Clergy will but forbid them See I beseech you worthy Country-men what sort of men and Doctrine you have to do with § 52. And why doth the man talk only against different practice Doth he not know that Government commandeth duty as well as forbiddeth the contrary Is not Omission against Government as well as Commission If the King command Taxes Military service c. may we disobey and call it Passive obedience What if the Bishops only forbid us to confess Christ to come to Church to Pray to give Alms to do any good May we forbear sobeit we do not the contrary Doubtless if Gods Word and Authority may not be pleaded for any duty which God commandeth and the Prelates forbid neither may it be pleaded for the Omission of any Villany commanded by Prelates no not Inquisition Torments or Massacres which God forbids But this man hath the Gramatical skill to call Omissive obedience by the name of Passive § 53. It 's like he will next say that I make odious suppositions That the supreme Church-power may command any Villanies and forbid Christian duties Ans. 1. I despair of getting any of these designers to tell me which is the Supreme Universal Church-power so as to be well understood I never heard of any pretenders but Pope and General Councils and as Bishop Guning holds the Colledg of all the Bishops in the world And certainly Pope and Councils have set up Heresies and decreed even the exterminating of all that will not dis-believe all their senses and deny Bread to be Bread and Wine to be Wine They have decreed deposing Kings absolving Subjects from their Allegiance adoring Images c. And what is it that yet they may not do If they say with Peter If all men deny thee I will not how shall I know that they say true Doth not the Church of England tell us that Councils have erred c § 54. And be not these very honest Sons of the Church of England that affirm it irreconcilable to Government to alledg Divine Authority of any different practices without exception and at the same time to Subscribe to Art 21.19.6.18 of the sufficiency of Scripture That the Churches of Jerusalem Alexandria Antioch Rome have erred in matters of Faith That the Church may not Ordain any thing contrary to Gods Written Word That General Councils may err and have erred and that things Ordained by them as necessary to salvation have neither strength nor Authority unless it may be declared that they are taken out of the holy Scripture And those are accursed that presume to say that every man may be saved by the Law or Sect which he professeth And why not if he must do all that the Governours require or nothing divers to them § 55. My Reason forbids me to trace such a Writer as this any further To tell men of every vain Harangue and confident discourse that 's full of gross error or false report is work unworthy of time and labour but I will a little more open the Coar of his deceit CHAP. V. Wherein Mr. Dodwell's deceits and the danger of them do consist § 1. AS to his Method of disputing that you may detect his fallacies he hath got this absurd ptetence p. 90. That there is but one sense of all Terms which Causes oblige men to mean and that every one ought to know who pretends to have skill in Causes Ans. Would you have thought that ever a man should publickly use such a Cothurnus among the Learned What a man is obliged to mean is one thing and what he doth mean is another And is there any one that knoweth what humane Language is that knoweth not that almost all words have various significations Doth he not know by how good reason the Schools oblige Disputants first to explain their Terms And what need there is of Definition to explain them He instanceth in the words Bishops and the Church of England And might have added the Catholick Church And doth he not know that it is the species of Bishops that we differ about and will the general name here explain each parties sense When we are for one sort of Bishops and against another And is it not such fraud as souls should not be abused by to refuse wilfully to define the Episcopacy that he meaneth and then plead that all should understand him And why is it not as much ignorance in him not to understand me as in me not to understand him when I use distinct explication which he obstinately refuseth And doth not Dr. Stillingfleet's case shame what he saith of the Church of England who was hardly brought to explain it and at last denieth the very being of the Church in Mr. Dodwell's sense which of you was to blame to meddle with the Word till you had skill in Causes to understand it without a Definition And doth not Dr. Stillingfleet take it as the Introduction of Popery to hold a Constitutive Regent Church-Government National or Catholick and so he and Mr. Dodwell mean not the same thing by the Church Catholick nor Bishop Guning Mr. Thorndike or the Church of Rome who are all for an Universal humane Supreme power And who is he that hath read Dr. Challoners Credo Eccles. Cathol Chillingworth Bishop Mortons Grand Imposture Bishop Bilson Dr. White Dr. Whitaker Dr. Sutliffe Bishop Andrews Bishop Carlton c. Chamier Sadeel Melancthon Bucer c. who knoweth not that the Papists and Prorestants by the name of the Catholick Church do mean several things and that we deny the very being of any such Church as they call the Catholick And is this the bold and happy Disputant that will save the Schools and World the labour of explaining Terms and foreagreeing of the sense and put men on disputing where the Subjâ—ct is denied and fill a Book with tedious confident Harangues and then hide all the fraud by saying that there is but one sense of all Terms which Causes oblige mâ—n to mean and that every one ought to know who pretend to have skill in Causes When the Cause disputed is only managed by words as they signifie the minds of the Speakers about the real matters § 2. And as to the material fundamental difference between Mr. Dodwell's party and us it lyeth in these following things I. We totally differ about the nature of Gods Government of man II. And about the use of the Holy Scripture and Gods Laws III. About the nature and extent of all humane Government IV. About the form of moral good and evil V. About the essential form of the Catholick Church VI. About Gods ordinary means of saving Grace VII About the use of Preaching VIII About the duty of worshipping God in Sacred Assemblies or the Communion of Saints IX About the difference of Apostles and the office of the Bishops X. About the office of a Presbyter or Parish-Pastor XI About the Necessaries to Ministry Churches Christianity and ordinary title to Salvation XII And
