points of Faith delivered in the Scriptures be better understood and confirmed than by the joynt consent of such Ancient Doctors who conversed with the Apostles or their immediate Successors and are rightly called Apostolici many of which were Persons of great Learning and Eloquence and so could not be charged with ignorance And doubtless they were very industrious in inquiring into the grounds of the Christian Faith for which they forsook all temporal accommodations and most of them their lives and against all opposition have not only handed down to us the Scriptures themselves pure and incorrupt but the proper and genuine sense of them We do not make them Judices but Indices fidei not the Authors but the witnesses to confirm and give evidence in matters of Faith 4. The Papists do calumniate the Reformed Divines as if they rejected the judgment of the Fathers whereas they do with one consent and none more readily than they of the Church of England appeal to their Authority for confirmation of the Faith which they profess I could easily fill a Volume with the testimonies of our Modern Divines concerning the authority of the Ancients how competent Judges they are of the questions now on foot The naming of some few will resolve us whether our Author's Opinion or theirs deserves the imputation of grosness and folly Calvin in his controversie with Pighius de libero Arbitrio says The controversie between me and Pighius would soon be ended if he would declare the tradition of the Church in the certain and perpetual consent of the Holy and Orthodox Bucer says as much on Matth. 1. concerning the consent of the Church about the perpetual Virginity of the Holy Virgin Mary That to doubt of that consent unless some plain Oracle of Scripture doth inforce it is not the part of them that have learned what the Church of Christ is When Zanchy was 70. Years old and had long studied the point He tells us in these words Hoc ego ingenuè profiteor talem esse meam conscientiam ut à veterum Patrum sive dogmatibus sive scripturarum interpretationibus non facilè nisi manifestis scripturarum testimoniis vel necessariis consequentiis apertisque demonstrationibus convictus atque coactus discedere queam Sic enim acquiescat mea conscientia in hac mentis quiete cupio etiam mori Epistola ad Confess fidei p. 47. Gualter in his Preface to Peter Martyr's common places says From hence come all kinds of evils the pest of disputatiousness the violation of all bonds of Charity and shaking the fundamentals of Faith because we do not reverence the Ancients as much as we ought Nor fear I to affirm that the chief cause of the Contentions of our Age is because most Divines insist on the Opinions of their present Masters and read their Books not enquiring what learned Antiquity did think or what errors and heresies were condemned by it As for the Divines of our own Church it may be sufficient to mention Bishop Jewel's Chalengee and how well he discharged it If any learned man of our adversaries said that learned Bishop or all the learned men that be alive be able to bring any one sufficient sentence out of any old Catholick Doctor or Father or out of any old General Council or out of the Holy Scriptures of God or any one example of the Primitive Church whereby it may be clearly and plainly proved that there was any private Mass in the world for 600 years after Christ or that c. to the number of 27. Articles now in controversie between us and the Church of Rome I am content to yield and to subscribe And in his Apologie for the Church of England he says We came as nigh as possibly we could to the Apostolical Churches and the Ancient Bishops neither did we direct our Doctrine only but our Sacraments and form of Publick Prayers to their rites and institutions And after him the Church provided by her constitutions Imprimis videant Concionatores ne quid unquam pro concione doceant quod à populo religiosè teneri credi volunt nisi quod consentaneum sit Veteri Novo Testamento quódque ex iis docuerint Antiqui Patres veteres Episcopi collegerint I add only that of the Royal Martyr in his discourse with Henderson 3d. paper When you and I differ about the sense of the Scriptures and I appeal to the unanimous consent of the Fathers and the Primitive Church you ought to find a more competent Judge or to rest in him that is proposed by me And this shall serve to assoil that question which our Author saith carryeth fire in the tail of it and brings with it a piece of Doctrine which is seldom pleasing to Superiors p. 200. But the fire proves an Ignis fatuus and our Author himself brings water enough to extinguish it for in p. 65. he saith If Aristotle and Aphrodiseus and Galen and the rest of those excellent men whom God hath endued with extraordinary portions of natural knowledge have with all thankful and ingenious men throughout all generations retained their credit intire notwithstanding it is acknowledged that they have all of them in many things swerved from the Truth Then why should not Christians express the same ingenuity to those who have laboured before us in the exposition of the Christian Faith and highly esteem them for their works sake their many infirmities notwithstanding From this general contempt of the Fathers our Author proceeds p. 206. to cast a slurr on S. Augustine For having mentioned S. Augustines argument which he maintained against the Donatists which was Unitatem Ecclesiae per totum Orbem dispersae propter nonnullorum peccata non esse deserendam i. e. that the Unity of the Church spread over the whole world ought not to be forsaken for the sins of some few that were in its communion he adds that though it were de facto false that Donatus his party shut up in Africa was the only Orthodox party yet it might have been true notwithstanding any thing S. Augustine brings to confute it And contrarily though it were de facto true that the part of Christians dispersed over the face of the Earth were the Orthodox yet it might have been false notwithstanding any thing S. Augustine brings to confirm it As if that learned Father who was as close and exact a disputant as the Church hath enjoyed ever since had wholly mistaken the question or were unable to urge one argument pro or con i.e. either for confutation of that wretched Schism or for defence of the Catholick Church That learned Father wrote a very large Volume against those Schismaticks which contains so much both of wit and Argument that there would not need any thing else to be said for the confutation of Schismaticks to the worlds end if his arguments were well understood and applyed And when our Author proves the Donatists in two
