Christian Religion For the Christian Religion giveth Rules to all sorts of Christian Societies These are not the usual ways of defining nor give me any true notice of your sence 6. And you make it not intelligible whether by the Rules of the Christian Religion you mean only the Divine Rule and whether you mention it as the uniting Bond or only as a Rule to some humane Rule But though the application look this way yet your words speak no more than what is common to the Churches which you accuse that are united for Order and Government according to the Rules of the Christian Religion If this will serve those are thus united that take the Bible for their Rule of Order c. But is not this against those Churches that take not the Bible but Canons or other humane Laws for the bound of their Church-Vnion or their Rule If it be uniting for Order and Government according to the Rules of the Christian Religion which maketh a Church let us then try which Societies are so united and let that be the matter of our Dispute § 24. Serm. p. 13. And it is a great mistake to make the Notion of a Church barely to relate to Acts of Worship and consequently that an adequate Notion of a Church is an Assembly for Divine Worship by which means they appropriate the Name of Churches to particular Congregations whereas if this held true the Church must be dissolved as soon as the Congregation is broken up But if they retain the nature of a Church when they do not meet together for Worship then there is some other Bond that uniteth them and whatever that is it constitutes the Church Ans 1. Did you write this as a Confutation of any body If so you should have told them who are your Adversaries I never met with one to my remembrance that saith the Church is no longer a Church than they are congregate but Mr. Cheney who writeth against my Plea for Peace And so the two first who now write against me write against one another and I must please them both When you so far differ among your selves you should bear with them that less differ from you 2. What mean you by the Notion of a Church which all Men know is an equivocal word Do you mean that a Church hath but one Notion I pray you tell us whether the Notion be the same as it is used Matth. 16. 18. 18. 17. 1 Corinth 11. 18 22. Acts 19. 32 39 40. 1 Crrinth 14. 34. Psalm 26. 5. Ephes 5. 27. 1 Tim. 3. 15. Acts 5. 11. Acts 20. 28. Rev. 2. 12 18. Rom. 16. 5. Phil. 2. 10. Acts 8. 1 3. Eph. 5. 23. Col. 1. 18. Eph. 1. 22. 5. 23. Doth any Man believe that it is in all these Texts taken in the same Notion or sence I am sure I need not ask this of you as to the sence of prophane Authors who use the word for any sort of Concilium coetus concio congregatio convivia as in Lucian Demosthenes Aristotle Thucidides c. 3. If you will pardon me for telling Men in Print so often that a Church is constituted not only for Communion in Worship but also in Doctrine and holy Living I will not ask you why you dissembled this nor why you would intimate the contrary to your Readers Repetition is not the least fault of my Writings and all will not prevent the mis-intimations even of such worthy Men as you Ad nauseam usque I have repeated that the Office of the Ministery standeth in a subordination to the three parts of Christ's Office Prophetical or Teaching Priestly or Worshipping Kingly or Ruling and that a particular Church is associated for the use and benefit of all three conjunctly Were you not willing to take notice of this or not willing that others should take notice of it 4. How many Writings of ours have told the World that we appropriate not the Notion of a Church to a particular Congregation Do not my Books which you cite copiously express the contrary Do we not over and over tell Men that the word Church must be considered as equivocal generical and specifical Do we take the Holy Catholick Church in the Creed for a particular Congregation Worthy Sir this is unworthy dealing whether it be by ignorance negligence rashness or wilfulness We distinguish between Churches of God's Institution and of Man's Invention And of the first sort what Independent is there that holdeth not an Vniversal Church at least besides particular Congregations And of Man's making who can number the sorts that are and may be made 5. Did you ever know Man save such Conformists as he that answered my Plea whether Greek Papist Episcopal Presbyterian Independent or Anabaptist who denieth a Church Bond that uniteth them when the Congregation is dismiss'd All confess that the Union of the pars regens and pars subdita for Church-ends doth make it a Church And who doth not distinguish between the Constitution and Administration the Status and the Exercitium 6. How then could you say If this be true the Church must be dissolved as soon as the Congregation is broken up What shew is there of such a consequence What if we held that the Church were so called barely in relation to Publick Worship doth it follow that this Relation ceaseth as soon as the several Acts of Worship cease Their mutual consent and the union of the VVorshippers Priest and People associated for that use may continue when the Act of VVorship is intermitted May it not continue a School when the Boys go home or play May it not be a Parliament when the House is risen tho it be only for the work of assembled Men that they are related and denominated 7. But Sir do you not confess even in your Iroenicon where you maintain that no Form of Church-Government is of Divine command 1. That God hath commanded that there be Assemblies ordinarily used for his VVorship 2dly And that Pastors are to be the Guides and chief Managers of this VVorship 3dly And that they should be also their Teachers 4thly And that they govern them by their Keys And if all this be true then such Assemblies are of Divine Institution not such as are associated only for VVorship but for Doctrine Worship and holy Living under the Teaching and Conduct of their Pastors If you deny that such Churches as we call Particular are of Divine Institution we have often proved it though few Christians deny it or need any proof And it is so oft repeated in the Books which you cite that I must suppose you know it though you seem to dissemble it that the Definition which I give of such a Church doth make the Terminus to be not the whole Church meeting at one time and place but personal presential Communion in Doctrine VVorship and Holy Conversation as distinct from absent Communion by Delegates or Letters only Your Parish is associated for such
