we there Worship and therefore it is it self a subordinate act of Worship So to stand or kneel at Prayer and not to sit Though in Scripture we read of sitting standing kneeling and prostration yet no one of these is made necessary by Institution yet are they subordinate Acts of Worship expressing our inward Worship of God And the reason why being uncovered or kneeling are now chosen is not a particular Institution but because the Custom of the Country hath made them the most congruous Expression of our inward Worship when as Paul tells us That then and there it was a shame for a man to be covered and the whole Church for many hundred years forbad all kneeling in Adoration on the Lord's Days And more To these I add the gesture of the Adult in Baptism whether they shall be Baptized kneeling to signifie Humble Reception or not is left to choice So is the Gesture in singing Psalms If any think that speaking to God by prayer praise or thanksgiving in Psalms should in honour to God be done Standing or Kneeling rather than Sitting it is no addition to God's Institution And that we commonly use sitting in Psalmody and not when we Pray in Prose is meerly because Custom maketh one more offensive than the other The same I say of the Gesture of Preaching which some do sitting with their Hats on and others stand to avoid a seeming dishonour of Gods Name and Service Also some holy Nonconformists I have known that would rarely name God but with their Hats put off or bowing their Heads or with Hands and Eyes lift up towards Heaven Old Mr. Atkins at Tipton near Dudley did thus use to shew such Reverence when he named God that would strike Reverence into those that saw and heard him and hath oft Affected me more than a Sermon This was External Worship not Instituted in the particulars but in general of Reverence to God 2. Another instance is in Vows to God which are acts of Worship But for the Matter of them several things may be Vowed which are not particularly commanded but onely in the General And for the Form or Words I do not think that Mr. Raphson can shew me all that Vow called the Covenant in any particular Institution and yet I conjecture that he taketh it not to be Idolatry nor Unlawful 3. Another Instance is in things devoted and offered to God The Scripture in general saith Honour God with thy substance and with the first Fruits of thy increase And that Christians at first sold all and laid at the Apostles Feet which yet Peter tells Ananias he might have chosen not to do And for many hundred years after they brought their Weekly Donations for the Ministers Sacraments and Poor to the Altar and Offer'd it first to God And so Paul would have the Corinthians give their Collections as to God for the Saints But no Institution told them how much they should give but the General Rule 4. Another Instance is the length or degree of outward Worship If I pray two hours rather than one it is an act of Honour or Worship not particularly commanded So whether men shall in Publick read one Chapter or two sing one Psalm or two or more is undetermined by God 5. Another is about set Days and Hours for Worship as to keep a yearly Thanksgiving for Deliverance from the Powder Plot the Spanish Invasion for the Reformation c. So also Fasts and what days Lectures shall be kept and what hour And what day and hour the Lord's Supper shall be Administred which are Circumstantial Acts of Worship 6. Another Instance is in the choice of Psalms and Hymns the use of Davids are Lawful and so are others but no Institution tyeth us to One but leaveth us to chuse 7. Another Instance is in the Tunes and Metre of Psalms which we use as Subordinate Acts of Worship It is but lately that the Churches used Metre and Melody of Tune but Prose read with a loud Voice yet I hope we are not Idolaters for our Metre and Melody which I may say also of Church Musick which David used and we may do where it 's Edifying but it 's no Institution now Yea when Paul directs the Church to use Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs which is for singing with grace in our hearts to the Lord and therefore it is Worship which some men must indite and make 8. Another Instance is in the versions of the Psalms of David where among many we may chuse which seems best 9. Another Instance is in the publick and private Reading of the Scriptures Translated where every word is the work of man God wrote it not in English but in Hebrew and Greek but man Translates it some well and some defectively yet I hope an English Bible is not an Idol 10. So also the dividing the Scriptures into Chapters and Verses which are the Works of man is no Idolatry 11. And another Instance is the Method and Words of Sermons and Prayers whether a Minister shall Preach by way of Doctrine Reason and Use or otherwise and Expound by way of Paraphrase or otherwise what words he shall use God hath not instituted in particular but mens invention maketh these some suddenly and some beforehand 12. Another Instance is the use of helps or written Words Whether one shall use Notes in Preaching and read them or not Whether the words of a Prayer shall be written and read or not God hath not determined And so Books of Catechism Publick Confessions Prayers Meditations as formed