I OF THK AT PRINCETON, N. J. SAMUEL AQNEW, OF PHILADELPHIA. PA. s%msvgJL AdytL-fg&i , •ez COLLECTION OF PURITAN AND ENGLISH THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE I LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY PRINCETON, NEW JERSEY SCB> W5X Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2011 with funding from Princeton Theological Seminary Library http://www.archive.org/details/nonconformistsviOObarr I THE JtottcottfQ?mtfts VINDICATED FROM THE A.B USES Put upon them cDVREL By Mr.< and j ISCRJFENER. ■ Being (brae fbort AnimadverGons on their Books foot! after they came forth:. In two Let- ters to a Friend (who could not hitherto get them Publithedj. Containing fbme Remarques upon the Celebrated Conference at Hampton- [our t. . m «ffi- — . By a Country Scholar. L O N DO N Printed for Thomas Farkhurft , at the Eible and three Crowns in Cheap fide, 1679. [1 ] THE NONCONFORMISTS Vindicated^ &>c. SIR, &> u ., j«p— «^ Hough I have of late wholly ad- dicted my felf to the Study of Pra&ical Theology, and fpent all that time I could redeem from my jSt neceffary oecaftons , in Reading fuch- Authors as make it their bufi- nefs to declare unto us the effentials of Chriftia- nity *, yet it hath beer, ibme delight to me, from time to time, by your Letters, to under ftand what Books have been Printed about thofe f comparative- ly^) Petit controversies that have of late years To miferably divided our Brittjb Churches. I heartily wifh, you had Sill continued only to be my In- telligencer, then I had been at liberty, either not to fend for the Authors you mentioned, or elfe when I had fent for them, to lay them afide as foon I had enough of them : but you were am- bitious to be my Benefactor, and therefore lately fent me at your own coft Mr. D^ej^s two Evi^i cal Volumes, conjuring me, r?y all "our f rie n d i Hip, to feaSTtSem over 3 and to return you my thoughts A 2 of i i CO of them : and though I have again and again im- portuned you to excufe me from fo unwelcome an employment, yet will you take no denial ^ wherefore that I may not feem finally obftinate, I do, here- with, fend you fome Animadverfions, the fruit of a few leifure hours •, in reading whereof, if you either encreafe the itch of difputation, or be forced to abate of the efteem you as yet have of your Author, you know where to lay the blame. I af- fure you, I envy not unto him the Ecdefiafflcal dignities and benefices he enjoys : but I think he was as unmeet a pcrion, as any could have been / pitched on, to undertake the Caufe of our Church, ' againft the Nonconforming Minifters : for the /grounds of this fo levere cenfure, I refer you to / what follows, and at prefent (hall only lay before you three or fl (Tary qualifications of him that oiifdrSuty with* any fuccefs, or credit to our Church. i. He had need to be free from all fujpjjtion of , -arrfbitiori, an-.! o? that, which the Apoille calls, the root of all evil? elfe his acTverfaries will fay, that in his pleadings for the Church, he feeks not her, but hers. The Writings of Mr. Hooker, Mr. Sprint, Dr. Barges, as they are in themfelves fober, and learned, fo they are by all, or moft, read with- out any prejudice : becauie they contented them- felves with fuch ordinary preferments, as they either had before they had written, or might have expected though they had never written for Cere- monies. Nay Dr. Burees protefTeth, that he loft • ' more by conforming, than any did by not conforming, (by the way, whereas Dz.Heylin faith Hift. of Lresby. * [33 Presby. Pag. $27. That King James occafioned this Dotlors preferring to the Rettory of Colflrill in War- wick flrire : the Reader may take notice that he was never Rector of ColJJrill, but of Sutton GoUfield, unto which the King occafioned not iiis preferment, for the prefentation was given him without his IFeking, by Mr. Shilton, after it had been fir ft refufed by Dr. Chetwindj; I therefore doubt not but he did write for the law-'uinefs of Subfcription, out of confcience, and that he would have con- tinued in that opinion, though Authority had frowned upon it. I dare not fay fo much concerning all that were, or would have been-, more