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
the worst oft carried the possession and Councils themselves were for divers whih was the Episcopal communion 3. Is communion and subjection all one with him or divers If divers I have communion with many Bishops that I am not subject to If the same how many must each man be subject to and in what order and cases 4. Communion is 1. mental or local and the first 1. In essentials 2. Integrals 3. Accidents of Christianity I have communion with all Christians in Essentials with the best in most integrals with none in all nor in all accidents 4. I am more secure in the mental communion of many Bishops than of some one and of All in Essentials and certain things than of some one in suspected things especially in universal communion with Christ and his whole Church 2. He that hath no communion with any true Bishops of Gods institution in his judgment will and profession hath no communion with Christs Church But if they are 1. of a false species 2. incapable 3. unordained 4. obtruders not consented to by the Clergy and the Flock it 's safest to disown them 5. And â—f they turn wolves thorns and thistles or hereticks 2. It 's dangerous to refuse communion with the true Episcopi Gregis but not with such as depose them 3. And its doubtful as to the Episcopi Episcoporum 1. It 's but deceit to distinguish only ordinary and extraordinary in speaking of the necessity of means The Gospel written or preached is an ordinary means which to want is hazardous indeed so is meditation prayer and sacraments where they may well be had and Pastors to administer them But there are many lesser means that may be wanting or ignorantly refused where salvation is safe The Church of England thinks preaching to be such which forbiddeth men to go for Preaching and from a bare Reader in his own Parish And the Indians converted by Frumentius and Edesius might have certain salvation before they had any Pastor And so may they that cannot know among contenders which is the true Pastor either as to the species or individual But 2. Comunion in every lawful thing is no ordinary requisite means of salvation Mark Reader that he said that suffer themselves to be excluded from Communion by such Governours for refusing submission to unsinful things And Dr. Saywell Bishop Gunnings Chaplain and this man make such refusal and schism damnable Now mark here how they make all indifferent imposed things consequently necessary to salvation and make all such indifferences to be Articles of faith or necessary to salvation to be believed E.g. if Organs the Cross in Baptism Surplices Church-images Exorcisms and five hundred such be indifferent and commanded by the Bishop he that is excommunicated for not conforming to them or withdraweth for it is a damnable Schismatick Ergo it is necessary to salvation to conform to every one of them in that case Ergo it 's necessary to salvation to hold them to be lawful or else to use them while I verily take them to be sins To what a mass now have these men brought the Aâ—ticles or necessaries to salvation Doth any living man know all lawful things to be such 1. Then in Abassia where there is but one Abuna Bishop local Communion with him is impossible to most 2. And how is the Patriarch of Alexandria who ordaineth him of that Place that is another Kingdom 2. Then in one Place-Communion with Papists in another with Greeks Moscovites Abisines Armenians c. is necessary in unsinful things 3. Who will judg but the Excommunicator what is unsinful as to his act 4. What a case were men in at Rome under Formosus Stephen Sergius Eugenius 4. Iohn 12. and 22. c. and at Alexandria under Peter Meletius Paulinus Flavianus and so oft in other Schisms and Nullities 5. The Novatians and Ioannites had the ordinary means of salvation in Constantinople under separate Pastors But it 's true that the ordinary means are confined to the visible Church and its external Communion where it may be had Of which more anon 1. Some think that if God had only commanded men to love him call upon him hate sin seek life eternal without an express promise one might be sure it should not be done in vain 2 But God hath expresly promised salvation to all that truly love trust and obey him and seek first Gods Kingdom and are pure in heart holy and love all men though they were excommunicate for not crossing subscribing or thinking Diocesans unlawful Chap. 3. The Promises of God and his Covenant on his part are all one Those that God promiseth to save shall certainly be savâ—d who those are the Gospel fully tâ—lls us yea and told men before the particular Churches were fixed under their proper Pastors called Elders and Bishops in the Scripture 3 Transaction is an ambiguous word 1. It was transacted by making the promise by Christ on Earth 2. It is transacted by giving the consenting penitent Believer a Right before God to Christ and salvation when he first truly so consenteth 3. It is transacted by a solemn Mâ—nisterial Investiture sealing and delivering that Right for the fuller comfort of the consenter and in soro Ecclesiae to give the Right of external Communion as a Tessara when the person is baptizâ—d 4. It is transacted by renewed confirmation and for further grace daily in the Eucharist I love not to offend you but I must be true to truth and souls and therefore tell men that these Generals and Confusions are but Cheats 3. Would you have men believe that external solemnities are necessary to the Right of Heart Covenanters before God as to salvetion Or that all external solemnities are of the same necessity The Church of England takes Confirmation to de an external solemnity for assuring men of Gods favour by the sign of Imposition of a Diocesans hands and yet bind you to profess that it is not necessary to salvation but the baptized Infants are certainly and undoubtedly saved without it Litanies Processions and many external solemnities are not essential to external Communion with the visible Church Chap. 8 O tremendous Is it no other Is not the universal visible Church consisting of all professed Christians Headed only by Christ the only universal Church visible in the world Is there no Communion with this as such Had the baptized Eunuch by Philip the Evangelist no Communion with the visible Church nor promise of salvation nor the Iberians Indians and many others that were baptized before they knew or had a Bishop Do not baptizing Presbyters and Lay-men say Turtullian and the Papists assure men of salvation though they should not hear of a Bishop Why was not Diocesan Episcopacy in the Creed if the belief and obedience be necessary to salvation a 1. 1. Apostles and Evangelists took men into the visible Communion of the universal Church before they had particular Church-Bishops 2. Fixed Church-Communion was exercised universally under
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
about the final Judgment If all these be little tollerable differences why may not we be tollerated If not judg Reader who they be that are intollerable when you hear them plead against tolleration § 3. I. For the first we judg that there is a God who is the Governour of the World by an universal Law which is above all humane Laws or will and that he is the fountain of all power and there is none but what he giveth and limiteth and that no man is above him nor hath true authority against his Laws But Mr. Dodwell saith That it is irreconcileable to Government in this life or to due subordination of subjects to superiours to practice differently and defend it by pretending Divine authority and appealing to writings Scriptures is our word by excellency so called And so God shall be God and be obeyed if the Clergy please § 4. II. As to the second we suppose that the Holy Scriptures are Gods Laws indited and recorded by the Holy Ghost to be the first obliging Rule of Faith and holy living which all men are to be obedient to before and against all contrary Laws of men But Mr. Dodwell as aforesaid alloweth no such prime obligation as will warrant an appeal to the Word of God from the visible Church-Governours that contradict it § 5. III. And for the third we suppose that all humane Powers are derived from God and have no authority but what he giveth them and are more under him and his Laws than the Justices are under the King and his Laws and can oblige no man against the Laws of God But how far Mr. Dodwell thinks otherwise you have heard He saith not indeed that we must break Gods Laws but we must not pretend them or appeal to them against our Governours In charity I hope he meaneth no worse but that we must take our Rulers word or exposition and judg nothing to be in the Scripture contrary to their commands And whether he give them the same dominion also over the Law of Nature let him tell you Paul disclaimed dominion over mens saith and the written Law of God § 6. IV. And for the fourth We take moral good to be a conformity to Gods Law and moral evil or sin to be a breach of it But Mr. Dodwell is for measuring them by the Clergies or Governours will though Gods Law be against theirs § 7. V. And for the fifth we take the Catholick Church to have no Supreme Government but God and our Glorified Redeemer God and man and that there is no such thing as a catholick-Catholick-Church of Gods making under any other Supreme Rulers But that as God is the invisible King of this visible world and Kings are subordinate Supremes in their Kingdom but neither one of them or many conjunct in an Aristocracy Supreme over all the earth so Christ is the partly visible and partly invisible supreme Ruler of the visible Church of Christians and each Pastor is under him over his proper flock bound to keep concord and peace but none under him Supreme over all whether Monarch as the Pope or Aristocracy as Councils Cardinals or ' others But Mr. Dodwell is for a visible Society with a visible humane Supreme But who the Supreme is I despair of getting him to acquaint us § 8. VI. And for the sixth we suppose that God sent forth Preachers to convert the world and turn them from darkness to light and the power of Satan to God and that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word preached and that whoever believeth shall be saved and the word of God is powerful to this end and sufficient to make us wise to salvation But Mr. Dodwell thinks that it is not Preaching but the delivering men the Sacraments that giveth them the first true saving grace and title to Salvation And that none in the world have this Sacrament or Covenant-title to life but those that receive it from a hand that had an Ordination by Bishops in his sense of uninterrupted succession from the Apostles by the like Ordination § 8. VII Accordingly we hold that Preaching is for the converting of souls and the means of saving faith and holiness But what he thinks it is good for I know not well nor whether he would send the Indians the Sacraments instead of Preachers § 10. VIII We take it to be our duty though men forbid us to confess Christ and assemble for Gods worship to read and hear the Scripture and to praise God But he thinks we must not practice differently from the ruling Clergies will if they forbid us nor alledg Divine authority for it § 11. IX We suppose that the office of a Prophetical Ministry bringing new Doctrines or Laws from God and the office of the Teachers and Rulers by these Laws are greatly different and must necessarily be distinguished Moses was a Prophetical Mediator in Legislation and he confirmâ—d his Mediation by uncontrouled Miracles The Prophets afterward came but on particular applicatory messages But the Priests and Levites as such were no Prophets nor had power to make any new additions or alterations of the Law but only to teach it the people and as guides apply it to their several cases so Christ and his Apostles commissioned to deliver and record all his Doctrines and Commands to the following ages did by the Holy Ghost Prophetically deliver to the world that body of Doctrine and Law which must rule them to the end and judg them and thus sealed and confirmed all by a multitude of uncontrouled Miracles but all following Bishops and Pastors are not to do the like nor add or alter nor are such Legislators being not Prophets nor workers of Miracles but only to teach and apply the Laws already recorded in Scripture and guide their Congregations in variable circumstances time place translations c. according to the general rules of Gods Law This is the truth But how much Mr. Dodwell equals the Bishops and Apostles and sets their words above the Scripture as to obligation you have seen before § 12. X. And as he giveth Bishops power to silence Presbyters and forbid the Preaching of the Gospel and Gods worship so how little knowledg or godliness or common sobriety or honesty he requireth to a saving Sacramenting Priest who must not be separated from you heard before contrary to Cyprian and many a Councils Canons But we know that Paul had no power to destruction but only to edification And they have no more § 13. XI We suppose that we must love honour and communicate with all such as true Ministers or Churches who have true faith and repentance and sincere obedience to Christs Laws and are able godly willing Pastors chosen or consented to by the flocks approved and ordained by senior Pastors especially in Synods where City-Pastors preside and especially if also authorized by the Christian Magistrate But he thinks if they have not also successivâ— Ordination from the Apostles by Bishops
