and invested with the same power of feeding and governing the Church of God with the Bishop and none other is an order distinct from and subject to the Bishop so to be ruled by him and not to exercise his Office but by the Bishops License and at his pleasure and that the Presbyter is bound to swear obedience to the Bishop as his Ordinary That certain particular Priests or Deacons shuld by Papal constitution and Princely indulgence without the counsel and common suffrages of the Colledge of Presbyters bespeaking their conset or consent of the common people The force of Prelacy covenanted against be constituted a Colledge or Cathedral Council to the Bishop to advise with him and rule under him by the name of Deans Deans and Chapters Arch-deacon and Prebends to Elect the Bishop in vacancy and hold Courts constitute Canons and exercise all Jurisdiction over all Churches and Ministers not being so much as chosen by them or having their consent much less commission so to do That any one Minister or Bishop doth stand charged with all the Congregations and Pastors of them in one County or many Counties making one Diocess and be by vertue of office bound to the inspection and pastoral Correction and Government of them and that the several Bishops of a Kingdom be themselves subject to one Metropolitan Church and Arch-bishop to whom they shall swear obedience and shall be subject to be by him overseen ordered and corrected sure if the Word of God conclude such superiority over the Church in one Kingdom it will conclude a Catholick superiority over the universal Church and advance the Pope as warrantably above the Arch-bishops as the Arch-bishops are above the Bishops and the Bishops above the Presbyters for these are not differences of kind but of degree nor is there pleaded for Divine Right or Apostolical Institution of the one in the Church of England what is not pleaded for the other by the Fathers of the Council of Trent and by Bellarmine that Cardinal Popes Champion Bellarm. de Clericis lib. 1.5 cap. 14. and who can deny a quatenus ad omne c Lastly That Bishops and Ministers of the Gospel may exercise their Office and Function by Vicegerents and Deputies Commissaries or Chancellours or that by any Apostolical direction they may and have authority to Commissionate any such or that the determination and disposal of Civil Affairs Matters of Marriage and Administrations belong to them that they must by themselves or joyning unto themselves Professors and Students of the Civil Law keep Courts on which Proctors Apparitros and the like are dependent and so judicially rule and govern in these cases This is the Form of Government these learned Casuists must think is if not of Divine Right by immediate precept from God yet established by the Apostles according to the mind and after the example of their Master Jesus Christ and that by vertue of their power and authority as deputed Governours of the Church or otherwise their thoughts are very vain and impertinent for not an Episcopal Government wherein all the Bishops Ministers of the Church within any City Country or Kingdom invested with equal authority and dignity being all of the same Order do by common Council govern the Church but this specifical Prelacy presuming it self to be an Hierarchy or holy Government and chief Priest-hood not to be gain-sayed without high profaness or with-stood and destroyed without sacriledge formally existing in Arch-bishops super our Princes to Bishops Bishops Soveraign Lords to all Ministers or Presbyters and enjoying the standing Cathedral Council and subordinate Judges Deans Arch-deacons Deans and Chapter and transmitting their power and Episcopal authority to Chancellours and Commissaries and so ruling with all state and pompous attendants not only mens profession of Religion but their propriety of civil enjoyments is Covenanted to be extirpated I hope Sir that these serious men would not cozen their own Consciences and cheat the World by their observation the Covenant would bind us against Episcopacy and Bishops in general and not take notice how it is limited to one particular kind and then Sir I must be free to tell them That the Divine Right or Apostolical Institution of this Episcopal Government is but a think so of no more value than a dream for I not only think but am sure the libraries of learning in all that famous Univesity will never lay us down this Form of Government in the Church of Ephesus though I should grant Timothy to be a Bishop therein Antioch Philippi Creet or the seven Churches of Asia supposing their Angels to have been Bishops in all which I deny not a Government by Bishops and those made by the Holy Ghost to whom I will presume to think had I then lived and been invested with that Ministerial authority I now by Gods grace enjoy poor simple I might have stood up as a Peer or at least Bishop Suffragan and if they give not some Scripture instance I think Ecclesiastical story will never prove the Apostles established this Form of Government in the Church or at least not by their Apostolical power and authority as deputed by Christ governours of the Church and I am sure not after the example nor according to the mind of Jesus Christ their Master it being directly inconsistent with the quality of this Kingdom and dictated parity of his Ministers Sir with Reverence may I speak it I think it had been very sutable to the learning and gravity of this learned Assembly to have laid down in this case of conscience some clear Reasons for their conjecture of this Divine Right and Apostolical Institution and Establishment And the rather for that Pope Nicholas hath affirmed Omnes sive Patriarchae cujuslibet apicem sive Metropolean primatus aut Episcopatuum Cathedras vel Eccl siarum sive cujuscunque ordinis dignitatem instituit Romana Ecclesia That Rome appointed all Ecclesiastical Dignities of Bishops Arch-bishops Deans Arch-deacons c. And Pope * Apud Gratian. Dist 22. cap. 1. Lucius and Clement with whom agreeth Peter Lombard and our own Historians That King Lucius instituted three Arch-bishopricks and * Distinct 80. lib. 4. dif 24. Brit Hist lib. 4. pag. 126. Polichro lib. 4. c. 16. fol. 163. Pagets Christianography Foxe saith 28. chief Priests called Flammens Acts and Monuments p. 96. Fol. 59 60. twenty five Bishopricks in the room and stead of the three Archflamens and twenty five flamens And that Devotus the Bishop of Winchester falling into the seat of the flamen thereof had all the possessions within twelve Miles cmopass containing thirty two Villages conferred on him and his Clergy And the Archbishops Bishops and Clergy of England in their Institution of a Christian man dedicated to Henry the eighth have told all the World It is out of all doubt that there is no mention made neither in the Scripture neither in the Writings of any authentical Doctor or Auctor of
Containing exceptions to the first Article of the Covenant really and constantly through the Grace of God endeavor in our several places and callings the preservation of the Reformed Religion in the Church of Scotland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government against our common Enemies The Reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches And shall endeavor to bring the Churches of God in the three Kingdoms to the nearest conjunction and uniformity in Religion Confession of Faith Form of Church-Government Directory for Worship and Catechizing That we and our posterity after us may as Brethren live in Faith and Love and the Lord may delight to dwell in the midst of us II. That we shall in like manner without respect of persons endeavor the extirpation of Popery Prelacy that is Church-Government by Archbishops Bishops their Chancellors and Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Archdeacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierarchy Superstition Heresie Schisme Profaneness and whatsoever shall be found to be contrary to sound Doctrine and the power of Godliness lest we pertake in other mens sins and thereby be in danger to receive of their plagues and that the Lord may be one and his Name one in the three Kingdoms III. We shall with the same sincerity reallity and constancy in our several Vocations endeavor with our estates and lives mutually to preserve the Rights and Priviledges of the Parliaments and the Liberties of the Kingdoms and to preserve and defend the Kings Majesties person and authority in the preservation and defence of the true Religion and Liberties of the Kingdoms that the world may bear witness with our Consciences of our Loyalty and that we have no thoughts or intentions to diminish His Majesties just power and greatness IV. We shall also with all faithfulness endeavrr the discovery of all such as have been or shall be Incendiaries Malignants or evil Instruments by hindring the Reformation of Religion dividing the King from His people or one of the Kingdoms from another or making any faction or parties amongst the people contrary to this League and Covenant that they may be brought to publick trial and receive condign punishment as the degree of their offences shall require or deserve or the supream Judicatories of both Kingdoms respectively or others having power from them for that effect shall judge convenient V. And whereas the happiness of a blessed Peace between these Kingdoms denied in former times to our progenitors is by the good providence of God granted unto us and hath been lately concluded and setled by both Parliaments we shall each one of us according to our place and interest endeavor that they may remaine conjoyned in a firm Peace and Vnion to all posterity And that Justice may be done upon the wilful opposers thereof in manner expressed in the precedent Articles VI. We shall also according to our places and callings in this common cause of Religion Liberty and Peace of the Kingdom assist and defend all those that enter into this League and Covenant in the maintaining and pursuing thereof and shall not suffer our selves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination perswasion or terror to be divided and withdrawn from this blessed Vnion and Conjunction whether to make defection to the contrary part or to give our selves to a detestable indifferency or neutrality in this cause which so much concerneth the glory of God the good of the Kingdoms and the honour of the King but shall all the dayes of our lives zealously and constantly continue therein against all lets and impediments whatsoever and what we are not able our selves to suppresse or overcome we shall reveal and make known that it may be timely prevented or removed All which we shall do as in the sight of God When I consider the matter of these several promises to have been propounded by a Parliament on advice had with an Assembly of Grave Learned and Judicions Divines who were to discover sin and make men to discerne between good and evil I cannot but retain a strong conjecture that it is all good and lawful And when I consider His late Majesties dissatisfaction expressed in His Contemplations to be more in respect of the manner than the matter my conjecture is much confirmed And when I observe His most Sacred Majesty at His late Coronation to have by Solemn Oath testified His allowance and approbation of the Solemn League and Covenant and by His Royal Declaration from Dumfirmling to have professed That on mature deliberation and being fully satisfied of the lawfulnesse and equity of the Solemn League and Covenant and every the Articles thereof Himself had sworn it and conjureth all his Subjects to lay aside their opposition to it Loyalty leads my conjecture unto a conclusion For such serious scrutiny by so sage and conscientious persons and that under the afflicting hand of that God who will not be mocked could not but have described the sinfulnesse of the matter if it be found But when I weigh the particulars promised and find them to be the Preservation of Religion and Reformation wherein it is corrupted and removal of what is thereunto obstructive as to the religious part of it and the preservation of the Kings Prerogative and peoples liberty and Nations unity and removal of the enemies thereof as to the civil part of it my conclusion is established and I find it so farre from unlawful that it binds us not to any thing which in the nature of it is not on us a positive duty though not bound by this most Sacred Bond and so farre is this Covenant from a repugnancie to our baptismal Covenant as our Dr. hath suggested in his * Page 12. Analysis that as I have in my * Page 22. Analepsis noted It is no hard matter to resolve it into the three heads of our baptismal promise taught by our Church For if I must believe the Articles of the Creed I must preserve sound Doctrine and reform to my power what is corrupt If I must keep Gods Commandments I must pursue pure worship and Religion towards God and Loyalty Love and unity towards men And if I must renounce the Divel and all his works I must extirpate Popery and Papal Prelacy Superstition Heresie Schisme will all incendiaries and evil instruments hinderers of Reformation And now I shall pray Dr. Gauden will shew us wherein this Covenant is so vastly different from the Covenant made in Baptisme Yet I shall consider once more the matter of the Covenant by those Rules which resolve the matter of an Oath unlawful and if it be therein chargeable I shall consent to the discharge of this Holy Bond. An Oath is in reference to the matter of it determined unlawful when it is unnecessary and about trifles and that is the prophaning of an Oath yet will
