that it 's necessary Necessitate praecepti and if you will Necessitate medii if you speak not of absolute Necessity ad esse Ordinationis but a lower Necessity as of a mutable means and ad bene esse Do you think this is good arguing The Holy Ghost hath revealed it to be the Will of Christ that a Bishop must be blameless and having faithful Children and be not soon angry Tit. 1. 6 7. One that ruleth well his own House having his Children in subjection with all Gravity 1 Tim. 3. 4 5 6. Ergo It is essential to a Bishop to have faithful Children to be blameless not to be soon angry c. O what an Interruption then is made in the Succession or is this good arguing It is the Will of Christ that a Christian should not speak an Idle Word Ergo He that speaks an idle Word is not a Christian Next you suppose your self questioned How you know that it was Christ's Mind and Will that Imposition of Hands should be used in the Ordination of Ministers and you confess 1. That you have neither express nor implicite Command for it 2. But conclude that Christ's Mind may be otherwise known I confess I like this Passage worse than all the rest of your Writing 1. I can find both implicite and in a large sense explicite Commands for it in the Word of God 1 Tim. 5. 22. Heb. 6. 2. 1 Tim. 4. 14. at least an implicite that is unquestionably plain 2. If you had confessed as readily only this that there was no Word of God implicite or explicite to prove the Essentiality of Imposition of Hands to Ordination then I should have believed you But you will needs do more and do much to destroy the very Duty of Imposition while you are pleading it so essential so unhappy are extream Courses and so sure a way is overdoing to undoing Yet with me you give up the Cause of the supposed Essentiality in disclaiming Scripture Precept implicite 3. I perceive it is your Judgment that there are Duties essential to Ordination and consequently without which in your Judgment there is no Ministry and no Church which have no Command in Scripture no not so much as implicite And consequently that Scripture is not God's only Word for revealing supernaturally or his sufficient Law for obliging to Duties of universal standing necessity but he hath another Word called Tradition which revealeth one part of his Mind as the Scripture doth the other and another Law obliging as aforesaid This is the great Master Difference between the Reformed Churches and the Romanists of which so much is said by Whittaker Chamier Baronius and Multitudes more that it 's meerly vain for me to meddle with it For I take it for granted that you would not venture to disclaim the Reformed Churches in this Point till you had well read the chief of their Writers That were to venture your Peace and Safety to save you a Labour At least I hope you have read Chillingworth Yet I must tell you that some moderate Papists confess that the written Word containeth all things of absolute necessity to Salvation but I doubt you do not so for I think you will say that ordinarily there is no Salvation without the Church and Ministry and no Ministry without Ordination and no Ordination without Imposition of Hands and no Imposition of Hands by any Scripture Command so much as implicite Yea it seems you take not up this Course on any strongly-apparent Necessity when such Cases as this will put you on it and you are so willing to make the Scripture silent where it speaks plainly that you may prove a necessity of another Word I do confess the necessity of Tradition to deliver us safe the Scripture it self the Cabinet with the Treasure and the certainty of Tradition in seconding Scripture by handing down to us the Articles of our Câ—eed and Substance of Christianity in and against which the Church 〈…〉 in sensu composito because so erring unchurcheth it But this will not 〈…〉 necessity of another Law besides the written Law for it is opus subordinaâ—â—â—◠〈…〉 not the part of a Law nor belongs to it's sufficiency to publish pro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈…〉 conserve it self But it belongs to it's Sufficiency to contain all the standing matter of Duty in Specie where the Species is permanently due and in genere only with Directions for determining of the Species when the said Species is of uncertain unconstant mutable Dueness He that faith a Duty of so great and standing necessity is not so much as implicitely commanded in Scripture doth plainly say that besides the Scripture which is insufficient God hath either another more perfect Law for Supernaturals or else another part to add to the Scripture to make it perfect Your Addition mollifieth the Matter in Terms but I doubt scarce in Sense for when you say that the Texts where Imposition of Hands is spoken of commented upon by the universal Practice of the Church from the first Age till this wild exorbitant last Century seems a clear Evidence what the Will of Christ is c. I very much like the Words and Sense which they in propriety express viz. That in a Matter of Fact where Scripture is obscure the Practice of the first second or third Centuries may be an excellent Commentary that is a help to understand them much more the Practice of the universal Church in all Ages But I must tell you that it is not the Work of a Commentary on the Laws expresly to add such Precepts about matters of such very great Concernment as is the very being of the Republick which are neither expresly or implicitly in the Law it self I must judge therefore that you make the Churches Practice a real Law though you thought meet to give it but the Title of a Comment And I scarce approve of your comparative Terms of the Centuries as bad as this is What! hath this Century which hath been the only reforming Age been worse than that before it whose Corruptions it reformed and worse than that of which Bellarmine saith Hoc seculo nullum extitit indoctius vel infoelicius quo qui Mathematicae aut Philosophiae operam dabat Magus vulgo putabatur and that of which Espencaeus saith that Graecè nosce suspectum fuerit Hebraicum propè Haereticum What worse than the four or five foregoing Centuries wherein Murderers Traytors common Whoremongers Sodomites Hereticks were the pretended Heads of the Church and grosly ignorant superstitious and wicked ones were the conspicuous part of the Body Will you appeal from this Century to those Did you not even now confess that it is admirably worth our Consideration that when God stirred up the drowzy World to depart from Rome's Superstitions and Idolatries he bowed the Hearts of some of the Church-Officers to go along with them Rome then was idolatrous We departed from it God stirred Men up and bowed their Hearts thereto I confess you
between us whether Men should wait for farther objective Revelations or Additions to the written Word or whether we should condemn the Errors of the Enthusiasts herein we are agreed in all this 5. Nor is the Question de Officio whether it be the Duty of all Men to look out after the written Word as far as they can and rest in it 6. Nor is the Question whether the Scripture only have the proper Nature of a Rule to Judge Controversies by 7. Nor yet whether Scripture be of necessity to the Church in General 8. Nor whether it be necessary as a means to the Salvation of all that have it 9. Nor whether it be the only sufficient means of safe keeping and propagating the whole Truth of God which is necessary to the Church 10. But the Question is of every particular Soul on Earth whether we may thus assert that there is no Salvation for them unless they know Christ by the Revelation of the Scripture And I cannot assent to the Article for these Reasons 1. It seems a Snare by the unmeet Expressions 2. We cannot be certain of the Truth of it 3. It is not of so great necessity as that all should be cast out of the Ministry though in other things Orthodox that will not own it 4. Much less is it a Fundamental Nor dare I judge all to Damnation that are not herein of your Opinion 5. It seems to me to be injurious to Christianity it self 6. And to the present intended Reformation 7. And to the Parliament 8. And to our selves 1. For the First of these Reasons It is confessed by some here that a Man may be converted by the Doctrine of the Scripture before he know the Writings or their Authority and that you intend not to assert that the divine Authority of the Scripture is that primum credibile which must needs be believed before any Truth therein contained can be savingly believed And it is thought by some that your Assertion is made good if it be but proved that all saving Revelation that is now in the World is from Scripture originally and subordinate to it and not co-ordinate But the obvious Sense of your Words will seem to many to be this that the particular Knowledge of that Person who will be saved must be by Scripture Revelation as the objective Cause or Instrument even under that Consideration either in the Mind of the Speaker or Hearer or both If it should be said that the Revelation which converted this or that Sinner did arise from the Scriptures a Thousand Years ago But hath since been taken up as coming another way and so there hath been an Intermission of ascribing it to the Scripture as to those Men by whom it was carried down this will not seem to agree with your Expressions And seeing many others must be Judges of your Sense who shall have Power to trie Ministers hereby you enable them by your obscure Expressions to wrong the Church oppress their Brethren and introduce Errors And so it seems you frame a â—nare 2. And you will put every poor Christian in these Places where Christ's Faith is known to many but by Verbal Tradition into an Impossibility of knowing that they have any true Faith because they cannot know that it came from the Scriptures 2. That we are not certain of the Truth of this Assertion nor can I be Judge 1. Because there was Salvation from Adam to Moses by Traâ—â—â—ion without the written Word and