s,cs^»^1 / 'ism^jr- i <[\Aji^\^{ 5CS **NX7^ } ... A N QUIR INTO T H E cto Opinions ( Chiefly ) Propagated by the 'Presbyterians of Scotland '; Together alfo with fbme Animadverfions on a Late Book, Entituled, A Defence of the Vindications of the* Kirk : i a Letter to a Friend ^EDINBURGH. By A.M. D.D. Jeremiah 6.1 6.- Ask fur the Old Paths, wh-.re is the good way, and walk therein, and yc Jhall find reft for your Souls : but they /aid, we will not walk therein. LONDON: Printed for Walter Ktttilhy, at the ttifk&f* Head in St. Paul's Church-yard,i 696. THE CONTENTS OF THIS TREATISE. TH E Introduction, inviting all the trttc Sons of tie Church (a allj the Afflicted C lergy) t mo(l frious Excrcife of true \ ftntame and Humiliation , P. i,i,: The Doctrines and Frincifi, tend for againjl th tarns ar\ the, CmIj>Aic, And Orthodox. p 9,10,1 1 « H A \\ I. The Jnfa [■'( VkM twji the < Nf* Doc:r The CONTENTS. Their Arguments reduced to three general • Heads, p. ij. i. Their Pleas from the Pretended imme- diate Inftitntion of our Saviour, confidered, p.16,17, 18,19,10,21. % Their Arguments from the Confufion of Names, obfervable in the New Teftament, proved to be Vain and Sophiflical, p. 22,13, 24,25, dv. 3. Their Arguments from the Teflimony of Ecclefeaftical Writters examined, p. 39, 40. The Teflimonj of St. Clement the Apoflo- lical Bifhop of Rome, Vindicated from thz Wilful Mi fakes of Presbyterians, p. 41,42, The -Teflimony of St. Polycarp Bifhop of Smyrna and Difciple of St. John theApoflk, enquired into particularly, p.49,5'0, 5: 1 . The Teflimony from Hermas impartially viewed, and the Difingenuity of Monfeeur Blondel reproved, p. 5*2,5:3, 54,^. Pope Pius hisEpiflle ft?Juftus Viennenfis Cenfured as Spurious ; and if it was Genuine, cannot ferve the Presbyterian Defign, p.f6. The Inflance 0/Marcion the Heretic as un- fit to fupport the New Doctrine, as the former Teflimony from the Spurious Epiftle of Pope Pius, p-57- The Teflimony from Juflin Martyr imper- tinently a Hedged by our Adverfaries 9 p, j 8,59. The Teflimony of the Gallican Martyrs, p.62,63. The The CONTENTS. T he Teftimony of St. Cyprian, p. 64, The Teflimony from the Authority of St. Jerome, p. 6$. The Error of St. Jerome discovered to he very different from the Ha9 Doctrine of the Presbyterians, p.66. »SV. Jerome never acknowledged any Inter- val, after the Death of the Avojlles in nhich Ecclefiaftical Affair sir. ;r. managed, Commu- ni Pre^byterorum Conii'io. Ibid & Seqq, St. Jerome taught, that Epifcopacy yr>t> the Atofiolical remedy oj , from p.65. to p.8o. The Teflimony from the Authority of Saint Auftin, examined. Saifjt Auftin reafoned from the Sncccffion ' of jingle Perjons governing the Church of Rome from the days of the Apo flics, am this Argument overthrew the Doctrine Schifm of the Donatilts, p.81 . to p.9 j. CHAP. EL Of the Succefion of Biflwfs from the Ape files, P94. Some Yreshyterian Conceffions preliminary to the true State of thi Lcn:roverlL\ [\; this Contrcv'.rft:, p. 15*0* The I . . -jrcvr the h fences if Parity, « itafios his t to Mine . The Pen, >; ft ^ordinate mitive Ages, p. 1 :nft large ■ ! (HAP. III. *V / f of our Saviour's Nativity, i II id. i upon 1 ritian C The CONTENTS. Presbyterian Exceptions removed, p. 175* 176,177. This further Prosecuted from feveral other Confederations, p.179,180, &c. The Festivity of Chriftmas more particu- larly confidered, p. 185. The Vindicator's Mistakes expofed, by the Anniverfary Commemoration of the Martyrs, celebrated by the firH Christians, p. i88,efc. The New Explications of the Vindicator infilled on, p. 196, &c. Some other ridiculous Fancies examined, viz. That Chriftmas was obferved in honour of Julius Caefar, p.iof. The Testimony cited from Buchanan can- not ferve the Presbyterian Dejign, p, 207,208. CHAP. IV. Of the Preslyterian Notion of Schifm, and their fabulous Stories concerning a Presbyteri- an Church in Scotland, in the first Ages of Christianity, p 211. Several Confi derations propefed to prove our Scotifb Presbyterians Schifmatich from the Catholic Church, in the striffefl Sen ft of that Word, p.213,214, &c. A Particular Enquiry into that Fabulous Story propagated by our Adv. rfaries, viz. That there was a Presbyterian Church in Scotland in the FirH Ages of Christianity, p.228,229. The The CONTENTS. Tht Authors cited by the Vindicator of the Kirk, to fupfort this Dream, particularly con- fidered, p. 230. the Authority of Profper miftaken, arid the Teflimony cited by onr Adversaries, from his Chronicon Confulare, more narronly enquired into, p. 245, &c. CHAP. V. 7 he Presbyterian Doctrine concerning Rites and Ceremonies examined, p. 2 5 0,2 5 1. Their Notions contradict the Practice of all civilizd Nations, Ibid. The frequent Allnfions to uncommanded fig- nificant Ceremonies practifed in the Worjhip of God, that we meet with in the Holy Scriptures, prove fuch Ceremonies Lawful beyond all Con- tradiction, p.Z^y&C. Several Exceptions, offered by the Vindica- tor, removed, p.2 56, 2 57. The Orthodox Principle Provd from an Allu/ion to the Ceremony of /mmer/ion, f ra- ti is d in the Apoflolical Church cf Rome, proved from Rom. 6. 4. pag 26 f. Of Presbyterian Ordinations, and how little can be f aid in their Defence, p.276, ($T. The Doctrine of No n- Reft fiance, truly Un- der flood, is (.if and Chrifiian in it felf, and in all its tendencies, p. 184,28). The EnthuJtaHic tubularities of the later Prcs- The CONTENTS. Presbyterians, in rejecting all Puhlick Forms* in the Solemn Worship of God, ref roved* p. 289,290,291,^. Calvin 's three Arguments for Tuhlick Li- turgies arc Solid and Unanfwerable, p. 29 3, 2,94, 295-. The Vindicators ufual Reproach, viz. That the Clergy of cur Church are Superstitious, examined, p. 295*, efr. The Nature of Superstition explain d, and a Parallel infiUed en, between the Supersti- tious Ufages cf the Ancient Hereticks, and the Modern Practices of the later Sectaries, p.296, 297, 298,^. The Vindicator s Attempt to Justice his Unaccountable Paradox fore'd upon the words of St. Jerome, from fome Expofuions offered by the Learned Grotius, ChaBifed and Ex- gofed, and the Vanity of that Comparifon de* monft l rated, p, 3 05^3 06, 307. The Conclufion. Exhorting all the true Sons of the Church to Pray for the Peace and Unity of its Mem- bers. It It is expe&ed the Reader will Pardon fome Points and Comma's that are mifplac'd. The Errors that diflurb the Senfe moft, are thefe following. Pdgi 16. I. 20. r. New. p. 20. marg. r. locum, p. . 1 16. /. 3. after Angel, a.i.i, a$ ic is renJer'd by the Scpru.iginr. />. 1 3S. /.21. r.Cenrefimum. f, 159. l.z.r.i. f. 162 7.5. r. Saeculi. p.l8». /. 19. r. acuteneft. p. 189.'. 7. fe accurate. />.>99 I.J. r. foppifh. /■. -<3 f.a8. r. Trea- tiles. p. 255. /.aj. */ivr unguarded, a.Yi, and not Sup- ported. P.291./.13. #ffir thar,d.i./ ; it. p 319. /.•:. r Sha- dow. A N ENQUIRY INTO THE New Opinions 5 cn . Sir, I Thought that our Enemies had made an end of their Libels, but I fee that it is not (b eafie for them to forbear the practices that we com- plain of. The malignity of Faction is ndlefs, and there is nothing lb apt to be pprcflcd and rcw'cd as Truth and Inno- ence* We mull (in thefe days of Atheifm Confuiion)arm out icl\es againll Ca- fumnies and Contradictions ■ and if re not guarded by Rdblutionand Forti- :rt (not only the Pecu- liar Minillrics of the od, but ) B An Enquiry into the Profeflion of Chriftianity it felf. We arc furrounded on all hands by the moft un- generous and fpiteful Adverfarics, the open and fcandalousSenfiialitiesof fome,and the fpiritual Raveriesof others,lay fiege to the Foundations of ourFaith 5 and it is with great difficulty that the publick Worfhip of God is not quite extinguifhed, as it is in- deed defpifed and ridicul'd : So grievous is our prefent Calamity, that the conten- ding Parties amongft us do impute our Dilafters to different Caufes,and therefore we are the further remov'd from our true Cure. If we were fo impartial as to ac- knowledge our Iniquities with Sorrow and Remorfe, we would quickly find the Ex- ercife of Contrition and Repentance more proper to remove the marks of God's An- ger, than the other Methods that are moft pleafing to Flefh and Blood. There is nothing more Eflential to Natural Religion than the belief of God's wife and watchful Providence. It inter- poles in the meaneft Accidents of humane Life, and much more in the remarkable Ruins and Calamities of publick Societies and Churches : And if we do not hear the Voice of the Rod, and of him that hath appointed it, he hath ftill more ter- rible Plagues in referve for us than the ipoiling of our Goods, or the affronting of the New Opinions^ &c of our Perfons. Let us therefore draw near unto him by our fervent Prayers, and ingenuous Humiliations : for the mod Innocent amongft us may find in the view of his Life feveral Adtions and OmifTions very difpleafing to our Heavenly Father, as well as unfuitable to our Baptifmal Vows and Engagements ; therefore the Hand of God is itretched out againft us, and he is provoked to let loofe amongft us a Spirit of Error and Confufion : and though wc may be very Innocent as to the Accufations of thofe who have wick- edly combined to defame us, yet who cf us CdM und r(lu/hi bis Errors ? If all things without us are in fuch diforder,thcn is it high time for us to look within our (clves,and to fix our Thoughts on their true Objects : If we arc expos'd ro the faded Toil j ngs an J Uncertainties. wc mull endeavour to cllabhih the Tranquilli- ty of our mind ? If wc know not v. b to lay our head, if wc have no frcferty upon Earth, the natural Conc.'uiion is, CO fut theft things tbjt art If here wc are pcrtccutcd and opprcilcd, wc mult carry our thoughts and defircs to that in- vifiblc Sandtuary that yields true Kale and Rcpotc under all prcflurcs and afflictions. It is worth our while to enquire why who bavc been dedicated to i!k A i 4 An Enquiry into vices of the Altar, are more particularly flruck at than others. It is not fo much our bufinefs to complain of our Perlecu- tors, as to look unto him that fmites us : and if he (by the difcipline of fo many erodes) oblige us to confider more nar- rowly the frame of our Souls, we may with greater eafe part with our former Conveniencies. Let every one of us re- tire into himfelf, and open up the feveral foldings of his own Confcience, and en- deavour hereafter to regulate our Actions by true and Chriftian Principles, knoV^ ing that all things are naked and open to tht Eyes of him with whom we have to do, and to whom we are fliortly to give an account of our time and talents, and of all things that we have done in the body rrhether they be good or evil. If we muft differ , let us imitate the Captain of our Salvation : this is Edifying to the Church, and it cftablifhes the Compofure of our own mind. Let us canvafs and exa- mine the Doffrwes and Pratiicts for which we fufler, and enquire whether they be not the Principles of the Catholic and Primi- tive Church in her firft and pureft ages. We muft not think that we are dif- charg'd from the peculiar Offices of our Miniftry, becaufe we are fore'd from our Refidence ; and expofed to all forts of In- dignities. the New Opinions, &c. y dignities. We muft firmly believe that all things work together for good to them thit love God: and that our Patience and Meeknefs may be of greater ufe to the Church than if we had been allow'd to continue in our former Stations. We fee how much holy things are contcmn'd in our days, how triumphantly Atheifm and Impiety lift up their Banners every where. Let us endeavour as much as is poflible to preferve fomeRemains of Religion amongfb the People. Let us aflert the ancient Order and Piety that made the Chriftian Church fo beautiful in former Ages. The Apolllc informs us, that the time would come when men could not endure \ "• 4 3, 4-, found Doctrine, but after their oven lufl frail they heap to themfelvcsTeachcrs hiving itching Ears, and they jhall turn away their Ears from the truth, and fh all he turn.d unto fables. The great rounder of our Religion fent his ApoiUes by found Dodtnne to en- lighten the World, and they convey'd this Spiritual Authority unto others who lliould tranfmit it by an orderly Succc/li- 011 ; and as their Million was Heavenly in its Original, lo their Do&rine was pure and holy in all its Tendencies. "J hey confidered themiclvcs as the Ambaiia- dors of jefus Chrift, and Delivered their Lommillion without an)' Mixture or N\- pcx An Enquiry into pocrify. They treated the People with all Humility and Tendemefs, but in the mean time took great care to mortifie their Lufts and their Paflions : but when they grew wanton and headftrong, and thought themfelves too wife to be led by their Spiritual Guides and Rulers, then they would have teachers of their own. Men chofen by themfelves, fuch as were taught to calculate their Doctrines to popular Fancies and Httmours, fuch as would proftitute the Gofpel, to pro- mote Error and Delufion, and make the Kingdom of Light fubfervient to that of Darknefs, and inftead of (erving our blefled Saviour, they became Slaves to the People, by whom they were originally employed : and becaufe they were fo un- happily fuccefsful as to gratifie their Lulls, they were therefore voted the moll edify- ing teachers. The Primitive Minifters of Religion had their immediate Commiffion fromHea- ven, accordingly they endeavoured by all means to reftore the Image of God in the Souls of Men, to raife their Thoughts and Defigns to that Happinefs and Treafure which the World cannot give, which God hath promifed and made fure by the Re- furredtion of Jefus Chrift from the dead. The other had their authority from Men, and the New Opinions, Sec. and therefore they mud needs pleafe the People who fent them. They mud re- concile the Rules and Morals of the Gof- pel, to the Wicked Practices and defigns of the World : they muft change the ftri&eft Maxims of the Evangel into loofer Theorems, and the fevere Difci- phne of the Ancient Church unto all Li- cence and Luxury, the true faith that works by love unto airy Notions and Mi- ftakes. Thus the People were pleas'd, and the Gofpel was defeated, the Church is ruinM, and God diihonour'd. Every Man inhisownilationis obliged to contend for the Faith once delivered to the Saints. When the Foundations of Ecclefiaftical Unity are fhaken loole, and the Anticnt Conftitutions trampled upon with great Infolcnce and Impiety, then the hedge of true Religion is noc only Invaded but Dcmolifhed, and with- out thofc Sacred Vehicles ic muft Evapo- rate into Giddincls an.l Enthufiafm ; the Extravagance of chefe lall days is bound- Ids as it is Sceptical, and Chrillianity ic (elf is more dangeroufly wounded by the Delufions of (omc that are Baptiz'd, than by the open Blafphcroics of Infidels : The lalt may be allaultcd by Reafon,(az lcaft in their more Lucid Intervals; but the firil are jritogetfcr inaccdfible : we muft noc An Enquiry into prcfume to inftrucl: them who pretend to extraordinary Illuminations, their Errors are made ftrong by their vanity, they plead a Divine Right to every Mew Opi- pinion, and if we approach them in the ancient Paths of Modefty and Humility, they look down upon us with Scorn and Indignation ; Nay, chey are inflexible to the plained and mod convincing argu- ments. I have frequently, with Grief and Sor- row, confidered the Decays of Religion, and the Difficulties of our Employment. We muft pull down ftrong Holds and lofty Imaginations, and grapple with the rudeft Oppofitions ; the Avenues of Mens Souls are blockaded by paflion and prejudices and they are fortified in their Error, not only by the Corruption of their Nature, but by the artifice of Seducers, their itch- ing Ears are pleafed, their Luftsare grati- fied, their Paflions are made more unruly, their Envy, Hatred, and Malice are in- dulged ; and they are allow'd to diftin- guifti themfelves from all others by fpecial Titles ofDivifion and Singularity, by which alone they think to make their Calling and Ekclion fure. Yet notwithftanding that we are thus refilled by the Multitude of their Follies and Delujfions, we muft not give over by faintnels the New Opinions, dec. Faintnefs and Defpond^ncy. We muft plead with them, who have left the Unity of the Church,by the words of Truth and Sobernefs, and exhort others to continue in that Do&rine that was reveal'd by our Saviour, taught by his Apoftles, and re- ceived by all Churches in the firlt and bed: Ages, that the prcfent Genera- tion may not rife in Judgment againit us for our Silencc,nor Poilenty cenfurc our Cowardice. We mud not be aihamed of the truth, even when it is contradidlcd with all polfiblc Violence and Fury. I addrcis this fhort Treatifc to you, with a defign rather to aflcrt the Truth, than to reply to what hath been lately publifhed by the Vindicator of the Kirk of Scotland, againft a certain Book, Kntituled, Apology for the Clergy, &c. though I think it ncccflary to make fome of his Millakcs a little more apparent. There arc certain Practices and Rij received by the Chridian Church, in ail Ages, which arc not determined expire in the Holy Scriptures in lo many Lei and Syllables, yet by the plainefl \ mod undeniable ConfequeqcpS, are agree- able to its general Rules, and the Uniform belief of all Chnllians ;and they that deny thole UfageSj or the Lawfillnefs of thole Rituals, venture upon untrodden Paths, and io An Equiry into and do foolifhly condemn the Wifdom of all former Ages. The fpecial Providence of God hath fo watch'd over the Church, that, fince the firft Plantations of Chriftianity, we have preferved to us fome Records and Monu- ments of its Dodtrine and Practices. The Books of iuch as have been learn'd in eve- ry age do plainly demonftrate that the firft Chriftians were agreed amongft them- felves in the great Articles of Religion, and in the general Rules of Ecclefiaftical Difcipline and Order, and by this Uniform mity of DodJrine and Rituals they ftreng- thened themfelves againft Infidels and Hereticks. There is nothing more oppo- fite to the fpirit of true Religion than Stubbornefs and Petulance, and when we defpife thofe Conftitutions that have been univerfally received amongft Chriftians, we overthrow the Foundations of Peace and Charity, and cotifcquently we ex- clude our (elves from the vifible fellow- ship of Chrift's Houfliold and Family. When we confider the Schifms and Tu- mults of particular Churches, the conftw fions of fo many Revolutions, the (bak- ings of fo many Nations, the boldnefs and a&ivity of Hereticks, we have reafon to adore the Goodnefs of God, that (o many Monuments of Ecclefialtical Anti- quity the New Opinions, dec 1 1 quity are prefervM ; and whatever is uni- formly determin'd by the Wifeil and the belt of Christians (their learn'dft Bifhops and Presbyters) nuifl be received as the Infallible truth of God, elfe we have no certain Standard to dittinguiih the Catho- lic Church in former Ages from the com- binations of Hereticks : thefe arc new in their fcveral Errors and Delufions, and upon that very account of their Novelty were expos'd and refuted by the Ancients : they neither agreed amongft themielves, nor with the Orthodox. But the Uni- form Voice of Chriftcndom in the firft and purefl: Ages, is the belt Key to the Do&nne and Pra&icc of the Apoltlcs and their Succellbrs. If it appear then that the Opinions which we oppofe, and are propagated by the Presbyterian Societies are fuch as were never entcrtain'd in the Chriftian Church for fourteen hundred Years after our *Sa- Mour s Incarnation, then I leave it to eve- ry fobcr Chriftka to confider, whether he may fafely continue in the communion of that Party that defpifcs the wholcCaiho- lie Church both Ancient and Modern. C H A I\ 12 An Enquiry into CHAP. I. The Novelty and Insufficiency of thofe Pleas and Arguments managed by the Presbyterians in defence of their New Doffirine of Parity. THE firft Opinion that I charge withEr- ror and Novelty amongft our Coun- try-men, is this, That they affirm,upon all Occafions,that our Saviour hath appointed his Church,under the NewTeftament (whe- ther Provincial,National,or Oecomenic) to be govern'd by the (everal clafles of Presby- ters adding in perfect Parity, and owning no Subordination to any higher Officer in the Ecclefiaftical Senate above a Presbyter in the modern and current Notion of the word, Such a Doctrine muft be of dan- gerous confequence, becaufe it is altoge- ther new, and never propagated in any part of the Chriftian Church until thefe laft days of Separation and Singularity. In this Opinion they differ, not only from the Uniform teftimony of Antiquity, but alfo from the firfl Presbyterians amongft our (elves. the New Opinio?^, See. 1 3 felves, who declare in their Confeffion of Faith, that all Cbtirch-Polity is variable : fb far they were at that time from ailerting that indifpenfible, divine, and unaltera- ble right of Parity. All that the firft Presbyterians pleaded was, that their new form was allowable, and not repugnant to the Oeconomy of the New Teftament and Primitive Inftitu- tion 5 and that it came very near to the Original Model of Churches, but they never thought to advance fiich a bold and rafh AfTertion as to affirm, That the Chri- ftian Church, by die Original Authority of our Saviour and his Apoftles, ought to be govern 'd in all Ages by a Parity of Presbyters ; or that there was no other Officer in the Church could pretend to any lhare of EcclefialTical Government a- bove a Presbyter. When a Society of Men let up for Di- vine, Abfolutc, and Infallible Right, they ought to bring plain Proofs for what they lay, elfc they mull needs be to >k\l upon as Impoftors, or at lead (elf-conceited and dcfigningMen. To propagate a t)o£b i under the notion of a probable Opinion (though it ihould happen to be an Lrror) is confident with Modcfty, and the pra- ctice of Learned Men m all AgCS: Bill to affirm a new Notion to I . 14 An Enquiry into Divine Right, and to require Obedience to that Scheme, as a thing that is due to Supreme and Infallible Authority, is much vvorfe than Speculative Enthufiafm. If a man only entertains himfelf with his Vi- fions and Fancies, he alone fuflers by it : but if I meet with a company of head- ftrong Fellows, who muft needs perfuade me that they fee fo many Armies in the Air fighting, and with the exadteft Difci- pline of War ; nay, their Banners, the lhape and colour of their Horfes,their fe- verai Squadrons, and the whole order of their Encampment, and will certainly knock me in the head unlefs I take my Oath upon it that I fee all this, who ne- ver fawany fuch thing in my Life.I think I have reafon to complain that my Circum- itances are very unlucky, I had certainly rather fall into the hands of High-way- men, than amongft thofe Spiritual Rob- bers, who diveft me of my Senfes, and the exercife of my Reafon. If you inform our Country men that their New Dodtrine is thus reprefentcd, they will tell you that none but wicked men oppofe their Government ; that it is Eftablifh'd upon the exprefs Institution of our Saviour, that it hath been afiertcd and prov'd by feverai Learned Men of their Party beyond contradiction. But if you ask the New Opinions, Sec. ask by what particular argument you may- be convinced of the Truth of their New Doctrine, then they begin to lead you intoaLabyrinth of dark and intricate Con- fluences, obfeure and perplext Probabi- lities; feveral Texts of Scripture they will alledge, but fadly wrefted and diftorted from their genuine Meaning and Defign, and the uniform Suffrages of all the Anci- ents : And if you are not fatisfied with fuch proofs as they advance, you mud be contented to fubmit to their Cenfure, and the New Difcipline muft be Obcy'd where- ever their Power is equal to their Pre- tences. I can give you but a fliort Hiftory of their Arguments by which they endeavour to Eftablifli their Divine Right of Parity. When you read their Books I think all their pleas of whatever kind or force may be reduced to theft three heads. Firlt, cither they pretend that this Parity of Presbyters is exprcfly commanded by our Saviour ; or, (econdly, They endeavour to fupport it by conlequences from ieveral Texts of Scripture ; or thirdly, from the Tcltimonics of the ancient Writers of the Church. Hrftlfay, they pretend that tin > I ty of Presbyters (exclufive of tti v penonty or JtinfdiCtion of aBifllop exprcfly i6 An Enquiry into exprefly commanded by our Saviour.This indeed promifes veryfair; For if our Savi- our hath plainly and pofitively Comman- ded that Ecclefiafrical Affairs fhall be ma- naged in all Churches and Ages communi Presbyter or urn confilio, and by fuch a Col- lege of Presbyters as excludes the Autho- rity and Jurifdidhon of a Bifhop, then, without all Controverfie,all Chriftians are oblig'd to fubmitto it. The Confequence is ptoin and undeniable ; and becaufe our Country-men do infift upon this more fre- quently than any of the foreign Presbyte- rians, we ought to hear them calmly and deliberately ; and when they plead the Authority of our Biefled Saviour we muft view thofe Texts with reverence and at- tention, and fee if any thing can be in- ferred from them that may probably fup- prt the now Scheme of Presbytery. The Parallel Texts of Scripture are, Fid.DickfininMatth. io. 25. But J [e fu s c ailed them unto ****** and An ' him and [aid. ye know that the Princes of Iwer to the Ire- . ■ ' ' %f ■' . r , . , , j 'vicH?7?,byG.Rjhe Gentiles exercije dominion over them, and they that are great ex'ercife authority upon them. ' v. 26. But it flhill not he fo among yon, hut rrhofotvjr will be great among you, let him be your Mini fier. v. 27. And who foever will he chief among ycu f let hi?n be your fe: vant. v.18. Even as the Son cf Man came not to be mini find unto but to mini fiery and to give his the New Opinions, &cc. 17 bis Ufa a TAnjom for mtny. See alfo /V^ 10, v. 42, 4}, 44, 4 J. and Luke 22.2^. From theie parallel Places they p!ead,thac the Officers of drift's Houfe were by his own exprefs Command eftablifh'd in a pertcft Equality, even in fuch a Pa- rity as excludes the Power and Juris- diction of any higher Order than that of a Presbyter in the modern Notion. Let us now examine, whether there be any Foundation for their Inference in the Texts I a ft mentioned. In the firftplace,wefind that our Blefied Saviour luppofesDegrces of Subordination amongft his own Difciplcs, as well as all other Societies, and therefore he directs the Ecclefiafticks, who would climb to the Higheft Places in the Church,to take other Methods than thole that are molt ufual amongft the Grandees of the World: He that delerved Preferment in thj < hurch was to be the Servant of all, fo that this Text refers to the Method of T. notion, and not to the Extirpation ot their Jurildiftion. They were not to alpire to Honour and Dignity Lv He 1 and Violence, or the other Arts that lb talhionable in Secular Courts, but ra- ther by all the Afl « I Modeih, Hu.: i- lity, and Sell den bl. 1 8 An Enquiry into Next, let me ask, whether the Apo. files underftood this Precept of our Sa- viour in the fenfe of our Adverfaries or not. If they did, (as it is alledg'd ) how came they to exercife Jurifdi<5tion over all Subordinate Ecclefiafticks,during their Life time, in all the Churches they Planted ? Did they go crofs to the Infti- tution cf our Saviour, who perfe£Uy un- derftood his meaning, and to whom the Precept was Originally delivered. But that which Baffles and Expofes this Argument to all Intents and Purpofes, is this, that he did that himfelf among them* which now he commanded them to do to one another, and therefore the doing of this towards one another in Obedi- ence to the Command now under confi* deration, could not infer a Parity, un- left they Blafphemoufly infer that Chrift and his Apoftles were equal : for when you read the Text with attention, you fee that our Saviour recommends what he Enjoyns from his own Conftant and Vifible Pra&ice amongft them, viz. that he himfelf, who was their Lord and Ma- Jlr, was their Servant^ and therefore it became the Greateft among them, in imitation of him, to be Modeft, Calm, and Humble towards all their Subordi- nate Brethren, and this qualify'd them more the New Opinions, &c tp inore than any other thing for Ecclefi- aftical Promotions. It is very fad that any fhould be lb much Infatuated with their new Schems of Parity, as toalledge fuch Texts, which f if underftood in their Senfe ) Degrades our Bleifed Saviour to the Degree of one of his Difciples ; for what he Comman- ded the Apoftles, he Pra&ifed among them himfelf. And this is the ftrongeil Motive to engage their Obedience ; there- fore I may realbnably infer, that what- ever it was that our Saviour comman- ded in thofe places of Scripture, it muft of neceiTity be toto carlo different from all Parity and Equality. He Comman- ded them, that they fhould ttdt exercife their Jurifdi&ion as the Lords of the Gentiles did, by a Spirit of Pride and Domination, but rather by the more Christian and engaging Behaviour of Charity and Humility. He that was to be the Greatelf among them, was to be their Servant, in Imitation of that Hea- venly Patern that was let them by our Blefled Lord and Saviour. S. Aw/ thought himfelf oblig'd to antwer his Epifcopal Charafter after this manner, when the Care of all the Churches lay upon him, when he employM his Jfoftcluil Power to promote the Edification of all M C 2 20 An Enquiry intQ and all the Fathers of the Church, who were advanced above their Brethren to Ecclefiaftical Power and Jurifdi&ion, had this Evangelical Notion of their Dignity, that they were the Servants of all others. From what hath been faid one may eafily fee, that there is no Ground, no not a Shadow of any Argument for the New Do&rine in thefe Texts of Scrip- ture. It is true, that Salmafius glances at this way of Reafoning in his Walo MeJJa!;m&, but he lays no great ftrefs upon it. That which is moft to our njid. Bez. in purpofe is, that Beza himfelf, in his locum. larger Notes upon the New Teftament, afferts, that all kind of Jurifdifrion is not forbidden in thefe Texts, but that only which is joyn'd with imperious Bit- ternefs and Domination. Let it be further confidered, that the Hierarchy and Subordination of Priefts was Eftablifhed by Divine Authority in the Jewifh Church : and if our Saviour had pnll'd down that ancient Polity, and commanded an Equality amongft the Presbyters of the New Teftament, he would not have ftated the Oppofition between his own Difciples and the Lords cf the Gentiles, but rather between the Priefts of theMofaic Oeconomy and the Difciples the Ntw Opinions, &c. 2 1 Difciples of the New Teftament. When he reprov'd the corrupt glofTesthat were introduc'd into the Church by the Scribes and Pharifees, and taught them Purer and more Heavenly Strains of Morahty, he ftates the Oppofiiion between the current Doftrine rcceivM among ft the Jews; and that which he himfelf Taught and Recommended ; and there is ri \ doubt to be made, if he had forbidden the feveral Degrees and Sujcrdin.uions Of Priefts, and Eftabhfhed a pertett E- Slality, he would have ftaftd 1 plain ppofition between the Model [ts, but either twice or thrice, and that only with regard to the Adminiftration of after days. Yet this Homoncmy of names :ould not be reafbrlably pleaded then a- ^ainft the Subordination of other Priefts to Aaron, nor againft the Deferencedue to his Pontifical Character. Was it then to be expe&ed that the Apoftles or Apoftolical Men fwhen they occafiomlly mentioned thePresbytersof theNewTefta- mcnt)might not make ufe of the currant language and Pharafeology of their own Country-men, who divided their Clergy into Priefts and Levitcs, as if there were no more but two Order*, even w lien the meaneft of the Jews knew that thd l)ig-» ni r y of the High Pri (I wns very honour- able, and diftinguifh'd from all Subor- dinate Priefts by all marks of Eminence and Authority ? It rs true, that in the H.r>io r.ivh. and ricphttiul Vv ritidgs, theHighfti is very frequently diftinguifh'd hf Ins Proper and Special Charafter; j et inthe 26 A?i Equiry into beginning of the JewiJI)Oeconomy neither Aaron nor E/eazar were called High' Pnefts when they are particularly nam'd, and if in thofedays any had been fomad as to have infer'd from this Confufio Nb- minum an Equality between all Priefts, he would certainly have been expos'd : for the Offices themfelves were fuftici- ently diftinguiffrd by thofe Special Mini- fir ies and jitrifdiftions that were peculi* arly appropriated to the one, and deny'd to the other, fuch as were vifible to the ob- fervat ion of the meaneft among the Jews. We do not at all deny but that Bifhops might be call'd Presbyters in the days of the Apoftles, and juftly fo too, though they had other Presbyters under their Government and Infpeftion : for the ufe of the Word Presbyter was another thing thn than now, if we confider it in its full Latitude and Extent. With us it fignifies fuch Priefts as affift the Bi- fhop in hisEcclefiaftical Adminiftrations, and are accountable to him for their Per- formances: And though all Presbyters are not Bifhops, yet all Bifhops are Pres- byters 5 and to infer an Equality of Offi- ces from the promifcuous life of Names* I think, is neither good Logick nor good Hiftory. We the New Opinions, &c. 27 We do not now Plead, (as feme Igno- rant People may pretend ) that there ought to be a Bifhop above Presbyters, becaufe there was a HigbPneji among the Jews, but rather thus, that the Hie- rarchy that obtained in the Patrhrcb.il and Jtwtjb Oeconcmy was never abrogated in the New 3 and though we meet with the fame Duh tomies or the Clergy in the New Teftament, as are frequently CcQn in the Old, we ought not to conclude from thence, that there was an Equality among them of the Higher Order in that Divifion, no more than there was a Pa- rity amongft the Prieftsofthe Old Tefh- ment, for that fame Highcft Order, or T^J/f, W as again divided into two, ziz. the Sttpriam and Subordin.uc. And not only they,but the Jews alio ofthe Apoftolical Age divided their Clergy into twoCljjfts u hen they (poke o' r 'their,on!y as in Oppofitionto thePeople Je no other diftincHon amongft tlv.ni than that ofPrieftsaniiLeviteb.-But then again, , upon other Occafions they Subdivide the Prieftsinto the Higbefl and ^ f4tt Order, when they confider'd the Hierarchy in it (elf, an ! diftii e- very 'i*Za of the Pfiefthood fr< 1 no- ther,of this we have clear Iofl . fA/fcthe Jew. V. 28 An Enquiry into Was it not then teafonable,^ that the Apoftles fhould fpeak the Language of the Age in which they lived, and that of their Predeceffors ? Whether then the Clergy be divided into their feveral Claf- fis by a Biparite or Tnpatite divifion, both is very Agreeable to the Cuftom of the Jews. If they compar'd the Ptiefts amongft themfelves, and reckoned up their Diftinttions and Suhordlmtions to one another, then they were Divided by a Tripartite Divifion ; but if they fpoke of them with regard to the People, then the Bipartite Divifion was more Conve- nient, fo that the Community of Names was very obfervable when the Offices themfelves were as truly Separated and Diftinguifhed as they could be. In like manner the firft Presbyter, or n^€^ in the Apoftolica! Age, he that was Vefted with a Proftafia, was as much above the Subordinate Presbyters as the High-Triefi among the Jews was above other Priefts, with whom neverthelefs he was frequent- ly Ranked, without any Nominal Diftin- ttionor Difcrimination, Nay, Salmafiw himfelf grants, that k u ~ even when the pretended Equality pre- vailM there was a Trxfes to whom the trotocrtb dria^orLoc^s in confejfuVrimariuty was conftantly due, and that during life. And the New Opinions, dec. 2? And there arefuch manifeft and palpable Evidences of this peculiar Honour and Jurifdjftion due to one of the Ecclefiafti- cal Senate in the Apoftoiical Age, that the Learned'ft Sticklers for Parity can* not deny it. The Jfocaljftic Angels fa- mongft whom we juftly reckon S Pclv- carp Bifhop of Smyrna*) ihe Epiftlts to Tim thy and Titus, ;md the Catalogues of Bifhopsiuccccding tlie Apcif.es in L\eral Sees (gathered at leaft towards the mid- dle of the Second Century J make it Evi- dent beyond all Contradittiur. It is impoflible to let us lee from anyAn- cient Record either Genuine or Suppo- fitious, that there was ever any thing of Moment Canonic Ally determin'd in the Ecclefiaftical Meetings without their Bi- fhop his particular Advice and Authority. And fince Cltmtns Roman us , Orige»> and S. Cyprian do compare the Evangelical Prieuhood and Miniitrations with the Aaronical,how is it that we 094 pietend to Conclude an 1. quality amongit the Presbyters of the New Teftament from \\\^Dichbtomits us'dinChnitian Writings, no more than we can 1 >retm oJ a V u uy among the Jeuilh Priells, becaulc they are irccjucntly Dubutont^.i, Specially fince the Ancients, \ di- Vide the C'cm'v only into two I 3° An Enquiry into do again upon other occafions Subdivide the Higheft Order, and diftingui/h the Bifhop from all Subordinate Presbyters. It is true, that Clemens Romanes a Writer of the Apoftolicd Age, Divides the Clergy into two Orders, but fo he Divides aifo the Jewifh Minifters of the Sanftuary into Priefts and Levites, which no Man will allow as a Proof of the Equa- lity of Priefts under the Old Teftament; but I fhall have Opportunity hereafter to confider the Teftimony alledg'd by Blondel from S. Clement's Epiftle to the Corinthians more particularly in its pro- per PI ice. I have formerly faid, that the moll: Ancient Writers, who Dichotomize the Clergy when they fpeak of them with regard to the Laity, do yet diftin^. \* guifh them by a Tripartite Divifion,when the Hierarchy is confider'd in it felf, and with regard to that Proftafia and JuriP didtion which diftinguifhes one Prieft Tenui deBap-^ rom anot ' ler - lertullian in his Book tifmo.' de Baptifmo, hath thefe Words, Jus qui- dem dandi baptifmnm habet fummns Sacer- dos qui ei Ep if cop us, dehinc Presbyteri & Diaconi, non tamtn fine Epifcopi An* thontate, qua falva falva pax eft : Yet Monfieur Blond I runs away with ano- ther Teftimony cited from his Apologe- ticks, as if he had fcund there a perfect Equality the New Opinions, &c. 3 1 Equality of Presbyters, becaufe the Se- niores are faid to be in the Government, than which there cannot be a more ab- furd Confequence,for he neither affirm'd that thofe Seniores were all Equal among themfelves, nor is it certain, whether by the Senicres he underftood all Presbyters in General, or thofe only who were ad- vanced to the Epifcopal Dignity ; for it was no part of his Bufinefsinan Apology Addrefs'd to the Heathens to iniift on the Subordinations of one Prieft unto ano- ther, for he only pleaded that there was nothing in the Cnriftian Meetings con- trary to the ftridefl: Rules of Morality and Decency, and that they were Men of Approv'd and Exemplary Lives who wereadvane'd to any lhare of theEctle- fiaftical Government. Clemens AUxandrinus is brought as a strtmst.Lit. 4* iWitnefs to ferve the fame Defign, but then unluckily he reckons up the three Orders of the Clergy, and calls them Imitations of the Angtlicsl Gloti \ m- Upon this Occafion it is necdlefs ro name S Cyprian, who AlVerrs the Jurit- didion and Prerogative of the Epifcopal Power upon all Occafiona with gr.a: Courage and Affurance) and S. J J lycstf the Famous Do&orol theAJtsti Ch h, Biffi 3? An Enquiry into Bifhop o£Smiraa 9 and Difciple pf Saint John, who ilouriih'd long before S. Cy- prian^ though he Divides the Clergy in- to two Orders in his Epiftle to the fhi- l/ppians, yet he honourably mentions and recommends theEpiftlesof SAgn&tiiM y in which the Apoftolical Hierarchy of Bi- fhop, Presbyter, and Deacon is fo often and ib exprefly mentioned : and S. Poly- carp ia the Eyi- raphe of that Epiftle di- ftinguifhes himfeif from his Subordinate Presbyters, according to the Modeftand Ufual Stile of thofe days, Polycarp and the Presbyters that Are with him, who, if he had flood on a Level with thole Pres- byters, would never have diftinguifh'd himfeif from the Community of his Bre- thren by his proper Name plac'd at fucrj a diftance, yet with Vifible (but very Mpdeft ) Marks of Diftin&ion and Pre- cedence, according to the humble Pra- ctice of thofe Glorious Martyrs. From what hath been faid, it is very evident, that there can be nothing more Foolifh and Extravagant than to con- clude a Parity among Priefts, becaufe fbme Ancient Chriftians us'd the Jewifh Phrafeology, for even thefe upon other Occafions frequently AiTert the Jurifdt- Bion of one Bifhop over many Presbyters; And Htrmas, who was Contemporary with the New Opinions, dec. 33 yfjithCltmtns Romanas ,repro\ es the Ambi- tion of fome in his own time, who ftrove for the firft Dignity and Preferment. And if there was no fuch Precedence then in the Church, there was no ground Pati9r Htr7K4tm for his Reprehenfion. The Sum of thefe Reafbninn;s amounts to this, that when the till mfl lewis would diftinguifh the H/g'j-PrieJi from the Levites, they thought the common Name of a Pricft was fufficient, * as is * evident from (everal places in P&yk the P Jew. And as it was unrealbnable to con- clude from thence that he had not a lin- gular Authority and Jurisdiction over fubordinate Priefts, fo now-a-Days an Argument founded upon the lame Lopk, is equally Impertinent and Sophiltical. When the Priefts were com raiM amo thcrnlekes one with another, thtn their Dignities and Subordinations might I leaibnably mentioned. If we comf i the Priefts of the Hem Tefftaakeni wiih the Deacons, we need lay no more than Priefts and Deacons ; but when we O m. pare the Priefts among themiclies, wc, mult acknowledge their leveral bubordi- The Priefts under the Old 1 At lowed tu offer tl« and by their Oi&rini D diftingqifhM 54 An Enquiry into diftinguifh'd from the Levites : So under the NrwTeftament, the Priefts, both of the higheft and fubordinate Order, offer the Euchariftical Sacrifice, and by fo do- ing, are fufficiently diftinguifh'd from Deacons; yet this is no Argument againft the Subordination of one Prieft unto ano- ther. Thus we fee there was the fame Reafon for thofe Dichotomies of the Cler- gy, both under the Old and New Tefta- nient. From what hath been faid we may ea- fily fee that the Jews us'd fuch Dichoto- mies of their Clergy, both under the Mc+ faic Oeconomy^ and in the Apoflolical Age % when the fuperiority of the High- Prieft xvas paft all Contradiction : And there can be a very good account given of this I hrafeology, and way of fpeaking from the different Confiderations that engaged bdth Jewifh and Chriftian Writers to ufe the Bipartite or Tr partite Divifion of the Clergy ; for the very fame Ghriftian Wri- ters, who only mentioned two Orders, do in other places reckon up the Hierar- chy of Bifbopy Presbyter, and Deacon^ as plainly a$ is poflible. From thefe Confide* rations, Hay, we may eafily perceive, that the Argument pleaded againft Epil- copacy, founded upon fuch Dichotomies, is not only Weak, but vsry Foolifh and Extravagant. Yet the New Opinions, &c 35 YztBlondtl, Sal/nxfius jand Df/£^ Men of great Learning and Reputation, im- ploy'd much Reading and Artifice to fup- port their New Hypothefis by this Ar- gument, and to wrelf fb many places of the Fathers, to promote an Opinion which was never heard of before the Days of Jet ius 5 tho it muft be contels'd, that Men of extraordinary Learning have been impo^d upon by the lame fallacies particularly our Country-man, Sir Tko* rnas Cr*t&> in his Book de Succtfs. Reg* Angl. But if he had read the ancient Mo- numentsof Ecclefiaftical Antiquity, with that accurate Attention wherewith he perus'd the vaft Volums of Civilians, C*- nomfis, and HiftortAns, he had certainly been of another Mind. Sd vifible is the Confufton of Names in the New Teftamenr, that Jpoflle, B:f]jop % and Prefbyttr, are (ometimes mentioned without any remarkable Diftindnon, vet fb as the Government of one anwngft many, is particularly Demonftrated. Our Saviour himtelt is call'd an Apoftle,M£. 3. i.fometimes the Word feems to be re- ftrain'd to the Number ot Twelve, and Matthias, upon the Apoftacy of J$uUSj is chofen to fill up the Number of the Twelve Apoillcb} but in the fame Apofto- Jical Writings, the Name of an A.oJ c D 2 »s 3 6 An Enquiry into v. coteiinpri- jsbeftow'd upon (everal others befides the 7. E £umen. ^Twelve, as vS. S. Barnabas, Paul Andro- Corinth. nicus, ^juntas, Epaphroditus, and others. Oar Saviour is call'd a Bifhop,i Pet. 2. 