But all this so as that no Article of the Confession no point of Doctrine no part of Worship is altered And yet the Brethren have raised such a hue and cry as if the later Bishops yea and Princes not excepting Queen Elizabeth had a design to corrupt the Articles to poison the Worship to impose unestablished things upon the conscience and liberty of the Subject and to punish men for disobedience thereunto As if all Religion were pessundated and Omnia in pejus ruere retro subâ—apsa referri All goes to ruine Thames to Tyber flows Th' Assembly to a Convocation grows As if as Pauls by the Brethrens fautors so the whole Church were like to be an Augaean Stable Well spake Tertullian of their fathers Prescript adv Heres non longè ab initio Scripturas obtendunt hac suâ audacia statim quosdam movent in ipso verò congressu firmos quidem fatigant infirmos capiunt medios cum scrupulo dimittunt They pretend Scripture saith he and by this their confidence they presently move some In disputation they trouble those that are strong they take the weak and send away the middle sort with doubting I conclude that notwithstanding the exceptions of the Brethren the Common-prayer-book as well as the Articles Act for uniformity of Com. prayer is established by Act of Parliament And that therefore If any manner of Parson Vicar or other whatsoever Minister shall preach declare or speak any thing in the derogation or depraving of the said faid Book or any thing therein contained or any part thereof and shall be thereof lawfully convicted shall forfeit c. I have done with the second Head of Objections viz. The establishing of the Liturgy and Worship Subsect 3. Discipline established Object I Come to that against the third the Discipline which they say is not established neither The discipline not establish'd They instance in the Episcopal Courts and Canons the first whereof is Jurisdiction Now the Bishops are of age Answ let them speak for themselves One of them Arch-bishop Whitgift against T. Cartwright Bishops Courts Lord Cant. speech at the censure of Dr. Bastwick c. in the Preface and the greatest in his time doth acknowledge That they exercise their jurisdiction in their Courts by vertue of the Laws and Commissions Royal onely The next in the same rank goes farther and upon occasion of such calumny makes it his suit unto the King and I do humbly in the Churches name desire your Majesty that it may be resolved by all the reverend Judges of England and then published by your Majesty that our keeping Courts and issuing Process in our own names and the like exceptions * Namely by T. Cartwright and others formerly taken and now renewed are not against the Laws of this Realm as 't is most certain they are not Thus far he What can indifferent men desire more then an appeal to all the legal Interpreters the Judges of that Law which they are said to violate and to the supreme Judge and spring-head thereof the King This for their Courts The Canons of the Church K. James As for the Canons Because the King-craft of that Prince which did confirm them as himself calls it is herein question'd as if he understood not what did touch his own prerogative and the Laws for he by his Authority under the Broad Seal confirmed those Canons I shall not take upon me the vindicatâ—on of so great a Person seeing he hath a Grandson and Successor our present Soveraign to do it for him at whose feet and the Laws I shall let that lie the rather because that point is like very shortly to be determined by publick authority So much for Discipline Subsect 4. Of Government Episcopal THe last is Government Episcopal namely and here 25 Edw. 3. Ann. 1350. Necessity of Reform p. 40. illis adhaeret aqua Themselves acknowledge and cite the Act saying That whereas the holy Church of England was FOVNDED in the estate of PRELACY within the said Realm of England by the said Grandfather Edw. 1. and his Progenitors and the Earls and other Nobles of his said Realm and their Ancestors to inform them and the people in the Law of God c. This then is granted to be according to the constitutions of this Nation Legal which is moreover known to all by this That all Acts of Parliament since that foundation have given the precedency of Baronship unto the Bishops the form usually being The Kings Majesty with the assent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal Object doth enact c. Nay but though Episcopacy was established by Law 17 Car. cap. 1. Office of Episcopacy ceased yet it is not so now For the Act of 17 Car. 1.11 repeating the clause of the Act of 1 Eliz. 1. which instals the Queen and her Successors with power of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction the onely ground of the Bishops authority and jurisdiction Reasons for necessity of Reform p. 51 52 53. and repealing that clause did besides the taking away their Votes in Parliament take also away their power authority and jurisdiction and so the very office it self of Episcopacy whereupon the Ordinance of Lords and Commons makes all their grants void since 17 Car. 1. because then their Office expired Answ 1 For answer first in general That it was neither in the purpose nor to speak as the thing is in the power with due observance be it uttered of either Parliament or Prince to take away the powers which are essential and unseparable from the Crown and Office of a King which we see of right to have belonged and with praise to have been executed not onely in the Scripture both by Jewish and Heathenish Princes as by Nebuchadnezzar by Cyrus Dan. 3.29 Ezr. 6. Jon. 2. by Darius by the King of Ninive c. as well as by David Jehosophat Hezekiah and Josiah but also in the primitive Church by Constantine and Answ 2 others after him Besides we may not conceive the Parliament intended to countervene an express Article of the Confession of this Church Artic. 37. of the Civil Magistrate which having named the Queens Majesty saith Unto whom the chief government of all estates of this Realm whether they be Ecclesiastical or Civil in all causes doth appertain That prerogative which we see to have been given always to all godly Princes in holy Scripture by God himself And in particular that it was not the Answ 3 purpose of the King or the two Houses as then they were to take away the office and ordinary jurisdiction of Episcopacy appears evidently in that the King he asserts it to be a main cause of the war Ei kâ—â— Basilic Med. 9. and of his own calamity for that he would not consent thereunto How oft saith the King was the business of the Bishops injoying their antient places Bishops Votes in Parliam and undoubted privileges in the
with his Presbytery But the Bishops themselves were judged by the Synod Moreover when the world began to be filled with Churches and the Metropolitanes themselves stood in need of particular Government over themselves for although they grew in number Patriarches yet all were not according to their places either prudent or vigilant for in all orders of men Note those of worth are but few the Fathers did commend the care of whole Provinces together unto certain Bishops of the chief Cities which persons they afterward called Patriarchs Thus far Bucer there And after noting the abuse of these powers and the usurpation of them by the Bishops of Rome whom hee calleth Antichrist which I note to evidence that a man may be full for Episcopacy yea and Archiepiscopacy and yet be as full against Popery which some should mark hee subjoyns what is very considerable in these times viz. At quia omnino necesse est ut singuli Clerici suos habeant proprios Custodes Curatores instaurenda est ut Episcoporum ita et Archidiaconorum aliorumque omnium quibuscunque censeantur nominibus quibus portio aliqua commissa est custodiendi gubernandique Cleri authoritas potestas sed vigilantia animadversio ne quis omnino sit in hoc ordine 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But because saith hee it is altogether necessary that every Minister and Clergy man should have their proper Guardians and Governours both the Authority of Bishops Bishops and of Archdeacons Archdeacons and of all * As Metropolitanes c. other officers by what names soever they be called unto whom any part of the power of guarding and governing the Ministry is committed ought to be restored As also watchfulness and observation least any man whatsoever of this profession be without government and not under rule Thus far hee With whose testimony not onely for his learning and piety both which were eminent in him but also for his reference to this Church as having been one of the reformers of it I close these Allegations and Witnesses Vide Bucer Script Anglican Onely adding this That had the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas observed this counsel of these their own learned men they had not given that advantage to the adversary by making a Schism in Government from the whole Universal Church scandalizing it also Nor had they given occasion to those who out of true or pretended imitation of them have brought Scotland and by it England the glory and refuge of the Reformed Churches and by both Ireland into those horrid confusions which have fallen upon them upon that quarrel as is noted by (a) Icon. Basilic Medit. 17. one who well knew and is not denyed by (b) Ministeâ—s Reasons for Reformation 1660. in the Preface others who had no small activity in blowing those fires some coals whereof they have still retained and by them attempted to kindle new flames as is noted by (c) Kings Declaration Oct. 5. 1660. pag. 7. another Authentique Author And for those our Brethren who had destroyed this Government among us it is to be feared it may be in many of them upon the like ground that the Rabbin saith the Jew the body of them D. Kimchi in Isa 53.9 for so hee expoundeth that Prophecy which the Chaldee Version applies to the Messiah as wee do was slaughtered in the captivity whilst hee explains those word with the rich in his death Hee saith it was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But Which sentence because it is in Rhyme wee may thus render The Wether had no fault but that His fleece was good and hee was fat Mark 12.7 According to this Come let us kill him and the Inheritance shall bee ours As it hath appeared since SECT III. Exceptions against the Government and Discipline THe Brethren the Authors of the former Tract Reasons of the necessity of Reformation p. 40. except also against the Government and Jurisdiction of the Bishops First That it is not by Divine Right in this Nation but that the Church of England is founded in the estate of Prelacy within the Realm of England by Law and authority of Parliament onely Where first we accept of their Concession Prelacy Episcopacy established by Law in England 25. Edw. 3. Anno 1350. then our Church Government by Episcopacy is established by Law in this Nation Now if they have this office by Law they must also have a power for the Execution of it as a Prelacy that is a superiour order of men to govern in Ecclesiastical Affairs which is their jurisdiction and power to exercise Discipline But the Brethren reply Object that this is taken away by the Act of 17th Carol. I. 11. wherein their sitting in Parliament is removed and the power of the King to authorize Commissioners for Causes Ecclesiastical which was granted by an Act 1. Eliz. cap. 1. Reas neces ref Pag. 51. And that there is not any branch or clause in that whole Act that gives more or other jurisdiction to Bishops or any other Ecclesiastical persons whatsoever But Answer unto this is given elsewhere in this Treatise therefore I leave it here and come to that which is more material viz. The Divine Right at least by consequent of that function Which having evidenced so plentifully before out of both Ancient and Modern Testimonies and those of some the greater Lights of the Reformed Churches And replyed to the Objections on the contrary And particularly because the Brethren do not here oppose it I shall need to say the less Onely take a verdict from one whom some of the Brethrens opinion cite as a witness which is St. Cyprian Which will at once carry with it both the Divine Right and also the inseparable adjunct of it though not a sole yet a superiour jurisdiction For that of sole jurisdiction seems a needless quarrel seeing the Bishop doth neither exercise any part of it alone but with others assistance and without which assistance hee cannot orderly administer it And the Church declares her self whilst shee appointeth in the ordering of Priests and consecrating of Bishops one of the greatest Acts pertaining to Government that there shall be other also assistant to the Bishop in Imposition of hands Though in that lesser point of Confirmation of Children and ordering of Deacons it is not so appointed though not excluding it But as I said Cyprian hath these words Neque enim aliunde haereses abortae sunt Cypr. lib. 1. Ep. 3. Vide in eand sentent ips lib. 3. Ep. 1. aut nata sunt Schismata quà m inde quod Sacerdoti Dei non obtemperatur Nec Unus in Ecclesia ad tempus Sacerdos ad tempus Judex vice Christi cogitatur Cui si secundum Magisteria divina obtemperaret fraternitas Universa nemo adversum Sacerdotum Collegium quicquam moveret Let not the Reader nauseate this once or twice
salus in summi Sacerdotii dignitate pendet cui si non exors quaedam ab omnibus eminens detur Potestas Hieron adâ—ers Luciferiaâ— Circ Med. tot in Ecclesiis efficientur Schismata quot Sacerdotes unde venit ut sine Chrismate Episcopi Jussione neque Presbyter neque Diaconus jus habeant baptizandi The safety of the Church saith hee depends upon the dignity of the chief Priesthood so hee calls Episcopacy unto which unless there be granted an exempted and above all eminent power there will bee so many Schisms in the Churches as there are Priests whence it comes to pass that without the Ordination â—hrismate and Authority Jussione of the Bâ—â—hop neither Presbâ—ter nor Deacon hath power to baptize Which last words exclude the notion of this place its being understood of Christs Again Ut Pontifices Christi qui tamen rectam fidem praedicant Ad Theophilum advers Error Jo. Heros Tom. 2. non Dominorum metu sed Patrum honore reveremur non sumus tam instati cordis ut ignoremus quid debeatur Sacerdotibus Christi c. That wee may saith hee those namely which preach the Orthodox Faith prosecute such Bishops not with the fear of Masters but the honour of Fathers For wee are not so swollen with pride that wee understand not what is due to the Priests of God Now in these places Although hee do sometimes imply Episcopacy to be of divine Authority as where he compares it to the office of Aaron Sometimes Apostolical as where hee saith it of their Tradition And sometimes Ecclesiastical but by the Authority of the whole world yet in all hee acknowledgeth such power in the Bishop to do that in the Church that none other may either in the nature of the thing as the extirpation of Schisms which could not be done before or in the right of Authority as Ordination and imposition of hands without which the Presbyters have no power at all not so much as to baptize So that let Episcopacy and Presbytery differ in order or in degree onely so long as some main parts of Jurisdiction can be performed onely by him or not without his pre-eminent Authority why struggle wee with that truth and that sword of the Spirit on which edge soever whereof wee fall wee are certainly wounded The General is but a souldier to use the Brethrens own comparison but may hee not do something that a common souldier yea the whole Council of Commanders cannot do So the Pylot in a ship not onely for his skill but for his place Magistrates may be said all to bee in the same order and to differ in degree one y But what Protestant is so weak of head and wilde of heart as to top Tyburn for denying the Kings Supremacy It being granted that there is the same use of a Bishop in the Church as of an Emperour or Commander in chief in an Army For the Church is an Army with banners as both Hieron Cant. 6.4 and the Brethren yeeld the question is not in what raâ—k or file but in what pâ—ace and power Not what Name but what Authority hee hath But too too much of this Criticism SUBSECT III. Necessit Ref. p. 44. TO that which the Brethren oppose viz. That there are examples of Ordinâ—tion in the New Testament without a Bishop if the assertion were strong yet is the proof weak For the laying on of the hands of Simeon Niger of Lucius of Cyrene and Mana en mentioned upon Paul and Barnabas Act. 13.1 was no Ordination for the one was an Apostle and the other an Evangelist before It was but a special and solemn mission Imposition of hands in which case laying on of hands was usual in that * Eam ceremoniam mutuati fuerant Apostoli ex veteri gentis suae consuetudine Cal. in 2 Tim. 1.6 Heb. 7. Nation even by those who were not properly Ecclesiastical men as Jacob laid his hands upon Ephraim and Manasseth and even among our selves wee often lay our hands on the head of a childe when wee pray God to bless him This imposition of hands therefore doth not argue â—urâ—sdiction in this place but the symbol of Blessing For if it were and that without controversie the less is blessed of the g eater Then must these Brethren be superiours to the Apostle Paul and Barnabas none of them beiâ—g an Apostle themselves which I suppose the Brethren will not say Mat. 18. Our Saviours laying his hands upon the children and blessing them was according to the custome though with more than common efficacy and authority That afterward it was applied to Ordination and by a Metonymy set for Ordination it self 〈…〉 doth not make it proper unto that but makes that the more solemn by this Again it might be said that these named in the Church of Antioch were Prophets as the Text calls them and Teachers but such as were Apostolical men such as Barnabas who afterward visited in his own name being accompanied by John Mark Act. 15. for societies sakes the Churches of Cyprus and 't is like several others also So that such persons are sometime called Apostles Rom. 16.7 Andronicus and Junia were of note among the Apostles Titus and the Brethren sent to Hierusalem are said to be the Apostles so in the original of the Churches And some were tryed 2 Cor. 8.23 which said they were Apostles but were not Rev. 2.2 which could not be understood of the Twelve nor of Paul Thirdly What might be done by extraordinary power or precept of the Holy Ghost doth not prejudice the observation of order where there is no such foundation Numb 23. Else every man that sees such a thing as Phinees did might do present execution Fourthly What might be done by such as were no Bishops where no Bishop was appointed doth not justifie the usurpation of those who contemn such Authority Moses did consecrate before Aaron was instituted but afterward it had been intrusion for him so to do Exod. 24. And the young men did sacrifice before the institution of the Priesthood might they do so also afterward 1 Tim. 4.14 Calvin in loâ— That Timothy was ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery The text saith But Calvin saith that hee rather thinketh it was the office than the Colledge of the Presbyters But howsoever yet this excludes not the Apostles presence who elsewhere saith it was by the Imposition of his hands Yea so 2 Tim. 1.6 that huc magis inclinat conjectura unum tantum fuisse qui manus imponeret That the conjecture leads rather to think that one onely laid on hands though in the name of the rest saith Mr. Calvin Sole Oâ—dinâ—tion Which may obstruct the Brethrens confidence that say there is no example in Scripture of sole Ordination but for this we contend not To say that the Ordination by the Presbyters made him a Preaching
due by nature to him being uttered as Law and in Parliament and cited by those that in the late contest appeared against him are authentick And the the things being so as they came farther into my knowledge and consideration the same sense of the Laws and my allegiance as that before of Religion did concuss and shake me from the one and setle me on the other side And this to the first Motive 2. The Integrity of the persons and their ability To the second the integrity and ability of many of the persons inviting to this contest might be very great yet all of them were not for it as shall be seen anon Besides Answ it is the doctrine of our Church that a Council may Artic. 21. Paphnut Socrates H. lib. 1. cap. 8. 3. Authority of the two Houses and have erred even in things pertaining to God And in the first and great Council of the Primitive Church in a very material point they all erred but one and suffered themselves by him to be corrected To the third the Authority of the two Houses I did not then so throughly consider though I had some doubts as was noted above that they were the Child the King Answ 1 the Parent that they were the Spouse the King the Husband 1. Their Relation that they were the Body the King the Head as we heard above out of Mr. Pym. Now these relations doubtless could not regularly act without much less in opposition to the chief relatum unless in cases of infancy alienation of mind voluntary absence abdication of the Government 2. Their Style and such like of which more anon Besides we heard even now themselves in Parliament style themselves His Majesties most humble and loyal subjects the Lords and Commons in Parliament in that Declaration wherein they did not onely pare the nails but even also pierce the quick 3. Their Title and Power whereon founded and in what consisting Moreover what power and authority they have it must be by Law Power publick and authoritative I suppose consists especially in three points first in making Laws secondly in declaring Law lastly in executing Law Touching the first Although the King being the fountain of Law it must primarily flow from him though into his Courts yet it is condescended unto and a share is granted them in making Laws and protecting Liberties Kings answer to the 19 propâ—sit 1642. pag. 12. what that is his late Majesty you will say hath fully opened In this Kingdom saith he the Laws are joyntly made by a King by a House of Peers and by a House of Commons chosen by the People all having free votes and particular privileges The Government according to those Laws is trusted to the King 1 power of Treaties of war and peace 1. Kings prerogative 2 of making Peers 3 of choosing Officers and Counsellors for State 4 Judges for Law 5 Commanders for Forts and Castles 6 giving Commissions for raising men to make war abroad or to prevent or provide against invasions or insurrections at home 7 benefit of confiscations 8 power of pardoning and some more of the like kind are placed in the King 2. House of Commons Next for the House of Commons he saith Again That the Prince may not make use of this high and perpetual power to the hurt of those for whose good he hath it and make use of the name of publick necessity for the gain of his private favourites and followers to the detriment of his people The House of Commons an excellent conserver of liberty but never intended for any share in government for they do not administer an Oath or the choosing of them that should govern is solely intrusted with the first Propositions concerning the levies of monies which is the sinews as well of peace as of war and the impeachment of those who for their own ends though countenanced by any surreptitiously gotten command of the King have violated that Law which he is bound when he knows it to protect and to the protection of which they were bound to advise him at least not to serve him in the contrary This for the Commons Next for the House of Lords he proceedeth And the Lords 3. House of Lords being trusted with a judicatory power are an excellent skreen and bank between the Prince and People to assist each against any encroachment of the other and by just judgment to preserve that Law which ought to be the rule of every one of the three Whence he adds Since therefore the power legally placed in both Houses is more than sufficient to prevent and restrain the power of tyranny c. Thus far the King A share then they have in their several degrees in the Legislative power though neither supreme nor co-ordinate but subalternate and by descent from the high unto the lower 2. Declaring Law In his speech after his assent to the Petition of Right Kings Answer to the Remonstrance of the 19 of May 1642. pag. 21. Touching the next the power of declaring Law though the King do avow That the power of declaring Law be not in either or both Houses of Parliament without his consent and that the Judges are the interpreters of Law under himself Yet he saith We deny not but that they the Lords and Commons in Parliament may have a power to declare in a particular doubtful case regularly brought before them what Law is but to make a general declaration whereby the known rule of the Law may be crossed or altered they have no power nor can exercise any without bringing the life and liberty of the subject to a lawless and arbitrary subjection Lastly as to the execution of Law or judging by it This is not in any other 3. Execution of Laws but either in the House of Peers in Parliament with the Kings consent who must sign all their capital sentences or in the Judges and other Officers by Commission from the King in whose name they all proceed So then the power of government original and final and of execution of the Laws is in the King so far as is made known by the constant practice of the Nation A power therefore of resistance publickly and by Arms how should they have in opposition to the King who have no power of judging or execution of the Law but by authority from him and his consent formally expressed 4. Their silence in point of particular Law Lastly There was though spoken of and they urged to produce it never any Law shewn nor the Charter or Custom or Act named that did either formally or virtually imply a power of Government and much less of Arms without and in opposition to the King which might settle and satisfie the conscience The Barons Wars For some presidents in tumultuous times of some great men will not be a fit example for a Parliament And some very few sentences of one or two Lawyers
1â— Quis non his pollicitationibus non alliceretur praesertim adolescentis animus cupidus veri Who would not have been inveigled with these promises especially the mind of a young man thirsty for truth As Austin once of himself in refeference unto the Manichees SECT IV. Of the Contents of Independency and in particular of the second and third of them viz. congregation and non subjection The Ingredients of Indep coll g ble out of the Apologetic Narration of the 5. Br. BUt to come neerer and to particulars There are three things in Independency especially First separation viz. from full and constant fellowship and communion with the Parochial Assemblies Secondly Congregation or collecting and constituting themselves into another body Lastly Independency and assuming or usurping of intire Ecclesiastical power into that body so as to be judicially and of right subject unto none other which is the esse and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Independency Of the two latter viz. Congregation and non subjection I shall speak here because I shall have occasion of much more large Discourse about the former namely separation And now for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that they do so congregate that is visible for they do by a certain covenant constitute themselves into a distinct body And that they arrogate an Independency also Apologet. Narrat pag. 23. although in words they reject the name saying That proud and insolent title of Independency was affixed unto us yet in as much as they do in terminis affirm first that any other particular Church hath only power to declare non communion with an offending Church pag. 19. Secondly that a Classis or combination of Churches have no juridical power over any particular one Pag. 15. pag. 17. Thirdly that the Magistrates power is of another nature though of use over the Church doth it not follow They also rightly denying a Catholick visible Church unavoidably that as a Church and as to Ecclesiastical jurisdiction they depend on none and therefore are Independent That therefore such they are as to congregating and Independing is beyond all contradiction Now then for the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and their grounds why they are so to shew the unsufficiency of them or which is all one that they ought not so to do is the next thing to be evidenced And 't is not so hard nor needs so long a proof if we consider their own grounds already yeilded and the unlawfulness of separation which shall the Lord assisting be cleared in the consequent and which themselves also seem to damn For we had likewise the fatal miscarriages and shipwâ—aâ—ks of the separation say they as Land-marks to forewarn us of those rocks and shelves they ran upon Apologetic Narrat pag. 5. And would God it had done it for the Independents have split upon the very same divisions First then for their concessions If it be true that all that conscience of the defilements say they we conceived to cleave to the true worship of God in them pag. 6. Concessions of Independents against Independency or of the unwarranted power in Church Governours exercised therein did never work in us any other thought much less opinion but that multitudes of the Assemblies and Parochial Congregations thereof were the true Churches and body of Christ and the Ministry thereof a true Ministry Then doubtless first their habitual Separation from such though in some acts rarely they did communicate with some of them was ipso facto unlawful and a Schisme evident This the foundation falling their superstructure of congregating into a body and binding themselves to that society which implies a constant renunciation of the former Churches is as drunkenness to thirst and their arrogating of a self-sufficient and independent power is as the fastening their iniquity with cords of vanity So that there seems no more needful for this place then that ex ore tuo serve nequam Matth. 25. out of thy own mouth thou shalt be judged Dost thou confess that notwithstanding any defilements in the worship any usurpation in the Church-Governours any pag. 6. mixture in the Congregations that yet multitudes of them were the true Churches and body of Christ and wilt thou separate thy self constantly and draw others from the true body of Christ Joh. 15. Are not the branches when broken off from the true Vine cut off from the * Quicquid à matrice discesserit seorsim vivere spirari non poterit substantian salutis amittit Cypr. de Simplic prolator p. edit Erasm 1520. 173. juice sap and life of the tree must they not needs wither and in the end be gathered to be burned I end this with that knock of the Hammer of this headless Schism for they are Independent St. Austin Hoc ergo Tichoâ—ius cùm vehementer copioseque dissereret ora contradicentium multis magnis ac manifestis sanctarum scripturarum testimoniis oppilaret non vidit quod consequenter videndum fuit Parmenianus autem ceterique Donatistae viderunt hoc esse consequens maluerunt suscipere obstinatissimum animum adversus apertissimam veritatem quam eâ concessâ superari ab Africanus Ecclesiis Aug. contr Ep. Parm. l. 1. c. 1. Independents This that the Church was not in Africk onely 1. their Inconsiderateness but diffused through the whole world when as Ticonius had earnestly and copiously discoursed and by many weighty and evident arguments of the holy Scriptures stopt the mouthes of the gain-sayers yet did not see that which by consequence did clearly follow 2. Or their Obstinacy On the other side Parmenian and the rest of the Donatists the separation saw the consequence and would rather assume a most stubborn resolution against manifest truth than by yielding to it be overcome of the African I may add in reference to those we speak of the English Churches But secondly toward satisfaction unto others if not to them What kind of Independency is here condemned I must explain my self All Independency of Churches is not denyed For then we must condemn the Church of England and other reformed who do not act as acknowledging any superior body on whom they do depend But according to the confession of this Church every particular or National Church Artic. 34. hath authority to ordain change and abolish Ceremonies or rites of the Church ordain'd onely by mans authority so that all things be done to edifying So Article 57 The Queens Majesty hath the chief power unto whom the chief government of all estates of of this Realm in all causes doth appertain and ought not to be subject to any foreign jurisdiction It speaks of causes Ecclesiastical Vindiciae Catholicae or the Rights of particular Christian Churches asserted Which kind of Independency I have elsewhere sufficiently if I mistake not vindicated But the Independency here opposed is that whereby Christians being before incorporated as members
