those Heresies More easily is the Argument answered importing That the reception into our use the form of the Lords Prayer according to S. Matthew should by the same reason abrogate that of S. Luke being the shorter For first the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Lukes Gospel was never received into the Lyturgie of the Church and therefore could not be abrogated by the Churches making choice of the other which we find in S. Matthew And secondly it was not in the power of the Church to have abrogated that Prayer as it stands in S. Luke because it is a part of the Gospel of the word of God which the Church hath no Authority to change or alter and much lesse to abrogate All that the Church can be said to have done in this particular is that the Church made choice rather of the Lords Prayer as it stands in S. Matthew then as it stands in S. Luke when it was absolutely in her power to make choice of either No contrariety to be found in any one clause of the said two Pater Nosters nor any the least contradiction to be met with between those three Creeds or any one Article of the same differing no otherwise in a manner but as the Commentary and the Text. But so it is not in the Case which is now before us nor in the supposition of making one general confession of all the Reformed Churches if they were severally subscribed with the Irish Articles He that subscribes unto the Articles of Ireland may without any doubt or scruple subscribe unto the Articles or Confessions of all the Reformed or Calvinian Churches But if he take the Articles of England also into that account he must of necessity subscribe to many plain and manifest contrarieties Against this nothing hath been said but that there is no substantial difference between those Articles as was conceived by the Lord Primate p. 118. that both Confessions are consistent as is affirmed by Doctor Bernards most eminent learned and judicious person p. 121. and finally that there is no difference in substance but onely in Method number of Subjects determined and other circumstantials as is declared by Doctor Bernard p. 119. But if the contrary be proved and that it shall appear that there is a substantial difference between those Articles that the Confessions of both Churches are inconsistent and that they do not onely differ in the Circumstantials of Method Number and the like I hope that then it will be granted that the approving and receiving of the Articles of England was virtually and in effect an Abrogating of the former Articles of the Church of Ireland And for the proof of this I shall compare some passages in the Articles of Ireland as they passed in Convocation Anno 1615. with the Doctrines publickly professed in the Church of England either contained expresly and in terminis in the Book of Articles or else delivered in some other publick Monument of Record of the Church of England to which those Articles relate First then The Articles of the Church of Ireland have entertained and incorporated the Nine Articles of Lambeth containing all the Calvinian Rigours in the Points of Predestination Grace Free-will c. which Articles or any of them could never find admittance in the Church of England by reason of their inconsistency with the authorized Doctrines of it as before was said so that by the incorporating of those Nine Articles into the Articles of Ireland there are as many aberrations from the doctrine of the Church of England Secondly It is said of Christ Num. 30. that for our sakes he endured most grievous torments immediately in his Soul and most painful sufferings in his Body The enduring of which grievous torments in his Soul as Calvin not without some touch of Blasphemy did first devise so did he lay it down for the true sense and meaning of the Article of Christs descending into Hell In which expression as the Articles of Ireland have taken up the words of Calvin so it may rationally be conceived that they take them with his meaning and construction also the rather in regard that there is no particular Article of Christs descending into Hell as in those of England and consequently no such Doctrine of a local Descent as the Church of England hath maintained Thirdly it is declared Num. 50. That the Abstinencies which are appointed by publick order of that State for eating of Fish and forbearing of Flesh at certain times and dayes appointed are no wayes meant to be Religious Fasts nor intended for the maintenance of any superstition in the choice of meats but are grounded meerly upon Politick Considerations for provision of things tending to the better preservation of the Common-wealth But the Church of England not taking notice of any Politick Considerations for the breeding of Cattle increase of shipping or the like as the Statists do nor intending the maintenance of any Superstition in choice of meats as the Papists do retaineth both her Weekly and her Annual Fasts ex vi Catholicae consuetudinis as Apostolical and Primitive Institutions and she retains them also not as Politick but as Religious Fasts as appears by the Epistle for Ash-wednesday taken out of the second Chapter of Joel from verse 12. unto verse 18. and by the Gospel for that day taken out of the sixth Chapter of S. Matthew from verse 16. unto verse 22. And more particularly from the Prayer appointed to be used on the first Sunday in Lent viz. O Lord which for our sakes didst fast fourty dayes and fourty nights give us grace to use such abstinence that our flesh being subdued to the Spirit we may ever obey the Godly motions in righteousness and true holinesse to thy honour and glory which livest and reignest c. Fourthly It is affirmed Num. 56. That the first day of the week which is the Lords day is wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and therefore we are bound to rest therein from our common and daily businesse and to bestow that leisure upon Holy Exercises both publick and private How contrary this is to the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Book of Homilies we have seen already and if it be contrary to the Book of Homilies it must be also contrary to the Book of Articles by which those Homilies are approved and recommended to the use of the Church Besides it is declared in the seventh of those Articles first that the Law given by Moses as touching Ceremonies and Rites do not bind Christian men nor ought the Civil Precepts thereof to be received in any Common-wealth and secondly that no Christian whatsoever is free from the obedience of the Commandments which are called Moral So that the Ceremonial part of the Law of Moses being wholly abrogated there is no more to be observed in any of the said Commandments then that which is naturally and plainly moral For otherwise the Old Testament must be
as are to receive the Communion viz. Almighty God our Heavenly Father who of his great mercy hath promised forgiveness of sins to all them which with hearty repentance and true faith turn unto him have mercy upon you pardon and deliver you from all your sins and confirm and strengthen you in all goodness and bring you to everlasting life through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen Or else the first clause in the form of Absolution used at the visitation of the sick would have served the turn that is to say Our Lord Jesus Christ who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truely repent and believe in him of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences And there could be no reason at all imaginable why the next clause should be superadded to this prayer viz. And by his Authority committed to me I absolve thee from all thy sins c. if the Priest did not forgive sins Authoritativè by such a delegated and commissionated power as before we spake of And that this is the Doctrine and intent of the Church of England appears by the acknowledgement of two learned men of the opposite faction For thus saith one of the great sticklers for the Church of Rome viz. Hereunto is also pertinent the Doctrine of those Protestants who hold that Priests have power not onely to pronounce but to give remission of sins Yea it seemeth to be the Doctrine of the Communion-Book in the visitation of the sick where the Priest saith And by his Authority committed unto me I absolve thee from all thy sins Then which there could not come a clearer Testimony from the mouth of an Adversary And for the other side I will take Dr. Lewis Bayley afterwards Bishop of Bangor a man precise enough as to the perpetual morality of the Lords day Sabbath and Calvinist enough in some other Tenets of that rigid Sect And yet this man in his Book called the Practice of Piety not onely doth advise his sick Penitent to send in time for some godly Minister to whom he may unfold his griefs confess his sins that so he may receive the benefit of Absolution but tells him that then he should not doubt in foro conscientiae but that his sins be as verily forgiven on earth as if he did hear Christ himself in foro judicii pronouncing them to be forgiven in Heaven And this he doth exemplifie in Doctor Reynolds the ablest and most learned