that are more skilful in Church-History than this Monsieur P. 103. The Church of England is be-lied for of her it is said that she holdeth subordination of Ministers in the Christian Church to be of Apostolical nay of Divine Institution having as she conceiveth for grounds of this her judgment beside Scripture the practice of the holy Apostles in their times of the Universal Church ever since until this latter age and which is more of Christ himself who ordained the Apostles and the Seventy in an imparity as two distinct Orders of Ministers in his Church yet notwithstanding she doth but simply assert the lawfulness of her own Government Certainly this man doth not pretend to know the conceptions of our Church till they be discovered and the Church hath no where declared her conceptions to be these That subordination of Ministers beside Scripture is grounded on the practice of the Apostles and of Christ himself The practice of the Apostles and of Christ is not beside Scripture but recorded in Scripture nor doth the Church any where say that Christ instituted the Apostles and the Seventy as two distinct Orders of Ministers in his Church if she do then Dr. Hammond did not know her mind or else plainly contradicts her P. 144. contains no fewer than four calumnies against Presbyterians which must be manifested in their order 1. The Presbyterians had no set-forms nor indeed would receive any whether for Common-prayer or for administration of Sacraments Matrimony c. I believe some Presbyterians had set-forms for all these and I am sure they do not account it unlawful to receive set-forms for any of these only they may and some of them do judge it inexpedient to have Ministers so tied up in all these as never in the least to vary either by addition or substraction I never heard of Presbyterian that administred Baptism in any other form of words than those appointed in the Liturgy I baptize in the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost nor the Lords Supper in any other form of words but what is Scriptural nor Marriage but in a set-form either that in the Common-prayer-book or that in the Directory 2. For a long time many of them had left off the use of that very form our Lord hath taught us p. 37. He had said That most if not all Directorians had left out of their Service for a long time that most complete most divine form of prayer Mr. Paget Mr. Ball Mr. Hodges have printed Apologies for the use of the Lords prayer hundreds of those who now suffer deprivation have thousands of witnesses that they have used it in their Churches and in their Families on Sundays on Fasting-days and yet they must have this filth thrown into their dish However on this occasion let us try what Mr. D. can say Suppose some Presbyterians had never used this prayer in the Pulpit but only at the Lords Supper had they not president in the ancient Church to justifie them in so doing yea suppose some should say that it were no sin never to use this prayer provided a man took it as the pattern of his prayer how would Mr. D. stop their mouths and prove them transgressors In his Sermon p. 26. he brings the words Luke 11. When ye pray say and this place is commonly urged but perhaps is not so strong as some imagine it to be at least when managed as they manage it for I ask What is the meaning of When ye pray say Is the meaning When ye pray say after this manner or say these words 〈◊〉 but after this manner then the sword is not long enough to reach Mr. Ainsworth and his disciples for they pretend to say after that manner and not to conceal any part of the truth the Syriack translation in Luke requires it to be rendred sic or ad hunc modum estote dicentes but let the words mean say these words then I ask Whether the words in St. Matthew or St. Luke If the words that occur in Luke then we have no precept for the Doxology as it is in Matthew And really I have wondred what they meant who were wont to say at the conclusion of their Pulpit-prayers In his name and in his words we further pray saying as he hath taught us and yet had never satisfied themselves that the Doxology which they constantly in that case used was of our Lords own inditing There is reason saith Dr. Hammond to believe that the words of Doxology came in out of the Greek Liturgies and that the ancientest Greek Copies have them not Pract. Cat. lib. 3. sect 2. Grotius had said as much before Those who believe these two Learned men had need alter the form of words with which they usher in the Lords Prayer 'T is not safe to ascribe to Christ any thing but what is his but how shall a man know that the copies in which the Doxology is wanting are the most ancient Erasmus saith he found the Doxology in all the Greek Copies Lucas Brugensis that it was in all the Greek Parisian Copies but one And if one look into the various readings collected in our late Polyglot Bibles he shall find the Copies that want these words of Doxology to be but few wherefore Grotius hath got no credit by saying Seeing that they are not extant in the most ancient Greek Copies but are extant in the Syriack Arabick and Latin Context we may learn not only that the Arabick and Latin Version but also the Syriack was made after that the Liturgy of the Churches was brought into a certain form For the Doxology is not in some Arabick Versions not in that which is inserted into the Polyglot Bibles If the Syriack and Arabick which Grotius saw had put in the Doxology out of the Greek Liturgies why did they not also put it in in the Gospel of Luke unless it could be made appear that the Greek Liturgies varied I know not how he can answer this question Let me add this caution to young Scholars that they be not too hasty to give credit to every Copy that some men magnifie That Syriack Translation which is followed in the New Testament in our Polyglot Bibles if it were the ancientest would be a good argument of the Antiquity of Festivals or Holy-days but the Translation which Immanuel Tremelius followed for ought I know may be much ancienter and in it there appeareth no such distinction of days To return to St. Luke if his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 import that we must use his very words in Greek or words in our language as near as may be to his then must we not follow our Liturgy for though it sometimes inserts the Doxology and sometimes omits it yet it never translateth the Lords Prayer according to St. Luke Give us this day our daily bread and forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us is not to translate but paraphrase on St. Luke It is
Arch-Deacons and such as were chosen by the respective Chapters of each Cathedral it might then be a Representation of the Cathedral Ministers but not of the Ministry of England and that I make good by two Parallels The first shall be betwixt our Convocation and the Council of Trent many sober and moderate Papists accused this to be a pack'd Assembly a Representation of not the Catholick Church but the Court of Rome because the greatest part of it were of the Popes Faction and depended wholly upon him So the major part of our Convocations were of the Bishops Faction and minded chiefly the interest of Cathedrals and therefore were not a Representative of all the Ministers in England I shall exemplifie this by instancing in the Diocess of Bathe and Wells wherein I lived In this there were Members of the lower house of Convocation one Dean three Arch-Deacons and one chosen by the Chapter of Wells and to ballance these there were but two Clarks chosen by the Ministry of the whole Diocess Now what impartial man but will determine that these seven could be no due representation of the Ministers of the Diocess of Bathe and Wells as long as five of them were Members of the Cathedral in whose Election the Ministers of the Diocess had no hand at all A second parallel shall be betwixt our Convocation and a civil Assembly wherein we will suppose that the Prince chuseth three hundred who are his Courtiers or else such as have their dependance either wholly or in great part upon him and the Nation chuse only a hundred you may call this Assembly a Parliament or what you will but surely no rational man can think it to be a representation of the Nation and as irrational were it to call the Convocation a representation of the Ministers of England seeing those chosen by the Ministers were an inconsiderable part of the Convocation Mr. D. belongeth to a Cathedral nay as report goes to several Cathedrals and therefore he had done but a piece of gratitude to vindicate the Church from the Arguments of a backslider from Conformity Well let him mean what he will by his Holy Church of England we are told that he himself is Presbyter of this Holy Church of England and that is a strange and very unusual phrase Dr. Hammond who deserved well of the Hierarchy in his Title page of his Dissertations calls himself Presbyterum Anglicanum and yet he was born in England and ordained in England and by an English Bishop John Durell was born in Jersey ordained in France and by a Scotish Bishop and yet he calls himself Ecclesiae Anglicanae Presbyterum I doubt if things were throughly searched into he would appear to be no English Presbyter for we admit no Presbyters but those who are canonically ordained i. e. by a Bishop you 'l say Mr. D. was ordained by a Bishop and he tells you the name of the Bishop and his title I know he doth but I ask who made him a Bishop and a Presbyter I much fear we shall find him one that was never ordained Presbyter but by Presbyters or by those who had been themselves created Presbyters by meer Presbyters though consecrated in England by Bishops and if so then vitium primae concoctionis non corrigitur in secundá aut tertiâ Let him well consider this and if occasion be get himself re-ordained by some Bishop of English Blood and Ordination else any one who envies him his preferments may chance to pick a hole in his coat If he know not the Pedigree of the Scotish Bishops it is in brief thus In the year 1610 King James sent for Mr. John Spotswood Mr. Gawen Hamilton Mr. Andrew Lamb into England that an Episcopal Character might be imprinted on them to that end he issued out a Commission under the great Seal of England to the Bishops of London Ely Wells and Rochester requiring them to proceed to the Consecration of three Scotch-men designed to be Bishops which Consecration they did perform accordingly Octob. 2◠1610. But Bishop Andrews moved a scruple how the persons to be consecrated were capable of Episcopal Consecration seeing none of them had been formerly ordained Priests Dr. Heylin tells us Hist of Pres p. 387. The scruple was removed by Archbishop Bancrost alledging that there was no such necessity of receiving Priesthood but that Episcopal Consecrations might be given without it but he neither tells us the Objection nor Answer aright the Objection was That the three Scots could not be consecrated Bishops because they had never been made Presbyters but by Presbyters to which Bancroft replyed That the Ordination of Presbyters by Presbyters was valid But our present Bishops are not of the same mind and therefore before they would consecrate Mr. James Sharp they first ordained him Deacon then Priest and this they did not out of a pike or spleen against the man but from judgement conceiving he would not ordain others legitimè unless he were so ordained such as are by him ordained are capable regularly of preferment among us but so are not any of the former brood of men that were ordained by Scotch Bishops This discourse is only designed to keep Mr. D. from despising the Presbyterians too much to which he would be tempted if he should conceive himself to stand on a basis as firm as some of his fellow Prebends I advise him also not to be too forward to publish to the world how he hath let the Ministers of forreign Churches Preach in his Church at the Savoy for doubtless it is against the Act of Uniformity to let them Preach though but occasionally in that Church unless they have been ordained by some Bishops because that Church at the Savoy hath submitted to the Bishop of London as Pastor and so hath not the immunities that other French Churches may claim and do claim As to the Book it self common fame spreads abroad that an Answer in Latin is preparing for it We must expect and see what kind of thing it will be for we may well conceive it will discover Mr. D. to be John Lack-truth John Lack-modesty Certain I am there be School-boys in England that can discover him to be no familiar of Priscian we lay-men can manifest that he had no regard to truth and for modesty he doth all-along bid defiance to it The Reverend Gisbert Voet Professor of Vtrecht of eminent learning and piety the only surviving member of the Synod of Dort is with him but a pitiful fellow He dares venture to censure Thomas Gataker than whom England scarce ever had either a more exact Critick or accomplished Divine Nay that you may see his pride to the full he was not ashamed to tell an Honourable person of this Nation that one reason which moved him to fall upon Mr. Baxter was because the Latin Apologist for the Nonconformists had represented him as no equal match for Mr. Baxter Could you think it possible that Mr. D. should conceit
most of the Fathers put together they are not much to be blamed But I must needs say that Presbyterians is now become a term that I understand not every Nonconformist who is not Congregational is in some mens mouths a Presbyterian though he never declared any dislike of Episcopacy yea though he vehemently protest that his judgment is for Episcopacy even for all and every part of Primitive Episcopacy In Dr. Heylins late History of Presbyterians a Presbyterian is sometimes one that would have the Lords day observed as a Sabbath one that thinks election and non election to be absolute and if a Presbyterian be such a one sure it would be no difficult task to prove that there were such men in the world long before Culvins name was ever heard of With other mâ—n a Presbyterian is the same with the old Non conformist and against such a Presbyterian it is that Mr. Scrivener seems to have laid his action but besides that he hath laid his Action coram non Judice I think that when the merits of the cause come to be examined he will quickly be non-suited For it will be impossible for him to prove either that such a Presbyterian is a Schismatick or that if he be a Schismatick his Schism is novel The old Non-conformist was one that could not think a Bishop to be by Divine institution an Officer of a superior Order to a Presbyter sole power of Jurisdiction and Ordination was the block he could never get over In matter of worship he could not satisfie himself to practise the Ceremonies retained and prescribed in the Church of England That the Ministers ordained in England were not true Ministers or that they might not be submitted to as such he never thought He could and did give and receive the Sacrament only sometimes he both Preached and Administred the Sacrament in private to such as were of his own opinion and perswasion If every such man must be accounted an Arian and a Schismatick he may comfort himself in this that he hath many among the Ancients who if they had lived in these days must needs have been called by the same name If such a one decline tryal by the Fathers it is only because he hath not had the good hap to read the Fathers or because he foresees the tryal will be too tedious and chargeable and might sooner be ended if only Scripture were made the Rule Mr. Scrivener is not sure such a stranger in our Israel as not to know how hard the Diocesans are put to it when the Fathers are brought against them He can tell no doubt who they be that are wont to call St. Hierom a discontented Presbyter and St. Cyprian a Popular Bishop He knows who they be that have undertaken to ruine Diocesan Episcopacy by Clement and Ignatius And it is possible he hath heard of those who did undertake to overthrow our English Hierarchy by Dr. Hammonds dissertations for Episcopacy He knows that when two were appointed to dispute against Dr. Preston in the five points the Dr. presently divided and set them at variance betwixt themselves and cannot chuse but think it very easie for the present Non-conformists if they were brought to a conference with the Prelatical to make them do execution one upon another To deal a little more closely with Mr. Scrivener he hath in the name of the Church of England and his own laid an action against a Novel Schism If the Non-conformists upon summons made shall think meet to appear to this Action doubtless they will plead not guilty they will not confess themselves guilty of causing any new schism but will averr that they proceed upon the same Principles that were laid down by the great instruments of our reformation here in England It will be replied that they oppugne Bishops they will rejoyn in the words of Dr. Stilling fleet Iren. p. 385. That they doubt not to make it evident that the main ground for setling Episcopal Government in this Nation was not accounted any pretence of Divine right but the convenience of that form of Church government to the state and condition of this Church at the time of its Reformation and that they for their parts were never asked whether Episcopal government was suitable to the condition of this Church when it was at first reformed but whether it be founded on Divine Right Now to answer them here the words of the declaration they are to make must be scanned and the particulars of those Books they are to assent and consent to must be searched if from them it do appear that he who doth without quillets declare assent and consent must receive Bishops as an higher order of Officers than Presbyters and that by Christs institution how will they be found guilty of Novellism or Schism unless Wickliff and Cranmer c. be found guilty also But perhaps it will go harder with them in the matter of Ceremonies Really it will and if for these they separate from the Church I am content they be cast for certainly it is against the whole rule of charity and humility to break off communion in all Ordinances because some one Ordinance is administred with some such ceremony as I account inexpedient or unlawful If any Church make the approving of the expedience or lawfulness of that Ceremony a necessary condition of my holding communion with her then she and not I causeth the Schism But to speak to the matter in issue The present Non-conformists are not the first that scrupled the use of the English Ceremonies Sundry of those who were martyred in Queen Maries days would never be brought to use them most of those who then fled into forreign parts both in their exile and at their return either durst not or did not care to use them Some of them for Non-conformity refused preferment some were turned out of that they had some took up with very small preferment where no eye could envy them I have sometimes thought upon it who they were that in Queen Eliz. Reign did the Church most service in disputing and writing against the Papists and I find them to have been such as either did not conform or conformed heavily and by halves I have heard it censured as an error in policy for a Court not to regard those in a time of peace whom they were forced to make use of in a time of war Let Mr. Scrivener consider whether the Conformists have strength and number sufficient to look the Papists and other adversaries in the face unless they take in the Non-conformists if they have not is it prudence to be at odds with those that must joyn with them in the day of Battel If he say they have number and strength enough let him then consider whether it may not be that some of them will prove false and treacherous or at least make a dishonourable peace I could here shew that sundry of them who most rigorously pressed conformity in Q.
