and Government is to be found wholly in the written word of God called the holy Scriptures This we are agreed on against the Papists who would supply the supposed defects of Scripture by their unwritten Traditions which they call the other part of Gods word Church Canons and Laws of men may determine of some modes and circumstances for the better execution of the Laws of God by the People whom they are over but they cannot make new Church Ordinances or Governments nor convey a Power which God the fountain of Power did not ordain and convey nor can they give what they themselves had not The Church-office and Authority therefore that is not proved from the Holy Scripture is to be taken as the fruit of humane arrogancy and presumption Yet I deny not but that we may find much in Antiquity in Fathers and Councils about matters of fact to help us to understand some Scriptures and so to discern the matter of right Prop. 3. The Scripture doth not Contradict but suppose and confirm the light of Nature nor doth it impose upon any man Natural impossibilities nor constitute offices which cannot be executed or which would destroy that end to which they are supposed to be Constituted Prop. 4. Ecclesiastical Authority comprehendeth not the power of the sword nor any power of using violence to mens bodies or laying mulcts or confiscations on their estates The Ecclesiastical Power which Christ ordained was exercised for the first three hundred years without any touching of mens bodies or purses before there were any Christian Princes Prop. 5. Magistrates are not eo nomine obliged to punish men because they are Excommunicated whether upon every just Excommunication they should punish I will not now dispute but they are bound to know that their penalties be deserved before they inflict them and therefore must themselves take Cognisance of the Cause and as rational agents understand before they act and not blindly follow the Judgements of the Bishops as if they were but as Executioners where the Bishops are Judges Prop. 6. The Power of the highest Church-governours is but an Authority of Directing in the way to salvation It is but Directive but then there is no room for the common Objection that then it is no greater then any other man may perform for it is one thing to Direct Occasionally from Charity and another thing to Direct by Authority in a standing office as purposely appointed hereunto The Power of Church-Governors is but of the same nature as is the Power of a Physitian over his Patients or of a School-master over his Schollers supposing he had not the power of the rod or actual force but such a power as the Professors of Philosophy or other sciences had in their several schools upon the adult nor all so great neither because the Laws by which we must rule are made to our hands as to the substantials Hence therefore it is plain that as we can bind or force no man to believe us or to understand the truth and to be Christians but by the power of demonstrated Evidence and by the light which we let in through Gods grace into their Consciences so neither can we cause any to execute our sentences against offenders further than by light we convince them that it is their duty so that if all the Bishops or Presbyteries in the land should judge such or such an opinion to be heresie and should Excommunicate those that own it as hereticks in this case if the Church do believe as the Pastors believe they will consent and avoid the Excommunicate person but if they take it to be Gods truth which the Pastors call heresie they will not take themselves bound by that sentence to avoid him nor will the Offender himself any further be sensible of a penalty in the sentence then he shall be convinced that he hath erred and if the Church avoid him he will justifie himself and judge that they do it wrongfully and will glory in his suffering so that it is on the Conscience that Church-Governors can work and no otherwise on the outward man but mediante Conscientiâ Prop. 7. The ground of this is partly because no Church Governors can bind any man contrary to Gods word Clave errante ita apparente if the people know that he erreth they are not to obey him against God Yet in the bare inconvenient determination of some Circumstantials by which the duty is not destroyed but less conveniently performed the people are bound to obey their Governors because it is not against Gods determination and because he erreth but in an undetermined point of which God appointed him to be the orderly determiner But if God have once determined no mans contrary determination can oblige nor yet if they go beyond the sphere of their own work and determine of an aliene subject which God did never commit to their determination else a Minister or Bishop might oblige every Taylor how to cut his garment and every Shoâ—-maker how to cut his shoe so that they should sin if they did disobey which is ridiculous to imagine and if they go about to introduce new stated Ordinances or Symbols in the Church which they have nothing to do with or in any other work shall assume to themselves a power which God never gave them it doth no more oblige then in the former case Prop. 8. Another reason of the sixth Proposition is because The People have a Iudgement of discerning whether the Governors do go according to Gods word or not else they should be led blindfold and be obliged by God to go against Gods word whensoever their Governors shall go against it It is not bruits or Infants but rational men that we must rule Prop. 9. The three things which Church power doth consist in are in conformity to the three parts of Christs own office 1. About matter of Faith 2. About matter of Worship 3. About matter of Practice in other cases 1. Church-Governors about Doctrine or Matters of Faith are the Peoples Teachers but cannot oblige them to Err or to believe any thing against God nor make that to be truth or error that is not so beâ—ore 2. In matter of Worship Church-guides are as Gods Priests and are to go before the people and stand between God and them and present their prayers and prayses to God and administer his holy mysteries and bless them in his name 3. The Commanding Power of Pastors is in two things 1. In Commanding them in the name of Christ to obey the Laws which he hath made them already And this is the principal 2. To give them new Directions of our own which as is said 1. Must not be against Gods Directions 2. Nor about any matter which is not the object of our own office but is without the verge of it 3. But it is only in the making of under laws for the better execution of the laws of Christ and those
spoke of such Bishops only as we have in question or that he did not plainly speak of Presbyters as such For he speaks of the plenitude of Power and Grace in the Church and therefore intended more then what was proper to a Prelate 2. He mentioneth Elders Majores natu in general without distinction And 3. His praesident is plainly related to the Church as the ubi shews it being the People and not the Elders over whom these Elders are said to preside And 4. Baptizing is first instanced which was known to be commonly the work of Presbyters and never appropriated to the Prelate So that the same persons that did Baptize even the Elders of the Church according to Firmilian did then possess the power of laying on hands and of ordaining But these things are more fully discussed in what followeth And if any either adversary or friend would see the Reformed Churches Ministry and Ordination more fully vindicated I refer them to Voetius against Jasenius Desperata causa Papatus which if I had read before I had written this Disputation I think I should have spared my labour Reader if others are too busie to misled thee I may suppose thee unwilling to be misled especially in a matter of so great concernment For saith Blessed Agustine Multos invenimus qui mentiri velint qui autem falli â—eminem de Doctrin Christ. l. 1. cap. 36. And therefore as thou lovest Christ his Church and Gospel and the souls of others and thine own take heed how thou venturest in following a sect of angry men to unchurch so great and excellent a part of the Catholich Church and to vilifie and depose so great a number of able faithfull Ministers of Christ as those that had not Prelatical Ordination And if you are Gentlemen or unlearned men that for want of long and diligent studying of these matters are uncapable of judging of them and therefore take all on the Authority of those whose Learning and parts you most esteem I beseech you before you venture your souls on it any further procure a satisfactory answer to these Questions 1. Whether the Reformed Churches that have no Prelates have not abounded with as learned men as any one of those that you admire of a contrary judgement 2. If you are tempted to suspect men of partiality whether they that plead for Lorship honour and preferment or they that plead against it and put it from them are more to be suspected caâ—teris paribus 3. If you will needs suspect the Protestant Ministers of partiality what ground of suspicion have you of them that were no Ministers such as the two Scaligers whose learning made them the admiration of the Christian world even to Papists as well as Protestants and yet were cordial friends to those Reformed Churches which these men deny and draw men to disown Such also as Salmasius that hath purposely wrote about the subject with abundance more 4. If these are not to be trusted why should not Bishops themselves be trusted were not Bishop Usher Andrews Davenant Hall and others of their mind as learned pious men as any whose Authority you can urge against them 5. If all this be nothing I beseech you get a modest resolution of this doubt at least whether the concurrent judgement of all the Protestant Churches in Christendom even of the English Bishops with the rest should not be of more authority with any sober