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-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-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-City-Church to be
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
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
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
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
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
judgers of the personal qualifications and that ordinis gratia ordinarily their approbation choice or consent shall be a relative part of their Receptive qualification 6. God himself giveth all the personal qualifications 7 He is ready to help the approvers and chusers to discern all these and to judg aright of them 8. The person being thus made a capable Recipient by personal qualifications and relative due Approbation Election and Consent God's Donation or Law doth give him Right and oblige him to the office-work And the Electors Approvers and Consenters are none of the proper efficient Donors or causes of this right and obligation but only efficient causes of his relative receptive capacity 9. That therefore the right and obligation is immediately from Gods Law by resultancy as the established medium of Gods conveyance but not immediately without any means of his receptively to make him materiam dispositam 10. That all this is true both of Soveraign Civil Power and of Church-power in Bishops and Pastors 11. That yet besides Approbation and Election God hath for the publick notice and order of the Church appointed a Regular Ministerial Investiture by which the Approved shall be solemnly put into possession as Kings are crowned and Ministers instituted and Ordination usually containeth both the approbation part of the election and the investiture 12 But this Investiture being but a Ministerial delivery of possession proveth not the Investor to be any Donor of the Power to the King or to the Bishop or Pastor 13. Nor is it necessary save ordinis gratia and in foro ecclesiae to avoid intrusion and confusion but not when it is set against the end or the end may and must be sought without it 14. Who it is that hath the power of this Ordination Approbation and Investiture is much of the controversie of these times some say it is the Magistrate but those that say it is the bishops are not agreed what species of bishops it is whether the chief Pastors of each particular Parish true Church or only a Diocesan that is the sole bishop of many parishes that are no true Churches or only Diocesans that are Archbishops over many true Parish-churches and bishops 15. But the Fundamentum juris being Christs Statute-Law or Grant and all that is left to man being but qualitatively or relatively to make the person an immediately capable Recipient and ministerially invest him therefore it follows that if at Alexandria Antioch Ierusalem Cesarea Constantinople London all the old bishops were dead or hereticks a just title may be restored without the ordination of one that had successive canonical ordination because there needeth no efficient donor but Christ and his Law and the receptive capacity may be without such ordination where it is not to be had as among Papists that will not ordain one on lawful terms c. for Order it self is but for the thing ordered and not against it And I will have mercy and not sacrifice â—morals before rituals and all power is to edification c. are certain rules And God never made men judges in partem utram libet whether there shall be Churches and Pastors and Worship or none or whether there shall be Civil Government or none no nor of what the species the Church-Offices shall be 16. I use to explain this by many expository similitudes 1. If the Laws of God authorize Soveraignty and the Constitution of the Kingdom say it shall be Monarchy were it Elective the Electors are not Efficients of power but determiners of the Recipient And if it be Hereditary or Elective the Investers by coronation are no efficients of the power but Ministerial deliverers of possession and that but necessary ad ordinem and not ad esse potestatis 2. If the King by a Charter to the University state the power of the Chancellor Vicechancellor Proctors and all the Masters of Colledges and then tell them who shall be capable and how chosen and how inveâ—ted here his power is immediately from the Kings Charter as the efficient Instrument and all that others do is but to determine of the Recipient and invest him 3. So it is as to the power of the Lord Mayor of London and the Mayors and Bailiffs of all Corporations 4. So it is in the essential power of the Husband over the Wife the woman chuseth who shall have it and the Parson that marrieth them investeth him in it but God only is the efficient donor of his Law 17. Therefore it is not in the power of the Electors Approvers or Investors to alter any of the Power established by God If both the woman and the Priest say that the man shall be her Husband but shall have no government of her it is a nullity Gods Law shall stand If the City and the Recorder say You shall be Lord Mayor but not have all the power given by the Kings Charter its vain and he shall have all that the Charter giveth him If the A Bp crown the King and say You shall be King but not have all the power stated by the Constitution on the King this