news sent him That if he think meet to reply upon Dally he shall not long want a rejoinder 2. Those that have defended our English Hierarchy have not been more uncivilly dealt with by any than by learned French-men I will not now because indeed I am ashamed tell what language Danaeus gave Saravia because of his Book De diversis Ministrorum gradibus Salmasius imagining himself disparaged by a word never intended as a disparagement could not forbear calling Dr. Hammond Knave Maresius in the first question he handleth against Dr. Prideaux not so bluntly but more virulently tells us That Dr. Hammond had proceeded to such a degree of fury as that he did professedly propugne the cause of the Pope not content to spit in a single Doctors face he thus censures all our Bishops Melius suae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 consuluissent Praesules Anglicani si moderatius in ea egissent illam cum reliquis Protestantibus maluissent agnoscere juris ecclesiastici quam mordicus asserere juris Divini Nam ut arcus nimia intensione frangitur sis illi nimium intendentes suam authoritatem dignitatem ea penitus exciderunt instar Cameli in fabula qui quod cornua affectasset etiam auribus multatus fuit page 68. And then page 70 speaking of some mischiefs that had befallen the Bishops he thus expresseth himself Ipsimet Praesules Angli fuissent ea declinaturi si fortunam suam magis reverenter habuissent neque ex parte collimassent ad Papismi restitutionem jure postliminii licet majorem aut saltem meliorem partem corum haec iniquitatis mysteria latuerint Quare nobis eminus hanc catastrophem spectantibus id solum dicendum restat domine justus es justa judicia tua And then page 111 speaking of our Bishops arrogating to themselves temporal jurisdiction he dreads not to let fall these Lines Haec defensio Jurisdictionis temporalis pro Ecclesiae Ministris portio aliqua est illius fermenti Papistici quo Hierarchiae Anglicanae massa paulatim se infici passa fuit dum magis ambit typhum saeculi ut loquar cum patribus Africanis quam humilitatem crucis meditatur potuissent forte Episcopi Anglicani suam 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sua rura retinuisse nisi voâ—uissent penitus suum Episcopatum ad modulum Romanum componere 3. But above all let that be considered which is laid down by Peter Moulin in his Letter to the Bishop of Winchester Where to excuse himself for not making the difference betwixt Bishops and Presbyters to be of Divine appointment he pleads that if he had laid the difference on that foundation the French Churches would have silenced him Will the French Churches silence him that should assert the jus Divinum of Episcopacy and yet will Mr. Durell go about to perswade us that they do not condemn our English Hierarchy which asserts it self to be Divine and cares not for being at all if it be not such The Two Archbishops in Dr. Bastwicks Case did protest even in open Court That if they could not prove their Episcopal Jurisdiction and Function which they claimed and exercised over other Ministers and themselves as they were Bishops to be superior in power dignity and degree to other Ministers Jure Divino they would forthwith cast away their Rochets off their backs lay down their Bishopricks at his Majesties feet and not continue one hour longer Bishops If therefore Mr. D. can bring any eminent French Divines that found Episcopacy as distinct from and superior to Presbytery on any Divine Law he will do something to stop the mouths of Nonconformists but such he will never be able to bring unless he first cause the Golden Ball to run before them or fill them with that which blindeth the eyes of the wise Certain I am that Dr. Andrew Rivet in his summa Controver Second Tract 22. Quest thus states the question We dispute not whether Bishops be de facto above Presbyters but whether they be so de jure nor is the question of Humane but Divine Law We deny that Bishops by Divine Law have any pre-eminence above Presbyters This is the more considerable because it is dedicated to four great Protestant Divines Peter Moulin William Rivet John Maximilian Langle Samuel Bochart and because it is again repeated in Rivets Writings against Grotius When some Ministers were by the Assembly employed to get foreign Divines by some Letters to signifie their minds in the controversy of our Episcopacy among others the said Ministers went to this Dr. Rivet then at the Hague desiring him that he would be pleased to signifie his mind He excused himself from Writing because of his relation to but took down one of his Books in which he denied the Divine Right of Episcopacy delaring That was his judgment which he would never deny This I had from the mouth of a very Reverend person still alive who was one employed to discourse him But I have a later testimony when the Scots went to Breda to treat with their King Dr. Rivet put a Preface to Bodius his Comment on the Ephesians commending it to the World and I am sure in that the English Hierarchy is sufficiently beaten down I have said all that for the present I intend to say about the French Churches of other Reformed Churches I may speak more briefly because most of them met together in a Synod at Dort to put an end to the differences about the five points What was done in that Synod Why saith Mr. Mountague in his Appeal page 70 In it and in other Dutch Synods the Discipline of the Church of England is held unlawful At this Mr. Durell had need to bestir himself for either Mr. Mountague or he will be found to be a Liar I shall not determine who is to blame but by reading the Acts of that Synod I do find that Session 144 notice was given That it was the will of the States that the Confession of Faith of the Belgick Churches should be read and examined by the Synod the Exteri being also present The One and thirtieth Article of that Confession when it comes to speak particularly of the Ministers of the Word saith That in what place soever they be they have the same power and authority as being all the Ministers of Christ the only Vniversal Bishop and only Head of the Church These words would not down with our British Divines because directly opposite to government by Archbishops and Bishops in England Whereupon the Lord Bishop of Landaff in his own name and the name of his Brethren made open protestation That whereas in the Confession there was inserted a strange conceit of the Parity of Ministers to be instituted by Christ he declared his own and his brethrens utter dissent in that point Now hence I thus argue either the words in that Article do condemn our Government in England or they do not if they do not why did our
I believe in this we are a singular Church there being no other that I ever heard or read of that hath not enjoyned her Congregations to sing some Psalms Mr. D certainly can either prove that our Church hath allowed and enjoyned us to sing Psalms or else he can shew us some Reformed Church that doth not enjoyn Psalmody But such is my weakness that I cannot 6. Capellus asketh us p. 709. Whether it were not better wisely to prescribe certain forms of Prayer fit for the publick edification of the Church than to permit them to the liberty of many Pastors unlearned and unexercised where others cannot be had The Presbyterians will answer yes but they think in a wealthy Nation where the King is a Protestant there is no necessity to take any into the Church for Ministers if they be unlearned and unexercised 7. Page 100. He asketh whether in all the Prayers that are to be made in the Church Pastors can perpetually vary them or express themselves in divers Words and Phrases concerning the same Argument yea he asketh what Prophet or Apostle can do this with edification Sure he forgets himself for he before told us Apostles could and did do it and I am sure we have had ordinary Pastors here in England that have done it and we have still hundreds and thousands that can and would do it might they be permitted Nor can I understand how it can be difficult to any one who hath well studied the Scriptures and observeth the Providences of God and is affected duly with his own and peoples wants and necessities I in my Family find it not difficult to vary as I please 8. Page 710 711. He contends that the Creeds are to be recited in a certain form of words but adds those whom he dealt with did bewray a manifest hatred against certain forms of Symbols Confessions and Catechism Whence again I infer that he dealt not with the Directorians for they liked the use of Confessions and Catechisms in set forms 9. Page 713. He thinks the Apotomy and rigor of those men worthily to be condemned who under pretext of certain and prescribed forms of Liturgy do study to eliminate out of the Church all use of Prayers conceived by Ministers themselves This will touch Mr. D s Copyhold unless he can prove against Dr. Heylin and others that some Prayers besides those prescribed in the Liturgy are allowed to Ministers in publick ministration 10. Page 716. He determines that it is better by much and more convenient and safe that those writings only should be publickly read which are truly Canonical and divinely inspired What will the peremptory enjoyners of the Apocryphal Chapters say to this 11. Page 719. Drawing up the sum of all his conceptions he saith 1. That forms are not simply and absolutely necessary 2. That they are not commonly necessary but only for order and decorum sake 3. That they are plainly necessary where we cannot have learned Ministers 4. Where there are learned and skilful Pastors a publick form of Liturgie is very useful and necessary to the common edification of the Church in the same communion of Divine worship 5. The use of Liturgies cannot of right be condemned or disallowed To all these Propositions there are Hundreds of Non-conformists can subscribe and are ready to subscribe the two last only being qualified with such distinctions as I believe were not either against or besides the mind of this Professor The Arguments of the Brownists and others which he scattereth up and down were fully propounded and clearly answered by Mr. John Ball before his Theses saw the light Let Mr. Baxters propositions concerning Liturgies be read and weighed and it will be found that they come very near to these of Capellus I must now come to Ceremonies The first I mention is the use of a Surplice concerning which the Nonconformists say That if they receive it they must receive it not only as serving to a decent order and godly discipline but as apt to stir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance of his duty to God by some notable and special signification whereby he might be edified but they have never found any such aptness in it to stir up their dull minds to the remembrance of their duty and that they dare not pretend to use a thing in order to such an end as they never expect to attain by it I my self have talked with some conformable Ministers and asked them whether they ever found their dull minds stirred up by the use of it they have been loth to give me any answer but what moved on the Latitudinarian hinge One indeed told me he did verily believe there was a wonderful vertue in it to excite his dull mind but asking him further whether it was apt to excite him as a man or as an English man or as a Minister He gave me a reply which for Friendship sake I will not here insert but such it was that I easily saw the Surplice had not cured him of all his dulness Nor can I chuse but wonder why they who pretend to be stirred up to a remembrance of their duty by a Surplice do use it so seldom there are but few that use it constantly some use it not above once a quarter few use it in the Pulpit yet I suppose their minds are apt to be as dull in the Pulpit as in the Desk and the Church as much requires them to use the Surplice at all times of their Ministration as at any time Perhaps we must say of Surplices as of pleasure commendat rarior usus Well but how doth Mr. D. discourse of Surplices Truly very innocently He tells us Page 23 24. That in Aquitan when a Minister is buried the neighbour Ministers that be present must all have their Gowns if Gowns can conveniently be had that was wisely put in Now this changing of apparel for divine service it seems burving of a Minister in France is Divine Service is the very same thing for which the Church of England is by some men reputed Popish and superstitious when she will have her Ministers to wear Surplices on the same occasion It should seem with him the Surplice is no Symbolical Vestment and that he reckons all those who put on their solemn apparel and best Clothes do the same thing that he doth when he puts on significant Garments But he is so kind that lest this should not satisfie he will find out some of the best Reformed Churches that count it no superstition for their Ministers to wear a Surplice and he instanceth in the Bohemians Polonians Lithuanians who did put on the surplice as oft as they preached in the Churches of the Augustan confession But it seems they lost nothing by this condescension for the Lutherans officiated in their Churches without a Surplice To requite him for this discovery I will tell him of some Lutheran Ministers viz. the Lutherans in Holland that do not use
in the most dangerous occurrences boldly and openly to own the name of his Redeemer without ever being ashamed with bearing his reproach As the Barrels go rumbling up and down the Streets so my Lord Mayor owes me a Groat The King the founder of this noble Order gives the Knights created by him a Garter and a Blew Riband as Badges to be known by others but would not be pleased if they should among themselves invent other badges and cognizances of their Order Christ also hath instituted Baptism to distinguish Christians from those who are no Christians How do we know whether it will like him that we should appoint a Cross to distinguish us more especially seeing thereby we shall be distinguished from a great number of our fellow Christians Again the Garter and Blew Riband are things to be worn and that may be seen and occasion spectators to enquire what they mean but so is not the Cross that was made on our foreheads after Baptism the Pagans that any of us have been among could take no notice of it and if our Parents did at any time admonish us of our engagement to crucifie the old man they put us in mind not of being crossed but of being baptized with Water to signifie the not only death but burial of the old man nor have our Kings of England been so fond of all the Rites and Ceremonies used at making of Knights of the Garter but that they have allowed some of them to be omitted where they have conceived they might be less acceptable King James being much pleased with the valour and piety of Maurice Prince of Orange sent him a Garter appointing his Embassador Sir Ralph Winwood to confer the honour on him freely and without any Rites or Laws but what the Prince himself would spontaneously undergo And the Embassador in a French Speech declared that the Rites wonted to be used in creating Knights of the Garter did seem somewhat abhorrent from the Discipline of the Reformed Churches in Holland and not altogether congruous to the polity of the Republick and that therefore the King to avoid offence had appointed it to be conferred without pomp and external magnificence I suppose Mr. D. thinks there is no Rite used in the creation of the Knights of St. George that is contrary to the Discipline of the Dutch Churches but the King was of another mind and chose rather to confer the highest honour without the wonted Ceremonies than not to confer it upon one who was like not to disgrace it And shall Ministers of the Gospel so stifly stand upon Ceremonies as rather not to administer baptism than to administer it without the sign of the Cross I must follow Mr. D. who tells us That several reformed Churches have a Ceremony of which Presbyterians ought to have as bad an opinion as of the Cross in Baptism The Ceremony he meaneth is Trine aspersion page 42. Why ought they to have as bad an opinion of Trine Aspersion as of the Cross in Baptism is there any Law either of God or man that tieth them to have as bad an opinion of the Trine Aspersion as of the Cross or do their Principles lead them to have as bad an opinion of one Ceremony as of the other I verily believe they do not for they say that Christ hath commanded Baptism and hath not strictly determined whether it shall be administred by Aspersion or Immersion nor whether by trine or une aspersion or immersion therefore the Church hath power to chuse the Rite that to her having consulted the general rules of Scripture and practice of the Primitive Churches shall seem best But they also say that God hath no where commanded that a Child shall be crossed or any where appointed his Church to institute any symbolical teaching signs at all if Mr. D. can shew them any command that a Child should be crossed they will not stick to grant that it is in the Churches power to order where the Child shall be crossed and how often and what kind of cross it shall be But it is to be feared he can shew no such command at least none such is shewed by him and yet he saith he is confident that if the trine aspersion were used or if we had retained the trine immersion as at the beginning of King Edward the sixths reign it would be accounted a gross superstition How may a man do to free him from this uncharitable confidence so contrary to Christianity I dare undertake to give it him under the hand and seal of as many as I am acquainted with that if the Church shall think meet to use trine aspersion or trine immersion she shall not be accounted either grosly or at all superstitious provided she declare that she doth not use either rite as necessary If by trine either aspersion or immersion she should prejudice the Babes in their health that would be a sin but not the sin of superstition But how doth Mr. D. prove that the Church hath not retained trine immersion Immersion it is plain she hath enjoyned unless the Sureties certifie that the Child be weak yet never any Minister of the Church in my hearing demanded such Certificate never did any Parents bring their Child in a dress fit for dipping that ever I could observe and yet I believe that I have seen as strong Children Baptized as are in most places of England and she no where saith it shall be dipped but once as neither doth she say that it shall be sprinkled but once so that Bishop Mountague in his Visitation Articles positively asserts That the Child is to be thrice aspersed with water on the face it may be some other Prelate of that age did as positively assert that the Child was to be sprinkled but once for those who have been most zealous to press Conformity have been at Daggers drawing about the meaning of some passages in that Liturgy to which they required subscription In the Hampton Court Conference the Metropolitan told the King That the administration of Baptism by women and lay persons was not allowed in the practice of the Church but enquired of by Bishops in their visitations and censured neither do the words in the Liturgy infer any such meaning But the Bishop of London replied That those learned men who framed the Book of Common-Prayer intended not by ambiguous terms to deceive any but did intend a permission of private persons to baptize in case of necessity and withal declared that the same was agreeable to the practice of the ancient Church urging both a place in the Acts and the authority of Tertullian and St. Ambrose plain in that point What could a man have done that had lived in those days to know the meaning of the Church But however King James being clear in his own judgment that a Minister is of the essence of the right and lawful ministry of the Sacrament carried it so as the words thereafter did run thus
according to the Ecclesiastical constitutions and common use of the Church I suppose the Bohemians and Moravians were to have Sermons on Holy days are we bound to have any They are not appointed to fast the Eves of any Saints days but so are we they are not ordered on the Saints days to cease from the works of their callings but so are we and are punishable with severity enough if we do not Page 27. mention being made of the Helvetick confession and of the Holy days commended by it 't is said it was subscribed by the Kirk of Scotland 1566. The Ministers of that Church being then of a different judgment from what their successors have shewed of late years which is a most egregious falshood for the Kirk then discovered her dislike of the festivals appointed or commended in the Confession of Helvetia and so have the Ministers of late years so as they concur in judgment fully as to this matter and I believe in every thing else Page 28. Crosses have not been pulled down from the top of Churches unless in some popular tumults The Latin Apologist hath shewen the falsity of this Page 29. The fratres Bohemi have their solemn dedication of Churches which ceremony is to be performed with them by the Bishop in the same manner as with us here in England The manner of dedication of Churches is not here agreed upon in England nor is there any Law that requires dedications and some places we have that never were dedicated and the ceremonies used in dedication with us are such as are not used in Bohemia Page 30. At Basil and Breme they have their Fonts of stone and use them for the Baptism of Infants by which we see that they are not of the same judgment with the Directorians who find Popery and Superstition in the very placing of them All the Directory saith is that Baptism is to be administred in the face of the Congregation where the people may most conveniently hear and see and not in the places where Fonts in the time of Popery were unfitly and superstitiously placed Are the Fonts at Basil and Breme placed where the people cannot hear and see Are they placed unfitly as in times of Popery if they be I see not how they can justifie themselves if they be not how can we see that the Divines of Basil and Breme are of a different mind about the placing of Fonts from the Directorians Page 31. I know none that did ever so much as move the question in what place and which way the Communion table ought to stand so it be seated where the people may see and hear except the new Scotch and English Presbyterians Either his knowledg is very small or else he did write this against his knowledg and conscience Page 30. In all Reformed Churches men use to enter into the place of publick Worship with their Hats off If this be meant of such times in which the congregation is performing publick Worship the Presbyterians do so and are enjoyned by the Directory so to do but if it be meant of entring at all times and upon all occasions it is known to be an untruth to all that have been in Holland The Divines there would laugh to see any so superstitious as to pull off his Hat every time he hath occasion to go through one of their Temples Ibid. In France the women that are persons of quality unmask themselves and the devoutest sort both of men and women use to kneel and make a short Prayer for Gods blessing on the service they come to perform before they fit down yet the Directory though it pretendeth conformity with them prohibiteth these very things If the French Ladies unmask themselves to shew that they are not ashamed to be seen at Protestant Assemblies what Directorian is he that will blame them But if by so unmasking themselves they design to shew their beauty c. then there is something in the 1 Cor. 11. that they may do well to think of The Directory forbids not private Prayers for Gods blessing unless any come in when the service of God is begun and if the devouter sort of men and women in France are wont to fall on their knees when the congregation is singing c. the Directory pretends not conformity with them they may do well to consider that God is the God of Order and not of Confusion an ejaculation in such cases is as much as can be needful provided it be joyned with shame or trouble for coming so late Page 37. In the Churches of Poland and Lithuania and likewise in them of Transylvania and Hungaria the people useth alway to say the Prayers aloud after the Minister just as we do in the Church of England Such was also the use of the Churches of the Vnity of the fratres Bohemi Our people do not much use to say the Prayers after the Minister that is certain except the Clerk be the people and there are but few Prayers they are enjoyned to repeat after him the Lords prayer is appointed to be said not after but with him What the use of the fratres Bohemi was I do not well know nor hath Mr. D. directed me how I may inform my self But I have met with something in Bishop Amos Comaenius which I commend to the diligent consideration of Mr. D. and all others that are zealous in this matter it is in his Annotations on the Ratio Disciplinae Ordinisq c. Page 100. The Ritual Books the forms of performing the sacred Ministries which they call Agenda are not with us appended to the Catechetical Books so as to come into the hands of the Common people but being put forth by themselves are given only to the Pastors not privately in a corner but in the sight of the Church After the death of the Pastor the same Books are put into the hands of the Seniors Some one wil say what superstition is this Ans Let others have their liberty of judging I do not think things are so to be managed that nothing mystical to be rather adored by the people than proudly to be looked on and afterwards vilely esteemed should be left to the Priests Religion rejoyceth in veils And our chief Master himself was wont to speak some things to his disciples by themselves The Apostle when he commands Bishop Timothy to commit some things to faithful men who are apt to teach others 2 Tim. 2.2 doth he not intimate a certain difference betwixt these things that are given to all and those that are given to the Teachers of others Certainly the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he useth signifieth to commit or concredit some thing singular And when we read it written of Christ that having read the sacred Text and laid aside his Book be began his speech so that all fixing their eyes on him admired the words that flowed from his mouth do we think these things happen otherwise to others viz.
