the Preachers defended even in the University from censure for them nay these were Printed in several Books of the same Authors licensed and allowed by the Archbishop and his Chaplains and many of them asserted in the visitation Articles of some Bishops and yet were not established in the Church of England As in Doctrine so in worship many corruptions were innovated and exercised As Bowing at the Name of Jesus The turning Communion-Tables into Altars or Altarwise and Railing them in furnishing them with Candlesticks and Tapers Tying the Gospel the blessing and other parts of the publick service to that place enclosed and bowing to these Altars The making Crucifixes and Canopies pictures of God Christ the Holy Ghost Virgin Mary and other Saints in our Church-windows Consecration of Churches Fonts Bells and the like All which and many such were first innovated to the Chappel at Lambeth and ferried over to White-hall and so transmitted to all Cathedral and almost all Parish Churches and yet were not established by Law though enforced by the corruption of Discipline in the Visitation Articles of Bishop Wren Bishop Mountague Bishop Peircy Bishop Lindsey and Bishop Skinner and others in their several Diocesses and by the silencing suspension excommunication and imprisonment and High Commission vexation of Mr. Chauncey Vicar and Mr. Parker an Inhabitant of Ware Mr. Burros of Colchester and many others Nor was Government any more pure if we consider how it was exercised in the High Commission and Star-Chamber with all rigor cruelty and injustice and in Visitations Citations Probate of VVills Letters of Administration and Excommunication in the name and under the Seal of the Bishops themselves never authorized thereunto All which were evidently needful to be reformed as having been so publickly exercised and potently defended and might well enforce a covenanted endeavor to reform Religion in the Kingdom of England I well know Sir that the change of Religion makes a great sound in the world especially if established I cannot be insensible of the noise made by it against our first Reformation and must expect the Eccho to follow all after acts and degrees thereof for all changes are scandalous and many very dangerous If therefore these Masters and Scholars of Oxford could rationally conceive the Covenant to bind them to endeavor a change of Religion in the substance matter and essential parts and form thereof then I must confess their exception is very important for we cannot deny that our Bishops Martyrs and Learned Divines have by Suffering and Writing testified it to have been agreeable to the Word of God And that to resolve that into the power and pleasure of a Parliament who may direct and authorize the profession but not prescribe the matter or form were to make it a Parliamentary Religion and the change thereof must needs condemn our Laws and the punishment of Papists not joyning with us as unjust and so justifie Papist and Separatist the one in his recusancy and the other in his separation But Sir when I consider the Religion of Scotland to be preserved as the concomitant and provocation the VVord of God to be the Rule and the best reformed Churches professing the same substantial Religion though differing in administration and order propounded as the pattern I see not how right reason can render any such sence of it and the rather for that Reformation not alteration of Religion is the formal act which presupposeth the continuation of the subject about which it is conversant But Sir if they as they needs must by Religion understand the order and annexed Ceremonies appendant to Religion whether established as was the Cross in Baptism holinesse of dayes and order of the Liturgy and the like or only exercised and enforced by Prelates power and countenance as the corruptions before mentioned then we must say their exception is of no weight not the reason any thing worth for this change can be no such scandal as is conceived for we deny them to have been testified by our Bishops Martyrs and learned men by any Sufferings or Writings untill of late by the persons and such like before mentioned as agreeable to the Word of God and must put them to the proof of it we think we are able to produce Tindal Latimer Hooper Ridley Farrar and many other Martyrs by laying down their Bishopricks and other contests and sufferings to have testified against them and Mr. Cartwright Baines and many Devonshire Cornwal and Lincolnshire Ministers and others ever since the Reformation by Writing Petition Remonstrance Apology and Sufferings to have testified against not only the corruptions exercised against which our Jewel Fulk Whitaker Archbishop Parker Dr. Ward Dr. Brownrigge Dr. Bancroft and all sound and learned Divines not devoted to return to Rome have written but even the very Order and Ceremonies established as being not agreeable to the Word of God And if these learned Gentlemen had pleased to observe the Visitation and high Commission proceedings they might have found Prynn Burton Bastwick Layton Workman Langley Hind Nichols Ball and many others known learned men who were silenced suspended imprisoned stigmatized and in much Sufferings testified these appendants to our Religion whether established or exercised to be no way agreeable to the Word of God and I know not whom they can ment on as a Martyr for them unless it be Lawde the late Archbishop the grand Innovator of our Church 2. If therefore our Religion be by Papists or Prelates reproached as a Parliamentary Religion we will rejoyce in our reproach and bless God we had a Parliament that had zeal to improve their power about those things that were properly subject thereunto 3. Nor can this Reformation justifie the recusancy of the Papists because these things never became a Reason for their recusancy further than they occasioned their obduracy by assuring their hopes of Englands return to them Nor the Separation of the Separatists for that the corruptions established were never made such essential parts of worship as to make a sufficient ground for separation Witness Cartwrights defence of the Church service The Masters and Scholars of Oxford cannot have been so little observant as not to know that the sober zealous Non-conformists who groaned under the burden of these corruptions and for this Reformation were grieved by and greatly contended against the * Mr. Geree his Vindiciae ecclesiae Anglicanae shewing necessity of reformation not Separation And Mr. Balls two Books against Mr. Cann Separation as that which was without sufficient ground yet like Jesus Christ their Master kept Communion with a Church whose Doctrine and Worship was very much in need of Reformation and taught men so to do granting There was something in the Doctrine and Worship of the Church of England not agreeable to the Word of God and yet not enough to lay a ground for separation 4. Much less doth this endeavor judge the Law against and punishment of Papists as unjust which
purity of Doctrine the greatest help of this unity by the mercy of God was that with the Doctrine the Discipline of Christ and his Apostles as it is prescribed in the Word of God was by little and little together received and according to that Discipline so near as might be the whole government of the Church was disposed the Lord God of his infinite goodness grant unto the Kings Majesty and to all the Rulers of the Church that according to the Word of God they may perpetually keep that unity and the purity of Doctrine Unto these might be added the testimony of Arundel Hutton and Matthews three English Archbishops approving the order of the Church of Scotland and the joy of King James professed in the Assembly 1590. That He was born to be a King of the sincerest Church in the world All which might have brought to their knowledge a better account but they looked not so farre back but take it up by occurrents of those unhappy times in which I fear Scotland was not more full of perplexities than Oxford of passion and prejudice 3. But in what particulars are the Doctrine Worship Discipline and Government much worse than that of England They should specifie these bad things for generalia non pungunt I confess in a Notion of Philosophy or question in Divinity the Say so of a University is of some Authority but of none in the case of an accusation which must be particularly charged and plainly proved if Englands Doctrine be doudtful and defective in respect of its clearness and certainty or sophisticated by the