either by Apostasie Heresie or Schism 1 Apostasie is a renouncing not only the Faith of Christ but the very name and title to Christianity No man will say that ever the Church of Rome fell thus 2 Heresie is an adhesion to some private or singular opinion or error in Faith contrary to the general approved Doctrine of the Church If the Church of Rome did ever adhere to any singular or new opinion disagreeable to the common received Doctrine of the Christian world I pray you satisfie me to these particulars 1. By what General Council was she condemn'd 2. Or which of the Fathers wrote against her 3. Or by what authority was she otherwise reproved for it seems to me a thing very incongruous that so great a Church should be condemn'd by every one that has a mind to condemn her 3 Schism is a departure or a division from the unity of the Church whereby that bond and communion held with some former Church is broken and dissolved If ever the Church of Rome divided it self by schism from any other body of faithful Christians brake communion or went forth from the society of any Elder Church I pray satisfie me to these particulars whose company did she leave From whom did she go forth Where was the true Church which she did forsake For it appears a little strange to me that a Church should be accounted Schismatical when there cannot be assign'd another Church different from her which from age to age hath continued visible from which she departed Hence he infers That the Church of Rome is the only true Church that leads to an eternity of bliss T. This indeed they commonly boast of as an unanswerable demonstration which they often scatter abroad in papers for the deluding of silly people Now though I see nothing in it but what has already been answered again and again yet for your fuller satisfaction Consider 1 suppose that we should grant his whole argument and every word in it to be true yet will it do little service to their cause nor will by any means yield that inference he would draw from it viz. that the Church of Rome is the only true Church and therefore to her communion we must betake our selves leaving the Church of England if ever we hope for salvation For pray what if we shou'd grant which yet he will never be able to prove that the Church of Rome is at this day as true and sound and flourishing a Church as we own it once to have been and should yield that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism what follows hence I beseech you What that she is the only true Church and the whole Catholick Church No by no means but only that she ought to be look'd upon as a sound part of the Catholick Church and therefore that her members viz. the Christians of that Diocess ought to live in strict fellowship with her and all other neighbouring Churches ought to give her due respect in maintaining such communion with her as sister-Churches are capable of holding one with another But it does not I say in the least follow that she is the supreme Mistress and Governess of all other Churches and therefore that all Christians in the world must render subjection to her and her Bishop otherwise they are to be look'd upon as no members of the Catholick Church nor at present in a capacity of salvation For such a supreme Mistress as this she never was when in her best and purest state nor therefore ought she to be esteemed so at this day neither do we of this Church owe obedience to her nor ought we to leave our own Church for her sake or at her command L. I cannot see how his argument proves us at all obliged thereto nor consequently how it reaches his purpose T. That it does not will still appear plainer if instead of Rome you name any other ancient Church suppose that of Ierusalem which was once very glorious and flourishing and deserved above all others to be stiled a Mother-Church now suppose that at this day it remain'd as sound and good as ever it was and to use his language that it never fell by Apostasie Heresie or Schism pray would it hence follow that all other Churches and particularly this of England must therefore yield subjection to the Church of Ierusalem That our Bishops must pay homage to the Bishop of that Church owning their dependance upon him and living in obedience to him And if they should refuse to do thus must our people therefore forsake their own Bishops and Clergy and withdraw from the Churches where they officiate and entertain Bishops or Priests that are sent over to us from Ierusalem and run into corners with them for the worship of God Surely there is not the least reason for any of this and not a whit more is there for our being thus subject to the Bishop of Rome or for our receiving and joyning with the Priests which are sent over to us by his authority There never was nor is now any reason why we should be thus enslaved to the Romish Church For in the very days of the Apostles and some hundred years after when that Church was in its best and purest state we of the Church of England rendred no such obedience to it own'd no such dependance upon it Neither indeed did the Bishops of that Church then claim any such power and Supremacy over us and other foreign Churches Wherefore as our ancestors the British Christians did not subject themselves to the Bishop of Rome nor ever thought such a subjection necessary to their salvation no more have we reason to do Whatever power or precedency the Bishops of Rome might afterwards have in these Western parts either by favour of the Emperor or by consent of the Bishops