next to white their locks were powdered with white powder their white Half-shirts were very visible to the great offence of some serious persons both in Countrey and University But let not Mr. D. rejoice because some Nonconformists did thus habit themselves for these Nonconformists were not Presbyterians but either inclined to ways of separation or else such as had newâ—y laid by their Canonical dress and were resolved no longer to be called black-coats Here therefore let me beseech all who would not be deceived in reading our Histories concerning the disorderly carriages of Ministers in the late times well to consider who they were that were so disorderly and if they find that any of them were of the old Nonconforming Presbyterians I am much mistaken if they find none were such how unreasonable is it to charge on Presbyterians the faults of such as returned to Conformity so soon as His Majesty required them and left not off to conform till they could not keep their Conformity and Livings too Too too long I have been in detecting falshoods had it not been necessary to try whether I could put Mr. D. to some shame I am now to shew you as briefly as I can in how many things he hath wronged his Munificent and Bountiful Mother of England P. 10. He takes pains to tell us of an Oath of Canonical obedience sworn by Ministers in Hungary to the Bishop and to the Seniors in the Oath he that swears acknowledgeth himself to receive his Ministry from both Bishop and Seniors These Seniors are but a more eminent sort of Presbyters as his quotation p. 11. intimates What is this but to bring in Hungary's witness against the sole power of Order and Jurisdiction of the English Bishops P. 12 13. He relates a tedious story of the fratres Bohemi and the care that they took to preserve a succession of Ministers They sent Michael Zambergius and two more to the poor Waldenses who never had a Bishop among them but in title only and two titular Bishops with some that had not so much as the title of Bishops made Zambergius and his two Collegues Bishops giving them power of Ordination This is manifestly to put a weapon into the Presbyterians hands they were wont only to quote the story of Pelagius the Pope being ordained by a Presbyter with two Bishops now Mr. D. hath afforded them another Story to prove that a Presbyter may lay hands on and ordain Bishops Is this his kindness to the Prelates Another prejudice and mischief he designes to the Church is as he tells us Page 14. To set forth a Collection of the several Liturgies of all the Protestant Churches This may please him because it is the brat of his own brain but will not sure please the Reverend Fathers of the Church Doth he not know that Archbishop Laud did put a stop to the Letters Patents for a Collection for the Palatinate because it was said in them that the Palatinate Religion and ours was the same and that Popery was an Antichristian yoke Doth he not also know that when a Book was Published here in England intituled a Declaration of the Faith and Ceremonies of the Palsgraves Churches Archbishop Laud took a course to call it in I advise him if he love his preferments no more to meddle in this kind Had Dr. Peter du Moulin any thing bestowed on him since he answered Philanax Anglicus P. 45. He quotes Calvin saying that the custom of distributing the Sacrament but thrice a year is vitious and yet that is the custom of our Church and that not observed in all places neither for the generality communicate but once a year and so follow if Mr. D. be in the right the Devils invention P. 53. He saith by just and evident consequence that there is not a wise understanding Christian in our Church for these are his words That every national Church ought to have Vniformity within it self hath always been the judgment of all sober Christians I assume That every national Church should have Vniformity within it self hath not been the judgment of the Church of England I tremble for Mr. D's sake to infer the conclusion The Minor I prove from the Canons of 1640. where a difformity is allowed and the Apostolical rule commended to dissenters not to judge not to despise Follow him but to P. 93 and there you shall have him charging Rebellion and Schisme on the major part of his Conforming brethren For there he tells us of a great persecution against all Ministers who adhered to the King and Church of England during the late troubles this persecution was so gentle to some as only to plunder and turn them out of their livings but cast others out of the Land or forced them to a voluntary exile Thus therefore I argue All Ministers that adhered to the King and Church were either turned out of their livings or banished or left the Land The major part of the Conforming Ministers did neither lose their livings nor were banished nor went into voluntary exile Theâ—â—â—â—re the major part of the Conforming Ministers neither adhered to King nor Church and by just consequence were Traitors and Schismaticks The Minor is as clear as the Sun to all that observed the management of things in England he that Licensed Mr. D's Book had the same Fellowship in All Soules at his Majesties return that he had at the decollation of his Father P. 95. He tells us that he and some others were admitted to livings in France the Synod desiring them only to conform to their Rites Ceremonies and Orders for the time they should live amongst them for a Nonconformist Minister is a thing unknown and never suffered in those Churches This is nonsense to an English ear for the Church may be full of Nonconformists if men are admitted into livings being desired only and not enjoyned to conform to Rites and Ceremonies and Orders But he told us P. 54. All admitted to livings must subscribe to the confession of faith wherefore we may think he subscribed to the parity of Ministers and by an order passed at Charenton all are to swear they will propugne the Canons of the Synod of Dort if that order be not rescinded then 't is like he is under Oath to defend a Doctrine which most of the Fathers of this Church think if not against our own Doctrine yet subversive of the Doctrine according to Godliness P. 96. He saith that it is a principle common to all reformed Churches in the World That every national Church hath power to make Laws for her self in all such outward things as are not either expresly commanded or forbidden in the word of God God forbid that any such principle should be maintained by all or by any Reformed Church in the whole world There are many outward as well as inward things not commanded nor forbidden expresly but only by just and necessary consequence about which the Church hath no power to make
from us Tell them that the ordinations made by Luther are invalid because he was but a mere Presbyter or that as many of them as come over hither must be reordained before they are capable of any Ecclesiastical preferment unless they have been ordained by Bishops properly so called they will quickly let you see that no reconciliation is to be hoped for I dare boldly say the generality of Presbyterians in England are against no Episcopacy but what the Lutherans themselves abhor There are sundry other things in Mr. Moines Letter for the which I could expose him but I forbear and desire English men not to estimate him by this Letter which is so interpolated that he need not own it as his I undertake at any time to bring a credible witness that shall swear that Mr. Moine hath both by word of mouth and also by Letter under his hand declared that his mind about Episcopacy is not truly represented by this Letter as Printed by Mr. Durel many things being left out that would as much have crossed his design as those which he hath published do further it I come now to the Assembly that Mr. Durell hath called to decide our controversies for us he will have Joannes Amos Comenius the only surviving Bohemian Bishop permitted to speak first and the Presbyterians desire nothing more they have some of them translated a great deal of his Book into English they refuse not to stand or fall by his Paraenesis directed by name to the Church of England when it seemed sollicitous concerning the best form of Church Government Had not Mr. D. picked and culled out of the writings of the Divines whom he quotes just so much as would serve his turn he had manifestly betrayed the cause of those who have preferred him in the judgment of uninterested men he hath done it consequentially by referring Scholars to the Books of the Authors themselves For let a man go to the Letter of Monsieur Bochart written to Dr. Morley and there he shall find that Presbytery is Ancienter than Episcopacy The Reader also is directed to go to a Letter of Monsieur Vauquelins to prove that he thought the Book of common prayer very far from Popery and Superstition Page 278. but if he go to Page 189. he shall find he saith only that there is not in the Book any formal superstition which certainly is not to say it is very far from superstition I profess I know not any one Member of that Assembly Mr. D. would have called that hath not in his writings said more against the Church of England in the Controversies now on foot than for it Of Danaeus I have spoken before and suppose Mr. D. will be willing enough to have him left out of the Synod if he will not let him at his leisure read what he saith of Aerius in his Comment upon St. Augustine de Haeresibus I shall enquire into the mind only of two or three more and they shall be such as I suppose he will have no quarrel against because they are Frenchmen viz. Capell Rivet Casaubon Capell tells him his mind plainly in his Theses de divini verbi necessitate Parag. 29. he saith that there were by the Apostles themselves instituted Churches and in every one of them before their death there was constituted by them a Colledge of Presbyters by whose Labor Ministry and dayly Preaching the Doctrine of the Gospel might be propagated to the end of the World In his Theses about the vocation of Evangelical Ministers Parag. 11. The ordinary power of Preaching the Gospel is that which by the Apostles is committed to their successors Presbyters being by them appointed in every City in the Churches founded by them In his Theses de diversis Ministrorum Evang. Ordinibus gradibus He vohemently contends that the Ministry was properly instituted by God to procure the eternal Salvation of men and that the order of Presbyters alone may suffice to that end and that the dignity and superiority of Bishops above Presbyters is meerly of humane constitution and that there was no cause why the Bishops and their Patrons should so much on this cause and account insult and wax insolent against those whom invidiously they call Puritans and Presbyterians In his Theses of the various Regiment of the Church Parag. 15. He severely censures the pompous mode of worship used in our Cathedrals but Parag. 24. he saith plainly that the English men did not do unwisely who threw the yoke of Episcopacy off their necks Ay but in his Theses about Liturgies he retracts what he had written about abolishing Hierarchical Government Ans No man can see such retractation but Mr. D. himself who sees by extramission and not by intramission as we may observe Page 193 194. Had Capell intended any retractation he would have used plain words importing a revocation or retractation of what he had before written but he useth no words but what may well consist with what he had before said When the same Capell comes to deliver his judgment about festivals he even laughs at the reason or argument used by our great Hooker to prove them by But go we from Capell to Dr. Andrew Rivet whose engagements and obligations to our Bishops were perhaps greater for that he was civilly treated by some of them as he doth somewhere acknowledge as also that at Oxford he had the Honorary degree of Doctor conferred on him His judgment about Episcopacy we have seen before about other things let him now have leave to speak First it is like enough that at the University be might observe that form of Oath Ita me Deus adjuvet sancta Dei Evangelia whether that Oath stuck in his stomach or no I cannot tell but in his explication of the Decalogue he puts this question What is to be thought of that custom which obtaineth in some Churches that have in other things thrown off the Popish superstitions that he that sweareth should touch the Holy Bibles or the Gospels or some part thereof And answereth if the words be conceived as among the Papists so God help me and these Holy Gospels I see not how the reliques of superstition can be excused In the same explication of the Decalogue putting the question concerning the Saints days observed here in England he saith he cannot approve the judgment of those who accuse our Church of Idolatry on that account but wisheth withal the custom were amended because of the peril of Idolatry Just as our Presbyterians are accustomed to say In his Comment on Exod. cap. 28. He handleth a question about the special and peculiar vestments of Ministers and hath these words Whereas in England Ministers put on linen vestments it were not to be indured if they did this in imitation of the Jews or for any mystical signification But how if they do it only for some distinction yet still we must be afraid of Gideons Ephod Of the novelty of Organical Musick he speaks
Baptism the last if his Translators have not abused him was scarce sound in any thing But the Cross was used in Constantine's times and why may it not now be used shall we accuse Constantine of Popery and Superstition Thus is the King said to have argued in the Conference and by his argument he gave us to understand that he liked not that any one should charge Constantine with Popery or Superstition I therefore will lay neither to his charge but yet his purpose not to be baptized till he might be baptized in the same River where Christ was baptized viz. Jordan if it did not proceed from superstition proceeded from a very odd humour God crossed him in that his design and put him under a necessity either to receive Baptism in another place than Jordan or not to receive it at all In this I follow Ensebius for whom should I rather follow than him who so well knew Constantine and hath transmitted his History to posterity If any man incline to those who would have Constantine baptized many years before at Rome I leave him to Scultetus in his Medulla who defends Eusebius against Baronius Mr. Knewstubb's second question was supposing the Church had power to add significant ceremonies whether she might there add them where Christ had already ordained one Which he supposed was no less derogatory to Christs Institution than if any Potentate of the Land should presume to add his Seal to the Great Seal of England To this Dr. Barlow saith p. 70. the King answered That the case was not alike for that no sign or thing was added to the Sacrament which was fully and perfectly finished before any mention of the Cross is made I dare not think this was King James his answer for it is only fitted and suted to our own Church as then it was ordered and still continues In the first Book of King Edward crossing was appointed before Baptism could be pretended to be perfected or indeed begun which was also the usage of the ancient Churches 2. I conceive the presumption of any subject would be great if he should add his own seal to confirm or signifie any thing that the King 's Great Seal was appointed to confirm and signifie though the Great Seal had been set before he set his Seal 3. Methinks the argument stands still in its full force If applying of water to a believer in the name of Father Son and Holy Ghost do signifie all that the Cross signifies to what end is the Cross used The child that is baptized with us is obliged by Baptism obediently to keep Gods holy will and commandments and walk in the same all the days of his life what can the Cross oblige him to more Is not confessing the saith of Christ crucified one of Gods commandments I know a learned man hath replied that constancy is not distinctly signified in being baptized as it is in being crossed But I ask Is it any benefit to a man to have some ceremony used that doth more distinctly mind him of his constancy than Baptism did If it be none then such a ceremony is needless if it be some benefit how came it to pass that no Apostle ever used any such ceremony and why do we not excogitate other ceremonies to admonish us as distinctly of other duties Mr. Knewstubbes third question was In case the Church had power to institute such a sign how far such an Ordinance was to bind them without impeaching their Christian liberty The King charged him never more to speak to that point And therefore I will not speak to it at all but must needs say it was an odd question if it were so propounded as the Relator hath worded it Dr. Reynolds is again brought on the stage p. 71. objecting the example of the Brazen Serpent stampt to powder because the people abused it to Idolatry wishing the Cross because superstitiously abused might be abandoned also To this the King is made to say 1. If it were abused to Superstition in the time of Popery that plainly implies that it was well used before Popery As if nothing had been abused by the Papists in Divine Worship but what had been once well used 2. That there is no resemblance between the Brazen Serpent a material visible thing and the sign of the Cross made in the air As if a thing made in the air might not be abused to superstition as well as a material visible thing 3. That the Papists themselves did never ascribe any power or spiritual grace to the sign of the Cross in Baptism Whether they did or no their Writings will best testifie 4. The material Crosses which in time of Popery were made for men to fall down before them to worship are removed as they desired Whereas most present at the Conference knew that in many places they were not removed The next thing objected was the wearing of a Surplice a kind of Garment which the Priests of Isis used to wear To which His Majesty answered inter alia That if Heathens were commorant among us so as they might take occasion to be strengthned or confirmed in Paganism then there were just cause to suppress the wearing of it A notable answer and which the Nonconformists may do well to treasure up as like to stand them in good stead in these controversies With my body I thee worship is an old and odd phrase and if it may not be altered it must be explained and then Mumpsimus may do as well as Sumpsimus The Ring in Marriage Dr. Reynolds approved and the corner'd cap. Committing of Ecclesiastical censures unto Lay-chancellors the King promised to take order to reform p. 78. And Archbishop Grindal's prophesyings it is like enough His Majesty would not have disliked if he had not misunderstood the design of them And now I would fain know whether what the Bishops got by this Conference may not be put in a mans eye and he never see the worse Dr. Reynolds got a great deal by it viz. a new Translation of the Bible such an explication of the use of the Cross as if the story be true he did acquiesce in a large addition concerning the Sacraments in the Church-catechism c. so that Dr. Heylin in his History of Presbyterians quarrels with King James for giving any way to the Conference There is but one thing more I will concern my self to take notice of in Mr. Scrivener's Action against the New Schism he desires to have one place in which Presbyter signifies a Lay-man Though I think I could satisfie his desire in this yet I find not my self on any account obliged so to do for the English Nonconformists are not over-fond of Ruling-Elders those Churches that retain such Officers will not acknowledg them to be lay-men nor indeed have they any reason to acknowledg them to be such For why should Church-officers chosen by the Church and commended to the grace of God by prayer be called laicks because they labour at some employment to keep themselves from being chargeable to the congregation why then the Apostle Paul was for some part of his time a Laick for he laboured And in later times I could instance in men that for their Learning and Piety deserved to be Metropolitans who yet were fain to preach and work It were to be wished that many in England to whom the care of souls is committed were permitted and enjoyned to follow some calling in the week-days for by that means they would be less scandalous than now they are Why should men that know not what it is to study be forbidden to dig Are they Laicks because they do not preach Many we have in England who would think scorn to be termed Laicks that never did preach never had licence to preach Are they Laicks because they are not ordained by laying on of hands It will be hard to prove that that ceremony is essential to make a man a Church-officer But yet Mr. Scrivener hath good leave to fall upon these Ruling-Elders to bring them into any Court by a Quo VVarranto and if he do chance to cast them there be but few Nonconformists that will be at cost to bring the business to a new Trial. These Elders in some places are made the more pert because of the multiplicity and variety of answers that the Prelatical give to those places of Scripture on which their divine institution is pretended to be built It would tire an ordinary patience to reckon up the various expositions that are given of 1 Tim. 5.17 Scultetus censures the answers given by Bilson another condemns the answer given by Scultetus others confute all the answers given by Mr. Mede Among all that have written against Elders whether unlearned or learned I have not met with any that have satisfied me yet I can satisfie my self about this place For those Churches that argue heartily for these Elders do argue from the general word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the two participles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the two articles 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the two species or kinds of Elders from the two participles two articles two special Elders divided and separated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the discretive particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let Mr. Scrivener face this argument with some of the old answers and see what will come on it And let him take heed how he strikes at these Lay-Elders as he will call them lest he wounds those among us known by the name of Lay-chancellors In the mean time I beseech him to commune with his own heart and to consider with what spirit he writ his books against Daillee and the English Nonconformists by so doing he will be brought I doubt not to take shame unto himself and so prevent the far greater shame of having his railings and calumnies laid open by others Quod erat exorandum FINIS