necessity of it Christ should profit them nothing Gal. 5. 2. Now from this History as our Author had contrived it he drew several wilde inferences As first p. 203. In this fantastical Hurry I cannot see saith he but all the World were Schismaticks To which I reply That all the World were not concerned in it there being some Nations that differed from both these in the observation of Easter as Socrates l. 5. c. 21. hath observed for even among the Jewish Converts some that agreed on the 14th day differed in the Moon and Venerable Bede observes that our Nation which the Pope pretends to have been his Converts did in those primitive times observe their Easter on the 14th day which by the way is an argument that we at first received the Christian Faith not from the Church of Rome who exploded this custome but more Anciently from Joseph of Arimathea or from St. Philip who as many good Authors affirm planted the Christian Religion in our neighbour Nation of France and as the Asian Churches affirm was one of them that taught them this custom nor do we read that they were condemned for Hereticks for so doing Neither did those Eastern Churches who differed in the Moneth anathematize each other and Socrates ubi supra gives this reason for it They that agree in the same Faith may differ from each other in respect of Rites as the Reformed Churches do at this day And though the Roman Church did excommunicate the Asian yet were they never the more Schismaticks for that being they were sui Juris not under the Roman power And according to our Authors definition of schism they being never members of that Church from which they were excommunicate could not be guilty of schism notwithstanding Victors rigor We say therefore they were still members of the Catholick Church And as for the Roman Church what should make them Schismaticks For though Victor did arrogate too much as to the manner of his proceedings yet as to the matter his prosecution against a Jewish ceremony when it grew into an Opinion of being necessary to be observed was his duty and approved by the practice of St. Paul himself And while there was a controversie between their Governors the People and Clergy too of both Parties continued in due subjection to their Superiors and in mutual charity to one another So that the Separatists of our Age can have no excuse for their Schism from this instance But our Author infers Secondly that this fell out through the ignorance or which he mentioneth also the malice of their Governors and that through the just judgment of God on the People because through sloth and blind obedience they examined not the things which they were taught but like beasts of burthen patiently couched down and indifferently underwent whatsoever their Superiors laid upon them To which I Answer It doth not appear there was any charge of ignorance to be imputed to Victor or his People for the reasons above mentioned much less of malice Our present Sectaries do call their opposition to Ceremonies more innocent than that by the name of zeal and love to the cause of God Nor was there any thing imposed on the Churches of either side that concerned their Faith nor any custome or rite de novo but only the Asian Churches were desired to translate the custome of observing Easter from a day which gave offence not only to the Church of Rome but several other Churches Petavius says the difference was not de Catholico dogmate sed de Ritu seu Ritûs potiùs tempore And if the Superiors in the Asian Churches had thought the Alteration fit as shortly after they did it had doubtless been the Peoples duty to submit for every Church hath power in those things which are indifferent and much more in such things as give offence to other Churches to appoint and alter rites and ceremonies for the publick Worship of God and the People shew themselves not beasts of burthen but Christ's Free-men in submitting to their Governors as far as Christian liberty doth permit If Victor had imposed new Articles of Faith as Pius Quintus did in the Council of Trent doubtless those Primitive Christians would have resisted even to bloud of which they gave too many instances when they constantly endured all manner of torments rather than they would renounce the Faith once delivered to them Our Author therefore needed to ask pardon for wounding the reputation of these Ancient Worthies in cool bloud as well as for massacring at once the authority of all the Fathers in the heat of a temptation p. 204. where he says thus You may plainly see the danger of our appeal to Antiquity for resolution in controversies of Faith and how small relief we are to expect from thence for if the discretion of the chiefest Guides of the Church did in a point so trivial so inconsiderable so mainly fail them as not to see the truth in a subject wherein it is the greatest marvel how they could avoid the sight of it Can we without the imputation of extreme grossness and folly think so poor spirited persons competent Judges of the questions now on foot in the Churches Pardon me I know not what temptation drew that note from me To this I reply 1. Whoever he be that so contemptuously rejects the Authority and trampleth on the reputation of the Fathers hath sufficiently excused those that shall slight his own This is the Author 's own sense Golden Remains p. 260. 2. I refer it to the judgment of the Reader whether Victor Bishop of Rome condemning some of the Asian Churches for adhering too tenaciously to a Jewish ceremony which was of ill consequence to those and other neighbouring Churches were not more excusable than a private person living many hundred years after the fact and never rightly knowing or else wrongfully representing it insolently and causlesly condemning the Ancient Fathers not of one or two Ages or parts of the Church but all in general as if the failing of one man in a point so trivial and inconsiderable as our Author calls it were sufficient reason to condemn them all for indiscreet and poor spirited persons And to impute extreme grossness and folly to all that should think them competent Judges of our differences This is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 beyond that of Abailardus who was wont to say that the Fathers for the most part did think this or that to be right but I think otherwise as if his single authority could out-weigh all theirs 3. He must pretend to have some new light for his guide and be either an Enthusiast or Socinian that can see any danger in appealing to Antiquity for resolution in controverted points of Faith For seeing there is scarce any point of Faith but some unhappy Wits have controverted it and in defence of their Opinions have put the Scriptures on the rack to make them speak their own sense how can