Protestant then the Contrary judgement of those few that are of late risen up for the cause that you are by them solicited to own It is a known Truth that the generality of the Bishops themselves and all the Protestant Churches in the world have owned them as true Ministers that were ordained by Presbyteries without Prelates and have owned them as true Churches that were guided by these Ministers and have taken them for valid administrations that were performed by them And are your few Recusants that would draw you to separation of greater Learning authorty and regard then all the Protestants in the world besides I beseech you if you will needs take things upon trust consider this and trust accordingly Though I must say it is pitty that any truely Catholick Christian should not have better grounds than these and be able himself in so palpable a case to perceive his duty For my own part my conscience witnesseth that I have not written the following Disputation out of a desire to quarrel with any man but am drawn to it to my great displeasure by the present danger and necessity of the Churches and by compassion to the souls that are turned from the publick Ordinances and engaged in the separation and also of the Churches that are divided and troubled by these means The sad complaints of many of my Brethren from several parts have moved my heart to this undertaking Through Gods Mercy I have peace at home but I may not therefore be insensible of the divisions and calamities abroad I shall adjoin here one of the Letters that invited me and no more because in that one you may see the scope and tenour of the rest and that I rush not on this displeasing work without a Call nor before there is a cause The passages that intimate an ever-valuing of my self you may charitably impute to the Authors juniority and humility with some mistake through distance and disacquaintance One of the Letters that invited me to this task Reverend Sir UNderstanding by the Preface to the Reader before your Gildaâ— Salvianus that you intend a second part wherein you promise to speak of the way how to discern the true Church and Ministry I make bold to present you with the desire of some Godly Ministers viz. that if you see it convenient you would do some thing towards the vindication of the present Churches and Ministers from the aspersions of the new Prelatical party in England It is a principle much made of by many of the Gentry and others that we are but Schismatical branches broken off from the true body and this by faithfull tradition is spread amongst them the learning of some rigid Prelatical Schollars is very prevalent with them to make them thus account of us With these men we must be all unchurched for casting off Diocesan Episcopacy though we be found in the faith and would spend our selves to save souls and the main substance of our Ordination at least cannot be found fault with yet because we had not a Bishop to lay his hands on us we are not sent from God Of what consequence this opinion may prove if it spread without being checked an ordinary apprehension may perceive I can guess something from what I observe from those of this leaven already that our most serious pains will be little regarded if our people take this infection when we would awaken them we cannot because they take it that we have no power to teach them It must not be men of mean parts that must
not so much as a ground to conjecture at any probability Sect. 20. But he saith that we may know that some Pastors at least are true or else God had forsaken his Church Aâ—sw But what the better are we for this if we know not which they are that are the true Pastors nor cannot possibly come to know it Sect 21. But he saith that Quod Christi locum tenent quod debemus illiâ— obedientiam may be known and thereupon he saith thaâ— Certe sumus certitudiâ—â— infallibili quod isti quos videmus sine veri Episcopi Pastores nostri Nam ad hoc non râ—quiritur nec fides nec Character Ordinis nec legitima Electio sed solum ut habeantur pro talibus ab Ecclesia From all this you may note 1. That they are veri Episcopi Pastores nostri that were never ordained if they are but reputed such by the Church 2. That we may know this by infallible Certainty 3. And that we owe them obedience as such So that as to the Church they are true Pastors without Ordination and consequenâ—ly to the Church a succession is unnecessary Sect. 22. Yet of such Usurpers he saith Eos quidem non esse in se veros Episcopos tamen donec pro talibus habentur ab Ecclesia deberi illis obedientiam cum conscientia etiam erroâ—â—a obliget So that they are not veri Episcopi in se and yet they are veri Episcopi Pastores nostri if Bellarmine say true And the words have some truth in them understood according to the distinction which I before gave Chap. 1. Sect. 5 6. He hath no such Call as will save himself from the penalty oâ— usurpation if he knowingly be an usurper but he hath such a Call as shall oblige the Church to obey him as their Bishop or Pastor Sect. 23 But his reason Cum conscientia etiam erronea obliget is a deceit and neither the only nor the chieâ— reason noâ— any reason Not the only nor chief reason because the obligation ariseth from God and that is the greatest Not any reason 1. Because indeed it is not an Erroneous Conscience that tells many people that their usurping Bishops or Pastors are to be obeyed as true Ministers For as it is terminated on the Pastors act or state it is no act of Conscience at all and therefore no error of conscience For conscience is the knowledge of our own affairs And as it is terminated on our own Duty of obeying them it is not Erroneous but right For it is the will of God that for order sake we obey both Magistrates and Pastors that are setled in Possâ—ssion if they rule us according to the Laws of Christ at least if we do not know the Nullity oâ— their call 2. And its false that an Erroneous Conscience bindeth that is makes us a Duty For at the same instant it is it self â— sin and we are bound to depose it and change 〈◊〉 and renounce the eâ—ror It doth but intangle a man in a Necessity of sinning till it be laid by But it is God only that can make our duty and cause such an obligation Sect. 24. From the adversaries Concessions then an uninterrupted succession or present true Ordination is not of Necessity to the being of the Ministry Church or Ordinances quoad Ecclesiam for the Church is bound to obey the usurpers and that as long as they are taken for true Pastors Which is as much as most Churches will desire in the case Sect. 25. And the consequence is easily proved For where God obligeth his Churches to the obedience of Pastors though usurpers and to the use of Ordinances and their Ministration there will he bless the Ministry and those Ordinances to the innocents that are not guilty of his usurpation and that obey God herein And consequently the Ordinances shall not be Nullities to them God would never set his servants upon the use of a means which is but a Nullity nor will he command them to a duty which he will blast to them when he hath done without their fault It s none of the Churches fault that the Bishop or Pastor is an usurper whâ—le they cannot know it and that any of his Predecessors were usurpers since the Apostles dayes And therefore where God imposeth duty on the Church and prescribeth means as Baptism Prayer the Lords Supper Church-Government c. it is certain that he will not blast it but bless it to 〈◊〉 obedient nor punish the Church so for the secret sin of I know not who committed I know not where nor when perhaps a thousand years ago Sect. 26. Argument 6. As other actions of usurpers are not Nullities to the innocent Church so neither is their Ordinanation and consequently those that are Ordained by usurpers may be true Ministers If their Baptizing Preaching Praises Consecration and administration of the Eucharist binding and loosing be not Nullities it follows undenyably on the same account that their Ordinations are not Nullities and consequently that they are true Ministers whom they ordain and succession of a more regular Ordination is not of Necessity to the Ministry Church or Ordinances Sect. 27. Argument 7. If such uninterrupted succession be not Necessary to be Known then is it not Necessary to the Being of the Ministry or Validity of Ordinances administred But such a succession is not Necessary to be known therefore The Consequence of the Major is plain because the Being or Nullity of Office and administrations had never been treated off by God to men nor had it been revealed or a thing regardable but that we may know it Nor doth it otherwise attain its ends And that it is not necessary to be known I further prove Sect. 28. If this succession must be known then either to the Pastor or to the Church or both but none of these therefore 1. If it must be known only to the Pastor then it is not Necessary as to the Church And yet it is not Necessary to be known to the Pastor himself neither For as is shewed its impossible for him to know it so much as by a Moral Certainty His Predecessors and their Ordinations were strange to him 2. Not to the Church For it is not possible for them to know it Nor likely that they should know as much as the true Ordination of their present Pastor according to the Prelatical way when it is done so far out of their sight Sect. 29. If the foresaid uninterrupted succession be necessary to the being of our Ministry or Churches or Ordinances then is it incumbent on all that will prove the truth of their Ministery Churches or Ordinances to prove the said succession But that is not true for then none as is aforesaid could prove any of them Either it is meet that we be able to Prove the truth of our Ministry Churches and administrations or not If not then why do the adversaries call us to it If yea then no man
