all the Members thereof how much more Vniversall practise This the Adversaries of Episcopall-government whether they be of the Classicall or Congregationall way turn off with a light finger as if it had no weight in it or as if the Apostle had said nothing in alledging the Customes of the Church Scripture is the onely thing they will be tryed by We refuse not to meet them there but let them consider that they come against the Established authority of their own Nationall Church against the custome and practise not onely of that but of all the Churches of God and there are bound to bring plain and expresse Scripture to demonstrate that Episcopacy or such a superiority over other inferiour Pastors or meere Presbyters is directly unlawfull for else the Custome and Practise of the Churches by the Apostles rule must be observed so long as in force i. e. till due Authority change them supposing they are changeable and that it is in the power of the present Church to change them It were well the Adversaries of the Episcopall Function would yeild more Authority to Universall Practise or Tradition of the Churches of God at least in their respect to some points they will acknowledge themselves bound to maintaine As first That Scripture is the Word of God I do not ask upon what grounds they finally believe this themselves but how they would maintaine it against Heathen or Jew and perswade them to it but upon the witnesse of universall Tradition which speaks to the conviction of all men upon the ground of common Sense or Reason as abovesaid 2. or Secondly That the observation of the Lords day comes from the Apostles How would they convince such a one as Mr. Trask was by the places of Scripture mentioning the Apostles meeting upon the first day of the week or that place which names the Lords day Rev. 1. which might be on Easter day the annuall Lords day He according to the doctrine of these men slighting the Witnesse of Universall Tradition or Practise found nothing in Scripture expresse but the Commandement for the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath so obstinately held for that till he was reclaimed by the labour and travail of our learned Bishops and made to see how the continued and undeniable practise of the whole Church did clearely shew those passages in Scripture were intimations of this practise then beginning and that their observing of the Seventh day or Jewish Sabbath for they observed that too as occasion served was but in complyance with the Jewes for a time while the Temple stood In like manner the Universall practice of the Church the best interpreter of Scripture where there is not any place of it so plaine as to take away all gainsaying tells us those passages we shew in Scripture for this Government contain so many intimations and sometimes exercises of that Episcopall power which should continue in the Church after the Apostles and assures us those other instances brought by the Adversaries against that Function cannot inferre any other way of Government And therefore we had good cause to say above Episcopall Government was conformable to Gods Word which is our second consideration §. XIV Episcopall government conformable to the word Secondly then take we a briefe survey of the Grounds on both sides which yet I cannot in reason enter upon without asking leave to suppose it possible which never was seen in any particular that Universall Tradition or Practise can be contrary unto Scripture but yeilding that as possible to the Adversaries it is cleare they are bound as abovesaid to demonstrate this Practise or Government is against Scripture and that their way is peremptorily there prescribed How impossible it is for them to do this appeares at first sight by their severall judgements upon the passages of Scripture concerning Church-government Some of them look upon these passages and think they see a Classicall or Presbyterian others of them look upon them and are as strongly perswaded they see a Congregationall or Independent way Where 's the clear Evidence then which they pretend against Episcopall Government To examine their chiefe Instances briefly and plainly for the satisfaction of ordinary Capacities make the triall of those that are alledged for the Classicall way because that pretends to more regularity and to a better foundation than the other Their Instances are from the mention made in Scripture of Presbytery and Presbyters or Elders and the name of Bishop applyed to them We read 1 Tim. 4. 14. the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery But what evidence is there in this to demonstrate that the power of ordination was put into the hands of meer Presbyters For first it is a question whether this laying on of hands was for ordination here or for some other purpose Secondly when that is granted it is a question whether the word Presbytery here implies the office to which Timothy was ordained or the Persons ordaining him for both interpretations are admitted Thirdly admit the Persons ordaining are meant yet never can it be proved they were meer Presbyters for besides that the word Presbytery or Eldership included the Apostles and all the chief Rulers of the Church 1 Pet. 5. 