indeed it doth not but he also might have done well before he dabled in the Printers Ink to read over some Compendiums then would he have amended the Title of above Fifty Pages in his Book not writing The Conformity of the Reformed Churches with the Reformed Church of England for this Enunciation There is a conformity betwixt the Reformed Churches and the Reformed Church of England in the things of present controversie cannot be proved but by an Induction shewing that all or the most or the most famous Reformed Churches agree with the Church of England in all or most or the chiefest of those matters the present Nonconformists scruple Hath he shewed this he doth as good as confess he hath not for Page 53. Sect. 63. giving us the summa totalis of his atchievements he plainly says it amounts but to thus much There is hardly one of the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church of England that is not used in some one Reformed Church or other Which suppose he had proved as he hath not he is many stages off from the conclusion he propounded to infer if he deem he is not let him write a Book to prove that the Language of the Matachuses is conformable to the English Language because there is some one word in which both languages do agree and see whether he will not be laughed at to purpose But I will free my mind from all prejudices that may be taken against Mr. D. on the account of his Country nor will I create him any odium from the high elogiums he bestows on the Earl of Clarendon sentenced by King and Parliament to perpetual banishment as unworthy to live in England though I wonder Mr. D. doth no where bewail his sin or misery in heaping so many praises on him who deserved so few 'T is not the man but his Book I am to undertake and in it I will shew 1. Where there is a real controversy betwixt Episcoparians and Presbyterians he quite mistakes it 2. That he takes a great deal of pains to prove that which was never questioned by any sober man among us 3. That he defiles his Paper with many untruths and falshoods 4. That he hath let fall not a few passages which are manifestly prejudicial and destructive to the Church of England as it is now established As to the real controversies now on foot the principal of them may be reduced to three general Heads Episcopacy Liturgy Ceremonies The Presbyterians say that if they conform they must receive Episcopacy as an order by Divine Law superior to Presbytery and invested with sole power of order and jurisdiction Search Mr. Durell's Book with Candles and if there be in it any one Line tending to prove that either there is any such Episcopacy in any one reformed Church or that any one Reformed Church if her judgment were asked would approve such an Episcopacy and I will confess my self mistaken He reckoneth himself most secure of the Lutheran Churches and among the Lutherans especially of such as are governed by a Monarchy particularly he tells us That in Denmark they have Bishops and Arch bishops name and thing Page 5. How much he is mistaken in this will soon appear if we consult the History of the Reformation of that Kingdom About the year 1537 Bugenbagius is sent for into Denmark where the Twelfth of August he performed all the Ecclesiastical part of the Kings Coronation and Fourteen days after that Coronation he ordained Seven Superintendents to be keepers and executors of all Ecclesiastical Ordination and to do the office of Bishops Now I ask seeing Bugenhage was but a Presbyter whether he put the Superintendents into an order higher than his own if he did who gave him an authority so to do If he did not then are there no Bishops properly so called in Denmark Melchior Adam who relates this of Bugenhagius relates also in the life of Luther that he calling Three other Presbyters to join with him in laying on of hands ordained Nicholas Amdsorf Bishop repudiating one chosen by the Colledg of Canons and very dear to the Emperor That is he ordained one by the name of a Bishop but he was only a Presbyter and could not think himself to be of an higher Order being ordained by Luther that was but a meer Presbyter Gerhard acquaints us That the Papists or at least some of them did proclaim the Ordinations in their Churches to be void and null because performed by Luther who was no Bishop but that ever any Lutheran thought their Ordinations less valid on that account will never be proved I have read Hunnius his Demonstration of the Lutheran Ministry and though he were himself a Superintendent yet he so little magnifies his Office that he sticks not to affirm That he who ordains ordains only as the Officer of the Church and that any one whatever that should by the Church be set to ordain would ordain as validly as a Bishop doth And if it will do Mr. D. any kindness I can and will on his desire direct him to a Lutheran who calls us Anglos Papizantes for straining Episcopacy so high and appropriating Ordination to that Order Chemnitius had occasion to examine the Anathematizing Decrees of the Conventicle of Trent one of them was If any one shall say that a Bishop is not superior to a Presbyter let him be Anathema There he was necessitated to shew the judgment of the Lutheran Churches and yet he there delivereth nothing but what the English Presbyterians can subscribe to and though the incomparable Philip Melancthon was blamed for giving more to Bishops than was meet yet he hath not given more to them than what the English Nonconformists are ready to give them Thus of the Lutheran Churches It will not be so difficult for me to find out the judgment of the Churches more strictly called Reformed because I shall find the most famous of them except the Gallican meeting together at the Synod of Dort Of the Gallican therefore by themselves and I say that the Writers of those Churches have done more against our English Hierarchy than the Writers of any or all Reformed Churches besides For 1. Some of them have made it their business to overthrow the credit of Ignatius his Epistles from which more than from any writing whatever our Hierarchy doth strengthen it self Did not Salmasius and Blondell strain their diligence to prove that even the most correct Copy of Ignatius is spurious And when our learned Hammond had taken some pains to vindicate the Epistles Maresius quarrels with Bâ—ondell because he did not presently all other business laid aside take the Doctor to task and maintain against him the Apology he had made for St. Hieroms opinion yet Dally tells us that Blondell had intended to answer for himself had he not been prevented by death Because death did prevent him therefore his friend Monsieur Dally hath done that work for him and it is said that Dr. Pierson hath
British Divines concern themselves to make protestation open protestation against them If they did then all at once down falls the one half of Mr. Durell's Book For then the Holland Churches in their very Confession of Faith condemn the Discipline of the Church of England and if the Holland Churches do so other Churches do so also For by the Divines of no other Church besides the English was any dislike shewn to those words asserting the parity of all Ministers As for the Deputies of the Gallo-Belgick Churches they declared That the French Churches though not there present had before in a National Synod held in the City of Vitriack 1583 declared solemnly their approbation not only of the Doctrine but also of the Discipline of their Holland Brethren No wonder they so readily consented for an Egg is not more like to an Egg than is the Gallican Confession to the Belgick in the matters of Ministers and Discipline both of them are a note above the Ela of many who have the ill hap to be called Presbyterians and lose their livings here in England both say That this is one part of the Polity taught in the word that there should be in the Church of Christ Pastors Elders Deacons To this it is like that Mr. Durell himself hath subscribed for he somewhere tells us That he had for some years a place among the French Protestants and he tells us page 54 That no man is to be ordained a Minister or admitted to any other office in the said hurcâ—es but he must subscribe besides the publick Confession of their Faith the Canons and Constitutions agreed on at Paris commonly known by the name of their Discipline Now if a man should go to him and ask him whether he believes it to be any piece of Christs Polity that there should be in his Church Elders Ruling-Elders distinct from Preaching Elders or Pastors he would either say no or say nothing Why did he with his hand subscribe to that which he did not with his heart believe Perhaps he is a Latitudinarian or hath a Sluce in his Conscience But the simple Nonconformists in England dare not say they assent to all and every thing if there be something unto which they do not unfeignedly assent they say they can promise not publickly to contradict any thing delivered in the Liturgy or Book of Ordination and some who are beneficed and dignified tell them they mean no more by professing assent and consent But Nonconformists cannot bring themselves to imagine that form of words imports no more What a misery it is that so many Families should be ruined for want of a distinguishing faculty Episcopius hath prescribed a Receipt which if they can but take may cure them of their scrupulosity but let them fear lest it purge them of their Conscience also For thus he What if the Magistrate require words and forms of speaking by which an opinion directly contrary to our faith and opinion is wont to be expressed Answ As long as my opinion is not known if those forms be such or conceived in such words which admit a true sense though a false be wont to be expressed by them I allow them for peace sake Respon ad 64. Quest Page 54. My Lord of Landaff's Protestation hath set my Pen a running further and faster than I designed yet I will not give it check until I have also taken notice of something else which his Lordship relates in his Book against Mountague viz. That he told some Divines of the Synod the cause of all their troubles was because they had no Bishops amongst them who by their authority might repress turbulent spirits that broached novelty every man having liberty to speak or write what they ist It seems his Lordship was of opinion thas if Holland had but been blessed with Bishops Arminianism had never come to such an Head in the Low-Countries and so the Papists tell us That if we would but submit our selves to the Bishop of Rome we should then have no differences about the sense of Scripture yet never any Pope of Rome hath set out any infallible Commentary upon the Bible nor hath any Episcopal authority in England proved sufficient to root up Arminianism among us Mr. Mountague when he first sowed the seeds thereof was of Bishop Carleton's own Diocess why did he not prevent his innovations taking root Why could he not keep his own Book against them from being suppressed What was the matter that no Convocation ever decided so important a controversy I find indeed His Majesty Mountague having been much vexed by the Commons about the year 1626 commanding all the Bishops to come before him reprehending such as appeared for not making known to him what was meet to be done about the Five points that made such a noise but Bishop Andrews and Bishop Laud laying their heads together thought it was not safe to adventure the determining of those points to a Convocation till they could get a Convocation more of their own minds wherefore after all expectations nothing came forth but a Proclamation from His Majesty Charging his Divines not to vent their heats by raising any doubts or publishing and maintaining any new inventions or opinions concerning Religion Much like to an Order the Remonstrants by means of Barnevelt procured from the States of Holland on purpose to prevent the calling of a Synod Of late indeed I find Arnold Poelenberg in a Preface to the 2d Volume of Episcopius his Works boasting of the great favour that the Remonstrant opinions and Authors find with our Prelates and with the leading men in both Universities but perhaps he reckons as the Proverb is without his host All experience tells us that Episcopacy without the Assistance of the Civil Magistrate will not put an end to our strifes and contentions and with the assistance of the Civil Magistrate Presbytery may do it But I return to Mr. D. whom I opposed with an Argument drawn from the Synod of Dort I must not forget that he also takes notice of the Synod of Dort and from the civil and respectful language given in it by Bogerman to the Bishop of Landaff concludes That Holland condemns not our Hierarchy And look how many Transmarine Divines he finds dedicating Books to our Bishops or Archbishops and giving them the titles by which they are commonly called among us so many good mediums he conceives he hath found to prove that beyond the seas the office of a Bishop or Archbishop is liked and honoured I only desire him if he can to be as good natured to our English-men and to believe Thomas Cartwright was a Convert because writing to the Archbishop he gives him his Titles and that Mr. Prynne had no design to unbishop Timothy and Titus because he dedicates his book to the right reverend Fathers in God William of Canterbury and Richard of York Primates of all England and Metropolitans And if his heart do not fail him let him
also infer That Francis Mason had no dislike of Popish Hierarchy because in a Dedicatory to Henry Bishop of Paris he calls him Amplissimum Praesulem and Antistitem Clarissimum and Virum Reverendissimum Dr. Heylin was not Master of so much charitable Logick for speaking Hist of Pres p. 282. of Bishop Grindals holding correspondence with Calvin and Beza Zanchy Bullinger Gualter and some other of the chief Divines among the Switzers he concludes at length That they all had their ends upon him for the advancing of Presbytery and Inconformity in the Church of England And really I have observed that most of the Divines that have by their Letters stroaked our Bishops have in some places of their Writings given a shrewd knock to the Cause defended by them Mr. Durell p. 281. tells us That Danaeus his calling the Archbishop Reverendissimum in Christo Patrem c. is as much as can be wished to testifie his good liking of the Church of England as it is by Law established And yet John Canne a very troublesome Separatist makes use of a passage in Danaeus to justifie his separation from the Church of England Mr. Ball clearly proves that the passage doth not warrant separation but yet Danâ—us might have written more moderately for these are his words on 1 Tim. 5. Ex his omnibus apparet quam nulla sit vel non legitima eorum verbi Dâ—i ministrorum vel Ecclesiae pastorum vocatio qui solius Regis vel Reginae vel Patroni vel Episeopi vel Archiepiscopi authoritate diplomate bullis jussu judicio fiunt vel eligun tur Id quod dolendum est fieri adhuc in iis Ecclesiis quae tamon purum Dei verbum habent sequuntur veluti in media Anglia Nan Anglos homines alioqui sapientissimos acutissimos pientissimos in istis tamen Papisticae Idololatriae tyrannidis reliquiis agnoscendis tollendis scientes prudentesque caecutire mirum est Itaque praeclare sentiunt qui omnem illam chartulariam Episcopaticam Curionum pastorum Ecclesiae ereandorum rationem item ex solo Episcopi consensu diplomate ministrorum verbi coelestis vocationem approbationem inaugurationem damnant tollendamque ex reformata ad Dei verbum Ecclesia censent quod ordo Dei verbo praescriptus in ordinatione hujusmodi personarum sit praetermissus ac violatus sicut perspicue apparet Denique senatui Ecclesiastico populo Christiano insomne suum atque suffragium misere sit hac ratione in hee genere vocationum Ecclesiasticarum ademptum in unum quendum Episcopum magna tyrannide atque abusu translatum Dominus Deus talibus corruptionibus quae adhuc in Ecclesiis ipsius supersunt defenduntur mederi magna sua misericordia dignetur velit quae tandem certe magnam Ecclesiae Dei ruinam secum trahent ipsum sacrosanctum verbi Ministerium reddent efficientq vel mercenarium vel omnino contemptibile abjectum Quod Dominus avertat Certainly this is not as much as can be wished to testifie Danaeus his good liking of the Church of England as it is by Law established Friderick Spanhem is another whose complaisant Dedicatory to the great Vsher seems to Mr. D. a sufficient argument to prove that the Reformed Church of Geneva is no enemy to the Bishops of the Church of England and yet Spanhem in that very third part of his Evangelical Doubts which he dedicates to the Archbishop determines it lawful for the innocent person after divorce to marry another wife quite contrary to Ecclesiastical Laws still unrepealed in the Church of England Well that is but a Peccadillo because many of our own Conformable Divines are of the same mind and as I suppose some of our Bishops also Dr. Abbot answering Bishops Second part p. 315. saith That the limitation of divorce which our Saviour giveth maketh it lawful for the party innocent to marry again the delinquent being left to the censure of the Church until satisfaction be given of true repentance for so hainous a sin The Church of England notwithstanding for the preventing of some mischiess that by the wickedness of men do arise by the abuse of the liberty of marriage upon divorce useth a restraint of that liberty that the parties divorced shall put in caution not to marry again as long as they both live As for the Authors of the reformation of our Ecclesiastical laws de Adult divort c. 6. they determine plainly Cum alter conjux adulterii damnatus est alteri licebit innocenti novum ad matrimonium si volet progredi and c. 7. Judex quoties alterum conjugem adulterii condemnat alteri sincerae personae libertatem denunciare debet ad novum matrimonium transeundi And cap. 19. Mensae societas thori solebat in certis criminibus adimi conjugibus salvo tamen inter illos reliquo matrimonii jure quae constitutio cum à sacris literis aliena sit maximam perversitatem habeat malorum sentinam in matrimonium comportaverit illud authoritate nostra totum aboleri placet But this it seems is not current doctrine now and so let it pass The aforesaid Friderick Spanhem makes Ruling-Elders to be one of those orders of Officers that are designed by Christ for the ruling of his Church and affirms them to be grounded on Scripture 1 Cor. 12.8 1 Tim. 5.17 So I find him quoted by Hornbeck Institut Theol. p. 523 524. And it will be difficult for Mr. Durell to prove that he can approve the divine right of Episcopacy who makes Lay-Elders commonly so called a divine institution Leaving Episcopacy let us come to Liturgy that we may see whether Mr. Durell be any more happy in managing that Controversie I do easily grant that he hath by a whole cloud of witnesses proved 1. That set-forms of prayer are lawful 2. That most Churches reformed do use set-forms of prayer 3. That the old English Common prayer-book was not so corrupt as that a man could not without defiling his conscience joyn with those who made use of it in the service of God But all these things had been proved many years before by an old Nonconformist who died about the beginning of the late Wars Mr. John Ball both in his tryal of the grounds tending to separation and in his answer to Mr. Cann and others If Mr. Durell will do any thing to purpose in this Controversie relating to Liturgies he must prove 1. That it is lawful for any Church so strictly to tye up her Ministers to a form as not to allow them to make any use of their own gifts in prayer in publick Or else 2dly That our Church hath not so tied up her Ministers but that they may still any Rubrick or Canon to the contrary notwithstanding use their own prayer at some times and upon some occasions in the publick If he will endeavour to prove the first the Presbyterians will be concerned to
answer him If the second there are many of his Conforming brethren will soon be upon his bones but for ought I see or can find Mr. D. never goes about either to prove the one or the other proposition and therefore I might be excused if I did wholly dismiss him and leave him to some of his friends to reconcile him to his own shadow yet because he swaggers and accounts that he hath by one thrust left the Assembly of Divines and the two Houses of Parliament weltring in their blood I will try quid tanto dignum feret hic promissor hiatu The things laid to the charge of the two Houses and the Assembly chosen by them are manifest untruths and those uttered in an Ordinance and in a preface to a Directory for the publick Worship of God throughout the three kingdoms vid. p. 3. If any manifest untruths are delivered by them let them for me lye down in their own sorrow and shame till they have made reparation to the parties injured But first we must see whether this heavy charge can be made good against them else the penance must be laid on him that brought in the charge The first untruth is That the book of Common prayer had proved an offence to the Reformed Churches abroad Is this an untruth and a manifest untruth too Why are not the Walachian Churches in Zealand Resormed Churches and was not the Liturgy used in the Church of England an offence to them Let Mr. D. read what Apollonius in the name of the whole Classis hath written against it and then tell us his mind let him also read the several Letters written by Calvin and Beza touching our Liturgy and it will be very evident that some things in our English Liturgy were offensive at Geneva and a man would think something in it was offensive to the Protestant Churches in France or else certainly they would have used their interest with the French Churches here in England to receive it from Bishop Laud who laboured with all his might for many years to impose it on them but could not prevail at last Lastly for ought I know the Scotish Churches may properly enough be called Churches abroad and Mr D. will not sure deny but that our Liturgy was offensive to them The second manifest untruth is that the two houses did take away the book of Common-prayer to answer the expectation of other Reformed Churches If there were other Reformed Churches besides those for which the Directory was appointed that expected the two Houses should take away the Common-prayer-book used in England then was there no manifest untruth in the before-mentioned expression Let us see whether there were not The abolishing of the Common-prayer-book was forth Kingdom of England and Dominion of Wales Can Mr. D. imagine that no other Churches reformed expected the taking away of the English Liturgy What thinks he of the Reformed Churches of Scotland The Churches of New England those English and Scotish Churches that were planted up and down the Low-Countreys and other places of Traffick Will he nullifie all these Churches or had they not desires as well as expectations that the Liturgy should be removed Did he never read with how great regret that Liturgy was obtruded upon those English that trafficked in foreign Nations If he have not let him vouchsafe to read over the History of Archbishop Laud written by Dr. Heylin and then tell us whether he was not too rash to give so many Nobles Gentlemen and Divines the lye If that History bring him under no sense of his temerity then I entreat him to enquire of the Assembly-men still alive whether they cannot help him to a sight of the Answers of Foreign Churches returned to the Latin Letter of the Assembly of Divines and by most of them he will find that the designed Reformation was not disgusted by them Till he have such an opportunity it will be wort his while to bestow a little time in reading Apo lonius his printed Epistle Mr. D. again falls upon the two Houses p. 14. thither I will follow him where conceiving wrath and fiery indignation against an expression in the Ordinance of the two Houses he makes a Manifesto That there was never nor is yet any one Reformed Church that hath only a Directory and not a book of Common-prayer for the publick worship of God To which Manifesto I say That the Church of Scotland had when the two Houses made that Ordinance no Book of Common-prayer for the publick worship of God but what was in the nature of a Directory and that the Church of Scotland was principally in their eye in the management of their Reformation and I also say that the Dutch Liturgy is but in the nature of a Directory for so I understand those words cap. 11. art 11. in the Harmony of the Belgick Synods Minister preces vel dictante spiritu vel certa sibi proposita formula concipiet It may be Mr. D. will put another construction on them for he seems to have used other Dictionaries than those we have opportunity to consult in England In one of the French Rubricks it is said that upon Sundays in the morning the following form is commonly used he tells us p 17. the meaning is That that form is to be used always and no other Could any Presbyterian have thought of such a meaning or how can any one of them be convinced that commonly and always are all one why he may be convinced by constant and uniform practice so he tells us ibid. But I say constant and uniform practice will never make commonly to be always I have been a member of the Church of England for these Thirty years and my occasions have called me to be in most Counties of the Nation and in all these years I never heard any Minister whether Prelatical or Presbyterian read King James his Statute against Swearing and yet the words of the Law are plain That it shall be read twice every year were I not a wise man if I should say the meaning of the Law is that the Statute shall never be read as constant and uniform practice doth shew Thus have I examined what Mr. D. had to say against the Two Houses and the Assembly and must now try not the words but the power of Ludovicus Capellus a man of great Learning but which in his later days especially he made use of to the disturbance of the Church better had it been for the Christian world that Saumur had never had a professor of Hebrew than a Professor that took so much pains to make the Hebrew Points or Vowels and Accents a late invention of the Tiberian Massarites long after sundry Translations were extant in the World All his Theses will not do so much good as his Arcanum punctationis revelatum and Critica Sacra have done hurt Let us notwithstanding hear what he hath concerning Liturgies Mr. D. himself being Translator A Hundred and fourty
