it in manner form then have been ever since the Pope was expelled not onely for not preaching for which no man is so censured but for all other wickednes of what kynde soever though abounding in the ministery there By which that theyr set service is advaunced above all that is called God made a very hatefull Idol to which both great small are compelled to bow down it to honour Which Idol-serviâ—e also vpholdeth an Idol-ministery which as it is truely so called would without it be vvell nigh as dumb as the Idols of the heathens which have mouthes speak not For conclusion he affirmeth that by the lawes of Geneva like strictnes to vvit vnto that in Engl is vsed towardes the inhabitants of that city though I vnadvisedly deny it in myne assertion of the Engl assemblyes difference therein from all â—mue Churches in the world pag 20. In that place of my book I observ tvvo mayn differences betvveen the Churches of Christ as the scriptures testify of them and the parrish asseÌ„blâ—es in their very constitution With these differences thus propounded he medleth not eyther by shewing how the assemblies agree therein with the Apostolicall Churches or how disagreeing from them in the one and other they can be true visible Churches rightly gathered constituted But where by the way for amplication I mention the reformed Churches as inâ—eressed in the same differences froÌ„ Engl he there stâ—ps in and takes me by the hand and leades me along to Geneva as bâ—like rayther hopeing to make the Church of Engl agree in some thing with the lawes of Geneva then with the lawes of Christs testament But was the Church of Geneva indeed gathered of all the apparently wicked and flâ—gitious persons in the citty amongst the rest scarse sensible in so vast a heap as were and are the English parrochiall assemblies If the state of Geneva did in a politique râ—spect expell out of the citie such the inhabitants as were not well affected towards the religion and that the Church were gathered of the rest being judged in charity capable of the holy things of God uppon their personall confessior how then standeth this agreement between the Genevean and Engl assemblies And if the Church of Gen had been gathered after popery as the Engl assemblies were and it was not of all the vnhallowed rowt in the citty vvithout separation I should confesse myne unadvisednes in my better judgement of it then it deserved And thus much for this letter which the Authour might more fitly have called â—n exercise of wit then â— Manuduction as he doth And for that it is in effect intended for the justification of the Ministerie it shall not be amisse for the better help of the Reader and furtherance of the truth breifly to set down such particulars as by the scriptures and good reason thereunto agreeable are of absolute necessitie for a true ordinary Church-officer and minister of Christ which for order sake I will reduce to four heads The first is that there be a true visible Church in which he is to be appoynted God haveing set in the Church Apostles Prophets Teachers etc mention being made every where of the makeing and ordeyning of Elders or Bishops in the Churches Whereupon 1. I desire to know how the ministers of the Church of England can be true Ministers not being made and ordeyned such in and to any particular Church 2. Since as is rightly acknowledged in the former part of the book Every true visible Church is a company of people called and separated out fâ—oÌ„ the world I would know how many and which of the parrish Churches consist of such a separated people and are not both at the â—est in their persons mixt of the people of God and the world and also mixt in one nationall provinciall and diocesan Church or body with all the godles multitude and part of the world in that land 3. I ad that since a separated people from the world is but the matter of the Church and that for a true Church a true form is also required it must also be shewed how that can be found there This form cannot be any particular act which is transeunt and passeth away but something constant and permanent without which resydeing actually in the whole and all the partes thereof the Church cannot consist one moment neyther yet can it be any personall thing eyther disposition or other relation whatsover nor other as I conceav then a publique orderly covenant and union of a particular assembly by which it hath in it self entyre right to Christ and to all the meanes of enjoying him which I rayther wiâ—h could be theÌ„ beleefe can be for the present found in any parrish Church in the land Lastly if the Provinciall and Diocesan Churches be not true visible Churches which I suppose is this Authours judgment I would know how the parrish assemblies being partes of the other and so partes of false Churches can any more be reputed true Churches then could a particular Iewish Synagogue be reputed a true Church which should have made it self an entyre and independent body in respect of the nationall Church and Temple But now if any of the parrish assemblyes be thus separated in theyr personall church estate and formed accordeingly though with defects wants we desire to take knowledg of them and which they be that we may rejoyce for the grace of God towards them and perform vnto them the dutyes of Christian fellowship as is meet The 2 d necessary for a true ministery is a fit person in whom apâ—nes to teach vnreproveablenes in conversation is found even reason teaching that whomsoever God calleth to any estate he fitteth coÌ„peâ—ently for the mayn works thereof In whom also for his own comfort with God is required an inward calling which with Calvin I conceav to be an holy disposition