amongst themselves or most of all by their own daily encroachments by the meer advantage of their Seat without either law or reason this I say nothing at all concerns us at this day since all his power here is utterly abrogated and taken away by just and lawful authority in a most mature and deliberate manner as you before heard And I then told you how in Henry the Eighth's time before our happy Reformation it was generally own'd and declared by the Popish Clergy themselves that the Bishop of Rome had no more authority over us in England than the Bishop of Ierusalem Antioch or any other foreign Bishop And long before that our Laws limited and restrain'd the Popes power as it seem'd good to our Rulers And so do Popish Princes themselves at this day suffering him to have no more power or priviledg amongst them than themselves think fit Since then the Church of Rome in the very days of its primitive purity and glory had no power over us in this Church no more hath it at this day nor ought to have though it were still as pure and good as at first it was
both Heathens Jews and all Infidels ought to joyn themselves L. Since then the Catholick Church signifies the whole society of Christian people where ever scattered over the face of the earth it hence appears that they who assert the Church of Rome to be this Catholick Church do thereby declare that there are no true Christians in the world but the Papists as we use to call them which seems to me very strange Doctrine But yet may not a particular Church be in some sense stiled Catholick T. Yes pâ—operly enough as it is a part of the Catholick Church holding the same faith with it and not schismatically dividing from it And thus of old the Church of Rome might be stiled Catholick and so might the Church of Ephesus of Antioch or any other place to distinguish them from Hereticks and Schismaticks that made factions and parties in their several Churches and separated from their own lawful Bishops and Pastors L. Are not those Christian Churches which are commonly callâ—d Reformed Churches parts of the Catholick Church T. Yes they are the best and soundest parts of it L. But why are they called Protestant and Reformed T. Not to trouble you with the first particular occasion of the name Protestant they are now generally stiled so because they protest against the errors and corruptions of the Roman Church and have Reformed themselves from the same according to the primitive pattern laid down in holy Scripture So that when you hear tell of the Protestant Religion or Reformed Religion you are not to understand thereby any new Religion distinct from Christianity but only the old Christian Religion in its native simplicity and purity separate from all Popish additions Nor do we say as I have told you that the Church was lost and now lately found out but this we say that it was greatly corrupted especially in these Western parts of the world over which the Bishops of Rome had by ill arts usurped an authority From which Usurpation our Rulers most justly and regularly delivered themselves and afterwards with great care and consideration reformed our Church from those corruptions which were chiefly introduced and supported by that authority L. But they of that Church use to tell us and so does my Author here that all who are not of their communion are Sectaries to whom by no means do agree the marks of the true Church which yet they say are all of them evidently to be found in theirs T. Nothing more common than for adversaries to give one another very ill names and that shall serve for half a confutation amongst ignorant people But names alter not the nature of things And as zealously as they of Rome do affect the name of Catholicks I doubt not but upon search they will be found as notorious Sectaries as any in Christendom whilst many of those whom they brand with that infamous title will appear to be true Catholick Christians if there now be or ever were any such in the world And in order to the proof of this pray let me hear what are those marks of the true Church L. They are said to be chiefly four that it is One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and this say they cannot be said of any Protestant Church and therefore not of our Church of England which is by them reckoned among Sectaries T. By these marks let us be tried Only take notice that no one particular Church can be stiled the Catholick Church as if a part was the whole But I say the Church of England which we are now chiefly concern'd to vindicate is a true and sound part of this One Holy Catholick and Apostolick Church and all the marks of a true Church do much more clearly and fully agree to it than to the Church of Rome But let me hear what they object to the contrary L. First they say it is not One that is it is not united because there are so many divisions in it Some will be Protestants some Presbyterians others Independents Anabaptists Quakers c. Nor can they be one whilst they acknowledg not one Head to determine controversies Whilst on the other hand the Papists pretend that they have this one Head one Faith the same Sacraments and so are all of one Religion and therefore having so much unity are to be own'd by this mark for the true Church c. T. In answer to this consider 1 That it cannot with any pretence of reason or Scripture be made the mark of a true Church that there shall be no divisions in it For were there not some to be found in the best and purest Churches immediately planted by the Apostles themselves As particularly in the Church of Corinth for which they are severely reproved 1 Cor. 1. 