man of all that shewed themselves on the Puritan party who being on his death-bed did earnestly desire to receive the benefit of sacerdotal Absolution according to the form prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer and humbly received it at the hands of Dr. Holland the Kings Professor in Divinity in the University of Oxon for the time then being and when he was not able to express his joy thankfulness in the way of speech did most affectionatly kiss the hand that gave it and yet this Doctor had not only a chief hand in the Millenary Petition as they commonly called it presented to K. James at his first coming to this Crown wherein they excepted not only against the use but the very name of Absolution as being a forinsecal word which they desired to have corrected but managed the whole busines of it at Hampton Court And this he did with such fidelity and zeal that to give that party some contentment it was ordered in the Conference there that to the word Absolution in the Rubrick following the general confession these words Remission of sins should be added for explanation sake as it stil continueth so powerful an Orator is death as to perswade men in extremities of sickness to apply those remedies which in the times of health they neither thought lawful nor convenient to be used in such extremities 7. But to proceed in the Article of Christs descending into Hell the Church of England doth maintain a local descent that is to say That the Soul of Christ at such time as his body lay in the grave did locally descend into the nethermost parts in which the Devil and his Angels are reserved in everlasting chains of darkness unto the judgment of the great terrible day This proved at large by Bishop Bilson in his learned and laborious Work entituled The Survey of Christ's sufferings in which he hath amassed together whatsoever the Fathers Greek and Latine or any of the ancient Writers have affirmed of this Article with all the Points and Branches which depend upon it And that this was the meaning of the first Reformers when this Article amongst others was first agreed upon in the Convocation of the year 1552. appears by that passage of S. Peter which is cited by them touching Christs preaching to the Spirits which were in prison And though that passage be left out of the present Article according as it passed in the Convocation of the year 1562. yet cannot that be used as an Argument to prove that the Church hath altered her judgment in that Point as some men would have it that passage being left out for these reasons following For first that passage was conceived to make the Article too inclinable to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which makes the chief end of Christs descent into Hell to be the fetching thence the souls of the Fathers who died before and under the Law and secondly because it was conceived by some learned men that the Text was capable of some other construction than to be used for an argument of this Descent The judgment of the Church continueth still the same as before it was and is as plain and positive for a local descent as ever formerly She had not else left this Article in the same place in which She found it or given it the same distinct Title as before it had viz. De Descensu Christi ad Inferos in the Latine Copies of King Edward the Sixth that is to say Of the going down of Christ into Hell as in the English Copies of Queen Elizabeths Reign Nor indeed was there any reason why this Article should have any distinct place or Title at all unlesse the maintenance of a local Descent were intended by it For having spoken in the former Article of Christs Suffering Crucifying Death and Burial it had been a very great impertinency not to call it worse to make a distinct Article of his Descending into Hell if to Descend into Hell did signifie the same with this being buried as some men then fancied or that there were not in it some further meaning which might deserve a place distinct from his Death and Burial The Article speaking thus viz. As Christ died for us and was buried so is it to be believed that he went down into Hell is either to be understood of a local Descent or else we are tied to believe nothing by it but what was explicitely or implicitely comprehended in the former Article Now that this
contrary to the New which is denied in the first clause of this Article and secondly this Article must be contradicted by the Book of Homilies which in another of these Articles is approved as before was said As Adversaries to which truth the Author of the Book entitled The Faith Doctrine and Religion professed and protected in the Realm of England c. being a Commentary on the 39. Articles Perused and by the lawful Authority of the Church of England allowed to be publick doth account all such as have taught and published first that whereas all other things were so changed that they were clean taken away as the Priesthood the Sacrifice and Sacraments this day that is the Sabbath day was so changd that it yet remaineth and secondly that the Commandment of sanctifying every seventh day as in the Mosaical Decalogue is Natural Moral and Perpetual If so then no such thing required of Christians as to dedicate the first day of the week wholly to the service of God or to rest thereon from our common and dayly business as it is positively determined in this Article of the Church of Ireland Adde here those desperate consequences which have been raised by some men from these Sabbath-Doctrines It having been preacht in some of the Pulpits in this Kingdom as Mr. Rogers tells us in his Preface to the Book above mentioned that to do any servile work or business on the Lords day is as great a sin as to kill a man or commit adultery that to throw a Bowle to make a Feast or dress a VVedding Dinner on the Lords day is as great a sin as for a man to take a knife and cut his childs throat and that to ring more Bells then one on the Lords day is as great a sin as to commit a wilful murder Most desperate consequents indeed but such as naturally do arise from such dangerous premises Fifthly it is declared Num. 71. that we ought to judg those Ministers to be lawfully called and sent which be called and chosen to the work of the Ministry by men who have publick Authority given them in the Church This serves to countenance the Ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas ordained if I may so call it by the imposition of the hands of two Lay-Elders for each single Presbyter without the assistance or benediction of the Bishop and is directly contrary to the Book entituled The form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons according to which Book justified and approved by the 36. Article of the Church of England no Priest or Presbyter can be otherwise ordained then by the laying on of the hands of the Bishop Sixthly it is declared Num. 74. That God hath given power to his Ministers not simply to forgive sins which prerogative he hath reserved onely to himselfe but in his name to declare and pronounce unto such as truly repent and unfainedly believe his Holy Gospel the absolution and forgiveness of sins VVhich Doctrine how contrary it is to the Doctrine of the Church of England hath been shewed at large in the tenth Section of this Book To which I shall now onely adde that for the better encouragement of the penitent party to make a true and sincere confession of his sins that so the Priest may proceed to Absolution on the better grounds it is ordered by the 113. Canon of the year 1603. That if any man confess his secret and hidden sins to the Minister for the unburthening of his conscience and to receive spiritual consolation and ease of mind from him the said Minister shall not at any time reveale and make known to any person whatsoever any crime or offence so committed to his trust and secrecy except they be such crimes as by the Laws of this Realm his own life may be called into question for concealing the same under pain of Irregularity By incurring of which pain of Irregularity he doth not onely actually forfeit all those spiritual promotions of which he is at that time possessed but is rendered utterly uncapable of receiving any other for the time to come Seventhly it is declared Num. 80. That the Bishop of Rome is so far from being the Supreme head of the Universal Church of Christ that his works and Doctrine do plainly discover him to be that man of sin foretold in the holy Scriptures whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth and abolish with the brightness of his coming Of which opinion the Lord Primate also was as is affirmed by Doctor Bernard p. 162. where he telleth that the Lord Primate had in two learned Sermons given his judgement at large that the Papacy was meant by Babylon in the seventeenth and eighteenth of the Revelation But there is no such Doctrine concerning Antichrist in the Book of Articles or in any other publick Monument or Record of the Church of England but the contrary rather And this appeareth by a prayer at the end of the second Homily for Whitsunday viz. That by the mighty power of the