are all the works of man and no Idolatry And if Parents impose words of Prayer on their Children it is no Sin as Deut. 6. and 11. shew 13. Another Instance is in the form of Ordination when the Words and many Circumstances are undetermined Imposition of Hands is a lawful Sign and so is doing it by a Writing or by meer Words without that Imposition some receive it Kneeling some Standing some by one Form of Words some by another c. some from one Ordainer some from many c. And none of these determined by Institution 14. The same is true of Discipline The Form of Words for Admonition for Absolution for Excommunication for the Penitents Confession and Request are left to Humane Wisdom so the matter and manner be regulated by the general Law And they that say that God hath Instituted that the Church shall be Governed Necessarily by fixed Classes with Appeals to National Synods and that here a Major Vote hath Governing Power over the lesser part yea and that these must be made up of Two sorts of Elders of which one sort are un-ordained or are not Authorised to Administer the Word and Sacraments do but add to the Word of God if they say these National Assemblies are the Supreame Church-Power what Law of God did ever Institute That a Minister or Classis e. g. in Geneva Breme Scotland is not as much subject to the Decrees of
Catholick Communion Defended against both Extreams AND UNNECESSARY DIVISION Confuted by Reasons against both the Active and Passive ways of SEPARATION Occasioned by the Racks and Reproaches of One sort and the Impatience and Censoriousness of the other and the Erroneous tho Confident Writings of Both. And written in Compassion of a Distracted Self-tearing People tho with little hope of any great success In FIVE PARTS I. The Dangerous Schismatick on the Three Cases about Church-Communion II. Animadversions on part of Mr. RAPHSON's Book III. A Survey of the Unreasonable Defender of Dr. STILLINGFLEET for Separation pretending to oppose it IV. Reasons of the Authors censured Communion with the Parish-Churches V. The Reasons why Dr. I. O's Twelve Arguments change not his Judgment By RICHARD BAXTER a Lover of Love and Peace and by defending them displeasing those that labour to destroy them Rom. 15. 7. Receive ye one another as Christ also received us to the glory of God Rom. 12. 18. If it be possible as much as lieth in you live peaceably with all men Psal. 18. 26 27. With the froward thou wilt shew thy self froward or wrestle For thou wilt save the afflicted people but wilt bring down high looks LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside near Mercers-Chappel 1684. TO THE READER IT 'S known that Christ suffered between Two Malefactors reputed by his Persecutors the greatest of the Three One of them was penitent and justified Christ and reproved the other who reproached even dying him that should have been taken for his only Hope Ignatius compared the Teeth of the Lions to the Milstones which must grind him to be Bread for his Fathers use The two Extreams have been at this unhappy Dividing-work since the Christian Church began to prosper Diotrephes and the Jewish Imposers on the one side and the Self-conceited separating Sects on the other were used by Satan to fight against Saving Truth and Love They were foretold by Paul Acts 20. both that grievous Wolves should enter and devour the Flocks and that of their own selves should men arise to speak perverse things and draw away Disciples after them But when Christian Power had lent one Party the Sword or made it the Executioner of Clergy-wrath the Church hath ever since between two Milstones been ground to Meal There hath indeed beâ—n much Differences in their dividing ways The upper Milstone hath still been violently active The nether Milstone thought it self innocent because it was passive Even before the Church-Tympanites many score several Sects rose up that had their several Societies separating from the rest on pretence of greater Orthodoxness and Piety No two of the Contraries could be in the Right much less all Therefore all or all save one did separate for Error But as Luther saith De Conciliis these Divisions were but a Play as at Foot-ball in comparison of the Strages or bloudy destructive Divisions which were made by Patriarchs and Councils of advanced Prelates If under Heathens the Novations sprung up from a Strife to have their Captain the great Bishop of Rome and the Donanists from a Strife to have their Captain the great Bishop of Carthage and so many other Sects What wonder if the Strife of Patriarchs Metropolitans and Councils when they were like great Secular Princes did cut all the Churches into those Shredâ— or Schisms which have continued it's Diseases and Reproach these 1200 if not 1300. years to this day unhealed and unlikely to be healed four of these Patriarchs condemning Rome and the Roman Fifth condemning them As it was said â—f Saul and David The Under sects and Schisms have killed their thousands and the Uppermost Patriarchal Conciliary Tyrannical Schisms their ten thousands Alas to what a horrid degree of Pravity is Humane Nature fallen What a scandalous Temptation give Men to the Bruitists who prefer the Bruits yea the wildest before Mâ—n When even the Learned sort who think