there was a considerable space of time after Christ's Assention before the Scriptures of the New Testament were written The first Christians were savingly called and the Churches gathered without these Writings by the preaching of the Doctrine which is now contained in them And though that be now necessary to the Safety of the Church and Truth which was not so necessary when the Apostles were present yet it is unproved that there is more necessary to the Salvation of every Soul now than was in those Days And it is considerable that it was not only the preaching of the Apostles but of all other Publishers of the Gospel in those Times that was in suo genere sufficient for Conversion without Scripture Yea and to the Gentiles that knew not the Scriptures of the Old Testament 2. If there be no Salvation but by a Scripture Revelation then either because there is no other way of revealing the Marrow of the Gospel or because it will not be saving in another way But neither of these can be proved true Ergo for the latter 1. The Word of God and Doctrine of his Gospel may save if revealed supposing other Necessaries in their Kinds For it sufficeth to the formal Object of Faith that it be veracitas revelantis and to the material Object that it be Hoc verum bonum revelatum but it must be truly revelatum though not by Scripture Ergo 2. God hath promised Salvation to all that truly believe and not to those that believe only by Scripture-Revelation nor hath he any where told us that he will annex his Spirits help to no other Revelation 2. For the former That there is now in the World no other way of revealing the Marrow of the Gospel but by Scripture or from it 1. It cannot be proved by Scripture as will appear when your Proofs are tryed 2. The contrary is defended by most learned Protestants 1. A Praecepto another collateral way of Revelation is commanded by God Ergo there 's another 2. From certain History and Experience which speak of the Performance of those Commands and the Instances they give of both are these 1. Ministers are commanded to preach the Gospel to all Nations before it was written and a Promise annexed that Christ would be with them to the end of the World In Obedience whereunto not only the Apostles but Multitudes more did so preach which was by delivering the great Master-Verities which are now in the written Word This Command is not reverst by the writing of the Word And therefore is still a Duty as to deliver the Gospel Doctrine in and by the Scripture so collaterally to preach the Substance of that Doctrine as delivered from the Mouth of Christ and his Apostles 2. Christ commanded before the Gospel was written to baptize Men into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost for the Pardon of Sin upon repenting and believing and for the hope of everlasting Glory upon a holy Life This was done accordingly both before and since the writing of the Gospel And so the very Sum and Kernel of the Gospel and indeed all the true Fundamentals and Essentials of the Christian Faith have been most certainly and constantly delivered down by Baptism as a collateral way distinct from the written Word which is evident in the very Succession of Christians to this Day 3. Another means hath been by Symbols called Creeds and Catechising which was mostly by opening the Creeds As Reverend Bishop Usher hath
manifested that the Western Creed now called the Apostles wanting two or three Clauses that now are in it was not only before the Nicene Creed but of such farther Antiquity that no beginning of it below the Apostles Days can be found So it is past doubt that in other Words the Churches had still a Symbol or Sum of their Belief which was the Test of the Orthodox and that which the Catechumeni were to be instructed in Origen Tertullian Irenaeus to speak of none of these below them do mention and recite them The Doctrine of this Creed they affirm themselves to have received from the Apostles by verbal Tradition as well as by Writing This then hath been a collateral way of delivering down the saving Truths of the Gospel though a far more imperfect way than by the Scriptures 4. Another means hath been by Parents teaching these Principles to their Children which as they were commanded to do and did before the writing of the Gospel so did they successively continue it as a collateral way 5. Another collateral means was in the constant use of the Lord's Supper in Commemoration of Christ's Death till he come to receive us to Glory where the very Sum and all the Fundamentals of our Religion are contained which hath been continued by uninterrupted Succession even from the time that preceded the writing of the Scriptures it is therefore conceived possible for some Souls to be converted in darker parts of the World by these or some of these means without the written Word 3. The ancient Doctors of the Church affirmed that they had their Doctrine from the Apostles by verbal as well as by written Tradition Yea and that if there were no Scripture yet Tradition might resolve the Doubts against the Hereticks and that in those Days which were nearer the Spring-Head Tradition was a better way than Scripture to confute Hereticks as Tertullian de Praescript at large and Irenaeus's Words are well known Whether in this they mistake or not I don't determine yet certainly this may tell us that we cannot conclude that there was then no co-ordinate way of delivering down the Sum of Christian Verity 4. He that will prove your negative Assertion must either know all the World and that de facto there is among them no such Tradition or else must have some Revelation from God that there is not any such nor shall be But we have neither of these Ergo we cannot certainly conclude it 5. We see by Experience that more in substance of other common Precepts and History can be delivered down to Posterity by other means without formal Records Ergo so may these For though they cannot have the golden Cabinet of Scripture but from the Spirit nor without the Spirit can Men believe Yet the Truths may be remembred and delivered as aforesaid 6. God can deliver the Marrow of the Gospel by other means than the Writing and he hath not told us that he will not Ergo for ought we know he doth 7. We ought not absolutely to exclude extraordinary means when God hath not tyed himself from them It is a dangerous Sin of them that leave the ordinary means and look out for extraordinary as Spirit of Prophesy Angels c. But to conclude that God will never reveal Christ by an Angel to one that hath not the Scripture is more than we may do I know not therefore why it is that you would not be prevailed with so much as to add the Word ordinarily when yet it 's by some affirmed to be your Sense and by all that it is your Duty to deliver your Sense as plain as you may So much of my Reasons against the certainty of the Truth of your Assertion 3. I next add that it seems not a Point so weighty as to cast out all that are different from us in this Opinion My Reasons are 1. From the Nature of the Thing 1. It hath so much to be said against the very Truth of it and so is doubtful 2. There can no ill Consequences be manifested to rise from the contrary Opinion Much less so ill as to deserve such a Censure It is no wrong to Scripture that there is a more imperfect collateral way of delivering some part of the same Truths no more than it is a wrong to Scripture that the Law of Nature delivers some other Part of them 2. From the Persons that were of the Opinion contrary to your Assertion who were the ancient Doctors of the Churches and many of the most learned judicious and godly of the Reformed Divines as I undertake to manifest when I have Opportunity and it is necessary For my own part if it were only my self that should be cast out by this Engine I should say the less but as I know not how many Hundred may be of the same Mind and as I think it to be the most common Judgment of Divines so I know such here among us of that Mind with whom I am not worthy to be named who would not subscribe to this your Assertion whereby it seems to me to be more tollerable to diffent from you 4. Seeing you have voted to lay down only Fundamentals to Salvation first and upon that Vote have put this as one you do not only damn all that believe any other way than by the written Word but you damn all those that will not damn them by owning this condemning Article Now that it is not Fundamental appears 1. In that the Fathers and choicest reformed Divines were else no Christians 2. No Creed of the ancient Churches did contain it 3. It is not of necessity to our believing on Christ the Foundation A Man may be brought himself by the Scripture to believe that yet thinks another may believe by verbal Tradition 4. No Scripture doth expresly no not implicitly deliver it much less as a Fundamental 5. My next Reason was that your Assertion and Reason are injurious to the Christian Cause For 1. When Gospel Truth is delivered down by two Hands you wrong it when you cut off one when neither is needless 2. We are able by other ways of Proof to confute those Infidels that deny the Authority of Scripture especially when they tell us that we cannot prove that our Doctrine was delivered from Christ and his Apostles and not since devised or corrupted by later Hands Now you would force our Arguments out of our Hands to the Advantage of the Enemy Upon the Experience of some late Debates with subtil Apostates now Infidels I am bold with Submission to say that I would not for all the World so wound the Christian Cause as it is wounded by those who bereave the Scripture of the Advantage of other Tradition And think that a Bible found by the way by one that never heard of it hath the same Advantages to procure Belief as Scripture and Scripture-Doctrine and matters of Fact delivered to us by the Hand of certain Tradition And 3. By the