Church-ruin to be devised than to suppose a more extensive Concord to be possible and necessary than indeed is and so to set up an impossible End and Means and to deny Concord and Peace to all that cannot have it on those terms If all should be denied to be the Kings Subjects who dare not profess Assent Consent and approbation of every law and part or word of the laws or that agree not of the meaning of every law or that differ in any matters of Religion what a Schism Confusion and Ruine would it unavoidably make in the Kingdom and how few Subjects would it leave the King Even as if none but men of the same stature visage or wit should be Subjects 4 The necessary Union and Concord of Christians is a matter of so great importance that it cannot be supposed that Christ is the sole Universal Lawgiver and yet hath not ordained or determined what shall be the terms of necessary Christian Unity and Concord And indeed he hath determined it Viz. I. He hath ordained Baptism himself to be our Christning or our visible Investiture in the Church Universal that is our Relation to Christ as the Head of his Universal Kingdom or Body And every rightfully baptized person till by violating that Covenant he forfeit his benefits is to be taken by us as a Member of Christ a Child of God and an Heir of Heaven and we are bound to love him as a brother and use him accordingly in all due Offices of Love And because the Church into which Baptism entereth us consists of Christian Pastors and People Apostles and Prophets having been as Foundations infallibly delivering us now recorded in Scripture the Word of Life and ordinary Pastors being appointed to teach and guide the people in holy Doctrine Worship and Conversation therefore it is implied that the baptized person at Age understandeth this and consenteth thereunto that is to receive as infallible the recorded sacred Doctrine of the infallible persons Apostles and Prophets and the ordinary Ministry of such ordinary Pastors and Teachers as he shall discern to be set over him by the Word and Spirit of Christ. Whether this consent to the Pastoral-Office be necessary to the Being of a Christian or only to the Well-being is a controversie with which I need not stop or lengthâ—n in this account But Baptism as such doth not enter us into any particular Church II. 1. Christ by himself and his â—pirit in the Apostles hath ordained that Christians shall be associated into particular Churches consisting of the aforesaid Ordinary Pastors and their Flocks for Personal Communion in holy Dâ—ctrine Worship and Conversation in all which these Pastors are their Guides according to the Laws or Word of Christ already delivered by the inâ—allible Ministry of the Apostles and Prophets against or beyond which Christ hath given them no power Their Office is of his own making and describing and their power to determine undetermined useful circumstances in Gods Worship and Church-discipline is but a power to obey Christs general commands to do all thingâ— in Love Peace Order Decency and to Edification which they may not violate 2. Every Christian that hath opportunity should be a Member of some such particular Church Statedly if it may be if not yet transiently But some may want such opportunity as single persons converted or cast among Infidels Travellers Embassadors Factors and other Merchants among Infidels or where Christianity is so corrupted by the Pâ—stors as that they will not allow men Communion without sinful Oaths Covenants Professions Words or Practices 3. No one at Age can be a Member of the Universal or of any particular Church and so the Subjâ—ct of that Pastor against his will or without his own consent however Antecedent Obligations may bind men to consent 4. Every such Church should have its proper Bishop and in Ignatius's time its Unity was describâ—d by One Altar and One Bishop with his fellow Presbyters and Deacons 5. Such Bâ—shops or Pastors were to be ordained by Senior Bishops or Pâ—stors and received by the Eâ—ection or Consent of the whole Church and for many hundred years no Churches received their Bishops on any other terms The Ordainers and the People or Church receiving him having each a necessary consent as a double Key for the security of the Church to which afterwards the Christian Magiâ—â—rates consent was added according to Gods word so far as protecting and countenancing of the Bishop did require The senior Bishops must consent to his Ordination the people must consent to him as formally related to themselves as their Pastor and the Magistrate as to one to be protected by him 6 As without mutual consent the relation of Pastor and flock is not founded so Gods Providence must direct every man to know what particular Church he should be of and whom by consent to take for the guide of his soul. In England men may freely chuse what Church and Pastor they will stand related to every man having liberty to dwell in what Parish or Diocess he please without asking leave of the Bishop to remove 7. The individuating or distinguâ—shing of particular Churches by peculiar Circuits or proper spaces of ground is no further of Gods institution than it is the performance of the general commands of doing all in order to edification c. And as in prosperous times under godly peaceable Princes it is greatly convenient and desirable so in several cases of Division Church-corruption by Heresie or Tyranny Persecution c. it is inconvenient and it becomes a necessary duty to gather Churches in the same space of ground where only some other Pastor had a Church before The cases in which this is lawful and the cases in which Separation is unlawful having written largely in another paper I shall offer it to you when you desire it 8. It is not of absolute necessity that all the members of a particular Church do always or usually meet in one place though it be very convenient and desirable where it may be done for Persecution may prohibit it or want of a large capacious place or the great dâ—stance of some of the Inhabitants or the age or weakness of others and therefore in the ancient Churches though at first they usually were all assembled in one place yet after when they encreased the Canons required all the people to assemble with the Bishop but at certain chief Festivals in the year having Chappels or Oratories in the Villages where they mâ—t on other days And with us many Parishes of great extent have many Chappels of ease 9. But that the end of the Association be not only for distanâ— communion by Delegates or Letters or meer relation to one common Ruler as all the Empire had to the Emperour but for PERSONAL COMMVNION of Pastor and Flock so that they may at least per vices meet together or live within the reach of each others personal notice and converse and Communion in
AN ANSWER TO Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke Confuting an Universal Humane Church-Supremacy Aristocratical and Monarchical as Church-Tyranny and Popery And defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's Treatise against it By Richard Baxter Preparatory to a fuller Treatise against such an Universal Soveraignty as contrary to Reason Christianity the Protestant Profession and the Church of England though the Corrupters usurp that Title LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers Chappel 1682. READER THough the difference between Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Thorndike and such others and those condemned by them be very great I would not have it seem greater than it is The sum of it is as followeth 1. Mr. Dodwell thinketh that there is no true Ministry Church-Sacraments nor Covenant-right to pardon and salvation but where there is a Ministry delivering the Sacraments who were ordained by Bishops in his sense of Bishops who had their Ordination from other Bishops and they from others by an uninterrupted chain of succession from the Apostles We know that by this Doctrine he condemneth or unchurcheth not only the Reformed Churches the Greeks and other Easterns but the Church of Rome it self and leaveth no certainty of the very being of any one Church on earth And we maintain that the sacred Scripture is the universal Law of Christ in which he hath described and instituted the office and work of the sacred Ministry and appointed the way of their continuance in the world by necessary Qualification Election Consent and ordinarily regular Ordination That as Presbyters