AN ANSWER TO Mr. Dodwell and Dr. Sherlocke Confuting an Universal Humane Church-Supremacy Aristocratical and Monarchical as Church-Tyranny and Popery And defending Dr. Isaac Barrow's Treatise against it By Richard Baxter Preparatory to a fuller Treatise against such an Universal Soveraignty as contrary to Reason Christianity the Protestant Profession and the Church of England though the Corrupters usurp that Title LONDON Printed for Thomas Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns at the lower end of Cheapside near Mercers Chappel 1682. READER THough the difference between Mr. Dodwell and Mr. Thorndike and such others and those condemned by them be very great I would not have it seem greater than it is The sum of it is as followeth 1. Mr. Dodwell thinketh that there is no true Ministry Church-Sacraments nor Covenant-right to pardon and salvation but where there is a Ministry delivering the Sacraments who were ordained by Bishops in his sense of Bishops who had their Ordination from other Bishops and they from others by an uninterrupted chain of succession from the Apostles We know that by this Doctrine he condemneth or unchurcheth not only the Reformed Churches the Greeks and other Easterns but the Church of Rome it self and leaveth no certainty of the very being of any one Church on earth And we maintain that the sacred Scripture is the universal Law of Christ in which he hath described and instituted the office and work of the sacred Ministry and appointed the way of their continuance in the world by necessary Qualification Election Consent and ordinarily regular Ordination That as Presbyters now lay on hands with the Bishop so senior Pastors are the Ordainers as the Colledg of Physicians license Physicians and the Convocation of Doctors make Doctors and man generateth man But to avoid contention and division the Churches have used to make one of these Presbyters or Pastors a President and partly a Ruler in each Colledg and Church and given him a Negative voice in Ordinations against which we strive not but maintain 1. That his consent is not so necessary as that no one can be a true Presbyter that hath it not As the Clergy at Rome in Cyprian's days long governed when they had no Bishop so if the Bishop be dead or refuse to ordain or would ordain none but Hereâ—icks or uncapable men or would tyrannize and impose men not consented to the Ordination is valid that is made without him And 2. That the true chief Pastor of every particular formed Church is a true Bishop though Diocesans should deny it 3. And that even Ordination it self is necessary but for Order where it may be had and not to the Being of the Ministry where it cannot be had on lawful terms no more than Coronation to the King or publick solemnization to Marriage 4. And we are assured that if Regular Ordination were interrupted by death heresie refusal neglect e. g. at Antioch Alexandria Constantinople Jerusalem c. Christs Charter or Scripture-Law would presently restore it to persons duly qualified chosen and ordained by the fittest there that can be had 5. If this were not so as multitudes of schismatical and unlawful Popes Ordinations at Rome would be invalid e. g. John 13. and 21. and 23. and Eugenius 4th deposed as a Heretick by a General Council c. so every usurping Bishop that pretendeth falsly that he was himself lawfully ordained would nullifie Churches Ministry and Sacraments of all ordained by him And many have falsly pretended to Orders 6. And that if men must refuse the Government and Sacraments of all Bishops and Presbyters that do not prove to them a Regular Ordination uninterrupted for 1600. years all the Ministry on earth may be refused and none for so doing should be called Schismaticks I never yet heard or saw a Bishop prove such a succession nor ever knew one that would take his Oath on it that he was a true Bishop on such terms II. Mr. Dodwell thinks that the Presbyters yea and Bishops were not given by God Pag. 60. saith he But where do they find that God ever gave Bishops Presbyters and Deacons Where note that it is of the Office in specie that we speake But we think that God hath made or instituted the Office and its work And if he did not 1. Who did If men was it Clerg-ymen or Lay-men If Lay-men was it Christians or Infidels And by what Authority Do the children beget the fathers and yet may not Presbyters propagate their species If Clergy-men who were they If not Apostles or Prophets or Evangelists they were none If these then it seems the Apostles did it not as Bishops for it is the making of the first Bishops that we question And what the Apostles did not as Bishops but as commissioned Apostles Christ did by his Spirit And they that will do the like must have the like Office Authority and Spirit If God gave not Bishops because the Apostles made them then God gave us not the Scripture because the Apostles and Evangelists wrote it And is not this the same or worse Doctrine than that which the Italian Iesuits would have had pass at Trent against Gods making Bishops or their Office And if God gave not Bishops or Presbyters they that reject them reject no gift or institution of God And if men made them how come they to be essential to the Church Did not Christ and his Spirit in the Apostles institute so much as the Church-essentials And if men made Bishops and Presbyters in specie may not man unmake them III. Mr. Dodwell maintaineth that the power of Presbyters is to be measured by the intention of the Ordainers who give it them and not by any Scripture-institution charter or description We maintain the contrary that God having instituted and described the Office of Bishops Pastors Presbyters Gods Law in Scripture is the Rule by which the office-power and obligation and work in the essentials must be known Otherwise 1. It would be supposed that God made not the office of Bishops or Presbyters which is false 2. That Ordainers may make new Churches Bishops or Presbyters in specie yea as many species of them as they shall intend 3. That they may abrogate or change the ancient species They may make one office only for preaching another only for praying another only for Baptism another only for the Lords Supper and others for new work of their own The Papists themselves abhor this Doctrine 4. Then no man can know the measure of his Authority not knowing the intentions of the Ordainers Perhaps three or ten ordainihg Bishops may have three or ten several intents 5. Then the Bishop may put down Gods Worship or Sacraments by limiting the Priests power 6. It 's contrary to all Ministerial Investitures The Investing Minister is not the Owner or the Donor but delivereth possession of what the Owner and Donor contracted for or gave If the Archbishop Crowning the King would infringe his Prerogative it 's a
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
willing to learn of him as his Disciple I was in his next The unwearied Labourer in Christs harvest and his marvellous joy c. And in the rest when I could not receive his reasonings I became worse and more mâ—serable than ever It 's a wonderful meritoriouâ— excellency with such men to become their Proselytes and admirers As true Charity and Piety would fain propagate Truâ—h Goodness and happiness so Pride Self-conceit and a Sectarian Spirit are like the inordinate lust of fornicators impatient longer than they are propagating their spurious kind And indeed the inordinate height of your self-conceitedness and confidence in gross confounding error will make chast souls afraid of your procacious sollicitations Had you sought my corporal destruction and not the Churches ruin for which you profess a zeal I might silently have let you take your course But the sober world so well knoweth that Satan and Papists are so much against the plain and serious preaching of the Gospel and so much for blood or cruelty towards Dissenters how faithful and truly religious soever that if you go on to be like them 1. In laâ—bouring us to cease preaching And 2. To call for punishment we know what to those that will not cease you will cherish men in the opinion that you are a Papist more than all your friends and talk can make them believe that you are not Sir when sin groweth crying and common I am one that dare not preach impenitency by hiding it and saying it is a doubtful or a little thing though I expect that guilt should be impatient and some Doctors should go on to say behind my back that less than this is unchristian and intemperate passion or abuse Methinks you who judg millions of true believers and lovers of God and holiness to damnation and by Printing this go about to have all men think them such and consequently to love them no better than the damnable should be loved should never be so partially tender as not to endure to be but told what you say and do And will you be angry with sober Christians for startling at such a Doctrine that All our other qualifications though we believe and love God c. will not save us unless we have the Sacrament from a Minister ordained by a Bishop of your described species and he from such another c. to the beginning Can Christian ears relish the description of such a Hell as containeth the believing Christian lovers of God and Holiness who call'd upon his name and sought first his Kingdom and Righteousness and forsook all for Christ but were damned for want of an uninterrupted Diocesan Ordination of the Priest that gave them the Sacrament and all his predecessors Sure Christians hitherto han't believed that Diocesans Sacraments will make a Heaven of wicked ungodly men nor the want of them make a Hell of Saints And will you be angry with me for not believing that God is such a one as will for ever hate and damn in Hell the souls that loved him above all Will he take that love from them when they die Or do they continue in Hell to love him while he hateth and tormenteth them Were not that to call him worse than the Devil whom they do not love You only tell us that they cannot be saved for want of your species of Sacramenters But if you meant not by this their Damnation but a Purgatory or Annihilation it 's meet you should deal plainly and tell us what it is They are Articles of our Faith and Religion That whoever believeth sincerely in Christ shall not perish but have everlasting life And that there is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth And that eye hath not seen c. what God hath prepared for them that love him When Dr. VVilkins once preached in Pauls Church an excellent Sermon for peace and concord on mutual forbearance on Rom. 14.17 The kingdom of God is not meat and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost For he that in these things serveth Christ is accepted of God and approved of men he accosted me at the Pulpit foot with these true words I am sure this Sermon pleased you If Dr. Tillotson will publish that Sermon as he hath done Dr. Isaac Barrow's those two books will more shame your love-killing schismatical doctrine than all that I have said against you And if the fore-mentioned moderating Doctors go on to publish me to be a man of unpeaceable provoking language for saying that such doctrines and practices are great sins they will seem to me to take the preaching of Repentance for reviling and that he is the sinner that tells men of sin and that the Laity are far happier men who may be called to Repentance for their vices than the Clergy or Church-corrupters who are heinously wronged if their sins be named and they be but intreated to consider and repent yea if we but tell the reason why we dare not do as they in a time when we have cause to study such Texts as Ezek. 9.4 Perhaps God may permit your principles to get the upper hand But if he do I shall love them never the better but the worse and shall better love the world which forsake not God nor is forsaken by him Mr. DODWEL's LEVIATHAN or Absolute Destructive Prelacy the Son of ABADDON APOLLYON and not of IESVS CHRIST c. CHAP. I. Of Mr. Dodwel's displeasure against me as if I accused him to be a Papist and accused unjustly the Councils of Bishops § 1. WHEN Mr. Dodwell in a tedious Volume did null the Reformed Churches their Ministry Sacraments and Covenant-title to salvation meerly for want of uninterrupted succession down from the Apostles of Ordination by such as he appropriateth the name of Bishops to I aggravated his fault as being one that professeth himself a Protestant He took this to be an accusation of Popery I Published to satisfie him that I meant no such thing but de nomine will call him what he calls himself and de re will be no judg of any thing but his books and words to which I leave the Reader to know him This satisfieth him not but he continueth so much concerned that I doubt he will make men think there is some tender place that is so impatient of a mis-supposed touch I have nothing to do with him or his Religion as his further than he assaulteth us by his Writings And he is the Accuser and the Accusation is of no less moment than aforesaid and sinning against the Holy Ghost and of Schism and subverting all Government if we do but practice differently from the Prelates will and alledg Scripture and Gods Authority for it and appeal to Christ. I am but on the Defence against all this § 2. I profess it is not meer education prejudices custom or worldly interest which keep me from Popery or his way of absolute obedience to Prelates I have studied what may
be said for it as well as against it and I never met but with Two Objections which seemed to me worthy of much further search One was that seeing de facto Popery and high Prelacy have so far and long ruled in the Church whether it be credible that Christ would so permit it if he hated it and give his Church de facto no better government 2. Whether mens great proneness to discord make not Popery Italian or French a prudent course And to these 1. I am sure that Christ came to destroy the works of the Devil and save his people from their sins and make them holy a peculiar people zealous of good works and gather a Church of such out of the world and rule them in a Communion of Saints till he bring them to perfection Therefore I have great reason to suspect those men and that order and course of government which cherisheth ignorance and sin in Ministers and People and hunteth and silenceth faithful Ministers and suppresseth persecuteth tormenteth burneth the most conscionable Christians that for fear of offending God disobey them that turn serious Religion and spiriritual Worship of God into bodily exercises and meer Conformity to their wills and outward taking Sacraments and using commanded Ceremonies and words under the shadow whereof for 1000. years piety hath withered and impiety prospered Christ promised to be with his servants to the end of the world Mat 28.30 And I cannot but think that he is most with those that are most acquainted with his Gospel and most love him and obey him and are most holy and heavenly and walk not after the flesh but the spirit rather than with the ignorant fleshly worldly malignant Persecutors that set them against serious godliness and godly men § 3. And I take not any notices of the time present from any thing but certain experience nor of the Ages past from enemies or suspected but of the eldest times from all our common Church-history and of the last 1000 or 1200 years as to the worst part of their actions from their own greatest friends and flatterers such as Baronius Binnius Platina Petavius and others § 4. And the matter of fact I confess hath had much power on my judgment Had the Popes and Lording sort of Diocesans been promoters of love and holiness in the Church and not the woful scandal of it and the enemies of good men and serious piety I should have been stronglier tempted to own their form of government to be of God though I am assured that Nature maketh one man or one Council uncapable of proper government over all the earth I should never have opposed that which doth good But destruction silencing persecuting cruelties rebellions worldliness ignorance malignity and cherishing sin and suppressing piety and the very word of God I am sure are all the work of the Devil what name or titles soever are pretended for them § 5. And the fact being to me past dispute I quietly submit to the dreadful providence of God that permitteth it considering 1. The Church on Earth is no better than the Angels of Heaven were and if so many of the Angels kept not their first estate but fell by Pride what wonder if many Bishops do so 2. If Adam and Eve both fell from Innocency and that so soon it is not incredible that the Serpent should beguile some Bishops to depart from the simplicity that is in Christ. 3. And if the first born man Cain murdered his righteous brother by malignant envy for his true Religion it 's no wonder if some Clergy-men are such 4. And if the whole world so soon was drowned in wickedness that only Noah and his house were meet to be saved from the flood what wonder if the Church had too great a deluge of iniquity 5. And to be short if Noah himself fall after such deliverance and a Cham be cursed that had been saved and their posterity proved so bad that all the Canaanites c. must be destroyed if Sodom's flames too better warned Lot or his Wife and Children if Abraham have an Ismael and Isaac an Esau and Iacob envious Sons and two Murderers and two Adulterers If Israel sin and die in the Wilderness if Aaron after that he had seen make them an Idol if Nadab and Abihu die as they did if Eli's and Samuel's Sons proved all so bad and in the days of the Judges there were so many revolts and ruins if the first King Saul so soon revolted if David so fell and Absolom so sinned and Solomon himself If Ten Tribes so quickly broke off from David's house and left him but Two if those Two proved as bad as the Prophets tell us and went into Captivity And if the Nation rebelled against Christ and be cursed and scattered over the Earth what wonder if the Pope and proudest Prelate did corrupt the Church of God If Christs chosen Twelve had a Iudas among them if the rest strove who should be greatest if Peter denied him and they all forsook him and fled if Heresies swarmed in the Apostles days and Iewish Teachers would have subjected the Gentiles to Moses's Law if all forsook Paul in his Tryal and many accused him before and such as Diotrephes cast out the Brethren and prated maliciously against Iohn if Christ tell us of a little flock and not many Noble and great are called if it be as hard for the Rich to be saved as Christ saith if for Three hundred years the Church was a persecuted people and if the Patriarchs and Bishops themselves for many hundred years after accused one another in Councils and accused such Councils themselves of Heresies and other crimes as much as is yet visible they did why should I be scandalized at the badness of Bishops and Councils and the woful corruptions of the Church Especially considering 1. That it was chiefly but the worldly proud domineering sort that thus miscarried as the very Angels did 2. That God kept up still a great number of humble and holy Bishops and Presbyters that joined not in usurpations and pride with the rest 3. And that God blest their labours to the saving of so many Millions of souls and propagating true serious Religion to this day Yea some of the great Patriarchs themselves have been holy humble men 4. And when God preserved by an humble Ministry so many Christians as the Albigenses Waldenses and many among the Papists themselves from the liking and guilt of the Roman corruptions 5. And when God hath raised so learned humble and holy a Ministry to reform the Churches and blest their labours in Europe and specially in England as he hath done even those that Mr. Dodwell degradeth yea many pious Diocesans here and elsewhere who yet cannot prove their title by his pretended way of successive Canonical Ordinations nor durst have sworn that they had such a call § 6. I am sure that the work of Christ is the restoring of Gods Image holy