Holy Ghost the comfortable Doctrine of Christ may be truly preached truly received and truly followed in all places to the beating down of Sin Death the Pope the Devil and all the Kingdom of Antichrist In which words the Pope the Devil and the Kingdom of Antichrist being reckoned as the three great enemies of the Church of Christ it must needs be by the Doctrine of this Church in the Book of Homilies that the Pope and Antichrist are as much distinguished as either the Devil and the Pope or the Devil and Antichrist which no man of reason can conceive to be one and the same Eighthly the Church of England in the tenth Article speaks very favourably of the will of man in the act of Conversion and all the other Acts of Piety which depend upon it viz. That we have no power to do good works pleasant and acceptable to God without the grace of God by Christ preventing us that we may have a good will and working with us when we have that good will according to that memorable saying of Saint Augustine the greatest Champion of Gods grace against the Pelagian Heresies Praevenit nos gratia Dei ut velimus subsequitur ne frustra velimus Whereas it is declared in the Articles of Ireland that man is meerly passive in the work of his own Conversion velut inanimatum quiddam as was said by Luther the Article affirming Num. 32. That no man can come unto Christ unless the Father draw him that is to say unless the Father doth so draw him that nothing be ascribed to mans will either in receiving of Grace preventing or working any thing by the assistance of Grace subsequent or Grace concurring no other kind of drawing by our Heavenly Father being allowed of in this Act in the Schools of Calvin For on this ground Calvin dislikes that saying of Saint Chrysostome that God draws none but such as are willing to come
Illud totum à Chrysostomo repetitum repudiari necesse est Quem trahit volentem trahit So he in the second Book of his Institutions Cap. 3. Upon which Dictate of their Master the Calvinists or Contra-Remonstrants whom the Lord Primate in compiling the Articles of Ireland followeth point per point affirmed expresly in the Conference holden at the Hague Sicut ad Nativitatem suam nemo de suo quicquam confert neque ad sui excitationem à mortuis quicquam confert de suo Ita etiam ad Conversionem suam nemo homo quicquam confert That is to say that as a man contributes nothing either towards his natural Generation or Resurrection from the dead so doth he not contribute any thing towards his Conversion and Regeneration Ninthly the twentieth Article of England ascribes unto the Church a power in determining Controversies of the faith of which the Articles of Ireland are utterly silent as if the Church were vested with no such authority contrary to Acts 15. v. 6 c. Tenthly it is declared in the 34. Article of the Church of England That whosoever through his private judgement willingly and purposely doth openly break the Traditions and Ceremonies of the Church which be not repugnant to the word of God and be ordained and approved by common Authority ought to be rebuked openly that others may fear to do the like as he that offendeth against the common order of the Church and hurteth the Authority of the Magistrate and woundeth the consciences of the weak Brethren But of this there is nothing said in the Articles of Ireland and thereby a wide gap laid open to all private men either out of singularity faction or perverseness of spirit to oppose the Ceremonies of the Church and deny conformity thereunto at their will and pleasure Eleventhly the 36. Article of England approves the Book of the Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops c. of which Consecration we find nothing in the Articles of Ireland as if such Consecrations had something in them which of it selfe is superstitious and ungodly or that the calling of Bishops was not warranted by the word of God Twelfthly it is declared in the 38. Article of England That the riches and goods of Christians are not common as touching the right title and possession of the same as certain Anabaptists do falsly boast Of which the Articles of Ireland are as silent as in the point of Consecration of Arch-Bishops and Bishops the dangerous consequence whereof may be felt too soon I know that these two last passages may rather argue some deficiency in the Articles of Ireland then any contrariety unto those of England But I have cause enough to think that many of those who willingly subscribe the Articles of Ireland as being totally Genevian both in the matter and method will be apt to boggle at these two the first as being contrary to the common Principles of the Presbyterians the second as being no less opposite to that levelling humour which doth affect as great a Parity in the Civil State as the others have contended for in the Ecclesiastical And thus far I have gone along with Doctor Bernard in answering all the several Charges which are laid upon me and freeing my selfe from all such opposition to the publick Doctrine of this Church as I stand accused for A crime for which I could not easily acquit my self and not take notice by the way how much the Doctrine Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England were opposed by him who laid that heavy charge upon me In the pursuit of which particulars I have not gone much further though somewhat further I have gone then I am warranted and instructed by Doctor Bernard himself and possibly had not gone so far but that I knew how speedily the examples of some men may be drawn into practice their practice made exemplary and the Obliquities of their judgement taken up as a Rule for others if warning of the danger be not given in convenient time Magnos errores magnorum virorum authoritate transmitti as was well observed by Vadianus is a thing too ordinary It is my wish that the business may rest here though I fear it will not the Doctors Book being such a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such an occasion of creating new contentions and reviving the old as if it had been publisht and intended to no other end then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to put the whole State of Greece into fresh combustions Others there are who either are concerned by name or interessed in the defence of that which they have formerly written in the Churches cause who may conceive themselves obliged to the like engagements as well to do themselves right in the eyes of the world as to maintain the dignity of the Episcopal calling in behalfe of the Church And to these last I shall refer the further prosecuting of the point of Episcopacy as it relates to Doctor Bernards actings in it who by furnishing the Lord Primates naked Affirmation with some Armour of Proof and citing many Forraign and Domestick Authors of the same opinion hath made himself a second party in the Quarrel and consequently stands bound by the Laws of Duel to abide the Combat If in that part which I have done I have done any thing amiss as I hope I have not I shall crave pardon for my errors though I may say with truth and modesty enough Si fuit errandum causas habet error honestas in the Poets language if well in any thing I shall expect no thanks for it from the hands of men considering that when I have done the best I can I am but an unprofitable servant in the Church of Christ a Tacit. in vit Agric. b In Epist ad Aenae c 2 Kings 23. 18. d Tertul. Apolog. 1 Sam. 28. 15. Deut. 18. 11. Andriant 12. Tom. 6. Contra Judaeos Dial. cum Tryâ—hone Lib. 1. Epist 2. Tostatus in Exod. 12. a Tract in Joan. b De 10. Cordis cap. 3. In Psal 91. c In Psal 23. Answ to Sir Tho. More p. 287. Declarat of Baptism p. 96. Contra Valent. Gentil Tom. 1. p. 254. Catech. qu. 103. Simner in Exod 20. Gomarus de orig Sabbati Bound Editio 2. p. 10. In Ezek. c. 20. In Rom. 3 In Orthod fide l. 24. c. 4. In Luk. 19. In Exod. 2. qu. 11. Hosp in de Fest Ethn. Jud. l. 3. c. 3. Annal. d. 7. De creat hominis l. 1. ad finem Hebr. 7. 10. Chap. 16. 29. In Decalogo Opera dies Dies Geniales l. 3. c. 18. Hospin De orig Fest c. 5. 2 Edit p. 65. Joseph adversus Apion l. 2. De Abrahamo Problem loc 55 Apud Euseb a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Purch pilgr. l. 1. c. 4. Emend Temp. l. 3. Id. l. 4. Id. l. 1. Ed. 2. In Levit. 13. qu. 3. Hist l. 36. Marlorat 7. a Illic secundâ feriâ populus terrae cum flamine regulo convenire solebant propter judicia Helmold Chron. Sclav l. 1. c. 24. Page 80. b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. De doctr temp l. 7. c. 3. Emend temp l. 2. Epist Oenon. ad Parid. Isych l. 6. in Levit. c. 23. In Psal 47. De coronâ mil. c. 3. Can. 16. Can. 49. Can. 52. De Castigatione Epist 289. Expos fidei Cath. 24. Injunct 20. In Exod. 20. qu. 12. Ibid. In Can. Con. Laod. In Can. Sol. Hom. 30. Iâ— omnes cap. de seriis Ad Eustochian In Num. Hom. 2. Hom. 5. in Mat. 1. Conc. Matiscon Can. 1. Collat. doct Cathol Protestant cap. 68. Synod Dordra Sess 14. Resp ad Cal. Gent. Consil redeundi Artic. 35. 36. Carthag 4 Can. 3. Ibid. Can. 4. Can. 2. Concil Antioch Can. 19. True subject p. 779. Mont. Gag cap. 11. p. 78. * Tacit. inâ— Agric.
