of Salvation such could not be brought to Faith Holiness and Salvation for want of teaching it is yet my sin to preach to them and my duty to let them rather be damned if I have not the Bishops consent to teach them and that because it is the Bishop and not I that shall answer for their damnation VIII That it is disputable with you whether those to whom Church power is given viz. Diocesans may not change not only the local temporary circumstances but the very Church-forms and suspend Laws of Christ. IX That Baptism entreth the Baptized into some particular Church and consequently under this fore-described Church-Government X. That in the case of Preaching the Gospel Ministers may in many cases do it though Emperours and Kings forbid them as in the days of Constantius Valens yea and better men but not if the Bishop forbid them or consent not XI That circa Sacra if the King command the Churches for Uniformity one Translation of the Bible one Version or Meter of the Psalms one Liturgy one Time or Place of Worship c. and the Bishop another we ought to obey the Bishop against the command of the King XII That the required Subscriptions Declarations Rubricks and Canons are primarily the Laws of the Church which the King and Parliament do confirm by their Sanction and therefore the Church is the Expounder of them These are some of your Assertions which I cannot yet receive I. My Reasons against the first are these 1. Because this maketh Gods of men and so is Idolatry giving them Gods proper Power and Prerogative 2. Yea it taketh down God or his Laws and setteth them above him For there cannot be two Absolute Governors that have not one Will. If I must not appeal from them to God then I must appeal from God to them that is I must break his Law if they bid me or else they are not Absolute 3. This maketh all Gods Laws at the will of maâ— as alterable or dispensible Man may forbid all that God commandeth and I must obey 4. Then all Villanies may be made Virtues or Duties at the will of man If they command us to curse God or Blaspheme or be perjured or commit Fornication Murder or Idolatry it would become a Duty 5. Then the Power and Lives of Kings would be at the Clergies mercy For if their power be Absolute they may make Treason and Rebellion a Duty 6. And all Family-Societies and Civil Converse migbt be overthrown while an Absolute Clergy may disoblige men from all duty to one another 7. Then the Council at Lateran which you have excellently proved in your Considerations to be the Author of its Canons doth or did oblige Princes to exterminate their Reformed Subjects and disoblige Subjects from their Allegiance to Princes that obey not the Pope herein and are excommunicate So of Greg. 7 th's Council Rom. 8. Then did the Church or Kingdom of England well to disobey or forsake the Roman Power that was over them 9. Were not our Martyrs rather Rebels that died for disobeying an Absolute Power 10. How should two contradicting Absolute Powers viz. General Councils be both obeyed E. g Nicen. 1. and Arimini Sirm. and Tyr. or Ephes. 2 and Calced 11. How will this stand with the Judgment and practice of the Apostles that said Whether it be meet that we obey God or man judg ye 12. How will it stand with Conformity to the Church of England that in the Articles saith that General Councils may err and have erred in matter of Faith c. 13. Is it not against the sense of all mankind even the common Light of Nature where utter Atheism hath not prevailed Say not that I wrong you by laying all this odium on your self I lay it but on your words And I doubt not but though disputing Interest draw such words from you on consideration you will re-call them by some limitations II. My Reasons against your second must pre-suppose that we understand one another as to the sense of the word Diocesan Church which being your â—erm had I been with you I must have desired you first to explain The word Diocess of old you know signified a part of the Empire larger than a Province and that had many Metropolitans in it I suppose that is not your sense Sometimes now it is taken for that space of ground which we call a Diocess sometimes for all the people in that space And with us a Diocesan Church is a Church of the lowest Order containing in it a multitude of fixed Parochial Congregations which have every one their stated Presbyter who is no Bishop and Vnum altare and are no Churches but parts of a Church and which is individuated by one Bishop and the measuring-space of ground whose inhabitants are its Members Till you tell me the contrary I must take this for your sense For you profess to me that you speak of such Diocesan Churches as ours and they have some above a thousand others many hundred Parishes and you say our Parishes are not Churches but Parts of a Church and so Families are 2. Either you mean that a Diocesan Church is the first in order of Execution and Existence or else in order of Intention and so last in Existence and Execution I know not your meaning and therefore must speak to both I. That a Diocesan Church is first in Intention is denied by me and disproved though it belong to you to prove it 1. Intentions no where declared of God in mature or supernatural Revelations are not to be asserted of him as Truths But a prime intention of a Diocesan Church is no where declared of God Ergo not to be asserted of him as truth 2. It is the end or ultimum rei complementum which is first in intention where there is ordo intentionis But a Diocesan Church is not the end or ultimum rei complementum Ergo not first intended The Major is not deniable The Minor hath the consent as far I as know of all the world For they are all either for the Hierarchy or against it They that are for it say that a Metropolitan is above a Diocesan and a Provincial above a Metropolitan and a Patriarchal above a Provincial and a National which hath Patriarchs as the Empire had above that and â—ay the new Catholicks an humane universal above a National Church as the complement or perfection and therefore must be first intended But those that are against the Hierarchy think that all these are Church-corruptions or humane policies set up by Usurpation and therefore not of prime Divine Intention 3. If you should go this way I would first debate the question with you how far there is such a thing as ordo intentionis to be ascribed to God For though St. Thomas as you use to call him assert such intentions it is with many limitations and others deny it and all confess that it needeth much Explication to be
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