or Humane Law is not necessary to the being or Government of a Church nor is it necessary that it be National And do you think that the Greek Churches have not Power to govern and reform themselves though they be not a National Church Why did Paul write to Corinth as Clemens also did and to the Galatians c. and John to Ephesus and the other six Rev. 2 3. to reform themselves if they had not Power to do it But if all the Christians under the Turk be one National Church then it is either because they have one Civil Head or one Ecclesiastical Head Not the latter for they have none such though the Bishops of Constantinople have some Primacy by their old Canons and Customs Not the former for an Infidel cannot be an essential part of a Christian Church as a constitutive Head is § 19. And the Churches in the Roman Empire before Constantine were true Churches of Christ's Institution and they had power to govern and reform themselves and yet they had no humane Constitutive Head Regal or Sacerdotal though they had a Civil Heathen Governour which was an extrinsick accidental Head It is so contrary to all Sence and Religion that either a Man as a Man or a Family or a Church as such should have no power to govern and reform it self that I must needs judg that while you speak confusedly you meant only a Regal or Supreme Civil Power which yet is totâ specie distinct from that which is properly Ecclesiastical § 20. Serm. p. 17. And so the several Churches of the Lydian or Proconsular Asia if they had been united in one Kingdom and governed by the same Authority under the same Rules might have been truly called the Lydian Church Answ 1. And is the Controversy de nomine Whether they might be called the Lydian Church when we expected a satisfactory explication de re No doubt but a Church is so equivocal a word that many sort of Assemblies or Societies may be so called I have told you of divers Sences in which we are called a Church National first Plea pag. 251 c. Either a Christian Kingdom or else the Churches of a Heathen or a Christian King as associated by agreement may be called a National Church 2. What if they be united in one Kingdom of a Heathen Mahometan or Arrian King and governed by his Regal Authority under the same Rules which he sets them Is this it that you mean in your Description A King as such is not an Ecclesiastick Person and therefore is not an essential part of a Church unless as it is equivocally so called And is it his Civil Laws for Church-Government that you mean or the Clergies Canons or God's Laws The Greeks under the Turk are under one Prince and governed by the same Civil Authority and Laws and also are under one Patriarch and by the Princes toleration are governed by the Ecclesiastick Authority and Laws of another Species If you confound these two Species or tell us not which you mean in your Definition it tendeth not to Edification 3. And what if they be under divers Kings as the Bulgarians and Greeks were and yet ruled by one Ecclesiastick Authority and Law why may not they also be called One Church as the Moscovites are now called part of the Greek Church 4. And why might it not be called the Lydian Church while it was a part of the Empire as the African and other Countries were But what is all this de nomine to the Controversy All grant that the Civil Power must be obeyed in their place and the Church-power in theirs 5. But here you grant that they are several Churches before their Union in one Kingdom And I suppose they were Churches 1. of another species than the National described by you 2. and were of Divine Institution 3. and continue so after their Union in one Kingdom 4. and have power to govern and reform themselves still though not Regal power § 21. Serm. Just as several Families united make one Kingdom which at first had a distinct and independent power but it would make strange confusion in the World to reduce Kingdoms back again to Families because at first they were made up of them Answ And are they not several Families still and have they not still a distinct Family-power to govern and reform themselves tho not a Regal Power Doth making a City or Kingdom dissolve Families You cannot mean it What mean you then by reducing these Kingdoms back to Families when they are Families still Had you said that dissolving Kingdoms or Cities and reducing them to be only Families is confusion it 's undeniable But still as Families in a Kingdom retain Family-power so particular Churches in a Kingdom retain the Church-power which God by his Institution gave them And this is that we desire § 22. Serm. Thus National Churches are National Societies of Christians under the same Laws of Government and Rules of Worship Ans 1. All Christians are under the same Divine Laws and Rules 2. Some Princes make no Church-Laws to Christians but their Civil Laws for the common Peace And some make various Laws for various sorts of Christians under them § 23. Serm. For the true Notion of a Church is no more than a Society of Men united together for their Order and Government according to the Rules of the Christian Religion Ans 1. There be many true Notions of such an equivocal word as a Church is 2. The Generical Notion sure is not enough for the definition of each species There must be more The Universal Church is a Society of Men so united and so may the Churches of divers Kingdoms and so is a Christian Kingdom as such and so is a Provincial Church and a Diocesan Church and a particular Parochial Church yet all these are not of the same species for they have different terminos in specie 3. This is a very defective Definition where 1. Men are made the qualified Subject when it should have been Christians 2. The two constitutive essential Relations of Pastor and Flock are not mentioned as if a Kingdom were defined without the mention of King and Subjects 3. They are said to be united in general without telling us what uniting is meant whether only by force command or consent whereas most take even the Mode of Investiture Baptism as well as Consent to be necessary ad esse as to the Visible Church 4. It is said they are united for Order and Government as if these were but the Terminus and so may those by agreement de futuro that yet have no Government whereas the Government is the constitutive Form 5. This Definition leaving out the specifick Form and Terminus maketh an Army a Navy a Ship a company of Christian Merchants or Corporation c. to be a Church For all these may be Societies of Men united together for their Order and Government according to the Rules of the