Heylen with whom he was acquainted told him that he found the Arch-bishop whom he knew before to be a nimble Disputant to be as well versed in Books as business That he had been ferreted by him from one hole to another till there was none left to afford him further shelter That he was now resolved to be Orthodox and to declare himself a true Son of the Church of England both for Doctrine and Discipline p. 361 362. If it be demanded why our Author did not refute this Tract in his life-time I answer 1. he did do it as effectually as the Philosopher confuted him that denied motion when he arose from his seat and walked up and down before him for his long profession and practice contrary to what was there written was Protestatio contraria facto 2. The Tract carried its confutation with it as appears in the examination 3. It 's not impossible that he foresaw how it might be serviceable to the Royal Party whom their adversaries had begun to revile and persecute as Arminians and Papists and in some cases poyson well tempered and rightly applied may become medicinal 4. He might be confident such weak arguments as he made use of though they might please the factious multitude who knew no better yet they could do no great hurt among Judicious men And because we cannot guess at the Author's aim which is secret we ought to judge by his actions which were publick The learned Bishop Taylor made use of a like Stratagem to break the Presbyterian power and to countenance Divisions between the Factions which were too much united against the Loyal Clergy for in his Liberty of Prophesying he insists on the same Topicks of Schism and Heresie of the incompetency of Councils and Fathers to determine our Ecclesiastical controversies and of scrupulous Consciences and urgeth far more cogent arguments than our Author did but still he had prepared his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Antidote to prevent any dangerous effect of his discourse Not unlike to some Mountebanks Pardon the Comparison who to amuse the vulgar and to effect their own ends do administer to their Merry-Andrews a certain Dose of Poison but immediately give them such an Antidote as causeth them to cast it up again and hinders the mischievous operation of it For the Judicious Reader may perceive such a reserve though it lay in Ambuscado and be compacted in a narrow compass as may easily rout those Troops which began too soon to cry Victoria and thought of nothing else but dividing the Spoil And if the learned Bishop did this and was blameless the goodness of the End in such cases denominating the Action I see no cause why our Author whose ends as we ought in charity to believe considering the integrity of the Person were for the restoring of peace seeing he represented the causes of War so frivolous and inconsiderable ought to be represented as a Criminal or adversary And thus I have endeavoured to rescue the Author's Person as well as his Papers from the Enemies tents according to the advice of Tully in the case of Muraena Tolle Catonem de Causâ that by any means he should take off Cato from appearing as an Enemy or an Evidence against him lest the Opinion of Cato's vertues should create him more prejudice than the strength of his Arguments were like to do I have only to acquaint the Reader that the reason why in the following Censure I have sometime named the Author as distinct from Mr. Hales is because I believe it is applied by too many to such intents as the Author never thought of and as the Epigrammatist saith of ill repeating so shall I say of ill applying other mens books Malè dum recitas incipit esse tuus I cannot certainly calculate the time when this Tract of Schism was first penned but I suppose it to be about Forty Years since it being quoted by Mr. Chillingworth in his Answer to Knott which wants but little of that age And unless my conjecture and credible information do both fail me the occasion on which it was written was this Mr. Hales and Mr. Chillingworth were of intimate acquaintance and beside a constant correspondence by Letters they had frequent converse with each other but more especially when Mr. Chillingworth came so far in his Answer as to Vindicate our Church from Schism which was charged on her by Knott He consulted with Mr. Hales concerning the nature of Schism and after discourse he desired Mr. Hales to write his thoughts about it which he did in this Tract out of which Mr. Chillingworth urged some arguments which I think are the worst in all his Book Sure I am that they caused ill reflections not only on the private reputation of Mr. Hales and Mr. Chillingworth but on the Church of England as if that did favour the Socinian Principles The Author of Infidelity Unmasked writing against Mr. Chillingworth tells him that his arguments concerning Schism were conceits borrowed from a Letter of Mr. John Hales of Eaton written to a private Friend of his as I am credibly informed saith that Author by a Person well known to them both at that time and who saw the Letter it self And he farther affirms of his own certain knowledge that Mr. Hales was of a very inconstant judgment One Year for Example says he doubting of or denying the blessed Trinity and the next Year professing and adoring the same And another Person in a Pamphlet called the Total Summ written against Mr. Chillingworth reviles him on the same account in these words In this you shew the Adamantinal hardness of your Socinian forehead and Samosatenian Conscience The truth is that some arguments borrowed from the Socinians and urged first by Mr. Hales and from him by Mr. Chillingworth gave occasion to that imputation But as for Mr. Chillingworth he had sufficiently secured his reputation in the Preface of his Book where he thus professeth I believe the Doctrine of the Trinity the Deity of our Saviour and all other Supernatural verities received in the Scripture as truly and as heartily as any man And whereas he dyed in the Faith of the Church of England he hath given assurance that he was then no Socinian As for Mr. Hales whatever he was when he wrote this Tract of Schism and some others yet as his Adversary says he did afterward profess and adore the blessed Trinity And for the Reader 's satisfaction as well as for Mr. Hales his Vindication I shall transcribe that account which he gives of his Faith concerning the Trinity in his Golden Remains Mr. HALES's Confession of the TRINITY The Summ of whatever either the Scriptures teach or the Schools conclude concerning the Doctrine of the Trinity is comprised in these few Lines GOD is One numerically one more one than any single Man is one if Unity could suscipere magis minus yet God is so One that he admits of distinction and so admits of