from Popery are 1. That it cherisheth Ignorance and I am sure that is the soil of all wickedness God Christ the Spirit and Scripture are Light and Satan is the Prince of Darkness 2. That it liveth like the Leech on blood hating and destroying the most holy persons who differ from them To these my Soul is unreconcilable I hate cruelty to Papists or Infidels much more to godly faithful persons that do hurt to none And I think I have convinced Mr. Dodwell himself that I am not inclined for the avoiding of Popery to run into any contrary Extreme nor to imitate them thaâ— ignorantly call Truth or harmless things Antichristian or Popish The name of Popery doth not affright me from any truth of God What I have written in many Books especially in the last part of my Catholick Theology and what censures I have suffered for it which never moved me to comply with the Censurers I think prove it I again and again profess That if the Papists or such as I now deal with would but prove that God ever made or allowed such a Church as they plead for in the world that is an Vniversal Church constituted or unified by any one Head or Supreme Governing pâ—râ— Monarchical or Aristocratical under Christ the Dispute whether it be Pope or Council or Cardinals or Colledge of Bishops in all the world shall not hinder me from a chearful and joyful declaring my self a Papist without partiality fear or shame in the sense that the word Papist hath still signified with such as I converse with These things I have taken the boldness to ask some of the greatest that on the fore mentioned terms appropriate the name of the Church of England to their Sect or Party and I could get no answer from them viz. Whether they took the Councils of Constance and Basil for Papists And whether they now take the Bishops and Church of France for Papists And whether they took Gerson Cusanus Cassander Erasmus for Papists or not 2. If yea What is the difference between the said Papists Church-Form and Government and that which these call the Church Catholick and Dispute for 3. If not Then is not the Controversie de nomine Whether the French Bishops and Church and the said Councils being of the same Form and Religion with the Church of England as called by these men ought to be called Papists or not And for that I shall strive with none Let every man call them as he seeth cause or if he will as they will call themselves Let them be Papists in France and Protestants in England I contend not for names But I wonder not at these Church-men if they unchurch the French Protestants and condemn their Ministry and Sacraments as none How else could their Persecution be justified And O that they would tell us what Churches they be that they live in communion with Whether the French Spanish Italian Greeks Nestorians Jacobites Copties Abassines be in their Communion or not If yea Whether the Reformed Churches be not as worthy of their communion If not whether the Church of England be all the Catholick Church in their account O that we could long more for God's righteous final Iudgment to which we appeal though Mr. Dodwell be against it and for the world of perfect Light and Love and Union Dated Septemb. 2. 1681. appointed a Publick Fast for the burning of London I have not time to gather the Errata of the Press I cast my eye on these Pag. 9. l. 19. for natures r. names p. 10. l. antep dele and. p. 11. l. antep r. is in p. 17. l. 1. for or r. over p. 5. l. 29. after excommunicating r. Christ's servants for not forsaking their faithful Pastors p. 10. l. ult for of r. by p. 16. l. 32. for our r. one p. 90. l. 12 r. temerity p. 139. l. 17. for by r. to pag. 151. l. 4. for by r. my c. THE CONTENTS A Late Letter of Mr. Dodwell's with the Answer written since the rest was printed Chap. 1. Of Mr. Dodwell's displeasure against me as if I accused him to be a Papist and wronged the Councils of Bishops p. 1. Chap. 2. His schismatical Church-destroying Scheme the sum of his great schismatical book confuted p. 7 Chap. 3. The consequents of Mr. Dodwell's foresaid Doctrine p. 21 Chap. 4. My words of Gods Collation of Ministerial Authority vindicated from the forgeries and fallacies of Mr. Dodwell p. 27 What my assertion is of the cause of Church power p. 29. The contrary p. 32. The truth proved p 33 c. His objections answered p. 36. c. Bishops are of God p. 46. c. His sad qualification of Ministers p. 48. Preferring God is no wrong to Government p. 54. What succession we have p. 54. Of Aidan and Finans Episcopacy p. 57. His assertion of supreme Church-power from whom there is no appeal to Scripture to God or the life to come and whose intention is the measure of the power of all ordained by them examined p. 57 c. Whether the Church on earth be one visible society under one visible humane Government p. 59. Whether Divine Authority may not be pretended for practising contrary to some superiors p. 60 Chap. 5. Wherein Mr Dodwell's deceits and their danger lie p. 63. Whether there be but one sense of all terms which causes obliging men to mean all that have skill in causes are to understand p. 63. Twelve great doctrinal Articles in which we differ from Mr. Dodwell p. 65. Some questions put to him p. 68 His second Letter to me from Ireland p. 70. My Answer to it p. 75. proving the impossibtlity of just Discipline in the Diocesan way which I dissent from The short Answer to Mr. Dodwell's long Letter which Dr Sherlocke and Mr. Morrice extol which is fully answered in my Treatise of Episcopacy p. 90. A Letter sent to Mr. Dodwell Mar. 12 1681. A Letter to Mr. Dodwell Nov. 15. 1680. Anothâ—r to him of July 9. 1677. opening many of our chief differences p. 100. Another after a personal conference sent to him but returned because he was gone into the Country debating with him eleven of our great differences in which Mr. Dodwell may be known p. 118. An Account of my dissent from Dr. Sherlocke his Doctrine Accusations and Argumentation specially about the essence of the Universal a National and Single Church and the nature of Schism c. CHap. 1. The Historical Proem Chap. 2. My â—etter and Counsâ—l to Mr. Sherlocke many years ago advising him to expound or retract his words which seem to deny the three Articles of our Baptismal covenant our belief in God the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost p. 162 His Answer p. 173 Chap. 3. Of the ill manner of these mens Confutations p. 174 Chap. 4. The main part of our difference viz. what is the essential form of the Catholick National and single Churches p. 182 Chap. 5. What is the
