belong to the Office of a Presbyter when yet he might not exercise it The Bishops in the Ordination of Presbyters enabled them to preach the Gospel And yet they were after that forbidden to preach till they had a License and it was put into the Visitation Articles to present those Ministers that preached without License If they will deny us the exercise of the Power that they first confess belongeth to our Office we are not answerable for their self-contradictions 2. By Discipline I suppose they mean but our Instruction and our publishing their Orders for Penance Excommunication or Absolution 3. They were the Judges of the sense of the Laws as far as the executâ—on required And the Vniversal Practice of England with their writings shewed us to our cost their judgement What good would it do us if the Law had been on our side while the Concurrent Iudgement and Practice of the Governors denyed it and went against it 4. He that had kept a man from the Sacrament according to the plain words of the Rubrick was to have been accountable for it at their Courts and so likely if he had been a man of serious piety and not a persecutor of Puritans to have been undone by it and was like to make so little of it as to the Ends of Discipline all men being compelled by the Presentments to receive the Sacrament that I never knew one to my best remembrance in 25 years time that I lived under the Bishops that was kept from the Sacrament except a Puritan that scrupled to take it kneeling And what was this to true Church-Government Sect. 17. Object But either they did it according to the established Law or not If they did the fault was in the Law and not in them If they did transgress the Law then the fault was in mens abuse and the Law and Order cannot be blamed Answ. A sad case to poor ignorant miserable souls that they must be left in obstinacy and deprived of Gods means of Reformation without Remedy because either the Law or Iudges must be excused The Iudges are the mouth of the Law to us that is Law in the issue to us which they unanimously call Law If the fault were in the Law it was time it should be altered if it was in the Bishops universally it was time they should be altered Let us but have a Remedy and enjoy Gods Ordinances which he that is the Churches Head and King hath appointed for our benefit and we have done Sect. 18. Object But may not Bishops when they Ordain Delegate what measure of Ministerial Power they please and if you never received more why should you use it Answ. A poor relief to the forsaken Church Deprive her of Government and then tell us that we had no power Is the Power desirable to us if the Ordinance were not desirable to the Church 2. What Power have Bishops and whence did they receive it to change the Office of Christs institution or his Apostles If so they may turn the three Orders which the Papists themselves say the Pope cannot alter into as many more Then they may create an Office for Baptizing only and another for the Lords Supper only and another for praying only and so of the rest which is worse then making Lay-elders or then taking away the Cup in the Sacrament Hath Christ by his Spirit instituted Church-offices and are they now at the Bishops power to transform them 3. If they had power to distribute the work in the exercise part to one and part to another yet they have no power to deprive the particular Churches of the whole or any part but one or more must do it and the Office must be the same and the power exercised to the edification and not the confusion and corruption of the Church Sect. 19. Object But the Keys were given only to the Apostles and not to the seventy Disciples nor to Presbyters Answ. 1. If the seventy were only Disciples and not Church-officers the Ancients and the English Bishops have been much mistaken that have so much urged it that Presbyters succeed them as Bishops do the Apostles But if they be Officers then they have the Keys 2. The Episcopal Divines even the Papists commonly confess that part of the Keys are given to the Presbyters and Christ gave them together 3. Were they given only to Apostles for themselves or to convey to others If to themselves only then no one hath them now If to convey to others then either to Apostles only as their Successors but there 's none such or to Patriarchs or Primates or Metropolitans or Archbishops only but none of this will please the Bishops or to Bishops only which I grant taking Bishops in the Scripture sense And I desire to see it proved that it was not a presumptuous Innovation in them whosoever they were that after the days of the Apostles Ordained a new sort of Presbyters in the Church that should have no power of the Keys 4. They that must use the Keys must have Power to use them But Parish Bishops must use them as the nature and necessity of the work doth prove Therefore Parish Bishops must have the Power If only one man in a Diocess of an hundred or two hundred Churches shall have the power of the Keys we may know after all the talk of Discipline what Discipline to expect Sect. 20. Object Why blame you Lay-chancellors Registers Proctors c. when you set up Lay-elders we are as well able to call Chancellors Ecclesiastical as you can call Lay-elders so Answ. I never pleaded for Lay-elders If other men erre will it justifie your error But I must tell you an unordained man in a single Parish having power only to assist the Pastor in Government is far unlike a Lay-Court to Govern all the Churches of a Diocess Sect. 21. Object Do not your Arguments against Bishops for excluding Discipline make as much for the casting out of Ministers of whom you complain in your Reformed Pastor for neglect of Discipline Ans. 1. The Nature of Prelacy as set up in England â—here only one man had the Government of so many Churches unavoidably excludeth it if the best men were Bishops till it be otherwise formed But the nature of a Parochial Episcopacy is fitted to promote it 2. Those Presbyters that I blamed for neglecting the higher acts of Discipline do yet keep away more prophane persons from the Lords Supper in some one Church then ever I knew kept away in all places under the Prelates 3. If Ministers sinfully neglect Discipline yet as Preachers and Guides in publick worship c. they are of unspeakable need and value to the Church But few Bishops of England preached ordinarily And 4. We are desirous that Bishops shall continue as Preachers but not as Diocesan excluders of Parochial Church-Discipline Sect. 22. Object By pretending to agree with them that say there were no Presbyters in Scripture times you would put down
valid 6. The Old Episcopal Divines thought it lawful to joyn in actual Communion with the Pastors and Churches that were not Prelatical But the New ones separate from their communion and teach the people to do so supposing Sacramental administrations to be there performed by men that are no Ministers and have no authority 7. The Old Episcopal Divines thought it meet to suspend silence imprison or undo those Godly Divines that did not bow towards the Altar or publish to their People Declarations or Instructions for Dancing on the Lords Day or that did preach twice a day But many of the New ones practically told us that this was their judgement Of these differences I have given you some proof hereafter and would do here in the express words of the Authors on both sides were it not that I should be needlesly tedious and that I should unnecessarily offend the particular Divines of the New party who are among us by reciting their words More of the differences I pass by I. And now I would know of those of you that follow the Ancient Episcopal Divines what hindereth you from a charitable peaceable Communion with those Orthodox Ministers now in England that some of you stand at a distance from Doctrinal differences at least requiring such a distance you cannot pretend B p Hall tels you in his Peace-maker after cited that there is none between you and the Forrein Presbyterian Churches And as for the matter of Episcopacy if you will insist upon the late English Frame as necessary viz. That there be but One Bishop over many hundred Churches and that he have the sole power of Excommunication and that he rule by a Layâ—Chancellor c. and be a Lord and seconded with a forcing power c. then you will forsake the Iudgement of your Leaders For they will tell you that some of these are but separable appurtenances some of them corruptions and blemishes and some not Necessary What need we any more ado You see in the published Iudgements of B p Hall B p Usher D r Holdsworth Forbes and others after cited that they would have all Presbyters to be Governors of the Churches one of them having a stated Presidency or Moderatorship and this will content them And are we not then agreed I am confident most of the Ministers in England would be content to yield you this But what if there be some that are not of your mind concerning the stated Presidency which you desire will you therefore uncharitably refuse communion with them so would not your Leaders In this therefore you will forsake them and forsake many holy Churches of Christ and forsake charity and Christ himself that teacheth you another lesson Will it not content you that you have freedom your selves to do that which seemeth best in your own eyes unless all others be of your opinion But perhaps you will say that you have not Liberty your selves to practise according to this your judgement To which I answer 1. Your Brethren of the Ministery have not the power of the Sword and therefore do neither deny you Liberty nor can give it you It is the Magistrates work And will you separate from us for other mens doings For that you have no rational pretence If you know of any that perswade Magistrates to restrain your Liberty that 's nothing to others Censure none but those that you know to be guilty 2. I never knew that you were deprived of the Liberty of exercising such an Episcopacy as the forementioned Bishops do desire I do not believe you could be hindered and we that are your neighbours never hear of it I know not of either Law or Execution against you If you think that the clause in the Covenant or the Ordinance against Prelacy or the late Advice that excepts Prelacy from Liberty are any restraint to you I think you are much mistaken It is only the late frame of Prelacy as it stood by Law exercised by Archbishops Bishops Deans Chancellors c. and that by force upon dissenters that is taken down You have not Liberty to force any by corporal punishment to your obedience But you have full Liberty for ought that ever I heard to exercise the meer Episcopacy desired by Hall Usher and such like on all that are of your judgement and will submit to it That we may hold constant Assemblies of Pastors we find by experience And in these Assemblies if you will choose one for your stated President who will hinder you No one I am confident Tell us whoever suffered for so doing or was prohibited or any way hindered from it by any force Nay more if you will give this President a Negative vote in Ordination and Iurisdiction who will hinder you yea who can If twenty Ministers shall resolve that they will never Ordain or Excommunicate any without the consent yea or Command if you must have it so of such a man whom they take for their President who can or will compell them to the contrary And all the People that are of your mind have Liberty to joyn themselves with such Pastors on such terms and submit themselves to you if they will But you will say that this is no setting up of Episcopacy while every one that is unwilling to obey us may refuse it I answer This is all that the Nature of Episcopacy requireth And this is all that the Church saw practised even Rome it self for above three hundred years after Christ. And is not that now tolerable for your Communion with us which served then for the Communion of all the Churches on earth Is the Primitive pattern of purity and simplicity become so vile in your eyes as to be inconsistent with Christian Communion Let not such principles be heard from your mouths or seen in your practises Whether the Magistrate ought to compell us all to be of your mind or way I will not now meddle with but if he will not will you therefore separate from your Brethren Or will you not exercise the Primitive Episcopacy on Consenters because you have not the sword to force Dissenters And are you denied your Liberty because you are not backed by the Sword This concerneth other mens Liberties and not yours You have the Liberty of Episcopal Government though not of smiting others with the Magistrates Sword and as much Liberty for ought I know as Presbyterians or Independents have though not so much countenance And how comes it to pass that the other modes of Government are commonly exercised upon meer Liberty and yours is not Is it because you have no confidence in any Arm but flesh If your Episcopal Power be of Divine appointment why may you not trust to a Divine assistance as well as others that you think are not of God If it can do nothing without the Sword let the Sword do all without it and retain its proper honour If it can do less on voluntary Subjects then other ways of Church-government can