themselves so fit to guide all the rest that none is worthy to Preach Christs Gospel who dissent from their prescribed Opinions and Ceremonies are yet unable after 1200. years experience of the Churches to understand that the terms and ways which have hitherto distracted and torn them and to this day made them the scorn of the Infidels and like the Sherds of a broken Pot are not the only ways and terms of Catholick Union and Communion which if any deny he is unworthy to live in Christian Society Lord is there no hope that the World at least the Learned part may be healed of this self-laceration and distraction If there be no Love and Peace but in Heaven and with the few that the World abhorreth O cause us all that are fervent Lovers of Love and Peace to be more weaned from this earthly Nest of Wasps and to love and long for the World where Love and Peace are perfected I have seen Canons which have ipso facto excommunicated Men how wise how holy how useful and how many soever that do but affirm any things in their Church-Offices Liturgies Words and Ceremonies to be at all repugnant to the Word of God and at once oblige Men to subscribe to an Article That not only they but General Councils are fallible So that I stand amazed to think what Spirit made such Canons and what such Men thought of themselves and of Humane Nature and of the History of all former Ages of the Churches If they must be acknowledged fallible and yet all cut off from Christ or from the Church who say they have any Error so much as in the said Offices Forms Words or Ceremonies sure they suppose that some miraculouus Power so wonderfully over-ruled fallible Men and therefore should shew us miracles to convince us For my part I am far from believing that I am so secured from Error and therefore only say Tho I be an unfit Iudge of my Superiors Acts I would not for all the Riches on Earth be charged at Gods judgment with the guilt of making and justifying such Canons much less with all the Consequents of their Executions And because I am unwilling to be guilty of any dividing-errors on the other side I have here impartially confuted them telling those that would not have the Authors or their former Actions so much remembred and blamed as I have done That God is against their carnal Policies and that it neither hath prospered nor will do And that when Men justifie Sin or lay it upon God he will with disdain cast it back upon them As I thank God who kept the main Body of the Religious Persons innocent from the crimes of a few tumified Sectarian Soldiers who by advantage subdued all the rest tho Malignity would ruine them by a false Accusation of such a Guilt so I will not so much as by Silence encourage that false Malignant Accusation nor leave the sober godly People of the Land under the intimated Suppositions That they Consented to the
Reedeeming Restauration and other such in Scripture intimate that Christ did restore Man to the state he fell from adding more mercy to it And therefore that his Soul was immortal and he in via and not in patria And I believe not what he adds of man's being not obliged to deny Sensuality were it not for Heaven 1. He thinks Adam was made but for Earth And yet God bound him Not to eat of that Fruit which his eye appetite and fancy led him to desire Doth he not here directly condemn God's Law and justifie Adam's Sin 2. Were there no Heaven for us man were bound to rule his Appetite and Sense by Reason And the bonum publicum and his own would oblige him by Reason to restrain Sensuality as to Women Wine Meat desire of our Neighbours Estate Anger that would kill others in revenge 3. And I think God doth not bind us now to take the forbearance of such comforts as further us in Holiness Thankfulness and other Duties to be any necessary way to Heaven § 36. Page 122 123. To prove his sort of Catholick Unity he is not content with Episcopatus Unus est but he asserteth That all the Bishops of the Church are but one Bishop invested with the same Power c. Ans. 1. Episcopacy may be said to be One as it is One in specie and for one remote End and Object as Justiceship in England may be called One But that all Bishops should be but one Bishop is strange Tho by impropriety of speech almost any thing may be said No doubt but the Name Bishop signifieth in common speech the Subject related Either he meaneth that the Subjects are one or the Relation While he abhorreth the distinguishing of the equivocal Unity we must take him to speak in sinsu famosiore usitato 1. They that have divers numerical constitutive parts of men matter and form are divers Bishops as Subjects of the Relation But so have e. g. the Bishop of Canterbury and York and London They have divers Souls and Bodies They that may depose and curse each other are not the same Bishop But so did Chrysostome and his Adversaries and hundreds more If they are One subjectively the Virtues and Vices of ones are anothers and the Creditor may take one man to Prison for anothers Debt 2. They cannot be One numerically in the Relation of Bishop For the Relation is Accidens quod sequitur subjectum The same numerical Accident cannot possibly be in two distinct Subjects For it perisheth if it cease to be in its Subject One man's Colour Virtue Learning