the Iconoclastae or adversaries to the worshipping of Images we may with more truth account them who were Iconolatrae worshippers of Images Hereticks if not Idolaters By the way let me observe that if it be my duty to withhold communion from such as set up a false way of worshipping God as this Council did it is my duty also to withdraw from the Communion of such as profess false opinions of the true God as the Arrians c. did to whose assemblies the Author sees no reason but we may joyn our selves p. 215. Though this be contrary to his own rule p. 218. It is alike unlawful to make profession of known or suspected falshoods as to put in practice unlawful or suspected Actions I hope the Reader will not think his patience injured if on this occasion I give him a brief account how Images were first brought into the Church of God and what reception they found in the Primitive times of both which I shall speak briefly They were first brought in by lewd hereticks and simple Christians newly converted from Paganism the customs whereof they had not fully unlearned Bishop Usher in his Answer to Maloon p. 508. gives this particular that the Gnostick hereticks had some Images painted in colours others framed of gold silver and other matter which they said were the representations of Christ made while he was in the power of Pontius Pilate The Collyridians who at certain times offered Cakes to the Virgin Mary did also cause Images of her to be made Carpocrates and Marcellina his companion brought the Images of Jesus and Paul to Rome in the time of Anicetus and worshipped them But the more plentiful seeds of this Idolatrous worship were sown by the heathen converts as Epiphanius observes We have seen the pictures of Peter and Paul and of Christ himself saith he for that of old they have been wont by a heathenish custom thus to honour them whom they counted their benefactors or Saviours And the Arrians and Donatists having for a long time rent the Church of God and pulled down the Fences both of Church and State they made way for vast numbers of Infidels to enter among whom the Christians being mixed and living in subjection to them in divers places they learned this custom also of making and honouring the Images of those whom they accounted their Patrons and benefactors Men of heretical perswasions were the first that were tainted worshipping the Graves and Pictures of their Leaders then these painted toyes insnared the vulgar and at Rome under Gregory the Second the worship of them is first practised and defended but at the same time opposed by Leo Isauricus and his successors And in a Council at Constantinople 338 Bishops condemned it Anno 754. the primitive Fathers having before that time constantly disputed against the very making and painting of Images as well as worshipping them whose testimonies against Images it will be in vain to heap up here I think it enough to observe that since Bishop Jewel challenged the Church of Rome to shew but one authority out of the Ancients for setting up of Images in the Churches and worshipping them during the first 600 years there hath not yet been any tolerable reply made But in the year 787. Hadrian being Bishop of Rome and Tharasius of Constantinople like Herod and Pilate were reconciled in this mischievous design and having the opportunity of a female Governess for Dux foemina facti they prevailed with Irene the Mother of Constantine to assemble a Council at Nice which the Papists call the seventh Oecumenical Council but by the Ancients was condemned as a Pseudo-synod This Irene was a Pagan the daughter of a Tartarian King and an Imperious tyrannical woman who in despite to the Council of Constantinople that had decreed against Images summoned this Synod which she so far defended that she caused the eyes of her own son Constantine to be pulled out because he would not consent to the Idolatrous having of Images as Bp. Jewel observes in the Article of Images where you may see more of the ignorance and impiety of this Synod This was the woman that called this meeting of the Bishops and you may guess under what fears they were of the cruelty of that woman who was so unnatural to her Son He that will be satisfied more fully concerning the Ignorance of this Synod may read it in their Acts mentioned by Binius or Surius or in Bishop Jewel concerning the Worshipping of Images ubi suprá Mittens Irene convocavit omnes Episcopos saith Baronius ad annum 787. so that the Pope had not then the power of calling Councils by the Cardinals own confession There was great intercourse of Letters between Hadrian and Tharasius before this Council was assembled which was done at last by Tharasius perswading of Irene and then there met 350 Bishops who agreed in this base decree for the adoration of Images as Bishop Usher calls it In this Synod the question for admission of lapsed Bishops and Presbyters was first proposed and although the Bishops that were readmitted were tainted with Arrianism as appears by the Synods demand that they should in the first place make an acknowledgment of the blessed Trinity yet Baronius slightly passeth over that and makes mention only of their submission to that point which as well the Cardinal as that Synod chiefly designed to advance i.e. the worshipping of images Basilius of Ancyra Theodorus of Myrene and Theodosius Bishop of Amorium are first called and these three post confessionem Sanctissimae Trinitatis of which the Cardinal says nothing more make a large profession of their sorrow for having adhered so long to the Iconoclastae or oppugners of Image-worship and present a confession of the Orthodox Faith as he calls it in opposition to those errors and hereticks to which they had adhered Now what that Orthodox faith was appears by the Confessions mentioned by Baronius wherein they did Anathematize them that broke down the images as Calumniators of Christians and such as did assume the sentences that are in the Scriptures against Idols and apply them to the venerable Images with much more to the like purpose But concerning their reception into the Church the question is greatly agitated and the books being produced by which it did appear that Athanasius Cyril and other ancient Pillars of the Church had received notorious hereticks into the Church a Bishop of the Province of Sicilia objects that the Canons of the Fathers which had been produced were enacted against the Novatians Encratists and Arrians hujus autem haeresis magistros quo loco habebimus but in what rank saith he shall we place the Masters of this heresie To which it was replyed by a Deacon of the same Province that it should be considered Minórne est quae nunc novata est haeresis an major illis quae hactenus fuere whether this new-sprung heresie were greater or less than those that were before it This is