life and light and love and that the destroying of these by hiding the Scriptures unintelligible worships Imagery dead hypocrisie silencing and persecuting and killing Gods servants making dividing engines to tear and Canons to batter the peace of the Church and this by an ignorant ungodly worldly Ministry seeking not the things of God but of men all this is the Devils work and to do the Devils work against Christ is not a sign of Christs servants he bids us judg of our selves and others by the fruits His servants we are whom we obey If a Peter once give Christ such worldly fleshly counsel he shall hear worse than I said of Church-Tyrants get thee behind me Satan thou art an offence unto me for thou savourest not the things that be of God but those that be of men Mat. 16.22 hating the good silencing thousands of faithful Ministers excommunicating and sinning against God in obedience to Prelates and for using the needful means of their own salvation and serving God but as Peter and Paul did this is the Devils work if he have any in the world And Mr. Dodwell must trust more to swords than words to keep it up for there is a spirit in true Christians that will never suffer them to believe that it is pleasing to God what name soever is pretended for it § 7. I will reverence the Iews visible Church to whom were committed the Oracles of God but will not say that they sinned not in persecuting Christ and his Apostles nor say that they are not now under their own curse and cut off from the Church who once cast out Christians from their Synagogues I will give due honour to Primogeniture and yet not equal Cain and Abel Ismael and Isaac Esau and Iacob c. but expect that as he that was born after the flesh did persecute him that was born after the spirit even so it will be now And the world was the world still when it was taken into the Church The Heathen Romans were less Persecutors than the Iews and so are the Turks than the Papists § 8. I shall in due place take notice of Mr. D's confining the Essence of the Ministry to transacting between God and man in covenanting requiring essentially no more skill than any man is capable of who is but capable of understanding the common dealings of the world p. 73 74. And that Immoralities of such mens Lives excuse us not from Schism for turning from such to better Teachers p. 72. contrary to the Epistle of the Carthage Council in the case of Martial and Basilides and even of Popes and Councils that forbid hearing Mass from a Fornicator And his denying the â—cripture to be intended or designed to be a Charter to appeal to for all future generations and for the extent of Offices and preventing litigious dispute about government and subjection p. 80 81. But that recourse ought now to be had to the intention of the Ordainers for these And what he saith p. 81. against appealing to Writings as he calls them against the sense of all the visible authority of this life as unreconcilable to the practice of any visible government on earth p. 81. And that subjects cannot preserve their subordination to their superiors if they practice differently and defend their practices and pretend Divine Authority for them where he speaketh indefinitely and excepteth no practices And if we may not appeal from man to God and Scripture we may appeal from Scripture to man And if mans Law be above Gods it is not from him for the inferior maketh not his superior And the root of all this iâ— p 82 That God hath made his Church and not only particular Churches that are parts of his Church a visible Society and constituted a visible Government in it Did I know what Mr. D. taketh this one visible Government to be whether General Council or Pope or all the Bishops of the world by a major vote or all the people of the Christian world or what I should know what to say to him But for this I must not hope § 9. But I shall after speak to his securing subterfuge 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 skill in causes Which I am so defective in that I know not at all what his cause is till he tell me Nor know I among many senses of most of his chief terms which it is that he meaneth I know not what he meaneth by a Papist and whether he take those for Papists that are as the Councils of Constance and Basil and the French for the supremacy of a Council the Pope being President or Principium Vnitatis and Patriarch of us in the West I know not who he meaneth by the Supreme Church-power in the visible Universal Church I know not by what he essentiateth the very Episcopacy which he so much pleads for no nor their Ordination I know not what he taketh to be the Supreme Church-power over the Church of England And how can I know by the bare general name when Dr. Stillingfleet denieth any such thing CHAP. II. His Schiswatical Church destroying Scheme Confuted § 1. BEcause he dealeth so falsly with my Doctrine by pretence of putting it into his words and order I will deal better with him and deal with his Scheme word by word as he hath laid it down As for his exceptions thâ—t I refel not his charge of the sin against the Holy Ghost c. I am not yet so idle having formerly written a Treatise of that sin His wilful refusal to answer Voetius de desperata Causa Papalus when he knoweth that this Plea is the Papists chief strength and Iansenius is so fully answered is but a dishonourable tergiversation And it 's like he knoweth how Melancthon in his Epistles copiously shameth Mr. Dodwell's cause as trusted to by the Papists when yet the Protestants here plead Melancthon's judgment for their Reformation And though Mr. D. told me that it is not for the Christian Interest to hold that the Roman successive Ordination hath been interrupted I think they that believe their own most flattering Historians must believe that the intercision there hath been more notorious than in those Reformed Churches which Mr. Dodwell nulleth or than those German and Danish Bishops whom Bugenhagius a Presbyter ordained But I will briefly examine the words of his destructive deceiving Frame 1. That all are obliged to submit to all unsinful conditions of the Episcopal Communion where they live if imposed by the Ecclesiasiastical Governours thereof And 2. That the nature of this obligation is such as will make them who rather than they will submit to such conditions either separate themselves or suffer themselves to be excluded from communion by such Governours for such a refusal of submission guilty of the sin of SCHISM Here are two parts a 1. That all are obliged to