and Archbishops of the essence and formality of the true Reformed Protestant Religion Will not the assertion thereof tend more to Schism than Scotlands supposed making their Discipline and Government the mark of a true Church As denying the Reformed Churches beyond the Sea to have attained to the true Reformed Protestant Religion which yet they handed over to us But what reason had these Gentlemen of Oxford to understand the Doctrine of the Church of England in such a latitude when the sence of it is limited by them who were then known to be Legislators and a power sufficient to prescribe an Oath unto which themselves subjected and were the best expositors thereof viz. the House of Commons who thus declared Whereas some doubts have been raised concerning the meaning of these words The true Reformed Protestant Religion expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England against all Popery and Popish innovations within this Realm contrary to the same Doctrine This House doth declare that by these words was and is meant only the publick Doctrine professed in the said Church so far as it is opposite to Popery and Popish innovations And that the said words are not to be extended to the maintaining of any form of Worship Discipline and Government nor of any the Rites and Ceremonies of the said Church of England By which these Gentlemen might have understood 1. The Realm and Church of England were two different Subjects the one professing Doctrine in the other wherein also there was Doctrine tending to Popery and Popish Innovation 2. There were in the Doctrines professed by the Church of England some adjuncts of Rites Ceremonies Government or some special order of Worship which might need Reformation and were not view'd to be maintained So that according to this sence of them who prescribed both there is more of consistency than contradiction between the Protestation and Solemn League and Covenant So that the manifest perjury they feared hath not so much as a seeming ground And as for the supposed contradiction of this Branch of the Covenant unto the Oath of Supremacy it will on examination vanish as an apparition a thing which so seemed but cannot be so proved For if they will not hiss me out of their Schools I will grant them their Proposition in the Oath and assumption in the Statute by them quoted and yet find a way to avoid the conclusion because a meer non sequitur on their premises and this if they will have the Argument logically resolved by denying the consequence of their major Proposition for I will grant unto them that the Oath of Supremacy doth bind us to our power to assist and defend all Jurisdictions Priviledges Preheminences and Authorities granted and belonging to the Kings Highness his heirs and successors or united and annexed unto the Imperial Crown of this Realm And assume with them That the King had the whole power and Authority for Reformation Order and Correction of all manner of Errors Heresies Schisms c. and yet deny the sequel viz. That we may not endeavour in our places and callings to reform Religion For the defence of the Kings power is no way repugnant with the duty of our particular capacity I hope a Minister may by his preaching or a Divine by his disputation in the Schools endeavour the correction and Reformation of Error and Heresie Schism or Superstition and yet not intrench on his Majesties Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction and so interfer with their Oath of Supremacy Yea in reference to judicial and authoritative Correction and Reformation which we will suppose can only be done by the King mens endeavor may be in their places and callings by Counsel Proposal Remonstrance Petition Supplication and the like to procure His Majesties consent and authority to reform Religion in the Kingdom of England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government and then Sir where is the Contradiction Yet Sir if I were to dispute with a single though Senior Sophister of Oxford I would deny both Propositions the major as to its sequel or consequence as before and the assumption as that which the Statute doth not prove viz. The whole power of Spiritual or Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction for Correction and Reformation is annexed to the King and Imperial Crown of this Realm For the power by that Statute is special and particular not general and universal as themselves have cited it is viz. such Jurisdictions Priviledges Superiorities and Preheminences Spiritual or Ecclesiastical as by any c. and as the Statute proceeds Spiritual or Ecclesiastical power or authority hath heretofore been or may lawfully be exercised or used for Visitation of any Ecclesiastical State or Persons and for Reformation c. So that the power given to the King is such a powor as Bishops Cardinals or Popes had used not such as Parliaments who ever retained a Jurisdicton in themselves over both Church and Crown enjoyed and exercised This power was purely executive not Legislative over persons and particular Societies not over the Kingdom and whole Realm I presume the Gentlemen of Oxford were not ignoront of the power and Legislative Authority which the Parliaments of England ever held over their Bishops and the Spiritual or Ecclesiastical estate of this Land tying them in all their administrations of Discipline and Government to the Customs and Statutes of this Realme as they may read at large in the Statute of the Submission of the Clergy 25. Hen. 8.19 wherein they confess many of their Canons and Constitutions be repugnant to the Laws and Statutes of this Realm whereby they did not only Restrain the exorbitancies and from time to time Reform the abuses of the Church but also extend the Prerogative and Jurisdiction of the King as in that Statute 1 Elizab. and Limit Restrain and Repeal it as in the case of this individual specifical power granted in the words of the Statute quoted by the Statute 17 Caroli entituled An Act for repeal of a branch of a Statute 10 Elizab. concerning Commissioners for causes Ecclesiastical which clause repealed is part of this very recited Paragraph and immediately annexed unto and dependent on this very grant of power and authority Nor are these Masters and Scholars of Oxford insensible that there is a vast difference between Executive and Legislative power and authority and that as no Ecclesiastical persons did ever enjoy however the Pope and his Bishops did contend for it so no King of England did ever pretend or lay claim unto the Legislative power further than allowed by Act of Parliaments who were ever Dictators of a general Reformation in the Land Church and Kingdom as at this time in the Reformation covenanted Nor can they be ignorant that it is very bad Logick from such Jurisdictions and Specifical Executive Authority to infer that the whole power of Reformation is so in the King that the Parliament may not propose or the people covenant in their places and callings to endeavor a Reformation
and after the example of their Master Jesus Christ and that by vertue of their ordinary power and authority derived from him as deputed by him Governours of his Church Or at least that Episcopal Aristocracy may lay a more just title and claim to a Divine Institution than Papal Monarchy Presbyterial Democracy and Independants by particular Congregations or gathered Churches 2. We are assured by the undoubted testimony of Ancient Records and later History that this Form of Government hath been continued with such an universal uninterrupted unquestioned succession in all the Churches and in all Kingdoms that have been called Christian for fifteen hundred years together that there never was in all that time any considerable opposition against it that of Aerius was the greatest which grew from discontent and gain'd him the reputation of an Heretick From which antiquity to depart they fear by this extirpation to give advantage to the Papists by contempt of antiquity and should diminish the Authority due to the consentient judgement and practice of the universal Church c. Sir this is a very fair and specious exception for Divine Institution and ancient universal practice are very strong bars against any Oath and strong conjecture of the one and certain assurance of the other do forcibly supersede any mans acting to the contrary yet Sir I wonder that these learned men do but think of a Divine Institution and yet are assured of ancient universal practice uninterrupted for fifteen hundred year methinks the last should rather have remained doubtful for conscience can only be satisfied in the certainty of the former A think so in a Divine Warrant is both sinful and dangerous and I think the universal uniterrupted practice of the Church for fifteen hundred years might well run back unto the times of our Lord and Saviour and at least the Acts of his Apostles and the Sacred as well as Ecclesiastical Story might make mention of this Government and so create an undeniable certainty for the one is a very uncertain ground of assurance without the other But stay Sir I forgot the year in which these learned men wrote it was 1647. and so indeed one hundred and forty years might return before Episcopal Government appeared in the World and yet they may by antient Records and later Histories find the practice of it fifteen hundred years but this will more weaken than strengthen the Divine Right for without doubt the most primitive and pure estate of the Church was in the first one hundred and forty years 2. Their Argument loseth its force by the ambiguity of their terms for I am Sir at the same loss with them for the Ratio formalis objecti Saint Peters Bonds abide p. 2 3. the thing to be extirpated as in my last with Dr. Gauden They tell us of an Episcopal Government and an Episcopal Aristocracy but do not describe it it is no marvel that the Popes Legates should interdict the dispute in the Council of Trent History of the Council of Trent Edit 3. p. 591 592. concerning the Divine Right of Episcopal Superiority or direct it into such general and uncertain debates that there might be of it no determination but Sir I think it very strange that a Protestant University professedly seeking satisfaction to their conscience should so sophistically by general terms of an uncertain acceptation maintain to themselves doubts to which they desire resolution They well know Episcopal Government may denominate the Government Communi Concilio Presbyterorum by all Ministers in the Church who are the very true undoubted Scripture-Bishops unto which or whom there may be ordinis causa for method sake a Superintendent Moderator or Chair-man and this Episcopal Government is undoubtedly of Divine Institution and antient practice prescribed by the Holy Ghost and propounded in the sacred story of the Acts of the Apostles Chap. 20.28 where as in other Scriptures Bishops and Presbyters are terms synonimous denominating persons invested with the same Office and Authority and enjoying the same qualifications and by common consent ruling the Church of Christ and then Sir we must tell them this is not to be endeavoured to be extirpated nor doth the Covenant so propound it which if it do I consent to reject it But if by Episcopal Government they mean that special Form and Frame of Government wherein one person is advanced into a distinct order of Ministry above other Ministers and is invested with Prince-like power over them enjoying an Authority peculiar to him eonomine as Bishop of sole Ordination and Jurisdiction unto whom all other his Fellow-Ministers are Subjects and must swear to him obedience who must have a Council denominated Deans Deacons Prebends Chapters and the like over and among whom he sits as Lord and yet over him acknowledgeth a more superiour order under the title of Arch-bishop to whom he oweth and sweareth obedience and in this superiour order and lordly manner he ruleth all Pastours and People somtimes by himself somtimes by his Chancellor or Comissary his Surrogates Deans and Arch-deacons with all Officers of State and Power within such prefixed bounds and limits which is called his peculiar Diocess and either they must mean this or mistake the meaning of the Covenant which yet doth very plainly describe the Prelacy to be extirpated to be a Government by Arch-bishops Bishops their Chancellours Commissaries Deans c. And then Sir I must deny not that they think for I must believe the profession of their thought though I think it strange but that there is any good ground for such thoughts and the opinion of an University will not without good demonstration in this point beget such thoughts in me That the Apostles by vertue of their ordinary power and authority derived from Christ and deputed Governours of his Church did ever establish this Episcopal Government or that it was according to the mind and after the example of Jesus Christ who himself did never exercise a Pompous and Princely power over his Disciples but conversed with them as his Peers and Equals and gave them in charge that they should not affect Superiority one over another or Princely power over Gods Heritage I must put these Masters and Scholars of Oxford to prove by plain and pregnant Scripture That the Office of the Ministry may in Ordination be divided and only some part of it be thereby committed so as that the Deacons may preach and baptize but not consecrate the Lords Supper That there are more orders of the Ministry than one the Bishop or Presbyter or more Officers in the Church than Elders and Deacons appointed by Christ or his Apostles by their Apostolical Authority who have only described their qualification and directed the Ordination of these two and no more That the Presbyter in whom is required the same qualification to whom is to be yielded the same obedience subjection and respest who receiveth the same Ordination and is charged with the same duty
