a Surplice no not in their own Churches so little do they find it to contribute to edification that they forbear it where they would not be blamed if they should use it So the Presbyterians are out of his debt A second Ceremony controverted is kneeling at the Sacrament about which I may say Iliacos extra muros peccatur intra I cannot by all that I have read see any unlawfulness in it and I hope the Presbyterians if they should be asked by any whether they had better forbear the Sacrament than receive it kneeling would well bethink themselves what answer to give I find not that ever any of our authorized Liturgies did allow any other gesture yet I have read in a Book called Treasure out of rubbish That some Commissioners of Q. Elizabeth did about the beginning of Her Reign at Coventry and other places appoint not kneeling but standing to be used at the Lords Table The Book was Printed by the Reverend Mr. Simeon Ash since His Majesties return to his Throne and I hear that many conforming Ministers are so compassionate as to deliver the consecrated Elements to those who do not kneel how they can so do non violata fide quam dederunt ecclesiae I understand not they themselves I hope have satisfied their own Consciences and can give a reason of their practice to their Governors though I cannot The Church in the 2d Book of King Edward inserted a Rubrick against Transubstantiation unhappily left out in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth King James King Charles the 1st but through the goodness of our present Soveraign now again put into the last Edition of our Liturgy may it never more be left out but continue to the shame of those who feared not to say we left it out because it seemed too much to favour the Sacramentarians The Church also appoints the Minister to use a kind of a Prayer in delivering the Eucharist whilst he useth that Prayer the Communicant is to kneel meekly but when he hath taken the Bread into his own hands he may then sit and eat it or stand and eat it I wish this could satisfie private Christians but there are Hundreds that cannot so quiet their own minds and yet if you discourse with them they can make Syllogisms and they live peaceable and godly lives Now here the Shoe pincheth the Nonconformist Minister whether he can promise never to give the Sacrament to any one who scrupleth kneeling Had Mr. D. clearly and solidly determined this question or had he strongly proved that the Church could not without dishonour allow more than one gesture in receiving the Sacrament I could easily have forgiven him all the raillery of his book but he thought he could get preferment at an easier rate therefore contents himself in a few lines p. 46 47. to instance in a very â—â—w Reformed Churches that receive the Sacrament kneeling First he instanceth in the Reformed Churches of Bohemia Reformed above two hundred years ago the remnant of it now left saith he receive it kneeling This instance little avaâ—leth our Church because from the beginning it was not so the Ancestors of the Bohemians did at first viz. 1494 use standing but being persecuted on that account were compelled to leave it off as Comenius tells us so that Mr. D. by this only proves the conformity of our Church with the Popish Church in persecuting those who will not kneel at the Sacrament Nor is he more lucky in his other instances of Polonia major and Lithuania for which he refers us to the Consensus Poloniae What a Character Dr. Heylin gives of the Reformation of Poland let him that loveth railing see Hist of Presb. 31 32 33. Indeed the Consent of Poland doth not much hit our humour here in England for in the Cracovian Synod 1573 all Choreae are condemned as dishonest A question being moved VVhether the rites in the use of the Lords Supper ought to be uniform It was concluded That according to the custom of the Primitive Church men should be left to their Christian liberty yet with admonition to the brethren that if any used sitting they should leave that proper to the Arrian Anabaptists In the Petricovian Synod Anno 1578 it is determined That uniformity in the rite of receiving the Lords Supper should not be pressed lest it should happen that there might be occasion to exercise Ecclesiastical Discipline upon any of the common people who are not easily brought to unusual ceremonies whereas the Synod judged it neither agreeable to the will of the Lord nor the custom of the Christian Church more pure to strike Christian men with the rod of Discipline for external rites yet so as the gesture of sitting at the Lords Table is rejected for a reason I shall more speak of by and by 'T is the Synodus Wlodislaviensis congregated 1583 that Mr. D. pitcheth upon in which Synod the matter of sitting at the Lords Table is again debated and there it is determined that sitting is as free as any other gesture which being brought in by way of Parenthesis Mr. D. never Englisheth or taketh notice of for he had called it an unmannerly and irreverent gesture and it was no wisdom