what Law maketh them whatever we think Ans Are not Churches formally relative societies what maketh them such but thoughts and wills of men expressed Gods mind exprest in his Institutions is his premised consent our consequent obedient consent maketh Christians Pastors and Churches If a Law cannot make the Parish consent to null Christs Officers and Churches it doth not null them to them If a Law say All marriages shall be void unless the Bishop remarry them This maketh them not void to any that consent not but say we stand to the valid marriage we had What doth another mans consent do to constitute me a Christian or Church-member except Parents for Infants And if my thoughts and consent put nothng in esse then the thoughts and consents of the conforming Clergy alters not their Churches and what then is that constituting cause you talk of Is it only the law for shame say not so Gods own Law as commanding us to be Christians Pastors or Churches maketh us not such without consent And can mans Law both null Gods Law and make us of what species it doth but bid us be without our consent XXX But here our Disputants think they expose me to derision What Do I intimate that one and the same Congregation may be two Churches of different species Ans I think to be such by open profession is disorderly and unusual But I think he that denieth this is unfit to deride the ignorance of another 1. If the people in one Kingdom may be in specie two Kingdoms the people of one Assembly may be two Churches but Bishop Bedle in his printed Letter said that Ireland was then two Kingdoms the King being Sovereign to some and the Pope to other And I think Hungary is so now between the Emperor and Turks 2. When Paul ordinarily held his assemblies in the Jewish Synagogues where half were Infidels and half Christians before he separated his Christians from them I think they were two Churches 3. If Independents had leave to meet in the Parish churches where the Parish Minister and their own Minister should preach by turns and the Parish only heard theirs as a lay preacher or none of their Pastor and so they heard the Parish Preachers I doubt not but they would be distinct church If one Parish church have two Pastors and one of them be professedly for an essential subjection to the Pope and the other against it and half the people of one mind and half of the other I think they are two Churches in one place If those Anabaptists who take none but the re-baptized for Church-members should with their Pastors join with Independents in worship tho esteeming them no churches I suppose you think they would be distinct churches in one place But I think none of this is the case of the churches that I join with for I suppose they null not Christs species of Ministers to themselves or me But if they did it to themselves that would not do it to me XXXI Obj. But one and the same Minister cannot be of two species and therefore relation to him cannot constitute distinct Churches Ans 1. One and the same man cannot be a Minister of Christ and no Minister of Christ so much is true nor of any two inconsistent species But if you will call any circumstantial difference a distinct species that will noâ— hinder the consistence The same man may be Christs Minister and the Kings Chaplain or a Dean or Preâ—endary or a Diocesan Bishop or Subject to a Diocesan such Bishops as Chrysostom Augustine Ambrose 〈◊〉 Parkeâ— Grindal Ushâ—r Davenant c and their Chaplains did not cease to be Christs Ministers 2 Relation to one of these men may make two sorts of consistent churcheâ— if the same man have a Parish and a Diocess as the German superintendents have and many other Bishops the warrantableness we are not now disputing 3. Yea one and the same Parish Minister may be Pastor of two Churches in one Assembly If he openly profess himself Orthodox the people that so own him are a church and if he secretly to a party of them profess himself an Anabaptist or a Papist and they unite with him as such they are another church such as it is Vespae habent favos marcionitae ecclesias Tertul. XXXII Obj. But the grand Objection is No man can be a Pastor of Christ against his will The Parish Ministers have all by conforming renounced the essence of the Christian Ministry and subscribed and sworn this renunciatâ—â— by subjecting themselves to Diocesans and swearing never to endeavour any alteration of the Diocesan Government and the Vestries who represent the churches have sworn the same and you have ofâ—en said that the Diocesan form of Government 1. Deposeth the Parish Bishops and maimeth the Ministry 2. Depâ—seth the Parish Churches 3. And maketh Parish Discipline impossible Ans It is impossible to write that which no man can misunderstand and make an ill use of I have oft told you 1. That I am in doubt whether Arch-Bishops as Successors of the Apostles only in the ordinary continued part of their Office be jure divino or not 2. That Congrational Bishops over Presbyters being ejusdem ordinis are an old venerable and lawful humane Institution 3. That Congregational Bishops only over the Laity are all Presbyters as such and of Christs Institution 4. Hereupon I have oft distinguished Diocesans into two sorts 1. Those that are but the Governors of true particular Churches that depose them not but Rule them by the word perswasively These are called Bishops being really Arch-Bishops These I never charged of the Consequents forenamed And if the King make them Cogent Magistrates also I will obey them I take the judgment of the Church of England manifest in Ordination Liturgy Articles c. to be for such Diocesans only tho I vastly dissent from many things in the Canons by which and the Mode in which some exercise their Government 2. The other sort is the Innovators form of Diocesan Government which hold that there is no Church without a Bishop and no Bishop but Diocesans either Bishop of Laity or Presbyters and so that the Parish Churches are no Churches but part of the lowest sort of true Political Churches These I take to be Super-conformists yea Nonconformists and Dissenters from the Church of England tho they may strive to get the name of the Church to themselves Now what I say of these Innovating Nonconformists and their designs and attempts our mistaking Separatists say I speak of the Laegal Church frame and so of all the Bishops and Parish-Churches And I see no hope of delivering the Church of God from the trouble of incogitant confident erroneous Dissenters that are not able to distinguish XXXIII I further answer this great Objection being concerned in Conscâ—ence to do it when men father their mistakes and Separation on me 1. The Parish-Ministers that I joyn with and I think the most that
truly thank God and him that I am called to review them and to clear my sence before I die And I adjure the tearing persecuting sect to think no more strangely and odiously of our differences in this case than of the sharp contention of Paul and Barnabas or that men should scramble if Gold and Pearls were scattered in the streets where dogs and swine would never strive about them Gods servants would please him we are all of weak understandings The Wisest best know their weakness The rest are nearest the state of the Fool who rageth and is confident It is impossible but offence must come Luke 17.1 But wo wo wo to any who will make canons so extreme hard for men to agree in as terms of their Union and Communion and excommunicate all that say a word against any word ceremony circumstances or office of their train and when they have done cry out against men for not agreeing to every syllable which a thousand to one are uncapable of understanding and the better men understand them the more they dislike them A Short Answer to the Chief Objections in a Book ENTITULED A Theological Dialogue c. THE chief matter of this Book is already answered by the Holy Ghost 1 Cor. 1.10 1 Cor. 3. Rom. 16.16 17. Eph. 4.4 to the 17. Phil. 2.1 2 3. 