c. cannot numerically be the Accident of another So that all Bishops being one Bishop is just like the rest of this man's Doctrine I believe one may be good and another bad one saved and another damned What can the man mean by it if he could speak his mind Sure nothing but that their Office is of the same species and they bound to use it in their several places as from one Christ under one Law of his with the greatest Love and Concord they can and for the common good of one Universal Church Can he mean more without gross Error And who denieth any of this as to the Episcopacy of Christ's institution § 37. They are bound to govern where it can be had by mutual advice and consent Ans. So far as the end requireth The common good So say the Independents And is that the Unity so much talkt of § 38. ' No Bishops are absolutely independent but are obliged to preserve the Unity of the Episcopacy Those Churches must be independent which have an independent Power and Government as all must have that have independent Governours or Bishops and independent Churches can never make one Body and one Catholick Communion because they are not Members of each other Ans. 1. No Two Churches on Earth of the same species Diocesan or Parochial c. are members of each other but all of the Universal or National of which they are parts no more than your fingers or eyes are members of each other 2. Reader pardon me that in the beginning I commended him as being for Diocesan Independency in Power These words make me again uncertain what he 's for Plain English would distinguish dependance of Subjects on Rulers in a Polity and dependance of Equals by Concord in a Community These are plain words He after saith that Diocesans have no proper Governors Ecclesiastick over them or to that sence But here he saith they are not independent in Power and Government Yet the man saith so little in any determinate sence that I know not whether by dependance in Government he mean a political dependance on superior Governors or a political Union of many persons to make one superior governing power like a Senate or a meer voluntary concord of many Governors that are Equals like that of many School-Masters or Princes whose Concord maketh them not One Polity but One Community The former sence some words of his do favour but elsewhere he so much denieth them that I hope it is but the last that he meaneth 3. But if this be his sence What independent whom he so much damneth doth not acknowledg a dependance in Community on all true Christians and in Polity on Christ Doth not every Christian confess that all true Churches and Christians depend on the Whole as Parts and on each other as Fellow-Members obliged to live on the same Christ in the same Love and Communion in Essentials and in as many Integrals of Religion as they can reach to I never met with the Christian that denied this Therefore what to make of this man's words I know not § 38. P. 126. he saith He who causelesly breaketh this Unity can be no Catholick Bishop Ans. Is it come to that Alas how few Catholick Bishops then do we hear of in the World Tho no good man breaks it in the Essentials who breaks it not in Degrees or Integrals They were guilty of Schism that said I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas Peter brake it in some degree Gal. 2. And much more those Phil. 1. that preacht Christ in strife to add to Paul's affliction How shall we know then what all his talk for Communion signifieth as to practice With what Bishops in the World must we hold Communion And how shall we know them If any prove that any English Bishop causelesly breaketh this Union in any degree must we separate from him I know no evasion for him here unless he will yet distinguish of Unumâ— Martinius saith Unus is 1. Indivisus 2. Sic indivisus ut etiam indivisibiâ—â—s 3. Sic indivisas ut divisibilis 4. Sic indivisus ut divisus seâ— distinctus ab aliis 5. Unicus solus 6. Unus cum aliquo seu idem aut numero aut genâ—re aut specie aut analogia item Essentia Persona Voluntate aut actu But this is Gibberish I suppose to the Doctor
Pastors have to the Universal Church will enable any of them more or fewer confederate or not ex authoritate Ministri Nuncii to tell any other Bishops or Churches of heinous scandalous sin and admonish them and renounce Communion with the impenitent and exhort people to forsake Heretick Bishops c. But all this as Equals and not as the fixed Overseers of other Churches nor as Rulers of other Pastors And so one Martin may do by a Synod of Bishops IX Kings are as truly and I think as much obliged to do their work in Concord and Communion The contrary dreadful Doctrine of Dr. Parker for setting up an Vniversal Council of Princes to govern all the Kings on earth is to be confuted elsewhere as also his subjecting Christ to Kings which implieth that they may command reward and punish him as Bishops And Kingship is as truly One as Episcopacy That is 1. It is of the same species 2. Under the same Universal King 3. Governed by the same Universal Laws 4. Bound to regard the Good of all the Church and World above that of their own Kingdoms 5. And bound to contribute the utmost of their Wit Interest and Power for the said common good of Church and World And because all