25. i cor. 15.7. ^gain the Government of the Apoftles is called their Epifcopacy, 1 AS. 20. fome- timestheNameof BJhop is attributed to fuch Priefts as were ot the firfl Order, invefted with Apoftolical Power and Ju- risdiction, 1 Jim. chap. 3. Tit. 1.7. thefe places are fb underftood by all the Fa- thers. Again the Bijhops mentioned, 1 Philip. I. are underftood by St. Chryfofiom 9 Qtcumenius, TheophilaB^ and fheodoret, to be the Priefts of the fecond Order ; for they concluded Epuphroditus to have been thenBiihopof Philippic as may be reafb* , nably collected from Philip. 2. 25. Our EfjgUjh Verfion follows Beza, and under- ftandsit as if Rpaphroditus had been a Meffenger fent by the Philippians to S. ?atd\ but Salmafms is much more inge- Vfak&ft, nuous, and acknowledges, Th?t the Word Apoflk in the facred Scriptures never figniiies any other than legatnm Dei ad homines. And this is very agreeable to the Opi- nion ofTheodoret 9 who thought that when the Btjjjops were named in the Apoftolic Age, fo as to be diftinguifhed from fub- ordinatc Priefts, they were then called Jpojilesy the New Opinions, &x. 37 Apoflks, tho upon other occafions they were promifcuouOy Named without any diftinftion. I only mention this tran- ficntly , not infifting upon k. My bufi- nefs at prefent is to prove that the Com- munity of Names was fb familiar in the Language of the Apoftolical Age, that no Man can conclude from thence a Com- munity of Offices. St. Petir calls himfelf a Prefbyttrfo St. Jobnthc Apoilie,and the Presbytery mentioned in the fir ft of Ti* mothy, 4. 14. was a Senate compos'd of Apoftles anJ other Presbyters, whether of tliefirftor fecond Rank is not certain, but that S. Paul himfeit was oaeof them is evident from the fecond Epift. to Timo- thy, 1. 6. In the firft, Timothy is exhort- ed not tonegleft theGift which was given him with the laying on of the Hands of the Presbytery. In the laft he is put in mind to ftir up the lame Gift which he received by the laying ( I.PmmPs Hands. And in the begin ing of Christia- nity (asS.Cfjryfrftow Witnelseth) both Biflups and Presbyters were iometimes call'd Deacons, which may be juftly con- cluded from C ' \. }. 17. and the Apo« iiles thcmlelvesarc called 6i«' in ! in the iirft of the A8$, their Apollo! Miniftry,to whiji Mitt I : iflumpd, 1 their i 1 Act. j 7. D 3 Now 38 An Enquiry into Now I take it for granted, that if any Man pretend to infer a Community of Offices, from the Community of Names, which we meet with in the Holy Scrip- tures ; he muft needs confound the higheft Order of the Church feven the Apofto- Ucal Dignity) with the loweft Rank of Ecclefiaftical Officers. Yet this is certain that the federal Offices were carefully ft- farattd'm thofe Days ; thothe Humility of fuch as were uppermoft, taught them not to be very forward to diftinguifh themfelves from their fubordinate Bre- thren, by Titles of Eminence and Juri£ di&ion ; and the Bifhops in the fecond Century tranfcribed the fame Copy in their Behaviour, who, tho they were careful to preferve the neceffary Diftinfti- on between the Prieftsof the firft and fe- cond Order, yet they ftudied the moft modeft Expreftions of Humility and Con- defcenfion, as may be feen from the fore* cited Inlcription of S, Polycarp's Epiftle to the Philippims,i\\zt Apoftolic Martyr and Prince of the Afiatick Church. I have confider'd this Argument the more carefully, in that I find it over and over again in all the Writings of our Ec- clefmRic Levellers, as their firft and laft Refuge to which they flee to; and yet there is not any thing more Frivolous and the New Opinions, &c. %$ and Trifling; for the Names of the low- eft Officers in theChnftian Church, were frequently allum'd by the higheft, and diftinftfon of Offices is rather inrerr'd from their PraBices, Peculiar Mw/Jirics, and Jl3sofJunfdtctio»,than from any Name; that we can fix upon. Thirdly, If they cannot eilablifh their New Doctrine of Parity neither upon the exprefs Commandment of our Saviour, nor upon the Conferences they manage a eonfufyone nominum, they endeavour to fupportit by fbme Teftimoniesof the Pri- mitive Fathers. When the Government and Revenues of the Church were facri- legioufly invaded by Athtijls and Entbu- fiafts under Oliver Cromwtl, the Learned Elondel employed all his skill to make the Ancients contraditt themfelves and all contemporary Records. When his f./w Book appeared, the Presbyterians con ; eluded ( before ever they Read it ) that Vc all was Pure and Undeniable Demonftra- tion; and our Country -men think they need return no other anfwer to any thing that is written againfr. them, than to &V that Eprfcopacy, and all that may be faid in its defence, is quite RuinYl and Dcftroycdby Monfieur # W/tV, and SV- mafius. And tho there are but very lev of them that ever read them, and that every 4<* An Enquiry into every Line- of their Writings,that hath the leaft colour of Argument, was fre- quently AnfweredandExpos'd, yetfuch is the Power of Prejudice and Partiality, that they fhut their Eyes againft the cleareft Evidences that are produced by their Adverfaries. It's enough for them to (ay that Blondel hath written a Book in their Defence, of 549 pages ; and this in their Opinion may bar all Deputations of that Nature. When we bid them name the place that they think proves their New Do&rine moft plaufibly, they refufe any fuch dole Engagement; they will tell you that Jerome was of their Opi- nion, and that their Learned Champion Blondel has fufficiently prov'd that this antient Monk was a Presbyterian. I muft not transfcribe the Accurate and unanfwerable Differtations of feve- ral Learned Men, who have fufficiently expos'd the Writings of Blondel and Sal- mafiits on this Head, particularly the in- Mdjs&enMt comparable Bifhop of Chefter, yet I may be allowed to examine fbme of the moft remarkable Teftimonies from Antiquity that are alledg^d by thofe Men to fupport their Doftrine oi Parity, that the Rea- der may have a Sample of their Partia- lities and Prepoffeflions, and if none of the fir ft Worthies of theChriftian Church appear the New Opinions, &c. 41 appear for the New Do&rine of Parity, we may fafely infer, that there are little hopes to defend their caufe by the Suffra- ges of after Ages. And in the next place I will particu- larly examine Blonktl's Argument from :he Authority of St. Jerome and Demon- v ~trate that he miftakes or ( which is much nore probable ) hides and mifreprefents :he Dodrine of that Learned lather ; and f St. Jerome be not his Friend, he and his ^flbciates may defpairof any other. Ftrfty I will examine fome of the moft •emarkable Teftimonies from Antiquity, md the firft that is namM is S. Clement n his famous Epiftle to the Qorinthuns. fhis is the Celebrated S. element, lb Ho- lourably mentioned by S. Paul himfclf, A °hilif.\. }. together with fome othe: vhofe Names are Written in the Bool )f Life, who was fellow Labourer with heApoftles, and Third Bifhop of Rtmz^'f' ** >y the Teltimony or Inntus, and prbba- )ly fat in the Chair of Rome from the fear 64, until the Year 8t, or 83. He vrote his rir(t Epiftle to the Cori*thiM*s % o compofe the (candalous Divifionsand ichifms that had rifen amonq them >y the Pride and Vault} oi lome orbulcnt Brethren, who rahi'd then jives upon the miraculous Gifts ( F it, 4 2 A?i Equity into Spirit, to the Contempt of their ordina- ry Ecclefiaftical Governors. It is thought by fbme, that this Epiftle was written towards the end of Nero's Perfecution,be- fore he was advanced to the See of Rome. Biondei Ap. I* is very obfervable that Blondel be- fat.* fore he produces any Teftimony from 2^£*<#**. acknowledges, that by the m9 tejte ) fecun- umvenal confent of the Ancients, this tT fiP lZZ ver y S > Clemnt Succeeded S. Peter in the rmt; itTnl'e Government of the See of Rome ; and tho annum Domini they vary as to his Order of Succeflion, VaitZZ,l^ of them a § ree « to the thing it Udiffcnecejfefit. te\u His firft Argument for Parity is found- ed on S.Clemenfs Infcription of his Epift, to the Corinthians. *h Ikkkwa t* Gs* « ?«- From this Infcription he concludes that the Church of Rome was then GovernM by a Colledgeof Presbyters, becaufethe whole Church of Rome wrote to the whole Church of Corinth, not mentioning the Diftin&ion of the Clergy from the Laity ^ when the Learned Elondel Rea* foned at this rate, hedefign'd (itfeems) to pleafe the Independent Party, (who were then moft Numerous and Potent in England) rather than the Presbyterians. yfpol pro /wr For if his Argument proves any thing, it X" 7 '-?-?- proves too much, viz. That the Laity bam the New Opinions, &c. 43 lath an equal (hare of Juriidi&ion in the idminiftration of Ecclefiaftical Affairs; vith Bifhops and Presbyters? And thus le might conclude, that when & Paul vrote an Epiftle together with Softbencs, ''tmctheus, Sylvmus, and all the Brethren hat were with him, that he had no grea- er Authority in the Ecclefiaftical Senate, han the meaneft of the Laity. Our Learned Country-man Junius, ;ives a far more reafonable Account of his Ancient Simplicity, of the Writings f the Apoftolical Age, than fuch Child- Ti Reafonings* and he tells us that Sr. Umtnt did not prefix his Name, nt mo- e(li£ &bumilitatis pofltris xtatibus exem- lar imitandum proponent, and this was ery fubfervient to his Defign, that he flight Teach the Corinthians, fwhom he xhorts to Concord and Humility) by is own Example, that true and undii 1 uifed Modefty,which was then Co vifi- Ic in the Practice of the firil Chriftians, moa botli Clergy andj_aity were of one itart y and ont Mmd. The next attempt that hUtukf makes o fiipporc his imaginary Parity in the 'rimitivc Church, is fiom St. Clmknt's**** lo ividingthe Clergy into B/Jbops smd D..t- K MP ifVKnp7it y \- a xeyh iviSt JktifidaarTU 7|l f 077 {TxoVjr; x) &&*hti 44 An Enquiry into co»s y according to the current Phrafeolo* gy that prevail ? d in the Apoftolical Age. When they confidered the Clergy only, in oppofition to the body of the People. I haveanfweted this already, when lex- amined their Argument, founded upon fuch Dichotomies : But when we confi- der this particular place of S. Clement, with regard to that Latitude, and pro- mifcuous ufe of Names, that was very current in thofe Days, the Word Dea- con may be underftood to comprehend all thofe Minifters of Religion (whether Presbyters in the modern Notion, or Dea- cons, who by the firft Inftitution, were obliged to attend upon Tables, ) and then his Argument vanishes into nothing ; nay rather it is a ftrong confirmation oi that which he would moil willingly de- rid.J&ifs.Be-foroy. ; for by Bijhops and Deacons, we w f: Co ' /c ^may underftand Apoftles, Bifhops, PreC U. 2. p. 3 1 4 . by ters, and Attendants upon Tables ; tot the Word Deacons in the Language of the Holy Script ures r As taken in the greatefl Latitude that may be, not only for fuel as were appointed by the Apoftles, par ticuiariy to the Miaiftry of Tables, but aifo the Apoftles themfelves, thehighef Officers in the Chriftian Church, an called Deacons. Who then is Paul, ant who is Apollos, but DcacoNsfy whom the belief the New Opinions, dec. 45 believed #ven as theLord gave to ever) M*"t 2 Cv ' : 6 ' And again, who hath made as able Dea- cons of the Ntw-Tcftamtnt, &c. And up- on ocher occafions they are called 4<*»r« toft*!*, &c. And thofe who were ordainM to the fpecial Miniftry of Tables, were Originally conftituted, that the Apolt themfelves might not be diverted from the Miniftry or Dtacoxjbio of the \Yo,d.' And Tycbicus is called a faithful Deaa/^, as alfo Timothy, £0 likewife Arch:pfus is< commanded to take heed to his Deacon- ' /&//>, tho it be not exprcily detei mined, - what room he held in the Eccleliafiical Hierarchy, whether he was Bijbvp, F> byter^ or Deacon } nay liich was the Lati- tude of the Word Deacon, in the Apoito- lical Age, that it was applyed promil. louily toall the three Orders ok the Chri- itian Hierarchy. So that if weun uitand St. Clement according to the current ex- tent of the Word, we may lately Hi- him to have meant by Bijbvpa, the 1 iclcfiaftical Governors,and by fo*fflr*#*ll iubordinate Miniitcrs of Religion, wh thcr iuchas were promoted to the l'rieft- Ihood, or the Deacons who w. M to their Attendance upon Ia!>L-s. \\ advantage then does M gain to his caulc; lor tilOtlgh Ptci in An Enquiry into in the modern Notion, are not perhaps the only Perfons who may be underftood by the Word Deacon, yet they may be comprehended as well as other Minifters of a lower Rank. Let it be obferved alfo, that S. Clement fpeaks nor of the Ecclefiaftical Polity,fuch as it was brought to perfe&ion afterwards by the Apoftles, but rather of the firft be- ginnings of theChriftian Church, imme- diatly after the Refurre&ion of our Savi- our. For th6 all the Degrees and Sub* ordinations of the Apofcolical Govern- ment, were founded upon divine Right ; yet they were not in one moment efra- blilhedin their True and Everlafting Fi-> gure, but had their beginnings the Jew- ifh Church went on from leffer fteps to that more perfect Scheme that was to continue until the coming of theMefliah. This is certain, that before the Apoftles left the World* they eftablifhed fuch art Ecclefiaftical Government as ought to continue in the Church, until the fecond coming of our Saviour. But let us fuppofe that where we meet with fuch Dichotomies in other Authors, fiich a Parity as is intended by the Prefc byterians, maybe underftood ;yetwhen we view the Text of St. Cement more narrowly, we muft not prefumeto make any the JNew Opinions, &c. 47 my fuch Inference, for the very fame K.Clement Dicbotomizies the Jewifh Cler-p Jr . ( » :.. ) *y whoare known to have had their High * c , 4 1 Priejifibitf Priefts^ Prie/li, and Levitts ; yet he comprehends them all in this fhort md Bipartite Divifion. For fpeaking 0! jfjfct he hath thefe Words, 'e£ ««/*J 3«». And muft we from hence conclude^ hat there was aParity amongft the Priefb pf the Old Teftament, becaufe they are :hus diftinguifh'd from the Laity without mentioning the feveral Gradations of the Hierarchy amongft themfelves ? Nay fo tittle do our Adverfaries gain by ftraining Che Language of St. Clemtnt, contrary to the Latitude and Simplicity of the Apo- ftolical Age; that the fame Author com- prehends all Minifters of Religion, under *£■ I# - ■* one general Word, whether CT'/fe'Vo/ *#rrvfvl Apo/tles, Bifhops^ Pre/by ters y or Deacon /,™< ^flo* and not only does he thus fpeak of the n 9tS /.-*. Priefts of the true Religion, but alio of ' Ti *^®" the * Egyptian Priefts, who are known***' **' to have had their (everal fubordinati- ons. But that which is moft material to our purpofe, is that the lame St. CUmint % when he exhorts the Corinthians to Chri- ftian Order and Harmony, feis before tli- m the beautiful Subordinations uncter the 48 An Enquiry into the Temple-Service, how the High Priejl, Prie/ls, and Levites, were diftinguifhed . , ... by their Mica a«t«p^ and immediatly re- 5h commends to the Corinthians, that every one of them fhould continue * *» ijy« 7*7^77. Now when we confider thePrimitive me- thod of Reafoning from Jewifh Precc dents, St. Clement had never talked at this rate, if the Jurifdiftion of one over ma- ! ny Priefts, had been abolifh'd under the NewTeftament, and Jerome himfelf (on < rxotet m. in W ^°f Q Writings M. Blondel endeavours pr. s. cuinm. to eftablifhhis Opinion ) in his Epiftle to fttji. col. 95. Evagrius, gives light to this place of St. Clements, Et utfeiamus traditiones Apofto- lie as fumptas de veteri te (I amenta quod A a- 7 en *^Vc< from the ripecr/We?/,. and the laft may fignifie Office and Age; both together. Nor can it be an Objeftion of any weight, that the firft ( who were there Spiritual Governors J are mentioned in the plural Number, ilnce this wasari Encyclical Epiftle Addrcfs'd to Corinth, a£ the principal City ; and from thence trans-' the New Opinions, &c. 49 mitted to its dependencies. How confi- derable the City of Corinth was in thole Days, every body knows ; and S. Chry- . ^ udJun . foftom informs us, that it was Populous :;.-'. ,*c and magnificent, in regard of its Riches? I: and Wifdom, Ksu f b>M^ ,: So hrwasS.Ckntem from intending a Parity of Priefts,by his promifcuous u fe of word , that he himfelf diftinguifhes plainly the fpirituai Governors from the body of Tub- ordinate Presbyters 5 and it is furprifing to obferve how much Men may be blinded with prejudice contrary to the Univerfal fuffrage of the Ancient*, who pLce S. C/e- wtnt 16 early in the Apoftolical Succeifioii of the Chair of Rom } the Reader may fee them all in one view, prefixt to J - nius his Edition of his Epiftle to the Corin- thians. A fecond WitncR made to appear an evidence for Parity, is the venerable S. Po- lycArp^ Bifhop of Staying w ho by * Irene ' hi Bifhop of LiovL is faid to hue been ■'■' taught by the Apoitles, to have con vers with many whoh id feed artri thathc himfcli law him in his Days, atria mat he knew him to have cum, United Billion of Smyrna. Iv the 1 - Jed - $o An; Enquiry into ¥c .^r r Apoftles. ' This is he who by * S.Jerome **$ • ^o- j s ca ]i ec j /^/-///j Af/£ princeps : One would think that when they name S. Polycarp, they had difcovered fbme clear Tefti- mony in his Writings to build their Hy- pothefis upon, but inlteadof this,nothing but a wretched confequence founded up- on the Bipartite Divifion of the Clergy, mentioned in his Epiftle to the Philippi- nes .And yet the Epigraphe of S. Polycarp's Sfpiftle clearly diftinguifhes him from hispresbyters, who were then with him, whfcii runs thus, Polycarp and the Pref- byttrs that are with htm to the Church of Cod which is at Philippi. And if he had not been vefted with Epifcopal Jurifc diclion and Eminence, amongft thole Presbyters, how was it agreeable to the primitive Modefty and (elf DeniaI,to have named himfe'f only in the frontifpiece of this Epiftle, and to mention none of his Brethern, fave only by the general name of Presbyters ? This is mighty uneafie to Blondel and the evidence of Truth forces from him the following words, id tarntn in $, M.-.rtyris epijlola peculiare apparet^quod earn pr.vatim (no & Prejbytercrnm nomine ad Philippenfiam fr at emit at em dedit ac (ibi CjUandzm fnpmTrefbyteros 'r^^iw, refer- vaffe videtur ut jam turn in Epifcop*Ji apice son 4*/.f. 14- the New Opinions, &c. 5 1 conftittttHmrzlicpiGsSmyrr>tn{.umYrtib)terQS gr&dufuperaffe conycert liceat. There are two things that baffle this fhadow of an Argument brought frcm the Epiftle ofS. Polycarp. The firft is that lrtn&its, who was intimately acquainted with him, and knew him to have been taught by S. Jvbm the ^pcftie, and by him ordained Bifhop of A fate the Herefiesof the ValentintAas, from the unanimous Doctrine prelerv'J a- mongft the Tingle fucccfforsofS. 1 downwards to that very Period in vfhkh he wrote. For if the Ecelefi iftical 1V\ of the Churefi of&fcrjWM, had been e- qually lodg'din the College of Presby- , his Argument s reneks, from the S ifons, teach- ing the i le firft delu /;/;, and convey \i bj the following Bifbops ; 1 nor \ i it. The : . . > co the I Efttfilei Of S. In;.::;!. . [\ the aliened in I t 2 52 An Enquiry into which I am to fpeak in due time. The Queition then concerning S. Polycarp is, whether we are to believe S./re#*///Bimop of Lions y who was fully acquainted with the manner of his Education, Apoftolical DoCtrine, and promotion to the See of Smyrna, rather than the dark and ground- iefs conjectures of later Ages. And from this fingle Inftance alone, we fee how in- flexible and Stubborn the Power of pre- judice is, how far it drives Men againfc Light and Conviction, and darkens all their Intellectuals in defiance of common Senfe and Reafbn. A third Witnefsalledg'd by Bloxdells Her mas, (I only name fome few of thofe that are neareft to the Apoftles J I do not now enquire into the Authority of this Book. It is moft probable that it was writ- tu. Tefi. vcte- ten towards the end of the Apoftolical Age; rw'dfnnum anc ] f omc f t j ie Ancients of great Autho- e ^ oms> x "rity make him to be the fame that is men- tion'd by S. Patil, Rom. 16. 14. It is without all Controverfie, a Book of great Antiquity, as appears by the Citations cut of him, (till preierv'd in fome Au- thentick Monuments, particularly hena* us f Clemens AUxandrinus^Tertulltan, and Grigf.n. There are two palpable eviden- ces that Epifccpacy was the Ecclefiaftical Government that obtain'd in the Chri- ftian the New Opinions, &c. 53 ftian Church, when this Book was writ- ten. The firft is from ihe fecond Vifion ofthefirft Book, where rhe lending of the Encyclical Epiftle in exteras civttates^ insinuated to be the peculiar Priviiedge of S. Clement, then Bifhop of Rome. The other infinuation is from the fecond Book, and 12th Mandat. Paragr. 2. where he re- proves the prepofterous Ambition of fach as would thruft themfelve* into the high- eft dignities, contrary to the Evangelical Methods of Humility and (elf-denial, ex* alt at tnim ft, & vult priman.Catbeclr.wt b.i- here. If there be no Power, there can be no Abufe of it, and therefore he re- proves that infatiable thirlt of Preferment chat puts (ome amongft them upon Pro- jects and Defigns, contrary to the com- mand of our Saviour who taught us, that he that deferv'd the I celefialcical Promo- tion was tobetheServantofall,andthi re- fore manv of rhe Primitive B and hidthemielvcs upon the : of their being namVl to the nity. And the other Citation from B the third, Sim/littdi. inGnuates 1 ly (ame thing that I intend, vix,.^ Prin- r/^4#«/tbcneuablifbedasthe fixe i m ment ut the Church which iom WO too 54 An Enquiry into Let us now hear the main Argument as it is propofed by Mr, Blondel from v. Not. si thefe words in the third Vifion ii fnnt Udit.Oxm: Apoftoli & Epifcopi, & Doclores & Mini- y?r/,&c. Hence he concludes, that the DoUores can be no other than the Epifcopi, and fb there are but two Orders below the Apoftles Epifcopi & Mini/trt. This is Tergiverfation with a Witnefs, fince the Presbyters of the Primitive Church are frequently diftinguifhed by the Name v. ittujtrijf. °f Doctors, as in the Martyrology of San- Epifc.cep. eta Perpttua & exivimus & vidimus ante V p^ c 2 SJ f na fores opt at urn Epifcopum ad dexter am & it i. Afpafium Presbyter um Doctor em ad Sini- fir am* And S. Cyprian in his 24 Epiftle qttando cum Presbyterk Dcctoribm lee tores diligenttr proharemus. The fame Phrafe is us'd by Tertullian alfo, before S. Cypri- an y and not only in the Writings of the Primitive Ages, but alio in the Hiftories of 'ater Times, we find the word (Doctor) made ufe of to fignifie a Presbyter Sub- ordinate to a Bifoop, Thus Radulphus de Baldoc, Bi/hop of London, cited by the Learned Vfber in his Antiquities of the Bririfh Churches, PLcnit eofdem legatos Ecc l e ^ bap' ; zi>i,y, Catholic* Fide f [stpta, ordi- Britan. p. 27. nar E':i wob in Ep'ifcopumfiledwinum &&• t i rem. And the word is taken in the fame Senfe by Galjridns Monemu- The the New Opinions^ &c. 5 5 The whole ftrength of B.'ondefs Ob- jection, founded upon this TeiHmony bf Htrmas, lies in a Si Jy and Fraudulent Trick that he would put upon his Rea- der, when he endeavours to Diftort the words in Httmas his Text, fitorrt their Natural and Genuine Conftruftion, to fomcthing that is more fubfervient to the New Doitrine. The words in bhr- P mas run thus, if fnnt AtaftoH & Epifcopt; & Doclores & Mimftn, c in cl & docticrtat. cr uiraft dvtrun: f.vicl? ;//, Sec. From thefe YY is, that there are but two Degrees of • Clergy named after the Ape Aliv.y i t ft m Deft \ copes ... . Violence Tcxr, for the e 1 p b6- irn E 4 As S^ An Enquiry into As for the Testimony cited from Pope Tius the Firft his Epiftle to Juftus Vien- nenfu, it deferves no particular Confide- ration, the Epiftle it felf being Suppofi- titious; and though it were Genuine, the words Pleaded by our Adverfaries do only recommend Humility to the Bijbop of l r ttn y and by no Confequence do they infinuateany Equality between him and the Preshyttrs whom he Governed, non fit majorem fed at mini ft rum Chrifti te 06- \ fervent, which is nothing elfe but a Chri- j ftian Imitation of thefe Words of our Saviour, let him be the Servant of all. jspoif.i^ Another Inftance alledg'd by the Pres- byterians is this, that when the Htretic Mweion came toRome,\n the Vacancy of the Aee,after the Death of Hjginus before another was chofen totheP0jtf//foi/e,t;his Heretic, I lay, being Expeli'd by his own Father, who was a Bifhop, both from his Society and Ecclefiaftical Communi- on, Pleaded with feveral of the Col- lege of Presbyters that he might be re- ceived into Communions and from thence Blond'd concludes that the Power of re- ceiving into the Church fuch as were Ex- communicated by the Epifcopal Autho- rity was lodg'd in the College of pres- et rs\ fifowever, he was deny'd Com* ! inion, becaufe they would not receive him the New Opinions, &cc. $y him without his Father's Allowance and Approbation : and the behaviour of thofe Grave Presbyters is a better Precedent to regulate our Opinions and Pra&ices than the Petition of a Lewd and Profligate Heretic. Nevertheless, it is very certain, that during the Vacancy of the See, the Pres- byters at Rome, and in all other Churches, night manage the ordinary Polity and Diicipline of the Church, though they never medled with iuch Special Afts of Jurifdi&ion as were always referv'd by Conftant Pradice and Primitive Inftitu- rion to the Epifcopal Order. From this piece of Hiftory, no Man in his Wits will conclude that the whole Ecclefiaiiical Jurildittion was then ledg'd in the College tiVresbyttr*, though they might prcferve Jbme Order m the See until another was chofen : nor js it pof- Ible for the Presbyterians to ir.fiance in any Church, that ever the College of freshtcrs attempted to perform the l-pi- [copal difttaguifbing Ails of JunuUdion, BVCfl when t was Vacant, chough they might od did manage the Ore nary Difcip r.e of lh I prion ious Method unti . as chofen. N i .1 that \\ ( r \byi 5 8 An Equity into at Rome might receive Marcion into their Communion when the See was Vacant, if they proceeded Canonically, and up- on evident figns of true Repentance and Contrition. I hope from hence no Man will conclude, that they would have Enterpriz'd any thing of this Nature and Confequence if their Biflhop was alive, or if another had been chofen in his room. As for the Teftimony cited from Jnftin Martyr, it is obvious to all who Know the defign of his Apology to An- tomimS) that he intended no more than to give the Emperor a true Account of what was Ordinarily performed in the Chriftian Meetings, in Gppofition ta the Scandalous and Abominable Stories that were daily Propagated againft them by their Enemies ; fo that when Jaftin Martyr pleads for the Innocence of the Chriftian Affemblies, he had no occafioii to reckon up the feveral Gradations of the Ecclefiaftical Hhrwchy, being only then concern'd to vindicate their Meet- ings from the Pagan Libelis. He gave the Emperor an Account of the Purity of their Worfhip, that they could not at all be charg 7 d with Sedition, Fa&ion, or/ thofe other Impieties, as were ordinarily talked againft them. Eefides the New Opinions, &c. 5^ Jefides all this, it is very well known n (hy the firft Chriftians were to pub- I any thing relating either to theMy- ics of their Religion, or the Confti- ion of the Church, more than was blutely NecefTary in their own De- ce againfi the Reproaches of the athens; lb that there can be noth. eluded from Juftin Martyr's mention- onlyi\\ii~\.\vo Orders of the Clergy in t Paragraph, inlifted on by our Ad ver- ges, but this 5 that then he had no O - ^on to inform the Heathens how the riftian Priefti were diftinguifh'd ( II another, with regard to their Au- rity and Jurilcliclion ; but who^v^r thern did Officiate in the PUSli tings, their Behaviour was Innocent Holy, and mod oppofite ro what > represented againtt them bv t l feed AcculJrs : and ir is very bard to ge a Man, that whenever he rrten- s a Prieft, he fhould give a parrii - Account what Rank I the jrch s whether he wa i a ord n Lyt Chrifli i &ni [tint : & devoti funt Serapi y qui jj Chrifti Epifcopos dicunt. Nemo iHic M l chifynagogtu Jud*orum y nemo Samaritet nemo Chrijiianorum Presbyter, non Mathi , maticus, non arufpex, non aliptes. It is altogether Naufeous to repeat all . more. This filly Quibble founded upoi I fuch Dichotomies of the Clergy as nod and then occurr amongft fome Anciet ,? Writers, for the Names as well as tl Offices were diftinguifhed in the earlie< Monuments of the Church, as you ma u fee in the A£ts of S. Ignatius his Martyl vauftifs. s. dom. Honor ab ant enim Sanctum per Ep \ ignat. atfa a-copos Presbyter os & Diaconos Afi* Civil fudVfer. Us ^ Ecele fa And Clemens Akxandx f . (D2 »//*, TertuUian^ and Ortgen, reckon the three Orders plainly, and witbo any Confufion of Names, when th would Diftinsuifh one Prieft from an there It is needlefs to mention here, wl ? our Adverfaries alledge from Papias J (bop of Hierapolis, who wa? the Com| A i i i in the New Opinions, &c. 6\ ion of S. Polycarfa who wrote all his Treatifes from the Accounts that he had rom older Men that were before him, whether B/fbops, Preshyttrs^ Deacons, or .ay-men % many of whom were Eye-wit- effes of our Saviour ; but becauie they re once named nf^^-n^/, with regard b their Age, not their Office, they im- mediately conclude them to have been 11 Presbyterians, afting in a perfect ♦quality amongft themfelves. For, Pa* 4** *£'• iai does not confider their Ecclefiaftical l " yhara&er and Subordination, but only ills us, that thole from whom he had is Intelligence were Ancient Men, who ad Conversed with the Firft, and Im- mediate Apoftles of our Saviour. The Power of Prejudice is uncon- uerable. How Miferablc is their Con- ition, who make it their Bufinefs to ead the Ancients with no other Defign han to Diftort their Words from their [fcnuincManing and Orignal Intention, f Men had not Ibid themfelves Unhap- pily toierve die Intcrcits of Little Tar- bfoiw could they fluit their \ gainft the Exprcft Tefti monies of thofc Jathers, whole broken Sentences the b much Torture and Abufc, to fupp< i heir Novelties, and by Wretched Con-' icnccs force them to i iy I lat th< ^ 2 An Enquiry into they neither knew nor ever heard of! And I would gladly defire the Serious and Attentive Reader to make an Efti* mate of the Presbyterian Candour (as tc their Citations from the Ancients) frond two Inftances that they infift upon. The firft is that of the Gallic an Martyr si their Epiftle to Eieuthtrm Bifhop of Ron* in which they recommend Ire/7*us, whc was then but Presbyter of the Churcl of Lions: (for Fothin'iM was not yet dead, The Diftindtion of Barnes and Offices is ft evident in that Ancient Monument ( .* great part whereof is fo happily Pre, ferv'd by E'tfekius} that Blondel knev not what to do with it. And not onh TLuftbius % but Jerome alfo had the Au < : thentic Letters of the Martyrs of Lions ^ and of the Church of Vitnne and Lyon: to the Churches of Afia and Pbngi.^ Fm; vc only that wretched Q il We of tlic \1part1tt: Divifion oi the ( I tten already ex] os ,1 , 1 Book extant tl . : 'hi Autl 1id Un< \\priA,i . 10ri pqutluoOftble as the And to cite Pa; Monies isalcogethe » v ^4 A?i Enquiry into was theconftant Refolution of SCyprhti toExercife hisEpifcopal Authority with the Advice of both Clergy and Laity, yet none ever Afferted or Diftinguifhed the Epifcopil Honour and Dignity more Solidly and Qearly than he did. And indeed, if the later Schifmaticks were at' the pains to read him, they would ne^ ver give us any more Trouble about him. I hope this is fiifficiently difcufs'd before, now by another hand, to whom I refer the Vindicator of the Kirk of Scotland for Chaftifement and Edification. Thus I have glanced at fome of the Principal Objections that are darted a- gainft the Hitrarchy^ from the Teftimo* [ e nies of the Firft Ages • but the Plain Truth is, fuchaswe have to do with, do difparage the Ancients, as incompetent Judges, and decline to be try'd by their Writings. But if they are not WitnefTes in a Matter of Fa£fc relating to the Go. vernment and Polity of the Church, the^ are nothing at all.* and if they have nci rrananitted to us the Ecclefiaftical Pra ctices and Conftitutions of the Fir Ages, we muft believe no Hiftories no; Records, There are twoTeftimoriies that I hav not yet confider'd, that our Adverfarfes are moft confident oft and which upon all J; k 8flC M toll the New Opinions, &c. 6$ all Occafions they cite as the undoubted Regifters of Presbytery, and therefore I will examine them more narrowly 5 and if they do not Prove their Ecclefiaftical Parity from thofe, they mud defpair to find any Shelter for their Novelties a- mongft the Ancientb. The Firft they cite with fb much Tri- umph and Oftentation isS. Jerome, who (as they fay) was the undoubted Patron of Presbytery in its full Extent and Lati- tude; therefore M. Blundd entitles his Bookie Epifcopit & Presbyttrk, his Apo- , logy Pro SenttntiA Hicronymi, as ir the Presbyterian Doctrine had been certainly efpous'd by S. Jerome. At this rate his Contemporaries were very much to be blam'd, who plac'd Atrtw amoogft the Htrtticks, and yet upon all Occafions make Honourable mention or S. J ? ■ if he taught the feme Doftrmefor u liich jkritu was Condemned as an Htrttic, The Tcftimonies infilled on frqm \\ Writings ofS. Jerome, are tl. ifi bis Commentary upon tin to r, publifhM in the \ he feems to Affert t! \ / and . on which our A I to j the whole Superftru&m Parity, Diligtnter Ai i* m 66 An Enquiry into mm dicenti* tit confiituas per civitates Fresbyteros, ficut ego tibi difpofui, qui t quaiis Presbyter debeat ordinart tn confe- quentibus differ ens, hoc ait, fi qnis eft fine crimine^ nnius Uxor is vir^ &c. Poftea in* titlit) opportet enim Epifcopum fixe crimine . effe tanquam Dei dijpenfatortm ; idem efl ergo Presbyter qui & Epifcopus, & ante* quxm Dink oli inftinliu jiudta in Religione fhrcnt, cr dictrttur in fopulis, ego ftim Paul/ ^ ego Apclloj ego ant em Cepba, com* muni Presbyterorum confilto Ecclefia guber* nabantur. Poftquam vero unufquijque eos quos baptizaverat fucs putavit effe, non Cbrifti 3 in tcto or be dtcretum eft ut ttnm de Presbyter is ekffus fuperponeretur c£te- rfc, ad quern omnis Ecclefia cur a pertineret 9 & Schiftnatum femin.t tollerentnr. And a little after, he endeavours to prove this Identity of Bifhop and Presby- ter from i Philip, i. A3. 20. I Epift. S: Pit. and the Epiftle to the Hebrews. The, Texts that are ordinarily infifted on tc prove the Presbyterian Parity. Next, he adds the following words [a Trite propter ea ut oftenderemm apnd vet ere. eofdemfuffe Pres by teres qucs & Epifccpos P art /at 1 m verb, ( ut diffenfionum Plant art, evclkrentur) ad nnkm oinnem folic it udir.tn % effe deUtam. Si cut ergo Presbyter i fcittnti fc ex Ecc/efij conf.ietndine ei qui fib i prd *i pofiitn the New Opinions, (Sec £7 tiofitus futrit ejfe fnbjeciosy it a, tpifcopi ne- ver int fe mag'.s covfuttudint quam d fpo- fitionis dominie £ vet it At t Presbyter is tJJ'c waJ0ref 7 & in ctmmuhe dtLtrt E :!US twpi I I Je quern in n 7tm 68 An Enquiry into man a urbis Ecclefia, altera t otitis orb is afti- mmdaeji: & Gallia, & Britannia, dr Afri- ca, ejr Ptrfes, & Oriens, & India, & ent- ries Barbara n at tones unum Cbriftum ado- rant, unam obfervant reguiam veritdtis. Si aiSoritas qvxratur orbis, major eft urbe ubicunque futrit Epifcopus^ five Roma, five Eugubii, five Conftanttnopoli, five Rhegii, five Alexandria^ five Tanis ejuf- dem meritiy ejufdem & Sactrdotii, pot en' tia divitiarum, & -pxupertatts bumilitas *vel fublimiortm zel inferiorem Epifcopum non facit. Ctterum omnes Apoftolorum fuccejjores funt. Again, in the fameEpiftle to Evagr/w, , Presbyter & Epifcopus, aliud ALtatn, ali*> ad dignitatis eji nomen, t/nde & ad Tttum & ad Timotheum de Ordinatione Eptfcopi & Diaconi dicitur, de Presbyteris omnino reticttur, qui in Epifcopo & Presbyter continetur, qui prwehitur a minori ad ma- jus provehitur, aut igitur ex Presbytera ordjnttur Diaconm, aut Presbyter minor^ Diacono comprobetur in quern crefcat ej parvo ) aut ft ex Diacono -ordinatur Pres x byter, xovtnt ft her is ?ninorem facer dot to tjje major em, 0* tit fci.imus Traditionei Aiofrolicas fumptas de vettri Ttftatnent quod Aaron & filii ejus at que Levitt in temflo faerttnt hoc fibi Epifcopi & Pres* byteri atqne Diaccni vend/cent tn Ecclefia. From P. the New Opinio?is, 6cc. 69 From thefe Tefti monies of S. Jei thus gathered together, we Firjt, That he thought thai: before the Contentions broke out in the Apofto'i' Church of Corinth^ Eccl ft* c rnmtm Pres- byt trot urn confilto gubt, n in this Period, the Apofti Churches they had Planted by t 1 Perfbnal and Apoftolical Authority^ until they had appointed others among ft thei , upon whom they devolved the Eccl( aftical Jurifdi&ion. Secondly^ This 'evident, that as S. Jerome thought that the Superintendence of Bill Presbyters was occafion'd by theCotitc tions that a role among the CoriMthuns 5 fo he though: that this Remedy of Schifin , . the Promotion of one above man was appoint ed by the Ap >ftles them andthatit was notth. I A >. S. J rome n there was a Period of the Church, iq which alter theApoftles wt Ecclei JuriidL: »*d in a College ol Pi heir lever il i ut : ftoli il Ch parity of P ftakc) yetf An Enquiry into found the inconvenience of this equality, and therefore appointed ut unus propone- nt ar ceteris. The ftate of the Controverfie then be- tween us and the Presbyterians as to the Poftrine of S. Jerome is this, whether he thought,or ever wrote that for fonte Years after the Apo files had left the World, the Government of Chriftian Churches was ■lodg'd in the Colledgeof Presbyters ; or whether he plainly affirm'd, thattho the Ecclefiaftical Affairs were managM in the beginning of the Apoftolical Plantations, Communi Prefbyterorum confilio, yet this Polity was afterwards changed by the Apoftles themfelves, and the Epilcopal Prefidency and JurifdicJion of one over many Presbyters, was eftablifh'd by the Apoftolical Authority t SotheConjefture of S. Jerome is nothing of kin to the er- rour of. the Presbyterians. Blondel faw that this was truly the Do£trineofS.jfer0tfze,andconfequent!y his ». Voluminous Apology is rather the defence of his own Opinions, than thole of any of the Ancients; therefore he enters his cau- tion, that none fhould think that the Apoftles themfelves appointed the Reme- dy of Schifm, mentioned by him, which he does not allow to have prevailed in the Church, before the Year 140. But this is the New Opinions^ &c. 7 1 is it that I intend to prove from the writ- ingsof S. Jerome y that he thought that Epif- copacy as Prafti^'d and Underftood in his own Days, was appointed by Apoftolical Autkority, and therefore the Doctrine of S. Jerome is not fairly and ingenuoufly re- prefented by Blond J and S.ilwafiHs. This appears, Fir/l, from the occafion of the Change that was introduced in the Eccldiaflical Government, according to the Opinion of S. Jtrcm? : The Reaibn why the Ee- clcfialtical Parity was aboiifh'd, and Pre- lacy introduc'd,\\ e-e thole DiJputes in th j Church of Ctrmthi and therefore l) change made, muft needs be b\ Apofto- lical Authority, and not by the determi- nation of later Ages. 1 hey only had Power to erect the Ecclcfiaftical Fabrick upon the beft Foundations ; and they C much more careful alous to prevent t!ie Conf prs that might befall the ( ind Divifions,than their SueceBbrs. This is it that S. Jcr^m plainly drives at, w ! arolein i d could h 1 | 7 2 An Enquiry into ginal of Divine and Apoftolical Authori- ty : Who could impofe Laws upon the Chriftian Church, difperfedinall Coun- tries but fuch as were inverted with Pow- er from above, to°o and Teach all Nati- ons ? There was no general Council cele- brated in the Chriftian Church before the firft Council of Nice ; no Meeting that could pretend to give Lawsto all Chrifti- ans 5 and it is hard to (ay that allChurches would have cheerfully fubmitted in this cafe, even to xhzDecifions ofanOecojnenic Synod, and therefore thePhrafein S.jFe- rome Toto orbe decretum, cannot be refer'd to any thing that is later than an Apofto- lical Tradition } no other Decree would have been univerfally receiv'd, none elfe could oblige all the Churches 5 fo S. ^e- rome affirms,that when the Apoftles them- felves perceived the Difeafe,they applyed a proper Remedy, for they only could do It with Succefs and Authority : Which Apoftolical Conftitution in his Commen- taries on the Epifcle toTitus, he calls con- faetudo Ec'clefi*, which he diftinguifhes. from the Di/ppfttioms dominies Veritas! meaning that the Prelacy of one Prieft above many, was introduced rather by Apoftolical Pra^ice, than the Perfbnal Mandate of omEljjcd Saviour. Sicond!j % fhe New Opinions, dec. 73 Secondly, let us confider S. Jtrom's ac- :ount of the Conftitutions or the parti- :ular Church of Alexandria that a Mir- Evangelifia ufque ad Her ac lam & Dic- lyfivrn, &c. The cuftom was even from he Days of S. Mark theEvangelift, that 1 Presbyter waschofen who Govern'd the .vhole Society. This, in the Opinion of 5. "Jerome, cuts off that imaginary inter- nal, wherein the Church is (aid to have >een Govern'd by a Parity of Presbyters. lalm.tfius was aware of this, and there- ore here he leaves S. Jerome ; for if the Hierarchy was prcferv'd in the Church of Alexandria from the Daysof S. Mark, then he pretended Period of Parity vanifhes, he C/jafma is doled up , and the three Drdersof Uifljop^ Prtftjter^ and Deacon, re trae'd to their Apoftolical Original, \nd when Salmafi ts cites thisTeftimony J rome, he adds thefe words; dutcm a Ma A I Xindrind Ecclefid r reor 10 5> (>r, that is to fay, whatever 1. IrhisAflociates might [cfol her Opinions very lifferent from t 1 by s r- ta carlo, r M from and it 74 A." Equity into We needed not to have infifted upor this, if our Adverfarks had read with Attention the conclufion of his famouj Epiftle to Evagrius, Et ut fciamus tradl tiones Apoflolicas fumptas de veteri tefta mento, quod Aaron & filii ejus at que Le< vita in templo f iter tint hoc fibi epifcopi Prejbyteri atque diaconi vendicent in Ec clefia,\v\\zrz two things are aflerted. Fir ft that the Hierarchy of the Chriftian Churcl is founded upon Apoftolical Tradition Secondly^ that the Apoftles had the mode of the Temple in their view, when the 1 ere&ed this Platform and Polity in th Church, which is evident from man; other Obfervations that may be madi from the Original Plantations of Chriftiaj nity ; for the Bifhop was the fame in th Church, as the High Prieft was in th Temple, and our Saviour introduced n change but fuch as neceffarily did refuli from the Nature of the Evangelical Oc conomy, which he was to eftablifh in th roam of theLevitical Worfbip,and therq fore you find the mod ancient Writer reafon (b often from Jewifh Precedent to regulate the Pf a&ice of the Chriftian as Clemens Romanus^ and Barnabas. Let us confider that S. Jerom in his Cat A /or us Script or W/n Ecclefiafiicorum^ciZQS th Geniuine Epiftles of S, Igvatius^m whic Epiftl the New Opinions, Sec. 75 Epiftles the Divine Original and Inftitu- ion of Epifcopal Eminence and Juris- li&ion, above Presbyters is frequently ind plainly exprefs'd. And : us 1 Herts that the Epiftles of S. Ig»sti*i are iippofititiousiyet he granc , that thofe vhich we have now trom the M.dicean library, were the very fine Epiftles vhich Eufehius and Jerome took to be the Senuin Epiftles of S. Ignatius, and there- ore whatever might be the Opinion of >.Jerom } as to the fir ft Original of Epii- opal Eminence and Authority ; yet when ve find him citing the Epiftles of S. Tg- *attns, as the genuine Work* of f hat Ho- y M*rtyr y it mufebe acknowledged, that M drcam'd of auy interval alter the poftles, wherein the Church was £0- ernM by a Parity of Prtflytirs. The I of Jtrom in the foremenru ■okj are thefe, Igtutius An kfid tertuis pojt [\trnm ApojloLim Ef C fCr/ci I I .. mrutus ad Bcftias^Romai.. rittu r, cumqug navioans Smyrnam veni(ft t . miitor 'johufi/jn EfifcoPMS tr.it y rtpfit unam Efijtoldm ai EfbeJ Um ad . \noty tertiam ad I r.i/A//fchifms that arofe in the Apoltolical Churches, is evident from his Words in lis Commentaries on the Epiftle to Titus ; P } oJi [ qu nmvero Hnufquifque eos qttos bapttza- verat fttos putavit ejfft noncbrijitjntotoorle iter tt am t(l> ut units, &c. In which words, :he Remedy againlt thofeConfufions, (in 'he Opinion of S. Jercmi*) was no longer Jelay'd, than the Dilcaie appear'd. lc> :crtain that S. Jerome was in an errour when he thought that at any time the phurch was Governed by a Parity of Pres- byters, for no fiich thing can be affirmed p\ the Apoftolical Age. The Apoiiles ihemfelves in Perfon Govern'd the Churches that they Tlanted and com- mitted tofingle Perfbnsthe Jr. (pLftion of them, when the public NeceaTitiesob 1 !