves from the communion of the Universal Church Ergo not Schismaticks But the mischief is that as this notion of Schism which our Author adheres unto is the same with that of the Papists as is to be seen in Filiucius Azorius c. but in an especial manner in Charity maintain'd by Catholicks even so he closes with the same Popish Faction in asserting 2. That separating from the Church of England is a separating from the Catholick Church as if the Catholick Church had been as much confin'd within the bounds of the Church of England as the Papists says within the limits of Rome Whence whoever separates from the Church of England cuts himself from the Catholick Church puts himself out of a state of salvation He is extra Ecclesiam extra quam nulla salus they are all while Schismaticks in a state of damnation But surely if these men believed so much methinks they should not be at rest until all their unscriptural impositions were removed unless they have greater kindness for such trifles than they have for such immortal souls for whom Christ dyed By this Doctrine we may understand why 't is that some of our Clergy shew greater tenderness towards Drunkards Swearers Papists than towards poor Dissenters The former may hold communion with the Church of England and consequently with the Catholick Church when the others are undoubtedly in a state of damnation as if we were all in the same state with Hereticks I 'le not as easily I might now enlarge in shewing the weakness which the Dean's Substitute hath discovered in the management of this Grotian or Cassandrian Design but only tell him That if he had consulted that excellent Treatise The Grotian Religion discovered by Mr. Baxter he might have seen an unanswerable confutation of a great part of his Book or if he had rather applied himself unto that great Prelate Bishop Bramhall a man of extraordinary worth for his Learning he might have better digested his Notion For there he would have been furnished with such distinctions about Communion that would
A REPLY TO THE DEFENCE OF Dr. Stillingfleet BEING A Counter Plot for Vnion between the Protestants in opposition to the Project of others for Conjunction with the Church of Rome By the Authors Of the Modest and Peaceable Inquiry Of the Reflections i.e. the Country Confor Of the Peaceable Designe Then Abner called to Joab and said shall the sword devour for ever Knowest thou not that it will be bitterness in the latter end How long shall it be then ere thou bid the people return from following their Brethren LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers Chappel 1681. To the Right Honourable THE EARL of HALLIFAX May it please your Lordship THE Design of these Papers being for the Glory of the King and the Peace of the Church we cannot think it dishonourable for any person of moderate Inclinations and in a capacity to serve so good an end to favour it Your Lordship therefore being at present at the Helme in the Administration of the greatest Affairs will not as we hope receive with any Disdaine this our humble Dedication Not that we concerne your Lordship in our little Contests as the Book is Controversal for we know Themistocles cannot fiddle but he can govern a State but because the Thing Designed is so momentous and concerns Statesmen such as your Lordship is We do intend no further avocation of your Honour from your other Imployment than to look over onely the Preface and the last Half Sheet of the Book wherein you will find a Foundation laid and Materials made ready There is wanting onely the Perfecting skill of some Master builder and then Hands to work We are sensible of the Meanness of such an Offering to so great and judicious a Person and being conscious that the blame which we deserve upon that account is too much for One there are Two of us to bear it Your Lordships humble Servants John Humfrey Stephen Lob. THE PREFACE IT hath pleased God that the hearts of most men at this present juncture or at least their faces are set upon Union of the Protestants and it is absolutely necessary that somewhat be done in order to a firm and lasting one among us Upon this point on all hands we seem to be agreed We must Unite or we must be undone but as for the means of obtaining this end the differences are many Some among the Conformists seem to propose an Execution of the Poenal Laws as a sure way of Uniting us Others as this Author of Dean Stillingfleets Defence c. insist on a Submission to the Bishops of the Universal Church to be the onely foundation of Unity in the Church The Dissenters differ from such as are of these Opinions and in the general assert That if ever an Union be obtained it must be by an Insisting onely on a Few Certain Necessary things as terms of Communion That the utmost severities of the Magistrate will rather fill the minds of the Sufferers with Prejudices against the Dictates of those men whose most powerful Argument is the Sword than Inlighten their Judgments or Dispose their Souls to any sincere Compliances and that the Notion of our Author to wit the Defender of the Dean of Pauls is Schismatical Upon this account it is not a little time is spent in a Representing the several Notions there are about the methods of Uniting us to be Ineffectual the one Party misliking the Proposals made by the Other But surely this is not the way to heal our breaches or put an end to the Warme and Indecent Contests that have been among us For which Reason though my principal aime is for Union yet will not I presume on any thing proposed by us I will onely acquaint the Reader with the Nature of the Ancient Constitution of our Government in Relation to Ecclesiastical Affairs and thereby shew what will most effectually conduce to Unite us in a way the least novel and most consistent with our Civil Establishment The which I can no sooner compass but I shall be capacitated to demonstrate to the World That the Principles of the Dissenter are very much adapted for concord not onely among themselves but with the moderate Episcoparians and very advantagious to the State in which they live The Ancient Constitution of our Government about Matters Ecclesiastical is very excellently describ'd in the Necessary Doctrine and Erudition of a Christian man composed by several Bishops and other great Doctors and approved by Authority in the days of Henry the 8th In this Judicious Tractate 't is manifest 1. That Church Government is Jure Divino 2. That to the Constituting such a Church Government those Church Officers onely are necessary who are mention'd in the New Testament 3. That in the New Testament there is mention made of no other Church Officers but Priests and Deacons That no other Government is of Divine Right but what is under the Conduct of Bishops or Priests i. e. Elders is evident in that the New Testament mentioneth no other Governours as Ecclesiastical but the Bishops or Elders whence that Government whose Constitution is such as that it becomes a Government on no other account than that the Governours are of humane make that Government cannot formally considered be of Divine Right 't is but Humane though circa Sacra 4. That Bishops or Priests the sole Governours of the Church are of one and the same Order their Power the same their work the same which is to preach the Word Administer Sacraments and Exercise Discipline All this I collect from what is asserted in the aforesaid Necessary Erudition about the Sacrament of Orders where 't is said That Bishops or Priests and Deacons are the onely Orders mention'd in the New Testament And of these two ORDERS onely that is to say Priests and Deacons Scripture maketh express mention That all others were afterward added by the Church That the Duty and Office of the Bishop Priest or Elder consisteth in true Preaching and Teaching the word of God unto the People in Dispensing and Ministring the Sacraments of Christ in Losing and Assoiling from sin such persons as be sorry and truly Penitent for the same and EXCOMMUNICATING such as BE GUILTY IN MANIFEST CRIMES and WILL NOT BE REFORMED OTHERWISE and finally in Praying for the Whole Church of Christ and specially for the flock committed unto ' em Thus the Order of a Bishop or Priest is one and the same whose Office is not onely to Preach and Administer Sacraments but moreover to exercise Discipline namely in Losing and Assoiling from sin such persons as be sorry and truly Penitent and in Excommunicating the Obstinately Vitious As much as if it had been said that Church Government and the Office of a Bishop or Elder is of Divine Right The Office of the Deacons in the Primitive Church was partly in Ministring Meat and Drink and other Necessaries to the poor people found of the Church partly also
in Ministring to the Bishops and Priests and in doing their duty in the Church Hereby 't is apparent that Deacons as they were not by Office Preachers nor Dispensers of the Sacraments neither were they Governours of the Church The Government of the Church being committed unto the Bishops or Presbyters onely The which being so 't will as I humbly apprehend follow That Church Government according to Christs Institution was seated in those Particular Societies which were under the care and conduct of Bishops or Elders every such society call it Parochial or Congregational being a Compleat Gospel Church i.e. a Church whose Elders or Bishops have as Entire a power for the Exercise of Discipline in their Congregations as for the Dispensing the word or Administring the Sacraments This is not onely to be found in the Necessary Erudition but moreover there are Intimations enough in other Discourses published in Henry the Eights time to incline a Judicious mind to conclude That the Office of a Priest and Bishop is One and the same and consequently that Particular Parochial or Congregational Churches are of Divine Institution I have observed in the Sum of Christianity compos'd by Francis Lambert of Avynyon a Treatise Published An. 1536. That the Notion of the Sameness of the Order of a Bishop or Elder appeared in the world with some kind of boldness For although this Lambert in his Epistle to Sebastian Prince of Lausane doth assert That there be MANY Bishops of ONE City for saith he every City hath so many Bishops as it hath true Evangelists or Preachers For every Preacher of the Truth c. is a true Bishop although he be not call'd so of many Bishops be only Prophets of Truth and there should be so many Bishops as the multitude of People requireth Verily Every Parish ought to have its proper Bishop And in the Treatise it self chap. 5. In every City Town and Village there ought to be many Bishops i. e. Evangelists or Preachers after the quantity of places and multitude of people If many Parishes be so great that one Bishop is not sufficient for them let them be divided and to every part a Bishop assigned This and much more in Lambert Notwithstanding which this Treatise is published by Tristram Rewell and dedicated to Queen Anne wife of Henry the 8th A thing that would not have been done but that this Opinion was very common at that time and within seven years after declar'd to be the sense of the Church of England as I have evinc'd out of the Necessary Erudition But 5. That the Superiority of one Bishop over another or of a Bishop over a Presbyter is of Humane not of Divine Right Diocesan Bishops Metropolitane or Patriarchal are not found in Sacred writings and concerning this the necessary Erudition is most express in these words And whereas we have thus summarily declar'd what is the Office and ministration which in Holy Scripture hath been committed to Bishops and Priests and in what things it consisteth as is before rehearsed lest peradventure it might be thought to some persons That such Authorities Powers and Jurisdictions as Patriarchs Primates Archbishops and Metropolitanes now have or heretofore at any time have had Justly and Lawfully over other Bishops were given them by God in holy Scripture We think it expedient and necessary That all men should be advertis'd and taught That all such lawful Powers and Authorities of ANY one Bishop over another were and be given to them by the Consent Ordinance and Positive Laws of men ONELY AND NOT BY ANY ORDINANCE OF GOD IN HOLY SCRIPTURE And all other Power and Authority which and Bishop hath used or exercised over another which hath not been given to him by such consent and Ordinance of Men as is aforesaid is in very deed no LAWFULL POWER but PLAIN USURPATION AND TYRANNY So far the Christian Erudition From whence 't is manifest That according unto them Diocesan Episcopacy is of Humane Right onely i. e. Any one Bishops Ruling