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
him a damnable schismatick 14. And hereby there are as many hundred new Articles of Faith made as there are things lawful which a Prelate will command For though all is not to be done that is to be believed yet all must be believed to be lawful and duty which must be done as such e. g. We cannot love God worship him hear and read his Word c. as by Divine obedience unless we believe it to be our duty by a Divine command Therefore when as Mr. Dodwell Dr. Saywell and such others tell us what damning schism it is to disobey such commands of the Bishops or to suffer our selves to be Excommunicate it plainly includeth that it is as damning a sin to take any lawful thing to be a sin and not to believe it to be lawful whatever the Bishop shall command And so to how many hundred indifferent things may the Articles of our Faith be extended while it is made ordinarily necessary to Salvation to do them and therefore to believe them to be lawful 15 By this he confoundeth Communion and Obedience I may have communion with many Bishops whom I am not bound to obey But I cannot hinder them from Excommunicating me without obeying them 16. Yea he maketh Communion and Salvation to lye not only on such obedience but on such perfection of obedience as reacheth to every lawful indifferent thing Whereas God himself under the Gospel accepteth of sincerity instead of perfection which the Law required of perfect man 17. This is the way to make Bishops absolute Lords of Kings and States and all the world if they can make them believe that on pain of damnation for schism all must obey them even in every indifferent thing 18. If you would ferret him out of his Burrough ask Mr. Dodwell what if the Bishop of the place where I live contradict the Archbishop or the Synod or most of the Bishops in the land which must I obey to escape damning schism Doubtless he will allow me to disobey my Bishop But what if the National Synod gainsay the Provincial He will say I may disobey the Provincial But what if a Council of many Nations called General gainsay the National and it be known that our National Church is gainsayed by the far greatest part of the Bishops in the world which must I obey If the National why not a Provincial against them And why are not they Schismaticks for disobeying a General Council If it be the greater Council that I must obey 1. What 's become then of his doctrine of obeying the Episcopacy of the place where we live 2. And then we are brought under a foreign Jurisdiction 3. And who but the Pope must call that General Council preside approve c. 4. And among all the erroneous and contradicting Councils called General how shall all Christians know which of them to obey We see whither all will come at last But saith Bishop Bilson To such Councils called General we owe respect for concord if they abuse us not by error or usurpation but subjection and obedience we owe them none 19. How hardly will these men ever resolve one's conscience which is to be taken for the Episcopacy of the place when there are in the same place both different species of Bishops and also divers Bishops of the same species and all pretending to be right In Ireland both the Papist and Protestant Bishops pretend to just succession and so they did in Bohemia Poland Transylvania Hungary c. And doth salvation lye on mens knowledg who hath right 20. And how contrary is it to the way of Christ and the ancient Church that made the Baptismal covenant the terms of salvation for men to make it necessary for every poor man and woman that will have Covenant-right to salvation and escape damning schism to be able to decide the controversies between all such pretenders and to know whether their Bishops be of a true species and have true Ordination and to be such rare Historians as to know that all the line of Ordainers down from the Apostles to their Bishops were truly ordained O difficult terms 21. Doth he not condemn all those Ancient and Modern Christians as Fautors oâ— damning Doctrine who thought that when there were none of the Clergy to do it lay-men might baptize and give the Lords Supper Grotius told us his judgment for it in Dissertat de Caenae administrat ubi Pastores non sunt And he hath vindicated Tertullian's judgment for it confessed by Rigaltius Anton. Govea tells us it was the case of the Christians of Malabar c. called of St. Thomas whose Bishops being all destroyed they caused a Deacon to administer the Eucharist as the Bishops and Presbyters had done which Grotius also repeateth Ionan Antiochenus magnified by Socrates lib. 6. cap. 3. when at Antioch there were two Churches with two Bishops Meletius and Paulinus stuck to Meletius till he died and after for three years would communicate with neither Did he by this become a damned Schismatick or lose his Covenant-right to salvation 22. Many of old were chosen for Bishops before they were baptized the cases of Ambrose Nectarius Synesius c. are known If the Church thought them all to be in a state of damnation for want of the Sacrament it 's strange that they would choose them to be their Bishops though it was irregular Indeed it 's true that Grotius saith ibid. in fine that Chrysostomes Nazianzenes and others cases tell us that it was ordinary in the Greek-Church to delay baptizing even the children of the faithful till at full years about Twenty Were they all that while without any promise of salvation or ordinary hope 23. What a task will it be for Mr. Dodwell to tell us what state the baptized are in till they receive the Lords Supper Baptism saveth them once but yet till they receive the Lords Supper by a Minister in successive Episcopal Orders they have no Covenant-title to salvation by his way But some Communicate not till Thirty years old some not till One and Twenty and in England scarce any before Sixteen Are they all this while the children of God or of the Devil And when is it that their Christianity ceaseth for want of the other Sacrament I believe that if they truly believe they are Gods children before they come to the second Sacrament or the third as some call it Was Constantine Mag. in a state of damnation who was not baptized till near his death Or the good Emperour Valentinian who died unbaptizâ—d but taken by Ambrose for a blessed man What absurdities are men fain to use to get the Mastery of the Christian world by making men believe that they can save or damn them by the power of Sacraments 24. And how is this man for Conformity by which they subscribe assent to the certain salvation of Infants so dying without Confirmation and ordain that the Lords Supper be not Administred to any till they are
ready to be Confirmed by learning the Catechism and recognizing the Covenant c. 25. Doth he not make the chief Bishops and Reformers of the Church of England to be the promoters of the Doctrine which he accounteth so damnable when Dr. Stillingfleet in his Irenicon recites the words of Cranmer and others of them at a Consultation down-right against not only the necessity of his uninterrupted succâ—ssion but also even of Episcopal Ordination it self And I have elsewhere cited about Fourteen of them for the validity of Ordination without Bishops And Dr. Stillingfleet Bishop Edw. Reignnolds and many more held that no Form of Government was of Divine determination Did all these plead for damning Schism against all title to salvation 26. And what could more directly contradict the main tenor of the Gospel which tells us of the saving power of the Word Preached how it converteth souls and promiseth salvation to all that truly believe and repent Insomuch that Paul thanks God that he baptizâ—d few of the Corinthians because God sent him not to baptize but to Preach the Gospel 27. But his Doctrine feigneth that God will damn them that truly believe repent love God forsake sin for want of the Sacrament or else that the Word converteth none but only Sacraments convert men 28. And then it will follow that none but unbelievers impenitent wicked men should be first admitted to the Sacrament for if that only converteth then it is only the unconverted that must first be received to it 29 When all 's done he doth but contradict his end for it 's hard to find a National Episcopacy on earth which imposeth no unlawful thing on Ministers or people And with all such he speaketh not for our Communion 30. Either Ordination and Collation of Church-power must be given by Superiors or by Equals if by Equals why may not Presbyters make Presbyters If by Superiors then who shall give the Pope his Power Or if you think any other be the highest who makes them such Who giveth the Archbishop of Canterbury his Power 31. In short as far as I can understand these men deny all Covenant-right to salvation to all men living and all true Sacraments and Church-Communion or at least all knowledg of any such thing seeing as it is certain that in most Churches such Ordination as they describe hath not had an uninterrupted succession so no man is sure that any one Church or man hath had such And they that silence us for not subscribing declaring and swearing obedience to our Diocesans and other Ordinaries are bold men if they dare swear themselves that they are true Bishops and have any Authority to rule and command us by an uninterrupted succession of a Canonical Episcopal Ordination down from the Apostles But I have already in my Book of Concord Part 3. Chap. 9. opened so many palpable and pernicious absurdities and ill consequents of Mr. Dodwell's Doctrine which he dare not undertake to answer but sâ—ly passeth by that I must expect the Reader will there peruse them who will judg uprightly between him and me and therefore will hear what both have said And those that will judg falsly upon partial trust to save themselves the labour of tryal are out of the reach of ordinary means to be saved from deceivers CHAP. IV. My words of Gods Collation of Ministerial Authority Vindicated from the forgeries and fallacies of Mr. Dodwell § 1. CHRIST hath taught me to judg of Prophets or Teachers by their fruits more than by their cloathing Mat. 7. And the fruits which are of God are those which express the Divine Nature and Image viz. holy Light and Truth holy Love and holy Life and Practice and the promoting of these in the world And Christ hath taught me that the Devil is 1. Against holy Light and Truth the Prince of Darkness and a Lyar and the Father of Lyes 2. Against holy Love accusing slandring and rendring as odious the servants and ways of Christ. 3. Against holy righteous and sober living and an opposer of it and a persecutor and murderer of the Saints And those that are likest Satan in these three parts of his Image and whose works are more certainly the works of these three Diabolical Principles I am taught by Christ to judg of by their fruits So much as there is in Mr. Dodwell's labours of holy Truth holy Love and helps to holy living so much sure is of God But so much as there is in his or any of his Parties cause of deceit and falshood and defence of ignorance so much as there is of Malignity Calumny or making odious the servants of Christ so much as there is of cruelty and destruction and silencing faithful Ministers and promoting ungodliness by upholding its defences I am obliged to resist as being from him against whom in my baptismal Covenant I was engaged § 2. He giveth his Reader the sum of my doctrine in this point p. 29 c. a chain of forgeries or putid falshoods Either he knew that he wrote falsly or he did not if yea then it seems he thinks that God or his Church needed his lyes if not how unfit is he to write against what he understandeth not But what made him devise a frame of his own words of above six pages to express my words by if he meant not to deceive those that would believe his writing without reading mine § 3. And whether it be from the Lord of love or the enemy of love that he goeth so far to the unchurching and damning of so many of the Reformed Churches besides the Churches of the Southern and Eastern parts of the world if not of all Churches on earth let the sons of Love consider § 4. And whether his endeavours to persuade all the Nonconformists to give over preaching Christs Gospel and all publick Worship of God till they can conscionably conform and his reasonings for that frame that hath long excluded true discipline and sheltered ignorance and ungodliness be of God and all his copious discourses to that end are to save souls or to starve and murder them I leave to mens impartial trial § 5. I so often and fully repeated my judgment of the Calling of the Ministry as leaveth his Forgeries inexcusable The sum is this 1. There is no power but of God 2. Gods universal Laws are the prime Laws and the only universal Laws of the Church or world 3. In his Laws God hath established or instituted the work and the species of that Ecclesiastical Ministry which he will have to teach and guide his Church to the end of the world And therein signified his owning of them as sent by him and promised them his help and blessing 4. In that Law he hath told us what men they are that he will thus own and bless and described the Essentials and the Integrals of their Receptive disposition or qualifications 5. He hath in that Law told us who shall be the tryers and