highly dignified. T^he fa^Engli.h man that grated hard upon the Pref- byterian Government in. the Latin tongue, was DrV Matthew. Mttl^e^J^^\Q^_f^eter^ . in a Book entituled devera, CathoTic^^CLrifliana^ Scclefa^ this very man, whether difcontcnted, b^cauie his Book agair.ft Mr. Mount ague was fuppnffco ; or ^ngry that he miffed fome prdermtnt he aimed at, or for fome other reafons we know not of, before his death, profcfTrd his hearty forrow that he had written (Tmnch avainft 'Presbytery and for the power oj the domimeringPrfUais a- may beieen in X&Tfpis ' aivimi m Regimt n is Ecc lejTaff ici. vV ho p r o - feffed a greater zeal for Hierarchy than Patrick^ Adamjbn f But Hierarchy not being able to pay its quarters in the worlds own con:, haw oooriy did he Recant all his actings for it ? Confejfing Presbyteries to be an ordinance cfChrifl, and craving Cods mercy that he had called them a foolijh inven- tion\ bewailing his pride and covetoufnefs . that I ad put A i him C 4l % him upon undertaking the office of an j4rchbiJhop> as that wherewith juftly the fincereft profeffors of the Word have found faulty and condemned as impertinent -■ to the office of a fencer e pafior of Gods word ■•> ingaging alfo that if he had healthy he would write a confu- tation of Sutliffes Books AH which , and much more, is to be faun, in the Records of tkzScettifi Nation. 2, He that would, with any advantage to- the Church, undertake to confute Nonconformifts, muft be one that hath feen and Well confidered, either all , lor the chiefeft of their Books^ and well knows the tHfipriej of the times in which they were written, . lie, firrt he may commit fuch foul roiftakes in J Chronology , as will render him ridiculous and — contemptible to ail his Readers. Can the mod mortified Presbyterian chuie but laugh , when fee finds in Dr. Heylins Hiftory of Presbyterians, Pag. 264, that about 1570. Mr. Carthwrights grace for Dot! or was denied him 7 by the major part of the Univerfity^ which fo difpleafed him> and his Adherents , that 7 from that time^ the degrees of Do- Elorsy JBatchelorSy and Af afters y were efteemed unlaw* \ fitly and thofe that tco'i them reckoned for the limbs of tsfntichrift y as appears by the Genevian notes on th Revelations, How can it appear from the Geneva notes, that from the time of denying Mv. Carth- wrights grace, degrees were accounted unlawful ? when every ows, that many years before • denial of that grace, thofe o pttS jf buih made, I , tag.lg^. where mention [ 5 ] mention being made of a Pamphlet written by Stubbes of Lincolns-lnne, it is laid, that Stubbes had married one of Mr, Garthwrights Sifters^ and therefore may be thought to have done nothing without his privity, Mr. Carthwright indeed married one of Mr. Stubbes his Sifters, but that Mr. Stubbes married one of his Sifters is a falfhood^ and if it were fuppofed to be a truth, what ground is that, why a manfhould think that Stubbes did nothing without his privity ? Do all writers make their Brothers-in law privy to their defigns ? I acknow- ledg that Thuanm faith it was found out Hhat Mr. Carthwright infiigated him to write the Libel i but Thu^invj is not to be relied on in mat- ters relating to '"trie' * Engtifi Puritans , becaufe in iiich, he follows one wh 3 v. as their bitter adver- iaryi as fi tf° becaufe Thuanm himicif was too too Antipuritanical, perfedlly in Religion of the fame mind with Cajfander and Baldwin ', whoie Character need not be given, Doubtlefs had there been either clear proof , or vehement lufpition, that Mr. Carthwright was accefTary to the compiling of the gaping Gulph, he had not efcaped fome fignal token of the Queens difpleafure^ for her Majefty was fo highly incenfed againft the Author, Printer* and Publisher of it, that nothing lefs would fatisfie her, * than arraignment of them upon the Statute of/ Philip and Mary, again fl the Authors and Difperferi of feditiom writings ^ and becaufe ibme or her chief Lawyers were of opinion, 'Oi|Ii^^aw^Fas ia bu i t f temporary, and of no force 'Trifter^rei^nT'iheTm-' pnfoneth one of them, and turns "srioiher out of his place, and prevailed fo far, that bath Stubbes, A 4 and C 6 1 andTage (who