obtruded fancies and terms of private men as Mr. Prynn hath plainly charged in his Epistle to the late King prefixed to his Quench-coal and as the Ministers of sundry Counties in their Reasons for Reformation have suggested and Mr. Hamâ—lton in his modest answer to Dr. Peirson hath cleerly demonstrated it will be found as much better than the Doctrine of the Church of Sco land as its Worship Discipline and Government is worse than that of England And I hope if the one be as good though nothing better than the other there can be no great Scruple to swear to endeavour the preservation of it 3 Reason of this exception referred to the fifth Section of this Treatise 4th Reason of this exception But to proceed Their third Reason is a supposed contradiction in this first Article of the Covenant This shall be considered under another Head The fourth Reason why they could not swear the preservation of the Religion in Scotland is this Wherein we already find some things to our thinking tending towards Superstition and Schism which call for Reformation Here Sir they seem to specifie what in the 2d reason they had suggested in general terms But let it be observed 1. That they find not in the Church of Scotland any formal Superstition or Schisme but at the most something tending towards them I imagine many Oxford Masters will not willingly admit a Reformation or be denied a preservation of many things apparently tending towards Popery bua not Popery it self 2. The things they find do but to their thinking tend towards Superstition or Shisme but they have no certainty of it Must conjecture stand against the Covenant and conclusions of others Methinks Superstition and Schism should be so well known to the Scholars of Oxford that they might be able to conclude what things tend thereunto 3. What are the things they find in the Church of Scotland which tend in their thinking to Superstition and Schism They point us unto the Margine and there we find viz. in accounting Bishops Antichristian and indifferent Ceremonies unlawful this they refer to Superstition And viz. in making their Discipline ad Government a mark of the true Church and the setting up thereof the erecting of the Throne of Jesus Christ and this they referre to Schism Sure Sir they were in a great strait that made a shift to specifie these sad corruptions but yet they do not tell us where they find these laid down as the Doctrines of the Church of Scotland whether in their Confession or form of Discipline Whilst in their Confession of Faith they give unto general Assemblies authority about Ceremonies Corpus Confessi Conf. Scot. Art 20. p. 120 121. I cannot think they deem indifferent Ceremonies unlawful nor do I find that they as England hath done do any where make their Discipline a part of their faith that so they might damn Bishops as Antichristian I find indeed Artic. 8. p. 118. that they make Discipline rightly administred as is prescribed in the Word of God the note of a true Church but they do not appropriate it to their Discipline and Government as these learned men would have us read it I know indeed that the Scotch Divines do account English Bishops Antichristian and English Popish Ceremonies unlawful but they deny them to be indifferent but these are specials and far from the generals charged on them nor can these specials be condemn'd in them until Catherwoods Alâ—are Damascenum and Mr. Gillespies Dispute against the English-Popish Ceremonies which have passed with much approbation through all the Reformed Churches and I presume missed not Oxford be fully answered 4. But wherein lieth the tendency of these principles to Superstition and Schism that these learned men think of As to their nature they are negative and exclusive and I deem a denial of any of Gods appointments to be prophanenesse not superstition I am apt to think Superstition to be a positive innovation and erection of some new matter and action into the worship of God on mans meer will and invention without Gods institution I remember Mr. Blake denieth the baptizing of Bells or the Horse in Huntingtonshire to be Superstition and damns it as a prophane misapplication of Gods Ordinance How then the exclusion neglect or prophane esteem of Bishops and Ceremonies can tend to Superstition I confesse I see not Think you Sir the Learned men of Oxford did deem Bishops and indifferent Ceremonies to be such immediate institutions and essential parts of Divine worship that they think a profane contempt of them might tend by exclusion thereof to make way for some innovation in their room then I also will think they tend towards Superstition but must think they are not indifferent I wish Sir they have not mistaken the Scotch notion of a true Church Gent. 2da c. 2. col 109. which is opposed as well to a corrupt as falsely constituted Church the Magdeburgences do so oppose it in the very same case Vera enim ecclesia c. For a true Church as it retains pure Doctrine so also it keep simplicity of Ceremonies but an hypocritical Church for the most part changeth the Ceremones instituted by God and multiplieth to its own traditions And Bishop Halls Vere and vera Ecclesia is no stranger at Oxford and if then Scotland concluding her Government to be according to the
that thereof they were still perswaded Sir what effect had been wrought on their consciences I cannot tell I will hope they were not seared or shut up by a resolution of non-perswasion to the contrary yet had I been amongst them with submission I must have expostulated with them and enquire Whether they had not subscribed to the use of the Common Prayer and form in the said Book prescribed in publick prayer Enjoyned to be subscribed by every Minister before he be ordained in Canons of 1603. Ca. 36. and NONE OTHER Did none of these Masters publickly pray in St Maryes in Oxford and other Churches before and after their Sermons Were not such prayers publick prayer Did they at such times use the Common Prayer If not did not their consciences mind them of their subscribed promise solemnly made in entring on so holy a calling Are not NONE OTHER words as fully exclusive of their own forms extemporary or premeditate as can be expressed Admit we this Common Prayer to be lawful yea necessary is not this exclusive subscription a plain limitation of the Spirit rejection of the gift of prayer and robbing the Church of Ministerial parts unto prayer as well as preaching to the edification thereof Did Christ when he prescribed the most perfect prayer tye his Disciples to use that and None other Can any rationally-religious man subscribe this promise and approve it to be agreeable to the VVord of God and stand perswaded it is not contrary thereunto Secondly Is it agreeable to the Word of God to affix a sentence of mans conception and framing to divine service and denominate it a Sentence of Scripture In the Rubrick of the Common Prayer the Priest is appointed to read one of these sentences of Scripture which follow The very first of which is At what time soever a sinner repenteth him of his sin from the bottom of his heart I will put all his wickednesse out of my remembrance saith the Lord the which is referred in the Margine as are the following sentences to their places unto Ezek. 18.21 As is Dr. Boyes in his Exposition of the Liturgy p. 1. 