and Government is to be found wholly in the written word of God called the holy Scriptures This we are agreed on against the Papists who would supply the supposed defects of Scripture by their unwritten Traditions which they call the other part of Gods word Church Canons and Laws of men may determine of some modes and circumstances for the better execution of the Laws of God by the People whom they are over but they cannot make new Church Ordinances or Governments nor convey a Power which God the fountain of Power did not ordain and convey nor can they give what they themselves had not The Church-office and Authority therefore that is not proved from the Holy Scripture is to be taken as the fruit of humane arrogancy and presumption Yet I deny not but that we may find much in Antiquity in Fathers and Councils about matters of fact to help us to understand some Scriptures and so to discern the matter of right Prop. 3. The Scripture doth not Contradict but suppose and confirm the light of Nature nor doth it impose upon any man Natural impossibilities nor constitute offices which cannot be executed or which would destroy that end to which they are supposed to be Constituted Prop. 4. Ecclesiastical Authority comprehendeth not the power of the sword nor any power of using violence to mens bodies or laying mulcts or confiscations on their estates The Ecclesiastical Power which Christ ordained was exercised for the first three hundred years without any touching of mens bodies or purses before there were any Christian Princes Prop. 5. Magistrates are not eo nomine obliged to punish men because they are Excommunicated whether upon every just Excommunication they should punish I will not now dispute but they are bound to know that their penalties be deserved before they inflict them and therefore must themselves take Cognisance of the Cause and as rational agents understand before they act and not blindly follow the Judgements of the Bishops as if they were but as Executioners where the Bishops are Judges Prop. 6. The Power of the highest Church-governours is but an Authority of Directing in the way to salvation It is but Directive but then there is no room for the common Objection that then it is no greater then any other man may perform for it is one thing to Direct Occasionally from Charity and another thing to Direct by Authority in a standing office as purposely appointed hereunto The Power of Church-Governors is but of the same nature as is the Power of a Physitian over his Patients or of a School-master over his Schollers supposing he had not the power of the rod or actual force but such a power as the Professors of Philosophy or other sciences had in their several schools upon the adult nor all so great neither because the Laws by which we must rule are made to our hands as to the substantials Hence therefore it is plain that as we can bind or force no man to believe us or to understand the truth and to be Christians but by the power of demonstrated Evidence and by the light which we let in through Gods grace into their Consciences so neither can we cause any to execute our sentences against offenders further than by light we convince them that it is their duty so that if all the Bishops or Presbyteries in the land should judge such or such an opinion to be heresie and should Excommunicate those that own it as hereticks in this case if the Church do believe as the Pastors believe they will consent and avoid the Excommunicate person but if they take it to be Gods truth which the Pastors call heresie they will not take themselves bound by that sentence to avoid him nor will the Offender himself any further be sensible of a penalty in the sentence then he shall be convinced that he hath erred and if the Church avoid him he will justifie himself and judge that they do it wrongfully and will glory in his suffering so that it is on the Conscience that Church-Governors can work and no otherwise on the outward man but mediante Conscientiâ Prop. 7. The ground of this is partly because no Church Governors can bind any man contrary to Gods word Clave errante ita apparente if the people know that he erreth they are not to obey him against God Yet in the bare inconvenient determination of some Circumstantials by which the duty is not destroyed but less conveniently performed the people are bound to obey their Governors because it is not against Gods determination and because he erreth but in an undetermined point of which God appointed him to be the orderly determiner But if God have once determined no mans contrary determination can oblige nor yet if they go beyond the sphere of their own work and determine of an aliene subject which God did never commit to their determination else a Minister or Bishop might oblige every Taylor how to cut his garment and every Shoâ—-maker how to cut his shoe so that they should sin if they did disobey which is ridiculous to imagine and if they go about to introduce new stated Ordinances or Symbols in the Church which they have nothing to do with or in any other work shall assume to themselves a power which God never gave them it doth no more oblige then in the former case Prop. 8. Another reason of the sixth Proposition is because The People have a Iudgement of discerning whether the Governors do go according to Gods word or not else they should be led blindfold and be obliged by God to go against Gods word whensoever their Governors shall go against it It is not bruits or Infants but rational men that we must rule Prop. 9. The three things which Church power doth consist in are in conformity to the three parts of Christs own office 1. About matter of Faith 2. About matter of Worship 3. About matter of Practice in other cases 1. Church-Governors about Doctrine or Matters of Faith are the Peoples Teachers but cannot oblige them to Err or to believe any thing against God nor make that to be truth or error that is not so beâ—ore 2. In matter of Worship Church-guides are as Gods Priests and are to go before the people and stand between God and them and present their prayers and prayses to God and administer his holy mysteries and bless them in his name 3. The Commanding Power of Pastors is in two things 1. In Commanding them in the name of Christ to obey the Laws which he hath made them already And this is the principal 2. To give them new Directions of our own which as is said 1. Must not be against Gods Directions 2. Nor about any matter which is not the object of our own office but is without the verge of it 3. But it is only in the making of under laws for the better execution of the laws of Christ and those
dayes and after He affirmeth also that the power of the Keyes belongeth to the Presbyters and that its convertible with the power of celebrating the Eucharist and that 's the Reason Why it belongs to them page 98. ibid. and that the Power of the Keys that is the whole power of the Church whereof that power is the root and sourse is common to Bâ—shops and Presbyters page 128 and that to this all sides agree page 106. and that by their Grant Deacons and others may preach but not Rule or administer the Lords Supper see page 118.123 And he is far from being of their mind that think in Scripture times there was but one single Bishop without other Presbyters in a Diocesan Church For he supposed many in a Congregation Page 126 he saith You see by St. Paul 1 Cor. 14. that one Assembly whereof he speaks there furnished with a great number of Prophets whether Presbyters or over and above them In the Records of the Church we find divers times a whole Bench of Presbyters presiding at one Assembly And before he had shewed how they sate about the Bishop and the congregation stood before them And page 127. he saith that Clemens the Disciple of the Apostles in his Epistle to the Corinthians to compose a difference among the Presbyters of that Church partly about the celebration of the Eucharist adviseth them to agree and take their turns in it I confess I knnw not whence he hath this doubtless not in the true approved Epistle of Clement but it shews in his judgement 1. That there were then many Presbyters in the Church of Corinth 2. And that that Church was but one Congregation or not very many Else what need the Presbyters take their turns when they might have done it at once 3. That the word Presbyter in Clemens signifieth not a Prelate 4. And it seems this intimateth there was then no Bishop in Corinth else no question but Clemens would have charged these disagreeing Presbyters to obey their Bishop and used some of Ignatius language 5. Nay if Bishops had been then known in the world is it not likely that he would have charged them to get a Bishop if they had not to Govern such a disagreeing Presbytery And page 129 130 131. he shews that the condemning of Marcion at Rome and of Noelus at Ephesus are expresty said by Epiphanius Haeres 42. num 1. 2. Haeres 57 num 1. to have been done and passed by the Act of the Presbyters of those Churches And which is of later date the Excommunication of Andronicus in Sâ—nesius 57. Epist. I find reported to have passed in the same sort and all this agreeable to the practice recorded in Scripture alledging 1. Tim. 5.19 Acts 21.18 citing Cyprian Ep. 46. and the Apost Constit. and saith Bloudell in this might have spared his exact diligence it being granted c. Mr. Thorndike also tells us pag. 62. of the words of Ninius that in Ireland alone Saint Patrick at the first plantation of Christianity founded three hundred and threescore and five Bishopricks And can any man believe that all these had Cities or more then one of our Parish Churches when all Ireland to this day hath not seven Cities and when all this was done at the first plantation of the Gospel I think we had this sort of Episcopacy Even since the Reformation there is reckoned in Ireland but four Arch-bishops nineteen Bishops What think you then were 365. Bishops at the first plantation of the Gospel To proceed to some further Evidence 1. It s manifest in Clemens Rom. Epist. to the Corinthians there is mention of no more but two Orders the one called sometime Bishops sometime Presters the other Deacons page 54.55.57 and this he saith the Apoâ—â—les did as knowing that contention would arise about the name of Episcopacy and that they so seâ—led the Ministerial Offices that others should succeed in them when some were deceased For my part I cannot see the least reason to be of their mind that think Clemens here doth speak only of Prelates or supereminent Bishops of which I refer the Reader to Mr. Burtons notes in his English Translatâ—on of Clemenâ— But suppose it were so If at that time the Churches had none but single Bishops it is plain then that they were but single Congregations For no other Congregations having communion in theâ—r-then-ordinary publike worship could be managed without a Bishop or Presbyter to do the work But for them that sleight Mr. Burtons other mens plain Reasons concerning the judgement of Clem. Romanus and force his words to speak what they mean not I desire them to observe the judgement of Grotius whom they profess so much to value who in his Epistol 162 ad Bignon gives this as one Reason to prove this Epistle of Clemens genuine Quod nusquam meminit exsortis illius Episcoporum autoritatis quae Ecclesiae consuetudine post Marci mortem Alexandriae atque eo exemplo alibi introduci cepit sed planè ut Paulus Apostolus ostendit Ecclesias communi Presbyterorum qui iidem omnes Episcopi ipsi Pauloque dicuntur consilio fuisse gubernatas Nam quod 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nominat omnia ista nomina non ad Ecclesiam sed ad Templum Hieros pertinent unde infert omnia recto ordine agenda si Iudaeis tanto magis Christianis You see that Grotius then and Clemens in his judgement were against Prelacy 2. The very same I say of Prelacie Epist. ad Philip. which mentioneth only two sorts Presbyters and Deacons 3. And though Ignatius oft mention three it seems to me that they were all but the Governours or Ministers of one Congregation or of no more people then one of our Parishes In the Epist. ad Smyrâ— he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Vbi Episcopus praesens fuerit illuc plebs Congregetur sicuti ubi Christus est omnis militia coelestis aâ—est as the common interpreter translateth it ut vid. est in Edit Perionii Vsherii c. Vbi comparuerit Episcopus ibi Multitudo sit quemadmodum ubi Christus ibi omnis astat exercitus coelestis as Hier. Vairlenius Videlius translate it Or Vbi utique apparet Episcopus illic multitudo sit quemadmodum utiq ubi est Christus Iesus illic Catholica Ecclesia as Vshers old Tranlation And by the Context it appeareth that this plâ—bs or multitudo is the Church which he ruleth and not only one Congregation among many that are under him For this doth without distinction bind all the people one as well as another to be where the Bishop is or appeareth viz. in the publick Assembly for Communion in Worship It is plain therefore there that were not then many such Assemblies under him otherwise all save one must have necessarily disobeyed this command And in the Epistle to the Philadelphians he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e.