Christians Or whether the higher Sacrament do not eminently contain the lower as making a man a Bishop containeth making him a Presbyter and that containeth eminently his Deaconship as some say If they must be baptized yet it implieth the Nullity of their Sacramental Communion before And if so Mr. Dodwell must confess that Priestly exhibition or investiture is null to an uncapable Subject But I think most will say that he should not be baptized it being done interpretatively And if so is his Prelatical mode of Ordination more necessary than actual Baptism Besides that as is said they make Lay-mens or womens baptizing sufficient ad esse And yet the Church of England professeth that only the Two Sacramens Baptism and the Lords Supper are generally necessary to salvation § 38. Pag. 67 68. He would persuade us that the Imposition of hands in Ordination signifieth what he asserteth But he giveth us not one word of proof of it Was it the Holy Ghost which was in the imposing Apostle or Prelate that was given by him and out of him into the Ordained No he was never in Scripture said to be the Ownor Donor or efficient conveyer of the Holy Ghost But Gods will made the Imposition of the Apostles hand a conditional act to qualifie the recipient to receive the Holy Ghost immediately from God as the Texts before cited and many more prove What if it be once said that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when many other Texts expound it It 's well known that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth many other causes mediums conditions as well as efficient conveying causes Is it like to signifie more here than in the Doctrine of Justification when it is so oft said that we are justified by faith And yet faith there is no efficient instrument conveying or giving us pardon and relative Justification but only a necessary qualification of the Recipient called by Dr. Twisse Causa dispositiva which is part of the Materialis upon which Gods Covenant immediately pardoneth and justifieth the believer so both there and here it is by or through the Act of man as a moral qualification of the Recipient made a condition by God § 39. After all this the man cometh himself pag. 72. to distinguish of Qualifications necessary to the being of the office and to the well-being yea and hath the face to say that I should have distinguished them as if I had not ever done it Is it not an unprofitable toil to dispute with such men that will pretend that a case by me constantly stated was not stated and then will long dispute himself for the unqualified without distinction and after all distinguish in the fag end This beseemeth not any man that will pretend to plead for truth But yet he will not be over-liberal to us he saith p. 13. All the skill that is requisite essentially is only in general to know the benefits to be peâ—formed on Gods part and the duties to be promised on mans and the nature and obligation of Covenants in general and the particular solemnities of Ecclesiastical Covenanting And of this how can any one be uncapable that is but capable of understanding the common dealings of the world Ans. 1. And yet must we have Universities and must the Holy Ghost be given by the Bishops for this And is there any need to open the Bible to know it and must so much riches and honour maintain this much and all be damned Schismaticks that turn to better 2. Set this qualified Ministry and his great zeal to perswade the Nonconformists to cease Preaching and his Unchurching the Reformed Churches altogether and it 's easie to see what this humble diligent man is labouring for 3. Do not many millions understand the common dealings of the world that understand not the Gospel The natural man receiveth not the things that be of God for they are spiritually discerned 4 Is not this a plain design to set up a carnal Kingdom of ignorant vicious Clergy-men such as St. Paul saith Rom. 8 neither are nor can be subject to Gods Law instead of a holy Catholick Church and Communion of Saints and to make Mahometans think that they are Saints in comparison of us and that Christians are an unholy sort of men 5. Either he includeth all that is necessary to the things named by him or not If not then his Priest must know the benefits of Gods Covenant without knowing what God is or that Christ is the Purchaser Covenanter c. If yea which I doubt not he will say then O what an excellent body of Theology is included in these few general words Then he must know all those Attributes of God and his Relations to man by which he is said to be our God He must know all the necessary articles of faith about the Person of Christ as God and man in two Natures and one Person his Incarnation Birth Life Sufferings Death Burial his Doctrine his Merits his Resurrection Ascension Glory Intercession Kingly and Prophetical office and last Judgment and Glorious Kingdom He must know what Covenant God formerly made and man broke and what sin original and actual and what curse and condemnation followed on mankind And Oh how many great and mysterious things are contained in Gods Covenant-benefits On Union with Christ Reconciliation Justification Adoption Sanctification The Doctrine of the Holy Ghost as the Third person in the Trinity and as the Inspirer of Prophets and Apostles and Inditer and confirmer of the Scriptures and the Witness of Christ and the Sanctifier and Comforter of the Elect besides Resurrection Glorification c. And what a deal is contained in mans necessary qualification Faith Repentance and promised duty And the true nature and use of the Sacraments themselves And is all this such a small or easie matter as he seems to intimate 6. But hath he yet proved that a true Minister of Christ hath no necessary work but thus to administer Sacraments I will yet believe 2 Tim. 4.1 2. that he must preach the Word in season out of season reprove rebuke exhort partly to convert the unconverted partly to confirm and guide believers and that the people should ask the Law at his mouth as being the messenger of the Lord of Hosts And that the very essence of his office is to be a Minister under the Teaching Priestly and Ruling office of Christ. 7. And if he had proved that a sorry Priest hath all that is essential to his office that proveth not that I must take him for my Pastor no not though the Diocesan command me Souls are more worth than to be wilfully made the Priests and Prelates merchandize If a man have all essential to a Physician and no more I will not trust my life to his skill which is less than my soul though the Bishop bid me If a woman have all that 's essential to a woman he is a fool that will take her for his wife because the Bishop bids him
the wisest and best man had right to the Crown or Church-power If copious discourses to the contrary will not hinder such busie disputers from such inhumane slanders are they meet to be disputed with I have over and over said that 1. Gifts or the best abilities 2. And due election or approbation of the Ordainers 3. And the peoples election and consent all set together do but make up the Qualification or Receptive disposition of the Recipient 4. Yea and his consent conjoined and that where all these in the necessary degree concur the power resulteth to that capâ—ble person from none of them all but immediately from God Law which is his instrument giving power to persons so qualified And that besides all these Ministerial Investiture for Orders sake when it may be had should introduce him into possession yea and the Magistrate must be judg whom he will countenance protect or tolerate But the case of Ordination and Investiture are necessary only where they may be had lawfully and without crossing their end as sacrifice was compared with mercy and the Rest of the Sabbath compared to works of charity and necessity § 43. And as it is the trick of such dealers p. 81. he must have Governours to do his work and therefore must not leave out that which may make us odious to them but tells men that our Hypothesis is unreconcilable with government in this life in that it permits persons to assume Authority and to extend it as far as they think fit by appealing to Writings against the sense of all the visible authority of this life Ans. 1. But â—f this Hypothesis be none of his Adversaries but come out of the Meal-Tub or forge of Inventers what shall such men be called 2. We permit no person to assume Authority But Writings are not so contemptible to us in comparison of that which you take to be all the visible Authority of the Church It is your Richard Hooker that saith that the Law maketh the King and giveth and measureth his power and that it's usurpation which obligeth no mans Conscience when power is taken and usâ—d which the Law never gave What I think of this I have elsewhere shewed The Statutes are not so contemptible in this case but the great Lawyers think they may be appealed to from visible Rulers in several cases And you must talk at other rates than you have done in your tedious fallacious Vagaries before wise Christians will believe that we may not appeal from Prelates to the written Word of God when the power used by them is justly questioned If not how caâ—e the Reformed Churches to justifie their Reformation Was it not by appealing to Scripture against the visible Church Rulers that were commonly against them Were not Pâ—pes Council Prelates and Priests against them for the far greatest part Did it overthrow all Government of the world to appeal from these to the â—cripture I hereby undertake to prove that neither Popes Prelates or Priests have any Church-Authority bâ—t what God hatâ— given them by his Word And is it not thâ—â— necessary to try it by that Word Must we take thâ—â—r own words for all that Popes or Prelates câ—â—im And it will put the Pope and Council hard to it to prove any Authority from God if the Scripture do not give it them And if it give it them it may give it others § 44. And whâ—n 〈◊〉 done we are far from granting that we have lesâ— to shâ—â— for our succession from the Apostleâ— than Popes or 〈…〉 have 1 We are 〈◊〉 that we have the same â—aptism Eucharist Creed Lâ—â—ds Praâ—â—r Dâ—calogue and Scriptâ—re delivered down from the Aâ—ostles 2. We are sure that we have a Ministry of the same species which Christ and his â—pirit in the Apostles instituted 3. We know that our Churches and Worship and Doctrine are the â—ame that are described and setled by the Apostles 4. We know that our present Ministers are qualified as the Apostâ—â—â— requiâ—ed 5. And that they are Elected or 〈◊〉 to by the 〈◊〉 is the Apostles required 6. And that they have as good an Ordination and Investiture as the Apostles ever made necessary to the Ministry That is 1. They have the Approbation of senior Pastors and many of them of Diocesans All that were put into any places by the Parliament when the Bishops were down were to have the Westminster Assemblies Approbation under their hands And that Assembly as called consisted of many Diocesans with many score grave Eminent Divines though the Diocesans were not actually present And a signed Approbation and Allowance hath the Essence of all that is of absolute necessity in Ordination 2. They were Ordained by true Bishops 1. All true Presbyters are Episcopi gregis and joyn in Ordination here in Enggland 2 The chief Pastors of City-Churches having Curates under them are Episcopi Eminentes vel Praesides such as Ordained for above Two hundred years after the Apostles And 3. The chosen Presidents of Synods were such Bishops But all these concurred in the Nonconformists Ordinations when the Diocesans were down They were Ordained at and by a Synod of Presbyters in some great Town or City where the Moderator and the chief City-Pastors were part 3. Many of them were Ordained by Diocesans 4. Many Ordained as aforesaid were after approved by Diocesans some by Imposition of Hands and all by Word or Writing for Archbishop Vsher did in my hearing by Word and in Writing more publickly declare his opinion of such Presbyters Ordination as valid â—though he excused not such as deposed the Diocesans from the guilt of Schism and so did the many other Bishops whom I formerly cited yea even Bancroft himself And surely all this hath all that is essential to Ordination 5. And we know that such a Ministry hath continued to propagate the Church and Gospel in the world since the Apostles days But we confess 1. That we cannot prove that such Ministers have still succeâ—ded in the same Towns 2. Nor that no one from whom their Ordination came down from the Apostles did pretend to have Orders or Authority when he had none 3. Or that no one of them in 1660. years was an Heretick or a Schismatick or a Papist 4. Or that no one Ordained in wrong words 5. Or that no one Ordained contrary to the Canons out of his own limits or without three Bishops or without the Presbyters 6. Or that no Competitors were Ordained by several Bishops Mr. Dodwell is a great Historian when he hath proved all this of all or any of his Clergy-friends he hath done something more than multiply words § 45. But on the other side we can easily prove and have proved 1. That our Diocesans are not of the same species with those of old 2 That the Apostles did not make them I think Mr. Dodwell will say that the Presbyters first made them by consent the Children begot the Fathers 3 And Dr. Hammond will defend it that
there is no certainty that any Subject Presbyters were made by the Apostles in Scripture times So that the very species of their Clergy hath no such succession as distinct from ours 4. And he that will read the Church-History and Councils declaring the multitude of doleful intercisions in East and West by Heresies the Patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch Constantinople Ierusalem and Rome and most of the chief Seats of Bishops having been judged Hereticks Simoniacks or no Bishops by General Councils yea Roman Bishops judged some of them Infidels and Diabolical by the Councils of Constance Basâ—l c. I say he that knoweth this History must know that the Diocesans that from these derive their succession have certainly had frequent and notorious intercisions § 46. And this leads me to another part of Mr. Dodwell's work viz. his proof that Aidan and Finan were Bishops As if this had been a great part of his Cause Such diverting noise is a great part of the art of deceiving Because I had said that Aiden and Finan were not Bishops but Presbyters that is when they came out of Scotland into Northumberland I apprehended that some men of his gâ—â—ius and design would be willing to mistake me and therefore Printed an Explication of the Words in the end of my first Answer to Dr. Stillingfleet But Mr. D would have men think that I said that they were never made and called Bishops at all and that I read not Beda from whom alone near Five and Thirty years ago I took almost all that I assert concerning them Let the Reader see my foresaid Explication If Mr. Dodwell will give us more than noise and mist about this matter 1. Let him prove that it was Diocesan Bishops that Ordained these Scots before they came into England when Beda saith they were sent from those Monasteries that were ruled by Presbyters and which would not so much as eat or communicate with the Roman Bishops 2. Let him prove that any Bishops in England Consecrated hem or made them Bishops here when Beda tells us that they were the first in the North and therefore had none here to Ordain them 3. Let him prove that they were here made true Diocesan Bishops of our species When 1. they had no Presbyters at first under them and therefore ruled none and had but one Congregation for one man can be but in one place at once 2. Their Church in Lindisfarne was not made of stone but of wood covered or thatcht with reeds and they are not said to have any other Church under them 3. They went indeed to preach all over the Country but not as to a Church but as to Heathens to convert them 4. Let him prove that ever they took themselves to be of a distinct order from Presbyters 5. At a Synod Bed c. 25. we find no more but the King and his Son and Hilda a woman-Abbess and three or four of this sort of Bishops far below our Ordaining City-Presbyters and their Synods But unlearned men that value Books by interest and preconceived opinions may think that by such talk Mr. Dodwell hath done some great matter § 47. But saith he p. 81 82. Our Hypothesis obliging inferiour