22 to say nothing of the effect though accidental of this supposed Scripture how many have been deceived really believing it to be a Sentence of Scripture when it is not found in all the Bible Methinks these men should have observed how our late Masters had corrected this gross and obvious fault in the Scotch Liturgy before they had thus confidently told the world They were perswaded there is nothing in the worship of England which is not agreeable to the VVord of God Thirdly In the VVorship of England much of Canonical Scripture is omitted and never to be read a fault complained of by the first Compilers of the Common-Prayer-Book and much of the Ap crypha Vide. The Preface of it vain false and ridiculous is appointed to be publickly read the great Bible-Translation of the Psalms is thrust out The titles of the Psalmes Psa 72. Psa 14. Psa 105.28 and a most corrupt Translation of them omitting some whole sentences adding whole verses and falsly translating many places and Texts is affixed unto the Common-Prayer-Book and made part of it Some part of Scripture is dignified above other parts thereof the Gospel must be honoured with the standing up of the people the Epistle no way different in the matter Christ crucified but only in the name and manner of Revelation from the Gospel is slighted Will the Gentlemen of Oxford say this is agreeable to the VVord of God They must prove it for we shall not believe them and the rather for that this gross abuse is palliated by this false profession in the Preface to this Book That nothing is ordained to be read but the pure VVord of God the holy Scriptures or that which is evidently grounded thereupon Vide. The Anatomy of the Service-book p. 18. and the rather for that we find the Common-Prayer-Book condemned in respect of these particulars by Dr. Spark no mean Son of the Church Fourthly Will these Masters and Scholars stand perswaded that the extraordinary Solemn Worship appointed by the Common-Prayer-Book unto holy dayes and their Eves is agreeable to the Word of God wherein every particular holy-day hath its distinct and particular Collects Epistles and Gospels as its Solemn Service appointed not to insist on the supposed influence of that reputed sanctity on the Six or Seaven days following directing the same service to be impertinently continued as in the Feast of the Nativity Easter Whitsuntide Ascension and others nor the unwaerrantable preheminence given to some parts of Scripture above others or the irrational denomination of some Prophetical and Historical portions of Scripture Epistles all which are well urged by many Non-conformists I would enquire what part of Sacred Writ stamps Sanctity on Wednesday and Friday more than the other four dayes of the week and sets them into a parity with Sunday to retain their Dialect that the same more Solemn service shall be read on those dayes as on that day By what Scripture-waâ—â— mediate or immediate are other dayes besides the Lords day made holy or sanctified in honour of the Saints so as in their nature to interdict mens labour in their lawful calling engage men to the exercises of Religion as oft as they return and become Subjects of that Solemn Service which may not on other dayes be offered unto God Is not a Religious owning and observation of some time as not appointed by the God of our time whose sole Prerogative it is to make it Solemn and Holy time to be Religiously employed a plain and formal Superstition repugnant to Gospel-Rules Gal. 4.10 Coloss 2.16 I am not ignorant that some holy-dayes have been of ancient and universal observation in the Church and have laid claim to Apostolical tradition and occasioned much controversie in the Church but I stand unsatisfied in their institution I deny not the just authority of the Church or Christian Magistrate over our time but I think there is a vast difference between time as the subject and as the adjunct of Religion God only can make it the first humane authority may appoint holy Fasting and holy Feasting those transient acts of Worship dependant on and subservient unto Gods dispensations of providence to his people and so may determine the second time like the dayes of Purim as a necessary adjunct to those acts of Worship but to make holy-dayes Subjects of Solemn Sacred service I have not seen any Commission that doth authorize the Church thereunto Eminent Saints call for the esteem of the Church but the keeping of them in a Calendar and appointing them their several holy-dayes sets them a pitch too high and shews the Church partial respecters of persons having some in admiration and slighting others no less deserving or subjects here unto an intolerable burden by necessitating every day to be Holy The Nativity Circumcission Passion
Resurrection and Ascension of our Lord and Saviour are all mysteries or matters of reverence esteem and admiration to the Church to be duly and distinctly considered yet under correction of better judgments the several holy dayes appointed to the memorial of them is in my thoughts no less irrational than irreligious I say irrational because though some of them be great Mysteries yet they are not simply and in themselves mercies to the Church but as they relate unto and center in the work of Mâ—â—â—â—edemption to which they do relate as several distinct actâ—â—â— that compleat and individual Blessing or Mercy and right reason doth direct commemoration of all the parts in the mercies by them perfected and compleated Irreligious it seems to me as without any divine Warrant nay redundant to Gods own institution who hath appointed the first day of the week as the day for the commemoration of the worlds Restitution by mans Redemption If this be the cause of the change of the Sabbath as we have been commonly taught doth it not supersede the appointment of the Church God doth not mediately what he doth immediately or by Commission what is done in his own person I well know some in their Contests for Holy-dayes make the Sabbath changeable at the Churches pleasure and if these several acts of Redemption be commemorated in their distinct holy-dayes I see not how we can avoid a return to the Jews Sabbath for the fourth command must needs be moral and this method takes away the reason of the alteration of the day Now Sir if the holy daies the foundation be Superstitious sure Oxford will not say the superstructure or Solemn Special service is agreeable to the Word of God! Fifthly Again Sir will the Masters and Scholars of Oxford say the very order and method of the Common Prayer is agreeable to the Word of God How do they ground their perswasion concerning the Versicles Popular Responds Intermixtures Abbreviations Abruptions and stops and present postings on again with a Let us pray wenn nothing but prayer is in hand that they are agreeable to the Word of God So do the very Papists Antiphonae responsoria versiculi ejusmodi minuta non videntur necessaria impediunt enim cursum piae utilis lectionis Spalat l. 17. c. 12. Art 96. Versiculos responsoria capitula omittere ideirco visum est quoniam legentes saepe morentur Card. Quignonius I observe the first Compilers of this Book to leave a blot on this method by taking away many Verses Responds Anthems and the like which did interrupt the duty of reading the Scriptures together and that for this very reason but à quatenus ad omne valet consequentia The number is not only to be abated but all things of this nature obstructive to and inconsistent with the Solemn and serious entire performance of any particular Act or Duty of Religion ought to be abolished Doth the VVord of God allow mute service or private devotion in the publick Assembly What warrant is there in the publick service of the Church for a silent space of time that the secret prayers of the people may be sent to heaven as is directed at the Ordination and Consecration of Priests and Bishops The reason therein declared is That Jesus Christ prayed all night before He sent out His Disciples and the Church of Antioch prayed when they sent out Paul and Barnabas but they do not tell us whether Christ were in an Assembly when he prayed alone or whether the Church of Antioch had a silent pace in which they secretly prayed nor whether the prayer of the one or of the other were mental or vocal but I observe it was joyned with Fasting in which our order agreeth not whilst any Sunday or Holy-day and a short space thereof will be an opportunity sufficient for such a work VVhat Text of either Old or New Testament allots to the people other portion of publick prayer save to say Amen 1 Cor. 14.15 In respect of which prayer is prescribed to be in a known tongue to their understanding How shall we make the peoples vocal responds salutation supplication for mercies deprecation of miseries meerly and only recited by the Ministers agreeable to the Word of God Exposition of the Liturgy p. 40. Must it be by the salutation of Boaz and his Reapers or Mary and Elizabeth to which Dr. Boyes referreth it it must then be proved that Boaz was in the publick Assembly and cele ' rating divine service and so for Mary and Elizabeth and that it was not a civil complement expressed in Religious words on an occasional meeting each with other as becomes Christian friends and that such pieces of civil respect witnesssing reciprocal affection are parts of Solemn Worship to pass between the Pastor and People in the celebration thereof I shall not deny sighs and short ejaculations to be ardent expressions of the mind and affection and find acceptance with God but question the suitableness thereof to standing solemn and publick Worship I yield to Dr. Boys that the Publican did affectionately dart out his Lord be merciful to me a sinner and the Woman of Canaan