over another Bishop or Presbyter is what the Scriptures do not direct unto and consequently 't is not of Divine Right neither is it any further Lawful than according unto the Laws of the Land in which 't is Exercis'd Though the Power of Diocesane Bishops as 't is Circa Sacra may be called Ecclesiastical yet if we consider its Origine and Source we shall find it to be but Civil seated primarily in the Civil Magistrate that 't is of an humane make and so far but no farther Lawful than as Sanction'd by the Laws of the Land Diocesane Bishops as such are not immediately owing unto God but unto our Civil Governours for their Being 't is on them their sole dependance is and on them they relie for the Continuance of their Power The King Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament can as they see cause make what Alterations they please in the Episcopal or Diocesan Government Though they cannot alter any Divine Law yet they can change any Law that receives its Being from themselves Though they cannot alter the Office of a Presbyter or Bishop which receives its Being from the Institution or Ordinance of Jesus Christ yet they may correct or amend any thing in the Humane viz. The Diocesane Constitution They can enlarge or narrow any Diocess yea pull down one and Erect another They can add unto or take from the Episcopal Jurisdiction as they judge Expedient That this was the sense of the Church of England in Henry the 8ths time yea and in most ages since an Episcopal Government has been established in this Kingdome and consequently the Antient Constitution of our Government is not only manifest from what hath been already taken out of the Necessary Erudition but from other passages that are in that excellent treatise and some other Considerations that I will insist on As First The Power that hath ever been acknowledged to be seated in the Kings of this Realm concerning the exempting any particular Churches from an Episcopal Jurisdiction evinces it If Episcopal Jurisdiction be of Divine Right it lies not in the power of any Prince to alter it If every Parish Presbyter is according to the Scriptures an Officer inferiour to some Diocesane Bishop the exempting such a Presbyter from Episcopal Jurisdiction is out of the power of any man 'T was a known Rule in our Land even in the days of Popery That no Law of man can alter or disanul any Law of God If then our Princes ever thought themselves to have been invested with a Power of exempting any Presbyter from Episcopal Jurisdiction 't is evident that they look not on that Jurisdiction to be of Divine Right But that our Princes judg'd themselves to have such a Power is notorious from the many Instances that can be given of their exercising it Whosoever consults the Learned Dr. Burnets History of the Refor part 1. lib. 3. will find That Ethelbert exempted a Monastry at Canterbury with some Churches
belonging unto it from the Jurisdiction of the Archbishop and his Successors King Ina's Charter to the Abbey of Glassenbury exemps them from the Bishops Jurisdiction The like did King Offa concerning the Monastry of St. Albans An. 793. Kenulph King of Mercia that at Abington Anno 821. and Knut that at St. Edmvndbury An. 1020. Yea and there are several places at this very time exempt from Episcopal Jurisdiction Whatever our Princes in after Ages might lose as to the Exercise of their just Power 't is certain that Henry 8th reassumed it as appears by his dismembring some Diocesses and by his removing some Churches from one Jurisdiction to another For this Consult Dr. Burnets History of Reformation part 1. lib. 3. page 301. where you 'l find the Complaint of the Roman party beyond the Sea concerning the Kings encroaching on the Jurisdiction of the Church c. to which 't was answered That the Division of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction whether of Patriarchs Primates Metropolitanes or Bishops was according to the Roman Law Regulated by the Emperours Of which the Antient Councils always approv'd And in England when the Bishoprick of Lincoln being judg'd of too great an extent the Bishoprick of Ely was taken out of it it was done only by the King with the consent of his Clergy and Nobles 'T is also evident out of Dr. Burnets Hist of the Ref. part 1. l. 3 p. 267. That this great Prince gave cut such a Commission to Bonner and it may be to others also as makes it most manifest that Diocesan Bishops were not of God's but only of the Magistrate's Institution Hence Bonner in his Commission from the King most gratefully acknowledges that he received it only from the King's bounty and must deliver it up again when it should please his Majesty to call for it even as Justices of the Peace c. whose Commission is ad Pacitum Moreover Lay-men had Ecclesiastical Dignities The E. of Hartford six Prebends promissed him as the Lord Cromwal in H. 8. was made Dean of Wells A thing very ordinary at that time Dr. Burnets Hist of the Refor part 2. Thus a Diocesane Episcopacy at best was judg'd but an humane Creature owing to the Magistrate alone for it's Rise and Conservation Secondly This seems to be the sense of the Reformers in Edward the 6th time who were under the Influence of that great Divine and Blessed Martyr Archbishop Cranmer In Henry 8th days Cranmer did his Utmost for the promoting a Reformation the which he did withal the Speed and Prudence the Ilness of the times would permit further attempt to carry on under King Edward and what he did was so highly approv'd of by all who were hearty for a Reformation that whoever considers how Unanimous the truly Protestans Bishops were in Concurring with this great Prelate Cranmer cannot but encline to think That their Principles in most things about Church Discipline were the same i. e. they were for the Divine Right of Bishops or Presbyters even when they judg'd the Superiority of a Bishop to a Presbyter to be but Humane That this may appear to be the sense of Cranmer I will only beseech my Reader to compare what was done under King Edw. 6th by this great Prelate with his Judgment concerning a Diocesan Episcopacy under Henry the 8th In Henry 8ths time Cranmer in answer to that Question Whether Bishops or Priests were first did assert That the Bishops and Priest were at one time and were no two things but both One Office in the beginning of Christs Religion That in the New Testament he that is appointed to be a BISHOP or PRIEST needeth no Cousecration by the Scripture for ELECTION or APPOINTING thereto is sufficient This was then Cranmers Judgment and I cannot understand that he did at any time in the least vary from it for in the Necessary Erudition which he subscribed there is nothing asserted but what is either Consistent with or an approbation of what was the Archbishops Opinion about these points 'T is true Cranmer was so Zealous an Asserter to the Kings Supremacy that he seem'd to be of that Opinion which doth now appear by the name of Erastianisme for he held That a Bishop or Priest by the Scripture is neither commanded nor forbidden to Excommunicate but where the Laws of any Region give him Authority to Excommunicate there he ought to use the same c. But from this he must be considered to have received because he subscribed the Necessary Erudition where 't is exprest That a part of the Priests or Bishops Office is according to the Scriptures to Excommunicate c. as well as Teach and Administer the Sacraments To all this add the Progress Cranmer made under Edw. 6. in the Reformation how far he went and how much farther he would have gone had not the Iniquity of those times been so exceeding great and the Reign of this worthy Prince so very short 'T is well known that he went so far as to tempt Dr. Heylin to conclude King Edwards death no Infelicity to the Church of England and to provoke Queen Elizabeth to say That they had stript the Church too much of its external Splendour and Magnificence That t was requisite to make some alteration in the Articles to the end a Compliance of the Roman Catholicks might be more easie What I have insisted on in this place about Cranmer is taken out of Dr. Burnets History and a Record in him ex M.SS. D. Stillingfleet 3. Such is the present Prerogative of his Majesty in Ecclesiastical as well as Civil Affairs that the asserting the Divine Right of a Diocesane Episcopacy is inconsistent with it The King is the Supream Head of the Church as well as of the State for which Reason he hath Power to appoint Officers to look after the management of Affairs in the One as in the Other But if the Diocesan Bishops depend not so much on the Prince for their Superiority and Power in making an Authoritative Inspection into Ecclesiasticalal Affairs as the Civil Magistrate who is it that is his Majesties Commissionated Officer about Ecclesiastical affairs T is either the Diocesane or None But if the Diocesane as such receives his Commission from Jesus Christ even as the Apostles did then they are Gods Officers and not the Kings And if so seeing the King doth nothing but by his Officers that is by such as act by a Commission received from him the King hath in this respect lost at least the Ezercise of his Prerogative But if they are the Kings Officers and depend as much on the King as the Civil then their Diocesan Episcopacy is not of Divine 't is but of Humane Right We acknowledge that 't is the sense of the Church of England that Princes are Ordain'd of God to Govern Ecclesiastical as well as other Persons and that therefore if we consider such as are appointed by the King to govern under him Circa Sacra as the
Realm to the fixing the desired Firm and lasting Union among all sorts of sound Protestants These Assemblies once established as so many Compleat Particular Churches whose Pastors have full Power for the Administring all Ordinances and the exercising Discipline over those who do freely and of choice submit thereunto may notwithstanding lesser Differences be considered as United unto one another in that they Profess the same Faith Preach the same Word and Administer the same Sacraments For the Proof hereof consult the Necessary Erudition where t is said That the Unity of the Holy Church of Christ is not divided by Distance of Place nor by Diversity of Traditions and Ceremonies diversesly observed in divers Churches for good Order of the same And though in Traditions Opinions and Policies there was some Diversity among them i.e. the Churches of Corinth of Ephese c. likewise as the Church of England Spain Italy Pole be not separate from the Unity but be one Church in God notwithstanding that among them there is great distance of Place Diversity of Traditions not in all things Unity of Opinions Alteration in Rites Ceremonies and Ordinances or Estimation of the same such Diversity in Opinions and other outward Manners and Customes of Policy doth not dissolve and break the Unity which is in One God One Faith One Doctrine of Christ and his Sacraments preserv'd and kept in these several Churches without any Superiority or Preheminence that one Church by Gods Law may or ought to Challenge over another Thus Particular Parochial or Congregational Churches may be United in One God One Faith One Doctrine of Christ and his Sacraments even where there is some difference between them in lesser matters What though in one Parish there is a Liturgy in another a Directory shall this hinder Union Don't even the Papists themselves acknowledge that the Church of England was very closely United even among themselves notwithstanding the several different Offices there were in use among us in the times of Popery One Office after the use of Sarum another after the use of York of Bangor c. and yet all United Moreover what more common than to observe many little differences in Civil Corporations even where they are all United in one head A consideration sufficient to evince the Union of Parochial Churches to be Possible notwithstanding some Remaining Differences in Customs c. In these Kingdoms there are a multitude of Particular Corporations and little Policies whose Customs and modes of Government within themselves are very Different The particular Laws by which they are govern'd as a Particular Body Corporate are of as many different kinds as there are Cities Towns or Parishes but yet All United in that they swear Alleigance to his Majesty and submit themselves to the General Laws of the Land The different Customs of different places do not in the least break the Union of the Nation And why may it not be so in the Church What Reason can there be given why the Union of many a Civil Society or Association may be notwithstanding the different Customes