Scripture revealeth for us to believe which are many I only instance in the Point of Sovereignty is contrary to the Determination of our General Councils That which is contrary to what a General Council pronounceth to be believed is in the Papists sence a Heresie But that the Pope is above a General Council and that a General Council is above the Pope are both determined to be believed by General Councils The first by the Councils at the Laterane and Florence and the second by the Councils at Constance and Basil They are both Heresies therefore because they are both against General Councils and they are both Points of Popery because both determined in General Councils as I have proved in my Key c. If you will peruse a Catalogue in the End of my Book called The Safe Religion or the Thirty two Novelties mentioned in my Key pag. 142 143 144. you will see whether Popery be Error If any other Doctrine contrary 〈◊〉 Christ's do infer an Anathema then everlasting Woe to Papists And here you may see the Safety of the true Catholicks that have rejected Popery Our Religion is all contained in the Holy Scripture we profess to have no other Rule and you charge us not that I know of with believing too much by holding any positive Error but with believing too little because we believe not your supernumerary Articles And therefore you cannot say that we teach any other Doctrine than Christ's though you fancy that we teach not all because we teach not your Traditions But on the contrary we prove that you teach another Doctrine and many such which Christ never delivered to the Church But yet to abate your severe Selâ—condemnation let me excuse you thus far as to say that you do it upon mistake For Gal. 1. saith not Let him be accursed that preacheth another Doctrine but another Gospel While it is the same Gospel in the Essentials that is preached and believed this Anathema belongs not even to you that err till you come to contradict the Essence and make it another Gospel as well as another Doctrine If you have made it your whole business till seventeen Years of Age to pray to God to direct you to follow his Doctrine it 's like that I and many another have made it at least as much of our Business till forty six Years of Age as ever you did and with better Advantage and yet are as confident of the Falseness of your Doctrine as we are that the Earth doth bear us here therefore you are not beforehand with us But what have you found that cheated or frighned you into Popery 1. The variety of Iudgments But you never found the far greater variety among Papists You never read the voluminous Dispute between the Dominicanes and Jesuits to overpass the rest or perhaps you will as others do expect that the very same Opinion be a Heresy in a Calvanist and none in a Dominicane or Iansenist or a Heresy in a Lutheran and none in a Iesuit You will run out of England because of Mens diversity of Complexions and finding a greater Diversity in France expect it should be esteemed none If I prove not before any impartial Judge that the Papists have far more and greater Differences amongst themsâ—â—ves than the reformed Churches called Protestants yea I doubt not I may add than Greeks Calvinists Lutherans and many more such set together then let your Imagination go for Truth Bellarmine himself hath enumerated enough 2. You say the Scripture admits of no private Interpretation But 1. You abuse the Text and your self with a false Interpretation of it in these Words An Interpretation is called private either as to the Subject Person or as to the Interpreter You take the Text to speak of the latter when the Context plainly sheweth you that it speaks of the former The Apostle directing them to understand the Prophesies of the Old Testament gives them this Caution That none of these Scriptures that are spoken of Christ the publick Person must be interpreted as spoken of David or other private Persons only of whom they were mentioned but as Types of Christ It is subjectively a private Interpretation to restrain that Scripture e. g. the Second Psalm to David or other ordinary Men which the Holy Ghost intended of the Messiah But here 's no talk against Private Interpreters but only against a Private Interpretation 2. But suppose it were as you imagin and the publick Judgment of any Case suppose a Publick Interpreter yet every Man must see with his own Eyes and their private Judgment of Discretion must be according to their private that is personal Interpretation Or else your Churches Interpretation must have another publick Interpretation and that another and so endlesly If we can understand your Councils which your Doctors disagree about without another publick Interpretation we may as easily understand the Scripture or at least much of it And therefore that can be none of the Sence which you imagine no Scripture c. 3. Yea suppose all Interpretation must be publick and you may not presume to misunderstand the Commands of Repentance Faith or Love without a publick Commentary do you think this doth not make against you Is not the Interpretation of the Papal Sect a more private Interpretation than that of the whole Church The Greek Arminians Abassines Protestants and so all the far greatest part of the Church interpret those Texts which you wrest for the Papal Soveraignty in a quite other Sense And is not the Interpretation of your Fourth or Third part of the Church that 's partial in the Cause more private than that of all the rest would you have Men care no more for their Souls than to cast them away upon the Delusion of such Reasonings as these 3. You next speak of Interpretations by Apostolical Tradition But are sober People capable of such a Bafflle as to lay their Salvation on a Dream that never had a Being Was there ever such a thing as an Interpretation of the Bible by Apostolical Tradition without which no Scripture must be interpreted Where is that Commentary that the World never knew and yet all must know it that will be saved Written it is not by Fathers Popes or Councils and if unwritten in whose Memory is it and how learnt they it Not in the Peoples nor the generality of Pastors for they that were most learned presume to write their private Interpretations and Commentaries never giving us the publick Commentary and take Liberty to differ about many hundred Texts among themselves and are not these then gross Delusions 4. You say the Church is a City set upon a Hill Christ speaks there of Preachers but let it be of the whole Church In good sadness can you believe that the Universality of Christians which is the true Catholick Church is not more conspicuous than the Papal Faction or any one particular Part Should your Sect be judged more visible than the
Protestant Divines of England are branded as Popish that since the Reformation have defended against the Pope that Bishops are jure Divino for so I say it was direct Popery that first denied Bishops to be jure Divino witness the Pope's and Papelins canvassing in the Council of Trent to oppress by Force and Tyranny the far major and more learned part of the Council that contended for so many Months with Suffrages Arguments and Protestations Protestant like to have it defined that Bishops were jure Divino and only the Pope and his Titulars and Courtiers suffered it not to be propounded least it should be as certainly it would have been defined for then Popes and Presbyterians could not have lorded it so Thus the chiefest and most pious and learned Bishops of our English Church must be branded for Popish Bishop Andrews Mountague White c. Reply to Sect. 15. 1. If you deny the Authors cited by me to be authentick pretend not to adhere to the Episcopal Protestants for sure these are such 2. You do not well to say that all the Protestant Bishops are branded as Popish that since the Reformation have defended against the Pope that Bishops are jure Divino either shew the Words where I so brand them or else do not tell us that your Words are true though in a matter of Fact before your Eyes we may well question your Argument when we find you so untrue in reporting a plain Writing Indeed our late Bishops and those most that were most suspected to be Popish did stand most upon the jus Divinum which many of the first did either disclaim or not maintain But it never came into my Thoughts to brand all for Papists that did own it Do I not cite Downame and others as Protestant Bishops who yet maintain it yea Bishop Andrews whom you name this is not fair 3. As for the Trent Quarrel about Bishops I say but this if the Spanish Bishops and the rest that stood for the jus Divinum of Episcopacy there were no Papists then those that I spoke of in England were none much less And I must cry you mercy for so esteeming them Except to Sect. 16. The 3d Argument is from the uncertainty of Succession which might have done the Hereticks good Service in the old times when St. Irenaeus and Tertullian muster up against them Successions of Catholick Bishops that ever taught as the Church then taught against the Hereticks Reply to Sect. 16. 