10 11 c. 2 Much less doth it become those of the Church of Rome to accuse others of divisions who have more and greater amongst themselves than can be found I believe in any other Church in Christendom They talk of one Head but sometimes they have had two or three Popes at once and that for several years together They are divided in points fundamental to their own Church as whether the Pope be above a General Council or the Council above the Pope Nor are they any more agreed where the Infallibility of which they boast so much is seated than about the Supremacy whether it be in the Pope or in a General Council or in both together Yea some say 't is neither in one or the other nor in both united as considered apart from the rest but in the whole body of the faithful as by them Religion is convey'd from one generation to another And are they not much better for an Infallible Judg of controversies whilst they are not yet agreed who he is and where this Infallibility is to be found In a multitude of other points are they divided as learned Writers of our Church have shewn at large and with great probability have some asserted that they hardly agree universally amongst themselves in any Doctrines but those wherein they agree with us 3 But again were they never so well united amongst themselves yet is this but the agreement of a Sect with it self and is far from proving them to be therefore the Catholick Church or any sound part of it As if suppose all the Quâ—kers were perfectly agreed together in all opinions and imagin their number was as great as the Papists are they therefore to be reckoned the Catholick Church because forsooth they are One amongst themselves Surely no since by their errors and their schism they divide themselves from all other Christians Thus whilst Papists are united in owning the Pope to be Christs Vicar on earth and the supreme visible Head over the whole Christian Church they do hereby only make a sect or faction let their number be never so great And by this means as well as many other ill opinions and practices which are imposed on the
therefore whilst the people take the Flesh under the species of Bread this may very well serve without taking the Wine too But if this be a good reason Why then need the consecrating Priest take the Wine Or why need our Saviour have appointed both Bread and Wine to be made use of in this his Holy Supper Here then you have a plain instance of their practising contrary to the Scripture in so weighty a matter as the Administring the Holy Communion To this may be joyn'd their custom of private Masses or Communions if that be not a contradiction the Priest himself many times receiving alone and none of the people who are present partaking with him contrary to the first institution of this Holy Sacrament and to the very nature and design of it as it is a Communion and contrary also to the practice of the Primitive Church To these may a great many more easily be added of which we have formerly taken notice Such as having their Prayers in an unknown Tongue contrary to the Apostles direction 1 Cor. 14. Their Worshipping of Saints and Angels which is forbidden in all those places that command us to Worship God alone in the name of Jesus Christ our only Mediator and most expresly Col. 2. 18. Rev. 22. 9. Also their Worship of Images and of the Host contrary to the second Commandment And for an instance of their false Doctrines many of which we have often mentioned we need go no further than that palpable one of Transubstantiation which he mentions as agreeable to Scripture that says This is my body But how little these words make for his purpose we have before shewn and that their plain meaning is This is the Sacrament of my Body or the representation and commemoration of it and the way of conveying the benefits that come by it according to the constant use of the like expressions in the matter of Sacraments even as the Paschal Lamb is called the Passover of which it was only a solemn Memorial But that the natural substance of Bread and consequently of Wine remains after Consecration we have proved from the Apostle who again and again calls it so 1 Cor. 11. How then can he say that without ground we separate from the Romish Church Since if there were nothing else to be blamed this alone were sufficient reason to keep out of their Communion since in order to it they require our belief of a Doctrine most apparently false namely that of Transubstantiation and enjoyn a practice founded upon this Doctrine which is notoriously sinful viz. the Worship of the Consecrated Elements as if they were now turned into the substance of Christ's Body and Blood yea into whole Christ both as to his Divine and Humane Nature Now they themselves as you have heard do grant that if there was no such change made by Consecration this Worship would be idolatrous and therefore we being upon good grounds assured that no such change there is do utterly abhor the very thoughts of such Idolatrous worship and do believe our selves bound in Conscience to Almighty God to undergo a Thousand deaths rather than be guilty of it yea though we lived in Popish Countries But besides this we here in England owe no manner of obedience to the Bishop of Rome nor are under any obligation to forsake the Communion of our own Church for that of the Romish but should be guilty of that hainous sin of Schism by so doing as the Papists amongst