Congregational or Parochial Bishops or Pastors without such as our Diocesans It must be Pastoral or true Episcopal regular Communion 3. Many Individual Bishops separating from one another have been and may be in one City 4. If e. g. the Bishop of Lincoln have many Counties and one differing from him were chosen by the Clergy at Leicester Hartford c. as he was by the King which of them is the Bishop on the place If Gloucester Clergy and People had chose another when Goodman a Papist was Bishop which was the Bishop 1. 1. Salvation is pronounced by Conformists to be certain upon Baptism without any other Sacrament 2. Popes and Papists are as much as any for tying salvation to Sacraments and yet a Pope Victor and his Council at Benevent 1078. decree that rather than Communicate with a Simonist they should persist without visible Communion and in mind joined to Christ have his Communion 3. What shall they do ordinarily in Italy Spain France c. that have none but Papist Bishops 1. Wilful neglect of any known means sheweth wilful disobedience against God But many means may be ignorantly neglected without destroying assurance of salvation Turtullian thought children should stay from Baptism unless in danger of death and Nazianzen was for some years delay This ignorance damned not the practisers Apocryphal books divers Sacraments Ceremonies Church-Offices Doctrines have been controverted means among true Christians 2. Faith comes by hearing Rom. 10. Christ blesseth them that hear and do it Thousands are mentioned as believing by hearing and salvation is promised to Faith 2. 1. Whoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved Ask and ye shall have True faith and conversion wrought by hearing Gods word and working by true love and prayer hath many a promise of pardon and salvation 2. Is a baptized praying believer out of the Communion of Christs Church though he doubt of Diocesans or Patriarchs He is not 2. 1. Ordinarily faith comes by hearing and hearing by preaching and he that truly believeth shall be saved Iohn 13.16 2. I think many Score or Hundreds of Protestant Divines have proved that Baptism giveth not the first Right to life but only solemnly confirmeth sealeth and by Ministerial investiture publickly delivereth that which true Faith received before See Gataker's two Tracts on Dr. Ward 's and Dr. Davenant's Theses 3. What 's Baptism to Episcopacy till King Iames alter'd it Women might Baptize in England and Priests still may And are men Baptized into the Name or Belief of Diocesans as Bellarmine saith Baptism binds them to the Pope Prove this if you can 2. If Baptism undoubtedly save at what Age doth the effect cease 2. The Lords Supper is necessary for corroboration and for expressing true obedience and living by Faith on Christ where it can lawfully be had and the need and use of it is understood B. This is false If they be given by a Lay-man falsly pretending Orders or by one who hath no Authority through uncapacity or usurpation yet the receiver loseth not his Right he taketh it as from God and if his ignorance be not culpable there is not so much as disobedience in it 2. If I prove that Papists have no such Authority as you plead for are all their Baptisms and Ordinations null III. Episcopal Communion is the Cothurnus the Hose drawn over your ulcer and snare 1. We have mental Communion in Essentials with all true Bishops in the world 2. We have Subject Communion with true Parish-Bishops 3. And with their Ruling Bishops at least as Magistrates 4. Novatians Luciferians Donatists and others in time of Schisms had all Orders in Episcopal Communion and so have Papists Greeks Moscovites Armenians 5. Parish-Bishops have more proof of Authority from Christ than the Diocesans or many hundred Congregations that have no other Bishops 6. Authority may be given by God without any Ordination where it cannot be had or not without sinning 1. No doubt but all true Authority must be derived from God 2. Those to whom it was first given were the Twelve Apostles They are considered 1. As the Inspired Prophetical Declarers and Recorders of the Laws and Doctrine and Promises of Christ. 2. As chief Pastors of the Church to gather and rule it All Gods gifts and graces that come to us by the mediation of the Gospel come by the Apostles mediation in the first sense as declaring Christs Will how Ministers shall be made in all Ages And as chief Pastors gathering and setling the first Churches which by Christs Charter shall call their Pastors and so others to the end of the world they may be said to be Mediators herein 3. But they mediate not as the Donors of the Pastoral power as being Pastors themselves but only as Ministerial investers The Sacraments come not to us without the mediation of the Apostles but they made them not nor make them effectual nor make new Apostles to deliver them 3. This is deceitful confusion 1. Authority to Administer Sacraments and Authority to call others to administer them are different things 2. And so is succession of Apostolical power and succession of common Ministry 3. And so is giving power as the Donor and giving it as an investing servant 4. And proper giving it and improper which is but qualifying the persons to receive it 1. Apostolical Prophetical conveyance harh no such succession 2. The Flock that have no Authority to Administer Sacraments partake of the Authority to call others to do it 3. Inferiors may have Authority to call Superiors else the highest could not be made 4. None of these people give the power but their Election is part of the receivers qualifications to whom God giveth it by his Law or Charter And then as serâ—ants they solemnize the Investiture 5. The power of this Law or Charter is never interrupted But if all Pastors were dead an Hundred years it would renew Pastoral power in the Church without uninterrupted Donors or Investers 4. This conveying power is where-ever Gods Law and capable receivers are A capable receiver is 1. One personally qualified with sufficiency and willingness 2. And that hath the Churches and Ordainers necessary consent when ordinary for order sake the Ordainers then must invest him by declaring him authorized by God c. The regular Ordination like publick Matrimony after contract is to be by authorized Ordainers and most Bishops Diocesan Papists Greeks Moscovites Armenian c. are of more doubtful Authority than Congregational or Parish Bishops though the former usurp the name as appropriated to them b. 2. 1. Then men in Rome Italy Spain France c. must be of the Papists Prelates Churches and Communion 2. Paulinus and Flavian Donatists Novatians Arrians c. may have Bishops in the same place And the Orthodox two or more at once Grotius thought as many as there were Synagogues in a City 3. Then if I prove the chief Pastor of a Parish or City-Church to be