none such as is granted therefore c. And what proof is there of Archbishops then Sect. 23. Their first proof is from the Apostles But they will never prove that they were fixed Bishops or Archbishops I have proved the contrary before But such an itinerant Episcopacy as the Apostles had laying by their extraordinaries for my part I think should be continued to the world and to the Church of which after Another of their proofs is from Timothy and Titus â— who thy say were Archbishops But there is full evidence that Timothy and Titus were not fixed Bishops or Archbishops but Itinerant Evangelists that did as the Apostles did even plant and settle Churches and then go further and do the like See and consider but the proofs of this in Prins unbishoping of Timothy and Titus Such Planters and Itinerants were pro tempore the Bishops of every Church where they came yet so as another might the next week be Bishop of the same Church and another the next week after him yea three or four or more at once as they should come into the place And therefore many Churches as well as Ephesus and Creet its like might have begun their Catalogue with Timothy and Titus and many a one besides Rome might have begun their Catalogue with Peter and Paul Sect. 24. Another of their proofs is of the Angels of the seven Churches which they say were Archbishops But how do they prove it Because those Churches or some of them were planted in chief Cities and therefore the Bishops were Metropolitans But how prove they the consequence By their strong imagination and affirmation The Orders of the Empire had not then such connection and proportion and correspondency with the Orders of the Church Let them give us any Valid proof that the Bishop of a Metropolis had then in Scripture times the Bishops of other Cities under him as the Governor of them and we shall thank them for such unexpected light But presumption must not go for proofs They were much later times that afforded occasion for such contentions as that of Basil and Anthymius Whether the bounds of their Episcopal Jurisdiction should change as the Emperours changed the State of the Provinces Let them prove that these Asian Angels had the Bishops of other Churches and the Churches themselves under their jurisdiction and then they have done something Sect. 25. But if there were any preheminence of Metropolilitans neer these times it cannot be proved to be any more then an honorary Primacy to be Episcopus primae sedis but not a Governour of the rest How else could Cyprian truly say even so long after as is before alledged that none of them was a Bishop of Bishops nor imposed on others but all were left free to their own consciences as being accountable only to God Sect. 26. Yea the Reverend Author above mentioned shews Dâ—ssertat de Episcop 4. cap. 10. Sect. 9 10 alibi that there were in those times more Bishops then one in a City though not in una Ecclesia aut Coeâ—u And the like hath Grotius oft So that a City had oft then more Churches then one and those Churches had their several Bishops and neither of these Bishops was the Governour of the other or his Congregation much less of the remoter Churches and Bishops of other Cities And this they think to have been the case of Peter and Paul at Rome yea and of their immediate successors there And so in other places Lege Dissert 5 c 1. Sect. 27. When the great Gregory Thaumaturgus was made Bishop of Neocaesarea he had but seventeen Christians in his City and when he had increased them by extraordinary successes yet we find not that he had so much as a Presbyter under him And if he had it s not likely that Musonius his first and chief entertainer would have been made but his Deacon and be the only man to accompany him and comfort him in his retirement in the persecution and that no Presbyter should be mentioned which shews that Bishops then were such as they were in Scripture-times at least in most places and had not many Churches with their Presbyters subject to them as Dâ—ocâ—san Bishops have And when Comana a small place not far off him received the faith Gregory Ordained Alexander the Colliar their Bishop over another single Congregâ—tion and did not keep them under his own Pastoral charge and Government Vid. Greg. Nysâ—n in vita Thaumat Sect. 28. But because that our Dâ—ocesan Bishops are such as the Archbishops that first assumed the Government of many Churches and because we shall hardly drive many from their presumption that Timothy and Titus were Archbishops besides the Apostles I shall now let that supposition stand and make it my next Argument that Argument 3. Ordination by Archbishops is not necessary to the Being of Ministers or Churches Our English Bishops were indeed Archbishops therefore Ordination by them is not Necessary It is not the Name but the office that is pleaded Necessary Sect. 29. And for the Major I think it will not be denyed All that I have to do with Protestants and Papists do grant the Validity of Ordination by Bishops And for the Minor it is easily proved The Bishops that are the Governours of many Churches and their Bishops are Archbishops The Bishops of England were the Governours of many Churches with their Bishops therefore they were Archbishops The Major will be granted And for the Minor I prove it by parts 1. That they were by undertaking the Governours of many Churches 2. And of many Bâ—shops Sect. 30. He that is the Governour over many Congregations of Christians associated for the publick Worship of God and holy communion and Edification under their Proper Pastors is the Governour of many Churches But such were our English Bishops therefore c. That such Societies as are here defined are true Churches is a truth so clear that no enemy of the Churches is is able to gainsay with any shew of Scripture or reason they being such Churches as are described in the Scriptures And 2. That our Ministers were true Pastors if any will deny as the Papists and Separatists do I shall have occasion to say more to them anon Sect. 31. Argument 4. If Ordination by such as the English Bishops be of Necessity to the Ministry and Churches then was there no true Ministry and Churches in the Scripture times nor in many years after But the consequent is false therefore so is the Antecedent The reason of the Consequence is because there were no such Bishops in those times and this is already proved they being neither the Itinerant Apostolical sort of Bishops nor the fixed Pastors of particular Churches besides which there were no other Sect. 32. Argument 5. If Ordination by such as the English Prelates be Necessary to the Being of the Ministry and Churches then none of the Protestants that have not such Prelates which is almost all are
for Holland he questioned if there was a Church among them or not or words fully to that Purpose Against which abuse of the Dr. the Bishop was fain to vindicate himself See page 124 125. Of his Posthumous Judgement Sect. 15. Moreover 5. We know not of almost any Bishops in England by whom men may be Ordained Four or five Reverend Learned men of that degree are commonly said to survive among us whom we much honour and value for their worth But as these are so distant and their residence to the most unknown so the rest if there be any are known to very few at all that I can hear of It s famed that many Bishops there are but we know it not to be true nor know not who they be and therefore it cannot well be expected that their Ordination should be sought If they reveal not themselves and their Authority and do not so much as once command or claim obedience from the generality of Ministers how can they expect to be obeyed If they plead the danger of persecution I answer 1. What Persecution do they suffer that are known above others of their way 2. If that will excuse them when we never heard of any that suffered the loss of a penny for being known to be a Bishop since the Wars were ended then it seems they take the Being of the Ministry and Churches to be but of small moment that are not worthy their hazzard in a manifestation of their power And if this excuse them from appearing it must needs in reason excuse others from knowing them obeying them and submitting to them Sect. 16. And when they shall declare themselves to be our Bishops they must in all reason expect that the proof of it as well as the naked affirmation be desired by us For we must not take every man for a Bishop that saith he is so They must shew us according to the Canons that the Clergy of the Diocess lawfully Elected them and Bishops Consecrated them which are transactions that we are strangers to If they take the secret Election of six or seven or very few in a Diocess to be currant because the rest are supposed to be uncapable by Schism 1. Then they shew themselves so exceedingly unjust as to be unmeet for Government if they will upon their secret presumptions and unproved suppositions cut off or censure so many parts of the Clergy without ever accusing them or calling them to speak for themselves or heâ—ring their Defence 2. And if upon such presumptuous Censures you make your selves Bishops besides the Canons you cannot expect obedience from those that you thus separate from and censure unheard Sect. 17. It s known that the English Bishops as Grotius himself affirmeth were chosen by the King according to the custom here the Chapter being shadows in the business And if the King may make Bishops he may make Presbyters and then Ordination is unnecessary But if you say that the Consecrators make them Bishops and not the Kings Election then Rome had many Bishops at once when ever three or four Popes were consecrated at once which marrs all succession thence dirived and then if some Bishops consecrate one and some another both are true Bishops of one Diocess and many Pastors may be thus Ordained to one Church Sect. 18. And it concerneth us before we become their subjects to have some credible Evidence that they are so Orthodox as to be capable of the place And the rather