desire to administer the gospell of Christ to the glory of God and furtherance of mans salvation Which inward calling as a true minister before men may want as did Indas so for that they in Engl much pretend it wheÌ„ they caÌ„noâ— justify their outward I demaund whether a man thus inwardly called of God forefitted accordingly being withall perswaded in his heart that a lawfull outward calling without sin in the enterance continuance cannot he had in the Ch of Engl whether I say such a maÌ„ be not bound in conscience to seek out or procure an other Church then the Church of Engl in the present state thereof by vnto which he may laâ—fully enter administer how otherwise he doth not eyther carelesly neglect or sinfully profane the Lordes inward calling in his heart The 3 d thing necessary is a true lawfull office or function of ministery there being as the Apostle teacheth diversityes of administrations but by the same Lord even the L Iesus who when he â—scended on high gave gifts vnto men some Apostles some Prophts some EvaÌ„gelists some Pastours Teachers Now this office order not being a matter of dignity as the order of knighthood or the like but of work service this worke standing summarily in feeding the flock Act. 20. 28. and this feeding in teaching ruleing as the two mayn partes thereof I demaund how that can possibly be the true lawfull function or office of a Byshop or Pastour vnto vvhich preaching to the flock is not necessarily required not ruleing so much as permitted as vve all knovv the case standeth vvith the English ministery Lastly there is required a true lavvfull outvvard calling of the ministers by those in vvhom the Lord hath left that right povver vvhich if the scriptures may bear svvay are the particular congregations in and vnto vvhich they are to administer And of such force is this true lawful outvvard calling as that by it none othervvise this fiâ— and lavvfull person becomes properly immediately a true pastour And hovv then can he be a true pastour vvhose calling vnto his function or office of preisthood in the Ch of Eng is merely by the prelate of the province or Diocesse by vvhose licence or institution he is also aftervvards designed to his more particular charge These 4 conditions every of them are necessarily requyred to the constitution of a true pastour are none of them to my knovvledg save the 2 d to be found in the parochiall ministery Let myne opposite eyther disprove the former or manifest the latter hovv vvhere such a ministery is to be found but let him do it in that godly simplycity vvhich becommeth the gospel and the things thereof pâ—escribeing to himself vvith due reverence of God in vvhose vvorke he dealeth the sacred bounds of the Apostle saying we can do nothing agaynst the truth but for the truth In into vvhich the God thereof guide both him and my selfe and all his alvvayes Amen * Isa 35. 8. psalm 84. 6 8. Pro 8. 8. ◠†Ps. 119. â—â— * 1 Sam 17. 51. 1. Quaere Answer Act. 1. 13. c. 10. 30 47. 〈◊〉 7. 2. Quaere Anâ—w 3 Qu Ans. 14â—5 Mr. Fox Rev. 13. 15. 16. 17. 14 9. 10. Act 9. Rev. 18. 4. 4 Qu Ans. 5 Qu Ans Act. 20. 17. 20 1 Thes 5. 1â— 1 Tim 5. 17. â— Cor. 4. 2. Rom 15. 31 Heb 13 17 * Gen 17. †1 Cor 5. 12. â— Qu Ans Ioh 10. 7 Qu Ans 1 Tim 5 Numb 16. Act. 6 14 * Book of ordering of Preists Mat. 10 40 1 Cor 16. 10. Quae 1 2. Heb. 6. â— Quare impedit Pag 10. Ans to the 3 obiect * 1 Cor 10. Iohn 16. 39. †De excoÌ„municato capiâ—nâ—o Coâ—secration of Byshops 1 Tim. 5. 17 Heb 13 17. Mat. â—8 20. Deut. 4. 2. 6. 1. 2. Psal 119. 8. 1. Cor. 5. â— â— 1 Cor. 5. 4. â— Math. 28. Mark 16. Psal. 115. * 1. Cor. 12. 28. Act. 14. 23 20. 17. 28 1 Tim. 3 1. Tit. 1. 5. 1 Tim 3. 1 Cor 12. 5 Eph 4. 8. 11. 12 13. 1 Tim 3. 1. 1 Tim. 5. 17 Heb 5. 4. 5 Act. 1 c 14. 1. Tim 3.
him not to hinder him For to obteyn licence of the Bishop is to obteyn publique authority of the publique officer and according to the publique lawes of the church to excercise a publique ministery 2. The great Turk is a lawfull civill Magistrate in his Dominions with whose civill authority it is lawfull to partake but so is not the Byshop a lawfull Ecclesiasticall officer in his Province or Diocesse with whose spirituall jurisdiction Gods servants may communicate And is this to lead men by the hand to take for graunted the mayn question in controversy to wit that the Bishops jurisdiction in their Provinces Diocesses is lawfull which I have also by sundry arguments proved vnlawfull antichristian Surely they who suffer themselves thus to be led must be as destitute of spirituall sight as was Saul of bodily when men led him by the hand to Damascut Theyr authority then being proved so confessed by this myne opposite els where antichristian so consequently one of the sinns of Babylon whether excercised by themselves or by others eyther Officials in the CoÌ„sistories or ministers in the Parochiall churches may not by Gods people be partaken with no not in actions though otherwise lawfull under the peyn of Babylons plagues And this answer also serveth to the 4 th demaund or Supposition of this persons takeing besydes his licence the form of admission called orders of the Diocesan And so that which I bring pag 15. Arg 2. of my book is here misapplyed I there speak of lawfull actions performed merely by the personall grace of fayth the Spirit in a godly man though of infirmity remayning in an estate standing otherwise culpable but here of actioÌ„s though in themselves lawfull yet performed immediately by vertue or vice rather of that very vnlawfull state standing Suppose after this that being desyred so chosen by some assembly wherein there are many fearing God apparently he taketh a Pastorall charge of them