the Kings in Europe may do more to this common good of all than Bishops without them can do I may say That they are bound hereto rather more than less than the Bishops As a rich man is bound to liberality more than a poor man and one that hath the Tutorage of Princes and Nobles Sons or a Physician that hath an Hundred such Patients is bound to more care and more bound to care than another And all Kingdoms are as truly parts of God's Kingdom over men as all Churches are parts of the Universal Church If Justices or Mayors will of themselves make a New Body Politick by Confederacy and Association and say We claim no Superiority but an Authority in order to Communion to make Laws of Government for the Kingdom or many Counties and should say It is One Kingdom as Unified by this Communion and these Laws of ours and not by their Relation to one King I should doubt whether to call them Sots or Rebels or Traitors § 5â— P. 206 207. he boldly repeateth How oft have I told him what it is that makes the Catholick Church One Catholick Church which is the constitutive Form he enquires after viz. Not one superior power over the whole Church but one Communion and this Communion is in Humane Forms and Canons Ans. How oft doth he tell us that which if a Dissenter had asserted I should have thought the Name of an Heretick too gentle for him as coming so near the denying both of the Church and Christ. See here the Church is not made One and so not made the Church by its unitive Relation to Christ the Head He is not the constitutive Regent Form but a Voluntary Agreement to make Laws of Government c. is the constitutive Form And yet he saith before It is not made by Man but God § 51. But p. 220. he disgraceth the Dean by these words Mr. B. indeed says That the Universal Church is headed by Christ himself But as the Dean adds this doth not remove the difficulty For the question is about the Visible Church whereof the particular Churches are parts and they being visible parts do require a visible constitutive Regent Head as essential to them Therefore the whole Visible Church must likewise have a visible constitutive Regent Head Ans. Dangerously false and the Fundamental Principle of Popery When they know how frequently the Papists are answered to this by Protestants and I told them how fully I had answered it to Iohnson and oft why have we no Reply but say over and over the same things Viz. 1. No Kingdom nor thing is Visible simpliciter but secundum quid Our King is not visible in Ireland nor but to â—ew in England His soul is visible to none nor his body save the outward Accidents If he were seen by none but Courtiers it were a Visible Kingdom 2. In all these Respects the Church is Visible 1. The Bodies of the Subjests are Visible 2. Their Oath af Allegiance Baptism and Profession are Visible 3. Christ lived Visibly on Earth 4. He is Visible in Heaven to his Courtiers 5. He hath one Visible Law and Covenant to govern all his Church 6. He hath Visible Officers 7. He hath Visible administrations of Mercy and Justice by himself and his Officers 8. And he is coming to Judgment Visibly and all Eyes shall see him Now the Controversie is either de re or de nomine De re none but a false Teacher will deny any one of these that I say not a gross Heretick 2. De nomine either this much may warrant the Name of a Visible Church or not If not we must go the old way of some former Protestants and say That the Chatholick Church is not Visible And for ought I see we must say That the Kingdom of Ireland if not of England is Invisible because few see the King and no man ever saw the Soul of King or Subjects or their Bodies save the skin If all this warrant not the Name of Visible Church the Confederacy of an unknown Company of Bishops will not But remember that the Controversie is but de nomine and we say more by far to prove it Visible than you do while you deny Popery § 52. P. 2â—5 I Argued That if a Regent Supreme be the informing part of a Diocesan Metropolical c. Church so must it he of the Catholick if the word Church be used univocally Hence he inferreth that I thus argue If there be not a Supreme Head over the whole Church there is no such over any part So little doth he understand an Argument When as I argued only from the parity of Reason That if the summa potestas be not the Form of the Catholick Church then it is not of Diocesan Churches But it is of Diocesan Churches as is confest Ergo This supposeth that they confess Christ to be the summa potestas Therefore I say He must be the Constitutive Form The man blusht not here to say That I infer A Bishop cannot govern his own Church unless one Bishop or a Colledge govern the whole How little Belief is due to such a Man § 53. P. 844. He saith I think it as certain That those Churches cannot be Members of the Catholick Church whose Communion is unlawful Answ. Seeing it is plain That he meaneth not only mental Communion in Essentials of which it's true but local Communion in outward Acts I take him to be one of the grossest Schismaticks that ever I had to do with and one of the greatest Enemies to Christian Catholick Love If any could prove it unlawful to have Ministerial Communion in England where he cannot have it without declaring Assent and Consent to all