1 Thes 5.12 13. John 17.22 23 24. And 1 Cor. 12. And Acts 20.30 The Spirit and Stile of it is answered in the third Chapter of James throughout I have nothing then to do but to answer the pretended argumentation of it For the Author shall not draw me from my Defensive part to play the part of a plaintif against others or to wast my time in altercations and spend many sheets to tell the world that another man hath not skill to speak sence and that he seduceth others by ambiguous words and by confusions Obj. 1. To prove us sinful for being members of the Church of England he saith Pag. 15. Is he not by Communion in the Sacarment of Baptisme made a member Page 13. Is not Baptisme according to the Liturgy a symbol of incorporation into the Church of England Confirmation another receiving the Lords Supper another symbol c. Ans 1. Baptism as such incorporateth no man into any particular Church but only into the universal as it did the Eunuch Acts 8. 2. The ceremonies or circumstantials of Baptism only shew what men submit to rather than to be unbaptized and not what particular Church they are of 3. This objection would insinuate that all that are Baptized in the publick manner in England were thereby incorporated into an unlawful Church which they must by being rebaptized or by open renunciation disclaim And so that it is not Lawful to Communicate with any that were Baptized in the Parish Church till they have repented it or are Rebaptized or Penitent openly And if you must have all in England renounce their Baptism before you will take their Communion for lawful the same reason will hold against your Communion with all the rest of the Churches on Earth And when you cut off your self from all saving a shred are you a Member of the undivided Body of Christ 4. If our Baptism in England doth incorporate into their Church which you suppose is no Church being a false Church doth not Baptism into your Church incorporate Persons into yours And what then if your Schism prove a Sin What if Rebaptizing prove a Sin What if the Covenant descriâ—ed by your Client to obey none but Christ in matters belonging to Worship prove a Sin are they all guilty of all these and such others Obj. II. All that are liable to a Church Excommunication when they have offended are declared Members of the Church But all Communicants and Native Inhabitants are so Therefore the Law hath excepted none How comes it to pass that the Church hath power of excommunicating any Person but by vertue of Incorporation which she hath by the same Law He that is not in the Church how comes he to be cast out Is he not by Communion in the Sacrament of baptism made a Member Ans 1. Doth their esteeming you a Member prove that you are so 2. You know that they excommunicate Papists and Atheists who deride them for it and say It 's a strange Church that will cast us out because they cannot compel us to come in 3. If this be a good argument that all are of their Church that are excommunicate then you are either safe from Excommunication or of their Church whether you will or not If to make good your argument you will aver that no Separatist Independent Presbyterian Anabaptist or Quaker was ever excommunicate or imprisoned as such you will change the Current of Intelligence and comfort many that can believe you and teach them how to escape a Prison for the time to come But if not you make your self and all these parties incorporate Members of the Church of England as well as me 4. Do you think a Lay Civilian by Excommunicating can prove or make a man a member of any Church against his will Then mens Argument against Parish Churches for want of consent is void They may be made such against their wills 5. But tho few men dâ—slâ—ke the Lay-Excommunicators and Absolvers more than I do nor grudge more at the Bishops and Deans who use them and let them put their names to the Excommunications especially of the poor Church-Wardens for not swearing c. yet let us not render them causelesly ridiculouâ— I imagine that they excommunicate not known Papists Anabaptists and such like out of their Church who they know were never in it but out of the Universal Church If this be not their sense let them give it you themselves for I am not bound to be their Interpreter And yet to moderate our Censures of them I 'le tell you a wonder Within this hour I received a Letter of credible Intelligence of a Chancellor who hearing of a Conventicle not presented by the Church-Wardens and being told that they met to repeat the publick Sermon said God forbid that they should be hindered Obj. III. Page 8. A Church in a sense is a Christian Kingdom that is a Royal Nation under Christ their King But there is no such gospel-Gospel-Church in your sense for there was neither Christian Kingdom nor King in the Apâ—stlâ—s days Ans The Institution may be in the Gospel before the existence Christian Kings and Kingdoms are neither unlawful nor needless because there were none then The Prophets not only foretel that Nations shall come in to Christ and serve him but that all Nations that do it not shall perish And Christs Commission to his Apostles was To go and Disciple all Nations as much as in them lay baptizing them Nations as such were first to be discipled and then baptized Infants are part of Nations And Matth. 23. Christ would have gathered Jerusalems Children all the Jewish
if by subjection you mean but joyning in their Churches as Christian and Protestant for doctrine and worship notwithstanding the defect which they cannot help yea which they disclaim bare accusation will not prove this a sin but by this we see how much of Christs Church you are for separating from 2. For my part I have oft published That it is not the least part of my charge against Popery that they unchurch almost all the Christian World save themselves But yet they are about a 4th or 3d part of professed Christians themselves and divers of them do not unchurch the Greeks But to unchurch or forbid Communion with all that are as faulty as the Helvetians and all other Protestant Churches that have Liturgies or partial faults is that which I dare not be guilty of I think that to say That a thousand parts to one of Christs Church are none of his Churches is next to deposing him from his Kingdom Much like as it would be to say no part of London is the Kings but Amen Corner nor any part of England but Barnet or Brentford 3. And is it not one of our just accusations of the Papists That they say all the Protestant Churches are no true Churches and the Ministers no true Pastors and that Communion with them is unlawful and shall we now justifie them and say as they tho not on the same Reason but for a far smaller difference Is this our running from Popery 4. Yea is it not the great thing that we accuse the superconformists for That they make us to be no true Ministers or Churches and are we indeed of the same mind One side saith We are no true Ministers for want of Bps. Ordination c. Another side saith You are no true Ministers for having Communion with the Bishops and Churches c. VII I mentioned the Judgment and Practise of the old Nonconformists and Presbyterians not as a rule but as a comparative example To this he saith p. 11. You and they might as well own the Church of England in the form and constitution as it is established as the Parish churches to be particular Gospel churches c. P. 12. To say you join with a quatenus and own not the very constitution and standing of the church with which you join in the sense the church asserts it is the greatest equivocation in practice that is The old Nonconformists nor you are to be no presidents to us in this case So far as the old Nonconformists and the old reforming conformists went forward with Reformation to bring the church out of the wilderness we honour them but when they turn back again and entice the people so to do we are afraid to tempt God in that manner P. 14. Those â—ld Nonconformists that did so are no presidents to 〈◊〉 If they halted and were lame must we be so such communicants are not acceptable to any Church and I know what Church would never admit them were it not to punish and expose them and their profession as ridiculous and inconsistent with its self And as for FRENCH and DUTCH what are they to us c. P. 16 He calls Mr. Fenns joining in the Liturgy with exception of some part The sulâ—en practice of a half-paced doting Noncâ—nformist Ans First to the Cause and secondly to the Persons 1. To call any practice Equivocation or by any ill name is no proof that it is so nor is here a word of true proof given us I ask