precept of the Moral Law or the Law of Natures are not to be dispenst withal upon any occasion or necessity whatsoever it be and much less to be changed and abrogated at the will of man which explanation not to dispute the mutability or immutability of a positive Law will find as many Adversaries as the proposition as that which crosseth with the Doctrine of some of the first Martyrs in the Church of England and with the first Reformers and other leading men of the Protestant and Reformed Churches And first it is resolved thus by Mr. Tyndal a man sufficiently famous for his great pains in translating the Bible into English who suffered Martyrdom in the year 1536. As for the Sabbath saith he we be Lords over the Sabbath and may yet change it into Monday or into any other day as we see need or may make every tenth day a holy day onely if we see cause why Neither was there any cause to change it from the Saturday but to put a difference between us and the Jewes neither need we any holy day at all if the people might be taught without it And somewhat to this purpose though not in terms so fully significant and express we find affirmed by John Frith a man of much learning for his age who suffered Martyrdom in the year 1533. Our fore-fathers saith he which were in the beginning of the Church did abrogate the Sabbath to the intent that men might have an example of Christian liberty c. Howbeit because it was necessary that a day should be reserved in which the people should come together to hear the word of God they ordained in stead of the Sabbath which was Saturday the next day following which is Sunday And although they might have kept the Saturday with the Jew as a thing indifferent yet they did much better Which words of his if they seem rather to demonstrate the Churches power in altering the time of worship from one day to another then the mutability of the precept on the which it was founded I am sure that Zuinglius the first Reformer of the Church among the Switzers will speak more fully to the purpose Hearken now Valentine saith he by what wayes and means the Sabbath may be made a ceremony if either we observe that day which the Jewes once did or think the Lords day so affixed unto any time Vt nefas sit illum in aliud tempus transferre that we conceive it an impiety it should be changed unto another on which as well as upon that we may not rest from labour and hearken to the word of God if perhaps such necessity should be this would indeed make it become a ceremony But Calvin speaks more plain then he when he professeth that he regarded not so much the number of seven Vt ejus servituti Ecclesias astringeret as to enthral the Church unto it And this is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much as can be comprehended in so narrow a compass More largely Vrsine the Divinity Reader in the University of Heidelberg and a great follower of Calvin in all his writings who makes this difference between the Lords day and the Sabbath That it was utterly unlawful to the Jewes either to neglect or change the Sabbath without express Commandment from God himself as being a ceremonial part of Divine Worship but for the Christian Church that that may design the first or second or any other day to Gods publick service so that our Christian Liberty be not thereby infringed or any opinion of necessity or holiness affixt unto them Ecclesia verò Christiana primum vel alium diem tribuit ministerio salva sua libertate sine opinions cultus vel necessitatis as his own words are Chemnitius yet more plainly for the Lutheran Churches who frequently affirms that it is libera observatio a voluntary observation that it is an especial part of our Christian liberty not to be tied to dayes and times in matters which concern Gods service and that the Apostles made it manifest by their example singulis diebus vel quocunque die that every day or any day may by the Church be set apart for religious exercises And finally as Bullinger Bucer Brentius cited by Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato è nostri◠non pauci besides many others of the Reformed Churches by telling us that the Church hath still a power to change the time of worship from one day to another do tacitly infer that the Church hath power to change that time from the seventh day to the tenth or twelfth as well as from the first day of the week to the third or fourth so they which teach us that the sanctifying of one day in seven is not the moral part of the fourth Commandment do imply no less Of which opinion beside Tostatus and the Schoolmen before remembred we find also Calvin to have been Lib. Instit 2. c. 8. 11. 34. besides Simler in Exod. 20. Aretius in his common places Loco 55. Franciscus Gomarus in his Book De origine Institutione Sabbati Ryvet in Exod. 20. p. 190. to whom Chemnitius may be added for the Lutheran Churches In one of which it is affirmed that the sanctifying of a seventh day rather then of the eighth or ninth juris est Divini sed ceremonialis And if it be ceremonial only though of Gods appointment it must be subject unto change and mutability as well as Circumcision and the Passover or any other of the legal or Mosaical Ordinances And by another it is said that it can neither be made good by the Law of Nature or Text of Scripture or any solid Argument drawn from thence Vnum è septem diebus ex vi praecepti quarti ad cultum Dei necessariò observandum that by the fourth commandment one day in seven is of necessity to be dedicated to Gods service which does as plainly contradict the Lord Primates second Proposition as the Explication of it is found contrary to the rest before The second way whereby the Lord Primate doth strengthen and support his positive Law and makes it to come more near to the Sabbatarians of these later times is by his fixing the first Institution of it on the second of Genesis which makes it equal in a manner to the Law of Nature if not part thereof For that the institution of it in the first beginning is the very same with making it a part or branch of the Law of Nature may be inferred first from these words of Tostatus in Gen. 2. Num Sabbatum cùm à Deo sanctificatum fuerit in primordio rerum c. whether the Sabbath being sanctified by God in the infancy of the World had been observed by men by the Law of Nature And secondly it may be inferred from Dr. Prideaux in his Tract De Sabbato Sect. 2. Some saith he fetch the Original of the Sabbath from the beginning of the World
some labours on that day and permitted others The Judges in that age used to hold their Courts of Judicature even in the hours and times of Gods publick service by which means many were necessitated to absent themselves from the publick meetings of the Church and neglect their duties unto God Many of the Artificers also which dwelt in great Towns and populous Cities whose penny was more precious with them then their Pater noster used to do the like For remedy whereof it was ordained by the Emperours Edict Vt omnes Judices urbanaeque plebes cunctarum Artium officia venerabili die Solis quiescant But on the other side it was permitted unto those who lived in Countrey Villages to attend their Husbandry because it hapneth many times Ut non aptius alio die frumenta sulcis vineae scrobibus mandentur that no day is more fit then that for sowing Corn and for planting Vines And then he gives this reason for it Ne occasione momenti pereat commoditas coelesti provisione concessa lest otherwise by neglect of convenient seasons they lose those benefits which their God had bestowed upon them And if the toyles of Husbandry were not onely permitted upon that day but in a manner seemed to be enjoyned by the former Edict no question but such worldly businesses as did not take men off from their attendance at the times of the ministration might be better suffered And so Saint Hierom doth inform us of Paula a devout and religious Lady that she caused her Maidens and other Women which belonged to her to repair diligently to the Church on the Lords day but so that after their return operi distributo instabant vel sibi vel caeteris vestimenta faciebant they betook themselves unto their tasks in making garments either for themselves or others Nor doth the Father censure or reprove her for it as certainly he would have done had any such Doctrine been then taught and countenanced in the Church of Christ touching the spending of the whole day or the Lords day wholly in religious exercises It appears also by S. Chrysoft that after the Divine duties of the day were finished which held but 1 or 2 hours in the morning unam aut duas hor as ex die integro as it is in Origen the people were required only to spend some time in meditation at their coming home 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and were then suffered to pursue the works of their several callings Saint Austine in his Tract De rectitudine Catholicae Conversationis adviseth us to be attent and silent all the time of Divine service not telling tales nor falling into jarres and quarrels as being to answer such of us as offend therein Dum nec ipse verbum Dei audit nec alios audire permittit as neither hearkning to the word of God our selves nor permitting others But for the residue of the day he left it in the same estate in which he found it to be disposed of by Gods people according as their several necessities and occasions required of them Thus have we seen as well the Doctrine as the Practise of the African and Eastern Churches Let us now turn our selves towards the West and we shall find that some in France had begun to Judaize so far as to impose many of those restraints on the Lords day which the Jewes had put upon their Sabbath viz. that none should travel on the Lords day with Waines or Horses or dress Meat or make clean the House or meddle with any manner of domestick business Which being taken into consideration by the third Council of Orleance Anno 540. it was there ordained that since those prohibitions did savour more of the Jew then of the Christian Die Dominico quod ante licuit licere that therefore whatsoever had formerly been lawful on that day should be lawful still Yet so that for the satisfaction and contentment of those troublesome Spirits who would not otherwise submit to the Determinations of the Council it was thought convenient that men should rest that day from Husbandry and the Vintage from sowing reaping hedging and such servile works quo facilius ad Ecclesiam venientes orationis gratia vacent that so they might have better leisure to go unto the Church and there say their prayers This as