Governours to prove their title to their office and the extent of it from the intention of their supream Governours does oblige all to a strict dependance on the supreme visible power so as to leave no place for appeal concerning the practice of such Government which as it lasts only for this life so it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice c. Ans. Alas for the poor world and Church that will be cheated at so gross a rate 1. Did you not know that the grand error that Protestants charge Papists with is the asserting of any such thing as a supreme visible power over the Church universal besides Christ. And did you think that your roteing over the name to them that deny the thing would make a wise man change his Religion 2. By your Hypothesis then no man can prove his title to his Office who either believeth not that there is any such universal Supreme or that knoweth not who it is I know no Competitors but the Pope and General Councils unless the Patriarch of Constantinople be one 3. And he that knoweth not the intention of this Supreme power is still unable to prove his office 4. And he that knoweth the intention of the Ordaining Diocesan is never the better if he know not the intention of the Supreme And what if the intention of the Supreme and of the Diocesan are contrary 5. But by your Hypothesis the Governours may alter the very species of the Priesthood as they please and what ever God saith of it in his Institution or Law it must be to us no other in kind or extent than the Governours intend If they say I ordain thee to baptize but not to teach or to do both but not to celebrate the Lords-Supper or to do that but not to pray or praise God or not to use the Keys of the Church our power is limited accordingly Then if the Prelates make Mass-Priests their intention is the measure of their power Answer the Papists then that ask Was it ever the intention of the Pope and his Prelates that the English Bishops should disclaim the Pope or the Mass or reform without them as they did 6. Seeing the English Bishops by you derive their succession from Willfred and Augustine and Rome is not the Church of Rome the â—ittest Judg of the extent of their power as knowing their own intentions Nay if they were so blind as to intend them power to pull down themselves may they not recall it 7. Did ever Protestant preach this Doctrine That there is no appeal from the supreme Prelates to God O dreadful what may men come to and what error so great that a former may not introduce Disgrace not the Church of England so much as thus to intimate that they set up themselves so as that there is no appeal to Scripture or God himself from them God hath commanded Preaching Praying Praises Baptism the Lords-Supper holy assemblies c. if the supreme Prelates interdict and forbid all these is there no appeal to God I have told you how much Robert Grosthead abhor'd this Doctrine and so told Pope Innocent the 4 th What absolute blind obedience to Prelates is this 8. And what a reason brings he That the practice lasteth only for this life and therefore c Doth any of our actions here last longer than while they are doing Praying Praise Sacraments obeying the King doing good to the poor c. and so swearing cursing adultery rebellion atheism blasphemy here last only for this life Must we therefore obey men without appeal to God if they forbid us all duty and command all sin 9. And what did the man mean when he said That it ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its
of his species they are no Ministers or Churches and have no Sacrament and Covenant title to Salvation but are Schismaticks and by their Ministry sin against the Holy Ghost And so destroyeth all certainty of title to Salvation and of Church-communion Ministry and Sacraments to all the Christian World § 14 XII Lastly we think that men shall be judged by their keeping or breaking Gods Law and according to what they did in the body But he would have us obey the Supreme Clergy and not plead Scripture or Divine authority for our different practice because the Government that lasteth but for this life ought not to admit of disputes more lasting than its practice § 15. I conclude with a request to him to resolve me these doubts 1. Whether Prophets having immediate messages from Heaven were not differenced from the teaching Priests and Pastors 2. Whether false Prophets were not grievously threatened among the Iews and whether Christ did not command us to beware of false Prophets 3. Whether he be not a false Prophet worse than a false teacher that falsely pretendeth to that which is proper to a Prophet 4. Whether it be not proper to a Prophet to deliver as immediately from God new Laws to the universal Church yea or to any Church which are not in the Scripture nor are revealed by it as Gods means besides the determination of circumstances left to humane prudence variable pro re nata if Moses and the Apostles in Legislation acted as Prophets do not they so that pretend to do the like 5. Whether the General Councils of Bishops and the Pope have not done the work proper to the Prophetical office when they have made Laws for the unversal Church and this as by Divine authority and undertaken to give all the Church the sense of Scripture which only shall be obligatory to them thereby For it is the maker of the sense that is the maker of the Law especially when they pretend to Infallibility or to be secured from erring in faith by Divine inspiration how ignorant or bad soever they be singly Is not this pretended authority and inspiration that of Prophets as different from meer Teachers and Guides by Gods Law already made 6. If it be so how many such Papal Councils arrogating such power have been false Prophets 7. But if they pretend not Inspiration nor Prophetical authority from God nor yet authority given them by the Scriptures or Laws of God already made or falsly pretend such then is not this to usurp Christs own authority and so instead of being false Prophets to be partly Vice-Christs or Law-givers to his universal Church called commonly Antichrists I would willingly have things so cleared that men may be freed from all such suspicions But if you are still confident that the universal Church hath a visible supreme Government besides Christs I should be glad 1. To see it proved 2. To know whose it is and how we may know them 3. And to know its true extent If you intend no fraud you cannot refuse me this when I promise you if performed I will let fall the suit and no more trouble you with lesser Controversies I have no Copy of my first Letter to Mr. Dodwell upon a Book which he sent me This is his Answer Reverend and Worthy Sir I Have received your very kind Letter wherein I hardly know whether I should be more thankful for your approbation or your reproof both of them being in their kind so useful and both of them being by you performed with so great civility I am confident that if our modern disputes had been moderated with that candor men would certainly have been more peaceful and very Orthodox than now we find them I could very heartily have wished that the opinions wherein we differ had not been of that nature as to sâ—parate Communion for this I look upon as the only circumstance that can make such differences grievous to a pious person for as for those others which exasperate many that Dissenters are not so wise to discern the truth or so fortunate in avoiding prejudices or lighting on faithful informations in a time when they are capâ—ble of receiving them or that they are not so submissive as themselves expect to that Pope which Luther has long since observed in every mans â—eart c. are reasons either sinful or at least insufficient to excuse the sin of uncharitableness upon such an account but as they aâ—e considering them as tempered with that piety and moderation which may expiate their other malignities that they are rather alledged as Apologies for your selves than as obligations on others rather to excuse your deformity in assisting at our Altars than erecting others in opposition to them that you are still iâ—quisitive and desirous of further information and ready to lay down your mistakes where you are convinced that they are such that still you preserve a pâ—aceable mind and embrace our Communion it sâ—lf in voto though perhaps not actually these are so valuable considerations even before God as well as man for excusing from the guilt of error as that whatever I may think of your opâ—nions I hope it shall not hinder me from a cordial respect and veneration for your person As I do very much esteem the good opinion of so great a lover of pâ—â—ce and piety as your self and should have been sorry to have given any juâ—t occasion of offence to you so I am not a little glad that upon a review of the particulars mentioned in your Letter I find my self so very innocent For as for my Preface the main parts of it wherein the disrepect of the Clergy is shewn to have been an Introductory to the Atheism of the age we live in and that the Conformable Clergy that is such as would answer the design of the Church not only as to their exterior demeanor in publick solemn Assemblies but also as to the qualifications of their persons and the conduct of their whole lives could not prove either trifling in their Preaching or scandalous in their examples and therefore that the Church is not responsible for their misdemeanors where they prove otherwise and that the Laity are in their proportion obliged to the same duties with the Clergy and therefore may make use of the advices there prescribed or where the errors of our modern School-Divinity are touched and some Proposals made for their reformation in these things I say I can see no occasion of offence but rather some preservatives against it The only thing I suppose you aim at is my taxing some opinions of Nonconformists and that with as little personal reflection as I was able which I conceived prejudicial to Church-authority which because you seem to disown I do not see why you should apprehend your self as particularly concerned especially there being nothing in the discourse whereby you could conclude either your self or any of your moderate temper to have been intended I will assure
sentence all men upon other mens trial and word As if the Bishop must Excommunicate all that some body else saith he must Excommunicate This turneth Decreeing into a Hangman-like Execution And the nature of the cause forbiddeth it No man is to be Excommunicate for any other crime as such but for Impenitence in some crime nor to be absolved after but upon Repentance Now if it were but whether a man de facto have been drunk or fornicated or perjured c. it were hard judging sententially meerly on trust from others but yet perhaps that might sometimes be done But when the case is Whether the man be penitent Personal trial is necessary to a Rational and Ecclesiastical administration of the sentence I conclude therefore that as a King can judg by many hundred Judges and a General command an Army by many hundred Commanders but not without any one by himself alone having Executioners under him So is it here VII And I pray you note one other difference In the Kingdom it is not one subject of an hundred or many hundreds that hath Law suits with others once in a year or seven years or his life Nor one of some hundreds where I have lived that findeth the Magistrate work as Criminal And in this we differ even from the Physician who in a City hath not one of many that is sick but we are all of a sinning corrupt disposition and the Pastor hath few of his flock that need not some personal applications in one degree or other And even as to gross sins lived in and ignorance or heresie against the very essence of Christianity it is a good Parish where a considerable part of it are not guilty so that it is easier for one Justice of Peace to send two or three thieves in a year to a Gaol and bind two or three to the good behaviour than for one Bishop to admonish exhort convince and judg 10000 impenitent sinners in a little time and hear all the Witnesses c. If you should have said that the Parish Priest is to reprove exhort convince them first till he prove them impenitent and he is to instruct the ignorant Infidels and Hereticks I answer 1. That is more than an executive power 2. We desire no more at all from Bishopâ— or any and know no other Episcopal power over the people but thus personally to convince men and declare to the Congregation upon proof the fitness or unfitnss of men for their Communion by penitence or impenitence But this is it that the Ministers are hindred from or denied They have no power to speak with any one ignorant Heretical Infidel or scandalous sinner in the Parish but such as are willing And few of the guilty are willing They will neither come to the Minister nor suffer him to come to them but shut their doors on him if they know that he cometh on such a work or else they will not be within Or if they be will tell him that they will not answer him When I came first to Kederminster the rabble multitude curst me in the streets and rose up against me but for saying That Infants Originally have that sin and misery which needs a Saviour yet such if they scorn to speak with us must be our Communicants for want of Pastoral power There is no Law or penalty that I ever knew of to constrain any to come to us receive us hear us or answer us if we had never so much cause to question them of or fortifie them against infidelity heresie ignorance or wicked lives And if any other accuse them to us as few will we must not judg them without trial It may be you will say Would you have them constrained by force to speak with the Pastor or give him any account of their faith life or knowledg besides coming with others into the Church I answer No we would have no force as we have none But then we would not be forced our selves by the Church-Lords and Monarchs to take our selves for the Pastors of such as refuse our Pastoral office and to give the Sacrament and all priviledges of Church-Communion to every one in the Parish who upon just suspicion of gross scandal heresie infidelity or ignorance obstinately refuseth to speak to us and give us any account or to be tried I that have yearly tried my Parish by Personal Conference know that thousands and thousands among us know not and therefore believe not whether Christ be God or man or Angel or what nor who the Holy Ghost is or why Christ died rose nor scarce any supernaturally revealed article of the Christian faith And that many that understand them believe them not And I desire no Church-power but not to take those 1. For Christians 2. And for my especial Christian flock 1. Who are no Christians 2. Who themselves refuse it Without their consent the Minister is forced on them They aâ—e forced by the sword to say that they are Christians and to come to Church and Communicate The old Christian Profession was I will be a Christian and hold Communion with the Church though I go to prison or death for it The Prelatical Christian Profession is I will rather be a Christian and Communicate than I will lye in Gaol and have all my Estate confiscate Seeing then that we have not the due power of a Pastor to deny our Office-administrations in Sacraments to those that refuse us in the other parts aforesaid we are utterly disabled from so much as preparing men for the Bishops or Chancellors Examination 3. But if it were otherwise that must not satisfie the Church-Monarch who must judg himself and therefore must hear by himself But you tell me It is plainly against experience in Ecclesiasticks Ans. It 's hard then to know any thing For I dispute all this while as if the question were Whether men in England speak English And if I herein err I am uncurable and therefore I allow you to despair of me You say The greatness of no City was thought sufficient to multiply Bishops Ans. 1. Gods Institution was that every Church have a Bishop Act. 14.23 c. 2. A particular Church then was A Society of Neighbour-Christians combined for Personal Communion in Gods Worship and holy living consisting of Pastor and flock 3. For 250 years I think you cannot prove that any one Bishop in the world save at Alexandria and Romr had more such Congregations and Altars than one nor these for a long time after the Apostles nor in many Churches of ome hundred years longer 4. At Antioch the third Patriarchate Ignatius professeth that every Church had one Altar and one Bishop with his Presbyters and Deacons fellow-servants And that in this one Church the Bishop must enquire of all by name even Servant-men and Maids and see that they absented not themselves from the Church Why is not Ignatius confuted if he erred Vid. Mede on the Point 5. Alexandria and Rome