difper fed the Copies) had fen fence parTed upon them, to lofe their ris^ht han3sTwhich accordingly were cut oft in the market-place of Weftminfter 7 with a Butchers knife and a Mallet*, but it is obferved by more than one of our Hiflorians, that when Stubbes his right hand was cut off, he did pull off his Hat with his left hand, and cry out, God fave the Queen : and the people by a general filence gave their Teftimony, that the punifhment was too fevere. Nor did the Queen her felf take much pleafure in reflecting on this penalty, but rather when the heat of paflion was over, received Stubbes into fome degree of favour, as is probable from the imployment that he had under Peregrine Lord Willoughbyfent by the Queen with four thoufand Soldiers to aflift the King of Navar, in which imployment he ended his days, but by a natural death. Secondly, if our Writers for Conformity know •noLTne state of the controverts, and the times, in which they were" managed, they will go near to contradict: one another \ and will it not make the Nonconformists good fport, to iee their adver- iaries at dififenfion among themlelves? Could Mr. Dwells Ekgliflj Book have been more effectually confuted by "any writing, than by Dr. Heylins Hiftory of Presbyterians ? Dr. Stradling licenfeth a Book tending to prove that the Presbyterians in England art a lingular fort of men, as contrary to the Presbyterians beyond the Seas as to their own Bliliops at home ^ the Vicechancellor of Oxford licenfeth a Book defigned to prove that all Pres- byterianS) all the reformed Churches over, are all afted [7] a&ed by one fpirit, equally prone to fedition and fchifme , alike bent to deftroy all Kingdoms and Churches into which they are received. Will not the Presbyterians fay Aha ! fo would we have it t will they not even blefs themfelves in thefe con- traditions of their adverfaries ? Dr. Heylin faith, Lib. 7. Pag. 275. " Whitgift diverted Carth- r Wrights admonition, in a Book entituled, An "aniwerto the Admonition. Cdrthwright fets out " a reply in the year following, and Whitgift pre- sently rejoyns in defence of his Anfwer^ againft "which (farthwright never ftirred , but left him " Matter of the field, pofTeft of all the figns of an "abfolute Victory. But Sir George Paul faith, cc Mr. Carthwright ( glorying be- like to have the "laft word) publifhed a fecond reply, fraught ct with no other fluff than had been before refuted, C1 from anfwering of which Whitgift was diflWaded. Will notfuchfweet concord as this, make delicate Mufick in the ears of the Nonconformifls ? Efpe- cially confidering that the Letter of Whkgker mentioned by the Bo&or, is pretended *Bythe Knight to be one of the main inducements moving Whitgift not to rejoyn to the fecond reply. And let me admonifh the Conformifts not much to glory in Whitahrs letter, reflecting fo much difgrace on Carthwrights Book , feeing Whitaker was then 1. Under thirty years" of age. 2. Never dreamed that his Letter (hould be made publick. 3. After- wards married the Widow of Dndly Fennor. 4, In thofe writings which were the product and ifTue of his more mature judgment and ftudy, layeth down fuch principles as the Nonconformifls think their E*1 their conclufions do naturally and lineally defcend from. 5. Died in over- (training his diligence to iuoprefc the* "Pelagian "notions of "Peter" BaroZ io much npvv-aclays aoplauued and admired. Certainly if they are to be accour:^::rTicto^Who keep the field iaft, the Nonconformifts have at leaft as many Vigors as the Conformifts^ though we fhould grant that Whitgift had the laft word of Carthwright, which yet is not to be granted. But doth not Mr. Fuller fay in his Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, he had ? Anfwer, He doth^but I have been affured, that being before Olivers triers for a livings he ingemtoujly ac- knowledged his error , and promifed to certifie it, if ever bis Boo^ came to a fecend Edition, which I therefore give notice of, that it may proceed no further, and that Mr. Ifaac Walton, who is (till alive, and hath fallen into the fame miftake in his life of Mr. Hooker. Pag. 85. may diiabufe his Reader. The which if he will vouchlafe to