it was the first restraint from Husbandry on the Lords day which had been made by the Canons of the Church so was it seconded by a Canon made in the Synod of Mascon in the 24. year of Ganthram King of the Burgundians Anno 588. and followed by another in the Council of Auxerre in France under Clotaire the second about two years after In both of which it was decreed Non licere die dominico boves jungere vel alia opera exercere that no man should be suffered to yoke his Oxen or do any manner of work upon the Sunday But then we must observe withall that these Councils acted onely by their own Authority not charging those restraints on God or on his Commandment it being positively declared by the Canon of the Council of Mascon that the Lord did not exact it of us that we should celebrate this day in a corporal abstinence or rest from labour who onely looks that we do yield obedience to his holy will by which contemning earthly things he may conduct us to the Heaven of his infinite mercy Which Declaration notwithstanding the Doctrine of it selfe was so offensive to Pope Gregory the first that partly to encounter with some Christians of the Eastern Countries who still observed the Jewish Sabbath and partly to prevent the further spreading of these restraints in the Western parts which made men seem to Judaize on the Lords day also he pronounced such as were active in promoting the practise and opinion of either side to be the Preachers of Antichrist qui veniens diem Sabbati diem Dominicum ab omni opere faciet custodiri as his own words are Less forward were the Eastern Churches in imposing any of these new restraints upon the people then the Western were the toiles of Husbandry it self not being prohibited in the Eastern parts of the Empire til the time of Leo Philosophus he began his Government Anno 886. who grounding himself on some command of the holy Ghost and the Lords Apostles which neither he nor any body else could ever finde decreed by his Imperial Edict ut omnes in die sacro c. à labore vacent Neque Agricolae c. that all men whatsoever as well the Husbandman as others should on the Lords day rest from all manner of work So long it was before any such general restraints were laid upon Gods people either in the West or East In all which time we neither find that the setting of some whole day apart for Gods solemn worship was lookt upon as Juris Divini naturalis which is the Lord Primates own opinion or
that the first day of the Week which is the Lords day was wholly to be dedicated to the service of God and therefore that men should be bound to rest therein from their common and daily business which is the Doctrine of the Articles of the Church of Ireland Next let us look upon the Protestant Lutheran Churches amongst whom though restraints from labour formerly imposed by many Canons Laws and Imperial Edicts do remain in force yet they indulge unto themselves all honest and lawful recreations and spare not to travel on that day as well as upon any other as their necessities or pleasures give occasion for it If they repair unto the Church and give their diligent attendance on Gods publick service there is no more expected of them they may dispose of all the rest of the day in their own affairs and follow all such businesses from which they are not barred by the Laws of the several Countries in which they live without being called to an account or censured for it And as for the Reformed or Calvinian Churches they give themselves more liberty on that day then the Lutherans doe few of them having any Divine offices until now of late in the Afternoons as neither had the Primitive Christians till toward the later end of the fifth or the beginning of the sixth Century In those of the Palatinate the Gentlemen betake themselves in the Afternoon of the Lords day to Hawking and Hunting according as the season of the year is fit for either or spend it in taking the Air visiting their Friends or whatsoever else shall seem pleasing unto them as doth the Husbandman in looking over his grounds ordering his cattel or following of such Recreations as are most agreeable to his nature and education And so it stood in the year 1612. at what time the Lady Elizabeth daughter to King James and wife to Frederick the fifth Prince Elector Palatine came first into that Countrey whose having Divine Service every afternoon in her Chappel or Closet officiated by her own Chaplains according to the Liturgy of the Church of England might give some hint to the Prince her Husband to cause the like religious offices to be performed in some part of the Afternoon in the City of Heidelberg and after by degrees in other the Cities and towns of his Dominions In the Netherlands they have not onely practice but a Canon for it it being thus decreed by the Synod of Dort Anno 1574. Publicae vespertinae preces non sunt introducendae ubi non sunt introductae ubi sunt tollantur that is to say That in such Churches where publick Evening prayer had not been admitted it should continue as it was and where they were admitted they should be put down And if they had no Evening Prayers there is no question to be made but that they had their Evening Pastimes and that the Afternoon was spent in such employments as were most suitable to the condition of each several man And so it stood till the last Synod of Dort Anno 1618. in which it was ordained that Catechism-Lectures should be read in their Churches on Sundayes in the Afternoon the Minister not to be deterred from doing his duty propter Auditorum infrequentiam though possibly at the first he might have few Auditors and that the Civil Magistrate should be implored ut omnia opera servilia quotidiana c. That all servile works and other prophanations of that day might be restrained quibus tempus pomeridianum maxime in pagis plerumque transique soleret wherewith the Afternoon chiefly in smaller Towns and Villages had before been spent that so they might repair to the Catechizing For both before that time and since they held their Fairs and Markets their Kirk-masses as they used to call them as well upon the Lords day as on any other and those as well frequented in the Afternoon as were the Churches in the forenoon France and even in Geneva it self the New Rome of the Calvinian party all honest Exercises shooting in peeces long-bows cross-bows c. are used on the Sunday and that in the morning both before and after Sermon neither do the Ministers find fault therewith so they hinder not from hearing of the Word at the time appointed And as for the Churches of the Switzers Zuinglius avoweth it to be lawful Die dominico peractis sacris laboribus incumbere On the Lords day after the end of Divine Service for any man to follow and pursue his labours as commonly we do saith he in the time of Harvest And possible enough it is that the pure Kirk of Scotland might have thought so too the Ministers thereof being very inclinable to the Doctrine of Zuinglius and the practise of the Helvetian Churches which they had readily taken into their Confession Anno 1561 but that they were resolved not to keep those holy dayes which in those Churches are allowed of all Holy dayes but the Lords day onely having been formerly put down by their Book of Discipline Nor could I ever learn from any of my Acquaintance of that Kingdom but that men followed their necessary businesses and honest recreations on the Lords day till by commerce and correspondence with the Puritan or Presbyterian party here in England the Sabbatarian Doctrines began by little and little to get ground amongst them On all which premises I conclude that the Authors of that Homily had neither any mind or meaning to contradict the Ancient Fathers the usages and customes of the Primitive times in the general practice of the Protestant and Reformed Churches and therefore that the words of the Homily are not to be understood in any such sense as he puts upon them The Doctrine of the Church of England is clear and uniform every way consonant to it self not to be bowed to a compliance with the Irish Articles of the year 1615. and much less with the judgement and opinion of one single person in 640. No Sophistry in all this but good Topical Arguments and such as may be more easily contemned then answered And so much toward the exonerating of the fourth charge the most material of them all in which the Historian stands accused for opposing the Doctrine of this Church in the Book of Homilies to which he had formerly subscribed SECT IX The Historian charged for mistaking the affairs of Ireland in two particulars which he ingenuously confesseth The great cunning of the Puritan faction in effecting their desires in the Convocation of Dublin Anno 1615. which they could not compass here in England The Historian accused for shamelesness c. for the second mistake though onely in a point of Circumstance the Articles of Ireland being called in and those of England received in the place thereof by the Convocation though not by Parliament The Lord Primates narrative of this business he finds himself surprized in passing the Canon and makes use of a sorry shift to salve