1. who am also an Elder and John Ep. 2. v. 1. Ep. 3. v. 1. the Elder St. Paul saith expresly he laid hands on Timothy 2 Tim. 1. 6. Neither can they in all Scripture give one instance of Imposition of hands for Ordination permitted to meere Presbyters alone So for the places alledged by them mentioning Bishops and Deacons onely as the Ministers of the Church Phil. 1. 1. or calling them first Elders and then presently Bishops Tit. 1. 5. 8. Acts 20. 17. 28. If we say that in these and the like places those first Elders set in the Churches newly planted were Bishops properly or that the Elders or Bishops there mentioned were of both sorts some Bishops properly some inferiour Presbyters the Adversaries could disprove neither part evidently or if in the third place we should grant them what they aime at that these were onely Presbyters it would be nothing to the purpose unlesse they could directly shew the power of Ordination and Government over those Churches fully committed to them For supposing those Elders to be such Presbyters the name Bishop might be appliable to any of them in as much as he had over-sight of any flock which Name was appropriated after to the more Generall Pastor who had oversight of the Presbyters and particular Flocks or Congregations within such Precincts And what marvail is it if the distinction of these two sorts of Elders or Bishops did not nay could not appeare so clearly in the beginning of the new planted Churches and whilst the Apostles were on earth governing the Churches as it did after the Churches were enlarged and the Apostles gone off Then clearly appeared who succeeded them and how far in that ordinary power which was to continue
Churches as Jerusalem Antioch Rome Ephesus Corinth and this practice and succession setled before St. John the Apostle dyed All which as it clearly shewes those severall Angels of the severall Churches to whom our Saviour by Saint John did write could be no other then such Bishops having chief care of and rule in those Churches therfore more chargeable with the Corruptions prevailing in them So doth it clearly convince that plea of the Adversaries which amounts to a charging the first Bishops with Usurpation and invasion upon the right of Presbyters or particular Congregations to be a conceit altogether unreasonable for it is beyond all Imagination that Saint John would have suffered such an invasion or that those first Bishops who conversed with the Apostles and were their disciples should make such an invasion and immediately subvert the Apostolicall order pretended for the Presbyterian Consistory Or that those first Bishops being holy men and many of them Martyrs for still we finde the heathen Persecutors sought chiefly after the Bishop of the Church that the chief Pastor being smitten the flock might be more easily scattered should be so ambitious and unjust or lastly that the Presbyters then should be so tame as not once to complain of the wrong done them or to transmit their Protestation against it to Posterity To conclude this Tryal by Scripture It comes to this issue The Adversaries were bound to shew direct Authority of Scripture against Episcopal Government it being in possession established by the continued Authority of this Nationall Church and which is more by the perpetuall practice of the Catholick Church against this it was expected they should bring some places of Scripture forbidding that power of Ordination and Jurisdiction to be committed to speciall hands such as Bishops properly taken or commending it to the Consistory of Presbyters or some instances at least of that power exercised by such a company Whereas all they can evince out of Scripture is that there were Presbyters strictly so taken and of the inferiour rank which being granted them we shew there was a Prelacy still over such Presbyters still there were special men that had an inspection and rule over them and when the Apostles went off the practise of the Church shewes the power was left in the hands of special men called Bishops properly So that the Government of the Church by Bishops appears as was said above conformable not onely to the Universal practise of the Church after the Apostles time but also to the Word of God i.e. to the practise and patterns we have there 1. of our Saviour appointing twelve Apostles and besides and under them seventy Disciples of a lower rank 2. of Apostolical practise by which we find the power exercised by special Elders viz. the Apostles themselves or other choice men appointed thereunto by them whereas all Elders had power of the Ministry of the Word and Sacraments 3. of the several Angels of the several Churches to whom the Epistles were directed Rev. c. 2. 