the Considerate Is it in the power of a Law-maker to make all Worship and Duty to God unlawful by commanding to do it for an unlawful end or upon false principles What if a Law said All people shall worship God not because the Scripture commandeth it but because the State commands it Would this make it unlawful to worship God I would disown the Principle and go on What if the Law should say The Pastoral Office is not of Divine Right but humane must the office therefore be renounced And why can such a Law any more bind me to judg of Church-constitutions by the Lawmakers words rather than by Gods Word Suppose that the Anabaptists say That rebaptizing is the true way of Church-gathering Is it a sin to communicate with them if they will receive me when I profess the contrary I am against the Covenant which you defend as making an Independent Church Is it therefore a sin to communicate with them because it is not as constituted by that Covenant What do Parties more differ in of late than Forms Orders Modes and Circumstances of Church Government and if they be of many contrary minds were it twenty there can be but one of them in the right And is it unlawful to join with all the rest Must we needs be sure which of these is in the right Almost all the Churches that I hear of in the world have their agreed professions published the Protestants are gathered in the Corpus confessionum the English Church Principles and Orders are expressed in the Book of Canons the Liturgy Ordination the 39 Articles the Homilies the Apology c. Must every one stay from their Churches till he hath read and understood all these Books and be sure that there is no fault or error in them What if it be poor men or women that cannot buy all these books and what if they cannot read whom shall they get to read them all and how shall they have time to study them or capacity to understand them when we can hardly get them to learn a Catechism and anderstand it You will say That is their crime that make all these Confessions and Books They will answer but that 's none of our fault We made them not and yet must we not communicate with any Church that maketh such The old Separatists called Brownists published their confession and therein owned many Parish Churches in England and Communion with them I recited their words in my Reasons c. But you are gone beyond them The New England churches printed their confession and all there agreed not to it The English Independents published their Principles and Confessions And the Presbyterians and they agreed in the Westminster Synods confession catechism and Directory Is every poor Man and Woman bound to stay from all their churches when for 14 years they had no other till they understand all these and know that they are faultless Or if there be any fault in any one of all these books is every one guilty of them that cometh to the churches The Anabaptists published their confession The Dutch have theirs Many churches agreed with them in the Synod of Dort The French have theirs the Saxons the Helvetians Geneva the Bohemians the Protestants in general had the Augustane and many more have theirs Reader See with whom these Writers will hold communion who make it unlawful to join with any church that have any fault in their constitutions or agreed Doctrines or Orders
Let us rise upward till we come to the Apostles days None of all these churches named dare profess all their agreements and confession to be without fault that ever I heard of except the English who bind Ministers to assent and consent to all things commanded and prescribed in three Books and excommunicate those that say their Books or Ceremonies and Government hath any thing contrary to the Word of God but no Lay-man is bound to believe them Wickliffe and John Hâ—s the Waldenses and the Bohemians Confessions are not faultless Of the Papist and the Sâ—cinians we will make no question the forenamed churches of Greeks Russians Armenians Abassines Nestorians Jacobites c. are alas past question faulty the general councils upward from that of Trent Basil Constance c. to the six first yea the four first which some equal to the four Gospels are far from being faultless in the Judgment of these Objectors and of my self the Arrian and other heretical councils are past question even that of Nice the first and best I suppose he and I think did not well in setling church-power as they did and forbidding all kneeling on the Lords days in Adoration and other the like The Donatists and the Novatians called the Puritans of those times had faulty agreements were it but for Bps. and Arch-Bps â—e will think them so this Writer can name no one church on the face of the Earth Orthodox or heretical tho Aerius called Presbyters equal with Bps. that was not for Bishops over Presbyters from the year 100 after Christ tâ—ll the Reformation that ever I could read of Yea consider whether they were not in the Apostles days when Jerome who most depresseth this degree saith That there were such at Alexandria chosen by the Presbyters from the days of Mark and Mark died long before John the Apostle But Episcopacy is not all Not only Epiphanius but all Church History that speaketh of such matters agreeth that besides the croud of latter Ceremonies there were certain ceremonies called the customes of the Universal Church which all the known Churches agreed in even those that differ'd about Easter-day and other such that is 1. Cloathing the Baptized in white Garments 2. Giving them milk and hony to tast 3. Anointing them with Oyl 4. Not kneeling in adoration on any Lords day or any other day between Easter and Whitsunday There is no notice when these began so ancient were they nor of any one Church or Christian that refused them but they were commonly called the Traditions Apostolical or customes of the Universal Church Now I agree with this Author that these things were indeed a deviation from the Apostles practice and ought not to have been thus used But the question is whether every Christian was guilty of the fault that had communion with any of these churches and whether had he then lived he should have separated from all the Churches on earth By this you see that this opinion must needs make men seekers who say that the church was in the wilderness and lost all true Ministry and say they particular churches and Scripture after the first or at most the second century and so that for fourteen hundred years Christ had no visible Kingdom on earth And consequently that we have no wiser answer to the Papist where was your church before Luther than to say that it was Invisible that is that we cannot prove that there was any such thing on Earth and consequently that we cannot prove that Christ had any Kingdom on earth and was its King that is whether there was any Christ in actual church-administration And doth separating from the whole visible church-communion agree with the prophecies and precepts of union Was this church like a grain of Mustard seed in its growth Was all the wonderful works of redemption wrought for no visible society after one or two hundred years in which a few persecuted ones were visible Is not this the next step and a temptation to utter infidelity If Christ have now no visible church on earth but the people called Brownists or Separatists doth it answer the Scripture description of him and his church And is it not exposing christianity to the scorn of infidels so to say Would not almost all rather turn Papists than believe this And be rather of their church than of none 2. But let us next speak of the persons I may speak my thoughts without imposing on you I think that the Major vote is no rule to the Minor nor always is in the right If a hundred men that understand not Greek or Hebrew Translate a Text one way and a good Linguist another way I will more suspect their judgment than his And so in the like case But if I hear a few odd persons condemn the judgment of the generality that are far better acquainted with matters of the same nature as if School-boys that are but in their Accidence should oppose all the upper Forms in expounding Horace or Hesiod or Homer which think you should I most suspect I say again to you compare the writings of Bucer Peter Martyr Calvin Beza Melancthon Chamiâ—r