^! them to remove toother places ; and tl fame Authority wuseommitted to others their Sueceifors, until the en.! of the World. But when we \ iew S« / ro n on all quarters, wc find nothing in his Sen- timents th it can he Iti ac Presbyterian Bypothefis ; for lie derivM the 78 An Enquiry into theSucceffion of Bifhop from the Apo fries, and knew no Interval of Parity after they left the World. Hitherto I have endeavoured by fair and immediate confequence to prove front the Writings of S.Jcrom, that he never thought of any fuch interval, after the Death of the Apoftles, in which EccSe- fiaftical Affairs were tranfi&ed, communi Prefbytervrurn confilio. I now go forward to prove that he expreileth no lefs him- felf plainly and in fo many Words ; and i here Imighttranfcribea great part of his Book entituied, Catalogns Serif tor urn Ea\ cleft ajlicorum, where fuch and fuch emi- nent Lights of the Church, are faid to have been ordain'd Bifhops of fuch Sees, iirtmediatly by the Apoftles themfelves. Thus S. James, qui aff-lUtur ff'it&r DfiMtft mcognomento J /> ft us y is faid to be ah Apeftdi lis Hierofolymornm BPffcoprts dtdwatHS i and Timotbj ordainM Bifhop of Efhefiu by S. fakl) and 3. Polycarp Bifhop oS Smyrnt > by S. Johx. Again, in his fc- cond Epiftte to ffiptftMUti f(lo SubjtBns Tontifisit-iO, &qu&(i animx ? arentem fnf- ape, cftind Ajroff & fiiios ejus bos Epifco* fnm & PrtfLyte} os effe never imus. And in in his 54Epiule he diftingnifhes xhtMon* txn^fts from the Catholi(kj in this, that amongft the Noztawjls* a 'Bifihp held Oi1 : V the New Opinions, &c. 79 )nly the Third room ; apudeos Epifcopns 'trtius eft. but that amongft the Catho- Ucks 9 apttd nos Apoflolorum locum Epifcopi v tntnt, and in his Commentaries on the irft of Titus, Apoftohts Ecclefia principem ( ormans. So he underftood that the Di- -eftions given to Titus in that Epiftle, tveredefign'd byS.P.W, to form an Ec- :lefiaftical Prince or Governor. Again, n his 13th Epiftle to Paulinns^Epifccpi & Presbyter i hnbe.tnt in exemplum Attofto- f os & Apoflolicos z'iros. qu;rum huncrem „.. , /r r i i ' Wljidetttes b. there n it ant nr rjr mt riturn. Hsmmmd From all thefe Teftimonies we plainh lee how difi genuoufly our Adverfaries J c i rcprefent the Opinion of S. Jervfo, who never affirmed any Identity between \Bijhcp and Prcjhttr, but what was purely nominal, fince he referv'J peculiar Afts of Jurifiliftion, to the Epifcopal Order, f especially Ordirt4tion 9 tyhich Power was never allowM to any fubordinare Prcbby- tcr. ) Now if this be the Doctrine of S. 7>- rom, that I'ifhops hold the room of the Apoftks, that id the Catholic Church they are in Poiililion of the Apoflolu Honour, that from the begintfiog, their Authority over partltufai" Churches v> cftablifhed by the A[ hat it is i jofliblet 8o An Enquiry into Schifms, unlefs there be granted to the #ifhop txors qu&daw & ab omnibm in Dialed, emiitnspoteftas, that in the framing thij wr/ Lucifer. Ecclefiaftical Hitrarchv, they had an Eye to the Jewifh Polity of the Temple, thai the Bifhops prefiding over Prefbyters it their feveral Divifions, are the Sons 01 Heirs or Succeflbrs of the Apoftolical Dig- nity. Pray ? What can be more faid for the Epifcopal Power, maintain'd anc preferv'd in the Catholic Church, that what hath been aflerted by S, Jtrom, Now it is certain, that in the Opinion of the Prefbyterians, none ever affirm'c their Parity fo clearly as S. Jerome ; anc therefore he is nam'd in the Front amongft all their Partiz^s, as if theii New Do&rine had been plainly deliverec by him. From this fingle Inftance one may fee their Method of Treating the Fathers, whom they force into their Serf vice, contary to their Original meaning and intention. I have infilled the longer upon thi; Authority, that the Reader may fee how uniucceisfully they are like to manage this Controverfie, if they appeal tothtfn Ancients. But St. Jerome is n:t the only Mar they ibufe : St. Auftin trull come in foi his {bare, Blondtl and Salnufws raife grea. the New Opinions, &c. 8 i great deal of Duft to make People believe that they have fome Footing for their New Hypothecs in his Writings ; and not only they, but ail the little Buffoons of their Party take it for granted, that the great Bifhop of Hippo was a Presby- terian. His Name is (o much the more Confiderable, that he was the Celebra- ted Do&or of the Church againft the Pelagians and Donatifis. And if they can Prove that he was of their Opinion, we are like to hear of it with all poffible Oftentation; but as III Luck would have it there was no Presbyterian in that Age exceptor////* All that the Patrons for Parity contended for in the beginning was no more than to write Apologies for their New Model, as a thing that might be tolerated with regard to the Difficult and Uneafie fituationof their Affairs in ibme Reformed Churches. But amongft us the Humour fermented much Higher, and theOppofition to the Ancient Government was lb Violent, hit the New Scheme of Paritv mult need; be AfTerted to derive its Original from Exprefs, F(fitf:>t, ant) iWi * \ i- horitv. There is hardly ;mv thtogrtfore nithinrr, than to lee io inahy Bo ks written upon Inch a Conrootwfie. It K'C believe the Ecclcfi altical Records, Cj there §2 An Enquiry into there remains no Debate but that the Univerfal Church has deriv'd this Hie- rarchy of Bzfiop, Presbyter^ and Deacon^ from the Apoftles. If we do not believe thole ancient Monuments, I am afraid our Sctpticifm may (even by Natural Conlequence ) pull down things more Sacred than the outward Hedge of Go- vernment. Matter of Faff cannot be convey'd to Pofterity but by Ttftimony : and if the Univerfal Church deliver this Difcipline, as a thing not introduc'd by Councils (either Provincial or Oecume- nic,) but rather as a thing received with- out Interruption, from the firft Planta- tions of Chriftianky ; How Impious muft it be to change this Apoftolical Order, for the later Dreams of Unmortified and Factious Men, who have nothing more in their View than to gratifie their Re- venge and other Paffions. To refift the Univerfal Confent qf the Church, in a Matter of Fatf, is the higheft ftep of Impudence and Irreligion. The Roman Orator tells us, that Omni in re confenfm Tufiui. qw8> omnium vox nature eft. So by Propor- tion the Uniform Confent of all the Ancient Churches is Fox Evangelii. But to return from this Digreffion, Blonde I and Salmdfius cites a Sentence or two from S, Anjiin, which they endea- vour the New Opinions, &c. 83 Vour to wreft from its true and OrigU nal meaning, as if that Eminent Father had faid, that the Authority and Juris- diction of a Bifhop above a Presbyter, was introduced by (bme Canonical Con- ftitutions later than Apoftolical Practice, That I may remove this Obje&ion, I will in the firft place fet down the Tefti- mony alledg'd from S. Au(tm in favour of Ecclefiaftical Parity. Secondly, I will let you fee that the later Sectaries miftake the Meaning of S. Aujlin^ and the Phrafe upon which they found this trifling Ob- jection. Thirdly, I fhall exprefly Prove from the very fame S. Axfiix, that he thought the Succeflion of Bithops go- verning Ecclefiaftical Affairs within their own Diftri&s continued in the Church from the days of the Apoftles, and there- fore he never dream'd of any fuch Pe- riod, in which Ecclefiaftical A^airs were governed by a Parity of Presbyters. As to the firlt of thefe, the Teftimony cited from S.Aujvin by Salmafucs is to be found in his 19th Epiftle addreifed to Si. Jerome, the occafion of ic was this. S. . Auftin invited S. Jerome to all pollible freedom in their Epifto'ary Converfari- on, to the end that the Difficulties that might occur to either, in reading the Holy Scriptures, might be fairly pronosM, O 2 without #4 An Enquiry into without either Ceremonial diftance or referve : And therefore S. Jerome is en- courag'd to take no Notice (in a manner^ of S. Auflin his Chara&er as a Bifhop, but that he might accoft him with all poffible Eafinefs and Freedom, that fo they (both of them) might with the greater fuccefs aflift one another, and Edifie the Chriftian Church by their Ex- plications of the dark Places of Scrip- ture: Therefore S. Aufiin hath thefe Words, Atqae identidem rogo ut me fiden- )pp.i$, ter corr jg aSf ti li mt l)i hoc pif S e jJ t p erm fpextris ; qnanquam enim fectmdum hone* rum vocabula^ qu£ jam Ecckfice nfus obtinu-' it, Ep'fcopatus Preset trio major fit^ tamen in mttltk rebus Attgtiftinns fiirmymo mi- ner eft 5 licet etiam a minore quolibet non fit refugienda. ml dedignandd corrtUio. From this Fatherly Condefcenfion they mull needs conclude St. Auftin to be a Presbyterian 5 becaufe he was Civil and Mannerly, he muft therefore be Degra-* ded from his Epifeopal Dignity : for he intended no more but that, tho Epifcopa- cy was higher than the Presbjterate, by the conftant Praflice of the Univerlal Church} yet St, Jerome was preferable' to St. Anftin by theaccomplifhments that he acquired. That this may more fully appear to bs his Meaning, let us confix der the New Opi?iio?is,8>cc. 3$ der fecondly, that our Adverfaries think their Modern Notions were fignified by fuch Words as they meet with in the Ancients, when they do not take heed that the Ancient apply'd thofe word* to fignifie things very different from what the later Ages have invented. lor St. Jtifiin meant no other thing by ZJ/us Ecc/tfi£ than xhsVaivtrfal PraBtce of the Chriftian Church from the begiqnia and this Notion is very familiar to him, viv.Thzt Catholic and Vniverfal Cuftouis had their Rife from Apoftolical Autho- rity. He indeed fome where complain'd that there were many Ullages crept into the Church in his own clays, both Bui then- fome and Llneafie j but fuch Ceremo- nies were not Introduc'd by the Early and Univtrfal Practice of the Church ; they knew for the mod part their Origi- nal, and the particular Occafions of their Inftitution, the Authority of fuch a P or the Canon of fuch a Council; and (here* fore S. An [I in thought it not Convenient that the Church fhou'd I e Over-char. with fuch Ritual Oblervaaces, asiaighc divert the Piety and Attention of I People. But ioc fqch GifToms an I C n- Jlitutions as were rcceivM Univerlii'iv in allChurthej»,from the vcryfirfl C J 86 An Enquiry into of the Gofpel, thofe he always confix der'd as Sacred and Inviolable, and that they were deriv'd from Apoftolical Au- thority: for nothing could oblige the U- niverfal Church, when it was difpers'd in the Dominions of many Princes, ( whole Interefts and Pretences were frequently oppofite to one another) but fome Ori- ginal Caufe of Univerfal Influence ; fo that S Auftin^ by this Complement, in- tended no more than that now under the Evangelical Oecoriomy, by the Conftant and Early Pra&ice of the Church, from the Days of the Apoftles, the Chara&er and Dignity of a Bifhop was above that of a Presbyter ; yet he freely yielded that S. Jerome had many Perfonal Ad- vantages, with regard to his Piety, Age, and Learning: and tho S. Auftin com- plained of the number of fome later Rites and Ceremonies in his own days, yet no man afferted the Authority of U« niverlal Tradition and Apoftolical Dip cipline, with greater vigour than S. Au- ftin did ; and we do not fo much lean on his Authority in this Particular, (tho we highly honour his Memory ) as on his Solid and Unanfwerable Reafbnings; For thus he Argues, that what was con- cur*. Do^- firm'd by Univerfil Cuftom in the Chri- ftian Church, could have no beginning latet the New Opinions, &c. 87 later th*n the Apoilles, quodhniverfa te- net Ec/cjia, nee ccncilus inftitut/tm, Jed femperrettntum^no?* rriji Author it Ate Jpojto- ilea traditum rectifjimp credimus. The Churches of Chrift: had Cuftoms in the Days of the Apoftles, that were univerfally obferv'd, (the Power of Ri- tuals being always iodg'd in the Church) and if S. Aufitn thought that the ufages and Practice of the Univerfal Church, which were not introduced by Councils, C yet ftill retain'd ) were of Apollolical Authority, what hurt has he done to the Epifcopal Power, when he tells us, that it was founded on ufus Eccltfix, which in his Language fignifics nothing elfe tlian that univerfal Pra&ice of the Chri ,tian Church, which obtaind in all Ages, and in all Places, and therefore mull needs fpring from no lower Original than Apoftolical Authority. Let our Advtr- iaries tell us plainly by what Council^ e$- ther Provincial or Oecomtmc ; was Epifl copyintrodue'd, ?nd if they cannot trace it to any later Original than that I have naoVd ; why do they dream that it may be imputed to any other Con&tution tlian that which is purely Divine. If an) Ait,( beconttntioiis, we haut no fnchCnflom y nor the Churches of Chrift. G 4 88 An Enquiry into But to convince you further how much S. Aaftin diftinguifh'd the Cuftoms of the Univerfal Church, from fuch Rites and Ceremonies as prevailed only in particu- lar places; you may Read his 118 Epi- ftle to Jan/tariits, where he determins plainly that we are to comply with the Ceremonies of particular Churches, in all innocent and indifferent Guftoms; tbtum hoc genus rerum liber as habet obfer- *v at tones y nee difciplina ulla eft in his melior gravi prudentique Chrifta.no \ quam ut eo modo agat quo agere viderit Eeclefiam^ ad quawcunque forte devenerit. But for other things that were decided by the Autho- rity of the Holy Scriptures, or, Conftuetu- dine univerfa Ecclefe* roborata ; thefe laft he thought immutable, as deriving their Obligation from a higher caufe, than the Difcipline and Conftitutionof particular Churches. In vain then do the Patrons of Parity diftort S.Auft/n^s Complement to S. Jerom^ as if he acknowledged that ever the Church was Govern'd by Ec- clefiafticat Officers,afting in perfe&Equa- lity ;for S. Jufiin meant no other thing by nfks Ecclefiti, than an univerfal and Ori- ginal Practice, deriv'd from the Apoftles; fuch Cuftoms, in his own Language, qn* co- fuetudine Ecchfteuniverfa roborata funt, which he plainly diftinguifhes from that ether i the New Opinions, &c. 8rove their Errour from their Novelty. Aow eafily might the Dou.it/(ls return jpon him, and tell him, that there was i Period in the Chnftian Church, after he Days of the Apoftles, in which the Dhurch was Governed without Bifhops, )y a Parity of Ecclefnftical Officers? And b his Argument to prove the Dona*Jls :rroneous, from the Succeffion of Bifho; /amonglt whom there was no D4**f(/ftJ lownward-. from S. Pettr, to bis own in it Iclf but weak ;inJ pi might reply, that Indeed there was dd iuch uninterrupted BticcefHon at all. The Teftimoby at kngth|s to be found in the 1^5 Epiille. 1 1 hi tn'tm or do Epifcoporum ftltt fucctdtntitWK onftde-r&ndus e/?, qtunto certi*j y & vert dlnbrittr .ib iffo Petro »:.. , cut to- iui E$sl( it Domww 41k, An Equiry into fuper banc petram xdificaboEcclefeam meam, & port* inftrorum non vincent earn. Pe- tro enimfuccejjit Linus, Lino Clemens, de- menti Anacletus,Anacleto Evarijius 9 and this Succeffion of one in the room of ano- ther he carries down from S. Peter to Anajlafus , who then was Bifhop of Rome, and fb concludes with thefe Words, in hoc or dine Succejfionis nullus Donatift& fcpifcopus invemtUY, If this was a good Argument in the Opinion of S. Auftin, then it is evident that he never thought of any Conftitu- tions later than the Apoftles, by which the Authority of a Bifhopabovea Presby- ter was eftablifhed. S. Pe/er^was the firft Bifhop of the Roman Church in his Opinion, and Linus fucceeded S. Peter 5 and thus Ecclefiaftical Affairs were ma* nag'd by a Succeffion of Bifhopsfrom tho Days of the Apoftles. From all which wo ,J may reafbnably infer, that by ufm Eccle* fix, in the Language of S. A*ftin, there was no more intended than the pra&ice of the Primitive and Univerfal Church, from the Days of S. Peter, to the time o{ Anaftafitis, who then fate in the Epilog pal Chair of Rome. Add to all this,that in his Catalogue oi Herefies, ad quod-vnlt-Deum, he reckons Jerius as one of the Hereticks, Aeriani 4 the New Opinions, Sec. p i Jerio quodzm funt nominati y qui cum r et Prefbyter dolmfft ftrtur, qnoa Epifcc- s nonfotuit ordinun, ( this was exadfcly e cafe of Mr. Andrew Melvil in Scot- vd$ ) and when S. A.tflin reckons up mc Opinions that were then thought sretical, he adds as one of the peculiar D&rines of Atrins, dicebat Prefbyter um Epifcofo nut I a differ tntii dtbere difcei - From thefe places we may lee how far Auflin was a Presbyterian, The truth our Adverfaricsmightbefomodeftas leave/// in the pofleffion ofthcCW»- s and Fathers ; fince th y have the Ec- :fiaftical Revenues at their own difpo- In the pureft times of the Church, 2 Chriftians rcafon'd againft the Herc- ks from the Succtffion of their C.itb'ltc "hops, who liv'd and died in the true d Orthodox Faith. If this was not a od Argument, might not the // p (wer, that there was no fuch Succeffion Bifhops lucceeding one another, from i Days of the Apoftles, but that the dcr of Bifhops was the Kcfult of 1 nations and Synodic il Conflitu- Bur we hear of no fuch aniwer d, i.'caufe indeed there was no '1 he firfl // Ttfidfchs rot have feil'd toexpoft an Argn- me 2 2 An Enquiry into ment, which was not fupported by \\ truth of Hiftory, if theTeftimony of tl Univerfal Church, and the unanimoi fuffrages of Catholick Antiquity had n< guarded it againft all exception and coi tradiftion. Thus far I have view'd the two mo confiderable Objeftions in favour of tl Presbyterian equality : Few of our A* verfaries ( I mean in our own Country Read any of the Ancients ; and when the would fet off' their New Do&rine wit p fome (hew of Learning, they confu c Blondel and Salmafius, and for the mo part they go no farther than Smettimnm It is enough for their purpofe that the; \ are fome Sentences in the Writings of tl n Fathers, which may be plaufibly forc'dl , admit of New fignifications. It is tl r uncurablePeevifhnefs of fome, that the think the defign of any Author, may \ fully underftood by brokenSentences,toi from their Neighbour places, when the have neither the Patience, nor good N, ture to hear and confider what is deli vered by the fame Author, in other Pan- graphs of his Works. There is fb muc juftice due to pll Men, that the ought to be heard in their own caufe 5 fc they are the beft Interpreters of their ow Words : If this Ind been duly weigh'cj the New Opinions, 6cc. ^3 ur bawling People would never have lited S. Auftin for their imaginary Parity. '•he Catholic Church had no Presbyte- rian Bifhops in the Days of S.Auftw, nor -id he himfelfever think, that hisCom- t lement beftowed upon S. Jcrom y would J.ave been made ufe of in after Ages, to fbett confufion and equality ; Tor he fever dream'd of any interval, after the Ways of theApoftles, in which the Chri- l:ian Church was governed by the Gene- va. Model, elfc he had not pleaded the Suc- effion of Catholick Eifhops againfc the I have nam'd but a few of the Tefti- aonies of the Ancients, which they abulc, ot knowing as yet whither their Remits n\\ determine them. And fince they naintain Praftices now, which we never leard of before ; it is but reafonable to xpeft that they may defend their Inno- vations by Arguments that we have not >een formerly acquainted with. I only efire the Reader to take Notice, that heir Opinion of Presbyterian Parity, by divine Right, is not onlv New, but ah- urd, and lupportcd by Dreams and vi- ionary Conlcquences. So unfaie it is to idvancc New Doctrines, that con trad id :he common Senle oi Mankind, as well as P4 An inquiry into as the univerfai and uninterrupted Tefti* mony of all Ciriftian Antiquity. CHAP II. Of the Succeffwn of Bijhops, from the Apjiles HItherf-oI haveexamin'-d fomeof the ok ft piaufible pretences for Pres- byterian Parity. Such as defignno more than Confufion and clamour, endeavour ro darken the true State of the Contro- verfie ; and therefore it is neceflary to re- move the Ambiguity by which they have oblcur'd it. Fir /I, it is granted on both Hands, that the Government: of the Chriftian Church hath been eftablifhed by our Saviour and hisApoftle , and that this Government fo 'fix'd, is of that importance to true Re- ligion, that it ought not to be chang'd or deftroyM until the end of the World 5 that they who wilfully oppofe the Ori- ginal institution of our Saviour and his Apoftles, ZiKtSchtfmaticks, in the ftrifteft Senfv, from Cathoiick Unity and Order-, St fondly ^ the Hevp Opinions, &c. 55 Secondly, it is agreed, that there was 1 Hierarchy under the Old Teftament, and that the High Pneft had a fuperiori- ty and Jurifdi£tion over all fubordinate Prieftsinthe JewifhOeconomy; whence this conclufion is neceiTary, that the fub- ordination of one Prieft unto another, is not in itfelf Simplicitcr unlawful. So much being premised as Common Principles, before I propofe the State of the Controverfie, let me be allow'd to Enquire into the Nature of the Apoftoli- cal Office; in which we muft Diftinguifh between the Ordinary, Permanent, Efjtn- ttal Power of the Apoftles, and the Ex- trinfic and Extraordinary Privileges and Advantages of that Power, fuch as were fuitable to the firft Plantations of Chri- ftianity. By the firft they were Diftin- guifh'd from all Subordinate Ecclefiafti- cal Officers in the Chriftian Church. By the Stcond, they were put in a capa- city to Exercife their Authority with the greater Succefs in the Conversion of In- fidels, and Government of thole that were already Converted. We ought (with the greater carcj to diftinguifh between the Ejjcntial Jprfh- lical Office, and the Extraordinary Pre- rogatives that adorn d the iirrt ApoftL in that the One was franhent, Tt'mpera- 9 $6 An Enquiry into ry 9 and Limited to the Exigencies of the firft Chriftian Miffion. The other is Ne* eeffary, Permanent, and perpetual in the Chriftian Church, Matt Ik 28. Behold i am with you even to the end of the world That this may appear more clearly let us confider, that the Apoftles as fitch were Formally and Effentially diftinguifhV) from all other Ecclefiaftical Officers ol any Subordinate Station or Dignity. Now it may be Reafonable to Enquire what it was that diftirtguifh'd an Apofile from the 72 Difciples, from Presbyters in the Modern Notion, or from Deacons in the Apoftolical Church, or the other Officer: that are nam'd in the Scriptures. The Presbyterians and Socinians * ( contrary *£*techifm. the Q n jf orm Teftimony of Antiquity) Racov. Sect. 9. n J . -^ 4 caf.i. quod amrm, That the Apoltolical Omce attinetadjpo-fgotf^ that it was Extraordinary, that clrtuZTjieo: they were Diftinguifh'd from other Sub- ampHusin Ec- ordinate Ecclefiafticks by their Infaliibi- iUjiachriftt jj r y - m p reac hi n g > by their Power ol Miracles, by their being immediately call'd by our Saviour to the JpoftoUte^by their unlimited and unconfin'd Commiffion to Propagate the Gofpel amongft all Nations. In Oppofition to which, wc affirm, That the True, Character/ 'flict Formal and tiib'inguifbing mark of an Apofik } was, his idfi/tirif} Stream, Spi- ritual, the New Opinions, dec. 97 ritual, and Perpetual Power, Authority, and Jurifdi&ion over all Subordinate Offi- cers, and all others believing in Chrift, and his Power to tranfmit this Authority unto his Succedors, according to the Commandment of our Saviour. The Permanent and Sncceffive Power of the Apollles was,to Preach the Gofpel, to Govern the Churches they had Planted, to give Rules and Dire&ions to their SuccefTors in the fame Office, and to all Subordinate Ecclefiaflicks, to inflift Cenfures, to Communicate this Authority to others, to Hear Complaints, to Decide Controversies and fettle the Dilciplinc of the Church, to Confer the Holy Ghoft, as the Neceffities of the Faithful do require in all Ages, f I mean thole Gifts of the Holy Ghott that mull needs attend the Authoritative Minillry •of Holy IhingsJ Now the Apoltolical Office being Effent tally no other than this, it remains for ever in the Church, and the ordinary Neceffities of the Church lido require that it fhould continue uoril the iecondComing of ourSaviour. But the Extraordinary Gift* oi the .Holy Ghoft, the Power of Miracles, ol fan and other Spiritual Furni- ture were but Temporary and Extrinl vantages, only Neceflary to the firft H l 9 8 An Enquiry into Forming of the Chriftian Church, and when its Fabric was Ere£ted, thenthofe Scaffoldings were removed. The Effence of the Apoftolical Office, as.fuch, did not confift in the foremen- tioned extraordinary Privileges, but ra- ther in that Rttforai Power and Spiritual j JurifJiftionderiv'd to them from our Sa- | Saviour, and by them regularly tranfc j mitted to their Su£cefTors in all Ages. That they were diftinguifh'd from Sub- i ordinate Officers is acknowledge, from whence I infer, that this Diftinfition muft confift in foniething that is fb Peculiar to j the Apoftolate, as is Incommunicable to any other Order of Ecciefiaftical Officers than fuch as were honour'd with the Apoftolical Character. • They were not diftinguifh'd from Sub- j ordinate Officers by the extraordinary : Gifts of the Holy Choft; for many of the htity amongft the firft Chriftians were « endued with -fitch : Nor by their Infalli- 1 j bility in Doftrine 5 for the Evangelifts I and the 72 Difciples were Infallible. And I S. Luke tells us in the Preface to his Got ( pel, that he wrote it from the Teftimony | r of fuch as were Eye-Witneffes and VndetA miniflers of the Word. And St. Stephen the Deacon was a Man full of the Holy Ghoft, endued with Wifdom, fuch as his Enemies AB.r the New Opinions, &c. 2P Enemies were not able to refill, and with the Power of Miracles,yet rot advanc'd to the Apoftolical Dignity : Nor is it neceflary to make up an Apoflte^ that he be imm?M&ttly call'd to the JpojloUte by our Saviour ; for Matthias, who was chofen to fill up the Vacancy that hap- , pen'd in the Sacred College by the Apo- fiacy of Judas, was not immtdutely Or- dain'd by our Saviour, but by the Apo- ftles, who had Power to continue that i Succeffion to the end of the World. And I thd it was necefTary that the fir (I Apo- J ftles of the Chriltian Church flionld be j Witncfles of our Saviours Refurrettion, j yet the being a Witncfs of his RcTur- j region did not make them Affiles ; elfe Muthi.is had been an Apoitje in the ftri&cft Notion, before he waY fornial Inveited with that (Jura&er: any one may fee the Abfurdity of this ; therefore I conclude, that the Bjfe*ce of the A ftolic Office cannot be plac'd in thole Extraordinary Privileges that were io Plentifully pour'd on the Firft Miniiiers of, or Converts to Chrii-ianitv. It re- mains therefore, that I ical Office, in its fixture and Effe*ee 3 petual in the Church ; tor our Saviour prom i fed to be with them unto the i_nd of the World. II 2 And loo An Enquiry into And as this Ordinary and Perpetual Power was deriv'd from Chrift to his Apoftles, Co by them it was convey 'd to their Succeflbrs to all fucceeding Ge- nerations, and then it muft be Jure Di- vino in the moft rigorous Notion of the Word. Nor is there any thing can for- mally diftinguifh an Apoftle from other Minifters cf the Evangelical Oeconomy, but their Supream ^nd Spiritual Power to Govern and ManageEcclefiaftical Affairs by their proper Authority, of which they are to give an account to our Saviour. And as the Office was derived unto c- thers, befides the Twelve, fo the Name of an Apoftle was not confin'd to that Number, Philip, 2. 25. Epapbrcditttsxs (aid to be their Apoltle. Its true, our Englifh Verfion reads it Epaphroditus yonr Mejf.nger: But this is altogether contrary to the Notion of that Word in the New Teftament; for an Apojlk in thofe Writings never fignifies a Meffen- ger lent by Men to Men, asBeza renders it, but rather the Meffenger of God to Men ; and the Vulgar Latin hath tran- flated it right, Ep&phroditnm fratrim • veftrnm autem Apoflolum, who, without all Queftion, was Bifhop of Philippi at this time, Taught and Ordain'd by the Apoftles 5 and the Word (Jpo/lleJ ought to the New Opinions, &c. 101 to be thus underftood in other place?, where they have Inadvertently rranflated it MeffengerS) z Cor. 8, 23. And the Engli/h reading of this place, as it runs, is certainly a Miftake; it being no con- siderable part of the Glory of Chrift, that thofe Apoitles were employed in In- ferior MefTages from one Church to ano- ther, but rather in the Authoritative Miffion and Delegation of them, for the ends of a more Heavenly Embafly : in this laft Senfe they were truly sip eft oli Eccleftarum, not lent by the Churches, but to the Churches by Chrift, which may be further illuftrated from Row.i6.j. where the Greek Phrafe may be jtrftly render'd inter Frmirios Apcjtolos. And I may fafely affirm, that the word (Ape- /?/e)nevcr fignifies in the New Tcframent any other than the Meflbngcr of God to- wards Men. And though the Provinces affign'd by the firft Apoftlcs to thofc Se- condary Apoftles, were more narrow and limited than thofe they took care of tlumfelves ; yet this alters not at all the Nature of their Office and Apoftolical Power,which they were toExercile with- in their proper Bounds,no more than the King's otjnd/t can be deny'd the Hon of fitting on the Throne of David in full Power and Royal Authority after the H ] A'oftiQy f 102 An Enquiry into „ m , Apofiacy of the ten Tribes : for they were V. Treat, of r / T ^. r / • ™ i n churchGovem- as truly Kings as any or their Royal Fre- wm by R.B. decefTors, even Solomon himfelf in all his Glory, though the number of their Sub- jects were not equal. When the Apoftles Divided the World amongft them, they did not meafure their Lots Geometrically, as if the Bounds and Provinces of their Infpe£Hon were as exa&Iy Equal as the Spiritual Power it felf, with which they were Inverted : But fome Laboured more, and Travell'd farther than others, yet the Extent of thofe Provinces and Regions that they Laboured in, did not at all change or alter the Reef oral Power and Jurifcli&i- on with which they were endued ; no more did the Apoftolical Authority,which was tranfmitted to their Succeflbrs, dif- fer from that which was Originally lodg'd in the firft Apoftles, though they were confin'd in the Exercife of that Power to narrower Limits, not by the Nature of the Power it felf, but by the variable Neceffities and Circumftances of the Church; the Rules of Order, and the Multitude of Converts, oblig'd them afterwards more to Perlbnal Refidence. When the Apoftles continued frr fome years at Jerufalem. after the Afcenfion of our Saviour, they divided the ( then ) known the New Opinions^ &c. j o 3 known World amongft them by Lots, and fome went into 4//^ and (ome into Scythi^ fome into Europe, fome as far as the Eaft Indies: they did not allot' them Travel together into tl le lime Coun- try, but ©very one went fpeedily about to Cultivate that Lot which feHi to his Share, as is plainly Infinuatea, A .'■ 1. when Mttbi^s Ucfto&n to the rff&[ioUte % v.2j. that fu (flight tiku . '-ot of his M n /try and Ap >Jl>'jb

ee or R e fidence does not pro- [ h^ir'cypri ccQd from the Nature of thePriefthood, | 40*, ettamu-but from Rules of Prudence, Ecclefiafti- vi Z fmn d m calOeconomy, and Canonical Conftitu- curabmt. tions : for the Apoftles ordain d Bilhops t caufaubmex- f or t j ie Spiritual Services of fuch as fhould i ™ZuZ:t afterwards believe, as St. Ckmtnt wit- mtmero 4. neiFeS. So the New Opinions, &c. 105 So much being premise! concerning the Nature of the Apoftolate, let us next en- quire whether this Rtctoral Power, and Epifcopal Jurifdi&ion, with which the Rrft Apoftles were inverted, over fubor- linate Ecclefiafticks,was afterwards com- nitted to, and exercifed by particular Perfons, fucceeding one after another, in he room of the Apoftles, in particular Churches; or whether the Apoftles did :ommit their Epifcopal Jurifdiftion, and ^poftolical Authority, which they exer- uisM in particular Churches,to fuch fingle tucceflors, duly and regularly chofen, )r to a College of Presbyters, acting in he Adminiftration of Ecclefiaftical Af- airs, in perteft Parity and Equality. This I take to be the genuine State of the Dontroverfie. I made it evident in the J. irft Chapter, that there was fuch a cwfverft. wjio/j of Names in the Holy Scriptures, hat it was not poiTible to ftate an Iden- ity or Community of Offices from the ommon Names frequently attributed to uch as were undeniably dilHnguifliM vith regard to their Authority 5 I ' ve mult fix this Debate (o, as it may be pafbnably determined, and that Wp may lot fight for ever in the Dark. We have the promife of our Meffed aviourfor the perpetual duration of the Apoftol io£ An Equity into Apoftolical Office, and this Promife was made to them, not in their Perfonal, but in their Spiritual Capacity ; for Chrift loved the Church as much after they were removed from the Earth, as before. If it appears then, that their Epifcopal Power was duly convey'd to fingle Suc^ ceffors, in all particular Churches, and not to a College of Presbyters, aftingin: a perfeft Parity and Equality; then it is clear, that Epifcopal Government is for ever eftablifhed by a Divine right, in tha Chriftian Church. In a matter of Fa£l, there can be no decifive proof but Teftimony, and the Teftimonyalledg'd by us, is 16 much the ftronger, that it hath been univerfally received ; for the Church knew no other Government for 1400 Years, than that which we plead for. Our next Enquiry muft be, whether we < find this ReSoral Power was transmitted immediatly by the Apoftles to fingle Succeffors. Let us Fir (I, view the Holy Scriptures,and then the Ecclefiaftical Re- cords. In the firft place we find Timothy fet over the Church of Ephefus by S. Pa»l 9 when he went into Macedonia, Compare A3s, 20 3, 4, 5. ver. and 1 Tim. 1. }. as I bef ought thte to abide (till at Ephefas, whtm the New Opinions, dec. 107 wen I went into Macedonia, thit thou tight eft charge forne, that thty Teach no chtr Doctrine. It is not deny'd but that ^hmothy after he was in a particular man- flr eftablifhed Bifhop of the Church of khefus, might wait upon S Paul, his Iritual Father, to yield that aiTifhnce * him that was due to fb eminent an ftoftle, and the fervices of his Religion. |t this cannot infer that he was difin- $g'd uponfuch occafional Joumies,from jit Epifcopal Authority and Infpe&ion, (nich was particularly committed to him the Church of Ephtfus by S. Paul. Hip was as much a Deacon when he- nt down to Samaria, as when lie lerv'd ' b Tables at Jeru/a/enr. Nor is there 1/ amongft the Presbyterians who >uld take it kindly, if they were told y had loft all Title and Rtlitwn to rticular Flocks, if upon fbme occafions by arc imploy'dtftfw and thtn tovifitc 1 Court or Foreign Churches: and we id that the Ancients took no notice of f fuch Objcftion againft his being the U and cllabhOi'd Bilhop oi Eptrfus ; in the Eleventh Aft of thcCouncil dfrunsmmmd. let Jon % tliev reckoned 27 Bilhops fronv / - : " rr - * ndm nothy to their own Days. "^ Now let us view from the Epiftlc* to mothy, what Powcrand Authority \ committed / 108 An Enquiry into committed unto him ; he is command not to rebuke an Elder, but to entre him as a Father, I Tim. J. I. and agai not to receive an accufation againft an I der, but before two or three Witnefli ver. 19. to rebuke fuch as Sin before a that others alfb may fear, to lay Ham fuddenly on no Man, ver. 22. toordd fuch Deacons as are firft proved and four blamelefs, and the following words, fin*. }. 14, 15. plainly infinuate his p? ticular Relation to the Church of Eph fus. Thefe things write I unto thee, hopi to come unto thee fhortly, but if I tarry lot that thou may eft know how thou ougbteft' behave thy f elf in the Houfe of God, wh\ is the Church of the living God, the Fit and ground of the Truth. He is lifcew> commanded 1 Tim. 5. 9. to take fpeo care of the Widows, and carefully to c ftinguifh fuch as were true Obje&s Charity, from fuch as might be juft charged with Levity and Wantonne He is directed in a fpecial manner, 1 77 2. 1. to order the publick Worfhip ai Liturgies of the Church, and 1 Tim, 2 1 . he is charged and he alone in thcChur of Ephef us, before God and the Lord Je/ Chrift, and the elect Angels , thathewoi ; obferve thefe things without preferring c before another, doing nothing by Part, Uty. the New Opinions \ &c. 109 In thefe Apoftolical Iniun&ions,addrefs'd articularly and Perfonally to Timothy, re contain'd the Nature, Extent and lathority of his Epifcopal Power and jrifdi&ion, his Relation to the Church iif Ephefus, and the Perpetuity of that 1 T » : 6 .13, liower committed to him in the Church,^,,. , ; Irhich he is commanded to commit to Vaithful Men % who fhould be able to teach uhers alfo. So this Power jvhich was Perfo- l*t//j lodg'd in him, was not Temporary or ranfeent >but Succeffive and Perpetual, and nriv'd unto others in Solidum, as he re- vived it himftlf. It is not then debated between us an;l ur Adverfaries, whether the Power ex- rcifed by Timothy in the Church of Eph- t/, was not the very fame Power that re plead for as due to Bifhops, in their prticular Stes 5 for they grant, that fuch i Power was exerciled by him in the Ihurch of Ephtf/ts, but they pretend that ; exerciled this Power under theNoti- n of an Evangelilt, not as proper Bifhop f Epht/u<. This lam to examine aUer- rards : I defire at prcfeot no more to be (ranted, than that which cannot be (Jo- yed, viz. 1. That the Power which lie tfercifed, was in it (elf lawful. :. i was pratiis'J by Tim -thy in the C f Ephtfus. j. That it was comoiiui / no An Enquiry into to him alone by S. Paul 5 and not to j Colledge of Presbyters, a£ting among! themfelves , in Parity and Equality 4. That there is no mention of any fpiri tuai Power, lodged in a Colledge of Prel byters, to which Timothy was accourJ table for his Adminiftrations. 5. Tha ' the great and mod: eminent Branches c the Epifcopal Power were lodg'd in hi I Perfon, the Ordination of fuch as wecl admitted unto the facred Fun&ion, thl care of the Widows, the Cenfuring < 1 Elders, and his Authoritative preventin j of Herefies. Thefe are the things aboil which the Epifcopal Authority was mod converfant in the Primitive Tims! 6. That thisAuthority was not in it felfr y becaufehe was Hurofolymifana Ec- clefi* yrafalus. I only name thefc in- ftances from the Scriptures, which plain- ly dcmonftfJte, that the Apoftolical or Epi (copal Authority, was convey d to lingle Perfbns in the firft Plantations ol 1 Chriftia- 1 1 4 An Enquiry into Chriftianity. I do not now infill on thofe j imaginary and (uperficial exceptions that are invented by our Adverfaries. Rev, 2. 5. The next I mention are the {even Angels of the feven Afiatic Churches. To pre- vent any Argument that might be found- ed on this Apofiolical and undeniable ex- ample of fingle Prefidentsand Governors, j over many Presbyters, in the JJiatic Churches, before the Death of S. john\ mbMefs. Salmafius enters only his proteftation , j>.i8* (wq muftnot call it an Argument) why \ thofe Angels ought not to be underftood fingle Perfons or Governors, but that by the Angels are meant the Churches them- 1 felves 5 quia auttm in urbibm tunc tempo- I ris eaparspopuli pur tor sanU torque^ at que adeo mzgisfpmtalis cenfebatur, qu* Qbrifii fidem acceperatjdto earn angelo comparavit, & fub An gelt nomine ad turn fermonem di- rexit. Sit trgo hccjixum per Angelos Vrbi- um nihil aliud voluijfe Johaxnem defignari ni flips as Ecclefias. But this filly fubter- fuge is far below the Learning and fenfe of Salmaftss, fince the Angels are exprefly diftinguifh'd from the Churches in the Text itfelf, 1 Rev. 20. the feven Stars are faid to be the Angels of the feven Churches, but according to Salmaftus his 1 interpretation, they muft needs be the feven Churches of ths feven Churches, and \ the New Opinions, &c 1 1 5 and in the beginning of thefecond Chap- rer, the Epiftle is Addrefs'd to the An- gel of the Church of Ephefw, and not to the Church of the Church of Bphefns\ where we may plainly fee, that as the Stars are diftingui£h'd from the Candle- fticks, fo the Angels are diftinguifh'd from the Churches. Yet it may be eafilyyield- ^ ed, that the Heavenly Admonitions hritf :rtm j e lpM: . Addrefs'd tothofe Angels, were alio com- & Myc*f. muHicated to the Churches, but by the ///- E M- e0 ?- lg * terpofal of their Angels, who cannot be Call'd a Company, a Multitude, or a College of Angels ; but one fingle Angel prefiding in their Ecclefiaftical Meetings and Affairs, both over the People, and fubordinate Presbyters. And th6 there be fome Inftruttions in thofe Epiftles, in which others, befides the Angels, are particularly admonifhed ; yet the Epiftles are no lels Addrefs'd to fingle Angels, than the Epiftle to the VbU Itpptans, is to the whole Church at fhu lippt, th& S. Paul uies particular compel- lations, chap 4. vcr. 2. 3. / intrt.it thti alfo, true yol^ 'fill w, btlp the ft Worn n which laboured with me in thtG jpel. The lecond Epiftle to Timothy is Ad- drefs'd to him alone, tho the conclufion be to all the faithful at Ephtfus. The Bilhopsof the Afiatic Churches arc laid to be Angels in Imitation of the Jews, L 2 amo 3 1 6 An Enquiry into amongft whom the High-Prieft was dig- nified with that Name, Mil y 3.7. The word ( Mzjjert?er ) may be tranflated An- gel; their Authority was not Tempora- ry orcoiifin'd to the Meetings of the Cler- gy; but extended both to Clergy and Lai- ty., therefore we find that the faults of the Churches are imputed to the Angels, be- caufe of their fpiritual Power, to reform and Chaftife thofe Abufes. There is one place more infifted on to prove that thofe Epiltles were dire&ecj to Communities, and not to fingle Per- fons, and that is the Epiftle to Thyatira, Rev. 2. 24. but unto you I fay, and unto the reft in Thyatira. ~ H^nce they plead as if this Epiftle had been directed to a< Community, becaufe thecompellationis in the Plural, ver. 24. But if we confult the moft ancient Manulcripts, the word (^) is left out, and then there is nofha- dow of an Objeftion; particularly in the rid******. Akxmdrian Manufcript, preferv'd in the 2?" mot R°y<* 1 Library^ that word is wanting, del, cap. 4 . and fo the Reading is plain and eafie. The Addrefs is not only to the Angel of Thy&* tira, but to the reft who had not known the depths of Satan, nor made any defection to the Gnoft/e Herefie. But if the common Reading be thought more genuine, yet the words infifted on by the Patrons of Ecclefiaftical Parity cannot the New Opinions, &c. 1 1 7 cannot be applyed Co properly to the An- gel of the Church bffkjaiirj. as to thofe that are mentioned in the latter end of the 23 i ter. And they are the other Churches of A/ia, which, bccaufe they are mentioned in the Speech directed to the Angel of the Church of Thyatira, the im- mediate Traxfttwn from him to them, is natural and eafie, and ail the Churches fhall know, viz>> the Churches of A fix (ball know that 1 am be which fear cheth the Rtins ani Hearts, ver. 24. but unto you /. e. the Churches of Afia, &c. • Beza himfelf acknowledges, that thole r. /. Br Epifbles are not AddrcfsM to a College of fi Presbyters, but to one tr'/es^ \\ horn he makes, in a ridiculous manner, contrary to the fenle of all Antiquity, a Weekly, or a Monthly MocttMor, Thefe Inllances being prcmis \1 of (13 many fingle Perfons inverted \. ith Epii« copal Authority , in the Apoftolick Churches; it is in vain to tell us, that the feven Angels are not called Pn (hops in the Scripture. VorlJiptiiin andiheLoi Supper are not called Sacrame >ts in the Writings of the New p 1 e fl \et we think we cxpfeft ilie Seni ripturej very agreeably, when we call thele / ~ : (tit: ttiat'N rone. We an I \ ah and Wbrlhip of the u 1 1 8 An Enquiry into ty ; Yet we believe we add nothing un- to theDo&rine revealed inScripture,when we exprefs aMyftery of our Faith by that word Trinity. But when they remem- ber that at this very time, when thofe Epiftles were addrefs'd to the Afiatic Angels, S. Polycarp was Bifhop of Smyrna 3 This very Thought alone fpoils all the Presbyterian Glofss and when we com- pare the Epiftle to the Angel of the Church of Smyrna., with the moft anci- rid.A** m*t- ent a&s of S. Polycarfs Martyrdom, they tyr. s.poiycarp. ^ q ^ a b etter Commentary on that Epiftle, than all the later Explications pf the Se&aries. The whole Queftion may be eafily de- termin'd, if we enquire into thefe three Particulars, Firft 9 Whether the Ancients affirm'd, that the Apoftolical Power was deriv'd to theBifhops as their Succeflbrs ? Second//, Whether they Infift frequently on this Succeflion of fingle Perfbns to the Apoftles in Particular Sees, when they reafon againft Hereticks? Ihirdly, Whe- ther we may with Safety and Confidence lean on their Authority and Tradition in 2n Affair of this Confequence ? I. Whether the Ancients affirm'd that the Apoftolical Power was deriv'd to the Bifliops as their Succeflbrs ? That they did is Evident from the early Cata- Iogue the New Opinions; &c. 1 1 ^ logue oi Bifhops, fucceeding one another in the Apoftolical Sees, by the moft anci- Records of the Church. Thus we find the Church of Ephefw governd by a Suc- ceffion cf fingle Perfons from Timothy, the Church of Creet from Titus; of Jern- falem from S.James the Juft ; the Church of Philhpi from Epaphroditm; of theCtf- loffians from Archipput; of Athens from l Dionyfut* Areopogita'-y of Smyrna from St. • Polycarp^ of Perfaamos from Antipis\ of Jlheffalomca from Gaius; of A attach from Evodius; or as others, from S. Ignatius; 1 of Alexandria from An /anus '^oi Rome from | Linusfac. And in all thofe Ancient Cata- logues of one Succeeding another, their I Subordinate Presbyters are not nam'd, as j being under the Care and Infpection of Itheir Ecclefiaftical Governors. II. It is next worth our Enquiry and Obfervation,in what Language the An- icients fpeak of Bifhops, who arc faid to ihave Succeeded the Apoftles. Let us Le- |C$in with S.lren*us } that mot} Venerable |Bifliop of L ont, who, in his Younger Jays, converted particularly wuhS./Vy- ^arp t and with feverai others who had een (bme of the Apoftles and Apoltoli- :al Men } Et habemus annum* rare eos qui if> Apoftolis mflituti fttnt bpifcopt in Ecc/t- l lis, & S'nc JJjrts tor urn ufque ad nos y qui I 4 nihil i?o An Enquiry into nihil t.akdocaerimt mque cognovert+n-t quale ab his deliratur. Afjd a litf Je after, he Reafons againft: the Falenti^ians^n^ their Foolifh Myfteries, that no fuch Dpftrine as they taught was delivered by the Apoftles : for if the Apoftles had reveal d fuch Myfteries to any, they would not have conceal^ them from the fiilhops ; Olios & Succeffores relinquebaflf fmm if- ■ forum locum Mjgifterit trade*$es. And thus he goes on to prove, from the Sue- ceffors of S. Peter, ("and S.Pclparpjwho vyas intimately known to himfelf ) that the Valentinim Herefies were againft the Apoftoiical Tradition ; and we muft take heed that Iren&us carefully diftinguiffrd between Bifhops and Presbyters. And uh.y c^.14. w^ at can ^ e more honourably faid of the Epifcopal Power and Jurifdi&ion than that they hold Locum magtfterii Apoflc* Lid. vb.t.c*p.6y And again, the fame Irentm, Agni- tio vera eft Apoftolorum Dottrina, & An- tiquus -Ecclefa flatus in Univerfo Mundo, dr cbaraciere Corporis Chrifti, fecundum fucceffiones Epifcoforum^ quibus illi earn qua in unoquoqut loco. *ft, Ec cleft am tradi- Lib.s.CM.10. derunt. And again he tells us, that the. Hereticks were much later, quw Bpif- copi 9 quibas Apcftoli trMidernnt. Eccleftas. L'b+ C443. And again fpeaklngof theBUhops,whoi \ the New. Opinions, &c 1 2 1 vtth regard to their Age, he calls Pre** yttri^ ( for that is it that he Pleaded a- ;ainft the VtUntinians^xXwx the £)odrine vhich the Ancient Bifhops received from Apoftles was Prior to their Fictions nd Novelties i ) and therefore he tells s, that we mult obey them, g>ui fuccef- mm bxbtnt ah A po /tolls gvi cum WpifcQpitus Sftcceffione cbarifrna vtrttatls . rtum,ftcundumpUchtnm Patris^acceperunt. > .ere you fee, that theEpiflopal and Apofto- as.u cal Dignity are one in the Language of y- tyj\ mf } quantum Ap : '■:> o . i c. Eptfcopos & Vdpufitvs ? D . And to (hew l#d "• orKemning their Aueho- . ;; d enim ;?