her Have mercy on me O Lord and blind Bartimeus O Son of David take pity on me But by his leave I must say these were personal not publick occasional not fixed ordinary Worship extemporary on the occasion not premeditated much less prescribed nay I will grant what he saith Augustine Reports of the Christians in Egypt and which History mentioneth of other Churches Yea I could be easily convinced that in the very first Age of the Gospel many Christians did in the Assembly utter their short expressions and darting prayers preces raptim quodammodo ejaculatas But yet it would be noted they were ejaculations personal expressed in a sacred rapture on the sudden ebolition of the Spirit which without doubt wrought in prayer as in Prophecy and in Psalmes the heat whereof required the Apostles restriction and regulation 1 Cor. 14. affection leading into confusion and so can be no warrant for such premeditated ejaculative expressions to be prescribed in set and publick prayer wherein all things by a Rule restraining this very method under the fervency of the Spirit Let all things be done decently and in order are to be regulated that therefore might be admitted and exercised in the Church and acceptable to God in private and personally expressed or on the immediate ebolition or boyling up of the Spirit and in the heat of affection in the infancy of the Church which will not be so in the publick and prescribed prayers of the Church in her Adult estate in which she must appear more serious and composed and so will not render this Order of Worship agreeable to the Word Sixthly Will the Masters and Scholars of Oxford say that the Rites and Ceremonies annexed to the Worship of God are agreeable to the Word of God viz. The Cross
and invested with the same power of feeding and governing the Church of God with the Bishop and none other is an order distinct from and subject to the Bishop so to be ruled by him and not to exercise his Office but by the Bishops License and at his pleasure and that the Presbyter is bound to swear obedience to the Bishop as his Ordinary That certain particular Priests or Deacons shuld by Papal constitution and Princely indulgence without the counsel and common suffrages of the Colledge of Presbyters bespeaking their conset or consent of the common people The force of Prelacy covenanted against be constituted a Colledge or Cathedral Council to the Bishop to advise with him and rule under him by the name of Deans Deans and Chapters Arch-deacon and Prebends to Elect the Bishop in vacancy and hold Courts constitute Canons and exercise all Jurisdiction over all Churches and Ministers not being so much as chosen by them or having their consent much less commission so to do That any one Minister or Bishop doth stand charged with all the Congregations and Pastors of them in one County or many Counties making one Diocess and be by vertue of office bound to the inspection and pastoral Correction and Government of them and that the several Bishops of a Kingdom be themselves subject to one Metropolitan Church and Arch-bishop to whom they shall swear obedience and shall be subject to be by him overseen ordered and corrected sure if the Word of God conclude such superiority over the Church in one Kingdom it will conclude a Catholick superiority over the universal Church and advance the Pope as warrantably above the Arch-bishops as the Arch-bishops are above the Bishops and the Bishops above the Presbyters for these are not differences of kind but of degree nor is there pleaded for Divine Right or Apostolical Institution of the one in the Church of England what is not pleaded for the other by the Fathers of the Council of Trent and by Bellarmine that Cardinal Popes Champion Bellarm. de Clericis lib. 1.5 cap. 14. and who can deny a quatenus ad omne c Lastly That Bishops and Ministers of the Gospel may exercise their Office and Function by Vicegerents and Deputies Commissaries or Chancellours or that by any Apostolical direction they may and have authority to Commissionate any such or that the determination and disposal of Civil Affairs Matters of Marriage and Administrations belong to them that they must by themselves or joyning unto themselves Professors and Students of the Civil Law keep Courts on which Proctors Apparitros and the like are dependent and so judicially rule and govern in these cases This is the Form of Government these learned Casuists must think is if not of Divine Right by immediate precept from God yet established by the Apostles according to the mind and after the example of their Master Jesus Christ and that by vertue of their power and authority as deputed Governours of the Church or otherwise their thoughts are very vain and impertinent for not an Episcopal Government wherein all the Bishops Ministers of the Church within any City Country or Kingdom invested with equal authority and dignity being all of the same Order do by common Council govern the Church but this specifical Prelacy presuming it self to be an Hierarchy or holy Government and chief Priest-hood not to be gain-sayed without high profaness or with-stood and destroyed without sacriledge formally existing in Arch-bishops super our Princes to Bishops Bishops Soveraign Lords to all Ministers or Presbyters and enjoying the standing Cathedral Council and subordinate Judges Deans Arch-deacons Deans and Chapter and transmitting their power and Episcopal authority to Chancellours and Commissaries and so ruling with all state and pompous attendants not only mens profession of Religion but their propriety of civil enjoyments is Covenanted to be extirpated I hope Sir that these serious men would not cozen their own Consciences and cheat the World by their observation the Covenant would bind us against Episcopacy and Bishops in general and not take notice how it is limited to one particular kind and then Sir I must be free to tell them That the Divine Right or Apostolical Institution of this Episcopal Government is but a think so of no more value than a dream for I not only think but am sure the libraries of learning in all that famous Univesity will never lay us down this Form of Government in the Church of Ephesus though I should grant Timothy to be a Bishop therein Antioch Philippi Creet or the seven Churches of Asia supposing their Angels to have been Bishops in all which I deny not a Government by Bishops and those made by the Holy Ghost to whom I will presume to think had I then lived and been invested with that Ministerial authority I now by Gods grace enjoy poor simple I might have stood up as a Peer or at least Bishop Suffragan and if they give not some Scripture instance I think Ecclesiastical story will never prove the Apostles established this Form of Government in the Church or at least not by their Apostolical power and authority as deputed by Christ governours of the Church and I am sure not after the example nor according to the mind of Jesus Christ their Master it being directly inconsistent with the quality of this Kingdom and dictated parity of his Ministers Sir with Reverence may I speak it I think it had been very sutable to the learning and gravity of this learned Assembly to have laid down in this case of conscience some clear Reasons for their conjecture of this Divine Right and Apostolical Institution and Establishment And the rather for that Pope Nicholas hath affirmed Omnes sive Patriarchae cujuslibet apicem sive Metropolean primatus aut Episcopatuum Cathedras vel Eccl siarum sive cujuscunque ordinis dignitatem instituit Romana Ecclesia That Rome appointed all Ecclesiastical Dignities of Bishops Arch-bishops Deans Arch-deacons c. And Pope * Apud Gratian. Dist 22. cap. 1. Lucius and Clement with whom agreeth Peter Lombard and our own Historians That King Lucius instituted three Arch-bishopricks and * Distinct 80. lib. 4. dif 24. Brit Hist lib. 4. pag. 126. Polichro lib. 4. c. 16. fol. 163. Pagets Christianography Foxe saith 28. chief Priests called Flammens Acts and Monuments p. 96. Fol. 59 60. twenty five Bishopricks in the room and stead of the three Archflamens and twenty five flamens And that Devotus the Bishop of Winchester falling into the seat of the flamen thereof had all the possessions within twelve Miles cmopass containing thirty two Villages conferred on him and his Clergy And the Archbishops Bishops and Clergy of England in their Institution of a Christian man dedicated to Henry the eighth have told all the World It is out of all doubt that there is no mention made neither in the Scripture neither in the Writings of any authentical Doctor or Auctor of