because that some that are suspected to be Bishops how truly I know not have given cause of some suspicion Either by writing against Original sin or by owning Grotius's Religion which what it was I have shewed elsewhere or by unchurching the Protestant Churches and Nullifying their Ministry that have not their kind of Ordination while they take the Roman Ordination to be Valid and their Church and Ministry to be true with other such like Sect. 19. And 6. If we should now when better may be had subject our selves to the Ordination and Government of the abolished Prelacy we should choose a more corrupt way of administration and prefer it to a more warrantable way That this way is corrupt is proved in the former Disputation That a way more warrantable may be had I shall prove anon Though submission to a faulty way in some cases of Necessity is excusable yet when we have our choice the case is altered Sect. 20. And a tender Conscience hath very great reason to fear lest by such voluntrary subjection they should incur moreover this double guilt 1. Of all the hurt that this corrupt sort of Episcopacy did before the abolition 2. And of all the hurt that it might do again if it were introduced which is neither small nor uncertain He that hath seen the fruits that it brought forth but for a few years before the abolition and weighs the arguments brought against it methinks should fear to be the restorer of it Sect. 21. If any man as Mr. Thorndike and others do shall write for a more regular sort of Episcopacy it s one thing to find a tolerable Bishop in his Book and another thing to find him existent in England For we know not of any New sort of Regulated Episcopacy planted and therefore must suppose that it is the Old sort that is in being Let them bring their Moderate forms into existence and then its like that many may be more inclined to submit to their Ordination but their moderate principles having not yet made us any Moderate Episcopacy I see not how we should be ever the more obliged for them to submit to the Old but rather are the more justified in disowning it when their own reformed modell is against it CHAP. VII The Ordination used now in England and in other Protestant Churches is Valid and agreeable to Scripture and the Practice of the Ancient Church Sect. 1. HAving already proved that the late English Bishops Ordination is not of necessity it is satisfactory without any more ado to them that would nullifie our Ministry and Churches that have not their Ordination But because we may meet with other adversaries and because in a case of so much weight we should walk in the clearest light that we can attain for the satisfaction of our own Consciences I shall further prove the Validity of our Ordination and the truth of our Call and Minstry and Churches Sect. 2. Argument 1. The Ordination is Valid which is performed by such Bishops as were instituted and existent in Scriture times But our Ordination used in England and other refoâ—med Churches is performed by such Bishops as were institutâ—d and existent in Scâ—â—pture times the refore such Ordination is Valid Thâ— Major will not be denyed being â—â—derstood with a supposition of other requisites that are not now in controversie For those that we have to deal with do grant that such Bishops as are mentioned Acts 20. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. Phil. 1.1 and
in other passages of Scripture had the power of Ordination and that it belonged not only to the Apostles and Evangelists and such as they call Archbishops but that the fixed Bishops of particular Churches had it Sect. 3. The Minor I prove thus that our Ordination is by Scripture Bishops The Scripture Bishops were the Pastors of Particular Churches having no Presbyters subject to them Most of our Ordainers are such Pastors therefore most of our Ordainers are Scripture Bishops Sect 4. The Major is asserted at large by the foresaid 〈◊〉 Dr. H. H. Annot. in Art 11. b. p. 407. Where he shews 〈◊〉 though this title of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders have been also 〈◊〉 second Order in the Church is now only in use for them under 〈◊〉 name of Presbyters yet in the Scripture times it belonged princâ—pally if not only to Bishops there being no evidence that any of 〈◊〉 second order were then instituted So that the Scripture Bishops were the Pastors of single Churches having no Presbyters under them for there were no inferiour Presbyters that had not the Power of Ordination instituted in those times This therefore may be taken as a granted truth Sect. 5. And that our Ordainers are such is commonly known 1. They are Pastors it is but few of the Prelates that denyed this They are Rectors of the People and have the Pastoral charge of souls 2. They are Pastors of Particular Churches 3. They have for the most part at least no subject or inferiour Presbyters under them therefore they are Scripture Bishops Sect. 6. Object The difference lyeth in another point The Scripture Bishops had the Power of Ordination Your Pastors have not the Power of Ordination thereefore they are not the same Answ. That is the thing in Question I am proving that they have the power of Ordination thus In Scripture times all single Pastors of single Churches had the Power of Ordination there being no other instituted But our Ordainers are the single Pastors of single Churches and of Christs institution therefore they have the Power of Ordination If the Pastors now are denyed to be such as were instituted in Scripture times 1. Let them shew who did institute them and by what authority 2. The sole Pastors of particular Churches were instituâ—ed in Scripture times But such are ours in question therefore c. Sect. 7. There is no sort of Pastors lawfull in the Church but what were instituted in Scripture times But the sort of Pastors now in question are lawfull in the Church therefore they were instituted in Scripture times The Minor will be granted us of all those that were Ordained by Prelates They would not Ordain men to an office which they thought unlawful The Major is proved thus No sort of Pastors are lawful in the Church but such of whom we may have sufficient evidence that they were instituted by Christ or his Apostles But we can have sufficient evidence of none but such as were instituted in Scripture times that they were instituted by Christ or his Apostles therefore no other sort is lawfull The Major is proved in that none but Christ and such as he committed it to have power to institute new Holy Offices for Worship in the Church But Christ hath committed this to none but Apostles if to them therefore c. Whether Apostles themselves did make any such new Office I will not now dispute but if they did 1. It was by that special Authority which no man since the planting of the Churches by them can lay claim to or prove that they have 2. And it was by that extraordinary guidance and inspiration of the Holy Ghost which none can manifest to have been since that time communicated Sect. 8. Moreover if there were a Power of instituting new Offices in the Church since Scripture times it was either in a Pope in Councils or in single Pastors But it was in none of these not in a Pope for there was no such Creature of long time after much less with this authority Not in a Council For 1. None such was used 2. None such is proved 3. Else they should have it still Not in every Bishop as will be easily granted Sect. 9. If such a Power of instituting New Church-Offices were after Scripture times in the Church then it is ceased since or continueth still Not ceased since For 1. The Powers or officers then lâ—â—t continue still therefore their authority continueth still 2. There is no proof that any such temporary power was given to any since Scripture times Nor doth any such continue still Otherwise men might still make us more New Offices and so we should not know when we have done nor should we need to look into Scripture for Christs will but to the will of men Sect. 10. Argument 2. No men since Scripture times had power to change the Institutions of Christ and the Apostles by taking down the sort of Pastors by them established and setting up another sort in their stead But if there be lawful Pastors of particular Churches that have not power of Ordination then men had power to make such a change For the sort of Pastors then instituted were such as had but one Church and were themselves personally to guide that Church in actual Worship and had the power of Ordination and there was no subject Presbyters nor no single Pastors that had not the Power of Ordination All single Pastors of particular Churches had that Poâ—er then But all or almost all such single Pastors of particular Churches are by the Dissenters supposed to be without that Power now Therefore it is by them supposed that Christs form of Church Government and sort of Officers are changed and consequently that men had power to change them for they suppose it lawfully done Sect. 11. Argument 3. The Pastors of City Churches may ordain especially the sole or chief Pastors Many of our present Ordainers are the Pastors of City Churches and the sole or chief Pastors in some Places therefore they may Ordain The Major is proved from the doctrine of the Dissenters which is that every City Church should have a Bâ—shop and that every Bishop is the chief and sometimes only Pastor of a City Church If they say that yet every Pastor though the sole Pastor of a City Church is not a Bishop I answer that then they will infer the same power of changing Scripture Institutions which I mentioned and disproved before Let them prove such a Power if they can Sect. 12. The Minor is undenyable and seen de facto that many of our Ordainers are such Pastors of City Churches and that of two sorts some of such Cities as have both the Name and Nature of Cities And some of such Cities as have truly the nature but in our English custom of speech have not the name such as are all Corporations in the several Market Towns of England Sect. 13. Argument 4. Those Pastors that have Presbyters