to touch a knife that would be sure to cut his fingers but there also it was determined That sitting should not be used at the Lords table in any of the Churches of Poland or Lithuania for this ceremony is not used in Christian Churches and Evangelical Assemblies and is only proper to the unbelieving Arrians placing themselves in a seat or throne equal to Christ Seeing therefore sitting crept into some of their Churches especially by occasion of those who denied the Lord that redeemed us they desire and exhort all their assemblies and brethren in the Lord that they would change sitting into standing or kneeling Mr. D. translates potissimum first and I believe he was the first that so translated that word Not content to make so bold with Priscian he riseth to greater impudence saying that what they observed about the first bringers in of sitting into Poland may be our observation also if what Dr. Owen have said be true as it is very likely That there is not a city a town scarce a village in England but had some of the Miscreant Socinians Whether Dr. Owen hath any words of this import I know not if he have 't is like he referred them to the time in which he did make his book which was many years after that sitting was brought into the English Churches by the two Houses Too many there were in the two Houses no doubt that sought their own things more than the Nations peace but they never had among them any Socinian that ever I did hear of but only one Fry who was also expelled when he discovered his blasphemies Nor do I find that these Hereticks do abound in those places of the Kingdom where I have been but Papists abound extremely so as the
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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
their hands As for what His Majesty is made to say pag. 36. That it suits neither with the Authority nor decency of Confirmation that every ordinary Pastor should do it and that there was as great reason that none should confirm without licence from the Bishop as none Preach without his licence I doubt the Relator hath both wronged the King and the Bishops cause The King for we can scarce conceive he should have such high thoughts of the Authority or decency of confirmation as to imagine that either was lessened by being administred by those by whom Baptism is administred And the Bishops cause also for it will not serve their turn that Presbyters should not confirm without their Licence as they do not Preach without their Licence unless it be also made appear that none can be licensed to confirm but themselves Before I pass from this I must also advert That the Relator makes the King to tax St. Jerome for asserting that a Bishop is not Divinae ordinationis and the Bishop of London to insert That if he could not prove his ordination lawful out of the Scriptures he would not be a Bishop four hours Wherein I observe the policy of the Bishop who reserved power to himself to continue a Bishop if he could prove his ordination lawful by the Scriptures he knew well enough that his Ordination might be lawful and vet a Bishop not be Divinae Ordinationis That is lawful by Scripture which no Scripture Law condemns or forbids but he that should say that every thing not prohibited is Divinae ordinationis would have much a-do to prove that he himself had any meetness to be consecrated a Bishop I suppose I can prove that it is lawful for me to wear a Beaver but when I had so proved should I not be ridiculous if I should say that a Beaver was Divinae ordinationis Besides if Dr. Reynolds had chanced to gravel the Bishop with an argument about the lawfulness of his Ordination he to keep his Bishoprick would presently have replied that he was ordained to be a Presbyter but he was only consecrated to be a Bishop and by that means he might have kept his lands and his credit too Let us now proceed with Dr. Reynolds who is made to say that the words in the 37th Article The Bishop of Rome hath no authority in this land be not sufficient unless it were added nor ought to have It is like the Doctor had observed that the Oath of Supremacy runs to that or the like effect And he had never heard it is as like that the King and his Council heartily laughed at the framers of that Oath and therefore scarce expected to be told that a Puritan was a Protestant frighted out of his wits for propounding that the Article might be as fully worded as the Oath yet it seems he had the hap to be laughed at for his honest well-meant motion so the Relator acquaints us p. 37. P. 38. The Dr. moved that this proposition The intention of the Minister is not of the essence of the Sacrament might be added unto the Book of Articles the rather because some in England had preached it to be essential Had it been told him that if he would name those men who so Preached they should be suspended till they had recalled so false and uncomfortable an opinion or that there was enough in the Articles to infer that the intention of the Minister is not essential to the