one Church when it is upon unwarrantable cause or reasons If one Church unjustly renounce Communion with another whole Church as no true Church or as Heretical I think that it is done by a whole Church against a whole Church makes it worse But perhaps you mean that for two National Churches to have two Kings is not unlawful No doubt of that But to what purpose is it Or is it that two National Churches may have different Accidents of Worship or Discipline And so may two Diocesan or Parish-Churches in our Nation if the King please at least § 15. You add Which according to the Scripture Antiquity and Reason have a just Right and Power to govern and reform themselves Ans Have not all Diocesan Churches power to govern and reform themselves Government is of various species Only the King or summa Potestas Civilis hath Power to govern and reform by his Species of Government But every Bishop may govern and reform his Church as a Bishop as every Master may his Family as a Master and every Man himself as a Man It 's a strange Man Family or Church that hath not power to govern and reform it self though not Regal Power Though Kings have Power they have not God's Power and all Power that is Humane is not Regal § 16. Serm. By whole Churches I mean the Churches of such Nations which upon the decay of the Roman Empire resumed their Right of Government to themselves and upon their owning Christianity incorporated into one Christian Society under the same common Ties and Rules of Order and Government Ans 1. And had not those as good right that were not under the Roman Empire as Abasia c. 2. Did the Churches under the Roman Power exercise their great diversity in Liturgies and other accidents of Worship without right Had not they a right to govern and reform themselves variously as they did 3. Christian Societies are of divers species Do you mean Christian Civil Societies Kingdoms free Cities c. or Churches Or do you take a Christian Kingdom and a Christian Church for the same as the Erastians do If so I suppose half the Conformists will be against you as well as I. At least you must confess that if de nomine a Christian Kingdom quasi tale may be called a Church it is equivocally and that there is a sort of Christian Churches which are of another Constitution Far were the Christian Bishops for 1300 years from believing that a Prince or Civil Power was essential to a Christian Church or that a Church in the common sence was not constituted of another sort of Regent part that had the Power of the Keyes Two species of Governours make two species of the Societies if they are not subordinate but prime constitutive Parts But the Prince and the Pastor are two species well opened among many by Bishop Bilson of Subjection And verily if you Conformists be divided among your selves about the very Constitutive Rector of a Christian Church you differ more from each other than we do from the generality of you 4. And what be the common Tyes and Rules of Order which you mean Are these notifying Terms for a Definition 1. There are divine unalterable Rules of Order and Government and there are humane Rules about alterable Accidents 2. There are Rules made by Contract such as Grotius thinks Canons are and Rules made by Governours which are binding Commands or Laws 3. There are Rules made by Civil Governours to be enforced by the Sword and Rules made only by Ecclesiastical Pastors to be executed only by the Power of the Word and Keys Do you mean all these Or which of them 1. All Christian Churches are tied by the common Divine Rule and is not consent to that enough to make a Church 2. Churches of various Nations may be under one Humane Rule of Agreement or Contract 3. The same Princes may give divers Rules about Accidents to the Churches of one Kingdom and also the same Rule for some Accidents to divers Churches under them who differ in other great things And doth agreement in those Accidents do more to make them Oâ— Church than their difference in Integrals to make them many 4. Princes may do as the Roman Emperours long did leave the Bishops in Councils to make their own Rules by consent and make no common Imperial Rule for them Are they ever the less One Church 5. The Roman Empire and Councils both left the several Bishops to make Rules for Liturgies and other Accidents for their several Churches Were they therefore the less one National Church So that I am no more acquainted by your Words what you mean by a whole Church than if you had said nothing There is a whole Diocesâ—â— Church and a whole Parish Church as well as a whole National Church And what the Power is and what the Rule of Order must be whether the Laws of Princes or Prelates and whether about Essential or Integrals or Accidents and what Accidents whether all or many or few and which that must make a Church to be One whole Church you never tell us An Infidel Prince or a Heretick Prince may give the same Rule of Order to his Christian Subjects in a whole Kingdom Is he therefore the constitutive Church-Head Or will you say as your Mr. Rich. Hooker doth That if he be the Head of a Christian Church it is necessary that he be a Christian To tell us of Common Ties and Rules of Order and never tell us what those Ties and Rules are may serve your Ends but not my Edification § 17. But I remember your Irenicum learnedly maintaineth that God hath instituted no one Form of Church-Government as necessary And if so then not a National Church-Form And is it not a whole Church if it be without a Form which not God but Man is the Author of Then God made or instituted no such thing as a whole Church Then it is a humane Creature Then why may not Man make yet more Forms and multiply and make and unmake as he seeth cause and several Countries have several Forms And forma dat nomen esse And if God made not any whole Church we should be acquainted who they be that were not a Church that had Power to make the first Church-Form and who hath the Power ever since and how it is proved and how it cometh to be any great matter to separate from a Church-Form which God never made and whether humane Church-Forms be not essential and constitutive Causes of the Churches and whether every commanded Oath Subscription Declaration Office or Ceremony be an essential part of this Church-Form And there be as many Church-Forms and Species as there be Orders Liturgies and Ceremonies And all these Differences in the same Kingdom constitute so many Schisms and Separations § 18. Do you take all the Christians in the Turkish Empire to be one National Church or not If not then one Head