are among them but the Union of many Particular-Parochial-Churches cannot be unless they all agree in every little thing Methinks it is as Reasonable to plead for a destroying the Particular Customes and Charters of Burroughs Corporations and Cities as the only way to Union in the Civil Government as 't is to assert That nothing but an Uniformity among every Parochial or Congregational Church can Unite us in the Ecclesiastical What though there are some differences among Parochial Churches as to their Customes and modes of Worship so long as they agree in One Faith One Lord One Baptism So long as they all Profess the same Faith Preach the same Word Administer the same Sacraments and submit unto the same Civil Government So long as they all Swear Allegiance to to their Prince and Subscribe any Test to assure the World they are sound Protestants the which being so what hinders a firm and lasting Union Certainly This is enough to shew that their Union if no more is as much as that between One City and another One Corporation and another and that their differences are no greater if so great than those between one City and another The which being so An Altering the Present Laws about Conformity and an Establishing such New ones as shall be Judged necessary by our Governours for the defence and safety of a Parochial or Congregational Church-Discipline as well as for the Regulating his Majesties Officers Circa Sacra will Unite us and put an end to that Horrid sin of Schism that hath these many years abounded in the midst of us Let the Dissenters be permitted to Embrace the Laws and Customes of their Fore-fathers in the Apostles days about Church-Discipline and the Mode of Worship and they are Relieved the which may be done without any Injury to the Conscience of any sound Protestant of the Episcopal Perswasion I say 2. This cannot but satisfie any moderate Episcoparian who may if he please firmly abide by those Ceremonies he now doth He may still Read the same Prayers among such as are of his own Opinion He may wear the same Vestments and address himself to his Majesties Officer the Lord Bishop as unto his Ordinary for Councel and Advice And if his Ordinary or Diocesan be an Elder for that is left to the Supream Magistrate to appoint he may look on him though in truth as such he being only the Kings Officer Circa Sacra as a Bishop who is of an Order Superiour to that of a Presbyter and so exercise Disciplene as he Receives Encouragement from him If there be any entring on the Ministry who think a Diocesane Episcopacy to be Jure Divino and is called unto a Parish or Congregation of the same Judgment This Candidate may if the Kings Officer be an Elder and of the same mind with him apply himself unto him as unto his Diocesane and receive Orders from him and do all things as now unless our Governours Judge meet to make any Alteration as to the use of some Ceremonies Only let none be by Law compelled to do so Let those that are so weak as to think a Diocesane Episcopacy to be of Divine Right enjoy the Liberty of their Consciences the which being attended but with the vouchsafing the like Liberty unto others I know not why they may not be satisfied We are not for the Pulling down Lord Bishops nor for an Alienating Church Lands If it seem good to our Governours to continue them we only desire that the Nature of their Office be declared to be no other than what it was Antiently in this Kingdom which is That they are meerly the Kings Creatures That all they do must be in the Kings Name and by vertue of a Commission receiv'd from him That as such they are only the Kings Magistrates that act Circa Sacra That their work is only to see that the Bishops or Presbyters
within their allotted Precincts discharge their Duty not only in leading Godly Lives but in Preaching the word administring the Sacraments and exercising Discipline according to the Rule of the Gospel We are far from pulling down such Bishops for we rather wish that whereas there is now one there might be five nor are we for the alienating Church Land any more than we are for the taking from his Majesties other Civil Officers those Pensions are allowed them for their great services A thing we esteem as necessary and highly expedient as what doth not only conduce very much to the Encouragement of all sorts of Learning the equal Administration of Justice but as what advanceth the Honour and Grandeur of the State But 3. This doth no way Embase his Majesties Prerogative in matters Ecclesiastical It doth rather make it the more Grand and August His Majesty is hereby acknowledged to be the Supream Head of the Church All Officers Circa Sacra depend as much on his Majesties Pleasure for their Places as any other Civil Officers 'T is in the Kings Name they must act by vertue of a Commission received from him whereby the King is Recognized as the sole Governour of the Kingdom and hath no Competitors with him nor is he in danger of Forreign Usurpations To summe up all Let all such Particular Congregational or Parochial Churches that are of Divine Institution according to the sense of the Old and most true Church of England be by Act of Patliament declar'd to be so and taken under the Protection of the Laws and the Dissenters are satisfied The which as hath been prov'd may be done without any wrong to the consciences of the Conformist This is the utmost I shall propose leaving it to the Wisdom of the Nation to Regulate and Order the Constitution so far as it is National and of Humane Make as they Judge most Expedient The States-men know best how to alter correct or amend any thing in the present Frame for which reason Modesty doth best become Divines whonever succeed in any undertakements beyond their Sphere If no encroachments be made on what is of Divine Institution no wrong can be done us I desire the Dean and his Substitute to consider this Proposal which is but a Revival of what was on our first leaving Rome strenuously asserted as the Onely way to break all the Designs of the Papists about Church Discipline From the corruptions of which did proceed all the Popes Tyranous Usurpations Certainly the Establishing this Notion cannot but be of extraordinary use as it Erects a Partition Wall between the Reformation and the Corruptions of the Roman Church as it is adjusted for the silencing all Differences among our selves the healing our Breaches and the fixing a firm and lasting Union among all sound Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational or meer Anabaptist I humbly apprehend this to be enough to evince That the Dissenters are not such Enemies to Union as some have Asserted nor are they for the destroying a National Church Government They are onely against Unaccountable Innovations even such as tend to the Ruine of the Old Protestant National Church which as such is but of Humane Institution and in all ages must be of such a Peculiar Form as is best suited to those great Ends viz. Gods Glory in the Flourishing of particular Parochial or Congregational Churches and the Peace of the State The Dissenters do know that as One Particular Church is not to depend on another as to be Accountable thereunto when at any time she may abuse her Power yet All are accountable unto the Magistrate of that Land in which they Live and that such is the state of things with us that what person soever is griev'd either by a Presbyter or Bishop or by any Inferiour Officer Circa Sacra he may make his Appeal to the Supream Magistrate with whom all Appeals on Earth are finally Lodg'd Whatever the Deans Substitute may assert 't is most undoubtedly true that no Appeal can be justly made from our King unto the Pope or any Colledge of Catholick Bishops whatsoever That herein as our Author dissents from the Church of England we do heartily agree with her That the sound Protestant Party among the Sons of the Church of England do accord with the Dissenters about this great Point is not only evident from what a Conformist hath written in the following Treatise but from what is asserted by the Judicious Dr. Burnet in the History of the Reformation The which I do the more chearfully insist on that the world may see How the Dissenters have been misrepresented and How clear they are from any Seditious or Factious Principles concerning Church Discipline In Dr. Burnets Preface to the History of the Reformation p. 1. for which the whole Kingdom have given the Dr. thanks 't is asserted That in Henry the 8ths time 't was an Establish'd Principle That every National Church is a compleat Body within it self so that the Church of England with the Authority and Concurrence of their Head and King might examine or Reform all Errors or Corruptions whether in Doctrine or Worship Moreover in the Preamble of that Act by which this Principle was fix'd 't is declared That the Crown of England was Imperial and that the Nation was a Compleat Body within it self with a full Power to give Justice in all Cases Spiritual as well as Temporal And that in the Spiritualty as there had been at all times so there were then men of that Sufficiency and Integrity that they might Declare and Determine all Doubts within the Kingdom And that several Kings as Ed. 1. Edw. 3. Ric. 2. and Hen. 4. had by several Laws Preserv'd the Liberties of the Realm both Spiritual and Temporal from the Annoyance of the See of Rome and other Forreign Potentates Hist Ref. p. 1. p. 127. Furthermore the same Judicious Author by an Extract out of the Necessary Erudition and out of the Kings Book de Differentia Regiae Ecclesiasticae Potestatis out of Gardiners de vera Obedientia and Bonners Prefix'd Epistle and out of a Letter written by Stokesly Bishop of London and Tonstall Bishop of Duresm hath made it evident that the Church in Henry 8. did not only assert the Kings Supremacy but as a Truth in Conjunction therewith held That in the Primitive Church the Bishops in their Councels made Rules for Ordering their Diocesses which they only called CANONS or RULES nor had they any Compulsive Authority but what was deriv'd from the Civil Sanction A sufficient evincement that they did not believe General Councils to be by Jesus Christ made the Regent part of the Catholick Church neither did they believe their Determinations or Decrees to lay any Obligation on the Conscience unless Sanction'd by the Magistrates command To this Dr. Burnet speaks excellently well in his Preface to the Second Part of the Hist Refor The Jurisdiction of Synods or Councils is founded either on the Rules
In contradiction to which the Dean's Substitute's Assertion is p. 226. That Excommunication casts a man out of the visible Society of Christ's Church not of this or that particular Church only but of the Whole Christian Church He that is cast out of one Church is thereby cast out of all and separated from the Body of Christ which is but One. And therefore such are out of a state of Salvation As if it had been said in opposition to Mr. Hooker Such as are Excommunicate are shut out clean from the Visible Church yea and from the Mystical Church A Notion that Mr. Hooker considers as held by none but Papists for he immediatly addresseth himself to the Church of Rome thus With what congruity then saith he doth the Church of Rome deny that her enemies whom she holds always for Hereticks do at all appertain to the Church of Christ How exclude they us from being any part of the Church of Christ under the colour and pretence of Heresie when they cannot but grant it possible even for him i. e. the Pope to be as touching his own personal perswasion Heretical who in their opinion not only is of the Church but holdeth the chief place of Authority over the same The like may be said by way of Answer unto our Author Moreover the Learned and Judicious Dr. Field Son of the Church is as full in contradicting what is asserted by our Author For this Dr. of the Church discoursing about the Schismatick says lib. 1. c. 13. That their departure is not such but that notwithstanding their Schisme they are and remain parts of the Church of God Schismaticks notwithstanding their Separation remain still conjoyn'd with the rest of God's people in respect of the profession of the whole saving Truth of God all outward acts of Religion and Divine Worship Power of Order and Holy Sacraments which they by vertue thereof administer and so still are and remain parts of the Church of God The like is asserted of such as are cast out by Excommunication c. 15. But I 'll not enlarge any further having sufficiently evinc'd that the Opinions of this man who treats the Dissenters with so much scorn and contempt are such as were antiently by Queen Elizabeths