Sacrament it had been sufficient but to say that His Majesty utterly disliked this motion for two reasons and to name but one of the two and to stuff up that with a story concerning Mr. Craig was to put the world under a temptation to think too meanly of their King It is unfit to thrust every position negative into the Book of Articles for that would swell the Book into a volume as big as the Bible and also confound the Reader therefore I may not insert this short position the Ministers intention is not of the essence of the Sacrament into the English Articles This is made to be the Kings argument to which whether Dr. Reynolds could reply nothing others may judge Here we might also speak of the Nine Articles of Lambeth put into the Irish Confession not long after this Conference but never put into ours though it seems the Doctor moved twice they might be put in For my part I am not sorry they are left out for some honest men may question the truth of them and not be able in faith to subscribe them and so the Church lose the benefit of their parts As for Latitudinarians they would have subscribed them in a sense of their own devising though they had thought them false in the sense of the framers and imposers of them or they would have said that by subscribing they did not declare the assent of their minds to the truth of the Articles but only their purpose not to publish their dissent to them so as to make a disturbance in the Church about them A Jesuit Papist and a Latitudinarian Protestant will stick at no subscription whatsoever As for the Dean of Paul his discourse to vindicate himself I am not concerned to contradict him in it but I think he contradicts himself if Dr. Barlow doth him no wrong p. 41 42. The motion made by the Dr. and related p. 43. concerning a Catechism produced a very considerable addition to the old Catechism which was all he aimed at in it also he succeeded in his motion that a straiter course might be taken for reformation of the general abuse and prophanation of the Sabbath day for that the Relator saith found a general and unanimous assent So that the Bishops then did not think it Judaism to call the Lords day Sabbath nor to provide for its sanctification Nor did he miscarry in his motion for a new Translation of the Bible for not long after the Conference a new one was published which hath been generally used ever since to Gods glory and the Churches edification As for his Majesties profession that he could never yet see a Bible well translated into English and that the Geneva Translation was the worst of all I believe his Majesty repented of it or else he had not given leave to Dr. Morton to defend the two places in the Geneva Notes that he took particular exception to Dr. Reynolds for conclusion of what concerned doctrine moved That unlawful and seditious books might be suppressed at least restrained and imparted to a few This a man might think would have been entertained with a general assent and consent but contrariwise the Bishop of London supposing himself to be principally aimed at answereth to what he was never accused of and saith but without any proof That the Book De Jure Magistratus in subditos was published by a great disciplinarian but named him not and the King is said to tell the Doctor that he was a better
Colledg-man than Statesman and by this means no course was taken to prevent such Commentaries both in Philosophy and Divinity as came into England from beyond the Seas to the corrupting and poisoning of young students in the University The motion about Pastors resident and learned pag. 51 52 53 is handsomly avoided by the King with an answer that he had consulted with his Bishops about that whom he found ready and willing to second him in it c. yet all that Kings days and ever since the Nation hath groaned under the burden of an unlearned and non-resident Ministry if the Law of the Land admit of very mean and tolerable sufficiency in any Clerks why have not the Bishops petitioned that the Law be altered so as to require greater sufficiency And if the Lay-Patrons are to blame who present very mean men to their Cures are Ecclesiastical-Patrons to be excused who present Clerks every way as mean Now come the Bishop of Londons motions to be considered in number Three 1. That there might be amongst us a praying Ministry he meant a Ministry that might read the Common-Prayer-Book to which very little learning indeed would suffice but I suppose there was then no want of such a Ministry nor is there now so that the motion might have been spared The Second motion was that till a sufficient and learned Minister might be placed in every Congregation godly Homilies might be read and the number of them encreased This motion sure was not liked for unto this day neither is a learned Minister setled in every Congregation nor the number of Homilies encreased His last motion was that Pulpits might not be made Pasquils wherein every humorous fellow or discontented might traduce his superiors This the King graciously