depriveth not the King of his power unless he give away that which God hath not stated on him but men so if an Ordaining Prelate Patron or Parish say This is a true Parish Church and we choose and Ordain you the true Pastor of it but you shall have but part of the true Pastoral Power stablished on the office by God it 's null Gods Institution shall be the measure of his power 18. But I confess that if God had left Church-Officers as much to the will of men as he hath done the Civil the case had been otherwise for Monarchy Aristocracy and Democracy are all lawful And the King or other supreme power may make new Species of Judges and Magistrates and Officers and alter them as they see cause And it would have been so in the Church if as the Italians at Trent would have carried it Christ had immediately Instituted only the Papacy and left it to the Pope to make Bishops and to Bishops to make Priests And yet I would not wrong the worst I cannot say that they would have empowered the Pope to change the Species of Priests or Bishops But God hath fixed the Species by making a setled Law for all the work and all the Authority to do it though Accidentals may be altered in work and Office § 6. This is the clear state of my assertions which how grosly Mr. Dodwell hath falsified in his forged description I will not stay to open But it is a great stress and fabrick that he layeth on the contrary supposition that his Species of Bishops are the givers of the Powers and so we can have no other or more than they are willing to give us And let him that thinks he spoke a sentence of truth and sense to prove it enjoy his error I would quickly prove the contrary to him if I knew what he
denieth § 7. I. If he deny that God hath Instituted the Office of the sacred Ministry and Pastorship in his Law 1. The Scripture will shame him to all that believe and understand it 2. And if it be not divinely established men may alter it and what is all this stir about to keep up their Domination § 8. II. If he think that God hath only Instituted Teachers or Rectors in genere but not in Specie then I give him the same answer as before Scripture will shame him and men may make new Species of Church-Pastors and unmake or alter them and how many or how oft who knows And who be the men that have this Office-changing-power that we may know whether and how far and how long we are bound to obey them § 9. III. If he think that Gods Law hath not described the Essential Qualifications of the Recipient then Prelates may make Pastors of Infidels Mahometans Bedlams or Blasphemers if not of Horses or Dogs § 10. IV. If he think that Gods Law hath determined of no way of Election Approbation or judging who is capable then every man may make himself a Bishop or Priest and the Turk may make Bishops for Christians or a company of Lay-enemies and persecutors may do it and then the Bishops Judgment and Ordination will have no Divine Authority § 11. V. If when the Recipient is duly qualified and chosen and capable he does not think that Gods Law or Grant is a sufficient signification of his Donative will and a fundamentum juris and an obliging instrument 1. He must deny the very nature and force of Gods Law and Grant And 2. He maketh it less effective than the Laws Charters and Donations of men are For which he cannot have the least shew of true reason § 12. VI. Can he devise any other sort of power in the Ordainers than I have named What is it If he say that they give the Office-power I ask Is the controversie about the word Give or the Act If that which I have named be called giving let him use his liberty and call it how he will 1. But as to the Thing what is it more than I have described It is God and not man that made the Office in genere specie Did our Bishops make the universal Law which stablisheth the Office in the world 2. And the Bishop never had that power and therefore cannot give that which he had not It 's Dr. Hammond's reason against Presbyters ordaining Nâ—mo dat quod non habet The word Office or Power and Duty signifieth an Accident which cannot transire a subjecto in subjectum The Ordaâ—ners have their own power but they have not another mans 3. Do they give it as Masters and Owners or only as the Donors Ministers No doubt they will say as his Ministers And do I need to prove to Mr. Dodwell that servants are not the Donors and give not their own but deliver their Masters Stewards themselves are but entrusted with the performance of their Masters will in delivering his Goods as he requireth them § 13. And this is so evident a truth that the Papists themselves who would fain have all power flow from the Pope are yet forced to plead for it as you may see in W Iohnson's alias Terret's answer to my first because else they cannot defend the Papal Power For the Pope hath been sometimes chosen by the Roman people sometime by the Roman Presbyters sometimes by people and Presbyters sometime by the Italian Bishops sometimes by Emperors and now by Cardinals and none of all these were Popes nor had Papal power and if they were the givers must give what they never had Whereupon the Papists are foâ—c't to grant that the Electors do but determine who shall be the Recipient but that the power floweth to him â—mâ—ediâ—tely from Gods Law or Institution § 14. And the Prelatists must needs say the same or else grant that Inferiors that never