news sent him That if he think meet to reply upon Dally he shall not long want a rejoinder 2. Those that have defended our English Hierarchy have not been more uncivilly dealt with by any than by learned French-men I will not now because indeed I am ashamed tell what language Danaeus gave Saravia because of his Book De diversis Ministrorum gradibus Salmasius imagining himself disparaged by a word never intended as a disparagement could not forbear calling Dr. Hammond Knave Maresius in the first question he handleth against Dr. Prideaux not so bluntly but more virulently tells us That Dr. Hammond had proceeded to such a degree of fury as that he did professedly propugne the cause of the Pope not content to spit in a single Doctors face he thus censures all our Bishops Melius suae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consuluissent Praesules Anglicani si moderatius in ea egissent illam cum reliquis Protestantibus maluissent agnoscere juris ecclesiastici quam mordicus asserere juris Divini Nam ut arcus nimia intensione frangitur sis illi nimium intendentes suam authoritatem dignitatem ea penitus exciderunt instar Cameli in fabula qui quod cornua affectasset etiam auribus multatus fuit page 68. And then page 70 speaking of some mischiefs that had befallen the Bishops he thus expresseth himself Ipsimet Praesules Angli fuissent ea declinaturi si fortunam suam magis reverenter habuissent neque ex parte collimassent ad Papismi restitutionem jure postliminii licet majorem aut saltem meliorem partem corum haec iniquitatis mysteria latuerint Quare nobis eminus hanc catastrophem spectantibus id solum dicendum restat domine justus es justa judicia tua And then page 111 speaking of our Bishops arrogating to themselves temporal jurisdiction he dreads not to let fall these Lines Haec defensio Jurisdictionis temporalis pro Ecclesiae Ministris portio aliqua est illius fermenti Papistici quo Hierarchiae Anglicanae massa paulatim se infici passa fuit dum magis ambit typhum saeculi ut loquar cum patribus Africanis quam humilitatem crucis meditatur potuissent forte Episcopi Anglicani suam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sua rura retinuisse nisi voâ—uissent penitus suum Episcopatum ad modulum Romanum componere 3. But above all let that be considered which is laid down by Peter Moulin in his Letter to the Bishop of Winchester Where to excuse himself for not making the difference betwixt Bishops and Presbyters to be of Divine appointment he pleads that if he had laid the difference on that foundation the French Churches would have silenced him Will the French Churches silence him that should assert the jus Divinum of Episcopacy and yet will Mr. Durell go about to perswade us that they do not condemn our English Hierarchy which asserts it self to be Divine and cares not for being at all if it be not such The Two Archbishops in Dr. Bastwicks Case did protest even in open Court That if they could not prove their Episcopal Jurisdiction and Function which they claimed and exercised over other Ministers and themselves as they were Bishops to be superior in power dignity and degree to other Ministers Jure Divino they would forthwith cast away their Rochets off their backs lay down their Bishopricks at his Majesties feet and not continue one hour longer Bishops If therefore Mr. D. can bring any eminent French Divines that found Episcopacy as distinct from and superior to Presbytery on any Divine Law he will do something to stop the mouths of Nonconformists but such he will never be able to bring unless he first cause the Golden Ball to run before them or fill them with that which blindeth the eyes of the wise Certain I am that Dr. Andrew Rivet in his summa Controver Second Tract 22. Quest thus states the question We dispute not whether Bishops be de facto above Presbyters but whether they be so de jure nor is the question of Humane but Divine Law We deny that Bishops by Divine Law have any pre-eminence above Presbyters This is the more considerable because it is dedicated to four great Protestant Divines Peter Moulin William Rivet John Maximilian Langle Samuel Bochart and because it is again repeated in Rivets Writings against Grotius When some Ministers were by the Assembly employed to get foreign Divines by some Letters to signifie their minds in the controversy of our Episcopacy among others the said Ministers went to this Dr. Rivet then at the Hague desiring him that he would be pleased to signifie his mind He excused himself from Writing because of his relation to but took down one of his Books in which he denied the Divine Right of Episcopacy delaring That was his judgment which he would never deny This I had from the mouth of a very Reverend person still alive who was one employed to discourse him But I have a later testimony when the Scots went to Breda to treat with their King Dr. Rivet put a Preface to Bodius his Comment on the Ephesians commending it to the World and I am sure in that the English Hierarchy is sufficiently beaten down I have said all that for the present I intend to say about the French Churches of other Reformed Churches I may speak more briefly because most of them met together in a Synod at Dort to put an end to the differences about the five points What was done in that Synod Why saith Mr. Mountague in his Appeal page 70 In it and in other Dutch Synods the Discipline of the Church of England is held unlawful At this Mr. Durell had need to bestir himself for either Mr. Mountague or he will be found to be a Liar I shall not determine who is to blame but by reading the Acts of that Synod I do find that Session 144 notice was given That it was the will of the States that the Confession of Faith of the Belgick Churches should be read and examined by the Synod the Exteri being also present The One and thirtieth Article of that Confession when it comes to speak particularly of the Ministers of the Word saith That in what place soever they be they have the same power and authority as being all the Ministers of Christ the only Vniversal Bishop and only Head of the Church These words would not down with our British Divines because directly opposite to government by Archbishops and Bishops in England Whereupon the Lord Bishop of Landaff in his own name and the name of his Brethren made open protestation That whereas in the Confession there was inserted a strange conceit of the Parity of Ministers to be instituted by Christ he declared his own and his brethrens utter dissent in that point Now hence I thus argue either the words in that Article do condemn our Government in England or they do not if they do not why did our