things against that and never as yet did that I hear of agree upon any other nor I think ever will For let it be considered that there is scarce any part of our Liturgy which some have not excepted against and you will find our Author's advice impracticable He himself would have no Absolution as appears not only by his omission of that Office when he enumerates the parts of a Liturgy but by telling us that the power of the Keys belongs to every one Clergy or Lay Male or Female not only for himself but for the benefit of others p. 172. and p. 183. that you may as well make your Muletter your Confessor as your Parish-Priest Others will have no confession Some are displeased at the Responses others cannot be reconciled to the Lord's Prayer against the use of which as the Leaders of one Faction have Printed so the Grandees of another have often preached The Reader knows what sort of People cannot joyn in the Gloria Patri the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds and it is well if they will stand to the Apostles The Te Deum and Magnificat are displeasing to some the Collects because they are too short and the Litany because it is too long to others Some are angry at the Prayer for Bishops others not very well pleased with those for the King If you read what our Author saith p. 60. concerning the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper as 1. that in the Communion there is nothing given but Bread and Wine 2. The Bread and Wine are signs indeed but not of any thing there exhibited but of something given long before 3. That Jesus Christ is eaten at the Communion-Table in no sense neither spiritually by vertue of any thing done there nor really nor metaphorically nor literally 4. The Spiritual eating of Christ of common to all places as well as the Lords Table you may see the Author was no friend to the Office for Administration of the Lord's Supper And it 's well known who are enemies to that of Baptism Our Author dislikes the consecration of Bishops to whom he denies any Superiority but that of reverence others oppose the Ordination of Priests It is sad to consider at what a Distance many of our People yet keep themselves and children from the Catechism and Confirmation and the burial of the Dead only that of Marriage they are pretty well reconciled to So that I say our Author's Proposals are impracticable if not impossible to be observed either to remove from our Liturgies whatever is i.e. seems scandalous to every Party or to leave nothing but what all agree on and I think we shall all agree sooner in an Universal character and language too than in such a Liturgy Our first Reformers have given us undeniable Proofs that they were very learned and very good Men and Bishop Jewel in their name professeth that they did consult the ancient Liturgies of the purest times and adapted ours to them The Papists condemn us for castrating as much as was thought sinful must we be still condemned for retaining what is decent If any thing in our Liturgy had been contrary to the Word of God I am confident the Church would have expunged it as soon as its adversaries had discovered it but if it be quarrelled at for requiring us to worship God according to the Apostolical injunction in Decency and order we had rather be accounted beasts of burden in submitting to the lawful Ordinances of our Superiors than wild Asses for kicking against our Masters It hath alway been the practice of the Church of God conform to the practice of the Holy Apostles Acts 15. when any opinions or practices contrary to Faith or Unity began to prevail to assemble in Councils and Synods that by conference and consulting with the Scriptures and Primitive customes they might raise a fence against the growing torrent and as well confirm their own as confute the opinions and practices of their adversaries as may be seen in the Decrees and Canons made in the first 600 Years And when by general consent and subscription these Decrees were approved they did as occasion required insert sometimes into the Liturgy such passages out of their own or former Articles as might help to instruct the People in the true Faith and be an antidote against those poisonous errors that were become Epidemical Hence first the Apostles Creed and the Gloria Patri c. and those being not express enough against prevailing errors the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds were inserted and some whole Articles were added to the Apostles Creed And if as our Author saith a man may go to an Arrian Church so there be no Arrianism exprest in their Liturgy why may not our Superiors require our communion in the Liturgy which is free from that and all other Doctrinal errors And whereas our Liturgy is in all things conform to our Articles of Doctrine which are so free from the exceptions either of Calvinists or Arminians as that both Parties appeal to it as to the standard whereby they would have their Opinions tryed as appears in the late quiquarticular controversies between Doctor Heylin and Mr. Hickman I see no reason why they may not upon our Author's grounds conform much rather to ours than unto Arrian Liturgies A Liturgy that hath past many fiery Trials first in the Marian days when the Composers of it imbraced it at their Martyrdom after which it appeared so inoffensive to the Papists themselves which I account no small commendation that for some Years after Queen Elizabeth came to the Crown they omitted not to frequent the use of it and in the beginning of our troubles when the Smectymnuans heated the Irons and made it pass the trial Ordeal its innocency was such that it came off untoucht And when in the Grand Debate their Successors thought to have blown it up by the fewel which they had heaped together in a mock-liturgy their plot was so confused and imperfect that a great part of the Brotherhood were of the Opinion that the old was better And I am still perswaded if it were put to the vote whether this Liturgy should be retained or any other formerly used in the Primitive or now in use among the Reformed Churches brought into its room they would give the like suffrage as I have heard Sr. Harry Martyne did when some of Cromwels Confidents had moved the question whether They should have a King or no King that if they must have a King they had rather have the Old Gentleman meaning King Charles of blessed memory than any other in the Nation Our Author begins to treat of Conventicles from p. 226. and continueth it to the end The substance of which I shall present to the Reader in these several and divers Periods First he says truly that all meetings upon unnecessary occasions of Separation are to be so stiled so that in this sense a Conventicle is nothing else but a congregation of schismaticks