do, we (hall have encouragement to try, whether we cannot acquaint him with feme more of his mi- ftakes, and mifadventures. In the mean time I fhould be glad to underftand, what afiurance can be given us, that Bifhop Jewel ever ufed fuch words concerning Carthwright as thofe mentioned by Dr. Hsylin. Lib. 7. Pag. 274- ancl elfe where, viz., Stultitia nata efl in corde pteri fed virga dtfciplin£ fiigabiteaw: for it feems improbable, that io grave a Prelate, fhould give fo unhandfome a character of a very learned man, concerning whom he could make no edimation, but by a few fcattered papers, defigned for a Book that faw not the light till jewel was entred into the chambers of Darkneis. All [93 All that I can fee any ground to acknowledg, at prefent, is but this, that Jewel both in a Sermon at Paul's, and in a conference with fome Brethren, had declared himfelf to be an approver of the Eng- lish ceremonies *, and that being ready to leave the world, he declared that what he uttered in his Ser- mon, and conference, was defigned neither to pleafe any mortal, nor to embitter or trouble any party that thought otherwise than himfelf^ but that neither party might prejudg the ether, and that the love of God by the Holy fpirit which is given to m, might be poured forth in the hearts of brethren. See his life written by the Nonconforming Dr. Eumpred. Pag. 255. edit. Lond. an. 1573. And if Dr. Hey fins friends will pleafe to confult, Pag, .-275. They fhall find Jewel died September 25. about three in the afternoon, not as the Doctor affirms, Lib 6. Pag. 270. Sep- tember the 22. And then they may alfo confider whether he hath not erred in dating Zanchies Letter to Queen Elizabeth, September the fecond -, for in my edition of Zanchies Letters put forth by his Heirs at Harmon* 1609, it bears date the tenth of September, 1571. Thefe are (mall matters, it will be faid *, I confels they be •, but if men will write Hiftories, they ought to be very exact:, and publifh nothing that need fear the fevered examina- tion. Let me be excufed if I here adventure to give two more inftances, one of Dr. Heylins imaginary Victories *, the other of his contrariety to other writers whom he fometiraes quotes with applaufe. Ltb. 8. Pag. 285. He acquaints us that Dr. Ban- crofts^ a mofl excellent and judicious Sermon (let that that pafsj he gives us the heads of that Sermon, faying, fag. 284, That they were all proved with fuch evidence of demonstration) fuch great variety of Learning) and strength of arguments) that none of all that farty could be found to take arms againfl them in defence either of their lend doctrine) or more fcandaloMVftf* All this with bitternefs and ma- lice more than enough *, but with no regard to truth: for Dr. John Reynolds at the defire of Sir Francis KnovoleS) did attaque that fo much ap- plauded Sermon of Feb. 9th. at St. ^auls Crofs 9 and pulled down two of the main pillars, viz.. The fupcriority which Bifiofs have among nt over their Clergy) is Gods own ordinance. ,2. Jerome and Calvin confefs that Bijhofs have had fuperiority ever fince the time of St. Mark the Evangeliji. The Letter of Dr. Reynolds in which he doth this, is in many mens hand?, and the Hiftorian doubtleis had, if not feen, yet heard of it, and therefore was inexcufable in reprefenting Dr. Bancroft to be fo formidable an adverfary, that none durft look him in the face. Let thofe who account Dr. Ban- crofts Sermon unanfwerable, reply to Dr. Reynolds his Letter, and if it be thought that Dr. Reynolds hath not refuted all the pauages of the Sermon, let us know what the particulars be that {till re- main unanfwered, and yet need an anfwer, and if after fuch notice given, fuch terror leize en Pres- byteritns that none dare appear, let the Sermon then be carried about in triumph •» till then 1 hope it will be no prefumption to lay, that Dr. Reynolds as well underPfood the judgment of the Fathers, concerning Epifcopacy, as Dr. Bancroft. ^ '- The , [ II 1 . The inttance of his contradi&ing others, (hall be part of the ftory concerning the infamous fe- paratilt Browne : Sir George Taul in the life of Archbifhop VVhitgift^ Pag. 5$, acquaints us, that Erown in the