years ago when the separation was made from the Church of Rome and that the Christian people coming out of Babylon did cast off the Popes tyranny the sacred Liturgy was purged of all that Popish superstition and idolatry and all such things as were over-burdensom or which did little or nothing contribute towards the edification of the Church and so were framed and prescribed in several places divers set forms of holy Liturgies by the several Authors of the Reformation that then was and those simple and pure in Germany France England Scotland the Netherlands c. differing as little as possible from the ancient set forms of the Primitive Church which set forms the Reformed have used hitherto with happiness and profit each of them in their several Nations and Districts Till at last of very late there did arise in England a froward scrupulous and over-nice that I say not altogether superstitious generation of men unto whom it hath seemed good for many Reasons but those very light and almost of no moment at all not only to blame but to cashier and to abolish wholly the Liturgy used hitherto in their Church together with the whole Hierarchical Government of their Bishops instead of which Liturgy they have brought in their Directory as they call it Mr. D. tells us pag. 15. That from hence the Reader may observe five things 1. That all reformed Churches have Liturgies but I say That from no words of Capellus any such observation can be collected if Mr. D. think otherwise his Logick is his own let him make use of it 2. That the Liturgy of the Church of England is judged by this great man not only simple and pure and free from all Popish Superstition and Idolatry but also from all such things as were over onerous and troublesom or which did contribute but little to the edification of the Church No such observation can be made from Capellus his words for he only speaks of the Liturgies that were introduced by the first Authors of our Reformation betwixt which and the present Liturgy there may be for ought Mr. Capell saith to the Contrary a vast difference But I believe this great man commended he knew not what and talked at an high rate of confidence concerning Liturgies of the first Reformers which he never saw A Papist will not desire greater advantage against the Praeses in Saumur than to have it granted that in the Liturgies made by the Authors of Reformation in all the places Capell mentioneth nothing was contained onerous or of little edification The Divines of King Henry the 8th were Authors of a Reformation their Liturgy had something in it superstitious idolatrous less profitable So had also the first Liturgy made by our Divines in King Edwards time else we must count it profitable to pray for the dead and to commend our Prayers to be presented by the holy Angels c. And if we speak even of the present Lutherans Liturgies every thing that hath little or nothing of profit in it is not taken away for what is the profit of Latin Cantions or where is the advantage of Exorcisme What good is to be got by the Doctrine of Consubstantiation I might urge other questions which no friend of Capellus would much care for answering 3. If Liturgies ought to recede as little as possible from that of the Primitive Church as he doth intimate undoubtedly the Liturgy of the Church of England is the best and most perfect of them all as coming nearest unto it How the Reader should be able to observe this from any words of Capellus cannot I divine it may be Mr. D. heartily thinks that our Liturgy cometh nearest to the Primitive Liturgies and so is the most perfect because primum in unoquoque genere est mensura reliquorum But Capellus neither did think so nor could think so without egregious contradiction to his own Principle for he had said just before That from the beginning the Formula's were most brief and most simple which without pomp and train and manifold variety consisted of a few Prayers and Lessons out of the Psalms and other Scripture Now certainly if our Liturgy be most simple yet it is not most brief nor doth it consist of but a few Prayers let Mr. D. read all that by the Liturgy is appointed to be read without defalcation and I will undertake he shall be under no temptation to make his Sermons tedious 4. That of all men who call themselves Reformed the Presbyterians are the first that ever left the use of set forms of Prayers Capellus useth not the word Presbyterians and if he had used it it would have been a very blind Mr. D. seems by Presbyterians to mean the major part of those Divines who by vertue of an Ordinance of Parliament did meet to give advice concerning Doctrine Discipline Worship If Capellus say that these were the first that left off the use of set forms of Prayer he was much mistaken set forms of Prayer had been long before laid aside and condemned as unlawful by such as were as little in love with Presbytery as Hierarchy he may know whom I mean if he will enquire who they were that left old England Dr. Heylin hath written the History of Presbyterians under which name he seems to bring all those Protestants who are not Lutherans nor satisfied with the Reformation of the Church of England This History his Son hath dedicated to the Two Houses of Parliament now sitting In the 2d Page of that Book it is said The Zuinglian Reformation was begun in defacing Images decrying the established Fasts and appointed Festivals abolishing set forms of worship denying the old Catholick Doctrine of a Real Presence and consequently all external reverence in the participation of the blessed Sacrament which Luther seriously laboured to preserve in the same estate in which he found them at the present And page 89. speaking of the Palatine Churches he would have us take them for Antilutherans in defacing Images abolishing all distinction of Fasts and Festivals and utterly denying all set forms of publick Worship I know a great deal of this is false maliciously false as is almost every thing in that Book which relates to the foreign Churches and therefore I hope the Bishops or others that have Authority will either call in the Book or some other way discover how much they abhor the design of it in the mean time here is work for Mr. Durell's Pen if he will not be partial and respect persons if he have any zeal left for Zuinglius Calvin Beza let him wipe off the aspersion of Rebellion Schism Aerianism from their faces or else let him know that seeing Dr. Heylins Book came out last his will be thought sufficiently confuted 5. Mr. D. tells us we may observe that the many reasons for which the Presbyterians have rejected the Book of Common Prayer are very light and almost of no moment at all Capell saith not so but
in the most dangerous occurrences boldly and openly to own the name of his Redeemer without ever being ashamed with bearing his reproach As the Barrels go rumbling up and down the Streets so my Lord Mayor owes me a Groat The King the founder of this noble Order gives the Knights created by him a Garter and a Blew Riband as Badges to be known by others but would not be pleased if they should among themselves invent other badges and cognizances of their Order Christ also hath instituted Baptism to distinguish Christians from those who are no Christians How do we know whether it will like him that we should appoint a Cross to distinguish us more especially seeing thereby we shall be distinguished from a great number of our fellow Christians Again the Garter and Blew Riband are things to be worn and that may be seen and occasion spectators to enquire what they mean but so is not the Cross that was made on our foreheads after Baptism the Pagans that any of us have been among could take no notice of it and if our Parents did at any time admonish us of our engagement to crucifie the old man they put us in mind not of being crossed but of being baptized with Water to signifie the not only death but burial of the old man nor have our Kings of England been so fond of all the Rites and Ceremonies used at making of Knights of the Garter but that they have allowed some of them to be omitted where they have conceived they might be less acceptable King James being much pleased with the valour and piety of Maurice Prince of Orange sent him a Garter