no mention of lawful in your Definitions 4. But though you will not tell us whether you mean Divine or Humane Laws and Rules yet I may confidently conjecture that it is Humane you mean for else 1. I am of the same National Church that you are yea if I prove that I am more conformable to God's Laws than you and such as you I shall prove that it will be a harder question whether you are of the Church of Eng. than whether I am 2. And you might know that such a Church we no more deny than you do at least 3. But then it can be but sincere not perfect Obedience to God's Laws and Rules which must prove one to be of this Church or else no Man is of it And then you must shew us whether a mistake in as small a matter as Meat and Drink or a Ceremony or Liturgick Form or Diocesan order do cut one off from that Church If yea than how much more would such Conformity to sin do it which we fear But supposing that you mean Humane Laws 5. Why may not Divine Laws make a Church If Humane Laws were necessary ad bene esse the Christians that I have read and converst with think that they are not necessary to the Being of a Church in sensu famosiore why then should they be in the Definition and only they 6. But the difficulty recurreth as to Humane Laws which of them are necessary to the Being of the Church For your Definition distinguished not The King hath great and excellent Laws which we all conform to Doth not our Conformity to these seem to prove us of the National Church though we conform not to your Formalities and Oaths and Ceremonies Imperfect Obedience serveth to continue men Subjects to the King It is not every Drunkeness or Oath or Fornication much less the miss of a Complement or Ceremony that makes a Man a Rebel or an Outlaw Why then should the refusal of a Prelates Subscription or Formality unchurch a sound and honest Christian 7. And if the humane Laws and Rules which you mention what ever you mean by them be subordinate to God's Laws and so be honest good and obligatory why should they cut off those from the Church which Christ's Laws cut not off yea which Christ receiveth and commandeth us to receive Receive him for God receiveth him and receive him as Christ receiveth us notwithstanding our Infirmities were good reasonings in St. Paul's Judgment which I prefer before any Bishops that I know 8. And a Man of less Acquaintance or Wit than you cannot be ignorant what abundance of Differences there are among your selves I have named you no small number in my â—d Plea some of you are hot against that which is called Arminianism and some hot for it some are for Bishops and Presbyters being of one Order and some of divers all are not of the mind of the Bishop of Hereford that wrote Naked Truth some even Bishops think that the damnatory part of Athanasius's Creed is not approved by Conformity others think that it is all to be approved A multitude such differences there are among your selves And why should not this as much unchurch some of you if it be being under the same Laws that maketh you one Church as the forbearing of a Declaration of Assent and Consent or of a Surplice c. 9. Especially tell us whether the Conformist's difference about the Constitutive Regent Part of the Church of England some being for one species and some for another do not plainly make them to be of two distinct Churches of England and further different from each other than we are from any part We justly say the Papists who are for two species of Soveraigns some for the Pope and some â—â—r a general Council are plainly of two Churches for the regent part is essential And I am sure that one part of the most Eminent Disputers for the Church of England and Conformity say that the King is the Extraneous Civil Governour but the Bishops are the Constitutive Essential Internal Governours of the Church as a Church and that if the Bishops command the use of one Translation Version Metre Liturgie and the King another we are to obey the Bishops and not the King And that the efficient cause of a National Church is the Bishops Agreement among themselves to associate into such a Church And others say that it is the King and his Laws that are the efficient of such a Church and are to be obeyed in matter of the Circumstances of Worship c. before the Bishops Can you prove that this difference between the Conformists about the very Constitutive Regent Power is not greater than Mens differences about a Ceremony or Form and doth not more to make them to be of two Churches 10. If all this confused stir be but about a Christian Kingdom be it known to you that we take such to be of Divine Command And if you know it not or dissemble it after I have said so much of it in the first Plea and elsewhere I cannot help that viz. if you will talk publickly against what you know or know not when told because you will not know But I have there largly told you what the Power of Princes about Church matters is which if you will not read I will not repeat 11. Your Words Laws and Rules would induce one to think that you joyned the Kings Laws and the Bishop's Canons together in your meaning as the bond of Uâ—ity If so is it two sorts of Governours by the Swoâ—d and by the Word Magistrates and Pastors which you take for the constitutive regent parts of the Church If so then either in Cooâ—dination and Coalâ—tion or in Subordination The first cannot be that the two Species in Coalition should make one Head unless both were in the Kings as Persona Mixta both Lay and Clergie as some affirm him to be like Melchizâ—deck But this both King and Clergie disown Nor can the second be because a subordinate Power is not essential to the whole body politick but only the supreme And the Magistracy Ministry are coordinate Species both depending immediately on God and Subordinate Mutually only Secundum quid Nor is the Legislative Power in England any other than one which is in the King and Parliament conjunct The Bishops Canons are not Laws Ejusdem Speciei till the King and Parliament make them such If this be your Judgment there are I think but few Conformists of your mind 12. I must Conjecture therefore by your words That the Laws and Rules which you define the Church by are the Laws of the King and Parliament and that it is the Civil Christian Sovereign that you take for the Constitutive Head of that National Church which you plead for or else I know not what to Conjecture And if this be your Meaning I add to what is said 1. Erastians have hitherto been distasted by the Bishops and I