by not multiplying Bishops as Churches or Converts needed it began the grand sin and calamity which hath undone us and therefore are not to be our Pattern Orbis major est urbe 6. Were Bishops necessarily to be distributed by Cities the Empires that have few or no Cities must have few or no Bishops and an Emperor might aliud agâ—ndo depose all the Bishops by dis franchizing the Cities 7. But every Corporation oppidum like our Market-Towns was then truly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And if you will but procure every such City with us to have a Bishop and the Office of such Bishops to be to drive men from sin and not to it and to silence Blasphemers and not faithful Preachers of the Gospel all our controversies of Prelacy are then at an end 8. And you must remember that great Cities had long but few Christians in comparison of the Heathens till Constantine's time and mostly long after And when Patrick with his own hand Ordained Three Hundred and Fifty Bishops in your Ireland they were but Ecclesiarum fundatores and with them he founded but septingentas Ecclesias and Ordained Five Thousand Clerks if Ioceline be true Vit. Patriâ— cap. 185. and not rather the far more credible report of Antonin in Chrâ—n tit 11. cap. 18. § 2. and Vincent specul histor lib. 20. cap. 23. who say that Ecclesias funâ—avit 365. â—rdinavit Episcopos eodem numero 365. et eo amplius in quibus spiritus Dei crat Presbyteros autem usque ad 3â—00 ordinavit Aâ— Vsher â—â—ceth them de primord Eccl. Br. p 9â—7 which is Ninius number there So that here is no more Churchâ—s thâ—n â—ishops and about Nine Presbyters to a Bishop You tell me of above One thousand Clergy-men at Rome in Corâ—elius's 〈◊〉 Ans. 1. This was above Two hundred and Fifty years after Christs Birth 2. I never took all the impotent persons poor and Widows in the Church to be Clergy-men and Clergy-women Cornelius his account is that there are Six and Forty Presbyters Seven Deacons Seven Sub-Deacons Two and Forty Acolytes Two and Fifty Exorcists and Readers with Porters Widows and impotent persons above One thousand and Fifty souls considering 1. How their Meetings were then obscure and small in Houses as the tolerated Churches in London And in so vast a City in how many distant places Besides the sub-urbicarian Assemblies 4 And how many Presbyters used still to be with the Bishop in the same Assembly 5. And that here are in all but Seven Deacons 6. And that many then were Presbyters that used not to Preach but for privater over-sight and as the Bishops Assessors 7. And that the poorer sort most commonly received the Gospel 8. And that none of these but the Six and Forty Presbyters had any power in the Discipline 9. And that by all this reckoning the whole Church maintained not besides the Officers near a thousand poor we may probably conjecture that the whole Church of that Bishop was not bigger than some one London-Parish Stepney Giles Cripplegate Martins c. where are about Fifty thousand souls 10. And when none were Christians but persecuted Volunteers they were the holiest and best of men and I have tryed that Six hundred such make less work for Discipline than Ten of the Rabble that are driven into our Churches and choose them rather than the Goal But when all 's done Two Cities under the power of great temptation are not to be our Rule against Gods Word and the state of all other Churches in the world and undeniable experience It 's true that you say that to erect another Altar was counted Schism that is Altare contra altare because when the Phrase came up no Church had more than one Altar Your Instances intimated of Antioch and Carthage I believe not and can give you had I liberty a Volume of proof from Antiquity that for Two hundred and Fifty years if not much longer Ignatius's Rule was true that every Church had one Altar and one Bishop at least except the two aforesaid Vlphilas was but an Arrian Bishop of a few Goths newly turned Arrians and the first that translated the Scriptures into the Gothick Tongue so that no Churches among them had the Scripture till after his translating and these few were presently persecuted to rhe death by Athanarichus ut socrat lib. 4 cap. 32. You may call these few a Kingdom if you please How few of the Indians were converted when Frumentius not Aedesius as you say was made their Bishop it 's easie to gather by the History Scythia and Persia used to have each a Bishop and he lived in the Roman Empire as near them as he durst as not being tolerated usually in their Land And as few it 's like Mosâ—s had among the Arabians there being no mention in the History of any thing to perswade us that he had many Churches under him that I remember And the work of these Bâ—shops was to ordain Presbyters who had the power of the Keys exceptae Ordinatione did all that Bishops did as Hierome saith So that then a Diocess had not one sole Church-Governour and therefore where you gather that yet Discipline was not dissolved I answer 1. In all this you leave out a matter of chief consideration viz. That all the Presbyters then were assistants in Discipline and had a true Church-Government over the people which now they have not 2. It 's strange that we that have eyes and ears must be sent to the Indians and ancient History to know whether one Bishop can hear and try and admonish so many thousands at once as we see by experience are those Objects of Discipline which the Scripture describeth and when we see that it is not done And after all this we have talk't but of a â—hantasm for it is not one Bishop but one Lay man a Chancellor that useth this Decretory power of the Keys over all these fouls so far as they are used as to the ordinary Court-tryals and exerciâ—e and the Bishop rarely medleth with it Again Nonconformists doubt not to prove that the Diocesan frame whiâ—h they dare not swear to 1. Doth depose the species of Churches of Gods Institution 2 And the Discipline it self almost totally 3. And the species of Presbyters 4. And the old species of Bishops And instead of each of these setteth up a new species of man's invention wholly different and inconsistent And that they are not willing to Swear Subscribe or deliberately and solemnly enter into a Church-Covenant That in their Places and Callings they will never endeavour any alteration of this no not by a request or word you may less wonder than if some were then loath to Swear or Covenant never to endeavour to take down the Priests of Dan and Bethel or reform the high places It 's dangerous making a solemn Ministerial Covenant Never to obey God in any one great matter and never to repent of so doing Again our Reasons
at the Savoy were 1. About another maâ—ter 2. Few of them received or ever published to the world And all that I have said to you is very little of our Cause which I will not touch unless I might prosecute it Your information about Bishop Sanderson and the word Vse of all things c. is as the rest to conquer our sense and experience 1. The words in the Act are most plain and Bishop Sanderson de Iuram concludeth That Oaths and Covenants must be taken in the plain and proper sense 2. It is notorious that after the Lords in a Proviso of another Act would have so expounded the Act of Uniformity that it is meant but of consent to use c and the Commons rejected it as intolerable and upon a meeting of both Houses satisfied the Lords by their Reasons who acquiesced in the rejection of that Exposition And shall we still stretch our sense against the plain words when the Parliament long after hath rejected such an Exposition Sir it is much more especially about Separation which your lines invite me to say and the cause requireth but I fear I have wronged you by prolixity already and much more by my freedom of speech which is from my inclination to speak of things as they are and is truly joined with a very great respect and honour of your self commanded by your excellent Book and judicious peaceable stile and temper I rest Jan. 5. 1672. Your unworthy Fellow-servant worthy to be Silenced RI. BAXTER The short Answer to Mr. Dodwell's long Letter fully answered in my Treatise of Episcopacy For the Worthy and much Honoured Mr. Henry Dodwell at Trinity Colledg near Dublin in Ireland Worthy Sir I Thankfully received yours of 28 Pages from the hand of Mr. Teate That I may not be again guilty of such hastiness in writing as you take notice of I premise this to acquaint you That your warning with my backwardness to such work and the multitude of Employments in which I am pre-engaged shall keep me a while from that error and you from the trouble And if I take not your concluding counsel to avoid both timerity and partiality in this Cause I shall notoriously contradict mine own interest I have studied the point as diligently as I could almost thirty years longer than you have lived in the world if the bearer of yours give me a true account of your age And yet I truly think it very possible that one of such admirable parts and diligence as your self evident in your great reading and accurate stile may know much more in half that time But if I can know my own thoughts I have studied with a desire whatever it cost me to know the truth I dare not say Impartially altogether For I have flesh and blood and who can choose but have a little partiality for that way which all his worldly interest pleadeth for Could I have proved Conformity lawful not to have contained a Covenant against the Church-form Church-offices and Church-discipline of Christs Institutions and for upholding that Church Usurpation and Tyranny which began and still continueth the Divisions of the Christian World nor the deliberate Ministerial owning of the Perjury of many thousands c. I need not have undergone the common scorn and hatred that I have born nor to have been deprived of all Ministerial maintenance and silenced for eleven years of that part of my life which should have been most serviceable to add no more my Reputation with those on the other extreme I did voluntarily cast away by opposing them when I could as easily have kept it as most I know lest it should be any snare or tempting interest to me I assure you That I have not wanted bread is a thing that I owe to thanks to any party for either Prelatists Presbyterians or Independents c. I confess I have read what the Antiprelatists say such as Beza Gerson Bucer Didoclav Parker Bains Iacob Blondel Salmasius c. But I have more diligently studied since I was twenty years of age the chiefest on the other side Saravia Bilson Downham Hooker Burges Covel Bridg Bancroft VVhitgift Spalatensis and since Petavius Hammond and multitudes more And I have now as you desired read over all yours that I might see the end before I past my judgment on the beginning But our apprehensions are various as our preconceptions are I find that we are all forestalled and readiest to learn of our selves who are not always the happiest Teachers of our selves What we have first laid in is usually made the standard of all that followeth and all must be reduced into a due Conformity and subserviency to our former sentiments You have shewed great learning ingenuity and piety and in a very fluent stile expressed what was in your mind and made me remember what one answereth him that said Hooker was yet unanswered viz. Reduce what you would have answered to Argument and it will soon be done I find that it had been much better to have said nothing than to have begun in such a manner of dispute in which the further we go the less we understand one another and make each other molestation instead of edification For plainly I find that though much may be learned out of so rare a discourse as you have vouchsafed me yet it doth very little at all to any dispatch of our presâ—nt controversie but might easily deceive me by avocation if I would forget what it is that I dispute about For I perceive 1. That we agree not in our sense of the terms which we make use of And from thence you infer some great and dangerous errors in my judgment 2. We agree least of all in common and obvious matters of fact which are before our eyes and the things of which I have had almost an Ages experience 3. I find that a very great part if not the far greatest of all your discourse is written upon a mis-understanding of my Words and judgment And if one were to publish such kind of Writings how tiresome would it be to the Reader should I set down a particular account of all your passages that are besides the question and all that proceed from such misunderstanding I speak not by way of blaming you for we are not competent Judges of other mens actions till we know the Reasons of them that may be laudable which crosseth our desires Perhaps you had Reasons to pass by the chief part of my explications of my sense and of the matter of fact and say nothing to them And perhaps you had Reasons when I had told you our Country-distribution of Acts of Government into Legislative and Judicial and Executive to make use still of the Equivocal word Decretory and to understand by it as you saw cause only the Legislative power and to leave out the Iudicial which was all that I controverted It may be you had Reason when I talk of a single or Parochial Church