appointing his Embassador Sir Ralph Winwood to confer the honour on him freely and without any Rites or Laws but what the Prince himself would spontaneously undergo And the Embassador in a French Speech declared that the Rites wonted to be used in creating Knights of the Garter did seem somewhat abhorrent from the Discipline of the Reformed Churches in Holland and not altogether congruous to the polity of the Republick and that therefore the King to avoid offence had appointed it to be conferred without pomp and external magnificence I suppose Mr. D. thinks there is no Rite used in the creation of the Knights of St. George that is contrary to the Discipline of the Dutch Churches but the King was of another mind and chose rather to confer the highest honour without the wonted Ceremonies than not to confer it upon one who was like not to disgrace it And shall Ministers of the Gospel so stifly stand upon Ceremonies as rather not to administer baptism than to administer it without the sign of the Cross I must follow Mr. D. who tells us That several reformed Churches have a Ceremony of which Presbyterians ought to have as bad an opinion as of the Cross in Baptism The Ceremony he meaneth is Trine aspersion page 42. Why ought they to have as bad an opinion of Trine Aspersion as of the Cross in Baptism is there any Law either of God or man that tieth them to have as bad an opinion of the Trine Aspersion as of the Cross or do their Principles lead them to have as bad an opinion of one Ceremony as of the other I verily believe they do not for they say that Christ hath commanded Baptism and hath not strictly determined whether it shall be administred by Aspersion or Immersion nor whether by trine or une aspersion or immersion therefore the Church hath power to chuse the Rite that to her having consulted the general rules of Scripture and practice of the Primitive Churches shall seem best But they also say that God hath no where commanded that a Child shall be crossed or any where appointed his Church to institute any symbolical teaching signs at all if Mr. D. can shew them any command that a Child should be crossed they will not stick to grant that it is in the Churches power to order where the Child shall be crossed and how often and what kind of cross it shall be But it is to be feared he can shew no such command at least none such is shewed by him and yet he saith he is confident that if the trine aspersion were used or if we had retained the trine immersion as at the beginning of King Edward the sixths reign it would be accounted a gross superstition How may a man do to free him from this uncharitable confidence so contrary to Christianity I dare undertake to give it him under the hand and seal of as many as I am acquainted with that if the Church shall think meet to use trine aspersion or trine immersion she shall not be accounted either grosly or at all superstitious provided she declare that she doth not use either rite as necessary If by trine either aspersion or immersion she should prejudice the Babes in their health that would be a sin but not the sin of superstition But how doth Mr. D. prove that the Church hath not retained trine immersion Immersion it is plain she hath enjoyned unless the Sureties certifie that the Child be weak yet never any Minister of the Church in my hearing demanded such Certificate never did any Parents bring their Child in a dress fit for dipping that ever I could observe and yet I believe that I have seen as strong Children Baptized as are in most places of England and she no where saith it shall be dipped but once as neither doth she say that it shall be sprinkled but once so that Bishop Mountague in his Visitation Articles positively asserts That the Child is to be thrice aspersed with water on the face it may be some other Prelate of that age did as positively assert that the Child was to be sprinkled but once for those who have been most zealous to press Conformity have been at Daggers drawing about the meaning of some passages in that Liturgy to which they required subscription In the Hampton Court Conference the Metropolitan told the King That the administration of Baptism by women and lay persons was not allowed in the practice of the Church but enquired of by Bishops in their visitations and censured neither do the words in the Liturgy infer any such meaning But the Bishop of London replied That those learned men who framed the Book of Common-Prayer intended not by ambiguous terms to deceive any but did intend a permission of private persons to baptize in case of necessity and withal declared that the same was agreeable to the practice of the ancient Church urging both a place in the Acts and the authority of Tertullian and St. Ambrose plain in that point What could a man have done that had lived in those days to know the meaning of the Church But however King James being clear in his own judgment that a Minister is of the essence of the right and lawful ministry of the Sacrament carried it so as the words thereafter did run thus
That private Baptism should be performed by the Minister of the Parish or in his absence by any other lawful Minister that can be procured Now any man would think Lay persons are not allowed to Baptize but Dr. Heylin in his introduction to the life of Archbishop Laud page 27. saith That the alteration was greater in sound than sense it being the opinion of many great Clerks That any man in cases of necessity that is extream who can but pronounce the words of Baptism may pass in the account and notion of a lawful Minister A prodigious assertion for a Turk or Jew may pronounce the words of Baptism Is he a lawful Minister of Baptism did ever any that pretended to reverence the authority of the Church thus wrest her words But to return to the rite of Baptism we have got a trick to sprinkle or to let water fall by drops but the Church allows no such rite but most expresly requires pouring even when the Child is at the weakest and seeing in the Baptism of Infants the Administrator is required to dip them if they may well endure it how comes it to pass that in the Baptism of Adult persons who are appointed by fasting and prayers to prepare themselves for the receiving of the Sacrament it is left indifferent to the Ministers either to dip them in the Font or pour water on them though there be a moral certainty that they may endure dipping well enough And what Prayers must these adult persons use to prepare themselves for Baptism must they make them themselves or must they be made by the Bishop or Priest or are there any preparatory Prayers to that purpose made already I wish Mr. D. would answer me these questions Object Well but what say you in the excuse of the Presbyterians who as Dr. Heylin tells us page 293. would not have their Children Baptized by the names of their Ancestors Richard Robert c. but by some name occurring in the Holy Scriptures especially in the Old Testament becouse meerly Hebrew and not prophaned with any mixture of the Greek or Roman Did not Snape and Cartwright in the Book of Discipline agree that the Minister in Baptizing Children should not admit of any such names as had been used in the time of Paganism the names of Idols and the like Did they not also take an bumor of giving such names unto their Children as many of them when they came to age were ashamed of Accepted Deliverance Discipline Praise God Reformation Tribunal Thankful Answ As for the