among the Antients yet without the notion of a proper sacrifice and so may we If any superstition have been joyned to it since Act. 27. yet what hinders but that St. Luke may call the Ship by the usual name of Castor and Pollux although it had it from those Idols Why must we needs always for often the Brethren acknowledge the Liturgy uses the word Minister declare our selves so far distant from those whom in Religion we have left as that we will not use our Mothers tongue because they once have spoken with it unless it be that we have so delivered them unto Sathan that we will alienate their minds from us and from the truth lest at any time they should be converted by it Yet we refuse not the other title that of Minister so there be no design in assuming it as there may be in casting the other wholly off And may not that name as much lower the Officers of God if so be that be not done even thereby already which perhaps discerned hath occasion'd the assumption of a more specious one viz. that of Presbyter as the other had in it peril either of pride or superstition Although to speak as the thing is what man is there now especially Minister for whose direction the Rubricks chiefly are that reading of that word in the Liturgy do so much as dream of an Altar or a Sacrifice but takes it onely as signifying the Officer of holy things in the Church Certain it is pag. 22. Bucer Melancthon Pistorius in the Liturgy composed for Colen do indifferently use this word with Pastor and Minister But enough have we conversed with these Nominals Next for want of fault in the things themselves they labour to find one in their opposition Contradiction in the Rubricks That because one Rubrick appoints the Collect Epistle and Gospel to be read all the week that is appointed for the Sunday and another Rubrick runs thus The Collects Epistles and Gospels to be used at the holy Communion therefore these were not intended to be read but at the Lords Supper and so contrary to the other when there is no Communion that appoints them to be read every day But how doth it follow that because these Collects Epistles Answ Propositio particularis in materia non necessaria aequipollet indefinitae and Gospels are appointed to be read at the Communion that they may not be read at other times yea the former Rubrick appoints them If there be a Communion they are to be read if there be none they may be read That the Communion was antiently administred every day in the Church of England is not proved by the Rubrick after the first Exhortation at the holy Communion for there is none such there nor any Rubrick at all that I find Yea the Rubrick after the Collects at the end of the Communion expresly saith Upon the holy-days if there be no Communion shall be said all that is appointed at the Communion Whence first it appears they did not think any contradiction to be betwixt the two Rubricks above mention'd Secondly that the Communion was not necessary to be administer'd every day which appears further in the next Rubrick which appoints that in Cathedral Churches c. they shall receive the Communion every Sunday at the least as supposing there may be Holy-days in the week wherein there might be no Communion Object p. 23. n. 3. Exception is further taken that the general Confession before the Communion is permitted to be pronounced by the people This say the Brethren gives liberty to Lay or private men to officiate 3. Confession to be pronounced by one of the people at least in part as to this Confession which is a branch of the Office peculiar to the Minister Sometimes the exception is that the Church or Bishops tyrannize over the people deprive them of all priviledge Ecclesiastical Now 't is a quarrel that it yields so much unto them Answ 1 First I might remember them that some of the Antients in certain cases yielded more Aug. contr Parmen l. 2. c. 13. As do also those of the Lutheran Confession Etsi laicus aliquis pereunti dederit Baptism necessitate compulsus quòd quum ipse acciperet dandum esse addidicit nescio an pie quisquam dixerit esse repetendum Nulla enim cogente necessitate si fiat Hieron adv Luciferian Lumbard lib. 4. dist 6. A. dist 5. C. Baptizari Châ—mait Exam. part 2. de Alsolutione alieni muneris usurpatio est c. i. e. Although a Lay-man if he administer Baptism and it be not a case of necessity he usurps another mans office Si autem necessitas urgeat aut nullum aut veniale delictum est The same is the seâ—tence of St. Jerom as also of the School and of the Canon-Law And of the Lutherans also But the Church of England for the abuses of that practise hath removed it Secondly the unlawfulness of administrations Answ 2 in the Church ariseth hence if any man take this honour unto himself and be not called of God by the hand of his Church But as the habitual power is fixed on such persons so may a temporary and transient one on any other by the authority of the Church But Answ 3 thirdly Ecclesiastical power Ecclesiastical power consists especially in dispensing and giving forth the things of God unto the people viz. The Word Sacraments and Administration of the Keys in binding and loosing in Excommunicating and Absolving Prayer is a more general and common act communicable also unto others Fourthly This particular Answ 4 hath a special consideration Inasmuch as it is a more immediate act of the Congregation the people is therefore not unproper to be pronounced by one of them especially being allowed by the Church thereunto as is Absolution the proper act of the Minister which following immediately upon the former seems to point at the peoples Confession before But this the Church hath left Arbitrary Lastly It is not in use and therefore Answ 5 needed no such animosity and opposition The fourth Exception The four h Except That the same Collect should be said on certain Festivals seven daies after with the Word as on this day As if as they jeered above the Minister might not change Queen for King The fifth Exception is against the last Rubrick after the Communion which saith The fifth Exception Rites and Sacram That every Parishioner shall communicate at the least three times in the year of which Easter to be one and shall also receive the Sacraments and other Rites c. Thus they recite the Rubrick And having made it for their turn they discharge three bruta fulmina against it First That it is contradictory to the Exhortation before the Communion who doth bid all present in the name of God to come c. Then the former seems to dispence with Gods own invitation Next That Easter should be one
repetition of this Testimony Non Crambe bis cocta haec bis repetita placebunt In Musick streins often repeatâ—d are In mental harmony why is' t a jarr nemo post divinum judicium post populi suffragium post Coepiscoporum consensum judicem se non jam Episcopi sed Dei faceret Nemo dissidio unitatis Christi Ecclesiam scinderet c. For from no other root saith hee either Heresies spring or Schisms do arise than from this That Obedience is not given to the Priest or Minister of God so hee calls the Bishop by way of eminency as the words following declare And that it is not considered that there is for the time but One Priest and but ONE JUDGE in Christs stead To whom if the WHOLE Church according as the Scripture hath appointed were obedient no man would move any thing against the Colledge of Ministers no man after Gods sentence the peoples suffrage election or approbation after the consent of the other Bishops would make himself Judge not now of the Bishop but of God himself In which Testimony onely by the way noting that populi suffragium must be according to Calvins observation not properly an Election though in a large sense it may be called so according to that of the former Author elsewhere Quum ipsa plebs maxime habeat potestatem L. 1. Ep. 4. vel eligendi dignos Sacerdotes vel indignos recusandi That the people have chief right either to chuse good Ministers or of refusing those that are bad But either a signification of their desire whom they would have or else an approbation of the Election made by the Bishops and confirmed by the Magistrate So Calvin Instit lib. 4. cap. 4. s 12. Cap. 13. Laodic Concil Est quidem illud fateor optimâ ratione sancitum in Laodicensi concilio ne turbis electio permitteretur primum soli Clerici eligebant offerebant Magistratui tum ad multitudinem res deferebatur Aut si à multitudine incipiebatur tantum id fiebat ut sciretur quem potissimum expeteret It is saith hee I confess excellently decreed in the Councel of Laodicea that the election of Ministers should not be permitted to the people But first the Clergy did chuse then they presented him to the Magistrate and lastly hee was propounded to the people c. But this occasionally onely to prevent mistaking As to the former Testimony of Cyprian out of it wee learne First That the eminency of one Minister above the rest in Government is of Divine Institution Post Judicum divinum Secondly That hee being chosen hath a sole superiour power of judgement in the Church to whom all must be obedient I say not hee hath a sole power absolutely but a sole superiour power over all within his Diocess and Jurisdiction by this Testimony whatsoever is to be said of the thing it self according to the Word of God And indeed the liberty or advantage that Civil Laws give of exercising Episcopal Authority doth not imply they have no other The Church hath taught us they may concur Will you such as be unquiet disobedient and criminous within your Diocess Book of Consecrat Q. At the consecrat of a Bishop correct and punish according to such Authority as yee have by Gods Word and as to you shall be committed by the Ordinance of this Realm 〈…〉 Ecclesiastical whether in order or degree which at present wee dispute not be according to Scripture as before hath been shewn Government and Jurisdiction cannot bee separated from it although the Laws should not confer any yea forbid it seeing the Church cannot subsist without Government which cannot be exercised regularly without Bishops Cypr. lib. 8. Ep. 3 The same Cyprian and in the same Epistle now cited shewing it to be the design of Satan in setting men to oppose godly Bishops that so hee may destroy Discipline and by that the Church it self saith Apparet quis impugnet non scilicet Christus qui Sacerdotes aut constituit aut protegit sed ille qui Christi adversarius Ecclesiae ejus inimicus Ob hoc Ecclesiae praepositum sua infestatione persequitur ut Gubernatore sublato atrocius atque violentius circa Ecclesiae naufragia grassetur Who it is and upon what design that opposeth Episcopacy It appears saith hee who opposeth the Bishop to be sure not Christ who either appointeth or protecteth Bishops But hee who is Christs adversary and his Churches enemy for this end persecutes and infests the Church Ruler that the Pylot being taken off hee might with greater cruelty and violence make spoil and shipwrack of the Church Thus far Cyprian And this here for the Right of this office in humane and divine SUBSECT II. THe next is whether it bee a distinct Order from or a superiour Degree above the Presbytery or ordinary Ministry Whether Episcopacy be a different order Necess Ref. p. 42. Touching the judgement of the Church of England in which point there need not be any great controversie if men that have little else to defend themselves were not too captious of words Of which sort of controversies the Apostle giveth warning viz. 2 Tim. 2.14 That wee should not strive about words without profit Answ 1 The Preface to the Book of Ordination of Ministers saith Preface to the Book of Ordination It is evident to all men diligently reading holy Scripture and Ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been THESE ORDERS of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons which offices were evermore had in such reverent estimation that no man by his own private authority might presume to execute any of them Where it is plain that saying these Orders and then naming three it is as much as if it had said These three Orders which is the Exception the Brethren have against it And because it calleth them presently Offices But that altereth not what it said before for every order is an office and every office is in some order Again they evidently prevaricate for whereas they say that the passage Almighty God which hast appointed divers orders of Ministers in the Church or in thy Church is in one prayer at the consecration namely of a Bishop It must be noted that it is three times in the book viz. At the ordering of a Deacen of a Priest and consecrating of a Bishop Now applying this word in prayer divers orders of Ministers to every one of those offices Can any man in his conscience doubt but that they took them for several orders who compiled the book and which being confirmed by Parliament and Convocation 8. Eliz. cap. 1. is the judgement of the Church of England in this point although it doth not every time it mentions the Bishop name order but sometime Office and Ministry That the book calls the inauguration of a Bishop Consecration of Bishops not an ordering but a Consecration doth not overthrow what
follows that no Minister can be made but hee must have the Authority of the Holy Ghost Secondly It is necessary also that hee receive the Holy Ghost it self in the gifts and abilities of it for the discharge of this calling For no man can say that is effectually teach that Jesus is the Lord but by the Holy Ghost saith the Apostle 1 Cor. 12. And every spirit that confesseth that is soundly preacheth that Jesus is the Christ is of God 1 John 4.1 2. John 16. For it is the Holy Ghost onely that leadeth into all Truth concerning Christ Thirdly The conveyance of the Holy Ghost in all publick Ordinances is by some Ministerial hand as in Baptism and the Lords Supper wherein at least unto the faithful the Holy Ghost is conveyed So as in respect of the thing it self the Holy Ghost is necessary to bee conveyed to every Minister that is to bee ordained Sense of the words 2. Next for the meaning of the phrase First wee must observe That the word Holy Ghost here may be either taken for his person and gifts or for his Authority or both by a Metonymy It is taken for his gifts where it is said John 7. that the Holy Ghost was not yet because Christ was not yet glorified It is taken for his Authority when the Apostle saith that the Holy Ghost had made the Ministers of Ephesus the overseers of the flock Act. 20. Secondly wee may expound the words by way of declaration and solemn pronouncing as well as imparative or communicative bidding And the other words may bee so expounded also according as in absolution it is in one place in the Common Prayer-Book pronounced authoritatively yet it is expounded to bee onely a declaring and pronouncing Now to apply the former The word Holy Ghost here seems to bee taken for the Authority especially of the Holy Ghost to the exercise of the Ministerial function As if it were said Take thou the Authority of the Holy Ghost which hee hath appointed his Church to communicate and dispense to persons worthy for the Ministry of the Word in binding and loosing and of the Sacraments 3. To their exceptions First To the exception general it self that this form hath no warrant No warrant It is answered Answ That in other things they urge the Letter of the Scripture And surely where there is no incongruity in the thing nor impediment from some other cause from using the very words of Institution there cannot bee desired a better warrant Now that there is no such incongruity nor impediment shall bee shewn in answering unto the Reasons of the former exception whereof the first is that Proof none but God himself hath power to give the Holy Ghost But it hindreth not but that what none but a superiour Authority can have power to give originally may yet bee given ministerially Answ and by delegation from that superiour power Neither Moses had power to consecrate Aaron nor Samuel to confer the Kingdome unto David nor the Apostles themselves to give the Holy Ghost but by delegation and commission Which power if as to that right of the conferring the power and authority of the Holy Ghost to the ordaining of a Minister the Church ministerially hath not for without that power it cannot bee done then must every Minister receive his authority and outward call immediately from Heaven Neither is repugnant hereunto Lib. 1. dist 14. cap. 1. Hic quaeritur Aug. de Trin. l. 15. c. 26. either that of the Master of the sentences nor of Austin himself whence hee hath it viz. Neque enim aliquis discipulorum ejus dedit spiritum sanctum Orabant quippe ut veniret in eos quibus manum imponebant non eum ipsi dabant Quem morem in suis propositis etiam nunc servat Ecclesia Object For neither saith hee any of the Disc ples gave the Holy Ghost but they prayed that hee might come on those upon whom they laid their hands but gave him not themselves which custome the Church even now retaineth in her Bishops For our Church doth pray in laying on of hands and with and under the words Answ 1 of Institution asketh also before and after What form of words the Apostles used in laying on of hands and conferring the Holy Ghost is not expressed but unlikely it is that they used none Now those they used whether they were those used by our Saviour or others in form of praying cannot be determined nor therefore their example urged in that which our Church pretendeth not unto But the former will bee more evident in other ministrations also In Absolution the form is in the Liturgy in the visitation of the sick Imperative and authoritative as I may so speak and in a good sense so it is by his authority committed unto mee I absolve thee from all thy sin c. yet in the general absolution after the general confession at morning-prayer by which the former must bee expounded it is expressed to bee but declaratory by way of solemn and authoritative pronouncing and with the concurrence of prayer for efficacy of such declaration Almighty God who hast given power and commandment to declare and pronounce to his people being penitent the absolution and remission of their sins c. In Baptism the Holy Ghost and remission of sins is given and that by the ministration and the words spoken by the Minister So also in the Lords Supper the body and blood of Christ sacramentally is conferred by the words and action of the Minister none of which is in the power of any to bestow but God onely Shall wee therefore except against the fruits of those Ordinances or against the Minister for pronouncing such words and doing such actions Again as in the Absolution there goeth with the Pronounciation prayer also and so likewise in Baptism and the Lords Supper what hindereth but that the words may be taken under a precatory sense also and as including prayer which more expresly goeth both before and after The words therefore take thou the Holy Ghost do not argue an original or an inherent power but Ministerial onely and so as not excluding a precatory vertue also This to the first Reason The second is because they were the words of Christ himself to his Apostles what Proof 2 then were all Christs words to his Apostles peculiar to them Answ It was to his Apostles that hee gave the command of baptizing and teaching and of giving his last Supper Have none therefore power since to administer these Ordinances Again if no Minister can be made but by the Holy Ghost and his Authority and this Authority were proper onely to the Apostles because the words were spoken to them then is the Church deprived of the Holy Ghost ever since the Apostles nor hath power to ordain a Ministry The third reason is taken from the parallel of other administrations Proof wherein the words of institution in
1538. p. 283. The summe is he distinguisheth betwixt miscarriage by errour ignorance and negligence which he acknowledgeth and the Lords correction of him for it and wilful guilt and intentional mischief which he denyeth to have been in that affair but retracting and lamenting we have him in the former Adde to these Mr. Ridley Bishop Bishop Ridley of Lond and one of the Learnedest of the Martyrs in Q. Marys time Whom his Answer to the Q. Commissioners April 2. 1554. hath these words His notable expression and protestation of Liberty to Retract These things I do rather recite at this present because it may happen to some of you hereafter as in times past it hath done unto me God may open it unto you in time to come Therefore I b] Fox Act and Mon. in Q. Mary protest here publickly that it may be lawful for me to adde or diminish whatsoever shall seem hereafter more convenient and meet for the purpose through more sound judgement better deliberation and more exact tryal of every particular thing Nay even Bellarmine himself that wrote against all Errants of his time whether real or imagined as if himself had been without errour and whom our c] Contro 1. Epist Dedic ad D. Cecil Whitaker styleth Virum sanè doctum ingenio foelicem judicio subtili lectione multiplici praeditum and to whom being a Cardinal and a Pillar it might be scandalous to alter any thing Yet he hath also the Recognition of his Works wherein he retracts several things he had formerly asserted Bellarmine and this formally Not to insist on his retractations real and in effect who whilest he writes for Recognit oper prefix Editionibus recent Cynthius aurem vellit admonuit undermines the main foundations of his own cause as might be shewn Yea and the five Independent Br. themselves that I may have them the more exorable Judges do profess and say In a jealousie of our selves Independents Apologetic Narrat p 11. we kept this reserve to alter and retract though not lightly whatever should be discovered to be taken up out of a misunderstanding of the rule c. Now Coronidis loco to set a Crown with the conclusion upon the ingenuity of the former Company His late Majesty We have His Royal Majesty our late Soveraign condescending unto Retractations yea even once and again We must saith he without endeavouring to excuse that Kings Answ to the Remonstr of May 19. 42. p. 10. which in truth was an errour Our going to the House of Commons Again elsewhere having spoken of his consenting to the deposition of Episcopal Government in Scotland he saith If any shall impute My yielding to them as My failing and sin I can easily acknowledge it c. Icon Basilic Medit. 17. p. 156. Seeing therefore imperfection and obnoxiousness unto errour is not only as the shadow to this body of death always following of it but also that the best and wisest of men in all Ages have judged it their parts to retract and denie their former judgements if found erroneous I shall conclude this first point touching the right causes and instances of Retractations with that of the great example in this kind so often quoted n] Aug. de Dono perseverantiae cap. 21. Bonae quippe spei est homo si eum sic proficientem dies ultimus vitae hujus invenerit ut adjiciantur ei quae proficienti defuerunt perficiendus quà m puniendus potiùs judicetur There is good hope of that man saith he whom the last day of his life shall find going forward in the pursuit of truth that there may be added to the thriving man what he yet wants and he may be counted worthy rather to be perfected then punished CHAP. II. How farre only the Authour declined how he behaved himself therein and what awakened him unto recovery Sect. I. How far the Authour lapsed in the Church Affairs IT follows next to represent in short how far only I proceeded in my lapse what was my carriage therein and by what means it pleased God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to stir up the sparks of light for my arising Of the first 1 Sam. 2. Psal 37. There is a promise that God will keep the feet of his Saints so that though they fall they shall not be cast off for the Lord will put under his hand And that they shall hear a voice behind them Isa 30. saying this is the way walk in it when they turn to the right hand and when they turn to the left according to that of the wise man Eccles 5. ult He that feareth God namely in sincerity shall come out of them all 1 Joh. 3. chap. 5. For he that is born of God cannot sin to wit that sin unto death and of final Apostacy The reason is first his seed remaineth in him Job 19. even the root of the matter as Job speaks And then again 1 Pet. 1. he is kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation as S. Peter uttereth it All which like as we have heard Psal 48. so have we seen in the City of the Lord of Hosts in the City of our God the Church that God will establish it for ever Matth. 16. so that the gates of Hell shall not for ever prevail against it For at my receding from the Church the many Conflicts of my spirit brought forth this protestation at my very first * At Colch Apr. 15. 1644. Artic. 3. admission into that Company The Authors protestation atentring into Indepency Which he noteth not as owning every expression in it but as to evidence his opposition even then to Separation viz. Causes and Motives of my present motion First Of coming off from the way I have been in 1. Negatively what they are not Not because the Congregations of England are all false Churches and the Ministers false ones and the Ordinances none For I conceive first that where any number of visible Christians have chosen expresly or by consent a fit Pastor and joyn in spirit with him and one with another in the things of God according to his Word though there be no express Covenant nor Separation from the multitude for want of light in these things they become a true Church they having thereby all the essential◠of one Secondly where God ordinarily and plentifully works to edification there must be something of a Church for he is not ordinarily present to edification but in his house 2. Positively what they were namely an apprehension of more purity in Assemblies and Ordinances Secondly Under what condition I desire to be taken on scil of a profession 1. Of my acknowledgement of the Authority of Magistracy over all persons in Civil Causes 2. In Church matters for the point of publick exercise so as not to raise tumults and by force to obtain the exercise of Religion 3. Of my