Verdict of the Church of England the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit as nothing more could be left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles afterward to adde unto it But against this Judgment I appeal and must reverse the same by Writ of Error For first although the Lords day had obtained such a pitch of credit in the Realm of England as is here affirmed it was obtained rather by the practises of the Sabbatarians who were instant in season and out of season to promote the Cause then by any countenance given unto it by the Church and the Rulers of it And secondly if any such Verdict had been given it was not given by any Jury which was legally summoned or trusted by the Church to act any thing in that particular And then the Foreman of this Jury must be Doctor Bound Master Greenham Master Perkins Doctor Lewis Bayley Master Dod Master Clever Doctor Gouge Master Whateley Doctor Sibs Doctor Preston Master Bifield Doctor Twisse and Master Ley must make up the Pannel the five Smectymnuans and he that pulled down the Cross in Saint Pauls Church-yard standing by in a readiness to put in for the Tales as occasion served Unless the Verdict had been given by these or such as these the Lords day never had attained such a pitch of credit as is here supposed but how a Verdict so given in may be affirmed to be a Verdict of the Church of England I am yet to seek So that except there had been something left to the Church of Ireland in their Articles to adde unto it The Sabbatarian Brethren would have found small comfort from any Verdict given on their side by the Church of England The Church of England differs as much in this point from the Articles of Ireland as the Lord Primate differeth in it from the Church of England The Lord Primate sets it down for a Proposition that the setting apart of one day in seven for Gods solemn worship is juris Divini Positivi recorded in the fourth Commandment p. 105. But the Lords Spiritual the most eminent Representers of the Church of England declared in the Parliament in the 5 6. of Edw. 6. That there is no certain time or definite number of dayes prescribed in holy Scripture but the appointment both of the time and also of the number of dayes is left by the Authority of Gods word to the liberty of Christs Church to be determined and assigned orderly in every Countrey by the discretion of the Rulers and Ministers thereof as they shall judge most expedient to the setting forth Gods glory and edification of their people The Church of England hath declared in the Homily of the time and place of prayer that the Lords day was instituted by the Authority of the Church and the consent of godly Christian people after Christs Ascension But the Lord Primate doth entitle it unto Christ himself and to that end alledgeth a passage out of the Homily De Semente ascribed but ascribed falsly unto S. Athanasius viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The proper meaning of which words hath been shewen already in the first Section of this Treatise The Lord Primate in conformity to the Articles of the Church of Ireland affirms for certain that the whole day must be set apart for Gods solemn worship But in the Church of England there is liberty given upon that day not onely for honest Recreations but also for such necessary works of labour as are not or have not been restrained by the Laws of the Land Which makes the difference in this case between the Lord Primate and the Church of England to be irreconcilable And here I would have left the Lord Primates Letter writ to his Honourable Friend the Contents whereof have been the sole Subject of the present Section but that the Lord Primate will not so part with the Historian he must needs bestow a dash upon him before he leaves him telling his Honourable Friend How little credit the Historian deserves in his Geography when he brings news of the remote parts of the world that tells so many untruths of things so lately and so publickly acted in his neighbour Nation This I must needs say comes in very unhandsomely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dictum at the best and savours little of that moderation humility and meekness of Spirit for which Doctor Bernard hath so fam'd him not onely in this present Treatise but his Funeral Sermon But let this pass cum caeteris erroribus without more ado I have some other game in chase to which now I hasten SECT X. Seven Points of Doctrine in which the Lord Primate differeth from the Church of England The Lord Primates judgment in the point of Episcopacy and the ordination of Ministers beyond the Seas That Bishops and Presbyters did differ Ordine and not onely Gradu proved by three passages in the Book of Consecration and by the different forms of the Ordination of Bishops Priests and Deacons used in the said Book The form and manner of making Bishops Priests and Deacons expresly regulated by the Canons of the fourth Council of Carthage The Ordination of Presbyters by Presbyters declared unlawful by the Rules of the Primitive Church The Universal Redemption of Mankind by the blood of Christ maintained by the Church of England but denied by the Lord Primate not constant to himselfe in his own opinion A Real presence of Christ in the Sacrament maintained by the Church of England and affirmed by the most eminent Prelates of it but both denied and opposed by the Lord Primate in his Answer to the Jesuites challenge That the Priest hath power to forgive sins proved by three several passages out of the Book of Common-Prayer The meaning of the two first passages subverted by the Lord Primates Gloss or Descant on them but no notice taken by him of the last which is most material That the Priest forgiveth sins either Declarativè or Optativè better approved by the Lord Primate neither of which come up close to the Church of England and the reason why The Church of England holdeth that the Priect forgiveth sins Authoritativè by a delegated not a soveraign power and that she so holdeth is affirmed by some learned men of the Church of Rome The benefit of Absolution from the hands of the Priest humbly desired and received by Doctor Reynolds at the time of his death The Church of England maintains a local Descent and the proof thereof The Church not altered in her judgement since the first making of that Article Anno 1552. as some men imagine The Lord Primate goes a different way from the Church of England and the great pains by him taken to make it good A transition to the nine Articles of Lambeth THe difference between the Church of England and the Lord Primate in the point of the Sabbath we have shewed already and well it were if he differed from the Church of England
in no point else But Doctor Bernard gives us some and the Answer to the Jesuites challenge hath given given us others First the Lord Primate tells us in a Letter writ to Doctor Bernard and by him now published That he ever declared his opinion to be but it was onely in private to some special Friends that Episcopus Presbyter gradu tantum differunt non ordine and consequently that in places where Bishops cannot be had the Ordination by Presbyters standeth valid And howsoever saith he I must needs think that the Churches which have no Bishops are thereby become very defective in their Government and that the Churches in France who living under a Popish power and cannot do what they would are more excusable in this defect then the Low-Countreyes that live under a a free State yet for the testifying my Communion with these Churches which I do love and honour as true Members of the Church universal I do profess that with like affection I should receive the blessed Sacrament at the hands of the Dutch Ministers if I were in Holland as I should do at the hands of the French Ministers if I were in Charentone And this I must needs say though I never saw it before in Print is no news to me at all For I have heard long since and from very good hands that the Lord Primate did so fully communicate his judgement in the point of Episcopacy to Doctor Preston then of Cambridge a man of quick parts and deep comprehensions that he used to say many times to his Friends and followers that if the Bishops of England did lay the foundation of their calling on no other grounds then the Primate did the differences between them would be soon agreed But on the other side it is the Doctrine of the Church of England that a Bishop and a Presbyter do differ Ordine in respect of some super our order which the Presbyter hath not and not Gradu onely in respect of some superiority of Degree which every Bishop hath above the Presbyters And this appears plainly by the Preface of the Book entituled The form and manner of making and consecrating Bishops Priests and Deacons approved by the Articles of the Church and established by the Laws of the Land in which Preface it is said expresly that it is evident unto all men diligently reading holy Scripture and ancient Authors that from the Apostles time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christs Church Bishops Priests and Deacons It follows not long after thus viz. And therefore to the intent these Orders should be continued and reverently used and esteemed in this Church of England it is requisite that no man not being at this present Bishop Priest nor Deacon shall execute any of them except he be called tried examined and admitted according to the form hereafter following Here then we have 3. Orders of Ministers Bishops Priests and Deacons the Bishop differing as much in Order from the Priest as the Priest differs in Order from the Deacon But because perhaps it may be said that this Preface is no part of the Book which stands approved by the Articles of the Church and establisht by the Laws of the Land let us next look into the body of the Book it selfe where in the form of consecrating an Arch-Bishop or Bishop we shall find a prayer in these words following viz. Almighty God giver of all good things who hast appointed divers Orders of Ministers in thy Church mercifully behold this thy servant now called to the work and Ministry of a Bishop and replenish him so with the truth of thy Doctrine and innocency of life that both by word and deed he may faithfully serve thee in this office c. By which Prayer it doth as evidently appear as it did before in the Preface not onely that the office of a Bishop doth differ from the Office of the Priests and Deacons but that the Bishop is of a different Order from all other Ministers And this appears yet further by the different forms used in the ordering of the Priests and Deacons and the form of consecrating an Arch-Bishop or Bishop Which certainly the Church had never distinguished in such solemnity for frustra fit per plura quod fieri potest per pauciora if the consecrating of a Bishop did not adde some further Order to him which before he had not as a Priest or Presbyter But because possibly some may say that the Church of England is either singular in this point or else did borrow these forms from the popish Ordinals as it is said to have borrowed her publick Liturgy from the popish Missals it will be found on the first search that nothing is done or appointed to be done by the Church of England but what was regulated and prescribed by the fourth Council of Carthage Anno 401. or thereabout In which Council it is first ordained that in the ordination of a Priest or Presbyter the Bishop holding his hand on his head and blessing him all the Presbyters that were present should hold their hands by the hands of the Bishop Whereas in the ordination of a Deacon it sufficeth that the Bishop alone put his hands upon the head of him that is ordained because he is not sanctified to priestly dignity but to the service of the Church But in the consecration of a Bishop it is there required that two Bishops holding the Book of Gospels over his head the third which regularly was to be the Metropolitan of the Province should pronounce the words of Consecration all the other Bishops which are present laying their hands upon him as others did I said that regularly the Bishop which pronounced the words of Consecration was to be the Metropolitan of the Province in which the New Bishop was ordained because we find it so ordered in the Council of Antioch Anno 365. in which it was decreed that a Bishop should not be ordained without a Synod and the presence of the Metropolitan that the Metropolitan by his letters should call unto him all the Bishops in the Province if conveniently they might come together if not that at the least the greater part should be present or give their consent by writing By which it seems that the consecration of a Bishop was esteemed a work of so great dignity in it self and of so great importance to the Church of Christ that all the Bishops of the Province were required to be present at it if they could conveniently But to return again to the fourth Council of Carthage we find therein three several and distinct forms of Ordination and consequently three several Orders of Ministers to be so ordained For otherwise it had been very unnecessary to use one form in the making of a Presbyter another in the consecrating of Bishops the one to be performed by the Bishop and some Presbyters onely the other not to be attempted but with the presence or the