Remonstrance they had declared to be so oppressive and dangerous if they will evade the influence compass and danger of the fourth Article of this Covenant in the first case I dare secure them from it in reference to the second 5. But the main thing which concerneth the Church of England is her foundation which if it be removed what shall the Righteous do And these serious Casuists do tell us That the holy Church of England was founded in the state of Prelacy within the Realm of England and they proved it by the Law for Gospel without doubt they had none to prove it that laying the Prophets and Apostles for the foundation and Christ an enemy to Prelacy the corner stone and in their Margin they cite the Statute of Carlile 25. Ed. 1. Recited 25. Ed 3. on which they profess They dare not by extirpation of Prelacy strike at the foundation of the Church which they are bound to uphold Truly Sir their care of the Church and its foundation is commendable but how comes it to pass that this Form of Government must be made the foundation of the Church without any danger of Schism by them to whom Scotlands making their Discipline and Government the mark of a true Church did seem so much tending to Schism Must the Government of England be a fundamental point of Religion the very esse of the Church and may not Scotland make her Government a note of distinction Turpe est doctori c. Sir we cannot deny the proofs cited and declaring the holy Church of England to be founded in the estate of Prelacy but I cannot but stand amazed to find men making Apologies propounding doubts professing a serious desire to have conscience satisfied so much to content themselves and cozen their Readers with plain fallacies such Sophisme as better beseems the Logick than Divinity Schools and common Halls than the Regent house Two things are to be explained What they mean by holy Church and what foundation this is to which the Statutes relate These learned men wel know that by holy Church in the acceptation of that Age and of those very Acts the Statute of Edward the first at Carlile and the Statute of Edward the third was meant the Pompous Popish Ecclesiastical State whereof Abbies and Priories were no small Members as in Magna Charta and other Grants of Kings which had then such influence on the Civil State as that no Act of Parliament could bind or be deemed valid without the ratifying censure of holy Church whose manner was by her authority to curse all that should not keep such Lawes as were agreed I wish the Masters and Scholars would speak out and tell us whether they think they are bound to uphold this holy Church or that the Church of Christ may not yea do not subsist in England now holy Church is driven out the Church simply Christian is very different from the pompous popish holy Church Again Sir the foundation mentioned in these Statutes is sutable to the Fabrick Foxe his Acts and Monuments p. 22. holy Churches viz. the temporal endowments whereby she was made so pompous the Lands Mannors and large Revenues given by the King or Nobles of the Land as the question occasioning the same doth plainly evidence which was Whether the exactions of the first fruits of Churches and Abbies and all Benefices in England and the profit of vacancies by Pope Clement were just and as the very words and scope of the Statute of 25. Edward 3d. doth plainly declare providing for the advousance and disposal of all Benefices and the profits thereof in manner as the founders that is first donors had established and so the Prelacy in which it was founded is an Independency as to Rome and a sole Power and Prerogative which England had free and within her self in respect of which in the very words of the Statutes themselves it is said The Bishop of Rome usurping the Seigniores of such Possessions and Benefices doth give and grant the same to Aliens which did not and Cardinals which might not dwel in England as if he had been Patron or Advowe of the said Benefices as he was not of right after the Law of England so that this Prelacy is purely Political and the foundation more profitable than pious could these learned men be so absurd as to make the very being of the Church to stand on such a foundation were there not Churches of Christ before Patrons Possessons and Presentations and may they not be when these large endowments are taken away from the places to which they are affixed This Prelacy will determine the Church of England by the fall of Monasteries to have been shaken in the foundation and by vertue of this Political Prelacy the Kings of England have given the possessions of Bishopricks to their Chancellours Treasurers Secretaries Kinsmen meer Lay-persons for increase of their means Pryns Catalogue of Testimonies for the parity of Presbyters and Bishops p. 16 17 18. and have kept the Episcopal and Archiepiscopal Seas void for 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 15 20. and sometimes 30. years together by what loadstone do these learned men think the holy Church did subsist when her Prelates her foundation in their sense was wanting or can they make us believe Denmark or Scotland have lost or the Reformed Churches never had the being of a Church of Christ because they never had or have expelled their Episcopal Prelacy Ecclesiastical Prelacy like the Petrae and Rupes as in the time of King Henery the third have ever been such swelling foundations to the Church and in the State that they have constrained the Kings and Parliament of England as of all other Nations in all Ages to exercise an high Prelacy over them by strict Laws and severe exactions to keep them within their bounds and at last to Covenant the extirpation thereof wherein the Oxford Reasons would make us believe we not only pull an old house about our ears but destroy the very Church if we have not wit enough to see how they would cosen us by the Law of man instead of the Law of God and a false gloss on fair words Having found so little weight in what is urged from the Government by Episcopacy of the estate of the Church of England we shall not expect much in what is incumbent upon themselves against their Covenanting to endeavour to extirpate this kind of Government yet that little we shall consider and it relates unto their personal capacities in their third exception or more publick Obigations in their fifth exception In reference to their personal capacities they say They are not satisfied how it can stand with justice ingenuity or humanity to require the extirpation of this Government Oxford Reasons third exception against extirpation of Prelacy unless it had been proved unlawful what Sir if it had been proved inexpedient it would have been consistent with Saint Pauls Justice Humanity and
very manner of making this Covenant is no less justifiable than the matter therein sworn and being seriously considered will not avail to reproach much less to discharge the Solemn League and Covenant Sectio Quinta Fifth Prop. The Ambiguities and Contradictions in the words of the Solemn League and Covenant are imagined not real SO Sacred is the nature of an Oath and so strict the obligation thereof that I freely confess simplicity of expression and sincerity of intention should continually attend it and ambiguous or contradictory terms do destroy the very nature thereof deceive men and blaspheme God in making him the Witness of a fallacy yet these ambiguities and contradictions must be real and in the very words of the Covenant not in the fancy or imagination of such as in prejudice do decline the Oath nor in the intention of him that sweareth not willing to be bound for if the words be clear and plain in their proper signification or vulgar acceptation the apprehension of the confederates or the due drift and scope of the Oath the Oath obligeth De juram prael 6. Sect. 22.11 p. 173 195. and must be carefully observed as Dr Sanderson Grotius and many others in this case do teach Some there are who charge the Solemn League and Covenant with ambiguities and contradiction in its terms and therefore have declined to swear it these having had a care to their passion and prejudice I cannot but commend confessing that whilst they but seem such to their imagination they might well be a remora to their act of swearing and spur unto the study of the Oath to be sworne but others plead them as an Argument to make void the Oath and such had need to see that there is no possibility of understanding