resentment of the premises and which hath wrought this repentance may never be repented of nor that there ever be cause that I retract these retractations Amen Yea there may be those who having lost me may by some artifice effect that I shall lose those whom they think I now intend to win that so being by both deserted I might be ruined But God who sees their plots and my plainness in this affair will I hope disappoint them But if he shall for his glory and my further mortification permit them I hope my suffering shall be like that of Mephibosheth for even David may be abused by a treacherous Ziba for my Loyalty 2 Sam. 19.27 1 King 2. not like that of Shimei for my Apostacy And that I shall never prove either * Qui Sacr. libros tradebancâ— ethnicis Traditor or Proditor false to this Church or faithless to my Country Quia qui in pace militibus suis futuram praenunciat pugnâ—m dabit militantibus in congressione victâ—riam Because he that hath warned his Souldiers of the approaching Battel Cypr. Epist 2. l. 1. will also in the conflict assist to victory And I may give them this taste of my spirit and his grace That whereas upon his Majesties return by prayer I was often importuned to ask and assured to have I wilingâ—y let slip the season that I might evidence I did not follow Christ for the Lâ—eaves nor the King for a Living As also that I might by the publishing this being not onely my retractation but confession also of my faith clearly be known and so no error personae or ignorantia facti be complained of afterward Besides Providence hath so disposed in outward matters that I may in the state I am perhaps not uncomfortably subsist without much addition Sect. 6. Proof that the Author went no further Now for close and confirmation that my lapse was not so exorbitant through the mercy of God as to my principles in either of the former causes I shall subjoyn a passage touching each out of those my actings which were most eminent in these particulars and first for the War Serm. on Judg 5.23 Jun 19 1642. at Trin. Ch. in Camb. Prov. 19. In that Discourse wherein I gave Answer in the University unto Dr. Feams Book at its first appearance there are these words Object 3. But the King forbids this help viz. by the War and commands the contrary Now where the word of a King is there is power and his wrath is as the roaring of a Lion Eccles 8. Ibid. And I counsel thee obey the Kings commandment and that because of the Oath of God vers 4. Rom. 13. And who shall say to the King What dost thou And He that resists resists the Ordinance of God c. Answ We are not to take notice of the Kings commands as they look upon the publick but by his Laws which are his deliberate will and by those whom the Law hath appointed interpreters of it And then indeed when a King comes in his Laws he is more than a man for he is the Minister of God and whosoever resists resists the Ordinance of God and he that resists shall receive to himself damnation Object 4. But the King saith He proceeded according to Law who shall judge Resp The same body rightly gathered that made the Law i. e. the Common-wealth can best judge of its own meaning And seeing Law is not declared by the King but in his Courts and the higher Court being that of Parliament we are to rest in their declaration unless we see manifestly to the contrary By which passage it doth appear that there was this especially that did misguide me viz. The misapplication of some true principles First That the Law of Nature allowing self-preservation to a Nation as well as a Man it might be endeavoured in case of necessity as to particular Laws illegally Which is untrue Rom. 3. for We must not do evil that good may come thereof Secondly That the King being always to be obey'd in his Laws declared in his Courts and the Parliament being the highest Court therefore what the two H. H. did declare to be Law was so wherein there was a doubble mistake 1. That the two Houses were the Parliament in exclusion of and opposition to the King that I say not a lesser part for number of Lords and Commons though enough in formality of Law 2. That it was Law which they declared to be so See the Declaration of 2 H. H. Novemb 2. 1642. in answer to that of the Kings May 26. pag. 22. though no Law was shewed but a sentence out of Bracton who wrote in Hen. 3. in the time of the Barons Wars and who in another place hath the clean contrary as shall appear and it may be a sentence or two out of some other private Lawyer against the constant sentence of Lawyers and the known practice of the Law and Parliaments This for the War that I might shew that Law the Authority of Parliament mistaken and no private headiness did transport me Next for Independency In the Tract I published on that Argument Vindiciae Catholicae cap. 1. p. 3. there is this passage Now the scope of this Treatise is not to unfasten the ground of all Church-combination and to lay a foundation for absolute Independency The conveniency and sometime the necessity of Classes and Synods for direction and determination and that by Divine Authority is freely acknowledged though no with power properly Juridical yea I add that Episcopacy it self was and might be maintained as also Presbytery if confined to a particular Church and not subjected to Superior Ecclesiastical power which was the most antient way of it might both consist together in a particular one Again The violation of Parochial limits oft-times manifestly prejudicial to edification yet am not I for the drawing of any godly able pag. 69. and faithful Ministers people from him who is for the substance of Reformation though with many defects in lesser things Again But this is not their my own and some others opinion pag. 79. that it is essentially requisite to the being of a visible Church that it meet in one place they hold it de benè esse for conveniency not absolutely necessary From which passages it is evident first That not such an Independency as some practised was pleaded for but such as might agree not with Presbytery onely but with Episcopacy and not onely with a Parochial Church or the Church of a City but such as might agree with a Nation also As indeed the Church of England and other National Churches are independent as to right of Jurisdiction from all other Churches There being no such thing in re as an universal Visible governing Church as I have I think evinced in the Treatise above mentioned but every expression in that passage I own not But to conclude I repeat that of Bucer
Peter saith he was more savingly displeased with himself when he wept then when he was pleasing to himself and presumed R. Hook Sermon of Pride near the end c. And if the blessed Apostle did need the corrosive of sharp and bitter strokes lest his heart should swell with too great abundance of heavenly Revelations 2 Cor. 12. Surely upon us whatsoever God in this world doth or shall inflict it cannot seem more than our pride doth exact not onely by way of revenge but of remedy Saith a learned and good man Hence that of the Father noted above namely That it is good for high and conceited men to fall into some manifest sin Aug. de Civit. l. 14. cap. 13. ut tu eis placeas quaerentibus nomen tuum qui sibi placuerant quaerendo suum That thou maist please them when they seek thy Name who pleased themselves in seeking of their own 3. Neglect of Reading 3. Hence the neglect of using such helps and following such directions as in the improvement whereof I might have been preserved Negligence in study 1. In general and of the Ministry of the Word must needs have had like some ominous Constellation a sinister influence here The Ministery is onus etiam Angelicis humeris formidandum 2 Cor. 2 16. A burden that the shoulder of an Angel may shake under Of which the Apostle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ' For these things sufficient what man is there for so the expression may be rendred Hence that of the same Author to all of this profession 1 Tim. 4.13 c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which I mention in this form because they were so commended unto me in my younger years by a learned Mr. Sam. ward sometime Preacher of Ipswich religious and elegant man In an Inscription written with his own hand on his works works indeed being elaborate pieces with the donation whereof he was pleased to befriend me This for studies in the general To come unto particulars And first the study of the Scriptures of which note what one spake Homil. of the perâ—l of Idolatry part 2. that was the best learned in them of all antient Doctors saith the Church of England as was noted above Tanta est Christianorum profundit as literarum ut si eas solas ab ineunte pueritiâ uâ—que ad decrepitam senectutem maximo otio summo studio meliore ingenio conarer addiscere in eis quotidie proficerem Aug. epist 3. Non quod ea quae necessaria sunt saluti tanta in eis perveniatur difficultate sed cum quisque ibi fidem tenuerit sine quâ piè recteque non vivitur tam multa tamque multiplicibus mysteriorum umbraculis opaca intelligenda proficientibus restat tantaque non solum in verbis quibus ista dicta sunt verum etiam in rebus quae intelligendae sunt latet altitudo sapientiae ut annosissimis acutissimis Ecclus 18.6 flagrantissimis cupiditate discendi hoc contingat quod eadem Scriptura quodam loco habet cum consummaverit homo tunc incipit That is So great is the depth of the Scripture and Christian learning that I might every day profit and gain more in them though I should study them onely and that from childhood even unto decrepit age with full leisure earnest intention and a better understanding than I have Not that unto those things which are necessary unto salvation Austin's Caution asscent is so difficult But thus that after a man hath learned as much thence as may enable him to believe without which we cannot live neither godly nor uprightly there remains so many things so darkly involved in so many veils and mysteries that are further to be understood by him that would go forward And there lies hid so great a heighth of wisdom not onely in the words wherein these things are uttered but also in the things that are to be known That this will befall the most antient the most acute and the most studious Reader which the same Scripture saith in another place viz. When a man hath ended Austin explained he must then begin Where by the way let it not offend the Reader that St. Austin calls the Book of Ecclesiasticus Scripture Whereas according to the Doctrine of the Church of England it is none of it but Apocrypha onely For the Canon of Scripture was taken by him strictly and largely as the * Artic 6. of the sufficiency the Scriptures learned note When strictly he acknowledgeth that there is no certain Authority but in the Books received in the Hebrew Canon whereof this is none * Whitak Controv 1. Q. 1. cap. 4. cap. 14. Adversus contradicentes non tanta firmitate proferuntur * D. Civit. lib. 17. cap. 20. quae scripta non sunt in Canone Judaeorum In tribus vero illis libris Proverbiis Ecclesiaste Cantico Canticorum quos Salomonis esse constat c. Against Opponents saith he we cannot with so good security produce any thing that is not written in the Hebrew Canon But in those three Books which it is certain are Solomon's that is Proverbs Ecclesiastes and the Song of Solomon c. But this occasionally And so much for the study of the Scriptures Next Touching the perusing of other good Authors 2. Other good Authors also that the neglect thereof doth object unto error and seducement I remember that when Mr. William Sedgwick Will. Sedgwick had fallen into that delirium touching the end of the world to be terminated by such a day After the time was some while passed certain Ministers Independent meeting on other occasion and among them my self discourse falling in concerning him Mr. Bridge as I remember conceiving him to be obsessed a degree below possession by a spirit communicated unto him by the * A woman near Ely that put this conceit into his head woman that possessed him with that delusion and his understanding thereby bowed down as it were a thing to be well observed Mr. Sydr Symson as rendring the cause of his lying open unto such temptations said That Mr. Sedgwick had lived upon his fancy this seven years and had neglected the reading of the Scripture and other good books Touching other Books Note a friend of his lying in his Study at Ely and observing he made no use of his Library asked in mirth to give him his Books saying ' I see you make no use of them He replyed ' They were good Introductions intimating that he was now beyond them And for the Scripture my self having some discourse with him about his former mistakes which then he Atheistically justified saying There was no other end of the world but this just with Hymeneus and Philetus And that God had burnt up all corruptioâ— in him c. And speech falling in about the Scripture he said 2 Tim. 2.17 18. He could have a glorious use of them
the Kingdom Dec. 15. 1642. was the fountain of all the following mischiefs The very first line is Your Majesties most humble and loyal subjects the Lords and Commons in Parliament assembled Next the Oathes of Allegiance and Supremacy do declare That the Kings Majesty is the onely Supream Governor of this Realm over all persons and in all causes 2. Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance 3 Eliz. cap. 1. Kings Answer to the Remonstrance of May 26. 1642. Remonstr of Lords and Commons Nov. 2. 1642. Ecclesiastical and Temporal and of all other his Dominions and Countries Yea and every Parliament-man before he can sit is bound by Law to swear them Now this is not answered in my judgment by a saying out of a Private * Fleta lib. 1. cap. 17. de justitiariis substituendis Lawyer that Rex habet in populo regendo superiores legem per quam factus est curiam suam videlicet Comites Barones And by that other that Rex est major singulis but minor universis For the former Author hath that sentence and words out of Bracton who hath several times also the quite contrary as shall appear Again It is against the tenor and current of Law and Lawyers and the known practise of the Nation Thirdly It may bear an other interpretation namely understanding the Law either of God who makes Kings Prov. 8. or of men made with the Kings consent whereunto he hath voluntarily obliged himself from which at first he might be free And by the superiority of his Court their legal jurisdiction conferred on them by his approbation for decision of ordinary controversies that may fall betwixt himself and his Subjects but not simply his superiors first because he calls it His Court now the owner is greater than the thing owned as such Again else the Earls and Barons were the superior power to the King Fourthly This refers not at all to the House of Commons whereof neither Fleta nor his Author Bracton in this sentence make any mention Again secondly the Oathes of Supremacy and Allegiance and the style the Parliament speak in of his Majesties loyal and humble subjects the Lords and Commons assembled in Parliament Remonstr Nov. 2. 1642. are not answered by saying that this of supream head and governor over all persons Object in all causes is meant of singular persons rather than of Courts or of the collective Body of the whole Kingdom And that it is meant in Curia not in Camera in his Courts not in his private Capacity and properly onely in his high Court of Parliament wherein and wherewith his Majesty hath supream Power For first Answ 1 The Oathes speak comprehensively both of Persons and Causes over all and in all So again the style of humble and obedient subjects is spoken as from them as the two Houses of Parliament for so they say assembled in Parliament Now if Subjects then and there sure Soveraigns or associates in Soveraignty they cannot be the terms in the same respect are contradictory Thirdly If the King be acknowledged to be the fountain of justice as the Law and Lawyers say he is of which anon then both Laws and Courts flow from him and thence are called his Laws his Courts and so ordine naturae dignitatis both in nature and dignity must be before and above both His splendor is in his Courts but his Supremacy not onely there but in his person also from whence it was derived to his Courts For there must be a First in nature either the King or his Courts and if they be His Courts then he made them and therefore in esse naturae before them Neither doth it hence follow as is there inferred Object That then the King may over-rule all his Courts Ibid. even the Parliament it self and so the goodly frame of Government should soon be dissolved and Arbitrary power brought in Answ For the King having both consented and sworn to the Laws and to the maintaining the jurisdiction of his Courts acting according to those Laws is not now in that respect sui juris and arbitrary in Government but obliged both to God and man to act by Laws and to preserve his Courts unviolate But if any Court shall assume a greater power than the King and Law hath given them or act in opposition to that power from whom they had their being whilst he doth not openly reject all Laws and Government much less when he doth rationally together with as many or more both of Lords and Commons though excluded the formality of being in such a place judge that he acts according to Law in the main of his proceedings In such case and in such actings they are not such a Court nor are not authorised with power from above but act excentrically and as private persons unto whom the Declaration grants the King to be superior As the Army having received Commission from the two Houses of Parliament afterward turned their Arms against them which they could not do by their Commission as also a great fautor of their proceedings since then spake in my hearing God thereby perhaps representing to the Houses by the Army their own failings toward their Superior And the Armies reasoning was on the like principles viz. That they were entrusted with power for the Kingdoms preservation and that the Parliament degenerating they must not see the Kingdom perish Object 3 Neither may it be received that if the Parliament may take account of what is done by his Majesty in his inferiour Courts Ibid. much more of what is done by him without the authority of any Court For to speak properly the Parliament takes account not of the Kings actions or authority in his Courts but of his Officers and of their administration of that authority and this also by the Kings consent established by Law whereby they are enabled so to do Or to speak yet more properly The Parliament that is the King Lords and Commons for the Parliament is not without the King as being the Head of it but without and in opposition unto him and the Laws they do not take such cognizance Again for that saying That they might much more take account of the Kings actions that are done without the authority of any Court meaning the great administration of Justice and the raising of Arms Seeing no Court is superior to its Author the King therefore no Court can give authority to him but he to them nor can they call him to account for then they were his superiors and had the Regal Power and himself should be no King as is expresly affirm'd in Mr. St. John's speech against Ship-mony of which afterward Humbly represent to him they may his miscarriages and punish his Ministers so it may be done without sedition and assuming the Sword which is inseparable from the Supreme Power Lastly How can this be assented unto that because when the Title is dubious Ibid. pag. ult he is
to be accepted for King whom the two Houses declare to be so by the Statute of 11 H. 7. that therefore much more they may judge in the great question what is the best service of the King and Kingdom Whence also it will follow that they have the power of declaring Law in all cases How I say can this be received namely to argue from a power in doubtful cases to a power in cases that are clear in Law and reason or sense Secondly when there is no King actually their power may be more as the wife that hath no husband Thirdly The Declaration of Parliament doth not give the King his title or authority but onely declares recognizeth and acknowledges that he had it before As for those assertions in that Declaration Ibid. viz. That the Soveraign Power resides in the King and both Houses of Parliament That the two Houses are judges superior to all others That the Kings negative voice doth not imply a liberty to deny c. because no Law is produced and that they oppose such as are known as also the practise of Parliament in this Nation conscience is to seek for a foundation of assent unto them It is delivered as Law that the King is the * Mr. Pym's speech at the attainder of the Earl of Straffâ—rd p. 10. Father the Husband of the Common-wealth he is the Head they are the body * Mr. St. Johns speech at the same Attaind p. m. 7. That the Laws are the Kings Laws he is the fountain from whence in their several channels they are derived to the subject * The case of Ship-mony a speech in Parliament Nov. 3. 1640. pag. 12 13. Note That he is the soul of the Law in whose power it is ALONE to execute Law and yet not be constrained thereunto That the Sacred PERSON of the King is INVIOLABLE and subject to no force or compulsion of any other and free from any coercive or vindicative power That this freedom is unsepar ble from the Person of the King because no force can be used but by Superiors or Equals and he that hath Superiors or Equals is no KING Again first The Judges in Calv. case recited by D. Austin Allegiance not impeached cap. 1. That allegiance of the subject is due to the King by the Law of Nature Secondly That the Law of Nature was before any Judicial or Municipal Law as being written from the beginning in mans heart Thirdly That the Law of Nature is immutable Fourthly That this immutable Law of Nature Bractoâ— is a part of the Law of England That Rex in regno parem habere non debet cum par in parem non habeat potestatem multo fortiùs non habeat superiorem The King in his Kingdom ought to have no equal because one equal cannot have power over another much less should he have any superior Object And this is not to be taken with that exposition as above Remonstr Nov. 2. 1642. Serg. Bradshaw at the sentencing hâ—s late Majesty vâ—z That he is major singulis minor universis Greater then any one but less then all For both the Statute is express That this Realm of England hath been accepted for an Empire governed by one supream Head unto whom a body politick compact of all sorts and degrees of People Answ of the Spirituality and Temporality 24 Hen. 8. cap. 12. 4. Declarat of Parliament Proposition in Parliament Apr. 25. 4 Car. propos 5. Rushworth Collect. p. 553. are bound next unto God in a natural obedience As also it is acknowledged in full Parliament First in general by the House of Lords As touching his Majesties Royal Prerogative intrinsecal to his Soveraignty and betrusted him withall from God Ad communem totius populi salutem non ad destructionem That his Majesty would resolve not to use or divert the same to the prejudice of any of his loyal people in the property of their goods or liberty of their persons is prayed by the Lords And in particular by the Commons Most dread Soveraign We your dutiful Commons now assembled in Parliament we think it is a meet and most necessary duty being called by your Majesty to consult and advise of the great and urgent affairs of this Church and Common-wealth Commons Remonstrance against the Duke 4 Car. Anno 1628. Rush Collect. pag. 631. Note finding them at this time in apparent danger of ruine and destruction faithfully and dutifully to inform your Majesty thereof and with bleeding hearts and bended knees to crave your speedy redress therein as to your wisdom unto which we most humbly SUBMIT our selves and our desires shall seem most convenient So then first the Kings prerogative is intrinsecal unto his Soveraignty and betrusted to him by God say the House of Lords And they most humbly submit themselves and their desires to the wisdâ—m of the King say the House of Commons even then when both Church and Common-wealth were in apparent danger of ruine and destruction And to return again unto the judgment of the Sages of the Law the former Author saith That the King is the most excellent * Bract. l. 1. c. 8. Majestas Intemerata pag. 38. Bract. l. 2. de Acquir rer domin c. 24. Stamf. r. 7. 11. Majestas Intemerata p. 32. part of the Common-wealth next unto â—od Again Dominus Rex habet ordinariam jurisdictionem dignitatem potestatem super omnes qui in regno suo sunt Our Lord the King saith the same * Bracton cited by Stamford lib. 2. cap. 2. Reasons of the University of Oxford against the Covenant sect 7. pag. 27. Bracton hath ordinary jurisdiction dignity and power over all which are in his Kingdom And ea quae jurisdictionis sunt pacis ad nullum pertinent nisi ad Coronam dignitatem regiam nec à Coronâ separari possunt And that therefore those things which are annexed to justice and peace belong to none but the Crown and dignity Royal neither can they be separated from the Crown We have heard the testimony of Lawyers yea and of the Law it self the dialect also and speech of Parliament and the judgment of those who have not by the way Dr. Bilson of Subj Rebel Part. 3. ed. Lond. 1586. p. 277. but ex professo handled this argument with the full witness of one of which number and that an eminent one I shall conclude this particular who speaking of the German Wars and of their Laws and ours saith Their States be free and may resist any wrong by the Laws of the Empire The German Emperor is elected and his power abated by the liberties and prerogatives of his Princes The Queen of England inheriteth and hath ONE and the same right over ALL her subjects be they NOBLES or others Now all the fore-mentioned allegations concerning the Person Power and Prerogative of the King and the subjection of all persons and our allegiance
Object whereof one contradicts himself is not a sufficient 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a firm footing to stand upon to shake not the earth onely but heaven also Bracton writing in Henry the third his time fol. 34. A. when the Barâ—ns had raised a Militia against the King saith indeed Rex habet superiorem Deum scilicet item legem per quà m factus est Rex item curiam suam viz. Comites Barones c. That the King hath a Superior namely God also the Law whereby he was made King also his Court to wit the Earls and Barons The like sentence verbatim almost is cited out of * lib. 1. c. 17. de justitiariis substituendis Declar. L. L. Com. Nov. 2. 1642. pag. 22. Fleta that the King had in populâ— regendo superiores legem per quam f ctus est curiam suam viz. Comites Barones c. But the former place in Bracton and so in Fleta is not meant of the Court of Parliament for there 's no mention of the Commons but it follows in the same place debent ei fraenum imponere they ought to bridle him Dr. Fearns's Conscience satisfied sect 4. pag. 17. 1248. It is likely he spake this in favour of the Militia raised against Henry the third for then he wrote and might call that Assembly of Earls and Barons then combined against the King Curiam the higher Court or Counsel But he contradicts this else-where not onely in that sentence Rex in regno parem habere non debet cum par in parem non habeat potestatem multò fortiùs non habeat superiorem That the King in his Kingdom ought to have no equal because one equal can have no power over another much less should he have any superior But also by other sentences quoted out of him above Somewhat perhaps like Cicero sometime with Pompey sometime for Cesar as not a few have been in our time Another also is cited who saith 2. Fortescue fol. 25. â— By the fuller answer to Dr. Fearn pag. 3. Ad hanc potestatem a pâ—pulo effluxam ipse habet quo non licet ei potestate aliâ populo suo dominari That the King by having this power flowing from the people is obliged so that it is not lawful for him to rule over them by any other authority Answ 1 But this assertion being back'd with no antient record or custom nor with any judged case or Act of Parliament yea contrary to the known process and practise of the Law and Acts of Parliament and general sentences of Lawyers cannot satisfie especially if we consider that if such power had flowen from the people yet as the King observes it doth not follow that it must therefore return unto them 2. Answer to the Remonstr of May 26. 1642. pag. 10. at least when and in what manner they will As in the case of the power of the Husband which first did flow unto him from the Wife but may not be resumed without breach of wedlock 3. 24 H. 8. c. 12. and that also adjudged lawfully The Law is otherwise which teacheth us That this Realm of England hath been accepted for an Empire governed by one supream Head unto whom a body politick compact of all sorts and degrees of people of the Spiritualty and Temporalty are bound to bear next unto God a natural obedience And that by the Law of nature and of the Land we owe Allegiance as we saw above Now this is not answered Reply to Dr. Ferm's answer sect 3. pag. 18. by saying ' By the preamble of the Statute it appears so to be made to prevent appeals to Rome and that by the supreme Head is meant such a one as is able to do all needful acts of justice which the King in his natural capacity cannot do and therefore must be understood in his politick capacity which takes in Law and Parliament For the whole body politick whether Parliament or People are governed and made subâ—ect to this Supreme Head and do owe unto him natural obedience And accordingly in His not in the Houses of Parliament's name though sitting do all judgments and executions of Law proceed The authority then of the two Houses of Parliament is the authority of the Body not of the Head by which even it also must be governed and against which it may not oppose it self 1 Tim. 2. For as he said I permit not a woman to usurp authority over the man but to live in subjection holds betwixt the political Spouse and Husband also I have done with the third 4. Case of Necessity To the fourth Motive the case of Necessity We must here note Thesin Hypothesin the general and the particular state of the Question 1. In Thesi and in general 'T is true Pleaders for Regal power do acknowledge that there may indeed fall out some cases wherein such designments may be warrantable As first Abbot de Anti-Ch cap. 7. n. 5. 6. in general when per patrias leges licere judicarunt Hîc verò politica res agitur Quid principi juris in subditos per leges cujusque reipublicae fundatrices permissum sit c. When they might judge that it was lawful by the Laws of their Country Now here the Question is civil and political namely What power is given to the Prince over his subjects by the fundamental Laws of each Common-wealth c. saith the Bishop of Salisbury Here Law is made the bottom in general but that Law must be produced that may be known In particular two or three cases are alleadg'd wherein onely it is found allowable Non alias igitur populo in eum potestas est Gull Barcla contr Monarchom lib. 3. prope sin quà m si id committat propter quod ipso jure Rex esse desinat Tunc enim quia se ipse principatu exuit atque in privatis constituit liber hoc modo populus superior efficitur reverso ad illum scilicet jure illo quod ante regem inauguratum in interregno habuit duo tantum commissa invenio duos inquam casus Horum unus est si regnum Rempublicam evertere conetur hoc est Aurel. Victor de Caesarib Sueton. cap. 49. cap. 30. si id ei propositum eaque intentio fuerit ut regnum disperdat quemadmodum de Nerone fertur de Caligula Talia cum Rex aliquis meditatur molitur serio omnem regnandi curam animum illico abjicit ac proinde imperium in subditos amittit ut * l. 1. ult D. pro. derelict dominus servi pro derelicto habiti dominium Alter casus est si Rex in alicujus clientelam se contulerit ac regnum quòd liberum à majoribus populo traditum accepit alienae ditioni mancipaverit c. And instanceth in Baliol King of Scots that subjected his Crown and Kingdom to Edward the first of England then