haveing the Bishops Patrons admission but cheifly professedly grounding his calling vpon the peoples choyse that he do nothing but the same he did before besydes the administration of the Sacraments to such as are in charity discretion to be esteemed worthy what hindreth from communion here Indeed if men may take liberty in disputeing first to suppose what themselves have a mynde vnto and after to suppose that others are also of the same mynde with them and yet have litle reason eyther for the one or other they may then easily conclude theyr purposes But .1 I deny that an assembly gathered consisting of many fearing God many which must also be supplied without the fear of God is a lawfull Church-assembly haveing a right in communion or common right to call enjoy a pastour his pastorall administrations 2. I deny that any doth or can truely take a pastorall charge in the parrish assemblyes It belongs to the pastours charge not onely to teach minister the sacraments but also that as a mayn parte or duety thereof to govern and rule the flock which no parochiall minister doth oâ— can take vpon him 3. The Church of England doth acknowledge no such calling as is cheifly grounded vpon the peoples choyce but onely that which is grounded vppon the Bishops ordination at the first and to the ministery at large and determinately eyther uppon the Bishops license or vppon the patrons presentation Bishops institution and Arch-deacons induction confirmed by the publique lawes of the same Church both ecclesiasticall civill According to which publique lawes and orders especially submission vnto them being publiquely professed and given as is by the minister here deciphered we are to judge of the publique ministery of the Church not according to the private intendiments and vnderhand professions of particular persons And let God all reasonable men judge between me myne opposite whether a man goeing to the publique governers of a Church desyreing of them a publique office or publique orders so receaving them according to the publique lawes of the same Church therewith authority to preach the word so preaching publiquely in the same Church whether I say such a man be not to be esteemed as called to that work by these governers so by coÌ„sequence whither al men pertakeing with him in that work of preaching for which he was so sent do nor partake therin withall what in them lyeth in the authority of the sender And for such a man except he have publiquely renounced his former calling to pretend in secret vnto his freinds whom he dare trust who he thinks will agayn trust beleeve him eyther that he preacheth not by that calling or by an other principally is but to put on a cloak of shame to walk in craftines more like in truth to a disguized familist then a minister of Iesus Christ. And if any ministery grounded as this man supposeth be to be found in any of the assemblyes I deny the â—ame to be the ministery of the Church of EnglaÌ„d about which our question is And howsoever men do build much vppon the peoples acceptance of and submission vnto theyr ministery yet is this a very sandy foundation wherevpon to build such a weight If they be not the lawfull ministers of those Churches before it is theyr syn to accept of them submit vnto them as such The peoples acceptance and submission are not causes but consequences of the ministers calling duetyes which they ow vnto them all theyr life long 4. The supposition is but an imagination that any parochiall minister doth administer the sacrameÌ„ts onely to such as are in charity discretion to be esteemed worthy He is by his parochiall cure shew me the man whose practise is not answerable to administer the sacrament of Baptism to all the infants born in the parrish though neyther parent can no not in the most enlarged if â—ot over-stretched charity be judged to be of the fayth so in the covenant of Abraham according to which covenant Baptism is to be administred Lastly I would know of this man so of others who would bring the presbiteriall government vpon the parrish assemblyes without a separation what should be done with such men of years in the parrish as are to be esteemed vncapeable of the L Supper It should seem as the common opinion is that such should be suspended so consequently remayning obstinate incorrigible excommunicated But by what law of God or reason of man do the Censures of the Church apperteyn vnto such as had never right to be of the Church nor were within Gods covenaÌ„t made onely with theyr faythfull theyr seed And since the Church is onely to iudg them which are within the same faln from theyr former holines at least externall how should not excommunication be greatly prophaned vpon such as never came vnder that
condition of eternall holines Suppose at length that he be deprived by that prelate which formerly admitted him for not conforming to humayne corruptiâ—ns his people for fear of 〈◊〉 forsake him if he I say now reiected by the prelate witnessing agaynst his corruptions shal without seeking any new licence fynde place to preach the gospell in occasionally els where why should any refuse to hear him First this his deprivation especially for well doeing or not doeing evill by the prelates spirituall jurisdiction shewes his spirituall bondage vnto the Anticristian Hâ—erarchy as doth also his forsakeing his flock when â—he wolfe thus cometh declare by the testimony of Christ himself of what Spirit he is And very fadeing is the colour which here he sets vpoÌ„ the ministers cessâ—ation from theyr ministery which is the peoples forsakeing them for fear of daâ—nger whereas the contrary is most true that the ministers did vniversally for fear of daunger