undertake more fully to wipe off this reproach for the learned adversaries are tall Cedars in knowledge in comparison of many of us and if men of parts do not grapple with them herein they will easily carry the vote in many mens judgements for they judge that the greater Schollars by far certainly have the better in the contest Sir We beseech you that you would improve your acquaintance in Antiquity for our help in this case Not that we would engage you in wrangling with particular men by name who will not want words but however you would evidence it that our Ordination by Presbyters is not void and of no effect I have this reason ready to give for this request for besides what I had formerly heard I was lately with some of those not of the meanest influence who urged Episcopacy as of absolute necessity affirming that this order the Church of God ever observed and that it was doubtless of Apostolical institution being a thing of Catholick tradition and that 's the best standard to intepret Scripture by What then are we arrived at that have forsaken the whole Church herein Though I am little versed in the Ancients yet I tell them we acknowledge that soon after the Apostles times the name Bishop came up as distinct fâ—om the Presbyters but then I call for their proof that the Primitive Bishops had the power of jurisdiction over Presbyters or that to him only ordination was appropriated I tell them also that we have certain evidence that in some Churches these Bishops were made by Presbyters so was the custom in Alexandria and when did ever the Church judge them to be no Bishops or Ministers And also of Tertullians Praesident probati quique Seniores and of Cyprians Salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo and that doubtless if Cyprian be to be believed the Church was then ruled by the joint consent of its Pastors of whom one was indeed the President or Moderator who yet called himself compresbyter and the Presbyters sâ—atres not filios as it was of lâ—te This answer I have had from some of them that the Church in those times was much under the cloâ—d being persecuted and had not that liberty to settle Diocesan Episcopacy in that Glory which the Apostolical institution aimed at and that the Church was then what it could be and not what it would be Do you judge of its weight For my part I am most stumbled at the reading of Ignatius whom Dr. H. so strenuously dâ—fends and cannot tell how to evade that Testimony in the behalf of Episcopacy if it be indeed the testimony of the true Ignatius But methinks his phrase is much unlike either that of Clemens or of Cyprian in this case It s great pity that Dr. Bloudel wants his eyes and so we are hindred of enjoying of more of his labours in this point His Notion of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a very pretty on and it were well if we had fuller evidence added to that which he hath endeavoured after in his Preface to his Apology for Hierom. Or if your judgement about the power of every single Pastor were fully improved it would conduce much to the clearing of these controversies I could methinks be glad of the practice of those proposals which Bishop Usher hath made in a late printed sheet But these angry Brethren who now oppose us are of a higher strain But I run out too far and forget whom I am writing to Truly I am deeply sensible what mischief those seeds which are as yet but thin-sown as I may say may grow up to in time I know not how it is with yoâ— but with us I fear 〈◊〉 for one at least would be easiâ—y drawn to â—uch an opinion of us if the temptation were but somewhat stronger multitudes observing how câ—vil transactions have 〈◊〉 in a round begin also to think we shall also arive at our old Church-customs again now â—f thâ—se Episcopal 〈◊〉 judgement should but be dispersed moâ—e abroad how easily would it make these people think that we have dâ—luded them all this whiâ—â— and so will not regard us Alas that a sad thought is it if I should study and preach and pray for mens souls and yet be reâ—ected as one that had no chaâ—ge of them as a Mâ—nister laid on me for God We thank you for what you said in your Christian Concord and 〈◊〉 you would enlarge further on this Subject as you see convenient That the striplings in the Ministry may be furnished with arguments against our 〈…〉 such able hands as yours are I have doâ—e only I shall desire your pardon for my interrupting you in your other business and if I shall hereafter crave your assistance and direction iâ— some cases I pray you excuse me if uncivil and vouchsafe to let me hear from you for I am about to settle where the charge is great The Lord continue you 〈◊〉 us that you may be further an instrument of good I rest Ian. 8. 1657. Your Affectionate friend and weak Brother M. E. Assert Those who nullifie our present Ministry and Churches which have not the Prelatical Ordination and teach the people to do the like do incur the guilt of grievous sin CHAP. I. Sect. 1. FOR the making good this Assertion 1. I shall prove that they groundlesly deny our Ministry and Churches and 2. I shall shew thâ— greatness of their sin In preparation to the first I must 1. Take some notice of the true Nature of the Ministerial function and 2. Of the Nature and Reasons of Ordination Sect. 2. We are agreed ore tenus at least that the Power and Honour of the Ministry is for the Work and the Work for the Ends which are the revelation of the Gospel the application or conveyance of the benefits to men the right worshiping of God and right Governing of his Church to the saving of our selves and our people and the Glorifying and Pleasing God Sect. 3. So that A Minister of the Gospel is an Officer of Iesus Christ set apart or separated to preach the Gospel and thereby to convert men to Christianity and by Baptism to receive Disciples into his Church to congregate Disciples and to be the Teachers Overseers and Governours of the particular Churches and to go before them in publick worship and administer to them the special Ordinances of Christ according to the word of God that in the Communion of Saints the members may be edified preserved and be fruitful and obedient to Christ and the Societies well ordered beautified and strengthened and both Ministers and People saved and the Sanctifier Redeemer and the Father Glorified and Pleased in his People now and for ever Sect. 4. In this Definition of a Minister 1. It is supposed that he be competently qualified for these works For if the Matter be not so far Disposed as to be capable of the Form it will not be informed thereby There are some Qualifications necessary
choose a certain person to be her Husband and the Minister or Magistrate solemnize their Marriage without any mention of such Governing Power the Power doth nevertheless belong to the man because God hath specified by his Law the Power of that Relation and the man is Lawfully put in the Relation that by the Law of God hath such a Power so is it in the case in hand Sect. 107. But yet 2. I add that the Prelates and the Laws of England gave to Presbyters a Power of Ordination For in all their Ordinations the Presbyters were to lay on hands with the Prelate and did in all Ordinations that I have seen And if they actually imposed hands and so Ordained it was an actual profession to all that they were supposed to have the power of Ordination which they exercised Sect. 108. Obj. But they had no Power given them to do it without a Prelate Answ. 1. By Christ they had 2. You may as well say that Bishops have no Power to Ordain because they were not ordinarily at least to do it without the Presbyters Sect. 109. Obj. Saith the foresaid Learned Author Dissert Praemonit sect 10.11 Vnum illud lubens interrogarem an Hieronymus dum hic esset Presbyteratu secundario fungeretur partiariâ tantum indutus potestate praesente sed spreto insuper habito Episcopo Diaconum aut Presbyterum ordinare aut Presbytero uni aut alteri adjunctus recte potuerit si affirmetur dicatur sodes qua demum ratione ab eo dictum sit Episcopum sola ordinatione ergo ordinatione à Presbytero disterminatum esse sin negetur quomodo igitur Presbytero Anglicano cui nullam quae non Hieronymo potestatem c. Answ. 1. This is none of our case in England we Ordain not praesente sed spreto Episcopo but most Countreyes know of no Bishop that they have but Presbyters 2. Hierom might have Ordained with his fellow-presbyters according to the Laws of Christ but not according to the Ecclesiastical Canons that then obtained or bore sway 3. Hierom plainly tells you that it is by Ecclesiastical appointment for the prevention of schisme that Bishops were set up so far as to have this power more then Presbyters in the point of Ordination 4. The English Presbyters are Parochial Bishops and have an Office of Christs making and not of the Prelates and are not under those Ecclesiastical Canons that restrained Hierom from the exercise of this power And therefore whereas it is added by this Learned Author Quid huic dilemmati reponi aut opponi possit fateor equidem me non adeo Lynceum esse ut perspiciam he may see that he could scarce have set us an easier task then to answer his dilemma Sect. 110. The second and their principal objection is that We have no precept or example in the Church for Presbyters Ordaining without Prelates therefore it is not to be done Answ. 1. I told you before how Bishop Vsher told me he answered this Objection to King Charlâ— viz. from the example of the Church of Alexandria where Presbyters made Bishops which is more Sect. 111. But 2. I answer you haue no example in Scripture or long after that ever Prelates of the English sort did ordain nor any precept for it nor was such a Prelacy then known as is proved and therefore their Ordination hath less warrant then that by Pretbyters Sect. 112. And 3. I have told you before of Scripture warrant for Ordination by a Presbyterie and also by the Teachers and other Officers of a single Church as was the Church of Antioch Prove that there was any Bishop Sect. 113. Lastly it is confessed by the Dissenters that such Presbyters or Bishops as are mentioned Act. 20. Phil. 1.1 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1 c. had power of Ordination But according to the judgement of most of the Fathers that ever I saw or heard of that interpret those texts it is Presbyters that are meant in all or some of those texts It is granted us also by the Dissenters that the chief or sole Pastors of single Churches in Scripture-times did ordain and had the power of Ordination But the Presbyters of England and other Protestant Churches are the chief or sole Pastors of single Churches therefore c. Sect. 114. Object 3. But the English Presbyters have broak their Oaths of Canoical obedience and therefore at least are schismatical Answ. 1. Many never took any such oath to my knowledge For my part I did not 2. The particular persons that are guilty must be accused and neither must they be judged before they speak for themselves nor yet must others be condemned for their sakes In these parts there is not one Presbyter I think of ten who differs from the Prelates about Ordination that ever took that oath And therefore it is few that can be called Schismaticks on that account Yea 3. And those few that did take that Oath have few of them that I know of done any thing against the Prelates Sect. 115. Object 4. The English Presbyters have pull'd down the Prelates and rebelled against them and therefore at least are guilty of Schism Answ. 1. The guilty must be named and heard their case is nothing to the rest It is not one often I think perhaps of twenty that can be proved guilty 2. It was not the Scripture Bishops that they Covenanted against or opposed but only the irregular English Prelacy before described And the endeavour of reforming this corrupted Preâ—acy and reducing it to the Primitive frame is in it self no schism Sect. 116. Object 5. Ignatius commandeth them to obey the Bishops and do nothing without them Answ. 1. Ignatius also commandeth them to obey the Presbyters as the Apostles of Christ and to do nothing without them 2. The Bishops that Ignatius mentioneth were such as our Parish Bishops or Presbyters are that have a Presbyterie to assist them They were the chief Pastors of a single Church as is before proved out of Ignatius and not the Pastors of hundreds of Churches Sect. 117. I shall trouble the Reader with no more of their objections seeing by what is said already he may be furnished to answer them all but I shall now leave it to his impartial sober consideration whether I have not proved the truth of our Ministry and of the Reformed Churches and the Validity of our administrations and of our Ordination it self CHAP. VIII The greatness of their sin that are now labouring to perswade the People of the Nullity of our Ministry Churches and administrations Sect. 1. HAving laid so fair a ground for my application I think it my duty to take the freedom to tell those Reverend persons that oppose us in this point the Reasons why I dare not joyn with them and the guilt that I am perswaded they heap upon their own souls Wherein I protest it is not mine intent to make them odious or cast disgrace upon them for I do with