Blondel Dailee and a bundance such and also Greenhams Perkins Dr. Jâ—â—n Râ—ignolds Cartwrights Dods Hildershams Hieroms Amesius's Payneâ— Râ—lâ—eâ—ks and many such yea with such conformists as Jewels Bp. Downames John Downames Davenants Bp. Halls Arch-Bp Ushers Bp. Rob. Abbots Dr Fieldâ— Dr. Challoners Dr. Airys c. I say compare these with the Theological writings of Mr. Penry Mr. Can and all other called separatâ—sts or Brownists in their times and tell me whether these later did manifest more Holy Wisdom in Heavenly things more skill in all other points of Divinity than the former If their writings giving Mr. Ainsworth his due honour in Hebrew and Piety were as far below the other as the lower forms of School-boys are beneath the highest which should we most suspect to have had the greater or the lesser light specially when the lower condemn and cut off themselves from communion with all Christs known Churches on earth for thirteen hundread years When Mr. Smith and lately a very good man here thought none fit to Baptize him again but Baptized himself was not that singularity a just cause of suspicion Yet I make not the old Nonconformists your rule VIII I argued also from the common frailties of us all that it will be unlawful to communicate with any Church on earth even with those of the objectors mind if we are guilty of the sins in Doctrine worship and discipline of all Churches that we communicate with I will aggravate none nor render that odious which God accepteth My work is to confute those that do so But I say that 1. we have all many errors And men use to put their errors into their prayers and preaching 2. Do not men use to deliberate more and study what to write than what to preach And have men reason to be confident that our preaching
may command all that consent to signifie it by such a sign as standing or lifting up the hand or subscribing c. And they are bound to obey them 6. I have oft enough instanced in Translations Metres Tunes Utensils Ornaments and many such like Obj. The Pastors make no Laws Ans Dally not with names Any thing is a Law which ruling authority maketh duty If Writing it maketh a Law they may write it But a verbal-Mandate is one species of a Law And imposeth and determineth and obligeth to obedience and it is sin to disobey because God commandeth them to obey Heb. 13.17 And even by the 5th Commandment It doth as truly limit and oblige when Pastors command as when Magistrates do it tho they force not by the Sword Obj. But these are but natural circumstances and belong no more to worship than to any other things Ans It 's a sad thought to me to think how many seem satisfied with such an answer as this All substances have their accidents quality time place c. But yet the accident of one substance is not the accident of another The quantity and quality of a man is not the quantity and quality of a Toad c. When these accidents are adjoyned to worship they be not accidents of other things Is Speaking no part nor accident of worship because speaking is used in common things Kneeling is used in other cases But kneeling in prayer to express reverence is not common to other things Putting off the hat sheweth Reverence to a Prince But to be uncovered at Prayer or Sacrament is the Accident at least of that Worship and not of other things Metre and Tunes belong to Ballads But the Metre and Tune of Psalms doth not but is appropriate to those Psalms Time and Place belong to all natural actions But the Time and Place separated to Gods Worship is an accident only of that It is not the natural specification of an act or circumstance or the generical nature that we speak of but the individual accident or circumstance as appropriate to a religious work Is love to God no worship because love is a natural act Is praying no act of Religion because we may pray to men Is eating and drinking no part of the Sacrament because we use them as natural acts for our daily sustenance Is washing no part of Baptism because we wash at other times Thinking is a natural act but holy thinking is more Were Davids sorts of Musick no part or accident of Worship because Musick is natural or artificial It magnifieth these acts to be applied to worship and it is a commendation of Worship-Ordinances that they are suited to nature and advance and sanctifie it Now at last I come closer to my question Have you no Church Rulers among you No Elders that rule well Is it unlawful to communicate with you if those Elders by Mandates which are obligatory to the flock do prescribe Days and Hours Temples or publick places for ordinary Worship and if they command you to use the new Translation rather than the Geneva publickly or prescribe the same Metre and Tunes rather than your Congregation shall sing some one Psalm and some another Or if they command them to be uncovered at Sacrament and Prayer or to kneel at prayer c. If you take this power from the Pastors and will separate from them for such obliging Laws or Mandates you do that very thing which you fiercely talk against you destroy or resist Christs Kingly Government by his Officers Oh what is Man What are the best of Men What doth the Church and World suffer by them The same men that cry up Christs Kingdom call it rebellion against him to obey his Officers As if we must depose or disobey the King unless we disobey all his Judges Justices and Officers All the obligatory decisions that the Apostles made about their Love Feasts anointing the sick the Kiss of Love long Hair covering or uncovering order of prophecying and of collections c. were not standing Laws to us nor done by uncommunicable power but were temporary Laws and local and such as their Successors when fit may make If you have no such Rulers in your Churches you should queston whether your Churches have the true order of Pastors as well as you question the Parish Ministers Do they not want ruling power as well as theirs specially if you deny the very power and they be but hindred in the exercise Obj. But some may be forced to say Our Pastors do nothing but by the peoples consent Ans They are their Pastors by consent and rule them as voluntary and not by force But their rule and precepts are never less obligatory on Conscience by vertue of Gods command to obey them Must they prescribe none of the things forementioned till all have voted it or consented They must command them to consent and they sin if they disobey tho they can force none to obey Object But some may be driven to say We allow such prescribing power to Pastors but not to Magistrates Ans 1. What Power the Kings of Judah used in Worship David Solomon Asa Jehosaphet Hezekiah Josiah I need not tell 2. Christ came not to put down Kings but to sanctifie their office All power is given him By him Kings reign The Kingdoms of the world are his by right Rulers are his Ministers for our good They must punish evil doers and promote well doing He commands us to honour and obey them They are keepers of both Tables They may drive Ministers to their duty and punish them for mal-administration Tho they may usurp nothing proper to the pastoral office nor forbid them any such thing yet such circumstances as belong to the nation or to many Churches and not to this or that in peculiar the Magistrates may determine It is of great use that all the approved Churches in a Nation signifie their consent in the same Confession of Faith the same anniversary days of Humiliation and Thanksgiving as is done about the Powder Plot and the same Translation of the Scripture if not also the same Psalm Books God strictly commandeth Concord and to serve him with one mind and mouth and to avoid confusion and division and discord What reason can any man give why Christs Officers appointed to rule by the sword may not thus discharge their trust Shall we sin if the Law impose a Translation Psalm Book or reverent gesture unless we separate Is commanded obedience become a sin And yet not if a Pastor or a ruling Majority of people injoin it or unless we leave all to confusion X. Here therefore I utterly renounce the opinion that shall hold that such things being lawful when uncommanded become unlawful when commanded by such as in Ministry Magistracy or Families or Schools are Rulers Yea if the Ruler misdo his work the sin is his I must not separate from every Kingdom Church or Family that is ill governed Nor am I