Protestants exploded as Popish and at this very time I verily believe rejected by the greatest part of the Episcopal Clergy and that the Contest now is not so much between Dissenters and the Church of England as between a few under the name of the Church of England on the one part and the greater number of the Church of England with the Dissenter on the other The former under the notion of running down Dissenters are preparing materials to meet the Papist The other to the end they may the more effectually prevent the Designs of Rome have sent forth their Plea for the Nonconformist finding themselves concern'd to check the Insolence of those who in this day of common Calamity would ruine the conscientious Protestant Dissenter This being so I must beseech the Reader not to misapprehend me in what follows as if I had been speaking reproachfully of the Church of England because I cannot but discover how agreeable the Sentunents of the Deans Substitute about Church-Government are unto those embrac'd by the French Papist That I may the more clearly shew what are the mischievous Tendencies of our Author's Notion about Church-Government I will give in short the most distinct and truest state of the Controversie I can shewing what is granted by sound Protestants and what not What are the Doctrines of the Papists How far the French and Italian Papist agree and wherein they differ and in what respects the Dean's Substitute concurs with the French § 1. All are so far agreed as to conclude That God hath had a Church at all times in every Age of the World We might be very particular in considering the divers Denominations under which the Church falls answerable to the divers capacities of the Members thereof and the divers states in which it is and hath been which I shall at this time pass by § 2. That the Church is but One one Body united to one Head § 3. That this One Church must be considered as the Members thereof are scattered up and down the World c. and as they are joyned together in particular Societies The former is call'd the Church Universal the other a Particular Church The Papists themselves do acknowledge That the Church must be considered as Universal and as Particular though they look'd on the Universal to be such whose whole existence was in Particulars as Universale est unum in multis singularibus Whence it follows That such as are not members of a Particular Church they belong not unto the Catholick Visible Church This very Notion hath been embrac'd by some to wit the Old Independents but of late it hath been generally exploded by Divines of that name they leaving it to entertain such as the Dean's Substitute § 4. That the Church of Christ is under Government There is such a thing as Church-Government Jure divino The Papists both French and Italian The Protestants whether Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational or Anabaptist heartily agree in Thesi about this § 5. The great difference is concerning what that Church-Government is which is of Divine Institution Where 't is seated whether in a Particular or in the Universal Church and whether it be Monarchical Aristocratical or Democratical or mixt § 6. The Papists with whom the Doctor 's Substitute doth agree assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government That all Church-Officers belong to the Universal Church and have an Original Right to govern the whole Universal Church Take the notion as found in the Defence We must saith he consider that all the Apostles had relation to the whole Church and therefore though being finite creatures they could not be every where at a time but betook themselves to different places and planted Churches in several Countreys and did more peculiarly apply themselves to the government of those Churches which they themselves had planted and ordained Bishops to succeed them in their care and charge yet their Original Right and Power in relation to the whole Church did still remain which they might re-assume when they saw occasion for it and which did oblige them to take care as far as possibly they could that the Church of Christ suffer'd no injury by the heresie or evil practises of any of their Colleagues P. 212. § 7. The Protestants excepting some obscure Writers assert particular Churches to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Church-Government among whom there are these differences 1. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from the Congregational and Anabaptistical about the extent of particular Churches e. g. the latter concluding that their number must be no more than are capable of personal communion the former contrarily judg That a company of a greater extent may be
included within the confines of a particular Church who in the management of their discourses concerning it give too great an advantage unto the Papacy 2. The Episcopal and Presbyterian differ from some of the Congregational concerning the nature of Discipline the Congregational being esteemed as espousers of a Democracy or Populacy the other against it 3. The Episcopal differs from the Presbyterian in that the Episcopal are for a Monarchy the Presbyterian for an Aristocracy § 8. All Protestants generally agree in asserting the Independency of particular Churches 'T is notorious that the Church of England established by Law is a particular National Church independent on any Foreign Power whatsoever Such is the constitution of our Church that what Bishop soever is found an abuser of his Power he is not accountable to any Colledg of Bishops but such as are conven'd by his Majesties Authority and that what apprehensions soever he may have of his being griev'd through any undue procedure he cannot make any Appeal to any Foreign Power from the King 'T is the King who is the Supreme Head of the Church of England there is no Power on earth equal unto or above his in Ecclesiastical Affairs To appeal unto any Foreign Power whether unto one Bishop singly or unto many by consent assembled 't is to do what tends to the subverting the present Constitution yea 't is to subvert the very foundation of our Government as 't is opposite unto a French or an Italian Papacy Whoever consults the many Laws made in Henry the 8th's time Edward the 6th's and Queen Elizabeths cannot but be fully satisfied that the Appeal of any Bishop or any other person from the King unto any other Foreign Power is contrary unto the ancient Laws of this Realm and that such as shall venture the doing so run themselves into a Praemunire For 't is most apparent that our National Church of England is a particular Independent Church That neither the Pope of Rome nor the Bishop of Paris nor any other Foreign Bishops have any Original Right or Power in relation to England and that therefore their assuming any such power is a sinful Usurpation All this is undoubtedly true Yet § 9. The Deans Substitute exposeth the Independency of Episcopal particular Churches as what is inconsistent with Catholick Union and asserts That if any Bishops abuse their Power they are accountable unto a General Council that is unto a Foreign Power whereby he doth his utmost to tare up the Church of England by the Roots to subvert his Majesties Supremacy as if all the Laws of the Land concerning it had not been of any force All this by Dr. Stilling fleet 's Defender That this is so I 'le evince from our Authors own words which are as follow And now I cannot but wonder saith he to find some Learned men very zealous assertors of the Independency of Bishops and to alledg St. Cyprians Authority for it for what ever difficulty there may be in giving an account of every particular saying in St. Cyprian certainly he would never be of this opinion who asserts but One Chair One Apostolical Office and Power which now resides in the Bishops of the Universal Church for when the same Power is in ten thousand hands it can be but One only by Unity of consent in the exercise of it and 't is very wild to imagine that any one of these persons who abuse this Power shall not be accountable to the rest for it i. e. to the Colledg of Bishops for saith he soon after if we consider the practise of the ancient Church we shall find that they never thought every Bishop to be Independent but as liable to the censure of their Colleagues as Presbyters and Deacons were to the censure of their Bishops P. 212. So far our Author who doth as it were expresly assert That the Archbishop of Canterbury though Metropolitan and Primate of England if he abuses his Power is accountable unto the General Council when by consent assembled that is the Archbishop who is not in power above any other Bishops as is by the Deans Substitute asserted abusing his Power is accountable to some Court above any in this Realm to a General Council a Colledg of Bishops § 10. Although the Papists generally assert That the Universal Church is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of all Church-Government as hath been already intimated yet there 's a difference between the French and Italian Papist about the kind of the Government the one insisting on an Aristocracy the other on a Monarchy i. e. the French holds That the pars Regens of the Universal Church is a General Council the Italian That it is one single person viz. the Bishop of Rome There hath been in the Church of Rome for some hundred years a great contest concerning the Supreme Regent part of the Universal Church Whether it be a General Council or the Pope Whether a General Council be above the Pope or the Pope above a General Council About which the Church of Rome is fallen into three parts as Bellarmine asserts 1. That the Pâ—pe is the Supreme Head of the Church and so much above a General Council that he cannot subject himself thereunto The Government of the Universal Church though mixt being composed of a Democracy Aristocracy and Monarchy yet principally 't is Monarchical The Supreme Power being immediately lodg'd in the Monarch who is the Bishop of Râ—me Christs Vicar and Peter's Successor he is above a General Council and not accountable to any on earth for any abuse he may be guilty of Of this opinion saith Bellarmine are all the Schoolmen generally especially Sanctus Antonius Jeannes de Turrecremata Alvarus Pelagius Dominicus Jacobatius Cajetan Pighius Ferrariensis Augustinus de Aneena Petrus de Monte c. Yea this is the sense of the Jesuits generally and of all such as are engag'd to support the Court of Rome as are the Italian Bishops for which reason I call it Italian Popery 2. There are some among the Canonists who assert That the Pope is above a General Council but yet may subject himself hereunto 3. There are others who assert That a General Council is above the Pope that the Supreme Governing-power over the whole Catholick Church is given them immediately that the Pope as every other Bishop is accountable to the General Council This is what hath been asserted by the Council at Constance Anno 1315. and by that of Basil Anno 1431. and by many Learned Divines in the Church of Rome viz. Cardinal Cameracensis Jeannes Gerson Jacobus Almain Nicolas Cusanus Panormitanus and his Master Cardinal Florentinus as also by Abulensis Gerson being a Chancellor at Paris had many followers among the French who at this very day assert That the Supreme Regent part of the Universal Church is a General Council for which reason I conclude that such as assert That a General Council is the Political Head or Regent part of the