superbiam quemadmodum digni sunt Dei justo judicio in omnibus supervenienti By whose command saith he men are born by the same command Kings are constituted fit for those who in each time are to be governed by them Some of them are given for the amendment and profit of their subjects and preservation of Justice but some for terrour and punishment and rebuke and some for mockery and contumely and pride according as men deserve the just judgment of God prevailing in all things Thus he by which he implies prayer and patience but no resistance Tertullian likewise Apologet. cap. 30. cap. 33. cap. 37. A quo sunt secundi Reges post quem Deum primi ante omnes super omnes Deos. From whom God they Kings are second after whom they are first before all and above all Gods that is above all inferiour Magistrates In a word we may see the sense of Antiquity in this point in him Instit l. 3. c. 3. § 10. Aug. Contr. Faust lib. 22. cap. 75. from whom Calvin would have us learn it in all viz. S. Austin Ordo naturalis hoc poscit ut suscipiendi belli Anthoritas penes principem sit exequendi autem ministerium milites debeant Natural order saith he requires this that the Authority of undertaking war be in the power of the Prince but that the souldiers owe the service of execution and management And that they wanted not either number or strength one of the former Authours gives us assurance Tertul. Apologet cap. 37. Si enim hostes extraneos non tantum vindices occultos agere vellemus deesset nobis res numerorum copiarum If we would saith he become open enemies and not secret revengers would there be wanting to us the force either of number or Armies And so shews that the Christians filled all places insomuch that should they but have withdrawn themselves only from the rest of men they should have made a desolation in the world And thus of the Primitive Christians * Anticavalierism 7. Reformed Churches So vain is it to say that Tertullian was mistaken in their number 7. In the last place come we to the examples of the Reformed Churches particularly those of France and Holland who are said to have defended themselves by arms as we have done defended by our Writers and owned by our Princes For Answer First we are to note that though perhaps it should be granted that it may be lawful in some cases for oppressed subjects to call for help unto other Foraign and lawful power because these powers are coordinate with their own in respect of degree and dignity and in such case there is no violation of order by the rising up of the inferiour against his Prince But secondly they were neither defended by our Writers Difference of Subject and Rebel part 3. pag. 279. Ed. Lond. 1586. nor patronized by our Princes farther then the Laws and their case as represented by them did allow If the Laws of the Land saith Dr. Bilson speaking of the French the Scottish and the Holland Civil wars do not permit them to guard their lives when they are assaulted with unjust force against law we will never excuse them from rebellion And a little after for my part I must confess saith he that except the Laws of those Realms do permit the people to stand on their right if the Prince would offer that wrong I dare not allow their arms And another treating of the same example saith Quarum injuriarum atrocitates Abbot de Antichrist cap. 7. n. 5 6. occasionem fortè dederunt bello civili dum vim vi propulsant tantummodo qui contra jus fasque indignissimè habiti id sibi per patrias LEGES licere judicarunt The horribleness of which injuries saith he peradventure gave occasion to the Civil war whilst they do only repell force by force and who contrary to all right and equity were treated most unworthily and did judge that they might do so by the Laws of their Country And again Hîc verò politica res agitur quid principi juris in subditos per leges cujusque Reip. fundatrices permissum sit The question here saith he is matter of Civil policy viz. What power the Prince hath over his subjects by the fundamental Laws of each Common-wealth So that we see they defended these actions of the Protestants abroad so far only as they were legal This for their cause But as to ours the former Authour shews it to be different The German Emperour saith he is elected and his power abated by the liberties of the Princes Bils of Subj and Rebel part 3. p. 277. But the Queen of England hath one and the same right over all her subjects be they NOBLES or others You see he makes our cause and case Kings of Engl laws and allegiance to differ from the former CHAP. VII Reply to certain general Reasons for the War Scripture and Reason for defence of Arms a Book so called AND now to draw towards an end of this first point the War The defences made in the justification of the War they are of three sorts from Scripture from Law and from Reason Those from Scripture and Law have been replyed to before SECT I. Law TO those from Reason laid down in the Book quoted in the Margin a seven fold errour more especially hath miscarried the Authours though men otherwise of Learning and Piety first in mistaking the word Law They seem to take the word Law to signifie only the agreements pactions and rules established by mutual consent betwixt Prince and people and make this only to be the ground of subjection and of commanding So that what is beyond it is no way obligatory either to be performed or suffered under farther then necessity and the want of power to resist doth enforce But they forget that there is another and superiour Law viz. that of God's Soveraignty oftentimes appointing an Invader or an Usurper or a Tyrant to rule for the punishment of a people Whose will only is the Law and whom God will have obeyed by all subjects in things lawful and not resisted in things unlawful So he appointed Nebuchadnezzar Jer. 25.15 not onely to rule over the Jews but over all the Nations there mentioned and they are enjoyned to obedience unto him So Hos 13.11 Hos 13.11 Jeroboam and the following Kings over the ten Tribes in his wrath as himself saith or even over all Israel as Saul who is understood to be pointed at in that Text. And of their Kings 't is expresly said they should onely be able to cry out in that day which by their practise 1 Sam. 8.18 may be understood that they should be allowed to do no other For else why joyned they not with David or why did not David himself resist him but always fled from him And the punishment of all those subjects that rebelled in the
Ethelred the Saxon King being married to Henry the first brought us forth a Royal seed derived from the antient blood of the Saxon Kings Yet why may we not think that some of our Princes originally might be as free as another lately who had no such such title either of Succession or Conquest professeth himself to have been in points of Law and Government Lord Protectors speech Septemb. 12. p. 11. and p. 13. untill he limited himself I say saith he the Authority I had in my hand being so boundless Again my power again by this resignation was boundless and unlimited as before All things being subject to Arbitrariness and a person having power over the three Nations pag. 14. boundless and unlimited Again The Government limited me and bâ—und my hands to act nothing to the prejudice of the Nations without consent of a Councel until Parliament and then limited by a Parliament I did accept it I was arbitrary in power May it not then have been in Princes as it was in this Vsurper and invader of the publick Liberties And indeed the Coronation-Oath seems to imply so much Coronation-Oath H. scrips 24. Apr. 61. die Coronationis casu non consilio dum opus recognoscerem wherein among other things the King is asked ' Sir will you grant to hold and keep the Laws and rightful customs which the Commonalty of this Realm consuetudines quas vulgus elegerit His Majesties answer to the Remonstrance of May 26. 1642. pag. 17. 15. whether you expound it have or shall choose Which words do not imply a force upon the King It is for the ease of Princes and satisfaction of Subjects that that unlimited power given by God to Princes is bounded in all places by Laws with their own consent Dr. Sandersons preface to Dr. Usher of the right of Kings pag. 12. but a desire of his engagement Therefore the choice of Laws being not the Princes but the Peoples advantage and priviledge is left unto them not as implying a co-ordinate power but a concession of liberty not now to be changed because established both by Law and Oath yet so that the King reserves to himself the power of a negative voice Negative voice and of refusing to pass their Elections into Laws if he like them not If it be said Object That the Houses have the like negative voice that 's a mistake Answ they have it in order the one house to the other but not in order to the King because he doth not propound Laws unto them his desiâ—es he may but they to him So that there is no such thing as a negative voice in the Houses about the Laws in order to the King it is onely in reference of the one House to the other So that to speak properly according to the known practise of the Parliament the two Houses seem to have no co-ordinate share in making Laws but in choosing things to be made Laws the King onely making of them for the Houses acknowledge Declar. Parl. ' That they are not Laws till the Royal assent But I may not correct the King who saith Object in this Kingdom the Laws are joyntly made by a King Kings answ to the 19 proposit p. 12. by a House of Peers and by a House of Commons chosen by the people all having free votes and particular privileges Nor do I but explain what he must intend Answ The making of the matter of the Laws belongs to the two Houses the conferring of the form Declar. Parl. in defence of that May 26. 1642. and giving them the esse and being of Laws is from the King onely and so acknowledged by the Houses viz. That if he do deny it is no Law without him Script Reas sect 5. p. 64. Kings answ to 19 Proposit p. 19. and so acknowledged by the greatest pleaders for the taking up of Arms. But secondly because his Majesty saith a little after We conjure you that you allow us our share in the Legislative power which would be counted in us not onely a breach of priviledge but Tyranny and subversion of Parliaments to deny you Which implies the other have a share also I answer That they have a share but derivative not original subordinate as subjects even in Parliament for so they call themselves not co-ordinate as equals The wife hath a share in the government of the family for sure she is more in point of right relating to the government of it than a servant but it is not a co-ordinate but subordinate power The King would not be understood to confute his Father Himself or the Laws Not his Father K. James's Law of Free Monarchies who saith That the King is above the Law as both the Author and giver of strength thereto Not Himself who hath several times avowed his Soveraignty though not his solitude his Supremacy though not his aloneness in government who at the time of publishing that answer had drawn his sword to vindicate his Sovereinty prerogative Nor was it his intent to confute the Law which maketh him the fountain of justice as we saw above therfore what waters of power any else have must needs flow originally from him Thirdly the King hath said he is no Lawyer neither is it necessary that he should so be if then his Majesty out of zeal to content his subjects should let fal any * To the 19 Propositions expression in that answer of his so much insisted on that might prejudice his legal right it ought not in duty as it cannot in conscience be improved against him contrary to the known practise of Laws and Parliament It is true the two Houses say in their declaration of November 2. 1642. That the Kings Soveraignty is in and with the two Houses That they are the supreme Court whose determinations ought not to be question'd by the King That the Kings power is a trust from the people That the two Houses may dispose of any thing of the King or Kingdoms But seeing no Law is produc'd a sentence of out Fleta above answered is not sufficient to bottom in my conscience so high assertions To conclude All that have share in Legislative power have it not equally the King is acknowledged by the Oath of Supremacy sworn by every Parliament man before he sit to be Supreme over all in these his Dominions Neither have they it originally but by concession and grant though now setledly But though they have this derivative power in Legâ—slation and in some cases in declaring Law so it be not against the known Lavvs yet have they none in execution of the Lavvs much less the povver of the Sword further then the King shall grant unto them For vvhich though Laws vvere spoken of yet vvere they never produc'd Though the King declare That there is no power in either or both Houses Kings Answer to the Declaration of both Houses in answer to his
and for some of our selves likewise if whilst we had such principles we had been silenc'd and asleep also To the last vâ—z That conscientious men are 3. Conscientientious men troubled for their unconformity unto these things molested and troubled I answer And well they may both for their own good and others whom by their example or perswasion they might mislead For if God may justly plague his people for neglecting his good and wholsome Law Act for the uniformity of Common-prayer in these cases provided as the Queen and Parliament imply he will It is as good service done to men by penalties to compel them to their duty in theâ—e particulars as to scourge a child to keep him from the fire St. Austin being once of the mind that Schismaticks and Hereticks should not be punished on better advice acquaintance with the Scripture and by experience Epist 48. and 50. was brought to be of another mind and wrote two large and elaborate Epistles to defend the lawfulness of the use of Laws to that purpose SECT III. Humane Inventions THe third general Exception is against the things we treat of that they are inventions humane and from man onely Answ several of them First The light of natural understanding wit and reason is from God he it is which thereby doth illuminate every man entring into the world Rich. Hook Eccles pol. lib. 3. sect 9. If there proceed from us any thing afterward corrupt and naught the mother therof is our own darkness neither doth it proceed from any such cause whereof God is the Author He is the Author of all that we think or do by vertue of that light which himself hath given And therefore the Laws which the very Heathens did gather to direct their actions by so far forth as they proceeded from the light of nature God himself doth acknowledge to have proceeded even from himself and that he was the writer of them in the table of their hearts In the second place How much more then is he the Author of those Laws which have been made by his Saints c. saith that praise worthy Author When the Disciples would have had our Saviour to put the man to silence who cast out devils in his name Mar. 9.38 and followed him not with them our Saviour rebuking of them gives us this useful Maxim in religious matters viz. That he that is not against us is on our part Things not opposing of the Scripture and intended for and tending to the furtherance of Religion they are not humane notions but the inventions of men directed by Scripture in the general touching such things viz. 1 Cor. 14. That all things be done to decency and edification and guided by the Spirit of God in such particulars Observance whereof rather then opposition thereto would represent a Christs Disciple The Feast of Dedication of the Temple was no injunction from the Lord 1 Maccab. 4.59 Joh. 10.22 But so useful an invention of man that our Lord himself observed it Remarkable also to this purpose is the profession of the Learned Zanchy touching things of this nature viz. Zanch. Observ in confess suam cap. 25. Aph. 10 11. ab initio Credo ea quae â piis patribus in nomine domini Congregatis communi omnium consensu citra ullam sacrarum literarum contradictionem definita recepta fuerunt ea etium quanquam haud ejusdem cum sacris literis authoritatis A SPIRITV SANCTO ESSE Those things saith he which have been concluded and received by the holy Fathers gathered together in the name of God Canons of the Church of what authority agreed on by common consent and without any contradiction to the Scripture although they are not of the same authority with the holy Scriptures yet I believe even those things to be from the HOLY GHOST Thus he Joh. 14. cap. 15. cap. 16. And it is not in vain that Christ hath promised his Spirit to his people to guide them into all truth SECT IV. Of the Apocrypha TO the fourth that many things in the premises are but Apocryphal and so not Scriptural nor obliging Now Touching the Apocrypha and its injunction to be read in some parts in the Church although all the Scripture be not read First which Books in case my self did think as some others do safer and better to be left publickly unread R. Hook Eccles pol. l. 5. sect 20. nevertheless as in other things of like nature even so in this my private judgment I should be loth to oppose against the force of their reverend authority who rather considering the divine excellency of some things in all and of all things in certain of those Apocrypha which we publickly read have thought it better to let them stand as a list or marginal border unto the Old Testament And though with divine yet as humane compositions to grant at the least unto certain of them publick audience in the Church of God And if in them there happen any speech that soundeth towards error should the mixture of a little dross constrain the Church to deprive her self of so much gold rather than learn how by art and judgment to make separation To this effect very fitly from the counsel that St. Jerom giveth unto Laeta of taking heed how she read the Apocrypha as also by the help of other learned mens judgment we may take direction And let me add that without such directions Confer Hamp Court pag. 61. King James said well he would not have all the Canonical Scripture read But because some there are who seem better to relish forreign judgments than those of their own Church Expositio de sacr libr. dignitate praefix ante Biblia Tigurin sive Leon Judae I shall recite first Bullingers opinion of those Books and the publick reading of them one of the Professors of the Church of Tigur his words are Ego verò arbitror salvo aliorum judicio istos libros Apocryphos rectissimè Hagiographa dici posse nimirum a sanctis viris de rebus Scriptos sacris quos quanquam non fint in Canone Hebraeo Ecclesia tamen quia sancta tradunt Canonicis non contradicunt recipit ac in sanctorum coetibus legit I do think saith he saving other mens judgments that these Apocryphal Books may very justly be called holy writings as being written by holy men touching holy things which though they are not in the Hebrew Canon yet because they treat of religious matters and do not contradict the holy Scriptures the Church doth receive them and reads them in the Assemblies of the Saints Then he produceth the judgment and relation of Cyprian Cyprian expos symb or Russinus for the work is ascribed to both in his Exposition of the Creed to the same purpose Where it is by the way to be noted out of the Text of Cyprian or Ruffinus first that he reckons the Books
to the judgment of these Brethren that the Q. and these Parl. then were in matter of the greatest moment the establishing of the Doctrine and Worship Articles and Liturgy of Almighty God and means of the salvation of men either so ignorant that they understood not what was requisite to the full establishment of their own Acts or so negligent that they minded it not as they should And seeing all the Kings and Parliaments since have swallowed their error As also all the Judges of the Land who do not only sit in Parliam to give advice but also have judged in their several Circuits the violations of those Books And because the present and future Parliaments may be subject to the like miscarriages may it be prevented in a better way then by the Parliam restoring to the Clergy the liberty of being elected Burgesses lost as I take it but in Henry the 8 th his time and so the Brethren may obtain places in the House of Commons and the Parliament enjoy the benefit of their guidance 2. To their instances particular in their printed sheet of alterations in the first printed book of Queen Elizabeth from that of Edward 6. viz. certain Saints days in the Kalender 1 Saints days but in black letters instead of others that were named in that of Edw. 6. Secondly certain Lessons of the Apocrypha appointed to be read instead of some out of the Canonical Scripture which were before appointed in the book of Edw. 6. For answer to both these first in general we have heard above to which I refer the reader Next in particular to that of the Saints days it doth not seem to hazzard the bringing in of new Holy-days both because as the brethren acknowledge they are set down in black letters those to be kept Holy-days in red but especially because the number of Holy-days is stinted they are set down by name in the Liturgy and a prohibition of any other to be kept so that as long as the book remains as now it is there can be no peril of that It may be the change of names was because the days now put in might be days of payment of mony or days of Law or perhaps unworthy persons names put out and better put in their room as Mr. Fox did in that Kalender of his Martyrology But this whatsoever it be makes no alteration in the Service or in the reading Yea but the alteration of the Chapters does 2. Apocryphal chapters To that therefore I say that this alteration was done either casu and by chance or consilio and of purpose And then either by privat hands or by publick authority by the Queen or Commissioners from her according to the clause in this Act authorising her for explanations In all which respects I refer unto the general answer afore-going But more particularly They might be altered upon some such suggestions as was made afterward by the Brethrens Ancestors modestly at the Conference of Hampton-Court of which afterwards To the Second 2. Book of Common-prayer aâ— it now stands established The book of Common-prayer as it now stands as established which the Brethren oppose as differing from that of Queen Elizabeth in alterations detractions and additions For answer first in general We must reflect on what hath been said above viz. That such alterations as have been made by Royal authority by commission under the great Seal being made but for explanations fake and containing nothing contrary to any thing in the book contained doth not derogate from the authority and establishment of the book but such alterations are confirmed such power being yielded to the Kings of this Nation by the Laws K. James Proclamation for uniformity of Com. prayer And for that purpose gave forth Our Commission undes Our Great Seal of England to the Arch-bishop of Canterbury and others according to the form which the LAWS of this Realm in like case prescribed to be used to make the said EXPLANATION c. saith the King upon occasion of the alterations made at the Instance of the Brethrens predecessors at the Conference at Hampton-Court But to come unto particulars first to the Alterations 1. Alterations in the Liturgy That of Holy-days hath beâ—n replyed unto as also that of Apocryphal Chapters To which I add R. Hook eccles pol. l. 5. § 20. That it cannot be reasonably thought that we do thereby offer disgrace unto the word of God For in such choice we do not think but that fitness of speech may be more respected than worthiness of matter But this alteration whatsoever it were was made as by the authority of the King By whose means the Apocryphal chapters were altered so it seems by the occasion of Dr. Reynolds anotations For the King said That Dr. Reynolds should note those chapters in the Apocrypha books where those offensive places were and bring them But why do the Brethren appear now so zealous for the reading of the Scripture Conf. Hamp Court p. 63. Matth. 15. which they had almost laid aside in the publick worship for their own traditions i. e. for what they thought better to deliver unto the people 3. As for the alterations made for explanations sake K. James explanation of the present Liturgy by the King at the suit of the Non-conformists at that Conference now made violations of the Statute and essential alterations of the book they were not in any part of the substance of the book it self not in any prayer Not any alteration in the matter of the Liturgy or Exhortation and so in no one point either of Doctrine or Worship let the Reader note against the calumnies insinuated by these Brethren but onely in some two or three words in the old Translation of the Gospels And in a few Rubricks Hook eccles pol. l. 5. § 19. which are directions for the service The words altered in the Gospels wherein the steps of the Latine-service-book have been somewhat too nearly followed they are these 1. ' And Jesus said to them Conf. Hamp Court p. 86. to be put twice into the Dominical Gospels instead of Jesus said to his Disciples Though at the Conference it was answered That for ought that could appear by the places Ibid. pag. 63. he might speak as well to his Disciples as to the Pharisees The alterations in the Rubricks are Ibid. pag. 86. 1. Before the general Absolution is put or Remission of sins which before was onely Absolution 2. In private Baptism the lawful Minister present before it was then they minister it 3. In the same Rubrick they procure not their children to be baptised before it was they baptize not children 4. In that before Confirmation Examination with Confirmation of children it was appointed but I do not find it was done So that as the alterations of the words of the old Translation were but two so these in the Rubricks are but three And none of
House of Peers carried for them by far the major part of Lords Yet after five repulses contrary to all order and custom it was by tumultuary instigation obtruded again and by a few carried when most of the Peers were forced to absent themselves In like manner was the Bill against root and branch brought on by tumultuary clamours and schismatical terrors Bill against Episcopacy which could never pass till both Houses were sufficiently thinned and over-awed To which partiality while in all reason justice and religion my conscience forbids me by consenting to make up their Votes to Acts of Parliament I must now be urged with an Army and constrained either to hazard my own A cause of the War defence of Episcopacy and my Kingdoms ruine by my defence or prostrate my conscience to the blind obedience of those men whose zealous superstition thinks or pretends they cannot do God and the Church a greater service than utterly to destroy that Primitive Apostolical and antiently Vniversal government of the Church by Bishops And the King hath the like complaint * Kings declaration to all his loving subjects Aug. 12. 1642. p. 8. print Cambr. else-where So that we see what was the mind and affection the scope and intent of the King and the two Houses as then when that Act passed touching Episcopacy Whence it will follow that as they had no intention nor ever consented to the Bill for it to destroy the office so neither did the Commons think that it was so by that Act of taking away their votes or by recalling of the former clause of 1 Eliz. 1. touching Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction for then they would not have prepared another Act for it which never passed the Houses whilst full nor the Kings assent afterward and so is no Law It remaineth therefore that the intention of the Parliament in the repealing of that clause was onely in reference unto the High-commission Court or other excentrical from the legal jurisdiction of Bishops and raised onely by the Kings prerogative yet of use whilst established but removed not for its unprofitableness as to prevent some greater inconvenience It was their jurisdiction in those cases and upon such special commission from the King that there ceased not their ordinary legal and per se Episcopal power of government in this Church * By Act of this present Parliament for restoring Episcopal jurisdiction As hath been of late more authentically evidenced Answ 4 even before this was printed As for the Ordinance that especially at that time as it could at no time cannot countervene a setled Law Neither have the Houses power to declare any thing against Law as we heard above Lord Cant. speech ubi suprà For close therefore I repeat that suit of his and do humbly in the Churches name desire of his Majesty that it may be resolved not onely by all the Reverend Judges of England A supplication to his Majesty and the two Houses of Parliament but by his Majejesty and both Houses of Parliament and then published by them that the Doctrine and Articles of Religion the Liturgy and Worship the Discipline and Government are not against or besides the Laws of this Realm That so the Church-Governors may go on cheerfully in their duty and the peoples minds be quieted by this assurance that neither the Laws nor their Liberties are infringed as Subjects thereby SECT VII Of the Obligation of the League and Covenant AGain it is objected that there is an engagement for the Reformation of the Doctrine Worship Assemblies Discipline and Government in the solemn League and Covenant therefore they are not to be adhered unto Subsect 1. That the Covenant obligeth not OMitting the elaborate and excellent pains of the University of Oxford in this argument Reasons of the University of Oxford concerning the Covenant 1647. Duplies of the professors of Aberdeen to the Brethr. concerning the Covenant 1638. Dr. Lesly Bish of Down in his Visitation speech Lond. 1638. 1. Argument Because it is opposite to after other Oaths c. Gal. 3.14 18. as also that of the Professors of Aberdeen in Scotland And of the Bishop of Down in Ireland the testimony of the three Kingdoms against it I shall propound only four Arguments to evince first the nullity of its obligation and then from thence collect what it binds yet unto The Arguments touching the former are First from the nature and order of this Oath The second from the power imposing of it The third from the matter of the oath it self The last from the scope and end of its framing and imposing First from the nature and order of this Oath When there are two oaths touching the same things and they contradictory one to another if the former be lawful and obliging the latter cannot be so too but void and null ipso facto Hence it is that our Apostle proveth the invalidity of the Ceremonial Law and Covenant being different from and in some sort opposite to the Covenant of Grace because it was made four hundred years after and so could not make the other void So this Oath and Covenant whereof we now speak being contradictory as shall be seen and is evident of it self to former lawful Oaths and Engagements confirmed by the Laws of the Kingdome as the Oath of Allegiance Supremacy Canonical Obedience Subscriptions to the three Articles and Protestations cannot make those former of none effect and is therefore void being taken as it was unlawful to take it unless the Obligation of the former Oaths and Engagements had been by the same or superiour power relaxed As was done by Hermannus Archbishop of Cullen to his subjects Sleid. Com. l. 18 Ad Ann. 1547. when he was no longer able to protect them Which was not our case Our former Oaths and Engagements were agreeable to Law and Equity both in their matter and authority injoyning them This contradictory to them and by an inferiour power yea by such a power as had not authority to do it which brings me to the second Argument 2. Arg. Because it was in posed by unsufficient power in opposition to the lawful authority namely taken from the power or rather the impotency of the imposers as to this act It is proved above that in the Government the King is Supreme by the Laws But if he were but equal yet in a coordinate power if when one desires to do his duty and is well able thereunto the other shall exclude him and act in opposition not only to him but also to the Laws established by all and impose upon the Subjects who are not obliged but as it proceeds from all to submit and to accept of such impositions if voluntarily is a threefold iniquity and injustice First Unto the person excluded against his will and right Secondly Against the liberty of the Subject who is not liable to injunctions proceeding from some but all Thirdly Against the priviledge