deny the Parish Pastors theâ— deny them nothing hereby essential to theiâ— office All that can with any colour be said is that the Law now seems to be on these mens side by requiring Reordination But 1. The Law-makers profess to establish the Church and not to change it to another thing 2. The Law-makers were not all of one mind in the Reasons of their Laws nor had all studied these kind of controversies Many of them and of the Clergy to this day say that it is not a proper ordination that they require but the giving them Authority to exercise their Ministry in England and the decision of a doubtful case Part of the Church taketh them for true Ministers that were ordained by Presbyters and part do not and that the Congregations may not divide they say they require this like Baptizing after a doubtful Baptism If thou art not baptized I baptize thee I am against this But this proveth not that they take a Presbyter for no Pastor Yea tho they should take his ordaining others to be a nullity Ordaining not being essential to him XXIV The Act of Uniformity or the like Law cannot make the Church no Church or of another species than 1. As it is esteemed by God and his Law 2. Or as it is esteemed by the greater part of the Christian Clergy and Laity Tho the Law should speak as the foresaid odd innovators do For 1. All Christians profess that Christ is the only just Institutor of the essentials of his own Churches All Christians profess Communion with them as Churches of Christs making by his Law The present Church of England professeth this in many books it bindeth all Ministers to hold to Scripture sufficiency and use Discipiine as well as Doctrine and Worship as Christ commandeth It openly holdeth all Laws and Canons about Church essentials yea and integrals to be void and null that are against the Sacred Scriptures and Law of God There is no Power but of God God hath given no power to nullifie his institutions 2. All true Christians who consent to a Parish Minister and attend on his Ministry and join in the Assemblies openly profess to own him first as a Minister of Christ and to join in Worship and Communion of the church as prescibed by Christ which no man hath power to overthrow 3. The Parliament and Convocations and Bishops and Clergy all confess that they have no power to overthrow the Church essentials or offices of Christs Institution They have not revoked the Church Writings in which all this is oft professed They confess that if their Laws mistake and do contrary they bind us not They never openly professed a war against God or Jesus Christ What if one Dr. S. Parker make Christ subject to the King in his Kingdom he is not the Kingdom nor the Church of England For all his words they never made any Law to command Christ or to punish him They never cited him to appear before them nor did any penal execution on his Person which Government implieth They bow at his name and profess subjection to him Therefore if the law had by error said any thing inconsistent with the essence of Churches and Ministry it had not been obligatory to Pastors or people but they ought still to take Churches and Pastors to be what Christ hath made them and described them to be XXV Suppose a Law should say All families shall be so under Diocesans as to have no power but from them and all shall subscribe to this This doth not null family-power and society as instituted by God nor make it a sin to live in Families nor dissolve them all But all must continue in Families as instâ—tuted by God And if any subscribe to this it will not make it a sin in all Wives Children and Servants to live in those families If the Law had said All Schools in England shall be essentially subject to Diocesans must we therefore have had no more Schools Or if the School-master subscribe to them is it a sin to be his Scholar If the Law should say All Christians shall choose their own Pastors and meet and pray and preach as they please but only in essential subjection to Diocesans must all therefore give over Church Communion If the Law had said All the Parish-Assemblies in England shall henceforth be essentially subject to the Pope or a forreign Council We must not therefore have forborn all such Assembling but have kept to the state and duty appointed us by Christ XXVI Here the mistaking Opponents say 1. That indeed de jure none can change the Essence of Christs Ministry and Churches but de facto they may and have done Ans What is meant by changing it de facto Have they de facto nulled Christs Power Law or Offices and Churches What Nulled it by a Nullity of pretended Authority and overcome his Power without Power De jure and de facto to be a true Church or Pastor is all one Christ made true ones De facto they cannot unmake them but by destroying matter or form because they cannot do it de jure They have destroyed neither matter or form of such parish churches as I plead for and which Christ instituted for they had not power to do it Indeed they may de facto make other sort of Churches and Ministers to themselves tho not de jure but not to us who stick to Christs institutions XXVII But say they We confess if the Law did bid all assemblies in England meet in dependance on Diocesans private and publick this would not alter the species of our separate Churches because man hath not power and we consent not Ans Very good And I pray you what alters the case as to the Parish-Churches Is it that they have Steeples and Bells or that they have Tythes It 's the Calamity of Dissenters that they either cannot consider or can feel no strength in the plainest truth that is said against them but thoughts and sense run all one way which they think right XXVIII Obj. But say they Constitutive and Declaritive Laws must be distinguished They can but declare our Meetings to be Diocesan which is false 〈…〉 the Parish-Meetings such Ans 1. Remember that declaring the Parish-Churches to be such doth no more constitute them such than yours Why then talk you so much of the words of Bishops and Clergy and Books as if their declarations made them such 2. But how doth a Law constitute one the Parochial to be Diocesan or null more than your separate meetings if by a Law of toleration it should say the same of them The truth is They are such to consenters that judg them such But they constitute them not such to any that consent not to such a constitution but hold to Christs XXIX But it is said that our thoughts alter not constitutions they are our own immanent acts that nihil ponunt in esse and therefore the Pastors and Churches will be
Schism and Covenant-breaking in me whatever it is in others XLVI Obj. But you swore against Prelacy and Liturgy and now you strengthen them Ans 1. As the Covenant was made the terms or test of national Church Union excluding all the Episcopal who were half the Kingdom and more I think it was a rash sinful Engine of unavoidable division But when I took it it was not so imposed but offered to them that were of that mind and I saw not then that snare 2. I never swore against the Common-Prayer nor against the Englsh frame of Prelacy much less all Episcopacy any further than in my place and calling to endeavour Reformation according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed churches And this I have endeavoured to the utmost of my power perhaps more than my accusers And 3. There is much good in the Liturgy Parish Order and Government I never did covenant against that and therefore the Ministers who laboured for Reformation and Concord 1660 and 1661 thought they kept their covenant by craving some amendments and not an abolition and if we did think any thing to be bad that was good we must not be obstinate in that error forsaking the good which is our duty is not the way to amend any sin or error avoiding Gods publick Worship and living like Atheists save in private is not the way to amend the faults of publick Worship or Government Praying to God for what we want and owning the Scriptures and Christian Religion and communicating with Christians on lawful terms is not encouraging any sin in church Priests or Prelates unless men by our duty will be encouraged to sin and we must not forsake