no power to cross or violate these his Laws And if they do it notoriously it is null and worse and no act of authority but of sin e. g. If Bishops baptize unconverted Infidels or give the other Sacrament to such or to notorious wicked impenitent persons 3. I believe that if one or many Bishops or Priests do disobey these Laws of Christ their sin doth not oblige all other persons to rebel or sin with them or disoblige them from their duty e. g. If some Bishops should refuse to receive penitent believers and their â—eed into the Church by Baptism others are nevertheless bound to receive them and not all the Bishops in the world to keep them out because some do it sinfully so if some Bishops would feed them with unâ—ound Doctrine or corrupt Gods Worship e. g. with Image-worship or language unintâ—lligible c. others must not follow them but do better And if some Bishops turn Christs sheep out of his sold and pasture unjustly denying them Communion others must not do wickedly with them but must receive such else one tyrant might oblige all the Churches to tyranny 4. But while the power of the Keys is lawfully used he that is justly cast out of the Communion of one Church should not be received to Communion with any other that hath just notice of his Exclusion till the cause be removed 5. But the notice of it concerneth not those that living out of reach are uncapable of Communion with that person If a woman in this Parish be Excommunicated as a Scold or a man as a Drunkard c. the Bishop is not bound to send notice of their names and case to Ethiopia or Armenia nor to all the Christian World no nor to all England Nor do they use to do it to all the Parishes in the Diocess but only to that one where the person liveth But I doubt not but all that Church should know of it of which he was a Communicating member by the way why is not all the Diocess told of it but that men are conscious that he hath not Personal communion with them and therefore need not be so Excommunicated 6. Therefore mens limited capacity allowing them Personal Communion but in a narrow compass there needs no Confederacy of all the Christian World for the rejecting of those that one of them hath first rejected 7. But in well-ordered agreeing Churches none should be received presently into the Communion of another Church without due notice of his aptitude or capacity which regularly should be by the Certificates of the Church whence he came called Communicatory Letters or if he was never before admitted to the Sacrament because not at age his own Personal profession giveth him right and so it doth in the Countries where through neglect such Certificates or Testimonies are not in use sobeit there come in no proof against him that he stands Excommunicate or deserveth it A professing Christian hath right to Communion if he travel through all the Churches in the World till his profession be disproved or his claim disabled by just testimony If a man be Excommunicate in e. g. Lincoln-Diocess in one parish-Parish-Church above a thousand Parishes more of the same Church Diocesan may receive him for want of notice unless they are bound to receive no stranger of another Parish and that is a kind of Excommunicating of all Christians from the Communion of all the Christian World except one Parish 8. The Legal Excommunication which is only a general pronunciation that such or such sinners in specie shall be actually excommunicate is done already by God himself in his Universal Laws And no man ought to make Laws to Excommunicate any that Gods Laws do not decree to be Excommunicate save that when there is a difficulty in discerning whether this or that Doctrine or practice be indeed the sin so condemned in Gods Laws mens Laws may expound it to remove that difficulty If all were excommunicate that Gods own Laws do require to be excommunicate alas how great would the number be So little need is there that Voluminous Councils should excommunicate many more and that Councils should be added to Councils to the end of the world to make new Laws for excommunicating men 9. Where God hath commanded all Christians in his Laws to avoid any sort of wicked men and with such not to eat the fact being once notorious the person is so far ipso jure excommunicate as that all are bound to avoid familiarity with that person though no Bishop sentence him But the Pastors having the Church Keys we must not go out of the Church because such a man is there for who shall be in the Church is at his Judgment but who shall be at my Table is at mine 10. But if the Church it self be essentiated of such as God thus commandeth all to avoid and this be notorious every Christian must avoid that Church The Essentials of a Church are the pars regens pars subdita the Pastors and the Body of the flock If either be so far corrupt the Church is corupt When any one essential part is wanting or depraved then the Essence is wanting or depraved Therefore where many Pastors make up the pars regens of a particular Church it is not the heresie or wickedness of some one only that will warrant a separation because one is but an integral and not an essential part But where one Bishop only is the essential regent constitutive part there that one mans heresie or notorious wickedness such as we are commanded to have no Communion with will allow us to avoid that Church as a Church though not each Member of it who are parts still of the Universal Church If I knew what further explication of my thoughts it is that you desire I should be ready to give it you III. As to the coercive power which you talk of it is strange if we can differ about the nature of it but we greatly differ I suppose about the extent of it Pardon me if to avoid confusion I first speak of the Name and then of the Thing 1. Though our ordinary use of the words coactive and coercive be to signifie that which worketh either on the Body and its provision only or on the Mind by force upon the Body or Estate yet if you will but tell me what you mean by it so distinctly that we may not be entangled with Logomachy take it in what sense you will The words which you use are the signification of your mind I desire but to understand and to be understood I follow Bishop Bilson of Christ. Obed. and others commonly that distinguish the power of Magistrates and Pastors by the Names of the power of the Sword and of the Word By the first they mean all power of corporal mulâ—ts and penalties directly such for he that grievâ—th the mind consequently troubleth the body By the latter they mean all that Official power of Gods
the Novatian Bishop that he would silence him but he quickly recalled his word before they parted and durst not do it 5. Did Cyril's Counsel against the Ioannites win them or harden them Was it not Atticus and Proclus love and lenity that ended that division 6. Did the Excommunicating of the Nestorians by Cyril compell them to obedience when so much of the East are Nestorians to this day and requite the Orthodox with their Excommunications 7. Did the Excommunicating of those that rejected the Council of Calcedon the Eutychians and Acephali compel them to obedience when many Emperours took their part and the greater number of Bishops joined with them and they equally damned those that received the Council for many Princes reigns And when so great a part of Christians as are the Iacobites Abassines c. own Dioscorus and condemn that Council to this day 8. Did the Excommunicating of the old Hereticks Gnosticks Basilidians Valentinians Paulinists Apollinarians Eunomians Aetians Photinians Macedonians Priscillians c. compel them to obedience at all or did they regard it 9. Did the Excommunicating of the parties that were for silence the Acacians as to the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and those that were for Zeno's Henoticon compel them to obedience 10 Dâ—d the mutual damnations of the Phantasticks Iustinian's and Gâ—mas party and the Corrupticolae force either to obedience 11. Did the Excommunications of the Monothelites compel them to obedience when in the days of Philippicus they had a Council saith Binnius of Innumerable Bishops And he saith that the General Council at Trul called Quiniâ—extum was of the same men that were in the approved sixth General Council and that they were Monothelites 12 Did the several Excommunications of the Constantinopolitan Bishop by the Roman and of the Roman again by them and the Alexandrian c compel either party to obedience 13. Had the Pope Excommunicated the Africans in the long fraction in the days of Aurelius and Austin would it have compeled them to obedience 14. When the Pope at last joined with Iuâ—tinians General Council against the Tria Capitula and condemned the refusers of it did it compel his own neighbour-Bishops to obedience when they so generally forsook him that there were not three Bishops to Consecrate the Pope but he was fain to use a Presbyter and when they set up a Patriarch at Aquileia as their chief and condemned or forsook the Pope for near an hundred years 15. Did the Popes Excommunicating of the Goths in Spain and and other parts compel them to obey him 16. Did Augustines rejection of the Britains and the Britains and Scots long refusing Communion with the Romanists compel either party to obey 17. Did the Excommunicating of Leo Isaurus Constantine and the rest of the Iconoclasts compel them to obey 18. Did the Excommunicating of the Albigenses and Waldenses bring them to obedience Or was it not say some Historians the murder of about two Millions that solitudinem fecit quam vocarunt pacem 19. Did the Excommunications of the Emperours Frederick Henry c. and their adherents as the Venetian Interdict compel them to obedience 20. Did the Excommunicating of the German Protestants and Queen Elizabeth and the English Protestants bring them to obedience How many such instances may I give you If you say To what purpose is all this I shall say No doubt so knowing a man can tell It is to tell you why I expect no more coercive power from meer Excommunication than experience and reason will allow me to expect And no such perfect obedience and universal concord by it as your words import And some questions I here crave your Answer of Qu. 1. The same that you so much urge on me Seeing this matter of fact is undeniable and Excommunication hath done no more than it hath done Is all Church-Government therefore vain Or what is your own way of remedy Qu. 2. Seeing it is Bishops themselves that for so many hundred years excommunicated one another as Hereticks and Schismaticks how shall they or their flocks be certain which Bishops they be whose excommunications they must take as Gods act and which not I pray answer it plainly 1. If any say It must be the Majority or greater number then so were the Arrians too long so were the Eutychians so were the Monothelites so were the Iconoclasts so the Papists say they are now If you say The Bishops in a General Council that 's almost all one What Wars were there between many General Councils and how long was it the Religion of one side to be for one and curse the other and of the other side to curse all that did not receive that How shall we know which Council to obey If you say as Binnius that all Councils have just so much power as the Pope giveth them how shall we know that this is true But I suppose that will not be your answer If you say we must obey that which is Orthodox who is the Judg If every man then they that judg the excommunicating-Bishops or Councils not Orthodox will not obey them Truly I know not what answer to expect from you Qu. 3. Can that man expect that excommunicating should set all right and bring men to obedience now in the end of the world who is constrained against his will to be certain that abused excommunications have been the great means of setting the Christian world into pernicious Schâ—sms and Confusions Qu. 4. At this day when the Papal Church unchurches all the Christian Churches that are not Subjects to the Pope and when the Greek Church excommunitcateth the Papal and most continue damning one another can you think that even excommunicating is the remedy to cure these Schisms and set all right Qu. 5. If denying men the Sacrament will constrain men to obedience why do not the Episcopal Churches through the world cure the Peoples sins by keeping them from the Sacrament when so great numbers are prophane and sensual and worldlings and wicked how easie a means of Conversion were it to forbid them all the Sacrament Qu. 6. Is it no contradiction to say that the Sacrament is Gods means of giving Sanctification and yet that keeping men from it is the means Qu. 7. But if you mean not constraining to obey God but only to obey the Bishop and not God what good will such obedience do the mans soul that will not save him I confess the Magistrate that hath the Sword may compel men to the use of the necessary suitable means of Conversion and Grace and those means may further Sanctification IV. As to the Fourth Point I have said enough of it to you heretofore 1. If no Religious Assemblies for Preaching Praying and Sacraments be lawful but what the Bishops allow then God hath put it into the Bishops power whether he shall have any such publick worship or any shall be obliged so to worship him or not But the Consequent is false Ergo So is
which maketh nothing for the mutability of the Universal Laws 8. No Pastors since the Apostles are by office or power appointed to make any Universal Laws for the Church nor any of the same kind and reason with Gods own Laws whose reason or cause was existent in the Apostles times but only to explain the word of God and apply it to particular persons and cases as Ministers under Christ in his Teaching Priestly and Governing office nor have the Apostles any other kind of Successors 9. Christ made not Peter or any one of his Apostles Governour of the rest But when they strove who should be the chief rebuked that expectation and determined That among them Preeminence should consist in excelling in humility and service 10. When the Corinthians were sick of the like disease Paul rebuked them for saying I am of Cephas and determineth that Apostles are but particular members of the body of which Christ only is the Head and not the Lords but Ministers and helpers of their faith 11 No Pastors as such have forcing power either to touch mens bodies or estates or inflict by the sword corporal penalties or mulcts But only by the word by which the power of the Keys is exercised to instruct men and urge Gods precepts promises and threats upon their Consciences 12. The Apostles were Bishops eminenter in that they called gathered and while they stayed with them governed Churches But not formaliter as taking any one particular Church for their proper charge But setled such fixed Bishops over them And though they distributed their labours about the world prudently and as the Spirit of Christ guided them yet we find not any probability that ever they divided the world into twelve or thirteen Provinces or ever setled twelve or thirteen chief Metropolitical seats in the world which their proper Successors as such should govern in preeminence Nor doth any History intimate such a thing nor yet that any Apostle took any City for his proper Diocess where another Apostle might not come and exercise equal Power 13. It seemeth that Christs sending out his seventy Disciples by two and two and the Apostles staying together much at Ierusalem and Paul and Barnabas's going forth together and after Paul Silas and Barnabas and Mark Peter and Paul supposed to be together at Rome c. that the Spirit of God did purposely prevent the intentions of any afterward of being the Metropolitical Successors of single Apostles or Disciples of Christs immediate sending in this or that City as their proper seat 14. As Grotius thinks that the Churches were instituted after the likeness of the Synagogues of which one City had many so Dr. Hammond endeavours to evince not only that Peter and Paul were Bishops of two distinct Churches of Rome one of the Iews and the other of the Gentile Christians but also that it was so in other Cities Dissertat 15. The Patriarchs were not 12 or 13 but three first and five afterward and none of them pretended to any power as especial Successors of any one Apostle but Antioch and Rome of Peter and that was not their first claim or title but an honorary reason why men afterward advanced them Alexandria claimed Succession but from St. Mark and Ierusalem from Iames no Apostle if Dr. Hammond and others be not much mistaken and Constantinople from none 16. The 28 Canon of Calcedon tels us enough of the foundation title and reason of Patriarchal power and all Church-History that the Metropolitical Powers were granted by Emperours either immediately or empowering Councils thereto 17. These Emperours having no power out of the Empire neither by themselves nor by Councils gave not any power that extended further than the Empire or that could by that title continue to any City which fell under the Government of another Prince 18 Aâ— theâ—e never was a Council truly Universal so the name Vniversal or Oecâ—menical was not of old given them in respect to the whole Christian world but to the whole Empire as the power that called them and the names of the Bishops subscribed c. fully prove 19. Before Christian Princes did empower them Councils were but for Counsel concord and correspondency and particular Pastors were bound by their Decrees only 1. For the