As objecting them to suspition of their Princes as hath appeared in the horrid Massacres of the poor brethren in Piedmont the Duke of Savoy's Dominions since Then by animating of them by this example to attempt the like which hapned also since in Holland where an insurrection being made in Rotterdam or some Town thereabout against the Magistrate the seditious cryed out that they were slaves but the English-men brave fellows This is known and I received it from a grave Minister several years since of one of the Dutch Congregations in England And thus much of the third argument taken from the matter of the Covenant I come now to the last from the scope and end of it 4. Argument that the Covenant binds not taken from the scope and end of it from whence the nullity of its obligation will be further evidenced The purpose was to strengthen and foment an unnatural civil war in the State and Schism in the Church to maintain the body a great part of it against the head to unsettle the doctrine of Religion the Worship Discipline and Government of the Church to ruine all those honest and upright-hearted brethren that were more tender of their duty to God and the King Now had the Oath been good in it self and the authority sufficient that imposed it yet such a design being visible and declared it were void by the very purpose of it much more when failing in those and other particulars as hath been evidenced It was forbidden to swear Jer. 4.2 The Lord liveth unless in truth in righteousness and in judgment that is for righteous purposes though the words were good Paul would not circumcise there Gal. 2.5 1 Cor. 1. where he saw the ill use they meant to make of it nay he would not Baptize But it may be objected that granting all this Ob ect Yet so far as it is good it binds and that from thence it follows that it should not have been taken or being taken that though in all things it binds not yet in those that are lawful and good it being taken and God solemnly invocated as we shall answer at the dreadful day of judgment that we took it with a true intention Distinction 1 to perform the same in those it binds Answ Not as any part of that Covenant To which I answer by a two-fold distinction First The Covenant is to be considered either per se and of it self as a publick National Covenant imposed by the power that then was Or else per accidens as there was occasionally joyned with it a personal and particular stipulation and oath of every man for himself Now in the former sense and as the National publick Covenant imposed by such Power in regard the Oath it self was contradictory to former lawful Oaths imposed by unsufficient power in opposition to the Legal and in the matter of it seditious schismatical and injurious as also in the scope and end It is wholly void in the obligation of it But in the latter sense as there was conjoyned accidently therewith a particular and personal swearing of each man for himself it may have an obligation in the sense of the next distinction which is That this Covenant must be Distinction 2 considered also first formally and entirely as such an Oath and Covenant in concreto Any Record or Deed vitiated in any one part makes void the whole in Law say the Brethren Necessity of Reform p. 36. and in the whole containing such a body of Articles Secondly materially and as having in it some particulars that taken thence and by themselves might not be unlawful to swear unto Now in the former sense as any thing in the Covenant is a part of it as that publick Covenant proposed by such Power and containing such illegal matter as a whole and body so it all and every thing therein contained is void invalid But accidentally Bonum ex inintegris causis malum ex quolibet defectu Dr. Sanders de juram and unlawful to be kept Because if in a body of an engagement any part be unlawful the whole is so But in the other sense as there happened by accident to be in it some things lawful to be sworn unto as to preserve what is good in one Church and to endeavour orderly to reform what may possibly be found amiss in the other c. may and doth bind but not as parts of that Covenant imposed by that Power c. but as a private and personal Engagement Ezek. 16.61 And as a private Oath Oath and Covenant and as made by a man in his chamber obliging only by the matters the invocation of the Name of God upon them whereunto each man was accidentally drawn by that occasion The same obligation lying upon him if on any other occasion he had in his closet sworn to those things and no otherwise nor with any reference at all to that Covenant I conclude therefore in reference to the Covenant as that Covenant and Oath it binds not neither in whole nor in part But it may be further objected Object 2 out of Josh 9.19 That when Joshua and the Princes had sworn though in a thing forbidden they took themselves obliged to keep it First it would be a good answer ad hominem Answ 1 Calvin in loc Videmus itaque ut Nomen Dei bis prosanaverint dum praetextu juramenti pertinaciter desendunt quod stultum promiserant Tremel in loc Deut. 20.10 Aug. Q. in Josh cap. 14. to return unto these persons the exposition of Calvin whom in this Covenant particularly about Church-discipline they do perversly imitate himself being of another spirit who saith in this place That the Princes did rashly to swear and foolishly to keep it because the Oath was void ipso facto being against express prohibition of God himself But others more agreeably judge the thing was not unlawful seeing though deceitfully they did seek peace which the Lord else-where alloweth to be granted Or as St. Austin For the honor of Gods Name and the commendation of clemency and on Gods part the reward of their faith I shall for close propound the greatest examples opposite in this argument of an Oath and about killing both of them as this Covenant is for that 's the scope to maintain the War against the King and the Church namely of two Kings David and Herod the one after Gods own heart the other after Sathans Of the first Video pium hominem sanctum Aug. de decollat Joh. Bapt. Tom. 10. pag. ed. lovan 438. cap. 2. in temerariam jurationem cecidisse maluisse non facere quod juraverat quam jurationem suam fuso hominis sanguine implere I see a good and holy man fallen into a rash oath and adjuration and choosing rather not to perform what by oath he had pre-ingaged than by the effusion of human blood to perfect it Saith St. Austin And
Scripture This refers especially to the seventh Article touching Predestination c. whose words in the latter part they are Lastly Ministers are not prohibited absolutely from searching but from that which is curious Answ 5 and beyond sobriety This for the doubtfulness of the Articles The second exception is their erroneousness 2. Error for on this the Brethren insist though under the other covered head of doubtfulness First because it is said Not every deadly sin committed willingly after Baptism Artic. 16. is a sin against the holy Ghost they infer that the Church holds the distinction of venial and deadly sin which is Popish What if the Article speak in the then received language and according to such distinction not owning of it therefore in the sense held by the adversary but using it for the purpose they had in hand viz. that though all sins be deadly of themselves yet seeing some are greater than other grant the worst which they call deadly sin as we usually express a great evil by that word that it is a deadly one as a deadly grief a deadly mischief yet is not every such a sin against the holy Ghost especially when the Church hath in other places so plainly declared her self to the people as in the Homilies Catechism and Common-prayer-book in the last whereof it prescribeth confession of sins to be made twice every day by all the Congregation Now it is not to be thought that every one is guilty of deadly sin every day in the sense expressed so that the people are in no great danger by that expression And the Articles declaring Artic. 11. Artic. 22. that we are accounted righteous before God onely for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ And that there is none other satisfaction for sin but that offering of Christ alone and damning of all Purgatory Pardons worshipping of Images and Reliques and invocation of Saints do declare they count no sin in it self venial but by the blood of Christ Again Artic. 20. where because 't is said The Church hath power to decree Rites and Ceremonies and authority in controversies of faith Because the Kings declaration and the Act before that say That the Articles must be taken in the literal and grammatical sense they infer ' That if a Convocation declare any thing in the premises they must assent and subscribe in the literal sense or be deprived But I it is not forbidden either by that Act or the Kings Declaration to enquire the literal sense and so to examine them nor 2 are they required by that declaration to subscribe to what a Synod shall conclude in the literal and grammatical sense of such conclusions or Canons but onely to the literal and grammatical sense of the Articles This therefore is a captious inference upon the Declaration and the Act. And so much more are their exceptions against the 34 Article That whosoever through his own private judgment willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant unto the Word of God and be ordained by common authority c. But are there not three or four Cautions in it that should defend it from all calumny 1. That these Traditions and Rites must not be repugnant to the Word of God 2. That they be established by common Authority 3. That a man do transgress of his own private judgment And 4. willingly purposely Yea and 5. openly This exception taketh away the obedience to all Church-Laws yea to all Civill Laws they may as well except against subscribing if any such Act were to the sense of this Article applyed to the Laws of the Kingdom As suppose they should be enjoyned to subscribe That whosoever shall through his private judgment willingly and purposely openly break the Laws of the Land which be not repugnant to the Word of God and be ordained by common Authority and to take these words of the Act in the literal and grammatical sense without putting their own private or new sense upon it c. Would not such persons be thought unworthy to have any place in any Common-wealth that should refuse And why then in the Church surely they must be both 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 men without yoke and without use and that per 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is pernitious unto all Societies and men of Belial 3. Artic. 35. Their third exception is against Artic. 35. wherein is required the subscribing to the Book of Homilies as a godly and wholesome doctrine and necessary for these times Against this they object that there are false doctrines or assertions in them First in general subscription to the Homilies is intended by the Church The Homilies how to be understood in Subscription not in so punctual and verbal a degree as is required unto the Articles as appears because the Articles are to be distinctly and severally read and the expressions in them every one assented to the Homilies not so but onely as they agree with the Articles which are the superior rule unto them Not therefore to every expression or sentence no nor doctrine nor assertion if any were contrary to the definitive doctrine of the Articles All men know that there is a greater latitude of expression allowed to popular Sermons as the Homilies are than to Articles And the Brethren would have their Sermons to contain necessary and wholesome doctrine yet perhaps will not be so hardy as to affirm that they may not have uttered some sentences not so true or congruous if exactly scanned or that nullnm unquam verbum emisit eorum quisque quod revocare vellet as he said above And lest there should any inconvenience arise to the people though now the danger is little the Homilies being so much if not too much laid aside the Common-prayer and reading of the Scripture publickly together with preaching according to the Articles are provided as a remedy Yea which is more if one Homily speak less warily in any material point it is corrected in another as in the Homily of Alms-deeds seeming in one passage or so to ascribe some kind of merit unto them though it doth not taking the word properly yet it explaineth it before-hand in another namely in the Homily of Salvation or Justification wherein that doctrine is excellently set forth as also in the Homily of Faith So when in the Homily of Alms Tobith is cited as Scripture not onely the Article doth regulate that expression but every ones Bible also Instructions to Preachers Artic. 1. Ann. 1622. Besides every exhortatory expression must not be called a doctrine or an assertion but that which as a point is purposely insisted on to be maintained of which sort I believe verily the Brethren will never be able to instance in any one out of the Homilies And indeed had they observed the instructions of King James above mentioned viz. That no preacher
men The Br. object Tyranny to Q. Eliz. and the Parl. which is not to be imagined To this first in general If this Reason be admitted it doth not only overthrow all constitutions that concern Religion whether made by Church or State whensoever any turbulent spirit shall fancy them not to be according to the Word And to all States and Churches But it condemns also all the Reformed Churches yea all the Churches and Christian States that are or ever have been I think in the world And particularly majorem in modum and in a special manner the Church of Geneva Ch. of Geneva requires conformity by Oath Revel 13.11 and Calvins Discipline where they are obliged thereunto by oath But to the dilemma in particular neither of the two Horns of this Lamb that speaks like a Dragon have any strength Have they forgotten or never learned that boyes are taught in the very rudiments of Logick and reasoning Kek. Log l. 3. c. 12. can 7. Quod per bonam consequentiam ex testimonio aliquo divino elicitur id EANDEM cum eo vim habet That what by good consequence is drawn from Scripture hath the same force that Scripture hath Did not our Saviour and all the Apostles prove their Doctrine so unto those that received nothing from them but what they proved Do not the Brethren think their Sermons and this their Book ought to be obeyed absolutely and in all the points they have excepted And indeed a good consequence is nothing but a natural effect Consequences And an effect is of the same nature with its cause yea as one saith nothing else but the cause in act or at least the cause is in the effect R. Hook l. 5. so is Scripture in the true consequénces of it And yet subscription to such conclusions do not argue the Authors to be infallible but only to be eyes unto the weaker-sighted to see the light by Tert. Advers Haeret. Omnia quidem dicta Domini omnibus posita sunt quae per aures judaeorum ad nos pervenerunt Gods Word is propounded unto all but it comes to us by the ears and so by the eyes of others And because men are called to subscribe and not children who should have their eyes their subscription only acknowledgeth that the Church and State have taken a true sample from the original leaving this still as the standard as prior tempore ordine naturâ dignitate Such are all the true determinations of Judges in reference to the Law as Deut. 17. They shall expound the Law to thee And the disobedient there was punished with death for contempt of the sentence of the Church and State and yet their determinations were not of equal authority but of equal force with the Law it self So here Secondly To the other horn of this Lamb or dilemma That else the statute did intend to tyrannize over the conscience which they say is not to be imagined Oportuit esse memorem Answ Did not the Brethren in the very lines immediately going before acknowledge yea urge it as an argument out of Sir Edw. Coke who saith He heard Wray Chief Justice of the K. Bench Pasch 23 Eliz. quoting Dier 23 Eliz. 377. lib. 6. fol. 69. Greens case Smiths case report that where one Smith subscribed to the 39 Articles of Religion with this addition so far forth as the same were agreeable to the Word of God that it was resolved by him and all the Judges of England that this subscription was not according to the Statute of Eliz 13. Because the Statute required an absolute subscription and this subscription made it conditional And that this Act was made for avoiding diversity of opinions c. And by this additâ—on the party might by his own private opinion take some of them to be against the Word of God and by this means diversity of opinions should not be avoided which was the scope of the Statute and the very Act it self made touching subscription hereby by of none effect Thus far their own quotation So then it is evident by the words themselves quoted just before and by the sentence of all the Judges of England that the Statute requireth absolute subscription which if it do they say it did intend to tyrannize over the consciences of men So then Q. Eliz. and that Parl. with all the Kings and Parliaments since that have confirmed that Act were Tyrants It concerns the present Parl. to vindicate their predecessors in this point also To what they add concerning mens subscribing when they are young Subscription of young men and before their judgments be mature It is answered first Those admitted to the Ministry though they may be as Timothy was but young in age yet they are not to be Novices in knowledge And Subscription is a good bond upon them Use of subscription both for the peoples good and their own to preserve them from novelties and apostacy But so that no man is engaged against the Word of God I hope then they will not urge the obligation of the Covenant upon those who have not had time or solidity throughly to ponder and weigh all the Articles thereof in the ballance of the Sanctuary and in the scale of the Law as they phrase it To the last of this head The liberty given to tender consciences Liberty to tender consciences is to be in things of lesser not of fundamentall consequence and in the Articles of the Faith for then how should the Magistrate be custos utriusque tabulae How should the Prince perform his trust of the souls as well as the bodies estates and names of his people How should there be one God one Faith one Baptisme in a particular Church and we all with one mouth glorifie God This is also against the practice of all Churches we have no such custome 1 Cor. 11. nor the Churches of God Thus much in reply to their three general first object against the Articles 1. Their doubtfulnesse 2. Their erroniousness and 3. The exacting of subscription to them I come now to the fourth viz. Their defectiveness and imperfection Defectiveness of the Artic. Where the first Exception is that Art 6. it is said that In the name of the holy Scripture we understand those Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament of whose Authority there was never any doubt in the Church The Brethren oppose that some Books and passages of the New Testament have been doubted of as the Epistle of James the second Epistle of Peter The Article they say is defective in not enumerating all the Books of the New Testament as it had done those of the Old and of the Apocrypha comprehending them only under this expression All the Books of the New Testament as they are commonly received These words of the Article being the former contains no matter of doctrine namely those of which there was never any doubt in the
Church and the latter All the Books of the New Testament as they are commonly received being plain and evident all Christians now agreeing in the number of them throughout Europe The exception against them might have been omitted as tending to raise scruples in the minds of the people unless this Tract of the Brethren had been presented in writing and not published in print But that this scruple may not extend it self too far I shall name such as to my remembrance have been at any time doubted of They are the second Epistle of Peter See a very full Confutation of these doubts in Bellarm de verb. D. lib. 1 cap. 16. seqq Tertul. Cont. Marcion l. 4. Hieron proâ—em in Epist ad Titum Euseb l. 3. c 3. Calvin saith it was by the cunning of the Devil â—hat the Epist to the Hebrews should be doubted of because it speaks so ful y of Christs Priesthood the second and third of John the Epistle of Jude and by some the History of the Adulteress John 8.1 the last Chapter of that Gospel the Epistle to the Hebrews the Epistle of James and the Revelation But first these doubters were some of them Hereticks as Marcion Tatianus c. Secondly This doubt did not spread it self in the Church but was onely of some private persons Again It was before the Church had generally consented in them The Churches motives in receiving books of Scripture Which having the same grounds of divine authority for them as for the rest both in regard of the 1 Antiquity and 2 general reception of them as also in regard of the 3 consonancy of them with the doctrine of all the other Scripture 4 and the enlargement and explanation of the same doctrine by them 5 and further the Presence of the Holy Ghost in efficacy by the matter of them thereby setting his seal unto them Upon these and the like grounds hath the Vniversal Church received them as the other I answer therfore in the words of Bullinger Professor of the Church of Tigur in this very argument De sacris libris eor dignitate Exposit premiss ante Biblia Tigurin Nec magnopere curandum existimo quod à quibusdam traditur quosdam veterum dubitasse de Epistolâ ad Hebraeos de epistolâ posteriore Petri Judae de epistolâ Jacobi Apocalypsi Quid enim ad nos quod pauci aliquot suis affectibus corrupti de rebus certis authenticis Authoribus dubitarunt Neither are we much to mind saith he what is said by some namely that certain of the Antients did doubt of the Epistle to the Hebrews of the second Epistle of Peter and of that of Jude of the Epistle of James and of the Revelation For what is it to us what some few corrupted by their depraved affections have judged concerning things certain and these undoubted Authors Thus far he Whence it appears it might truly be said there was never any doubt in the Church of these books because either the persons were not of the Church but Hereticks that doubted or else were some few perverted judgments it never came so far as to be a doubt in the Church So much for the first Exception The next is they are defective because the Articles do speak nothing of sundry points of Popery and Arminianism Predestination abused universal Redemption Object universal Grace the manner of Conversion and falling from grace which King James procured the Synod of Dort to confute and for which the late Synod at London is so much maligned To this first in general Answ It hath been always counted both the wisdom and the tenderness not onely of the English but of the antient Church to make Articles of faith whereunto all especially Ministers Conf. Hamp Court p. 39. must subscribe to be but few First It being unfit to thrust into the Book every position negative or affirmative which would make the Book swell into a volume as big as the Bible and also confound the Reader saith King James When such questions arise among Schollars pag. 40. the quietest proceeding were to determine them in the Universities and not to stuff the Book of Articles with all conclusions Theological Secondly The better course would be to punish the broachers of false doctrine as occasion should be offered For were the Articles never so many and sound who can prevent the contrary opinions of men till they be heard Thus the King Ep. 57. ad Dardanum St. Austin saith Regulam fidei pusillis magnisque communem in Ecclesia tenent The rule of faith is common to the weak and to the wise Hence my Lord Primate of Ireland infers That the rule of faith must contain such truths ONELY B. Ushers answ to the Jesuite pag. 417. as are GENERALLY agreed upon by the consent of all true Christians And accordingly we see the Creed called the Apostles the Nicene the Constantinopolitan and Athanasian how short they are now they were the Articles of Religion of those times The Articles of Ireland are larger but taken for the most part ad verbum out of our Articles Homilies and Common-prayer-book But secondly why do the Brethren urge more Articles when as they neither are willing to subscribe to these few wherein they have found but two or three faults and those inconsiderable but also refuse to subscribe to any without limits unless they mean as good-fellows upon the way to range themselves whilst they leave others bound behind them 3. Touching King James though he was opposite to the Tenets of Arminius yet you heard even now he was averse also from having the contrary doctrines inserted into the Articles farther then they are already for one of them falling from grace was there the question Conf. Hamp Court pag. 39.40 And as opposite he was to the preaching of them to the people as appears by these words That no Preacher of what title soever under the degree of a Bishop or Dean at the least do from henceforth presume to preach in any popular auditory the deep points of Predestination Election K. James Instructions to Preachers Ann. 1622. Artâ—c 3. Reprobation or of the universality efficacy resistibility or irresistibility of Gods grace but leave those themes to be handled by the learned men and that moderately and modestly by way of use and application rather than by way of positive Doctrine as being more fit for the Schools and Universities than for simple Auditories You see the King whom you quote is not of your mind 4. As to the matters themselves the Articles speak sufficiently of them so far as to clear what is most necessary in them As the eighth Article of Original sin the tenth Article of Free-will the seventeenth Article of Predestination and Election leaving what is disputable and uncomfortable to be gathered from what is expressed 5. As to the Assembly they are not condemned by all men for their conclusions in those