us are at this day of which more in another place As to what he talks that they who go from their Church can give no reason why they should rather turn to Luther than to the Calvinists c. it concerns not us in the least who neither turn to the one or the other but continue in Communion with our own Church in which we were Baptized and live in obedience to our own Rulers in Church and State whom God hath set over us Nor do I discern by what reason he makes this silly inference nor yet for what purpose But let me hear his next Argument L. It cannot be proved that ever at any time were admitted any Priests that were not first duly consecrated by Bishops Wherefore we rightly infer that all Lutheran Ministers Calvinists or any other Sects not Consecrated according to the old custom of the Holy Church are for both from the name and reality of the Divine Priesthood and so that in their Cene or Supper as they call it they give but a meer piece of Bread as also that they have no power to Absolve from Sins but send away people as entangled and defiled with Sin as they were when they came to them T. As to this Argument we of the Church of England are nothing concerned in it since our Priests receive Ordination from Bishops and therefore have as full authority for the exercise of their Ministerial function as those of any Christian Church in the World Some other Reformed Churches also do embrace Episcopal Government As for such who want it we shall not enter into a dispute concerning the validity of their Orders But this I think we may safely assert that if the people be duly qualified for the Lord's Supper as St. Paul himself calls it 1 Cor. 11. 20. by a firm belief of the Gospel and sincere love and obedience to our Blessed Saviour they shall not want the benefits that are promised to worthy Communicants through any defect or irregularity in the Ordination of their Ministers And if they do truly repent of their sins and forsake them they shall for Christ's sake obtain forgiveness from God though never any Priest should give them Absolution But on the other hand our Writers have shewn that according to the common principle received in the Romish Church That the truth of Sacraments depends upon the intention of the Priest the people cannot be certain at any time that they have true Sacraments no nor whether he be a true Priest that Administers them But I shall trouble you with nothing more on this Argument L. There is no need since it reaches not our Church in the least I shall therefore proceed to the fifth which is this It cannot be found in the whole Holy Scripture that nothing is to be believed but what clearly and expresly is contained written in the same whence follows the ruine and overthrow of the ground-work on which Lutherans Calvinists and other Sectaries rely when they affirm that nothing is to be believed but what is expresly set down in Holy Writ T. I wonder who says so Every thing is to be believed that has sufficient evidence of its truth whether it be in Scripture or not But this we say and this I suppose he means to argue against that nothing is of necessity to be believed in order to Salvation but what is contain'd in Holy Scripture Which in effect is the same as to say that the Holy Scripture contains all necessary
that there are any other traditions of equal necessity to salvation which are not contain'd in these holy Scriptures 2 Note well that though the Church of God hath been a most faithful preserver of these holy Scriptures and hath carefully transmitted them from one generation to another yet it is not the Church which gives authority to the Scriptures as if she by any power in her could make that to be the word of God which is not so or unmake that which is indeed so No but the Church received for the word of God that which was delivered by holy men inspired by the Holy Ghost who gave full evidence of this their inspiration both by the nature of that Doctrine which they delivered and by the mighty miracles which God enabled them to work for the attesting the truth of this Doctrine both preached and written Now the Church which was in being in the first ages when these holy men committed their Doctrine to writing was a most competent witness of their writing those Books which go under their names and accordingly received them as the Sacred writings of such persons divinely inspired and so convey'd them to the next generation Thus the Iewish Church received the Books of Moses and the Prophets and thus the Primitive Christian Church received the writings of the Evangelists and the Apostles as also the Books of the Old Testament both upon the tradition of the Iewish Church and also upon the authority of our Blessed Saviour who own'd and approved of the same And thus the Books both of the Old Testament and the New have ever since by the good Providence of God been preserved in the Christian Church and handed down from one generation to another and so shall be we need not question to the end of the world And this same tradition of the Church whereby these holy Books are distinguished from all others and carefully delivered by the former age to the next following this we give all just regard to and do freely grant that this is of singular use for our information what Books belong to the Canon of Scripture what not and by this tradition we learn that this Book was written by this man under whose name it goes and another by that as for instance this by St. Matthew that by St. Mark c. But whilst the Church thus bears