* i J tlftm hi ■', >;fa Worn 1/.: 9 quart do at Illy iTfZ An Equiry into Evangelii, nee loci fui mtmores y fed m que fut urum Domini judicium , neque nun fibi Pr&pofitum Epifcopum eogitantes, quo \\ nnnquam omnino fub antecefforibus faclur, \ eft, tot urn fibi vmdicent } What S.Cr/r; \ an's Notion was of Epifcopal Power am \ Jurifdidtion is known to every body, tha i is not utterly a Stranger to Ecclefiaftica r Antiquity : You may take a hint of i from his 27 Epiftle, fade per temper m\ & fuccejfionum vices Eptfcoporum Ordinatk% & Ecc/eji* ratio decurrit 9 ut Ecclefiafuptifi Epifeopopos conjlituatur, fr omnis ait mi Ecclefis per eofdem gubernetur. Cum hoci itaque Divina lege fundatum fit, miroti quofdam audaci temeritate fie mihifcriberm voluijje. t The fame S.Cyprian in his 69 Epiftle, > to Florentine Eupianus afierts, that thet Bifhops fucceeded the Apoftles Vicaru^ Ordinatione ; and before him Tertullian\\ de prdferiptionibus, per cur re Ecclefias Apfrfa flolicaSy apud qua* ipfaadbuc Cathedra Ap De vrtfenpt. TertuS/ans Notion of a Bifhop is fuffi- t Cap > 2 ' ciently known from his BookDe Baptifi»* t i in which he affirms, that the Presbyters, jo and Deacons could do nothing without tt Exprefs Licence from the Bifhop. The I the New Opinions, &c. 123 The Reader is intreated to read S. Cy- rUn himfelf ; and then let him judge 'hethcr BloncLl and his Affociates are DC difingenuous to the Higheft Degree, sho would endeavour to Engage him in : eir Fa&ion, when he Exprefly affirms, :at the Bifhops fucceeded the Apoftles, kf their Authority over the Church, [x)th Presbyters, Deacons, and Laity) jfcftablifhed Divin* Lege. And that by fe fame Law it is appointed, ut omnis JU6 Ecclefi£ per eofdem gubernetur. So .it it isneedlefs to Cite later Fathers in Queftion, who frequently affert the fie things. Nay, S. Jerome himfelf (as ormerly proved ) declares that they d the room of the Apoftles. Secondly, Let us Enquire Recording to ' propos'd Method ) whether the Anci- s infifted frequently on this Succeffion Single Perfbnsto the Apoftles in Par- ilarSee/, in their Reafbnings againft eticks? And here it is neediefs to t what I have already cited from *us, who reafbns againft the F it is Exprcfs'd, 1 Pofn 124 An Enquiry into D e?r*fcript. Pofitive to our Purpofe ; Edant ergo or <$3 2 - gints Eccltftarumfuartsm^evolvant or dint Epifcoporum fuorum y it a per Succejjiones t initio, decurrentens 9 ut primus iUe Epifcof aliquem ex Apc/ioliSj vel Apoflolicts vm qui tamen cum Apoftolis per/ever aver it, h [ buerit auElorem ejr antecefforem > hoc em modo Ecclefia Apofiolica cetfus fuos dej runt 9 f cut Smyrnaorum Ecclefia Polycarpm ah Johanne conlocatum refert>&c % — Perim utique & cat era exhibent quos ab Apoft lis in Epifcopatum conflitutos Apo^oti [ feminis traduces habeant. Thus reafoned that Ancient Fathe i8 lb near the Apoftolical Age, and thi he informs us, that the Catholic Churc R reafoned againft Hereticks in his Daysjn and by this Succeflion of True and Latjf ful Bifhops fucceeding one another in t\u room of the Apoftles, and prefervingtb Catholic Tradition delivered to them h\ their firft Founders, the Church diftif t guifh'd her folf from the Synagogues Apoftle, that after he returned to Ephefus I c rom Patmos, being defired, he went into yhe Neighbouring Provinces, partly that \\he might conjlitute Bifhops, partly that he >' night form entire Churches , and partly, that ipe might fepar ate for the f acred Fun&ion Yuch as VPtre pointed to him by the Holj* phojl. And it is upon the Faith of fuch Hifto- ries, recorded by Apoftolical Men, who uvere competent Witnefles of the matter , )f Fa3 ; that the Ancients did reafon * rom their Apoftolical SuccefTion, to over* ;.j:hro\v the Herefies that molefted the '/Church: Such an Argument deferv'd to ioe the lefs regarded, if it depended upon ! :he peculiar Speculations and Rcafonings ' }f any one fingle Eifhop or Presbyter, jUutwhen we meet with it as a thing ge- j icrally infifted on, not only in one Age, J but 128 An Enquiry into but by a conftant and perpetual Tradition and Pra&ice, tranfmitted to Pofterity in after Ages, we muft fuppofe that they could not be miftaken in an Argument, upon which fo much depended. Nay, this Succeffion of fingte Pferfbn! governing particular Churches, in the room of the Apoftles is ib evident, thai lbme of the learnedft of the Gallic** Church have yielded, not only their Sue* ceffion, buttheir Jurifdi&ion and Preemi- nence alfb. So much is granted by d* Moulin^ in one of his Letters to the Bifhop inter opufcul °^ ^^hefltr f Denique quomodocuntfue H Epifiep.mn- appe/Uver/s Titum y & Timotheum, & Mar- cant, fen Epifcopos, feu Evangel? flas, con* flat eos habuiffe Succejfores Epifcopos 7 here- des iliim prominentia. And this is i\\ J that is contended for, that they are the Spiritual Heirs ofthofe Apoftles or Apofto- ' lical Men, from whom they had theii { Original Miffion and Authority. Thirdly, Let us enquire whether we l may fafely lean on the Authority of the 1 Ancients in an Affair of this Confe- ' quence ? And there is no doubt but that we may, and that we ought ; efpeciall) \ confidering that they were fb near to the : Apoftolicil Age. It is certain, that the:; Apoftolical Churches had their own Fajfr | a in which were recorded the Succeffion a I [ then [ ton. the New Opinions, &c 1 2\ HjtticL h Here 1 30 An Enquiry mo Here we are carefully to diftiaguifh be- tween the Teftiinonies of the. Ancients, as to particular Doctrines and theorems, ' and their Teftimony, as to the Pubhck, Vifdle, Vmverfnlly received Practice of the Cliurch. In the .fir ft :■■ they might be. miftaken, becaufe fuch Theorems might depen&upon the ftrength of xhm ratio- anrttvd and tnteilcctHalFzcuhy, and they had no Priviledge again tt Erroursof that Nature. But we'muft not think that theylyedin a matter of Fact, farlefswas it polfible ,tor them to confpire to propo- gate fuch a Lie to. future Generations. 2. They Q were Men of extraordinary fan&ity, and upon all occafions ready to maintain the Cluiftian Caufe in the face of all. danger, even to the Effufion of their Bleed upOn publick Scaffolds and Thea- tres* Ihey 'had .moreover. ( many of them)jhe Gifts of difcerning of Spirits, and other extraordinary and miraculous Advantages, of which the Church was not altogether Idft deftitute for fdme Ages after thsiiApofties ; To that whether we confider their being fo near to the Apoftles, or their extraordinary advantages, or their unanimity in delivering thh Tefti- mony, or the Nature.of the Teftimony it feif, .the thing being a matter of Fact, twilled with the vifible Pfra&ice of the Church the New Opi?iions, Sec 1 31 Church, upon thefe and fuch like Con- fidcrations, we mull cither receive this Hiftorical Truth, or fay, That no Age, nor no Society of Men in any Age, can tranfmit the knowledge of any matter of Fact to the next Generation. And if this be the Confequence of their rejecting the Teftimony of the firft Ages, we lie nor only how unreafbnable, but how importa- ble it is to put in any exception againft this Truth, fuppofmg the Frame and Conftitutionof Human Nature, to be no ether than it is. When we plead Antiquity for the Epi- scopal Government, we do not only in- tend, that it was received in the firil Ages by fome Men, and in lomc Chur ches, ( for the molt damnable Hercfies might have been lb received } but our meaning is, thai it was from the beginning,; thai it was eftablithcd by Divine Authority 5 that the Polity of the Glinllian Chuieli is but a true Copy of that Which was 1 appointed under the Jewifh Occonomy ; that it wasduly tranlinirted by the Apb- . to fingle Succeflors, in particular ; ; that it Was Perpetual and noi Tem- poraiyithat the b&effitiesofthe ( lurch in ail Ages, do require that it fllbuld I preserved firm and inviolable to the end of the World; thai theApbftk flji K 1 td 13? An Enquiry into ed fuch a Polity in theChriftian Church, that what was fettled in the tnoft emi- nent Churches, was alfo eftablifhed in the more obfcure and leffer Churches ; That the Apoftles were infpired by the Spirit of God, and eftablifhed an unifor- mity in all Churches, as to that hedge of Government and Difcipline, which was lb neceffary for preferving the Ca- tholic Do&rine and Unity. Whence is evident, that there was not a different Po^ Mh*mJi ap ^ li y in one Church, from what wasefta- cLX* blifhed in another, but that the Face of the Primitive Church was uniform, and that this Conftitution was eftablifhed by Apoftolical Authority, To this there is nothing anfwered that is fixt and folid. When our Adverfaries are forced to yield, that/0 and/? it was in the Churches that fucceeded the Apoftles, they tell us that the Ancients were erroneous in feveral things, which may be eafily granted, without any dan- ger to this Hiftorical Truth, which de- pends not upon any particular Man's private Fancies or Reafonings, but upon the early Catholhk^ and TJniverfal Tradi- tion of the Church, in a matter of Fact, in which it was impoffible either for the Church, or the moft eminent Lights in the Church, to be impofed upon them- felves the New Opinions, to us, wcrcluiTicicntly acquainted v* trie Apdftolical Conftitutions, which i s andConjlj//ttw,/s were not c ltrvcd in the Ecclefuftical K convcyM t) their Eyes, i:i toe *J P;a&ic-j of the Church. 134 An Enquiry into If we found the Ancients reafoning for Epifcopacy by fome uncertain and pro- bable Arguments, or infinuating that it was then oppofed by lome few, we might, in that cafe, fufped, that there was a defign to introduce fomething into the Church, that was acceptable to the lead- ing Men of that Age : But when we find the Sris of (ingle Succeflbrs, in all the Apoftolical Churches, governing Ec- eJefiaftical Affairs, and this Succreffion not affcrted, as a thing that was then oppofed, but rather ftppo fed, a Tradition fo ftated and conveyed is as Authentic and infal- lible as any thing of that Nature can be. Let us in the next place confider the dangerous Confequences they run upon, who do derogate from the Authority of this Traditional Conveyance, in a matter of Pact. For by the fame reafons they muft queftion the moft facred things of our Religion. It is certain, that the Christian Church did not univerfally and uniformly fix upon the number of the in* Jpired Books that were received into the Canon of the Scriptures, before the Apoftles left the World 5 for fever al "Books that now we receive into the num- ber of Canonical Books were difputed againft, and queftioned by Men of Emi- nence and Authority, after the Apcft'eS were removed. But the. Nem Qpinicws, &c. B.ttfftfre Clwrch ha vingmadeaa accu- rate {ejftch into the Dodjrine contained in .xhofewSooks, and finding that ic /was •agreeable to the Apoftolical Standard, and -that the Original Conveyance of fuch and fuch Books was .fupported by the Tciri- ■raony- of Apoftolical Pcrlbns. or ftp •Men who tontferfed with fuch* upon- this icruxiny,' I fay Ionic Books wuc needtved into -iiwCxnon, which, upon their firft appearance, were doubted of.- Then I would gladly ad\,h we receive the Xtftt mooy of the Ancient Church, after the Days of the Apoitles, for the Authority of. fuch and iuch i>:oks now received in- to i , , how dare wedilpuce their ridelity in a matter of Fao.t the Polity of the Church, in whichrh could not be deceive I, and in it ielf pii liniverlalLyatteitev] ihan the other, w i: we »e:e;vc \yitliq pie ) ) kb\ - to die fuber thrj^hrs &a£. a» Let us in the next place confider the Conceflions of the Learned Presbyterians in this Controverfie ; for fbme of them (and thofe the Men of greateft Reputa- tion and Authority ) do yield fuch Pro- fo fit ions as not only fhakes,but quite over- throws the whole Fabrick of the New Do&rine. I begin Fir ft with the Learned w*t* Mefs. f.Salmafius writing againft Petavius, at- I ihi)?. qui Heretici illi quos vocas nufqnam ntgarunt antique etiam tempera difcrimtn i md inter Epfcofos & Ynsbyttros agvo- the New Opinions, &o 1 37 vijfe x qui (aunt rem efje untiquiffimam, ut duo hi or dines in Ecdefii fuerint dtjltnttt, Epifcoporum& Presbptrerum, ji excipian- tur Apofelicx tempora quorum £vo y ut tc- rum [cripta, teji^ntur nullum confiit eorum ordinum fu/jft drjtinftionem. So that ac- :ording to Sa/ntajius-, there wasa Diftinc- ion always between Bifbop and Presby- :er, excepting the Days of the Apoftles. \gain, thd he affirms, that Eipop and 9resb)tcr were the fame in the Apoftoli- :al Age, yet he grants, that the Apofcles mu ^ f ailed thcmielves Bi(hopsa l nd Presbyters 5 17. b that the Argument ( fo much infifted - »n by hirrj and pthers ) from the equahty nd confufionof Names, can never infer n equality of Offices fed & ip(l porro ' tpofioii fe y.piftopos & Presbyteros nomi- ttbxnt ut ex honoris confortto pares vide- °nttir tllis, qui bus Ecclcfi.ts cur.md.is acre- wftirfas commit ttb.int* \ Again he grants, that the Ancient* firmed Timothy to be Bifhopof E^'ACf 41,42. f ' -.ndApoftle.butl need notweary the Kea-^ \s- Iter, or accumulate conccflions from $al- wftus: I will only Nameonc or two more, \\4c0bus er^oApoftolus, quern Z'dunt ab Api- 'Wlis Efifeop ,r,i ejfi. ordinxtum fttptr l : ptf- \%Hs \ ores conftituti/< z>i\tt4tiir, co- quo ho.iic unit; Epi, CPW* f wusfrf! , isfr*efhAbApoftottstm*Hie- roj'.lymorum c 438 An Equiry into rofolymOYum Epzfcopum ordinatHm Qlemen 'Alexandrines fcripfit. Alii ab ipfo Qhrifi volunt 1 flam finmomv accepffle. So here wc have a Diocefan Biftiop eftablifhed by the Apoftles, in the Perfon of S. Jzmes th* 8l jufl, in the City of Jerusalem. Again, mutatam regiminis Apoftqlici for tnam^poJbApoffolorum Petri ejr Tauli obit urn non invitus etiam conce§erim y it a tamen u. veriffimum fit, baud (latim ab eorttm obin p. 207, novum'huntct morem cepiffe. And again circa pnem pri mi faculi & initium fecund id inisaluijfe fufpicor. Monfieur Jttondel is not fb liberal anc ingenuous, yet we have reafon to than! him too for lome CohGefftons that are ve fy ufeful. Thus he yields,that before th< Year of our Lord 140. the fingle Spiritu al Epifcopacy of one over many Presby ters, did not prevail ; quod ante annum can j j ^ t'efflmum quadragefimum evenijje 1 donee v[: 'prefat.p'.j6. q-^fqu^m probavcrit . ' Again, in his Pre face he grants, that tho there might bi manyThoufand Chrifnansin feveral Ci ties in the Apoftolick Days, yet the? were not fomany Churches in that City as there were Congregations, but onl one Church. But this could not be fc un'efs they were knit together by thei Dependence upon one Bifhop, as fome thofe places cited by Blondel himfelf, 1.1 ' ' - '' • ' the : the New Opinions, &x. 13^ be Margin of his Pieface, fufficiently ->roves. I have named the Learned D<* Moulin l efore, as more Liberal than any of them, br he grants that the Succeflbrs of 7% tothy and Titus were the Epifcopi bsre- zs eorum prt-emiuenti£. And Monfieur Bocbart, one of thc p , ?/ . reateft .Criticks of the laflr Age, hath e/' : f.'/^. 9 ' .lefe words 3 Interim Epifcopnk regimen Bat - We Antiqtufjimum, & Paulo pofi Apoftolos #r univerfam Ecc/tfiam magno cum frrtSu fl/nui(]e, eft mi hi comptrtifjlmum. Suppoie then that Dh Moulin, Bl?ndel % (maJtM, and Bocbartus were fitting iu ouncil together, and one fhould ask em, when it was that this great Cor- ption that prepared the way for Anti- rift (I mean EpifcopacyJ cnter'd jn- thc Chnftian Church. Blomdtl, who the mod Pofuiveand the moft Partial, lis you,that for 40 Years after the Apo- es, the Golden Age of perfect Parity d Presbytery prevailed. Bocb.irtus fays, that he dares not al- V it fuJi continuance ; for he tliinks t hpifc pacji prevailed in the Chriltian lurch, and that with great advantage /all the ends of trueReligion and Piety, ulo pofi Afofiolos. By which Phrafe I cannot extend the Duration ot Prc>- b'ytcfy, ?4o An Enquiry into faytery, in that Apoftolical Period, bt yond ten or twelve Years : So that intli year 1 1 J . the Epifcopal Government we with great Advantage and Succefs efts blifhed all over the Ghriftian Church. But Sdmafius is the beft natur'd Ma in the World ; for he grants that Epifill fdcy prevailed a little after the Marty) dom of S. Peter and S. ?aul, long befbiji the Death of S. John, and many othd: Apoftolical Perfons: DuMoulin is as generous as any of then and the Gonclufion is, they cannot tet when it began, but they are very fure is a thing moft Ancient, and as near tlj times of the Apoftles as is poffible, evil from the beginning of the Second Ce I tury. Let us now ftand upon this Groun. that the Adverfary yields, and lee whl Batteries we can raife hew to beat dotal the NewDo&rine. All over the Chriftian Church, a Ij (hop prefiding over both Qergy and Lei ty, ineveryCfty, was the Ecclefiaftkt Government in that early Age, imitll diately after the Apoftles, towards M beginning of the Second Century : th | let me ask cpto molimine y qiribttt m&chinX was the Eccfefiaftical Parity of Presbl ters, (which the Apoftles left the Churl the New Opinions, &c. 1 4 i fn pofleffion of) changed from that Equa- I lity into the Prelacy that is now com- plained of; efpecially fince the Apoftles eftablifhed their Church Polity in great Unity and Uniformity ? The Gofpel was at this time propaga- : gated over the whole Roman Empire, and ; far beyond it, even amongft thofe Bri- 1 tains that were not then Subdued by the ; Roman Arms. There was no general Council to appoint a Change of fuch vaft Confequence as that of the Government iof the whole Church mud needs be. The \Cbange it felf could not creep infenfibly into the Church: For fuch a Change^ in the Ecclefiaftical Government, lies open :to theObfervation of all Men, and every Man is tender of being incroached upon in his Rights and Liberties. The Church all this time ( except for fbme Intervals) was under Periecution. Did all the Pres- byters then all the World over,\vhen they icould not meet inCouncil; I ask if in that interval they confpired to Change the Ecclefiaftical Government that u Eftablifhed byApoftolical Authority ? Did they f ) quickly agree upon a Change of fuch Con(equence,even when they could ;not meet in any confiderable Body, and was there none lb Faithful ambn^lt them af!, as to oppofe that New Httr** ,ci- 142 An Enquiry into Anti.chriftian in it felf,and contrary to thq Inftirution ofourSavjour and hisApoftles? Were not the Ecclefiafticks of the Second Century(many of them; ordain'd by the Apoftles or Apoftolic Men ? Now the Apoltl.es had the Miraculous Gifts pf Difcerning of Spirits, and they were led by the Holy Gholt to fuch Perfonsas were beft qualified for the Sacred Fun&i- on. Shall we fay of thofe that were cho- fen by the Holy Ghoft himfelf, that were fo ready to fhed their blood for the teftir mony of Jefus, that even they were fo forward to grafp a Power over their Brei fhren, that they could not but know was Contrary to, and Subverfwe of the Crown and Scepter of Jefus Chrift ? Is this a thing to be imagined ) Can it (enter into the Heart of any Man that be- lieves the other Parts of the Evangelica Hiftory, or whole Soul is moulded aftei the true Original frame of our Nature: Let me then again once more ask, k the Name of Peace and Friendfhip, foi my own Information, How this Change that is pretended by the Patrons of Parity was in it felf poffible, all things duly con fidered, fo many Nations and of fbmany Languages, Tongues, and Kindreds, un 1 der fo many Princes and Governors,who(; Interefts were different, and fpmetime opnofite to one another, muft needs agre the flew Opinions, &c. \a^ to this Change: the Churches of Arm* ma in the Eafi, and Spain in the Wtft, of Afric in the South, and Britain in the North, al! of them fball agree in this Conftitution, long before the firft Gene- ral Council for near 200 Years? How- can this be, unlefs fuch a Constitution had been derived to them from the Apo- rtles themiclves? For if we believe that there was fuch an early Change, as is pretended, we may believe the moil mon- itrous Abfurdities that the moPt Poetical Fancy can put together ; ^uicquid vel >.arrxt fama,vcl audtt fahnla. The Chriftian Religion was received 1 in many Populous Cities in Europe, Aju, and Afric, when this Change is laid to be :Hiade, when it was impolFible that all If he Clergy, or any confiJerable Number i of them, or their Delegats could meet to nine the Expediency or Neceflky of fuch a Change $ and it was equally im- poifib'e thac,tho' a great body of them 1 could meet together,thev could agree up- : on the change 5 and yet more impoflible jhat ( whether the attempt had pre- i vail'd or not) we fbould bear nothing j of it in all the Ecclefiaftical Records j that no Hiftorian took notice of it, tho nothing was more memorable in all the Transitions, of the Church ; that wc hear nothing of it in the Writings that arc 144 An Equity ^ nt0 are extant, or in the Fragments of them that are loft, nor in the Hiftories of Con- temporary Pagans. What a ftrange miraculous Confpiracy this was, that no Man oppofed fiich an Antichriftian Enterprize ; that thole very Perlbns, who were marked out for the Sacred Funttion by the Holy Ghoft,fhould venture upon a Conftitution fo contrary to the Apoftolical Rule and Authority / But if this pretended Change was a- greed upon by fbme few Ecclefiafticks of Ambitious Defigns, how came it to be fo tamely fubmitted unto by all other Eccle- fiafticks, without any Oppofition or Do lay ? It is not eafy to number the Abfur- dities that neceffarily follow upon their Hypothefis ; and therefore fince the pre- tended Change,»fo circumftantiated, was in it felf impoflible, I may be allowed to fay, that the firft Original of Epifcopacy was Divine and Apoftolical : And there was no fuch Change, from Farity to Pre- lacy, becaufe fuch Change in the early Ages of the Church, was altogether im- practicable. For let any Man name the Ordinary Methods by which a Change of that Na- ture could be brought about in fuch a manner as this is faid to have happened, and then he will eafily fee that there was no the New Opinions, Sec. 145 no fiich thing; or if it has been,that there was nothing fo Miraculous for the man- ner of it fince the beginning of the World. Let us but Superficially view fome of the Confequences that will follow, if their Hypothecs be allowed. As firjt, that they who were marked for the Sacred Fun&ion by the Holy Ghoft, after fbme Experience, judged it neceffary to change the Government of Parity for Prelacy; that this Change was brought about not by any of the Ordinary Methods, by which things of that Nature are tranfc aded amongft Mankind, but inftantly and in a Miraculous manner 5 that the immediate Succeffors of the Apoftles were all Presbyterians, but that thofe Presbyterians (moft of them Mart) rs for Chriftianity) preferred Prelacy to Parity ; that in their Opinion there was no other remedy againft Schifm and Coofofioo. Such conclufions are Evident and Necefc fary, if their Hypothtfisbz allowed But in the mean time, (contrary to their In- tention ) they efrablifh Epifcopacy up- on a Sure and Divine foundation, no lefs than if they had Aifcrted its immediate Derivation from Apoftolical Prafticeand Authority: and therefore fincc we have rhe Univerfal Confent of the Chriftian L Church, 1^5 An Enquiry into Church,in the pureit Ages 5 for the ppifco- pal Conltitution,we muftconclude,that it could be Eftablifhed by no lower,or later Sanction than Divine and Apoftolical Precept ; for there was nothing Univer- fally received of the whole Chriftian Church, in the Firft Ages, and without Contradi6fron,but what was deriv'd from Chrift and his Apoftles. And if we meet with none before Ae* rius that ever oppofed the Dignity and Jurifdiftion belonging to the Htgh-Priejl^ or Presbyter, which is all one, we may reafbnably conclude, that this Ecclefialti- cal Polity was deriv'd from Divine In- stitution. And the Oppofition that Ae- rius made to it, proceeded only from his own Pride and Ignorance, for he was be- yond all meafure ambitious 5 and it feemshisDulnefsandStupidity wereequal to his Ambition. He was not Saccelsful in his Defigns of beingchofena Bifhop, and therefore he employed the little Ta- lent that he had to aflert that there ought to be no difference between a Bifhop and a Presbyter. It is not worth the while to infill: up- on Jerius. I refume the force of the Former Argument, that the Change from Parity to Prelacy^ in that Period of the Church (wherein the Presbyterians grant Prelacy the New Opinions, &c Prelacy to have Univerfaily prevaii'd} was in it felf abfolut-ly Impoilible. By abfolute lmpo/fibiltty 1 do not mean Im- foffibility in the Metapbyficnl fenie ; but I only mean this much, that f uch a Change, from Parity to Prelacy, all things duly confidered, with regard to the Conititu- tion of Humane Nature, theConftancv, Piety, and Innocence o\ the firft Christi- an;, the Impofliblity of managing a Cou- fpiracy, to lerve iuch a Defign attiongft fo many Nations and Churches, in an inflxnt^ upon luch a Suppofition, I the pretended Change was Impoifible, even as ImpoiTiblens it is for ire alone, by my own Strength and Contrivance, to place the Earth much nearer the Sttti than it is ; for there is no Metsphyficfil lm- poilibility in the thing it felf: bur 1 am cut ot all hope to ice any 1 lie li Ddfij n take cilecT: at any time, before the general Conflagration of the World ; and there - fore why fhall we run our (elves into (uch byrinthas to endeavour to find a rea- lisable Cauie for this pretended Change, when no Inch Caulecan be named. -include therefore, that the Su- per! I [urifcHfl on of a Bi(hop bovc • Presbyter was t. begin- ning; and this i^ the true Reafon why find it ib Parly and I Ul iverlally I v . \\ - 148 An Enquiry into acknowledged in the Ecclefiaflical Re- cords, not as a thing fprung up from Canonical Conftitution, but rather co-e- val with the A poftolical Plantations. We muft not lay, that the Primitive Church immediately fucceeding theApoftles, fo foonApoftatized from their Original Efta- blifhment 5 elfe we have no certain Stan- dard to know what is Genuine and what is Supposititious in the whole frame of our Religion, For if thty, who were mark- ed for the Sacred Fun&ion by the Holy Ghoft, fo boldly ventured to change the Original Conftitution, in things relating to ihe effential Order and Unity of the Catholic Church, th«y might make bold with other things as much as with thefe. And if the Univerfal Teftimony of the Fir ft and Beft Chriftians deceive us in a matter of Fa8 f I would truft them far kfs in a matter of Opinion : the lafl may depend upon their own private Skill and Judgment, but the other was Vifible to all of them, and in the Practice of the Church; therefore we maybe allowed to infer from the Conceflions of the Learned it Presbyterians, that the Hierar- chy of Bifbopi Preskyttr, and Deacon, was in the Chriftian Church from the begin- ning, or in the Words of Du Moulin, the Btfhops arc the Succefforsof the Apoftles, Htfttdes eorum preeminent i*. When the New Opinions, dec. 14^ When the Presbyterians firft fet up their Gentva, Difcipline, molt of their Writings only pleaded that their new-Con- ftitution and Polity was allowable, and might be Defended as a thing Innoienr, and in it felf Subfervient to good Defigns. They thought it not convenient to pre- tend at that time to a Jus Drtrhutm exciu- five of all other Forms, though they made hafte towards it upon all occafions. Beza in his Epiitles to ibme of the Eng- lifh Bifhops fpeaks fbftiy, and in general Terms, and keepsatadiftancefrom what was directly oppofite to the Praclice and Sentiments of thole he wrote tos but when he writes to Knox he takes off the Mask, and hides nothings and it is trom Mr. Kjiox and Mr. Mtttnl our Couutry- men have deriv'd all their Fire and Vio- lence in this Controvcrfie. Niv, they are of late fo Vifionxirc, that they fat] y no Evidence, no Record can be true or genuine that is againli them : and this is the Reafon why, in this la It Age, the Lcarnedft of that Party take fo much pains to Di (prove all Teftin that make any thing againft their S though tlie Ancient Writings wc in Favour of Epilcopacy, have nothi h them contrary to the Doctrine and Simplicity of thole Ages in which they JS° An Enquiry into have been written : and though the cita- tions of the Ancients, from thofe Wri- tings, be the very fame that are now to be feen ; nay, though we have the fuc- ceffive Teftimonies of all Ages, to con- firm us in the belief, that fuch Writings are Genuine, yet if they give the leaft Countenance to, or Evidence for theEc- clefiafticalH^r^r^jthey are immediately voted Suppofititious and Spurious. This is the reafon why Dailie and others, were at fo much pains to overthrow the Autho- rity of S Ignatius his Epiftles ; not that they found any thing in them, unagreea- ble to the Purity, Zeal, and Simplicity of thofe days in which they were written, but only becaufe they contain irrefragable Proofs for the Authority and Dignity of Bifhops over Presbyters. This is the rea- fon why they have been at fuch extraor- dinary Pains to gather Obje£tionsagainft the Authority of S. Ignatius his Epiftles. But this Controverfie is exhausted by the accurate Performances of the Incom- parable Bifhopof Chtfter, who has Effi- ciently proved that if the Epiftles of yind. s. jgnsn, S. Ignatius are not to be received as the genuine Rema ns of that Holy Martyr, no other Writings may be received, how- ever convey'd, or c&efitliv preferv'd. It is true, that now for a confiderable time the the New Opinions, dec. i c i the Presbyterian:) are well p.ealed not to hear of S. Ignatius his Epifties, (I mean the Florentine Copy, publifhed by Ifkac V (hop of C h:fier. Moofi ur VArroqtit made an attempt upon it ; yet none or his oivn JParty thought that the Book he pretended to Anfwer, received any confiderabic hurt by that Gentleman's Enterprize, thsugh otherwife a Learned iMan. But if the Reader is curious to fee all that he oa- ther'd together full) Examined and Re- futed, he may coi ifult Le Noufty lh . fir a' us Ad Biblijhtcam maxim ah.. By which he may eafily perceive, tbaf no- thing prompts our Adverfaries to opr the Authority of S. Ignatius his Epiftl but an uncurable Itch of Contradiction, and a bound'efs Ambition to fuppo: . Caufe, for which they were never vet a- ble to bring one plaufible Aigumcnt. Tis no part of my Dtfigfl to renew in the Writings of thole that 1 h s ready narrnd. Let rtic Call. | .i.iicious .. e fhdul I j[e ot S. Igmtim '.. I 4 [152 An Enquiry into as they pleafe ? Are our Evidences for Epifcopacy lefs Clear or more Doubtful, if thole Epiftles were never written? Have not we the Atts of S. Ignatius his Martyrdom that diftinguifh Bi{hop,Fres- byter, and Deacon, as fully as the Epiftles of S. Ignatius do : and will they fay that the Ecclefiaftical Polity, when S. Ignati- us wrote his Epiftles, was different from that which prevailed when the JcJs of his Martyrdom were recorded 5 fo that it is no great matter to the debate in hand, whether they acknowledge the Epiftles of S. Ignatius, or not. No good Argument was ever alledged againft them, nor ftiall we ever hear of any hereafter ; and moft of thofe that Daille made ufe of, were levelled againft the interpolated Epiftles, rather than thofe Publifhed from rhe Medicxan Library. wah Mef{. Nay, S&lmafius himfelf yields the whole * 53 ' Caufe as far as our Controverfie is con- cerned ; for he tells us, Epiftol&HU r.at& & fuppofit* videntur circa initium aut medium fee undi fieculi, quo tempore primus fwgularis Epifcopatus fupra Presbyter atum introduHus fuit. Now according to the Judgment of this Learned Critic, there is nothing found in the Epiftles of S. Jg~ natius % that can prove them to be later than the beginning of the Second Centu* ry : the New Opinions, &c. j^ rys and if fo, whether they were writ- ten by S. Ignatius, or by another, he that wrote them, could not reprefent the Ecclefiaftical Polity different from what it was in the days of S. Ignatius ; be- caufehis Contemporaries knew what the EcclefiafticalGovernment was in the days of S. Ignatius, as well as he. When one p£r/c?//4*e.ranother,he muft not make that other aft, and fpeak things unagreeable to the Chara&er he bore, and the time in which he lived, elfe he expofes him- (elf to Laughter ; and therefore fince Salmafius grants, that for any thing he :an guefs, the Author of thole Epiltles lived towards the beginning of the Se- cond Century, then I fay, the Author of thofe EpilUes, whoever he was, gave us a true Idea of the Ecclefiaftical Polity to- wards the beginning of the Second Cen- tury : and though he fhould write them towards die middle of that Centurv, yet lie mull reprefent the EcclefitfticaJ Go- vernment; lucli us he him (elf, and thole in biiiOWfl days thought it to have been in the days ol S lgmstins ; for cerrainly, they knew very well what that Ecclefi- aftical Polity was which then prevailed in the Church, being but lo little remo- ved from the time ol S. IgMMiigs his Mar- tyrdom. We mult not think that the Primitive 154 An Equiry into Primitive Martyrs and Bilhops were el ther fo Unskilful or lb Unconcerned, th they knew nothing of the VifiblePra&i: of the Church for (ome years before the* own time, when many of them we: then alive towards the middle of theSd cond Century, who had probably Coin verfed with S. Ignatius himfelf, and mel certainly with S. Polycarp, Upon til whole matter the Epiftles of S. Ignatil are acknowledged to be lb old, and to coil tain nothing unagreeable to the Simptf city of the Firft Ages, that they wifli the] had never appeared. Few Books are better attefted than tt| Epiftles of S. Ignatius : and it is grea Petulance for any Man, at the diftance t\ 1600 Years, to pretend that he know better what S. Ignatius wrote,thanfi///eii us did, who was a moll accurate Searche into all the ancient Monuments of th Church, that hardly could he beimpofo upon in an Affair of this Confequena The firft Chriftians, who were lb carefi to gather up a few hard Bones that th Lions had not devoured,would no doubt be very watchful over the precious Re mains of his iVtind, and the laft Exhort a , tions that he wrote to feveral Churchei as he went from Antmb to Rome. Thai the New Opinions, dec. 155 That S. Polyctrp made a Colle&ion of hofe Epiftles is part all doubt ; and Ir - <*us cites them. And fince it was not aoflible to obtrude Counterfeit EpiftJes ponthe World, in the name of S I ni- cither in the days of S. Pchcarp or rcn^us, how come we to think but that us might fee the trueEpiftles? And i is acknowledged by Dnllt him'elf, lat he had the fame Copy of S. Ignatius lat we now have. And what is cited from hofeEpiftlesby he not in this cafe the mod proper and aoft neceffary ? and whether the Tradi- ion for the fuperiority of a Bifhop above Presbyter, be not more univerial, una- limousand uncoatradifted, in the Primi- ive Ages, than many other Traditions fiat are unqueftionably received ? |, Oner. 7. Whether the Ecclefiaftical government could be changed from Pa- , Jty to Prelacy, ( as is pretended ) in thole I arly Ages of tlie Church, especially fince j bme Apoftles and feveral Apoltolical ivlen furviv'd the Period, fixe by fome 1 Presbyterians, for the beginning of this * pretended ) Change ; and if the Change I vas in it fell impoiIiblc,then Prelacy mult needs be acknowledged Apoftohcal. 8. Whether the Opinion of St >e not difmgenuoully reprcfemed >y the Presbyterians, fince hi never ac mow ledge J nor affirmed any interval, lifter the Death ol the Apoftles, in which icdefufHcal A:lairs were governed) c Mmtn: I UHijilic ? i6o An Enquiry into ghter. 9. Whether there is any gooc and iblid Argument brought by the Pres byterians, againft the Authority ofSt.7^ nxtius his Epiftles, that is not alreadj fufficiently anfwered ? A plain and folid Anfwer to thefe fcln Queries will afmoft exhauft this Contro verfie. So much I thought fit to fay a prefent,to let our Countrey-menfee, tha the fancy of a Jus divinum propagatet by our Presbyterians, is vain and Enthn fiafth) as it is new and Sophiftical, and op polite to the current Pra&ice of the uni verfal Church, for 1 400 Years after tb Apoftles ; and therefore, fuch as zealoui fly impofe this New Difcipline upon th Clergy or People, as if it were of Divin Inftitution, can deferve no other Nam' than that of Impoftors and fa lie Pre; phets. The moft intelligent of our Adverfa riesdo not deny, but that a certain Pre fidency was lodg'd in one Bifhop abovl feveral Presbyters, from the Days of th] Apoftles. So the Quarrel is not (as the)! pretend) fo much againft Epifcopacy, a againft the large extent of their Diocefr and the encreafeof theirPowerover wha it was in the Primitive and pureft Age As for the laft of thefe, the Power c Bilhops over Presbyters, in the manage men * the New Opinions, &c. \6i ment of all Ecclefiaftical Affairs, was in thofe Days much more abfolute than in thefe. The firft and Original Rule of Ecclefiaftical Government being that no- thing was to be done without the Bifhop, no not thole A&s of Ecclefiaftical Power, which were within the compafs of the Pricftly Order. The fuboroii.ate Cler- gy were not to Baptize without his ex- prefs Licence, as Ttrtullian witnefleth, and Dionyfius Bifhop of Corinth writing ad Qnoffios , puts Pinytus the Bifhop of that Church in mind, m»' B*pw ^vov i*t- % - » ,* , r /*.*- Q-sli-ia Eu ebittm it was in his Power, it leems, toreltrain the Presbyters from Marriage, for the word 'A«/u?o/ cannot be extended to other | Chriftians, than thofe of the Clergy, Knee a Power to reftrain the l.aity from Marriage \v,s never pretended to, by any Bifhop in any part of the Chriftian Church ; and Dior*yfius Bifhop of Corinth .flourilhed about the year 170. See then i how high the Power of Bifhops were to- wards the middle of the fecond Century ; ami the Apoltolic Canons, or trie Rules jof Primitive Difcipline, w Inch have I 1 ^gathered together, towards the end of the fecond Century, or beginning of the Ifhird, frequently put us in mind of the Aro-.ver ol Jbifhops over Presbyters and M Laity 162 An Enquiry into Laity, in a I Spiritual Affairs, asalfothe Genuine EpiiHes of St. Ignatim> tho we ihould allow them to be no other than what S Ima/ms himfelf graius,Gsw/#^ ad int:um ant medium ftcuncli fecuii. As to the other Pretence, That inthofe days there was no Diocejan Epifcopacy. 'Tis but a poor Logomachy, invented only to darken the Controveriie, and to per- plex the thoughts of illiterate People; for the word a«jmcij«k is but borrowed from th£ civil- Government totheEcclefiaftical, and tho* the Dioceffesin the Ecclefiaftical fenfe, bear no proportion to the extent of thofe Dioceffes, into which the Ro-I man Empire was divided; yet they may J very well fignifie the bounds of fucha particular Bifhop'slnfpeetion andGovern- rnent, as well as any other that was formerly ufed. Words do change daily, and the bounds of Epifcopal Jurifdi&iori, were, never Geometrically meafured. The extent of their Diocefles mud be now regulated by Human Laws, and if the Dioceffes are wider in fbme places than convenience would allow 3 this does not at all change the Nature or Authori- ty of Epiicopal Jurisdiction. A Presby- ter is the fame Man, and his Office th* fame, in a little Parifh. as in a larger and perhaps there are not two Diocelfo in* r the whole Chriftiari Church, exaftlj equal the New Opime?is y &c 1 53 equal to one another. A Bifhop and his Presbyters govern'd the Ecclefiaftical Affairs of fuch a City, and its Territo- ries. If afterwards, icrne parts of his Diocefs were annex'd to another Diocefs, luch a circumftantialor Modsl alteration did not at all change the Nature of the Government. Nay, this is fuch an exception, as is invented only to amufe ignorant People. Corneluis Bifhopof /^weJucceiTor to Fa- bianus, in his time had 44 Presbyters, yet be was no other with regard to his Power and Authority, than the Hrft Bifhops of Rom ^ who perhaps might have but two or three. When Grtgorius Tbuttnitur- gus entered upon his Bifhopriek of Nto- cjjaria, there were but 17 Chriitians in tint large City. Perhaps one Presbyter at that time was fufticient, or, it may 1:0 fubordinate Oflicer was neceilary. He alone might attend the Spiritual ne- ceffitics of lo many ; but he was 10 fuc- cefsful in hisMiniftry, that when became to die, there were but 17 Pag ins in that great City. 1 hope it cannot be pretend cd that when they were all convened, thev met all in one Houie for Worllip$ and therefore, there J ( on- ! itions who had fi I '. esbyters to Officiate, but ftlll under tlw lol M * 1^4 An Enquiry into of one fupream Biihop : Thefe variations in the number of the faithful, and the bounds of his infpefticn, made no change ac all, neither in him nor in the Nature of his Dignity and Junfdi&ion. It is unreafonable to quarrel the Dioce- jan iVodel of Epifcopacy, which is fo lively reprefented in the City of Jtrufa- ltm> under the Epif copal infpe&ion of St. James the juft, who was plac'd Bifhop of that Church by the Apoftles them- felves, which Blondsl dare not openly de- ny 5 at leaft, he muft oppofe all Anti- quity, if he contradi&s it. There needs no other thing then to be enquired into, than whether the Chriilians ofjtr/f/em lor fome years after the Afcenfion of our Lord, could meet in one Congregation, , and if not, then the Qyeftion is ended by the moft infallible demonftration in our favours. Act. 6, 7. we read, that the word cf God encre fifed and the numbtr of the Difcip/es multiplied greatly in Jerufalem, and a great Company of the Pr it (Is became oh dent to the Faith, In thofe daysths Text feith; that the number of the Difci- ples was multiplied. We read 1 Ccr. 15; '-. That our Si viour before his Afcenfr- on, appeared to Five hundred Brethren at e n a- ^ Acts 2.41. about Three thousand Souls are addsd unto the Church, again, Five thoufand the New Opinions, &c. 16$ thoufand. All this rime the Apoftlcs daily in the Temple, and in truer} Houfe y ceafed not to Teach an.i Pretch \jefus Ch> i . and^S^J. i ]> H Bctewi "*r* tin added unto the Lo> d,mu.t t ■ <.s •' : of M n and Women. Nay, ibeJr Minds were fo famous, that Multitudes ctmc out of the Cities round about, unto Jerufalew, and brought their fick Folks unto the A: oft ;, and Act. 21. 