3. which is the last instance in holy Writ to this purpose §. XV Episcopacy most agreeable to the reason of Church-government Lastly The Government of the Church by Bishops was said above to be most agreeable to the reason of Church-government for preserving Unity and excluding Schism This is very obvious in the writings of the Fathers St. Cyprian had much to do with the Novatian Schismaticks of his time which caused him to write many Epistles upon that occasion and a Book intituled De Vnitate Ecclesiae wherein he shewes the Unity of the Church as to the preventing of Schisme stands much upon this that there be one Bishop in one Church St. Hierom whom they of the Presbyterian perswasion take for their best friend because he strives to advance the Order of Presbyters as much as he can yet as he denies the power of Ordination belongs to Presbyters so he acknowledges that Bishops were appointed over Presbyters to keep out Faction and Schism that the people should not say as they did at Corinth I am of Paul I of Apollos I of this Teacher I of that And for his saying of Presbyters that they did anciently communi consilio with joint advice rule the Churches is not to be understood exclusivè to the Bishop for such a time was never known in the Church but joyntly with him as his Council so were the Presbyteri Civitatis to the Bishop and their advice was more used and there was more cause for it before the many Canons and decrees of Councils gave rule in most particulars what the Bishop should do as it was by that time S. Jerom wrote and whatever he saith for the advancing of the order of Presbyters it is but to set them above all Deacons even those that immediately attended on the Bishop and it seems carried themselves too high it is not to equal them to Bishops whose Prelacy St. Jerome acknowledged and thought it very necessary for this purpose of keeping out Schism which the Parity of Presbyters would expose it to And I would appeale to the reason of any of that perswasion whether it were not more convenient and necessary for keeping all in order to have one aged grave learned and experienced in the way of the Church to be the standing Moderator of the Classis or company of Presbyters than to change their Moderator year by year and leave the place open to every young unexperienc'd Presbyter that can make a faction to advance him unto it I have heard this inconvenience complained on by some of the new erected Classes whereas a Bishop being such a Moderator as is fixed and above all competition is more enabled to keep all ordinary Presbyters in their station and within their bounds And then again I would demand whether the Apostles who complained of Divisions as in the Church of Corinth and of false Teachers there and elswhere were not careful to provide the most reasonable Expedient in government against them It cannot be denyed and upon this score and to this very end of preserving Schism it cannot be thought otherwise but that the Apostles gave beginning to this Government throughout the Church 1. Notwithstanding those of the Classicall perswasion bear themselves much upon Mr. Blondels Collections whose pains might have been better implyed to the use of the Church upon some other Argument For in this it is impossible to drive out of Antiquity though ransaked over again any more to the purpose of the Presbyterian claim than has been already acknowledged and the weakness of it discovered viz. That it seems to be the judgement of some Fathers that the name Bishop was at first common to all Elders and that those Bishops mentioned Phil. 1. 1. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. were Presbyters or Elders of the second rank But what advantage is this to the cause they would establish without proving also that the power of Ordination and Government which we appropriate to
Requests that he knows are made in publique and God who is not taken with words or varying of the phrase will hear him as he did the penitent Son who thought and resolved before-hand what to confesse what to beg I will go and say Luke 15. 18. and accordingly he said when he came into his Fathers presence And as our Saviour prayed thrice saying the same words Mat. 26. 44. so let the same affections and desires of the heart return or be present they may again be uttered in the same form of words And if the forms of the publique Service do contein as we said above they do in generall all the requests fitting to be made then may they still be used for the expressing such requests and desires Here that they may seem to say something rather than nothing they reply That prayer of the penitent Son though set and before composed was his own and so was that prayer of our Saviour though set and in the same words repeated but the set Forms of the Church are not his prayers that ministers in the Congregation If he would utter his own prayers though set and before prepared they would joyn with him for then they conceive he prayes what the Lord has put into his minde whether upon former premeditation or present conception These seem to be the most reasonable of all those that are against the set Forms of the Church for they see Reason