the Church being within the time of the Apostles that Christ did ever make or institute any distinction or difference to be in the pre-eminence of Power Order or Jurisdiction between the Apostles themselves or between the Bishops themselves but that they were all equal in power authority and jurisdiction and that there is now and since the time of the Apostles such difference among the Bishops it was devised by the antient Fathers of the primitive Church for the conservation of good order and unity of the Catholick Church and that either by the consent and authority or else by the permission and suffering of the Prince and civil power for the time ruling the said Fathers considering the infinite multitude of Christians so greatly encreased taking examples from the Old Testament thought it expedient to make degrees among Bishops and to limit their several Diocesses bounds of Jurisdiction and Power And then Sir this Form of Government will seem to be more Jewish Papal Paganish or at best political and civil than Apostolical the last of which the Statutes of our Kingdom do declare it to be affirming that the Arch-bishops Bishops Arch-deacons and other Ecclesiastical persons have no manner of Jurisdiction Ecclesiastical 26. Hen 8. cap. 26.31 Henr. 8. cap. 9 10.37 Hen 8 cap. 17. 1. Ed. 6 cap. 2 1 5 8. Eliz c. 1. but by under and from the Kings Royal Majesty and Patrick Adamson Arch-Bishop of Saint Andrews in Scotland Anno 1591. in his Recantation at the Synod at Fife professed sincerely ex animo That Bishops and Ministers are by the Word of God equal and the Hierarchy or Superiority of the Bishops nullo nititur verbi fundamento And I think it had been but Reason some satisfactory answer had been given to Gersom Bucer his Dissertationes de Gubernatione Ecclesiae Didoclavius his Altare Damascenum Cartwright's Exceptions Paul Bains his Diocesan Tryal Smectymnus and especially Mr. William Pryns publick and positive Challenge in the unbishoping of Timothy and Titus which I think will be ad Grecas Calendas before they think so of an University had been published as a stumbling Block to the peoples swearing of the Solemn League and Covenant when thereunto called by Parliament But it may be Sir I run too fast methinks their think so of Divine Right and Apostolical establishment is asserted very faintly and therefore it is restrained and limited with an Episcopal Aristocracy hath a fairer pretension and may lay a juster title and claim to a Divine Institution than Papal Monarchy Presbyterian Democracy or Independent Yet I must say fair pretension and comparative claims are very weak props against Parliamentary Resolves and the power of an Oath it must be plain and undeniable Divine Right must stand against them But what is that they call Episcopal Aristocracy Are not these learned men mistaken in their terms hath not Englands Episcopacy been ever deemed a Monarchy and of the same kind but lower degree with Papacy How can it be conformable to the Government of the Nation which these very men tell us is Merum Imperium an Empire Monarchy p. 11 and establish that Maxim no Bishop no King if it be an Aristocracy Whoever deemed Presbytery a Democracy Or on what colourable ground can it be so deemed doth not this Form fix the Government in the seniores and illustrior pars populi The Officers of the Church ordering all and ruling the whole Church excluding the Congregation from all Acts of Government save a shewing their just exception to any Order Office or Censure If Presbytery be a Democracy what can Independency be judged I find these learned men by the nicety of this distinction at a loss for its name as well they might and so I shall leave it and suppose a willingness in the University of Oxford to assent to Doctor Whitakers Thesis That Regimen Ecclesiae non est Monarchicum nec Aristocraticum nec Democraticum sed Democratica Monarchica Aristocratica That the Government of the Church is a Formal Aristocracy qualified with something of Monarchy which he means not to be the superiority of Prelates and Democracy by which is not meant the ruling power of the people let but this learned Doctor explain himself and Mr. Thomas Cartwright expound nay translate his words and we shall find a Government which will lay a very fair claim unto a Divine Right Si velimus Christum ipsum respiscere fuit semper Ecclesiae Regimen Monarchicum Whitak oper Tom. 2. de Rom. Pont. Quest 12. de Origin Eccles Cartwrights first Reply to Whitakers gift page 35 si Ecclesiae Presbyteros qui in Doctrina Disciplina suas partes agebant Aristocratioun si totum corpus Ecclesiae quatenus in Electione Episcoporum Presbyterorum suffragia ferebat ita tamen ut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 semper Presbyteris servatur Democraticum which Cartwright thus renders The Church is governed with that kind of Government the Philosophers have affirmed to be the best for in respect of Christ the head not his Vicar or Superiority of single Prelates it is a Monarchy in respect of the Ancients and Pastours that govern in common all the Presbytery with like Authority among themselves not a Superiority over them it is an Aristocracy and in respect the people are not excluded but have their interest unto exception in Church-matters it is a Democracy If then these men will take down the towring power of Prelates and turn their Magisterial Throne into a Ministerial Chair and bring into the Cathedral Council of Deans and Chapters all the Presbyters and let these lofty persons stand amongst their Fellows till by common consent for common order one of them be set in the Chair to gather Suffrages regulate the Assembly declare their sentence and see to the execution of their Decrees and summon them together they shall constitute a Government which I think will not only fairly pretend unto but plainly appear to have an Apostolical Institution and Establishment and there are very many both ancient and moderne Authors of my opinion and then we need no more dispute the matter of extirpation of Prelacy for in this sense the Covenant will rather establish it Their think so of Divine Right turns into an assurance of universal uninterrupted succession of this Form of Government in all Kingdoms that have been called Christian for fifteen hundred years together without any considerable opposition save that of Aerius which sprang from discontent and gain'd him the reputation of an Heretick This is Sir the old only and usual guard of Prelacy I will not deny Antiquity its due Reverence though I put not on it The Antiquity of Englands Prelacy observed nor consent unto it an authority equal with or as the Papists Idolize it above the Scriptures I confess in matters of Fact it may give a clearer conviction than direction and assert things past done rather than that they should be done and continue It is well if
of God in the sense there intended is at this time encreased To which Sir I should have then answered 1. Answer Their ability to say it is of little moment nor could we well judge it for whether they were under any natural wilfull violent or judicial incapacity is not our part to determine Others were able to say it and if these reverend Fathers and Students did know it though they were not able to say it it was for us sufficient And therefore may I be bold further to enquire 2. Whether they were able to read the whole Sentence expressing the sense Of the enemies of God whose rage power and presumption was at this time encreased here intended and calling to mind the treacherous and bloody plots conspiracies attempts and practices of the enemies of God against the true Religion and Professors thereof in all places especially in these three Kingdoms ever sinte the Reformation of Religion and how much their rage power and presumption are of late and at this time encreased whereof the deplorable estate of the Church and Kingdom of Ireland the distressed estate of the Church and Kingdom of England and the dangerous estate of the Church and Kingdom of Scotland are present and publick testimonies Are not these full expressions of the sense in which the enemies of God whose raâ—â— power and presumption were encreased are to be understood And is it rational or religious to enquire after and suspend a duty on jealousie of a sense intended when we have the sense plainly expressed Is not this repugnant to the end of Speech the Interpreter of the mind 3. Were the Masters Scholars and other Members and Officers of the University of Oxford such strangers in the Protestant Israel as not to know the Papists and Popishly affected were enemies of God against true Religion and the Professors thereof in all places Or so unacquainted at home as not to know their plots conspiracies attempts and practices were especially against these three Kingdoms the most publick and potent professors of true Religion ever since the Reformation Had they no notion of the Rebellions against King Edward the sixth Of the Treasons Plots Conspiracies Roaring Bulls and Raging Spanish Armado against Queen Elizabeth Of the Gunpowder-Treason and other plots against King James Of the Colledge of Propagators of the Catholick cause erected in Rome under the Government of Cardinal Barbarin and designed against these Kingdoms Or of the grand Plot agitated by Con or Cuneus the Popes Nuncio in England discovered by Andreas ab Habernefield first to Sir William Boswel His Majesties Resident in Flanders and by him unto Laud late Archbishop of Canterbury and since fully cleared and laid open by Mr. William Prynn in his Romes Master-piece published in 1643. four years before their reasons and might have been profitable to their eye-sight 4. Did not this learned University judge it to be an high encrease of their Rage Power and Presumption to distribute their Jesuits into such several Orders as should be capable in any place or profession to propagate their plots To press upon the late King and Archbishop for a publick profession of union with Rome To boast openly of Englands returning to Popery To tender a Cardinals Hat to the late Archbishop To poison our Fountains the Universities and our very people with Arminian and Popish doctrines publickly preached and printed and Popish pictures publickly sold and bound up with our Testaments and Bibles To provoke the High-Commission cruelties and Puritans discontents To plot a plain Popish Service-book with very little variation oâ— from the Mass-book and procure it to be by force and violence imposed on the Church and Kingdom of Scotland to the raising Mutinies and stirring up the Bellum Episcopale with pretence to yoke them and intention to destroy the King and Protestant cause To rebell openly in Ireland and with rage and cruelty to murder and massacre the Protestants To divide between King and Parliament in England and possess themselves of his Majesties Garrisons and Armies as under their command To abet advise and effect the most barbarous murther of his late Majesty and our since confusions All which and many the like to have been the atchievements and accomplishments of these enemies of God to true Religion He that is in any measure observant of our affairs can run and read And are not these expressions of rage power and presumption let right reason judge 2. Oxford Reasons second exception They cannot truly affirm that they had used or given consent to any supplication or remonstrance to the purposes therein expressed To this Sir consider That although they cannot affirm it yet others can do it in truth and with joy 2. What are the purposes therein expressed not as before intended shall we judge it from the Preface It is the glory of God and the advancement of the Kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ the honor and happiness of the Kings Majesty and His Posterity the publick liberty peace and safety of the Kingdoms wherein every ones private condition is included For the End is the Argument which is urged to enforce the constancy to the Covenant and in Article the sixth it is expressed to be the glory of God good of the Kingdoms and the honour of the King and these are the onely purposes expressed in these particular acts propounded for the production of them and shall we be so uncharitable as to think the Gentlemen of Oxford to have been so void of piety towards God love to their Country or loyalty toward their King as not to have used or given consent to Supplication or Remonstrance to these purposes therein expressed Must we think them so speechless as not to pray to God nor speak to men for the effecting of these purposes expressed No! I will rather presume them modest and not willing to publish their piety and zeal to good purposes or passionately prejudiced against some one expedient propounded to the effecting of these purposes expressed and thereby acted to confound the purpose and pursuing meanes But 3. Had not the University of Oxford Representees in Parliament If they did not sit were they violently excluded Or did they give their No to the Supplications or Remonstrances to the purposes expressed in the Covenant and if they did were not these Supplications and Remonstrances carried by the Majority of Votes And is not the Negative so swallowed therein that all persons and bodies corporate through the Nation did thereunto consent When we finde Oxford excepted we will say they could not truly affirme they gave consent But 3dly Oxford Reasons third exception they did not conceive the entring into such a League and Covenant to be a lawful proper and probable means to preserve our selves and our Religion from ruine and destruction To this Sir we must enquire into the conceipt of these Gentlemen and desire to know whether it relate unto the quality of the Covenant or the act