20. St. Junes and his Elders obferved to St. Paul, that many I ho afinJ of the Jews were converted. T,j < J " -ft Brother, sta ftvanuftt , bow m*mj my 14 is are conv rted to Chr fiiamty. M my of the Pnefts were converted, the Mir ides of the Apoftles were undenv able; they became bold and afTiduous after the cthi- fion of the Holy Ghoft \ and 'ho the San- hedrim night be filled with Indi.-n tti yet the Body of the PcMpklud no Pre- judices ac'inft theChnitians at rlmtime. The Apoltles continued a fuveral Years after the A of OUT Saviour. Hjrc ir was thai thefirft P. _ ah- t the Gofpclbeg hwith Divin i and Vigour. Hare the t til f thi T vU wisrtnt, the Rocks clef 1 > > r, and hom the 1) ; t ;/*4- A I 1 ill this the w< nd ttill V - - 1:011 that the !nha!>itanrs of Jirufa m ,, t 7 ^ 1. ad for thePcrlbnofS.^/^^ej the Jalt,^!. 1 M 3 if *66 An Enquiry into if the Progreis of the Gofpel was in any mealure proportionable to thofe firft Be- ginnings, the number of Chriftians ia jtritfd,m muft exceed feveral Congre- gations, even by a modeft Computation. And we find the earliefl: Accounts of Ec- clefiaftical Hiftorians agree to the Ac- r Apud Eufeb. counts °f St. Luke. For Hegejippus tells us, Lib.2 cap. 23. That, by S. James a great many of the St* TioMav ph £ Q ar*es who mither believed a Judgment to $f a^vTM come9 nor A Refurreclionjvere Converted by vrnvQiTwy, fo, m . That a great many of the Rulers and Principal Men in the City were by. his Mi- ts'ftry brought to believe the Gofpel. The Jrws made an Vproar, the Scribes and Pha- n fees faying, that it was to be feared that all the People would turn Chriftians I know there are a great many Evafi- ons infifted on by the later Presbyteri- ans, to fhun the force of all Arguments ; but it is then only feafonaMe to confider thofe Exceptions, when we are particu- larly acquainted, which of them they molt truft to. As for the Cavillings a- gainft Diocefan Epifcopacy, thty are, with fb much judgment and Evidence diffipated by the Learned Doftor Mtu- ImdmVrintedxice in his Treatife on that Subjeft, that Anm 1691, it will be their- Wifdom to confider that Book, before they renew their former Arguments. And Mr-Clarkfonha? con-* trary the New Opinions, &:c. i6y trary to his own Intention, ferved the Church, when his Difcourfc of Primi- tive Epifcopacy occafuned thePublifhing of that excellent Treat ife. The Vindicator of the Kirk of Scot' land tells us, that we pug^t to anfwer Blondtl and his Brethren. Hi knows very well, that this might bo rerort.d with Advantage ; but I chule rather ro inform him, that there is not any one In- ftance in Blondtl, D.uli , or Sib}i\[i>.<, that has noc been frequently anfueiL J already Let him coniult thofe Authors, (and it is not probable, that he, or any of his brethren, can add any thinj;; to their ColIccT:ions:and we defircto know from him what thofe Arguments are, cither from Scripture, Reafon, or Autho- rity, in defence of Presbytery, that are not (ufficiently anfwer'd, to the Sar - ion of all unbyalsM Ven 3 many years before the late Rizchttion. M 4 CHAP. 1 68 An Enquiry into CHAP. Ill Of fever al other New Opinions, pro-\ pagatec/ by the Presbyterians cm Scotland. THE next New Opinion that I take! notice of, is, That our Presbyteri-I ans of Scotland teach the People that iti is Superfluous and Unlawful to obferve j the great Holy-Days of our Saviour's Na-1 tivity, Refurredtion, and Afccnfion ; or3 to Commemorate fin their anniverfaryl Returns) the Piety, Faith, andMartyr-1 dom of thofe Saints that are mentioned] in the Holy Scriptures. This is certain-] ly a New DoQrine, and flyes in the Face of the whole Chriftian Church, Ancient and Modern, Reformed and Unrefi rmed. And there needs no other Argument to e^pofe the Sjperftitious Peevifhnefs of our A'lverfarios in this Particular, than that rhev oppofe the Practice of all Re- formed Churches, both Lutherans and Cahinifts, escepiing cnly the Church of Geneva, who in a popular Hurry, with- out the Know ledge or Interpofal ofCafoin, aboiifhed the flew Opinions, Sec. 1 69 abolifhed the Obfervation of Holy-Days : Nay, Calvin folemnly prot efts that he had no hand in it* Ego (}x%*tf) fmcTc ttfiari E?ijl adHaIlCm pojjnm me tnfcio, ac nee optante qutdem rwn. hanc rem ( Ftfrorum alr-gattontm) fntjfe tranfi3tm % And in another place 5 Qnum «***«. iplebifcito attdtvi abrogates effe dtcs /His, adeo res erat inexpeftata ut p7opcmodnm \obJtuputrim. And our firft Reformers in Scotland, though Warm and Precipitate enough, never thought of any Project fb o ij j e 1 ^ ^ r Buck. Hi ft. Giddy and Singular. Our Countryman ^ Iy Buchanan is Pofuive and Exprefs, that >apon a certain Occafion they Solemnly ■Igned an Uniformity with England', Re- 'Ugtcnis Cultm % & Ritibus cum Arglis ccm* ] minibus fubferfpftrant. And the French •?rotcftants, though they built much af- ler the Model of Gmevt, yet they rc- • ained ftill the Obfervation of the great c loIy-Days. In a Word, to reach that * he Religious Obfervation of fuch Holy- ^ is Unlawful and Supetftiti us, is 00 cenfure the Wildom of all Ages, and he moft Ancient Coi ftitutions of the Ihriftian Church. The) wen O i^in.iily bpointed to Commemorate: the Miite- ies oi our Redemption w it!i all poffible -eal, Gratitude, and Sclem ! it e faid that they arj abufed to \ nd ^iot, lb may the moft Holy Exerctlc 1 7° A?i Equiry into abufed,and theHigheft My fteries: and there is nothing (6 (acred in Religioner fb Uni verfally ufeful in Nature, againft which fome fuch Objedbion may not be ftarted Def.vind.y. 27. The£>ueJiion is #po(iie to 1 lll< irt- - crmany Citations tot! ay he 1 ' ■< his Vm- v cation. e the jewlftl CIuik' rgh nt R rnn; * fed I v 5 nay not do t Of 172 An Enquiry into Of this the Author of the Apology gav two Inftances, the Fajls mentioned ii Zachary 7. and the Feafi of the Dedica tion, 1 Maccab.4. 59. To the firft, the Vindicator Anfwen that thofe Fajls mentioned Z^ck-]. wer difown*d by God ; but he leaves us to guet , e what Words of Scripture he builds thi J Fancy upon .* and I cannot but approv. IC , his Conduct, becaufe his Expofition a ' that Text of Zachq. is as New, and Un J heard of, as his Interpretation of Ordi ' { natio in S. Jeromes Epiftle to Evtgrius. The Jews are laid not to have Faflet ° unto Gcd y Zjch. 7. notwithftanding oi ? their outward Penitential Solemnities \ becaufe they did not hear the former Pro* phets when "Jerufalem was inhabited. Anc this Admonition is again renewed bj Zjch. ver.9. Execute true Judgment ^ /hen mercy and compafjion every man to his Bro* ther, and opprefs not the Widow nor tbt Fatherlefs, the Stranger nor the Poor, ana let none of you imagine evil again'} his Brother in your Heart. If the Jews had had regard to thefe Moral Inftru&ions, their Solemn Fafts had been acceptable to God, though appointed by Human; Authority ; nor were they ever reprov'd upon the account of the firft Inftitution of fuch Fafts, but merely becaule they were Trifling and Superficial in the Fef- the New Opinions,£>cc. 173 Performance, and came to thofe Solem- nities with their Injuftice, Fraud, and pppreffion. The Phrafe that perhaps the Vindica- tor would infift on, is ver.$. Did ye at all Ta(l unto we, iven unto me, only infinu- ites, that they were Carelefs, Indevout, % mmoral, and Irreligious in their Pub- .ick appearances before God. And in )ther places we find Expreffions of higher ndignation,and greater Averfionagainft he Solemnities of God's own immediate fXppointmenr, when they were not per- orm'd with true Innocence, Contrition, ind Sincerity, If a. 1. 11,11,13,14,15, lo what purpoft is the multitude of ycur Sacrifces unto me, faith the Lord, when Vu come to appear before me, who hath re- 1'iiredthis at % yottr hand to tread my Courts? Now put the cafe, tlut there had been uch an Hxpreflion as this made uie of, with regard to thole Falts mentioned Zech.y.who hath rtquirtd this at your hand, :hen it would be impoflible toperfwade :he Vindicator, but that the Inftitution of hofe Solemnities was plainly ftnuk at, Unci not the Manner of their Pertornui nly* ypt all are agreed, that the Initi- ution is not found fault with by Iw.ah, otwithilandin^ of fuch Uxpreliions ; Jt only that the Jtwj were Profane an I religious in their mod Solemn Addrel- ks .174 An E?iquiry into fes. And I defire the Vindicator woulc be pleated to tell me where he finds the Inftitution of fuch Farts blamed : Foi the Context, Zach. 7. Tufficicntly fhew< wherein they came fhort of their Duty They Opprefjed the Poor, the Father lef and the Widow ; fb that, in the company ol fiich Abominations, they could not be fa id to Fafi unto God, The Vw die not defires that we fhould prove that thofi o^W.p.3i.Fafts were only difown'd upon the Act count of their Irreligious Performance^ To which I anfwer,that there is nothing elfe blamed. . If he fay that the Inftituti- on it felf is found fault with, this is ar Affirmative Proportion, and we have bet- ter Reafbn to defire him to prove an Af- firmative, than he can have to oblige u: to prove a Ntgtt/ve. Again, the Vindicator tells us, thai Cbr.fi and the. Prophets hadfo many thingi of greater moment to reprove and infifi pan ticuUrly ftp on, that they contented tbemfeive. to comprehend fitch things as thefe, {viz, Solemnities of Human Inftitution) undo general R proofs. It Teems then that Chrifi and the Pro* pints did not patticularly reprove the Human Inftitution of Feafts and Fafts We are obliged for this difcovery to ths fharp lighted Presbyterians,who fee Con- fluences that were never ieen in any for*- /■ the New Opinions, &c. 175 mer Age. but there are two Scriptural In- ftances brought by the Vindicator to prove the Human Inftitutionof FeaftsandFafts unlawful. The firft is, 1 Kjngi 12. 33. Jeroboam (he lays, ) is reproi-edfor dt- vifing Huty-days that God /j .id not appoint' id. And thus he leaves the Hiftory of Je- roboam. But I would intreat him to read the Chapter from the beginning to the end, and not to impofe upon himfeif and his Readers at this rate, ( for it is of greater confequence todifguitethe Hiito- ry of the Scripture, than the Stories of the Rabble, and the Perfections that the Ctergy met with ) and then he will find -that jeroboam openly and avowedly tor- look the Worfhipat the Temple of Jew. , faltm y and made unto himJJj two Calves of i^old y and (aid unto the Btopl , it is ; much [or you to go up unto Jeiulalcm. ifle- bold thy UadsO Ilrael, which brought t up out of the Land of Egypt. So hi upon the Altar at Bethel, to the honour ot thole Calves of Gold. AnJ this isnothn left than the forlalung the true Godj and Ins Worlhip, and turning Idolater, 111 m- polition to God and his plain and expcfcls Initiations of Worttuping at jfei II 'Jeroboam had appointed a I cult in ho- nour of the true God, and had Lomman !- td the People to bring the r S unified to Jcw/alcm, to be offered unto hun ; and hoc I j6 An Enquiry into not to the two Golden Calves at Betbel; then I fuppole heought not to be blamed for he and the People would have only offered to God, fbme portions of their time for Sacrifices, Prayers, and Praifes, which were not exprefly required by the Law, and yet would be acceptable as free will Offerings, when they were prefented at the Altar in Jerufalem. The ium of his Argument is no more than this 5 ind.simcr.de the Idolatry of Jeroboam, who let up the legibus Hefo-*- tw0 Golden Calves at Bethel, is to be blamed} erg^the Ob:ervationof any Re- ligious Anniverfary folemnity, \m honour of the true God, is unlawful. And if the Vindicator pleafe himfelf with fuch Con fequences, he may enjoy the fatisfa&ion of his own Dream. I know no Man fo cruel as to give him any difturbance. But there is another plain Text that condemns fuch lolemnities in the Opini- on of the Vindicator, and that it is Mattb. I J. 9. in vain do they Worfhif me, teach- ing for DoSrines the commandmtnts of Men. Teaching for Doctrines in the Lan- guage of the New-Teftament, is the affirming fuch a thing to be the Com- mand or immediate Will of God, when tiammmd. ^ it hath no other Original Authority, than Pr*a.cauchj. Human inftitution* To pretend that an invention of our own is immediately enact- ed by God, or td fet it up againft any knowd the New Opinions, &c. 177 known Law of his, is the crime noted by that Phrafe, and nothing elfe but what fhall bear fomeJnalogy to that; and there* fore the Crime here reproved, is not chargeable on thofe who own the ftated Feafts and Fafts of the Church to owe their beginning to EcclefiafticalConftitu- tion, and do not at all pretend that they were immedixttly prelcrib'd by our &r&/« our^ farlefs do they fetthemup in oppo- fition to any of his Commandments, and Inftitutions,but rather in a perfect (iibordi- nation to all of them, and with a pious dc- fign to commemorate both his Laws and Benefits, with all poffible Zeal and fblem- nity. This is not to Uicb for Doftrines, the Commandments of Mtn, but rather to make the Commandments of Menfub- fervjent to the keeping the Command- ments-of God. And when Human Aa* thority is thus employed, the Command- ments of Men are oblerved with an Eye to the Commandments of God. We do not pretend that we have any exprt/s in- flitution in the New-Telrament, for cele- brating the Chriftian Ftjtnints. We know that they owe their beginning to the Piety and Wiidomof fhe A. oltles, or their SuccefTbrs ; and they were, appoint- ed for no other end, than tint The fevc ral ftepsof our redemption might make the molt lading unprotuOfl incur M ties. N Another i 7S An Enquiry into Another placg cited by the Vindicator again!} the Chriihan F.fHvit testis Jer. 7. 31. It is very difficult to guefs his mean- ing or dtfign in citing this Text. Jo bum thtir ^cns arid their D.auohttrs in the Val- ley of rhj Son c/Hinnom, was in it felf abominable. God commanded no fuch Worfhip ; erg 0, to appoint a time for the . folemn and Religious performance of that true Worfhip, which he himielf com- manded, talis under the fame Cenfure. The Vindicator muft certainly fuppofe his Adverfary to be very tame, it he thinks that fuch Fooleries pafs for the Exercifes of Reafbn 5 befidesthe Phrafe which [com- manded thernn t, hath in it a rnanifeft Me- iofis, i. e. I exprefly forbad fuch abomi- nable Idolatrous Sacrifices. They are as contrary to the Original Diftates of Hu- .roaaity,as to all the Principles of reveal'd Religion. No Human inftitution could legitimate a Worfhip, in it (elf Idolatrous, and oppofite to the goodnefs and Sove- reignty of the fupream Being. The other Inftance pleaded by the Au- thor of the Apology was theFeaft of the Dedication of the Temple, at which our Saviour was prefent ; and this had no other Original than Human Inftitution. But the Vindicator fays,that at the Feaft of „j Dedication* our Saviour walked in the Tent- ue) .vina. p. 2 2. ' . the New Opinions, &c i J? pie. But this cannot be ftrained ((ays he) ro (ignifie cither joyning or Approbation. 1 here is no (training in the cafe ? w hen we fay, that our Saviour was in the Ttrn- p/e, at the lead of the Dedication, who never feparated from the Publick Wor- fhip of thejenrs. And was there a more proper Occafion to reprove Fejhz ittes ap- pointed by Human Authority, than w hen lie himfelf was prefent in the Temple, an the Feait of the Dtc-.icuwn. But the Vindicator thought lie went thither only to walk. This bold aid irre- ligious fancy will vanifh, whed we call to mind, that our Saviour quarell'd nothing in the whole Jewijb Conflitutioivnecily becaufe it owed its beginning to Humane Appointment; and be himfelf complied with iuch ufages amongft them, in the vorfhip of God. So he eat the Paiehal Lamb,not according ro the Original In(H- \\\i\o\\jv>th ihtir Loins girt, \ndtb t i !X . st , on tbttr Fat, with flavts :n thti H r?:ls, but leaning, as the Cultom thea was in our Saviour's Days. And this is ft h the more obfervable thai there is Nothing in the Original Precept; t! the lead hint of its i eing ! ttfnpo* rary and tranfienr, o r relative rottl • the* that it was ol per] em.il !'<» N 3 o i8o An Enquiry into \ Obligation , yet the Church changed that ritual of Divine inftitution, in the cele- bration of the Pafchal Lamb into ano- ther, which fignified more properly R /?, and Pofledionof the Land of Canaan, as the other did, their Travelling and un- lettled ftate and condition. The Jew/fh Pcft-caenium of Bread and Wine after the Pafchal Lamb, was found- ed upon no Divine Inftitution; yet our Saviour not only complied wiih it, but adopted it unto his own Religion, ad gave it higher Significations, and efta- blifhed it for ever, a federal Rite of the New Covenant, to convey unto u the .graces of bis Holy Spirit, and thefaving effeftsofhisSacrificeandlnterceffion.This I fuppofe, fufficiently proves by the by, the vanity of Presbyterian Speculations, concerning fignificant Rites and Ceremo- nies 3 and by proportion, that our Savi- cur would not find fault with Earthly Go- vernors, if by their Authority, fomefb- lemn Portions of our time were fet apart for the Publick Worfhip of God, as the Anniverfary Feaft of the Dedication was, by Judas Alaccahxus, in memory of their vid. Dr. Fatk- having purged the Temple from the Pro- nerv ubert. fanations of Antiochus. EaUf.f. 194. j am not at | e |f ure t0 follow the Vim dicator every where, farlefs am I inclin'd to ^ the New Opinions^ &c. 1 8 1 to examine ali his Exceptions againft the Author of the Apology; he endeavours to reprefent him not only as fuperftirious, but as Raving and Mad. He cites the fol- lowing words from hisAdverfary: It iscer- tain t thst nothing pr^frvetb the knotrltdge ofChnft'tan Rtligion amongft tht body of the People % mort than theFeftivsties of the Church. What ! replies the Vindicator^ not the Word and Sacraments ? Whether this looketh rather like raving than like d.fputing y let th R .der fudge* If the ~\.>thor of Ac Apology had tf- ferted thtf the C rriftian / ; ! - ties y and FaAs might be duly and Reltgioufly cele- brated without the Word and Sacraments, and had magnified their Efficacy in that feparated notion ; the Vmd c>.ir might run out unto fiich Tragical complaiiv B it I am of the Opinion, that all Chrifti- ans look upon the Icfti vitics of the Church, as the fitteft feafons for Chrifti- anExerciies ; and it isnotpoffihleto have any notion of Chriftian Fertilities with- out the Word and Sacraments. Are they nut Originally defigned to make tisThirft I I lunger utter Kig!ueoufhef>, to qui en all the Graces of the Spirit, to makj us hear the word of God uiJi greater attention, and to receive the Sacraments with all Devotion and Humility; (*4or- dinaianon pttguant. Chrillian ielhvitics N } a; j I 8 % An Enquiry into are obferved for the fake of the Word and Sacraments, and therefore, if. they promote the knowledge of the Chriftian Religion, it is becaufe the Wprdof God is Preached, and the Sacraments admt- niftred with greater Zeal and Unanimity than at other Seafons ; and here I think there is no Raving at all, but the words of Truth and Sobernefs. If one fhould fay to his Neighbour, ' there is nothing can preferve your Health more than to keep good hours, and to live in the clear and open Air 5 but he to whom he gives this Advice, returns up- on him with great indignation and fays, What? No, not good and wholefeme Nourifhment and warm Cloathing? His Friend doubtlefs would admire his Wit and Accutenefs ; but in the mean time would tell him, that when he recom- mended to him to keep good hours, he in- tended nothing elfe, but that all the Ani- ons of his Life fhould be performed in Vheir proper and convenient Seafons, and that he fhould Eat and Drink only when his Appetite prompted him, and not at other times ; and if he underftood gcod hours, without any regard to the employ- ment of Life, he miftaok his meaning, and the fignificaticn of that word in or- dinary Conversion ; for to keep grod hour* the New Opinions, ccc. trs is no more adjuft theAcY of our Lire to their inoft coovetiieiii fbn c , for there is a time for every thing under the S Whoever thought thai the C!ir. : Feftivities had any tcn.ien :v to promote Ke'igion, without their pr ptrantl eifen- tial Exercife? Such tunes, ( ii only the Idea of time occur to your mio< not be more Holy than other tirflesj But they are called H .ly-days Ly zrcl.ztn t and txtrtnfu Denomination, becaule of the Holjr e ifat are appoincei to be lormedon inch Days, wi H .;t- Vigour and Sole.. 'or one Day is not more hoi.y thin anuki. muft not think that ; when the Stfil is .n luch a Sign or the 2 j than in but luch a | homy and Ex. \ !>y :h it is'.liitnii' nos« I to chink of GhriH without their , ( faff v Inch th I to W h:chlhey are ti b) isilQ on a, i i n lo i - " -> which ] il.1 N 4 Bible 184 An Enquiry into poflible. And if the Vindicator imagines that Feftivicies are thought by his Ad- verfaries to promote Religion, without the Word and Sacraments; he miftakes the plain Language of thofe he difputes againft : I do not (ay, that he Raves ; for Grofs Ignorance, and Raving, are two different things. The Chriftian Feftivi- ties cannot be underftood,nor thought of, without their immediateRelation toChri- ftian Exercifes, and are only valued upon this confideration, That then we apply our felves to all the exercifes of Devoti- on, with all poflible Zeal and Solemnity, And if they are feparated from fuch Ex ercifes, they are Abominations in the fight of God, as the Sacrifices and Feftivities of God's own Inftitution were,when irre- gioufly performed. If it be faid, that notwithftanding of their firft Chriftian Inftitution, fuch Ho- Ij-dxys are not employed as they were Ori- ginally intended* this proves indeed the Corruption of Humane Nature, and that our Appetite for Spiritual things is de- cayed, but not at all the unlawfulnefs or inexpediency of that Conftitution, by which we are fo fotemnly put in mind of our beft and higheft Intereft ; elfe the cqnfequence muft be, that the Bible, Sa- craments, Priefthood, and all Religious exercifes 9 the New Opinions, dec. I g 5 exercifes, arc inconvenient and unlawful, For they arc every Day trampled upon, md expofed to Contempt and Denlion. Notwithstanding of all this, it cannot )e denied but that many good Chriflians eceive much Advantage and Increale of :heir Faith, Hope, and Charity, at iuch blemnTimes as have been feparatcd from ;he beginning for our Spiritual Ad van- age Let us in the next place confider his rhoughts concerning the Antiquity of uch lfated I -eftivities and Falls in the ^hriftian Church. Again we c*nproze/fays ,ie, ) by the SiUnce hcih of Scr pture anu of thtr Church- Hi jforj, thit this Frft: viz. Chriftmas ) r\\:s not u f d for ^co "ears after Qlrrijl ; and a notable conf. •on of this Argument m.iy Let tiqmfrom 'hat is taken ofEafter tntii >■ f // he f]>ou!d have laid thole, ) i$ KrdcfChrijlbias, Here is an AfTertion andiheConri- on of it. Let me be allowed to< t icm both, without any ELtl ffcrtion is, that the if »*/, (nay, nor any xnAtf i ig Halter,) is not mentioned fnatim. And this alfb is the fenfe .,- TertulliaK.pro natalitiis ( Martyr um} ann* K i tis, c*f>.$. aie fdcimns (viz,. oUatior/esj Now if the Anniverfary Commemora ]t < tion of the Mxrtjrs was fb early as thft days of S. Ignatius and S. Polycarp, tW two Difciples of S. John the Apoftle, tbj Vwdiia'or will acknowledge that he il once miftaken i .j his Calculations of th^ Chriftian Feftivities: for not orly tbj Chrijlm/A the New Opinions^&cc. 189 '.hriftmas Holy-Days, but iiu *dt* f ftU W&rtjrum are much older than he thought. md it is much later to fearch the Ongi- al Monuments, than at all times totruft he CnruriMctSy whole Colle&ions ir> eed have been very uietul, yet not ib turate and exaft as to iuperfede all [farther Enquiry. Several Genuine R.- brds of Exlefi-.fticdl Annq my are, by pe great diligence of the laft Age, now hade Publiek, that the Ctr,titrle. '1 he Vindicator left this Confideration Itogether untouched. It was more the Bufincis of the Church to Commemo 1 ip2 An Enquiry into the Nativity of our Bleffed Saviour, thai to fix the time when he was born. Thi is no new Fancy, as the Vindicator ma 1 be apt to imagine. 'Tis the Do&rin of no lefs Man than S. Ah ft in ; Nos t Contra Adi- Dominicam diem & Pafcha foknniUr celt mam. CsfdC. b rarm ^ fr 4 fo dierum cehbritates ; fe, quia intelligimus quo pertineant y nan tern for a obftrvamus, fed qu& tills fignificantm temportbus. But I think it will be ven difficult for theVivd/catcr to difprove thi common Tradition, That our Saviour wa; born on the 25 th of December. *j>tf. vin.t.19. He blames the Author of the Apology that he Pleaded not for the Obfervatioi of Holy-Days with that Cogency of Ar gument and Reafbn that Do&or Hooka did. In this we are fully agreed $ for am apt to believe that he could nevei come up, no not in one fingle Inftance and in the height of his ftrength, to the' ineaneft of Dcftor Hooker's Performan* ces : yet he ought to do what he can tc ferve the Church, according to his Ca-]! parity, againft thofeLate and NewOpi* nions that opprefs both Truth and Inno-, cence. The Author of the Apology, pleaded that the Authority of the Apoftles and their Succeffors was a fufficient warrant for the Celebration of fuch Feftivals to the ibid. the New Opinions, &c. 193 the end of the World. Hirt (faith the Vindicator) is [hufjling with a. Witntfs, bt- caufe the Afojiks ani their Sr t cce(fors are confnfedly put together. Therefore it is butjuft to Explain what he thinks isDark and Obfcure :for there is no more meant than that the Church may, by that Power which is Perpetually lodgM in her, Re- gulate the Publick Solemnities of VVor- £hip ; and when fhe Enjoyns nothing but what is Lawful, we ought to obey. The Apoftles made feveral Conftitutions relating to Uniformity and Ecclefiaftical Order that are laid afide by their Suc- ceffors, and other Ufages came in their room. Such Conftitutions are in their nature variable, unlefs they are equally fubfervient to the great Ends of Oilci- pline in all Ages and Countries 5 tt mfi confuetHiitne Eccleft* Vnizerfjc roboratx (int. In that cafe they ought to be removed by no lels Authority than that to which they owe their Original Efta- plifhment. As for leffer Uiages, their Continuance or Abrogation may depend upon the Convenience of Particular Churches. The Apoftolical Dtdcaneffts are no more in the Presbyterian Vi fir- ings, than in any of the Reformed Churches. o IP4 An Enquiry into ibid. The Vindicator is not yet fatisfied ; toi he tells us, that it u fleafant to obftrve> that our Learned A^ologifl is forced to ufe the fame Argument for Chriftmas, that the Pafifts ufe for the blind Obedience to all that their Church enjoy net h. I heartily forgive him his Ironical and Swcaftic Jeflr. In the mean time, the Author of the Apology was not forced to ufe any other Argument than fuch as he plealed him (elf : and he thinks that he may plead for Obedience to our Lawful Governors in things that are Lawful in their own Nature ; and fuch Conftituti- ons that regulate thePublick Solemnities of Worfhip, may eafily be diftinguifhed from the Arbitrary impofing upon our Faith, fuch Articles as were never re- vealed by our Saviour or his Apoftles, which is the Popifh Pra&ice. To En- joyn theFirft is Reafonable and Advan tageeus to the Ends of Piety and Devor tion .• to impofe the Laft is more than our Governors dare Juftly pretend to 5 fo he pleaded not for a Blind Obedience, but for a Reafonable Subordination,witli out which all Humane Societies muft crumble into pieces. Vef.Pind.f.*$, The Vindicator is, in the next Place, 3P * highly Incenfed, that his Citation from S, Aifjlin is no more regarded 3 but that it the AW Opi?iio?is y &x. 1^5 it is laid to be Nonfenfe. He may be very furc, that if the Author of the Apo- logy thought that S. Anjhn had made ufe of any fuch Expreflion, in the fenfe intended by the/ 7 'indicator , he had treated it with greater Deference : But to be ve- ry plain, he is of Opinion, that there is nothing in all the Works of S. Auftw, that can be diftorted to lei ve the Vindict- tar'sdefignin this Particular. If he had been lo Favourable and Kind, he might have told Ub, where fudi a Sen- tence might be found- and then \vc might eafily fee, whether there were any fuch words made life oi by S. A* ft in thai could be reconciled to the / >\ Hypothecs. To cite two or three 9ti \ from the fcveral Urge Volumes of S. An- fttn, without telling us where they may be found, is, to leave us in a v, fl Dd without a Guide: and it is not \ei\ pro- bable that there is any thing to be met with in his Works againir. die Lautul- nelsof keeping Aooiverfary holv-l)< fince he himlelf derives thole CuflofllS that Univerlally prevailed in the ChurcJ from no lower Caule than Apoft Authority. However, when the ■ cator leads us to the Plac Exprcilions are to be met witl any probable Kealon, that the O 2 be i 96 An Enquiry into be underftood in his Senfe, they fhall then be confidered. Pef.vind.^10. Again, the Vindicator fays, it is not a. day being Anniverfary (as he dreameth, 'viz. the Author of the Apology) that is the ground of our Scruple : for we do not di fallow Anniverfary Days for any civil Work or Solemnity 5 but that men fhould feparate, by their own Authority, one day of the Tear from the refl y by fequeflring it from civil ufe ( for which the Lord hath allowed us all the fix days in the Week ) and dedicating it to Religious Employment , rve think this belongeth to God alone. The Quarrel then againft fiich Days is not their being Anniverfary, for if we thought fo formerly we were but Dream- ing. We are now aflured by the Vindi* cator that this is not the ground of their Scruple^ And the truth is, after all his Illuminations, weareftill left in the Dark where to find it : but if ever we thought that fuch days being Anniverfary was the Ground of it, we miftook it widely ; for they allow Anniverfary days for any civil Work or Solemnity : but to Sepa- rate a day for Religious Exercifes, this belongeth to God alone, as he feems to infer from the Fourth Commandment, The Debate then is not concerning their being Anniverfary Days, nor their being feparated the New Opinions, dec. ipy feparated for Religious Exercifes : for upon Occafions fame Days may be ap- pointed by Humane Authority for fuch; but the great danger is, if they fhould be feparated from civil life, and Dedicated to Religious Employment, and by Hu- mane Authority to return every Year. Die Quint Hi &nt colorem. The Author of the Apology was Rafh and Precipitate : He has brought an old Houfe upon his head. He ventured to difclofe Myfteries that Humane Eyes cannot pierce into. Authority may Se- parate a Day upon occafion of fome ex- traordinary Mercies or Judgments that concern one Nation, City, or Family, notwithftanding of any Infinuationthat may lie againll it in the bolbm of the Fourth Commandment; then by necefia- ry Confequence, the Separating any part of our time, by Humane Authority,from Civil to Religious Exercifes, is no Breach of the Fourth Commandment ; and it is not poffible for him to invent another rcafbn, why Religious Solemnities may be quarrelled but purely upon the ac- count of their being Anniverlary. And if, for lefTer Mercies that concern one City or Family, we may Separate (6 much of our time to the immediate honour of God, why may not thofc Mercies, that O * con 1^8 An Enquiry into concern Mankind in general, all Genera- tions, Tongues, Kindreds, and Nations, defcrve an AnnuaI,or Anniverfary Com- memoration? Why the one is allowed and the other forbidden,I defireto know from the Fourth or any other Command- ment. So it feems in their Opinion, the words in the fourth Commandment may allow a day now and then to be fet a- part for Religious Exercifes, if the occa- fions were never fo frequent. But if they recur Yearly upon us, that is forbidden in the fourth Commandment. Yet the fault is not in their being Anniverfary. I do not fay that this is raving, but cer- tainly here are extraordinary Speculati- ons, and far above the reach of ordinary Mortals to comprehend. The next words cited from the Author of the Apology, are fuch as one would have thought deferve no great Cenfure, JUL njifzi that it is very dangerous to feparate from j he Church in thofi Conjlitutions and Solemnities that have been derived from the Apofiles or Apoftolic times. To which the Vindicator replies, that the Reader will Judge whether any one word of this Thra- fonic triumph be true, or have fufficknt foundation in what he hath proved. One great Misfortune is in our prefent Engagement, that we are not likely to under- the New Opinions, &c. i ^ underftand one another. For hitherto I thought that to be Thrjfowcal in Words andA&ions fignified aToppifhkind ofVa- nity, when a Man admires himfelf, and applauds his own Wit and Performances, to rhe difparagement of better Men or his Equals 3 and vents upon every occafi- i on fuch fulfbm Conceits of himfelf as ' makes him Ridiculous. But here the 1 Apologift is reprefented as in a Tbrafontc Triumph, becaufe or his Deference and • Regard to thole Ufagesand Conftitutions i that have Univerially prevailed in the I Chriftian Church. If we do not un- I dcrftand one another, it is in vain torea- I ion. I pretend that thure is norlr Thrafonicd in that Deference that is juftly due to the wiidom of fb many Nations and Ages. But he is of another Opini- on, and therefore I think that lie ought in the firit placctowrite a DtOioridnznA lend me a Copy of it, that we may know what fuch and liich words do lignilie in his D.a/tcf, elfe we may beat the Air at this rate as long as we live, and very little to our Satisfaction and K liiic ition. The next AlFauItmav bctnduredmGfC . , ior he only upbraids hitn with rhe iveaknefs ofhislntelle&u ilsai d illogical Rumblings, itisthishe (the Apologift) ttlkib m % (i;tt 1 know n< t to wb.xt fMff§ft % ) O 4 that i oo An Enquiry into that the knowledge of Chrift doth not extinguifh the light of Reafon, therefore fuch Conftitutions, ( as the Reafon of all Mankind is agreed in ) have nothing in them contrary to the Purity of our Reli- gion. Thefe are fuch looft Arguings ,(faith the Vindicator ) of which the meanefl Logician might be afbamed. If I underftand the Apologift right, his meaning is this,that noSociety of Mankinc either Jewifh, Christian, Mahometan, or Pagan,ever thought AnniverfaryRzYxgiom Solemnities unlawful, tho eftabliflied on- ly by Humane Authority ; but on the contrary, that all of them judged fiich ve ry proper to preferve and excite in the People all Devotion and Obedience. There was nothing in the Light of Nature againft them : The Seafons of them were regulat- ed by Humane Prudence. They were forbidden neither by Mofes^nor our bleffed Saviour-, theirLawfulnefs is only queftion* ed in thefe laft Days, by fbme kw 9 who cannot reafbnably be thought wifer or better than the reft of Mankind, and therefore ( faith the Apologift ) Men had better comply with fuch Conftitutions, than raife fuch a clamour as deftroys all Unity and Order about things not only innocent, but ufeful in their Nature and Tendency. I] the flew Opinions, &c. 201 I am willing to be informed where the Flaw of this reafoning lies. Whatever is agreeable to true Reafon, is rather im- proved then condemned by Religion ; but fuch Conftitutions are agreeable to true Reafon : erg9 y there is nothing in them ! contrary to the Purity of our Religion. ' This £y%//w(Ifuppofe) is right enough 1 for the form, if we can defend the feveral fropofitions in it. The firft I think is evi- dent ; for God never fet up two Lights, the one to extinguifh the other, but ra- ther the latter, to exalt and advance the former; th6 we know by the Gofpcl feve- ral Myfteries that unaffifted Reafon would never penetrate into ; yet the Prin- ciples of Reafon are ftill the fame that they were, before Revelation did illumi- nate it. And there is nothing in Reve- lation that overthrows the Principles of Reafon, nay, it teaches us to Reafon bet- ter, and without the true cxercifc of Rea- fon, we are not capable of the Advanta- ges of Revelation; for all its Superftruc- turs pretuppolcour being reafunable Crea- tures: And when our Sa-jionr brought the laft and mod perfett Revelation into the World, there was no necelfuy to inform Mankind, that they mull: needs appoint Anniverfary Solemnities, to increafe and Iprefcrve the Reverence due to Chriitiani- 202 An Equiry into ty 5 for all Nations of whatever Religi- on were already agreed, that fuch Con- ftitutions were the ordinary Concomitants of Religion, as public kly profefs'd. And why fhQuld not the true Religion have as many expreffions of our Love and Re- verence, as any other InlHtution? As for the fecond Propofition, that fuch Conftitutions are agreeable to true Reafbn ; all Nations have Agreed in this, and this is the beft Evidence of what is agreeable to true Reafbn 5 and it is no objection in Z^n? againft the Univerfality of their Content, that fome fewlndividu als in our Days pretend, that the reft of Mankind have been miftaken ; for it is a „, , maxim in the Civil- law : quod maior pars L. 19. ft. ad r . . , ■ Z J 1. M/imeip. curia ejficit pro eo habttur acp omms egerint. And again,, rtfertur adumverfos quodptt- blice fit per major em partem. So that when ru!fsjl}?. €re ~y$v ir ' eec Mwh an y t ' i ' n § t ' lat ' iat ^ ^ een equally received amongft all Nations, and in all Religions, we may be allowed to think that fuch a Conftitution in it lelf was agreeable to Humane Reaibn : (I fpeak or fuch Conftitutions in their ge- neral and abiira&cci Nature, feparated from the particular e#ds and cbjtSs of L different Religions, which may be good 4 or bad, as the Religion is, ) the jews and the Chriftians have equally agreed in this, \i 3 f the New Opinions, &c. 203 this, and therefore a pnmo ad ultinium, there is nothing in iuch Confutations I unagreeable to Humane Reafon, and con- jfequendy nothing prejudicial to true Re- ligion. Bat \\~\zV indicator hath fbmething more I to add. We do not dtny (faith he,^ the vjeof Rtafon in Religion but that the ' 4 f e °f R ta f on ts to appoint New Ordinances, it weans of Grace, that Chrifl hath not ap- pointed, rve deny. But hath any of his Ad verfaries affirm- ed that Men, by the light of Reafbn, without any Revelation, might appoint New Ordinances and i\\w Means of Grace, hat Chrift hath not appointed ? The An* liverfary Holy-days were never intended introduce into thcChurch AV^Ordinan- :esand Meansof Grace, but have been ap- pointed rather toencreafcourDcvotion tor he old o»eJ,that arc acknowledged by all 3hri(tians to have been mftituted by owr Saviour; When I receive the Etcbarifi jpon Chriftmaft day, I never tbo new Mean of Grace different from r hat ippointed byour vV<: /tf'; . Such I Day go to Church, and the whole time w pent in Prayers, Praifes, and Enehati 4/Sacrilices ; butthe*?rj me -i! pace md new Ordinances I cannot i.e. The xiblick Scalom, and Anniversary iolem- nitics> 204 An Enquiry into nities put me in mind of the Myfteriei of my Redemption. I apply my felf tc the Federal Rites of God's Inftitution, bj which the Graces of his Spirit are gou veyed and revived. Where then are the new means of Grace that Chrift hath noi appointed? The publickSeafons are no thing elfe than Circumftances of time wh.ch may well be regulated by Ecclefi aftical Authority. It is a great misfor tune to be taught to reproach and nick na^e the excellent Conftitutions of the 1 Church from their Infancy. Thus the Sf^ratiftsy without any further exami nation, profecute the Church by vifio- nary and groundlefs Accufation$'; they cannot endure to hear of a Holy-day 1 Why? becaufe they cannot allow thai Men can appoint new means of Grace, that Chrift hath not appointed. This b ftrong natural Nonfence ; no Art coulc match it : The Church regulates thejai publick Seaibns and Solemnities of Reli gion; ergo, (he appoints new Means o! Grace that Chrift hath not appointed there are no fuch ergos in the cafe. The Confequence is this, that fhe appointshei Children to approach her Altars at fuch I and fuch Seafbns, and partake of the oh Means of Grace appointed by our Saviour, with all poffibleZealj Decency* and Una nimity. How the New Opinions, &x. 205 However, the Vindicator hath fbme- thing more to fay, and after many harfh Complements beftowed upon the Apolo- :rift, he comes at length to this, Our Ar- ?ume*t hath yt greater ftrength, if we con- sider not only that the Holy-day now debt- l(d about, (viz Chriftmas ) was kept by the Heathens in Honour of Julius C«far, and hence called Yule in Scotland. The longer a Man lives, the more op- portunities he hath to learn f mething hat is new, (b ignorant have I been of ;his piece of Roman Antiquiry. I never ;hought that Chnjlmis was obferved in lonour of Jwti*s C^far: Our Saviour .vasborn in the Days of Auguftu$ y audit s not probable that his Nativity was ce- lebrated before he was born, or that Jn- 'iu4 Cafir was any Type of him, or that ;he Heathens ever oblerved this Feftivity, )r that there was any Feaft oblerved in iny place of the World, to the Honour ifj/t/iu Ccef.ir. Sometime ago we might ?c allowed to fmile, if we heard any uch thing ; but now after fi< Years op- preiTion, our Animal Spirits move fo hea- vily, that nothing can p t ihcm in a brisker Motion. Vet this odd piece C itor y is proved Efficiently by th< ' u rjfor^fsys he) V ianJ. Many Buck lib. S hift. 2o£ An Enquiry into Many of our Words in Scotland, f if I may be permitted to inform one that may know it better than my felf ) are but French Words Corrupted, which may be done by the change or Addition of one Letter, and the word (Tucl) is but Noel, and this again but the contra&ion of Nou- uellts, fb that le jour cle Noel is nothing elfe than the Day of Tidings, firft pub- 1 idled by the Shepherds which brought Joy to all Nations. And thisHiiforicalSolaecifm fas far as I can guefsj feems to be built on Bacha- nan's Authority, not well confidered ; for fpeaking of the Britijh King Arthur, and his Victories againft the Saxons, he tells us that when he came to York, the Town was Surrendered unto him, and to- wards the end of December, the Nobility that came to Court fpent their time in all. Excefsand Riot, (b that renata eft ("faith Buchanan) veterum Saturnaliorum imago ; the ancient Saturnalia feemed to be re- vived, and the whole Scene looked ra- ther like the Pagan Solemnity of Saturn, - t then the Commemoration of our Savi- ours Nativity. This informs us, what their Pra&ice was, and not what it cught to be, which became the more abomina- ble, that they committed fuch Follies when they were obliged in thofe Seafbns to be better employed. He the New Opinions, &c. 207 He adds, Aejhr C7*/'*) td ftftttm vo- c intJS/ifari< Quin ) nom me fro S tirno ful- ftittito, 16 he thought that they fhould ra- ther call that Teltivity by the Name of ■Situwalia, than ^uli.i ; but he miftook it ; for the People by that Word had no regard to Julius C*f*r k nor did they call it Jul**, (for they ipoke no Latin) but 7W, which I have accounted for alrea- dy. It our Author had read the place in RuchinnAn, he would not have laid that \chnfimafs was obierved in honour of J/t- luts C&f&r ; for his defign was to fhew how inconfiitent their Debaucheries were to tlie Ecclefiaftical Inititution ; and that by their Lull and Riot, they facriik I rather tioSatur*, than celebrated thcN u ktivity of our Saviour, which may he ca- ^athered from the wards thai immc- d lately follow, tndgo perfmifum tfi^ />.u.i- Chrifii its ctrcmotttis c. im hi aladds, that the comi ,!)t the Nativity of our S 4 by fuch Ceremonies. I 1/ 208 An Enquiry into little underftood the Nature and Ten- dency of Chriftian Religion, if they pre- tended to honour our Saviour by break- ing of his Laws ; apd therefore the Hifto- rian thought, that the Name of Satur- nalia % or Bacchanalia, belonged rather to thofe Feafts, when they were attended withfuch enormous Pra&ices, than the Natalitia Domini. And fo far he was in the right, if, inftead of minding the Ho- ly exercifes intended by the Church, Men give themfelves over to all Lafcivioufnefs and diforder. When our Country-man wrote his Hiftory, he was very apt to blame the Church for every fcandalous Fault that appeared among the Chriflians. But