evidence of truth which they made known 2. And by the General Law of God to maintain unity and peace and help each other But afterward by vertuâ— of the Princes Law or Will they exercised a direct Government over the particular Bishops and those were oft banished that did not submit to them 20. While Councils met but for Counsel and Concord and also when afterwards they were but Provincial or National under Kings where none of the Patriarchal Spirit and Interest did corrupt them they made excellent Orders and were a great blessing to the Churches Of the first sort e. g. were divers African and of the latter divers Spanish and French when neither Emperor nor Popâ— did over-rule them but the Gothish and French Kings moderately govern them But though I deny not any good which the Councils called General did especially the firâ—â— Nicene yet I must profess that the History of the Patriarchal Seats and the History of the General Councils and the Church-Wars then and after them managed by Four of the Patriarchs especially and their Bishops the confusion caused in most of the Churches the Anathematizâ—ng of one another the blood that hath been shed in the open streets of Monks and common people yea the fighting and fury of Bishops at the Councils to the death of some of them their â—iring out the endeavours of such Emperors and their Officers that would have kept Peace and Concord among them do all put me out of hope that the Peace and Concord of the Christian world should ever be setled by Popes Patriarchs or such kind of Councils which all have so long filled the Christian world with most calamitous divisions contentions and blood-shed and made the snares which continue its divisions and distractions to this day II. I conceive that the means of Church-concord appointed by God is as follows But I premise 1. It must be pre-supposed That no perfect Concord will be had on earth yea that there will unavoidably be very many differences which must be born So great is the diversity of mens natural Capacity and Temper their Education Company Teachers Helps Interests Callings Temptations c. that it is not probable that any Two men in all the world are in every particular of the same mind And every man that groweth in knowledg will more and more differ from himself and not be of the same mind as he was when he knew less 2. Yet must our increase in knowledg and Concord be our continual endeavour and it is the use of teaching to bring these differences caused by ignorance to as small a number as we can 3. There is scarce a more effectual means of Division and Confusion and
Doctrine Worship and Discipline this is essential to a partiicular Church primi ordinis of Divine Institution of which I now treat III. 1. As Christians must gather into particular Churches under their proper Bishops so these Churches must hold a certain Communion among themselves so much as is necessary to their mutual Edification and Preservation of which Synods and Communicatory Letters and Messengers are the means 2. An association of several Churches for Communion of Churches doth tota specie differ from an association of individual Christians into one Church primae speciei And it differeth in the matter end and kind of Communion 3. If these several Churches agree in the same Baptismal Covenant in the same ancient Creed or Articles of Faith and in the same love and holy desires summed up by Christ in the Lords-prayer and in taking the commands of Christ for the Rule of their conversation and receiving Gods Revelations recorded in the holy Scriptures so far as they understand them renouncing all contraries to any of this so soon as they perceive them so to be this should suffice to their loving and comfortable communion without any desires of Domination or Government over one another And though I will not do any thing unpeaceably against Patriarchs Metropolitans Archbishops or Diocesans if they govern according to the Laws of God yet I know no Divine right that any of them have to be the Rulers of the particular Bishops and Churches Though a humane presidency for order we deny not nor that junior Bishops do owe some respect and submission to the Seniors 4. Though the General Laws of Christ for concord edification c. do enable Magistrates by command or Pastors by contract to chuse and make new Officers of their own which God never particularly instituted for the determining and executing such circumstantials as God hath left to humane prudence as Presidents Moderators Churchwardens Summoners c. yet I deny 1. That any Officer of meer humane Institution hath a superior proper Ecclesiastical Power of the Keys to be a Bishop of Bishops and to govern the Governouâ—s of the particular Churches by Excommunications Depositions and Absolutions seeing ex ratione rei it belongeth to the same Legislator who instituted the inferiour order to have instituted the Superiour if he would have had it 2. And I peremptorily deny that any such pretended Superiour Patriarch Primate Metropolitan Archbishop c. hath any power save Diabolical to deprive any particular Churches Bishops or Christians of any of the Priviledges setled on them by Christs Vniversal Laws or to disoblige them from any duties required by Christ. IV. It belongeth to the Office of Princes and Magistrates only to Rule all both Clergy and Laity by the sword or force even to drive Ministers to do their certain duty and to punish them for sin And they are to keep peace among the Churches and as bad as the Secular Powers have been had they not kept peace better than the Bishops have done I am possest with horrour to think what a field of blood the Churches had been throughout the world since the Exaltation of the Clergy V. Christ only is as the Universal Legislator so the Universal final judg from whom there is no appeal VI. Every Christian as a Rational Agent hath a Judgment of discerning by which he must judg whether his Rulers commands be according to Christs commands or not And if they be must obey Christ in them If not must not obey them against Christ but appeal to him And if any do this erroneously it is his sin if justly it is his duty These six Particulars I take to be the sufficient means which Christ hath appointed for the concord of the Church and that the seven points of Concord mentioned by the Apostle should satisfie us herein viz. 1. One body 2. One Spirit 3. One hope of our calling 4 One Lord. 5. One Faith 6. One Baptism 7. One God and Father of all And they that agree in these are bound to keep the Unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace as knowing that the Kingdom of God consisteth not in meats and dâ—inks but in Righteousness peace and joy in the Holy Ghost And he that in these serveth Christ is acceptable to God and should be approved of men Rom. 14.17 18. Ephes. 4.6 7 c. Nor is it lawful for any to hate persecute silence or Excommunicate their Brethren that agree in these or to divide distract or confound the Churches for the interest of their several Preeminences or Provinces which have no higher than humane authority perhaps questionable at least unquestionably below the authority of God and null when it is against it I am sure by the Church-History of all ages since Christ the great divider of the Christian World hath been the Pride of a worldly too ignorant Clergy 1. Striving who should be greatest 2. Striving about ambiguous words 3. Imposing unnecessary things by their Authority upon the Churches to be ignorant of this is impossible to me when once I have read the History of the Church which warneth me what to suspect as the causes of our distractions for the things that had been are And how unexcusable these three evils are and how contrary to Christ these Texts do tell me I. Luk 22.24 25 26 1 Pet. 5.1 2 3 4. 1 Cor. 3.5 6 7 22. 2 Cor. 1.24 II. 2 Tim. 2.14 16 23 24 25. 1 Tim. 1.4 5 6. III. 2 Cor. 11.3 Act. 15.28 Revel 2.24 25 Mat. 15.8 9. Rom. 14 15 throughout To tell you that I am not only as you say on the destructive part I have thus told you briefly what I assert as the way to peace And now I shall destructively tell you why I differ from your Principles as truly destructive of truth unity and peace Some of the Principles which I have heard from your mouth which I dissent from are these I. That the Church must have some Ecclesiastical Governours that are absolute from whom no man may appeal to an invisible Power II. That Diocesan Churches are the first in order of Divine Institution III. That Diocesan-Bishops by consent may make other Church-forms as National Patriarchal c. And that such Churches are not made by Princes but by the consent of Prelates IV. That these Church-forms of mans making stand in a Governing Superiority over those of Gods making V. That where by such consent of Diocesans such superior Jurisdictions are once setled it is a sin for any to gather Assemblies within the local bounds of their Jurisdiction without their consent VI. That you cannot see how those that do so can be saved VII That if I preach on the account of my Ministerial office and the peoples necessity to such as else would have no Preaching nor any publick worship of God e. g. in a Parish where there are 40000 more than can hear in the Parish-Church though I must conclude that according to the ordinary way
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
to say I supposed in it but a single Pastor You are not accountable to me for such errors be they never so causless in my opinion It may be you had Reason to write against the old Nonconformists that are in another world and to think that for the Names sake it concerned us and to plead that Conformity to all the present Covenants and Oaths and Subscriptions is necessary because you could wish the Discipline more Regular as if we were to Subscribe to what is in your wishes It may be you had Reason to suppose the Parish-Priests to have the Government of the People even the power of the Church-Keys and yet sometimes to unsay it again without answering my Proof to the contrary when I take it for the chief supposition that causeth my Nonconformity And to prove copiously that a Bishop may govern a Diocess when he hath a Governor under him in every Parish without answering my Proofs that he hath no such under him but hath quantum in se half degraded the Presbyters And when I said that Discipline is not possible under such Diocesans as are with us you might have Reason that I know not of to leave out as are with us and to prove it possible with other Diocesans that have governing Presbyters under them Perhaps you had Reason to confound the Convincing Perswasive Declarative Power of a Iudg with that of a private man and thence to raise the supposition which you raise Perhaps you know some Medium between corporal force and Mulcts proper to the Magistrate and Authoritative perswasion and prevailing on the Conscience by the Reverence of Gods Laws though I know none And you were not bound to teach me what you know Perhaps you had Reason to think that I may Subscribe That no man in Three Kingdoms that hath Vowed it is bound to endeavour to alter our Church-Government by Lay-Chancellors because you defend it not but wish it altered And it may be you have Reasons unknown to me that none but Irregular endeavours are there disclaimed and that our Lawgivers spake universally and would be interpreted particularly with many such like But abscondita quae supra nos nihil ad nos What I may not pretend to understand I will not presume to censure but only say That I am uncapable of being informed by them This I am satisfied of that my Schismatical Principles take into Church-Communion such as you and those that are in knowledg below not only you but me even the weakest true Christians But upon your Catholick terms no man of my measure of knowledg must be tolerated to be a Preacher or a Christian in Church-Communion nor live at least out of Goal or some such penalty And if one at Muscovy can get a Courtier to make him a Bishop he and such other are the Church which why you still put it in the feminine Gender when it consisteth of Masculine Court-Bishops I know not And if he command us to do that which we account the most inhumane perjury if he think it to be but the renunciation of an unlawful Oath as I understand you we are Schismaticks if we obey him not Whether in cases of commanded blasphemy and all other crimes we must accordingly renounce our understandings I know not Though there be somewhat of Irony in all this there is nothing but what is consistent with the high estimation of your extraordinary worth And I must say that our different Educations I doubt not is a great cause of our different sentiments Had I never been a Pastor nor lived out of a Colledg and had met with such a taking Orator I might have thought as you do And had you converst with as many Country-people as I have done and such I think you would have thought as I do My great deceiver is Sense and Experience I am inclined to look near me in judging of present matters of fact As if our Controversie were Whether one Schoolmaster can govern a thousand Schools without any but Monitors under him and Teachers that have no Government And your way is from old Histories to prove that some body did so 1400 years ago or a thousand in some places of the world if stories deceive us not and therefore it may be so now Though none of those excellent men do it who are put into the places of the silenced Schismatical Ministers nor none of the excellent Bishops that are over us who are so good that one of them no doubt would do it were it possible But seriously I take it for a great mercy of God that honest Christians of little learning have that experience in the Practicals of Religion which the studied accurate plausible Orations of contradictors cannot overcome though they are not so well skill'd at the same weapons as to answer them Sir pardon and accept this short and thankful acknowledgment that I have received your Learned Tractate till I take the leisure if I so long live to return you an answer suitable to your discourse and expectations I rest Aug. 5. 1673. Your Servant RICH. BAXTER Mr. Dodwell desiring me not to make haste in answering him I sent him only this intending more but want of time and the quality of the task being put but to answer a multitude of words delayed it till he came to London and then I thought we might talk it out which we oft tried to little purpose His great proof of large Churches of many Altars from the only two that swelled first Rome and Alexandria are so fully answered in this annexed Letter which worthy Mr. Clerkson wrote to me that I think he needs no other answer since published by me As is a fâ—ll discourse on the Subject by Mr. Clerkson himself against Dr. Stâ—llingfleet A Copy of the Letter to Mr. Dodwell March 12. 1681. SIR SInce your Speech with me I have thought again of what you insisted on and find it consist of these four Points 1. Whether I charge you with Popery or at least do not vindicate you when so accused 2. Your reasons against answering Voetius and me 3. Your desire to know my terms of concord 4. Your perswading me to give over Preaching Lest words be mis-understood or forgotten I send you my Answer to each of these I. I take it to be none of my business to tell what Religion other men are of till I am called to it And then I take my self bound to judg every man what he professeth to be till I can disprove it 2. I distinguish the Name e. g. of Protestant or Papist from the Thing Accordingly 1. I am sure you deny your self to be a Papist and I believe you 2. What you mean by the word I refer all men that talk of it to your Books which are fitter to tell your mind than I am that know no mans heart Grotius took a Papist to be one that flattered Popes taking all to be just which they said and did and not one that