had Superior power may yet give it others for how else shall the supreme Ecclesiastical power in every National Church be given If it be in a Primate or a Synod those that have not the supreme power must give it for there is none above them or equal to do it And so Archbishops are chosen and Councils called § 15. And thus almost all Societies by contract are formed e. g. The King giveth Commission to several men to List voluntary Souldiers and be their Captains and command them Every Souldier chooseth his own Captain and thereby subjecteth himself to him but it is not by giving him his power for that floweth immediately from the Kings Commission but by making himself a subject to it and so maâ—ing the Captain Relatively a Recipient of power from God and the King over this particular man for the Soldiers have no governing-power to give nor are superiors to their Captain § 16. And thus Servants impropeâ—ly only make men their Masters not by giving them a Domestick Ruling-power which they never had themselves but by making themselves the Correlate Subjects and so putting their Masters into the Relation to which Gods Lâ—w immediately giveth the Ruling-power All the power is from God and God doth not first give it the Servant Souldier c. to give the Master or Captain but the Servants or Souldiers consent is a Causa sine quae non disposâ—tiva Recipientis to make the Receiver capable of it from God § 17. And indeed all Kings and Soveraigns thus hold their Soveraignty from God Though God hath not made the form in Specie necessary all power is of God and the Soveraignty from him by no mediate Efficient below his Law It 's a falshood in politicks to say that the people as such efficiently give the Soveraign his power and that he is universis minor in Authority though he is not universis melior and therefore their common good is more than his the finis regiminis Nor is it true that Richard Hooker saith that in defect of Heirs it escheateth to the people but only that it belongeth to the people to choose a new Recipient to whom the power shall flow from Gods Law and not from them I do not think that the King of France Spain or England will believe that their power is given â—fficiently by and floweth from their People Parliaments or the Prelate that Crowneth them And the case is evidently the â—am as to the Ministry § 18. And the French Papists by some called Protestants who are for the Ecclesiastical Soveraignty of General Councils above the Pope do not believe that the Pope giveth them their power though he may call them But whoever calleth them or chooseth them they suppose that God only giveth them their power § 19. And in all these cases it is notorious that an interrâ—ption of due Election and Investiture hindereth not the restoration of interrupted power If the Law say whoever is thus and thus chosen to be Lord Chancellor Lord
work that God hath â—ade Officers to do already And then we need not say â—that Orders are Iure Divino if the Bishop may make more at his pleasure but quo jure and what shall set his bounds and end This seemeth more in kind than the Italians at Trent would have given to the Pope over Bishops Anâ— if they do not themselves also that same Essential part of their Office which they give to others they degrade themselves For the ceasing or alienation of an Essential part changeth the specieâ— But I suppose you will say 〈◊〉 is Preâ—byters to whom they may delegate this work And 〈◊〉 either it is a worâ— which God hath made part of the Presbyters Office or not If it be then that Presbyter doth his ow◠〈◊〉 appointed him by God and not another 〈…〉 not 〈◊〉 he maketh a new Officer who is â—either 〈…〉 But the 〈…〉 the Office 〈◊〉 that it may not be 〈◊〉 thoâ—gh Bishop may Ordain men to an Office of 〈…〉 the King or Church may make new Officers 〈…〉 Clock keepers Ostiaries c. 〈…〉 and obligation to personal duty to be done 〈◊〉 personâ—l abiâ—â—ty as is the Office of a Physician a Judg a School 〈…〉 a Pilot c where he that Authorâ—zeth and obligâ—th another statedly to do his work doth thereby make that other a Physician Judg School-Master Pilot c. This is but Ordinâ—tioâ— And if a Bishop be but one that may appoint others to do the Episcopal work then 1. Why is not every King a Bishop for he may appoint men to do a Bishops work And why is he not also a Physician Musician Pilot c. because he may do the like by them 2. And then the Bishop appointed by the King is no more a Bishop indeed than one appointed by a Bishop is But this delegation that I speak against is a smaller sin than such men choose To depute others to exercise Discipline whom God appointed not de specie thereto is but Sacriledg and Usurpation by alienating it from the true office and setting up a false one But yet the thing might some how be done if any were to do it But the almost total deposition and destruction of the Discipline it self and letting none do it by pretending the sole authority of doing it is another kind of sin Now to your answer from the similitude of Civil Monarchs I reply It is no wonder if we never agree about Church-offices if we no better agree of the general nature of them and their work Of which if you will please to read a sheet or two which I wrote the last year to Ludov. Molinaeus of the difference of Magistracy and Church-power and also read the Lord Bacons Considerations you will excuse