of the Churches and Ministry and the substance of worship it self and the Salvation of men souls As if it were better for Churches to be no Churches then not Prelatical Churches or for souls to be condemned then to be saved by men that are not Prelatical I speak not these things to exasperate them though I can expect no better but in the grief of my soul for the sad condition that they would bring men into Sect. 32. 26. They lay a very dangerous snare to draw Ministers to be guilty of casting off the work of God Flesh and blood would be glad of a fair pretence for so much liberty and ease O how fain would it be unyoakt and leave this labourious displeasing kind of life And when such as these shall perswade them that they are no Ministers they may do much to gratifie the flesh For some will say I am at a loss between both wayes I cannot see the lawfulness of Prelacy and yet they speak so confidently of the nullity of all other callings that I will forbear till I am better resolved Another will say I find my self to be no Minister and therefore free from the Obligation to Ministerial Offices and I will take heed how I come under that yoak again till I have fuller resolution Another will scruple being twice Ordained and so will think it safer to surcease At least they tempt men to such resolutions that would discharge them from so hard a work Sect. 33. 27. By this means also they make the breaches that are among us to be uncurable and proclaim themselves utterly unreconcileable to the most of the Protestant Churches For if they will have no reconciliation or communion with them till they shall confess themselves no Churches and cast off all their Ministers they may as well say flatly they will have none at all For no reasonable man can imagine or expect that ever the Churches should yield to these terms When they are declared no Ministers or Churches you cannot then have Communion with them as Ministers or Churches Sect. 34. 28. And it is easie to see how much they befriend and encourage the Papists in all this Is it not enough that you have vindicated the Pope from being the Antichrist but you must also openly proclaim that Rome is a true Church their Priests true Priests their Ordinances and Administrations Valid but all the Protestant Churches that are not Prelatical are indeed no Churches their Ministers no Ministers c. Who would not then be a Papist rather then a member of such a Protestant Church How can you more plainly invite men to turn Papists unless you would do it expresly and with open face Or how could you gratifie Papists more Sect. 35. 29. And truly if all these evils were accomplâ—shed the Ministers forsaken iniquity let loose the Ordinances prophaned by unworthy men c. we could expect nothing but that the judgements of God should be poured out upon us for our Apostacy and that temporal plagues involuntary should accompany the spiritual plagues that we have chosen and that God should even forsake our land and make us a by word and an hissing to the Nations and that his judgements should write as upon our doors This is the people that wilfully cast out the Ministers and mercies of the Lord. Sect. 36. 30. And if all this were but accomplished in the Conclusion I may be bold to ask what would the Devil himself have more except our damnation it self If he were to plead his own cause and to speak for himself would he not say the very same as these Learned Reverend Disputers do would he not say to all our graceless people Hear nâ—t these Ministers they are no true Ministers Ioyn not in Communion with their Churches they are no true Churches I doubt not but he would say many of the same words if he had leave to speak And should not a man of any fear be afraid and a man of any piety be unwilling to plead the very cause of Satan and say as he would have them say by accusing so many famous Churches and Ministers as being none indeed and drawing the people so to censure them and forsake them This is no work for a Minister of Christ. Sect. 37. Besides what is here said I desire those whom it doth concern that are afraid of plunging themselves into the depth of guilt and horror that they will impartially read over my first sheet for the Ministry which further shews the aggravations of their sin that are now the opposers and reproachers of them Consider them and take heed Sect. 38. But again I desire these Brethren to believe that as it is none of the Prelatical Divines that I here speak of but those that thus nullifie our Church Ministry while they own the Ministry and Church of Rome so it is none of my desire to provoke even these or injure them in the least degree But I could not in this sad condition of the Church but propound these hainous evils to their consideration to provoke them to try and to take heed lest they should incur so great a load of guilt while they think they are pleading for Order in the Church How can there be any charity to the Church or to our brethren in us if we can see them in such a gulf of sin as this and yet say nothing to them for fear of provoking them to displeasure Sect. 39. And I think it necessary that all young men that are cast by their arguings into temptations of falling with them into the same transgressions should have the case laid open to them that they may see their danger and not by the accusations of Schism be led into far greater real Schism with so many other sins as these Sect. 40. Yet is it not my intent to justifie any disorders or miscarriages that any have been guilty of in opposition to the Prelacie And if they can prove that I have been guilty of any such thing my self I shall accept of their reproof and condemn my sin as soon as I can discern it Only I must crave that the usual way of presumption affirmation or bare names of crimes be not supposed sufficient for Conviction without proof and before the cause is heard And also I do profess that for all that I have here said against the English Prelacy and though I earnestly desire it may never be restored yet were I to live under it again I would live peaceably and submissively being obedient and perswading others to obedience in all things lawfull CHAP. IX The sinfulness of despising or neglecting Ordination Sect. 1. IT is a thing so common and hardly avoided for men in opposing one extream to seem to countenance the other and for men that are convinced of the evil of one to run into the other as the only truth that I think it necessary here to endeavour the prevention of this miscarriage and having said so much
and not till then we shall have perfect Holiness so when we come to Heaven and not till then we shall have perfect Vnity and Peace But till then I shall take that which you call Patching as my Duty and our great Benefit If you think one man have not a Negative voice we neither urge you to say that he hath nor so much as to seem to own his claim You shall have leave in the publike Register of the Association to put it under your hand that Not as owning the claim of the Presidents Negative voice but as yielding in a Lawful thing for Peace you do Consent to forbear Ordaining any without him except in Cases of Necessity This you may do without any shew of contradicting your Principles and this is all that is desired § 30. Quest. And may we not for peace sake grant them as much in point of Iurisdiction as of Ordination and Consent to do nothing without Necessity but when the President is one and doth Consent Answ. Either by Iurisdiction you mean Law making or Executive Government The first belongs to none but Christ in the substance of his Worship and the Circumstances no man may Vniversally and Vnchangeably determine of but pro re nata according to emergent occasions the Magistrate may make Laws for them and the Pastors may make Agreements for Concord about them but none should determine of them without need and therefore here is no work for Legislators the Usurpers that have grievously wronged the Church And for Executive Government either it is over the People or over the Pastors To give a Negative voice to the President of an Association of the Pastors of many Churches in Governing the People of a single Church is to set up a new Office a fixed Pastor of many Churches and to overthrow Government and introduce the noxious sort of Prelacy which for my part I intend not to be guilty of And for proper Government of the Pastors I know none but God and Magistrates that have that Power Every Bishop saith Cyprian and the Council of Carthage hath Power of his own will and is responsible for his Actions to God and none of us are Episcopi Episcoporum Bishops of Bishops But there is a Communion among Pastors and Churches to be exercised and so an avoiding or rejecting from Communion and this some call improperly a Government And in this for my part I should consent where peace doth require it that we will not agree upon the rejecting of any Pastor of our Association no more then to the Accepting or Ordaining of them without the President but in cases of Necessity and that just on the terms exprest about Ordination § 31. As for instance in a particular Church there is a Communion to be held among all the members though none of them but the Officers are Governors of the Church And in many cases where the Peoples Consent is needful its common to stand to a Major vote and so great a stress is laid on this that by many of the Congregational way the Government of the Church is said to be in the Major vote of the people and yet 1. This is indeed no Government that belongs to them but Consent to Communion or Exclusion and 2. No Scripture doth require a Minor part to stand in all cases to the decision of a Major vote nor give a Major vote any Rule over the Consciences of the Minor part shew us this voting power in Scripture And yet 3. All agree that upon natural Reasons and General Rules of Scripture the Churches are allowed yea obliged in lawful things for maintaining Vnity and Peace to stand to the judgement of a Major vote in Cases that belong to them to vote in though there be no particular word for it in the Scripture Even so Associate Pastors have not a proper Government of one another neither by Presidents or Major votes though over the people they have but are all under the Government of God and the Magistrate only And yet they may in acts of Consent about Communion or Non-communion with one another prudentially agree to take the Consent of the President or of the Major vote of Pastors or of both where Peace or Order or Edification requireth it except in cases of Necessity § 32. Quest. But what will you take for a Case of Necessity which you will except Answ. 1. If the President be dead 2. Or sick or absent and cannot come 3. Or if he be malignant and wilfully refuse to Consent that the Church be well provided for or Governed 4. And withall supposing that without the great hurt or hazzard of the Churches we cannot delay the business till he be one or do Consent 5. Especially if he be set in enmity against the welfare of the Church and by pretence of a suspending vote would destroy the Church and bring in unworthy hurtful persons or things In all such Cases of Necessity its time to lay by our humane Rules for peace and Order § 33. Object But who shall be judge of this Necessity Answ. The Magistrate only shall be the Compelling Iudge The people shall be the Discerning Iudges the Pastors shall at least have as much power as the People each of them shall Discern so far as they must obey and execute And God only shall be the final Iudge § 34. Object But this will but cause Divisions and Confusions while the President thinks one thing Necessary and the Pastors another and the People another Answ. I answered this before Reason must not be cast by and the Churches ruined and poyson and destruction taken in on pretence of such inconveniences If such a Case of difference fall out each man will execute as he discerneth or judgeth being to answer for his own actions and having none that can undertake to answer for him And when we all come to the Bar of God for final Judgement he that was in the right shall be justified and he that falsly pretended Necessity against duty shall bear the blame § 35. Object But in the mean time the Churches will be divided Answ. 1. I told you there is no more hope of â— perfect Vnity on earth then of perfect Holiness 2. When two evils are before us though neither must be chosen for Evil is not an Object of choice unless as seeming good yet the Greater Evil must be first and most studiously repelled And the deformity and destruction of the Churches and the casting out of the Gospel and Worship of God is a greater Evil then disorder about good actions and differences about some Circumstances of Necessary works § 36. All this that I have said about the Negative de facto though not de jure that I would have Consented to for peace I intend not to extend to those Cases and Countries where peace requireth it not but rather the contrary muchâ—less to encourage any to think such a Negative Necessary in it self Some things may be Lawfully