1. It seems you are confident of an uninterrupted Succession of authoritative Ordination though you seem to think none authoritative but Episcopal But so were not the Protestant Bishops who took the Reformed Churches to have true Ministers and to be true Churches when yet Episcopal Ordination is interrupted with them Such are all those with whose Words you say I fill my Book to whom I may add Men which is strange that were thought nearer your own way As Bishop Bromhall in his late Answer to Militerius who yet would have the Pope to be the Principium Unitatis to the Church and the Answer to Fontanus's Letter said to be Dr. Stewards besides Dr. Fern yea if you were one of those that would yield that Presbyters may ordain yet I am still unpersuaded that you are able to prove an uninterrupted Succession of Authoritative Ordination and if you are able I should heartily thank you if you would perform it and seeing it is so Necessary it is not well that no Episcopal Divine will perform it If you are not able methinks you should not judge it so necessary at least except you know them that are able If you cast it on us to disprove that Succession I refer you to our Answer to Bellarmine and others in those Papers as to that point 2. As for Tertullian and Irenaeus and others of the primitive Ages pleading such Succession I answer 1. It is one thing to maintain an uninterrupted Succession then when and where it was certain and another to maintain it now when it is not 2. It is one thing then to maintain that such a Succession was de facto and another to affirm that it must be or would be to the end of the World which those Fathers did not It was the Scope of Irenaeus and Tertullian not to make an uninterrupted Succession of standing absolute necessity ad esse Officii nor to prophecy that so it should still be and the Church should never want it but from the present certainty of such a Succession de facto to prove that the Orthodox Churches had better Evidence of the Soundness of their Faith than the Hereticks had If this be not their meaning I cannot understand them it was easy then to prove the Succession and therefore it might be made a Medium against Hereticks to prove that the Churches had better Evidence than they But now the Case is altered both through time and Sin It might have been proved by Tradition without Scripture what was sound Doctrine and what not before the Scripture was written An Heretick might have been confuted in the Days of the Apostles without their Writings and perhaps in a great measure some time after but it follows not that they may be so to the End of the World Those that heard it from the Mouth of the Apostles could tell the Church what Doctrine they taught but how uncertain a way Tradition would have been to acquaint the World with God's Mind by that time it had passed through the puddle of depraved Ages even to 1653. God well knew and therefore provided us a more certain way So is it also in this Case of Succession as the Fathers pleaded it against the Hereticks to prove the Soundness of the Tradition of those Churches Except to Sect. 17. Against all which a Quirk it seems lay that if secretly any of them had had but a secret Canonical Irregularity all the following Successions were null But the evident Truth is much otherwise that the Church never anulled the Acts or Ordinations made by Bishops which the Catholick Church then had accepted and reputed Catholick Bishops though afterwards they came to know of any Secret Irregularities or canonical Disablings had they then been urged or prosecuted by any against those Bishops and then they should have been accepted for Bishops by the Church no longer Reply to Sect. 17. 1. I have proved and more can do open and not only secret Irregularities in the Church of Rome's Ordinations known a Priâ—re and not only after the Ordinations The Multitude of Protestant Writers even English Bishops have made that evident enough against the Pope which you call a Querk general Councils have condemned Popes as Hereticks and Infidels and yet they have ordained more 2. If it were otherwise yet all your Answer would only prove that we must sometimes take them for Bishops who were none when the Nullity is secret but not that they are Bishops indeed or have Authority It is one thing to
Errours have divided and distracted the Christian Churches and one would think Experience should save us from them § 53. But the Brethren resolved that they would hold on the way which they had begun And though they were honest and competently judicious Men yet those that managed the Business did want the Judgment and Accurateness which such a Work required though they would think any Man supercilious that should tell them so And the tincture of Faction stuck so upon their Minds that it hindered their Judgment The great doer of all that worded the Articles was Dr. Owen Mr. Nye and Dr. Goodwin and Mr. Syd Sympson were his Assistants and Dr. Cheynell his Scribe Mr. Marshall a sober worthy Man did something the rest sober Orthodox Men said little but suffered the Heat of the rest to carry all § 54. When I saw they would not change their Method I saw also that there was nothing for me and others of my Mind to do but only to hinder them from doing harm and trusting in their own Opinions or crude Conceirs among our Fundamentals And presently Dr. Owen in extolling the Holy Scriptures put in that That no Man could know God to Salvation by any other means I told him that this was neither a Fundamental nor a Truth and that if among the Papists or any others a poor Christian should believe by the teaching of another without ever knowing that there is a Scripture he should be saved because it is promised that whoever believed should be saved He said awhile That there could be no other way of Saving Revelation of Jesus Christ I told him that he was savingly revealed by Preaching many years before the New Testament was written He told us that the Primitive Church was bound to believe no more from the Apostles but what was written before in the Old Testament and proved thence I told him that by that Assertion he subverted the Christian Church and Faith 1. By overthrowing the Material 2. and the Formal Object of our Faith or the medium necessary thereto 1. For the Matter it is not in the Old Testament That this Iesus is the Christ that he is already incarnate conceived by the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary fulfilled the Law suffered was crucified buried and rose again ascended into Heaven and is there at the right hand of God in our Nature and therein intercedeth for the Church that he hath instituted the Sacraments sent his Apostles given the Holy Ghost to them to direct them into all Truth c. with more of the like 2. That if Christ and his Apostles were not to be believed for the Image of God appearing on their Doctrine and the Divine Attestation of Miracles confirming it then Moses and the Prophets were not for those Reasons to be believed And consequently not to be believed at all for there was no reason to believe them which Christ also gave us not for the belief of him and his Apostles After a deal of wrangling about these Things because the Doctor was the hotter and better befriended in that Assembly and I was then under great Weakness and Soporous or Scotomatical Ilness of my Head I asked their leave to give them the Reasons of my Opinion in Writing which I brought in and never received any Answer to it And yet if Mr. Vines who came but seldom had not stuck to me when he was there they would have made the World believe as some of them endeavoured that I was Popish and pleaded for the Sufficiency of Tradition to Salvation without the Scripture But Bishop Usher was of the same mind with me and told me that he had said the same to the Iesuits Challenge Cap. de Tradit § 55. Many other such crude and unsound Passages like the Savoy Articles of Justification after put into the Independant Agreement had come into our New Fundamentals And all because the over-Orthodox Doctors Owen and Cheynell took it to be their Duty in all their Fundamentals to put in those words which as they said did obviate the Heresies and Errours of the Divines Whenas I told them they should make the Rule to look no way but strait forward and put in their Rejections after as the Synod of Dort doth as being the Contradictions of the Rule One merry passage I remember occasioned laughter Mr. Sympson caused them to make this a Fundamental That He that alloweth himself or others in any known sin cannot be saved I pleaded against the word allowed and told them that many a Thousand lived in wilful sin which they could not be said to allow themselves in but confessed it to be sin and went on against Conscience and yet were impenitent and in a state of Death And that there seemed a little contradiction between known sin and allowed so far as a Man knoweth that he sinneth he doth not allow that is approve it Other Exceptions there were but they would have their way and my opposition to any thing did but heighten their Resolution At last I told them As stiff as they were in their opinion and way I would force them with one word to change or blot out all that Fundamental I urged them to take my wager and they would not believe me but marvelled what I meant I told them that the Parliament took the Independant way of Separation to be a sin and when this Article came before them they would say By our Brethrens own Judgment we are all damned Men if we allow the Independants or 〈◊〉 other Sectaries in their sin They gave me no Answer but they left out all that Fundamental The Papers which I gave them in were these Without the Knowledge of whom by the Revelation of Scripture there is no Salvation The Words by the Revelation of the Scripture I desired might be either here left out or changed into the Revelation of the Gospel or the Word of God To this you will not consent because it would intimate that there may be another co-ordinate way of Revealing Christ besides the written Word by which there may be Salvation I cannot subscribe to the Article as it stands of which when I have shewed the point of our Difference I shall give you my Reasons 1. Our Difference is not de doctrina tradita but de modo tradendi For I have fully acknowledged that there is no Salvation without the Knowledge of the Essentials of the Christian Faith 2. And that the Light of Nature and Book of the Creatures is insufficient hereunto So far we are agreed as to the way of the Revelation 3. Nor do I doubt of the full Perfection of the Scripture but detest the Popish Doctrines of Traditions or unwritten Verities to supply what is supposed to be wanting in the Scripture as if it were but a part of God's Word for the revealing of these supernatural things I desired rather that you would more fully express the Scriptures Perfection and Infallability 4. Nor is it any doubt