Major is undenyable because there are all things enumerated that are Necessary to the determination of the person qualified that is to receive the power from Christ Sect. 68. And the Minor I prove by parts 1. That our Ministry have usually the peoples consent is a known case that needs no proof 2. So is it that they have the Magistrates allowance and his Authority appointing Approvers for their Introduction and allowing Ordination and commanding Ministerial Works Sect. 69. And doubtless the Magistrate himself hath so much Authority in Ecclesiastical affairs that if he command a qualified person to preach the Gospel and command the people to receive him I see not how either of them can be allowed to disobey him Though yet the party ought also to have recourse to Pastors for Ordination and people for consent where it may be done And Grotius commendeth the saying of Musculus that would have no Minister question his Call that being qualified hath the Christian Magistrates Commission And though this assertion need some limitations yet it is apparent that Magistrates power is great about the Offices of the Church For Solomon put out Abiathar from the Priesthood and put Zadeck in his place 1 Kings 2.27 35. David and the Captains of the host separated to Gods service those of the sons of Asaph and of Heman and of Ieduthun who should Prophesie with Harps c. 1 Chron 16.4 And so did Solomon 2 Chron. 8.14 15. They were for the service of the house of God according to the Kings Order 1 Chron. 25.1 6. And methinks those men should acknowledge this that were wont to stile the King In all causes and over all persons the supream Head and Governour Sect. 70. But 3. We have moreover in the Ordination of the Reformed Churches The approbation and solemn Investiture of the fittest Ecclesiastical Officers that are to be had And no more is requisite to an orderly Admission There being nothing for man to do but to determine of the qualified person and present him to God to receive the power and obligation from his Law it is easie to discern that where all these concur the Peoples Election or Consent the Magistrates Authority the determination of fit Ecclesiastical Officers and the qualification and consent of the person himself there needs no more to the designation of the man Nor hath God tyed the essence of the Church or Ministry to a certain formality or to the interest or will of Prelates nor can any more ad ordinem be required but that a qualified person do enter by the best and most Orderly way that is open to him in those times and places where he is And that we have the fittest Approvers and Ordainers I prove Sect. 71. If the most of the Protestant Churches have no other Ecclesiastical Officers to Ordain but Presbyters then is it the most fit and orderly way to enter into the Ministry in those Churches by their Ordination and those Presbyters are the fittest that are there to Ordain But the Antecedent is a known truth If any in denyal of the Consequence say that the Churches should rather be without Ministers then have Ordination by such they are confuted by what is said before Sect. 72. And if you say that they should have Bishops and it is their own fault that they have not I answer Suppose that were a granted truth it can reach but to some that have the Rule It is not the fault of every Congregation or expectant of the Ministry It is not in their power to alter Laws and forms of Government and therefore they are bound to enter by the fittest way that is open to them Sect. 73. Moreover even in England the Presbyteries are fitter for Ordination then the present Bishops as to the Nation in general therefore the Ordination by Presbyteries is done by the fittest Ecclesiastical officers and is the most regular and desireable Ordination Sect. 74. I prove the Antecedent by comparing the Ordination of the Presbyteries and the present Prelates 1. I have before shewed that the English Prelacy is more unlike the Primitive Episcopacy then our Parochial Presbytery or Episcopacy is and therefore hath less reason to appropriate to themselves the Power of Ordaining 2. The Ordaining Presbyters are Many and known persons and the Prelates few and to the most and except three or four to almost all that I am acquainted wiâ—h unknown 3. The Presbyters Ordain Openly where all may be satisfied of the impartiality and Order of their proceedings But the Prelates Ordain in Private where the same satisfaction is not given to the Church 4. Hereupon it is easie for any vagrant to counterfeit the Prelates secret Orders and say he was Ordained by them when it is no such matter and who can disprove him But the publick Ordination of Presbyters is not so easily pretended by such as have it not and the pretence is easily discovered 5. The Prelates for ought I hear are very few and therefore few can have access to them for Ordination But Presbyteries are in most countreyes 6. The Prelates as far as I can learn Ordain Ministers without the peoples consent over whom they are placed and without giving them any notice of it before hand that they may put in their exceptions if they dissent But the Presbyters ordinarily require the consent of the people or at least will hear the reasons of their dissent 7. The Presbyteries Ordain with the Magistrates allowance and the Prelates without and against them Those therefore that are Ordained by Prelates usually stand on that foundation alone and want the consent of People and Magistrates when those that are Ordained by Presbyteries have all 8. Ordination by Prelates is now pleaded for on Schismatical grounds and in submitting to it with many of them we must seem to consent to their Principles that all other Ordination is Null and the Churches are no true Churches that are without it But Presbyteries Ordain not on such dividing terms 9. We hear not of neer so much care in the Prelates Ordinations in these or former times as the Presbyteries I could give some instances even of late of the great difference which I will not offend them with expressing 10. Most of them that we hear of Ordain out of their own Diocesses which is against the ancient Canons of the Church 11. Some of them by their Doctrines and their Nullifying all the Reformed Churches and Ministry that have no Prelates do shew us that if they had their will they would yet make more lamentable destructive work in the Church then the hottest persecutors of their late predecessors did For it is plain that they would have all the Ministers disowned or cast out that are not for the Prelacy And what a case then would this land and others be in Of which more anon So that we have reason to fear that these are destroyers and not faithful Pastors I speak not of all but only of the guilty For
choose a certain person to be her Husband and the Minister or Magistrate solemnize their Marriage without any mention of such Governing Power the Power doth nevertheless belong to the man because God hath specified by his Law the Power of that Relation and the man is Lawfully put in the Relation that by the Law of God hath such a Power so is it in the case in hand Sect. 107. But yet 2. I add that the Prelates and the Laws of England gave to Presbyters a Power of Ordination For in all their Ordinations the Presbyters were to lay on hands with the Prelate and did in all Ordinations that I have seen And if they actually imposed hands and so Ordained it was an actual profession to all that they were supposed to have the power of Ordination which they exercised Sect. 108. Obj. But they had no Power given them to do it without a Prelate Answ. 1. By Christ they had 2. You may as well say that Bishops have no Power to Ordain because they were not ordinarily at least to do it without the Presbyters Sect. 109. Obj. Saith the foresaid Learned Author Dissert Praemonit sect 10.11 Vnum illud lubens interrogarem an Hieronymus dum hic esset Presbyteratu secundario fungeretur partiariâ tantum indutus potestate praesente sed spreto insuper habito Episcopo Diaconum aut Presbyterum ordinare aut Presbytero uni aut alteri adjunctus recte potuerit si affirmetur dicatur sodes qua demum ratione ab eo dictum sit Episcopum sola ordinatione ergo ordinatione à Presbytero disterminatum esse sin negetur quomodo igitur Presbytero Anglicano cui nullam quae non Hieronymo potestatem c. Answ. 1. This is none of our case in England we Ordain not praesente sed spreto Episcopo but most Countreyes know of no Bishop that they have but Presbyters 2. Hierom might have Ordained with his fellow-presbyters according to the Laws of Christ but not according to the Ecclesiastical Canons that then obtained or bore sway 3. Hierom plainly tells you that it is by Ecclesiastical appointment for the prevention of schisme that Bishops were set up so far as to have this power more then Presbyters in the point of Ordination 4. The English Presbyters are Parochial Bishops and have an Office of Christs making and not of the Prelates and are not under those Ecclesiastical Canons that restrained Hierom from the exercise of this power And therefore whereas it is added by this Learned Author Quid huic dilemmati reponi aut opponi possit fateor equidem me non adeo Lynceum esse ut perspiciam he may see that he could scarce have set us an easier task then to answer his dilemma Sect. 110. The second and their principal objection is that We have no precept or example in the Church for Presbyters Ordaining without Prelates therefore it is not to be done Answ. 1. I told you before how Bishop Vsher told me he answered this Objection to King Charlâ— viz. from the example of the Church of Alexandria where Presbyters made Bishops which is more Sect. 111. But 2. I answer you haue no example in Scripture or long after that ever Prelates of the English sort did ordain nor any