Discipline of Jersy and Guernsey made by Mr. Cartwright and Snape I never saw it but once when I minded not what was in it now I know not where to get it and therefore leave it to Mr. D. to answer for his forefathers and neighbors The Presbyterians have not hired me to be their Advocate I am only for peace and would not have men made worse than they be 'T is doubtless an unjust scrupulosity for any man to question the lawfulness of calling his Child either Robert or Richard or Arthur or VVilliam but if the Question be not what is lawful but what is expedient I say caeteris paribus it is more expedient that Children be named by the names of such persons as were famous in their generations for piety and learning Dr. Rivet tells Baily Tractatu 3. page 33. Quest 8. That they used diligence to bring Parents to give to their Children names borrowed from them whose life was laudable in the Church that they may be stirred up to the imitation of those whose name they bear for such better agree to Christians than either the ambitious or superstitious names of Heathens He also tells us that in his remembrance a vain-glorious fellow whose name was Le Grand would needs name his Child Alexander but the Ministers refused to gratifie his ambition they would not have a mean fellows Child called Alexander the Great but that ever any Presbyterian refused to Baptize a Child because it was to be called Richard may well pass for a Story of Dr. Heylin's which many times are none of the truest As for the reason he gives out of his own head of the Presbyterians chusing Old Testament names because the Old Testament is meerly Hebrew it argueth his great ignorance some of the Presbyterians Children before they come from School know that the Old Testament is not meerly Hebrew Where our English Tongue can afford happy compositions I should think such a composition in a Childs name would not make Baptism contemptible nor the Imposer ridiculous yet I confess I should never advise any man to name his Child Praise God nor The Lord is near for though he may excuse himself by the names of Quod vult Deus A deo-datus usual in St. Austin's time yet it savors of affectation to give such names and it may occasion the taking of the Lords name in vain nor do I find that Presbyterians have delighted themselves in such names Accepted was the name of Dr. Frewen late Archbishop of York was he ever ashamed of it or had he any reason to be ashamed of it or was his Father a Presbyterian Let the Church Books from 1582 be searched and it will be found to the shame of this Historian that Presbyterians have given such names to their Children as other people did and that none of their Children are called by such uncouth names as are mentioned in the Objection My next task is to give in a Catalogue of Mr. D's impertinencies which are indeed many and too many to be insisted on particularly Page 51. He gives us some sayings of some Churches against Sacriledg A thing that hath been done more copiously by Dr. John Hoornbeck in his examination of the Popes Bull sent forth to nullifie the peace of Germany and if Mr. D. please he may read a very smart Discourse against the sin of Sacriledg in Mr. Baxters defence of the VVorcestershire Petition If Ancestors through mistake have given maintenance to Idolatrous uses Magistrates may convert that maintenance to uses truly pious If there be a true superfluity of Church revenues for some one good use Magistrates may out of that superfluity provide for some other good use If the Soveraign power please in cases of true necessity to make use of Church-mens Lands as well as others to maintain the Nation against foreign Invasions c. what is there in such an action blame-worthy These and such like cases excepted I profess I know not the Presbyterian alive or dead that was not against the alienation of Church-Lands Mr. D. tells us he saw some Presbyterian Ministers made nothing of purchasing and detaining Church-Lands and in his Margin nameth Dr. Burges so that it seemeth Dr. Burges is some Presbyterian Ministers But he ought before he so called him to prove that he was so much as one Presbyterian Minister he was not that Dr. Burges of whom we heard before that made the Book against Dr.
British Divines concern themselves to make protestation open protestation against them If they did then all at once down falls the one half of Mr. Durell's Book For then the Holland Churches in their very Confession of Faith condemn the Discipline of the Church of England and if the Holland Churches do so other Churches do so also For by the Divines of no other Church besides the English was any dislike shewn to those words asserting the parity of all Ministers As for the Deputies of the Gallo-Belgick Churches they declared That the French Churches though not there present had before in a National Synod held in the City of Vitriack 1583 declared solemnly their approbation not only of the Doctrine but also of the Discipline of their Holland Brethren No wonder they so readily consented for an Egg is not more like to an Egg than is the Gallican Confession to the Belgick in the matters of Ministers and Discipline both of them are a note above the Ela of many who have the ill hap to be called Presbyterians and lose their livings here in England both say That this is one part of the Polity taught in the word that there should be in the Church of Christ Pastors Elders Deacons To this it is like that Mr. Durell himself hath subscribed for he somewhere tells us That he had for some years a place among the French Protestants and he tells us page 54 That no man is to be ordained a Minister or admitted to any other office in the said hurcâ—es but he must subscribe besides the publick Confession of their Faith the Canons and Constitutions agreed on at Paris commonly known by the name of their Discipline Now if a man should go to him and ask him whether he believes it to be any piece of Christs Polity that there should be in his Church Elders Ruling-Elders distinct from Preaching Elders or Pastors he would either say no or say nothing Why did he with his hand subscribe to that which he did not with his heart believe Perhaps he is a Latitudinarian or hath a Sluce in his Conscience But the simple Nonconformists in England dare not say they assent to all and every thing if there be something unto which they do not unfeignedly assent they say they can promise not publickly to contradict any thing delivered in the Liturgy or Book of Ordination and some who are beneficed and dignified tell them they mean no more by professing assent and consent But Nonconformists cannot bring themselves to imagine that form of words imports no more What a misery it is that so many Families should be ruined for want of a distinguishing faculty Episcopius hath prescribed a Receipt which if they can but take may cure them of their scrupulosity but let them fear lest it purge them of their Conscience also For thus he What if the Magistrate require words and forms of speaking by which an opinion directly contrary to our faith and opinion is wont to be expressed Answ As long as my opinion is not known if those forms be such or conceived in such words which admit a true sense though a false be wont to be expressed by them I allow them for peace sake Respon ad 64. Quest Page 54. My Lord of Landaff's Protestation hath set my Pen a running further and faster than I designed yet I will not give it check until I have also