the terms in a sound sence and making them to agree among themselves lest they be found Students unto perjury Forasmuch as the last have recourse unto the first let us consider what seemed to the one and are since alledged by the other to be ambiguous and contradictory that the one may be justified and the other acquitted if found real or both condemned if found imagined 1. Ambiguity Oxford Reasons Sect. 6 p. 17. League Illegal p. 27. The ambiguities that are urged are these 1. Those words in the first Article of the Covenant the common enemies the Masters and Scholars of Oxford do charge with ambiguity but assign no cause or reason for the same and Dr. Featley his ghost following their exception enquireth whether by common enemies are meant the world the flesh or the devil enemies to all true Religion or Papists and Independents enemies to the Discipline of the Scotch Church Unto this exception Sir I answer The words common enemies are words in their own nature and signification plain and cleer to be understood nor do I know them to be darkned by any variety of acceptation they are indeed relative terms to be specified or particularly assigned by their objects things or persons so that the Kingdom of England or professors of true Religion being annexed to common enemies as objects of that enmity doth make its sence plain and obvious to every capacity If then common enemies had been mentioned in the Covenant without an object assigned it might have been an individuum vagum and so ambiguous as not to be understood But they are not left so general for they are limited with this possessive our The words run thus The preservation of the Reformed Religion of the Church of Scotland in doctrine worship discipline and government against OVR COMMON enemies This Relative OVR doth limit and explâ—in COMMON ENEMIES and if they will consider the antecedent which can be no other than the Noblemen Barons Knights Gentlemen Citizens Burgesses and Commons of all sorts c. living under one King being of one reformed religion having before our eyes c. and men described by these and the like qualities and in special by one that is fully exegetical to these terms in the Preface of the Covenant and discharge all imaginable ambiguity in them viz. Calling to mind the treacherous and bloody plots and conspiracies attempts and practices of the enemies of God against the true religion and professors thereof in all places but especially in these three Kingdoms ever since the reformation they will find that an ordinary Grammarian would easily read this Riddle and tell them common enemies limited by this possessive OUR must mean the enemies of England Scotland and Ireland as living under one King in the profession of one reformed Religion wherein some had made a progress to be preserved others were in pursuit of a greater degree of reformation but all opposed by the plots conspiracies c. of known enemies to true religion especially the professors thereof in these three Kingdoms Now whilst this enmity was not seen by the Masters and Scholars of Oxford it is no wonder if they imagined an ambiguity in these words Common Enemies and Dr. Featley his Ghost might hereby have assured himself that both the flesh the world and the devil are enemies to all true religion and so to reformation and Papists professed enemies to the reformed Religion were here intended and Independents though scarcely then known by that name by their enmity to the discipline and government of Scotland parts of the true reformed Religion might be accidentally accounted into the number of the Common enemies so far as the qualifications before mentioned in reference to the antecedent objects of this common enmity will include them And so Sir the words can be of no very dark or doubtful construction to the one or to the other there being no real ambiguity in them 2. The next words charged with Ambiguity The second Ambiguity charged on the Covenant are in the same Article the best Reformed Churches concerning which the Masters and Scholars of Oxford enquire which they be but by their leave that is not necessary to be resolved in or before the taking of the Covenant yet the words are of a plain and clear construction making this sence obvious to the meanest capacity in endeavouring the Reformation of the Church of England the Word of God shall be our Rule and forasmuch as many Churches are reformed some more and better some worse and less the best Reformed Churches shall be our pattern so that the Covenant asserts not which are the best reformed Churches but binds the Covenanter to the observation of whatever Church shall appear and be found the best Reformed as the example to which he shall endeavour England may be conformed The next words imagined to be so ambiguous as to impede the swearing the Covenant in judgement are in the second Article The third Ambiguity charged on the Covenant League Illegal p. 27. and profoundly stated by Dr. Featley's Ghost who enquires what is meant by Church-Government by Arch-bishops Bishops Deans c. as if it were not so particularly specified that every ordinary
capacity may run and read it if he know any thing of the late Hierarchy in this Church Dr. Gauden hath appeared no less willing to suppose and suggest the same Ambiguities in his Analysis to which I have before Answered in my Analepsis and he that hath but half an eye cannot but see that the very and whole frame of Government by Arch-deacons Prebends Chapters Deans Bishops and Arch-bishops whereby all Government which belongs to Presbyters in Common was engrossed by a few pretended Ministers to Cathedral Churches and a Superiority of Office and Order above Presbyters not ordained by God or consented to by themselves was exercised is utterly to be abolished the which is so clearly expressed that it can admit of no evasive Salvoes The next Ambiguity is imagined by the Masters and Scholars of Oxford to be in the fourth Article in the word Malignants The Fourth Ambiguity charged on the Covenant and they enquire who are to be accounted Malignants as if it were left in its latitude to be understood by every mans private fancy whilst it is expressely limited and explained in the Article it self such as have been or shall be Malignants by hindring Reformation of Religion dividing the King from his people or one Kingdom from another so that the Malignity predicated is described and specified by the formality of it but those learned men know not how farre the hindring Reformation of Religion may be extended To which I say it matters not unto the discovery of a Malignant for they will not deny both these to admit majus and minus if Reformation be hindred it is Malignity which is in degree more or less according to the measure of that obstruction which is made Again they know not what are meant by the Supream Judicatories of both Kingdoms sure they will not pretend to ignorance in the signification they know well what a Judicatory is and wherein Supream almost every Englishman knoweth the sence of these Roman terms I believe their doubt was which be the Supream Judicatories and the words can be construed no otherwise than to mean those to which the other Courts of Judgement are subject and from which there is no appeal if they please to ask Lawyers I presume they will tell them it is the Parliament yet this is not necessary to be known to the expounding of the words of the Covenant These are Oxford Reasons sect 6. p. 17 18. Sir the ambiguous terms which in the judgment of these learned men are of a dark and doubtful construction whether really and in themselves let rational men judge others they do stick at but profess the use men have made thereof doth occasion it they well know false glosses male interpretations and a strained sence may by wicked men be put on the plainest text yet it doth not lose its genuine and proper signification especially in an Oath wherein some men are willing to wrest it with rigour beyond its scope others to writh themselves out of its just obligation I shall be free to tell them that no Rules of right Reason will justifie the rigorous sence put on the third Article in the Case of the King by Mr. Challoner though in a speech in Parliament nor the Laxe sence put on the second Article in the Case of Prelacy by Dr. John Gauden though unto the Loosing of St. Peters bonds nor will the words of the Covenant warrant the one or the other But such ambiguities are made according to mens wills minds fancies and lusts not found in the words which are