that it is lawful for such to use more suitable helps though Men forbid it A Soul is precious God Worketh by Means and according to the suitableness of Means That agreeth not to some which others can make shift with Two or Three words from a Conformest that saith God can Bless the weakest Means to you or the Fault is in your self will not serve instead of needful Helps The King or Bishop have not Authority to Tie a Sick Man to Eat that which he cannot Digest or Hurteth him Every Man is neerliest concerned for his own Soul and most Entrusted with it Parish-Order it self is but a humane alterable Circumstance which I am not bound to observe at the hazard of my Edification and Salvation XXVII What if the Magistrate grant a Toleration of divers Modes of Worship as the French and Dutch Churches are here Tolerated and many in Holland and in many other Countries Are these separating Schismaticks that differ from each other If so it is not because they disobey the Magistrate for he Tolerateth them all If not then meer diversity of Modes of Worship maketh not Schismaticks XXVIII If it be no true Political Church in the strict sense as an Organized Society which hath not true Authorized Pastors and if any Parish have either Vncapable Persons or such as were never Consented to by the Flocks and so have no True Pastor and if the Bishops hold That Parishes are not proper Political Churches but parts of Churches having no Pastors that have the Power of the Keyes or the whole Essence of the Pastoral Office but only Half-Pastors that want an Essential Part of the Power If on any such Account any Parishes are no true Pastoral Churches Qu. Whether to Separate from such a Parish be to Separate from a Church in the sense in question XXIX The mutual Condemnations in the times of the Novations Donatists Nestorians Evtychians Monothelites Phantasiasts Image-Patrons c. tell the World how needful mutual forbearance is to prevent worse Divisions and Confusions And the Papists take themselves to be all of one Church though they differ even in Doctrines of Morality as dangerously as the Jansenists against the Jesuits have shewed and though many Sects and Orders be permitted to Live and Worship God with very great diversity in their several sorts of Monasteries Why then should the little differences of our questioned Assemblies be thought to be so great as maketh us not to be of one Church XXX Some good Christians think That though an undisciplined Church may be Communicated with occasionally yea and constantly while there is a hopeful Tryal of its Reformation yet when there is no hope after Patient Tâ—yal a better Course and Communion should be chosen where it may be had And they think that Multitudes whom they know to be prophane Swearers Cursers Drunkards Fornicators Haters of serious Piety Hobbists Infidels Atheists Sadduces c. are continued in the Church of England And they say they scarce ever heard one Man of all these Excommunicated nor one Man of them all ever brought to Publick Confession and Repentance And they think Lay Chancellours having not rightfully the Power of the Keys there is no ordinary Means of hopeful Reformation and Exercise of Discipline especially the Largeness of the Diocesses making it impossible to be used to One of an Hundred that according to the Law of Christ it should be used on And they think That the Church-Discipline is not only None as to the Right Use and made Impossible but worse than None while it is used most to Excommunicate from Christ's Church the True and Conscionable Members of Christ that dare not Conform and so to lead to their Imprisonment and utter Ruin And they think That no Man hath true Authority to confine them to such an Undisciplined and Illdisciplined Church and forbid them the Use of better where Christ's Discipline may be used Whether these Men be in the Right or in the Wrong if the Matter of Fact be true I should desire rather the Reformation of such a Church than the Reproach or Afflicting of Men as Separatists and Schismaticks that choose another sort of Communion as to their more Ordinary Practise not denying this to be a true Diseased Church And so much in these Thirty Instances about that which I think deserveth not the Reproach of any dangerous Separation I told you Thirty Instances also of Unlawful Separation which I named And now you may judge whether you spake to Edification when you said That the People are Condemned by their own Teachers without telling whom and for what and how far they Condemn them and how far not § 34. And Did you think the Consequence good That because we think it Lawful to Hear you yea and to many a Duty therefore we Condemn them for Hearing any one else that Conformeth not As if they that have Communion with your Diocesan-Church must have Communion with no other So far am I from your Opinion that I take it to be wofully Separating and Schismatical And will never be a Member of a Particular Church which will forbid me Communion with all others that differ from them yea that doth not hold its Communion in Unity with all the True Christian Churches on Earth Though a Schismatical Disputer for Prelacy tells me That though I Communicate with the Church of England I am a Schismatick for Communicating with Nonconformists who saith he are Schismaticks But he that will Communicate with no Church that hath any Guilt of Schism when the Christian VVorld is broken into so many Sects I doubt will be the greatest Schismatick and will Communicate with few on Earth And as Smith Baptized himself not liking any other Baptism this Man may become a Church to himself And indeed the word Condemn them sounds Harsh when it signifieth no more than that we Judge them to be Mistaken and Culpable If I Condemn every Man or every Church which I judge to be Sinners I must Condemn all Mankind I use not so harsh a Phrase of your Self as to say I Condemn You When yet I Judge your Book to be more Schismatical than the Meetings of most that I am acquainted with which you Accuse § 35. But yet your Mistake is Greater than I have hitherto mentioned I know not many if any that use to Hear Me who Separate from You Many of them are Episcopal and for your Liturgy and Ceremonies I think most of them go to the Parish-Churches and few if any that I know do deny it to be Lawful How then can you prove it True that we Condemn them What is it for Is it because they neither Separate from the Conformists or Nonconformists This is it that we Exhort them to It was an ill Slip to put our Condemning them for Commending them But a fair Exposition will make it Lawful § 36. But you say How they can preach lawfully to a people that commit a fault in hearing them I do not