a true Bishop by vertue of Gods Law and if he have better Qualification and Election and Ordination to be of surer Authority than the Diocesan it 's his Communion that we must prefer 4. But indeed Baptism and Salvation are ordinarily given before Episcopal Communion of any sort 5. They that thought the Pope Antichrist as most Protestant Bishops long did thought it a duty to reject the Communion of the Bishops of the places where they lived And Denmark and other Countries set up others against them that were ordained by Bugenhagius and other Prsbyters 6. Parochial and Diocesan bounds are humane mutable institutions 7. If the Bishop of the place be a Schismatick the Communion of a better near is better b. II. 1. All causleless separation from any Christians or causleless disobedience to any Pastor or neglect of any Christian duty needful to the Churches peace and concord and every opinion and practice that is against them doth make a man guilty of sinful Division or Schism in some degree And while every Christian hath many errors and sins which all tend to some sinful breach as the least sore is solutio continui I cannot see but every man living hath some guilt of Schism nor that there is any Church on earth that hath not some such guilt But every degree of guilt denominateth not the man or Church a Schismatick in a predominant or mortal sense And in Charity I hope that even some of those heinous Schismaticks may be saved that divide the Churches by their usurpation obtrusion sinful impositions and worldly domination yea some that in blind zeal put down Parish-Bishops and smite and silence the Pastors and scatter the Flocks And if I must have Communion with none that 's guilty of Schism with what Church or Bishop should I joyn And if their Sacraments be invalid what a case is Italy Spain France yea and England in Must all be baptized again that they baptized 2. But it 's no schism but a duty for the people as far to forsake a sinful Bishop much more an usurper as Cyprian and that Council advised them to do in the case of Martial and Basilides 3. And after all this deceitful confusion note Reader that he denieth not our disobedience to be lawful in case of sinful conditions imposed And if we fully prove not this to be our case let our accusers silence us and let our guilt be our shame 4. And if people that had Parish-Bishops on the place where they lived lawfully called shall forsake them to obey a Diocesan that is not on the place but perhaps Forty or Fifty or Sixty Miles off and never saw them and was obtruded contrary to the ancient Canons which nullifie such and sets himself to silence faithful Pastors and persecute them and other godly Christians for not sinning heinously upon deliberate choice and covenant doth not even this man conclude such to be Schismaticks that are out of the ordinary way and hope of salvation CHAP. III. The consequence of Mr. Dodwell's foresaid doctrine 1. THOSE that live under the Popish Bishops in Italy Spain France c. must live in their communion and under their command in all unsinful things 2. The Protestant Churches that have not Episcopal Ordination are no true Churches and have no true Ministers or Sacraments nor any Covenant-right to salvation 3. The Protestant Churches are in the same unchurched damnable case that have Bishops if they have not an uninterrupted succession of such from the Apostles canonically ordained 4. Therefore the Churches of Denmark Germany c. that have Superintendents ordained at the Reformation by Bugenhagius Pomeranus a Presbyter and all the rest whose succession was interrupted are in the same case 5. It is Schism and rejecting Sacraments and Covenant-right to salvation in all the people that continue in such Protestant Churches and communicate with them 6. It is better for the Protestants in France to joyn with the Papists than to live as they do without Sacraments or Church-communion 7. Yet by self contradiction it will follow that certainly the Church of Rome and all that derive their ordination from that Church have no true Bishops Ministers Sacraments Churches nor Covenant-right to salvation for it 's certain their true succession hath been oft interrupted 1. By such utterly uncapable persons as all History describeth and even Baronius calleth Apostaticos non Apostolicos and such as divers General Councils judged Hereticks Infidels Simoniaks c. e g. Eugenius 4. who yet kept in 2. By such whose false ordination the Canons expresly null 3. By many Schisms two or three Popes at once of whom none can tell who had the right or whether any 4 By the Popes taking on him to be Christs Universal Vicar an Office in specie usurpt which he maketh his Episcopacy and as such giveth his orders And all his Presbyters have turned the true Ministry into the false one of Mass-Priests and being no true Ministers can give no true Sacraments by his rule 8. Yea it is certain that few if any Churches on earth can prove such an uninterrupted succession as he and the Papists describe and most it s known have no such thing 9. Therefore if any have such a succession they cannot know it it being a thing that cannot be proved and so cannot be sure that they are true Churches c. 10. For the certainty of any true Ministry Church Sacraments and Salvation dependeth on such knowledg of History as is not in the world viz. To know that this Bishop and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and his Ordainer and so up to the Apostles were every one true Bishops and truly Ordained which no mortal man can know 11. Men that by a Prince against even the Nullifying Canons can but get possession of Patriarchal and Diocesan Churches without the Clergy or peoples choice have thereby the power of damning men that fear God at their pleasure For 1. they must pass for the Bishops of the place 2. They may command any unsinful thing and excommunicate him that doth not obey 3. He is a Schismatick that suffers himself so to be Excommunicate and so is in a damnable state 4. He cannot hinder it not knowing the thing to be unsinful 12. For by this whoever will escape damnable schism must be one that knoweth the unsinfulness as he speaks of all things in the world that are such which a Prelate may command or else he must do any thing which he judgeth sin if a Prelate command it But that is wicked Idolizing man 13. And therefore by this rule no man living can be saved that a Prelate hath a mind to damn or from his damning impositions For no man living knoweth the lawfulness of all lawful things and therefore may take a commanded thing for sin that is not and then if he wilfully do that which he judgeth sin he rebelleth against God if he do it not the Prelate may excommunicate him and unresistibly make