purity of Doctrine the greatest help of this unity by the mercy of God was that with the Doctrine the Discipline of Christ and his Apostles as it is prescribed in the Word of God was by little and little together received and according to that Discipline so near as might be the whole government of the Church was disposed the Lord God of his infinite goodness grant unto the Kings Majesty and to all the Rulers of the Church that according to the Word of God they may perpetually keep that unity and the purity of Doctrine Unto these might be added the testimony of Arundel Hutton and Matthews three English Archbishops approving the order of the Church of Scotland and the joy of King James professed in the Assembly 1590. That He was born to be a King of the sincerest Church in the world All which might have brought to their knowledge a better account but they looked not so farre back but take it up by occurrents of those unhappy times in which I fear Scotland was not more full of perplexities than Oxford of passion and prejudice 3. But in what particulars are the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government much worse than that of England They should specifie these bad things for generalia non pungunt I confess in a Notion of Philosophy or question in Divinity the Say so of a University is of some Authority but of none in the case of an accusation which must be particularly charged and plainly proved if Englands Doctrine be doudtful and defective in respect of its clearness and certainty or sophisticated by the obtruded fancies and terms of private men as Mr. Prynn hath plainly charged in his Epistle to the late King prefixed to his Quench-coal and as the Ministers of sundry Counties in their Reasons for Reformation have suggested and Mr. Hamâ—lton in his modest answer to Dr. Peirson hath cleerly demonstrated it will be found as much better than the Doctrine of the Church of Sco land as its Worship Discipline and Government is worse than that of England And I hope if the one be as good though nothing better than the other there can be no great Scruple to swear to endeavour the preservation of it 3 Reason of this exception referred to the fifth Section of this Treatise 4th Reason of this exception But to proceed Their third Reason is a supposed contradiction in this first Article of the Covenant This shall be considered under another Head The fourth Reason why they could not swear the preservation of the Religion in Scotland is this Wherein we already find some things to our thinking tending towards Superstition and Schism which call for Reformation Here Sir they seem to specifie what in the 2d reason they had suggested in general terms But let it be observed 1. That they find not in the Church of Scotland any formal Superstition or Schisme but at the most something tending towards them I imagine many Oxford Masters will not willingly admit a Reformation or be denied a preservation of many things apparently tending towards Popery bua not Popery it self 2. The things they find do but to their thinking tend towards Superstition or Shisme but they have no certainty of it Must conjecture stand against the Covenant and conclusions of others Methinks Superstition and Schism should be so well known to the Scholars of Oxford that they might be able to conclude what things tend thereunto 3. What are the things they find in the Church of Scotland which tend in their thinking to Superstition and Schism They point us unto the Margine and there we find viz. in accounting Bishops Antichristian and indifferent Ceremonies unlawful this they refer to Superstition And viz. in making their Discipline ad Government a mark of the true Church and the setting up thereof the erecting of the Throne of Jesus Christ and this they referre to Schism Sure Sir they were in a great strait that made a shift to specifie these sad corruptions but yet they do not tell us where they find these laid down as the Doctrines of the Church of Scotland whether in their Confession or form of Discipline Whilst in their Confession of Faith they give unto general Assemblies authority about Ceremonies Corpus Confessi Conf. Scot. Art 20. p. 120 121. I cannot think they deem indifferent Ceremonies unlawful nor do I find that they as England hath done do any where make their Discipline a part of their faith that so they might damn Bishops as Antichristian I find indeed Artic. 8. p. 118. that they make Discipline rightly administred as is prescribed in the Word of God the note of a true Church but they do not appropriate it to their Discipline and Government as these learned men would have us read it I know indeed that the Scotch Divines do account English Bishops Antichristian and English Popish Ceremonies unlawful but they deny them to be indifferent but these are specials and far from the generals charged on them nor can these specials be condemn'd in them until Catherwoods Alâ—are Damascenum and Mr. Gillespies Dispute against the English-Popish Ceremonies which have passed with much approbation through all the Reformed Churches and I presume missed not Oxford be fully answered 4. But wherein lieth the tendency of these principles to Superstition and Schism that these learned men think of As to their nature they are negative and exclusive and I deem a denial of any of Gods appointments to be prophanenesse not superstition I am apt to think Superstition to be a positive innovation and erection of some new matter and action into the worship of God on mans meer will and invention without Gods institution I remember Mr. Blake denieth the baptizing of Bells or the Horse in Huntingtonshire to be Superstition and damns it as a prophane misapplication of Gods Ordinance How then the exclusion neglect or prophane esteem of Bishops and Ceremonies can tend to Superstition I confesse I see not Think you Sir the Learned men of Oxford did deem Bishops and indifferent Ceremonies to be such immediate institutions and essential parts of Divine worship that they think a profane contempt of them might tend by exclusion thereof to make way for some innovation in their room then I also will think they tend towards Superstition but must think they are not indifferent I wish Sir they have not mistaken the Scotch notion of a true Church Gent. 2da c. 2. col 109. which is opposed as well to a corrupt as falsely constituted Church the Magdeburgences do so oppose it in the very same case Vera enim ecclesia c. For a true Church as it retains pure Doctrine so also it keep simplicity of Ceremonies but an hypocritical Church for the most part changeth the Ceremones instituted by God and multiplieth to its own traditions And Bishop Halls Vere and vera Ecclesia is no stranger at Oxford and if then Scotland concluding her Government to be according to the
the Preachers defended even in the University from censure for them nay these were Printed in several Books of the same Authors licensed and allowed by the Archbishop and his Chaplains and many of them asserted in the visitation Articles of some Bishops and yet were not established in the Church of England As in Doctrine so in worship many corruptions were innovated and exercised As Bowing at the Name of Jesus The turning Communion-Tables into Altars or Altarwise and Railing them in furnishing them with Candlesticks and Tapers Tying the Gospel the blessing and other parts of the publick service to that place enclosed and bowing to these Altars The making Crucifixes and Canopies pictures of God Christ the Holy Ghost Virgin Mary and other Saints in our Church-windows Consecration of Churches Fonts Bells and the like All which and many such were first innovated to the Chappel at Lambeth and ferried over to White-hall and so transmitted to all Cathedral and almost all Parish Churches and yet were not established by Law though enforced by the corruption of Discipline in the Visitation Articles of Bishop Wren Bishop Mountague Bishop Peircy Bishop Lindsey and Bishop Skinner and others in their several Diocesses and by the silencing suspension excommunication and imprisonment and High Commission vexation of Mr. Chauncey Vicar and Mr. Parker an Inhabitant of Ware Mr. Burros of Colchester and many others Nor was Government any more pure if we consider how it was exercised in the High Commission and Star-Chamber with all rigor cruelty and injustice and in Visitations Citations Probate of VVills Letters of Administration and Excommunication in the name and under the Seal of the Bishops themselves never authorized thereunto All which were evidently needful to be reformed as having been so publickly exercised and potently defended and might well enforce a covenanted endeavor to reform Religion in the Kingdom of England I well know Sir that the change of Religion makes a great sound in the world especially if established I cannot be insensible of the noise made by it against our first Reformation and must expect the Eccho to follow all after acts and degrees thereof for all changes are scandalous and many very dangerous If therefore these Masters and Scholars of Oxford could rationally conceive the Covenant to bind them to endeavor a change of Religion in the substance matter and essential parts and form thereof then I must confess their exception is very important for we cannot deny that our Bishops Martyrs and Learned Divines have by Suffering and Writing testified it to have been agreeable to the Word of God And that to resolve that into the power and pleasure of a Parliament who may direct and authorize the profession but not prescribe the matter or form were to make it a Parliamentary Religion and the change thereof must needs condemn our Laws and the punishment of Papists not joyning with us as unjust and so justifie Papist and Separatist the one in his recusancy and the other in his separation But Sir when I consider the Religion of Scotland to be preserved as the concomitant and provocation the VVord of God to be the Rule and the best reformed Churches professing the same substantial Religion though differing in administration and order propounded as the pattern I see not how right reason can render any such sence of it and the rather for that Reformation not alteration of Religion is the formal act which presupposeth the continuation of the subject about which it is conversant But Sir if they as they needs must by Religion understand the order and annexed Ceremonies appendant to Religion whether established as was the Cross in Baptism holinesse of dayes and order of the Liturgy and the like or only exercised and enforced by Prelates power and countenance as the corruptions before mentioned then we must say their exception is of no weight not the reason any thing worth for this change can be no such scandal as is conceived for we deny them to have been testified by our Bishops Martyrs and learned men by any Sufferings or Writings untill of late by the persons and such like before mentioned as agreeable to the Word of God and must put them to the proof of it we think we are able to produce Tindal Latimer Hooper Ridley Farrar and many other Martyrs by laying down their Bishopricks and other contests and sufferings to have testified against them and Mr. Cartwright Baines and many Devonshire Cornwal and Lincolnshire Ministers and others ever since the Reformation by Writing Petition Remonstrance Apology and Sufferings to have testified against not only the corruptions exercised against which our Jewel Fulk Whitaker Archbishop Parker Dr. Ward Dr. Brownrigge Dr. Bancroft and all sound and learned Divines not devoted to return to Rome have written but even the very Order and Ceremonies established as being not agreeable to the Word of God And if these learned Gentlemen had pleased to observe the Visitation and high Commission proceedings they might have found Prynn Burton Bastwick Layton Workman Langley Hind Nichols Ball and many others known learned men who were silenced suspended imprisoned stigmatized and in much Sufferings testified these appendants to our Religion whether established or exercised to be no way agreeable to the Word of God and I know not whom they can ment on as a Martyr for them unless it be Lawde the late Archbishop the grand Innovator of our Church 2. If therefore our Religion be by Papists or Prelates reproached as a Parliamentary Religion we will rejoyce in our reproach and bless God we had a Parliament that had zeal to improve their power about those things that were properly subject thereunto 3. Nor can this Reformation justifie the recusancy of the Papists because these things never became a Reason for their recusancy further than they occasioned their obduracy by assuring their hopes of Englands return to them Nor the Separation of the Separatists for that the corruptions established were never made such essential parts of worship as to make a sufficient ground for separation Witness Cartwrights defence of the Church service The Masters and Scholars of Oxford cannot have been so little observant as not to know that the sober zealous Non-conformists who groaned under the burden of these corruptions and for this Reformation were grieved by and greatly contended against the * Mr. Geree his Vindiciae ecclesiae Anglicanae shewing necessity of reformation not Separation And Mr. Balls two Books against Mr. Cann Separation as that which was without sufficient ground yet like Jesus Christ their Master kept Communion with a Church whose Doctrine and Worship was very much in need of Reformation and taught men so to do granting There was something in the Doctrine and Worship of the Church of England not agreeable to the Word of God and yet not enough to lay a ground for separation 4. Much less doth this endeavor judge the Law against and punishment of Papists as unjust which