accepted and so did the complaining Ministers as I suppose for that the Pulpit should be made a Stage is certainly a very lewd custom but obtains too too much among I know whom Proceed we with Dr. Reynolds to Subscription as to which we find him only desiring that Ministers might be put upon it to subscribe according to the Statutes of the Realm viz. to the Articles of Religion and the Kings supremacy to subscribe otherwise they could not because among other things the Common Prayer-Book enjoined the Reading of some Chapters in which were manifest errors directly repugnant to Scriptures instancing particularly in Ecclesiasticus 48.10 where the words inferr That Elias in person was to come before Christ and if so Christ is not yet come Now let us take notice of what is answered 1. Bishop Bancroft answers That the most of the objections against the Books of Apocrypha were the old cavils of the Jews renewed by St. Jerome in his time who was the first that gave them the name of Apocrypha which opinion upon Ruffinus his challenge he after a sort disclaimed the rather because a general offence was taken at his speeches in that kind This I must needs say was a politick answer for first we are told that not all the objections but some of the objections against these books are the old cavils of the Jews renewed by St. Jerome 2. We are told that St. Jerome was the first that called these Books Apocryphal which opinion after a sort he reclaimed upon Ruffinus his challenge What can any man reply to such an answer should one bring an objection against these books that the Jews never would have brought he would have been told That not all objections against them but only some are Jewish cavils Should one say that Jerome disclaimed not his opinion concerning books Apocryphal he would be told That he did not indeed disclaim his opinion absolutely but yet after a sort he did and how far 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or after a sort may reach no one can tell Nor have we the least reference to any place of Jerome's Works in which this disclaiming of his opinion is recorded whether St. Jerome disclaimed his opinion he who hath not St. Jerome's Works by him may find discussed in Dr. Cosens his Scholastical History of the Canon of Scripture I say it cannot be imagined why the Jews should less esteem the Apocryphal books than they deserved they retain the Canonical books of the Old Testament which make more against them than the Apocrypha Nor is St. Jerome the first who called the Apocryphal books by the name of Apocrypha others before him had given them that name or one equivalent as I can make appear Indeed the Ancients of the Church have so blasted some especially of the Apocryphal Writings that I cannot but wonder how they came to be read in our Churches The History of Susanna was accounted a Fable even by Julius Africanus contemporary to Origen and yet our newest Calendar appointeth it to be read as also the story of Bell and Dragon There is a common saying in mens mouths that these books are Canonical not for the confirming of our faith but the regulating of our manners but he who shall make all Apocryphal books a rule for his manners may chance to set more on his Doomsday-book than he will quickly get off again As for him who shall make them a rule of Faith he will undoubtedly become a Heretick Dr. Reynolds his instance the Bishops would not meddle with but the King who was not in conference to be contradicted p. 62. is made 1. To argue and demonstrate That whatsoever Ben Sirach had said Ecclus. 48.10 of Elias Elias had in his own person while he lived performed and accomplished 2. To check Dr. Reynolds for imposing on a man that was dead a sense never meant by him 3. To use a pleasant apostrophe to the Lords VVhat trow ye makes these men so angry with Ecclesiasticus By my soul I think he was a Bishop or else they would never use him so 4. Yet after all to will Dr. Reynolds to note those chapters in the Apocrypha-books that were offensive and bring them to the Lord Archbishop on VVednesday following Had the Relator consulted the Kings honour he had not inserted one of his Jeers managed with an Oath into a Conference concerning Religion nor would he had he regarded his own reputation have called a sarcasm in which was an oath an unnecessary oath a pleasant apostrophe To the place it self I say the Greek copies Ecclus. 48.10 much differ among themselves and as much from the Latin Translation our English Translations also greatly vary but I could never yet meet with any Copy or Translation from which at least an unwary Reader or hearer would not â—ollect that Elias was to come before the day of 〈◊〉 Lord either first or second Junius saith the place argueth the ignorance of the author blind in the promises concerning the Kingdom of Christ Grotius acknowledgeth little less The Syriack and Arabick Translatour carry it clearly for Elias his being to come before the day of the Lord to turn the hearts of the children to the Parents as may be