Parliament by Charter yet if they are unqualified when they come thither the choice is judged null If a City choose and Invest a proclaimed Rebel for Mayor I will believe it null or invalid though Mr. D. will not And if he write Forty Books with such streams of confident words to prove that the Election and Investiture of the dâ—â—lared Heretick Bishops at Alexandria Antioch Constantinople and most of the Empire in many Ages Arrians Eutichians c. were yet judged valid by the Councils of the Orthodox no man that ever read the Councils will believe him 5. Nor will I believe him that any Bishops Ordination can make a true Bishop or Priest of a Woman an Infant or a professed Heathen Infidel or proper Heretick or any uncapable person any more than he can make a Woman to be a Husband or a dumb man the University Orator § 23. He saith They cannot give an Instance of any Power setled by Charter whereupon a failure of all who are by the Charter empowred to dispose of Offices the power must devolve to those who are not by the Charter empowred to dispose of them and where such a Charter is not thought in Law to fail by becoming unpracticable till the supreme power interpose c. Ans. Still the same fraud If all empowred to dispose of Offices is an ambiguous word The Prince disposeth of them by giving the Power and the Electors by choosing the Receivers and the Minister by delivering the Insignia If Electors and all die indeed there are none to determine of the Receiver And yet if the Plague kill most of the Electors at Age and leave not a due number when the rest left come to Age and choose the Charter will renew the Office-power 2. But if it be only the Ministerial Invester that faileth the sense of the Lawgiver must be judged of by the words and by other notices and the light of common Reason e. g. Whether it be the meaning of the Charter which saith that the Recorder shall give the Oath or the former Mayor shall deliver the Insignia that if the Recorder or Mayor be dead or sick or mad or wilfully refuse the City shall have no Mayor or if no Priest will Marry folks all England must live unmarried or if the Archbishops and Bishops will Ordain none but Hereticks all the Churches must have no other Ministers And here Nature and Christ teach us that the Means is only for the End and Order for the thing ordered and God will have us understand his own Laws so as that Rituals give place to Morals I will have mercy and not sacrifice And sure if the King of Spains Charter for the making of Governours at the West Indies should not express or reasonably imply a Remedy in case of the failure of circumstances of meer Order his Countrey might be lost before they could send to Spain for a new Charter or new power And Mr. D. saith Which is the very case impugned by me of the Nonconformists And so judg whether he must not turn a Seeker and say that all Ministry Churches and Sacraments cease till a new Commission comes from Heaven upon the failure of every such circumstance yea when almost all the Churches charge each other with failures and intercisions and the very species of the Ordainers is so much altered If the King send his Army into the Indies or his Navies and mention no power but the Generals as chief or no way of choosing a new General but by the Field-Officers choice and giving him an Oath by the Secretary c. yet no man doubteth but it was his meaning that if the General die or turn Rebel yea and the major part of the Field-Officers or the Secretary the Army should choose another General rather than perish and the Kings service miscarry § 24. He addeth They cannot give an Instance of any humane Charter that ever allows any person empowered to extend his own power by a private exposition of the Charter against the sense of all the visible supreme powers of the society Ans. This opens the Core of the Aposthume 1. We deny as confidently as any French or Italians affirm that there is any such thing at a supreme visible power over the universal Church under Jesus Christ and therefore none such is disobeyed or contradicted 2. And we maintain That by Divine appointment there is no visible National supreme Church-power but that of the Civil Christian Soveraign and therefore none such disobeyed 3. And we hold that no man can extend his own power further than Christs own Law extendeth it False expositions give no power 4. And therefore we prove by your own Rule that Christ being the only supreme universal Ruler and having described and specified the Office of a Pastor and order of a Church no Bishops can by their private exposition turn a single Church into a Diocesan or a Presbyter of Christs description into an half Presbyter of their own making But if they make a man a Pastor his power and work shall be what Christ saith and not what the Ordaâ—ner will Investing-Ministers Acts are null if they contradict the Order of the Donor If the King give you a Parsonage of 300. l. a year and the Instituter say you shall have but 100. l. out of it it 's vain he instituteth you but as the Donors instrument in the same Benefice and power given by him § 25. He addeth p. 38. Where can they find such a Charter for the power of Presbyters in Scripture as they speak of Ans. Nay then we are far from agreeing if you think that the very Species of a Pastors Office is not found in Scripture as of Christs institution Thâ—n it seems the Bishops make the very Species The Italian Bishops at Trent scarce gave so much to the Pope Then why may not the Bishops put down Presbyters if they make the Species or make as many Species as they please Indeed Dr. Hammond thought that there was no evidence of the Order of Subject Presbyters in Scripture-times And if God instituted none let us have none But I have told you before and often where in Scripture the true Pastors Office is described § 26. He adds They may find some actual practices but will they call that a Charter Ans. This is indeed to strike at our foundation If we prove not Christ to be King and Lawgiver and that his Laws or Governing-precepts were partly given by himself and partly by his Spirit in his Commissioned Apostles and these Recorded Sealed and Delivered in Scripture If we prove not that these as the authorized Agents of Christ delivered his Will by words and practice in setling and describing the Pastors of his Churches then take the Ministry and spare not for mans invention I cited you before the Texts that are our proof But if the Office which you call Priestly be of mans making in specie I doubt the Diocesans will prove so much more
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
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
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