to allow the people to pray in set Forms of other mens making and the Minister to pray in set Forms of his own but not anothers composing Now if they would well examine this they would see little Reason upon such a difference to quarrel with Authority and abstein from the publick Worship of God in his Church For no ground in Scripture can they have of such a distinction much lesse warrant upon such a pretended difference to abstein from Church Communion Also by this reason the Minister should not use the Lords prayer because not of his own composing Again this is to place the substance and effect of prayer in Frame of Words rather than in matter or things prayed for and the suitable affections of the heart both which may be found right in using Forms composed by others For the matter of the Church Forms it is plain there is nothing but according to the will of God and if he that uses them prepare his heart with suitable affections God requires no more The prophet bids Take words with yow and say Take away all Iniquity c. Hos. 14. 2. If then the heart be prepared with such motions and desires as are fitting for Confession and petition is it so materiall whence we take the words either suggested to us by others as it is there or invented by our selves Surely if the people can better understand the things prayed for and better prepare their hearts with suitable affections when the set Forms of the Church are used than they can when they hear the Ministers Prayer which they can by reason Those Forms contein all necessary requests better than any one mans prayer can probably do and because the publique prayers being necessarily expressed in generals the people ought still from those general Confessions or Petitions to reflect upon their own particular Sinnes Infirmities Wants and Desires it is therefore most reasonable the people have the Publique prayers in the Set forms with which they are best acquainted which speaks the expediency following II. They are not Lawful but Expedient too in publick Every particular man as he best knowes his private Necessities so he may expresse them in private to God as his heart suggests but in publique it is necessary that the requests of and for the whole Congregation should be in general expressions such as may comprehend the necessities and concernments of all and it is needful this be done in set forms prudently and godlily composed not left to the conceptions and inventions of so many thousands as minister in this Nationall Church and are to be the Mouth of the Congregation to God for though some may do it discreetly yet would many inconveniences follow through the different performance of others 1. Want of Uniformity in the publique Worship of the same Church 2. Defect often in not putting up all the requests which are fitting to be made not doing all that is fit to be done at publique meetings to the glory and worship of God 3. Many Impertinencies Tautologies in expression sometimes unfitness and unlawfulness of that which is spoken such as the Congregation cannot say Amen to A difference there is betwixt Liberty in this performance of publique worship and of preaching for the Worship and Prayers are presented immediately to God himself but preaching though it treats of things pertaining to God yet speaks to the people To the Prayers of the Church the whole Congregation is to say Amen but that which is delivered in preaching falls under trial and examination whether it be so For providing and delivering a Sermon to the people they have liberty of time as they please of using what means help they please but as for the putting up the prayers of the Congregation wheresoever there is a despising of set Forms and an expectation of private Conceptions from the Minister there the former inconveniences will often be run into by some through self-conceit of Gifts and Pride of shewing them in variety of Expressions and length of Prayers by others through disability and weakness yet thinking themselves concerned in reputation to follow the former to attempt the like way of a seeming extemporary long Prayer Notwithstanding they plead for Liberty in using the spiritual Gifts they have to the edifying of the Church for to that end they are given and the Apostle bids to use them to that purpose 1 Cor. 14. True but first they must observe a difference between the Gifts then and now and know that all were to be used with submission to the Church The Gifts then were extraordinary by special aâ—â—lation or revelation of the spirit spiritual gifts now are ordinary from the operation and motion indeed of the same spirit but upon use of means Therefore they which strive to order their Assemblies according to the particular passages of that Chapter doing in them as then was used cause great confusion and ridiculous deportment in their holy meetings But secondly if the Apostle give restraints there as he doth to those spiritual gifts though extraordinary that they be used with submission to the Church as is thought fit for order and edification much more the use of Gifts now ought to be limited Else may women that are gifted take the liberty of using them in the Church but the Apostle saw Reason to impose Silence upon them in the same Chapter or at least every man that has gifts may use them as some now plead for the Liberty to the edification of the Church but many of