never had these pieces of Religion for their ground or reason You see Sir that the first ground of these learned mens dissatisfaction as to the covenanted endeavor of Reformation of Religion in England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government is clearly groundless supposing a change and suggesting a scandal not to be rupposed Let us try the strength of their second reason for this exception And that is They could not covenant this Reformation without wrong to themselves 2 Reason for this exception their consciences reputation and estates in bearing false witness against themselves and sundry other wayes swearing to endeavor to reform that as corrupt and vitious which they had by their personal subscription approved as agreeable to the Word of God and for which they had not been condemned of their own hearts nor convinced by their brethren that therein they did amiss 2. Which they are in conscience perswaded were not against the Word of God as they stand established by law 3. Which they believe to be in sundry respects much better more agreeable to the Word of God and pactice of the Catholick Church than that to be preserved in Scotland 4. To which all Clerks admitted to any Benefice are required to assent To these reasons Sir I should have answered 1. Credit is indeed a matter of concerment and Reputation is to be regarded and our Estate by all just prudent meanes duely preserved but they are not equivalent to the purity of Gospel administrations nor must be admitted barres to duy or stays from the endeavour of a necessary Reformation when called for 2. We are at a loss to understand their terms the establishment by Law is not expressed in the Covenant and many corruptions we have noted were exercised not established The endeavour of a Reformation of them though not them only was and is required and it is very doubtful how or where to find and prove an establishment by law to which they so much cleave yet I hope the defect in proof thereof will be no just demurre to the endeavour of a Reformation of what is really vitious and corrupt whether established or only exercised We must also entreat a comment on these words the practice of the Catholick Church It is well known that Rome doth engross and monopolize this Epithite nor can the Worship Doctrine and Discipline of the Church of England admit it to be predicated of any so well as that for all reformed Churches do in their practice differ and I presume it will be hard to prove the agreement of the Primitive Churches in these particulars which were first derived from Apostate Rome and have ever since continued as the dregs of their Catholick practices not more to the grief of the Reformed Churches abroad and Non-conformists at home then joy and exultation of the Children of that Church as a plain evidence of their continued possession and encouragement to expect and endeavor a full recovery of England into her bosom But as to their Argument 3 The Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government might be vitious and corrupt notwithstanding their apprehension and assent to the contrary or the subscription of others required by the Law We well know that the Reformation of the Church in England was begun on more * Henry the 8th his discontent at the Pope Political than pious principles which did easily consent to a retaining of what was justly discharged in other Rerormed Churches embracing the administration of the Gospel in its simplicity for the sake of its naked self might consist with those Publick ends which did provoke it and Policy being the principle predominant in the first hath strugled against piety unto this last act and is not yet mastered and I presume the Scholars and Masters of Oxford will not plead an immunity from policy passion and prejudice when they are to pass judgment against their credits reputation and estates as in the case of this Covenant they apprehend they were to do and that these prirciples will provoke us to yield our own and exact from others an assent to things as agreeable to the Word of God which in themselves are vitious and corrupt no serious man or Christian can or will deny It is wel if we find this Reason stated under a more cautious vigilant and pious frame of spirit 4. But I must confess I wonder not so much to hear these Gentlemen to profess They had by their personal subscription approved the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England as agreeable to the Word of God which might be an act of rashness an effect of ignorance an event of some distressed condition or distemper of mind fear of losing or hope of gaining preferment as to hear them say That this was enjoyned by law to them and all that were admitted to benefices That the Doctrine of the Church was to be assented unto I grant is by Law established but the assent to Worship Discipline and Government I observe not to be enjoyned by any full and formal Law I find indeed something relating to Discipline in the ordering of Deacons and Priests Bishops and Archbishops and the Churches power about traditions and Rites or Ceremonies inserted into the 39. Articles but how or by what Law they are established 13. Eliz 12. I know not The Statute requiring Ministers assent doth not specifie the Articles particulary and the general Note whereby to know them laid down in the Statute is this Articles of Religion which ONLY concern the Confession of the true Christian Faith and Doctrine of the Sacraments This particle ONLY is in my judgment exclusive to Discipline and Government and how these came into the Articles I know not only I find the Epistle to His late Majesty before the * A Book supposed to have be on written by Mr. William Frynn Quench-Coal to charge corruption and forgery to have been acted about these Articles and earnestly implores justice against the Forgers and Obtruders thereof and untill the Legality of the Canons of 1603. and sence thereof be clearly asserted and fully vindicated from the * Necessity for Reformation p. 56 57 58 59. exceptions which are urged against them we must be at a loss for their establishment for if the King had not authority by vertue of the Statute pretended or the matter of them be repugnant to standing Statutes as is suggested the establishment of Worship Discipline and Government by law must abide very doubtful but the University of Oxford might make a Law unto themselves to which these Gentlemen might refer But 5. Whether established or exercised I think it very strange to see these learned men on serious thoughts to profess their own hearts did not condemn them nor had their brethren convinced their judgements they had done amiss by their personal subscription to approve the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England to be agreeable to the Word of GOD but
in Baptism Surplice in divine service supposed to be established Or those since pressed as the Bowing at the Name of Jesus Turning Tables into Altars and Bowing to them and placing on them Candlesticks and Tapers The Consecration of Churches and the like though I should which I confess I cannot admit what is pretended in the Preface to the Common-Prayer-Book that they are apt to stirre up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable and special signification whereby he might be edified yet I must enquire by what authority are they appointed the highest pretended is the Church and I see no Commission the Church hath to appoint such things If I mistake not the power of the Church is declarative executive and Ministerial not judicial and magisterial She may publish the matter and prescribe the Order of Gods Worship but not constitute or ordain new matter though never so much tending to edification against which she is expresly barr'd by the 2d Commandment And if she hath power to continue our Ceremonies because significant why or how shall those be excluded which are more antient and significant Such as were the baptizing for the Dead putting Cream and Honey into the mouth of the baptized insufflation and spitting at the Devil and the World and coming to baptism in a white Garment which was left behind and profitably produced as a pledge against Elpidophorus when Apostatized from the Faith in which he had been baptized and many such like Tertul Coron mil. pa. 449. Contra Marcion lib. 7. p. 155. which Tertullian mentioneth as used in the Church in the Year of our Lord 62. in the times of the Apostles than which the use of the Cross cannot be more ancient nor is it indeed so ancient If then the Church have not a power to ordain them on what basis do all our Ceremonies stand save that prophane Maxime No Ceremonies no Bishop Before it be determined that these Ceremonies are agreeable to the Word of God I wish it may be determined whether the appointment and Religious exercise of matter significant and so in it self tending to edification not instituted by Jesus Christ be not the very formality of Superstition Seventhly and Lastly Is it agreeable to the Word of God in ordination to divide the work of the Ministry and give authority to apply one of the Sacraments and not the other to baptize but not administer the Lords Supper otherwise than as Assistant to him who hath ministerial power of consecration as it is done in the Ordering of Deacons Again is it agreeable to the Word to denominate Gospel Ministers Priests which properly relate to a Sacrifice and Altar If so why did our late Masters altar the Title into Presbyters in the Scotch Liturgy It is agreeable to the Word that the Ministers of Jesus Christ swear or Solemnly promise obedience unto their fellow Ministers under the notion of an ordinary and Cheif Minister It is reason they keep order and be subject to the Assembly but parity of Office and Authority admits not of obedience Is it agreeable to the Word that Bishops sweare or Solemnly promise obedience unto the Archbishops If so why not Archbishops to Cardinals or Patriarchs and they to the Pope Is it because the Sea bounds our Papacy Is it in the forme of ordination agreeable to the Word that the Bishop ordaining do Magisterially repeat the words of Jesus Christ who had a power and did effect it viz. Receive thou the Holy Ghost Whose sins thou dost forgive they are forgiven and whose sins thou dost retain they are retained as actually giving the Holy Ghost as a qualification for that Office and after this to give authority of administration with a Take thou authority to preach the Word of God and to minister the Holy Sacraments Is it agreeable to the Word of God by a special Solemn and Religious act to Consecrate unto a degree convenient and only necessary for the method and Order of an Assembly as if it were and indeed however others think by reason of the variation of the word I believe it was intended to be an actual Ordination to a distinct Office of Ministry in the Church like the Cheif Priest-hood among the Jews I am at a loss in Civil or Religious Policy to finde a warrant for so Sacred a forme in an advancement to a degree yet I will not deny the formalities of the Chaire Is it agreeable to the Word of God that excommunication the last and greatest of Censures do proceed without admonition and be inflicted ipso facto before obstinacy the proper and only ground of it be detected much lesse convicted and that so dreadful a Censure be denounced on the non-observance of Rites and Ceremonies declared indifferent and other light and frivolous occasions nay on the very discharge of duty As suppose an exercise in a Market-Town Canons of 1603. Can. 72. or a Fast kept in the Parish Church on the occasion of some special exigency of that Parish or by a Minister in a private family whose domestick concernments may call for the house and family to mourn apart and intreat the assistance of their special particular friends in prayer and yet in all these cases it is directed in the Canons made by the Convocation in London of which the Bishop of London sate President Anno 1603. Sir these things and such like in the Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of England are obvious and have been often urged as needing Reformation and as Reasons Apologizing for the Non-subscription of the Sober Learned and Pious Non-conformists ever since the Reformation as by Mr. Thomas Cartwright the Ministers of Devonshire and Cornwal the Ministers within the Diocess of Lincolne and many others whose Printed Books could not but have been seen by at least some of the Masters and Scholars of Oxford and might have convinced their judgments that they had done amiss by their personal subscription to approve that all things in the four specified particulars were agreeable to the Word of God Sixthly Their confidence that all things in these four specified particulars are agreeable to the Word of God and need no Reformation may well engage them to conclude that they are much better than those of Scotland which they wear to swear to preserve For the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government in the Church of Scotland differeth in all the particulars mentioned and so must needs be dissonant if these be AGREEABLE TO THE WORD OF GOD Yet Sir methinks the good grounds on which they thought so might for their clearer Apology and satisfaction of other souls called to swear the same Covenant have been specified and declared the rather for that they seemed to be in a strait when they pointed unto the accounting of Bishops Antichristian and indifferent Ceremonies unlawful the making their Discipline the mark of a true Church and the setting up thereof the erecting of the