me for here passing by what is there said I. The standing of the Magistrates Office is by the Law of Nature which therefore alloweth variety and mutations of inferior Orders as there is cause But the standing of the Clergy is by Supernatural Institution Our Book of Ordination saith there are three Orders c. Therefore man may not alter them or make more of that same kind II. Kingly power requireth not ad dispositionem materiae such Personal ability as the Pastoral-office doth A child may be a King and it may serve turn if he be but the head of power and give others commission to do all the rest of the Governing work But it is not so with a Judg a Physician an Orator or a Bishop who is not subjectum capax of the essence of the office without personal aptitude III. God hath described the Bishops office in Scripture as consisting of three parts viz. Teaching Priestly or about Worship and Sacraments and ruling as under Christs Prophetical Priestly and Kingly Office And he hath no where made one more proper to a Bishop than another nor said this is Essential and that is but Integral Therefore the Bishop may as well allow a Layman to administer the Sacraments c. as one not appointed to it by God to Rule by the Keys IV. The Bishops Pastoral Rule is only by Gods word upon the Conscience as Bishop Bilson of Obed. sheweth at large and all Protestants agree and not by any mulcts or corporal force If he use the sword or constraint it is not as a Bishop but as a Magistrate But the Kings is by the sword And will it follow that because the King may appoint another to apprehend men and carry them to prison c. that therefore a Bishop appointed by God to Preach Worship and Rule and therein to draw the Impenitent to Repentance by patient exhortations and reproofs c. may commit this to another never appointed to it of God V. Either it is the Bishops work as was said that is delegated by him or some other If properly his own than either he maketh more Bishops and that 's all we plead for or else a Presbyter or Layman may do a Bishops proper work And then what need of a Bishop to pass by the contradiction VI. But my chief answer to you is the King as Supreme Magistrate doth appoint and rule by others that are truly Magistrates They have every one a Judicial power in their several places under him even every Justice of Peace But you suppose the Bishop to set up no Bishops nor no Church-Governours under him at all A King can rule a Kingdom by Supremo Judgment when he hath hundreds of Judges under him who do it by his authority And if this had been all our dispute whether a Patriarch or Archbishop can rule a thousand Churches by a thousand Inferior Bishops or Church-rulers you had said something But doth it follow that your Church Monarch can over-see them all himself without any sub-oversees or rule them by Gods word on the Conscience without any sub-rulers You appropriate the Decretory Power to your Monarch and communicate only the executive Hold to that The whole Government is but Legislatio Iudicium Legislation now we meddle not with yet our Bishops allow it to the Presbyters in Convocation for they take Canons to be Church-Laws It is a lower power that is denied to them that they grant the higher to Bare execution is no Government A Hangman is no Governour A Governour may also be Executioner but a meer Executioner is no Governour The People are Executioners of Excommunications while they withdraw from the Excommunicate and with such do not eat c. as 1 Cor. 5. And the Parish-Priest is an Executioner while he as a Cryer proclaimeth or readeth the Chancellors Excommunication in the Church and when he denieth the Sacrament to those that he is bid deny it to I grant you that this is Communicated But it is the Judicial power it self which I have been proving the Bishop uncapable of Exploration is part of the Judicial work I know you include not that in execution which follows it If you did it would be a sad office for a Bishop to
the Antecedent True Pastors have but the power to promote and order Gods worship but not to exclude or forbid it to any much less to all or 1000. without necessary cause 2. And then if Preaching and Hearing and Sacraments be ordinarily necessary to mens salvation then God hath left it to the will or power of the Bishops whether any of the people shall be ordinarily saved But that is not so 3. And then if the King should license or command us to Preach Pray and Communicate and the Bishop forbid it it were sin But that I will not believe unless the Cause more than the Authority make the difference To cooclude I hold that just use of the Keys is very necessary and that it is the great sin of England to reject it But that a false usurped use of excomunication hath been the incendiary of the Christian world which hath broken it to pieces caused horrid Schisms Rebellions Treasons Murders and bloody Wars I. The just use is 1. When a scandalous or great sinner is with convincing evidence told of his error and with seriousness yet with love and compassion intreated to repent and either prevailed with and so absolved or after due patience Authoritatively pronounced uncapable of Church-Communion and bound over to answer it at the Bar of Christ in terror if he repent not and this by the Pastor of that particular Church which either statedly or pro tempore he belongeth to 2. And when this