Word and Sacraments which worketh by the senses of hearing seeing and tasting upon the Conscience that is on the Understanding and Will and by these reformeth practice The word is thus deâ—ivered either Generally by common Doctrine which is historical assertive precepts prohibitions promises or threatnings or by personal application of these 1. By meer words as in personal instruction precept threatning c. and by declaration that this person proved and judged guilty of impenitency in such and such sin is uncapable of Church-communion therefore by auâ—hority from Christ I command him to forbear and you to avoid him And such a one being proved innocent or penitent hath by Gods Law right to Communion with his Church therefore I absolve him invite him receive him and command you in Christs name to hold loving Communion with him 2. Or it is the application of words and Sacramental signs togetâ—er by solemn tradition and investiture or the denying of such Sacraments Briefly Magistrates by mulcts prisons exile 〈◊〉 c. work on the body Pastors have no such power bâ—t by General Doctrine and personal application by words and Sacraments given or denied work on the mind or conscience 〈◊〉 which some call a Perswasive power distinguishing as Camero 〈◊〉 between private perswasion of an equal c. and Doctâ—ral Pastoral Official Perswasion whose force is by the Divine authority of the perswader used in Teaching Disciplinary judging and Sacraments If you will call this last coercive or by any other name you have your liberty I will do my part that you may understand me if I may not understand you 2. Now ad rem can we disagree how far this constraineth the unwilling Not without some great neglect or culpable defect I may suppose then that we are agreed of all these particulars 1. That Gods Laws have told us who must or must not have Sacramental Communion which we must obey whatever be the effects 2. That Excommunication is not only nor alway chiefly to bring the person Excommunicated to obedience no more than hanging but to keep the purity and reputation of the Church and the safety of the members and to warn others 3. That the way by which it is to affect the offender is 1. By shaming him 2. By striking his Conscience with the sense of Gods displeasure declared thus by his Ministers 4. So far as the Sacrament is a means of conveying grace to deny it is not to reform but to destroy But when the person hath made himself uncapable of the benefit of the Sacrament and apt to receive it abusively to his hurt then it may possibly humble him to be denied it 5. If the denial of the Sacrament work not on a mans Conscience morally as threatnings do it no way compelleth him to his duty nor saveth him from sin 6. De facto many hundred thousands of ignorant wicked members of Episcopal Churches are so far from being constrained to goodness by being without the Sacrament that they are content to be without it and loth to be forced to it 7. The more sin and wickedness any man hath the less true conscience and the less conscience the less doth he regard a due Excommunication 8. The Bishops themselves are conscious of the insufficiency of their Excommunications alone to compel any to obedience while they confess that without the Secular power of the sword to back it they would be but laught at and despised by the most Nor durst they ever try to govern by their Church Keys alone among us without the enforcement of the sword And at the same time while they Excommunicate them from the Sacrament they have a Law to lay them in Gaol and utterly ruin them if they will not receive it How loth are the Bishops to lose this compelling Law 9. I think few of my acquaintance in England do believe that any great number are brought to holy reformation no nor to Episcopal obedience by the fear of being kept from the Sacrament but that which they fear is the Corporal penalty that followeth lay by that and you may try 10. If you will trust to that spiritual power alone valeat quantum valere potest without corporal force few that I know of will resist you but many thousands will despise you as the Bishops well foresee bring as many to obedience by it as you can But if you mean that you must needs have the Magistrate to second you as your Lictor or Executioner and to imprison fine banish burn c. it would be too gross hypocrisie to call the effects of this coercive power the effects of Excommunication and to call it coercive power to deny a man the Sacrament because he feareth the sword 11. De facto there are supposed to be in the Parish that you dwell in above 60000 souls suppose 10000 of these yearly receive the Sacrament though some say it is not 5000. Are the other 40000 compelled to obedience by not communicating 12. All those forbear your Sacrament without any sense of coercion or loss 1. Who believe as you do that Sacramental Communion is a sin where it cannot lawfully be had that is say you where the Bishops forbid it say they where Gods Laws forbid it by reason of adherent sin 2. And that take the Bishops who forbid it them to be Usurpers that have no true calling as all the Papists do of our Bishops and many others 3. Who take it to be more eligible yea a necessary duty to hold Communion with purer societies 4. Besides all those Sectaries that make light of Sacraments in general What Papists Quakers Anabaptist Separatists c. are compelled to any good by the Bishops denying them the Sacrament 13. Nothing but Ignorance or Impudence can deny that the difficulty of knowing whose Excommunication it is that is to be dreaded as owned by God hath encouraged professed Christians so confusedly to Excommunicate one another as that this Excommunication hath been so far from constraining most to repentance that it hath made Christianity a horrid scandal to Infidels and Heathens by setting the Christian World in the odious confusion of Excommunicating one another To give some instances how far Excommunication is not coercive 1. Who but the Devil was the gainer of Pope Victor's Excommunicating the Asians about Easter-day Did it compel them to obedience 2. When the Orthodox Excommunicated the Arrians did it force them to obey When they got almost all the Bishops for them and Excommunicated and destroyed their Excommunicators 3. When the Cecilians or Orthodox and the Donatists for so many ages Excommunicated one another meerly upon the difference which party had the true Ordained Bishops did Excommunications force them to obedience 4. To pass forty other Sects when Rome Excommunicated yea and prosecuted the Novatians did it compel them to obey And did not Atticus Sisinnius and Proclus win more by allowing them their own Communion and living with them in love and peace Chrysostome since threatned