Throne of Christ as things tending towards Superstition and Schisme and the worst things in the Church of Scotland which called for Reformation rather than Preservation Lastly the Hazard of their estates doth seem indeed to be their great stumbling block in their way to the Covenant All Clerks are by the Lawes yet in force required to give their assent unto what by this Covenant is required to be reformed and that on pain of losing their Benefice Which Sir we shall admit though it would admit a dispute in reference to many if not all the particulars mentioned yet how should this demurre to the taking of the Covenant Because the Law requires our assent it will not therefore follow they need not reformation nor it is not lawful for us to endeavour their reformation Many men have assented to the Law who could never give the assent required by the Law and by suffering shewed that the Law is their burden binding them to suffer whilst it requireth what they in truth and good Conscience cannot yield But must good men continue under this burden and take no care to ease themselves Is it a sin for men to covenant in their places to endeavour the removal of a burdensom Law Or might not the Reformation covenanted be so endeavoured Nay Sir on the consideration of the whole Reason can such endeavour be any wrong to mens consciences reputation or estate and then there is no strength in this 2d Reason of Oxford against the covenanting such an endeavour But we proceed to their 3d. Reason of this Exception The third Reason on which the Masters 3d. Reason of this exception Scholars c. of Oxford stand dissatisfied concerning the Covenant or Reformation of England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government is indeed the most weighty and considerable if but clearly proved and it is Their manifest danger of perjury the Covenant in this point seeming directly contrary to the former Solemn Protestation I presume they mean that of May 5. 1641. which they had sworn neither for hope or fear or other respect ever to relinquish or the Oath of Supremacy which according to the Laws of this Realm and the Statutes of this University they had sworn Unto this Reason I easily grant that contradictory Oaths do run the soul on manifest perjury and if the first were lawful the last must needs be sinful neither to be sworn at first nor obliging at last if it be sworn 2. But the contradiction must be manifest and clear not seeming and conjectural which may spring by passion and prejudice to the fancy of such as are willing to suppose it as all things look yellow to Jaundies eyes and is not in reality such to impartial Readers It seems this contradiction between this Covenant and those Oaths was to the men of Oxford but seeming though to their best understandings in their then capacity I presume and it must pass into a certainty before it discharge the bond to such as are under it though seeming so to be might suspend the act of them to whom it so seemed 3. But let us see wherein seems this contradiction It is well if it amount not to as much as the Scotch Notions before specified which seemed to tend to Superstition and Schisme First then of the contradiction to their protestation which I imagine can be no other but that of May 5. 1641. and so far as it concernes Religion runneth thus I A. B. do in the presence of Almighty God vow and protest to maintain and defend as farre as lawfully I may with my life power and estate the true Reformed Protestant Religion expressed in the doctrine of the Church of England against all Popery and Popish Innovations within this Realm contrary to the same Doctrine The Solemn League and Covenant in the Article under consideration runneth thus That we shall sincerely really and constantly through the grace of God endeavor in our several places and callings the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdom of England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and example of the best reformed Churches Contraria contrariis juxta opposita magis elucescunt Let any impartial eye reade these two Oaths thus opposed and shew me wherein seeme the contradiction to lie They may indeed seem different in their sound and manner of expression but Oxford well knoweth that all diversa are not opposita all difference amounts not to a contradiction diversa opposita aeque dissentanea sunt sed non aeque dissentiunt they differ indeed but not with the same difference I wish that on second thoughts they will please to tell us whether the difference be Re or Ratione only the same thing being protested in the first though not in the same words and after the manner which was covenanted in the last But they specifie the contradiction viz. The Doctrine they vowed to maintain by the name of the true Protestant Religion expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England they took to be the same now to be reformed and altered But Sir were they not in taking it so to be much mistaken The Covenant binds to Reforme Doctrine in the Kingdom of England was there no such Doctrine openly divulged in the Court Sermons and Printed books of Mountague Reive Heylen Dowe Cozens Pocklington and others before mentioned In Mountague Apello ad Caesarem originum Ecclesiasticorum 2 parts Anti-diatribae Pocklingtons Sunday no Sabbath Altare Christianum Heylens Coal from the Altar History of the Sabbath Sales his introduction to a devout life Shelfords five Treatises Dowe against Mr. Burton Cozens his houres of Prayer and many other licensed books publickly sold in the Kingdom and in the Visitation Articles of Bishop Mountague Bishop Peirce and Bishop Wren on which many good men were vexed which was distinct and different if I may not say expresly contrary to the Protestant Religion expressed in the Doctrine of the Church of England And did not these need Reformation And is it not the duty of every good Subject and Protestant in maintenance of this Religion to endeavor a Reformation alteration and total expunction of such Doctrine and so to Covenant And then Sir where is the contradiction In this sense the Protestation and Covenant do plainly coincidere and agree in one and the same thing But Sir let us allow them their sence That the Doctrine protested to be maintained is the same covenanted to be reformed Are Maintenance and Reformation incompetible is there not a possbility of some adjuncts unto the substance of the Doctrine of the Church of England expressing the true Reformed Protestant Religion and seperable without the destruction thereof Or may not the Doctrine of the Church of England be reformed as to the scant general dubious and difficult manner of expression and yet the matter thereof be maintained and defended Are those Articles which concern the Government of the Church and Consecration of the Bishops
and excommunicating of the best of men for meer trifles things indifferent so judged by themselves at the least nay many times for opposing profaness and superstition yea for performing their duties in praying and preaching and the like evils which did attend it though I should say but accidentally by the corruption of Montague Laude Wren Pierce and their Companions be written in such sensible Acts and legible Characters that England might feel and the World read them I think there need not be much of Reason offered to shew not only the expediency but necessity of extirpation of a Government though in it self good yet capable of such enormities unlesse it be of an immediate and undoubted divine right But Sir Had not Oxford their numbers in Parliament and did they not trust them with their understandings or must a Parliament offer Reasons of the necessity and expediency of every Act they impose on the Subject before the Subject yield obedience and yet the Vote of the House of Commons past the 10th of June 1641. viz. That this Government hath been found by long experience to be a great impediment to the perfect reformation and growth of Religion and very prejudicial to the Civil State together with the learned Speeches of many Members in the House printed to offer Reason without as well as within doors might have laid something before the judgments of these Gentlemen I presume Sir the Subjects obedience must not in the judgment of this University be suspended untill the Reasons of State producing the resolution be known to and and apprehended by every person and society 2. If this Prelacy judged thus evil were but contemporary with Popery Superstition Heresie Schisme and Prophaness though we should presume it good I hope it may be ranked amongst its fellows and taken upon suspition it may be a grief but no wrong to stay an honest man found in company with Thieves when he hath cleared himself justice will let him go But Sir if this Prelatical Government be in the formality of it a plain and clear Papacy as the deriving it from Rome and its standing on no basis but the constitutions of the Church when Popish and institution of the Pope not Christ or any Christian Magistrate nor General Assembly of the Ministers of the Church of God in this Kingdom the owning of Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury Papam alterius mundi the content all Papists find in the same could they but continue it in dependance on Rome for Consecration and Investiture pure circumstances not of the essence of the Government and principally its springing from the same principles standing on the same Basis the indulgence of Princes and being supported by the self-same Arguments and Authorities which are urged by Bellarmine and the Council of Trent History of the Council of Trent Edit 3. p. 589 590. to p. 616. for the defence of the Papacy in all which respects it must needs appear that the difference between an universal Metropolitan or Diocesan Bishop is in degrees and limits not in kind for is there not the same reason for Arch-bishops over Bishops to receive their Oath of Obedience as for Juridical Bishops over Presbyters and so the same for Cardinals over Arch-bishops and Popes over Cardinals do suggest it to be and if it were the Foot-stool or Stirrup of the Papacy as Salmasius doth at large demonstrate in his Apparatus ad Papatum and as Beza doth affirm when he tells us Episcopi Papam pepererunt Beza Epist 79. I hope it can be no great wrong to ranck it with Popery which might be its proper name though through use of a larger signification And if Sir its Rule whereby to square it and Reason of sustentation be that which is not more openly Canted by some then indeed generally practised viz. No Ceremonies no Bishop whereby the Cross in Baptism the Altar the Surplice and other matters innovated into the worship of God the use of which how edifying soever to the Church of God is a formal Superstition it cannot be much abused to call Superstition its companion And if it have been found to indulge Heresie by publishing and printing cum priveligio all Heretical Notions and silencing the Pulpit and stopping the Press from all possibility of Confutation or if by innovation of Superstition into worship and obtrusion of Error in Doctrine on the souls of men it hath provoked Schism I hope there is no great cause of complaint for putting these together with it And if it have been approved a protection and promotion of Revels Church-ales Clerks-ales The seventy two Ministers of Somersetshire in their unanimous consent to the continuance of Revels Church-ales c. Sports and Pastimes on the Lords day so that its Deans and Chapters or other Colledge and Conventions have proved like unto Bishop Pierce his Septuagint in their Agreement against Justice Richardson's order for suppressing of these and the like profaness certified in a letter to the late Arch-bishop dated the fifth of November 1633. and suppressing all Ministers that refuse to stir up such licentiousness as did the visitations of the Arch-bishop of Canterbury Bishop Pierce and others it sure can be no great wrong to rank it with profaness and intimate it to have in it some contrariety to the power of godlinesse to which whatever some few very few Bishops might do the current of Episcopacy did never yield much countenance or speak much amity Sir in these and the like respects the extirpation hereof must be endeavoured by all that will not partake of other mens sins and I must be free to tell them that in their Parallel case propounded which yet will not square the alteration yea extirpation of the Civil Government of the City capable of such proximity unto Treason Murder Advltery Theft Cousenage and the like would be by all ingenuous men judged both just and reasonable but I insist too long in abatement of their affection who offer Arguments by which they were perswaded to adhere unto their object let us therefore weigh them severally Subsectio Octava This Preface being past they proceed to the Reasons why they cannot Covenant an endeavour to extirpate Prelacy that is to say The Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellours or Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Arch-deacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierarchy And they propound five Reasons two relate unto the Government the third and fifth unto their own capacity and the fourth unto the estate of the Church according to this order I shall consider them And 1. Oxford first and second exception to the extirpation of Prelacy They tell us They are not satisfied how they can with a good conscience swear to extirpate Episcopal Government which say they we think to be if not Jure Divino in the strictest sense by express command yet of Apostolical institution that is to say was established in the Churches by the Apostles according to the mind