Satyr is not the way to reclaim Mankind ; the Purity of his Phrafe could not hide the Bitternefs of his Temper. When we confider hislnve&ives againftQueen Ma- ry, they may be compired,for Stile and Contrivance, to the mod celebrated Re- mains of Antiquity, but for Spite and ill nature to the higheft order of Devils. Towards the middle of this page, the Vindicator gathers together a great ma- ny expreffions from the Author of the ^■3 J ' Apology, wherein he beftowes great Elogies on the Feftivities of the Church; and therefore the Vindicator thinks, that he the New Opinions, Sec. 209 he equals them to the Word and Sacra- ments ; for tndeed ht (the Apologift ) faith as much as Qhr iftmtfs, and othit Holy- days are the Power of Uod urito Salvati- on. He does indeed look upon the Feftivi- ties and Falls of the Church, as the pub- lick and itated Seafons, wherein the Pow- er of God unto Salvation, or the Word and Sacraments are difplayed with all poflible Ad vantages, to (upport our Faith, Hope, and Charity ; this is not to make them equal to the Word and Sacraments, but rather fubfervient to them both. Bnthe (the Apologift ) faith, that by tbeConftnt of all Nations, fnch Solemn i+ ties are nectjfxry to the Being and Beauty of Rtligion. An ordinary Degree of good Nature would have palTedover this without any Severity or Cenfure. Religion may be confidered in a twofold Capacity, either with regard to the internal lixcrcite, or Secjndly, the external Profeffion. To the firit, it may be, fuch Solemnities are not bfblutely neceilary \ to the feeonJ they may be very uleful, as i'r: as the Exerciles of Religion muft be med, (bine- times with Order, Uniformity, and So- V But 21 o An Enquiry into But his Libel is not yet over ; for he makes the Apologift to damn them all to Hell) who do not objtrve Chriftmafs. It is not my way to give any Man the Lie, he mayrecolle&himfelf a little,and then he mult acknowledge that he never read any iuch thing in the Bopk that he pretends to refute, and therefore the Confequences that he draws from this vanifh into Air and Imagination. As for the feveral other reformed Churches, that he fays have no Anniverfary Feftivities, they are all of them in the World of the Moon, ex- cept Geneva, who yet hath one Day an- fVerable to the fifth of November in Br/- Le )our cTefca-taJv. Tis true, when our Country is un- lade. der the Eclipfe of Presbytery, the Men of his Way endeavour tofupprefs theOb- fervation of theFeftivities; but they were never yet able,in the height of their Pow- er, totally to abolifh them, C A A P. the New Opinions, &c 2 1 1 CHAP. IV. Of the Presbyterian Notion of Schifm, and their fabulous Sto- ries concerning their Ecclefiafli- cal Parity in the firfi Ages of of Chrifiianity. THE next thing that deferves Re- proof, is their notion of Schiftn ; lpeak of it here as reprefented by their Vindicator, who will not allow that the Scots Presbyterians (generally fpeaking) are Schifmaticks, tho they have all the marks, by which luch may be dillin- guifhed from others, who worlhip God in Unity and Society. There is nothing of greater Confequcnce to the Edification the People than Chriiiian Umtv l h is i, judicially urged by the Holy Ghoft, ? and S. Psud declareth that the Difcuids- and Contentions of the Cor tut buns were ' ' • '■ 3 3 * an 1 .vidence of their being Carnal. And it is certain, that Sl; i irom any Ghriftian Church dul\ canftttQted f is then Lawful and Necciury, and free P 2 from 212 An Enquiry into from Schifm, where Communion cannot be kept wuhout Sin. It is needlefs to cite the Ancients to this purpofe, who declare againft Schifm frequently and 2SS:*i6 ^ evere 'y- Diomfius Alexdndrinus thought that to fuffer Martyrdom to preferve the Unity of the Church, is no lefs Glorious than to be a Martyr for refufing to offer DeVmt^cEc Sacrifice unto Idols. And S. CyprUx at titf*. ferteth, That the Sin of breaking the Churches Peace by Schifm is in divers refpe&s more heinous than thatofthofe Ltpftd Chriftians, who, in the time of Perfection, offered Sacrifice to Idols. And again, that the Stain of it could not be removed by Martyrdom. By the \\ord(Schifmy\s meant in the common Ec- clefiaftical Notion, thofe Unneceflary and Faftious Separations, from any part of the Catholic Church, where we may hold Communion without breaking the Laws of God. For fuch a Separation is manifestly a Breach of our Baptifmal Vows, by which we are United unto the whole body of Chriftians all the World over, and obliged to hold Com- munion with all the Faithful, and upon all occafion c , where there is nothing im- pofed in it felf Sinful, If the Church that requires our Obe- dience, hath in its WorfhipPublick and Heretical the New Opinions, &c. 2 1 3 Heretical Confeffions, or if our Ecclefi- aftical Governors enjoyn us to believe any thing contrary to the Catholic Tra- dition of the Chnftian Church, or if the Worfhip it felf be polluted with feveral things that are inconfillent with the Ho- nour of God, the Purity and Simplicity of our Religion, in that cafe we ought to feparate from a Church lo defiled, that we may not be divided trom Chrift the Head and original Fountain of all true Peace and Unity. The Author of the Apology offered ^: P4 . feveral Confiderationsto prove the Pres- byterians of Scotland Schematics. As firft, that they feparate from all other Churches in the World, as well as that to which they owe Obedience. That there is not now a Church upon Eaith with whom they think they may com- municate without fear of being Polluted. The Vindicator favs, tb.it this U falfe^Def.y;^. for none of them refnf to commu i r ate with the Churches ^Holland, France, Geneva, &c. And t ho there be in thofe Churches fever d things that they diflike, ytt thtj thought tt not Unlawful to commu mcate with them* The things ( I fuppofej that they dilliked in France and I {'Hind were their Hinted Liturgies in the Publick Woi (hip, V J the.: 214 An Enquiry into their Obfervation ot the Chriftian Fefti- vities and fuch like. For what they difliked in any of thofe Churches, he tells us, they abstained from the Praffice and Approbation of it. At this rate it will be difficult to find Schifmatics in all the Records of the Church. We cannot be (aid to be Mem- bers of a particular Church, or to hold Communion with it, if we do not joyn in their Worfhip, as it is eftablifhed a- mongft them. The Publick Worfhip in the Churches of Holland, (at leaft the more Solemn parts of it,)is fix'd and Li- turgical. I fuppofe the Presbyterians forbore the Pra&ice of this, and could not approve it ; yet he fays, they chear- fully communicated with the Churches of Holland. The Churches of France and Holland both obferve the great Feftivities. Does he know any Presbyterian that re- ceived the Sacrament upon fuch Feftivi- ties ? No fare. They would keep at a diftance from fuch Heathenifh and Su- perfluous Obfervances. And at the rate that he explains his Communion with the Churches of Holland, there is not a Church upon Earth with which he may not Communicate. For fince he for- bears the Pra&ice of thofe things that he diflikes, why may not he be faid to hold the New Opinions, &c. 2 1 5 hold Communion with all vifible Churches upon Earth : for he cannot deny but that there arc very many £x- cellent things amongft them ; and lie may only forbear the things he (Jpes not love. He could Communicate dfiHi the Proteftant Churches of France t\\6 they retained the Chriftiau Fertilities, which (in his Sen ft. J arc humane Or "dmanses gnd new Means cf Grace that Chrift ha>h nut .appointed. And if there be many thi : in the Roman Church that are unexe ble, it is but his forbearing the Practice of them. In a wcrd, they cm commu- nicate with any Church, and hold Chri- ftian Fellowfhip with no Church. It is true, the firft Presbyterians never fcru- pled the Communion of the D.'tcb or trench Proteftants, no nor the Com; nionofthe Rpifcopal Church of sStashnd. Their Objections then a gain ft /'/ Liturgies, and Ftjliz.. and Raw, they are now grown up .0 a terrible and Gigantic ftatLre. They mud no more come near a Liturgy, i\y&\ r would Sacrifice their Children in Ac Valley of the Son OJ Uinnom. He grants that ti mtrly lift a tbt j) \ rant for tbt ( stole too great Defiretut to 1 } 4 %\6 An Enquiry into Compofure, therefore they think^it better to lay it ajide. And not only to lay it afide, but to turn out the Epifcopal Clergy out of their Livings, if they prefume to retain it in the Publick Worfhip, according to the ancient Cuftom of the Church. This is Infolence and Impiety with a witnefs. He knows no W arrant for the eonftant ufe of it ; But he knows very good War- rants for the eonftant life of Extemporary Prayer in the Publick Worfhip. I would ask the Vindicator jNhy he thinks that the Doxology can be laid to be more a Humane Compofure, than the Pfalms which now they fing in their Churches- The matter of the one is as Orthodox and Unquestionable as the other : and the Me- tre in which thePfalms areSung,is as much a Humane Compofure as the other can be. The Confeflion of our Faith in the Holy Trinity , is as much Scripture and Reve- lation as any of the Pfalms of David. But this is aDigreffion, and upon the former Confideration I affirm, That our Presbyterians are Schifmatics in the ftri&eft Notion ; becaufe they cannot keep the Communion of any of the Re- formed Churches, who all of- them have (ix ? d and eftablifhed Liturgies, and retain tlte grf at Chriftian Feftivities. It is true, Geneve i i the New Opinions, &c. 2 1 7 Geneve hath no Feftivals. And I ac- knowledge it was a miftake in the Au- thor cf the Apology ro fay that they , had any fuch. But upon the whole mat- ter, our Presbyterians cannot be laid to hold Communion with the Protectant Churches abroad, becaufe of their (tinted Forms and Humane Ordinances, Organs , Significant Rites and Ceremonies : all which are fo twifted with the Solemnities of their Worfhip, t»^at fince the Presby- terians cannot approve of thele, they muft not be fuppoied to hold Communi- on with the Ioreign Churches. A fecond Conlideration propofed hy j ?0 i\^. :he Apologiit to prove them Schifma- :ics is this, That if the prefent Presby- terians had lived one hundred and fifty iV'ears before the firft Council of Nice, Lhere was then a Ncceflity ("by their principles) to Separate from the Unity Df the Church. Here flays the Vindicator) there is a ; large Field tbrDifputatiion. He demies t hit he Hierarchy was thin in the Church : horv- twver fame cf the names might Lc ; jet th: hin? now flgnifed by thofe vamts was not ■• hen * >• / Amongftthc things that oblige them n iolcparatc from the Unity of the Church e, hey reckon An mvcriary Feftivities, I « * pi& 2 1 8 An Equity into nificant Ceremonies, the fign of the , Qxo^&c . And does he think that thefe and fuch like were not then received into the \ Chriftian Church ? I befeech him to read i fome of the Ancient Monuments of the: Church. It were enough to make anii Man ridiculous to prove things that are! fo evident in Ecclefiaftical Hiftory. The! Commemoration of Martyrs^ the Qbferl vation ofEafter, are much older than the! Period named by the Apologift. And ill is a demonftration of their being Schitl matics in the notion of the Catholic! Church, That they would have been obliged to have feparated from theCorn-i munion of Chrift's Vifible Church, i% the Firft and Pureft Ages. A third Confideration makes therrffi; Schifmatics, becaufe fuch Practices a*fe they are now guilty of,were CondemnecE, as Schifmatical by their rfw/zPredeceflTorsL He tells us, that this was formerly ar%, fwered by him, but leaves us to guefifc where it may be fcund ; and fo I let life alone. jfooi-M 6 - A fourth Confideration is this, thatL no Schifmatics can be named in the Rej) 3f cords of Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, to whorr that Name is more agreeable than to th^, Presbyterians of Scotland. T< i the New Opinions, ur Adverfaries can fay for their own. However he miftook the Novatians or the Donatifts 5 for thefe, and not the donatifts, denied Repentance to the Lap//, and the Truth is,our Vindicator is never nore unfortunate than when he meddles zith the Ancients .) The Bifhops them- fdves were admitted to Repentance mongft the Donatifts (-a Practice alto- gether contrary to the Difcipline of the fchurch.) IheNivatians taught that the bhurch could pardon no Crimes; but tfie Donatifts received into their Fellow- pipfuch as had gone through the feve- al Steps of their publick Repentance, kgain, the Novations abftain'J from fe- lond Marriages, the other did not ; and lie only thing wherein they agreed, was lie Name of Puritan, or Cat ban: The Irft thought themfelves pure, beca: Iiey kept at a diftance from the Lapfi; file other, becaufe they would have no- fling to do with CecilisM nor his Suc- fcflbrs, in the See of Cartba?t. Upo:i lie whole matter I delire to know w ; I was, in the Opinion ot the Catho Church 222 An Enquiry into Church, that made both of them Sche- matics and whether it was not, That \ upon frivilous pretences they left the I Communion of theChurch, anderected 1 Altar againfl: Altar. I fuppofe there were \ many amongft the Novatiaxs, better Men! than any of the later Sectaries; yet,| by overfireachingtheEcckfiaftical Diici*l pline, unto too much rigour and feverityjl C inconfiftent withChnftianCompaffion,! and Human infirmity ) they incurred thee: Cenfure of the Church, and the infa-I mous Chara&er of Schifmatics: Andi *I am ftill of the Opinion, that both Afo-I vatians and Danaiifts had more plaufible Pleas for their leparation, than any that: ever the Presbyterians made ufeof. A fifth reafbn to prove them Scifma- tics is founded on theDoftrine of S. Cy+ priav, but our Author iays, that a B/fhopi in Cyprian's time was not a Diocefan, but the Pajlorofa Flock, or the Mo dt rater of a Presbytery, and a little after tells us, That they difown the Bifoops of Scctland, jot w being their Bifbops. If S.Cyprian was a Diocefm Bifhof, he lo allowes himfelf and his Party to be trulyifo Schifmatics, and this is a plain demons i ftration that he is altogether unacquainc ed with the Works of S. Cyprian : He ought to remember that he makes the Bithops,- the flew Opinions, &c 223 Sifbops, ( as fuperiour to, and diftin- juifhed from Presbyters) the SucceiTors >f the Apoftles; and in another place, hat the Polity of the Church that then )btain , d, was eftablifhed Divin* kgt. \\\ Jurifdiftion and Authority was then odg'd in the Bifhops, inLmuch that 're^byters did not meddle with the fpe- ial A&s of J urifdiftion belonging to him, o not when the See was vacant, as ap- •ears from the Epiftleof the Roman Pns- yttrs, upon the Death of Fabianus 5 in yhich they plainly infinuate, that they pdno Authority as long as they wanted V Bifhop ; poft txctljnm nobd'ttjimx mev> \i* I'iriFabiani /tondum eftEptfcopus <&c.qu't \mnix 1 (I a modtrttur, cr torrtm qui Ltpfi 34. tor t that what he iaid, againft the Cler- gy's ^reaching only Morality was aimtd at the Writtt of that Book, that be pre - tends to reiute, andfone others who are of mis Kidn . iricrc I defirc the Reader to take ncn hat whcnhisfccondl /*^/V*f#0/yapp$aredj ii winch he thus Cenfured the Clergy, ie ncitliLf law any Sermons of his A«l- l/erlary in Print, nor did he Inm'cli ever Iliearhim Preach. Vaai that ume,w itL- Q om 226 An Enquiry into out any further knowledge, he intended that Cenfure againft him, and fuch as he is pleafed to call the Men of his Kidney. I fee then what fair dealing I muft expe£t from him. Yet he is pleafed to fay, that his Ad- verfary is very uncharitable, that he did not think, that his decretum Prateritum and Pr&damnatnm (though fairly Printed, and folemnly diftinguifhed from other Words in hallic Letters, to fix the Rea- der's attention ) was not the Printer's De f Vin(i fault, rather than his. There are fome 35. * mentioned in the Gofpel, who laid heavy Burthens on other Mens Shoulders, hut they themfelves would not touch them with one of their Fingers. I am not concerned what comes of his decretum pr&damnatum, fince he now difowns it, he (hall never hear more of it from me. He allows himfelf to Cenfure thofe Difcourfes, that he never heard at a blind venture, meerly becaufe they were Preached without the Walls of a Conventicle ; but if we read the words as they are plainly Printed,the we muft be uncharitable, and rejoyce i evil, becaufe we do not immediately con- elude that Presbyterians, efpecially their Leaders, are beyond the poffibility of (tumbling or Inadvertence. Andtho 1 we read BUfphemy and Nonfence, yet we muft : the New Opinions , &c 227 l muft blame the Printer, rather than pre- I fume to think the Author capable of fuch I a miftake. Well ! let the Printer be lb (great a Blockhead as he rcprefents him, the fheets were corre&ed fas 7am in- formed ) by the Author ; and if I was as uncharitable as he is pleaied to repre- prefent his Adverfary, I would require better Proof of his Innocence in this par- ticular ; let me only be permitted to tell him, thatfmcehe allows his Adverfary no other Talent than that of D cUmition, he may think that this Pra&ice of his might be expofed more plaulibly than now I am refolved to do. One Talent in an evil time is very confiderable, if it be not laid up in a Napkin ; fometime or other it may yield encrcafe. I wifh the ienie of Human infirmities may effe&u- ally wacfa him to be more Charitably in- clined, and then he will certainly forbear ib Magiiterially to Cenfure either the Sermons or Morality of thole, tint: he was never well acquainted with. That which I am to examine in the next place is of greater ConfeqtfCDI Our Author continues lull in his former : miftake and errour j he will i non his Readers, that the firfl i amonglt the Scots, were Pi I i about the end of the fecund, < r beginning CL2 of 228 An Enquiry into of the third Century. If this hold, it is certainly a better Argument for Presby- terian Government, than the Pra&iceof their firft Reformers ; for this laft pre- tence is found to be a Lie in matter of Faff, and an Impertinence in point pf Reafon. But if there was a Presbyterian Church in our Country fo near the Apoftolic times, then their Tenure is much more Authentick and Ancient, than the Autho- rity of Beza and Mtlvil ; therefore we ought, without any Tergiverfation or fhifting, to hear their pretences, and fair- ly examine their Arguments. In the firft place, the Reader may take notice, that this prefent Debate is Qvtfiio Fact/find therefore by the fenle of all Man- ^ kind muft be decided by Teftimony, and by the relation of fuch Authors as might know the Truth of what they wrote themfelves, or had it conveyed to them by competent Witneffes. And the Author of the Apology, from this general Topic, and fbme proper Amplifications, conclud- ed, that we had no fuch Model in the Pri- mitive times, and that there was no Hi- ftorical evidence for any fuch Fabulous and Monkifh Story. This piece of Hiftory, the Author of the Apology ( faith the Vindicator*) call* tth an imaginary Hypothefis ■ *s tf he muU the New Opinions, &c. 22^ would hector ns out of onr Principles. No doubt then, his faring InfoIeiKc muft be chaltileds for Men of Honour and Courage are not ro be lb afronted; an J therefore we may reafonably expect to hear in fome fewLines after, that xhtVm- dicator (hall name fome competent Wit- nefljs,upon whofeTeftimony this account may be fiifficiently eftablifhed. Before we come to thisclofe Engage- ment, we muft endure the SaI/us and Ex- curfions of his Critical skill, by which his Antagonift muft be baffled and expofed. He firft runs down his Adverfary for fil- ing that Boetbius and others, from u honi Buchanan borrowed this fabulous S:o: were his contemporary Mcnkj But if he had read with as much Attention's Hade and Severity, he would have feen that the Apologift never called B etbivs a Mwk j for theeemms being immediately placed after Contemporary M>nk< y B& thins is fair- ly ft ruck out of the Lift, and if the / dicittr could have anfwered the Argu- ment that is made ufe of to diiprovc the Legendary Tables that he advai. had never played at fuch fmall Qama, nor would he have told us, that thole Hiftorians, whom he Cited from fl were not contemporary with Buchd*4W % fince the Author of the Apology told him, CLl that 230 An Enquiry into 'jtpoLp.$2. that Buchanan had this Story from his contemporary Monks, or f uch as were little removed from his own Age ' which laft words he leaves untouched, becaufe they plainly obviated the Objection that he raifes againft the word {Contemporary.} v»f.vind.p 56. However he tells us, that to reafon as the Apologift doth, is at one blow to raze the Foundation of^the Hiftoryofour Nation, and that of moll others , and to make thtm all to he Fools who have enquired into thefe Antiquities that concern our Nation and others. All of them have fpent their time in vain, if this new Judge of Learn- ing may he heard. To require that a matter of Faff be at- tefted by competent WitnefTes is, in the Language of our Author 7 to raze the Foundation of all FLiflory. And if Hiftory be deftroyed, and the Moral certainty that is conveyed by Teftimony, then the A^hority of Revelation falls, and fo Atheifm is introduced^ atleaft boundlefs Scepticifm and- Uncertainty. Little did the Author of the Apology think, that he advanced lb monftrous a propofition, when heafferted, that we cannot believe a matter of Fait without lufficient evi- dence ; but the Vindicator lays, this is to raze the Foundation of all Hiftory, 1 the New Opinio?is, &c. 231 I may be allowed to put him in mind, that unlefs this Principle is laid down, as our firft Foundation^ we have no certain Rule to diftinguifh true or probable Hi- ftory from Legendary Tableland Creams. Nay, this is iuppofed as the ground upon which all Judges proceed im qtfftionii fa&f, that the thing is proved by compe- tent Witneffes, who are prefumed to he bon.e fidei^ who knew the thing that they affirm, or had it tranfmitted to their Hands by undoubted Records, written by fuch as might fufficiently know the Truth of what theyaffirmed. Now I defire to be informed what is thereto* inthis/^/^f/^y//. As ny againft the Apologift, whom lie calls a mm Jud^c of Lidrrjiv?, I let itpafs, lor it were Cruelty to deftroy an innocent Jell, that no body is pleaied with but the Author himfelf; therefore I go for u to examine, Birfa the Nature pf the 4 gumeiit in general, made to dii- prove this A1j>j/{(Jj Story of a Pr mn Church in Scotl.ind, pear the Apoito- lic Age; and S con.Uy^ I wil! examine the Principal Teftimony upOp wliLli tins idle Dream is founded. And I. LetMsenquire whether the Ar- gument made liic oi dilprove this Story, 0*4 .3 3 2 An Enquiry into or fuch as is not ordinarily ufed by other Men, upon iuch occafions, in all Ages, when Fiftions are impofed without either Truth or Credibility. The Author of the Apology recommended to the Vindicator to Read the Learned Du Launoy de Autho- ritate Argument i negantis in quejliombus fact/, And there he might fee with his own Eyes, That in all Ages Men reafoned as the Apolpgiftdid, by which he might eafily perceive, that (bme may miftake Old things for New things, & vice ver- flfhl! fl 'fa'J^ BUC if he Wil1 n0t l00k li P 0n the f0r ' l ? ' ' mer Author, he may be advifed to view Eufebius, l/b.3. where by this very Argu- ment he overthrows the Authority of fe- veral Books, that fbme would impofe up- on the Church, meerly becaufe they were not duly attefted, and becaufe none of the Ancients brought any Teftimonies from thofe Writings ; therefore he con- cluded fuch Writings were not then re- ceived in the Church. And this is no other Argument for the matter, than fuch as the Apologift made ufe of. Again, Eufebius reafbnsagainft the Gofpel of S. u .. ... .Peter, and his Apocalypfe; and by the lib. 3. cap. 2$. lame Argument he endeavours to ihake &cq. 38. the Authority of the fecond Epiftle that goes under the name of S. Cltment. At the fame rate Dioni fins Bifhop of Corinth, reafons the New Opinions, &c. 233 •eafbns againlt fuch Books as he would trike out of the Canon of the Scriptures, ind pray where fhould I make an end, if named all the Authors who plead againft he Auhority of any fpurious Writings, >rany fabulous Legend, from the filence )f contemporary Authors Nay lecondly, I defire to know whe- herthe fubjecl: matter will allow of any )ther method of reafoning. It is acknow- edged to be in it (elf £luy Teftimony, and if there be no fuffi- ient Teftimony fortheaffirmativefwhich he Presbyterians hold) viz-. That in the Primitive Ages, the Ecclefiaftical Govern- ment was managed by Monks without Bifhops, in our Country. Then I fay in be lenfe of the Law, fucli an affirmative huft pals for a fiction, and this I think is 10 new method of reafoning ; nor is it poflTiblc for all the Philofbphers in the jVorld, to name a more proper Argument o decide a Quejtio fUti, than that of [reftimony. Th.r.-Uy Whether the oppofitc Method |)f believing all things, without examin- ing the Teftim nies upon which their ere- nihility is founded, A pen a Door oall fables and Romances* when that clebrated Divine of the Sorbon y whom I 234 An Equiry into I formerly named ; examined the pre" I tended Miracles and Stories, that were!) zealoufly propagated by the Monks, by the Critical Rules of Hiftory, the Religi- ous Orders made a terrible noife, as ii their great Diana was immediatly to be pulled down, and then reafoned juft as the Vindicator doth, that certainly du Lau. noy*s method would ruin all Hiftory and Religion^ the People believed fiich thing! as they had zealoufly propagated amongfl them to eftablifh the Reputation of theii refpe&ive Orders ; and therefore it was not time to call in queftion the Truth of thofe things that were received amongfl their Profelites. Notwithftanding of all this, he perfifted in his former Principle^ that no matter of Fa3 could be believed unlefs it wasduely attefted, and convey ed down to pofterity from the Writings of thofe who were qualified to atteft it, and in a capacity to know what they delivered unto others. It is not poffible to imagine, what our Author would be at, when he tells us t ha^ this method of reafoning, razes the Foim* datton of all Hsftory. On the contrary, it diftinguifhes true Hiftory from Legen- dary Stories. If a matter of FaS be not attefted by any credible Author living, within Two hundred Years of the perfoJ s in v the New Opinions, &c. 235 n which fu«Jia thing isfaidto havehap- ened, then Kay, any Story thus void f ail proper Tettimony, muft pafs for a fable; for the learned Scrbonift fuppofed pat theoutmoflthatOralTraditioncouId nrry any particular matter of Fact, could It exceed the fpace of Two hundred ears 3 and if no Witneffes appeared for in that fpace, then none that came af- jrwards can be received as credible Wit- jrfies ; for where there is no ancient onument of the thing, nor theRclation nfirmed by an uninterrupted Tradition; fuch acale, to aflirm a matter of Fact, ipt naked of all its Credentials, is to let for Lies and Fables, in oppofition to le Hiftory and Records. If I fhould firm that the King of China was mar- ed Five hundred ycirs ago to a Presby- ian Lady, whom he took Captive id 5 Wars, that by her good InftruQions d Example, he was net only converted Chriftian, but a rigid Presbyterian. y Neighbours no doubt would ask me lere I read fuch a Story ; and the plain, uth is, I never read any fuch thing in ■Life: And I am firmly perfwacic .!, it never a Man faid it before, and tbei l- e it mull (s amongft ail other e Imaginations, upon this fundamen- i Reafon, that there is nofbfficientTefti- toelhiblifh the Truth of it. But I .( t%6 An Enquiry into But does our Author think, that th Hiftory of our Nation muft Perifh, i there was not a Presbyterian Church ii Scotland, fonear the Apoftolick Age. An< does he think to ferve the Honour of hi Country by faying, that the Evideno for the one, muft fall and rife with tH evidence for the other. I hope he wi confider better of it, and remember tha many collateral Proofs may be brougb from the Roman Hiftorians,that the Scot inhabited that part of Britainlong befor, the imaginary Period of his Presbyteriaij Church, and they were Authors capa ble to kno w the Truth of what they wrotc ( for the Druides, who were learned a inquifitive both amongft the Britains a the Gauls, were able to inform the Roman] what Nations inhabited the fibveral pari of thislfland. 5. g. m. Befides,that our learned Advocate hatl fufficiently demonftrated, that the mani ner of reckoning the Scottifh Genealo' gies at their Marriages, their Births, an( 6ther remarkable folemnities, was an in fallible conveyance of true, conftant, an< , perpetual Traditions. Their fl*r*fr,whof ! Science it was to repeat thofe Genealo, ] gies upon folemn occafions, and to cele brate their greateftAtchie vments in Verfe could not add one to the number of thei King the New Opinions, dec. 237 Sing's, but upon the Death of his Pre- Jeceffon So that this Tradition was rwifted with the Pra&ice and Cuftom of :he Nation, and depends not upon the idelity of one Author, but upon the con- lant and uninterrupted Pra&ice which 3egan in imitation of their Anceftors, Tom the firft Colonies of them, that Were planted here ; ib that the Cuftom ! t felf was not of any later Date than the Origin of our Nation, in that part of the '.(land. It is not the Teftimony of this M the other Writer, this or the other Generation, but an untraceable Cuftom, [>hich could not fail, becaufe of the cer- tain manner of its Conveyance. For if f:hey had but added one to the number of ::heir King's that was not formerly heard bf, there would be a thouland WitnefTes Lo expofe the Forgery. I return from this Higreffion, for I am fenfible that it is al- together needlefs. And now let me tell the l'indicator % When we return to our former iubjeQ", mat to eftablifh our I iiftory upon jbudows hnd Stories, is to razt it to the Ground, md to deftroy it, from which I conclude, that if he does not prove from iufficient Teftimony, and by Authors capable to kuow the Truth of what they wrote,) Ins Presbyterian Church in Scotland, ni the 238 An Enquiry into the Apoftolick Times, hemuft allow my j Story of the King of China, to be as well I attefted as the other Monkifh Fable, that j he fo zealoufly contends for. Nay, the Vindicator himfelf, (whenj the Coniequences of his own method \ were not a&ually under consideration)! reafons at the fame rate that he blames ; in his Adverfary ; for he pleads from the 1 ( pretended ) Silence of the Primitive! Writers, for the firft Three hundredj Years, againft the Obfervation of Chrift* mafs. So natural it is for all Men to rea- fon againft the Truth of any matter of JF*<2, from the Silence of fuch as oughtl to Record it. And tho he miftook th Theme, to which he applyed this Medium J\ yet the Argument in it felf, ( if no Tefti- mony could be brought to the contrary J was Reafonable and Agreeable to the common and approved Methods in fuch Cafes. Now when fo much is faid in Defence of the Argument in its Nature and Ori- ginal force, he may again confult Blonde and all thofe Authors, from whom he hac jhis Srory of his Presbyterian Culdees and fee if any of them was a competen Witnefs in an Affair, at fo great a diftana from the time in which they lived. Le them inform us frcm whom they had thi Story 1 '1 the New Opinions, &c. 23? Story 5 for a Witnefb at the diftanceof Eight or nine Hundred Years, is as in- competent, as he that Writes at the di- ftance of Sixteen thoufand. The Monks before the Reformation knew nothing Df true Ecclefiaftical Antiquity ; and thofe Gentlemen who built upon their Stories were highly guilty of Inadver- tence. I again defire to know an Inftanceof any Presbyterian Church, in any place of the World, before the Days of Calvim and Beza, As for the Albtgtnfes and WaI- \4enjes, who got up in the Twelfth Cen- tury, they only declaimed againft the corrupt manners of the Church of Rome, and if they had no Bifhops, it was becaufe their Circumftances were unfettled, they |wcr« driven from one place to another, that their Ecclefiaftical Polity, could not ibe reared intoanylixt Eftablifhment : Nor did they ever declaim againil the fiibordi- mationofone Prieft unto another ;and th6 they had been in all regards Presbyterian, thev are too late a Precedent for any Cfinltian Church to argue from their Practice. Our Author anfw/rs, that if bis Ad- verlary had re^Blondel from th ltg.n>;- id, hi JJ) mid find lnflgma \ in sll fhe Chrifiun Churches, tn Afia, Eu- ro r 240 An Enquiry into rope, and Africa, and that he jhouU have an/wered all that he had Written in his Apology. To which I reply, that he never wrote anything in defence of Presbytery, but what hath been frequently and folidly re* futed. Let the Vindicator read Blondel, Salmafius and Dalle, and fee, if out of them all, he can name one Presbyterian Church managing Ecckfuftical Affairs in perfect Parity and Equality. It is very ealy for him to fet us Tasks, as if we were obliged to give him an account of our Proficiency and Reading; and there- fore I defire him ( having no left Autho- rity over him, than he hath over me) to Read Blondel from the beginning to the end y and lethimchufe out of hisVolumi* nous Colle&ions, thofe Inftances, that he thinks cannot be anfwered ; and let him ftrengthen BlwdelPs Argument with as many improvments of his own, as he judges convenient ; and if they are un- anfwerable, then he may Triumph with the greater fuccefs over his baffled Adver- faries. Nay, I make him a more reafb- nable Offer ; let him fingle out Ten or Twelve inftances out of all the Churches of Europe, Afta, and Africa^ where he thinks the ftrengchof his Caufe lies, and this may be done in little room, without thsfe the New Opinions, &c. 241 thefe tedious Altercations and Miftakes, and they fhall be fairly confidered. It was reafonable for the Apologift to think, that the firftChriftians among the Scots knew no other Church Government, than that which /Aejwereacquain ted with, by whom they were converted, and I am very con- fident thofe were no Presbyterians ; for amongft all the ancient Hereticks I find none left confidered than Aerius, or whole Party was more contemptible or of fhor- ter continuance. I begin now to be afraid, that the Vin- dicator thinks, that I have forgotten my promife, I made to examine his />/?/• mony, by which he would oblige us to be- lieve that there was a Presbyterian Church in Scotland near the Apoftolick Age, in the end of the Second, or beginn- ing of the Third Century. I ask in the firft place who (aid 10 ? He tells us, E I demand again, from whom had Blondd this Story ? Blonde I (ays he had ic from Johtt Fordon and John Major, and the Third he cites is Boethiu*. but it is very ominous in the beginning, to find;, that Boitbtus plainly contradicts the firfl • two Witnelfes named by don fays, That the Scots, before the com- ing of VtlLidnts, weietaughtin the Fait rr^ and had the StCHunents lifauriftred R th 242 An Enquiry into them only by Priefts and Monks : John Ma\or fays the lame ; but Bottbius tells us, that about the Year 263, our Coun- try men began, Chrifti dogma accuratiffime amplexari) that they were Taught by the Culdtfit and that all Pri.fts afterwards were called by that name s and a little af- ter Pontificem inter ft communi fuf- fragio deligebant , perns qntm divinarum rt- rum ejjet pote/ias. And then that Paliadi- us was the firft Bifhop that was ordain'd by the Pope ^cum antea popultfuffragiisex Monacbis & Culd&is Pontifices affumeren- tur. So that Roethius was perfwaded that we had Bifhops in Scotland before Pai/a- dzus> he only tells us, that Palladius was the firft Bifhop that came from Rome ; nor does he fay, that the Culdai laid their Hands upoia the Bifhop, as Blondel, (af- ter his way, ) adds to his Words. For there is nothing faid by Boethius,but That the Bifhops were Ele&ed from amongft the Priefts and the Monks. Now here are Three Witneffes, and the laft contradi&s the other two : And I except agaiaft all the Three, that none of them could be a competent Witnefs in Affairs of that Nature, at ib great a diftance from their own time, unlefs they had named the Authors and Records, up- on whole Teftimony their Relation was founded the New Opinions, &c 24^ founded. And the Vindicator himfelf is as good an Evidence tor this imaginary Parity, in the Primitive Ages, as either For don, Major, or Bot thins, tho all of them had agreed in the fame Tettimony. But let us examine this Atfair to the Def.rmd.f. jA bottom, and not interrupt cur Author 5 he ( the Apologift ) doth alfo di at unfair- ly, and not as a diffntant with the Vind- cator^forhe taktth nc notice ff what grounds be brought for what he affirmed, wz.Thit Palladius was the fir (I Bijbop in Scotland, and ytt Chriflianity was publukjy Proffftd tn it above 300 Tears before his time ; this is proved out of Baronius, Spondanus, Beda, and others, but it was hisW'fdomto take no notice of this. And to make all fure he fays., that Spondanus out of Prof- fer writes, that Piffddius was the 1i.1l Bifhopwho came among fat Scot t$ and Bircnius fbtweth, th.?r they w re Converted fame Centuries btfkte his tbrte, i.<. as t lie l'indicat)r formerly explaiiul hinileli", above 300 Tears before Patladitfc Now 1 am rcfolve ,i to he a little more rafh and daring than the Apologift itfa hedurft nor it Icemsexari- ids upon which the rsndicM < 1 ted, at Icafi a washh W thofe Argantcflti, rh it -.■■ re t< to hot h\*, Rngei Now r ! H I ai? 244 An Enquiry into are named, the whole Strefs lies upon the Authority of Profper. Spondanus epi- tomized Baronius^ and Baronius built up- on the Authority of Pro/per: fo the Con- troverfie is at length come to this, Whe- ther Pro/ptr affirms that above 300 Years before Palladius was fent by Pope Celeflin, there was a Presbyterian Church in Scot- land. And if we find that Profper fays no fuch thing, then all this noife of Au- thors and Teftimonies vanifh into Silence and a profound Miftake.. In the firft place, I cannot excufe the Barm, ad an Vindicator from fupine ne2ligenceat leaft, chr. 43 1. that he does not read the Authors that he cites, elfe he had not named Baronius^ who never thought that Palladius was fent by PopeCeleflin to the Scoto-Britanni 9 but rather to the \rifh? for fpeaking of his Miffion, he hath thefe words ; per- duBum quoque fuiffe ad Hiberniam infulam^ fed cito morte fubdullum ex hac vita mi* grajfe, ex Probo qui res geftas S. Patricii fc'rifjit diclum eft fuperius^ Hibernorum qui- dem converfionem Deus* S. Patricio referva- vit. Now whatever the Teftimony of Prof- per be, Spondanus and Baronius leaves the Vindicator ; for they underftood Profper*s words of Palladius his Miffion to Ireland, and not to that part of Britain which is now called Scotland. Laft the New Opinions, Sec. 245 Laft of al ! , Ictus hear theTeftimorn it felf, upon which Baromus built hi/ Narrative, and that is cited from the Chro- melt of Prrfper^ and he flourifhed about the Year 444. The words cited from P/ry^r are thefe, BaJJo & Anttocbo Cofs. Ad Scotos in Chr. - fium crtdentes crdinatur a Papa. Cel ft no Palladium, & primus Epifcopus mittitur. The Auguftan Copy of the fame Chro- nicle reads itthus, Biffo & Antiocho Cofs. Ad Scotos tn ChnJlnmcredenteS) ordinatns a Papa Ceteftino Palladins y primus Epifcopus mifjrts tji. Siippofing then that this Chronic n p r Confutes diotftum, whence this Tcftimo- ny is cited, was written by Profper^ all that can beinferr'd is, that Pal/4 ins the fill Bifhop of the Roman MifTion, which is eafily granted ; for a^ fi n as the Pope afpired to his univerfal Supremacy, there were Bifhops fern to other Churc' Jy conftituted, not to introduce ! which was the Governn.' ni- verfal. Church, but rather a Su and Uniformity with the 1 This was the bufine^ I Aufti li. \!^nk in / flood the Hiftory of Ptti* ••■'■ ii whom lie rcprc 2^6 An Enquiry into fent from Rome, and the words themfelves ipfinuate no other meaning , neither is it evident from the Chronicon per confhl.es digeftnm, whether there was any formed Organiz'd Church amongft the Scott in Chriflum credent ts^ when Palladius was fent by Celejlin* To let this go, there is fomthing more to be obferved, it is this, that the Chro- nicon per Confutes digeftum is not thought by the Learned to be the genuine Work of Yrofper, becaufe it is fo very unlike his Stile, and written by a moreobfeure Au- thor, later perhaps than the Days of Prof per. It is very true, that Proffer wrote a Chronicon ab or be condito, but that other, per Confutes digeftum, whence Banmus had the words juft now mentioned, is none of his. The true Qhronicon written by Vrofptr is loft, only a Fragment of it is preferved, in which there is not one word of Palladia , being fent to the Scots. And P. Tith&w in his Preface to that frag- ment of Profperh Chronicle, hath thefe words; & vcro quamvis in annorum nc~ tatione vdde confufum perturbat unique fit 7 Prcfptri tamen ingemum fie refert^ ut non immerito vide at ur mttiibrum effe amp lions rjus 9 quod ipfius nomine ab or he condito ad captam a Vandalis Romtm, Gennadius Mafji- lienfis Frefbyter fe legifje teftatur, ac. w/re- the New Opinions, &c. 247 ptur undt fa&um ftt rtt aliud ptr Confutes ds- oejium b&ttenus in omnibus Hitronymn?ii Chronic 1 Editionibns ProfperiTitulo ft/bju/i- geretnr quod ttfi cum ijio non p sue I community nt pott ad ejufdem xtati. II , nam per tintntia, alt er ins time a genii tjfe facile intelli°et) qui tttrnmqnc attcntius te- T gerit. And the Learned Doftor Cavt n forms us, how fadly the CbronrconCo> tare hath been fpoiled and interpolat 1 by the Boldtiefs and Ignorance of Tran- fcribers. Let the Vmdkator confider, that when we difleft this Telfimony from Prvfi and lee all its Der'e&s a- -d Weakness,'" it ierveshimto no purpofe. Baronnf< dnd Spondanns never underftood it in hisSenfe; and the Author of the Chronicle ( « bo- ever he was) affirmed only, that us was the firit Bifhop of the Rom ,n Million ; and this is all that is found in the Chr on icon per Confutes dig (Ihm, \\\\ is lamentably fpoilM by leveral interpola- tions. And for the Prcsbytirhn Gkti&t t not one of them is mentiorfd ; for the I ragmenc that is preferred ot rhl true Lbrontcon, written I >] ; is not a word of this Artair to be met with in it. Now let me ftand upon my former ground, and ask where the Hillonaiv, lit R 4 that 348 An Enquiry into that affirm there was a Presbyterian Church in Scotland, in the firft Ages of Chriftianity . The Vindicator fays above 300 Years before Palladitis was lent, and he being fent in the Year 431, (as Baro- nius fays ) by the Vindicators Calculati- ons, we had a Presbyterian Church in Scotland towards the beginning of the Second Century, when we have no cer- tain Records of any Progrefsthat Chrifti- anity made in this Ifland at that time. But fome Men are very happy who entertain their pleafant Dreams and Vifions for true Hiftories. We read of a Gentleman at Athens , who thought that all the Ships that came in to the fir mm were his own, and he could prove it by as good Tefti- mony, as any our Author brings for his Presbyterian Church in the Primitive Ages. I am ftill of the Opinion that the Monks advanced this Fable, to gratifie the Popes defign of exempting the Religious Orders from Epifcopal Jurifdi&ion ; that they were encouraged to do lb by the Pope, needs neither Proof nor Ilhflration : And this was all that was intended by the Au- thor of the Apology, that the Monks were made fubfervient by the Court of Rome, to trample upon the Epifcopal Dignity. This laft propofition may be confidently affirmed,, the New Opinions, &c. 24^ affirmed, tho the Origin of the Fable be left as aConje&ure. But the Vindicator is at great pains tofqueeze his Adverfary's words, that he may find in them fome flaw or other, as to their Pofition and Or- der. I wifh he would think fuch Obfer- vations below his gravity ; for I never read a Book that lies more open to Re- marks of that Nature, than that which I now confider : And one, that cannot preferve his 1 itle Page free from Inadver- tence and Miltake, ought to be fbmewhat merciful in his Trifling and letter Criti- |:ifms. There was never any fuch Book [written as the Apology of the Okjgy y elic lithad been much more accurate and exa£t, !:han that which was attempted haflily by one of their number, in their Defence, \:o Hop the Calumnies that were then loud- y propagated, to defame them. In ano- ther place, our Author represents his Ad- 1/crfary, as if he thought there were no ■Foreign Proteftants but the French \ I jieartily fcrgive him, if he was altoge- ther (b ignorant, it was great Conde- • cenfion in him, to take any notice of am. CHAP. 25° An Equity into CHAP. V. The Prefbyterian Vcftrine concernA ing Rites and Ceremonies exa-\ mined. I Make hafte to confider another Article! of the Presbyterian Do&rine, which! is altogether. New, and their own ; fori they teach, That afignificant Rite in the Worfhip of God, not founded upon Di« vine Inftitution, isfuperftitious, unlaw- ful, and abominable \ and fuch as may Legitimate a fcparation from any Churchy where it is enjoyned to preferve Order and Uniformity. And upon this vain and filly Theorem they have railed Tra- gical Complaints, broken the Unity o£ the Church, and filled the Heads and Mouths of the People, with a Thoafi^J Airy and unaccountable Fancies. It is not my defign in Co fhort a Di£ courfe, to gather together all the Knave- ries that have been vented in this Con- troverfie. I muft not enter into that La- byrinth and idle Talk j I am only con- cerned in a few words ; to vindicate the Practice the New Opinions, &c. 251 Practice of all Chriftian Churches, from :he later Foolleries that have beenobjett- *d against it. In the tirft place, On they name any fociety of Men that ever met together n publick, to Worlhip God, without bme fuch fignificant Ceremony, which had no other Original, than humane Ap- ■pintment? I wiih no other Ceremonies Q be introduced into the Church, than mole that are already received, either by me Cuftom of the Nation, or imposed by tie Wifdom of our Sureriours.