points but for convelling and tearing up the foundations of many generations in * As the invisibility of the Catholick Church c. Doctrine Worship and Discipline without legitimate Authority and for other things which need not here be named Their third instance of the defectiveness of the Articles Object 3 is that they speak nothing of the creation of providence fall of man of sin of the punishment of sin of Gods Covenants effectual calling Adoption Sanctification Faith Repentance Perseverance of the Law of God Christian Liberty and liberty of conscience Religious worship of the Sabbath or Lords day of Marriage and Divorce the Communion of Saints Church-Government and Discipline of the Resurrection or of the last Judgment All which the Scripture teach as necessary and are comprised in the Apostles creed That the Assemblies Confession hath all these and that with proofs of Scripture which the Answ 1 Articles want But they should consider that a Confession of faith is one thing and a Catechism or a common-place book to refer ones reading unto is another If the Church shall think fit to compile one of these for the help of young students no doubt but all those shall be expresly treated on though perhaps not in the same form or titles But to constitute a Confession of Faith of all these heads with the several Articles which the Assembly hath subjoyned would doubtless have excluded many more from subscription than the Articles ever did Especially where they have made that an Article of faith which never was a Protestant doctrine viz. That the Church Catholick is a visible and organical body Assemblies Confess ch 35. Artic. 2. whereas it is an article of our faith in the Apostles Creed and not of sense And that which is laid as the foundation of the usurpation of the Bishops of Rome Bellarm. de Eccles l. 3. c. 2. by Bellarmine for either that or somewhat like it must follow upon that ground so that a fair Bridge is hereby laid from Thames to Tiber for his Holiness to walk upon A point universally opposed by the Protestant party except Peter Ramus and perhaps one or two more althongh of late owned by some of them of which * Vindicia Catholicae in answer to Mr. Hudson else-where I instance in this that be it true or false yet a point of this nature should not have been made an Article for the not subscribing whereto men must have been rejected from the Ministry others there are that would have stuck no doubt with many men orthodox able and godly 2. As to the things themselves they are all in effect touched either in the Articles Articles of Ireland Anno 1615. whence taken or the Homilies which are approved by the Articles or in the Liturgy or in the Book of Ordination a branch also of the Articles And the Articles of Ireland which are more full in themselves than ours and comprehend in terminis most or all these heads they are taken verbatim out of the books now mention'd And to give some instances The Creation and Providence is mentioned in the first Article of God and in the Catechism in the Common-prayer-book And more largely in the Homily for Rogation week part 1 2. The fall of man his sin and punishment of it professedly discours'd of in the Homily of the misery of mankind and is touched in the Articles Artic. 9. 10. of Original sin and Free-will Gods Covenant may be understood in the Articles of Justification and Predestination Artic. 11. 17. and is discours'd on largely in the Homily of Salvation Effectual calling also in the same 17th Article and more largely in the Homily of Faith Where also of Adoption as likewise in the lesser Catechism in the Liturgy Faith in the Article of Justification by faith Sanctification in the Homily of good works and divers others Repentance hath a proper Homily for it Perseverance is expresly set down in the 17th Article Of the Law of God in the Homily of the misery of Man And in the Catechism in the Liturgy so far as concerns practice Christian liberty in the Articles of the Traditions of the Church And the Homily of disobedience and wilful rebellion Religious worship is the subject of the Liturgy And of several Articles and of the Homily of the time and place of prayer The Sabbath or Lords day in the Homily of the time and place of prayer Of Marriage both in the Homily of Matrimony and in the Exhortation at Marriage in the Common-prayer-book Divorce as a point of Law is discoursed in the Canons Communion of Saints is the ground of all Exhortations to Unity as the Homily against Contention and exhortation to Charity as love and good works Church-government is the subject of Artic. 20. 21. of the authority of the Church and of General Councils And for Orders they are in the Book of Ordination For the Rules in the book of Canons and in the Rubricks in the Liturgy about Order and in the Commination there Of the Resurrection the Homily on Easter-day And of the last Judgment in the Homily against the fear of Death Seeing therefore that most or all of these heads are either expresly treated on or occasionally either in the Articles or branches of them how say they that they contain nothing of them Proofs to Confessions Lastly for the proofs added in the Assemblies Confession not added in the Articles they know it is not usual to add Proofs unto Confessions as may be seen in the Confessions of the Reformed Churches where they are rare And even lately their Brethren of the Independent way published their Confession without proofs And unless it be that of New England the Assemblies and those of the Separation I remember not that I have seen any with frequent proofs And if I mistake not it had not been amiss if the Assembly had kept the Track in this in as much as the Proofs sometimes do not infer the Article In a Catechism or Sermon or Dispute they are more proper than in a Confession Because that is a thing supposed to be grounded not in this or that place but on the current of the Scripture Besides Proofs occasion Dispute which is abhorrent from the nature of a Confession The places alledg'd may be clear a proof and yet not so to every less-intelligent Reader I conclude this discourse touching the imperfection and defectiveness of the Articles with that considerable passage of Erasmus to this purpose Summa religionis nostrae pax est unanimitas Erasm presat in Hilarium ea vix constare poterit nisi de quà m potest paucissimis definiamus in multis liberum relinquamus suum cuique judicium propterea quod ingens sit rerum plurimarum obscuritas c. The sum saith he of our Religion is peace and unanimity of which there is little hope unless those things which shall shall be enjoyned as matters of faith be
65. But give me leave to close with the testimony for the practice of it and the reason of that practice out of Austine not only the Vulgar one that we should not be ashamed of Christ crucified but one somewhat deeper Ecce venturi estis ad fontem sanctum diluemini baptismo Aegyptiis insequentibus Israelitas Serm. de Temp. 119. cap. 8. similia erant vestra peccata persequentibus sed usque ad mare rubrum Quid est usque ad mare rubrum Usque ad fontem Christi cruce sanguine consecratum lanceâ perforatum est latus Christi manavit pretium nostrum Ideo SIGNO Christi signatur Baptismus id est aqua ubi tangimini quasi in mare rubrum transitis Behold you are coming unto the holy fountain ye shall be washed in Baptisme Your sins that follow you are like the Aegyptians that pursued the Israelites but how far but unto the Red Sea What is it unto the Red Sea As far as the Font consecrated with the CROSSE and blood of Christ Christs side was pierced with a spear and our redemption flowed out Why the Cross in Bapt. Therefore Baptisme that is water where you are dipped or sprinkled and as it were pass into the Red Sea is signed with the sign of Christ Thus far he wherein he signifieth both the use of it by the Antient Church in Baptiâ—me And also the reason that it might represent by what suffering and means the remission of our siâ—s by the blood of Christ applyed in Baptisme was obtained and brought unâ—o effect I conclude this with Bucers judgment of this ceremony as enjoined in our Liturgy Signum hoc non tam In Script Angl. in Censur Liturg Angl. c. 12 de Sign Crucis in fronte Baptizand quòd est usus in Ecclesia Antiquissimi quà m quòd est admodum simplex praesentis admonitionis Crucis Christi adhiberi nec indecens nec inutile existimo si adhibeatur modò purè intellectum religiosè excipiatur nullâ nec superstitione adjunctâ nec elementi servitute aut vulgari consuetudine This sign of the Cross in Bapt. for of that he is passing his censure not so much because it is of most antient use in the Church as because it is simple and of present admonition of the Cross of Christ I think it neither undecent nor unprofitable to be used Provided it be rightly understood and piously received without superstition or servitude to the very sign or of common custome Thus far he The third is kneeling at the Communion A ceremony which some most of all others scruple Kneeling at the Commun Matth. 23. and yet the Brethren now mentioned who strain at every gnat swallow this camel very smoothly For they say the Rubrick named above hath solidly and excellently declared it We will not refuse nec ab hoste doceri Phil 1. to hear truth though preached of strife and envy as the Apostle speaks the rather because it may also oyl some other minds exulcerated likewise The Rubrick is this The Rubrick about kneeling at the Lords Supper Whereas it is ordained in the Book of Com. prayer in the Administration of the Lords Supper that the Communicants kneeling should receive the holy Communion which thing being well meant for a signification of the humble and grateful acknowledgment of the benefits of Christ given unto the worthy receiver and to avoid the profanation and disorder which about the holy Communion might else ensue lest yet the same kneeling might be thought or taken otherwise we do declare that it is not meant thereby that any adoration is done or ought to be done either unto the Sacramental bread and wine there bodily received nor unto any real and essential presence there being of Christs natural flesh and blood for as concerning the Sacramental bread and wine they remain still in their very natural substances and therefore may not be adored for that were idolatry to be abhorred of all faithfull Christians And as concerning the natural body and blood of our Saviour Christ they are in Heaven and not here for it is contrary to the truth of Christs natural body to be in moe places then one at one time This is the Rubrick the doctrine whereof being definitively prescribed in the twenty eighth Article of Religion Artic. 28. and diffusely for popular audience handled in the Homily of the worthy receiving of the Sacrament Hom. of the Sacram. Tom. 2. might without any great peril be omitted especially as it seems not being confirmed by Parl. as being sent when the Book was printed off as we have noted elsewhere But as to the matter of that Rubrick seeing neither Scripture nor Father is alledged nor a third part so much spoken for satisfaction as in the Canon for explic of the Cross in Baptism why may not this as well as that satisfie The heads of which arguments for the Cross in that Canon being these Reasons for the Cross in Bapt. out of the Canon Note 1. The Apostles so far honoured the name of the Cross that under it they comprehend Christ and all his benefits 2. It began to be in use and reverend estimation in the Primitive Ch. even in the Baptism of their children and otherwise The opposition to which would have been a note of an enemy of Christ 3. That though abused in Popery yet being purged from the superstitious opinions had of it there and being of use as a token that we should not be ashamed of Christ crucified and as press-money to engage us to fight under his banner against our spiritual enemies it was approved both in Ed. 6. time by the Martyrs and other Confessors and by Bucer in his censure of the Liturgy and by the Confessions of the Reformed Churches It being cautioned 1. Cautions That it is no part of the substance of Baptism 2. That the child is both baptized and received into the Congregation before the signing with the Cross 3. Because it is in it self indifferent but being injoyned by authority ought not by private men to be neglected which arguments seem as full for this as did the former for the kneeling But for kneeling at the Sacram. we have also as in the * See Goulart Annot. in Cypr. lib. ad Demetr ca. 19. in Epist 56. cap. 7. Hooker pol. l. 5. § 58. former the suffrage of Reformed Churches in allowance and in some cases in practice also The French Churches in their late Apology written by Monsieur Joh. Daille say Thanks be to God we are not so ill taught as to scruple the * Apolog. of the French Churches translated by my learned friend Mr. Th. Smith Printed Camòr 1653. chap. 12. receiving the Sacrament on our knees Our Brethren of England never receive it otherwise and when we receive it with them we do very readily conform our selves to their order Thus they and this for that ceremony The last is
their usual mistakes For first they are in the Roman and Paris Edition of the Greek and in many antient Eastern Psalters as is noted in those Bibles As also are they in that Edition so magnifi'd by Austin which he followed in his Exposition of the Psalms Aug. in Ps 13. But howsoever they are Scripture and are found altogether in Rom. 3. as themselves acknowledge I might add that they are also in that follow'd by Jerom Hieron in Ps 13. if that Commentary upon the Psalmes be his which Bellarmine saith is obscura quaestio a difficult Problem When they add Insert sheet pag. 6. Object Answ that the Translation of the Epistles and Gospels is as antient as 25 Hen. 8. and taken out of the Mass-book This is added to make this Translation odious but sure they will grant that the Epistles and Gospels in the Mass-book were first taken out of the Scripture it self But of the Mass-book in general we have spoken above and shewen that every thing in it ought not to be rejected Hook eccles pol. 5. § 19. Conf. Hamp Court pag. 45 46. Lastly for the particular places they name some of them have been objected and answered long since And the difference not overthrowing either faith or manners there being also a correct translation for constant use appointed and these but onely in the Epistles and Gospels which are to be used not so frequently these faults moreover not being many nor of any great consequence are venial That of Hezekiah his destroying the brazen Serpent might have here been omitted having been so fully replyed unto and the disproportion shewn by a learned Pen so long ago And afterward briefly by a learned King Hook eccles pol. l. 5. § 65. Conf. Hamp Court pag. 73. Of which Books and Answers the Brethren take not the least notice whether out of ignorance or want of ingenuity may be left in medio without danger of the Law I hope Necess Reform pag. 18. 1. The Kalender Next after the man that bore the Armour comes the Champion himself after the inserted sheet the solemn treatise where the first title is of the Kalender And the main quarrel against it for appointing so much of the Apocrypha to be read In the Answer to the fourth general Exception of which above To the particulars if any thing sound toward error or be indeed dross should that deprive the Church of the gold contained in the rest Do we not read of the Midwifes lying of Abrahams twice of Rachels stealing her fathers Idols and many other in Scripture which ought not therefore to be rejected Again if it were requisite to spend time in the particulars there might not want perhaps a probable defence Tob. 3. of what either the daughter of Raguel or Raphael the Angel or Asmodeus the evil Spirit or Judith are there said to have done or spoken Jacob said He obtained the portion of Sichem with his sword and with his bowe much after that sense that Judith there speaks according unto Calvins Exposition Jus victoriae ad se transfert quasi divinitus sibi concessum quia in ejus gratiam homicidis Deut peperceret Calv. in Genes 48.22 Simeon and Levi might have a laudable zeal as Judith speaks and God might use it in his secret counsel and did so to purchase a place for Jacob And Jacob own the Land as his conquest though he detest the action The like may be said touching Judith's prayer as no doubt Jahel had hers before she cut of Sisera's head Judg. 4. whom also she slew by the deceit of her lips as well as Judith did Holofernes Genes 30. Did not Rachel and Leah with great Religion bless God for the children that they had made their husband Jacob beget upon their Handmaids Times and persons must be noted And every thing in Scripture is not to be imitated Else we might say as the Brethren Are not these gallant chapters to be read in the Churches The examples then in Scripture must be interpreted by rule and may not also the Apocrypha The next Regiment assaulted by the Brethren are the Redcoats the Rubricks so called 2. The Rubricks because antiently written in red Letters and are directions how to officiate and read the Common-prayer-book the first whereof is cloathed not with a coat of Male but of a Priest at which they fire They say Priest is the old style and title in the Mass-book This Mass-book is the Gorgons head wherewith they terrifie all assailants But was the Mass book ever in English True indeed Fox Act. Mon. in Edw. 6. King Edward the sixth for the appeasing of a rebellion told the Rebels so but that was not as it was the Mass-book but as it was a Prayer-book as little as might be at that time different Besides that prayer-book is not the same with ours now for it hath been reformed more than once since The Mass then never having been in English the word Priest could not be taken thence Yea but it answers to Sacerdos in the Mass-book which signifies Priest Priest That 's the Brethrens translation to avoid Presbyter out of the Mass-book whose evident derivative Priest is with very little alteration If this please not may one more antient and more cheerful be admitted viz. Walter Mapes Arch-deac of Oxf. in King Johns time M. Sâ—r. Sacerdos enim est cùm sacra dederit Tunc verò Presbyter cùm ter praebiberit i. e. When sacred things he gives he is a Priest A Presbyter when thrice before the rest He takes his Cup and so begins the Feast Thirdly Is it equipollent the word Priest to a sacrifice surely not in the etymology for it signifies onely an administration of holy things nor in the use unless we shall say that in the Primitive Church they owned a proper and real sacrifice These Bâ—ethren with the finger point us to take notice That they have seriously consulted Antiquity pag. 47. did they never in all their reading meet amongst a multitude of the like with such a passage as this Cùm haec tanta ac talia multa alia exempla praecedant Cypr. lib. 1. ep 3. quibus Sacerdotalis authoritas potestas divina dignatione formatur quales putas esse eos qui Sacerdotum hostes contra ecclesiam catholicam rebelles nec praemonentis domini comminatione nec futuri judicii ultione terrentur c. Whereas these such so great and so many examples have gone before us of the admonitions and executions of the judgments of God against the despisers of the Priesthood whereby the authority and power of Priesthood is by Gods special providence established what kind of men wouldst thou take them to be who being enemies to Priests and rebels against the Catholick Church are neither terrified with the Lords forewarning nor with the punishment of the judgment to come And what more usual than that title
a reason is demanded seeing every Lords day is celebrated upon the same account that Easter is viz. the memory of the Resurrection of our Lord. Lastly It is non-sense or worse say these sensible men to require that the people should receive the Sacram. and other Rites thrice a year as implying the Popish Sacraments or else Superstitious ceremonies Antique Answ 1 Crossings c. When the Lord did three times enjoyn his Antient people to appear before him three times in the year Deut. 16.16 Exod. 23.14 and 34.24 with Levit. 23.38 whereof Easter was one yet he did not forbid their free-will-offerings much less do they that make this trine-appearance with an ad minimum and at least More they desire and exhort unto less they will nor permit They dispence not with Gods own invitation who hath set no precise time do exhort the people often in his name and bind them to some frequency if exhortation will not serve 1 Cor. 1. Next They that were not sent to baptize but had Answ 2 work of more necessity and haste their silence must not be construed to a Prohibition Gal. 4. explain'd And when they do reprove those that observed times and days and moneths and years As part of Moses Law obligatory to Christians and upon some opinion of righteousness thereby in derogation to the All-sufficiency of Christs righteousness Gal. 2. chap. 3. chap. 5. 6. 1 Tim. 6. they do no more thereby forbid the observation of times as invitements and advantages unto piety then when they exhort to be rich in good works and lay up for our selves a good foundation that we may lay hold on eternal life Rom. 3. do therefore forbid us to believe that a man is justified by the faith of Jesus Christ and that we are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ Rom. 6. ult but for eternal life it is the gift of God When our Saviour forbad to call any Answ 3 man father upon earth he meant not to confute the Law Matth. 15.4 nor his own reproof of the Pharisees who made all things whereby they might gain to be Corban and so suffered not a man to help his father or his mother from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is but a fresh mans consequence To conclude That because our Saviour in one sense forbad to swear at all Matth. 5. interpreted upon viz. the Pharisees exposition and dispensation and that whatsoever was more proceeded of evil he ever meant to condemn himself when he added Amen Amen 2 Cor. 1.21 Revel 10.6 which is literally more or the Saints or Angels both which we find to have taken deep oaths upon great occasions is a Quakers Logick Again Such is the frailty of our memories that Answ 4 without some standing memorials we should not seriously mind the things that do belong unto our peace The use of solemn Festivals And such is the hardness of our hearts that unless these times be solemn and therefore can be but seldome for familiaritas parit contemptum we should have little impression of them Hence ever since we read of any instituted Church we find they had their stata tempora not only hebdomadary but yearly also Yea nature did thus much dictate unto the Heathen that besides those days of the week wherein they did some special worship unto their Idols the footsteps whereof remain still in the appellations of them yet they had also their Annua solennia yea and Olympiads also more rare and solemner Now it is not unknown I suppose unto the Brethren that why Easter to be one seeing every Lords day is in memory of the Resurrection It is a question that should have been put first to our Fathers yea our Universal Mother who were more concerned to answer for they have told us Illa autem quae non scripta sed tradita custodimus Aug. ep 118. ad Januar. c. 1. quae quidem toto terrarum orbe observantur datur intelligi vel ab ipsis Apostolis vel plenariis conciliis quorum est in ecclesia saluberrima authoritas commendata atque statuta retineri The antâ—quity of the four solemn Feastivals sicuti quòd domini Passio Resurrectio Ascensio in Coelum Adventus de coelo Sp. Sancti anniversaria solennitate celebrantur That those things which are not written in the Scriptures but kept by tradition and which are observed throughout all Churches we are thereby given to understand that they were instituted and commended unto us either by the Apostles themselves or by some General Councils who have a Soveraign Authority in the Church as the yearly celebration of the Passion and the Resurrection and the Ascension of our Lord and the coming down of the H. Ghost Thus that Father of whom as was noted above out of Calvin we must learn if we would know the certainty of the judgment of Antiquity and of our Mother the Primitive Church And particularly for Easter The same Author gives us to understand Chap. 1. Aug. ib. cap. 7. Nonnullos probabilis quaedam ratio delectavit ut uno certo die per annum quo ipsam coenam Dominus dedit tanquam ad insigniorem commemorationem post cibos offerri accipi liceat corpus sanguis domini That some are of opinion that the body and blood of our Lord should be offered namely by the Minister to the people and received upon one certain day in the year namely that whereon he himself received it which they do on a very probable ground viz. that the commemoration might be the more solemn Which ground holds with us in celebrating the Communion both upon the day that Christ himself did as also upon that whereon we commemorate that action of his whereby he applyed the efficacy of all his sufferings Easter day his Resurrection for he was delivered for our sins and was raised again for our justification We do it therefore upon these daies specially Hom. 4. ult as well as on others more ordinarily viz. That the commemoration might be the more solemn But they aim at the root whilest they strike at one of the branches and are offended at the genus Festival times besides the Sabbath as well as at Easter specially Of which to that of the Antient Church related by S. Austin I shall only add that They are the splendour and outward dignity of our Religion R. Hook Eccles pol. l. 5. § 72. in fine forcible witnesses of antient truth provocations to the exercises of all piety shadows of our endless felicity in Heaven on Earth everlasting Records and Memorials Wherein they which cannot be drawn to hearken to that we teach may only by looking upon what we do in a manner read whatsoever we believe The last thing they object against this Rubrick is a meer calumny and yet they raise a great tragedy upon it
they alledge the Apostles doctrine practise To the Assertion first which is no less inconsiderately uttered than confidently affirmed if generally taken Absurdities of the Brethrens Assert For so it overthrows Civil bounds National Laws Divine and Ecclesiastical Institutions It overthrows Civil bounds Might not the Brethrens Neighbour say unto them Sirs your Garden your Orchard your Close your Land were once indifferent and common to all men it is not the Authority of any Man or Law that can make that proper to you and necessarily to belong to you which Providence at the Creation left common and indifferent for all men On such a discourse as this the Levellers go And my self knew a man that would therefore pay no rent to his Landlord saying Why should not he have a house as well as he Smile not Brethren for the parallel fully holds all Tenures were at first indifferent and common Secondly It destroys National Laws for 't is in it self indifferent whether for example theft shall be punished by restitution or imprisonment or scourging or death Now when the Law of any Nation hath appointed such a punishment necessarily to be inflicted upon such a Malefactor he may upon this ground say The kind of punishment is indifferent and no Law of man can make that necessary without injustice It everteth also even divine Ordinances The Water in Baptism the Bread and Wine in the Lords Supper are before separation indifferent and common Therefore they cannot in particular by this principle be made necessary and obliging to be used Lastly because they intend Ceremonies in Religion it takes away the ground of Ecclesiastical Institutions whose object is especially things in their own nature indifferent as times place persons gestures habits c. for what obedience can be expected where no Authority can make it necessary in such things which leads me to a Answ 2 second Answer Gen. viz. That though no Law can alter the nature of things in themselves metaphysically and abstractedly considered yet it may and doth alter the obligation of practice about them that what was free before to do or not is otherwise now For example It was indifferent whether Paul would sacrifice or not Act. 21. but after the Church had judged it requisite for him he thought it his duty now to do it Again it was indifferent for him to circumcise or not to circumcise Act. 16. Gal. 2.3 5. yet according to circumstances he did it to Timothy and would not do it to others To abstain from blood and from things strangled I suppose the Brethren count indifferent because the Apostle saith Every Creature of God is good 1 Tim. 4. and nothing to be refused yet the Apostles for that time made it a matter of necessity to abstain from them Act. 15. Whether a Man pray uncovered and the Woman covered might seem indifferent but the Apostle besides other Arguments determines it by the custom and practice of the Church as a matter necessary to go that way he propounded As to that clause Indifferent things cannot be made necessary if they offend tender Consciences and are scandalous to good men It is answered that The due performance of the Worship of God And the general edification of all Consciences When scandal is not to be regarded by directing the reverent performance of their duty And the satisfaction of the Consciences of the greater part of the Church together with the taking away the scandal from profession apt to be cast upon it by the Adversary for omitting these Ceremonies is of more consequence and ought to be more eyed by those in Authority then the satisfying of a few though good men Paul no doubt gave very great offence in sacrificing in circumcising Timothy Gal. 2.5 in not circumcising Titus and in being stiffe against it Yet because the more publick and common good of the Church was concerned his charity directed him to love the Body and tender the welfare of that rather then of some particular Members though otherwise pretious This for their proposition next for their proof from the Apostles Doctrine and Practice Their proof Rom. 14. First his Doctrine All things indeed are pure but it is evil to him that eateth with offence See to the like effect also the Proposit touching Reform of the Liturg. now in the Press And it is good neither to eat Flesh nor drink Wine whereby thy Brother stumbleth or is made weak To take heed lest our liberty become a stumbling-block But if one will use his liberty and the other will take offence then his charge is Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not and let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth 2. His practise If Meat make my Brother to offend 1 Cor. 8. I will eat no Flesh whilest the world standeth lest I make my Brother to offend Answ But do these things prove that things indifferent may not by Authority be made necessary as to practise Nothing less For the things the Apostle mentioneth were as to any publick Injunction by Authority then in being left free no Law passed on them And they were observed according as Conscience in some and Charity in others did direct But are the Brethren able to shew out of these or any other places of the Apostles doctrine or practice That after the Church hath declared that they seek not to be justified by Works Gal. 2. much less Ceremonies but by the Faith of Jesus Christ That they own but one Mediator betwixt God and Man 1 Tim. 2. even the Man Christ Jesus That they having an eye to decency order and reverence in the Worship of God 1 Cor. 14. to which they are injoyned do judge that such and such Ceremonies without opinion of holiness in the things themselves or of adding any substance to the matter of the Worship are usefull to the better performance of Gods service and edification of his people and not in themâ—elves contrariant thereunto Are they able to shew that the Apostle because either things are in themselves indifferent or because some would be offended at them did in such a case either by doctrine or practice incourage unto disobedience I trow they are not To be sure the places alleadged prove it not as hath been shewed they speaking only of such things as on which no Civil nor Ecclesiastical sanction had passed but were in every mans liberty And the Apostles doctrine and practice as we heard prove the contrary he referring to the custom of the Church 1 Cor. 11. as a determination in things of themselves indifferent and himself also practising divers things Act. 21.16 Gal. 2. that without all question did offend many tender Consciences Certain it is that things strangled and blood were things indifferent yet commanded as necessary for the time by the Apostles Act. 15. So Circumcision sacrificing c. practised by Paul with offence to some Thus of