Universal Church are in the number of French Papists Thus Cassander yea and Grotius as to Church-Government were for a French Papacy Whether the Dean's Substitute be or be not I 'le leave to the impartial censure of the judicious Râ—â—der who is desired to consider his notion as compared with that of the Parisians 1. The Dean's Substitute doth suggest That the Universal Church is the first Seat of Government 't is a political organiz'd Body in which there is a Pars Imperans Subdita the Bishops in their Colledg being the Governours or Pars Imperans and all others of the Universal Church the subdite part It may be our Author to gratifie the Dean will deny the Universal Church to be a political organiz'd body as indeed he doth but 't is even when he 's resolv'd to assert That the Universal church is the Seat of Government and Discipline as if there could be any Government in any Society without a governing and governed parts But so it is as a National even so the Universal church with him is not a political body that is 't is not such a body unto whose constitution a pars Imperans and subdita is necessary even when its constitution is such that it cannot be but there must be in it some Governours and other Governed Therâ— is not a Regent part in the Catholick Church but there is a Governing part that is there are Governours viz. the Catholick Bishops in their Colledg who are the Governours of the Catholick church Thus our Learned Gentleman in one place endeavouring to fetch the Dean off from that difficulty Mr. Humphreys had driven him unto concerning the constitutive Regent part of the church of England as National doth say The Dean answers in my poor opinion with great judgment and consideration We deny any necessity of such a constitutive Regent part For though a National church be one body yet it is not such a political body as Mr. B. describes i. e. there is no such Government as cannot be without a Pars Regens Subdita p. 562. And yet he grants That Church-Governours united and governing by consent are the pars Imperans and christian peoplo in obedience to the Laws of our Saviour submitting to such government are the pars subdita p. 565. All which is true saith he without a Constitutive Regent Head i. e. There is a Governing part or a pars Regens or to speak English a Constitutive Regent part or Head without a Constitutive Regent Head The like is asserted of the Universal Church namely That it is a Church governed by the Colledge of Bishops which Colledge of Bishops are the Pars Imperans though not the constitutive Regent part For we must allow him to wallow in his contradictions But a Governing part there is in the Universal Church which Governing part is compos'd of Bishops II. The Governours of the Universal Church are Catholick Bishops in Council who though they are equals and as such have no Superiority over one another p. 213. yet the Colledge or these Bishops assembled have Authority and command over any of its collegues that is every single Bishop is under the Authority and command of this Foreign Council III. The Catholick Church is One when it is not rent and divided but united and coupled by the cement of Bishops who stick câ—ose together p. 596. The result of all is That the Catholick Church of Christ being one Visible Political Body it is a compleatly Organiz'd body on Earth hath its Governing and Governed parts The Visible Governing part being a Terrestrial Numerical Head though collective viz. A Colledge of Bishops a General Council A Notion that doth not only subvert the present constitution of the Church of England that thinks not it self accountable to any such Forreign Power but moreover in it self as grosly absurd as 't is suited to the French the Cassandrian or the Grotian Model leading us all to Unite with all the other parts of the Catholick Church by rendring an unwarrantable Obedience unto such a Governing Power as is seldom in being and when so as dangerous and of as destructive a tendency to the Government of Jesus Christ as that of the Italian Papacy But whether our Author had a clear prospect of this Intreague when at first he was put on it I 'll not venture to determine it being sufficient that I have fully proved That the New-Modell'd Episcopacy of this Gentleman is the same with that of the French which is as inconsistent with the old-establish'd Episcopacy of our Church as is the Italian Papacy For if our Author may safely exceed the bounds of those Laws that do with the greatest Severity forbid our Appeal to any Forreign Power by addressing himself unto a Forreign Colledge Why may not another presume to make his Appeal to the Court of Rome What Reason can be given for the One which will not prove cogent for the Other especially to such who living where they have constant experiences of the excellency of a Monarchical Government in the State may be easily induced to conclude Monarchy as admirable in the Church and then farewel Impossibilities viz. General Councils a Roman Monarch in the Church being much more desirable Having thus given a true state of the Controversie whereby we find our Author to agree exactly with the French Papist about Gâ—vernment asserting the Universal Church as such to be a Governed Body in which there is a Governour and the Governed 't will be requisite that as I have shewn what are some of the Absurdities which flow from it that I do moreover evince it to be in it self unsound and false That this may the more clearly and with the greater conviction be performed I will be so just as to do our Author all the right imaginable by taking notice what he seems to assert and what he 's resolv'd to deny and accordingly proceed to the strictest disquisition after the Truth Our Author asserts That the Universal Church as such is the Seat of Government 't is a Body under Government as much as if it had been said There must be in it a Governing and a Governed part It being impossible that Government should be without Order which Order is secundum sub Supra Wherever there is Government there must be a Superiour part Governing and an Inferiour Governed There must be Dominus Subditus This our Author seems to grant when he doth to this Assertion of the Government of the Universal Church add his thoughts about the Governours thereof which he saies are the Universal Bishops assembled in Council But alrhough this is what our Author doth assert he doth notwithstanding resolutely deny the Universal Church to be a Political Body what he saith of a National that he asserts of the Universal Church both which are Govern'd Societies but neither a Political Body p. 564 565. All which is to fetch off the Dean from Mr. Humphrey's and Mr. B's unanswerable Queries
concerning the constitutive Regent part of a National church whose existence must be acknowledged if a National church as such be a Governed church or a Body Politick but yet this cannot be found out For which reason they distinguish between a Governed Society and a Body Politick between a Governing and a Regent part and assert That the National church is a Govern'd Society but not a Body Politick that it hath a Governing but not a Regent part the like of an Universal church This is the true state of our Author's Judgment wherein we have an admirable account of the Gentleman 's acute distinguishing the excellency of which I 'll leave to the entertainment of his Admirers and if he please consider the Notion according to his own stating it that is to gratifie him I won't insist on the word Policy nor Regent nor constitutive Regent part but only on government Governours and Governed and so our Enquiry being about the Government of the Universal Church we must consider what is necessary thereunto and see whether what our Author asserts be agreeable unto such a constitution for if not so 't is far from Truth To consider what it is that is necessary to the constitution of any Governed Body that is what is so necessary that the absence thereof is destructive to the Constitution To this I Answer That a Governing and a Governed part is so necessary unto Goverement that where either one of these be absent there can be no Government A Governed Body cannot be without a Governing part neither can this be without a part Governed Government doth necessarily infer both these remove either one the Government is destroyed Government is a Relation resulting from that mutual respect the Governing and Governed parts have to each other whence as Sublato uno Relatorum tollitur alterum and where there is nor Subject nor Term i. e. nor Relate nor Correlate there can be no Relation Remove the Governing part from the Universal or National Church and the Government ceases Paternity may be where there is no Father assoon as Government without a Governing part Whence I infer That where there is a Fixed Government there must be a fixed Governing part This premised Let us next enquire whether or no what our Author asserts be suitable to this undoubted Rule Doth he shew us such a Governing part The Government is a constant fixed Government but where is the constant fixed Governing part 'T is a General Council saith he i. e. the universal Bishops in their Colledge assembled But is this a fixed Governing part Is it not evident to an ordinary capacity that the assembling such a Council of all the Bishops in the World is a difficulty insuperable and that without such an Assembly 't is impossible they should by joynt consent govern the Universal Church The astembling of the Catholick Bishops is as easie as the gathering together their consent per literas format as and much more conducive to the desired End because when assembled they can debate the matters before 'em and with the greater judgment give their determinations But 't is well known that had such an Assembly been possible yet the Church of God for the first 300 years had no such Assembly excepting that in the Apostles days i. e. it had no such Governing part which is as if it had been said There was no Government in the Universal Church the first 300 years To gratifie our Author Let us suppose that the Universal Church is as such a Governed Society and that it hath its Governours But though this be so yet it must be still acknowedged that a Governour cannot be without Power to Govern I would therefore beseech my Author to shew me What is that Power with which this Colledge of Bishops are invested Is it Legislative only or also Executive Whether the one or the other is it in the Colledge Subjectively and Formally or only in 'em as in fine seu regulante or supplente or How 'T would be necessary that our Author consult the Parisian Doctors if he will speak to the purpose when he espouses their Notion Let our Author assert as it pleaseth him at an adventure it matters not for his Notion is such as necessarily directs us to conclude what he must if he will be consistent with himself assert and that is this All Church-Government is Universal and as such it must be exercised no one being a Governour in the Church but he that is a Catholick Officer That the due course of exercising this Power is when it flows originally from the Head unto all its Members That it flows from the Invisible or rather unseen Head in Heaven immediately unto the visible Head on Earth is granted by all those who assert an Universal Church-Government though there is a Dispute among the Papists whether this Head be the Council or the Pope As it flows immediately from Christ to the visible Head so it proceeds from this visible Head unto the Patriarchs from thence to the Metropolitans from thence to the Diocesans For which Reason if any are injur'd by their Diocesan they may Appeal to their Metropolitan from thence to their Patriarch from thence to the Pope or Council This our Author must hold That there may be no wrong done the Little Ones of Christ if any be grieved by One he may Appeal unto an Higher till he comes unto the Highest Power on Earth from whence if he find not relief he must acquiesce leaving the whole to him who is in Heaven But if there be no constant visible Head actually existing where shall the grieved lodge his last Appeal The Dean's Substitute supposes an equality of Power in Patriarchs Metropolitans and Diocesans whence if his Diocesan doth abuse his Power he is not accountable to any Metropolitan nor Patriarch but only unto the Catholick Colledge The which being so 't will follow That Executive Power must be lodg'd in some Supreme Head Subjectively who can receive Appeals I say Subjectively or Formally and not only Virtually for 't is an Executive Power only that can relieve in this case which cannot Actually be where 't is only Virtually For which Reason 't is evident that according to our Author there must be a fixed Governing part invested with an Executive Power from whom relief is to be expected if at any time the Diocesan doth abuse his Power which Governing part must be either a Colledge of Bishops or one single Person And if the obtaining the former be as indeed 't is impossible the acknowledging the latter is necessary Thus we see how fairly this Gentleman at length leads us to Rome or some other Pope as the only necessary way of governing the Church In doing which he doth but carry on the Project of which Sir Francis Winnington takes notice at the Trial of the Lord Stafford when he assured the Lords That as an encouragement to the POPISH PLOTTERS there did appear in some men too easie