- And to ineftion the Lawfulness of fuch, is idly 3 declaim againic the Prattice of all Na- i The Light of Nature teaches us to jorfhip God, and all Men have agreed frthis, that the fo'unn Worfhip of the te/// ought to be performed in Unity and ociety. Secondly, That this publick Vorfhip fhould be fixed and cita! lifhed \f the Wiidom and Authority of eom- ctent Judges, as to the manner andme- lod. Thirdly, 1 'hat we ought to e*p ci i ur Adoration in thepobiick w'oifhip of tod, by fuch figoific m S oi I i< id Devotion known in that N. on where we live to < erence and Eftccm. h ; ! •nilkant Signs being indiflj; est in then Nature, 252 An Enquiry into Nature, are variable according to th< Age, or Country, with whom we hav< to do, and may be changed by the Autho rity and Wildom of our Superiours, x u oft ^s there isfufficient Reafon, of whicljai they only are the Judges. Thefe things ( I think) are plain toal u who view the Precepts of Natural RelijL gion, or the confequential Pra&ices c% all civilizM Nations. It is not poffibletOj form an Objeftion againft the decent vifi \\ ble motions of the Body in publick Wor ,= fhip,which may not be emproved againfj r j all the Vocal expreflions of the TongueL The laft our Adverfaries allow of, anew by confequence they ought to admit thJ f other. Nature led us at firft to the Work {hip of the Deity; this Worjhip was perl formed uniformly ; therefore the exteri (( orpartofit was fo managed, as to fig-j nifie to all our Affociates in that Worfhif v the profound Reverence wherewith wc approached the moft High God ; and thii iK again muft needs bring along with i\^ thofe outward fignifications of Refpe&.j that are made decent by Cuftomand Au- /i thority, to whole Decifion alone Goc left thofe exterior Rituals of Worfhip. L As for the two Sacraments of the New ^ Teftament, they fall under another Con-jh federation ; they are Seals and Convey- n anccJ the New Opinions , &c. 253 ances of the Evangelical Weflings and fa- vours, as well as plain and open Signifi- cations of our Worfhip and Obedience, and therefore, in their complex Nature and Tendency, they muft be founded up- m pofitive and Divine Inftitution. It is true, there were many Ceremonies in the Law founded upon exprefs Authority, :>ut they were all of them either difcri- ninative Badges of the Je.vsfrom the Ido- latrous Nations, or Typical; therefore it kvas convenient, that the Divine Autho- rity fhould immediatly interpofe in the appointment of fuch Ceremonies. As for -.hole Rites in the Wcrfhip of God, that fvvere onlySignirications of Reverence and Uniformity , they were ftill retained nmongft the Jews, as they were tranfait- ked to them by Patriarchal Cuftom and [Tradition, tho 7 only founded upon Human appointment. My Author tells me, that he had much d Vccafwn to conftder this Controverftt about ^Ceremonies ; that he read many vj our ficlc t Yjut never nut with any \\h > mtMdged it fi lightly as his preterit ry. All this may be true,forhi$Defigawaf to write foqg r l reatie&'s 00 that fub- Rett ; and what 1 1 then, wasbafti- ly put together, In the mean time, he 'made ule oi iome Arguments (hat were formerly 254 A* 1 & nc l u vy into formerly infifted on by others of unquefti- onable Sufficiency, and which he thinks are not yet anfwered, tho' he hath been infulted very fuperci!ioufly upon this Head. The genera I M dium that he made ufe of is this, there arefeveral fignificant Ceremonies mentioned in, and alluded I to, in the Holy Scriptures, which were Praftis'd in the Worihip of God, under' the Patriarchal, JwijhjZn&CbriftianOe* conomy, which had no other Original, 1 thanHumane|appointment} and therefore he concluded, that fuch Ufages were in their own Nature lawful, and not at all tainted with Superftition. And tho' this, or the other particular Ceremony was in it ielf indifferent, yet the Obedience that is due to our Super iouts, in things law- ful, is necelTary to the ends of publick Worfhip and Uniformity. Let us then confider the few Inftances that were named by the Apologift, to prove fuch Jigntficant Ceremonies Law- ful, and the firft is, Exod. 3. J. Mtjrs is commanded to put of his Shooes, before he approached the place of God's extra- ordinary Prefence } and why ? becauft e J- ' -hi >th c pl ace rvfjereon be flood was Holy-ground Here Q faith the Vindicator ) is accurate Logick, and may become tbt highejl Seatifi an Vmvtrftty, We ought to obey what Goo (9M?nc>.ftddb \ the tier* Opinions, &c. 255 wmmandeth 5 ergo, not muft obferze whit Man devifeth Ana enjoymth in Qc J's PVcr- (bip. And a little after, If this be a Ce- rtrnony which all mufi obftrve, why doth not our Author and his Party obftrve it f If his Adverfary had affirmed that whatever Ceremony expreffesour Reve- rence in one Country, or one Age, muft oeceflarily do fo in all Ages and Nations, :hen he might ask this jocular, (but very impertinent ) Queftion. Asfor the Jeft if accurate Logick, and the hightft Seatm %n Vniverfity, I have nothing to fay to t but this, that it reflc&s as much on the wofotmdly Learned Mr. Mtde, as on the other whom he frequently upbraids for want of Logick. And I am of the Opinion that he de- (erved the hightfl Seat in any "Cmverfity, where true Knowledge and Innocence were thought valuable things. And if his Adverfary built his Argument upon Mr. Mtdts Hypothefis, he mighl have fpared him until he got him alone un- Suarded by the Authority of fo great a lame. But I (uppole that he had him only in his view, when this raiebtj ■ fF/f- tictfm broke forth, if the Author of the Apology polldftd the higheft Scat in an UnivLiiity, he never thought that he de- fer ved it above many of his Brethren ■ and 2 56 An Enquiry into and I hope the Vindicator himfelf is fo good a Proteftant, as not to pretend me- rit for his prefent Elevation. However, the Argument ftands yet in full force, if he does not prove that in the Text cited there is contained an Ori ginal pofitive Inititution of that Ceremo- ny of Difcalceation,pra£tis'din the Wor- fhipof God amongft thzEaftern Nations, under the Patriarchal Oeconomy. But when we read the Text with Attention, there is no appearance of any fuch Infti- tution : Mofts is admonHhed not to ap- proach the Bufh, until firfthe put off his Shoes ; and the reaibn is added, the place whereon he flood was Holy-ground. And fb this Admonition fuppofes him acquainted with the current Pra&ice and Cuftom, before he was put in mind of God's ex- traordinary Prefence in that place. Be- fides that the words in the Text have no- thing in them of the Nature of an Infti- tution, but rather a Divine Advertife- ment, which the meaneft in the Coun- try would have underftood as well as Mofts 5 and it is rather a ftrong Confir- mation that the Ceremonies which ex- prefs our Reverence in the publick Wor- Ihip are acceptable to God, asfignifica-i tions of our Humility and Adoration, thr?fenje ; lor if thefe Signs of Humiliation were Itill in ufe in our Country, who would leluie them, that was not rclolvedto be lingular ? J Another inftance mentioned to prove significant Ceremonies ot Human Jnfritu- lion lawful in the Worfhip of G<> Md bominem, viz. That of lifting nv th* S Right 258 An Enquiry into Right Hand bare in Jwearmg the Cove- nant. To this he Anfwers, that the Ceremony cf lifting up the right Hand in [wearing an Oath, not only hath Warrant from Scripture Example > hut it is the civil Cujlom of the Nation ; therefore it is not pertinent to bring it as an example of a Religious Jig" nifcant Ceremony. But I ask whether a Ceremony's being mentioned in the Scripture, makes it on- ly allowable; or was it not in it felf law- ful and decent, before it was Recorded in any Scripture Example, and is it not Lawful to us, upon the fame Original Reafons that made it Lawful to them, who firft Pra&ic'd it ? and it was decently and lawfully Pra&ic'd before it was men- tioned in any Scripture Example ; and the allufions that are made to fiich ufagesin Scripture, prove them lawful beyond all Contradi&ion, antecedently to any men« tion of them in the Holy Scriptures* And 'tis wonderful to think that ourPres* byterians (hould grant, that there are ma- ny fuch Cuftoms and Ceremonies allud ed to inHoly Writings ; (when they are on« ly Incidentlyand occalionally Recorded) which had no other Original than Humar Appointment, and yet deny the lawful neft of fuch Rites and Ceremonies, unlefi thej 1! k the New Opinions^ dec 25^ they arc founded upon expreis Divine In* ftitution,/.e. The Sen pturesate Witneiles, that under the Patriarch*!, Jflj> and Qhriflt&n (Jcconomy Men have been al- ways fbttifhly (uperftirious, and yet this fuperftition was neither diicovered nor blamed by any of the Prophets or the Apoftles, until the Presbyterians ap- peared. We are next to hear a rnoft Meta- phyfical diftinftion, v/js. That if a Gr.- mooy be the civil Cttftom of i n, then it may be. apfhtd to Religion* Then Dr/r. •;./;. 39. they art not R> lig tons Certm nits, i e. pc. bar to Rtligien, but are civil R< ufed in R< lig ion. This is a piece of New Philofophy, andfeems to becpe-val with Presbytery 4 even in US lateft Figure. If it be a civ I Ctrtnony, tho it 1. 1 ifftf d into the Worfhij) oi ( kid, witho I ) vine Inftitution, then; is no d tnger in ir, but 'dfhwfici'ii Ceremony introduced in the publick WorfhipbyH man ■ ; 1 int-« ment, is abominable aod fuperfth the qivil Authoiity can inti I ;ni- ficantCcrcmony intotheW may not the Ecclefiaftical Authority do it f Jhepreten ion from fignificant s eir having no higher A i6 o An Enquiry into was Humane. But the Vindicator tells us, That there is no hazard to apply a civil Ceremony to the immediate Worfhip of God, were it never fo fignificant and iSymbo^cal 5 but if it be a Ceremony of Human appointment, and not uscl in civil and fo!emn A&ions, then immedi* atly it isSuperftitionand rvi^Worfbtf. I always thought that a Sign or Cere- mony that owed its Original to civil Au- thority, Cuftom, or Appointment, was in it felf a Human Ordinance. A Cere* mony eftablifhed by civil Authority in the Worfhip of God ( were it never fo fig- nificant andSy mbolical ) may be complyed with, without the leaft fear of Popery ; but if it be of any Ecclefiaftical appoint- ment, and only applyed to Religion, from that very moment it becomes a Limb of Antkhrifi^ fome Rag of the Whore of Babylon. But may not I be allowed to ask how the one can be fo innocent, and the other fo abominable? Is not that which is ap- pointed by civil Authority,Sy mbolical and fignificant? Yes; fcr the lifting up of our Hands fignifies our immediate Ap- peal to the Omnifcience of Heaven, and to the Juftice of God, if we wilfully de- fert what then we promife. Is not this Symbolical Ceremony pra&ic'd in the Worfhip the New Opinions, &c. 261 Worfhip of God.^ Yes ; for when we take our deliberate Oath, we Worfhip God in the moft folemn manner. Is it not of Human appointment ? Yes; for it hath no Divine Inftitution,and yet not- withftanding of all thefe, it is by the Vindicator '* conccffion ; free of all Super - ftition and Idolatry. It remains ftill a Myftery, why a Ce- remony appointed by Ecclefiaftical Au- thority, and for no other end, than to preferve Decency and Uniformity, in the publick Worfhip of God, fhoufd not be as little tainted with fupcrftition as the former. And befides it's very hard to di- ftinguifh a fignificant Ceremony, that derives its Original from civil Authority, from a Symbolical Rite, that owes its be- ginning to fbme Ecclefiaftical Coufticuti- on, efpecially if the one and the other have obtained place in the Chriltiari Church, by immemorial poiTeflion ; as for Example, how do wo know that the Ceremony of killing the I when we take an Oath, had its firft rile from the civil Authority, or t'r Ecclefi- aftical Laws.- andhow tadly mull we be pcrplexr, when we know tliar a cunt Ceremony, hath both tl Ecclefiaftical Sanction toAuth< is Stubbornnels and . die s > 2^2 An Enquiry into fift it in the firft Senfe ; it is Superftition and Idolatry to comply with it in the fe- cond. If we confider the Ecclefiaftical Ce- remonies as having the civil S&nction, they are in that regard civil Ceremonies. May we not then view them all under that Red'iplicatiouy and fb comply with them, abftra&ing from their being ap- pointed by Ecclefiaftical Authority. And how comes it to pafs, that the civil Magiftrate, or the Traditional Cu- r ftomofa Nation, can Legitimate a figni- ficant Ceremony in the Worfhip of God, and yet the Canons and Conftitutions of the Church cannot do it ? And how come the Presbyterians (who formerly pre- tended to oppofe Eraftianifm ) to give the civil Magiftrate fuch an unlimited Power about the Decencies of pubiick Worfhip, but the Ecclefiaftical Autho- rity muftnot prefume to meddle withit? By the firft a fignificant Ceremony, in the Worfhip of God,may be made Grave, Venerable, and Decent ; but if it has its rife from thefecond, it becomes immedi- atly Idolatry, Superftition, and what el(e you pleafe. According to the Vindicator, a Cere* mony that is us'din civil A&ions,may be applied to Religious Solemnities, and then the New Opi?iions y &c. 263 then I think it was a very eafy thing to reconcile all the Presbyterians to the Church 1 for if the few Ceremonies that theyquarell'dlnd been at any time us'd in civil Solemnities, all their fcruples va- ni£hed,and the Ceremonies of the Church would in that cafe be as innocent as the Cloaks, Cravats, and long Periwigs^ that arenowufed in their publick Appearan- ces. But here arifeth a new Scruple. Sup- pofe that the Significant Ceremony of Lifting up the rtght bind bare hath ano- ther Signification in Civil Aftions, than that which it hath in Religious Worfhip, Qutritur, Whether its being us'd in a different Signification, in Civil Aftions, may make it Lawful in Religious YVor- fhip, when it hath a higher Signification ? This I think is very difficult to be under- floed ; and therefore I defirc the cator to tell me why a Significant Cere- mony of Humane Appointment us\l in Civil Aftions, in one Signification, can be made Lawful in Religious Worfhip, when the Signification is very different from the former? As for Example, when they Swore their Confpiracyof the L ague and Covm4Mt % they were to holdup thfb right hand ban. The Signification of it in this Scflemn Atl of Werfhip, v S 4 2^4 An Enquiry into their Appeal to the Oranifcience of God, concerning their Refblution and Since- rity : But if at any time this Ceremony of lifting up the hand hare is applied to Civil Attions or Solemnities as fuch, I hope the Signification of it muft be very different from what it was in the imme- diate Worfhip of God, But according to this New Philofophy, a Ceremony is made Lawful, in the Worfhip of God, if it is us'd in Civil Aftions,tho it change its Signification in the Firft, from what it was defigned to reprefent in the Se- cond. If the Wit of Man can name me any thing that is more Abfurd and Ri- diculous, more Unaccountable and Foo- lifhj am deceived. I do not know whe- ther fuch Theorems be fit for the Highefi Seat in an Vniverfity, or not. I am very confident they are paft all Natural Un- derftanding. I have no Inclination to rob a Man of the pleafant Ideas that he may have of himfclf, or his own Performances, I would be as eafie to fuch as is poffible* and therefore I fhall endeavour to name a Cer mony praftis'd in the Solemn and Immediate Worfhip of God, founded upon no Divine or exprefs Inftitution » and yet in it felf very Lawful, and never us'd ( for any thing I know ) in Civil Solem- the New Opinions, &c. 2^5 Solemnities. And if this be made evi- dent, then I fuppofe all the little Excep- tions againft Significant Ceremonies in the Worfhip of God, are Idle and Fri- volous Impertinencies. But I think I can do this, when I invite your Thoughts and Attention to Rom. 6. 4. Thtnf&rt we are buried with him by B/ipttfm unto Death: that like as Chrifi was raifed up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even fo we alfo fbould walk in newmfs of life. I know no body denies, but that in this Text there is a palpable AUufion unto that Significant Ceremony of Imnterfion^ pra&ifed by the firft Chriftians in their Adminiftration of Baptifm. To prove that this Ceremony was Practifed by the Jews and firft Chriftians, were to defpife my Adverfary more than Modcfty will allow. The firft Chriftians changed not that Rite in Baptifm, from what it was Pra&ifed amongft the Jews. It is true, that the Signification of it among the Chriftians, did more clearly relate to the Death and Refurre&ion of the Mef- (ias, than was exprefly known arm he Jews; but this Ceremony was f>un- i|ided on thePrattice of the Jewifh Church, nd from them derived to the Chriftians, nd never eftablifhed by any other Au- hority, than what was purely Humane and 266 An Equity into and Ecclefiaftical. When they were Bap- tized, both amongft the Jews and the Chriftians, they were once all over un- der Water : This Immerfion among the Jews, fignified that their Proftlytes muft die to their former Gods, Idolatries, Su- perftitions, and Pagan\Abominations. This was a Cuftom lb known amongft them, comei. Tacit. t ^ lat a ^ l ^ Qir Learned Neighbours were Hifi.uh.s. acquainted with it ; but amongft the Ci en7Zia7n(ii c hriftians it fignified not only the Change tw?,*tJiv*-Of their former Religion,but particularly firate nofcantur their Conformity to Chrift in his Death ™££Z and Refurreaion : which Signification idem ufurpant,of a Humane Ceremony the Apoftle puts mcjuidquam them in mind of, that by that very lur^ZmL. Cuftom, which had no other Original tsmneredeos than Ecclefiaftical Appointment, they txire Pamam: obliged to be mortified to the Parentes. Libe- __„ , , R . . r , « T r t% res, Fratres, World, and to be railed unto Newnels of I zrn£ra\, incon- fiftent with the Dictates of Humane Rea- fon, and the Pra&ice of all Nations. For the Apoftle reafons from the Vifible Ce- remony of the Chrifii.m Church in his own days, to put the Romans in mind of their Promifes and Engagements. The Adminifiration of Baptifm, as it was then Celebrated, reprefemed in a Vifible nnd Senfible manner the Burial of our Saviour, and his Refurreftion : which Symbolical anions fignified our Dju 1 S» 3 and our being R tij unto Nt'ivn>f< of I If it be (aid, that this Significant ( t rcmony of Immerfion was ufed in Civil Aftions, and lb might be applied toHe- ■ n J z6& An Enquiry into ligion ; then I defire to know when,how, and where it was applied to any other than a Religious Aftion. If it be faid that we have Scripture example for it, then I would ask whether it was allowa- ble, in the praftice of the firft Chriftians and Jews, before it was Recorded, or alluded to, in any place of the New Teftament. Its being mentioned thus is but a confequent of its being Pra&ifed, and not at all the Gaule of its being Lawful. And if it was Lawful, then I fay a Significant Ceremony, in the fo- lemn WorQiip of God, founded upon no Divine Inftitution, applied only to Reli- gion, is in it felf Lawful, and frequent- ly ufeful, when regulated and deter- mined by Wife and Prudent Governors. From this, not only the former Infe- rence may be deduced, but alio another, iriz>. That the Power of Rituals is ftill lodged in the Church, which fhe may Vary and Alter, to ftrve the ends of Edification until the end of the World. And the current pra£Hce of the Presbyte- rians,is as unagreeable to this Rite of Im« merjion, in the Adminiftration ol Baptifm, as that of any other Chriftian Church. I know not whether the Vindicator fhall be pleated with thislnftance, for it is no more than the Continuation and Improve- the New Opinions, &c. 269 Improvement of the firft Medium, viz. That there are freqnent Allufions in the Scripture to fuch Significant Rites and Ufages pra&ifed in the Wurfhip of God, which were eftablifhed only by Ecclefi- aftical Authority and Appointment. Up- on this Foundation the Author of the Apology thought that fuch Rites and Ufages were Lawful ; and therefore tho he might be in an Error, the Vindicator fhculd not treat him with fo much Dif- dain and Severity : for it is not poffible in every Line to hit the Subject (6 Ex- a&ly and fo Happily, as to ftop the Mouth of every obftinate Adverfary. And when we reafbn againit Men of Age and Experience, it is needlefs to appear armed at all times with the School-Jarron and Formality of Syllogifm. But if nothing pleale but what is rear'd unto Logical Form and Figure, it might be thus pro- poled. A significant Ceremony founded up- on no Divine Inilitution, and alluded to, in S. Paul's Reafbn'mgs, Rom. 6.4. is a thing in it felf Lawful. But the Ceremony of Immcrfion, in the Adminiftration of Baptilm, was founded upon no Divine Inilitution, and yet alluded to by S.F.ut/, as a thing re- ceived in the current Praclice ol the Apoftolical Church ; 2 7° An Enquiry into Er°o y fuch a Significant Ceremony in the Worfhip of God, founded upon no Divine Inftirution is in it felf Lawful. The firft Propofition I hope is out of K2£j'*i'*to dan S er : for that which the Apoftte Matth^.6. ib. » . , ~. r i_ a ^^8.38. alludes to, in the Practice or the Apo- ftohcal Church, is at leaftSafe and Inno- cent ; for he advances nothing but from Undoubted Reafon or Revelation. The Second is as much beyond queftion as the firft, if there be any fuch allufion as is mentioned in the words of §. Paul, which I think is beyond all Controverfie, when we confider the Mannet of Bap- tizing among the Jews by Immerfion, and the Pra&ice of the Primitive Chri- ftians, which might be illuftrated from the moft Ancient Records, particularly from the Writings of Tertnllian : and it was this Rite of Immerfion that made the attendance of the Deaconeffes fo ne- ceffary in the Apoftolic Church, when Women were Baptiz'd,becaufe the whole body was once all under Water. And the Rubric of the Church of England mentions Dipping in the firft place, as being the Original Ceremony, but leaves it to the Admw?firator 9 whether Dipptng i or Pouring Water on the Face be thought moft convenient, The An&baptifts infift upon it as abfolutely Neceflary. The Anmm the New Opinions, &c. 271 Ancient Churches "uniformly pra&is'd it, and the whole Society of Ghriftians, An- cient and Modern, agreed in the Law- fulnefsof it: and it it was unbecoming the Higheji Seat in an University to rea- ion from fiich Allufions, it may be very proper for another to expofe the Sophiftry of it, fince he tells us fo often of his accunte Logic and ftrift Laws of Confe- quence, againft which I believe he thinks very few are able to (land. The Proteftants abroad, who have vid - Dun!. molt receded from the Practices o^ the t££j£ Roman Church, never thought that a... Significant Ceremony, in the Worfhip ot God, was in it (elf Superftitious and Unlawful : Nor did they think them parts of Worfhip, as is Qonttntioujly lug- geftcd by Inconfiderate People. If 1 was to fill this Treatife with Citations, I would weary the Reader. It may luffice r u . to name only the Proteftants in the V*l- *«*»•*& ^/ ley of Piedmont, who were fb far froi 1 condemning inch Rites, that until tfa Year 1630. they kept their ancient/ Cuftomofthe7>/m AlperfioninBaptiim/^- and thcTrim Fra&ion in t lie other Sacra- menr,and of Unleavened Bread : but tliele were afterwards changed, when all their old Mmiftersdied in tne time oft lie W they were then ioreed to employ iume 272 An Enquiry intq Geneva, Students, who, by degrees pra- ftifed according to the Cuftom of their own Church. I have dwelt too long upon the former Theme. The next that falls under Con- fideration are his Thoughts of Ordinate en, where he juftifies what was former- ly faid to the Reproach of our Bifhops, that fome of them, upon the Reftoration of the Government, fubmitted to Re- Ordination, to the great Scandal, not on- Def.yind.p.^Jy of this, (viz. the Presbyterian Kirk of Scotland) but other Reformed Churches. All this fignifies no more, than that the Presbyterians are refolved to be Scandalized at every thing the Bifhops do. But our Vindicator is very Critical, for he obferves, that his Adverfary makes all the Foreign Churches^ and the French Divines to be convertible terms. The Poor Creatures that he difputes a- gainft, never heard of any Reformed Churches abroad. My advice is, that he would forbear fiich Obfervations, for I could pick more than a hundred Sole- eifms out of his Book that I have now in my hands. For fince he cannot order his Title Page without miftaking the Pofition of his Particles, he ought not to Impute thofe Faults and Blunders to his Adverfary, that are only lodg'd in his own Imagination. The the New Opinions, &c. 273 The other Cenfure is levelled againft his Adverfary's Vmivcrjk) Learning,wirii the want of which he is frequently Up- braided. Now the Vindicator informs us, Defriwlf^ that he underftood not that Trite diftin- ftion of M-tertaliter and Formatter. What an unhappy drudgery it is to be condemn'd to anfwer fuch ravc- ries. Did the Author of the Apology ever (ay that there wasnoiuch diltin- ftion, and that it might not be ufed per- tinently upon many Occafions. but the Vindicator is at lome pains to prove that fuch a Diftin&ion as Materialiter and Formaliter may be ufed. He is a very Charitable Man that condefcends to teach the deprived Clergy the Necef- fity of that diftin&ion Ma'ertditcr & tcrmal;ter,which he Learnedly illultrates by the Example of an Ufurper. I would ^ ; , only ask him, whether it be worth h.»s while to write Books for the Informati- on of fuch B/ocLbtusis t as he reprelents his Adverfanes to be. Xbe Author of the Apology inren no more than to expoie the Application . of that Diihnction, to the Oath of Cano- nical Obtditnct ; tor fine e Vr. M. ^raflCJE 1 that one may pay Material Ca>w»i:slObt- dience, he mult needs yield, in th< I Lreadi; that what h ry comman- ded, was jn it lelt' Lawful ; and I . T 274 An Enquiry into of them had conformed, they would have done nothing but what he acknow- ledges to be Juft and Reafbnable in it felf, and confequencly there was no oo cafion for their clamouring fo much a- gainft Canonical Obedience. A Man, who for leveral Years obeyed what was enjoyned by his Dioctfan, and Signed a Paper, which his Bifhop judged Equivaient to a promife of full and La- conical Obedience,who moved in all pub- lick Steps of his Fun&ion, without any vifible Diftin&ion from his Brethren, meeting with them at the Hours and Days appointed for the Ordinary Exer- cife of Difcipline and other Solemn Ad- miniftrations. If there was nothing in- tended by him, but only Material Cano- nical Obedience^ one would have thought it a very odd chance, that he was fb Re- gular and Uniform in his Praftices, as to do what his Neighbours did in the fame manner, and in the fameSeafbns; if this was not Formal Canonical Obedi- ence, at leaft pra ft fertbat imaginem for malts obedient ia. And I had rather incut the danger of Formal Canonical Obedience, than the fufpicion of Hypocrifie. Suppofe that a Cameronian Soldier ir the Confederate Army, fhould tell his Com* rades when he returns to the Weft oi Scotland^ that Truly he paid Material Obe^ diena the New Opinions, &c 275 iience to his Officer when he was in FUrh ders$ but his Confidence did not allow him to pay it Formally. His Neighbour would ask him, whether he marched in Rank and File; whether he Obeyed the word of Command 5 whether he Ad- vanced and Retired, according to the ufual Signal, and as his Officer ordered him to do? Heanfwers, that all this he did ; and then I believe his Neighbour might reafonably conclude that he paid Formal Obedience, according to the Sa- cramtntum Militare, whether he himlelf thought lb or not. Moreover, the Author of the Apolo- gy never intended to Iniinuare, no not by the remotett Conlequence, that Mr.Af. had not Vnwerfety Learning, though he prefumed to play himfelf a little w ith a Diftinftion, which ferved the other to fo little purpoie, when applied to the Oath of CanoHicAlObtdnnce. Nay, I am apt to believe that he thinks none of the Deprived Clergy lb contemptible* as that they want to be informed of lucha Diltinftion as M.tttrithttr and Formati^ ttr. But I leave the I 7 udic.xt *<-r to in umph a while over the Man of Straw that he himlelf raifed, and beat again to the Ground. All that the Author of the Apoh\: (aid of Prcshfivri4*s0rdinafi isno \vav« 2j6 An Enquiry into wave the Debate : for though we fhould not Approve them, we need not abfo- Jutely Condemn them. We may fufpend our Judgment; at leaft, we need not be lb forward to pronounce Sentence, We may leave them in that Abyfs of Dark- neis, Novelty, and Uncertainty, where we found them. This, I hope, is no conceflion at all in their favour: nor is itnecefTary to come to any Peremptory Decifion of that guzftion. Only to pleaie the Vindicator^ let him look again, and he will find no fuch Conceflion, either Materially or Formally, in any thing that is faid by the Apologift. But our Au- thor is always upon the Inquifitive Pin : He mull find out our Opinions, whether we have a mind to let him know them or not : but this Pragmatical Humour obliges People frequently to hear things that are highly Difbbliging, as well as Harfh and Unpleafant. Whatever Plea's may be managed in defence of the Ordinations of Foreign Presbyterians from their Ntceffities^ from the Unlawful Conditions required by Po- pifli Bifhops ; from their preferving ftill in their Rituals the Ejjemials of Ordina* tion^ when they impofe hands upon him that is Ordained 5 and from the Solemn words they pronounce when they convey Formally the Power of Adminiftrating Sa- craments, the New Opinions, dec. 277 craments, and of Abfblving of Penitents, I fay, whatever Pleas may be favoura- bly ufed from thele or fuch like Top/. in their Defence, I am ftijl at liberty to wave the Debate, and leave it without engaging my lelf in any Rich Quarrel, Neverthelefs, the Ordination of the later Scots Prtsiytertans is left Naked and Deftitute of all fuch Arguments. 1 [ they were under no neceflity toSepar from their Bifhops in the Kle oi Britain. And it is very uncertain, whether t! retain fuch Solemn and Formal words, when they impofc Hands, as exprefly de- clare that the Prieftly Power of Aclmi- niftrating Sacraments, and of Abfblv. of Penitent j, is then conveyed to 1. . that is Ordained. And if there he no fuch Conveyance, there is no Qrdti on ; and if the Words made do not Formally and P'a inh fignifie fuch a Power, then there is no fuch Power c veved; for where-cver there is any Poa-lt forwiUv conveyed, the words ufed formdUy fignifying fuch a er tranfmitted by him , who i-. Authority, unto him that i. O It is not my intention to BaptizeajQhil that formally admits him withinihe cloture of the Chuiv.h, Mnjcfs I | ■ nouiiLe the words of ir > 1 - itituUQU. I do not pretend by th 1 J 278 An Enquiry into finuate,that the Solemn words pronounced in Ordination are as Unchangeable as the Form of Baptifm ; yet in all Ages, a- midft their Accidental Variations, the Power of Adminiftrating Sacraments, and of Abfolving of Penitents, was always retained in the Forms of the Church, under whatever fignificant Words, fuch a Power was formally transfer^. There is none of them that remembers by what Solemn Words tta Power of a Priefi was conveyed unto him, when he was faid to be Ordained 5 befides, that there are many of their number in the Weft, who think Impofition of hands altogether Unneceflary. And its very odd to hear the Vindicator fay (according to his Principles^ that their Adminiftra- tions are Null, if they are not truly Or- dained : for at this rate he Nullifies all the Adminiftrations of Mr. Bruce, fome- time a Preacher at Edinburgh, who, for feveral Years, performed all Offices as a Minifter, before he was Ordained. But I am not concerned in this, further than to put him in mind of a Confequence that he muft neceflarily revoke upon his own Principles. I am under no Obligation to Juftifie their Ordinations. Let him make the beft of them that he can. The Church is a Spiritual Society, and foun- ded upon Spiritual Rules of Order and Pifcipline, the New Opitiions, &c. Difcipline, from the beginning. Tin* made it neceffary to Authorize and Di- ftinguifh the t \ 'inifters of Religion from the body of the People, and to convey that Spiritual Power by certain Law^ and Methods, and in flich words as he who was Ordained, knew what Power he re- ceived, and from whom. I am afraid, when all thefe things are duly confider'd, the P)esbytcna,* Ordina- tions in our Country may be found a very Superficial Cbarttr, a Tenure not worth the leaning to. And fince Orel:- nation Cduly conveyed) is a bundar^ <.»- ta/, and abfolutely NecelTary to the Ik- ing and Continuance of an Organic Church, I wifh my Country-men would examine from whom the Presbyterians in our days had their Ordir.atun. Whe- ther they can prove, that the i : .\}cnt. of Ordination have been inviolably ob- lerved when they were ieparatcd,to << ciate in Holy Things? Whether the Pricftly Power was Duly and bormuUv conveyed in fuch Plain and Intelligible words, that they who gave it, who received it remembers exactly the Power that then was given, and the words in which it wa*convey<$d ? Whe- ther,ever (ince the Presbj tenans fori to uiethe Method oi , they h agreed among themfclvei upon any ocl T 4 $80 An Enquiry into model of Ordination, in which are pre* ferved any remains of thofe ancient Forms by which Priefts have been diftinguifhed from the People. Vef.yin4.M ' Now the Vindicator tells me ( to the great Reproach of the Epifcopal Church; that he knew a Bifhop in England jvho ( aid to a Presbyterian Minifter, that he looked on him as no better than a Mechanic, becaufe he wanted Epifcopal Ordination. For any thing I know, (or the Vindi- cator either) the Bifhop was in the right. Perhaps he knew him Materialiter to be a Mechanic, though Formaliter y efpecially upon Sundays he appeared another thing. This is a Queftion altogether feparated from the concern of Foreign Presbyteri- ans, of whom I fay nothing: I leave them to the Infinite Goodnefs of God, who makes Abatements for thofe difficult Circumftances, in which we may be placed upon Earth, and therefore I en- tirely wave that Queftion. As for the prefent Presbyterians of Scotland, it is not eafie to name any colourable pre- tence to Juftifie their Ordinations. Let them look to it ferioufly, who continue in their Communion, whether they can Adminifter the Sacraments who never had any Authoritative Miflion ? Whe- ther they can Minifterially abfblve Pent' UntSy who were never duly Diftinguifh- ed the New Opi?iions, &c. 281 ed from the People to Officiate } Whe- ther fuch can duly tranfmit this Ordina- tion to others ? The Queftion is not {"im- ply, Whether Presbyters can Ordain that are truly fuch ; but whether thofe, who have no Evidence of their being Presby- ters, can confer Or din niton ? If thty fay that they derive their Commiflion from the People to whom they Preach, then we muft know who inverted the People with that Power. And it muft be made Evidenr, not only that the People had fuch a Power, but that they conveyed it to them in due Form : Neither of which will ever appear. What our Author hath concerning n the pttcipline of the Church, is not? 1 *' 11 worth confidcring. If any thing be faid againft th-ir Difciplin-:,and the Methods ol' the ; r Irtquifltiop. lie then infinuates that this is to declaim againft all Dilci- pline in general: Bgt one m;: veil ientDHciplrne to be 1 ftph and yet at the iame time in lili that the Presbyterian Government been heaW of He asks me, bkt Dr/crp/z/jf />, which u not thi nth thetr^ or is not x <:r< .it *nd / " I i II him tlr i I never Lilt with their Dil its t but lor being - fly Pragmatical, nd 282 An Equity into from its having no tendency, (as by them managed.) to Edifie the Chriftian Church, or to reclaim wicked People ; therefore would I have the ancient Scrift Difcipline revived, which had all thofe happy Effe&s. But this is his way,when we fignifie our Difpleafure againft their Difcipline, he immediately concludes, that we are againft all Difcipline in ge- neral, and the StriSnefs of it efpecially : and this is a very popular Topic when he declaims amongft the Sifters againft thole Wicked Men, who would pull down the Government of Chrifl's own Inftitution, and the Difcipline of his Houfe, and would gladly Indulge all Wickednefs and Immorality. They are the Enemies of God and all true Religi- on. They know nothing of the affin^s of the Spirit of God upon their own hearts. And in a Word, all this warfare between the Malignants and the GodIy,is nothing elfe but the Oppofition betwxen the Seed of the Serpent and the Seed of the Woman, f , Again, he faith, that his Adverfary ?£ JWM7, hath the Brow to wijlj that the ancient Dif- cipline might be rejlored. And was not this an extraordinary flight of Impu dence, to difparage the Presbyteriar Difcipline, and to wifh that inftead of ii we had the Ancient Difcipline reftored 13ui :r the New Opinions j &c. 285 But he tells us, that the Amitnt D/fci- pline wis mort Jlr/S ; and then the Infi- \ nuation is, that we only oppofe their i Difcipline, becaufe of its Striftnefs. Hut it is impoflible for him to forbear fuch Inferences: for his bufmefs is more to propagate Ltbells againft the Clergy, and to reprefent them as pleading tor Wickednefs and Vice, rather than to re- turn Sober Anfwers, elfe he had upon this occafion confidered Bifhop BrambalTs (View of the New Dilcipline, to which he was referred, and not have treated Ihis Adversary (b Maliciouily, as to re- Iprefent him pleading either for Rcmifi Difcipline, or no Dilcipline at all,which I would advife him to forbear hereaf- ter 5 Nam fi ptrgat drccre qu.t vu!t y aw Wkt qtt/e nen i/u/t. I now call to mind fbme other Lafhes D*fstmt.p.if 4 is Pen againft the Apologift, upon the head of Non-Rtfiftance. And he ap- plauds his Wit, that he forbears to >ate the Queftion thrill hi under (land it >ctter , and know the ftate of the Con- rovcrfie: So he concludes, that he did lot know it. Why then was not lie fo Charitable, as to ftate the Conrroverfie nore Clearly, fincc he was at the pains inftruft his Adverfin •, that there was bch a diltinftion as Afa/er/.t/. ; f:rand For- An Enquiry into maliter. Might not he drop fbme of his Ink to give him better Notions of Re- finance and Non- Reft/lance than he had before ? And yet though he thinks that his Adverfary underftood not the State of the Controverfie, he tells us, that bis Opinion was Intelligibly enough expreiTed* and if fb, what ground of Complaint againft him, that he waved a Contro- verfie, in which the Presbyterians of Scotland are too much concerned. And his Adverfary dated one Branch of it fairly, and proved to a Demonftration that the Presbyterians are Rebells in the ftrifteft Senfe,becaufe they a£fcually were in Arms againft the Laws, and upon fre- quent occafions refilled the Unqueftiona- ble Authority of King and Parliament. So far we are very fure the Author of the Apology underftood the State of the Controverfie :and the Vindicator thought it convenient not to trouble himfelf with that Argument, becaufe it may prove fomewhat Stiff and Inflexible. They were in Arms againft the Authority of thofe Parliaments that have been Valid, Legal, Unexceptionable in their firft Original and Intrinfic Constitution, both as to the Authority by which they were conveen'd, and the Members of which tjiey were compofed. They were Par- liaments the New Opinions, & c . 