taken notice of something else which his Lordship relates in his Book against Mountague viz. That he told some Divines of the Synod the cause of all their troubles was because they had no Bishops amongst them who by their authority might repress turbulent spirits that broached novelty every man having liberty to speak or write what they ist It seems his Lordship was of opinion thas if Holland had but been blessed with Bishops Arminianism had never come to such an Head in the Low-Countries and so the Papists tell us That if we would but submit our selves to the Bishop of Rome we should then have no differences about the sense of Scripture yet never any Pope of Rome hath set out any infallible Commentary upon the Bible nor hath any Episcopal authority in England proved sufficient to root up Arminianism among us Mr. Mountague when he first sowed the seeds thereof was of Bishop Carleton's own Diocess why did he not prevent his innovations taking root Why could he not keep his own Book against them from being suppressed What was the matter that no Convocation ever decided so important a controversy I find indeed His Majesty Mountague having been much vexed by the Commons about the year 1626 commanding all the Bishops to come before him reprehending such as appeared for not making known to him what was meet to be done about the Five points that made such a noise but Bishop Andrews and Bishop Laud laying their heads together thought it was not safe to adventure the determining of those points to a Convocation till they could get a Convocation more of their own minds wherefore after all expectations nothing came forth but a Proclamation from His Majesty Charging his Divines not to vent their heats by raising any doubts or publishing and maintaining any new inventions or opinions concerning Religion Much like to an Order the Remonstrants by means of Barnevelt procured from the States of Holland on purpose to prevent the calling of a Synod Of late indeed I find Arnold Poelenberg in a Preface to the 2d Volume of Episcopius his Works boasting of the great favour that the Remonstrant opinions and Authors find with our Prelates and with the leading men in both Universities but perhaps he reckons as the Proverb is without his host All experience tells us that Episcopacy without the Assistance of the Civil Magistrate will not put an end to our strifes and contentions and with the assistance of the Civil Magistrate Presbytery may do it But I return to Mr. D. whom I opposed with an Argument drawn from the Synod of Dort I must not forget that he also takes notice of the Synod of Dort and from the civil and respectful language given in it by Bogerman to the Bishop of Landaff concludes That Holland condemns not our Hierarchy And look how many Transmarine Divines he finds dedicating Books to our Bishops or Archbishops and giving them the titles by which they are commonly called among us so many good mediums he conceives he hath found to prove that beyond the seas the office of a Bishop or Archbishop is liked and honoured I only desire him if he can to be as good natured to our English-men and to believe Thomas Cartwright was a Convert because writing to the Archbishop he gives him his Titles and that Mr. Prynne had no design to unbishop Timothy and Titus because he dedicates his book to the right reverend Fathers in God William of Canterbury and Richard of York Primates of all England and Metropolitans And if his heart do not fail him let him
yet many of them never declared dislike of Episcopacy nor opened their mouths against Ceremonies never took the Covenant nor Engagement were presented to vacant Livings by the true and undoubted Patrons By Gods blessing they added to the Church such as should be saved His Majesties return they defired so as none more yet they must not be suffered to continue in an Ecclesiastical Benefice unless they will submit to a thing scarce ever heard of Reordination It may be their mistake that they do not judge Ordination by Presbyters to be a nullity but what is this to Schism Obj. I may expect you will thus accost me If Mr. D. be so easily mastered why do you not pay a debt of love you owe why do you not write in Latin as once Mr. Nichols did in English A Plea for the Innocent Resp Verily for this reason because I love not to have to do with those who when they are put to silence know not how to be ashamed such a one this Monsieur is for not long ago he met with a Noble Gentleman of this Nation who hearing him say That all the Divines beyond seas condemned the English Nonconformists told him plainly That he knew it was not so and that some in France looked on him as an apostate for complying so far as he had done and when he replied These are only some unwise hot-headed men the honourable person rejoined Nay they are worthy and well tempered Ministers Yet did not Mr. D. change the copy of his countenance Is it possible then that I should bring him to repentance In a word if you account Mr. D. an Author any way considerable you have near you our old friend S. E. let him cull out of the Vindiciae what he esteemeth most strong that do you send to me if I do not by the first return of the Carrier send you a satisfactory answer provided it be directed not against persons but the Cause then account me a very vain-glorious animal In the mean time listen not to those who are given to vain jangling and false-witness bearing but put on charity the bond of perfection so shall an abundant entrance be administred unto you into that Kingdom where there are no perverse disputers to that Kingdom that we may be both brought is the sincere prayer of SIR Your humble servant W. B. LOng time after I had written the Appendix against Dr. Heylin I was informed that something else was come abroad in Latin in the which the Nonconformists were concerned I could not think any thing was said in it that had not been said before and therefore I had once some thoughts never so much as to look into it but being told that the Author of it was Mr. Matthew Scrivener reputed at Cambridge while he there resided a close Student and great Scholar I resolved to cast my eye upon some Pages of it that so if it seemed written with any candor and judgement I might either give an answer to it or tell such Nonconforming friends as I was acquainted with that I found it unanswerable But looking into it at the Stationers shop I soon found it to be made up of little besides scurrility and calumny Monsieur Daillees Book of the Right use of the Fathers which I thought no Protestant had looked on without admiration nor Papist without terror this English Presbyter undertakes to answer endeavours first of all to make it appear that the Book deserved not the Elogiums that some of great name and esteem among us had bestowed upon it and that Mr. Daillee was but a Cham taking delight to lay open the nakedness of the Fathers Then proceeds to give him a general and particular answer I confess I was moved not a little to see a writer that had deserved so well of the Reformed Religion so unworthily dealt with by one pretending to be a Protestant For what one thing hath Mr. J. D. said more or less about the Fathers than what had been said many years before by some of our most eminent Divines in England It must be acknowledged that he hath handled the point more copioufly than any who went before him and the heads of his discourse are exemplified with a most admirable collection of