forsake the people and that in sundry places where the people offered to suffer persequution with them at the magistrates handes But myne answer is that this man remayning by the prelates ordination a minister of the Church of Engl as he was before his institution or licence so preaching by that calling communion cannot be had with him therein without submission vnto vpholding of the Prelates Antichristian authority which in that work he exerciseth Suppose lastly that the sâ—me man doth besydes the good actions which God hath commaunded admit of some thing at mans commaund which is not lawfull yet houlding the fayth building faythfully in the mayn things of the Gospell and it may be repenting also of what he hath done at his admission is no communion lawfull with him in those very things which if they were done by another after the same manner were heavenly dutyes May not his fault be an humayn infirmity in an externall ordinance May not some faultes of his enterance be circumstantiall personall actions by which his calling is not abolished This Quaere is in effect comprehended in the former in whose answers it hath also been answered But for more full satisfaction I further ad that I may not partake in the sinns though of humâ—yn infirmity of persons otherwise goâ—ly whether those sinâ—s be in the work done or in the vnlawfull calling of the doer of which we here speak and not of any personall or circumstantiall action as is in vayn insinuated And he that breaks down the partition wall which an vnlawfull especially an antichristian calling sets vp in the Ch not making coÌ„science of partaking therwith in duetyes how heavenly soever in themselves makes way for all Babylonish confusion neyther is Israel now to be blamed for communicateing with Corah in the heavenly duety of burning inceâ—se to the Lord to whom onely a lawfull outward calling was wanting he so ministering by an Anti-mosaicall as do the men of whom we speak by an Anti-Christian calling And for the ministers repenting of what he hath done at his admission it may well be called as truely being a supposition but of an impossibility and contradiction He cannot repent of his sin which is his reâ—â—eaving authority from the Bishop to preach but he must forsake renounce the same authority as he receaved it which if 〈◊〉 indeed truth he ceaseth to be a minister of the Church of England And thus it appeareth how this Authour is so far from leading a good conscience by the hand aâ—â—e promiseth as that he doth not so much as poynt out with the finger any passible way into publique communion with the parrish assemblyes as they stand but rayther haveing framed a plot of ministery other devise in his study sends men by doubtfull suppositions to seek they know not what nor where It remaynes we now come to his removall of the barrs which I in my book set in the way the first whereof is that such a parrishional minister is a branch of the prelacy as receaving power from it by which it doth administer and therefore all communion with it to be avoyded by Gods people His answer is that in proper accurate speach the minister whom he formerly described is no branch of the prelacy nor doth receave his power of ministering froÌ„ any prelate The question is not whether the minister which he describeth or rather Supposeth be a branch of the prelacy so minister or no but whether the ministery of the parrish assemblyes being partes of the Diocesses and Provinces be such or no. He addeth that the power of right he that is his supposed minister had before ever he had to do with any prelate which power is from God by the Church but a power of externall legall abillity to do that which from God by the people he had formerly right to do this he may be sayd to receav from the prelate He looseth himself in the labyrinth of his own devise for even his supposed minister had to do with the prelate both for license to preach orders of ministery before this supposed right conveyed to him by the people as appears in his Quae 3. 4. 5 compared together 2. None of the parrish assemblyes have in theyr hands as Churches power of right to chuse theyr ministers nor are the Lords free people in that case but do on the contrary stand in subjection bondage spirituall to the prelate and patron by whose appoyntment they must receave them will they nil they Indeed some of them do by favour or mony get ius patronatus into theyr handes so do agree amongst themselves what person they will present vnto the Bishop for theyr Clark but this they do not as a Church neither will or may the Bishop so receave him from them or appoynt him over them but as a patron which right any one profane person may have enioy as well as they nor that such a person may be ordeyned a minister in of that Church accordeing to the order Apostolicall but that being before or first a minister at large of the Bishops makeing and ordeyning he may by the same episcopall authority in way of licence or institution conveyed be determined to that particular parrish according to the Popish order So that if there were any thing in the distinction between the power of right of freedom he hath the power of right or authority by the Byshop at the first in his ordination the legall ability or freedom afterwards by the patron prelate presenting appointing him to his place so the parrish as a Church onely receaves him so appoynted by others But the distinction is more subtile then sound iâ— not a distinction without a difference yet a division of things inseparable in this kynde No man hath externall spirituall power of right to minister the holy things of God but by a lawful calling no man haveing a lawful calling wants