acknowledgement of that speciall exhibition Christ makes of himselfe there and in sense of his own unworthiness what Christian that understands himself could accuse these of superstition and Popery or not rather approve them as significant and seemly expressions of Christian devotion There is a Custom of uncovering the head at the coming in of light if this be done with thankfulnesse of soul for the light of the Gospel and desire of enjoying the light of heaven what harm Is it not lawfull yea Christian-like to glorify God on all occasions for the comming in of the light is but an occasional remembrance Let me put it to them farther should a Papist when he uncovers the head or bows the body at the sight of a Crosse doe it out of hearty thankfulness to God for redemption by Christ Crucified making the Crosse no object of the Worship but only the sight of it an occasionall remembrance and motive would there be any thing in this unbeseeming a Christian I cannot but say it concerns a Christian often to remember and thankfully to acknowledge Gods mercies upon any occasion and if the inward worship which stands in such due acknowledgments of the heart may upon occasionall remembrances be given then may the outward expression also by uncovering the head or bowing the body unlesse prudence out of respect of time or place forbid it for Religion will not And to come a little more home to those that are so ready to cry superstition should any one of them escape a shipwrack or hazard of battail or be redeemed out of Turkish slavery and so oft as he hears of other mens suffering in any of these kindes or so oft as he sees a ship safe in harbour or lookes on the Armour he wore in that battel or on the Chain he bore in Captivity should be so oft uncovering his head lift up his heart to God in thankfull acknowledgement of the blessing and desire of farther Protection would there be any thing in this but what beseems a good Christian when as neither words heard nor things seen are made any object of the worship but accasionall remembrances and motives How much rather may this be done when we hear that name which carries salvation in it see those things which minde us of the greatest mercies and therefore may move us and all this the more if the Prudence and Authority of the Ch has so determined I have enlarged this discourse to instances beyond the enjoyned Rites and practises of this Church to meet with that vain plea of superstition and Popery charged upon it for the better countenancing of the Schism made and the sacriledge committed in these our dayes §. XXII Cause of their several Error that have divided from this Church To winde up all By that which has been said it may appear what is the Cause of this Error which carries so many such severall wayes from the Communion of this Church and what the Issue of it The Cause is their misunderstanding of the Rule by which they should be guided First of the supreme Rule the Scripture which for faith and substance of worship is a set and punctuall Rule not so for other matters of practice Secondly of the next and as I may say Secundary Rule the witnesse of Vniversall Custome practice or Tradition which as unfolded above 2. 13. is the best externall proof of Scripture so also the best expositor of it bringing down nothing as of the substance of Faith and Worship but what is clearly grounded on Scripture and giving clear light to those darker passages in scripture which concern the beginnings of some Practises which were to continue in the Church as Infant◠baptism Observation of Lords day Easter Pentecost Episcopal Government Thirdly thein misunderstanding of the Authority of the present Church defining in matters of faith and worship according to direct Scripture and decreeing in other matters according to prudence but in both having respect to and in a due sort guided by Vniversal consent or Tradition of the Catholique Church viz. the Doctrines that have been always taught and the Customes or Practices alwayes observed therein For let men forsake the guidance of these Rules and what remains but the extravagancie of a private judgement and what can follow but error upon error and what can be the issue of that but remedilesse consasion Hence have we so many private interpretations of Scripture broached instead of Catholick doctrine Circumstantials of Worship taken for Substance and thereupon the lawfull Worship of the Church ignorantly charged with Superstition And for matters of Practice some will have all practices observed they meet with in Scrip Some not all but not any else save what is there Lastly upon the like mis-understanding they cast out the perpetuall government of the Church