285 liaraents which had neither Extrinfic nor Intrinfic Nullities. In a word, the Au- thority of thole Parliaments was refifted by them, that they themfelves could form no Objections againft : fuch as were agreeable in all regards to our O- riginal Conftitution and Hereditary M ■ narchy. As for the other Branch of this Con- troverfie, whether the King of Scots may be Refifted even by the whole Body or the People ColitSivt or Reprefentatrje. The Apologift told the Vindicator, that when both of them ftood on a Level, he fhould declare his mind plainly. This was enough one would think, to fati^fie him in a thing that his Adverfary de- clined to be too Pofitive and Deciiive. Now, whether we ftand on a Level or not, I tell him that our Laws determine that the King ought not to be Refifted, neither by the CoOe&iiH nor Reprcfcnta- tiv>' Body of the People. And it the Primorts Rt?w, ( whom the Vindicator names) or the Body of the People make Steps that are againft the Law, in things that lb nearly concern the quiet of the Nation, they know vcr\ well what name fuch Practices defcrve, in the Scnfe of the Law it ielt. 1 he Ld\\ s arc the great Security ot our Peace and Pro- perty, 286 An Enquiry into perty, and however they may be at fbtnetimes Unjuft and Tyranical, yet they ought to be taken down with the fame Pomp and Ceremony that they were advanced unto being. If I cannot invade the Perfon or Goods of my Neighbour otherwife than in the Method that the Law allows and Prefcribes 5 pray, may I invade the King without either Law or Authority ? Is he in a worfe condition than any of the Subje&s, whom I cannot touch o* therwiie than as the Law directs? If refitting of the King, was a thing fb Al* lowable and Neceflary, as it is frequent in their Pra&ices, why did not the Laws of Scotland plainly declare in w r hat cafes the King is to be refilled, and by whom, and how ? And fince the Property of my Neighbour is guarded by many Laws, Rules, and Reftri&ions, fo that I cannot meddle with him but according to the Regulations of the Law, it's wonderful to think that any body may meddle with the King, where there is no Law to re- gulate his motions ; efpecially fince the Shaking, Difturbing, or Unfettling the Rights of the Monarchy, overturns Na- tions and Kingdoms, and involves them -in a thoufand difafters 1 whereas the wronging my Neighbour is no more than the the flew Opinions, &c. 2 8 7 the injury done to a particular Man. Now its very odd to fay, that the Law fhould befo tender of Individuals and pri- vate Subjeds, but have no regard to the King, upon whole Safety the whole body of the People depends. Therefore fuppofe it lawful to refill the King, ei- ther by the Primores Regni (as our Au- thour Faintly and Timeroufly infinuates) or by the Wtjl Country People at Ptnt- land Hills, or Bothwel Bridge 5 I hope in that cafe they can name the Laws that invert them with that power of refilling • "For thedifturbingthe King, isof greater confequence to the Cor/jmonivtaltb, than the Robbing a private Man upon the Highway. Now if the Laws gave no Kules to regulate the refinance or our Kings, in that cafe, Hay, the Laws do fupnole it altogether unlawful. So much I affirm is very plain upon the Suppofiti- on, that there were no expreis Laws againft refiftance. The Doftrine of Nonnfifltnce truly ftated and explained, runs the lame Fate of other Evangelick Precept s,/.e.Flefh and Blood cannot receive them, but the more they are Pra&ic'd, the more Chriftiani- ty recommends it leli to the World. And the Church ought to be more terrible by her Spiritual Weapons, that bv herCar- iu! l 288 An Enquiry into nal ; >vhen fhe makes ufe of the laft, flie becomes weak and Contemptible, and being diffident of Gods everlafting Arm, file trufts to little inventions of her own. But if fhe prevail againft Herefie, Infi- delity, or Wickedncis, ( as the Primi- tive Church did ) (he muft betake her to the Methods of Patience, Fortitude, and Sincerity, by which alone fhe would overawe all her Enemies. To oppofe the Church when fhe Fights by Spiritual Weapons of Chriftian Do- ctrine and Stedfaftnefs, is to proclaim War againft Heaven 5 and God can ea- fily defeat and infatuate all Earthly Pow- ers that ftrugle againft his AmbafTadors and Servants. Therefore I reckon that the Church is always fafer by following clofely the Rules of her Original Confti- tution, than by all her fecular Wiles and Stratagems ; the Experience of all Ages confirms this. We believe that the Gos- pel which we Preach is reveal'd by God, and he will defend it 5 and there is no need of our Vioknce to fecure the Church* Let us live according to the Precepts of the Gofpel, and then in defiance of all oppofition, foe will be ttrribk as An Ar- my with Banners* God gave the Apoftles no Rules as to the management of this World, but he cttnttftindtq the New Opinions, dec. 28^ commanded them, and their SucceiTors to Preach the Gofpel in the Face of all Danger and Perfecution, and whatet be the event, we are very fure, thau the Chriftian Religion fhall flourilh in its Faith and Morals, more then when we lean to the crooked inventions of M.n. If the People are allowed upon all oc- cafions, when either they areopprefsM, or pretend it, to refift Authority, then all the Precepts of Meeknefs and Patience are in vain 5 for what King can grapple with the whole Community, or the Ma- jor part of them? If they refift his Edicts, what does he fignifie ? If they may do it in the cafe of Oppredion, they ought to doit ; for we have no Precept nefs and Patience, to iurFer thofe Evils which by our own Power we may law- fully remove; in that cafe v . i* Cowardice and Pufillanimity , rather than Patience and Fortitude. Another thing very remai among!! the Presbyterians of ^\ tUnd this, that they abhor and call oii allefl blifhed Forms and Rules in the Worfhip of God ; nay ib Zealous they fince the Revolution againft thefe, that rheyturn out the Epilcopal Clergy"ouc of their Living*} it tin the arcieot 1 on never (0 V 2po ' An Enquiry into Catholick, or Orthodox. And this for- bearance of all fuch is enjoined, (forfooth) under the Notion of Uniformity, /. e. they mull defert the Pra£tice of all Chri- ftian Churches, and then they are capa- ble to be incorporated into Presbyterian Societies. It is matter of Aftonilhment to hear, that the Epifcopal Clergy are enjoined to forbear the Lvrd*s Trayir^ Reading of the Holy Scrip fires in their AiTembiies, the Apoftolkk^ Creed, and the Doxclogy \ And are thele the things to be laid afide in Order to their Union, with the Presbyterians? What a fad condition is the Church brought unto ! That Form of Prayer muft be banifhed,which ismoft perfect in it (elf, and recommended by the Uniform Practice of the whole Catholick Church, enjoined by our Saviour to his Di(cip!es,and retained in the publick Offi- ces of all Chriflians reformed and uni- formed, and formerly ufed by the Pres- byterians themfelves, tho now they keep at fuch a diftancefrom it, as if our Savi- our had expreily forbidden it. Thefe things are grievous in their Nature, and have no Tendency -but to promote Atheifm and the Contempt of all things facred. When the Madnefs and Dreams of idle People are fb feverely impos'd for Laws and Rules of "Uniformity , when the humour of Schifm the New Opinions, V : we fay that iucli a t] rbidden by God only becaule we forbid it our fjp this is to 7 mskdmemts of Afep 5 but to regulate 1 on, tliatare indifferent in their Nature. according to theprucnt Determination of our Suptriours, dnnot fill under that Cenfure, die all s< vil and Ecclcfiaftical, in 11 it in the ei*3t. When we 1 y th that are not 1. prefer Human [nflicutiona tp the I maadtnents of God, when v. things beyond their own Ntturc> V to 2 $6 An Enquiry into tf, andOrder, in which God hath placed them 5 when we efteem the Means more then the End, and feparate the Ecclefi- aftical Laws from their Relation andS/*^- fervitncy, to the Laws of God ; when our Thoughts and Notions of things are fb confus'd thatwemiftake their Subordina- tion one unto another, and Praftice ac- cording to fuch Notions, then we put Light for Darknefs } and Darknefsfor Light. Our beft performances muft needs be tainted with Folly and Superftition, and we Worfhip God, not according to the Di&ates of true Reafbn or Revelation, but according to the dark Idea which we form to our (elves ; this is Superftition in its true Colours. Its very obfervable, that when S. Vaul reproves the Superftition of Hereticks, and judaizing Chriftians, he places it much in their Negative Scrupulofity. They were taught by Seducers to mix with uhfs.%^,12, their own Religion thefantaftick Aufte- rities of other Se£b, as if our abftinence £om moderate and lawful Pleafures and fatisfa&ions, were things in their own Nature very acceptable to God, for biding to Marry , and commanding to abflain from M ats. They condemn'd things in their own Naturejawfuland ufeful, as if they were dangerous and hurtful, and taught the New Opinions, &c. 2^7 that thofe Abftinencieshad in them fuch intrinfick Excellencies, as made up a great part of true Religion. And this kin 1 of Superftition was much more plaufible than that which prevails in our Days, yet both of them agree in their Original and fundamental Principle, in that, un- der the Notion of Religion, they keep * at a diftance from things Excellent and ufeful, as if G~d had forbidden them. That Negstive Superftition which pre- vailed amongft the Pagans and Judaizing Chriftians, had in it ( as S. P.ml informs us) a fhew of Wifdom, Humility, and Mortification, and a Zealous forwardnefs in Religion. Tho' as they managed thofe Ab(iimnct$ and Severities, thev became the greateft Obftaclcs to true Rc'i jion, fince they were impofed as things more valuable in their m the Love of God and our Neighbour ; but that Superftition which prevails in on; tmong&GurScbtfiBdticksyisofa mored m- gerous Confcquence, they Co thofe Solemnities of Religion and Ea fiaftical Constitutions, astl Nature unUwful and it Tendency to promo: gion in all its mi 1 ; and to Condemn I by Col', wfi : 2p8 An Equity into promote the trueends of Religion, is no Jefs than a great ftep towards Athetfm. The one and the other confift in their Cokf.2 2T 22. Negatives^touchxotytajie not, handle nob) Which agrees exaftly with the fuperftiti- ousFooleries of our Days; you mufl not fay, you mujl not fing, you mujl not obferve a Holy -day. The one placed much of their Religion in their forbearance of innocent things ; but the other value themfelves upon their rejecting excellent and ufeful ^Conftitutions. The firft was more plau- fible, becaufe they pretended to mortifie the Flefh ; and Abftinence, if difcreetly ufed, ( and with Subordination to better things, ) had a Tendency to fo good an end, but when overvalu'd and not duly placed, became Superftitious, But the latter fort of Negatives that reje&s the Conflitutions of the Church, in things indifferent, implies a direft Stubbornnefs againft all Authority- and introduces the Contempt of publick Worfhip, Atbeifm* rand Sceptiafn, and a boundlefs Latitude of Morals. Let the ferious Reader confider, which of the two is worfe; yet they have theun Impudence to charge all Chriftian^ Churches with Superftition, when their own Practices are Superftitious to a de- gree beyond Companion. The Super fiit ion which the New Opinio?:^ ccc. 299 which S. P*ml reproved in the Primitive Heretic!^, hid in \: a more perfect Rule , thin the Gaftol it ielr, and therelo.e they preferred . own Schemes and htvtttiQw to it ; rhis is that which the Ap. > being fuijM to Or; m?uts y 4 'h». By which are not meant tl /-appointed by lawful Authority, to prefer ve the So- lemnities of Worfhtp in Order and De- cency, but rather th< I ions of y - who had no Autho. :y at all , who Taught the I there was more true Perfection aud San- ptity in t ! i w i r own Schemes, than in og the Precepts of ( . . Vpoftles. -low different is this from the Practice of Gkfijtuf Church, who hath appoinr- d all lie. direct Subordination ind Subiervuncy to ; ftods of I i ; and if Lojillitt.: itbout th and Dep( ;iak': their I nd | y. 3oo An Enquiry into Thofe Primitive Hereticks thought, that their nicer obfervances were more pleafing unto God, than Faith and Obe- dience. They reprefented him to them- felves, as a Pcevifb and Angry Beeing t and and foonerpleafed with their unreafonable and lingular Impofitions, than with the mod fegnificant expreffions of true Reli- gion 3 they made thofe Aufterities/>4r/j of their Religion, as things more agreea- ble to the Divine Nature. If we confi- der the Exercife of Fajling, as a fubfer- vient mean to advance greater Purity, and to keep the body vnfubjectton to the Spi- rit, then it is approved by God and the Pra&ice of all civilized Nations ; but when we look upon it as a thing pleafing unto God, feparated trom any fuch Rela- tion and Tendency, we miftake it widely ; for in it (elf its neither good nor bad, but as it is determined to either by its circum- [lances. Nay, which is more, the Rituals and Solemnities of Worfhip, which have been appointed by God himfelf, are not ac< ceptable to him, if they are not performed to advance things more excellent in their Nature, than all external Ceremonies can be. To obey is better than Sacrifice^ ana 1to.x5.22.jjj hearken than the Fat of Rams. And all Conftitutions of whatever kind that K the flew Opini07is y &c. 301 that are not employed to advance the Love of God, and our Neighbour, are abufed, and if we think to recommend ourfelves unto God, by fuch publick or private obfervances, whether they are impofed by Divine or Ecclefiattical Au- thority, we deceive our ftlves, and the Truth ts not in us. How Religious did the Pharifte appear s.sutth.u.10. unto himfelf, who asked our Saviour, if it wis Lawful to heal on the Sabbath D.ty ; he thought that the nicer Obfervation of the letter of the Law, concerning the Sabbath ,or the ftricter Adherence to fo;. later Rules invented by the Phar/fees, was of greater moment and more pleafing un- to God, than the fafety of Mankind, for whom the Sabbath it felfwas Originally appointed ; this was to overturn the whole frame of Religion, to place things uppermoff, which by their Original In- ftitution were eftablifhcd in the loueit Rank ; to think that it was mgre agree ble to the infinite goodnds of God to for- bear the healing of a Man, ( becaujfc of the Sabbath-day ) than to rcftorc him to his perfect Health, was altogether un ; poming the Dignit) of our Nature, and much more the 1 lonourofthatGbdwhi ra Worlbip. I have known fbme«S ferjlitions people, to whom the molt 1 lent 302 An Enquiry into cellent and the tnoft comfortable things became terrihk and nntafy 3 they repte* fented God to their Fancy, as if he were all Thunder and Indignationi, this made them approach him v/ith a flavifh and and Snperfttttous fear, to that degree, that they would not venture to break open a 7 Letter ("upon a Sunday ) addrefled to them from a Friend, in the retnoteft part of the World ; yet they would bitterly declaim againftthe Obfervation of Chrift- * mtis and Eafter. In the mean time they confidered not, that the Letter might be Addrek'd from one who then wanted their Affifhnce and Condu£t, their Advice and Charity in things of the greateft Con- feqtience to Soul and Body: And to relieve him in firch a difficult ftrait, refembled the antonjincl goodnfcfs of God ; Whereas my forbearance to touch the Seal, for fear of breaking the Sabbath, refembles the mean Notions of a Superfluous Jtw % whom our-Saviour confuted by $crifii#A Retfon, and Miracle. Sciptrfittwn is Hot only bliftd, iwreafo* x/ihfe zw&ConfT'fds buc it leads alfo di* redly unto Atbeifm^ and by the Powcf ^ of Prejudice and Faftion, it makes a Man defpife the Omnifcience of God, and to' venture upon the moil daririg Impieties. Thus the Co&etftitfterff whfen they were the flew Opinions, &c. 303 in their full Career againft the ancient Conftitution of Church and Mate, with H,nds lifted up to Heaven y abjur'd tL Primitive Stations. But if you fhould ask molt of thole fullen Creatures what they meant by the Stations that thej jur'd in the Covtnant } thcy muft needs tell you, that truly they knew nothing them ; yet they renounce them by their folemn Oath as things unagreeable to their Reformation ; and perhaps there are very few in their General AjJtmLly, ( who only had their Education amongft the Presbyterians, J can tell you to this Day, what was meant by the Stations of the Primitive Church. It i9 difficult to name any thing more Safer/lit ions among!! 1 1 40/, or of more dangerous I mience than fuch a btutd and Att Pra&ice. lor the stations of the firft Chnjlians were the moft 1L. r- i/cs, and rtloft agreeablfe to our Religion, and had a Natural Tendei our Souls from the World ; and Li general Nature were nothing e!f<; tlnn thole Fa/Is thai < ftrictelt attendance upon publick Prayers, and the Other Devotions * hutch. To t ike our folemn Oath,thai we will ver countenance, no fcxercifi Humil 3°4 An Enquiry i?ito Self Denial, as were the Stations of the firfl Chriftians, is ( in my humble Opi- nion) not only Superftitious but Atbeijli- cal: for the Body of the People had no true Notion of what they meant, nor did they ever enquire into their Nature, * but blindly fwore what they were taught by their Leaders ; fb they fwore neither in ?ruth 9 nor Righteoufnefs, nor Judg- ment. B go fry and Super (lit ion have betray 'd the World unto greater Follies and Di£ afters than any other thing that can be named s Nay, they are the greateft Ob- ftacles to our Peace here, and happinefs hereafter. True Reafbn and Revelation ought to direft our approaches towards God: When we Worfhip him at a Ven- ture, we may happen to perform fbme outward a&s of Obedience ; but being deftituteof Reafon chey are void of Life, and confequently unagreeable to the Na- ture of the Living God, who is himfelf all Light and Life, and abhors thofe Sa- crifices that bear no Impreflions of his Nature and Perfe&ions. When we Wor- JJj/p ("as our Saviour faid to the Woman of Samaria ) ne know not what^ when we approach him in the Dark, not knowing who he is ; when we draw a Pi&ure of hkri in cur own Mind like our t the New Opinions, &c. 305 our felves, eafily Pleated and Difpleafed with little Things and unaccountable Trifles. When we forget that all the Ritual part of Religion hath no ether end than to promote the MortL When 1 Ceremonies of Worfhip f whether thi are of Divine or Humane Conftitutioj Opprefs and Devour the Vitxls of De- votion, that they were originally defign- ed to preferve, then we change true P - try unto Superjtitiofi, and we miftake the Nature of true Religion, and under the Pretence of Zeal, we heighten and in- flame ourPaflions, we give loofe Reins to our moft unruly Appetites, and think that we do God good Serine we venture upon the moil Barbarous Aftions. In a Word, Snptrjtition is a Piece of blind Service, and \\. r.n- acctptabk; zBatlard-kinctofWorfh proceeds from P rea- fonabk Fear ; whereas 1 I Light are the BJftntUl Ingredients of that H f/j/p with which God IS J leafc !. and by which iin> Imam: is I ills of K hrtguiir cl the more they a die name of I ti,then"tfi governable \ - 306 An Enquiry into the Corruption of our Nature. Our greateft Zeal mud therefore be employ 'd againft that which is unqueftionably e- vil. The Jews would not enter Pilate's Hall, becaufe it was the Preparation. It was not pjffible to have more Tender^ Delicate, and Nice Conferences, yet in the mean time they were confulting the Death of the Lord of Life. The Bloody Enfhufiajtsi in our own Country, who combin'd to Murther a Venerable Old Dr. sharp, Man upon the High-way, would not f^ f %jf part from the Houfe where they had St. Andrews, r . . - I made their appointment, until hrltthey fung Pfalms, and Blafphemou/ly perver- ted feveral places of Scripture to ferve their Confphacy. This is the fame Folly and Madnefs for the Nature of it, that the Poet fo Pltafantly fnay, I may fay fo 7 hzologic ally) ridicules in the Egyptians. jvven.fat.i$, Lanatis animalibus abftir.et omnls Menfa, nefas illic fat urn jugular 'e capetl Dimidios^ alias facit , Offa gtnis, flmos oculotum [anguine pugnos: Here was a Scuffle with a Witnefs 5 they fought for their Religion, they were Martyrs for their little Idols, wheu they only pleafed their own Fury anJ PalTion: and we iee this folly exaftly copied by many Chriitians. They contend warmly tor their own Opinions, and they think that by fo doing they are the onlv 1 zo.intes of Heaven, and molt : of God. Sel' is the Idol that Mankind bow to, it is the and lmpitty, and therefore our 5 gave u% this Command in the firft place to dtny oar ft/vts. When Out wi Subdued to the Will ol GoJ t then Reli- gion hath its true Conqueil in the Sou!. If we ftruggle for th cits that are hut of yefterday, u\ O fition to tlie Doftrine and Practice . 1 the Catholic Church, we I ra- ther than the Go/fel, we are Si i I turns in tlie ftneteft Notion \ an I to let op< ur cvn Decrees agaiaft t 1 many Ages, uArtn ./,,- .•.;.;/'..; rial higlielt Senle. But when we defend the C rnd I her Catholic Coaftitutions, we X 2 3°S An E?iquir) into propagate our own peculiar Opinions. There is nothing in this undertaking that is contrary to the Humility of the Go/pel : for the Doftrinesand Difcipline of the Church are not Ours, i.e. not lately invented by us, but received in all Ages ; and in Defending them we cannot be laid to ferve the ends of Pride, Vanity, or Super [lit ion. We do not diftinguifh our felves from the Croud, nor do we draw upon us the Eyes of Men, by go- ing out of the Common Road : On the contrary, it is the fatal Dileale of all Sectaries to contend for their own No- * ' velties more fiercely than they would do for the four Evangels : and they im- pofe their new Chimeras , withgrea- ter rigour upon others, than Faith, Mtrcy, the Love of God and our Neigh* hour. I have upon this occafion difcourfed freely of Super(iition, becaufe we are frequently charged with it by our Ad* verfaries ; and I leave it to the Impar- tial Reader to examine, whether this their Acculation be not very Blind and Diftngenuotts, when he views the Nature and EffeGs of Superjiition, and the pre- ient Pra&ices of the Presbyterians. They pretend to hide nothing from the People ; and indeed their Cotidefcen- fions the New Opinions, &c. 30^ fions to popu'ar Fancies, are very Ser- vile and Unbecoming : and mod: of them (whofe good Opinion they court,) con- tinue (till in their profound Ignorant even when they bitterly declaim a all others ; eipecially thofe who do not tamely fubmit to their Dictates. It very fad to obierve, how much well- meaning People may be Impolcd upon, and Deluded by the Sound of words t! c!o not underftand : and I think) i, a very dangerous Branch of SMperjiitioif. The very Cdteehifm t' they teach the People, is (for the n part) lo contrived, thai none can unJer- derftand it but they who have had their Education in the Univtrfii pofed to ferve the llypotht-fu of a certain Order of School-mtn % rather than ad ted to the Capacities of the People, k is true, they amu!e their Fbllowei the Opinion of knowing more than th( Neighbours; yet tins knowledge is n t only ImMgindrj and Super fir- dlo very dangerous t>> true ( 'hnilian P ftice > lodge Co many \\ prds in th Memories ; £ very • no J is to their mind, I are 1 | ' lit be inftanccd in k X j in 310 An Enquiry into in the Aflemblies Shorter and Larger Ca? techifm, which I humbly Judge impofli- ble for the People to underftand, unlefs they had been Educated from their In- fancy in the Contentious and Artificial Language of the Schools. I do not now confider whether the Doctrine contained in their Catechifm be Orthodox or not ; I oniy fay, that it is impoffible for the People to underftand it. I name but one Queflion, which the Catechift thus propofes, Wherein confifts the Sinfulness of that Eftate whereinto nun fell ? The Anfwer is as follows, The Sinfulnefs of that Efiate whereinto Man fell, con ft (is in the guilt of Adam'* frfi Sin, the want of Original Righteouf- nefs, and the Corruption cf his whole Na- ture, which is commonly call d Original Sin, together with all actual Tranfgref/ions which -proceed from it. If we view the feveral Particulars of which this Anfwer confifts, we meet with nothing in it but what is very Dark, and altogether beyond the Comprehen- fion of Illiterate People: Nay, though they were Learn d, yet unlefs they are acquainted with the Language of the Schools, they cannot penetrate into the meaning of this Anfwer ; it pre-fuppofes, that the AW Opi?iions, &c. 3 1 1 that the Perfon Cattchiz'd is \\ ell Verfed in the Syflcmxtic Learning, and that he hath read the common Place* or 7Si gy^ as they are ranged bv the Jifms, or thofe among the Reformed, who built too much on their FomnJUttons. And can we reafonably think, that a Van, who never con vers'd wit!) them,nor their Books, can have any diltinct notion of what is wrapt up in the Clouds of that Unknown Language : Muft every Plo 1 •- man be acquainted with all t! - ?«* Diftindhons of the Schools i And if not, then the PreibyttrtM Catechifm is Jo contrived, as to teed their friii and I >//7y, and yet they are left in the m Lamentable / n 1 tna . The firft Particular that makes Up tliis Anlwer, is, Dt re*t* primipeccsti primi Horn in is • Hi: Next isasdffficult as tlie Former, Dt frivstiott J Orivindu ; and the English Words, in which uc haveit 9 leaves it mi I whether they intend to ] I by it Pnvatio or , or a more Gtatr*/ Phrafe than either ot them. this Language libel) to l e undc by tlie iiody or the People ? l be ticultr, is as much above their L. any ot the other t (eems to Infinuate, that :' 312 An Enquiry into of Humane Nature, was not only Bruiftd y Weakned, and Diftortid, contrary to its Original Byafs, but rather wholly De- ftroyed 5 and that there are no Remains of the Divine Image left upon the Souls of Men. But thefe three Particulars do not fall of them together) make up (in the defign of the Catechift ) the Smfuhefs of that Eftate whereinto Mm fell : There is a Fourth added, which is, all actual Transgreffions which proceed from it. So that he that anfwers, muft recolleft all thefe together in his own Mind, before he attains any true Notion of what is asked in this Queftion ; and witha! have fome tollerable skill in the M- tap by fie kj. When we look upon the Body of the People, as engaged in the Various in- cumbrances of Humane Life, and how little they are acquainted with the Nice- ties of the Schools ; we muft needs con- elude, that they that compofed this Ca- techifnt^ defigned it rather as the Badge of their Party than as the Inftrudiions of the Faithful, The Knowledge of our Lord Jefus Chrift ought not to be mix'd with, nor deliver'd in Metaphyseal Niceties. The Publick Catechifms of the Church fhould be formed in the raoft Vnexcepti- cnahle wordsTuch as are agreeable to the Principles of Natural Religion., and the great the New Opinions, &c. 3 x 3 great Articles of our 1 aith, that are re- ceived amongft all Chriiti ans : but when the People are inftr y in thole nicer Sb/bl/okt/js, that the divided Tra- ternities have invei diftinguifh themielvcs from one another; when they pic ife themfclvcs with fuch words Monks y and ill natur'd Zealots pitch'd upon as r their Soci- eties: This is nothing clfe than to lite up a Banner for Fa£tJM s Inoravce, and S fterftitiin. They are taught by their Leaders to bawl agaioft tl 'it mc- the ChnjliAH Church : and that, which they i'ct up in Oppofition to it, leads them naturally to Pride and / ibkfiafm* '\\\>: Chi fiidn Religion v. •the Rel i! Katie an 1 therefore it : in 1 PUined Language, Inch Under llaud : This was the Prac: our Siv/o/tr and his ApoUles ; tl livercdthey/ I Cur- rent idiom of the Jews. Tl; nothing more foolifhly S s than .tickled and pleated w ith words ti we do not underftand : I lame Irapreflion upon the Imagipation, yet t!iey cor (olid N< '.aiihmcni to the mind. This is the t\ ; ie of our Iy arc wonderfully delight w . 314 An Equiry into with fuch Modes of fpeaking, as put their Animal Spirits in motion, even when their Mind, their Reafon, and their Judgment, are altogether unacquainted with the Force and Vi&ories of true Re- ligion. This charge may be fairly managed againft their Catechifm in General, as well as that Particular Queftion which I mentioned. Their Homilies to the People run in the fame Strain : and the Bigots of their Party, are fo much in love with the found of certain Words, that they think they underftand them, even when they have no clear Notion or Idea conveyed to their Mind. This is very accountable to fuch as are acquain- ted with the frame of Humane Nature, the Delufions of an Animal Religion, the grofs Ignorance of the Populace, and how few there are that have either Skill or Courage, to examine the things that are in Vogue^ by the Principles of true Reafon ; yet,amidft all their lamen- table Errors and Miftakes, they are highly conceited of their own Knowledge, and they have the Vanity to accufe all Chru fiian Churches of Superftition, when they them/elves are Irrecoverably tainted with that Difeafe. It the New Opinions, &c. 3 1 5 It is very probable, that if the /"/.- dicator take thefe Paragraphs of mine to task, he will mod: Zealoufly undertake the Defence of all that Ortbsjox S that is contained in their Publick Cate- chifms, and write olil .1 whole Sjjkmxo confute his Adverfary. But that w rtich I confider at prelent, isnot whether ti are Orthodox or 1 r, but whether the People underftand t Doctrine or not, or the it Niceties and Language in which their Catechifm is compofed. They keep them in perpetu- al Darknefs and Ignorance: anil when he names any one Alan, thai \U tber {/(iterate fas many of the People are filp- pofed to bc / that underftand their Cate- in, then I may be pefwaded toretn much ol wh 1 i charge them with. Purfuant to this defign of keeping f hem in the Dark, they forbid the 3m fturesol the Old and Jtiew Teftament to be read in tlmr Ptillick Afrmblht. In the beginning of the / r#* the Poo ;-|0\M, w hei was tranflated into the ir own Par i at now the C/a the Apottjphal % are I lie. Tl bf Athtifm and Enthu U needs be Sctndj/ottj to all Ch \fi\ - So- 3 1 6 An Enquiry i?ito cieties, as well as contrary to the Praftice of the Church in all Ages. How can the People be acquainted with the Hiftory of the Go/pel, unlefs the Holy Scriptures are read Publicity in the Church ; efpe- cially, confidering that they have banifh'd that fhort AbftraB of Chriftian Funda- mentals contained in the Apo/lles Creed. Many of the People cannot read at all, and they that can, negleft the Scriptures but too much in Private. Muft they banifh the Oracles of the Prophets and Apofiles, to make way for thttr Extempo- rary Effufwns } If fuch Practices be not expofed, it is not poffible to preferve the People from down-right Atbeifm, nor the P rot eft ant Religion from the Re- proaches and Irfaltings of its Open and Avowed Enemas. And though we have no Communion with fuch Licentious Dreamers, yet their Neighbourhood ex- pofe US to the Vnchar/table JJJaults of our Enemies, as if we as well as they had fhaken off all Communion witb the An- cient, Primitive, and Apoflolic Church. . When their Publick Worfhip changes its Appearances, as oft as the Seafbns of the Year, we cannot but lament the Con- dition of poor People, who are Enflaved to their Vnreafonable Diftates, always Learnings and never able to come to the Knowledge the New Opinions, &c. 317 kno.vkdge of the Truths they are led into a Labyrinth, whence they cannot extri- cate themfelves. and reduced to that un- certainty, that they do not know into what Religion they are baptized ; for their Preachers require them to Educate their Children in the Covenants of the Kjrk of Scotland, Weftminfter Qonftfjwn and Catecbifms ; and is it likely, that when they are bid fhift for themfelves in fuch a Defart, ( without the conduct of the Graze, Ancient y Comprebenfive y a.r\d folid Forms of the Cbrijiun Church J they can arrive at any meafure of trniChrifii- an Knowledge. Another r en. a> liable Innovation in their Government is this, That thd they have banifhed Bt/Jjops and Deacons, contrary to the Practice of the Primitiv: Church, yet, (to make amends) they have iru: another Order of Men into the Ecclcfi 4 (ti- ed Government that is altogethci and of their own Invention. I mtin ; Laytldtrs ; and theft are 'cw, to be veflcd with the 1 l H) 'f' i n and Pon i rnmeot ( in thin] ing to theDifcipIineandp3- lit) of the Chun IT 1 1 Nay more,// the Clergj, as much a fhemfelvcs may do. fl : cc til 3*8 An Enquiry into a bolder Encroachment upon the Spiritual Authority of Ecdtfiaftics, than by fuch a Sacrilegious Vfurpdftdfi. What right have they to the t$amb or Office of Presbyters, who are not duly diftinguifhed by an Au- thorttativt iMiffion from the reft of Man- kind^ ferve in the Offices of Religion, who have no imposition of Hands from theGo^er- nors of thzChurcb, no,nor from their own Confi/lories. And if they have fuch a Power in the EccUfiafiical Government as is pre- tended ; how notorious is the Encroach- ment of Pm/^r/tf#Preachers,over thofe Lay-Eiders, ( who are faid to have equal Power with themfel ves ) in that they ne- ver 6iffer/Ae«?,whofe fole office is Govern- ment, (and therefore may be prefumed to be better acquainted with it, than they who are diverted with Cares of another Nature ) to interpoie in the mod Ejfenti- al A8s of *] fir i fdt &*()/!, 1 meap thsfolemn and Authoritative lmpofition of Hands^ Adminijlration of oacr anient s 9 and Abfolu- tion of Penitents ; and how inexcusable rnulr thole filly Creatures be, who never plead their own Righcinan Affair of this Confequence ! But the Truth is, tho their Leaders have pofiefled them with the thought of their having unequal fhare in the Ecclefiaflial Government and juris- diction, yet they never rfurft 'venture up- on the moft Effentiai Ati s of Power and Au* the Hew Opinions, &c. 317 Author ity,ihty are a Stt of Men thruft in- to thzRoom of Clergy-men ^without any fha ow of aTitle,either in the word of God^nor in the Praftice of the Ancient Church. Another Theorem, by which they en- deavour to recommend themfelves and their Party to the unthinking multitude, is this, They affirm, that there is an un- alterable Ri»ht in the body of the People, to chule their own Pajtors) tho they take great care to Order the matter fo,as none be admitted into Ecclefiaftical Offices but iuchas the Conftftory approves. They who were defigned for aol} Orders in the Primitive Church, were firft Vublukly named in their Ajfemiiies 9 that the People might know whether any Crime could be objected agaiaft their Promotion \ and ii' upon due Tryal,they were found Innoc then the Church proceeded to a Rt^uUr Ordtn.it -n ; but when the Multitudi ! gan to think that the Original Power of naming Clergy-men^ waslodg'd in the ielves, then Tumults and ( n be- came innumerable : And there are iomc Ancient Canons that fuppofeth \ J eto be unwilling to receive the Buhop, a:: he i&Qrddined, as the 36 Canon of the Apoltlcs. Such a ( lonftil ur n;ii had t* altogether ridiculous, iJ the People in choleDays were at Libert} tocbule wh th 320 An Enquiry i?ito they pleafed. It were impoflible to efta- blifh Uniformity in any part of the Chrifti- an Church, it popular Elections, without their necejfary Re ft riff ions- cindLimitations, were allowed 5 the Multitudes moft pla- ces, ( if left to their own Difcretion, ) would chufe fuch as refemble themfelves in their Month and Intellectuals. The Praftices of contending Ptrties upon thofe occafions are Scandalous and Abo- minable: Impudence and Fa&ion appear every where without difguife. Can there be any thing more Reproachful, than to fee a Company of mean Mechanicks lay- ing Wagers, that fuch a one fhall Preach better than another ? It was not their Talent of Preachings that recommended them in the vrimitivz Churchy when the Chriflians were of one Heart and of one Mind ; both Clergy and Laity agreed to advance thofe who were moft eminent for Charity^ Piety, Chaflity, and a Holy Life. I need not dwell upon this New Opinion ; the prefent Treshyterian Practice condemns it to all intents and purpoies, fince they allow no Congregation to chufe for themfelves. Another remarkable Theorem, upon which the Vindicator values himfelf is, his odd and extraordinary Interpretation of the Words Of S. j^rom^ in his Epiftle to the New Opi?rio?is, &l. 3 2 1 to Evagrius. It muft be confeis'd, that if there be any Honour due to the Author of that Paradoxical Expolirion of the Words of S. Jerome, 'tis only owing to his own Invention 5 if Oramatw in the Language of S. Jerome, figaifieth theor- dtring of Meetings, and not the E lmfofition of Han's, then it OluD knowledg'djthattlie/ r ind Ucdtor $lon made this Difcotery. Howe his Notion is a little out of the common road, yet bethinks it very confident with m learning, than ever the Jfologift. h of. IheQueftion is not, wl of Learning his Adverfar. i f d, but whether hisExpofitiin of Sjf < v - be reconcii'd to common Senie, tl guage of that Age in which S. wrote, or any other Writer erf the Chri- stian Church. He tells us, that f m I bad odd Avy> of /owe i why fhou'd he be blai tins, who rv is tl Critical skill? Tor, i tions that v unufual, isihtVindictt > I the words of S. Jeron Ctt : to be D *0K! I 3^2 An Enquiry into from all L ex og) .,pbers y Criticks y and other Expositors'-) thus, he is fufficiently jufti- fied, (hethinks) by aParallel Example, in the Writings of Urotzus. Whether the Vindicator does modeftly compare his own Interpretation of S. Je- romes Epiftie, with that Expofition of i Cor. 12. 28. offered by Qrotim, I leave it to others to Determine. Let us now en- quire, whether Grotius his Expofition be without any Countenance from Lexicogra- fbers, Crtticks, and cthtr Expofitors ; the word fignifies properly, to help one that is ready to fall. This was the Duty and Pra&ice of thofe, who were ftronger in the Faith, and higher in Authori- ty ; of whom then could this be fb eafily meant, as of thole who were Pr i i in that Period to the 1 1 to enquire into it more than Dthers of the i:d. B.t hi ftf\ - I cm rs fur ia The more I read in tl o ra ph, Jiemore D*9 inefs and Confufion round iboui chePerlon than ' it any A. at that ti \c r I uppofe the S neai ne to th o be DO oilier th. 33 o An Enquiry into Plundering Reformer , who afterwards made himfelf as famous in FUndtrs for Robberies y as he was at Edinburgh for Tumults ; He perhaps was taken Notice of in the beginning of the Late Rtvdtt* tion. Here in Seven or Eight Lines, I find the Vindicator in as many miftakes as there are words 5 and this is enough to let him and others fee, that, whatever his other Accomplifhments are, there is not a Man upon Earth lefs qualified to be an Hiftorian. What had the Author of the Apology to do with thofe Occur- rences that fell out in that Society, feve- ral Years before he knew it f Such things as had no relation to his Defign, nor to the Tumults at the beginning of the La/l Rtvo/titiov. Wer*c ic not eafier to row in the Galleys than to confider luch trifling Cavils ? Defyind.^.%. Next, as to his Perfbnal Reflexions, I think it not worth my while to rake in- to that Puddle. He tells us, that the Jpologifl faid, that he read the Vindica- tor's whole Bok with Vtffion He him- felf knows very well that this is moft fraudulently mifreprefented. All that he faid was no more than that he was - j - provoked in every other Line to the Unde- ** cencies of Paffion. And is it necefary to fall into thole Diforders at all times, when the New Opinions, &c. 3 3 1 when we are provoked ? Cod forbid. Again we are told, that the Author of the Apology fays, that he had not the Vindicators Book by him when he en- deavoured to refute //-. But this he nei- ther laid ir r thought. He might fajf that his Library tbt?i, ( and in the Circum- ftances he was in) v is not worth the naming. In another place he is very angry that the Author of the ApAogy fbould have laid, that the Presbyterians had no Au- thority over the E| >i but what they derived froai the State ; and upon this occafion he reprefents his Ad- verfuyas if he was pleading for I ftidnifm. But it is very extravagant in him to think thai Forty or Fifty Preach* of the Pnsbjteriau way, had a y over a Thoiiiand of the Efifa Whu gave them any Power t meddle with oar Cler but the Com Or ra in the Qonvention* If Parity of Presby- ters be the Rule of E merit, who put the Bp un- der their [urifdi&ion ? I ) Scripture for thi -w»i E- dition or P uhkh Fifty or Xhreefcore K to domi .r a They and ? a 33^ An Equiry into a Flight of Erajhamfm, never before heard in the Chriftia* Church. I am wearied of mentioning his Re- flexions. I wifh he would forbear fuch Pra&ices, and fee what he can do tolup- port his caufe by a fair Tryal, without the afllftance of Perfonal Libtls and Whiffling Stories : and unlefs he and his Affociates manage ^e/>Controverfies with greater Candour and Civility, I think not my lelf obliged to confider any of their Books, far left to anfw'er///^,whofe Names and Character I am not acquaint- ed with. If our Adverfaries have no- thing in their view than to make the People acquainted with the Truth, they need not the help of thofe mean a.ndA 7 aJly Methods that hitherto they have made ufe of. Such Arguments are proper for the Rabble, and for them too, only in their mad Intervals of Fury and Re/or- mation. They who have engaged the Unthinking Multitude in this violent Oppofition againft the Chriftian Cb/trcb, are concerned to let the more Intelligent part of the Nation fee, that their New Scheme is founded, either upon Reafon, Revelation, or the Pra&ice of the Fnrejt Antiquity, I fhould be very forry if any of them underftood this humbleEntreaty to proceed from Vanity, Pride, or Info- lence. the Hew Opinions, &c. 333 knee. I abhor all hoc- headed Defiances. I ought to know my feh better than to provoke any Man alive : but I defire to be Inftru&ed ; and I am as yet fully \\ fwaded that the whole Fabric of their Government and Difcipline is altogether New, and confequently highly Dange- rous and Antichrijlian : and I wifh my Country-men would inform tkqmftfa of the tmt ftate of our Debates, that they may not be impofed upon id an affair of this Confequence, nor think thatGtf^ Almighty can be fervt tal and Super ft itious Paffions, by a Lima Rage and hmfttnom Zeal, tut by a reafon. Strvice, fuch as becomes the Di: our Nfttrrr, the M.ijtjiy and Gravity of Publick IVorfbp, and 'the /; /iF dom of that Supreme Beimg t to w horn we owe all Wcrjbip and Ojtdience. It may be that the Vindicator thinks, that he has been formerly tf tth lbme Seventy ; hut / on- ly owes it to himlelf. I am with Contention^ nor with Com Men. I have no inclination to ContiritUi this Debate, otherwife than it the Chrifltiin tburch, ami th< of Edification. We are BaptU Difcipline and 1 on of H and Charity ■ Si ( J - arc 334 ^ n & nc { u i r y into are amongft the Firfi ana Originalkffons of the Chriftian Inftitution. Let us therefore fincereiy examine the Springs and Motives of all our Aftions, and of our Publick Debates in a Particular manner. Revexge and Hypocrifie are fre- quently at the bottom of the moft Plau- Jible Performances. The Surly humour of many 'Nominal Christians is very in- confiftent with the Religion they Profeft. Some Men fetupfor Reformers of others, who are themftlves Slaves to the Vileft Paffions. Some would overawe the World into the Belief of their New Opu nions, when their Rage and Irregular Heats openly defie all Juftke and RelU giotf. SIR, I am afraid I have put your Patience too much to the Trial ; and yet this dif- courfe feems to be but a fhort Effay 9 in comparifon of what might be written on thefe Heads. If they oblige me to con- tinue the Examination of the New Opi- nions, by Fair and Chriftian Methods, or by fuch Arguments as have any Real or Apparent weight, then I may be encou- raged to enter into a more Narrow Dif- quifition. Indeed when \ve : view our preferit Gircumfiarices andf many-fold In- the New Opinions, &c. 335 firmities, we muft needs acknowledge that of our /elves we have no ftrength to flop the Current of Popular and PftVdilii Errors. We oughc to know our own Frai/nes and Weakness better, than to imagine that we can refift, or itand be- fore an Impetuous Tide, when it isarifing. We muft not expeel that the Giddy Mul- titude will turn Phdojophers, or that we Our [elves are the fitted Inftruments to Reform a Nation, ib much funk under the Power of Prejudice and Delufi.n. On the other hand, we muft remem- ber, that our blejjed S.wicur redeemed the Church with his own Blood ; that the Faith onct delivered unto the Saint 7, is belt preferred within the Enclofures of Order and "unity ; that this Unity can- not be maintained, if we openly con- temn the PratJ/ce, Forms, and Rituals of jheVniverfdl Church \ that Sebifm ordi- narily ends in Herefit and Dtlufiom ; and therefore neither Opfrtjfioms nor Dif.»v V cf tb> living. bra i of the jf////,that are are Jrrefiftible. When (foiling, bfoStoii n*ov( tq- wari that it was net [toffibfe the thvtl to hinder hin. We i i diverted in oi:r P Temptations, v. hen \ Remifi and out of Order ; but w hen ! is recolUOed^ ai plead by thoft Arguments Hjai //>- them who put their\r\i(\ \ i 538 An Enquiry into of his Wings. If our private Calamities occafion our Humiliations and Repentance, ought we not to pray for the Peace .of Je- ruialem, For my Brethren and Companions fakes , I will now fay Peace be within thee. Let us lift our Byes to him that dwells in the Heavens, for our Soul is exceedingly filled with the f corning ofthofe that are at eafe, and with the Contempt of theproud. But we, f who have been feparated for the foleran Services of Religion} ought in a more fpecial manner to be thus em- ployed and to exhort the People, in Sea- Jon and out of Seafon, to keep within the Unity of the Chriftian Church. Every New Do&rine in Religion ought to be examined. If we are fliaken with every Wind, it is an Argument that we are not fufficiently eftablifhed in the Truth. We muft not venture our Souls amongft a Society of Men, who are lately come up- on the Stage, all whofe Appearances have been fetal to Truth, Peace, and Order; We are unacquainted with their Miffion and Ordination* Let us examine their Pretences by the moftAncient and Genuine Records, and fland in the good Old Ways, for in theft only we [hull find rcji unto our Souls. Truth loves to inhabit Calm and Serene Spirits : It cannot enter where all the Avenues are blocked up with Bitter* wf the New Opinions, &c. 33^ nefs and Indignation. The Zjal of God's Houfe is AcJive, but full of * Light 3 and when we are warmed by its Rajes^ it teaches us to Mortifie the Flcfi mth the Affections and Lufts thereof, to be Patient in Tribulation, rejoycing in Hope. Our Time runs faft, we are fhortly to appear before ouxOmnifcient Judge ,and He knows xhtfirfi Motions and the darkeji Recefles of our Souls. The Night and the Light are both alike unto him. We muft fhort- ly give an Account of what we have done, or fhall do in the body ; let us therefore pafs the time of our fojourning here m fear, and pray for Afliftance and Illumination from above, to lead us through the Wind- ings and Turnings of this Dirk and T fiftuoHs World, that when wc leave thcfe vain and empty Shadows, wemay(with Joy and Confidence ) give up our Souls un- to God. is unto the Hands of our MOST FAlTHFVL CREATOR. Give my Dutiful Refpeih to all o«r Friends, I bid you heartily farewell, and I continue, S I R, BOOKS lately Printed for Walter Kettilby. ADifcourfe concerning Lent^ in two Parts; the Firft, An Hiftorical Ac- count of itsObfervation, the Second, An Eflay concerning its Original. This fub- divided into two Repartitions, whereof the Firft is preparatory, and fhews, that moft of ourChriftian Ordinances are de- rived from the Jews,and the Second Con- jectures, that Lent is of the fame Origi- nal. By George Hooper, D. D. Dean of Canterbury, and Chaplain inordinary to His Majefty. True ConduS of Terfons of Quality. Tranflated out of French, Oclavo. A Treat if e relating to the Worfhip ofGoJ 9 divided into Six Sections, Concerning firft, The Nature of Divine Worfhip ; fecondly, the peculiar Objefl: of Wor- fhip; thirdly, the true Worfhippers of God 5 fourthly, Affiftance requifite to Worfhip; fifthly, the placeof Worfhip; fixthly, the fbiemn Time of Worfhip. By John Templtr, D. D. Octavo. A Sermon Preached at the Funeral of the Reverend Dr. John Scot, by Z. Ifham, Rector of St. Botolph's Bifbop-gate,cgW. Two Jffize Sermons, Preached at the Affizesat Winchefter, Quarto.