their general exception The next is against the Ceremonies of this Church and of the Common-prayer Book in particular Of the Ceremonies in partic Against which they except these things First that they are not established by Law Secondly that they are superstitious Thirdly that they are scandalous Fourthly that they have been occasions of persecution Fifthly they are burdensom for their number And lastly even by the consequence of the Article 34. of the 2. Homilie of the time and place of Prayer by the very Preface of the Common-prayer Book it self and also the practice of the Bishops they ought to be removed Touching the first that they are not established they endeavour to prove first generally in that the Common-prayer Book is not established secondly particularly because of the Book of 2. and 5 6 Ed. 6. and the Act of Uniformity of Common-prayer Touching the first that they are not established In the Answ to the sixth gen Except because the Common-prayer Book is not established hath been answered above Touching the particular proof here the Brethren do prevaricate not unpalpably and very undutifully traduce Qu. Eliz. and the Parliament that established the Book of Common Prayer P. 34. For first they say that However the Rubrick before the Book of Common-prayer printed in 1 Eliz. directeth to use such Ornaments as were in use in 2 Edw. 6. Ornaments of service yet that is no part of the Book of Common-prayer which the Parliament of 1 Eliz. established because the Book of 5. 6 Edw. 6. hath no such Rubrick or direction and that Act of 1 Eliz. for Uniformity of Common-prayer injoyns all things to be done according to the Book of 5 6 Edw. 6. and none other nor otherwise therefore nothing according to the Book of 2 Edw. 6. which yet * P. 39. afterward they say is good Law So that they make that Parliament very weak and inconsiderate men Answ and indeed meer C. Combs if that word might be used in reference to so awfull an Assembly that what they appointed in the very entrance of the Book by Rubr. they would establish they did by the Act immediately overthrow They appoint such Ornaments in the Book unto the Minister in Divine Service as was in use by Act of Parliament in the second year of Ed. 6. And in the Act they conform the Prayer-book unto that of 5 6. Ed. 6. and none other or otherwise As if the former were not an Exception and a Provâ—so also in the Act it self Act for Uniformity prope sinem Provided alwayes sayes the Act and be it enacted that such Ornaments of the Church and of the Ministers thereof shall be received and be in use as were in the Church of England by the Authority of Parliament in the second year of the Reign of King Edw. 6. untill other order shall be therein taken note by the Authority of the Queens Majesty Note with the advice of her Commissioners appointed and authorised under the Great Seal of England for Causes Ecclesiastical or of the Metropolitane of this Realm Which latter clause of the Act yields a farther Answer to the Breth viz. that if those Ornaments were not otherwise established either by the Act or by the Liturgie yet by this Act Other Ceremonies if they be established by the Queen and her Commissioners and so by the following Princes Q. hath power to ordain Ceremon Rites and Orders Ecclesiastical it is sufficient The like may be said for Ceremonies Rites and Orders appointed by the Book That Act immediately after the former words subjoyning And also that if there shall happen any contempt or irreverence to be used in the Ceremonies or Rites of the Church by the misusing of the Orders appointed in this Book the Queens Majesty may by the like advice of the said Commissioners or Metropolitane ordain and publish such further Ceremonies or Rites as may be most for the advancement of Gods glory the edifying of his Church and the due reverence of Christs holy Mysteries and Sacraments So that here is establishment enough Next they would prove that the Ceremonies in the Common-prayer Book for of those they are speaking are not established by Law Pag. 38. because the Common-prayer Book of 2 Edw. 6. is in some things referred to And particularly as to Ornaments and Rites both by the Rubrick before Common-prayer in the present Liturgy and by the Statute of 1 Eliz. 2. So that as to this point vâ—z of Ornaments and Rites which they named and as to Ceremonies for of those they are speaking and instance in them presently so much of that Book is still in force by Law But that Book hath expresly given a liberty in some of the things here desired to be no further imposed where in the last page thereof called Certain Notes for the more plain Explication and decent Ministration of things contained therein it saith As touching kneeling crossing holding up of hands knocking upon the breast and other gestures they may be used or left as every mans devotion serveth without blame This say the Brethren is still good Law c. wherein they do as well falsifie as prevaricate for neither the Rubrick before the Common-prayer nor the Act for Uniformity do name Ornaments and Rites as the Brethren recite the words but Ornaments only Now the word Rites comprehends the Ceremonies also which are not referred to in this Act but bounded in the Book it self and further liberty given to the Queen about them as we saw above out of the Act. Again they prevaricate for they know it was far from the meaning of that Rubrick they quote in 2 Ed. 6. when it names kneeling crossing and other gestures as things indifferent to be done or left according to every mans devotion Far it was from them to intend the Crosse in Baptism or the kneeling at the Communion or other gesturâ—s establisht in that very Book and by Act of Parliament and the latter whereof they explain by Rubrick in the Book of 5 6. Edw. 6. But the Brethren know they meant these words of such other Crossings and Kneelings and gestures which were many in those times not appointed by the Book So much for the â—stablishment The next is they are superstitious Superstitious Thirdly scandalous Both which have been replyed to above to which I referre for brevities sake only because this Tract is growen farre beyond what I intended The fourth is they have been occasions of persecution to manâ— able and godly peaceable Miniâ—teâ—s and sober Christians With reference to what hath been said above I add Pâ—â—â—â—â—ble Ministâ—â—s first Touching the Ministers that peacâ—â—ble they are not if like the Brethren Who first endâ—avour to enflame the people as well as Parliament and then to cast questions of difference between the King and Parliament â—ag â—â—â— â—â—â—r â— about Prerogative â— as they not obscurely do by quarrellâ—ng the validity of the
displeased God so sore and filthily defiled his holy house and his place of prayer Which last words the Brethren refer to piping singing and playing on Organs Whereas 't is evident that passage hath respect especially to that before where it spake of Images Idols Altars with gross and filthy corrupting the Lords holy Supper and the Gazeing sights Again It condemneth not all piping singing or playing on Organs but such as they were wont to have which was both superstitious for kind and too much for quantity Matth. 6. He that forbad us to pray as the Heathen either for babling or length did not forbid us to pray soberly and upon just occasion largely Thirdly If you take all in concreto and together then singing is also condemned by the Homily for it is ranked with piping and Organs Therefore it must be understood with the former restriction such singing as was then and so such piping such organing namely such as took up so much time and was fitted more to please the fancy than for godly delight and spiritual excitation of the affection and edification Lastly The Composers of these Homilies were Bishops the Homil. were approved by Bishops and by Princes and Parliaments who had Organs and singing in their Chappels and Cathedrals besides the Royal Chappel And therefore cannot be understood to condemn that thing in Doctrine which themselves did allow in practise unless we should compare them to him * Deletum in Autographo repositum ab operis who having an Altar in his Chappel yet wrote strenuously for The holy Table Name and Thing This detorting therefore of mens words against their scope and meaning by the Brethren savours of their folly who as he speaks Job 13.7 will lie for God which he as little owns as stands in need of To the last The Bishops omitting the Pastoral Staff which by the 2 Edw. 6. he is enjoyned to have in his hand or to have it born by his Chaplain First the Common-prayer in the Rubrick referrs to that Act of 2 Edw. 6. onely in respect of ornaments to be used in the time of the Communion Rubrick before the Confession of sins and other times of his Ministration not to other things or times as this which is an ornament to themselves which for humility's sake they have omitted and to avoid ostentation but this is no example for otheâ—s to neglect the things that concern the more immediate worship of God In the former things the Law gives it as a priviledge in these it puts it on as an obligation A Knight shall wear his Spurs and Sword that is he may but He shall serve the King in his Wars that is he must I shall end this discourse with that which Austin ended his de Ritib Ecclesiae concerning the Ceremonies of the Church Ep. 119. Januar cap. ult Sic itaque adhibeatur scientia tanquam machina quaedam per quam structura charitatis assurgat quae maneat in aeternum etiam cùm scientia destruetur quae ad finem charitatis adhibita multum est utilis per se autem ipsam sine tali sine non modo superflua sed etiam pernitiosa probata est Let us therefore so make use of knowledge as we would do of an Engine by which the building of Charity may be raised which abideth for ever even when Knowledge shall be destroyed Which knowledge when it is applyed to charity is very useful that of it self without such an end and use is not onely found to be a supersluous but even a pernitious matter Saith this Father I add Vade tu fac similiter And thus we have found mighty and vehement informations K. James Proclamation for the uniformity of Com. prayer supported with so weak and ssender proof as it appeareth unto Us and Our Councel that there was no cause why any change at all should be made in that which was most impugned the Book of Common-prayer neither in the Doctrine which appeared to be sincere neither in the Forms and Rites which were justified out of the practice of the Primitive Church saith King James I conclude with an Admonition an earnest Suit 1. An Admonition and an humble Supplication My Admonition is to all first that they beware lest this * Let not every wanton Wit be permitted to bring what fancies he list into the Pulpit c. Dr. Ushers Serm. before the Commons Feb. 18. 1620. pag. 6. Exod. 32. Amos 8.11 wantonness arising from spiritual fulness as it is in the bodily They ate and drank and then rose up to play be not punished with a famine not of bread and water but of hearing the Word of God either in the letter or in the saving power of it and of enjoying his holy Worship Next That they would apply to this in its proportion what one of the learned Professors of Tigur hath concerning the Scripture on an occasion of the curiosities of some about that Quis enim alius in Scripturis praeter Dei cognitionem fidem vitae nostrae officium scopus nobis esse vel possit vel debeat non video * R. Gualter presat in 3. Tom. operum Zuinglii VVhat things we are to aim at in reading of Scripture More then the knowledge of God Faith and the duties of our life what other end we should aim at in Scripture I say or in a confession of faith and form of Worship I see not Now these by the Articles and Liturgy as they are that we have as plentifully enjoyed as any other Church is acknowledged by other Churches as shall appear and is on all hands owned My earnnest suit is unto these Brethren 2. A Suit Isa that now labour of this Book that they would not travell to bring forth but wind That they would consider the water is now troubled on both sides the penny in the bottom will not be seen That in paring of the nails too near there is peril of cutting of the flesh And that if any thing in it self considered may need amendment yet as in some diseases at least in some remedies Medicina est morbo pejor The medicine worse than the malady Plutarch de sanitat inenda non procul à fine According to that of the Philosopher Longissimè a recta ratione absunt qui ejiciendorum è corpore redundantium humorum causa qui familiares corpori sunt consueti in corpus inficiunt coccos Gnidios scammoniam aliaque medicamenta a temperie corporis aliena saeva Accustomed humors though not so good in the body are yet better grapled with then scammony 3. An humble Supplication unto Authority Isa 49. Revel 12. My humble supplication is to those who are in power if so be that this voice shall by any eccho ascend their ears That they would be as 't is promised nursing fathers unto this child-birth of the Church That they would be as a wall to
religionem nobiscum profiteantur cum alioqui nihil minus revera sint quà m fratres propter innumerabilia quibus scatent vitia i. e. We do not deny saith he but that there are very many that for this cause onely are counted brethren because they profess the same pure Religion with us whereas otherwise they are indeed nothing less than brethren by reason of the innumerable vices wherewith they swarm Thus he It is then the Profession of the true Faith that makes a Brother from whom then till ejected from and by the Church we may not in matters of Religion and Worship withdraw and separate although in private converse we may because as Austin notes this may be done without danger of Schism but that cannot Nam in domibus suis quique boni fideles ita disciplinam suorum moderantur Aug. contr Parmen l. 3. cap. 2. regunt ut ibi quoque obtemperent Apostoli praecipienti cum ejusmodi nec cibum simul sumere sed non tam facilè malorum multitudo non potest à bonorum commixtione separari i. e. For in their houses all the Faithful do so order the government of those that belong unto them that they obey the Apostles Precept commanding with such a one no not to eat but not so easily a multitude of bad men are separated from the mixture with the good as to wit a bad member of a family may The next shall be Calvin whom some would make a Patron in their way of separating he discoursing of this point among other vehement expressions hath this Instit lib. 4. cap. 1. s 9. Vbi reverenter auditur Evangelii praedicatio neque sacramenta negliguntur illic pro eo tempore neque fallax neque ambigua Ecclesiae apparet facies cujus vel authoritatem spernere vel monita respuere vel consiliis refragari vel castigationes ludere nemini impunè licet multo minus ab ea deficere ac ejus abrumpere unitatem c. i. e. A true Church Wheresoever the preaching of the Gospel is reverently heard and the Sacraments are not neglected there for that time there appears neither a deceitful nor a doubtful face of a Church whose authority they that despise or contemn its counsels or reject its advice or make sport with its chastenings they shall never escape unpunished much less if they fall off from it and rend the Unity of it And afterward Sect. 16. Quanquam autem ex inconsiderato justitiae zelo haec tentatio bonis etiam interdum oboritur hoc tamen recipiemus nimiam morositatem ex superbia magis factu falfâque sanctitatis opinione quà m ex vera sanctitate veroque ejus studio nasci The Cause of separation That is Although this temptation doth arise sometimes even in good men by an inconsiderate zeal of Righteousness yet this we shall finde That too much strictness doth grow rather of pride and height and a false opinion of Holiness than of true Holiness or a true zeal for it Thus he And he doth in that Chapter Sect. 14 15 17 18 19. by examples not onely of the Church of the Jews and in the time of our Saviour Christ but also in the Apostolical Churches demonstrate That greater Vices in Manners and fouler Errors in Doctrine to have been tolerated than are in those Churches that Separation is now made from And adds this memorable Note viz. Quondam autem sacrum unitatis vinculum solvunt nemo justani impii hujus divortii poenam effugit quin se pestiferis erroribus ac teterrimis deliriis fascinet The punishment of separation i. e. But because they dissolve the sacred bond of Unity no man shall escape this just punishment That he shall intoxicate himself with most pestilent Errors and most pernicious fancies Thus he The truth whereof with horror we see at this day in the Anabaptists and Quakers who first began with Separation But the whole discourse in that Chapter is well worth the serious perusal The last Witness from these Churches shall be his Vide Sleid in lib. 15. Ad Ann. 1543. unto whom as the Forreign so our own Church ows much of its Reformation As besides his other Writings appears in that excellent Liturgy of the Church of Colen composed by him Melancthon and Pistemus of which before As also in his censure of our own Common Prayer Book he as I said Bucer Script Anglic. in his Commentary on Zephany Chap. 3. it is at the end of his Exposition on the Evangelists and the Psalms hath a vivide practical and experimental Discourse most effectual to this purpose part whereof is as followeth Indubiè haud temerè factum est Bucer in Zeph. 3.15 c. ut nullum ferè pietatis exemplum scriptura paulo magnificentius praedicet in quo non uno Christo excepto simul insignem lapsum notavit Quà m foede lapsus fuit Aaron David Petrus sed ne Moses quidem perpetuo stetit aut quisquam sanctorum alius Vult enim Deus ex suorum infirmitate bonitatis suae gloriam illustrare Equidem al quot novi qui proximo sexennio quo Evangelium Christi mundus iterum coepit persequi pro Christo mortem fortissime oppetierunt in quibus paulo ante vitam severiorem nemo non desiderabat ita tamen corda eorum timor Dei possederat ut licet plus nimio carni per omnem fere vitam indulsissent ubi eo ventum fuit ut vel negandus illis Christus erat vel semeltota caro igni tradenda alacri vultu confidenti pectore mortis durissimos cruciatus vitae admodum lautae delicataeque quam eis mundus promittebat protulerint That is Doubtless it is not without cause That the Scripture doth not make mention scarce of any great example of piety Christ onely excepted who is not noted for some remarkable failing For how fouly did Aaron David and Peter fall Yea Moses himself did not always stand no nor any other of the Saints For God will by the infirmity of his Saints take occasion to illustrate the glory of his goodness Truly I have known some within these six last years wherein the world hath begun again to persecute the Gospel who have couragiously undergone death for Christ in whom a little before there was no man but could have wished a more sober life But the fear of God had so possessed their hearts that though they had too much indulged the flesh almost all their life yet when it came to that point that they must either deny Christ or else deliver the whole flesh to the fire at once they did with a chearful countenance and a confident spirit prefer the most cruel torments of death before a dainty and delicate life which the world proffered them Thus he And having mentioned others such who at that time of his writing did undergo most grievous sufferings for the Truth he adds Vt enim
unto the fifth and last thing the Government under which I comprehend the Ministry as well as Episcopacy both in their Calling and employment First The Ministry To whose constitution it is required that he be orthodox in Doctrine able in parts Conditions requisite to the constitution of a Ministry innocent of life examined by such as are in place so to do that he be not excepted against by the People and solemnly consecrated by prayer and imposition of hands thereunto More we shall not finde in Scripture necessary as by the consideration of 1 Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. Act. 14.23 with other places may appear Now if unto all this God do give evident testimony to his Ministry by his presence therewith both on the hearts of his people and conviction of the adversaries All of them observed in the Church of England Book of Ordination of Ministers Book of Canons Can. 34 and 35. and by appearing for him otherwise there is then a further seal of his Ministry The former six Particulars are all observed in the Church of England in the ordering of Ministers as by the Book of Ordination may appear although perhaps not with that exactness at all times as might be wished And for the seventh and last God hath set to his seal in the plentiful blessing of their Labours 'T is true that one of the Ancients saith Cum ipsa plebs maxime habeat potestatem eligendi dignos sacerdotes Cypr. l. 1. ep 4. vel indignos recusandi That the People especially have the power of choosing good Ministers or refusing those who are bad He doth not mean a jurisdiction and authority but a liberty of accepting or refusing upon just ground alledged touching their conversation not as if the power as People and distinct from the Ministery were in their hands for so he explaineth himself in the same place Vt plebe praesente vel detegantur malorum crimina vel bonorum merita praedicentur The people being present that the crimes of those that are evil may be discovered and the merit of the godly may be declared And a little after he expresseth the same thing more fully shewing the Form of Ordination of Ministers in his time De traditione divina Apostolica observatione servandum est tenendum quod apud nos quoque ferè per provincias universas tenetur ut ad ordinationes ritè celebrandas ad eam plebem cui praepositus ordinatur Episcopi ejusdem provinciae proximi quique conveniant Episcopus deligatur plebe praesente quae singulorum vitam plenissimè novit uniuscujusque actum de ejus conversatione prospexit That is It is to be observed and kept as a divine and Apostolical Institution which is also held by us and almost in all Provinces That for the right Ordination of a Minister the Bishops of that Province do assemble unto that people unto whom the Bishop or Minister is to be ordained and that the Bishop or Minister be ordained in the presence of the people who do know perfectly the life of every one and perceiveth their actions by conversing with them But by this testimony it appeareth That the Interest of the People was a liberty from their knowledge of the life of the person to accept or refuse but that the Election was not wholly by them but the Bishops or Ministry were to regulate the Election which he expresseth in the Epistle before also Nemo adversum sacerdotum collegium quicquam moneret Epist. 3. l. 1. nemo post divinum judicium post populi suffragium post coepiscoporum consensum judicem se non jam Episcopi sed Dei faceret No man saith he would if the Brotherhood did obey their Ordinary according to the Institution of Christ move any thing to wit against the Bishop after the Judgement of the Colledge of Ministers after the divine Approbation after the suffrages of the People and after the consent of the other Bishops c. But that the People should have the power of Election of Ministers Instit l. 4. cap. 4. s 12. Calvin cites against it and approves the Councel of Laodicea Can. 13. Est equidem illud fateor optima ratione sancitum in Laodicensi concilio ne turbis electio permittatur Vix enim unquam evenit ut tot capita uno sensu rem aliquam bene componat ut ferè illud verum est Incertum scindi studia in contraria vulgus primum soli clerici eligebant quem elegerant offerebant magistratui tum ad multitudinem res deferebatur Aut si à multitudine incipiebatur tantum id fiebat ut sciretur quem potissimum expeteret Auditis popularium vota clerici demum eligebant Hunc ordinem ponit Leo Epist 87. expectanda sunt vota Civium testimonia populorum honoratorum arbitrium electio clericorum That is That truly I confess is with very good reason decreed by the Councel of Laodicea Can. 13. Popular Elections not allowed That the Election of Ministers should not be permitted to the People For it hardly at any time comes to pass that so many heads do with one consent compose any business well and that is commonly true which the Poet saith ' The common people being weak 'To several Factions quickly break First therefore the Ministers chose then they offered him to the Magistrate afterward the matter was brought to the people or if the business began with the people it was onely that they might know whom especially they desired which when they understood then the Clergy did choose Thus Calvin Beza also De Minister Grad cap. 23. Quod tota multitudo simul fuit convocata suffragium tulit nec essentiale nec perpetuum fuit i. e. That the People were called and gave their voyce was neither of the essence of the Call nor perpetual And with us Book of Canons Can. 31. the Ordination of Ministers is appointed at four times of the year at which time Prayer and Fasting is enjoyned any that will are permitted to be present See the Book of Ordination proclamation made unto them to except against the persons to be ordained And no Bishop permitted to ordain any not of his Diocess without Letters testimonial Canon 34 35. under pain of suspension But if in this there may be any defect or have been abuse yet we are to consider that of the Church of England saying That in the Primitive Church in the beginning of Lent The Commination at the end of the Liturgy and at the beginning notorious sinners were put to open penance and punished in this world in stead whereof until the said Discipline be restored which thing is much to be wished it is thought good c. may perhaps imply that it would if it might without greater peril reform some other things also among which this of the somewhat more particular approbation or acceptation of the people if it should be found