particulars but that he hath brought the Fathers any one peg lower than they had been brought by Juel Humfred Whitaker Rainolds Dr. George Abbot Down c. will never be proved Bishop Cosins hath put together all the reasons that were scattered and dispersed in other mens writings to prove the Non-canonicalness of the Apocryphal Books now it would be no wonder if a Protestant in some writing should obiter take notice that the Bishop in some particular had mistook himself but he that should professedly undertake to answer him would scarce be accounted other than a Papist e. c. The Bishop saith p. 18. All the Canonical Books of the Old Testament were originally written in Hebrew except c. but these other books he means those canonized at Trent were all confessedly first written in the Greek tongue c. I may doubt whether all the controverted books were first written in the Greek tongue I may confidently affirm this is not confessed concerning all the controverted books for who knows not that Ecclesiasticus is generally affirmed to be written first in Hebrew to say nothing of other books and yet not be thought spightful nor Popish but if I should publish a whole book against the Bishop labouring to lessen his reputation and esteem to weaken the authorities by him produced would not any man say that either I was a Papist or that I cared not how much I gratified the Papist so I could but show my teeth against Bishop Cosins yet just such a game it is that Mr. Scrivener plays Obj. But if what he hath said against Daillee be truth if his answers to him be rational is it not meet he should be honoured Will it not be for our credit and reputation to let the Papists know that we will not spare our own how renowned soever where they exceed the bounds of modesty and sobriety Ans If any one through a zeal without knowledg against Popery shall say those things against the Fathers that may discourage those who have leasure and money from buying and reading of them or so weaken their authority as to prejudice the interest of Christianity he doth deserve praise and commendation who shall endeavour to bring the Fathers to their due esteem But neither hath Mr. Daillee wronged the Fathers nor Mr. Scrivener righted them but because Mr. Scrivener heard a Presbyterian in a Sermon put off an objection taken from the authority of the Fathers by referring his hearers to Mr. Daillee therefore he resolves to encounter Mr. Daillee And as spleen seems to be the chief thing that put him on this undertaking so in the managing of it he hath discovered more of petulant spleen than of judgment This censure I had some purpose
to make good but that 1. I am assured that Daillee is like in a short time to be vindicated by some of his own 2. I am now also fallen into a place where I can have no books but what my own Library affords and though I have most of the ancient Fathers of some Edition yet in a matter of this nature I shall neither be able to satisfie my self nor others unless I had opportunity to consult all the Editions of them or at least the most renowned For it often happeneth that when a man thinketh he hath the Fathers on his side and hath brought their testimonies too plain to be eluded for his opinion he reapeth no benefit thereby because those who differ from him deny the copies according to which he proceedeth to be such as are to be relied on It was my hap not long since to read Dr. Waltons Prolegomena that I might see what he could say for the comparative novelty of the Hebrew Letters that we at present use among other arguments I found him to make use of the authority of Eusebius his Chronicle ad annum mundi 4740. the words quoted out of him are these Fuit Esdras eruditissimus legis divinae clarus omnium Judaeorum magister qui de captivitate regressi suerunt in Judaeam affirmaturque divinas Scripturas memoriter condidisse ut Samari tanis non miscerentur literas Judaicas commutasse What is his collection hence why this Hic videmus Eusebium non tantum hanc literarum mutationem diserte asserere sed etiam ejus causam adferre ut sc Judaeicum Samaritanis non miscerentur I could see no such disert or manifest assertion of the change of the Letters in this testimony of Eusebius He that only saith affirmatur cannot be concluded so much as to deliver his own opinion Many Historians and Chronographers use affirmatur or some word of like import in such matters as they themselves do not believe and I hope for the credit of Eusebius that he did not think Esdram divinas scripturas memoriter condidisse and if so it is not like that he believed the other part of the affirmation neither But Mr. Baily a learned and industrious Scotch-man in his lately published Historical and Chronological Work lib. 1. p. 197. tells me That he had read over and over Eusebius his Chronicle as well the Greek as the Latin Copy set forth by Scaliger with great care out of the best Manuscripts and could not find one word in them concerning this change of Letters by Esdras and yet if Scaliger had in any Copy of good repute found any thing that might have confirmed this change of Letters he would no doubt have inserted it because he doth with so much passion take upon him to defend that change Now if this be true as I doubt it is that Dr. Walton in his prologue to so renowned a Work as the Polyglotts followed a Translation of Eusebius that was corrupted I may well be affrighted from examining testimonies of Fathers till I be where I may be assured that the testimonies I am to examine are not counterfeited In the mean time I shall lay down some few things concerning the Fathers 1. Many times the usefulness and almost absolute necessity of being acquainted with the Oriental Languages and the Writings of the Fathers is most cried up by those who themselves are but strangers to them It is not many years since a son of the Church at a Lecture in the Countrey Preached up the necessity of the knowledge of the Original Hebrew affirming that they were not worthy the name of Divines who did not well understand it but this pert young man being at Dinner taken to task about his own skill in Hebrew it was found that he could not so much as read Hebrew yet he was out-done by the bold Jesuit who as Melchior Adam relates the story in his life pag. 845. in a Dispute with Graserus about the Hebrew Text of the Bibles made boast of his skill in Hebrew but this Father of the society having an Hebrew Bible without points put into his hands knew not which was the top which was the bottom of the Pages which occasioned Graserus his Scholar to laugh at his daring ignorance so that the Nobleman who brought this Father withdrew and wish'd him so ignorant to be gone They who have read the reasons of Edmund Campian cannot but know how much he boasted of the Fathers as if they had been all his own from first to last even as much as Gregory the 13th on this account he earnestly desired to be admitted to dispute with our Divines Quo quo se moverit adversarius feret incommodum Patres admiserit captus est Excluserit nullus est But when this vain-glorious creature came to be disputed with it was found that he could not understand a Greek Father and that it might well be questioned whether he could so much as read Greek Dr. Fulk plainly tells him in the third days conference that it was not above a dozen years since he heard him at Oxford ask a Stationer for Irenaeus's Epistles In the fourth days conference when Mr. Clark brought