clear and plain to every common capacity These supposed ambiguities are not more visible to have been imagined without any real ground in the words of the Covenant than the suggested contradictions in it self the learned men of Oxford do charge the Covenant to be an Oath in which one part is contradictory to another but with Reverence may I tell them one part is confined to their breasts or to such to whom they shew it Oxford Reasons sect 6. p. 16. for it goeth not abroad with the Covenant as will appear in the very naming of their supposed suggested contradictions which are these 1. To preserve as it is without change 1. Contradiction charged on the Covenant and yet to reform and alter and not to preserve one and the same Reformed Religion In what Articles of the Covenant this contradiction lieth they do not tell us nor can I see it the Reformed Religion in Scotland is to be preserved and Reformation of Religion in England endeavored Are these opposites and contraries were there not Doctrins Worship Discipline and Government in England which were no part of the Reformed Religion and cannot these be altered and abolished whilst that is preserved where then is the contradiction 2. Absolutely and without exception to preserve 2 Contradiction charged on the Covenant and yet upon supposition to extirpate the self-same thing viz. the present Religion of the Church of Scotland I want Sir their eyes to read this contradiction the first part to preserve is legible in the Covenant but to extirpate the present Religion in the Church of Scotland I read not Oh but they tell us it is on a supposition but I suppose that supposition must be expressed in plain terms in the Covenant to make a contradictory part thereof The Extirpation covenanted relates to Popery Prelacy Errour Heresie Schisme c. which of those can we suppose the present Religion of Scotland to be they will bring good Compurgators for every of them I know the University did suppose * Reason sect 4 p. 4. there were some things in the Church of Scotland which to their thinking did tend to schism and superstition yet they dare not charge it do but suppose it and that not to be but tend toward superstition and schism and they do not affirm them neither to be the Religion of Scotland such supposed extirpation may suppose a contradiction justly deserving to be charged to be a suppositum non supponendum Their next Contradiction is as clear a supposition as this 3. Contradiction charged on the Covenant to reform Church-Government in England and Ireland according to the Word of God and yet to extirpate that we are perswaded is according to the Word of God here it is visible the contradiction is between the Covenant and their perswasion not one part against another part of it self how well-grounded their perswasion is we have before enquired I shall therefore only tell them it is not fair play to beg the question and on their own perswasion to arraign the Covenant as an Oath contradictory to it self yet The next is of the very same nature 4. Contradiction charged on the Covenant to extirpate heresie schismes and prophaneness and yet to extirpate the Government we conceive the want of which is the chief cause of all evils and the restoring and continuance of which the proper and effectual remedy Sure
and excommunicating of the best of men for meer trifles things indifferent so judged by themselves at the least nay many times for opposing profaness and superstition yea for performing their duties in praying and preaching and the like evils which did attend it though I should say but accidentally by the corruption of Montague Laude Wren Pierce and their Companions be written in such sensible Acts and legible Characters that England might feel and the World read them I think there need not be much of Reason offered to shew not only the expediency but necessity of extirpation of a Government though in it self good yet capable of such enormities unlesse it be of an immediate and undoubted divine right But Sir Had not Oxford their numbers in Parliament and did they not trust them with their understandings or must a Parliament offer Reasons of the necessity and expediency of every Act they impose on the Subject before the Subject yield obedience and yet the Vote of the House of Commons past the 10th of June 1641. viz. That this Government hath been found by long experience to be a great impediment to the perfect reformation and growth of Religion and very prejudicial to the Civil State together with the learned Speeches of many Members in the House printed to offer Reason without as well as within doors might have laid something before the judgments of these Gentlemen I presume Sir the Subjects obedience must not in the judgment of this University be suspended untill the Reasons of State producing the resolution be known to and and apprehended by every person and society 2. If this Prelacy judged thus evil were but contemporary with Popery Superstition Heresie Schisme and Prophaness though we should presume it good I hope it may be ranked amongst its fellows and taken upon suspition it may be a grief but no wrong to stay an honest man found in company with Thieves when he hath cleared himself justice will let him go But Sir if this Prelatical Government be in the formality of it a plain and clear Papacy as the deriving it from Rome and its standing on no basis but the constitutions of the Church when Popish and institution of the Pope not Christ or any Christian Magistrate nor General Assembly of the Ministers of the Church of God in this Kingdom the owning of Anselme Archbishop of Canterbury Papam alterius mundi the content all Papists find in the same could they but continue it in dependance on Rome for Consecration and Investiture pure circumstances not of the essence of the Government and principally its springing from the same principles standing on the same Basis the indulgence of Princes and being supported by the self-same Arguments and Authorities which are urged by Bellarmine and the Council of Trent History of the Council of Trent Edit 3. p. 589 590. to p. 616. for the defence of the Papacy in all which respects it must needs appear that the difference between an universal Metropolitan or Diocesan Bishop is in degrees and limits not in kind for is there not the same reason for Arch-bishops over Bishops to receive their Oath of Obedience as for Juridical Bishops over Presbyters and so the same for Cardinals over Arch-bishops and Popes over Cardinals do suggest it to be and if it were the Foot-stool or Stirrup of the Papacy as Salmasius doth at large demonstrate in his Apparatus ad Papatum and as Beza doth affirm when he tells us Episcopi Papam pepererunt Beza Epist 79. I hope it can be no great wrong to ranck it with Popery which might be its proper name though through use of a larger signification And if Sir its Rule whereby to square it and Reason of sustentation be that which is not more openly Canted by some then indeed generally practised viz. No Ceremonies no Bishop whereby the Cross in Baptism the Altar the Surplice and other matters innovated into the worship of God the use of which how edifying soever to the Church of God is a formal Superstition it cannot be much abused to call Superstition its companion And if it have been found to indulge Heresie by publishing and printing cum priveligio all Heretical Notions and silencing the Pulpit and stopping the Press from all possibility of Confutation or if by innovation of Superstition into worship and obtrusion of Error in Doctrine on the souls of men it hath provoked Schism I hope there is no great cause of complaint for putting these together with it And if it have been approved a protection and promotion of Revels Church-ales Clerks-ales The seventy two Ministers of Somersetshire in their unanimous consent to the continuance of Revels Church-ales c. Sports and Pastimes on the Lords day so that its Deans and Chapters or other Colledge and Conventions have proved like unto Bishop Pierce his Septuagint in their Agreement against Justice Richardson's order for suppressing of these and the like profaness certified in a letter to the late Arch-bishop dated the fifth of November 1633. and suppressing all Ministers that refuse to stir up such licentiousness as did the visitations of the Arch-bishop of Canterbury Bishop Pierce and others it sure can be no great wrong to rank it with profaness and intimate it to have in it some contrariety to the power of godlinesse to which whatever some few