but cannot agree what to set up in this as in many other things following their private judgement destitute of the guidance of the former Rules and therefore upon necessity disagreeing one destroying what the other would build yet all pretending for Satan is here an Angel of light to set up the Discipline Scepter and Kingdome of Christ and to advance Purity of Religion This was the pretence of all Schismaticks and it is the Master-piece of Satans cunning as above noted 8. to set men on work under that pretence but with mis-guided zeal to purge reform refine a Church and to out-strip others in that zeal till they have brought all to confusion But we should not be ignorant of his devices as the Apostle warns them in a case not much unlike 2 Cor. 2. 11. for Satan was there playing his part as an Angel of light under the pretence and covert of severity and strictnesse against the Incestuous person as he did after in the Novation Schismaticks These his devices we might indeed have seen in those Ancient Schismaticks Montanists Novatians Donatists and in those more irregular of the last Age Anabaptists Libertines Familists and the like whose Errors and Follies were well silenced by Learned Protestant Writers but now broken out again when that which did let the Civil and Ecclesiastical Authority was taken away or so weakned that it could not stop the inundation of former Errors and exorbitant phansies flowing back upon us from every corner into which they had retired and working apparently to confusion to a levelling upon levelling as in the State so in the Church-government and affairs The consideration of the first is not to my present purpose but as for the businesse of the Church and Religion I cannot but note How they who first pretended to Reformation by Covenant obliging themselves and others and conceiving that Cov. in such generall terms as might engage men of all sects and perswasions to joyn with them in pulling down what was establisht invading the means and revenues belonging to Cathedral Churches did not or would not I pray God they may yet see Satans device by like principles
their or the like Principles may in time consider it and not think it enough to say the Lord be glorified because they prosper and are become rich but rather enquire whether that they have done be as to their private advantage and gain so to the behoofe of Gods Church and the advancement of true Religion and whether the Lord to whom they have so oft appealed by their Fasts and Thanksgivings can indeed own their doings as making for his glory certainly the Lord must deny himself which he will not do if he own Injustice Schisme and Sacriledge Hee forbeares a while and keepes silence for Causes best known to himself and men prospering by those sins think he is such a one as themselves approving their doings but he will reprove them and set before them what they have done He will appeare and they shall be ashamed If such considerations as these prevaile not with them that doe gain by the formentioned sins yet let the word of exhortation take hold upon you all you that have followed the Schism in the simplicity of your hearts not engaged by any design of gain or self-interest but only deceived with the pretence of Purity in Gods worship and of strictnesse of life Doe not make your selves guilty of other mens sins sins that cannot stand with Righteousnesse or that Charity which the Apostle requires so strictly 1 Cor. 13. without which all your other supposed Purity Faith or Knowledge is nothing will stand you in no stead Consider sadly how those you follow have led you from the Unity of this your Nationall Church and thereby from the profession of Catholick Primitive Truth from Obedienee to your lawfull Governors and Guides who bore the same Office taught the same Doctrine held the same way of publick Worship as did those martyrd Bishops in Primitive Times as did also those other in Queene Marie's dayes How I say they have led you from this Catholique Communion into a way of which whether Classicall or Congregationall we see the late and irregular beginning it being but the product of some tumultuary Reformations made in France Geneva Holland or Scotland and by those that would be contentious here imitated and violently attempted to the disturbance of this Church not without the down-right guilt of Schism and Sacriledge Consider it sadly and do as those Confessors did who being led away by the Novation Schismaticks under like pretence of purity and strictness as soon as they perceived their error confessed it and returned to the Unity of the Catholick Church as St. Cyprian often relates and propounds it as an example and motive for Unity Do you so and then may you obteine what you pretend was your aim and desire Purity and righteousnesse indeed which you cannot in the way of Schisme by reason it holds not a perfect Rule of Righteousness but such as is strict in denying small things and flying appearances of Evill but large in admitting great Offences teaching to straine at