the hearts of the People filled with invincible prejudices and scruples to the neglect and contempt of this necessary duty which by Christ's institution and by Primitive practice ought to be frequently performed and by the Constitutions of the Church at least three times every Year but hath been totally omitted by some very adult Christians all their lives contrary to the advice and practice of former Nonconformists as well as to the commands of God and his Church And what can the end of these things be but hardning the People in their disobedience and ignorance in uncharitable prejudices and distances from their more pious and peaceable Brethren and provoking their Superiors to Acts of rigor and severity unless they will permit all things to run to confusion And whereas upon the late Test all Persons that had any publick office or imployment were required to receive this Holy Sacrament according to the Custome of the Church of England or to forfeit that imployment not one of an Hundred of those scrupulous Persons that were concerned continued a Recusant I suppose they have sufficiently convinced the Magistrates that the best way of removing these Scruples is to require the more frequent practice of that duty under the like penalties And now I hope the frivolousness of our Author's position p. 218. That wheresoever false or suspected Opinions and he asserts the same of practising suspected Actions in the same period are made a piece of the Liturgy he that separates is not the Schismatick doth evidently appear And if he that separates be not the Schismatick then they that require the performance of a suspected action are so and by consequence it will be in the power of every scrupulous faction to denominate their Governours to be the Schismaticks As our Author determineth the case a man may as innocently disbelieve any Article of his Christian faith upon this pretence of scruples against them as disobey the command of his Superiors For saith he p. 194. when uncertain conclusions are obtruded for truth or acts ministring just scruples are required to be performed consent were conspiracy and open contestation is not faction or schism c. And p. 218. he gives this Reason for it It is alike unlawful to make profession of known or suspected falshoods as to put in practice unlawful or suspected Now suppose a subtle Socinian should meet with a scrupulous person and tell him that he doth well indeed to suspend his Communion from that Church which imposeth those things to be practised in the worship of God which have no warrant from thence but are rather condemned as Will-worship and Superstition but yet while he strains at a Gnat he swallows a Camel and suffers his Conscience to be imposed upon in matters of Faith which are of greater concern and then insinuate that there is no express text in Scripture nor any good Argument from Reason for a Trinity of persons in the Unity of the Godhead but both Scripture and Reason affirm there can be but one Supreme eternal God and then by wresting the Scriptures and perswading him that the Doctrine of the Trinity had its rise from Ecclesiastical Tradition not from the Scriptures and they that require the belief of it do teach for Doctrines the Commandments of men suppose I say by this leaven the scrupulous humor is fermented and swells up into a strong suspicion and he begins to grow sowr and discontented with his Teachers and likes the Arrian and Socinian Doctors better Doth not this man proceed upon the Authors grounds and may be as much justified by them if he turn Heretick as if he become a Schismatick And indeed there is not one Article of our Faith but cunning Sophisters may work upon persons disposed to scruples to have strong suspicions of them For Mr. Baxter tells us in his Saints everlasting rest Part 1. ch 7. Sect. 14. That Professors of Religion did oppose almost all the Worship of God out of Conscience which others did out of Prophaneness Upon this very pretense some will not hear of Infant Baptism nor others of the Lord's day but turn Anabaptists and Sabbatarians and for ought I know others may justifie rebellion and not only the Omission of moral duties but the Commission of any vice or impiety Experience hath evidently taught us that those persons who have been prone to entertain scruples in matters of Religion first have fallen next into sedition and rebellion and then to impiety and immoralities to Quakerism Atheism unnatural affection to Parents and acts and practices of as great cruelty and barbarity against themselves as against others But our Author grounds his Objection on Rom. 14. 23. Whatsoever is not of Faith is sin and He that doubteth is damned if he eat And this objection seems to be inforced by the Authority of Bishop Sanderson who p. 228. de Obligatione Conscientiae saith thus If any one through some fast rooted error of judgment do think the Law to be unjust which is not so the obligation of the Law doth remain notwithstanding that error of mind so that he is not free from sin if he do not obey yet that he sinneth more grievously if he should obey before that error be laid aside Which ease the Reverend Casuist intended to speak of more at large when he should come to treat of the comparison of both obligations viz. as I suppose the authority of the Magistrate and of Conscience For I perceive the question to which he makes this an Answer was What assurance that any Law is unjust is required to secure a subject in point of Conscience that he is not bound by that Law But the good Bishop never came to that point under which we might have expected his farther judgment in that case and therefore I shall take a little pains in finding out his resolution in some other parts of his writings Answer The Bishop says If a subject because that probable reasons do appear on both sides knoweth not nor can determine whether a Law be just or no so that his judgment hang in aequilibrio not knowing to which to incline in this case the subject is bound actually to obey so that he sinneth if he do not obey and if he do obey he sinneth not Now I observe that when the Bishop comes to give his reasons why a subject should obey against a scrupulous Conscience the same Reasons do require his obedience though his scruples he inveterate and obfirmed yea in things doubtful as by these following Reasons of his may appear His first Reason is because by a Reason of Law In dubiis potior est conditio possidentis therefore where there is a contest concerning a right betwixt the Lawgiver and the subject the right is alway to be presumed to be on the Lawgivers side as being in possession of the right unless some fit reason can be given to the contrary but in this case i. e. in things doubtful no such fit reason can