Arcbbifiops time was changed from his fancies , and, after obtained a benefice called but commended it to us , for brevity B fake, C 16] fake, after a conditional major to proceed thus, But the Antecedent is true. Ergo, fo is theConfe- quem ) or but the Confequent is falfe. Ergo, fo is the Antecedent : I was as fare that thofe School- men ( in whofe Logicks and Metaphyficks I had wafted too much time ) did ufually fo argue, and I had read that long before them, the Stoicks were much pleafed with this form of Argumenta- tion, and called it Ao^o^ott^, how then (faid I within my fclf ) comes it to pafs, that an ancient Dr. in Divinity, who hath combated not only Pa- r/taw, but alio Bifhops and Heads of Houfes, and fometimes nibbles at Bellarmine himfelf, (hould upon the reading of ftch a Syllogifm fall into fuch a fit of admiration ? What Anlwer I gave my felf, is not material *, but I refolved to lay afide my opinion of the Do&ors abilities -, but rather to hope that he would ma e known fome myftery that was hid from Duncan, BargefdiciuS) Ifendorne, &c. till I came to his 8 1 Page, where 1 met with thcfe words, The ^Antecedent in all Hypothetical fropofitiom being conditional, imperfect, and of m fttll fenfe, cannct be faid to be either true or falfe. When I had read them , I then concluded the Dr. was void of all rational learning, and perhaps did not know what hypothetical fignified \ for certainly every hypothetical I ropofition is a com- pound Proportion •, and if it be compound, it muft confift of Two Proportions, and one o- thofe Propofitions muft needs be the Antecedent : Now if the Antecedent be a Proportion, it muft needs be either true or falfe. i know that fometimes the Antecedent , as well as the Confequent , is not formally [17] formally a Proportion-, but it's evermore, at Ieaft virtually a Propofmon, and therefore may be faid to be true or falfe •, if it could not, why do our Logicks io carefully tell us, that we muft not efti- mate the verity or falfity of a conditional, from the verity or falfity of its farts , but from the true or falfe connexion that is betwixt them ? It were per- fectly needlefs to tell us , that we are not to eftimate the verity of a conditional, from the verity of the Antecedent, if the Antecedent neither can be laid to be true nor falfe Be- fides, if there may be sffkmation and negation in the Antecedent, then may the Antecedent be either true or falfe •, but there may be affirmation or negation in the Antecedent, Ergo. The minor I prove from the common rule given for the right making of thofe conditional Syllogifms, in which the ma)or only is Hypothetical * 7 the Rule is, That Tee muft either proceed from the fofition of the An- tecedent, to the pofition of the fonfequept \ or from the deftrutlion of the Confequent to the deftmclioft of the Antecedent i) if we proceed not thus, we may from true premifes infer a falfe conclufion: Now what is it to put ponere the Antecedent? Why, it is to bring it into the minor, with the fame quality it had in the major; That is, if it were affirmative in the major, it muff be affirmative in the minor, if negative in the major, then nega- tive in the minor: Ay, but whatever dull Logici- ans prate, is not the Antecedent in every Hypo- thetical, conditional, impert'eft? Anfw. Certain- ly it is not; for the [if} which is commonly pre- fixed to the Antecedent, is no part of the Anrece- 82 dent£ C 18.] dent ; but it is the copula that converteth the An- tecedent and the Confequent, juft as the Verb [uT\ in a Categorical, coupleth the fubject and predi* cate. Let this be the example, if the Sun jhineth, it is day, here be two proportions, the S un fmneth, it is day, both are joined into one compound pro- portion by the Conjunction */• an I the plain mean-* ing is, if thefirft proportion be true, the fecond is alfo. No iefs ignorance doth the Dr. bewray, when he faith, In every hypothetical Syllogifm^ the major propofition conj.fieth of two parts, or branch- es, whereof one is called the Antecedent, the other the confequent: For I can ma e him an Hundred HypoiheticalSyllogifms, in which the minor only and conclufion (ball be Hypothetical, and the