testimony to the Scripture to which testimony we give all due regard she does not I say give authority to it For there is a vast difference betwixt these two It 's the Kings hand and seal which gives authority to a writing containing suppose a grant of this or that priviledg but some credible persons his Secretaries or others who were witnesses to his signing or sealing of that writing may give testimony to it and so procure it to be own'd as authentick Thus the holy Scriptures which are recommended to us by the testimony of the Church derive their authority from God only who hath set to his seal that they are true as I have said both by the miracles that were wrought to confirm the Doctrine contained in them by the holiness of that Doctrine and many other circumstances relating thereto 3 Yet again take notice when I say we give such regard to the testimony of the Church I do not hereby mean the Roman Church as distinct from all others no by no means but the truly Catholick even the whole Christian Church whether of the East or West the North or South For this hath been the constant tradition of the whole Church in all ages ever since the Apostles that these Books were written by men divinely inspired and were given to be the rule of our faith and manners If some doubt was for a while made concerning a Book or two yet when these doubts were removed they were received into the Canon with the rest And this hath been the opinion not only of the Catholick Church but of most Hereticks and Schisinaticks also whose testimony here may be of great force whilst they could not but own the authority of Scripture even though they were confuted by it Yea to this I may add the acknowledgment of Heathens themselves or of Iews who lived in those times that the Books which go under the names of St. Matthew St. Paul c. were indeed written by them Thus we have a general current tradition not only of the Roman but of all other Churches in the world that such and such Books belong to the Canon of Scripture and this is commonly granted by Hereticks and Schismaticks themselves And even Heathens and Infidels who wrote against the Christian Religion have own'd these Books to be written by those persons whose names they bear who were eminent in that age for the propagating of our holy Religion So that we have a much more famous and uncontroulable tradition for it than that the Books which are said to be written by Tully Virgil c. are indeed their works which I think no body makes any doubt of Lastly from what hath been said you may infer that though we give just regard to this current tradition of the Universal Church by which these holy Books are convey'd to us as Canonical Scripture yet it does not in the least follow that we are therefore obliged to embrace all those Doctrines and practices of the Roman Church which she would impose upon us under the venerable name of Traditions of the Catholick Church whilst they are for the most part only the private opinions and usages of their own Church many of them of very late date and expresly contrary to the judgment and practice of the Christian Church in the first and purest ages of it as well as to the holy Scripture it self So that there is no more reason for our embracing these traditions of the Romish Church than there was for our Saviour and his Apostles to receive all the traditions of the Iewish Church by many of which they had made void the Commandments of God After all then Tradition rightly understood makes nothing against but apparently for us For if there be any other Tradition as universal as this of the Books of Holy Scripture our Church readily embraces it as before has been exprest And we will own that the summ of our Faith is brought down by Tradition viz. in the very form of baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost and more largely in the Apostles Creed wherein this form is explain'd We grant also that at first the Christian Faith was thus planted by the Preaching of the Gospel before the Books of the New Testament were written But now this our Faith is most plainly and fully contained in these Sacred Books whereas the additional Doctrines of the Romish Church are no more brought down by Universal Tradition than they are contain'd in the Holy Scripture which we assert to be the only sure and perfect rule of Faith and manners and upon all accounts much
our Church both formerly and very lately Only pray consider what an unreasonable thing it is for any to pretend that they have as good ground to separate from our Church as our Church it self had to separate from Rome Surely there is a very plain and vast difference in the case since as I have often told you the Church of Rome has nothing to do with us in England and she also imposed things unlawful as conditions of Communion Neither of which can be justly pleaded by our Separatists For I hope the authority of our Church and State extends to those of our own Nation and I reckon that our obedience in this case is bound upon us by the express commands of God himself which enjoyns us to be subject to the higher Powers to Kings and all in authority under them to obey them that have the Spiritual rule over us and watch for our souls to have respect to the very custom of the Church wherein we live to consult for the peace of it and to avoid all factions and divisions By such precepts I reckon we are obliged to submit to lawful authority requiring of us nothing but what is lawful And nothing else doth our Church require for there