Gnats and swallow Camells to scruple at a Rite and Ceremony but makes no bones of Disobedience Schisme Sacriledge and so necessarily leaves your Consciences while ye are in that Communion defiled with your partaking in such sinnes But return into the Unity of this Church and shew your Communion with it in the publique worship of God Liturgy and Sacrament then may you perfect Holinsse in the feare of God and with good Conscience peforme all the parts of Purity and Righteousnesse And do it in Gods name according to all the Duties he requires of you and according to all the opportnuities he puts into your hands So will your Purity and Righteousnesse exceed that of the Pharisees and as many as walk after this Rule Peace be on them and Mercy and on the Israel of God Amen The End It holds the truth between Romanists and Sectaries In Catholick Practice and Tradition In the visible and invisible condition of the Church The Article touching the Church In the Papal Infallibility and private judgment In the due subordination of Pastors and Governors National-Church Reformation Publick or Private Actual Non-communion Schisme Difference of it in regard of the parties between which Difference in degrees of it Iust cause for Reformation Trial of a Church as to a safe communion with it A necessary Rule Such authority in the nationall Ch of Engl. VVhat makes a Church Christian Orthodox Protestant and reformed we have not cast off the Faith received Bishop of Rome his pretence to universall jurisdiction Impossible to make it good His special pretence to jurisdiction over this Chur Conclusion of the whole case as it stands with the Roman Church Difference 'twixt just and distempered Reformations 1. Church Government 2. Church Authority in making Decrees Orders 3. Force of Church-Custome 4. Vnion of charity 5. Admonition and rejection of Hereticks and Schismaticks Application of the Premises VVant of Purity Ancient Schismaticks had like pretence of purity VVhat is meant by a Bishop Force of universall practise or Catholick Tradition Presbytery Elders and Bishops Of the first Elders set in the Church by the Apostles No example or precept in Scripture for the Adversaries pretension The alteration of Church-government from Presbyterian to Episcopall not imaginable Of other reformed Churches which have not Bishops Our Liturgy how agreeing with the Mass-book Lawfulnesse of set Formes Expediency of set Forms in publick Expediency of Set Formes in publique Spirituall gifts to be used but with submission to the Chur Lords Prayer undervalued neglected Not burthensome or superstitious Vse of Ceremonies significant Standing up at Creed Ring in Marriage Cross in Baptisme Kneeling at the Sacrament Bowing at the name Circumstantialls of VVorship Objective terminations of VVorship and Circumstantiall Instances Confusion the Issue of Error having passed due bounds Confusion levelling upon levelling Self-Condemnation of the Pharisees How it concernes these days Gods Iudgements on Schism and Sacriledge VVhy God suffers Error so much to prevaile against Truth Confusion of boundless Error Punished often with its owne pretences Exhort to all that truly desire Purity which cannot be had truly in the state of Schisme
under Ecclesiasticall Censures The ancient Church pretended to no more had no other way or means of preserving Unity as said Treat 1. c. 13. When we ask of Those that dissent from this Church in following their own sense or interpretation of Scripture Who shall judge The Papists think we then come into their Road and oppose their Plea to our Sectaries But we are still in the midst between them Not establishing a Papal Infallible Judge nor allowing Private Judgment to stand against the Publick Not calling them to be tryed at Rome as if that Church should judge for all but to submit to the Publick Judgment of this National Church of which they were Members and in which there is such power as is said of judging for others and of censuring or binding the obstinate Gainsayers as Treat 2. c. 1. nu 36. If it be objected There was such Authority in the Governours of this Church before Reformation how then could Private Judgement take place against them to introduce the Reformation We answer It is possible there may be cause of dissenting from the chiefe Governours of the Church and that Reformation may take its first rise from Private Judgement as Tr. 1. c. 9. but then to be managed with all peaceable moderation and subjection as is there shewn and more largely Tr. 2. c. 1. Now whether our Reformation took rise from some private judgement intimated to them in Authority or from the immediate inclination and judgment of those that had the Authority it is not materiall seeing all was carryed peaceably and the work done not against but by those that were the chiefe Governours in the Church V. As for that due Subordination of Pastors and Governours in the Church seen and set forth in the true ancient Episcopal Government it is wronged on both sides The first invasion was made upon it by Papal