now lay on hands with the Bishop so senior Pastors are the Ordainers as the Colledg of Physicians license Physicians and the Convocation of Doctors make Doctors and man generateth man But to avoid contention and division the Churches have used to make one of these Presbyters or Pastors a President and partly a Ruler in each Colledg and Church and given him a Negative voice in Ordinations against which we strive not but maintain 1. That his consent is not so necessary as that no one can be a true Presbyter that hath it not As the Clergy at Rome in Cyprian's days long governed when they had no Bishop so if the Bishop be dead or refuse to ordain or would ordain none but Hereâ—icks or uncapable men or would tyrannize and impose men not consented to the Ordination is valid that is made without him And 2. That the true chief Pastor of every particular formed Church is a true Bishop though Diocesans should deny it 3. And that even Ordination it self is necessary but for Order where it may be had and not to the Being of the Ministry where it cannot be had on lawful terms no more than Coronation to the King or publick solemnization to Marriage 4. And we are assured that if Regular Ordination were interrupted by death heresie refusal neglect e. g. at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople Jerusalem c. Christs Charter or Scripture-Law would presently restore it to persons duly qualified chosen and ordained by the fittest there that can be had 5. If this were not so as multitudes of schismatical and unlawful Popes Ordinations at Rome would be invalid e. g. John 13. and 21. and 23. and Eugenius 4th deposed as a Heretick by a General Council c. so every usurping Bishop that pretendeth falsly that he was himself lawfully ordained would nullifie Churches Ministry and Sacraments of all ordained by him And many have falsly pretended to Orders 6. And that if men must refuse the Government and Sacraments of all Bishops and Presbyters that do not prove to them a Regular Ordination uninterrupted for 1600. years all the Ministry on earth may be refused and none for so doing should be called Schismaticks I never yet heard or saw a Bishop prove such a succession nor ever knew one that would take his Oath on it that he was a true Bishop on such terms II. Mr. Dodwell thinks that the Presbyters yea and Bishops were not given by God Pag. 60. saith he But where do they find that God ever gave Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Where note that it is of the Office in specie that we speake But we think that God hath made or instituted the Office and its work And if he did not 1. Who did If men was it Clerg-ymen or Lay-men If Lay-men was it Christians or Infidels And by what Authority Do the children beget the fathers and yet may not Presbyters propagate their species If Clergy-men who were they If not Apostles or Prophets or Evangelists they were none If these then it seems the Apostles did it not as Bishops for it is the making of the first Bishops that we question And what the Apostles did not as Bishops but as commissioned Apostles Christ did by his Spirit And they that will do the like must have the like Office Authority and Spirit If God gave not Bishops because the Apostles made them then God gave us not the Scripture because the Apostles and Evangelists wrote it And is not this the same or worse Doctrine than that which the Italian Iesuits would have had pass at Trent against Gods making Bishops or their Office And if God gave not Bishops or Presbyters they that reject them reject no gift or institution of God And if men made them how come they to be essential to the Church Did not Christ and his Spirit in the Apostles institute so much as the Church-essentials And if men made Bishops and Presbyters in specie may not man unmake them III. Mr. Dodwell maintaineth that the power of Presbyters is to be measured by the intention of the Ordainers who give it them and not by any Scripture-institution charter or description We maintain the contrary that God having instituted and described the Office of Bishops Pastors Presbyters Gods Law in Scripture is the Rule by which the office-power and obligation and work in the essentials must be known Otherwise 1. It would be supposed that God made not the office of Bishops or Presbyters which is false 2. That Ordainers may make new Churches Bishops or Presbyters in specie yea as many species of them as they shall intend 3. That they may abrogate or change the ancient species They may make one office only for preaching another only for praying another only for Baptism another only for the Lords Supper and others for new work of their own The Papists themselves abhor this Doctrine 4. Then no man can know the measure of his Authority not knowing the intentions of the Ordainers Perhaps three or ten ordainihg Bishops may have three or ten several intents 5. Then the Bishop may put down Gods Worship or Sacraments by limiting the Priests power 6. It 's contrary to all Ministerial Investitures The Investing Minister is not the Owner or the Donor but delivereth possession of what the Owner and Donor contracted for or gave If the Archbishop Crowning the King would infringe his Prerogative it 's a
Nullity because he is not the Giver of it nor is his intention but the Kingdoms constitution the measure of it If the Priest would make the man whom he marrieth to a woman no governour of her it 's a Nullity for it is not his intent that makes the power 7. If this were otherwise I call and call again but in vain to Mr. Dodwell and all his party to tell me how the Bishops and Priests of the Church of England in the days of Henry the 8th and Edward the 6th and Queen Elizabeth came to have power to put down the Mass to set up the Liturgie to take down Images and to reform as they did when it was certainly contrary to the intention of their Ordainers 8. And setting this point together with the other that Ordination of Presbyters is null I ask them and ask again but all in vain 1. Do not Bishops generate their Species and make Bishops their equals 2. Who then can give his Office to the Archhishop if he have no Superior in England unless his Inferiors give it or you fly to a Forreign Iurisdiction 3. Whose Intention is it that giveth power to the Pope if he be greatest Or to the General Council if it be greatest If there be none above them either God or Inferiours give them their power 4. And what if these Inferiours that make Popes Primates or Councils by Intention would take down half their power Is it then done What self-contradiction and confusion would some men rather run into than grant Christ to be Christ that is the only Vniversal Head and Legislator to the Church on Earth IV. Accordingly Mr. D. holdeth that there is a supreme Authority in man over the Universal Church from whose intention and sense it is not lawful for us to appeal so much as to the Sacred Scripture no nor to the Day of Iudgment for any practice different from them See his Reply p. 80 81 82 83 84 85. Though we hold that no unjust Appeal should suspend the authorised Acts of a Governour this Doctrine seems to me to be worse than Antichristian and to put down God If God indeed be the Vniversal Soveraign Lawgiver and the final Iudge if God be God and man be man and not above him to say that we must not obey him before man and disobey man that commands what he forbids or that we must not appeal from mans subordinate Law to his supreme Law nor from mans judgment to his final judgment and to say as he and Thorndike