precept for it nor was such a Prelacy then known as is proved and therefore their Ordination hath less warrant then that by Pretbyters Sect. 112. And 3. I have told you before of Scripture warrant for Ordination by a Presbyterie and also by the Teachers and other Officers of a single Church as was the Church of Antioch Prove that there was any Bishop Sect. 113. Lastly it is confessed by the Dissenters that such Presbyters or Bishops as are mentioned Act. 20. Phil. 1.1 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1 c. had power of Ordination But according to the judgement of most of the Fathers that ever I saw or heard of that interpret those texts it is Presbyters that are meant in all or some of those texts It is granted us also by the Dissenters that the chief or sole Pastors of single Churches in Scripture-times did ordain and had the power of Ordination But the Presbyters of England and other Protestant Churches are the chief or sole Pastors of single Churches therefore c. Sect. 114. Object 3. But the English Presbyters have broak their Oaths of Canoical obedience and therefore at least are schismatical Answ. 1. Many never took any such oath to my knowledge For my part I did not 2. The particular persons that are guilty must be accused and neither must they be judged before they speak for themselves nor yet must others be condemned for their sakes In these parts there is not one Presbyter I think of ten who differs from the Prelates about Ordination that ever took that oath And therefore it is few that can be called Schismaticks on that account Yea 3. And those few that did take that Oath have few of them that I know of done any thing against the Prelates Sect. 115. Object 4. The English Presbyters have pull'd down the Prelates and rebelled against them and therefore at least are guilty of Schism Answ. 1. The guilty must be named and heard their case is nothing to the rest It is not one often I think perhaps of twenty that can be proved guilty 2. It was not the Scripture Bishops that they Covenanted against or opposed but only the irregular English Prelacy before described And the endeavour of reforming this corrupted Preâ—acy and reducing it to the Primitive frame is in it self no schism Sect. 116. Object 5. Ignatius commandeth them to obey the Bishops and do nothing without them Answ. 1. Ignatius also commandeth them to obey the Presbyters as the Apostles of Christ and to do nothing without them 2. The Bishops that Ignatius mentioneth were such as our Parish Bishops or Presbyters are that have a Presbyterie to assist them They were the chief Pastors of a single Church as is before proved out of Ignatius and not the Pastors of hundreds of Churches Sect. 117. I shall trouble the Reader with no more of their objections seeing by what is said already he may be furnished to answer them all but I shall now leave it to his impartial sober consideration whether I have not proved the truth of our Ministry and of the Reformed Churches and the Validity of our administrations and of our Ordination it self CHAP. VIII The greatness of their sin that are now labouring to perswade the People of the Nullity of our Ministry Churches and administrations Sect. 1. HAving laid so fair a ground for my application I think it my duty to take the freedom to tell those Reverend persons that oppose us in this point the Reasons why I dare not joyn with them and the guilt that I am perswaded they heap upon their own souls Wherein I protest it is not mine intent to make them odious or cast disgrace upon them for I do with
Accommodation § 10. A fourth witness is Dr. Forbs of Scotland who having written purposely a Book called his Irenicon for Accommodation on such terms I need to say no more of him but refer you to the Book I shall name no more of the Episcopal party These four are enow to my purpose § 11. That the Presbyterians of England specially are willing to close upon these terms of a fixed Moderator I prove 1. By the profest Consent of that Reverend Learned servant of Christ Mr. Thomas Gataker a Member of the late Assembly at Westminster who hath professed his judgement of this matter in a Book against Lilly I refer you to his own words for brevity sake § 12. My next witness and for brevity many in one shall be Mr. Geree and the Province of London citing him in their Ius Divinum Ministerii pag. Append. 122. the words are these That the Ancient Fathers in the point of Episcopacy differ more from the high Prelatist thâ—n from the Presbyterian for the Presbyterians alwayes have a President to guide their actions which they acknowledge may be perpetual durante vita modo se bene gesserit or temporary to avoid inconvenience which Bilson takes hold of as advantagious because so little discrepant as he saith from what he maintaineth See the rest there § 13. 3. Beza the Leader against Prelacy saith de grad Minist Evang. Instituti Divini est ut in omni coetu Presbyterorum unus sit qui ordine praeat praesit reliquis It is of Divine Institution that in every Assembly of Presbyters there be one that go before and be above the rest And dividing Bishops into Divine Humane and Diabolical he makes the Humane tolerable Prelacy to be the fixed President § 14. 4. Calvin who is accused for ejecting Episcopacy besides what he writes of it to Card Sadolet saith in his Institut lib. 4. cap. 4. § 1. Ea cautione totam suam Oeconomiam composuerunt Ecclesiae veteris Episcopi ad unicam illam Dei verbi normam ut facile videas nihil fere hac parte habuisse à verbo Dei alienum § 2. Quibus ergo docendi munus injuâ—ctum erat eos omnes nominabant Presbyteros Illi ex suo numero in singulis civitatibus unum eligebant cui specialiter dabant titulum Episcopi ne ex aequalitate ut fâ—â—ri solet dissidia nascerentur Neque tamen sic honore dignitate superior erat Episcopus ut Dominium in Collegas haberet sed quas partes habet Consul in Senatu ut referat de negotiis sententias roget consulendo monendo hortando aliis praeâ—at authoritate sua totam actionem regat quod decretum Communi Consilio fuerit exequatur id munus sustinebat Episcopus in Presbyterorum coetu § 4. fine Gubernationem sic constituti nonnulli Hierarchiam vocarunt nomine ut mihi videtur improprio certe scripturis inusitato Cavere enim voluit spiritus sanctus nequis principatum aut dominationem somniaret quum de Ecclesiae gubernatione agitur Verum si rem omisso vocabulâ— intueamur N. B. reperiemus veteres Episcopos non aliam regendae Ecclesiae formam voluisse fingere ab ea quam Deus verbo suo praescripsit This he writes after the mention of Archbishops and Patriarcks as well as of Bishops governing in Synods § 15. Where by the way let me give you this observation that Bishops Governing but in Synods can have no other power of Government then the Synods themselves have But Synods themselves as such are not directly for Government but for Concord and Communion of Churches and so consequently for well-governing the several flocks Nor hath a Synod any Governing Power over a particular Pastor as being his superiour appointed to that end but only a Power of Consent or Agreement to which for unity and communion sake he is consequentially obliged not by Virtue of Gods Command that requireth us to obey the Higher Power for three Pastors are not made so the Rulers of one but by virtue of Gods commands that require us to do all things in Unity and to maintain the Peace and Concoâ—d of the Churches and to avoid Divisions and discord § 16. If any think that this doth too much favour the Congregational way I must tell him that it is so true and clear that the Episcopal men that are moderate acknowledge it For instance the Reverend Bishop Vsher did without asking of himself profess to me that it was his judgement that certainly Councils or Synods are not for Government but for Vnity and that a Bishâ—p out of Council hath the same Governing Power as all the Council though their vote may bind him for Vnity to consent § 17. This being so it must needs follow that an Archbishop or the President of a National Provincial Diocesan or Classicall Assembly or of any Association of the Pastors of many Churches hath no superiour Governing power over the Parochial or Congregational Bishop of one Church but only in concurrence with the Synod a Power of Determining by way of Agreement such points as he shall be obliged for Unity and Communion to consent to and perform if they be not contrary to the word of God This evidently follows from this Reverend Archbishops doctrine and the truth § 18. And if any shall think that the Presbyterians will not yield that a particular Church do ordinarily consist but of one full Congregation I confute them by producing their own Concessions in the London Ministers Ius Divinum Ministerii Append pag. 123. they plainly say that The later Bishops were Diocesan the former that is the Bishops of the first or ancient times were Bishops only of one Congregation And pag. 82. they say These Angels were Congregational not Diocesan In the beginning of Christianity the number of Believers even in the greatest Cities were so few as that they might well meet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one and the same place And thâ—se were called the Church of the City and therefore to ordain Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are all one in Scripture Thus far they yield to the Congregational men § 19. 5. One other witness of the Presbyterians readiness to accommodate on these terms I shall give and no more and that is Mr. Richard Vines a man that was most eminent for his management of the Presbyterian cause in the Assembly and at Vxbridge Treaty and in the Isle of Wight the Papers there presented to the King are to be seen in Print When we did set up our Association in this County I purposing to do nothing without advise and designing a hearty closure of all sober Godly men Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational and Erastian did consult first about it by Letters with Mr. Vines and in his answer to mine he approved of the design and thought our distance very small and yielded to a fixed Presidency though not to a Negative