Accommodation § 10. A fourth witness is Dr. Forbs of Scotland who having written purposely a Book called his Irenicon for Accommodation on such terms I need to say no more of him but refer you to the Book I shall name no more of the Episcopal party These four are enow to my purpose § 11. That the Presbyterians of England specially are willing to close upon these terms of a fixed Moderator I prove 1. By the profest Consent of that Reverend Learned servant of Christ Mr. Thomas Gataker a Member of the late Assembly at Westminster who hath professed his judgement of this matter in a Book against Lilly I refer you to his own words for brevity sake § 12. My next witness and for brevity many in one shall be Mr. Geree and the Province of London citing him in their Ius Divinum Ministerii pag. Append. 122. the words are these That the Ancient Fathers in the point of Episcopacy differ more from the high Prelatist thâ—n from the Presbyterian for the Presbyterians alwayes have a President to guide their actions which they acknowledge may be perpetual durante vita modo se bene gesserit or temporary to avoid inconvenience which Bilson takes hold of as advantagious because so little discrepant as he saith from what he maintaineth See the rest there § 13. 3. Beza the Leader against Prelacy saith de grad Minist Evang. Instituti Divini est ut in omni coetu Presbyterorum unus sit qui ordine praeat praesit reliquis It is of Divine Institution that in every Assembly of Presbyters there be one that go before and be above the rest And dividing Bishops into Divine Humane and Diabolical he makes the Humane tolerable Prelacy to be the fixed President § 14. 4. Calvin who is accused for ejecting Episcopacy besides what he writes of it to Card Sadolet saith in his Institut lib. 4. cap. 4. § 1. Ea cautione totam suam Oeconomiam composuerunt Ecclesiae veteris Episcopi ad unicam illam Dei verbi normam ut facile videas nihil fere hac parte habuisse à verbo Dei alienum § 2. Quibus ergo docendi munus injuâ—ctum erat eos omnes nominabant Presbyteros Illi ex suo numero in singulis civitatibus unum eligebant cui specialiter dabant titulum Episcopi ne ex aequalitate ut fâ—â—ri solet dissidia nascerentur Neque tamen sic honore dignitate superior erat Episcopus ut Dominium in Collegas haberet sed quas partes habet Consul in Senatu ut referat de negotiis sententias roget consulendo monendo hortando aliis praeâ—at authoritate sua totam actionem regat quod decretum Communi Consilio fuerit exequatur id munus sustinebat Episcopus in Presbyterorum coetu § 4. fine Gubernationem sic constituti nonnulli Hierarchiam vocarunt nomine ut mihi videtur improprio certe scripturis inusitato Cavere enim voluit spiritus sanctus nequis principatum aut dominationem somniaret quum de Ecclesiae gubernatione agitur Verum si rem omisso vocabulâ— intueamur N. B. reperiemus veteres Episcopos non aliam regendae Ecclesiae formam voluisse fingere ab ea quam Deus verbo suo praescripsit This he writes after the mention of Archbishops and Patriarcks as well as of Bishops governing in Synods § 15. Where by the way let me give you this observation that Bishops Governing but in Synods can have no other power of Government then the Synods themselves have But Synods themselves as such are not directly for Government but for Concord and Communion of Churches and so consequently for well-governing the several flocks Nor hath a Synod any Governing Power over a particular Pastor as being his superiour appointed to that end but only a Power of Consent or Agreement to which for unity and communion sake he is consequentially obliged not by Virtue of Gods Command that requireth us to obey the Higher Power for three Pastors are not made so the Rulers of one but by virtue of Gods commands that require us to do all things in Unity and to maintain the Peace and Concoâ—d of the Churches and to avoid Divisions and discord § 16. If any think that this doth too much favour the Congregational way I must tell him that it is so true and clear that the Episcopal men that are moderate acknowledge it For instance the Reverend Bishop Vsher did without asking of himself profess to me that it was his judgement that certainly Councils or Synods are not for Government but for Vnity and that a Bishâ—p out of Council hath the same Governing Power as all the Council though their vote may bind him for Vnity to consent § 17. This being so it must needs follow that an Archbishop or the President of a National Provincial Diocesan or Classicall Assembly or of any Association of the Pastors of many Churches hath no superiour Governing power over the Parochial or Congregational Bishop of one Church but only in concurrence with the Synod a Power of Determining by way of Agreement such points as he shall be obliged for Unity and Communion to consent to and perform if they be not contrary to the word of God This evidently follows from this Reverend Archbishops doctrine and the truth § 18. And if any shall think that the Presbyterians will not yield that a particular Church do ordinarily consist but of one full Congregation I confute them by producing their own Concessions in the London Ministers Ius Divinum Ministerii Append pag. 123. they plainly say that The later Bishops were Diocesan the former that is the Bishops of the first or ancient times were Bishops only of one Congregation And pag. 82. they say These Angels were Congregational not Diocesan In the beginning of Christianity the number of Believers even in the greatest Cities were so few as that they might well meet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in one and the same place And thâ—se were called the Church of the City and therefore to ordain Elders 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are all one in Scripture Thus far they yield to the Congregational men § 19. 5. One other witness of the Presbyterians readiness to accommodate on these terms I shall give and no more and that is Mr. Richard Vines a man that was most eminent for his management of the Presbyterian cause in the Assembly and at Vxbridge Treaty and in the Isle of Wight the Papers there presented to the King are to be seen in Print When we did set up our Association in this County I purposing to do nothing without advise and designing a hearty closure of all sober Godly men Episcopal Presbyterian Congregational and Erastian did consult first about it by Letters with Mr. Vines and in his answer to mine he approved of the design and thought our distance very small and yielded to a fixed Presidency though not to a Negative
do more hurt by breaking the Churches peace then they do good by converting souls But who was it that laid these snares in their way Who laid the Churches peace upon your inventions Had not the Church a sure Rule and an happy order and unity and peace before your Common prayer Book or Ceremonies were born Why must the Church have no peace but upon such terms Who made this Necessity that all men must be taken for intolerable schismaticks that dare not stint themselves in the publick worship by your impositions Will you not be confounded before God when these Questions must be answered The Church might have kept both Peace and her Pastors if you had let all alone as the Apostles left it and had not turned the forms of your Devotions to be a snare for others 9. And it is great unmercifulness to the Souls of particular men when you will drive them into such snares and câ—mpell them to go against their consciences in indifferent things what ever is not of faith is sin And whether they believe it good or bad you will compell them to practise all that you impose Have you not Consciences your selves Do you not know what it is for a man to be driven against his Conscience If not you are no Christians and then no wonder if you want the Charity and compassion of Christians and so easily for nothing abuse and injure the Christian cause 10. And in thus doing you deal unjustly and do not as you would be done by You would have Liberty your selves now to use a Liturgy And why should not others have Liberty to disuse it Either you take it for a thing Necessary in it self or for Indifferent If as Necessary then you are so much the more arrogant and injurious to the Churches and your usurpation is the more intolerable and you do much to Justifie them that deprive you of your own liberty For I know no Liberty that you should have to make universal Laws for the Church or to make new duties by your own meer wills or turn Indifferent things into Necessary and so to multiply our work and burden and danger and to silence suspend or excommunicate all that dare not submit to your usurped Dominion But if you take it for a thing in it self Indifferent whether we pray in a Form of prescribed words or not then as we are content that you have your Liberty on one part you have as just cause to allow us our liberty on the other and to do as you would be done by 11. And by these Impositions you set up a New Office or Power in the Church Consisting of a New Legislation and a Government of the Church by such new humane Laws We know no Law-giver but 1. Christ as to universal Laws of standing necessity to the Churches in the matters of Salvation And 2. Magistrates to make by-laws under Christ for a just determination of those mutable circumstances that ought to be determined by humane Prudence and 3. The Ministers or Pastors of particular Churches to direct and guide the people as there is cause As for Bishops or Councils we know of no Legislative Power that they have over their Brethren though Agreements they may make which may be obligatory 1. by consent as other contracts 2. and in order to unity where the case requireth such Agreements But to set up a New sort of Jurisdiction in the Church by Legislation to make Forms and Ceremonies obligatory and by Executions to punish Pastors that will not practise them is a dangerous device 12. Lastly by this means you will harden the Papists that by their Inventions and Impositions have divided the Church and been guilty of so much usurpation and tyrannie For how can we condemn that in them that is practised by our selves And though in number of Inventions and Impositions they exceed yet it is not well to concur with them in the kind of unnecessary Impositions and so far to Justifie them in their injury to the Church If none of these or other Reasons will alloy the Imperious distemper of the Proud but they must needs by a usurped Legislation be making Indifferent things become necessary to others and domineer over mens Consciences and the Church of God we must leave them to him that being the Lord and Lawgiver of the Church is Jealous of his Prerogative and abhorreth Idols and will not give his glory to another and that delighteth to pull down the Proud and humble them that exalt themselves But yet how far an Agreement or voluntary Consent of the Churches is desirable as to a Liturgy I shall shew more anon Prop. 7. THE safest way of composing a stinted Liturgie is to take it all or as much as may be for words as well as matter out of the Holy Scriptures Reas. 1. This way is least lyable to scruple because all are satisfied of the infallible Truth of Scripture and the fitness of its expressions that are not like to be satisfied with mans And it is a laudable disposition in the Creature to prefer the words of God before all other and therefore not to be discouraged in any Reas. 2. This way tends most to the peace of the Church All will unite in the words of God that will not unite in the forms and words of men If they understand not a word of God yet knowing it to be true they will not quarrel with it but submit But if they understand not the words of men they will be ready to suspect them and so to quarrel with them and so the Churches peace will be broken Besides the judgements of men being fallible many will suspect that its possible there may be some error in their forms though we see them not and God should be worshiped in the surest way Reas. 3. There is no other words that may be preferred before the words of God or stand in Competition with them and therefore me thinks this should easily be decided Object But the Scripture hath not forms enough for all the Churches uses Answ. It hath matter and words for such Forms Without any additions save only terms of Connection the sentences of holy Scripture may suffice the Church for all its uses as to forms Object But men may speak untruths in Scripture words if they will and by misplacing and misapplying them may make them speak what was never meant in them Answ. But 1. When they use no expository terms of their own but meerly recite the words of Scripture the perverting them will not be so easie or common And 2. When they have placed them how they please the people are left at liberty 〈…〉 to the sence they have in the 〈…〉 to what mens misplacing 〈…〉 put upon them when we professedly make our forms out of Gods word we do as it were tell the people that they must give each sentence its proper interpretation as it s meant in Scripture because we pretend not to change it