do that to do so and practise accordingly is inconsistent with all Government are things that I had hoped my ears or eyes should never have seen or heard delivered by a sober Christian. Papists most commoâ—ly abhor it save some few Flatterers of the Pope If â—his be so a man must not only worship Images swear to the Pope and do all that Councils command but also curse Christ if the Turkish Rulers bid him blaspheme God if Heathen Rulers bid him and condemn all the Martyrs as Rebels that did subvert all Government by practising contrary to it and appealing to God And then man must be every where of the Rulers Religion and do whatever wickedness he commandeth Dan. 1. and 3.6 and the Church for three hundred years and more tell us of other kind of Examples V. Mr. D. holdeth this Absolute Destructive Power to be essentially necessary to the Vnity of the Catholick Church which is the sum of Thorndike's Book I would not go further from them or the French in the point of Vnity than I needs must I shall therefore tell you what is our judgment of it 1. We grant them that Christ's Church on earth is one and its Vnity is part of its very essence as the Vnity of the parts of a House Ship c. 2. We hold that this essential Vnity consisteth in the Vnion of all Christians with Christ the only unifying Vniversal Head and that the Vnity described Ephes. 4.4 5 6. sufficeth to it viz. One Body of Christ one Spirit one Hope of Grace and Glory one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father c. And that all this is prescribed in the Gospel and every true Christian hath all this 3. That all must endeavour to keep this Vnity in the bond of peace and to be in every lesser matter of one mind as far as they can And the Pastors of the Churches to beautifie and strengthen the Church by as much concord as they can well obtain 4. But that perfect concord being the fruit of personal perfection will never be had on earth And the differences of the infirm that cannot be cured must be tolerated in tender Brotherly Love And to persecute or destroy Christians who unite in Christ and the Essentials of Christianity because they are not of one size of knowledg and differ in lesser things is the work of Satan the Enemy of Love and the great Destroyer 5. We believe that Synods or Councils are so far good and useful as they are needful to the foresaid strength and concord of the Churches But that they are for Agreement and not for direct Regiment as Archbishop Usher was wont to say Councils are not for Government of the several Bishops by the Majority but for Consultation and Concord And they that cannot in all things consent to them in Accidentals or lesser matters are not therefore cut off from Christ's Vniversal Church But it is a fault peevishly and causelesly to dissent and be singular a breach of Christ's general Law of doing our work as much as we can in Love and Concord Plainly Reader do you know the difference between the Senate of Rome or Venice and the Assembly at Nimmegen Ratisbone or Frankford The said Senate is una persona Politica though plures naturales and hath the Supreme Government by Vote in Legislation and Iudgment and it is Rebellion there to disown their Power and a Crime not to obey it At Nimmegen Ratisbone c. many Princes or their Agents meet for Peace and Christian Concord It is a sin for any of them to be causelesly against any Vote that is useful to those ends But no one of them nor the major Vote is Governour of the rest nor is any one to be dispossest of his Dominion that seeth reason to dissent This is plain truth Though Dr. Sherlock find fault with the Learned and Iudicious Dr. Barrow for asserting it in his Treatise against the Papacy And it being not Regiment but Concord that is the end of Synods as over Bishops there is no more use than possibility of an Vniversal Council or one Vniversal Colledge But the necessity and aptitude of Councils for strengthning concord must measure their extent What Mr. D's opinion is of the degree of corporal punishment which he would have used to his ends I know not Mr. Thorndike is against Death and Banishment For my part the two greatest things that have alienated me
the worst oft carried the possession and Councils themselves were for divers whih was the Episcopal communion 3. Is communion and subjection all one with him or divers If divers I have communion with many Bishops that I am not subject to If the same how many must each man be subject to and in what order and cases 4. Communion is 1. mental or local and the first 1. In essentials 2. Integrals 3. Accidents of Christianity I have communion with all Christians in Essentials with the best in most integrals with none in all nor in all accidents 4. I am more secure in the mental communion of many Bishops than of some one and of All in Essentials and certain things than of some one in suspected things especially in universal communion with Christ and his whole Church 2. He that hath no communion with any true Bishops of Gods institution in his judgment will and profession hath no communion with Christs Church But if they are 1. of a false species 2. incapable 3. unordained 4. obtruders not consented to by the Clergy and the Flock it 's safest to disown them 5. And â—f they turn wolves thorns and thistles or hereticks 2. It 's dangerous to refuse communion with the true Episcopi Gregis but not with such as depose them 3. And its doubtful as to the Episcopi Episcoporum 1. It 's but deceit to distinguish only ordinary and extraordinary in speaking of the necessity of means The Gospel written or preached is an ordinary means which to want is hazardous indeed so is meditation prayer and sacraments where they may well be had and Pastors to administer them But there are many lesser means that may be wanting or ignorantly refused where salvation is safe The Church of England thinks preaching to be such which forbiddeth men to go for Preaching and from a bare Reader in his own Parish And the Indians converted by Frumentius and Edesius might have certain salvation before they had any Pastor And so may they that cannot know among contenders which is the true Pastor either as to the species or individual But 2. Comunion in every lawful thing is no ordinary requisite means of salvation Mark Reader that he said that suffer themselves to be excluded from Communion by such Governours for refusing submission to unsinful things And Dr. Saywell Bishop Gunnings Chaplain and this man make such refusal and schism damnable Now mark here how they make all indifferent imposed things consequently necessary to salvation and make all such indifferences to be Articles of faith or necessary to salvation to be believed E.g. if Organs the Cross in Baptism Surplices Church-images Exorcisms and five hundred such be indifferent and commanded by the Bishop he that is excommunicated for not conforming to them or withdraweth for it is a damnable Schismatick Ergo it is necessary to salvation to conform to every one of them in that case Ergo it 's necessary to salvation to hold them to be lawful or else to use them while I verily take them to be sins To what a mass now have these men brought the Aâ—ticles or necessaries to salvation Doth any living man know all lawful things to be such 1. Then in Abassia where there is but one Abuna Bishop local Communion with him is impossible to most 2. And how is the Patriarch of Alexandria who ordaineth him of that Place that is another Kingdom 2. Then in one Place-Communion with Papists in another with Greeks