Reasonings that are brought against co-ordinate Tradition you will invalidate subservient Tradition which is necessary to convey the very Scriptures from the Apostles and to assure us that these are all the same Writings and not corrupt and which is the Canonical and that there were no more 6. My sixth Reason against your Assertion is That it seems injurious to the Work we have in hand For 1. you will by any one Errour keep or cast out many godly Men from the Ministry 2. You will harden the Libertines when they discern it 3. And you will do more to introduce an Universal Toleration than can be done by most other Means imaginable For 1. One flaw found in your Work may cause it to be cast by 2. It will seem a potent Reason for such Toleration when the choicest Enemies shall mistake in their very Fundamentals 3. You will force us that are your Brethren to petition for Liberty and then others will think that they may come in at the same Gap 7. I added It will be a dishonour to the Parliament 1. When they shall send so hard a Work abroad and establish such a crooked Rule if they thus receive it from you if they reject or correct it it will be their grief to see our Division and Mistake 8. Lastly I added That it will be much to our own dishonour For 1. The Parliament will exactly scan it and no doubt discover the Mistake And 2. many too curious Eyes will examine it and what a reproach will it be to us to be the By-word of Gainsayers and to hear that such chosen Enemies have erred in their very Fundamentals and for the Papists to insult over us and say we can agree in no Confession and know not yet what Religion we are of And withal it may bring us under Jealousies with others that indeed we are Friends to Universal Toleration and made such flaws in our Work to destroy it and intended to undo all by our overdoing or misdoing I should not have presumed to have put you to so much trouble nor have made any stop in your Work when the dispatch is so desirable had not the Consequents of Silence seemed to me so intollerable I only add 1. I dare not think but Scripture is sufficient both for Matter and Words to afford us Fundamentals and to any thing which it speaks I am ready to subscribe 2. I dare not think that your late Reverend Assembly hath left out the very Fundamentals in their large Confession to which in this Article I offered to subscrible 3. I dare not undertake at the day of Judgment to justifie that Man from the Charge of damnable Infidelity who hath had only verbal Tradition of Gods Revelation of the Sum of Christianity as if this did not make his Infidelity inexcusable because he had it not from Scripture But I think that he shall be damned for his Infidelity who believeth not in Christ if he have all other Means besides the Scripture to help him to believe Ri. Baxter After this Paper they new worded the Article which occasioned the following Paper The Article All the means of Revealing Iesus Christ are subordinate and subservient to the Holy Scriptures and none of them co-ordinate It is no small trouble to me that I was necessitated to be the least delay to your Proceedings by reason of my unsatisfiedness with the former Article But that after our Endeavours for a Closure in that point and when we thought that all had been brought to Agreement the Matter of our Difference should be again received by the Addition of this Article is yet a greater trouble to me Not so much for my own sake as others lest it should offend the Parliament and open the Mouths of our Adversaries that we cannot our selves agree in Fundamentals and lest it prove an occasion for other to sue for an Universal Toleration I am unsatisfied in the last that is the Negative Clause of this Article as I was in the former 1. As to the Truth of it and 2. As to the weight of it as a Test for the Ministers that shall be allowed to preach 3. And as to the Necessity of it to Salvation as a Fundamental Concerning the first it must be remembred 1. That you speak of All means of revealing Christ without any Exception Limitation or Restriction no not so much as to ordinary means nor restraining it to means sufficient to Salvation 2. That you deny them to be co-ordinate absolutely also without any distinction exception or limitation 3. I desire it may be observed that I am not my self imposing any Terms on you or offering the Terms subordinate or any other to be put into the Article but only giving a Reason why I cannot subscribe it as it is which I shall now render having premised these Observations 1. The word co-ordinate being comprehensive and ambiguous I conceive doth among others contain these several Sences following 1. As the Species is subordinate to the Genus 2. As the nearer Causes in the same rank are subordinate to the higher and remote and all to the first Cause as in Generation the nearer Parents to the remote 3. As the Means are subordinate to the End in order thereto 4. As the less worthy is subordinate to the more worthy in degrees of Comparison Many other common Sences I now pass These being at least the three first common and the opposed Co-ordination universally denied I see no Evidence to warrant the denial 1. In the first respect I conceive that Divine Revelation being the Genus by word and by writing are distinct Species And as the delivery of the thing revealed is the Genus so the delivery of the perfect word in Scripture and of the Sum of the matter in Sacraments and other Means forementioned are distinct Species 2. In order of Efficiency I conceive that some Means are Supra-ordinate to Scripture and some Co-ordinate and Subordinate in several Respects and some Subordinate only of which I shall give Instances anon 3. In order to the nearer End those Means are subordinate to Scripture which are supra-ordinate in Efficiency and some of those which ab origine are co-ordinate when yet in order to the more remote End they are co-ordinate 4. In order of Dignity some Means are above Scripture some below it For Instances in these Cases 1. Jesus Christ himself both as the great Prophet of his Church inditing the Scriptures by his Spirit and sending the Apostles and still sending Ministers and owning his own Word is one Means of Revealing himself to Mankind And he is in order of Efficiency and of Dignity above the Scripture but subordinate as to the End which is near but not as to the ultimate End 2. The Holy Ghost inspiring the Apostles is a Means of Revelation supra-ordinate to the Scripture in Efficiency and Dignity And the Holy Ghost as enabling and sending forth Pastors is co-ordinate in Efficiency and subordinate as to one
till it be effectually reformed by Divines of both Perswasions equally deputed thereunto And that your Majesty would procure that Moderation in the Imposition hereafter which we before desired 4. Concerning Ceremonies Returning our humble Thanks for your Majesty's gracious Concessions of which we are assured you will never have cause to repent we further crave 1. That your Majesty would leave out those words concerning us That we do not in our Iudgments believe the practice of those particular Ceremonies which we except against to be in it self unlawful for we have not so declared our Judgments Indeed we have said that treating in order to a happy uniting of our Brethren through the Land our Work is not to say what is our own Opinion or what will satisfie us but what will satisfie so many as may procure the said Union And we have said that some think some of them unlawful in themselves and others but inconvenient And while the Imposers think them but indifferent we conceived they might reasonably be entreated to let them go for the saving of their Brethrens Consciences and the Churches Peace We are sure that a Christian's Conscience should be tender of adding to or diminishing from the Matter of God's Worship in the smallest Point the Laws of God being herein the only perfect Rule Deut. 12. 32. And that a Synod infallibly guided by the Holy Ghost would lay upon the Churches no greater burden then necessary things Acts 15. 28. And that for things indifferent Christians should not despise or judge each other Rom. 14. much less by silencing the able and faithful Ministers of the Gospel to punish the Flocks even in their Souls for the tolerable Differences and supposed Mistakes of Ministers We doubt not but Peter and Paul went to Heaven without the Ceremonies in question And seeing your Majesty well expresseth it That the Universal Church cannot introduce one Ceremony in the Worship of God that is contrary to God's Word expressed in the Scriptures and Multitudes of Protestants at home and abroad do think that all Mystical Sacramental Rites of Humane Institution are contrary to the perfection of God's Law and to Deut. 12. 32. c. though the Determination of meer Circumstances necessary in genere be not so and therefore dare not use them for fear of the Displeasure of God the Universal Sovereign it must needs be a great Expression of your Majesty's wisdom and tenderness of God's Honour and the Safety of your Peoples Souls to refuse in things unnecessary to drive Men upon apprehended Sin and upon the Wrath of God and the Terrours of a Condemning Conscience 2. We beseech your Majesty to understand that it is not our meaning by the Word abolishing to crave a Prohibition against your own or other Mens Liberty in the things in question but it is a full Liberty that we desire such as should be in unnecessary things and such as will tend to the Concord of your People viz. That there be no Law or Canon for or against them commanding recommending or prohibiting them As now there is none for any particular Gesture in singing of Psalms where Liberty preserveth an uninterrupted Unity For the Particular Ceremonies 1. We humbly crave as to kneeling in the Act of Receiving that your Majesty will declare our Liberty therein that none should be troubled for receiving it standing or sitting And your Majesty's Expressions upon Reasons best known if not only to themselves command us to render some of our Reasons 1. We are sure that Christ and his Apostles sinned not by not receiving it kneeling and many are not sure that by kneeling they should not sin and therefore for the better Security though not for absolute Necessity we crave leave to take the safer side 2. We are sure that kneeling in any Adoration at all in any Worship on any Lord's Day in the Year or any Week-day between Ester and Pentcost was not only disused but forbidden by General Councils as Concil Nicen. 