very few Bishops might do the current of Episcopacy did never yield much countenance or speak much amity Sir in these and the like respects the extirpation hereof must be endeavoured by all that will not partake of other mens sins and I must be free to tell them that in their Parallel case propounded which yet will not square the alteration yea extirpation of the Civil Government of the City capable of such proximity unto Treason Murder Advltery Theft Cousenage and the like would be by all ingenuous men judged both just and reasonable but I insist too long in abatement of their affection who offer Arguments by which they were perswaded to adhere unto their object let us therefore weigh them severally Subsectio Octava This Preface being past they proceed to the Reasons why they cannot Covenant an endeavour to extirpate Prelacy that is to say The Government by Arch-Bishops Bishops their Chancellours or Commissaries Deans Deans and Chapters Arch-deacons and all other Ecclesiastical Officers depending on that Hierarchy And they propound five Reasons two relate unto the Government the third and fifth unto their own capacity and the fourth unto the estate of the Church according to this order I shall consider them And 1. Oxford first and second exception to the extirpation of Prelacy They tell us They are not satisfied how they can with a good conscience swear to extirpate Episcopal Government which say they we think to be if not Jure Divino in the strictest sense by express command yet of Apostolical institution that is to say was established in the Churches by the Apostles according to the mind
and after the example of their Master Jesus Christ and that by vertue of their ordinary power and authority derived from him as deputed by him Governours of his Church Or at least that Episcopal Aristocracy may lay a more just title and claim to a Divine Institution than Papal Monarchy Presbyterial Democracy and Independants by particular Congregations or gathered Churches 2. We are assured by the undoubted testimony of Ancient Records and later History that this Form of Government hath been continued with such an universal uninterrupted unquestioned succession in all the Churches and in all Kingdoms that have been called Christian for fifteen hundred years together that there never was in all that time any considerable opposition against it that of Aerius was the greatest which grew from discontent and gain'd him the reputation of an Heretick From which antiquity to depart they fear by this extirpation to give advantage to the Papists by contempt of antiquity and should diminish the Authority due to the consentient judgement and practice of the universal Church c. Sir this is a very fair and specious exception for Divine Institution and ancient universal practice are very strong bars against any Oath and strong conjecture of the one and certain assurance of the other do forcibly supersede any mans acting to the contrary yet Sir I wonder that these learned men do but think of a Divine Institution and yet are assured of ancient universal practice uninterrupted for fifteen hundred year methinks the last should rather have remained doubtful for conscience can only be satisfied in the certainty of the former A think so in a Divine Warrant is both sinful and dangerous and I think the universal uniterrupted practice of the Church for fifteen hundred years might well run back unto the times of our Lord and Saviour and at least the Acts of his Apostles and the Sacred as well as Ecclesiastical Story might make mention of this Government and so create an undeniable certainty for the one is a very uncertain ground of assurance without the other But stay Sir I forgot the year in which these learned men wrote it was 1647. and so indeed one hundred and forty years might return before Episcopal Government appeared in the World and yet they may by antient Records and later Histories find the practice of it fifteen hundred years but this will more weaken than strengthen the Divine Right for without doubt the most primitive and pure estate of the Church was in the first one hundred and forty years 2. Their Argument loseth its force by the ambiguity of their terms for I am Sir at the same loss with them for the Ratio formalis objecti Saint Peters Bonds abide p. 2 3. the thing to be extirpated as in my last with Dr. Gauden They tell us of an Episcopal Government and an Episcopal Aristocracy but do not describe it it is no marvel that the Popes Legates should interdict the dispute in the Council of Trent History of the Council of Trent Edit 3. p. 591 592. concerning the Divine Right of Episcopal Superiority or direct it into such general and uncertain debates that there might be of it no determination but Sir I think it very strange that a Protestant University professedly seeking satisfaction to their conscience should so sophistically by general terms of an uncertain acceptation maintain to themselves doubts to which they desire resolution They well know Episcopal Government may denominate the Government Communi Concilio Presbyterorum by all Ministers in the Church who are the very true undoubted Scripture-Bishops unto which or whom there may be ordinis causa for method sake a Superintendent Moderator or Chair-man and this Episcopal Government is undoubtedly of Divine Institution and antient practice prescribed by the Holy Ghost and propounded in the sacred story of the Acts of the Apostles Chap. 20.28 where as in other Scriptures Bishops and Presbyters are terms synonimous denominating persons invested with the same Office and Authority and enjoying the same qualifications and by common consent ruling the Church of Christ and then Sir we must tell them this is not to be endeavoured to be extirpated nor doth the Covenant so propound it which if it do I consent to reject it But if by Episcopal Government they mean that special Form and Frame of Government wherein one person is advanced into a distinct order of Ministry above other Ministers and is invested with Prince-like power over them enjoying an Authority peculiar to him eonomine as Bishop of sole Ordination and Jurisdiction unto whom all other his Fellow-Ministers are Subjects and must swear to him obedience who must have a Council denominated Deans Deacons Prebends Chapters and the like over and among whom he sits as Lord and yet over him acknowledgeth a more superiour order under the title of Arch-bishop to whom he oweth and sweareth obedience and in this superiour order and lordly manner he ruleth all Pastours and People somtimes by himself somtimes by his Chancellor or Comissary his Surrogates Deans and Arch-deacons with all Officers of State and Power within such prefixed bounds and limits which is called his peculiar Diocess and either they must mean this or mistake the meaning of the Covenant which yet doth very plainly describe the Prelacy to be extirpated to be a Government by Arch-bishops Bishops their Chancellours Commissaries Deans c. And then Sir I must deny not that they think for I must believe the profession of their thought though I think it strange but that there is any good ground for such thoughts and the opinion of an University will not without good demonstration in this point beget such thoughts in me That the Apostles by vertue of their ordinary power and authority derived from Christ and deputed Governours of his Church did ever establish this Episcopal Government or that it was according to the mind and after the example of Jesus Christ who himself did never exercise a Pompous and Princely power over his Disciples but conversed with them as his Peers and Equals and gave them in charge that they should not affect Superiority one over another or Princely power over Gods Heritage I must put these Masters and Scholars of Oxford to prove by plain and pregnant Scripture That the Office of the Ministry may in Ordination be divided and only some part of it be thereby committed so as that the Deacons may preach and baptize but not consecrate the Lords Supper That there are more orders of the Ministry than one the Bishop or Presbyter or more Officers in the Church than Elders and Deacons appointed by Christ or his Apostles by their Apostolical Authority who have only described their qualification and directed the Ordination of these two and no more That the Presbyter in whom is required the same qualification to whom is to be yielded the same obedience subjection and respest who receiveth the same Ordination and is charged with the same duty