several parts that none but a great stranger to the History of the Church can ever call in question Ans Bishop Gunning will give you no thanks for this It seems after all the anger we are much agreed I never denied Chappelâ— to a Church nor thought they must all meet at once If they all meet per vices at one Altar they are associated for presential Communion and not distant only and this is that I am for Make it but such a Church that meet at one Altar and that can know one another and are associated for such personal Communion in presence and though I could wish it neither too small nor too great it is of the Species which I plead for as of God There is certainly a Specifique difference between a Church that hath a Constitutive formal Governour who hath the whole Pastoral power and is associated for presential mutual help in faith worship and holy living and one that either hath but a half Pastor without the power of the Keyes or that is associated only for distant Communion and never see each other even for another sort of Communion Conformists hold that Bishops and Presbyters are distinct orders Therefore Churches differing in the very Order or Species of the Constitutive Governours and in the Triminus or end and the nature of the Communions are certainly of distinct Species and not only of distinct degrees in the same Species But such are our Parochial and Diocesan Churches Just such a Church as you here describe is it that I would have and yet if the Chappels also have Altars and there be more than one to the Church as long as they are under the same Bishop and Presbyters associate for Communion in presence it alters not the Species § 46. I thank you also for adding p. 28. And yet this distribution even in Creet was so uncommon in those Elder times that Epiphanius takes notice of it as an extraordinary thing at Alexandria and therfore it is probably supposed that there was no suâ—h thing in all the Cities in his time Ans 1. It s true of Creet which had an hundred Cities But your therefore makes me think you put Creet for Cyprus For there it was that Epiphanius was a Bishop 2. But you grant me the foundation of all my cause Let the Diocess or Parish or Church call it what you will be no bigger than that the same Bishop may performe the true Pastoral office to them in present Communion and not only by writs and delegates rule men that have no personal present Communion nor ever intend it as the end of their relation and I have my desire as to the Species of the lowest sort of Churches 1 Thes 5. 12. 13. Know them which labour among you and are over you in the Lord and admonish you But such are not those whom we never saw nor heard and never laboured among or admonished the twentieth or fortieth or hundredth Congregation in their Diocess and whom the people cannot know Heb. 13. 7. Remember then which have rule over you who have spoken to you the word of God whose faith follow considering the end of their conversation 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 But such are not they that the people never heard the word of God from nor knew their conversation nor the men And Bishop Taylor saith No man can give account of those that he knoweth not that is Pastors account Make Parishes true Churches and restore them Church discipline and we are satisfied § 47. Serm. p. 29. If we look over the ancient Cannons of the Church we shall find two things very plain in them 1. That the notion of a Church was the same with that of a Diocess or such a number of Christians as were under the inspection of a Bishop Ans 1. Very true and the Bishop was their ordinary Preacher and only pronounced the blessing c. Therefore till the Species was altered it was like a School whose Schollars lived in City and Country but were under a Bishop that Governed them personally in presence But after they were like many score or hundred Schools that had Teaching Ushers and one absent Governour to the most To Govern as a Schoolmaster in presence specifically differs from Governing as Princes or visitors by Laws or extraordinary inspection 2. I pray you forget not that by this measure if you hold to it you unchurch all our Parish Churches Every Church then had a Bishop no Parish now hath a Bishop proper to it self or at least not many Therefore no Parish by this rule is a Church Ecclesia est plebs Episcopo adunata You make no Church below a Diocess § 48. Serm. 2. That those Presbyters who rejected the authority of their Bishop or affected Seperate meetings where no fault could be found with the Doctrine of a Cburch were condemned of Schism Ans Good still They were not to set up altare contra altare but joyn with the Bishop in Governing the same Church in present Communion at least per vices But if a Bishop than had put down a hundred or a thousand Bishops and Churches about him and said you shall be all but one Church in another sort of Communion and I will be your only Bishop Christians then would have abhorred him Now we have hundreds of Altars locally separated from the Bishop 2. But yet if then the Doctrine of faith had been never so sound Christians would have separated 1. From unlawful worship specially Idolatry 2. And from wicked Bishops as the forementioned Epistle of Cyprian and the Carthage Council sheweth § 49. You Confess Martin and Theognostus separation from the Synods and Communion of the neighbour Bishops And if it were not lawful for neighbours to communicate with them I shall believe as Cyprian that the same reason would at least warrant the people to forsake them till you shew reason to the contrary And you confess the Joannites separation and only say that after they returned It s true But did they do well or ill before they returned not till gentleness and honouring Chrysostome reduced them and though Cyril Alex. called them Schismaticks and said it was fitter the Church Canons should be kept than such refractory Nonconformists gratified by restoring the honour of their ejected Pastor yet Atticus had more wit and honesty then to follow his Council or be moved by his threatning Our case hath ten times more to be said for it than the Joannites had who were not cast out but departed nor had any Impositions forced on them which they took to be many hainous sins Had you been impartial you had easily seen this But as Cyril and others accusation of the Joannites as separatists and schismaticks did not finally attain his ends against the Joannites no more shall yours against the more excusable In an Ale-house or Crowd of the debauched or ignorant