Moscovites Abisines Armenians c. is necessary in unsinful things 3. Who will judg but the Excommunicator what is unsinful as to his act 4. What a case were men in at Rome under Formosus Stephen Sergius Eugenius 4. Iohn 12. and 22. c. and at Alexandria under Peter Meletius Paulinus Flavianus and so oft in other Schisms and Nullities 5. The Novatians and Ioannites had the ordinary means of salvation in Constantinople under separate Pastors But it 's true that the ordinary means are confined to the visible Church and its external Communion where it may be had Of which more anon 1. Some think that if God had only commanded men to love him call upon him hate sin seek life eternal without an express promise one might be sure it should not be done in vain 2 But God hath expresly promised salvation to all that truly love trust and obey him and seek first Gods Kingdom and are pure in heart holy and love all men though they were excommunicate for not crossing subscribing or thinking Diocesans unlawful Chap. 3. The Promises of God and his Covenant on his part are all one Those that God promiseth to save shall certainly be savâ—d who those are the Gospel fully tâ—lls us yea and told men before the particular Churches were fixed under their proper Pastors called Elders and Bishops in the Scripture 3 Transaction is an ambiguous word 1. It was transacted by making the promise by Christ on Earth 2. It is transacted by giving the consenting penitent Believer a Right before God to Christ and salvation when he first truly so consenteth 3. It is transacted by a solemn Mâ—nisterial Investiture sealing and delivering that Right for the fuller comfort of the consenter and in soro Ecclesiae to give the Right of external Communion as a Tessara when the person is baptizâ—d 4. It is transacted by renewed confirmation and for further grace daily in the Eucharist I love not to offend you but I must be true to truth and souls and therefore tell men that these Generals and Confusions are but Cheats 3. Would you have men believe that external solemnities are necessary to the Right of Heart Covenanters before God as to salvetion Or that all external solemnities are of the same necessity The Church of England takes Confirmation to de an external solemnity for assuring men of Gods favour by the sign of Imposition of a Diocesans hands and yet bind you to profess that it is not necessary to salvation but the baptized Infants are certainly and undoubtedly saved without it Litanies Processions and many external solemnities are not essential to external Communion with the visible Church Chap. 8 O tremendous Is it no other Is not the universal visible Church consisting of all professed Christians Headed only by Christ the only universal Church visible in the world Is there no Communion with this as such Had the baptized Eunuch by Philip the Evangelist no Communion with the visible Church nor promise of salvation nor the Iberians Indians and many others that were baptized before they knew or had a Bishop Do not baptizing Presbyters and Lay-men say Turtullian and the Papists assure men of salvation though they should not hear of a Bishop Why was not Diocesan Episcopacy in the Creed if the belief and obedience be necessary to salvation a 1. 1. Apostles and Evangelists took men into the visible Communion of the universal Church before they had particular Church-Bishops 2. Fixed Church-Communion was exercised universally under
the wisest and best man had right to the Crown or Church-power If copious discourses to the contrary will not hinder such busie disputers from such inhumane slanders are they meet to be disputed with I have over and over said that 1. Gifts or the best abilities 2. And due election or approbation of the Ordainers 3. And the peoples election and consent all set together do but make up the Qualification or Receptive disposition of the Recipient 4. Yea and his consent conjoined and that where all these in the necessary degree concur the power resulteth to that capâ—ble person from none of them all but immediately from God Law which is his instrument giving power to persons so qualified And that besides all these Ministerial Investiture for Orders sake when it may be had should introduce him into possession yea and the Magistrate must be judg whom he will countenance protect or tolerate But the case of Ordination and Investiture are necessary only where they may be had lawfully and without crossing their end as sacrifice was compared with mercy and the Rest of the Sabbath compared to works of charity and necessity § 43. And as it is the trick of such dealers p. 81. he must have Governours to do his work and therefore must not leave out that which may make us odious to them but tells men that our Hypothesis is unreconcilable with government in this life in that it permits persons to assume Authority and to extend it as far as they think fit by appealing to Writings against the sense of all the visible authority of this life Ans. 1. But â—f this Hypothesis be none of his Adversaries but come out of the Meal-Tub or forge of Inventers what shall such men be called 2. We permit no person to assume Authority But Writings are not so contemptible to us in comparison of that which you take to be all the visible Authority of the Church It is your Richard Hooker that saith that the Law maketh the King and giveth and measureth his power and that it's usurpation which obligeth no mans Conscience when power is taken and usâ—d which the Law never gave What I think of this I have elsewhere shewed The Statutes are not so contemptible in this case but the great Lawyers think they may be appealed to from visible Rulers in several cases And you must talk at other rates than you have done in your tedious fallacious Vagaries before wise Christians will believe that we may not appeal from Prelates to the written Word of God when the power used by them is justly questioned If not how caâ—e the Reformed Churches to justifie their Reformation Was it not by appealing to Scripture against the visible Church Rulers that were commonly against them Were not Pâ—pes Council Prelates and Priests against them for the far greatest part Did it overthrow all Government of the world to appeal from these to the â—cripture I hereby undertake to prove that neither Popes Prelates or Priests have any Church-Authority bâ—t what God hatâ— given them by his Word And is it not thâ—â— necessary to try it by that Word Must we take thâ—â—r own words for all that Popes or Prelates câ—â—im And it will put the Pope and Council hard to it to prove any Authority from God if the Scripture do not give it them And if it give it them it may give it others § 44. And whâ—n 〈◊〉 done we are far from granting that we have lesâ— to shâ—â— for our succession from the Apostleâ— than Popes or 〈…〉 have 1 We are 〈◊〉 that we have the same â—aptism Eucharist Creed Lâ—â—ds Praâ—â—r Dâ—calogue and Scriptâ—re delivered down from the Aâ—ostles 2. We are sure that we have a Ministry of the same species which Christ and his â—pirit in the Apostles instituted 3. We know that our Churches and Worship and Doctrine are the â—ame that are described and setled by the Apostles 4. We know that our present Ministers are qualified as the Apostâ—â—â— requiâ—ed 5. And that they are Elected or 〈◊〉 to by the 〈◊〉 is the Apostles required 6. And that they have as good an Ordination and Investiture as the Apostles ever made necessary to the Ministry That is 1. They have the Approbation of senior Pastors and many of them of