usurpation under the title of Vniversal Bishop or Pastor which in the judgement of Gregory the first is to make him in effect the onely Bishop and all others but his Ministers as the same Gregory declared against John of Constantinople affecting that Title and cleared himselfe and his Predecessors from assuming it to themselves But it was not long ere his Successors challenged and obtained it and ever since have used it to the vassalage of Christian Bishops where they will suffer themselves to be so abused On the other side every Sect risen in these dayes has lift up a hand to pull down that office and power making spoil of the Means and Maintenance thereunto belonging The Church of England in her Reformation did according to the Universall Practice of the Church retain the Episcopal Government vindicating it from Papal Usurpation and is now put to defend it against the invasion of all other Sects which therefore stand convinced of down-right Schisme as will appear below I have the longer stayed upon these Instances because they doe much tend to the clearing of the businesse in hand Now more particularly to the Case which is thus in generall resolved §. III. Resolution of the case The true Protestant Church of ENGLAND is unjustly charged with Schisme by the ROMAN for that Division which followed between them upon the Reformation But does justly charge all other Sects with Schisme which have divided from it since that Reformation There are three words to speak of here by way of Explication 1. National Church for we have often spoken in the Treatises and still shall speak of the Church of England as of a Nationall Church That therefore is to be accounted a Nationall Church which has in it the whole subordination of Church governments as the third Councel of Carth. Can. 2. Provinciae quae primas sedes habent viz. One Primate with severall Bishops Priests and Deacons Whether the extent of it be bounded with the Limits of the Nation or according to the Precincts appointed by the Ancient Councils or the Supreme Civil Power Every Congregation nay every House may bear the name of a Church the Church in their hâ—use Rom. 16. 5. but as part onely of and in subordination to the National Church So the Churches of Ephesus Rome Corinth upon the first planting of Christianity in these Cities began in a singular Congregation but being inlarged to a due fulnesse had every of them the exercise or practise of that whole subordination of power and Government II. For the word Reformation We must distinguish between that which is Publick or Nationall the reformation of a whole Church in forbidding and casting out errors or Corruptions in beliefe or practice and that which is Private or particular the Reformation of a mans self in not admitting or ceasing to professe Errors prevailing or imposed by the Church of which he is a Member or in which he was baptized and Educated upon which Reforming of himselfe may follow a dividing from that Church by Excommunication or at least by Non-communion III. Touching the words Schisme or dividing of Communion we must distinguish Actual non-communion or want of Actual Communion with a Church from Schisme or the guilt of Schisme The first which is want of Actual communion may happen between two Nationall Churches disagreeing in some practises and that disagreement followed with too much heat as Tr. 1. c. 17 18. and sometimes between a Church and particular Members of it through mis-informations passion exasperations But Schisme is a wilfull i.e. voluntary causles dividing or separating from those we ought to hold Communion with And as before said of Non-communion so observe that the guilt of Schisme may fall either upon a Nationall Church causlesly dividing from or refusing to hold communion with other Churches or else upon the Members and parts of a National Church withdrawing their obedience from their lawfull Pastors or Governours and dividing from them and the Congregations under them setting up a distinct communion or joyning themselves to any such elsewhere set up The case between the Churches of England and of Rome stands according to the first consideration of Schisme as it falls between two Nationall Churches and if the division which followed upon the Reformation must be call'd Schism we shall see in examining the cause of our Reformation that the guilt of it falls on them not us But the case between the Church of England and other Sects which have divided from it stands according to the second consideration of Schism between a Nationall Church and the Members thereof Which dividing from it stand guilty of the highest degree of disobedience unto their Governours and the highest breach of Charity both towards their Governours and also all the people of God continuing in obedience to and Communion with them Lastly there are degrees in the height and guilt of Schism A Schism by a bare recess from the Communion of an established Church setting up a distinct Communion from it but leaving it in its own condition and establishment