1 Can. 20. and Concil Trull c. and disclaimed by ancient Writers and this as a general and uncontroled Tradition And therefore that kneeling in the Act of receiving is a Novelty contrary to the Decrees and Practice of the Church for many hundred Years after the Apostles And if we part with the venerable Examples of all Antiquity where it agrees with Scripture and that for nothing we shall depart from the Terms which most Moderators think necessary for the Reconciling of the Churches And Novelty is a Dishonour to any part of Religion And if Antiquity be Honourable the most ancient or nearest the Legislation and Fountain must be most honourable And it is not safe to intimate a Charge of Unreverence upon all the Apostles and primitive Christians and the Universal Church for so many hundred Years together of its purest Time 3. Though our meaning be good it is not good to shew a needless Countenance of the Papists Practice of Adoring the Bread as God when it is used by them round about us Saith Bishop Hall in his Life pag. 20. I had a dangerous Conflict with a Sarbonist who took occasion by our kneeling at the Receipt of the Echarist to persuade all the Company of our Acknowledgment of a Transubstantiation 4. Some of us that could rather kneel than be deprived of Communion should yet suffer much before we durst put all others from the Communion that durst not take it kneeling which therefore we crave we might not be put upon it 2. We humbly crave also that the religious Observation of Holy-days of human Institution may be declared to be left indifferent that none be troubled for not observing them 3. We humbly tender your Majesty our Thanks for your gracious Concession of Liberty as to the Cross and Surplice and bowing at the Name Iesus rather than Christ or God But we farther humbly beseech your Majesty 1. That this Liberty in forbearing the Surpliâ—â— might extend to the Colledges and Cathedrals also that it drive not thence all those that Scruple it and make not those Places receptive only of a Party and that the Youth of the Nation may have just Liberty as well as the Elder If they be engaged in the Universities and their Liberties there cut off in their beginning they cannot afterwards be free many hopeful Persons will be else diverted from the Service of the Church 2. That your Majesty will endeavour the repealing of all Laws and Canons by which these Ceremonies are imposed that they might be left at full Liberty 4. We also humbly tender our Thanks to your Majesty for your gracious Concession of the Forbearance of the Subscription required by that Canon But 1. we humbly acquaint your Majesty that we do not dissent from the Doctrine of the Church of England expressed in the Articles and Homilies But it is the controverted Passages about Government Liturgy and Ceremonies and some Byâ—passages and Phrases in the doctrinal Part which are scrupled by
that all the Snares that ever they could lay for us never procured them just advantage once truly to say that we disagreed among our selves For though there were enow at a distance who could not have agreed to all that we did yet we so far left them out though to the displeasure both of the Prelatists and them that no discord was found in any of our Proposals or Debates which cut some of them more to the heart than all that else we did to their displeasure § 209. By this time our frequent crossing of their Expectations I saw had made some of the Bishops angry above all Bishop Morley who over-ruled the whole business and did interess himself in it deeplier than the rest and was of a hotter Spirit and a readier Tongue But that which displeased them most was the freedom of my Speeches to them that is that I spake to them as on terms of Equality as to the Cause yet with all honourable Titles to their Persons For I perceived that they had that eminency of Power and Interest that the greatest Lords were glad of their favour did expect that the presence of so many of them should have awed us into such a silence or cowardliness as should have betrayed our Cause or at least that their Vehemency and Passions and Interruptions should have put us out of Countenance But I intreated them to give us leave with the due honour of their Persons to use that necessary liberty of Speech to them as beseemed such as are very confident that they plead for the Cause of God and the happiness and healing of a bleeding Church and that upon the warrant of the King's Commission And I must say that though they frowned at my freedom of Speech they never once accused me of any unmannerly or unreverent Language § 210. When we were going to our Disputation Dr. Pierce asked whether he that was none of the three deputed by them to that Service might joyn with the rest And we told that we cared not how many joyned the more the better for if any one of them could see any Evidence of Truth which the rest did overlook it would redound to our Benefit who desired nothing but the Victory of Truth § 211. And before he began with them he would fain have had one bout with me himself Whereas I moved them to some Christian Charity to all those Consciencious Christians that were to be put away from the Communion of the Church if they did but scruple the lawfulness of kneeling in the reception of the Sacrament though I still profest to them that I held it not unlawful my self when the Sacrament could not be otherwise had Dr. Pierce offered himself to a Disputation to prove that let them be never so many it is an Act of Mercy to them to put them all from the Communion of the Church I easily perceived what advantage his Confidence and Passion gave me and I intreated him to try his skill but his Brethren would not give him leave I earnestly entreated them to give him leave but to try one Argument but I could not prevail with them being wiser than to suffer his Passion to expose their Cause to Laughter and Contempt But yet he could not forbear to cast out his medium and tell us how he would have argued viz. That they that receive the Sacrament being in judgment against kneeling in the Act of Receiving do receive it Schismatically and so to their own Damnation Ergo it is an Act of Charity to keep them from the Communion of the Church Where note That our Dispute was only whether the Legistators should by Laws or Canons keep them away and not whether a Pastor supposing such Laws existent should keep them away And therefore by making it damnable Schism antecedently to our Laws he must needs mean that some Foreign Laws or General Councils do prove it Schism or else the Custom of the Universal Church And as to the first I did at large there prove that the Twentieth Canon of the Council at Nice and the Concil Trull and the most ancient Writers do unanimously decree against kneeling and make it universally unlawful and that by Apostolical Tradition to adore kneeling on any Lord's Day in the Year and on any other Day between Easter and Whitsunday and that no General Council hath reversed this till meer Disuse and contrary Custom did it And for Custom the Protestant Churches concur not in that Custom nor are they Schismaticks for differing from the Papists and others that do so nor is it better for them all to be without any Church Communion than not to kneel in the Act of Receiving Nor do the Papists themselves make every Man a Schismatick that followeth not the Custom of their Church in every particular Gesture unless he separate from their Church it self much less do they pronounce Damnation on all such But if it were the Law of our own Land or Church which he thought made it Schism then he might as well have so argued for sitting or standing and against kneeling viz. That it is Charity to make a Law is keep all from Church◠Communion that will kneel because when such a Law is made it is damnable Schism to kneel But the very truth is I perceived so little Compassion to Souls in the zealous and swaying Managers of these Controversies and so little regard of the Scruples and Tenderness of Godly People who were afraid of Sinning a◠that I scarce thought among Protestants there had been any such Whether they would have abated one Ceremony if they had had an hundred more to keep all the Dissenters in three Nations from being cast out of the Ministry and Church I know not but of those they have they would not abate one which made me oft think that their Spirits are much more like the Papists than their Formal Worship and Discipline is so much do they agree in destroying Men for their Opinions and Ceremonies sake and in Building the Tombs of the Prophets and over-honouring the dead Saints while they go on to hate and destroy the living And it made me oft remember Bishop Hall's Character of an Hyprocrite who boweth at the Name of Iesus and sweareth by the Name of God and would set all the World on fire for a Circumstances And it made me remember what that learned godly Minister Mr Spinage hath oft told me and many others and is still ready to justifie upon Oath that being heretofore familiar with this Mr. Thomas Pierce and saying once to him These Men that you so abhor are very godly Men and have much Communion with God he brake out into this Answer A pou on this Communion with God And it made me think of Augustine's Description of the sottish Worldlings that had far rather thus were one Star fewer in Heaven than one Cow or one Tree the fewer in their Grounds So had these Men rather One thousand eight hundred godly