Diocesans All that were put into any places by the Parliament when the Bishops were down were to have the Westminster Assemblies Approbation under their hands And that Assembly as called consisted of many Diocesans with many score grave Eminent Divines though the Diocesans were not actually present And a signed Approbation and Allowance hath the Essence of all that is of absolute necessity in Ordination 2. They were Ordained by true Bishops 1. All true Presbyters are Episcopi gregis and joyn in Ordination here in Enggland 2 The chief Pastors of City-Churches having Curates under them are Episcopi Eminentes vel Praesides such as Ordained for above Two hundred years after the Apostles And 3. The chosen Presidents of Synods were such Bishops But all these concurred in the Nonconformists Ordinations when the Diocesans were down They were Ordained at and by a Synod of Presbyters in some great Town or City where the Moderator and the chief City-Pastors were part 3. Many of them were Ordained by Diocesans 4. Many Ordained as aforesaid were after approved by Diocesans some by Imposition of Hands and all by Word or Writing for Archbishop Vsher did in my hearing by Word and in Writing more publickly declare his opinion of such Presbyters Ordination as valid â—though he excused not such as deposed the Diocesans from the guilt of Schism and so did the many other Bishops whom I formerly cited yea even Bancroft himself And surely all this hath all that is essential to Ordination 5. And we know that such a Ministry hath continued to propagate the Church and Gospel in the world since the Apostles days But we confess 1. That we cannot prove that such Ministers have still succeâ—ded in the same Towns 2. Nor that no one from whom their Ordination came down from the Apostles did pretend to have Orders or Authority when he had none 3. Or that no one of them in 1660. years was an Heretick or a Schismatick or a Papist 4. Or that no one Ordained in wrong words 5. Or that no one Ordained contrary to the Canons out of his own limits or without three Bishops or without the Presbyters 6. Or that no Competitors were Ordained by several Bishops Mr. Dodwell is a great Historian when he hath proved all this of all or any of his Clergy-friends he hath done something more than multiply words § 45. But on the other side we can easily prove and have proved 1. That our Diocesans are not of the same species with those of old 2 That the Apostles did not make them I think Mr. Dodwell will say that the Presbyters first made them by consent the Children begot the Fathers 3 And Dr. Hammond will defend it that
there is no certainty that any Subject Presbyters were made by the Apostles in Scripture times So that the very species of their Clergy hath no such succession as distinct from ours 4. And he that will read the Church-History and Councils declaring the multitude of doleful intercisions in East and West by Heresies the Patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch Constantinople Ierusalem and Rome and most of the chief Seats of Bishops having been judged Hereticks Simoniacks or no Bishops by General Councils yea Roman Bishops judged some of them Infidels and Diabolical by the Councils of Constance Basâ—l c. I say he that knoweth this History must know that the Diocesans that from these derive their succession have certainly had frequent and notorious intercisions § 46. And this leads me to another part of Mr. Dodwell's work viz. his proof that Aidan and Finan were Bishops As if this had been a great part of his Cause Such diverting noise is a great part of the art of deceiving Because I had said that Aiden and Finan were not Bishops but Presbyters that is when they came out of Scotland into Northumberland I apprehended that some men of his gâ—â—ius and design would be willing to mistake me and therefore Printed an Explication of the Words in the end of my first Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet But Mr. D would have men think that I said that they were never made and called Bishops at all and that I read not Beda from whom alone near Five and Thirty years ago I took almost all that I assert concerning them Let the Reader see my foresaid Explication If Mr. Dodwell will give us more than noise and mist about this matter 1. Let him prove that it was Diocesan Bishops that Ordained these Scots before they came into England when Beda saith they were sent from those Monasteries that were ruled by Presbyters and which would not so much as eat or communicate with the Roman Bishops 2. Let him prove that any Bishops in England Consecrated hem or made them Bishops here when Beda tells us that they were the first in the North and therefore had none here to Ordain them 3. Let him prove that they were here made true Diocesan Bishops of our species When 1. they had no Presbyters at first under them and therefore ruled none and had but one Congregation for one man can be but in one place at once 2. Their Church in Lindisfarne was not made of stone but of wood covered or thatcht with reeds and they are not said to have any other Church under them 3. They went indeed to preach all over the Country but not as to a Church but as to Heathens to convert them 4. Let him prove that ever they took themselves to be of a distinct order from Presbyters 5. At a Synod Bed c. 25. we find no more but the King and his Son and Hilda a woman-Abbess and three or four of this sort of Bishops far below our Ordaining City-Presbyters and their Synods But unlearned men that value Books by interest and preconceived opinions may think that by such talk Mr. Dodwell hath done some great matter § 47. But saith he p. 81 82. Our Hypothesis obliging inferiour Governours to prove their title to their office and the extent of it from the intention of their supream Governours does oblige all to a strict dependance on the supreme visible power so as to leave no place for appeal concerning the practice of such Government which as it lasts only for this life so it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice c. Ans. Alas for the poor world and Church that will be cheated at so gross a rate 1. Did you not know that the grand error that Protestants charge Papists with is the asserting of any such thing as a supreme visible power over the Church universal besides Christ. And did you think that your roteing over the name to them that deny the thing would make a wise man change his Religion 2. By your Hypothesis then no man can prove his title to his Office who either believeth not that there is any such universal Supreme or that knoweth not who it is I know no Competitors but the Pope and General Councils unless the Patriarch of Constantinople be one 3. And he that knoweth not the intention of this Supreme power is still unable to prove his office 4. And he that knoweth the intention of the Ordaining Diocesan is never the better if he know not the intention of the Supreme And what if the intention of the Supreme and of the Diocesan are contrary 5. But by your Hypothesis the Governours may alter the very species of the Priesthood as they please and what ever God saith of it in his Institution or Law it must be to us no other in kind or extent than the Governours intend If they say I ordain thee to baptize but not to teach or to do both but not to celebrate the Lords-Supper or to do that but not to pray or praise God or not to use the Keys of the Church our power is limited accordingly Then if the Prelates make Mass-Priests their intention is the measure of