of Divine Worship did it by the Aid of the Holy Ghost 'T is true this expression could not escape the censure of such as were Popishly affected they thinking it too much that it was said the Book was drawn by the aid of the Holy Ghost as if the import of those expressions had been nothing less than that those persons concern'd in the drawing it up had been extraordinarily inspir'd But 't was well answer'd by such as said That it must not be so understood that 't was only to be taken in that sense as all good motions and consultations are directed or assisted by the secret influences of Gods H. Spirit which doth often help good men even in their imperfect actions where the good that is done is justly ascrib'd to the grace of God For this consult that truly Judicious and Deserving Dr. Burnet in his History of the Reformation Part 2. lib. 1. p. 94. The same that is said of this expression when applied to the first Composers of the Divine Service may be said of such as are assisted in free prayer by the secret Influences of the Holy Spirit Moreover 2. The Clergy at their Ordinination were to receive the Holy Ghost In King Edward's days whenever a Bishop or Priest was Ordained 't was said Receive thou the Holy Ghost in the Name of the Father c. But to what purpose if not to aid and assist them in the discharge of their Ministerial Function viz. in Prayer in Preaching in giving private Admenitions and Exhortations c. Hence I argue The Spirit accordingly is given them or not If not no wonder they reproach its work and gracious Influences to say no more But if they do at their Ordination receive a plentiful portion of the Spirit how can they talk so much against the Assistances thereof vouchsafed to others What is it confin'd unto the Clergy only or unto the Episcopal Clergy that none without canting must mention One word of the Spirit But 3. 'T is surprizing that any of our Clergy should speak any thing against the secret motions of Gods Spirit for surely such of them as are just and true and faithful to God and their own souls have actually felt so much of the Internal workings of the Holy Ghost on their souls that they were thereby quickned and moved to enter on the work of the Ministry Thus 't is with them or at least they are conscientiously perswaded of as much and can such as have felt the power of the Holy Ghost on their own hearts speak evil of the Assistance it affords unto others That the honest among the Episcopal Clergy are such as know what 't is to be moved by the Holy Spirit as they themselves trust is evident from the answer they give to the question propos'd to them when they are presented to Orders which is Do you trust that you are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon you this Office and Ministration to serve God for the promoting his glory and for the edifying his people To which the answer is He trusts he is It may be some may inquire How comes it to pass then that so many of the Clergy thus ordained do not only neglect their own work but by their uncomely discourses reflect on this very spirit To this no other answer but that of the Learned and Pious Dr. Burnet shall be given who in his Hist of the Reformation Par. 2. l. p. 145. thus expresseth himself It has been oft lamented that many come to receive Orders before they have seriously read over these Questions and examined themselves whether they could with a good conscience make the Answers there prescribed since it is scarce credible that men of common honesty would lye in the presence of God on so great an occasion and yet 't is too visible that many have not any such inward vocation nor have ever considered seriously what it is If it were well apprehended that heat that many have to get into Orders would soon abate who perhaps have nothing in their eye but some place of Profit or Benefice to which way must be made by that preceding Ceremony and so enter into Orders as others are associated into Fraternities and Corporations with little previous sense of that Holy Character they are to receive when they thus dedicate their Lives and Labours to the Service of God in the Gospel In the Primitive Church the apprehersion of this made even good and holy men afraid to enter under such bonds and therefore they were often to be drag'd almost by force or catcht at unawares and be so initiated as appears in the Lives of these two Greek Fathers Nazianzen and Chrysâ—stome If men make their first step to the Holy Altar by such a lye as is their pretending to a motion of the Holy Ghost concerning which they know little but that they have nothing at all of it they have no reason to expect that Blessing which otherwise attends on such Dedications And it had been happy for the Church if all those that are authoriz'd to confer Orders had stood on this more critically and not been contented with a bare putting these Questions to those who come to be Ordain'd but had used a due strictness before-hand sutable to that grave admonition of St. Paul to Timothy Lay hands suddenly on no man and be not partakers of other mens sins How would the Church have flourish'd if this worthy Drs. counsel had been both given and taken at the beginning of the Reformation If all that entred on the Ministry had felt the mighty power of the Spirit in turning them from darkness to light from the power of Satan unto God! How would they have labour'd for the conversion and edification of their hearers The which work could not prosper in their hands but such as were born of God receiving the Spirit would have been enabled by it to cry Abba Father Spiritual and free prayer would have been from the beginning so well known that the suggesting it to have been Jesuitical would with the greatest contempt and scorn be rejected and those many rash and indecent epithetes given it would have been consider'd but as the overtacts of ill-will to the Reformation of the Church of England § II. The Account our Author gives of the first Separation is very unrrue For 1. It was not the laying aside All forms of prayer that the old Nonconformists prest hard for They were for the amending the Liturgy but not for the removing all Liturgies 'T is true in K. Edward's days there was a contest between Hooper and Ridley c. about the old Popish Vestments but not about Forms of Prayer In Queen Maries days at Franckfort there were great contentions among some of them who before had used the English Liturgy but not that those who were against the use of the English Liturgy at that time were against it as it was a Form of Prayer but they apprehended that they being
and renders sincere Obedience to the known Will of God he shall be saved All which may be even with those who being verily perswaded that their compliances with the present Impositions are sinful durst not Conform that is The Promise of Salvation is made by Christ to many who do not conform to the Impâ—sitions of the Church of England But Salvation by our Author is denied unto such their Non-compliance is enough to make 'em Schismatical to cut them off from Christ and the hopes of Salvation which being no ways justifiable in the Conscience of any sober man the Dissenters are unjustly Excommunicated and he that so Excommunicates is Schismatical 'T is most certain That many good Christians cannot conform to the imposed terms of Communion with the Church and that for this single Reason they are Excommunicable if not actually Excommunicated from the Church that is put out of a state of Salvation The which being so 't will unavoidably follow That either the Excommunication is unjust or That the Church hath greater Power than he that is the Lord of it to open and shut the gates of Heaven If the latter then the Church sets itself up above all that is called God in this world and Christ in the other For whereas Repentance towards God and Faith in our Lord Jesus Christ is sufficient for our Salvation these add somwhat more to wit an Obedience to new Impositions threatning the neglect with Damnation But if the former if the Excommunication is unjust then according to Dr. Gunning with the addition of our Author Our Ecclesiastical Governours are the Schismaticks The Argument here in short is this He that doth unjustly Excommunicate any out of the Catholick Church is a Schismatick This is Dr. Gunning's But the Church of England shutting those out of Salvation to whom Christ hath promised it Excommunicates unjustly This is our Authors Therefore the Church of England according to the Position of our Author is the Schismatick Hereby we may easily perceive what an admirable Defender the Church of England hath in the Defender of the Dean and how little the true Protestant Clergy of the Church are beholding to this man who insists on such Notions as do necessarily lead judicious men to conclude the Church of England Schismatical But to return to our Author who leaping over all the difficulties though but hinted in the Enquiry runs unto another Question viz. From Ceremonies to Circumstances form the Parts of their Religion to the external Appendages thereunto confounding the one with the other and then runs triumphantly assuring his Reader That 't is impossible to worship God or exercise any act of Religion but it must be in some time or in some place it must be done in some circumstances therefore we may make some things a part of our Religion which God has not At this rate he fills up a great part of his Second Chapter Insisting on nothing but what had its answer in that Enquiry he attempted to confute Therefore if I should say no more than what I have in giving the true state of the Controversie it would be sufficient For it lies on him either to prove to our Conviction that We may without sin comply with their Impositions i. e. He must so far effectually enlighten our Conscience as to help us to see that the Impositions are not sinful and that we may lawfully Conform or shew That we must Conform contrary to the Convictions of our Consciences and render a blind Obedience unto their Commands Believing as the Church believes or they ought to remove the Impositions or acknowledge that our Compliances are not sinful One of these must be done Let him do either and the Controversie will be ended and the Dissenters freed from Schisme But if he cannot enlighten us to see the Lawfulness of their Impositions nor perswade us to render a blind Obedience nor remove the Impositions but plead for their continuance 't will appear That they by imposing what in their Judgments is but Indifferent as things necessary to our Salvation are the Schismaticks This might suffice as a full Answer But that nothing may escape consideration that our Author may think deserves it I le reflect a little on his main strength If there be any force in this Argument says he it consists in these two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with And secondly That the Opinion of Dissenters That indifferent things are unlawful in the worship of God is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of some indifferent things cannot meerly upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks and if the opinion of Dissenters that all indifferent things are unlawful be not a sufficient reason for parting with them then there may be no fault in the Episcopals will not nor a sufficient justification or excuse in the Dissenters cannot p. 9. First saith he If there be any force in this Argument it consists in two things First That all things which are in their own nature indifferent may without sin be parted with This is his mistake he should have said That if there be any strength in the Enquiry it lyes in this viz. No one indifferent Ceremony must be made so necessary a part of Religion as to be a term of Communion 'T is this he should have considered For you sin by insisting on any one or more indifferent things so zealously as to make 'em terms of Communion with your Church and consequently with the Church Catholick so as to deny us a right to Christ and Salvation for a mere non-compliance You can part with your indifferent Ceremonies without sin and open the door of Salvation to the wretched Dissenter if you will even when they cannot without sin comply with your intolerable Impositions The indifferent things you impose you impose as terms of our Communion with you which you make to be the same with Catholick Communion that is of Salvation 2. You add the second thing viz. That the Opinion of Dissenters That Indifferent things are unlawful is a just reason for parting with them For if it be not say you lawful to part with every thing that is indifferent those who retain the use of Indifferent things cannot merely upon that account be called Dividers or Schismaticks c. You should remember that I distinguished between Ceremonies and Circumstances between what is a part of Religion and Intrinsecal thereunto and what is Extrinsecal only But you run to external Circumstances that are necessary in Thesi which is off from the point in hand You run from what is Indifferent to what is Necessary as if we called you to part with any necessary thing whereas there is never any indifferent Ceremony that is grievous to our Consciences but you may part with or cease to impose 'em and yet