all their Exceptions against the New Common Prayer Book in the Points wherein it is much worse than the old § 405. And for the Latitudinarians and Unwilling Conformists their Plea is That the use of the Forms and Ceremonies is lawful and that is all that they are required to subscribe to because the Act saith they shall declare their Assent and Consent to the use of all things c. They do not subscribe their Consent to the thing in it self but to so much as is to be used by them and so far only as that they will use it But this is so gross that the Non-conformists cannot stretch so far For 1. What Man can doubt whether all things in the Book were intended for some use or other though not each part to the same use Did the Convocation and Parliament contrive and impose things which they themselves did judge to be of no use Is not the Kalendar and Direction for reading Scripture of use to tell you what Days to keep and what Chapters to read Is not the Rubrick of use to direct you in the several Offices Is not the Doctrinal Determination about the Saving of Baptized Infants and other such like of use to tell us its Doctrine is taken to be true Doubtless every part hath its intended usefulness 2. The words are as express to exclude such stretching as could well be devised For 1. It is Assent as well as Consent which is declared 2. It is to all and every thing which includeth every word 3. It is to every thing contained in it as well as to every thing prescribed by it And the Doctrinals as of three Orders Iure Divino c. are contained in it 3. To put all out of doubt since this Act the Parliament made another Act to which while Proviso's were offered the whole House of Lords sent it back to the Commons with this Proviso That those that declared Assent and Consent to all and every thing c. should be obliged to understand it only as to the use of what was required of them and not as to the things in themselves considered The Commons refused this Proviso and the Houses had a meeting about it in which the Commons delivered their Reasons against that Exposition of the Declaration And in the end the Lords did acquiesce in their Reasons and consented to cast out the Proviso so that now the Parliament hath expounded their own words and there is no more pretence left for the Latitudinarian Equivocation § 406. But if it were otherwise is the use of all things contained there lawful 1. To what they say about the Apocrypha it is answered That it is not lawful to read publickly in the Church on any days so many above One hundred in two Months of the Apocryphal Chapters in the same manner time and title of Lessons with the holy Scripture with no fuller distinction When 1. Experience telleth us That many of the People who understand not the Greek word Apocrypha are thereby drawn to take them for Canonical Scripture being also bound up with it in the Books 2. And when Tobit Susanna Bell and the Dragon Iudith are ordinarily by Protestants taken for Fables or Untruths and therefore not so much as pious Instructions § 407. 2. And for the disorder and defects of the Common Prayer before proved they seem but ill matter for such an unfeigned Assent and Consent § 408. 3. And for the new Clause of the Salvation of Baptized Infants as certain by the Word of God the Scruple were the less if it were confined to the Infants of true Believers But our Church admitteth of all Infants even of Infidels and Heathens without distinction if they have but Godfathers and Godmothers and the Canon enforceth Ministers to Baptize them all without exception And when in our Publick Debate with the Bishops I instanced in one of my Parishioners that was a professed Infidel and yet said he would come and make the common Profession for his Child for Custom sake even Dr. Sanderson the Bishop of Lincoln answered me That if there were Godfathers it had a sufficient Title which Bishop Morley and others of them confirmed Now these Godfathers being not Adopters nor Owners we cannot see it certain in God's Word That all those are saved whom they present to Baptism no nor whom ungodly and hypocritical Christians present for how can the Convenant save the Child as the Child of a Believer which saveth not the Parent as a Believer himself So that while unmeet Subjects are Baptized we cannot Subscribe to this Assertion § 409. And it is strange that when Infant-Baptism it self and commonly said by these Men to be a Tradition and not commanded or found in Scripture that yet they find it certain by the Word of God that Baptized Infants are saved § 410. But some say That it is certain that all Infants so dying are saved and therefore all Baptized Infants But 1. They never shewed us any Word of God from whence that certainty may appear to us nor have they answered what is said against it 2. And what jesting with holy Things is this to speak that of the Baptized only which they mean of all As if they would perswade People that it is some effect of Baptism and priviledge of the Children of the Church which they think belongeth to all the Children of Heathens § 411. Some say that the word All Children is not in and of some its true Answ. The Indefinite here according to common Speech is equivalent to an Universal Children baptized dying before actual sin is equal to all children baptized your Consciences must tell you that if you limit it to some only you cross the sence of the Compilers of the Liturgy I am sure Dr. Gunning who brought it in hath publickly exprest his sence for the Salvation of all such Infants § 412. 4. As to the Practice of Baptizing all Children that can have Godfathers and of Confirming Administring the Lord's Supper Absolving Burying c. with unjust Application to Persons unfit for the Sacraments or Titles given them we know not how to Assent and Consent to the Imposition or Form of as long as we know that the same Church which commandeth us to use those words doth command us to apply them to unworthy Persons And how it may harden the Wicked to Perdition is easily conjectured § 413. 5. And for the Ceremonies they are so largely written about on both sides that I need not stay here to recite the Arguments For my own part as I would receive the Lord's Supper kneeling rather then not at all so I have no Censure for those that wear the Surplice though I never wore it But that Man may adjoyn such a Human Sacrament as the Cross in Baptism to God's Sacrament I am not satisfied in And cannot Assent or Consent to it that such a solemn dedicating Sign should be stated in God's Publick Worship by Man 1.
I never spake for liberty herein for Episcopal Independents yea and Anabaptists that only deny Infant Baptism I wrote that hindering men's Ministry for their being against the Parliament And I think I kept many and many thousands from taking the Covenant 7. At least do you deny Liberty to none but those that denyed it to others and we shall thankfully acquiesce Strict I cannot think the maker of these Proposals could imagin that any much less all of them would or could be agreed to Answ. 1. You speak truly if you mean by those men of whom upon former tryal he had so great Experience It were great weakness in him to have expected it But yet he is so charitable as to be confident though not certain that if these Proposals were made to the Conformable London Ministers such as Dr. Whitchcot Dr. Stillingfleet Mr. Gifford Dr. Tillotson Dr. Cradock Dr. Outram Dr. Ford and many more such Learned worthy peaceable men in this City they would either grant all that is here desired or abate so little as should be no hinderance to our present Concord And though I have no great acquaintance with any of them yet my knowledge of them by fame and hearing them preach doth render me so fully persuaded that if we could get the Case but referred to their Judgment and Counsel instead of the Interessed Bishops who brought us to the state that we are in I make no doubt but we should be all healed in a few weeks time And that you may not think my confidence vain take this proof Bishop Wilkins was no fool nor fanatick These men are much of his spirit and judgment who was a Lover of Mankind and of honesty peace and Impartiality and Justice And we agreed with him upon Terms like these upon the Lord Keeper Bridgman's Invitation so far that by mutual Consent the Agreement was drawn up into the form of an Act to have been offered to the house so that as much as lay in him and us we were all agreed and healed And why should I suspect that any of these worthy persons are less peaceable 2. But by this Conclusion those many persons who have talk't so loud how ready some great Clergy-men are to Condescend agree and abate all Unnecessary things to Unite us and prevent Popery may now see past all doubt the very truth of the Case This Animadverter you see would not grant any one of all these Proposals no not our forbearance of an Oath or Subscription to Ceremony or any piece of their imposed formalities not the leaving out of a word of the Liturâ—ie c. What is it then that they would abate such Dealing will make men see at last Strict Or that if the Non-conformists were upon such Terms as these permitted to exercise their Ministry and made capable of Pastoral charges and other Preferments in our Church this would be a means to heal our lamentable Divisions that are now among us unless he will say that the best expedient to suppress Schism is to embrace and cherish and to reward Schismaticks still professing and resolving to be so Or that it is better and safer for the Church to have a fire within her bowels than without her doors or contraries by being mingled together would thereby become less contrary or destructive to one another No certainly And therefore if they will still continue Non-conformists it is better and safer for the Church they should be still kept out than taken into it Answ. 1. But 't is our Opinion pardon our folly that if the Law had not been made which forbad Daniel to pray to God or commanded the