years ago when the separation was made from the Church of Rome and that the Christian people coming out of Babylon did cast off the Popes tyranny the sacred Liturgy was purged of all that Popish superstition and idolatry and all such things as were over-burdensom or which did little or nothing contribute towards the edification of the Church and so were framed and prescribed in several places divers set forms of holy Liturgies by the several Authors of the Reformation that then was and those simple and pure in Germany France England Scotland the Netherlands c. differing as little as possible from the ancient set forms of the Primitive Church which set forms the Reformed have used hitherto with happiness and profit each of them in their several Nations and Districts Till at last of very late there did arise in England a froward scrupulous and over-nice that I say not altogether superstitious generation of men unto whom it hath seemed good for many Reasons but those very light and almost of no moment at all not only to blame but to cashier and to abolish wholly the Liturgy used hitherto in their Church together with the whole Hierarchical Government of their Bishops instead of which Liturgy they have brought in their Directory as they call it Mr. D. tells us pag. 15. That from hence the Reader may observe five things 1. That all reformed Churches have Liturgies but I say That from no words of Capellus any such observation can be collected if Mr. D. think otherwise his Logick is his own let him make use of it 2. That the Liturgy of the Church of England is judged by this great man not only simple and pure and free from all Popish Superstition and Idolatry but also from all such things as were over onerous and troublesom or which did contribute but little to the edification of the Church No such observation can be made from Capellus his words for he only speaks of the Liturgies that were introduced by the first Authors of our Reformation betwixt which and the present Liturgy there may be for ought Mr. Capell saith to the Contrary a vast difference But I believe this great man commended he knew not what and talked at an high rate of confidence concerning Liturgies of the first Reformers which he never saw A Papist will not desire greater advantage against the Praeses in Saumur than to have it granted that in the Liturgies made by the Authors of Reformation in all the places Capell mentioneth nothing was contained onerous or of little edification The Divines of King Henry the 8th were Authors of a Reformation their Liturgy had something in it superstitious idolatrous less profitable So had also the first Liturgy made by our Divines in King Edwards time else we must count it profitable to pray for the dead and to commend our Prayers to be presented by the holy Angels c. And if we speak even of the present Lutherans Liturgies every thing that hath little or nothing of profit in it is not taken away for what is the profit of Latin Cantions or where is the advantage of Exorcisme What good is to be got by the Doctrine of Consubstantiation I might urge other questions which no friend of Capellus would much care for answering 3. If Liturgies ought to recede as little as possible from that of the Primitive Church as he doth intimate undoubtedly the Liturgy of the Church of England is the best and most perfect of them all as coming nearest unto it How the Reader should be able to observe this from any words of Capellus cannot I divine it may be Mr. D. heartily thinks that our Liturgy cometh nearest to the Primitive Liturgies and so is the most perfect because primum in unoquoque genere est mensura reliquorum But Capellus neither did think so nor could think so without egregious contradiction to his own Principle for he had said just before That from the beginning the Formula's were most brief and most simple which without pomp and train and manifold variety consisted of a few Prayers and Lessons out of the Psalms and other Scripture Now certainly if our Liturgy be most simple yet it is not most brief nor doth it consist of but a few Prayers let Mr. D. read all that by the Liturgy is appointed to be read without defalcation and I will undertake he shall be under no temptation to make his Sermons tedious 4. That of all men who call themselves Reformed the Presbyterians are the first that ever left the use of set forms of Prayers Capellus useth not the word Presbyterians and if he had used it it would have been a very blind Mr. D. seems by Presbyterians to mean the major part of those Divines who by vertue of an Ordinance of Parliament did meet to give advice concerning Doctrine Discipline Worship If Capellus say that these were the first that left off the use of set forms of Prayer he was much mistaken set forms of Prayer had been long before laid aside and condemned as unlawful by such as were as little in love with Presbytery as Hierarchy he may know whom I mean if he will enquire who they were that left old England Dr. Heylin hath written the History of Presbyterians under which name he seems to bring all those Protestants who are not Lutherans nor satisfied with the Reformation of the Church of England This History his Son hath dedicated to the Two Houses of Parliament now sitting In the 2d Page of that Book it is said The Zuinglian Reformation was begun in defacing Images decrying the established Fasts and appointed Festivals abolishing set forms of worship denying the old Catholick Doctrine of a Real Presence and consequently all external reverence in the participation of the blessed Sacrament which Luther seriously laboured to preserve in the same estate in which he found them at the present And page 89. speaking of the Palatine Churches he would have us take them for Antilutherans in defacing Images abolishing all distinction of Fasts and Festivals and utterly denying all set forms of publick Worship I know a great deal of this is false maliciously false as is almost every thing in that Book which relates to the foreign Churches and therefore I hope the Bishops or others that have Authority will either call in the Book or some other way discover how much they abhor the design of it in the mean time here is work for Mr. Durell's Pen if he will not be partial and respect persons if he have any zeal left for Zuinglius Calvin Beza let him wipe off the aspersion of Rebellion Schism Aerianism from their faces or else let him know that seeing Dr. Heylins Book came out last his will be thought sufficiently confuted 5. Mr. D. tells us we may observe that the many reasons for which the Presbyterians have rejected the Book of Common Prayer are very light and almost of no moment at all Capell saith not so but
same thing that moved the Polonians to forbid sitting may move us to forbid kneeling and leave it proper to the wretched Papists who worship a piece of bread instead of their Saviour But this gesture of kneeling would be a little better considered The Fathers of the before mentioned Synods seem to say not indeed in that Meeting which Mr. D. quotes but in the Meeting of 1578. That those who fell off to Arrianism were the first that were authors of sitting in their Churches If I mistake their meaning detur venia but if I do not I humbly conceive they were themselves mistaken John Alasco a Noble-men of Poland was upon Cranmer's persuasion sent for into our England by King Edward the sixth about the year 1549. and permitted to have a Church of strangers especially of Dutch whom he brought up to receive the Sacrament sitting and also during his abode here put forth a book to prove the lawfulness of that gesture After many troublesome wandrings from place to place at last being invited by at least forty Letters he returned to his own Countrey and no question administred the Sacrament to his flock sitting and taught others on whom he had influence so to do Now this Alasco never fell off to Arrianism perhaps this was the reason why in the Meeting 1583. it is not said that the Arrians first brought in sitting but that it was chiefly brought in by them The aforesaid Fathers seem also to affirm that sitting had not been used by any Evangelical Churches in Europe at the time of their meeting but if they so meant they were greatly mistaken for sitting was brought into the Church of Scotland by authority as the most proper and convenient gesture 1560. and our Confessor Mr. Thomas Beacon in an authorized Catechism 1563. speaks of sitting as a gesture used in certain Reformed Churches and which he himself could best allow if it were received by publick authority and common consent Who the Arrian-Anabaptists were that had caused such a detestation of themselves among the Polonians I cannot certainly know but by such stories as have come to my hands I guess they were Georgius Blandrata and Franciscus Davidis and their Spawn who both denied the Divinity of Jesus and also his adorability Socinus and his followers held the Principle That Jesus is not God and yet denied the conclusion that naturally and lineally descended from it That Jesus is not to be worshipped for they had found out a distinction of Deus natus factus The former would not stick to say That Jesus was one of their brethren and fellow-servants so would the latter for they ascribed unto Christ a dignity and excellency nearly approaching unto the dignity and excellency of the Creator but conferred on him by the singular bounty and good will of him who created him Wherefore the Socinians properly so called could not use sitting at the Lords Table as a token of their equality with Christ nor indeed do they much concern themselves what gesture is used in Sacramental Communion Volkelius saith They use sitting but yet so that they damn not those who had rather use standing so as there be no appearance of idolatry They would have us believe they hate the very appearance of Idolatry and yet they commit Idolatry for what greater Idolatry than to worship him that by nature is not God as they blasphemously say Jesus is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The last Ceremony but about which there is the greatest Controversie is the sign of the Cross Nonconformists say this sign is made a Sacramental sign because it is used as a token that the child shall not be ashamed to profess Christ crucified c. and also as a ceremony by which it is dedicated unto God In clearing this ceremony therefore Mr. D. should have taken most pains but in this he is slightest of all He gives us not an instance of any one Reformed Church that hath appointed the sign of the Cross to be used either in Baptism or in any other Ordinance only he tells us of Bibles printed at Geneva for the use of the Church and that before them Christian Religion is represented in an Emblem as leaning upon a Cross and that some Reformed have Crosses upon their Churches and that some Ministers in Prussia to humor the Lutherans will make a Cross in the Air with their hand when they say The Dord be with you All this is to as much purpose as if he had told us that the Rumpers did use the sign of the Cross in the Flags of their Ships and put it on the money which they coined or that some Nonconformists have it in their Coat of Arms as I am sure they have I believe there is not a Nonconformist in England that questioneth the lawfulness of making the sign of a Cross upon any thing he useth And if the sign of the Cross were made so as that it remained and were visible after it were made then perhaps it might have an aptitude to occasion a good thought concerning a crucified Saviour but what can be the benefit of a Cross that leaves no impression on the forehead I know the Baptismal water being applied to an infant leaveth no such mark on the flesh as it can take notice of at years of discretion but the Spirit if he be not grieved will bring our Baptism to our remembrance and he hath so done to many in the hour of temptation but how shall a man be secured that the blessed Spirit will engage himself to bring our being crossed to our remembrance I have made observation and could never find any difference betwixt us that were crossed and those who were not crossed Do we confess the Faith of a crucified Saviour so do they do we fight under his Banner so do they do we joyn our selves to Christs flock so do they the things that we know they know also so that they are under a temptation to think that the Cross is an useless sign I must not dissemble that Mr. D. takes on him in his Sermon page 29 to explicate and shew the usefulness of this sign As when the King having created those noble Knights of his Order bestows on them the Garter and the Blew Riband as Badges to be known by of others and to put them in mind of the great honour done unto them In like manner when an infant hath by Baptism been enrolled in the Militia of the King of Glory Jesus Christ our Lord this sign of the Cross is made upon his forehead to declare unto all such as are present and as many as shall thereafter know it that he hath received it and to himself when he comes to years of understanding that he was consecrated to Christ crucified that he hath put on his Livery and wears his Badge that he is bound to crucifie the old man and to bear the Cross that to this he is called by our Saviour that he ought in all places and
concerning the Minister thereof Presbyterians say That no Law of God hath appropriated it to a Bishop strictly so called If Mr. D. can shew us any such Law or if he can prove that in all or in any Reformed Church a meer Presbyter is not accounted to have power to confirm as well as to baptize he shall do something let him therefore shew himself a man and undertake this work and when he hath his hand in let him also wipe off a blot thrown upon the Church of England and Geneva by Dr. Heylin with the Pen of a virulent Papist VVilliam Reynolds History of Presby pag. 283. viz. That 1576 the Common-prayer-Book was Printed by Richard Jugg the Queens Printer the whole order of private Baptism and confirmation of Children being omitted which omission was designed to bring the Church of England into some Conformity to the desired Orders of Geneva Pag. 47. he is so prodigal of his Ink and Paper as to tell us That in all reformed Churches Matrimony is celebrated in the publick Congregation and by the Minister This may be true of all reformed Churches in reference to their own Members at least I hope it is but if he should intend to assert That Reformed Churches allow not that any who are constant livers in the same Cities with them shall be married otherwise than by the Ministers and in the Church he is mistaken Yet let it be supposed that Papists dwelling with Protestants are forced to marry in the Church and to make use of a Minister what is this to the Presbyterians The composers of the Directory say VVe judge it expedient that Marriage be solemnized by a lawful Minister of the word that he may counsel them and pray for them In the said directory care also is taken that before any marriage the persons intent of marriage be published by the Minister three several sabbath days in the congregation at the place or places of their most usual and constant abode respectively and all Ministers are to have sufficient testimony of this publication before they proceed to solemnize Marriage By the Liturgy also sufficient provision is made that of all that are to be married the Bannes be published in the Church three several sundays or Holy days in the time of Divine service but any one that hath mony may have a licence to be Married without any such publication of Bannes by which means great inconveniences have arisen in Church and State Care also is taken by the 62 Canon of 1603. That none shall be married unless the Parents or Governors of the parties to be married being under the age of twenty one shall either personally or by sufficient testimony signifie their consent given to the said marriage The directory is somewhat more strict requiring that persons though of age shall be bound to have a Certificate of their Parents consent if it be their first marriage And really it seems but rational that a man and a woman though of the age of Thirty if never married before should be bound to signifie their Parents consent before any Minister adventure to marry them The greatest differences I find among Protestants about Marriage are reducible to Two Heads 1. We say here in England That though Children he bound to ask the consent of Parents yet if the marriage be made no such consent asked or obtained the marriage is valid fieri non debet factum valet is our Rule but beyond Seas such marriages are by many held to be void and of no effect Mr. D. hath so many obligations laid on him by our Church that it would be but gratitude to take her part and to answer the Arguments of Dissenters 2. Our Church hath thought meet to prohibit marriage for certain times and seasons which are particularized in our common Almanacks Other Churches leave it free to persons to marry all the year about to these the Presbyterians joyn themselves they say marriage is not to be forbidden at any time unless on such days in which God calls to fasting weeping mourning to confirm them in this opinion they had the judgment of a whole Convocation in England assembled in the year 1575 agreeing That Bishops should take order that it be published and declared in every Parish Church within their Diocesses that marriage might be solemnized at all times of the year but though the Church thought meet to put this Article into the Book the Head of the Church Q. Elizabeth did not so think and therefore suffered it not to be Printed Dr. Heyl. Hist of Presb. 282 283. Object Ay but there are some who scruple the Ring in Marriage which Mr. D. saith is used in Hessen Poland Lithuania Sol. If there be any such the more is the pity for rational ground of scruple there is none any more than there is to scruple taking seisin by a Turf Nor do I know any one Presbyterian now living that doth scruple the use of a Ring in Marriage Pag. 48. we are informed by Mr. D. That in most places of the Reformed Churches they have Funeral Sermons in Hungary and Transilvania two or three in Bohemia but one and that at the Grave As if he would suggest to us that either Presbyterians are against Funeral Sermons or the Episcopal extreamly for them whereas the truth is there never were more Funeral Sermons than in those days when the Presbyterians had their Churches and Pulpits and now that they are thrust out when any one of them dye 't is seldom but some body is hired to Preach a Sermon I say hired for they are as rare as Black Swans that will Preach a Funeral Sermon under an Angel or a Noble And whereas he tells us ibid. of the Minister with singing Boys going before the Corps he knows that in England we have singing Boys but in few places scarce any where but in Cathedrals which do not use to send their singing Boys to go before the Corps at every Funeral Civil respects or differences at Burials may be suted to the rank and condition of the party deceased whiles he was living as for the Religious part of Funerals why should it not be alike to all that have attained like precious faith Doth Mr. D. know any Churches where only the moneyed Christians are honoured with Sermons the poor being laid in their graves without any If he did not why would he lay open the nakedness of his Fathers why would he tempt strangers to think that with them there is respect of persons The Scots say Either let us have Sermons at all Funerals or at none so say the Hollanders so I suppose the French either say or think But Mr. D. Page 49. quotes a scrap of a Letter from Monsieur Drelincourt saying I am so far from allowing the custom of the Reformed Churches of this Kingdom where the Ministers are silent at dead mens Burials that I would think it unsufferable were it not for the condition under which we live I believe Mr.