their power Answer the Papists then that ask Was it ever the intention of the Pope and his Prelates that the English Bishops should disclaim the Pope or the Mass or reform without them as they did 6. Seeing the English Bishops by you derive their succession from Willfred and Augustine and Rome is not the Church of Rome the â—ittest Judg of the extent of their power as knowing their own intentions Nay if they were so blind as to intend them power to pull down themselves may they not recall it 7. Did ever Protestant preach this Doctrine That there is no appeal from the supreme Prelates to God O dreadful what may men come to and what error so great that a former may not introduce Disgrace not the Church of England so much as thus to intimate that they set up themselves so as that there is no appeal to Scripture or God himself from them God hath commanded Preaching Praying Praises Baptism the Lords-Supper holy assemblies c. if the supreme Prelates interdict and forbid all these is there no appeal to God I have told you how much Robert Grosthead abhor'd this Doctrine and so told Pope Innocent the 4 th What absolute blind obedience to Prelates is this 8. And what a reason brings he That the practice lasteth only for this life and therefore c Doth any of our actions here last longer than while they are doing Praying Praise Sacraments obeying the King doing good to the poor c. and so swearing cursing adultery rebellion atheism blasphemy here last only for this life Must we therefore obey men without appeal to God if they forbid us all duty and command all sin 9. And what did the man mean when he said That it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its
of his species they are no Ministers or Churches and have no Sacrament and Covenant title to Salvation but are Schismaticks and by their Ministry sin against the Holy Ghost And so destroyeth all certainty of title to Salvation and of Church-communion Ministry and Sacraments to all the Christian World § 14 XII Lastly we think that men shall be judged by their keeping or breaking Gods Law and according to what they did in the body But he would have us obey the Supreme Clergy and not plead Scripture or Divine authority for our different practice because the Government that lasteth but for this life ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice § 15. I conclude with a request to him to resolve me these doubts 1. Whether Prophets having immediate messages from Heaven were not differenced from the teaching Priests and Pastors 2. Whether false Prophets were not grievously threatened among the Iews and whether Christ did not command us to beware of false Prophets 3. Whether he be not a false Prophet worse than a false teacher that falsely pretendeth to that which is proper to a Prophet 4. Whether it be not proper to a Prophet to deliver as immediately from God new Laws to the universal Church yea or to any Church which are not in the Scripture nor are revealed by it as Gods means besides the determination of circumstances left to humane prudence variable pro re nata if Moses and the Apostles in Legislation acted as Prophets do not they so that pretend to do the like 5. Whether the General Councils of Bishops and the Pope have not done the work proper to the Prophetical office when they have made Laws for the unversal Church and this as by Divine authority and undertaken to give all the Church the sense of Scripture which only shall be obligatory to them thereby For it is the maker of the sense that is the maker of the Law especially when they pretend to Infallibility or to be secured from erring in faith by Divine inspiration how ignorant or bad soever they be singly Is not this pretended authority and inspiration that of Prophets as different from meer Teachers and Guides by Gods Law already made 6. If it be so how many such Papal Councils arrogating such power have been false Prophets 7. But if they pretend not Inspiration nor Prophetical authority from God nor yet authority given them by the Scriptures or Laws of God already made or falsly pretend such then is not this to usurp Christs own authority and so instead of being false Prophets to be partly Vice-Christs or Law-givers to his universal Church called commonly Antichrists I would willingly have things so cleared that men may be freed from all such suspicions But if you are still confident that the universal Church hath a visible supreme Government besides Christs I should be glad 1. To see it proved 2. To know whose it is and how we may know them 3. And to know its true extent If you intend no fraud you cannot refuse me this when I promise you if performed I will let fall the suit and no more trouble you with lesser Controversies I have no Copy of my first Letter to Mr. Dodwell upon a Book which he sent me This is his Answer Reverend and Worthy Sir I Have received your very kind Letter wherein I hardly know whether I should be more thankful for your approbation or your reproof both of them being in their kind so useful and both of them being by you performed with so great civility I am confident that if our modern disputes had been moderated with that candor men would certainly have been more peaceful and very Orthodox than now we find them I could very heartily have wished that the opinions wherein we differ had not been of that nature as to sâ—parate Communion for this I look upon as the only circumstance that can make such differences grievous to a pious person for as for those others which exasperate many that Dissenters are not so wise to discern the truth or so fortunate in avoiding prejudices or lighting on faithful informations in a time when they are capâ—ble of receiving them or that they are not so submissive as themselves expect to that Pope which Luther has long since observed in every mans â—eart c. are reasons either sinful or at least insufficient to excuse the sin of uncharitableness upon such an account but as they aâ—e considering them as tempered with that piety and moderation which may expiate their other malignities that they are rather alledged as Apologies for your selves than as obligations on others rather to excuse your deformity in assisting at our Altars than erecting others in opposition to them that you are still iâ—quisitive and desirous of further information and ready to lay down your mistakes where you are convinced that they are such that still you preserve a pâ—aceable mind and embrace our Communion it sâ—lf in voto though perhaps not actually these are so valuable considerations even before God as well as man for excusing from the guilt of error as that whatever I may think of your opâ—nions I hope it shall not hinder me from a cordial respect and veneration for your person As I do very much esteem the good opinion of so great a lover of pâ—â—ce and piety as your self and should have been sorry to have given any juâ—t occasion of offence to you so I am not a little glad that upon a review of the particulars mentioned in your Letter I find my self so very innocent For as for my Preface the main parts of it wherein the disrepect of the Clergy is shewn to have been an Introductory to the Atheism of the age we live in and that the Conformable Clergy that is such as would answer the design of the Church not only as to their exterior demeanor in publick solemn Assemblies but also as to the qualifications of their persons and the conduct of their whole lives could not prove either trifling in their Preaching or scandalous in their examples and therefore that the Church is not responsible for their misdemeanors where they prove otherwise and that the Laity are in their proportion obliged to the same duties with the Clergy and therefore may make use of the advices there prescribed or where the errors of our modern School-Divinity are touched and some Proposals made for their reformation in these things I say I can see no occasion of offence but rather some preservatives against it The only thing I suppose you aim at is my taxing some opinions of Nonconformists and that with as little personal reflection as I was able which I conceived prejudicial to Church-authority which because you seem to disown I do not see why you should apprehend your self as particularly concerned especially there being nothing in the discourse whereby you could conclude either your self or any of your moderate temper to have been intended I will assure