Supper and are taken eaten and drank by them which though it be onely in an Heavenly and Spiritual manner yet are they both given and taken truly and really or in very deed by Gods faithful people By which it seems that it is agreed on on both sides that is to say the Church of England and the Church of Rome that there is a true and real presence of Christ in the holy Eucharist the disagreement being onely in the modus Praesentiae But on the contrary the Lord Primate in his Answer to the Jesuits challenge hath written one whole Chapter against the real presence of Christ in the Sacrament In which though he would seem to aim at the Church of Rome though by that Church not onely the reall presence of Christ in the Sacrament but the corporal eating of his body is maintained and taught yet doth he strike obliquely and on the by on the Church of England All that he doth allow concerning the real presence is no more then this viz. That in the receiving of the blessed Sacrament we are to distinguish between the outward and thâ— inward Action of the Communicant In the outward wiâ—â— our bodily mouth we receive really the visible elements of Bread and Wine in the inward we do by faith really receive the Body and Blood of our Lord that is to say we are truely and indeed made partakers of Christ crucified to the spiritual strengthning of our inward man Which is no more then any Calvinist in the pack which either do not understand or wilfully oppose the Doctrines of the Church of England will stick to say 5. The Church of England teacheth that the Priest hath power to forgive sins as may be easily proved by three several Arguments not very easie to be answered The first is from those solemn words used in the Ordination of the Priest or Presbyter that is to say Receive the Holy Ghost whose sins ye forgive they are forgiven and whose sins ye retain they are retained Which were a gross prophanation of the words of our Lord and Saviour and a meer mockery of the Priest if no such power were given unto him as is there affirmed The second Argument is taken from one of the Exhortations before the Communion where we find it thus viz. And because it is requisite that no man should come to the holy Communion but with a full trust in Gods mercy and with a quiet conscience therefore if there be any of you which by the means aforesaid cannot quiet his own Conscience but requireth further comfort or counsel then let him come to me or to some other discreet and learned Minister of Gods word and open his grief that he may receive such ghostly counsel advice and comfort as his conscience may be relieved and that by the Ministry of Gods word he may receive comfort and the benefit of absolution to the quieting of his conscience and avoiding of all scruple and doubtfulness The third and most material proof we have in the form prescribed for the visitation of the sick In which it is required that after the sick person hath made a confession of his faith and profest himselfe to be in charity with all men he shall then make a special confession if he feel his conscience troubled with any weighty matter And then it followeth that after such confession the Minister shall absolve him in this manner viz. Our Lord Jesus Christ who hath left power to his Church to absolve all sinners which truly repent and believe in him of his great mercy forgive thee thine offences and by his Authority committed to me I absolve thee from all thy sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Amen Of the first of these three places deduced all of them from the best Monuments and Records of the Church of England the Lord Primate takes notice in his Answer to the Jesuites challenge p. 109. where he treatech purposely of the Priests power to forgive sins but gives us such a gloss upon it as utterly subverts as well the Doctrine of this Church in that particular as her purpose in it and of the second he takes notice p. 81. where he speaks purposely of Confession but gives us such a gloss upon that also as he did on the other But of the third which is more positive and material then the other two he is not pleased to take any notice at all as if no such Doctrine were either taught by the Church of England or no such power had been ever exercised by the Ministers of it For in the canvassing of this point he declares sometimes that the Priest doth forgive sins onely declarative by the way of declaration only when on the consideration of the true Faith and sincere Repentance of the party penitent he doth declare unto him in the name of God that his sins are pardoned and sometimes that the Priest forgives sins only optativè by the way of prayers and intercession when on the like consideration he makes his prayers unto God that the sins of the penitent may be pardoned Neither of which comes up unto the Doctrine of the Church of England which holdeth that the Priest forgiveth sins authoritativè by vertue of a power committed to him by our Lord and Saviour That the supreme power of forgiving sins is in God alone against whose Divine Majesty all sins of what sort soever may be truly said to be committed was never questioned by any which pretended to the Christian faith The power which is given to the Priest is but a delegated gower such as is exercised by Judges under Soveraign Princes where they are not tied unto the Verdict of twelve men as with us in England who by the power committed to them in their several Circuits and Divisions do actually absolve the party which is brought before them if on good proof they find him innocent of the crimes which he stands accused for and so discharge him of his Irons And such a power as this I say is both given to and exercised by the Priests or Presbyters in the Church of England For if they did forgive sins onely Declarativè that form of Absolution which follows the general Confession in the beginning of the Common-prayer-Book would have been sufficient that is to say Almighty God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which desireth not the death of a sinner but rather that he may turn from his wickedness and live and hath given power and commandment to his Ministers to declare and pronounce to his people being penitent the absolution and remission of their sins and pardoneth and absolveth all them which truly repent and unfainedly believe his holy Gospel Or if he did forgive sins onely Optativè in the way of prayers and intercession there could not be a better way of Absolution then that which is prescribed to be used by the Priest or Bishop after the general confession made by such
before the Congregation according to the custome of other Reformed Churches of which care there had been no need if the publick Liturgy had been read as it ought to be as well the Commandments as the Creed being appointed to be read publickly in the Course thereof But being it is said with reference to the Reformed Churches I want reason to believe that the often publick reading of the Commandments and the Creed supplied the place of the Publick Liturgy on the dayes of Preaching according to the Custome of some of the Reformed Churches which were therein imitated Secondly it is appointed by the Liturgy or Common-prayer-Book of Both Churches what dayes should be accounted holy and observed as Festivals each of them having their several Lessons Collects Epistles and Gospels as well the Sunday or Lords day it selfe or as the greater Festivals of Easter and Whitsuntide or those of the Ascension and Nativity of our Lord and Saviour No difference made between them except it be the addition of some proper Psalmes to some special Festivals in the intent and purpose of the publick Liturgies But whether the Lord Primate observed all these several Holy dayes which the Church allows of and in such manner as is prescribed by the Church may be very well doubted It s true that Doctor Bernard tells us that it was the Lord Primates judgement and opinion That the Annual Commemorations of the Articles of the Faith such as the Nativity Passion Resurrection of our Saviour c. were still to be observed which Saint Austin saith in his time were in use through the whole Catholick Church of Christ and is now in other Reformed Churches as a means to keep them in the memory of the vulgar according to the pattern of Gods injunction to the Israelites in the Old Testament for the types of them as appeared by his then constant preaching on those Subjects p. 152. But then it is as true withal that Doctor Bernard tells us nothing of the Lord Primates observation of the other Holy dayes as certainly he would have done had there been ground for it And therefore if the Lord Primate were so punctual in keeping the Anniversaries of the Nativity Passion Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord and Saviour and of the coming down of the Holy Ghost as Doctor Bernard saith he was it may be probably conceived that this was done rather in compliance with some of the forraign Reformed Churches which observe those dayes and those dayes onely than in obedience to the prescripts of the Churches of England and Ireland Thirdly the day of the Passion of our Saviour commonly called Goodfriday is by both Churches reckoned for jejunium statum a standing though but an Annual Fast as well as Lent the Ember dayes and Rogation week and hath its proper