Drelincourt if he be still alive thinks Mr. D. dealt not civilly with him in publishing this piece of his Letter for he sure took no delight to let the world know that he accounted the custom of the Holland Churches unsufferable especially seeing the French Churches in Holland comply with them and yet cannot plead that they fear persecution The same Drelincourt if we may believe Mr. D. said that he found upon perusal of the Common Prayer Book office for Burial of the dead nothing that was contrary to piety or pure Doctrine and the service of God Is not this a rare commendation of the Liturgy that it hath nothing in it contrary to piety c. But what Common prayer Book did this learned Divine read over in all but this last there were expressions to be used at Burials that were apt to harden men in their impenitence which therefore are now either changed or left quite out At present I know little liable to exception save only that Burial seems appropriated to a Priest may a Deacon Baptise and Preach and may he not bury our dead out of our sight In the Old Liturgy it was said the Minister meeting the Corps at the Church stile shall say in this last edition of the Liturgy it is said the Priests and Clerks and so throughout the whole Office we have no other word but Priest which is never applied to any that are but Deacons there is some mystery in this which Mr. D. can expound or else take no notice of 2. By the Liturgy the form of Burial is not to be used for any that dye unbaptized What 's the meaning of this If Christian Parents lose a child before they can get it to be baptized must they to all other their sorrow have this also added That their child shall not have Christian bâ—rial Shall the Idolatrous Papists child be buried and shall the child of the Antipaedobaptist not be buried according to the Liturgy How will Mr. Tombs after all the pains he hath taken to desend the Liturgy brook this 3. Seeing the Office is to be read at the burial of all baptized being neither excommunicate nor murderers of themselves why is the Priest appointed to say His â—ope is that every one who is buried rests in the Lord. What if a man be killed in bed with another's Wife What if he be killed in a Duel or in an Alehouse half drunk What if he be by God struck dead with an oath or blasphemy upon his tongues end must we use the very same words for him that we use for one that led a most Christian life and died a comfortable death I have much more charity for some that laid violent hands on themselves than for those who contrary to all laws of God and man do dye in Duels by the sword of another Pag. 50. he hath other words of Drelincourts as little to purpose If we were permitted saith he to preach at Paris and there to minister the holy communion I am of this perswasion that it would be a pious and charitable work to give that comfort to those poor sick persons who have kept their bed for many years and are not able to go as far as Charenton which is the place of our ordinary exercises of Religion This is a marvellous wary speech 1. If they were permitted 2. If they were permitted both to preach and administer the Sacrament 3. Then it would be pious and charitable to give the Communion to such as have kept their beds for many years Can Mr. D. think that the English Presbyterians will be offended at a perswasion thus qualified It may rather be questioned Whether some of them would not judg it charitable and pious to administer the Sacrament in such cases though they had no permission from the King at least it may be conceived that they would adventure if they should be permitted only to administer the Sacrament though no leave were given them to preach for a Sermon is not of the essence of a Sacrament and I deem they would perform this act of charity and piety to such as had been confined to their beds though only for one or two years which are not many There is not one word in all the Directory against private Communion P. 40. Mr. D. gives us notice That in the Bohemian Churches the people do alway say Amen at the end of the Prayers in the same manner that we do here in England Which is so far from crossing the Presbyterians that they as many think by their good will would have the people say nothing but Amen P. 39. he fancieth he may put the Presbyterians to silence by telling them of Churches that sing Hymns and spiritual songs besides Psalms But he may know that Presbyterians are as much at liberty to sing any godly Hymn or spiritual Song as he himself is Let him but procure the Te Deum or the Lords prayer to be set to ordinary times and then he shall see whether the Presbyterians will make any scruple for conscience-sake to sing those forms or the three Creeds which are said to be set with musical notes in the French and Dutch Churches but not sung by the French Churches by reason both the Rhime and the language are something course and old Presbyterians are not so dainty they continue to sing the old Psalms though the language and rhime be odd and uncouth in many places P. 183. he goes about to stab the Presbyterians with a declaration of a National Synod met at Figeac 1579. What is the declaration Why it is a declaration against reading verses aloud before they be sung as being inept threatning censure to such Churches as used it The Presbyterians think this custom unfit and therefore exhorted all Congregations to get Psalm-books and to learn to read they allowed reading of Psalms line by line only for necessity when ignorance had prevailed so far that many in most Congregations could not read at all Let Mr. D. but take care that all be taught to read or learn the psalms without book and I dare half undertake for Presbyterians they shall leave off so inept or unmeet a custom Till then they and Episcopal men too must do as they can and remember that they are debtors to the unwise as well as wise P. 22. Mr. D. makes mention of Churches whose Ministers wear commonly either a long cloak or a gown and long cap nay Calvin saith he did wear a gown and a cap as often as he taught either in the Divinity-School or in the Church at Geneva If Presbyterians do not wear a cap when they teach in the church they may easily be pardoned by Mr. D. As for a gown let him but get them liberty to preach and they will promise never to need his pardon for want of that I am sure I have seen those whom the Parliament sent down to Cambridg into the places of such as were ejected preach both in gowns and
hoods and so I have heard they did at Oxford when they preached Latin Sermons for which they have been scolded at by filly women as Calvin was by the Wife of Frumentius I had almost forgot another Impertinence p. 37. The French Churches require that the Ministers who ought to use Imposition of hands upon those that are to be admitted to the ministry among them should pray standing on that occasion the new received Minister and the Congregation kneeling at the same time This was the constant practice of the Presbyterians as to Ordainers and Ordained in all places where I have been or of which I have heard As for the people they were commonly so numerous at Ordinations that they could not without huge inconvenience kneel I also find that I have passed over something page 32. They have the Ten Commandments in Letters of Gold upon two great Tables where they are able to be at the charge of it and in some places they have also the Creed and the Lords Prayer in the same manner conformable to one of the constitutions of the Church of England to the same purpose Who are meant by they I cannot tell the precedent words were in Princes Chappels in Germany and other parts they have them i. e. Chalices gilt Are there any Princes in Germany or other parts who cannot be at the charge of having the Ten Commandments in Letters of Gold upon two great Tables Or doth Mr. D. mean the French Churches as many as have ability do set up the Commandments in Letters of Gold upon two great Tables If so I doubt he wronged his Conscience But let it be supposed that in all French Churches that are not very poor the Ten Commandments are set up in Letters of Gold what mean those words in some places they have also the Creed and the Lords Prayer in the same manner conformable to one of the constitutions of the Church of England Have the rich French Churches the Lords Prayer and Creed on two Tables and in Letters of Gold If they have not why is it said that they have the Creed and Lords Prayer in the same manner The Churches of France I am certain may be conformable enough to the constitution of the Church of England and yet not have either the Commandments in Two Tables or in Letters of Gold for all the constitution requires is but that the Ten Commandments be set upon the East-end of every Church and Chappel where the people may best see and read the same and other chosen sentences written upon the walls of the said Churches and Chappels in convenient places Here is no mention of two great Tables no mention of Letters of Gold no mention of Creed or Lords Prayer But why did Mr. D. trouble himself to bring in all or any of this Stuff Did Presbyterians ever deny the lawfulness or expedience of having either the Decalogue or Creed or Lords Prayer set upon conspicuous places in the Temple I know an eminent Nonconformist now living who was wont to rejoyce that the Painter had set the Lords Prayer just over against his Pulpit that if it had hapned he had been out he might by his eyes help himself Had the Creed been so placed it had been well for Mr. D. for they say that not long since he was horribly out in repeating the Articles of Faith after Sermon I shall conclude this Catalogue of Impertinencies with Mr. D's stories concerning reformed Churches that â—eep the very same Temples that were used in time of Popery pag. 28. so did the Presbyterians and Mr. Paget hath defended the lawfulness of using such places against the frivolous exceptions of Mr. Ainsworth and now let the world judge whether Mr. D. deserve not to be called and accounted Mr. Impertinent I must come to a third part of my task which will be perhaps necessary but is somewhat more unpleasing than any of the other viz. to muster up some of those Speeches of Mr. Durell which Countreymen call Wiskers you may call them by another name but will not know how to excuse except by the English Proverb that Travellers may by authority Pag. 8. Bellarmine was an eye-witness in his time much against his will of Oecolampadius his being called Bishop of the Church of Basil Oecolampadius on his Tomb in Basil is called Templi hujus verus Episcopus Bellarmine in his fourth Book De notis Eccle. cap. 8. saith That when he was at Basil he read him called on his Tomb the first Bishop of that City which is a Lye but then he also faith that he read this non sine risu if these words do not signifie much against his will where is Mr. D's veracity Pag. 13. All understanding men amongst the French say plainly That if God Almighty were pleased that all France should embrace the Reformed Religion as England hath the Episcopal Government must be established in their Churches Do all understanding men say this and say it plainly I shall manifest the contrary ere I have done and indeed have manifested it already Pag. 16. He dreads not to affirm That Smectymnuus and all Smectymnuans being bound most of them by their Oath to use set forms never use them S. M. T. Y. when Mr. D. Printed this were dead and so not bound by Oath to use set forms as for E. C. M. N. W. S. who were then alive how will it be proved that either they were bound by Oath to use set forms or that they never used them The Smectymnuans if by them he mean the Nonconformists and whom else can he mean were never the most of them by Oath bound to use set forms and yet sometimes some of them have used them yea did use them at that very time when Mr. D. was hammering out this Book Pag. 18. There is not one Minister in all France but hath made unto himself a set form which he useth always and no other What confidence is this hath he received Letters from every Minister in France or spoke with every Minister in France Hath he certain knowledg that every Minister made a form unto himself did never any use a form that he had learned from another did never any make to himself above one form I must needs doubt there is untruth in this till I see the thing proved under the hands of all Ministers in France Pag. 22. In Hungaria and Transilvania Ministers never go abroad without their long Cloak and Cassock just as here Here I am sure Ministers go abroad without long Cloak and Cassock and are by the Canons of the Church allowed so to do Si non caste tamen caute Page 26. speaking of the fratres Bohemi and the Moravians 'tis said that they have days for commemoration of the Blessed Virgin and of the Holy Apostles and other Saints and Martyrs as also one for the commemoration of all the Saints all which days they keep after the same manner that they are kept here in England
If words flow from the mouth of Gods messenger not seen before that the hearers are rendred more attent and more profound admirers of the grace of God For if prescribed things only be always recited what will there be to excite attention Curiosity rather will be excited whilest this and the other by beholding the same things in his Books attendeth whether they be accurately read what place is here for devotion Neither is it to be thought that ours are bound to the Books delivered to them to words and syllables it is free to them to use any thing drawn out of the treasures of mystical wisdom which make to excite zeal according to variety of occasions Whence it comes to pass that Godly hearers are scarce ever present at Sacred mysteries without new motion of heart Page 61. It is said that the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas take those things in which they differ from the Reformed Church of England to be sinful and that therefore they would have her conform to them By whom is this said in such indefinite terms as are here made use of I doubt it will be found that none have so said at least none that are called or accounted Presbyterians and if none can be found what opinion will the world have of Mr. D's veracity But if any have said that some reformed Churches abroad have accounted some things in which the English Church differs from them to be sinful it is a thing so manifest that I wonder Mr. D. can find a forehead to deny it He mentioneth in this place the Reformed Churches in the Electorate of Brandenburg and I do not observe him to have mentioned them any where else I suppose by the Churches he joyneth them with that he meaneth such as close with that Reformation that the Elector himself affecteth and would fain have introduced and it will not be amiss to let our Countrymen understand what that is The heads of it are recited in the Continuation of Thuanus at the year 1614. Page 396 397. Edit Francof 1628. 1. Images Crosses Statues are to be removed out of Churches 2. Altars remaining since Popery and built to perform the Sacrifice of the Mass are to be taken away and in place of them are to be put oblong wooden Tables covered with black cloth a linnen cloth when the Supper is to be administred being put upon it 3. Instead of Hosts Wafers are to be used which being cut into long pieces should be received and broken by the hands of those who come to the Lords Table 4. That instead of Chalices used in Mass Cups should be used in the administration of the Lords Supper 5. The Casiolae which may very well signifie the Surplice as well as other Vestments are to be left to the Popish Priests 6. No linnen is to be put under or offer'd to those who come to the Lords Table nor are they to kneel as if Christ were corporally present 7. The sign of the Cross is not to be added at the end of the benediction 8. The Ministers of the Gospel are not to turn the back to men 9. Prayers and Epistles are not to be sung before Sermon but read 10. Auricular Confession is to be left off 11. At the Name of Jesus knees are not to be bowed or head uncovered 12. Prayers in the Pulpit are not to be muttered but pronounced with a loud voice 13. The Supper of the Lord is not for fear of danger to be administred to sick persons especially when the plague is abroad 14. Stone-Fonts are to be removed and Basons substituted in their rooms 15. The Decalogue is not to be recited imperfect but intire 16. The Catechism in some things that are exroneous is to be amended 17. The Sacred Trinity a mystery to be adored and ineffable is not to be represented by any images either carved or painted 18. The words of the holy Supper are to be interpreted by Sacramental analogy and collation of other places of holy Scripture 19. To the Gospels and Epistles which are explicated on Lords days and yearly repeated Ministers ought not so to be bound that they may not instead of them read and preach upon any other notable Text of the Bible Dr. Heylin hath exemplified the heads of this designed Reformation on purpose to show as he tells us Hist of Presby 412. how Calvinian and Lutheran Churches differ and how near ours approacheth to the latter and I have exemplified them to shew that if Ceremonies be but gnats English Presbyterians are not the only persons that do strain at them declaring also my just abhorrence of the Historians impudence in ascribing the designment of this Reformation to the plots and practices of a subtil Lady P. 85. Mr. D. having before recited a Letter of Mr. Chabrets in which he makes a question whether the Liturgy received at the Savoy Congregation be the same that was used in Q. Eliz. King James or King Charles I.'s time or another compiled by Archbishop Laud that had been occasion of much trouble adds words of great reproach against those who accused the late Lord Archbishop of making a new Book of Common-prayer other than those that were used in the times of our last three Soveraigns this he makes a thing that never was But he is now to know that Archbishop Laud did make or cause to be made a Common-prayer-book for the Kirk of Scotland different in many things from any that had been used here in England in any of the three last Soveraigns Reigns which Common-prayer-book among other things occasioned great disturbances betwixt the two Kingdoms nay he made some alterations in the Liturgy for England that were not very pleasing to some palates among the sons of the Church what they were if Mr. D. pleaseth he may see in Mr. Prynnes Epistle Dedicatory to his Quench-coal It is not for such a poor creature as I am to blame or find fault with those alterations which I find imitated in our last edition of the Liturgy Only I wonder why in the Office for the Fifth of November Ministers are not directed to read the Statute for the observing of that day seeing it is by law appointed to be read Ibid. He complains that our Convocations are beyond seas represented to consist only of Archbishops and Bishops and that the inferior Clergy is not permitted to sit and vote in them Really if any gave such information he was but too like to Mr. D. speaking of that which he either did not or would not understand The Convocations of England do consist of an upper and lower House and though the Upper House consists but of Archbishops and Bishops yet the Lower consists of the inferior Clergy Deans Prebendaries Arch-deacons and Proctors of the Clergy P. 116. Mr. D. calls our Convocations a Council consisting of above sixscore reverend grave and learned Divines chosen out of many thousands whereof twenty-six are Archbishops and Bishops a greater number Deans and Prebends and
Archdeacons Which shews he understandeth not the frame and constitution of our Convocations though they be the Church-Representative that he pretends to write for The Convocation for the very Province of Canterbury besides which there is one for the Province of York consists of an Archbishop twenty-one Bishops for the Upper House the Lower House consist of Deans twenty-two Prebendaries twenty-four Arch deacons fifty-four Clerks representing the Clergy forty-four so that the very Lower House for this one Province consists of One hundred forty-four persons But how these are chosen out of many thousands they are men of rare faculties that can understand If we speak of the members of Convocation neither Bishops nor Deans nor Arch-deacons are chosen to it but come of course just as Peers do to the House of Lords As for the Prebends they are chosen only by the Chapters which I hope are not many thousands the Diocesan Clergy may be said to be chosen out of many thousands but they for the Province of Canterbury are but forty-four It may be Mr. D. meant that these Divines are chosen to their Dignities out of many thousands but that will be a grosser untruth than the other for Bishops are chosen by the Dean and Chapter of that Church to which they are sent but they have not many thousands to chuse out of there is but one nominated to be chosen and him I believe the Dean and Chapter must chuse and return his Election and the Election being returned and ratified by Royal assent the Metropolitan must either consecrate or confirm as occasion requireth That which the Puritans were wont to complain of was the inequality of the Representative they say for example If all who are chosen by the Diocesan Clergy for the whole Province of Canterbury should desire a Reformation yet they could not carry it because the Arch-deacons who are the Bishops creatures as being chosen solely by them are ten in number more than they and they also were wont to say That the Bishops would take on them to nominate the two Clerks for the Diocess and if it be so they said it was in effect all one as if the Convocation had consisted only of Bishops This notwithstanding Dr. Taylor in his Episcopacy asserted seems to envy the Presbyters so much as sitting in Councils 'T is evident saith he Episc assert p. 283. that the Laws of Provinces and of the Catholick Church were made by Conventions of Bishops without the intervening or concurrence of Presbyters or any else for sentence and decision the instances of this are just as many as there are Councils The parishes of both Provinces in England are above nine thousand two hundred the pastors of these parishes send about Fifty-two to represent them and in the very House where they sit there are above twice as many in whose election they were no way concerned that have equal votes with them and besides there is an Upper House of Bishops Mr. Durell would exceed Plutarch himself if he could find in any Reformed Church a parallel Let him try how such a Synod as this will hit with that which the Theses of Saumur say concerning Councils But I have almost forgotten my self Let Mr. D. go on to wipe off false aspersions cast on our Bishops P. 86. Men beyond the seas are told that every one of our Bishops is a Pope nay more than a Pope in his Diocess prescribing and imposing of himself what he pleaseth to his Clergy whereas every Bishops authority is limited by his subscription to the 39 articles c. by the Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical and by the Laws of the Land according to the prescript whereof he is to rule his diccess and no otherwise calling always to joyn with him in imposition of hands and other matters of weighty concernment some of the Prebends of his Cathedral or other grave Ministers of the Diocess Certainly this Preacher knows not what a Pope is if he think that what these calumniators report of the Bishops makes them worse than Popes But let them deserve to keep the Whetstone for their tale Mr. D. will have it from them again for nothing is more false than that by any Constitutions or Laws Bishops are bound to call unto them either Prebends or grave Ministers to joyn with them in imposition of hands and in all other weighty matters The Bishops lay on hands in confirmation of children who is to joyn with him in that Imposition They lay on hands when they ordain Deacons are they to call any to joyn with them in that imposition of hands Ay but they cannot ordain a Presbyter regularly unless some Presbyters joyn with them in laying on of hands Really they cannot but now the question is What the hands of the Presbyters signifie And truly if we ask those that stickle for Hierarchy they will say they signifie just nothing or next to nothing this conjunction of Presbyters is not ad essentiam operis but ad dignitatem sacerdotii The Presbyters hands confer nothing of the power of Order upon the party ordained but only testifie their consent unto the business and approbation of the man So Dr. Heylin History of Episcopacy p. 162. and to the same purpose Dr. Taylor in Episcopacy asserted Is not the Presbytery fairly advanced it may do what the Laity did or at least may do testifie consent and approbation of the man Again the suspension of a Minister is a weighty thing who is appointed to joyn with the Bishop in this Excommunication also is a weighty thing Who must joyn with the Bishop in that Finally Mr. D. would oblige me greatly if he would fully satisfie me what Canons and Constitutions the Bishops are to govern their Clergy by I hope no Canons are in force but those of 1603. which I am sure are more than be well observed but there were Legatine Canons in number Seventy-seven made by Otho and Othobone and Provincial Canons made under Stephen Langthon and Henry Chichly Archbishops of Canterbury digested into a body by William Lindwood as the former were by John Mon Canon of Lincoln and some say that so much of all these Canons as is not contrary to the Laws and Customs of the Land is still in force if so as so it may be for ought I know then I am sure a great many of the Clergy know not how they are to be governed but if any should know all Canons and Constitutions and understand that the Bishop prescribes things contrary to all Law and Canons what then Why then there lyes an Appeal or a Prohibition may be obtained to the cost of neither of which a poor Countrey-Vicar can easily raise his purse P. 87. Mr. D. is at his old trade of over-reaching for he describeth Monsieur Goyon to be a man as well versed in antiquity as is possible Yet neither he nor I can tell the bounds of possibility in the skill of antiquity and perhaps both of us can tell of some