Tertullians Book against Hermogenes to prove the Scriptures sufficiency he knew of no such book and yet when he was convinced that there was such a book then he could answer and pretended to know upon what account Tertullian argued against Hermogenes And he pretended in the same days conference that he knew the meaning of St. Basil and yet would not or could not read the place in Greek though it were easie and the sentence short and though he knew not where to find it in the Latin book So it seemed not improbable to some that Campian made not that confident Pamphlet but only turned it into good Latin Thompson also in his Treatise de Amissione Intercisione justificationis gratiae musters up the testimonies of many Fathers but when his book was only manuscript one who knew him asked him this question Vnde tot Patrum testimonia usurparet qui patres vix quidem attigisset I could shew the like ignorance and confidence in another Arminian who troubled Mr. Robert Baily of Scotland with testimonies of Fathers against Predestination but such as were all taken out of Vossius and concluded them with an Item that Beza and Calvin acknowledged the Fathers to be against themselves quoting as Vossius through an oversight had done Beza on Rom. 9.39 when as that Chapter hath but 33 Verses in it And Calvins third book of Institutions 33 Chapter when there be but 25 Chapters in that whole book I could also discover a great many now living who carry it in their Sermons and Discourses as if they followed the ancient Fathers when indeed they follow none but Hugh Groot But would I by all this insinuate that Mr. Scrivener is not well versed in the Fathers for whom he Apologizeth I answer I would insinuate no
more but that it is possible that all his pretended zeal for the Fathers may be without any great knowledge of them What the course of his Studies hath been I know not his friends were wont to think that his genius led him rather to School-men than Fathers if it did so he is not the worse to be liked for of the two a Minister who hath the cure of souls may better want Patristical than Scholastical Theology I suppose it would a little discompose his gravity to be catechized any whit strictly concerning the age stile and design of some of the Fathers whom he undertakes to defend if in this I be mistaken the matter is not great for I design it only to keep our Priests from boasting of a false gift 2. I never yet in all my life met with any person of any perswasion whatsoever that would recede from any opinion he had at first imbibed because one or more Fathers were against him We all first take up our opinions from the Catechisms or Confessions that are authorized in those Churches of which we are members and many that I say not most go all their days by an implicit faith believing as the Church believes and as their Ministers do Preach never taking pains to search whether they agree to the Canon of Faith Popish Divines think that their Church cannot err and so strain all their learning and diligence to defend what she hath determined all that call themselves Protestants say they ought to use their judgement of discretion though they may be bound if in some comparatively less matters they have knowledge different from the Church in which they are Ministers to have it to themselves This is truth but the men who do conscientiously and impartially make use of their judgement of discretion are not very many they are very soon tyed up by subscriptions and account it not for their credit to recede from them if in disputation they be pressed with the authority of the Fathers or ancient Doctors they either bluntly declare that they little regard them or else find out some plausible salvo or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to elude them 1. Some will flatly declare that they do not much matter what mind the Fathers are of The great Patron of Ubiquity Jacobus Andraeas is reported by Scultetus in his Nuncupatory to his Medulla not to value the Fathers at all Athanasius with him was Sathanasius Vigilius Dormilius and all the Patres he would in contempt call Matres that is I suppose weak and silly creatures unfit to be used as guides and directors in matters of Religion The Papists themselves as great a shew as they sometimes make of Fathers do at other times use language not much more civil concerning them Was it not a Pope of Rome that declared his esteem of the learning of Thomas Aquinas to be so great that he doubted not to give unto him the first place after the Canonical Scripture Such a Speech is fathered upon one of the Innocents by Augustin Hunne if I may credit Dr. G. Abbot against Hill Pag. 426. and I suppose I may well credit him because I find as much in Alvarez de Auxiliis lib. 1. pag. 52. Indeed to almost all truly and throughly Popish Writers the Fathers are but Children his Holiness as they call him is all in all with them Suarez in 3. Com. 1. qu. 2. not 2. disp 42. sect 1. saith The definition of the Pope is altogether true and if it should be contrary to the sayings of all Saints it were to be preferred to them Bellar. lib. 4. de Pon. cap. 5. If the Pope should err by commanding vices or prohibiting vertues the Church would be bound to believe vices to be good and vertues bad unless she would sin against her conscience Cornelius Mus in his Comments on the Romans p. 606. e. g. I to confess ingenuously would more believe the Pope alone in those things which concern the mysteries of faith than a thousand Austins Hieroms Gregories c. because the Pope in matters of faith cannot err Much such ranting stuff I could quote did I count it needful but indeed it is not needful for his Holiness takes upon him to have a power to correct Fathers that they may just fit and suit the present state of his Church By the Constitution of Sixtus the Fifth care is taken to set out Fathers free from the corruptions they have contracted by coming through the hands of Hereticks but with this proviso That if any more weighty doubts and difficulties shall happen in the authority of old Books in the correction and emendation of books things being first examined in the Congregation they should be referred to him that in variety of readings he might determine that by a special priviledge granted to his See which was most consonant to orthodox verity and lest we should think that the Pope must determine nothing of his own head but after he hath taken great pains hear Gregory de Valentia Analysis fidei lib. 8. p. 70. Non est ratio ulla firma quamobrem existimare debeamus studii diligentiam Pontifici esse necessariam sive in definiendo studium adhibeat sive non adhibeat infallibiliter certe definiet But this it may be is said but by one and a long time since not so we shall find our Countrey-man Thomas Bacon or Southwell in his Analysis fidei saying as much But do not Calvinists as much set at naught the Fathers when they make not for them Ans So they are charged to do by Papists and the Remonstrants and their adherents Campian saith Causaeus called Dionysius the Areopagite a doting old man but Dr. Humphred denies him to have used any such broad language even of the pretended Dionysius De Patribus p. 520 c. Grotius also gives them such a bob pag. 15. Piet. Illus Ordin Hollandiae but quoteth no Author that gave him any occasion to vent such a reproach 2. Some hating to speak contemptibly of the Fathers will civilly put off their authority either by putting another sense on their words than is commonly given or by blaming the edition or the translation or by opposing one Father to another or the same Father to himself or by saying that he relates the opinion of others So that they do by them just as they do at Oxford by Aristotle his authority must not be denied in disputations under a penalty appointed by the Statutes yet any one in Paervisiis or Augustinensibus holds the opinion that he best liketh how contrary soever it be to Aristotle and if Aristotle be urged against him Loquitur ad modum vulgi disputative non doctrinaliter c. serves well enough to put him by and shift him off The day is yet I suppose to come that ever any Scholar in disputation said I find that Aristotle is against me and therefore I do revoke and recall my opinion promising to be of another mind for the future If