in Afrâ—ca and call the rest Cecilians and let the Papists reduce it to the subscribers to their Trent confession or to them only that believe in the Popes universal Headship and Government and call all others Hereticks yet will all true Catholicks imitate Augustine and the Councils that were called against the Donatists who still described the Catholike Church to be that which was dispersed over the world having begun at Ierusalem and though to Gods praise we dare rejoycingly affirm that the most illustrious and the soundest part of it is in Europe among the Reformed yet dare we not say that it is all or the greatest part here Nay we confess that we are but a small part of Christs Church And therefore common sobriety may tell us that the Peace of so great a part of Christs Church as is in all the rest of the world is highly to be valued and sought with all our might in righteousness Moreover even among the reformed Churches there are many for some Episcopacy or Superintendency As the Church of England and Ireland was lately for Diocesan Episcopacy so the Churches in Denmark Sweden Saxionie and other parts of Germany Transilvania c. are for a lower sort of Episcopacy called Superintendency among them 3. And the quality of many of the Divines of that way is such as bespeaks our greatest reverence to them and should move us to thirst after Unity and Reconciliation with them Many of them are men of eminent Learning and Godliness and sound in the faith I know that it is commonly objected that they are generally ungodly men that are that way and though some of them are Learned men yet they are all or almost all of careless and carnal lives or meerly formal and superstitious and therefore their Communion is not much to be desired To which I answer 1. The plain undenyable truth is that it was so here with the most of them in the Bishops dayes where ever I was acquainted There were more Ministers in many places that would have scorned threatned or troubled a man for a godly diligent life then that would lead him that way by a good example We must speak that truth that cannot be hid whoever be displeased To this day too many of that way are careless and scandalous But then Consider withall 2. That it is but too common for the common sort even of Ministers as well as people to be careless and bad what ever opinions they are of Especially if the times do discountenance practical Religiousness the greater part are likely to follow the times being that way also so strongly enclined by nature 3. Consider also that we have had and have men of that Judgement that have been excellent Instruments of the Churches good and so eminent for Gods graces and gifts that their names will be pretious whilest Christ hath in England a Reformed Church were there in all England but one such man dissenting from us as Hooper Farrar Latimer Cranmer Ridley Iewel Abbot Davenant Vsher Hall c. what sober Godly man would not be exceeding solicitous for a reconciliation I am sure besides the godliness of their lives and painful preaching One Iewel One Vsher One Davenant hath done so much against the Roman Usurpers as they will never well claw it off them to the last Moreover who knoweth not that most of the Godly able Ministers of England since the Reformation did judge Episcopacy some of them Lawful and some of them most fit for the Non-conformists were but few and that even before this late trouble and war the most even almost all of those that were of the late Assembly at Westminster and most through the land did subscribe and conform to Episcopal Government as a thing not contrary to the word of God so that it is evident that it is very consistent with a Godly life to judge Episcopacy lawful and fit or else we should not have had so many hundred learned and godly men of that mind And I am not altogether unapt to believe that many of them yet are so far reconcileable to it moderated that if it were again established they would submit to it as they did For I hear but of few that have made any recantation of their former conformity but contrarily have known divers of them profess a reconcilableness as aforesaid as Mr. Gataker doth in one of his books express his own Judgement If I have proved this preparatory proposition which I think needeth but litle proof then have I also proved 1. That they have sinned much who have hitherto forborn the use of any means for Peace which was in their power 2. And that we are bound our selves to desire and seek after a peace with such men and that we cannot discharge a good conscience while we neglect such means as is within our reach and fit for us to use The second Proposition is that A Certain Episcopacy may be yielded to for the peace if not also for the right order of the Church In the declaration of my judgement concerning this I make no doubt but I shall displease both sides the one for yielding so much the other for yielding no more But jacta est alea I live not upon mens favour nor the air of their applause That truth which displeaseth at present may tend to peace and produce it at the last when the angry humour is allayed or at least when the angry age is gone For the clearer determination of this and the main Question following it is necessary that I here stay 1. To open the nature of Church-Government in general 2. To open the sence of the word Episcopacy and the several sorts of Bishops And then 3. I shall tell you what sort of Episcopacy it is that I could yield to for the Churches peace 1. I must confess I think that the greatest part of the controversie by far is in this first question of the nature of Ecclesiastical Government strictly so called which is only in the hands of Christs Ministers Bishops or whomsoever commonly called Clergy men Aâ—d concerning this having written my thoughts more largely elâ—ewhere I shall now lay down these few Propositions Prop. 1. All this power Ecclesiastical is Jure divino given from God himself and that either immediately or by the mediation only of the Apâ—stles I mean as to the determination in specie what it shall be and the constitution of that order and power in the Church though perhaps some other causes at least sine quibus non may intervene for the reception of this power by an individual person These therefore that plead only the Laws of the Land or only Canons of former Bishops for their standing or authority do say nothing that as to our controversie is regardable Whâ—t men do they may undo if there be reason for it and if it depend on their authority we must submit to their reason Prop. 2. This Divine Constitution of the Species of Church-Power
and we have to dispute of It is Ecclesiastical Government by Ministers and not secular by Magistrates that is our controversie It is of the Power left by Christ to Pastors and not to Princes § 25. Object But at least those should be excommunicated that deny obedience to their Bishops that is a Power that is left in the Bishops themselves whether the Magistrate consent or not Answ. 1. Excommunication is a sentence that should fall on none but for such gross and hainous sin if not also obstinacy and impenitency in them as is mentioned in Scripture Using it in cases of controversie and tolerable differences is but a tearing and dividing the Church 2. We take it not for our duty to excommunicate you because you are for Diocesan Prelacy therefore you should not take it for yours to excommunicate others because they are against it For 3. If your species of Episcopacy be such as I have proved it you have more need to repent and amend and ask forgiveness of God and men then to excommunicate them that are not of your opinion and for your sin 4. But if you take this to be your duty who hath hindered you from it these twelve years You had liberty for ought I know to have discharged your consciences and to have excommunicated us all 5. But you might so easily see what was like to come of it that it is no wonder that you forbore If such a Ministry and such a people as are now your adherents whose description I forbear should execute your sentence and cast us and our adherents out of their communion what contempt would it bring upon you in England The Ale-houses would be shut up for the most part against uâ— But that and the rest would be easily born I think this is not your way § 26. Object 7. But what need you form us a new sort of Episcopacy were we not well enough before Why did you pull down that which was well planted and now pretend to commend a better to us We were well if you had let us alone § 27. Answ. 1. But We were not well because you would not let us alone The Ministers that were silenced and imprisoned and banished and the thousands of people that were fain to follow them and all those that were undone by your prosecutions in England were not well But this is a small matter The ignorant Congregations that had ignorant and drunken guides where Piety was scorned as Puritanism and impiety made a thing of nothing and where Satan was so commonly served the many hundred Congregations in England that never knew what true Discipline meant nor never saw in all their lives a drunkard oppressor railer blasphemer either cast out or penitently confess his sin before the Church all these were not well though you were well 2. Whether we were well before I have shewed in my first Disputation and thither I refer you 3. And whether we have brought in a new Episcopacy or only cast out a new one and desire to bring in the Old we are content to put it to an equal tryall We all concurr in offering you this motion Let the oldest stand and the newest be cast out § 28. Object 8. Iudge now by the effects The Episcopacy which you blame did keep up Order and Vnity in the Church It kept under those weeds of heresie and error that since sprung up We had then no Quakers nor Seekers nor such other Sects as now abound This swarm of Errors shews which Government is best § 29. Answ. This is a gross fallacy à non causa pro causa to which I return you my answer in these seven considerations 1. You tell us of the good that you think you did but you tell us not of the hurt I hope I love Divisions or Heresies as little as ever a Bishop in England and yet I must profess that I had rather an hundred times have things continue as they are with all our swarms of heresies then to be restored to their ancient pass Our loss iâ— as great as Iosephs in being removed from the Prison to Pharaohs ungodly family I mean in spirituals of seculars anon I know not of an Anabaptist Separatist Quaker or any other Sectary in the Town that I live in for all this noise unless you will take a few Infidels for Sectaries or a few ignorant Papists or those of your own way But on the other side I hope there are many hundreds that truly fear God that formerly were drowned in ignorance and ungodliness The families that were wont to curse and swear and rail at Godliness do now worship God and set up holy instructions and cast out sin and this is our change And in some measure I have reason to believe that it is so in other places also § 30. 