expression of their affection only wishing it may have its dependance on right Reason yet confess petitioning is every mans liberty And for the fourth and fifth That they held their livelyhoods by such titles and were sworn to preserve the immunities liberties and profits of the same I only say they held them at the pleasure of the Parliament whose power is over the enjoyments of all persons and publick much more particular societies against whose Laws no Domestick Laws or Oaths could bind and so their plea in this amounts to no more than what might be said for the Monasteries and Abbies which I presume they will not say were wickedly demolished unless they prove Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters to be built on a better foundation which I would not advise them to seek in the Statute of Carlile repeated in the 25. Edw. 3 d. in which they are conjoyned Their fifth exception is In respect of their Obligation by Oath and Duty to the King Oxford Reasons fifth Exception to the 2d Article of the Covenant and therein their dissatisfaction doth arise from the Oath of Supremacy Coronation Oath The benefit this Government brings unto the Kings Honour and Estate The â—greeableness of this Government to the Civil Constitution of the Kingdom Unto which I answer briefly That the Oath of Supremacy doth acknowledge the King to be the only Supreme Governour in all Ecclesiastical Causes and over all Ecclesiastical persons and that by the Oath of Supremacy and the protestation of the fifth of May they and we were bound to maintain the Kings Honour and Estate and Jurisdiction we freely grant but in swearing to endeavour the extirpation of this Government by Arch-bishops Bishops c. I see not the danger of disloyalty or injury to the King or double perjury to our selves or contradiction to the Parliaments declared and professed knowledge that the King is entrusted with the Ecclesiastical Laws as well as Temporal and therefore wish the nature of the Kings Supremacy may be well considered That the King is Supreme Head and Governour of the Subjects distributively or particularly considered no sober man will deny or that he is the Supream and Topmost Branch and Apex of all that Honour Power and Authority with which the Collective Body of the Nation the three Estates in Parliament Assembled in respect of which the Lords and Commons Methodiet Majestatis causa apply themselves unto Him under the Title of Our Soveraign Lord no Regular man will deny and that he is Supreme in all Exhibition and administration of Justice so that the Judges are by and from Him and in His Name and Authority and so all Submission Honour and Acquiescency in Judicial Proceedings is to Him no good Statist or Civilian will deny and that He is Supream Head and Governour in things Spiritual and Ecclesiastical Ratione objecti or circa Ecclesiam the Executive Administration about not in the Church within His Dominions in opposition to all Papal and Forraign Power no Free-born Subject Good Christian or Protestant will deny but that He is so Supream as to have in Himself sole Legislation to the Church in things Political but belonging to the Church such as is the publick National profession of Christian Faith in such a Form and Method of Articles such a National uniform and publick method and order of worship and such a National Discipline and Government of all the Churches within His Realm so as that the People in Parliament Assembled may not debate consult conclude concerning them and sedente Parliamâ—â—to put in execution by present supersedeas of former Acts and by present Votes and Orders of Restriction and Regulation as in other Affairs of the Nation I think no Loyal Subject Wise Politician Good Statesman or True-born English-man will affirm for that the Supremacy of the King is affixed by the power of Parliament and in all Writs of Summons they are called to consult the ardent Affairs of the Church no less than of the Civil State and the thirty nine Articles Form of Common Prayer and the Government of the Church lay claim to Acts of Parliament for their Civil Sanction and the Parliament in the Remonstrance of December 1641. owned and cited by these learned men do declare the King entrusted with the Ecclesiastical Law to regulate all the Members of the Church of England by such Rules of Order and Discipline as are established by Parliament and the very Statute enjoyning the Oath of Supremacy and the Admonition of Queen Elizabeth in Her Injunctions appointed by Statute to be the Exposition thereof doth oppose the King to the Pope and * That is to say under God to have the Sove aignty and Rule over all manner of persons born within her Majesties Dominions or Countries of what Estate soever Ecclesiastical or Temporal as no Forraign power shall or ought to have any superiority over them Admon Enacted to expound the Oath of Supremacy quinto Elizab. primo Forraign power not to the Parliament and makes Him the executor of all Jurisdiction Superiority and Preheminences by any Ecclesiastical power or authority which heretofore hath been and may be lawfully exercised which was always directed by power of the Parliament of England And I remember the Lord Chief Baron Bridgeman in his late learned Speech concerning the Kings Supremacy unto the late condemned Traytors at the Old Baily did declare the King to be Supream that is beyond the Coercive power of His people but not to have the Legislative power in His own Breast so as to Rule at His own Will and the known Estate of England is to be Ruled and the Coronation Oath binds the King accordingly in all Ecclesiastical and Civil Affairs by such Lawes quas populus elegerit as the people shall choose so that His Majesties Supremacy is not denied when His Prerogative amplified by the Statute of 1 Elizabethae Ca. 1. is contracted and abridged by the Statute of Caroli 17. Or when the Parliament do see good by their Votes Resolves Orders or imposed Oaths to alter or extirpate the Government which the King was empowred to execute and administer His Supremacy being purely executive and that subject to the Legislation of Parliament upon which account the Peoples Oath of maintaining the Honour Estate and Jurisdiction of the King may be voided as to this and that particular mode and thing and yet the Parliament not take upon them to absolve the People from that obedience they owe under God unto the King nor is the limitation of the exercise of Supremacy as to this or that particular and in this or that species inconsistent with or destructive to the Kings Supremacy rightly understood And on these Considerations let it be observed that the Kings Coronation Oath to grant keep and confirm the Laws Customes and Franchises granted to the Clergy by the glorious King Saint Edward and preserve to the Bishops their Churches all Canonical priviledges c. which
these learned men do cite is limited unto the Laws of the Land which the People in Parliament assembled shall choose according to which the King is bound to Rule for otherwise this Coronation Oath will not only bind the perpetuation of this Government by Prelacy but also to the Restitution of the Abbies and Monasteries demolished and the Popes Supremacy expelled all which were granted to the Clergy by the glorious King St. Edward 2. But admit we these learned men the sense they seem to put upon the Kings Supremacy methinks the modest expressions of the Covenant might have anticipated this exception it only binding us within our places and callings which might be by humble advice and supplication to the King by vertue of His Supream Authority to effect it to endeavour the extirpation of this Prelacy that is the Government by Arch-bishops Bishops Deans Deans and Chapters and the like but such was their affection to it that they could not desire nay they could not but beg of God that he would not suffer the King to assent thereunto which affection we must not think to abate untill their judgements be better inform'd 3. As to the benefit which did redound to the Crown by the Collation of Bishopricks and Deanaries by their first fruits and yearly tenths and profits in vacancies though some question the Kings propriety not in respect of the Law of the Land but of the Law of God I shall not insist on that only say That the constant enjoyment of the full possessions of them will make a much greater revenue and maintain to the King a greater Honour and Estate than the first fruits tenths and profits of vacancies although such vacancies as the Kings of England have by vertue of this Argument continued for the space of 5 10 15 20. or sometimes thirty years together taking the profits to themselves or bestowing them on their attendants and undoubtedly there is the same capacity to extirpate the whole Government as some Episcopal Seas and to enlarge the Revenues of the Crown by the Reversion of all the profits of the Government and the abolishment thereof as to continue so long vacancies moreover I would desire to know what is in this Argument more prevalent for Arch-bishops Bishops and their Cathedral Churches than for Abbots and Priors their Monasteries and houses 4. As to the agreeableness of this Government in the Church to the Civil constitution of the Kingdom I only say that I question whether the Lord Christ who declared his Kingdom not to be of this World will allow or do appoint the Governments of the World to be the square of Government in his Church and I confess I can hardly reconcile it to his Regal Power and Faithful Administration in his House and I must have a better Comment on the Text than I have yet met withall if it be not prohibited in these terms The Princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them and they are great and exercise authority upon them but it shall not be so among you but whosoever will be great among you let him be your M nister and whosoever will be Chief among you let him be your servant Matth. 20.25.29 27. Mark 10.42 43 44. Luke 22.23 24. The sense whereof made Pope Gregory write himself Servus Servorum Dei Whitehead and others refuse Coverdalle and many others decline their Bishopricks as having in them aliquid commune eum Antichristo I think the Clown his question to the Bishop of Cullen were worth considering What will become of the Bishops when the Dukes be damned Yet the agreeableness of Prelacy with Englands ill Government hath not been so obvious to others as these Gentlemen suppose the vigilant eye and strong hand wherewith in all Ages it hath been restrained these Petrae and Rupes Winchester and Rivallo in the time of King Henry the 3d. were judged very dangerous when they constrained a Covenant without and against the Kings consent to remove them as evil Counsellours Matthew Paris our old Historian notes Bishops to have ever been the Make-bates between the King and People screwing up the Kings Prerogative beyond thee onstitutions of the Kingdom and liberties yea safety of the Subjects and chargeth all the Wars Broiles Mischiefs and Evils of the Barons Wars to have sprung from and been acted by the Bishops And when ngKi Philip lay on his death-bed He charged His son If He would Rule by his Nobles He must keep his Bishops low The premuniries by which they have ever been awed and their late High Commission authorizing them to act any appellation provocation priviledge exemption proclamation law statute whatsoever notwithstanding and their bold Usurpation in their own name and authorities and under their own seals to issue forth Process Excommunications Censures and other Judgements and their Imperial Canons in 1640. do bespeak them prejudicial to the Civil Government and Constitution of the Kingdom and I think a private society should with very much of modesty affirm the agreeableness of this Government after the Parliament on mature deliberation and debate as most proper Judges Vote of the 10th of June had voted this Government to have been found by long experience very prejudicial to the Civil State of these Kingdoms Now Sir as to the so often Canted Aphorisme of King James No Bishop No King with which the Prelates and their Priests do too much strive to rivet their Government unto the Crown I must be free to say that it is more politick than pious and of no more warrant or authority than the Spaniards one universal Emperour and one Pope or universal Bishop and when the Scots loyal adherence to and advancement of His most Sacred Majesty unto the Ruine of their Kingdom Loss of their lives and Estates Exile and Imprisonment of their Nobles and Conquest of their Land together with the uncessant struglings of the Covenant Interest under Sequestration Imprisonments Banishments and death of many not ceasing till they had by Gods blessing effected the Happy and Honourable Restitution of King and Kingdom be well considered I hope these learned Masters and Scholars of Oxford will see some proceedings that may at least weaken their belief in this political Maxime We have seen Sir the strength of these learned exceptions unto the second Article of the Covenant the great eye-sore of our Age and find little or nothing therein to charge the matter thereof with falshood or injustice but that notwithstanding the grudging of proud and profane men it stands in this respect established they have herein been long and constrained me to stay too long in consideration of what they urge but as they so I shall be more brief and contracted in their following exceptions wherein they suggest many to be great ones but profess to take up with few which we must needs imagine not to be of the least weight Unto the third Article they except nothing as to the matter of the promise Subjectio quinta