by not multiplying Bishops as Churches or Converts needed it began the grand sin and calamity which hath undone us and therefore are not to be our Pattern Orbis major est urbe 6. Were Bishops necessarily to be distributed by Cities the Empires that have few or no Cities must have few or no Bishops and an Emperor might aliud agâ—ndo depose all the Bishops by dis franchizing the Cities 7. But every Corporation oppidum like our Market-Towns was then truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if you will but procure every such City with us to have a Bishop and the Office of such Bishops to be to drive men from sin and not to it and to silence Blasphemers and not faithful Preachers of the Gospel all our controversies of Prelacy are then at an end 8. And you must remember that great Cities had long but few Christians in comparison of the Heathens till Constantine's time and mostly long after And when Patrick with his own hand Ordained Three Hundred and Fifty Bishops in your Ireland they were but Ecclesiarum fundatores and with them he founded but septingentas Ecclesias and Ordained Five Thousand Clerks if Ioceline be true Vit. Patriâ— cap. 185. and not rather the far more credible report of Antonin in Chrâ—n tit 11. cap. 18. § 2. and Vincent specul histor lib. 20. cap. 23. who say that Ecclesias funâ—avit 365. â—rdinavit Episcopos eodem numero 365. et eo amplius in quibus spiritus Dei crat Presbyteros autem usque ad 3â—00 ordinavit Aâ— Vsher â—â—ceth them de primord Eccl. Br. p 9â—7 which is Ninius number there So that here is no more Churchâ—s thâ—n â—ishops and about Nine Presbyters to a Bishop You tell me of above One thousand Clergy-men at Rome in Corâ—elius's 〈◊〉 Ans. 1. This was above Two hundred and Fifty years after Christs Birth 2. I never took all the impotent persons poor and Widows in the Church to be Clergy-men and Clergy-women Cornelius his account is that there are Six and Forty Presbyters Seven Deacons Seven Sub-Deacons Two and Forty Acolytes Two and Fifty Exorcists and Readers with Porters Widows and impotent persons above One thousand and Fifty souls considering 1. How their Meetings were then obscure and small in Houses as the tolerated Churches in London And in so vast a City in how many distant places Besides the sub-urbicarian Assemblies 4 And how many Presbyters used still to be with the Bishop in the same Assembly 5. And that here are in all but Seven Deacons 6. And that many then were Presbyters that used not to Preach but for privater over-sight and as the Bishops Assessors 7. And that the poorer sort most commonly received the Gospel 8. And that none of these but the Six and Forty Presbyters had any power in the Discipline 9. And that by all this reckoning the whole Church maintained not besides the Officers near a thousand poor we may probably conjecture that the whole Church of that Bishop was not bigger than some one London-Parish Stepney Giles Cripplegate Martins c. where are about Fifty thousand souls 10. And when none were Christians but persecuted Volunteers they were the holiest and best of men and I have tryed that Six hundred such make less work for Discipline than Ten of the Rabble that are driven into our Churches and choose them rather than the Goal But when all 's done Two Cities under the power of great temptation are not to be our Rule against Gods Word and the state of all other Churches in the world and undeniable experience It 's true that you say that to erect another Altar was counted Schism that is Altare contra altare because when the Phrase came up no Church had more than one Altar Your Instances intimated of Antioch and Carthage I believe not and can give you had I liberty a Volume of proof from Antiquity that for Two hundred and Fifty years if not much longer Ignatius's Rule was true that every Church had one Altar and one Bishop at least except the two aforesaid Vlphilas was but an Arrian Bishop of a few Goths newly turned Arrians and the first that translated the Scriptures into the Gothick Tongue so that no Churches among them had the Scripture till after his translating and these few were presently persecuted to rhe death by Athanarichus ut socrat lib. 4 cap. 32. You may call these few a Kingdom if you please How few of the Indians were converted when Frumentius not Aedesius as you say was made their Bishop it 's easie to gather by the History Scythia and Persia used to have each a Bishop and he lived in the Roman Empire as near them as he durst as not being tolerated usually in their Land And as few it 's like Mosâ—s had among the Arabians there being no mention in the History of any thing to perswade us that he had many Churches under him that I remember And the work of these Bâ—shops was to ordain Presbyters who had the power of the Keys exceptae Ordinatione did all that Bishops did as Hierome saith So that then a Diocess had not one sole Church-Governour and therefore where you gather that yet Discipline was not dissolved I answer 1. In all this you leave out a matter of chief consideration viz. That all the Presbyters then were assistants in Discipline and had a true Church-Government over the people which now they have not 2. It 's strange that we that have eyes and ears must be sent to the Indians and ancient History to know whether one Bishop can hear and try and admonish so many thousands at once as we see by experience are those Objects of Discipline which the Scripture describeth and when we see that it is not done And after all this we have talk't but of a â—hantasm for it is not one Bishop but one Lay man a Chancellor that useth this Decretory power of the Keys over all these fouls so far as they are used as to the ordinary Court-tryals and exerciâ—e and the Bishop rarely medleth with it Again Nonconformists doubt not to prove that the Diocesan frame whiâ—h they dare not swear to 1. Doth depose the species of Churches of Gods Institution 2 And the Discipline it self almost totally 3. And the species of Presbyters 4. And the old species of Bishops And instead of each of these setteth up a new species of man's invention wholly different and inconsistent And that they are not willing to Swear Subscribe or deliberately and solemnly enter into a Church-Covenant That in their Places and Callings they will never endeavour any alteration of this no not by a request or word you may less wonder than if some were then loath to Swear or Covenant never to endeavour to take down the Priests of Dan and Bethel or reform the high places It 's dangerous making a solemn Ministerial Covenant Never to obey God in any one great matter and never to repent of so doing Again our Reasons