2. The Errors of the times are many of them your own and therefore you exclaim against your selves It is of your own selves that men arise that write against Original sin and for Liberty of Prophecying which is more then Liberty of Believing and for a kind of Limbus Patrum and Infantum and for humane Satisfactions for sin to God and for the Primacy of the Pope and that all our Protestant Churches are no Churches or Ministers no Ministers that have not Prelatical Ordination yea and a Succession of it with many the like to say nothing of other Pelagian weeds It doth not therefore become you to reproach us with our swarms of Errors while you introduce them § 31. 3. There were Heresies and Sects even in the dayes of Prelacy Had you not then the Familists the Grundleâ—onians such as Hacket and Coppinger and Arthington and the Anabaptists and Separatists and Antinomians and Papists and such like besides the contentions between the Arminians and Antiarminians and the contentions raised by Episcopacy it self and the Ceremonies that it upheld Who were they that rose up against the Bishops and pulled them down if there were Unity under them as you pretend § 32. 4. The truth is it was the Magistrate and not Episcopacy that kept that Unity and Peace among us which we had and that kept under Heresies so much as they were kept under Take not therefore the Magistrates honour to your selves Who would have attended your Courts or submitted to your censures had it not been for fear of the Secular power I think but few You know the Hereticks themselves obeyed you not for Conscience sake Nor would they have regarded your Excommunication if the Magistrate would have let them alone If it was the spiritual sword in your hands that kept out Heresies why did you not keep them out since as well as then You have the same power from Christ now as ever you had And I hope the fears of persecution will not hinder you from your duty especially when you can name so few that have suffered for exercising Church-discipline by Episcopal power at least this was no hinderance a
changed our Religion nor our Church What if he read his prayers and I say mine without book or what if he pray in white and I in black or what if he kneel in receiving the Eucharist and I sit or stand or what if he use the Cross in baptisme and I baptize no better then the Apostles did without it do these or such like make us to be of two Religions Do I change my Religion if I read with a pair of spectacles or if I look towards the South or West rather then the East c. We see what these men would make the Christian Religion to be Were the Apostles no Christians because they had no kneeling at the Eucharist nor Cross in Baptism nor Surplice nor at least our Common Prayer-book c Dare you say they were no Christians or yet that Christian Religion was one thing then and another thing now And for our Churches we do not only meet in the same places but we have the same doctrine the same worship in every part though he talk of our no true worship as if Praying Praising God c. were no true worship the things changed were by the imposers and defenders see Dr. Burgess Rejoynder professed to be no parts at all of worship but meer accidents we have the same people save here and there a few that separate by yours and others seducement and some vile ones that we cast out we have abundance of the same Ministers that we had And yet must we have no worship Ministry Communion of Saints or Salvation because we have only a Parochial and not a Diocesan Episcopacy Forsooth we have lost our Religion and are all lost men because our Bishops have but single Parish-churches to oversee which they find a load as heavy as they can bear and we have not one Bishop to take the Government of an hundred or two hundred Churches At Rome he is a damned man that believeth not in the Pope and is out of the Catholike Church because he is out of the subjection of the Pope and with these men we are lost men if we never so much believe in Christ because we believe not in an Archbishop and are out of the Catholike Church and Communion of Saints because we will not be ruled by such Rulers as these And what 's all this to such Counties as this where I live and most else in England that I hear of that know of no Bishop they have and they rejected none nor doth any come and command them any Obedience Must we be unchristened unchurcht and damned for not obeying when we have none to obey or none that calls for our obedience But I shall let these men pass and leave them in their separation desiring that they had Catholike spirits and principles This much I have said to let men see that there is no possibility of our union with this sort that are resolved on a separation and that it is not these Novelists and Dividers but the antient Episcopal party of England that we can easily agree with § 7. The next that I shall instance in that was agreed with these Principles of ours is the late Reverend and Learned Bishâ—p Vsher of whose Concord with us I have two proofs The one was his own profession to my self The other is his own writings especially his Propositions given in to King Charls now printed called The Reduction of Episcopacy to the form of Synodical Government received in the ancient Church which consisteth of four Propositions having first proved that all Presbyters have the power of Discipline and Church-government the first alloweth the single Rector of the Parish to take notice of the scandalous reprove admonish and debar them from the Lords Table The second is that in every Rurall Dâ—anry all the Pastors within the Precinct may by the Chorepiscopus or Suffragan be every month Assembled in a Synod and according to the Major part of their voices he conclude all matters that shall be brought into debate before them as Excommunication c. The third is for a Diocesan Synod once or Twice a year where by the consent of the Major part of the Rectors all things might be concluded by the Bishop or Superintendent call him whether you will or in his absence by one of the suffragans whom he deputes to be Moderator The fourth is for Provincial and National Synods in like sort § 8. And when I had perused these papers in M. S. I told him that yet one thing was left out that the Episcopal party would many of them stick at more then he and that is a Negative voice in Ordination in the President to which and the rest I proposed this for accommodation in brief 1. Let every particular or Parish Church have a Bishop and Presbyters to assist him where possibly they can be had 2. Let all these Associate and their several Associations have a stated President 3. Let all men be at liberty for the name whether they will call him a Bishop President Moderator Superintendent or the like 4. And for the Negative voice in Ordination let all Ministers of the Assâ—ciation agree that de facto they will not Ordain without him but in Cases of Necessity but let every man be left free to his own Principles on which he shall ground this practice and not be bound to consent that de jure a Negative vote is due to the President These terms did I propose to the Bishop for Accommodation and intreated him to tell me plainly his judgement whether they are satisfactory and sufficient for the Episcopal party to yield to for Peace and Communion and his answer was this They are sufficient and modâ—rate men will accept them but others will not as I have tryed for many of them are offended with me for propounding such terms And thus this Reverend Bishop and I were agreed for Peace in a quarter of an hour the truth of whâ—ch I solemnly profess and so would all the Ministers and Christians in England if they were not either wiser or foolisher honester or dishonester then he and I. And this I leave on Record to Posterity as a testimony against the dividers and contenders of this age That it was not long of men of the temper and principles of this Reverend Archbishop and my self that the Episcopal party and their dissenting Brethren in England were not speedily and heartily agreed for we actually did it To no honour of mine but to the honour of this peaceable man and the shame of the unpeaceable hinderers or refusers of our Reconciliation let this testimony live that Posterity may know whom to blame for our Calamities they all extoll Peace when they reject it and destroy it § 9 For a third witness of the Reconcileableness of the Moderate Episcopal party on these terms I may well produce Dr. Holdsworth who subscribed these same Propositions of Bishop Vsher to the King and therefore was a Consenter to the same way of