duty to avoid such mens encouragement the sons of the Coal are most angry with those that come nearest to them in all things save their sin and error and say those that stand afar off cannot hurt them I do not justâ—fie all that is in every Assembly that I join with must I needs renounce Local communion with every Independent Presbyterian or Anabaptist church that I dissent from for fear of strengthning them I covenanted as much against Schism as faulty Prelacy and yet if I must join with no church that is guilty of Schism alas whither shall I go 4. I humbly desire you to examine whether your way be not a breach of the covenant you plead not only as it advantageth Prophaneness Popery and Schism but as it strengtheneth that which you say I strengthen he knoweth not England who knoweth not that perceiving the error of unwarrantable separation and the unjust accusations of the Liturgy and churches used by very many besides some failings in some private churches hath been and is a grand cause of encouraging too great a number even to superconformity and to the fierce opposition of us and to the utmost confidence in their own way and as you charge me more than others as drawing more to the communion of Godly Protestant Parish Ministers that is to christian catholick love peace and communion So do the Sons of the Coal the superconformists more fiercely revile me as stopping more than you have done from their extremities Gods Word is a sufficient rule keep to that and fear not breaking any self-made laws XLVII Obj. But by this latitude you may join with Papists and say you judg of them according to Christs description Ans I answered this in the former book When I joyn with any church as a church I join with them as meeting to profess and practice christian faith and worship their by faults I own not But if they openly profess Idolatry or Heresie instead of Worship and Faith or if they meet to practice any sin which renders the whole church or worship rejected by God I must not assemble with them but avoid them which I must not do for tolerable failings lest I avoid all the world I say again I will cast away my Wine or Broth for Poyson in it which I will not do for a fly If the church renounce Christs description in the essentials notoriously I will not call it a church against their own consent But if they do it only in some Accident or Integrals I will only disown those faults XLVIII Obj. But say they p. 13.14 It is impossible there should be two national churches at least in one nation therefore by joining with a Parish you can be no part of the national church tho we confess that if you join with a Parish Assembly that forms it self into a compleat single church and the people â—onsent to take the Parish Minister for their Pastor and the Minister should exercise the whole power of a Pastor in this Parish church Mr. B. may hold communion with this Parish church and not own the Diocesan constitution Ans Of two churches in one assembly I spake before 1. Doth this Author think that exercise of power is as essential to a Minister as Power Yea that it must be the whole power that is exercised and so that no one is a true Pastor among the Presbyterians when the Classis exerciseth the highest part of the Power nor in Helvetia where Discipline is unexercised nor in England from the first Reformation Were all the Conformists that submitted to Diocesans no Church-Pastors nor no Independents whose Churches having many Pastors and Elders no one exerciseth no nor hath more than part of the power Integrity and essentiality office and exercise are not all one 2. All good Ministers that I know in the Parish Assemblies do consent to the Pastoral Office and the people love them and shew their consent by ordinary Communion and they exercise all essential to the office tho under the restraints of Government not owning in consent destructive but governing Diocesans some as de jure divino lawful some as best some as necessary many as merely impowered to a cogent Government by the King and doth not your concession imply that these are true Churches of intolerable men I speak not 3. What you confidently deny is certainly true There may be two national churches in one nation if not three that is the word is equivocal and hath divers sences and it is not called national because all persons in the nation are of it but because that the diffused parts of the Nation own it formally in a publick national relation 1. A Christian Kingdom as such is by many called a national Church thus England is such 2. A coalition of the most or all the publick Ministers in a Nation in Synodical Agreements for Communion as such is called a National Church such also is England 3. The subjection of the most of the Clergy in a nation by consent to some Ecclesiastical Primate Patriarch or other constitutive governing Head as a Bishop is in his Diocess may make a national Church in another sence The same men may be of divers of these equivocal Churches or if part be for one form and part
Catechism the Râ—fâ—rmatio Legum Ecâ—les the Canons and the licenced books of the Protestant Bishops and Doctors such as Arch-bp Cranmers Bp. Hâ—â—pers Arch-bp â—arkers Arch-bp Grinâ—als Arch-bp Abbots Arch-bp Edward Sandys Arch-bp Whitgift Bp. Pilkâ—nton Bp. Jewel Bp. Ally Bp. Babingtâ—n Bp. Mâ—rtâ—n â—p Hall Bp. Davenant Bp. â—rideaux Bp. Brâ—wnâ—ig B. â—otter Bp. Miles Smith Bp. Carlâ—on Bp Bayly Bp. Parry Bp. Câ—wper and many more such besides those in Irâ—land aforesaid And such â—rs as Dr. Whâ—taker Dr Field Dr. Crakenthâ—â—pe Dr. Sutlive Dr. Masâ—n Dr. VVhite Dr. â—iâ—y Dr. Chaloner Dr. VVard Dr. VVillet Dr. Holland and abundance more besides all other old licenced Writers I think that all these do fitlier notify and denominate the Church of Englands Judgment than the Writings of one Irish Arch-Bp and Dr. Hammond and Dr. Gunning since Bp. and a few more such in the points wherein they differ from the rest tho Grotius and their Chaplains be added to the number And now I will add this further evidence in the conclusion besides that as I said before the present Laws put us to abjure alterations and therefore sure they never thought that they so altered the Government themselves that even while they say that the Parishes are no Churches but parcels of Churches and the Priests are no Bps. of the Flock most really acknowledg them the thing that deny the Name And the argument from the definition is stronger than from the Name And here I will but name first the Scripture descriptions of a Bp. and 2. Dr. Hammonds exposition of those Texts 3. And the matter of fact among us The first part of the Bps. office is teaching the flock Under this teaching part 1. the Bishops office is to preach to them 1 Pet. 5.2 3. Feed the flock of God which is among you taking the oversight Or Episcopacy thereof c. Dr. Hammond The Bps. of your several Churches I exhort Take care of your several Churches and Govern them c. Qust Whom doth the Law require to do more in feeding and guiding the flock The Incubment that preacheth daily or the Bp. that never seeth the most nor ever preacheth to one Flock of many Who are they that are among the Flock the Incumbent that dwells with them or the Bp. that is a stranger to them 1 Thes 5.12 We beseech you brethren to know them that labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you and to esteem them very highly in love for their work sake and be at peace among your selves Dr. Hammond Pay your Bps. as great a respect as is possible for the pains they have taken among you Qust Who Laboureth among them most in the several parishes publickly and privately The Bp. that never saw them or the Incumbent that layeth out all his Study and Time on them Who are most among them Who most admonisheth them What is meant by among themselves Is it that Lincoln shire Leicester-shire Northamton-shire Buckingham-shire be at peace among themselves from Gainsborough to Oxford-shire or is it not rather that neighbour Christians that see each other so live in peace 1 Tim. 5.17 The elders that rule well are worthy of double honour especially they thaâ— labour in the word and doctrine Dr. Hammond Let the Bps. that have discharged that function well receive for their reward twice as much as others have especially