is nothing in her Prayers or Sacraments contrary to the Word of God This holy Word neither directly or by any good consequence forbids forms of Prayer or kneeling at the Communion which is all that the people are concerned in for as to the Cross and Surplice they belong to the Minister Now one would wonder how ever any man should fancy that a Prayer becomes unlawful by my knowing it beforehand and having often used it one would think this should rather recommend it Or why should it seem unlawful to kneel in reverence to God when I receive from him such great blessings as are represented and bestow'd in the Lords-Supper and am praying that I may effectually partake of them Are these things to be compared with what the Church of Rome requires of its members Is a form of Prayer to the true God like worshipping an Image or praying to an Angel or Saint which in other words is but to ask whether saying the Lords-prayer be as much a fault as praying to the Virgin Mary Is our kneeling to God at the Communion like adoring the Host which our Church expresly declared her abhorrence of as gross Idolatry But besides all this it cannot so fitly be said that our Church separated from the Church of Rome to which she ow'd no obedience but rather that she only Reformed her self from such errors and corruptions as the Romish Church was infected with and had spread the infection amongst her neighbours But Papists properly were the Separatists who refused to hold communion with our Church after it was Reformed though this Reformation was wrought in a regular manner and by just authority as I have before shewn And yet after all shall this our Church be stiled Popish when those holy men who were chief Reformers of it and who composed and used those Prayers which are objected against laid down their lives many of them for a testimony against Popery Yea and all other Reformed Churches have profest their great honour for our Church their communion with it and have as occasion has been offered declared against those who separate from it yea the most learned and judicious Nonconformists themselves have heretofore with great zeal preach'd and written against such separation and some of them more lately So that they who separate from us and set up Churches of their own gathering in opposition to those established by Law seem to have espoused a very desperate cause which has neither Scripture Reason nor good authority to defend it Strange that the Church of England which hath generally been accounted the glory and bulwark of the Reformation the envy and vexation of the Papist that yet she her self should be deserted and condemned by those who come out of her own bowels as a Popish Church O that there were many more such Popish Churches in the world Or rather O that all Christian Churches were so thoroughly Reformed from Popery In how happy a state would Christendom then be Wherefore again let me beseech you as you have any regard to the peace and prosperity of Church and State and to the interest of Religion amongst us see that you vehemently abhor all thoughts of Separation utterly reject all temptations to it For Religions sake I say for it 's too too apparent how much this suffers by our divisions as well as the publick weal whilst we are broken into parties and factions it threatens ruin to the Kingdom thus divided against it self yea and to the Kingdom of God also that is amongst us for this consists in righteousness and peace and that joy in the Holy Ghost which flows from charity and concord But where there is strife and envy there will be confusion and disorder and every evil work censures and slanders hatred and malice sedition and rebellion biting and devouring each other till at length without the infinite mercy of God we shall be consumed one of another or by a common enemy Wherefore I will add If you have any zeal against Popery see that you live in strict communion with the Church of England as now by Law established For nothing can be more directly framed in opposition to Popery than the whole constitution of our Church and should this be broken to pieces to what shall we crumble whither shall we run who can tell us nay who cannot tell what in all likelihood will be the event If in a besieged City there be several factions that in fury against each other break down their own walls and throw open their Gates are they not like to fall into the hands of their enemies who are watching for such an advantage whatever abhorrence our Dissenters have for Popery they cannot do a thing more pleasing to the Papist or more serviceable to his cause than to reproach the Church of England as Popish and set up themselves as a party against it By this means they give their assistance for the weakning and destroying of that Church which the Papist on the other hand hath so long been endeavouring to undermine and subvert by whose overthrow though the Papist might be exalted yet themselves most probably and most justly too would be crushed in pieces by its ruins But I fear I have tired you L. So far from it that I am greatly pleased with this your serious and earnest advice which may the better secure me against all temptations to separation if hereafter I should meet with them But I hope through the grace of God I shall always live so mindful of my duty to yield obedience to my Rulers in all things lawful and to do my utmost for preservation of the peace both of Church and State that I shall never be drawn into any separating party or faction which oft occasions