own or else to dissolve them I take no notice of the High commendations given of our Liturgy by the noble Princess of Turenne and the Dutchess of la Force her own Mother he that will may see them Page 78 and 186. I only wish that if the English Liturgy be of so great force to edifie people in the Protestant Religion it had been put into the hand of the Noble Marquess of Turenne to prevent his revolt to Popery for it is said that he is grown a Roman Catholick In his Sermon P. 20. He is not ashamed to say that whosoever hath devotion and leisure enough to come to the Church and be present at Divine Service every day morning and evening may hear the whole Bible read every Year the old Testament once and the new no less than thrice and the Book of Psalms no less than twelve times This can only be practised by those who live near to Cathedrals let us imagine that any so living had devotion and leisure enough to come to his mother Church from the first of January to the last of December this man would not hear the whole Bible neither the Old Testament once nor the New Testament thrice The Liturgy saith so yet Mr. D. in a pang of zeal dare say otherwise Whether the Church do well to leave out 188 Chapters of the Old Testament and to appoint 121 of the Apocrypha is not the question we are on a matter of fact and I say Mr. D. hath falsified in that and will have no thanks for his falsification the Church not desiring him to lie for her sake Another tale in P. 23. of his Sermon It is required of the People that they repeat aloud the confession of Sins that they may be more sensibly affected therewith This is just like giving a reason why the Swan sings just before her death whenas we know that she doth not so sing The people are not required to repeat aloud the confession of sins rather they are exhorted to repeat it with a submiss or lowly voice But now we are fallen on this word Loud I would fain know what the meaning of it is In the first Book of Edward the sixth the Priest being in the Quire was appointed to begin the Divine Service with the Lords-Prayer using a loud voice in the late Liturgies he is appointed after the Absolution to begin it with a loud voice in this last with an audible voice the people kneeling and repeating it with him in the Precatiuncles after the Creed the Minister Clarks and People are ordered to say the Lords-Prayer with a loud voice in former and later Books But in K. Edward's first Book the people were not to speak till deliver us from evil at evening prayer t 's appointed that the Minister shall kneel and say the Lords-Prayer the people kneeling and repeating it with him no mention being made of the kind of voice to be used yet after the Creed at evening prayer all are to say the Prayer with a loud voice I never observed any Minister or people to speak louder in repeating the Lords Prayer at one time than at another nor know I what is meant by a loud voice or whether there be any difference betwixt it and an audible voice nor if there be none what 's meant by an audible voice for to whom must the peoples voice be audible to those that sit next to them or to the Minister or to the whole congregation Mr. D. doth converse with great personages and he knows the meaning of these terms P. 265. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth before the making of the Act of Uniformity those that did not love white made a great noise within and without this land and bestirred themselves on all sides that they might be dispensed with for wearing the surplice Among other means used by them to come to their ends they applied themselves to some in the reformed Churches beyond the Seas and perswaded them that if the surplice was imposed huge numbers of Ministers nay many of the Bishops themselves would leave their Ministry Whereupon the Prince Elector Palatine that then was commanded Zanchius to write to the Queen to disswade her Majesty from imposing the use of such Vestments which he did accordingly but the business not succeeding according to their desires and the Nonconformists giving out still that there would be a great dissipation in this Church by the desertion of so many Bishops and Ministers what did Zanchius thereupon c. Such an Harangue of impertinence and falshood have I seldom or never met with and yet we are in the Margin directed to Zanchy's Epistle to Juel as if thence all the materials of it had been fetched In my books Zanchy's Letter to Juel bears date just the very day next to that written to Q. Eliz. so that in twenty four hours time the Nonconformists of England must know that a Letter came from heidelberg to London was received by the Queen and proved not effectual with her and thereupon give out stories of Bishops that would leave their Sees and hope for another Address to be made on their behalf if so they must needs have the Intelligences that move the Primum mobile for their Secretaries and Messengers Zanchy's Letter to Juel I am sure doth not in the least intimate that the English Nonconformists made any applications to some in the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas all that can thence be collected is but this that the June before he did write his Letter one called Montius returned out of England and told him besides others that a great difference was stirred up in the English Church about Vestments and therefore desired him that he would by a Letter both admonish the Queen of her Office and also write to those Bishops that were known to him and especially to Juel Upon his and others entreaties and his Princes command Zanchy did write to the Queen a Letter as he was confident not evil which is to be seen and not knowing what the Queen would do he writes also to Juel That he would by his Authority Learning and Prudence endeavour with the Bishops not to leave their Sees rather than wear linnen yet so that they must know that the Queen is inexorable and also when they wear linne make a protestation This Letter 't is like never came to Juel's hands he dying about twelve days after it was written Nor need it trouble us that Juel never saw it seeing there was no Bishop then in any danger to lose his Place for not wearing linnen nor can I think there is any one Minister now so much out of love with white as rather to leave his Ministry than put on a Surplice provided he may but make lawful protestation how and on what accounts he useth it Indeed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of some Nonconformists in the late times was this that they loved white too well for their woollen clothes were white or
Laws to her self any more than about those things that are expresly either commanded or forbidden else there would be mad work in the World Where doth Mr. D. find family Prayer or infant Baptisme or the observation of the Lords days expresly either forbidden or commanded in Gods word He will say that the Church may make Laws about these I grant she may but no other than what she can make about things either commanded or forbidden expresly So that he wrongeth not only our own Church but all Reformed Churches in affixing such a principle to them Dr. Heylin ascribes to Calvin a quite contrary principle Hist of Presb. 238. That in carrying on the work of a Reformation there is not any thing to be exacted which is not warranted and required by the word of God that in such cases there is no Rule left for worldly wisdom for moderation and compliance but all things to be ordered as they are directed by his will revealed Page 241. He makes this Calvins rule and Martyrs judgment to be grounded on it That nothing should be acted in a Reformation which is not warranted expresly in the word of God Are East and West more opposite than Dr. H. and Mr. D. yet neither truly represents the opinion of the Reformed I beseech those who are at leisure and have well studied the point to state plainly and clearly unto us the due matter of Ecclesiastical Laws and to show us the meaning of the term indifferent so frequently made use of in this Controversy for it seemeth somewhat an uncouth assertion that Church governors may command all things that are usually called indifferent for then many of their Laws would be very contemptible The old definition of things Adiaphorous was that they were things neither commanded nor forbidden this definition seemed to me innocent enough but of late there are Divines sprung up that say the highest acts of love to God are not commanded neither I trow are they forbidden must we call them then things indifferent And hath the Church power to determine who shall put forth those Acts and how often they shall be put forth It may be Mr. D. thinks the highest acts of love are commanded and so do I but he had best not to be too forward in publishing that notion P. 99. He falls into an high commendation of the Bohemian Churches as he doth also in many other Pages of his Book this is little to the advantage of our Church for if that Church be to be imitated we must have lay Presbyters and lay Presbyteresses also Pastors of Parishes must confirm people must come under examination every time they receive the Sacrament we must have no dancings and we may have particular Synods without a Bishop if we communicate the acts thereof presently to the absent Bishops and we must have none brought into Communion but those who are willing and yet we here can by censures if we please make Papists communicate with us or else have them excommunicated and clapt into Prison P. 107. He gives the Presbyterians lame Cause a cruth For he saith God only hath power to bind the Conscience immediately ask him when mens Consciences are bound immediately he tells you when humane Laws and Constitutions are thrust upon men as if they were Divine Here will the Presbyterian say Episcopacy which is but an humane institution is thrust on us as Divine and not only as good and profitable therefore unless we will give men jurisdiction over our consciences we cannot conform Mr. D. cannot bring himself off here but by maintaining that Episcopacy is a Divine institution and it would be too great impudence to say that in so saying he should not contradict every reformed Church almost besides our own P. 118. He mentions the sending of a Printed Copy of the Acts of the Synod of Dort to King James Prince Charles Archbishop of Canterbury by Festus Hommius this is to rub a sore place and to tell the World that we who now suffer our Divines and Students to bespatter that Synod did once well approve of its decisions P. 126. He mentions a Letter of Monsieur le Moine out of which he saith he will set down as much as fits his present design what doth he set down Why Page 136. That the English have a natural fierceness and withal a natural inclination to superstition Is this for Mr. Durells design to blaft the people of that nation where he hath been so highly preferred Are we indeed fierce and superstitious Naturally fierce and naturally Superstitious What kind of superstition is it to which we are so naturally inclined that so we may know how to enquire after the cure of so dangerous a disease It is no matter if we may believe Mr. Moine to enquire further let but Episcopal Authority be established that will keep us from going beyond our bounds Very good but by whom shall this Episcopal Authority be managed By English men I hope but how then can we be assured that their natural fierceness and inclination to superstition will not remain in them We never could observe that a mans being constituted a Bishop did make him less fierce or superstitious any more than less an English man Perhaps this Learned Predicant would have all our Divines come and study in France that they may lose their disease of superstition as sometimes they do their Consumptions in so refined an Air but that Plot will not take He hath another argument for Episcopacy it cannot enter into a rational mans imagination that a great Kingdom should come by custom to be content to see its Bishops no more having honoured and reverenced them for the space of 1400 Years If this be so then may the Bishops be secure we are so accustomed to love them that we cannot be content to be without them and have been a great Kingdom and honoured and reverenced them 1400 Years Where may we that live in England find these things recorded concerning our selves for the Histories we read usually do not make us a great Kingdom but many petty Kingdoms 1400 Years ago If ever any made their ungratefulness notorious certainly they are the English opposers of Episcopacy who will not consider that they owe their Reformation to the care and zeal of their Bishops who did so wonderfully well repurge the Church of England an hundred years ago and so happily set up the holy truth again in its genuine lustre But this is not all they owe unto them they owe them also their Christianity For whether it was brought over into England by Joseph of Arimathea or by Simon Cannaeus or by St. Paul or by St. Peter or by Luke disciple of Philip or by Phaganus and Perusianus in the time of King Lucius it is constant that it was done by the Ministry of Bishops and that they are endebted to their charity zeal and abilities for the holy Reformation they now enjoy Do we indeed owe our late Reformation from Popery
if when you come into the room he rise up to you then take him to be a servant of Christ Austin not rising up to them when they came into the place of conference they contradict him in every thing he propounded In three things at last saith Austin if you will comply I will bear with all other your diversities 1. You must celèbrate Easter as we do 2. You must administer Baptism according to the manner of the holy Roman Church 3. You must preach with us the Gospel to the English Nation Of the many other things in which the Britans differed from the Romish I conceive this was one that they left both Ordination and Excommunication to a Presbyter as well as to a Bishop And this Austin would have tolerated The reasons of this my opinion are many and probable grounded on the Histories of those times one I shall mention viz. that the Scots were mingled with the British when they had these meetings now that the Scots did originally commit acts of order and jurisdiction to Presbyters is a thing well known if any doubt concerning it he may receive satisfaction from the large Preface of Mr. Selden to the Histories published by Mr. Bee not twenty years ago I am the more confident in this my opinion because I find that when our British Churches had throughly imbibed the Romish modes and customs then at a Synod held at Celichyth A. D. 816. it was decreed That none of the Scottish Nation should be permitted to use the sacred Ministry among us This was all I had intended about our old British Churches when loe there came to my hands the History of Mr. Petry quoted by the Latin Apologist that Historian goeth a little more confidently to work than I have done for thus saith he Century 11. Pag. 282 283. As for England since the Saxons or Englishes receiving the faith by Augustine they had always Bishops for they had their Pattern from Rome as it was then but if we look up to the Ancient Britans in that Land we shall find it otherways I have said in Century 7. Chap. 4. that seven Bishops and one Archbishop came from the Britans unto Augustin and there I followed the words of Bishop Juel in the defence of the Apology Page 14. An. 1520. where he quoteth Bede His lib. 2. cap. 2. and in the same Page he quoteth Galfred lib. 8. cap. 8. repeating the same words What I wrote then upon trust I have afterwards examined and I find that Bede speaks not so for in the Edition in Fol. Camb. An. 1643. he saith Austin called the Bishops or Doctors of the nearest Province of the Britans and in the same Page he speaking of the same persons saith a blind English Boy was brought unto the Priests of the Britans and again they said they would not depart from the Ancient Customs without the consent and licence suorum In the Margin it is said in the Saxon Language it is said without the permission and licence of their Nation Then speaking of their second conference he saith then came seven Bishops as they said and more very Learned men especially of that Famous Monastry of which the Governour at that time was Dinooth In a word Beda hath not one word of an Archbishop nor in all his History nameth he one Bishops-See nor any Bishops name and whom he calleth Bishops of Britan he calleth them Doctors or Teachers and Priests yea he calleth them oftner Priests nor calleth he them simply Bishops as he calleth them simply Priests but Bishops as they say or Bishops or Teachers Yet Beda could distinguish between a Bishop and a Priest What can be concluded from hence but that no Bishop or Prelate was among the Britans other than Priests As for Galfrid it is no marvail that he wrote according to the stile of his own time that is the year 1150. The said Author also quotes Gildas a Britan Presbyter distinguishing Church-men into Bishops or Priests and the Clerks but naming no other degree of Church-men calling the first sort oftest Sacerdotes simply but never Episcopos unless he adds sive Sacerdotes What think I of all this truly whatever I think I will not say very much for I have not by me either Juels Apology or the Cambridg Edition of Bede or Galfrid or Gildas Only thus much I may say that if Gildas who lived before Austin was sent to us and Bede who was born as Thomas Stubbes computes but Anno 677. can give us no tidings of any Church Officers above Presbyters among the Britans it will not signifie much that Jeffry Monmouth who lived but in King Stephens time makes mention of Bishops To put an end to this matter 1. He who first converted this Island to Christianity was no Bishop 2. Those two whom Eleutherius sent upon the Petition of Lucius to instruct us were no Bishops 3. Austin himself and his associates when they first attempted the conversion of the Mercian Saxons were no Bishops but only Monks 4. Wickliffe and his followers were no Bishops but being Presbyters were wont to ordain Presbyters 5. No one Bishop ever suffered death in England for striving against Popery till Queen Maries Reign 6. Of those Bishops who suffered in Queen Maries Reign the Nonconformists may lay claim to as many at least as the Conformists can do and perhaps there was not one Martyr in all her Reign that afferted the Jus divinum of Episcopacy Now if all these things be true what means the clamor of ingratitude against Presbyterians for not owning those to whom they owe the Nations Reformation from Popery yea and its Christianity also But let us view more of Mr. Moines Letter Pag. 139. If the French had kept Bishops and as many Ceremonies as would serve to fix the attention of the people without superstition they should have seen for certain far greater progress of Reformation and the resistance of a great many persons overcome who are frighted from their communion by the irregularity of their government and the bareness of their service If this were certain I could wish that they had Bishops and Ceremonies among them to morrow but we in England have not been able to observe that the number of Papists is lessened since the restitution of Bishops and Ceremonies nay since that some among us have fallen off to Popery who before professed the Reformed Religion It is not any form of Government or external mode of worship that must put the Papists to shame but the exemplary lives of Ministers and people who separate from them When men once feel in their hearts the power of Godliness they are in no great danger to turn Roman Catholicks He hath another conceit P. 139 140. that the not receiving of Episcopal Government may hinder the much desired union with the brethren that do follow the confession of Auspurg In this I do vehemently dissent from him for the yielding to Episcopal government would rather alienate them