those that preach the Gospel to whom it was news and continue to instruct congregatons of Christians in setled Churches Quest On whom doth the law impose most preaching On Bps. or on parish Priests And who doth most of that work Heb. 13. Remember them who have the rule over you who have spoken to you the word of God Dr. Hammond Set before your eyes the Bps. and governours who have been in your Church and preached the Gospel to you Quest Ask the parishes who those be 2 Tim. 4.2 I charge thee before God and the Lord Jesus Christ who shall judg the quiâ—k and the dead at his appearing and his Kingdom preach the word be instant in season out of season reprove rebuke exhort with all long suffering and dâ—â—â—rine Not only Dr. Hammond but all that are for Prelacy expound this of a Bps office Quest Ask the people who most performs it 2. The Bps Office is also to watch over all the Flock personally by conference instruction counsel admonition exhortation reproof comfort as every one shall need Saith Bp. Jer. Taylâ—r Pref. to Treat of Rep. No man can give account of thâ—se that he knoweth not Acts 20.10 28 31. I taught you publickly and from house to house Take heed tâ— your selves and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you Bps to â—eed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own Blood Therefore watch and remember that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears Dr. Hammond Instructing both in the Synagogues and the private Schools and in your several houses whither I also came Wherefore ye that are Bps. or governors of the several Churches Look to your selves and the Churches committed to your trust to Rule and order all the faithful under you Quest Is this done more by the Diocesans or by the Incumbents Do Diocesans teach from house to house from Southwark to Christ-Church from Nâ—wark to Alesbury or Tame Who doth the law appoint to warn every one in the Church from house to house and night and day c. Col. 1.28 Whom we preach warning every man and teaching every man in all wisdom that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus Heb. 13.17 Obey them that have the rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your souls as those that must give account Dr. Hammâ—nd Obey those that are set to rule over your several Churches the Bps. whose whole care is spent among you as being to give account of your proficiency in the Gospel Qâ—st Is it the Diocesan or the Incumbent that the law requireth to preach to and warn every man c. And that watch for their Souls as those that must give account Is not the incumbent of this or that parish fitter to watch and give account of each Soul than the Diocesan for a whole Country or many Counties who never saw them Can he do as Ignatius's Bishops that must take notice of all the Church even Servants and Maids 3. The bishops office is to be a visible example to all the flock of Humility Meekness Patience Holiness Charity and good Works Heb. 13.7 Remember them who have the rule over you who have spoken to you the word of God whose faith follow considering the end of their conversations Dr. Hammond Set before your eyes the Bishops observe their manner of living Quest VVho can observe his example whom he never saw nor know Or who can make an unknown man his pattern Do the flâ—cks see more the Incumbents example or the
Nation into his Church as a Hen gathereth her Chickens under her Wings And Rom. 11. Only their own unbelief broke them off from being a National Church including Infants And it is part of the Saints triumph that the Kingdoms of the World are become the Kingdoms of the Lord and of his Christ If you will read Mr. Beverlys Book called The whole duty of Nations it will give you full proof of this Where hath the Gospel extensively much prospered where Princes and Rulers were not Christians The Turks give liberty of Religion And yet the sometime famous Greek Churches Corinth Philippi Coloss Ephesus Laodicea Philadelphia and more than all the West are Apostatized or withered to a few ignorant vicious scandalous Christians Obj. IV. 8. If such a confederation in lawful Circumstantials as well as Integrals will make a Church I know not why we may not have a Catholick Visible Church organized if this be a due acception of a Church Ans This is as much as to say If the name Church may be used equivocally as all words must of several sorts then all those sorts may be the same I deny it If you dislike the use of the name you have your liberty as a Grammarian to forbear it But sure the Name and the Thing are not all one nor the Controversies about them 2. But we have a Catholick Visible Church Organized as I have oft proved against the Papists viz. under one Christ the Head and his Ministers as his subordinate Officers Obj. V. Page 3. If you touch a mans finger you touch the man we have communion with an integrum perpartes and with a Genus by the Species and with both by individuals Nay as every part of the Scripture one verse or sentence of it makes up sence so every part of the Liturgy as in form and manner therein contrived is Liturgy and worship thereafter is according to the Liturgy tho it be but part of the wâ—rship Page 20. As for the falseness in Integrals it gives the denomination to the whole for an Integral part is an essential part of the whole Much more there is to the same purpose making him guilty of all that useth a part Ans 1. You have the freedom of using words at your pleasure but not imposing them on mankind when necessity hath taught the World to distinguish essential and integral parts you have no authority to confound their Language by the quibble of calling Integrals essential causes of the whole A totum per aggregationem as a heap of Sand or a field of Grass is not constituted of a proper essentiating form and so homogeneous matter aggregate is all the being it hath And if you make contiguity an essential cause or how else you will you have liberty of speech But we will not be cheated by it to believe that it causeth any more than Totality or Integrality and the absence of it is a privation of no more And all mens Graces Obedience and Worship are defective in point of Integrality and degree and I hope you will not say that they need no favour or pardon or amendment 2. All human actions have their faults must we therefore do nothing or converse with no men England is one Kingdom If there be one or many faults in its Laws or officers may we therefore obey none that are faultless The Laws are the Rule of National Justice may a Judg Justice Officer or subject use none of them because some are faulty Doth that make him guilty of all Bonum est ex causis integris The fault of a part may indeed denominate the whole faulty so far But the whole Law or Liturgy may be called faulty for a part and yet he that useth either not be guilty of any of the bad part for using the good The Law and Liturgy are one thing and the use is another Its faults are no further his than he owneth them your Bread or Meat may be called bad if part only be bad and yet if you eat none but the good part it will not hurt you 2. But if it must be otherwise no man may hear you or joyn with your Churches And do you think as aforesaid that Mr. Faldo and all his Church at Barnet lived not in a sinful communion very many years that omitted at least an integral part of publick worship the singing of Gods praise Christ with his Disciples sung a Hymn after the Sacrament The Jews Church made it the chief part of their Worship James prescribeth it us in all our Holy Mirth such as the Lords Day is appointed for 1 Cor. 14.26 Every one had a Psalm and with them no one had a Psalm tho his Judgment was for it the question was Whether he should forsake them for refusing it I thought not because it was better that they had something that was good than nothing But your argument would not only unchurch them but make all sinners that communicated with them for omissions of great duties are faults and greater faults than tolerable failings in performance He that prayeth not at all doth worse than he that prayeth by a Book and he that preacheth or teacheth not at all doth worse than he that readeth a Sermon so that their total stated omission and opposition to singing by your false rule