be given because it would destroy the supposition which is that the things are equally doubted of A second reason is taken from another rule of Law That in a doubtful case the safer part is to be chosen and it is certainly more safe to obey with a doubting Conscience than not to obey with a doubting Conscience Because secondly it is safer in giving honour to Superiors to exceed that measure which we owe than to be defective in it Thirdly Because from the same rule it is generally more safe that he who is free should think himself bound than that he who is bound should think himself free for seeing through the natural pravity of mans heart he sinneth more often through too much confidence than through too much fear and we are more prone to carnal licentiousness than is fit and we are all too impatient to bear the yoke unless we do with full purpose of mind resolve to obey such Laws as are not evidently unjust the wisdom of the flesh and the craft of the Serpent thereunto added will often suggest such excuses as will hinder us from doing our duty in this respect In his Sermon on Rom. 14. 23. the Bishop first shews what a doubting Conscience is namely when the scales hang even so as a man cannot well resolve whether way he should rather take Sect. 25. which he says may be because reasons seem to be probable pro and con and there are learned men of the one opinion as well as of the other and Sect. 28. he says If the liberty of the agent be determined by some Superior power to whom he oweth obedience so as he is not sui juris ad hoc to do or not to do at his own choice but to do what he is commanded this one circumstance quite altereth the whole case and now he is bound in Conscience to do the thing commanded his doubtfulness of mind whether that thing be lawful or no notwithstanding And afterward he adds Truly it is a great wonder to me that any man endued with understanding and that is able in any measure to weigh the force of those precepts and reasons which bind inferiors to yield obedience to their Superiors should be otherwise minded in cases of like nature Whatever is commanded us by them whom God hath set over us either in Church Common-wealth or Family quod tamen non sit certum displicere Deo saith S. Bernard which is not evidently contrary to the Law and will of God ought of us to be received and obeyed no otherwise than if God himself had commanded because God himself hath commanded us to obey the higher powers and to submit our selves to their Ordinances And in the close of the 29 Sect. If the Conscience be only doubtful whether the thing be lawful or no but have not as yet passed a peremptory judgment against it yea although he rather incline to think it unlawful in that case if the Magistrate shall command it to be done the subject with a good Conscience may do it nay he cannot with a good Conscience refuse to do it though it be Dubitante Conscientiâ And he is positive p. 240. de Obligatione Conscientiae That there is no reason nor shew of reason yet given why the power of determining and appointing things indifferent should not oblige in Ecclesiastical as well as in Civil affairs Pardon the repetition of the Arguments because as Diamonds are not cut but by Diamonds so I could not presume of explaining his meaning but by himself And if the Reader will but add to this what Mr. Falkner hath said concerning this objection from Rom. 14. 23. he may easily perceive that neither that text nor any conclusions to be drawn from it can be prest for the service of our Separatists For as he says p. 425. This rule must be applyed to the special case intended which is that wherever the omitting any action is certainly free from sin and the practice of it appeareth to any person doubtful there to do that action is a very evil and dangerous practice because it containeth in it a chusing to run the hazard of Sin which choice is alway a sin But the case is much different when both acting and forbearing may be doubted of where the one of them is a duty and it is impossible that both of them should be forborn For God having commanded Superiors to rule and Inferiors to obey to suspend all action here is to perform an inward moral action of choice about a matter of duty which if it be not regularly managed is a sin And in this case so far as concerneth the obedience of a Child Servant or Subject they ought to account their Superiors command to lay such an obligation upon them to duty that they must be guided thereby unless they be able to prove themselves bound to act the contrary Having thus removed the Objection concerning doubts and scruples I may take liberty to recreate my Reader with a known story of a Scrupling house erected in Oxford by some of the Visitors Anno 1646. There was in S. Peters the East a place set a part for all people that were dissatisfied or troubled in mind to meet in every Tuesday for resolution of their doubts in a plain and familiar discourse Many Sermons were preached to commend the usefulness of that Ordinance which they grounded on several places of Scripture One day while Hen. Wilkinson Sen. was Chair-man and Mr. Reynolds Harris Temple Cornish Lungly and Cheynel were set down with him some souldiers of the Independent party Erbury Grymes Hewson and others came to visit the Visitors and after a while Erbury proposeth his doubt whether in the Church of Christ the Ministery was committed to certain select men for he thought all the gifted Brethren might preach and declared his readiness to dispute it with them but the _____ pretending an Order agreed upon for delaying the resolution of Scruples a week after the first proposal put off the dispute until the next meeting Which being noised through the University a great concourse of Gentlemen Scholars and Souldiers attended it And Erbury who had been sometime of Brasen-nose Colledge after a bold Prologue begun the Comedy affirming That in the Church of Christ there was no Commission given to Select men for preaching the Gospel And after some discourse about stating the Question Erbury urgeth that if they had such a commission it was either Ordinary or Extraordinary The Answer was that it was Ordinary He replies then they had it from the Bishops or some others At which the Doctores Resoluti were unresolved what to Answer for if they should say from the Bishops they feared to displease the people to whom they had often preached that they were Antichristian and yet they could not deny it they having been all Episcopally Ordained And so being put into some confusion and not replying directly but seeking subterfuges the souldiers were with great acclamations