left men as much power to make new Species of Churches as to diversifie the Forms of Common-wealth 8. And as to our disturbing your peace if you had built your frame on Christs foundation and laid your peace on the unity of the Spirit and the seven particulars named Eph. 4. 45. 6. and had not built it on uncharitableness on imperious usurpation nor that love of the world which Paul Servita saith brought in the Church corruptions you would not have been so tender nor your peace like an aspen leaf in the wind as that your Brethren who you say agree in Doctrine and the substance of worship with you cannot quietly joyn near you in the worship of God without your imposed words and ceremonies but they become disturbers of your peace It s a sickly peace that is so easily disturbed by so small dissent As Rome thinketh that all wrong her that do not obey her and pleadeth for Empire under the name of Communion so do some others and will enter a suite against them as Schismatiks that will not let them ride and lash them without complaint If you have the humility and Charity of a Christian without envy c. What harm doth it do you that I and such others worship God in another room without your book while your Church is as full as it can well hold Do you not differ much more among your selves as I before shewed And the Papists yet more among themselves and yet are in one Church and tollerated But so their Power and Wills may be obeyed some men can bear with much more against God Who heareth such out cries against ten thousand or twenty thousand in a Parish that come not to any Church at all as against a few Christians that pray and preach without your book what Informers what indictments what prosecutions what invectives are equally against all these aforesaid § 51. Serm. p 31. It is very uncertain whether the Primitive form were such as they fancy c but it s certainly our duty to preserve peace and unity amongst Christians Ans 1. Then it is certainly a sin to make racks to tear them and make concord impossible and say none shall have Communion with us that will not say and Swear what we bid them and that think any thing sin which we impose and to shut men out by Cannonical Excommunication and then call them Schismaticks in Presse and Pulpit for not coming in 2. If it be uncertain whether that which we desire be the Primitive form it is uncertain then whether you oppose not and fight not against the Primitive form 3. What you say is uncertain I shall God willing prove certain elsewhere and have done All is not uncertain to others which is so to you 4. Mark this you that are for the Divine right of Episcopacy as the Primitive forme instituted by Christ As he taketh it for uncertain as beyond Congregational formes so were it so if the Church should cast it out he seemeth to hold your endeavours to reduce it to be a sinful breaking of the Churches peace You are disturbers if in Holland Geneva Helvetia you would reduce them to that which you suppose to be the Primitive form It may be it was but from the circumstances of the times And so the head of the Church hath made no particular Church Species but left all to the better wit of men who knowes to whom § 52 Serm. It is impossible so to do if men break all orders in pieces for the fancy they have taken up of a Primitive Platform Ans Anglice It is impossible to preserve Peace and unity among Christians if men will not suppose that Christ never instituted his own Church formes or will not forsake his Institutions but fancy that they must be conformable thereto and will not preferre the wills and commands of Bishops to whom they never consented and take it to be a breaking of all orders in pieces not to do all that they enjoyn us though we take it to be heynous sin and will not give over Gods worship and our Ministry when they forbid us Dan. 6. We shall find no fault against this Daniel except it be concerning the Law of his God but if he pray openly when forbidden away with him to the Lyons for the Laws of the Medes and Persians are more inflexible than Gods § 53. As to what you say of preferring Morals and the ends it is more truly than prudently mentioned as to your cause For the very naming of it will make the Readers think whether your subscription and declaration and oaths and imposed practices which the Nonconformists judge unlawful be greater matters than their preaching the Gospel avoiding great sins the concord and strength of the Protestant Churches and the avoding temptations to wrath and persecution and divisions which will be bitter in the latter end Go learn what this meaneth I will have mercy and not Sacrifice or needless Ceremony § 54. Serm. p. 32 Men may please themselves in talking of preserving peace and Love under separate Communions But our own sad experience shews the contrary For as nothing tends more to unite mens hearrs than joyning together in the same Prayer and Sacraments so nothing doth more alienate mens affections than withdrawing from each other into separate Congregations Ans 1. But do all separate from you that are in other Parish Churche◠than yours if not do all separate that differ as Cathedrals from Parish Churches or as conforming Preachers do from one another If not do they separate that omit a form or ceremony of yours 2. I am sorry if you have experience of the alienating of your affections from your neighbours that quietly worship God by you but it s like you know what you say For my part many of them have said and written more against me them against you and I thank God I love them heartily yea and that your own party from whom I have suffered far more It is mens diseases that make them impatient of a cross opinion or word or censure and then they cry out of mens unpeaceableness As Seneca saith They that are sore complainif they but think their sore is touched 3. Let the Magistrates keep Peace and punish all that abuse their brethren 4. But we easily grant to you that when men do not only differ but fly from each others Communion as unlawful it hath a great tendency to the alienations and evils which you mention Had we not thought so we had never stoopt and pleaded and begg'd of the Bishops to prevent or heal it as we did 1660 and 1661. And wo to the impenitent that are the cause of all and to this day will not be perswaded by all the sad experience that they complain of Sir instead of all your accusations and reasonings it would have better dispatched all the business would you but consider who it is that must cure the distance which you complain of I have fully proved