no Transgression but here is no Law of God commanding Christmas day or the other Holy daies therefore there is no transgression in not keeping them And then 9. it is not so sure that there is no transgression in keeping them therefore the surer side is to be taken 10. And it seems strange that we find not so much as any ancient general Council making any mention of Christmas or such daies though of the Martyrs daies some do All these reasons which I run over hastily and many more which for brevity I pretermit do seem to make it a very hard question whether the keeping of this sort of Holy daies be lawfull § 47. And it is not to be much stuck at that a Day to Christ doth seem more necessary and pious then a Day in commemoration of a Martyr or a particular Mercy For in the highest parts of Gods worship God hath left man least to do as to Legislation and Decisions and usurpations here are far most dangerous A weekly Day is somewhat more then an Annâ—versary And yet I think there is few of the contrary minded but would doubt whether man might impose on the Church the observation of another weekly Holy day in commemoration of Christs Nativity The worship of God is a more excellent and necessary thing then the veneration due to a worthy person And yet we have not so much liberty to make new waies of worshiping God as of veneration to men So is it here though even the Daies that are for the memorial of the Saints are ultimately for the honour of God yet those that are set apart directly and immediately to commemorate the work of Redemption are Relatively much higher and therefore seem to be more exempted from the Determination of humane laws § 48. By this and much more I am fully satisfied 1. That the keeping of these daies is a thing of it self unnecessary 2. And that there being none on earth that can justly pretend to a power of universal Government over the whole Catholick Church it is certain that none on earth can bind the Catholick Church to such observances The Canons of Pastors are Authoritative Directions to their own flocks that are bound to obey them so it be in lawful things but to other Churches or to their fellow Pastors they are but Agreements and how far they bind I shall shew anon 3. And even in a single Church or a Province or Nation I am satisfied that it is a great sin for Magistrates or Pastors to force all that scruple it to the observation of these daies and to lay the unity or Peace of their Churches on it and to cast out censure reproach or punish them that dare not obey such impositions for fear of sining against God And it is a most dsingenuous thing to insinuate and put into the minds of men accusations of the Impiety of the dissenters and to perswade the world that it is irreligiousness or humorous singularity when it is so known a thing to all that know them that the persons that scruple or disown these daies do ordinarily walk in uprightness and the fear of God in other matters and profess that it is only a fear of breaking the Laws of God that keeps them from conformity to the will of others and that they are reproached by the multitude of the observers of these daies for their spending the Lords Day in Holy exercises which the reproachers spend too much in idleness sensuality or prophaness and it is not long since many of them were cast out of the Ministerial service or suspended for not reading a Book authorizing Dancing and other recreations on the Lords day In a word to reproach them as Precisians and Puritans for the strictness of their lives and yet at the same time to perswade men that they are ungodly for not keeping Holy daies or not kneeling at the Sacrament is not ingenuous dealing and draws too neer the Manners of the Pagans who called the Christians ungodly because they durst not offer their sacrifices and when they dragd them to the judgement-seats they cryd Tollite impios as iâ— themselves were the Godly men I compare not the matter of the causes here but only the temper of the persons and manner and justice of proceedings § 49. And yet for all this I am resolved if I live where such Holy daies as these are observed to censure no man for observing them nor would I deny them liberty to follow their judgements if I had the power of their Liberties provided they use not reproach and violence to others and seek not to deprive them of their Liberties Paul hath so long agoe decided these cases Rom. 14. 15. that if men would be Ruled by the word of God the controversie were as to the troublesome part of it at an end They that through weakness observe a Day to the Lord that is not commanded them of God should not judge their brethren that observe it not and they that observe it not should not despise or set at naught their weaker though censorious brethren that observe it but every one should be fully perswaded in his own mind The Holy Ghost hath decided the case that we should here bear with one another § 50. Yea more I would not only give men their Liberty in this but if I lived under a Government that peremptorily commanded it I would observe the outward rest of such a Holy day and I would preach on it and joyn with the Assemblies in Gods worship on it Yea I would thus observe the Day rather then offend a weak brother or hinder any mans salvation much more rather then I would make any division in the Church I think in as great matters as this did Paul condescend when he circumcised Timothy and resolved to eat no flesh while he lived rather then offend his brother and to become all things to all men for their good Where a thing is evil but by accident the greatest Accidents must weigh down the less I may lawfully obey and use the day when another doth unlawfully command it And I think this is the true case § 51. 7. And for the next ceremony the Name and form of an Altar no doubt it is a thing indifferent whether the Table stand this way or that way and the Primitive Churches used commonly the names of Sacrifice and Altar and Priest and I think lawfully for my part I will not be he that shall condemn them But they used them but metaphorically as Scripture it self doth Heb. 13.10 15 16. Rom. 12.1 Ephes. 5.2 Phil. 2.17 4.18 All believers are called Priests and their service Sacrifices 1 Pet. 2.5 9. Rev. 1.6 5.10 20.6 I conceive that the dislike of these things in England the form and name of an Altar and the Rails about it was not as if they were simply evil But 1. because they were illegal innovations forced on the Churches without Law or any just authority
Thanksgiving Scripture is a Directory and out of it we shall be glad of any direction that you will gather for us Would you have forms of Words for Prayer and Praise Scripture hath given you many the Lords Prayer the Psalms and many more And if you think you can do better you have liberty to do it your selves And is not that enough God hath left it indifferent to us whether we use a stinted form or not If you be not wiser then God do you leave it indifferent also Would you have a stated day for Gospel-worship in Commemoration of the work of our Redemption Christ and his Apostles have taught you to observe one even the Lords day to these Ends. Would you have exciting mystical instituted signs Christ hath appointed you Baptism and the Lords Supper which signifie the very substance of the Gospel Can your signs do more Or is a greater number more desirable Why may not a few of Christs institution full and clear that have a promise of his blessing serve turn without the additions of mens froathy wits Use the Lords Supper ofter and with more preparation and you will need no Sacramental Riâ—es of your own If Christs signs will not do it in vain do you hope for it from the devises of men Gods Ordinances have no blemishes and wants that need your patches Do that which Scripture hath cut out for you and I warrant you you 'l find no want of such additions The making of the Law and Rule of Worship is Gods work the obeying it is yours It s a course most perverse when you fail and deal falsly in your own work to fall upon Gods work and take on you to mend that Do your own well in obeying and judge not the Law and trouble not the Church with your additions § 35. Yet still remember that we allow both Magistrates and Pastors to see to the execution of Gods laws and to determine of Circumstances in order thereto that are necessary in genere But it is only 1. Such Mystical signs as in genere are not commanded us and left to mans determination that I speak of 2. And also the needless determination of circumstances and making Laws for such things as should be left to the prudence of every Pastor to be varyed as occasion requireth CHAP. XV. Reasons for Obedience in Lawfull things § 1. LEST men that are apt to run from one extream into another should make an ill use of that which I have before written I shall here annex some Reasons to perswade men to just obedience and preserve them from any sinfull nonconformity to the commands of their Governours and the evill effects that are like to follow thereupon § 2. But first I will lay together some Propositions for decision of the Controversie How far we are bound to obey mens precepts about Religion Especially in case we doubt of the lawfulness of obeying them and so cannot obey them in faith § 3. Briefly 1. We must obey both Magistrates and Pastors in all things lawfull which belong to their offices to command 2. It belongs not to their office to make God a new worship But to command the Mode and Circumstances of worship belongeth to their office for guiding them wherein God hath given them generall rules 3. We must not take the Lawfull commands of our Governours to be unlawfull 4. If we do through weakness or perversness take Lawfull things to be unlawfull that will not excuse us in our disobedience Our error is our sin and one sin will not excuse another sin Even as on the other side if we judge things unlawfull to be lawfull that will not excuse us for our disobedience to God in obeying men 5. As I have before shewed many things that are miscommanded must be obeyed 6. As an erroneous judgement will not excuse us from Obedience to our Governours so much less will a doubtfulness excuse us 7. As such a doubting erring judgement cannot obey in plenary faith so much less can he disobey in faith For it is a known Command of God that we obey them that have the Rule over us but they have no word of God against the act of obedience now in question It is their own erring judgement that intangleth them in a necessity of sinning till it be changed 7. In doubtfull cases it is our duty to use Gods means for our information and one means is to consult with our Teachers and hear their words with teachableness and meekness 8. If upon advising with them we reâ—ain in doubt about the lawfulness of some Circumstance of order if it be such as may be dispensed with they should dispense with us if it may not be dispensed with without a greater injury to the Church or cause of God then our dispensation will countervail then is it our duty to obey our Teachers notwithstanding such doubts For it being their office to Teach us it must be our duty to believe them with a humane faith in cases where we have no Evidences to the contrary And the Duty of Obeying them being certain and the sinfulness of the thing commanded being uncertain and unknown and only suspected we must go on the surer side 9. Yet must we in great and doubtfull cases not take up with the suspected judgement of a single Pastor but apply our selves to the unanimous Pastors of other Churches 10. Christians should not be over-busie in prying into the work of their Governours not too forward to suspect their determinations But when they know that it is their Rulers work to guide them by determining of due Circumstances of worship they should without causeless scruples readily obey till they see just reason to stop them in their obedience They must not go out of their own places to search into the Actions of another mans office to trouble themselves without any cause § 4. And now I intreat all humble Christians readâ—â—y to obey both Magistrates and Pastors in all Lawfull things and to consider to that end of these Reasons following Reas. 1. If you will not obey in Lawfull things you deny authority or overthow Government it self which is a great ordinance of God established in the fifth commandment with promise And as that commandment respecting societies and common good is greater then the following commands as they respect the private good of our neighbours or are but particular Means to that Publick good whose foundation is laid in the fifth commandment so accordingly the sin against this fifth commandment must be greater then that against the rest § 5. Reas. 2. In disobeying the lawfull commands of our superiors we disobey Christ who ruleth by them as his officers Even as the disobeying a Justice of Peace or Judge is a disobeying of the soveraign Power yea in some cases when their sentence is unjust Some of the ancient Doctors thought that the fifth commandment was the last of the first Table of the Decalogue and that the Honouring of Governors is