licence to preach in his Dominions How Humane Laws bind the Conscience Q. Whether the Laws of men do bind the Conscience Answ p. 37. Taking conscience in a stricter sense as including essentially a relation to God's obligation the full sense of the question is this Whether it be a sin against God to break the laws of man Answ It is a sin against God to break such Laws as Rulers are authorized by God to make First because God commandeth us to obey our Rulers God commandeth us to obey in general and their Law determineth of the particular matter therefore God obligeth us in conscience of his Law to obey them in that particular 2. Because by making them his Officers by his commission he hath given them a certain beam of authority which is Divine as derived from God therefore they can command us by a power derived from God therefore to disobey is to sin against a power derived from God Man being God's officer first his own Law layeth on us an obligation on derivatively Divine for it is no Law which hath no obligation and it is no authoritative obligation which is not derived from God 2. God's own Law bindeth us to obey Man's Laws Romans 13. And it may be a good reason to perswade obedience to our Ecclesiastical Governours because Preaching is a cheap and easie work in comparison of Church-government Take heed of engaging your selves in a Sect or Faction a narrow Sectarian separating mind will make all the truths of God give place to the opinions of his Party and measure the prosperity of the Gospel by the prosperity of his Party he will not stick to persecute all the rest of the Church of Christ if the interest of his Sect require it Overvalue not any private or singular opinions of your own or others for if once spiritual pride and ignorance of your own weakness make you espouse particular opinions as peculiarly your own you will think your conceits more illuminating and necessary than they are as if Mens sincerity lay in the imbracing of them and their Salvation on the receiving of them and think all that are against your opinion deserve to be cast out as enemies to Reformation and perhaps Twenty Years after experience may bring you to your wits and make you see the falshood or smalness of all those points which you made so great a matter of and then what comfort will you have of your persecutions O the deceitfulness of the heart of man Little do the many real Separatists who cry out against Persecution suspect that the same spirit is in them Whence is Persecution but from thinking ill of others and abhorring or not loving them and do not you do so by those whom you causlesly separate from It is one and the same sin in the Persecutor and Divider or Separatist which causeth the one to smite their Brethren and the other to excommunicate them the one to cast them into Prison as Schismaticks and the other to cast them out of the Church as profane the one to account them intolerable in the Land and the other to account them intolerable in the Church the inward thoughts of both are the same that those whom they smite or separate from are bad and unlovely and unfit for better usage But I have observed that Professors of Religion did oppose and deride almost all that worship of God out of pretended conscience which others did out of profaness Saints Rest part 1. c. 7. Sect. 14. It was none of the old cause that the People should have liberty and the Magistrate should have no power in all matters of God's worship faith and conscience And as it is not the old cause so it is not the good cause For first it contradicteth the express revelation of the will of God in the Holy Scripture Moses as a Magistrate had to do in matters of Religion and so had the Kings of Israel and Judah Law and providence are both quite changed if toleration of false worship and other abuses of Religion tend not to the ruine of the Common-wealth If Magistrates must give liberty for all to propagate a false religion then so must Parents and Masters also which would be a crime so horrid in the nature and effects of it as I am loth to name with its proper titles The Magistrates will quickly find that the distractions of the Church will breed and feed such distractions in the Common-wealth as may make them wish they had quenched the fire while it was yet quenchable Our unity is not only our strength but their strength and the fire that begun in the Church may if let alone reach the Court. Pag. 423. of his 5. Disputations he lays down this as the summ of what he had said That Man may determine of modes and circumstances of Worship necessary and commanded in genere but not determined by God in specie Sect. 65. and then infers Sect. 67. If the mischoosing of such circumstances by Church-governors be but an inconvenience and do not destroy the Ordinance it self or frustrate the ends of it we are to obey 1. For he is the Judge in his own work and not we 2. The thing is not sinful though inconvenient 3. Obedience is commanded to our lawful Governors Sect. 70. And when we do obey in a case of miscommanding it is not a doing evil that good may come of it as some do misconceive but it is only a submitting to that which is ill-commanded but not evil in him that doth submit It is the determiner that is the cause of the inconvenience and not the obeyer Nor is it inconvenient for me to obey though it be worse perhaps to him that commandeth while he sinneth in commanding he may make it my duty to obey p. 461. Sect. 6. The reasons of this are obvious and clear even because it is the office of the Governors to determine of such circumstances It is the Pastor's office to guide and over-see the Flock and when he determineth these he is but in his own way and doth but his own work and therefore he is therein the Judge if the case be controvertible If none shall obey a Magistrate or Pastor in the works of their own office as long as they think he did them not the best way all Governours then would be presently overthrown and obedience denyed We are sure that God hath commanded us to obey them that are ever us in the Lord 1 Thess 5. 12. Hebr. 13. 7. 17 c. And therefore a certain duty may not be forborn on uncertain conjectures or upon every miscarriage of them that we owe it to This would un-church all Churches as they are Political Societies for if Pastors be taken down and the work of Pastors the Church is taken down S. 7. And the things in which the Pastor is now supposed to err are not of themselves unlawful but only by such an accident as being