Prayer or the present Liturgy Ceremonies and Administration of Religious Offices 't is his own Comment and he is not obliged to confute it Yet thus much I will say on his behalf that upon my knowledg he is in his judgment for a Form of Prayer in Publique-Offices and Administrations and hath a very hearty esteem for that of our Church but I cannot say so of the Ceremonies I think he might be easily perswaded to part with them and if some exceptionable passages in the Liturgy and Rubricks were altered I believe he would make no opposition to it But he charges this admirable Conformist as he is pleased to call him with giving away at once the Episcopal Office and instead of it sets up a Bishop in every Parish and either an Antichristian Bishop of Bishops or an Ecclesiastical Minister of State to govern them How little there is of truth in this charge may be collected from what I have said already The Conformist sets up no more Bishops than the necessities of the Church and the duty and work of the Episcopal-Office requires and I understand not that this is giving away the Episcopal Office And if this Author can free Metropolitan Bishops from Antichristianism which he says some do derive from the very days of the Apostles and that not without some good appearance of Reason I hope the Conformist will defend the Episcopi Episcoporum from that appellation As to what he says of an Ecclesiastical Minister of State the Conformist hath no more to reply than this He hopes this Gentleman will not plead an Exemption for the Clergy from under the Civil Magistrates Power and Government and if this be granted I know not what can be matter of Controversie between him and this Author For he supposes him to exercise no Power over the Bishops but what is inherent in the King and in this Minister of State by Delegation that is in few words to see that they do their own Duty carefully reprove their Negligence and Male-administrations and preserve peace among them And what is there in this Doctrine that our Author should take such offence at I am yet to seek He addes And alters the whole frame of our Worship leaves every man to do as he lists and all this without injury to our present Constitution In these Lines to speak plainly there is not one word of truth as any man may easily collect from what I have said already And this Gentleman himself confesses in the next page That the Conformist will not indeed allow of universal Toleration How this can be reconciled with Leaving all men to do as they list I am not able to tell That the Conformist said That those that hinder the Union of Presbyterians with the Church of England by continuing the Impositions are Factors for the Pope I do easily acknowledg and I believe he is still of the same minde and as I remember he gave some Reasons for it too which this Gentleman takes no notice of When he confutes them perhaps he may hear of a Vindication if there be just reason for it Pag. the 8th he proceeds thus He i.e. the Conform pleads for the Indulgence of others particularly the Independents who he says will be content with their own Congregations and is mightily taken with Mr. Humfreys Project That the tolerated Churches such as Independents be declared parts of the National Church whereof the King to be the Head The Countrey-Conformist is so great a Lover of Peace that I do easily suppose he might be pleased with Mr. H's Project as he calls it and I do assure him that I my self am much more pleased with it since I read his Book than I was before though I had always a value for it For I think the Design of uniting the Dissenting Protestants in this Nation is into one National Church whereof the King to be the Head more laudable than the design of uniting Protestants in a General Council or in a Pope Primate or Metropolitan which seems to be the design of our Author though he hath not Courage or Instruction enough as yet to speak it out For he affirms 1. That the Episcopal Office and Power is but one and not resident in the Bishops of the Universal Church p. 212. 2. That the Independency of Bishops is inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity p. 115. And 3. that although equals have no Authority over one the other yet a Collegue hath Authority over any one of his Collegues p. 213. 4. That the Bonds and Combinations of Churches are of Divine Right though the ordering and determination of them be of Humane Prudence p. 258. 5. That the Unity of the Church is as much of Divine Right as any Form of Government in it and that the whole Church may be divided into greater or lesser parts as may best serve the ends of Peace and Unity And that it seems strange to him that a National or Patriarchal Church should not be thought as much a Divine Institution as any particular Church p. 259. And further he adds When Christ and his Apostles have instituted one Form of Government for all particular Churches and commanded them all to live in Unity Peace Communion and amicable Correspondency with each other the Union and Combination of Churches into one according to this Institution to serve the ends of Catholick Communion must be thought as much a Divine Institution as the bounds of particular Churches For if we will not allow those Churches to be of Divine Institution which have Officers of Divine Appointment and are formed according to the general Directions of Christ and his Apostles so as may serve the ends of Church-Government I know not where to find a Church of Divine Institution in the world pag. 259 260. These are the words of our Author from whence we may collect many things for our Information 1. That the Bishops of the Catholique Church are the regent part thereof in the same sense that the Bishops of any National Church are the regent part of that Church For although there be no Superiority among Bishops their Power and Office being the same yet Independency among them being inconsistent with Ecclesiastical Unity both in the National and in the Universal Church they are bound to unite for the Government of both and this by Divine Command Authority and Obligation 2. That whatsoever is determined by the Bishops of the Catholick Church doth oblige all particular Bishops and all Christians all the world over provided they determine nothing contrary to the Word of God 3. That whatever Bishop shall refuse their Canons and Determinations and govern his particular Church by other Laws than they shall appoint is a Schismatick and they may Depose and Excommunicate him yea if a whole combination of Bishops do refuse to govern their National Church by their Laws Appointments and Constitutions they are all Schismaticks and if the Nation refuse to forsake such Bishops they are all Schismaticks
afraid this is all that is attainaable in this Nation yea and in the Christian world whatever our Author may say to the contrary and that those that will have more shall have less 'T is with Christian Churches as 't is with some weakly constituted bodies if no violent remedies be used they may drill out for many years but if you will be tampering and nothing will satisfie you but a perfect health you will soon destroy them If Churches that have some defects may be endured God may have some worship and we may see some peace among Christians but if like Ecclesiastical Mountebanks we will be perpetually trying experiments upon sickly and diseased Churches we may disturb the peace of Christians destroy the Churches and leave few to call upon the name of God in the world What I have discoursed I think may with some probability be expected from Mr. H.'s design But can we expect so much from the design of this Gentleman Or is there the least shadow for it For my part I can see no such thing he must have better eyes or worse than I have that can see any advantage like to betide Protestants by uniting in a General Council or in a Patriarch or Pope ruling by the Canons thereof And yet I think this is that our Author would be at For he affirms That it is not enough or sufficient to Christian Unity that the Christians of one Nation or one Congregation be united among themselves unless they be united to the Catholique Church For if there be but one Church a whole Nation may be Schismatical as well as single persons c. Well then I am past all doubt that Protestants will never agree to the Canons of a General Council nor to the Government of a Patriarch or Pope according to those Canons and then they are all Schismaticks and if the Princes in whose Dominions they live can be prevailed withal to do it they are to be Proscribed Banished sent to the Galleys and Mines or be chastised at home by Axes and Halters And I think this is a very pious and charitable Design and becoming a Protestant Doctor and Son of the Church of England But by the way give me leave to add that whereas this Gentleman hath undertaken to vindicate the Learned Dean of St. Pauls from what Mr. Humfrey hath said against him concerning the Constitutive Head of this National Church I am shrewdly afraid that he has given up the Doctor 's Cause and left it to shift for it self as well as it can or rather asserted that of his Adversary The Doctor had said That we deny any need of a Constitutive Regent part or one Formal Ecclesiastical Head as essential to a National Church This Mr. H. confutes and this Author affirms and defends but grants a pars imperans subdita or a ruling and ruled part p. 567. Church-Governours united and governing by consent says he are the governing part Christian people in obedience to the Laws of our Saviour submitting to such Government are the ruled part and all this is true without a Constitutive Regent Head pag. ibid. This methinks looks strange That the Bishops by consent which consent they are obliged to by the Laws of Christ should be the pars imperans and yet not the Constitutive Regent Head is in my opinion a Paradox For I would fain learn what it is that makes a Constitutive Regent Head to any Body Is it not Right and Obligation to Rule Doth not this make Kings and Princes Constitutive Heads of their Principalities and Kingdoms And doth not this make Aristocracies and Democracies the essential Regent part of those Commonwealths over which they do preside Have the Bishops of this Nation Right and Obligation to rule all the Christian People in it This I think our Author will grant And how he will deny them to be the Constitutive Head of the National Church with any consistency of Reason I do not yet understand This Gentleman indeed says That though a National Church be one body yet ' t is not such a body as he Mr. B. describes nor can be according to its Original Constitution which differs from Secular Forms of Government by that ancient Church-Canon of our Saviour It shall not be so among you And then adds A National Church as governed by consent may be one body in an Ecclesiastical though not in a Civil Political sense That it cannot be a Body consisting of Head and Members in a Political sense according to Mr. B's description I do not find proved by that Church-Canon of our Saviour That the Ecclesiastical and Civil Forms of Government do differ I readily grant but are there no other Differences but such as are essential A Regent formal Head and Members is of the essence of political bodies and that is no body that is without them whatever ever this Gentleman says to the contrary Many other defects are consistent with the being of Political bodies but if they want a Head they are no Body The Church differs in many things from Civil Political bodies and particularly in this that it is not armed with civil power and jurisdiction p. 566. by which I suppose this Author means Coercive power But what then Hath the Church no Constitutive Head because it hath no Coercive power or because it cannot imprison fine and destroy its members Masters and Parents and Tutors can't do these things and yet most men think they are the Regent formal Heads of their Families children and pupils Well then against that marvellous Oracle of our Author That a National Church governed by consent may be a body in an Ecclesiastical tho' not in a civil political sense i. e. tho' it may be a Church yet it cannot be a Commonwealth or Kingdom I will advance this proposition That a National Church is a body in a political sense as well as in an Ecclesiastical or else it is no body at all and that according to his own doctrine And if he will defend the Deans cause he must write a book in his own confutation which I think he ought to do in revenge on himself that he hath hitherunto betrayed it as the Dr. has the Church of England's Our Author I remember somewhere calls Mr. Humfrey Mr. Baxter's Eccho when yet Mr. Humfrey's Answer to the Drs. Book came out before Mr. Baxter's When the Eccho now can be proved to go before the Voice or the Voice to follow the Eccho then shall the Deans determination of the question between him and them concerning the Constitutive Head of the National Church be held as unanswerable as this Gentleman affirms it in one place and as admirable as he cryes it up in another Having said thus much on the behalf of Mr. H. I shall add a few lines more before I return to the vindication of the Countrey Conformist The learned D. of St. Pauls had charged the Nonconformists with joining with the Papists for a general Toleration and