them when written and the like after the printing for the collecting the Errata of the Press I find by this hasty review and by some observation of mens readiness to misunderstand me that it is necessary to speak a little more about the following particulars that I may be understood by such as are willing to understand me and the mistakes of others I shall easily bear Sect. 1. Pag. 89. There is somewhat that requireth correction of the pen and somewhat that requireth explication In translating that passage of Ignatius Unus panis qui pro omnibus fractus est must be written next effusus est before unus Calix And for the following objection though it was made by a discreet person yet I know no ground for it unless Is. Vossius his Edition leave out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I have not now at hand but is likelyest I know not of any Greek copy that leaves it out Indeed Bishop Ushers Latine doth and the Vulgar Latine leaves out the translation of the next words before it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of which saith Bishop Usher Ex interpretatione hac excidisse videantur And noting the corruption of the Vulgar Translation in this very place I there premised to my Answer that it might occasion a change in the Text that it hath done so in many places I think is easie to prove but that it hath done so here there is no probability if any Greek Copy be as is objected and the Reasons of my conjecture of the possibility are so little for a probability that as I express them not so I think them not worth the expressing but rather bid you take that as non dictum Though of the general I find Bishop Usher himself saying both of his Latine Version Ex eâ solâ integritati suae restitui posse Ignatium polliceri non ausim and of the first Greek Edition Hanc reliqui sequuti sunt editores non ex Graco aliquo codice alio sed partim ex ingenio partim ex vetere Vulgato Latino Interprete non paucis in locis eandem corrigentes Epist. ad Lect. ante Annot. pag. 26. Dissert Sect. 2. I must intreat the Reader to observe that my drift in this writing is not so much to oppose any form of Government meerly as contrary to the Institution or Apostolical Rule as to plead against that which I take to be destructive to the Ends of Government Not that I desire not a careful adhering to the sacred Rule but 1. Because I suppose that many circumstantials of Discipline undetermined in the Word are feigned by some to be substanstantial necessary things and that many matters are indifferent that some lay the Peace if not the being of the Church upon 2. Because I so far hate contention that if any Government contrary to my Iudgement were set up that did not apparently in the nature of it wrong the Church I would silently live under it in peace and quietness and accordingly would be now loth to enter a quarrel with any Writers that differ from us in tolerable things But if I know that their judgement reduced to practice is like to be the undoing of many souls and to cast Discipline almost wholly out of the Church I think it better to displease them then let them undo the Church without contradiction The best is the serious Christians of this age have experience to help them to understand the case and I suppose my Disputation to be unto them as if I Disputed before a man that is restored from want or banishment or sickness whether he should be reduced to the Condition from which he is restored Sect. 3. Some passages here will occasion the Question as p. 5. Whether and how far Church Government is jure Divino But of this in the main I am agreed with them that I dispute To speak further my own judgement is 1. That the Spirit of God hath established all the Officers and worship-Ordinances of his Church and that no new Church-office or Ordinance of worship as to the substance may be instituted by man 2. But that there are many Circumstantials about the Exercise of those Offices and Ordinances that are not determined particularly by a Law but are left to humane prudence to determine of by the General directions of the Law And so I suppose that Bishops and Presbyters are but one Office of Gods institution but in the exercise of this Office if one for order be made a Moderator or President of the rest or by agreement upon a disparity of parts or interest do unequally divide their work between them in the exercise it is a thing that may be done and is fit where the Edification of the Church requireth it but not a thing that always must be done nor is of it self a Duty but a thing indifferent The following Case therefore I hence resolve Sect. 4. Quest. Whether the Order of subject Presbyters might lawfully be created by Bishops or any humane Power and whether the Order of Bishops might lawfully be created for the avoiding of Schism by the consent of Presbyters or Metropolitans by Bishops Answ. If you understand by the word Order a distinct Office none may create any of these but God But if by Subject Presbyters be meant only men of the same Office with Bishops that do for the Churches benefit subject themselves to the direction or Presidency of another upon some disparity in their gifts or the like in the exercise of that Office I suppose that this is a thing that by Consent may be lawfully done And so I verily believe that betimes in the Church it was done of which anon So if by Bishops be meant no distinct Office but one of the Presbyters chosen from among the rest to exercise his Ministery in some eminency above the rest by reason of his greater Gifts or for Peace and Order I doubt not but it is a thing that consent may do And accordingly the Canon Law defines a Bishop that he is Unus è Presbyteris c. So if by a Metropolitan be not meant another Office but one in the same Office by reason of the advantage of his Seat chosen to some acts of Order for the common benefit I doubt not but it may be done but every such Indifferent thing is not to be made Necessary statedly and universally to the Church Sect. 5. When I do in these Papers plead that the Order of Subject Presbyters was not instituted in Scripture times and consequently that it is not of Divine Institution I mean as aforesaid that as a distinct Office or Species of Church ministers as to the Power from God it is not of Divine Institution nor a lawful Institution of man but that among men in the same Office some might Prudentially be chosen to an eminency of degree as to the exercise and that according to the difference of their advantages there might be a disparity in the use of their
authority and gifts I think was done in Scripture times and might have been after if it had not then And my judgement is that ordinarily every particular Church such as our Parish Churches are had more Elders then One but not such store of men of eminent gifts as that all these Elders could be such But as if half a dozen of the most judicious persons of this Parish were Ordained to be Elders of the same Office with my self but because they are not equally fit for publick preaching should most imploy themselves in the rest of the Oversight consenting that the publick preaching lie most upon me and that I be the Moderator of them for Order in Circumstantials This I think was the true Episcopacy and Presbytery of the first times From the mistake of which two contrary Errors have arisen The one of those that think this Moderator was of another Office in specie having certain work assigned him by God which is above the reach of the Office of Presbyters to perform and that he had many fixed Churches for his charge The other of them that think these Elders were such as are called now Lay-elders that is Vnordained men authorized to Govern without Authority to Preach Baptize or Administer the Lords Supper And so both the Prelatical on one side and the Presbyterians and Independents on the other side run out and mistake the ancient form and then contend against each other This was the substance of what I wrote to Mr. Vines which his subjoyned Letter refers to where he signifieth that his judgement was the same When Paul and Barnabas were together Paul was the chief speaker and yet Barnabas by the Idolaters called Jupiter Nature teacheth us that men in the same Office should yet have the preheminence that 's due to them by their Age and Parts and Interests c. and that Order should be kept among them as in Colledges and all Societies is usual The most excellent part of our work is publick preaching but the most of it for quantity is the rest of the Oversight of the Church in Instructing personally admonishing reproving enquiring into the truth of accusations comforting visiting the sick stablishing the weak looking to the poor absolving answering doubts excommunicating and much more And therefore as there is a necessity as the experienced know of many Elders in a particular Church of any great number so it is fit that most hands should be most imployed about the said works of Oversight yet so as that they may preach as need and occasion requireth and administer Sacraments and that the eminent Speakers be most employed in publick preaching yet so as to do their part of the rest as occasion requireth And so the former Elders that Rule well shall be worthy of double honour but especially these that labour in the Word and Doctrine by more ordinary publick preaching And such kind of seldom-preaching Ministers as the former were in the first times and should be in most Churches yet that are numerous Sect. 6. When I speak in these Papers therefore of other mens Concessions that there were de facto in Scripture times but One Bishop without any subject Presbyters to a particular Church remember that I speak not my own judgement but urge against them their own Concessions And when I profess my Agreement with them it is not in this much less in all things for then I needed not disspute against them but it is in this much that in Scripture times there was de facto 1. No meer Bishop of many particular Churches or stated worshipping Congregations 2. Nor any distinct Office or Order of Presbyters that radically had no Power to Ordain or Govern or Confirm c. which are the subject Presbyters I mean Sect. 7. Specially remember that by Bishops in that dispute I mean according to the Modern use one that is no Archbishop and yet no meer Presbyter but one supposed to be between both that is a Superior to meer Presbyters in Order or Office and not only in degree or modification of the exercise but below Archbishops whether in Order or Degree These are they that I dispute against excluding Metropolitans or Archbishops from the question and that for many Reasons Sect. 8. If it were proved or granted that there were Archbishops in those times of Divine Institution it would no whit weaken my Arguments For it is only the lowest sort of Bishops that I dispute about yea it confirmeth them For if every combination of many particular Churches had an Archbishop then the Governors of such Combinations were not meer Bishops and then the meer Bishops were Parish Bishops or Bishops of single Churches only and that is it that I plead for against Diocesan Bishops that have many of these Churches perhaps some hundreds under one Bishop of the lowest rank having only Presbyters under him of another Order Sect. 9. If any think that I should have answered all that is written for an Apostolical Institution of Metropolitans or of Archbishops or of the subject sort of Presbyters or other points here toucht I answer them 1. In the former my work was not much concerned nor can any man prove me engaged to do all that he fancieth me concerned to do 2. Few men love to be contradicted and confuted and I have no reason to provoke them further then necessity requireth it 3. I take not all that I read for an argument so considerable as to need Replyes If any value the Arguments that I took not to need an Answer let them make their best of them I have taken none of them out of their hands by robbing them of their Books if they think them valid let them be so to them Every Book that we write must not be in folio and if it were we should leave some body unanswered still I have not been a contemner or neglecter of the writings of the contrary-minded But voluminously to tell the world of that I think they abuse or are abused in is unpleasing and unprofitable Sect. 10. And as to the Jus Divinum of limited Diocesses to the Apostles as Bishops and of Archbishops Metropolitans c. I shall say but this 1. That I take not all for currant in matter of fact that two or three or twice so many say was done when I have either cross testimony or valid Reasons of the improbability I believe such Historians but with a humane faith and allow them such a degree of that as the probability of their report and credibility of the persons doth require 2. I take it for no proof that all that was done in all the Churches that I am told was done in some 3. I take the Law of Nature and Scripture to be the entire Divine Law for the Government of the Church and World 4. And therefore if any Father or Historian tell me that this was delivered by the Apostles as a Law to the Vniversal Church which is not contained in Scriptures