is duly notified to such Neighbour-Pastors as he may seek Communion with and they agree not to receive any justly cast out by others but to receive and relieve the injured and falsly condemned 3. And when the King and his Justices permit not the ejected violently to intrude and take the Sacrament or joyn with the Church by force but preserveth forcibly the Peace and Priviledges of the Churches II. The excommunication that hath turned the Church into Factions and undone almost East and West is 1. When a Bishop because of his humane Superiory as Patriark Primate or Pope claimeth the power of excommunicating other Bishops as his Subjects whose Sentence must stand because of his Regent power 2. Or at least gathering a Council where he shall preside and that Council shall take themselves to have a Governing power of the Keys over the particular Bishop not only to renounce Communion with them themselves but to oblige all others to stand to their judicial Sentence 3. When Bishops shall meddle causelesly in other Bishops Churches and make themseves Judges either of distant unknown persons and cases or of such as they have nothing to do to try Yea judg men of other Countries or so distant as the Witnesses and Causes cannot without oppression be brought to their Bar. 4. When they disgrace Gods universal Laws of Communion as insâ—fficiâ—nt and make a multitude of unnecessary ensnaring dividing Laws of their own according to which they must be mens Judges 5. When these Laws are not made only for their own flocks and selves but for all the Christian world or for absent or dissenting persons 6. When men excommunicate others for hard words not understood that deserve it not as to real matter 7. Or do it to keep up an unlawful usurped power over those Churches that never consented to take them for their Pastors and to rule where they have no true Authority but such as standeth on a forcing strength 8. When Lay-Chancellors use the Keys of the Church 9. When men excommunicate others wickedly for doing their duty to God and man or unjustly without sufficient Cause 10. When unjust excommunicators force Ministers against their Consciences to publish their condemnations against those that they know to be not worthy of that Sentence if not the best of their flocks 11. And when they damn all as Hereticks Schismaticks c. that communicate with any that they thus unjustly damn 12. When they dishonour Kings and higher Pwers by disgracing excommunications much more when they depose them 13. When they tell Princes that it is their duty to banish imprison or destroy men because excommunicate and not reconciled and make Kings their Executioners And so of old when a Bishop was excommunicate he must presently be banished And they say the Scots horning is of the same nature If all had been either banished or imprisoned that were excommunicate aâ—d unreconciled in the pursuit of the General Councils of old how great a diminution would it have made of the free Subjects of the Empire And if Princes must strike with the Sword all that stand excommunicate without trying and judging the persons themselves it is no wonder if such Prelates as can first so debase them to be their Lictors can next depose them He is like to be a great Persecuter that will imprison or banish all that a proud contentious Clergy will excommunicate As corruptio optimi est pessima I doubt not but a wise humble holy spiritual loving heavenly zealous patient exemplary sort of Pastors is the means of continuing Christs Kingdom in the World and such are the Pillars and Basis of Truth in the House of God as it is said of Timothy not of the Church as is commonly mistaken So an ignorant worldly carnal proud usurping domineering hypocritical sort of Pastors have been the great plagues and causes of Schism confusion and common calamity And that when Satan can be the chuser of Pastors for Christs Church he will and too oft hath ever chuse such as shall most succesfully serve him in Christs Name And I doubt not but such holy Discipline as shall keep clean the Church of Christ and keep off the reproach of wickedness and uncleanness from the Christian Religion and manifest duly to the flock the difference between the precious and the vile is a great Ordinance of God which one man cannot exercise over many hundred Parishes and unknown people But an usurped domineering use of excommunication to subdue Kings Princes Nobles and people to the Jurisdiction Opinions and Canons of Popes Patriarchs Prelates or their Councils I think hath done not the least part of Satans work in the world And I must tell you that I have lived now near 62. now near 66. years and I never saw one man or woman reformed or converted by excommunication and I hope I have known thousands converted from their sin by Preaching even by some that are now forbidden to Preach All that ever I knew excommunicate were of two sorts 1. Dissenters from the Opinions of the Bishops or conscientious refusers of their commands And these all rejoice in their sufferings applying Blessed are ye when they cast out your names c. say all evil of you falsly c. or they take their censure for wicked persecution The Papists laugh at their Excommunicators and say What an odd conditioned Church have you that will cast us out that never came in and because we will not come in 2. Ungodly impenitent sinners And these hate