more than a Ceremony that knoweth it if the King command me to Preach at one hour or one place and the Bishop at another or to use for Uniformity such a Translation Metre Liturgy Utensils Garments c and the Bishops others I will obey the King before the Bishop But if either or both command me to sin I will obey neither so and if they would take me off from that which Christ hath made a real part of my own Office as commanding that I shall preach and pray in no words but such as they prescribe c. I think neither hath power to do this But Bishop Bilson of Christian Obedience and Bishop Andrews in his Tortura Toetis and Buckeridg of Rochester and Grotius de imprrio sum Potest circa Sacra have said so much of the Power of Kings about Religion as that I think I need not add any more And by the same Arguments that you will absolve me from obeying if the King forbid me to Preach by the same you absolve if the Bishop forbid me If I may disobey Constantius and Valens I may disobey Eusebius Nicomed Theognis Maris If I may disobey Theodosius junior Anastasius Zeno Iustinian I may disobey Petrus Moggus Dioscorus Severus c. But you will much cross your â—nds if you tell the Londoners that they may preach and worship God though the King forbid them but not at all if the Bishop forbid them For he that exalteth himself or is sinfully exalted by others shall be brought low If the reverence of the King were not greater in England than of the Bishops the consciences of many thousands would stick but little at disobedience There are so many cases first to be resolved As 1. Whether such Diocesans deposing all Parochial Churches and Bishops and reducing them to Chappels or parts only of a Church be not against Christs Law 2. Whether they destroy not the ancient order of particular Churches Bishops and Discipline 3. Who made their office and by what power 4. Who chose and called them to it 5. Whether their Commands be not null as contrary to Gods 6 How far Communion with them that silence hundreds of faithful Ministers and set up in their stead c. is lawful Many such questions the people are not so easily satisfied in as you are XI And the three last all set together look with an ill design The Preface to Dr. Rich. Cousins Tables tells the King That the Church-Government here is the Kings or derived from him and dependant on him and Grotius de Imperio sum potest proveth at large the Power of Kings circa sacra as doth Spalatensis and many more and that Canons are but good counsel till the King make them Laws And we know no Law-makers but the King and Parliament But if the Church be the Expounders of the Liturgy Rubrick and Canons Articles and Acts of Uniformity and out of Convocation-time the Bishops be the Church and the Archbishops be the Rulers of the Bishops that swear obedience to them this hath a dangerous aspect For then it is in the power of the Bishops if not of the Archbishops only to put a sense upon our 39 Articles Rubricks c. consistent with Popery or Heresie and so to change the Religion of the Kingdom without King or Parliament or against them at their pleasure And thus Officers of mans making who become a Church of mans devising may have advantage by this and the former Articles to destroy Godliness Christianity and Humanity Indeed by the Preface to the Liturgy the Bishop is made the Expounder of any thing doubtful in the Book and by the Index the Act of Uniformity is made part of the Book But this affrighteth me the more from declaring 1. Because I must consent to all the Penalties and Impositions of the Act it self 2. And the Bishop Exposition is limited so that it must be contrary to nothing in the Book Thus I have given you the reasons of my destructive Conference If I had been with you and we had been to enter upon any dispute that tendeth to satisfaction I would have endeavoured to avoid the common frustraters of Disputes 1. By ambiguous words 2. And subjects that are no subjects Therefore if you desire any such dispute I. I intreat you to write me down your sense of some terms which we shall frequently use and I will do the like of any at your desire As what you mean 1. By the word Bishop 2. By a Church 3. By a particular Church 4. By a Diocess and Diocesan Church 5. By a National Church 6. By the Vniversal Church 7. By Church Government and Iurisdiction 8. By Schism I shall dispute no terms unexplained lest one take them in one sense and the other in another and so we dispute but about a sound of words II. I desire that the denied Subject of the Question may not be taken for granted instead of being proved On these terms supposing the common Laws of Disputation especially avoiding words that have no determinate sense I shall not refuse whenever you invite me and I am able to debate with you any of these points that I am concerned in especially whether my Preaching Christs Gospel as I do be my sin or my duty And if our great distance in Principles put either of us upon râ—â—sons that seem dishonouring to the person opposed we shall I hope 〈…〉 that it is the opinion only that is directly intended But 〈…〉 opinion is the persons opinion if it be bad is a dishâ—nâ—â—r whiâ—â— the owner only is guilty of and the opponent caâ—not 〈…〉 must not forbear to open the evil of the cause for avoiding the dishonour of the owner but must the rather open it in hope that the owner will disown it when he understandeth truly what it is For I suppose it is evidence of Truth that we desire In Conclusion remember I pray you 1. That it is not the ancient Episcopacy which was in Cyprians days yea which agreeth with Epiphanius's Intimations and Petavius excellent Notes thereon in Haeres 69. which I deny And I conjecture that at this day in England there are more Episcopal than Presbyterian silenced Non-conformists 2. That what sort of Prelacy or higher Rulers I dare not subscribe to yet I can live quietly and submissively under though not obey them by sinning against God or breaking my Vows of Baptism or Ordination and perfidiously leaving souls to Satan Nothing more threateneth the subversion of the Church-Government than swearing men to approve of all thâ—t's in it Many can submit and live in peace that dare not subscribe or swear Approbation It was the caetâ—ra Oath 1640 that constrained me to thâ—se searches which 〈◊〉 me a Nonconformist It is an easie maâ—â—er for Overdoers to add but a claâ—se or two more to their Oaths and Subscriptions which shall maâ—e almost all the conscionable Ministers of the Kingdom Nonconformists 3. Whenever notorious necessity ceaseth by the sufficient number and qâ—ality of Conforming Preachers I will cease Preaching in England But death is liker first to silence me Though I take my Conforming to be a Complex of heinous sins should I be guilty of it yet till I am called I perswade none to Nonformity for fear of casting them occasionally out of the Ministry preferring their work before the change of their judgment till such endeavours are clearly made by duty But all your endeavour as far as ever I perceived is not so much to draw us to Conformity as to persuade us to give over Preaching Christs Gospel so contrary are our designs 1 Thes· 2.15 16. Methinks is a fearful Text. And so are the words of the Liturgy before the Sacrament If any of you be a hinderer of Gods Word repent or take not this Sacrament lest Satan enter into you as he did into Judas and fill you c. FINIS This was written long ago The Earl of Orery ☜