and distinct office that is to say its proper Lessons Collect Epistle and Gospel accommodated to the day and every way instructive in the story of our Saviours passion And it is ordered by the thirteenth Canon of the year 1603. That all Ministers shall observe the Orders Rites and Ceremonies prescribed in the Book of Common-prayer as well in reading the holy Scriptures and saying of Prayers as in Administration of the Sacraments without either diminishing in regard of preaching or in any other respect or adding any thing in the matter and form thereof But on the contrary Doctor Bernard telleth us that the Friday before Easter Good Friday by no means take heed of that appointed for the remembrance of the Passion of our Saviour was by the Lord Primate at Droghedah in Ireland observed duly as a solemn fast inclining the rather to that choice that is to say of making it a solemn not a standing fast out of prudence and the security from censure by the then custome of having Sermons beyond their ordinary limit in England and that when the publick prayers were ended that is to say so much of the publick prayers as might be no hindrance to his preaching be preached upon that subject extending himself in Prayer and Sermon beyond his ordinary time which being known to be his constant custom some from Dublin as other parts came to partake of it p. 154. Fourthly by the 55. Canon of the year 1603. there is a form of Prayer prescribed to be used by Preachers before their Sermons the beginning of which Canon is as followeth viz. Before all Sermons Lectures and Homilies Preachers and Ministers shall move the people to joyn with them in prayer in this Form or to this effect as briefly as conveniently they may Ye shall pray for Christs holy Catholick Church c. But on the contrary Doctor Bernard tells us of the Lord Primate that he did not onely spin out his own Prayers to a more then ordinary length as appeareth by the former passage but that he was also much for the Ministers improving of their gifts and abilities in prayer before Sermon and after according to his own practice p. 150. and that he required the like extemporary and unpremeditated prayers of his houshold Chaplains in his Family-prayers at six of the clock in the morning and at eight at night Fifthly it is appointed by the eighteenth Canon of the year 1603. That as often as in the Divine Service the Lord JESUS shall be mentioned due and lowly reverence shall be done by all persons present as it hath been accustomed testifying by these outward Ceremonies Gestures their inward Humility Christian Resolution and due acknowledgment that the Lord Jesus Christ the true and eternal Son of God is the onely Saviour of the World in whom alone all Mercies Graces and Promises of God to mankind for this life and the life to come are fully and wholly comprised But on the contrary Doctor Bernard tells us of the Lord Primate p. 147. That as for bowing at the name of Jesus though he censured not those that did either in our or other Reformed Churches according to the custome of each which we of England must needs take for a special favour yet he did not conceive the injunction of it could be founded upon that of the Apostle Phil. 2. 10. and wondered at some learned mens assertions that it was the exposition of all the Fathers upon it a touch for Doctor Andrews the late learned and most renowned Bishop of Winchester and as the wise composers of the Liturgy gave no direct injunction for it there so in Ireland he withstood the putting of it into the Canon Anno 1634. Sixthly it is appointed by the said eighteenth Canon of the year 1603. That no man shall cover his head in the Church or Chappel in the time of Divine Service whereof I hope the Sermon did deserve to be accounted part except he have some infirmity in which case let him wear a night-Cap or Coif and in the seventh Canon of the year 1640. that all good and well-affected people members of this Church be ready to tender their acknowledgement
unto the Lord in whose house they are by doing reverence and obeisance at their coming in and going out of the Church Chancel or Chappel according to the most ancient custome of the Primitive Church in the purest times and of this Church also for many years in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth What low esteem the Lord Primate had of these two Canons and how little he conformed himself to the tenour and intent thereof might be easily proved but that I am to go no further in these particulars then Doctor Bernard doth conduct me All therefore I shall adde is this that though these Canons did not bind the Lord Primate unto any observance when he was in Ireland yet at such time as he was in England and constantly repaired to one Church or other he was obliged both in obedience to the Law and for the avoiding of scandal to conform unto them Cum Romae sum jejuno Sabbato cum hic sum non jejuno Sabbato was the rule and practice of Saint Ambrose who was not only Arch-Bishop of Millan but perhaps Lord Primate of the Diocess of Italy also All this considered Doctor Bernard needed not to have told us of him That he did not affect some arbitrary innovations not within the compass of the Rule and Order of the Book and that he did not take upon him to introduce any Rite or Ceremony upon his own opinion of Decency till the Church had judged it so p. 147. It was too manifest by that which hath been said before that there were no works of supererogation to be lookt for from him It had been well if he had readily observed what was commanded in the Book as Doctor Bernard sayes he did when he was in Ireland and had applyed himself to those Decencies which the Church had judged to be fit when he was iâ— England Nor needed so much boast be made of his Conformity to the Discipline Liturgy and Articles of the Church of England or that many of those who were asperst by the name of Puritans received such satisfaction from him as to concur with him in the above said particulars p. 160. For this might very well be done and yet the men remain as unconformable to the Rules of the Church their kneeling at the Communion excepted onely as they were before Matters which had not now been brought to the publick view if Doctor Bernard had not given as well the hints as the occasion for these Discoveries So that it may be truly said in the words of Tacitus though not altogether in his meaning Pessimum inimicorum genus laudantes viz. that the Panegyrist is sometimes a mans greatest enemy unless perhaps it might be Doctor Bernards purpose to set forth the Lord Primate as the pattern of a complete Prelate as Xenophon set forth his Cyrus for the example of a gallant and perfect Prince by telling us rather what he should have been then what he was Finally whereas the Doctor tells us that each party had a great and reverent opinion of him p. 163. I am sorry that any part of it should be lost by this unlucky Adventure this most unseasonable publishing of his private Letters For my part I had no intent of saying any thing to lessen that great and reverent opinion which each party had of him and am sorry that Doctor Bernard hath provoked me to say so much And so I lay him down again in the Bed of Peace desiring heartily ut placida compostus morte quiescat that he may rest in quiet there without more disturbances SECT XII Doctor Bernards endevour to revive the old quarrel touching the Lord Primate and the Earl of Strafford the Answerers resolution not to engage himself therein The Canon of the year 1634. for the approving and receiving of the Articles of the Church of England A Recapitulation of the Arguments used by the Observator to prove that the superinducing of the Articles of the Church of England was a repealing of the Articles of Ireland Doctor Bernards weak Answers to those Arguments and his weaker Arguments to prove the contrary The Difference between the Articles of England and Ireland consists not onely in some Circumstantials as Doctor Bernard would fain have it A view of some material and substantial differences between those Articles The Conclusion of the whole Discourse ANd now we are come to Doctor Bernard who promising no more then the confirmation of something which the Lord Primate had written in one of his Letters viz. That the Articles of Ireland were not called in Anno 1634. as Doctor Heylyn had affirmed p. 173. must needs go somewhat out of his way to hook in the remembrance of some former Quarrels which Doctor Heylyn had forgotten and is not now willing to remember The Author of the Book called Extraneus vapulans whosoever he was declares himself unwilling to receive that Question Whether the Lord Primate had any sharp tooth against the Lord Lieutenant or not in regard the parties were both dead and all displeasures buried in the same grave with them p. 292. He also wished that the Doctor by his Panegyrick had not awakened those enquiries which were like to be so little advantagious to the memory of that learned Prelate p. 296. And finally conceived that Doctor Bernard would have done that reverend person and himself some right if he had suffered such Enquiries to die with the parties most concerned in them without reviving them again by his double diligence p. 298. Which passages if Doctor Bernard had laid to heart he would not so unseasonably have endevoured to revive that Quarrel and brought Doctor Heylyn on the stage provoking him by several wayes to resume that Argument which he had long since laid aside and is resolved upon no provocation whatsoever to take up again He hath laid the Lord Primate down again in the Bed of Peace and will not raise him from it by a new disturbance But whereas Doctor Bernard tells us that it is left to the prudence of a third person who hath a convenient opportunity in his History to clear the whole in the Examination and Moderation of all the passages between Mr. l'Estrange and him p. 114. That third person whosoever he is must be very prudent if he can carry the matter so and with such Moderation as not to give offence to both parties and be called to an account by each of them for his Examination For so it hapneth many times that he who voluntarily steps in to part a fray between two persons gets some knocks on both sides at the least from one And therefore it was well resolved by one of the old Heathen Philosophers Se nolle inter duos Amicos Arbitrum esse c. that he vvould never arbitrate any business betvveen tvvo of his Friends because he vvas sure that by his so doing he must make one of them to become his Enemy The preamble of Doctor Bernard being thus passed over