worshiping of the Golden Image they had been no Inconformists that kept not such a Law And that if the Law were repeated which requireth Corporations to declare that no man is bound by the solemn vow no not to repent nor against Popery Schism or Prophaness they would be no Inconformists that did not so declare And that if the Laws commanded us not to swear subscribe declare Cross c. We were no Inconformists or Schismaticks if we did them not But the name of Schismaticks is by such Godfathers as Ithacius Idacius and the rest of the Council of Bishops from whom Ambrose dissended put upon such as St. Martin who separated from them to the death for their Church-Tyranny and wicked Lives and bringing Godly people into the suspicion and reproach of Priscillianism if they did but meet for mutual edification and live Religiously As Grotius saith that by a Papist he meaneth one that approveth of all that any Pope shall say or do and I hope there are few such so with some men a Schismatick is one that approveth not of all that a Pope or Prelate will prescribe And if all the present Non-conformists were commanded to Preach with horns on their heads to signifie the conquering power of the Church or Word they were Schismaticks by such men's nomination if they disobeyed But I will now only ask 1. Q. Were all the Apostles and the Churches in their time and long after Schismaticks who knew not our Oaths Declarations Subscriptions Liturgie Ceremonies c. Q. 2. Did they not take as wise a course for the Churche's concord and the avoiding of Schism as either the English or Roman Bishops take Q. 3 Had not the Omission or the Romish Canons about Transubstantiation Tradition and such like been a better way to prevent heresie than the obeying them And may it not be so in our case Would any be Schismaticks for dissenting from Lay men's power of the Keys from Crossing c. if there were no such Laws And did not Peter and Paul please God as well without them as you do with them And did not Peter and Paul go as safe a way to Heaven as you And is he that consenteth to go the same way to heaven as they did and to do all that the Universal Church imposed for an hundred two hundred years after them at least yet worthier of the Name of a Schismatick than the New Lords that by new Laws do make and call all Schismaticks that live as the Apostles did or did command them and no more 2. You have tryed your Better and safer way by silencing 1800 Ministers of Christ by which the Flocks are scattered and divided and we are as Guelphes and Gibelines in Contention And if yet it seem best to you a few years by Death's interposition will help you to be of another mind But alas must the souls of Millions and the Nation pay so dear for your mistake while you are preparing for the too late Convictions of sad Experience Strict The only certain and safe way of healing these Divisions as I conceive is for all that are taken into the Church to submit to one and the same Rule as well in Agendis as Credendis as well in circumstantials and ceremonials as in Substantials and Essentials as well in the manner as the matter of Religious
Rector of his Parish Church shall as such have power to Preach to them without any further License and to judge according to God's Word to whom and how to perform the proper Work of his Office on what Text and Subject to Preach in what Words and Order to Teach and Pray But if Canons also be made a Rule they shall not oblige him against the Word of God And if for Uniformity or some Mens disability he be tyed to use the Words of prescribed Forms called a Liturgy he shall not be so servilely tyed to them as to be punishable for every Omission of any Collect Sentence or Word while at least the greatest part of the Service appointed for the Day is there read and the Substance and Necessary Part of the Offices be there performed no though he omit the Cross in Baptism and the Surplice and deny not Communion to those that dare not receive it kneeling And if any worthy Minister scruple to use the Liturgy but will be present and not Preach against it he shall be capable notwithstanding of preaching as a Lecturer or Assistant if the Incumbent Pastor do Consent VII No Oath Subscription Covenant Profession or Promise shall be made Necessary to Ministers or Candidates for the Ministry besides the Oath of Allegiance and Supremacy and Subscribing to the Sacred Canonical Scriptures and to the ancient Creeds or at the most to the Articles of the Church excepting to them that scruple the Twentieth Thirty fourth and Thirty sixth as they speak only of Ceremonies Traditions and Bishops and the necessary Renunciation of Heresie Popery Rebellion and Usurpation and the Promise of Ministerial Fidelity according to the Word of God Or at least none but what the Reformed Churches are commonly agreed in And let none be capable of Benefices and Church-Dignities or Government in the Universities or Free-Schools who hath not taken the said Oaths Subscriptions and Renunciations VIII Let none have any Benefice with Cure of Souls who is not Ordained to the Sacred Ministry by such Bishops or Pastors as the Law shall thereto appoint for the time to come But those that already are otherwise Ordained by other Pastors shall not be disabled or required to be Ordained again And let no Pastor by Patrons or others be imposed on any Parish Church without the consent of the greater number of the stated Communicants And at his Entrance let some Neighbour Ministers in that Congregation declare him their Pastor as so Consented to and Ordained and preach to them the Duty of the Pastor and Flock and pray for his Success IX If any Pastor be accused of Tyranny Injury or Mal-administration he shall be responsible to the next Synod of Neighbour Pastors or to the Diocesan and his Synod or to the Magistrate or whomsoever the Law shall appoint and if guilty and unreformed after a first and second Admonition shall be punished as his Offence deserveth but only in a Course of Justice according to the Laws and not Arbitrarily Nor so as to be forbidden his Ministerial Labours till he be proved to do more hurt than good And if the supposed Injury to any who is denied Communion be doubtful or but to one or few let not for their sake the Church be deprived of their Pastor but let the Person if proved injured have power to forbear all his Payments and Tythes to the Pastor and to Communicate elsewhere X. Because Patrons who choose Pastors for all the Churches are of so different Minds and Dispositions that there is no certainty that none shall be by them Presented and by Bishops Instituted and Inducted to whom godly Persons may justly scruple to commit the Pastoral Conduct of their Souls whose Safety is more to them then all the World And because there may be some things left in the Liliurgy Church Government and Orders which after their best search may be judged sinful by such godly and peaceable Christians as yet consent to the Word of God and all that the Apostles and their Churches practised And Humanity and Christianity abhor Persecution and Human Darkness and great Difference of Apprehensions is such as leaveth us in Despair of Variety and Concord in doubtful and unnecessary Things Let such Persons be allowed to assemble for Communion and the Worship of God under such Pastors and in such Order as they judge best Provided 1. That their Pastors and Teachers do take all the foresaid Oaths Professions and Subscriptions before some Court of Judicature or Justices at Sessions or the Diocesan as shall be by Law appointed who thereupon shall give them a Testimonial thereof or a written License of Toleration 2. That they be responsible for their Doctrine and Ministration and punishable according to the Laws if they preach or practice any thing inconsistent with their foresaid Profession of Faith and Obedience or of Christian Love and Peace 3. That their Communicants pay all Dues to the Parish Ministers and Churches where they live And if such People as live where the Incumbent is judged by them unfit for the Trust and Conduct of their Souls shall hold Communion with a Neighbour Parish Church they shall not be punishable for it They paying their Parish Dues at home Nor shall private Persons be forbidden peaceably to pray or edifie each other in their Houses XI Christian Priviledges and Church Communion being unvaluable Benefits and just Excommunication a dreadful Punishment no unwilling Person hath right to the said Benefits Therefore none shall be driven by Penalties to say that he is a Christian or to be Baptized or to have Communion in the Lord's Supper Nor shall any be Fined Imprisoned or Corporally and Positively punished by the Sword meerly as a Non-Communicant or Excommunicate and Reconciled but as the Magistrate shall judge the Crimes of themselves deserve But if Non-Communicants be denied all Publick Trust in Churches Universities or Civil Government it is more properly the Securing of he Kingdom Church and Souls then a punishing of them But all Parishioners at Age shall be obliged to forbear reproaching Religion and profaning the Lord's Day and shall hear publick Preaching in some allowed or tolerated Church and shall not refuse to be Catechized or to confer for their Instruction with the Parish Minister and shall pay him all his Tythes and Church Dues XII The Church Power above Parish Churches Diocefan Synodical Chancellors Officials Commissaries c. we presume not to meddle with But were it reduced to the Primitive State or to Archbishop Usher's Model of the Primitive Government yea or but to the King's Description in his Declaration 1660. about Ecclesiastical Affairs and if also the Bishops were chosen as of old for Six hundred years and more it would be a Reformation of great Benefit to the Kingdom and the Churches of Christ therein But if we have but Parish Reformation Religion will be preserved without any wrong or hurt to either the Diocesans or the Tolerated And if Diocesans be good Men