prove It hath been usual for Princes to decase bad Priests and heretical or contentious Bishops and to correct disorders and restrain usurpations of Prelates among themselves And if any such thing be now done by our present Governours I know not any thing of that necessity in the English Species of Prelacy as will warrant us to dâ—sobey them Sect. 8. And it is a thing that is inconsistent with the Peace and Unity of these Churches Which is another reason For 1. We have seen the ill effects of it which I am not willing to open to the worst 2. And the multitude of the most conscientious people are against it 3. And the generality of the most conscionable faithful Ministers are against it So that it could not be restored without the apparent ruine of these Churches 4. And a Learned Reverend Assembly of Divines chosen out of the several Counties by a Parliament were against it 5. And many Parliaments have been against it 5. And the generality of their adherents in the two Nations that then lived in their Power have taken a Solemn Covenant against it Not against all Episcopacy but against the English sort of Prelacie So that it cannot be restored without incomparably much more hurt then the continuance of it would have done good and without setting all these Churches on a flame So far is it now from being a likely means of Unity or Peace among us Sect. 9. And if yet they plead the obligation of the ancient Laws which is most insisted on by many I must by way of just excuse remember them of one thing which its like they do not forget that if those Laws are still in force to oblige us to seek Ordination from the Prelates and to Authorize the Prelates to Ordain notwithstanding the Laws of later Powers that have repealed them then it must needs follow that those later Powers are taken for no Powers and consequently that the same Laws do oblige the Prelates to put the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy as to some other Power upon the Oâ—dained before they lay hands upon them and oblige the Ordained to take those Oaths as well as to be so Ordained For if they be yet of force in one they are of 〈◊〉 in both And so no man can be Ordained by you 〈…〉 guilty of that which the present Lawes make 〈…〉 forfeiting his life which I know nothing in the 〈…〉 him to do 〈…〉 think I may conclude that it is your own judgement that men should rather forbear your Ordination then hazard their lives or violate the present Laws because when a Declaration or Order came forth not long ago prohibiting men of your perswasion that had been sequestred to Preach or Administer Sacraments the generality of you presently obeyed it and some wrote for the forbearance that they practised And if an Ordained man should obey the present power by forbearing to preach and administer Sacraments or may forbear these to escape a temporal danger much more may men do so about your sort of Ordination Sect. 11. Moreover 4. We shall be guilty of a fixed Schism among the Refoâ—â—ed Churchâ—s and of making the healing of our breaches impossible if by our compliance we own your dividing Principle that No other are true Ministers or Churches but such as have your Manner of Ordination For by this Rule all the Ministers in these and other Protestant Nations must be degraded or taken for no Ministers and all the Churches for no true Churches though perhaps they may be confessed Christian Communities Nor the Ordinances and administrations true And do you think these are likely terms for Peace Will they ever be yielded to by so many Churches Or is it a desirable thing Should Rome be so much gratified And our Churches ruined and the souls of millions cast away and sacrificed to your opinions or Peace While your Prelacy pretended to no more but to be the best sort of Government and your Church to be the best of Churches we could submit to you in all things that were not flatly sinful But when you will be the only Churches and unchurch all others even the most flourishing Churches for knowledge and holiness and when you must be the only Ministers and others must be none unless they will be Ordained by you this is enough to put a sober man to a stand whether he shall not be guilty of notorious schism by complying with so schismatical a principle if he subject himself voluntarily to a Prelacy that hath such principles and pretences and to an Ordination that is administred on these grounds and terms This was not the ground nor these the principles of the former English Prelates and therefore we were more capable of subjection to them or Communion with them We could have lived in their Communion and in the Communion of the rest of the Protestant Churches that have no Prelacy But if by innovation you have made such a change as that we must separate from all the Reformed Churches and Ministers that have not your kind of Ordination if we will be your subjects or be Ordained by you according to your grounds its time for us to look about us that we escape that separation and schism that you would lead us into and engage us in by your way of Ordination Sect. 12. Among your selves there are many that affirm that if the Pope would have been content with his old Patriarchal Power and principium unitatis or primacy of Order and wave his last four hundred years determinations or at least not obtrude them on other Churches as Bishop Bromhall speaks they could have held communion with him that now cannot If Rome would have been content to be a Member of the Catholick Church though pretendedly the noblest they could have owned it But when it will be The Catholick Church and separate it self from all the rest unchurching all that are not subject to them and united in their Government they then drive us further from Communion with them Imitate them not in any degree in this Notorious schiâ—m and separation Be contented to be Ministers and Churches and tell not Christ he hath none but you and such as you and tell not Satan that the Kingdom of Christ is thus cut short to the honour or rejoycing of his adversary Sect. 13. It was not so ridiculous as sad to me to read in Mr. T. Ps. Self-revenger against Mr. Barlee pag. 37. and Ordination called a Notorious Comoe Tragedie equally sad and ridiculous which he and others lately acted in Daintry Church intituled by the Actors An Ordination of Ministers but by many of the Spectators An Ordination of Lay-Preachers to be Lay-preachers still and without repentance for ever uncapable of the Priesthood by being Ordained by such Priests as were uncapable of Ordaining Thus Mr. P. Sect. 14. And it seems he was of the same judgement whoever he was that would have abused Bishop Vsher by giving out that he told him that as
for Holland he questioned if there was a Church among them or not or words fully to that Purpose Against which abuse of the Dr. the Bishop was fain to vindicate himself See page 124 125. Of his Posthumous Judgement Sect. 15. Moreover 5. We know not of almost any Bishops in England by whom men may be Ordained Four or five Reverend Learned men of that degree are commonly said to survive among us whom we much honour and value for their worth But as these are so distant and their residence to the most unknown so the rest if there be any are known to very few at all that I can hear of It s famed that many Bishops there are but we know it not to be true nor know not who they be and therefore it cannot well be expected that their Ordination should be sought If they reveal not themselves and their Authority and do not so much as once command or claim obedience from the generality of Ministers how can they expect to be obeyed If they plead the danger of persecution I answer 1. What Persecution do they suffer that are known above others of their way 2. If that will excuse them when we never heard of any that suffered the loss of a penny for being known to be a Bishop since the Wars were ended then it seems they take the Being of the Ministry and Churches to be but of small moment that are not worthy their hazzard in a manifestation of their power And if this excuse them from appearing it must needs in reason excuse others from knowing them obeying them and submitting to them Sect. 16. And when they shall declare themselves to be our Bishops they must in all reason expect that the proof of it as well as the naked affirmation be desired by us For we must not take every man for a Bishop that saith he is so They must shew us according to the Canons that the Clergy of the Diocess lawfully Elected them and Bishops Consecrated them which are transactions that we are strangers to If they take the secret Election of six or seven or very few in a Diocess to be currant because the rest are supposed to be uncapable by Schism 1. Then they shew themselves so exceedingly unjust as to be unmeet for Government if they will upon their secret presumptions and unproved suppositions cut off or censure so many parts of the Clergy without ever accusing them or calling them to speak for themselves or heâ—ring their Defence 2. And if upon such presumptuous Censures you make your selves Bishops besides the Canons you cannot expect obedience from those that you thus separate from and censure unheard Sect. 17. It s known that the English Bishops as Grotius himself affirmeth were chosen by the King according to the custom here the Chapter being shadows in the business And if the King may make Bishops he may make Presbyters and then Ordination is unnecessary But if you say that the Consecrators make them Bishops and not the Kings Election then Rome had many Bishops at once when ever three or four Popes were consecrated at once which marrs all succession thence dirived and then if some Bishops consecrate one and some another both are true Bishops of one Diocess and many Pastors may be thus Ordained to one Church Sect. 18. And it concerneth us before we become their subjects to have some credible Evidence that they are so Orthodox as to be capable of the place And the rather because that some that are suspected to be Bishops how truly I know not have given cause of some suspicion Either by writing against Original sin or by owning Grotius's Religion which what it was I have shewed elsewhere or by unchurching the Protestant Churches and Nullifying their Ministry that have not their kind of Ordination while they take the Roman Ordination to be Valid and their Church and Ministry to be true with other such like Sect. 19. And 6. If we should now when better may be had subject our selves to the Ordination and Government of the abolished Prelacy we should choose a more corrupt way of administration and prefer it to a more warrantable way That this way is corrupt is proved in the former Disputation That a way more warrantable may be had I shall prove anon Though submission to a faulty way in some cases of Necessity is excusable yet when we have our choice the case is altered Sect. 20. And a tender Conscience hath very great reason to fear lest by such voluntrary subjection they should incur moreover this double guilt 1. Of all the hurt that this corrupt sort of Episcopacy did before the abolition 2. And of all the hurt that it might do again if it were introduced which is neither small nor uncertain He that hath seen the fruits that it brought forth but for a few years before the abolition and weighs the arguments brought against it methinks should fear to be the restorer of it Sect. 21. If any man as Mr. Thorndike and others do shall write for a more regular sort of Episcopacy it s one thing to find a tolerable Bishop in his Book and another thing to find him existent in England For we know not of any New sort of Regulated Episcopacy planted and therefore must suppose that it is the Old sort that is in being Let them bring their Moderate forms into existence and then its like that many may be more inclined to submit to their Ordination but their moderate principles having not yet made us any Moderate Episcopacy I see not how we should be ever the more obliged for them to submit to the Old but rather are the more justified in disowning it when their own reformed modell is against it CHAP. VII The Ordination used now in England and in other Protestant Churches is Valid and agreeable to Scripture and the Practice of the Ancient Church Sect. 1. HAving already proved that the late English Bishops Ordination is not of necessity it is satisfactory without any more ado to them that would nullifie our Ministry and Churches that have not their Ordination But because we may meet with other adversaries and because in a case of so much weight we should walk in the clearest light that we can attain for the satisfaction of our own Consciences I shall further prove the Validity of our Ordination and the truth of our Call and Minstry and Churches Sect. 2. Argument 1. The Ordination is Valid which is performed by such Bishops as were instituted and existent in Scriture times But our Ordination used in England and other refoâ—med Churches is performed by such Bishops as were institutâ—d and existent in Scâ—â—pture times the refore such Ordination is Valid Thâ— Major will not be denyed being â—â—derstood with a supposition of other requisites that are not now in controversie For those that we have to deal with do grant that such Bishops as are mentioned Acts 20. 1 Tim. 3. Tit. 1. Phil. 1.1 and