denominated them no worshippers of God if the whole must be denominated from a part How many private Meetings in London never sing a Psalm for fear of being discovered Yea how many seldom read a Chapter but only preach and pray and sometime administer the Sacrament Must we needs say therefore that they omit all Worship VI. On such occasions I argued That if we must not communicate with any Parish Church because of the faults of the Liturgy it will follow that we must not communicate with any Church on Earth that hath as great faults and that by this we must renounce Communion with all Christs Body on Earth All the Armenians Nestorians Eutychians Copties Abassines Georgians Greeks Russians Papists yea Lutherans have a more faulty Liturgie or manner of worship than the English Yea the Churches called Calvinists have their Liturgies and faults And I instanced in Switzerland because as God hath of late most preserved their peace so they are taken to be the honestest sort of Protestants that in poverty serve God with soundest doctrine and least scandal of Life but yet have no proper discipline but the Magistrates Is it a sin to have confederacy or Communion with their Churches To this he plainly saith Page 11. It is That is all that confederate with them as Churches are guilty of their error called Erastian For subjection tâ— such discipline is the condition of their Communion Ans Subjection is an equivocal word If it were by profession or subscription of consent it were indeed to be guilty of that error tho not by a fauâ—t of the Part denominating the whole to make their worship unlawful or their Churches none but
for another yet agreeing in the same ordinary external Communion one part may be called national as well as the other The question is de â—omine the name equivocal from diversity of relations I own 1. A Christian Kingdom 2. I own a national association of Parish Churches and Pastors 3. Tho these submit to Diocesan superiority and be parts of a Diocess but true single Churches I do not therefore separate from them 4 A national Church headed by one constitutive pastoral Head I disown call which you will the national Church But saith he of his approved parish Church P. 14. Such a Church aâ—â—iâ—meth to it self all that pastâ—ral pâ—wer that in pursuance of Canon and Statute Law is fixed in the Bishop Ans Incogitantly spoken Do all Independents assume the power of Ordination Jurisdiction over others Citations Licencing Subspendings Degradings silencings instituting inducting c. which are so fixed on the Bishop If none of this be pastoral power then the appropriating it is no depriving parish Ministers of pastoral power and to be under Magistrates power nulls not the pastors XLIX What he saith about unlawful terms of Communion p 21. c. in the instances of kneeling putting off the hat standing up c. I answer 1. The Author all along seemeth to forget that I am not accusing him not telling every man his duty but only giving the Reasons of my own and such others practice so they make a long ado to vindicate him whose Manuscript I answered and say His question was only whether it be lawful to communicate with the churches as setled by Law and not in other respects When I ever told them I meddle with none of their Questions but my own viz 1. Whether I and such other do well or ill in that communion we hold with the Parish Churches 2. Whether all Protestants in England are bound in conscience to renounce and avoid Communion in the Liturgy with all Parish Churches and Chappels and rather to give over all church worship I only gave my Reasons why that Manuscript divulged and boasted of as unanswerable changed not my Judgment and I answered that in his Arguments which went further than the question put by them and assaulted my own assertions having before in my Christian Directory and cure of Church divisions without naming him fully answered his printed Reasons to prove it unlawful to use an imposed form or Liturgy especially because Ministers must use their own gifts But if any man believe that it is a sin to communicate kneeling or standing or sitting unless he lye down as Christ did or at any time save at a feast or supper or any where save in an Inn or an upper room or with any women or more than twelve or if they think it sin to kneel at prayer or be uncovered or to sing Psalms in our Metre and Tunes whether these men should separate from all the Churches that will not receive them in their own way or how far they do well or ill that will not let every man do what he will is none of the case that I have before me It will not follow that I must separate from a Church that bids me kneel and be uncovered c. because you take it to be sin put not your measures on all others And here because same maketh Mr. Faldo the Author of the Vindication which I answered that I may so far vindicate him as to shew that it 's â—earce likely I ask whether if Mr. Faldo did well as a pastor to keep up a church at Barnâ—â— many years which would not endure the singing of a psalm of praise to God but constantly forbore it tho his Judgment was against them besides that many of them were not only against Infant Baptism but fâ—rther differ'd in other things was this communion more lawful or laudable than with honest parish Ministers in the Liturgy Did he the whole office of a pastor What if the Bishop had forbid him to sing â—salms Is not the Church State more concerned in the whole congregation than in an absent Bishop what greater omission or defect is there in many Parish-Churches I again say that I am so far of the Judgment of Hildersham John Ball c. that I had rather joyn caeteris paribus in a Church that useth the Psalms Chapters and all the Lords-day Prayers in the Liturgy before Sermon than one that only giveth us one Psalm or none and a Pulpit-prayer and a Sermon without all the rest of Church Worship L. I will conclude all with repeating a little of the Explication of my misused writings I. The pastoral Oversight of the Laity by the Elders or Bishops of the several Flocks is of Christs Institution and belongs to all true Presbyters And tho in necessity it may be done by divers transient Ministers pro tempore most regularly every Church should have it s stated Pastors II. Where such Churches are large the work requireth many Ministers where each one hath but part of the Charge III. Reason and Church-consent among these made one a President over the rest and called him the Bishop pecularly if it were in Marks days as Hierom saith it was in John's And tho this be not essential to a Church it is lawful and fit and at last it grew to so great a Reputation and Opinion of necessity that all Churches had such Bishops and gave them a Negative voice and ordained not without them and defined Churches as essentiated by Relation to them Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo adunata If now such men as J.O. Mr. Nye Dr. Goodwin c. should have in one Church six or seven young men of their own training up to be their Assistant-presbyters I do not think an Independent Church would take it for any crime that he should have a Negative voice in acts of Order and Discipline or that they should ordain Ministers therein without his Consent IV. By degrees single Congregations increased to as many as our great Parishes that have Chappels and tho still they communicated in the chief Church at some special times of the year they ordinarily met in divers places and the Presbyters officiated some in one meeting and some in another at first whosoever the Bishop daily sent but after their particular Tyths or Chappels were assigned to each yet all together were esteemed but one Church governed by one Bishop and his Colledg of Presbyters V. When they increased yet more and more fixed Chappels were assigned to fixed Presbyters but not as distinct Churches but parts of the Diocesan Church tho at last they were larger than one Bishop and Colledg could guide according to the first Institution VI. Yet long every Christian City had a Bishop and Church and every incorporate big Town like our Corporations or Market-Towns was called a City not because it had a Market as a reverend Slanderer seigneth me to lay but because Custom the master of Language called all Corporations and great