out a Constitutive Head and an Ecclesiastical Constitutive Head by Christs Institution and to say that all this is true without one is to me a perfect contradiction When he goes on then p. 566. to prove that this is all that is or can be required to make a National Church One by two Arguments I answer If there be so much as this indeed required his two Arguments must prove it not onely to be One but one Political proper Church with an Ecclesiastical Constitutive Regent part to it The Bishops he says have equal power by Christs appointment and rule not by Superiority but by Consent that is not by Superiority over one another but they do rule by a Superiority I hope over the people and that is an Aristocratical Government and when the People do consent to Unite in Communion with them this makes them Members he says of that Political body And these are his two reasons p. 566 and 567. which need no other Animadversion but this notice of them The great questions onely are whether this indeed be the will of Christ that the Catholick and so every National Church as he states the matter should be ruled by these Bishops as Colleagues that is by a Government as he calls it by consent and if it be how it should come to pass that we have not in England such a Government where there is for certain no such Rule by consent of the Colledg without a Superiority but by a Superiority or a Supremacy of the King who is the Head of these Bishops themselves as well as the Nation This I make not my Province P. 568. He hath four things for the strengthning the Government of his Mintage and then concludes that if Mr. Baxter can give him one reason why this may not be called one Church or Ecclesiastical Body Politick without a Constitutive Regent part he will think farther of it To which I answer and tell him presently why this cannot be called one Church or Ecclesiastical Body Politick without a Constitutive Regent part the reason is because it is a Body Politick Ecclesiastical with a Constitutive Regent part and so he need think no farther of it And this Answer being of another nature then that which he fancies like to be made him in the next page p. 569. I need say nothing to that nor the next p. 570. but come on to p. 571. for now he hath prepared the way as he says to justify the Doctor Well where there is a Political Church says Mr. Baxter there must be a Constitutive Head The Doctor answers there may be the true notion of a Church without one I Reply This is a coming off but the question indeed at the bottome is whether it be the true notion of the Church of England The Doctor argues If it be necessary that every Church must have a Constitutive Regent part as essential to it then it unavoidably follows that there must be a Catholick Visible Head to the Church Catholick Visible This Argument the Deans Defender thinks unanswerable But we reply the Argument is such as needs no Answer and it may easily be Answered In the first place it needs no Answer because the thing it would prove is but what we can grant him that is a Visible Head to the Catholick Church Christ is that Head we say and he is Visible When he was on earth he gave Laws for his Church and Commissionated Officers which are Rights of a Head He after appeared to Paul and Commissionated him and is now Visible in Heaven This is plain proof in Reason Sense and Scripture and not to be jeered off and therefore in the first place the Doctors Argument needs no Answer In the next place we say farther it is easily Answered for we deny the Argument If it be necessary for a Church to have a Constitutive Head it follows that the Catholick Church must have a Constitutive one but it follows not that it must have a Catholick Visible Head or that that Constitutive Head must be Visible This in truth is introducing four Terms into the Argument which we know is false Arguing When there is put more into the thing Asserted in the Consequence then there is to prove it in the Antecedent in an Hypothetical Syllogisme it is all one as to argue with four terms in a Syllogism that is Categorical But the Doctor says he puts more strength in it The question is about the Catholick Church whereof particular Churches are parts and they being Visible do require the Constitutive Regent part to be Visible I Answer though here be more words here is no more strength put into the Argument I still deny the Consequence For though the Catholick Church consists of Particular Churches which are Visible it consists also of that society in heaven which is not Visible Christs Body is but one Body whereof part is in Heaven and part on Earth and while the Head is in Heaven it follows not that because part of the Body is Visible therefore the Head must be Visible It is all one as if he should argue thus Particular Churches are on Earth and if Christ be Head of the Catholick Church whereof they are parts he must not be in Heaven And when indeed this is one and the same Argument and we know it to be false we do justly deny the Doctors Argument Suppose a man so high as that his head reached above the clouds will you argue that this person hath no head because his head is not visible I deny the Argument There is really nothing hard in the Doctors Argument but to understand why his Defender whom I value for his Parts should come to think it unanswerable It may be the Doctors confident word at first it undenyably follows drew on this apprehension and he hath fetcht the Argument over so long till he hath put enough in it to make himself believe it We are far says he from asserting that the Universal Head must be Visible if the Subordinate be so he should be as far from asserting the Head to be Visible because Particular Churches or the Members are so but this we assert that if no Church can be a true Visible Church without a Subordinate Visible Head then the Universal Church cannot be a Visible Church without a Subordinate Catholick Visible Head p. 574 575 576. This he takes to be the Doctors Argument and he will make the consequence hold before he has done with it But against whom does the Doctor and this man argue Is it not against Mr. Bexter and did Mr. Baxter ever say this that there can be no true Church without a Subordinate Head under Christ Is not Mr. Baxter a Protestant as well as the Doctor and do they not both maintain the Catholick Church to have one onely Supreme Head and no Subordinate one in Earth If his Defender hath found out one who is not the Pope but the Colledge of Bishops I desire Doctor Stillingfleet
formed of an Independent National Church Political but not to be held as the Congregationalist supposes his Particular Independent One and They their Catholick to be of Divine but of Humane Institution for it is manifestly a thing Accidental to the Church of Christ that the Supream Magistrate and the whole Body of a Nation are Christian It should be declared then in such a Bill of Act of Parliament that the Church of England consists of the King as the Head and all the several Assemblies of the Protestants as the Body A Discrimination between the Tolerable and Intolerable is never to be gain-said by any Wise Man It is not for me or any One persons but a Convocation or Parliament to prescribe the Terms of National Communion but I would have all our Assemblies that are Tolerable to be made Legal by such an Act and thereby parts of the National Church as well as the Parochial Congregations That the Bishops should be declared Ecclesiastical Officers under the KING acting Circa Sacra only by Vertue of His Authority and Commission As Jehoshophat appointed Officers for Government in the Matters of God and the Kings Matters So should the Bishops be in Our Ecclesiastical as the Judges are in Civil Matters the Substitutes of his Majesty and Execute His Jurisdiction Upon this Account if any of the Eminent among the Non-conformists were Chosen to be Bishops they could not refuse it Let two or three the most fit of those Parties be the next that are called to this Function upon such an Act an commanded to Hold it and then would UNION indeed Commence Their Work in general should be to Supervise the Churches of both sorts in their Diocesses that they all Walk according to their own Order agreeable to the Gospel and the Peace of one another I am sensible unto what Distress a Congregational Minister may be brought in the exercise of Discipline over some potent turbulent and refractory Members and what Relief he might find in such a 〈…〉 al Ecclesiastical Officer as this I am sensible how the many inconveniences supposed of Congregational Episcopacy by this one onely means may be salved This shall Advance and not Lessen the outward Power and Honour of the Bishops I humbly Motion a Third Clerk for the Convocation to be added to the Two in every Diocess and chose out of the Non-conformists for the Unanimous prosecution of Holiness and Concord throughout all the Churches And the two Provinces of Canterbury and York should Unite in this Convocation for the making them one National Church and not two Provincial ones in a diverse Assembly By this means should one Organ more be added to this great Political Society for deriving an influence from this Head to these parts of the Body as well as Others which now seem neglected and to have no care taken of them It were the part of such a Convocation to Decree that neither Church should Unchurch one another That no members of Either should depart from One Church to the Other without a sufficient peaceable reason That when a man hath his choice to be of One Church which he will in regard to Fixed Communion he should Occasionally come also to the Other for maintaining this National Union There are these and other things of such a nature as these I should expect then would be moulded into Canons that kindly preventing all our scruples would render the Nation happy in the satisfaction of both Parties An Act of Parliament to this purpose would make the Church of England to be in Earnest such a Church as the Church-men would have us still think it the Best Constituted the most Exemplary and the most Glorious of any that is or indeed that well can be in this World But is not all this at last too Erastian I answer No. We suppose that every Parish where there is a Pastor and a Flock does contain in it such a Particular Church as is of Christs Institution That Christ committed to every such Church a compleat power of Doctrine Worship and Discipline That what Christ hath committed to his Church cannot be taken away by any That the Authority of the Magistrate is for care and oversight and so to protect and maintain this power but not to destroy it That the Church as National and Diocesan as part of the National and Parochial qua Parochial as part of the Diocesan are of Humane institution and owe their power and preservation of it to the Supream Magistrate That as the Magistrate does not take away or invade but preserve the power of the Keys invested in the Miinster but given with the Pastor himself to the Church No more can the Diocesans that Derive from him assume it to themselves and deprive the Particular Churches of it That so long as this Power is preserved there is no Erastianism maintained as to a Particular Church and as to the National there is no danger of it And thus I have offered my Mite to the Sanctuary that is so much as I have and what I think fit for Cultivation by Others whom GOD shall make Wise-hearted and Concern'd for the Welfare of Sion There is Room also here left for the farther Invention of Such in regard to many the like things as or greater then these For they that will may see something more in a few Sheets in part Entituled Animadversions upon the Debate between Dr. Stillingfleet and Mr. Baxter Concerning the National Church and Head of it J. H. THE END