necessary in respect of their Ministry might possibly be one But I determine not onely I do from the premisses conclude seeing there is in the Ministries Ordination in England all the essentials observed and that God by his blessing of their Labours and protecting of their Calling declared his owning of them whatsoever defects may be imagined in their outward Calling Brightman in Apocal. 3.20 with Mr. Brightman in the place above noted Quid ergo verbum propter labem aliquam externae vocationis tam perverse respuunt cujus vim divinam in cordibus sentiunt Why do they for some defect in the external Call so perversly reject that Word and Ministry whose soveraign and divine power they feel upon their hearts I dismiss this particular and pass to the other Branch touching the Governors of these and their Regiment the Bishops SECT II. Of Episcopacy its Right and Title IT is certain ever since God had a formal and instituted Church there have been superior Ministers in it distinguished also by some appellations from the rest As the High Priests in the Jewish and the Apostles in the First Christian Church 1. Scripture And it is as evident that the Church cannot want such by the need that the Church of Ephesus 1 Tim. 1. and those adjacent had of Timothy and the Churches of Crete had of Titus Tit. 1. For Non minor est virtus quà m quaerere porta tueri A Common-wealth hath need not onely at first of a Magistrate but ever after And a Bishop is nothing else but an Ecclesiastical Magistrate And though times may require some things or persons extraordinary as the Church had Apostles at the first of unlimited power yet as Calvin observes Hoc Natura dictat Epist ad Reg. Polon 1554. Vnum ex singulis collegiis deligendum cui pâ—ecipua cura incumbat Nature it self saith he teacheth us That in all orders of men some one must be chosen unto whom the chief care must be committed And this is the esse or substance of Episcopacy Elsewhere he gives the reason of it Comment in Epist. ad Phil. cap. 1.1 Fateor quidem ut sunt hominum ingenia mores non posse ordinem stare inter verbi ministros quin reliqui praesit unus I confess saith he as mens spirits and manners are Order cannot stand among the Ministers of the Word unless one be over the rest But he would have first their jurisdiction restrained the name of Bishop common and the limits of their Government confined unto one City though afterward in his Letter to the King of Poland he acknowledgeth what the primitive Government was and seemeth not to disapprove it as we shall see anon And the best Independent extant hath expressed so much in my hearing viz. D. T. G. The Church would ever stand in need of such persons as Timothy and Titus This for Scripture Next come we to the Primitive Church 2. The Primitive Church wherein the practice is known to be both most ancient and universal Hierom indeed but without proof being himself no Bishop and angry sometimes with some of them and particularly with John Bishop of Jerusalem and even with Austin himself a passionate man Vid. Epist Aug. 8. seq and somewhat high in respect of his eminency for Learning especially in the Tongues in those times saith Hieron in Epist ad Tit. 1.5 Idem est Presbyter qui Episcopus antequam diaboli instinctu studia in religione fierent diceretur in populis Ego sum Pauli ego Apollo ego autem Cephae Communi Presbyterorum consilio Ecclesiae gubernabantur Postquam vero unusquisque eos quos baptizaverat suos putabat esse non Christi In toto orbe decretum est ut unus de Presbyteris electus superponeretur caeteris ad quem omnis Ecclesiae cura pertineret schismatum semina tollerentur That is The same is a Presbyter and a Bishop And before that 1 Cor. 1. by the instinct of the Devil Factions began in Religion and these speeches were among the people I am of Paul I of Apollo but I of Cephas The Churches were governed by the common advice of the Presbyters But after that every one reckoned those whom hee had baptized to be his own and not Christs It was determined in the WHOLE WORLD that One chosen out of the Presbyters should be set over the rest unto whom the WHOLE care of the Church should belong and so the seeds of Schism should be taken away Concerning which testimony fore-prizing what others have said there need not be required a better testimony First it comes from an Adversary next it proveth the thing it contendeth against under favour of so great a person for if then and upon that occasion Episcopacy had its rise when Schisms began in the Church and that one said I am of Paul another I am of Apollo and that those whom some had baptized they counted their own Disciples And that this came to pass even in the very Apostles time Vers 12 13 14 15. as Paul complains Epistle to the Corinthians the first chapter the first And that hee grants that it was decreed in the whole world and that for so useful an End It must follow that Episcopacy succeeded the Apostleship And indeed from the end of their institution it appears in Scripture that they did so as to the office by what name soever For Paul saith expresly both to Timothy and Titus To Timothy that hee besought him to abide still at Ephesus that hee might charge some to teach no other 1 Tim. 1.3 and no Heterodox doctrine And to Titus that for this cause left I thee in Crete that hee might stop the mouths of vain that is Tit. 1.5 erronious and schismatical talkers not onely by word and by example but also by authority Hee so commands him to reject an Heretick Chap. 3. that is excommunicate him as may be conceived And indeed wee see by experience in some Churches those that are of latitude where this Government of late hath been suspended what factions have grown As in the Netherland Churches about Arminius so far that had not the Authority of the Magistrate and assistance of Neighbours interposed those Churches and that Republick had been utterly ruined what divisions are growing at this day among the Churches of France some adhering unto the opinion of Amiraldus about these points others opposing of them I hear with grief and have been told that a Minister of no mean note in that Church lately in London and whom I could name should say that some Ministers of France should express so much that had their Churches full establishment from the Civil Power they could not govern them without Episcopacy which it seems both Calvin Beza and of late Diodate foresaw of whom afterward By this Testimony it appears Episcopacy to have been of greatest Antiquity Universality and of such Necessity
for use that without it the Churches could not be preserved neither in Truth nor Vnity And though Hierome seem to imply that there was some times when the Churches were governed without it yet unless hee mean the time of the Apostles who were themselves instead of it no time by his own words can be assigned when the Church either could or did want it neither doth hee name any certain time or alledge any Author as hee useth to do in case of History neither under correction of men of larger reading do I beleeve hee could Seeing it is evident in the Ecclesiastical History and by the Monuments of the most Antient Writers that Episcopacy was contiguous with the Apostles time as appears by Ignatius Policarpus Vide Eus Hist Hieron de Scriptorib Ecclesiast Clemens Irenaeus and others Whereas Hierome lived in the fourth Century above three hundred years after Christ 'T is true St. Austin that mirrour of Modesty and Humility writing unto this same Hierome when hee had received some contemptuous expressions from him as I said before Aug. ad Hieron Epist. 19. that Father was a little high in answer to him saith Quanquam enim secundum honorum vocabula quae jam Ecclesiae usus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyterio major sit Object tamen in multis rebus Augustinus Hieronymo minor est Although saith hee according to titles of honour which now the USE of the Church hath obtained Episcopacy be superiour to Presbytery yet in many things Austin is inferiour to Hierome Answ Hee saith it is by use of the Church that Episcopacy is above Presbytery but hee speaketh of the difference of names and tiles implying that in the Scripture they have often all one name Epist ad Evagrium as Hierome had proved in that Commentary upon the first of Titus and elsewhere but doth not deny nor imply that the Office was the same Again hee saith the Use of the Church now this Use may be as antient as the Apostles Lastly Hee knew with whom hee was dealing and on purpose composed his expression to the qualifying of Jerome Vide Epist ad Hieron 15. as appears in his other Epistles to him hee doth not dispute ex professo this point Cyprian the antient of them both in the place now cited carries it very far for the dignity of Episcopacy â—â—pr lib. 1. Ep. 3. and the eminency of one both in Place and Authority Having proved by many examples the preheminency of place and duty of Obedience by the Scripture given to the High Priests among the Jews applying to the Bishop in a Christian Church hee saith Cum haec tanta ac talia multa alia exempla praecedant quibus Sacerdotalis autoritas potestas divina dignatione firmatur quales putas esse eos qui Sacerdotum hostes contra Ecclesiam Catholicam rebelles nec praemonentis Domini comminatione nec futuri judicii ultione terrentur Neque enim aliundè haereses abortae sunt aut nata sunt schismata quà m inde quod Sacerdoti Dei non obtempetatur nec UNUS in Ecclesia ad tempus Sacerdos ad tempus Judex vice Christi cogitatur Cui si secundum Magisteria divina obtemperaret fraternitas universa nemo adversum Sacerdotum Collegium quicquam moneret nemo post divinum judicium post populi suffragium post Co-episcoporum consensum judicem se non jam Episcopi sed Dei faceret nemo dissidio unitatis Christi Ecclesiam scinderet that is Seeing these so great such and so many other examples have gone before by which the authority and power of the Priestly dignity is confirmed by Gods institution what kind of men do you think them who being enemies of the Priesthood and rebels against the Catholick Church are neither terrified by Gods threatnings nor yet with fear of the judgement to come For from no other cause do Heresies arise nor Factions in the Church have their beginning than from hence that there is not given obedience to the Priest of God hee means the Bishop as the words following will shew neither is considered that for the time there is but One Priest namely chief that ought to be in the Church of God and for the time but one Judge in the stead of Christ To whom according to the Doctrine of Christ did the whole Brother-hood give obedience no man would move any thing against the Colledge of Priests by whom the Bishops was chosen no man would make himself Judge not now of the Bishop but of God himself after that hee hath been chosen by the Divine Judgement by the suffrage of the people desired and by the consent of other Bishops confirmed I urge this Testimony being very antient Cyprian lived about the year 250. to shew the judgement of Antiquity touching Episcopacy namely the Institution Use and End of it viz. preservation of Truth and Peace in the Church as wee saw before out of St. Hierome Spurâ—ous testimonies though grayer-headed I pass not at Yea and Hieron himself elsewhere doth imply that a Bishop might ordain which a Presbyter could not do Quid enim facit exceptâ ordinatione Hieron Epist ad Evagr. Tom. 3. Episcopus quod Presbyter non facit that is what doth a Bishop do except Ordination which a Presbyter doth not thus hee but Ordination carries with it some Superiour jurisdiction Since my writing of this De Evangel Ministerium gradib cap. 23. I have consulted what Savania hath observed upon this place of Hierome on Tit. 1.5 against Beza and finde that his cogitations are the same much-what with mine as indeed it is obvious to any one considering of it neither do I see cause to alter them Savania Beza for any thing I finde in Beza his reply unto them whose judgement in this point wee shall hear anon out of the same writing And so I dismiss the Testimony from Antiquity Proceed wee now to the Judgement of the Reformed Churches expressed by their chief Writers and even those who have erected another Government Calvin the supposed Parent of Presbytery 1. The Reformed Christian Churches Judgement of Episcopacy but hee was onely the foster Father for Farel and Viret had before him ejected Episcopacy at Geneva or rather the Bishop hee the ground being as it were vacant raised Presbytery or rather ripened it in the room thereof Hee first argues the right of Episcopacy for the substance of it from Nature it self Calvin 1. Hoc natura dictat Unum ex singulis Collegiis delegendum exi precipua cura incumbat Epist. ad R pol. 1554. 2. Fateor quidem ut sunt hominum ingenia mores non posse ordinem stare inter verbi Ministros quin reliquis praesit Unus Praes ad duc Witemberg ante Epist ad Gal. Epist ad R. pol. 1554. then acknowledges the Necessity of it for the upholding of the order of the Ministery from the disposition and spirit of men both
Baptism in the administration of the Lords Supper c. are first rehearsed and then at the act of Ministring a prayer is used not a Magisterial use of the very words of Christ himself in the first institution First it is untrue that there is any difference in this Answ between Ordination and Baptism or the Lords Supper for as in these there goeth prayer before and after So also in this of Ordination But in the very act there is used a Magisterial if the Brethren will have it so or an authoritative command precept or imperative expression In Baptism I baptize thee in the name of the Father c. not a praying that hee may be baptized The sense whereof is I wash away thy sins or as Ananias to Paul arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins Act. 22.16 which is Magisterial and commanding At the least it is an using of the very words of Christ himself at the first institution as neer as may bee which the Brethren deny to be lawful So in the Lords Supper It is not in the very act I pray that thou mayest be one for whom Christ died and that thou mayest feed on him by Faith But a peremptory assertion that Christ died for him and an imperative command that hee should feed on him by Faith In neither the one Sacrament nor the other is there a prayer used in the very act of administring Neither were it unlawful if the former were in the Lords Supper Take thou the body of Christ take thou his blood which some have used But that our Church for the avoiding of Superstition hath been forced to use other words The Germane and Dutch Churches use a form not unlike that now named The Dutch Form of the Lords Supper in the Dutch Churches The bread which wee break is the communion of the body of Christ take and eat it where they are commanded to take the body of Christ as peremptorily as the Minister is commanded to take the Holy Ghost So in the Cup. But none can give the body and blood of Christ but himself onely And in the Germane Church of Colen Liber Reform Colen in the Liturgy above mentioned in the form of giving the Lords Supper Accipe manduca ad salutem tuam corpus Domini quod pro te traditum est Take and eat the body of Christ to thy salvation c. But secondly as was said above if the words may bear the fotm of a prayer also there needs no altering unless it bee of the Brethrens spirit unto more charity Again wherein wee differ from the very words of Institution it is partly because it would bee incongruous to use them as to say This is my body which is given for you c. And partly to prevent as was said such superstitions as had grown into the use of that Sacrament for want of a more clear explication of those words But it is not incongruous english to say as a Deputy in the name of the Original Author receive the Holy Ghost So also there hath no Superstition arisen upon these words because by Doctrine prevented elsewhere by reason whereof the Church should be constrained to change the very words of our Saviour Especially seeing they serve more emphatically to confirm the assurance of the Minister in his call as also to beget a greater Authority for his person and office in the hearts of the people both which is very necessary Ac uberrimum h. doctrinae fructum quotidie percipit Ecclesia dum pastores suos intelligit divinitus ordinatos esse aeternae salutis sponsoris Cal. in Joh. 20.23 Whilst the people hereby understand that their Ministers are ordained by God to be his Embassadors If it be replied Object that it nourisheth a Popish opinion of the Episcopal and Priestly power to convey the Holy Ghost Object and to forgive sins Answ It is answered that neither of these opinions are Popish but onely the Application of them to unfit persons and the perverse exposition of them as if they had such power in their sleeve to dispense when and to whom they pleased The danger whereof is not such among us who are better taught as that wee should for it alter the words of institution and form of ordaining of which there is such particular use To their third exception that it countenances a sole Except 3 power of Ordination Answ the very form of Ordination answers which appoints that the Bishops with the Priests or Ministers that are present shall lay on their hands and not the Bishop alone To their last of offence to Except 4 Protestant Churches abroad Vide Harm confess they have not declared any such offence in their publick confessions in reference to our Church that I know of nor will if they consider our Doctrine in this particular Answ If some particular men should not be satisfied if for that wee should alter wee should do it rather for the Brethren who are or have been of our own Church But to satisfie a few we may not by unnecessary change scandalize many more To conclude the sense of our Church in these words and this ceremony might be expressed in that of Austin ' on those words Received yee the Spirit by the works of the Law or by the hearing of Faith Aug. in Gal. 3. 2. Tom. 4. Ab Apostolo praedicata est eis fides in qua praedicatione utique adventum praesentiam spiriti sancti senserant By the Apostle saith hee the Faith was preached unto them in which preaching verily there was felt the coming and presence of the Holy Ghost So doth our Church give the Spirit whilst shee repeating the words of Institution intends and prayes that those to whom her word is directed and for whom her prayers Annot. in Joh. 20.22 in Indic Authoâ—it ap Aug. tanquam ex Serm. 11. de verb. dom Tom. 10 quanquam id ibi non invenio sententia tamen proba est may feel the coming and presence of the Spirit I end all with the words of that Author Insufflavit dixit accipite Sp. S. Ecclesiastica iis verbis poâ—estas coâ—lata esse intelligitur inspiratio ergo haec gratia quaedam est quae per traditionem infunditur ordinatis He breathed on them and said Receive the Holy Ghost in these words wee must understand saith hee an Ecclesiastical power is given This Inspiration therefore is a certain grace or priviledge which by delivery in imposition of hands is infused into the ordained which sentence being it takes in both the power and the gift may not unfitly being expounded as a Ministerial act assisted with prayer close this dissertation SUBSECT IV. Consecration of Bishops and Archbishops c. 3. Gen. Exception against book of Ordination THe last Exception they have against the book of Ordination is about consecration of Bishops and Archbishops Where first that because that the same portion of Scripture is appointed to
admit all those to govern whom in that very question and the answer to it they did intend to oblige to subjection and obedience So gross is the Brethrens conscience to dare to utter and their confidence to think that so palpable a Calumny would pass undiscerned yea so ridiculous their hopes as to fancy it would bee beleeved To the third viz. that out of the Liturgy Proof 3 Because it is said in the Rubrick before the Communion Liberty given to the Minister by the Liturgy touching Communicants that the Minister is authorized to restrain notorious offenders from the Sacrament till they have openly declared themselves to have repented The Brethren query What is this but as much and as high jurisdiction as any Bishop can use in that particular Answ But first how shall wee make a coat for the Moon sometime they struggle as even lately if not at present for more power about the Sacrament and when my self mentioned this Rubrick unto one Mr. J. Cas that is no Cypher among them hee said it was not sufficient Again if the Brethren are by Law already instated in as much jurisdiction as any Bishop can use about the Sacrament and that is the greatest point why rest they not in it why blaspheme they the Common-prayer-book wherein it is contained why do they so wrestle imponere pelio ossam And make the Church and State as blocks to be For steps to mount unto their Prelacy But thirdly There are some Acts common in all governments and some proper A petty Constable may charge any man upon a warrant to assist him as well as the Sheriff of the County upon a writ Some kinde of share in government and exercise of Discipline was never denyed to a Minister as a Minister no more than a share with the Bishop in Preaching of the Word But Jurisdiction is a word of a louder sound than Discipline and the Government of the Church than some kinde of restraining a particular communicant Although those Acts belong to Government and are exercised by private Ministers yet they are about lesser things And also it is by concession and delegation not to bee challenged I think of right otherwise than as the officer of the Church appointed in her name to do that which of himself and as a private Minister hee could not do For then there must bee not as the Brethren say if the Bishops have sole Jurisdiction so many Popes that is six and twenty but sixty times six and twenty Popes in England For every Minister might then exclude whom hee pleased from the Communion and exercise an absolute tyranny upon the people And so much of their third proof Their last is from Law Proof 4 which because I do not understand it much that it belongs unto the Judges to determine Answ That the Bishops have appealed thereunto that my self have said above something to that point That * Vid. Tract of the R. Bp. Linc. now published of the Legality of the Bishops Courts c. Wherein the Kings Proclam and Judges sentence are recited it is declared already by the sentence of all the Judges Enrolled in the Courts of Record and by his late Majesties Proclamation and that it is like shortly to be further determined I supersede from further answering although I could Onely I may not pass the great inconsideration of the Brethren with so much virulency resisting the useful restitution of the Bishops into Parliament which is the interest of Christ himself of the Ministry and of the Kingdome First Though we are blessed be God all Christians yet our masters cause will probably bee minded a little more intently by those whom hee hath commissioned for that purpose the Ministry the honour and flower whereof are the Prelacy Again other persons have a vote in Parliament more immediately by their proxyes Why England should observe Episcopacy the Clergy none but in the Bishops Lastly The publick interest to bee concerned may well bee thought from not onely that engagement of thankfulness that lyes upon it unto Prelacy under whose Government and by whose Influence and through the effusion of the blood of whose members Religion hath been restored nor onely in regard they were by the Antient Laws even the first members next the head for the form was The Kings Majesty the Lords Spiritual and Temporal Nor onely in respect perhaps of some higher ingagements But from our experience the Mistress of fools For first neither King Lords nor Commons continued in power long after the Bishops ejectment And next hitherto wee have had no face of a Church no certainty of Doctrine no observation of Worship no exercise of Government to speak of but all things have gone to Babylonian confusion and antique Chaos Discite justitiam moniti The Phrygians will not learn till lasht they be If that amend us not then worse are wee I shall for close touching the Civil honour annexed unto Episcopacy in this Nation Zanch. confess cap. 25. Aph. 21. subjoyn the conclusion and judgement of the learned Zanchy and that in the confession of his Faith The conclusion is Episcoporum qui principes sunt politicam authoritatem non negari That the Civil Authority of Bishops which are also Magistrates or Princes is not denyed The explication follows Interim non diffitemur Episcopos qui simul etiam principes sunt praeter autoritatem Ecclesiasticam sua etiam habere jura politica Secularesque potestates quemadmodum reliqui habent principes jus imperandi secularia jus gladii nonnullos jus elegendi confirmandique Reges Imperatores aliaque politica constituendi administrandi subditosque sibi populos ad obedientiam sibi praestandam cogendi c. That besides their Ecclesiastical Authority they have also Civil Rights and SECULAR Powers and may constrain obedience unto such their powers c. which hee contradicts not in the observations Neither doth hee contradict it in his explication of that Aphorism And that place Mat. 20.25 It shall not bee so among you is understood by some to concern all Christians saith hee neither doth hee refute it SECT VI. The close of the Church-Controversie HAving thus far passed through all the five heads of motives unto Separation viz. The Doctrine the Worship the Assemblies the Discipline and the Government with replies unto them and having also vindicated them according to my weak arm by the sword of the spirit against the opposers of them I come now to close this whole dissertation His present Majesty hath indulged to the Brethren and their adherents very much in all the Premises May it prove successeful But his Grandfather King James having tasted of this Solunne geuse and wilde fowl whilst in Scotland and being pressed at his first coming as His Majesty now to the like here hee utters his judgement upon observation of Gods presence with this Church and Nation in these words We have seen the Kingdome under that form of Religion
sure that it is not there in any point condemned of Heresie unless it be of the ANABAPTISTS as it is here And I do not think but there be some as well there as in England and it is like enough that SUCH do finde fault with it Who are offended with the Liturgy Dr. Martin Nay even of Mr. Cox himself and other that were Preachers in King Edwards time they have disproved your * This Book established 5 6. Edw. 6. was re-established 1. Eliz. with two or three alterations and is that we now use as was proved above The Alterations are in the Act prefixed before the Service-Book second Book in divers points and have now made a third Book how say you which of these three Books will you allow now Careless Forsooth I say still as I have written that the second Book is good and godly and IN ALL POINTS agreeing to the Word of God and I am sure that neither Master Cox nor any other of our godly Preachers that be fled unto Frankford have condemned that Book IN ANY POINT as repugnant to the Word of God though perchance they have altered something therein according to the usage of that Country where now they are And I have not denied in my Articles but the Church of Christ hath power and authority to enlarge or diminish any thing in the same GOOD BOOK so far forth as it is agreeable to the Scriptures D. Martin But what authority have you or how durst you bee so bold to make an Article of the Faith concerning that Book to be beleeved of all men under pain of damnation Carelesse Ah Master Doctor have I bound any man to beleeve that Article under pain of damnation as you do charge mee I am sure there is no such word in all my Articles I have there written what I hold and beleeve my self as I am bound to do in conscience And now I will add thus much more That the same Book which is so consonant and agreeable to the Word of God ☞ Nore in the fear of God and consider being set forth by Common Authority both of the Kings Majesty that is dead and the whole Parliament House ought not to be despised by mee or any other private man under pain of Gods high displeasure and DAMNATION except they repent 2. Concerning Monarchy and that of this Nation * The Testimony of Mr. Sam. Ward sometime the famous Preacher of Ipswitch the Author of several elegant and useful pieces Hoc enim mihi ratum indubitatum semper fuit hoc semper cum Politicis Theologis gravissimis sensi palum apud omnes professus sum Monarchiam haereditariam sub qua mihi vitales auras feliciter haurine bonis omnimodis frui piè tranquillè degere contigit esse omnium quotquot extant aut excogitari possunt regiminum formae longè multumque praestantissimam utilissimam laudatissimam Cui me ex animo favere ille novit qui perscrutatur renes meos c. i. e. This hath alwaies been with mee a certain and undoubted maxime In his Preface to King Charls the first prefixed before his Treatise in Latine of the Load-stone dedicated unto him intituled Magnetis Reductorium this alwaies with the best States-men and Divines I have ever concluded and openly among all men professed viz. That a Monarchical Government hereditary under which providence hath so ordered that I have drawn my vital breath enjoyed many comforts have had the opportunity to live godly and quietly is of all Governments which are or can be divised by many degrees the best the most beneficial and most commendable to which that I am from my heart a well-wisher hee knows that searches my reins and my heart said that Author Dr. Sanderson the now Right Reverend Bishop of Lincoln in his late treatise intituled Episcopacy not prejudicial to Regal Power as established by Law in the Postscript Lastly Concerning the Divine Right of Episcopacy Though from one in that function yet because it derives it higher and founds it somewhat deeper more solidly and also briefer than is usually done deserves more special notice His words are My opinion is that Episcopal Government is not to bee derived meerly from Apostolical practice or Institution But that it is originally founded in the person and office of the Messias our Blessed Lord JESUS CHRIST who being sent by his heavenly Father to bee the great Apostle Heb. 3.1 Bishop and Pastor 1 Pet. 2.25 of his Church and annointed to that office immediately after his Baptism by JOHN with power and the Holy Ghost Act. 10.37 8. descending then upon him in a bodily shape Luke 3.22 did afterward before his ascension into Heaven send and impower his holy Apostles giving them the Holy Ghost likewise as his Father had given him John 20.21 to execute the same Apostolical Episcopal and Pastoral office for the ordering and governing of his Church until his coming again and so the same office to continue in them and their Successors unto the end of the world Mat. 28.18 20. This I take to be so clear from these and other like Texts of Scripture that if they shall bee diligently compared together both between themselves and with the following practice of all the Churches of Christ as well in the Apostles times as in the purest and Primitive times nearest thereunto there will bee left little cause why any man should doubt thereof Thus that Reverend Author II. Certain other Examples of Retractations In the next place other Instances of Retractations and repentings Beda prefat in Retract suas in Actor Apostol Tom. 6. Cujus Augustini industriam nobis quoque pro modulo nostro placuit imitari Nunc in idem volumen Actor Apostolic brevem Retractationis libellum condamus studio maximè vel addendi quae minus dicta vel emendandi quae socus quam placuit dicta videbantur The ingenuity and industry of St. Austin in his Retractations it is my purpose in my small measure to imitate also Now therefore let us compile a brief Treatise of Retractations with this intent especially either of adding those things which were not sufficiently expressed or of amending those that were expressed otherwise than did seem convenient saith venerable Bede Again For my part saith another though a late Author yet one of good note Good Reader Mr. Whately in his Bride-Bush in his advertisement to the Reader I account it no shame to confess and revoke an errour and will therefore do it plainly and without circumstance Then hee closes with this honest and Austin-like expression viz. From him that had rather confess his own error than make thee erre for company The like whereunto wee heard above out of that Father And Dr. Bishop Brownriggs sentence concerning Retractations Related by Dr. Gauden the now very Rev. Bishop of Excester his successon Brownrigge the late most worthy Bishop of Excester would say that Hee