Gloucester 57 in the County of Salop and 73 in the County of Devon who give their testimony and call it the Solemn League and Covenant of the three Kingdoms and in the sense of the National Obligation they give this testimony and thus plead We find the Covenant is antiquated and banished as intended to be of force during the time of our intestine Warres we confess we are amazed at this quirk we pray the Wars may cease for ever which yet there is fear may too soon be recalled by God Pag. 27. for this treacherous dealing in his Covenant but we believe no honest understanding heart can be perswaded the Covenant was intended as a Truce made with God for three or four years but we shall labour to stop this Gap with some few strong stakes cut out of the Covenant and so passing through the several Articles of the Covenant they advise those terms may be viewed constantly Pag. 28 29. all the dayes of our life our posterity the Lord may dwell in the midst of us and good of the Kingdoms whereupon they conclude these are not for a few years but for ever and affectionately cry out to the Nation Oh England turn not Harlot break not Covenant with thy God and the Lord keep England from this Covenant-breaking and his vengeance from his people Unto this give me leave to add this passage out of the Testimony of the York-shire Ministers It cannot be unknown to the Churches abroad Pag. 8. that all the three Kingdoms stand engaged by vertue of a Solemn League and Covenant sworn with hands lifted up to the most High God sincerely really and constantly by the grace of God to endeavour in our several places the Reformation of Religion in the Kingdoms of England and Ireland in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government according to the Word of God and example of the best Reformed Churches I shall Sir add but one more and it is that in which we have all the rest their 's being little else but a concurrence with this and that is the Testimony of the Ministers of our own City of London and they profess thus Pag. 26. In order to the Reformation and Defence of Religion within these three Kingdoms we shall never forget how solemnly and chearfully the Sacred League and Covenant was sworn with hands lifted up to the most High God wherein the three Kingdoms stand engaged joyntly and severally c. Yet we cannot but observe to the great grief of our heart that this Solemn Covenant of God hath been and is daily neglected slighted vilified reproached and opposed even by too many who have entred into it and endeavours have been used wholly to evade it and render it useless and that it hath been manifestly violated to the dishonour of God to the prejudice of a real Reformation the sadning of the hearts of Gods people and pulling down his dreadful judgments upon us and upon the whole Kingdom Sir I will say no more Pag. 28. but I pray God London Ministers may retain or recover their first love and Englands Watchmen may remember the loud Alarums they have sometimes sounded and the grounds thereof Sectio semptima Prop. 7. The Obligation of the Solemn League and Covenant is permanent and abiding never by any humane act or power to be absolved or discharged SIR By the permanency of the Obligation of the Covenant we mean the continuance of its Bond on the mind and consciences of men so that the Subjects thereof are and for ever will be bound to pursue and perform the things and matters therein promised nor is it in the power of any man or humane authority to release acquit or discharge them from the same but that when and howsoever the Solemn League and Covenant is slighted laid aside or violated by any the Subjects thereof they shall be liable unto the guilt and punishment of perjury in the breach thereof This permanency of obligation and impossibility of discharge doth spring from a double cause 1. The nature of an Oath which is a solemn and serious Appeal to and invocation of God as Witness and Avenger of the thing sworn and sincerity of the Subject swearing so as in case of dissimulation falshood or non-performance of the thing covenanted we shall be liable unto the guilt and punishment of perjury to be inflicted by the God who judgeth righteously And 2ly From the Manner and Form of the Covenant which is absolute and without a condition which might at any time fail and so cause a Cessation of the Bond of the Covenant thereupon dependent and is expressely exclusive to all manner of discharge or release by any humane Act or Power whatsoever by an express protest That this Covenant we make in the presence of Almighty God the Searcher of all hearts with a true intention to perform the same as we shall answer at that great day when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed and by a peculiar provision That we shall never suffer our selves directly or indirectly by whatsoever combination perswasion or terrour to be divided or withdrawn from this blessed union and conjunction whether to make defection to the contrary part or to give up our selves to a detestable neutrality in this cause which so much concerneth the Glory of God Good of the Kingdoms and Honour of the King but shall all the days of our lives zealously and constantly continue therein So that the matter of this Covenant being as I have before asserted good and lawful because just and possible if there were in the World any power or persons entrusted with that divine Prerogative to discharge the Obligation of an Oath we could not receive it because it is actually and expresly disclaimed We Sir live amongst Protestants who by their very profession do protest against all Papal Dispensations and Jesuitical Commutation thereupon dependent and therefore I need not stand to make any defence in this cause against the same which would be to suggest some Protestant Divines to be so Popishly affected as to have recourse to Rome for relief against St. Peters Restraint I presume Sir Englands Bishops would not be reputed Popish and other ways to discharge the Obligation of the Covenant we have none save the release of Superiors which alwayes must be in such cases and manner as are peculiar unto them and proper to their cognizance I am not insensible that some suppose to themselves and suggest to others a nullity or non-obliging force of the Covenant by reason that His late Majesty of glorious Memory did interdict the Act concerning which it is necessary to be enquired Whether by the Light of Nature Law of Nations or Rule of Scripture the Prince the Political Parent have such full compleat Parental Authority over His Kingdom collectively or distributively considered as by His interdict to make void the Oath they put upon themselves 2. Whether the Parliaments of England both or either House
Word of God should say De specie It is the sign of a true that is a pure Church best Reformed because the erecting of the Throne of Christ doth it not tend more to provoke Reformation of Churches truly constituted but not compleated than to stirre up Schism For they do ot nor ever did deny communion with Churches herein defective and under male-administration of Discipline and Government Subsectio quinta We see Sir very little ground to stumble at the preservation of the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government of the Church of Scotland let us try the strength of their exceptions against the endeavor of the Reformation of these in the Kingdom of England And to this they tell us They are not satisfied how they can swear to endeavour the Reformation of Religion in Doctrine Oxford exceptions to Reformation of England Worship Discipline and Government which without making a change therein cannot be done For this they urge three grounds or reasons which seem to be of weight The first whereof 1 Reason for this exception is Without giving manifest scandal to the Papist and Seperatist By Yielding the cause which our godly Bishops and Martyrs and all our learned Divines ever since the Reformation have both by their Writings and Sufferings maintained who have justified against them both the Religion established in the Church of England to be agreeable to the Word of God 2. Justifying the Papists reproach and scorne We know not where to stay what is our Religion and that it is a Parliamentary Religion 3. A tacite acknowledgement that there is something both in Doctrine and Worship whereunto their conformity hath been required not agreeable to the Word of God and so justifying the recusancy of the one and separation of the other 4. An implyed Confession that the laws and punishments of Papists for not joyning in that form of Worship which our selves as well as they do not approve of were unjust A very fair and specious exception To which Sir I say 1. That it is well Scandal is at length become an Argument of any force Had it been regarded when rightly pleaded by the Nonconformists enemies to separation as well as Popery there might not have been a Solemn League and Covenant to constrain its plea in a case wherein under correction it seems to have lost its force For if Sir we have through ignorance practised or wilfulness persisted in any sinful Superstitious course concerning which we have been admonished by some and declined by others and yet being armed with power did constrain a compliance with us so that a Recession from the same must be our shame and their scandal to whom we would not hearken I hope we must not for fear thereof go on in sin and refuse so much as to endeavour a Reformation If in this case scandal had been of any force how or when had Protestant Religion been effected by such who had burned for Hereticks all that were but suspected of inclining to it Were not the Papists then as much and more scandaâ—ized as now Is Scandal of any more force in the following degrees of Reformation than in the first act thereof Though it is a stop to sin and stay of violence in imposing things indifferent must it be of any strength to barre duty in the endeavors of Reformation I believe Sir professors of Physick and Chirurgery will not consent ill humors to go unpurged or festred incurable members uncut off because some will be scandalized that their advice was not sooner minded and others at the past real and now-seeming cruelty acted by the present change 2. It is to me strange to see Papists and Separatists conjoyned as objects of the same scandal I am sure the reason and ground must be directly contrary Continuance of corruption to the one and Removal thereof to the other the Separatist is offended that there were so many Popish Ceremonies retained and that so long when by him too rigidly resisted The Papist that there were so few and likely to be gone so soon But I presume they are supposed in aliquo tertio convenire to agree in some other capacity The things are now to be Reformed for non-observance of which they were both afflicted and then Sir 3. The Scandal seems to be a meer fancy springing from a fallacy in these words The Religion established in the Church of England which these serious Casuists with reverence may I note it do to me seem sophistically to understand in a sence different from the words of the Covenant which are these The Reformation of Religion in the Kingdom of England in Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government It must therefore be observed that Religion as it denoteth the matter sabstantial parts and essential form of divine Worship is different from the Circumstances Ord r and Ceremonies annexed thereunto and only as appendants thereof deemed Religious which are conversant about and separable from Religion liable to alteration as the prudence of men doth direct and none but ignorant Idiots will deem the change of them a charge of Religion for these are different in the Reformed Churches whom yet I hope the Universitie of Oxford will own to be of the same Protestant Religion with the Church of England agreeing in the same faith though not subscribing the same formal individual Articles administring the same worship though not in the same order and with the same Ceremonies Again Sir we must distinguish between what is established and what is exercised in the Kingdom of England Though we do not justifie nay believe a necessity of Reformation in many particulars in the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government established yet we know in all these particulars many gross and absurd corruptions brought in and continued by a strong hand were exercised in the Kingdom of England and that in reference to all these particulars 1. For Doctrine as that auricular confession and pennance was necessary and profitable for Christian men and in Christs Church That Christians must have Altars and bow to them as towards Gods mercy-seat and the place of Christ his real presence on earth That Jesus Christ and his passion are offered up as a Sacrifice in the Sacrament of the Altar That Crucifixes Images and Pictures of Christ God and Saints may be lawfully and profitably used and set up in Churches That the Pope or Papacy is not Antichrist That there are Canonical houres of prayer which ought to be observed That Churches Altars Chalices and Church-yards ought to be consecrated That men had free-will of themselves to believe and repent That men might totally and finally fall from grace That Sunday is no Sabbath That Bishops have a Superiority of Order and Jurisdiction above other Ministers and that by Divine Right Nor can there be a true Church where there are not such Bishops These and many such like it is well known were publickly preached by Mountague Cozens Pocklington Shelford Dowe Reeves Adams and others and