expresly and largely especially in his Preface to his comment on Hosea and in his Catholicus Orthodoxus against Baily Where also he may be seen decrying the observation of Lent if it pretend to be Apostolical He is indeed a most professed Champion of the Presbyterian cause in almost every thing under debate As for Isaac Casaubon he was indeed a very Learned Critick and for ought I know a person truly pious Mr. D. accounts him his own and therefore in the very title Page of his Vindiciae brings in his testimony to the Church of England out of an Epistle written to Claudius Salmasius Quod sime conjectura non fallit totius Reformatoinis pars integerrima est in Anglia ubi cum studio veritatis viget studium antiquitatis These words are indeed found in an Epistle written raptim hastily by Casaubon to Salmasius much about that time when some of our Bishops had declared their approbation of some of Casaubons Theological Essaies which sundry Divines both from Holland and France had disliked In this good mood Casaubon commends the English for the study of Antiquity but at other times he grievously complains to Thuanus and Heinsius that we encourage no study but Theology In the 604 Epis he asks what good could come of instructing his two sons in learning Medicina hic sane non viget Jurisprudentia illa vetus vera plane jacet vix de nomine paucis nota Epistle 799. he intimates his design to send his son Merick to Heinsius because he desired to have him well exercised in Greek Latin Hebrew and could not hope that should be done in England Is not the study of Antiquity like to be carried on well where a young man cannot he trained up to any eminent skill in Hebrew Greek or Latin I suppose we had not in this last Epistle been so extremely undervalued had not the learned man been exasperated by Mr. Mountague whose endeavours against Baronius he judged very injurious to his own credit and reputation as may be seen Epistle 717 718. This may suffice to make us not to be proud of Casaubons commendation if I thought it not sufficient I could go near to prove that Casaubon judged men more or less studious of antiquity according as they were more or less zealous against the Arminians But I let pass his synodical determinations and come to his Sermon where I find him Pag. 16. giving leave to Rome to rank our Reformers among the Contentious if it can be found that either they have laid aside or taken up any one thing whereof it may be said that the Holy Apostles or Apostolick Churches had or had not such a Custom he addes indeed Rome was never able to do it nor never shall But she knows well enough that she can for she knows that we have taken up Surplices which were not used by the Holy Apostles or any Apostolick Churches and we give Baronies to our Bishops which neither the Apostles nor any Apostolick Churches did and we place our Baptisteries in our Temples which was done neither by Apostles nor Apostolical Churches On the other side we have left off Unction and Love-feasts and the Holy Kiss all which were used by the Apostles and Apostolical Churches So that Rome by Mr. D's carelesly worded proposition hath leave to reckon our Reformers among contentious ones P. 17. He useth a plain Turkish Argument to confirm and uphold the cause of the Church for he saith that the miraculous manner whereby it hath pleased God to raise her up ought to be to all an evident proof that she is her beloveds and her beloved is hers and an argument that her Reformation is certainly the work of God and his Counsel which shall stand Just thus the Papists were wont to prate when Popery was restored by Q. Mary and just thus also did the Fanaticks argue when they were permitted by God to conquer three flourishing Kingdomes and to put all the Nations round about into a pannick fear Let us not be high minded but rejoice in trembling God hath pleaded with us by his strange judgments since Episcopacy was re-established among us we have had a sharp war a dreadful fire a sweeping Pestilence I do not say because Episcopacy is restored but because sin doth abound and prophaness runs like a river and mighty flowing stream if we do not soundly humble our selves God may soon take from us his worship our Ministers and all that Reformation in the which we glory and yet his Counsel will stand nevertheless Pag. 22. He perfectly affronteth the express words of our Church in the Liturgy for there it is said that the commination of sinners is used until the Primitive discipline of putting persons convicted of notorious sins to pennance at the beginning of Lent and only until that discipline can be restored which is much to be wished But Mr. D. saith there can be nothing more powerful to touch sinners to the quick and to draw them from their evil courses than the Commination to which the whole Congregation is bound to say Amen after every particular denunciation of Gods curse upon all sorts of sinners who persist in their sins And indeed it is meet he should say so for he had before given Rome leave to call us Contentious if we had left off any custom used in the Apostolick Churches and we here do confess that we have left off one that was very godly indeed we say it is to be wished it were restored but who hinders the restoring of it but our selves Have other Churches power to enjoyn Penance and have we none Or will other people submit to that discipline and not ours Are not fornicators put to open pennance and why may not other sinners be so punished too But not to multiply interrogatories the Church holds pennance would be more powerful than the form of commination she useth Mr. D. saith nothing can be more powerful than the commination he will sure impose some pennance on himself for this boldness and watch his Pen better for the time to come Perhaps he will say his meaning was honest and wholesome viz. that the form of Commination is very powerful to touch sinners to the quick if so he may do well to consider 1. Whether it be conducible to tye Ministers never to use it but on Ashwednesdays unless they have particular order from their Ordinaries for why should so powerful a preservative against sin be used but once a year especially seeing the use of it but once a year is found insufficient to reclaim profaneness cum primis saluturis est caeremonia sed non video cur debeat exhiberi solum uno die non saepius said the Great Bucer when he saw it restrained by the first Book of K. Edward to one day thereupon it was altered in following Liturgies to divers times in the year Grindals Articles enjoyned it to be used on some Sunday near the three great feasts of the Church
Easter Pentecost Christmas Ashwednesday not excluded but now no day is allowed but Ashwednesday unless there come an order from the Ordinary which I have not heard that any Ordinary hath sent since the return of his Majesty 2. What meaneth that mincing of the commination Deut. 27.16 the Text saith Cursed is he that setteth light by Father and Mother we say Cursed is he that curseth Father and Mother what if any should from this take occasion to think that there is no great danger in setting light by Father and Mother provided they do not rise so high in their impiety as to curse them an iniquity that I hope few are guilty of and what meaneth that addition to the curse of the man that maketh any carved or molten image viz. to worship it In the Text there is no such addition and the Church did afterwards in the last commination curse the worshippers of images though now it be changed into Idolaters The very making of some images viz. of God the Trinity c. doth entitle to a curse whether they be worshipped or no and what hurt were it if people were made to know so much 3. Why have we no curse against prophane swearing so common among us nor any against Rebellion The Scripture affordeth plenty of such curses But as the Comminations is now ordered I can say Amen to it taking Amen not only as it signifieth so it is but as it usually signifieth so be it so run the words in the Bible Deut. 27. so also Jer. 17.5 And he is unworthy to be continued a Church member who is like to curse himself by any such imprecation nor shall any man that so prayeth sin against another that is guilty of those sins for when we say Cursed is such a sinner our meaning is if he continue and whilest he continueth such and with that restriction we may say cursed be as I doubt not but the Israelites did as often as they used this ceremony appointed by God so thought the Septuagint else they would not have Translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Lords-prayer few scruple to say yet he that useth that form doth virtually curse himself if he have any malice reigning in his heart P. 23. He saith we are appointed to be confirmed to receive the blessing from our Pastor as if none were our Pastor but a Bishop and he gives it with the Imposition of hands and with prayers without Chrisme or any such superstitious or superfluous Ceremony What words are these they do indeed directly only reflect on the ancient Church and our first Reformers and the compilers of the first Liturgy of Edward the sixth by which chrism was appointed at Baptism though not that I find in Confirmation by the Ancients I am sure it was used in Confirmation Mr. D. dare adventure to call it superstitious and superfluous But his words will by just consequence reach the cross in Baptism used also in confirmation by the first Reformers for why should chrisme be accounted a superstitious and superfluous Ceremony rather than the cross the one is as Ancient as the other and as innocent as the other both were equally abused in Popery of the two the Cross may seem more superfluous for in Baptism we have an outward rite signifying the same thing that the Cross is pretended to signifie but to signifie our unction by the Holy Ghost which was in the first Liturgy prayed for and ought still to be prayed for we have no outward rite at all Nor do I fee why unction may not as well be used to certifie confirmed persons of the unction from the Holy one as imposition of hands to certifie them of Gods gracious favour and goodness towards them which is made the end in the Office of Confirmation P. 26. If the several repetitions of the Lords-prayer which are to be found in our Liturgy were made immediately one after another or within a short time c. I say upon such an account we might justly be censured for using vain repetitions This wounds the Liturgy sorely if it do not strike it to the very heart for not to say that it doth appoint several Lords-prayers to be said within a short space which may truly be said it manifestly appoints repetitions of gloria Patri within a short space and this will bring us within the guilt of vain repetitions unless a reason can be given why gloria Patri may be repeated within a short space and Pater noster may not which reason Mr. D. will give ad Graecas Calendas Thus have I given you an account of Mr. D's English Book under four heads and now you will expect to have my judgment as touching his Latin Book called vindiciae sacrae Ecclesiae Anglicanae I say first that I know not what he means by his Ecclesia Anglicana doth he mean the company of true believers or good Christians really or reputatively so in England if he do quis Lacedaemoniorum vituperat why doth he make a vindication of that Church which none went about to accuse doth he mean by it the Bishops of the several Diocesses in this Kingdom of England 't is like he cannot mean them for they call themselves the Sons of the Church and we look on the Church as that to which the last complaint must be made for so our Saviour directs if thy Brother offend first tell him then take with thee two or three then tell the Church now if any one should injure a Bishop as for my part I judge Mr. D. hath grievously injured every one of them by dedicating such a Volume of raileries to them the Bishop must first tell him by himself and then take with him two or three and if he regard not them then he must tell the Church that is himself if a Bishop be the Church 'T is like by the Church he means the Church representative or Convocation now there is a Canon that denounceth an heavy penalty against those who deny the Convocation to be the Church of England by representation and I am fully resolved not to come within the reach of that Canon I love not excommengement But if Mr. D. will take up the patronage of this Church Representative his best way had been first to prove that it is the Church Representative or else the Presbyterians will say that his whole discourse is de non-ente Mr. Henry Jeanes had before he knew how things went in the world set forth a treatise which it was my hap to read over asserting the obligation that lay upon English Divines to comply with the Church but in his retractations and repentings thus he recalls himself I wonder upon what account I or any man else could think the Convocation to be the Church of England if in any sense it can be called the Church of England it was because it represented the Ministry of England and that it did not because the far major part of it were Cathedral-men Bishops Deans
and discipline but only the Bishops and five Deans why neither the Dean of Christ-Church nor the Dean of VVorcester nor the Dean of Windsor were admitted nor yet Dr. Field nor Dr. King I find no reason assigned nor will I guess at so great a distance what might be the reason but why none of the Plaintiffs as they are called were admitted His Majesty gave this reason That the Bishops might not be confronted by the contrary opponents and that if any thing should be found meet to be redressed it might be done without any visible alteration I suppose King James thought the things he mentioned in that days Conference were too too liable to exception and was resolved to take course with his Bishops and their adherents to have some little amendment that if they should happen to be mentioned in the next days designed Conference they might answer they had already considered them and would have no more done or said about them The particulars of that Cabal-Conference are said to be touching the Common-prayer-book Excommunication providing of fit and able Ministers for Ireland How the providing of fit and able Ministers for Ireland could be proper for this days Conference I understand not Dr. Barlow saith p. 9. it was referred to a consultation if so and that consultation produced any good effect all good Christians are to rejoyce for doubtless that Nation then wanted Ministers But the Millenary Petition pretended to be the occasion of this Conference toucheth not upon Ireland if any thing was meet to be done about that Church in this Conference reason rather required that the Council for Ireland and the Irish Bishops should have been summoned to debate and conclude concerning that affair Perhaps the Doctor mistook Ireland for England or was willing to have us believe that there was no want of a Learned Ministry here in England but we shall hear more of this in the second days Conference As to the Common-prayer Book the King desired satisfaction about Confirmation Absolution Private Baptism Confirmation we shall find mentioned in the second days conference and thither I refer my considerations concerning it Absolution His Majesty said he had heard likened to the Popes Pardons If any one had informed His Majesty that Absolution as used or at least as prescribed in the Church of England had any thing in it resembling the abominable pardons of the Pope I know not how he can be excused from bearing false witness against the Liturgy The Millenarian Petitioners only pray that the term Absolution might be corrected which His Majesty was willing to gratifie them in appointing Absolution to be explained by remission of sins There is that I know no real difference betwixt those that are called Presbyterians and Episcopal Divines about Absolution Both allow a general Absolution and a particular Absolution Dr. Heylin chargeth Bp. Vsher with utterly subverting as well the Doctrine of the English Church as her purpose in absolution but from that charge the Primate is acquitted by his Chaplain Dr. Bernard Baptism King James thought was not to be administred by private persons in any case whatsoever and therefore propounded it to the Bishops that the words in the Book purporting a permission and suffering of women and private persons to baptize might be altered And here it is pretty or rather sad to observe how the Prelates contradicted one another Whitgift said The administration of Baptism by women or private persons was not allowed in the practice of our Church but enquired of by Bishops in their Visitation and censured and that the words in the Book did not infer any such meaning as that they were permitted to Baptise But the words of the Book being pressed by His Majesty Bp. Babington confessed that the words were doubtful and might be pressed to such a meaning but yet it seemed by the contrary practice of the Church censuring women in this case that the Compilers of the Book did not so intend them and yet propounded them ambiguously because otherwise perhaps the Book would not then have passed in Parliament But on the contrary Bp. Bancroft for his part declared That the Compilers of the Book of Common Prayer intended not by ambiguous terms to deceive any but did indeed by those words intend a permission of private persons to Baptize in case of necessity as appeared by their letters some parts whereof he read declaring that the same was agreeable to the practice of the ancient Church urging to that purpose Acts 2. where Three thousand were baptized in one day a thing which could not possibly at least probably be done by the Apostles alone and besides the Apostles there were then no Bishops nor Priests He also alledged Tertullian and Ambrose plain in that point The Bishop of Winchester also spake learnedly and earnestly to the same purpose affirming that the denying of private persons to baptize in case of necessity were to cross all antiquity and that it was a rule agreed upon among Divines That the Minister is not of the essence of the sacrament But King James persisting in his opinion to have the alteration made saith the Relator pag. 19. it was not so much stuck at by the Bishops it seems that to please His Majesty they did not much stick to have all antiquity crossed and a Rule among Divines over-ruled Had the Presbyterians in a point of so great moment shewed themselves so facile what a noise would have been made But seeing the alteration is made and Baptism restrained to Ministers we may now without offence I hope enquire what is to be said in this controversie and whether other Churches do well to allow that which we see not meet to allow And first I would know whether Christ the confessed institutor of Baptism hath any where commanded lay-persons in the absence of those to whom the word of reconciliation is committed to administer Baptism if he have not then their not administring it can be no sin because no transgression of a Law And how can we think that the party who dies unbaptized shall fare the worse for not having received that which no one was bound to give him If it be said he hath laid commandment on lay-persons where a Minister cannot be had to Baptize I desire to see where that command is recorded 2. I demand whether a lay-person male or female do sin in Baptizing If so no power on earth can authorize him or her to Baptize If it be said there is no sin in the case then again I demand where is the permission of Christ granted to him or her for certainly that must needs be sin which is not allowed by Christ the author of the Sacrament 3. How can we in faith expect that any lay-person should convey rem Sacramenti that is be the Minister of Sacramental grace Is it any where revealed in Scripture that he doth any more than the outward act which of it self availeth nothing if it be not why might we
ought rather to conform our selves in Orders and Ceremonies to the fashion of the Turks than of the Papists which position he doubted they approved because contrary to the Orders of the Universities they appeared before His Majesty in Turky Gowns not in their Scholastical habits sorting to their degrees Musa mihi causas memora quo numine laeso Tantaene animis coelestibus irae So much wrath at the first dash when men are summoned by the King and bid by him open their grievances must they as soon almost as they have opened their mouths be thus schooled and terrified are the Articles of our Religion so sacred that to propound a doubt about them is no less a crime than schism May not a man think that the Bishop feared he should not be able to answer the Doctor who took so much care that he might not be put to answer him at all Is this to shew forth meekness of wisdom Let us a little reflect on the particulars of this great Diocesans passion 1. He would have the ancient Canon remembred Schismatici contra Episcopos non sunt audiendi This Canon might have been kept in store till Dr. Reynolds had been condemned for a Schismatick or till the Bishops had said something which he contradicted but seeing it is now brought into the field we may be allowed to view it and see what metal it is made of May not a King so much as hear what Schismaticks can say for themselves Must it be taken for granted that Bishops are not culpable causes of the Schism that is made in a Church Such a Canon as this would have done excellent service at the Council of Trent 2. So would the other Canon That no man should be admitted to speak against that whereunto he had formerly subscribed have done the Popish Bishops excellent service in Queen Maries Reign by it I suppose Bishop Cranmer and Bishop Ridleys mouths might have been quite stopped for I doubt they had subscribed to something they were to speak against 3. The Statute 10 Elizabethae did not make it penal for any man having leave from the King to propound his objections against the Liturgy or discipline of the Church of England 4. Dr. Reynolds his Turky-Gown was not a Turkish habit nor was his University habit conformable to the habit of the Papists nor doth any order of the University require that a Doctor should have on his Doctors habit every time he appears before the King So that all this passionate harangue of words might have been spared It may be we may meet with more reason in the answers to what the Doctor moved 1. He moved the 6th Article After we have received the Holy Ghost we may depart from grace might be worded so as that it might not so much as seem to favour the Doctrine of the Saints Apostasie and that therefore the words neither totally nor finally might be added What replied the Bishop of London to this why that too many in these days neglecting holiness of life presumed too much of persisting in grace laying all their religion on Predestination If I shall be saved I shall be saved which he said was contrary to the true doctrine of Predestination wherein we should argue rather ascendendo than descendendo thus I live in obedience to God and therefore I trust God hath elected and predestinated me to salvation not thus which is the usual course God hath chosen me to life therefore though I sin never so grievously yet I shall not be damned for whom he loves he loves to the end And then shewed his Majesty the doctrine of England ouching Predestination VVe must receive Gods promises c. But under favour these words do not contain the doctrine of Predestination but are only a caution against the abuse of the doctrine of Predestination laid down in the foregoing words As for those who did usually argue descendendo I suppose they were only men of wretched and profligate lives and we must not bauk a truth lest they should stumble at it or if we must then must we also forbear to say God is merciful and Christ died for sinners lest men should thence conclude Therefore I shall be saved though I live in many sins for so it is argued usually Wherefore the Bishop hath shewed no reason why the Doctor 's addition might not be made for the comfort of the trembling penitent and more full and apert confutation of those who assert a total apostasie from grace received Yet I confess Dr. Reynolds needed not to have made this motion because the seventeenth Article clearly enough asserteth perseverance The second thing moved by the Dr. related to the 23d Article in which it is said That it is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of preaching or administring the Sacraments in the Congregation before he be lawfully called What could Dr. R. take exception at in this Article why saith the Relator at those words In the Congregation as implying a lawfulness for any man whosoever out of the Congregation to preach and administer the Sacraments though he had no lawful call thereunto He that can think the Doctor argued at this rate must think he was not the Dr. Reynolds whose praise is in all the Reformed Churches I should rather conceive the Dr. took exception at the words in the Congregation as not sufficient to express what was needful to be expressed in all Articles of Religion that men may not in private preach and administer the Sacraments though they have no lawful call thereunto This sure was the Doctors arguing but was not to be so propounded lest it should have been thought necessary to say more for the perfection of the Churches Articles than could well be said But supposing Dr. R. to have disputed as the Relator hath reported what was answered to him Why that it was a vain objection because by the doctrine and practice of the Church of England none but a licensed Minister might Preach nor either publickly or privately administer the Eucharist or the Lords-Supper pag. 30 31. We are not told by whom this was answered if we had we might have been apt to think they were not the profoundest men in the world for the rejoynder is easie that the Church of England owned another Sacrament besides the Eucharist Here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the King must be brought in to answer for those who were not of one mind to answer for themselves and what is he said to have answered why that he had taken order for private baptism with the Bishops already I ask had the Doctor a spirit of divination to know what had been ordered in the first days conference If he had not this answer of the Kings proved not the Doctor 's objection to be frivolous but rather handsomely implied it to have some weight in it The Doctor being already acquitted of vanity let us now see what the framers of the Article might mean by