inserting the words in the Congregation King Edwards Article was thus worded It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of publick preaching or ministring the Sacraments in the Congregation before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent which be chosen and called by men who have publick authority given them in the Congregation to call and send Ministers into the Lords Vineyard And the present Article doth not differ unless it be altered since Mr. Rogers his time Out of the last clause of the Article I argue thus Those ought to be judged lawfully called and sent which be chosen and called to the work of the Ministry by men who have publick authority given unto them in the Congregation to call and send Ministers into the Lords Vineyard Some not ordained by Bishops have c. ergo This syllogism might if urged make some work and stir and therefore I do not so much as form it in words at length Still I am unsatisfied why the words in the Congregation are added either in the first or second clause of the Article but at adventure I am glad they are added until it be in some publick Record of our Churches doctrine defined what preaching is for if Reading be Preaching then I should not be over-forward to subscribe that it is not lawful for Laicks to preach privately About Confirmation the Doctor observed as the Relator tells us p. 25 a contradiction betwixt the 25th Article and the words used concerning it in the Collect for Confirmation in the Communion-book and therefore desired that both the contradiction might be considered and the ground of Confirmation examined In this we are told p. 31. was observed a curiosity or malice for the Article insinuates That the making of Confirmation to be a Sacrament is a corrupt imitation of the Apostles but the Communion book aiming at the right use and proper source thereof makes it to be according to the Apostles example and his Majesty comparing both places concluded the objection to be a meer cavil Seeing the Article is by all Ministers to be subscribed I shall be glad if it can be made appear that the meaning is only that the making of Confirmation to be a Sacrament is a corrupt following of the Apostles but that it seems to insinuate something more can hardly be denied by any one that reads the whole syntax But the Bishop in the Collect for Confirmation saith inter alia VVe make our humble supplications unto thee for these thy servants upon whom after the example of thy holy Apostles we lay our hands In which words I would fain know who are included in the we for I take it that the Bishop alone lays on hands and let no Minister desire to join with him in imposition of hands for confirmation if he must be supposed to say that he doth it after the example of the holy Apostles for that ever the Apostles laid hands on any that had been duly baptized in their inâ—ancy to confirm them may be sooner said than firmly proved yet if it can be proved that they did I shall heartily rejoyce for the more apostolical Confirmation proves to be the more easily and chearfully I hope it will be submitted to This I find that in the old Liturgy no one question was to be propounded to the Confirmand in the new there is one to be propounded and it is such a one as may make all ungodly wretches afraid to have it propounded to them sure I am without horrible hypocrisie they cannot answer to it affirmatively But then the new Liturgy hath chopped off two of the Considerations for which in the old Confirmatition was said to be appointed the reason whereof as I cannot certainly tell so I will not uncertainly conjecture though I have heard stories about this affair that startled me Bishop Bancroft saith Confer p. 32. That Confirmation was not so much founded upon the places in the Acts of the Apostles which some of the Fathers had often shewed but upon Heb. 6.2 where it is made a part of the Apostles Catechism In the first days Conference he had said It was set down and named in express words Heb. 6 2. and affirmed it to be an Institution Apostolical p. 11. Here I may I hope enquire what the Bishop meant by saying Confirmation was not so much founded on the places in the Acts which some of the Fathers had often shewed What doth which relate to Have some of the Fathers often shewed that Confirmation is not so much founded upon the places in the Acts of the Apostles If they have down falls presently much of many of our Episcopal brethrens building concerning Episcopacy if they have shewn no such thing I cannot make sense of the Bishop's saying concerning the places in the Acts. As for Heb. 6.2 I am willing to think that by laying on of hands there may be signified Confirmation but I cannot much blame those who differ from me in expounding that place for I find Bishop Vsher referring the laying on of hands to the ordaining of Ministers others refer it to that and sundry other things performed by imposition of hands these would count themselves wronged if one should say That they deny that which is set down and named in express words The Bishop of Durham I must not forget that is related p. 11. to have noted something out of the Gospel of St. Matthew for the imposition of hands upon children He might out of that Gospel have observed many things concerning Christs laying of hands on the children brought to him But the difficulty will be how to make those things pertinent to the laying on of hands upon those who are too big many times to be called little children and are already baptized and desire to be orderly admitted to the Lords Supper and when these are made appear pertinent then it will be worth consideration whether the Bishops should not rather say VVe lay on hands in imitation of Christ than in imitation of the holy Apostles Obj. But all this while the main Controversie about Confirmation is not touched which relates to the Minister of Confirmation which Dr. Reynolds and his party would have had in their own hands whereas none of all the Fathers ever admitted any to confirm but Bishops alone as said the Bishops of London and Winchester p. 34 35. Answ To me this is not the main question let our Bishops censure those who admit to the Sacrament such as can neither say Lords-Prayer Belief Ten Commandments nor answer the questions in the Common Prayer-Book Catechism nor are either confirmed or desirous to be confirmed let also the Bishops themselves ride through their Dioceses and confirm all that are unconfirmed and suspend such from the Sacrament as either are unwilling or unmeet to be confirmed and I perswade my self the Presbyters will not be vexed that so much work is taken off