excel in Love and Tenderness as much as in Knowledge and as mothers quiet crying Children and not therefore cast them out of doors 7. They Cross the ends of the Ministry if they take the Converting of Souls to be any of its end For as Generation so Regeneration maketh Infants and Children before they are grown Men and Children will be weak and troublesome And he that would have no such Children must not endeavour mens Conversion 8. Yea they greatly increase the Disease which they would Cure Men will not love those that hurt them so easily as others And when they are displeased with you they are the hardlier pleased with your Doctrine 9. Driving men into the Church maketh it like a Prison and corrupteth it as composed of involuntary Members 10. Yea they must destroy the Church if they will suffer none in it that have as great weaknesses as these Thus I declared both the evil of passionate Separation and of mistaking the way of Cure I would repeat the Sermons were it not for fear of being tedious 6. I have Printed in my second Plea for Peace what our Non-conformity is not containing as much in this point as he can reasonably desire as it was approved by many others named in our Judgment about the Interest of Reason in Religion so that he cannot say that I speak but of my self 7. I suppose he believeth that I am acquainted with more Non-conformable Ministers than he is or else he will not think that I am any such Antesignamâ—s as Bishop Morley calleth me And I meet with few or none that contradict what in this case of Separation I have Published They are commonly for Reformed Parish Churches not taking all in the Parish for the Church but bounding Churches in Parishes for Order and Preach elsewhere but on necessity and as Assistants and not as Adversaries 8. Doth not our Practice who go to the Parish Churches shew our Judgments to the People if we said nothing 9. I could not have drawn the People so much from too great distance if I had not preached to them At Acton I constantly heard Dr. Rieves and his Curate and I preached only in my house between his Sermons and then led the People to the Church which Judge Hales my neighbour thought was good service to the Church And the very Sermon that I was sent to the Common Gaol for was on Matth. 5. Blessed are the meek perswading to submissive peace and patience 10. When Bishop Morley forbad me to preach in his Diocess and I could not get leave at my departure to Preach to my hearers one farewel Sermon in publick I Preacht in a private house to them on David's words Bring back the Ark of God into the City if I have found favour c. purposely to perswade them as my last advice not to depart from the publick Parish Assembly though the Liturgy be there the publick worship But if the Minister that is there shall be intolerable 1. As utterly unable 2. Or a Heretick 3. Or so malignant an Enemy of Godliness as to do more hurt than good I advised them not to own any such Minister nor encourage him in his Usurpation And it was on that account that they long forbore till the Vicar was dead and a better succeeded him 11. Since then I have written to my old Flock to perswade them to joyn in the Parish Assembly and I hear not of three that do refuse it And all this I have said as to that matter of fact to shew you how farr to believe this Reverend Doctor 's intimated ironical accusation If he say that Other Preachers do not so I Answer First How knoweth he the Negative that never heareth them but like a separatist avoideth it as unlawful 2. Is it not likely that in season they preach their judgment 3. But I confess they may find more profitable work than to preach over all the suspected passages in the Liturgy and other parts of Conformity and answer all the Peoples objections against them The Builders and Owners of the houses are the fittest to do such offices to maintain it § 65. Is it that they fear the reproaches of the People which some few of the most Eminent persons among them have found they must undergo if they touch upon thiâ— subject Ans 1. So farr as your accusation is untrue as to the fact it 's but a further ill intimation to ask why they do not that which they do 2. If they that should better know what their auditors most need must preach what you appoint that know them less you may make their Sermons for them as well as their prayers 3. Those few Persons it seems at least toucht on what you say they preacht not And for my part whom I know you mean for one I never felt my self much tempted to grudge at the Dissenters that therefore will not hear me If they hear others more suitable to them by whom they can more profit as more esteeming them what hurt is that to me Would I have none taught the knowledge of Christ but by my self While we have all one Faith it 's some convenience for men to assemble and hear where they do it with unprejudiced undisturbed minds 4. If those persons you mention have before and since such censures as you intimate done what you would perswade men that they do not your self-contradiction is most palpable § 66. Serm. For I know not how it cometh to pass that the most Godly people among them can least endure to be told of their faults Ans 1. Did you not intend the Most Godly for a scorn you would confess it false 2. If you mean those that we esteem most Godly it is not true neither 3. If you mean those that think themselves so it 's no wonder if they mistake if not it 's not true 2. I pray you take warning by them or by your own reproof and do not now shew that you are one of the most Godly by less enduring to be told of your faults If otherwise you have forecondemned your own impatience 3. Verily they have dealt much more patiently with me than the Bishops and Canoneers have done Though some have spoken their dislike of me none of them even when they were in power did ever silence or imprison me nor ever forbid me to Preach save once at an Assizes How can you think that we can feel their censures when we have so much worse to feel from the Canoneers And when you ask Is it for fear they should have none left to preach to If you separated not from us you would see that such have some left still § 67. Serm. p. 42. Whence we see the Church of Englands endeavour after uniformity is acquitted from Tyranny over the Consciences of men by the Judgment of the most Learned of the Assembly c. Ans 1. Of the Assembly I have said enough 2. If you think the Assemblies Vniformity or