major a plain Categorical. It may be Mr. D> will fay, | this (hakes not his Corn*, and indeed it doth not : but he alfo might have done well, before hedabled in the Printers Ink, to read over fome Compendi- ums •, then would he have amended the Title of above Fifty Pages in his Book, not writing The \ Conformity of the Reformed Qjurches, with the Re* formed Church of England ; for this Enunciation, There is a conformity betwixt the Reformed Church- es, and the Fef armed Church of England in the things of prefent controverfie, cannot be proved, but by an Induction, (hewing, that all, or the moft, or the moft famous Reformed Churches, agree with the Church of England in all, or moft, or the chiefeft of thofe matters the prefent Nonconform- ifts fcruple. Hath he (hewed this? he doth as goodasconfef hehath not; for Page 53. Seel:. 6$. giving us the fumma totalis of his achievements, he C i9 3 he plainly fays, it amounts but to thus much; There is hardly one of the Rites and Ceremonies of the £hurch of England that is not nfed in fome one Reformed £hurch or other. Which iuppoie he had proved ( as he hath not ) he is, many ftages off from the conc'ufion he propounded to infer $ if he deem he is not, let him write a Book to prove that the Language of the Matachufes is conforma- ble to the Englifh Language, becaufe there is fome one word in which both languages do agree, and fee whether he will not be laughed at to pur- pofe. But I will free my mind from all prejudices that may be taken againd Mr. D, on the account of his Country, nor will I create him any odium from the high elogiums he beftows on the Lad of Clarendon, fenfenced by King and Pj^rHament to perpetual bamlriment , as unwortRJ to Tiveln England, (ffiough T wonder Mr. D. doth no where bewail his fin or mifery in heaping fo many praifes on him whodeferved fo few J 'lis not the man, but his Book I am to undertake^ and in it I will' fhew, 1. Where there is a real controverfy betwixt Efifcoparians and Presbyterians, he quite miftakes it. 2. That he takes a great deal of pains to prove that which was never quelUoned by any fober man among us. 3. That he defiles his Paper with many untruths and falflioods. 4« That he hath let fall not a few pafTages which are manifeftly prejudicial and deitru&ive B 3 to / [20T to the Church of England, as it is now efta- blifted. As to the real controverfies now on foot, the principal of them may be reduced to three general Heads, Epifcopacy, Liturgy Ceremonies. The Presbyterians ' i ay , that if they conform, they wufi receivt r ^ifcopacy'"2s an order by Divine Law, Juperior to Presbytery, and invefted with fole power of order and]nrifdi£bion : Search Mr. Durelfs Book with Candles, and if there be in it any one Line tending to prove that either there is any fiich Epifcopacy in any one reformed Church, or that any one Reformed Church, if her judgment were asked, would approve iuch an Epifcopacy, and I will confeis my fell miftaken. He reckoneth hinv felf mod fecure of the Lutheran Churches, and among the Lutherans, efpeciaily of fuch as are go- verned by a Monarchy , particularly he tells us, That in Denmark^ they have Biftops, and Archbi- jhops, name and thing, Page 5. How much he is miftaken in this, will foon appear, if we confult the Hiftory of the Reformation of that Kingdom. About the year 1557, Bugenhagim is fent for into "Denmark where the Twelith of Augufl-, he per- formed all the Ecclefiaftical part of the Kings Co- ronation •, and Fourteen days after that Corona- tion , he ordained Seven Superintendents , to be keepers and executors of all Ecclefiaftical Ordina- tion, and to do the office of Bifhops : Now I ask, feeing Buvenhave was but a Presbyter* whether he put the Superintendents into an order higher than his own ? if he did, who gave him an autho- rity fo to do? If he did not, then are there no Bifhops ! [21] Bifhops properly fo called in Denmark; Melchior tAdam, who relates this of Bugenhagitu, relates alio in the life of Lather, that he, calling Three other Presbyters to join with him in laying on of hands, ordained Nicholas aAmdforf Biihop, repu- diating one chofen by the Coliedg of Canons, and very dear to the Lmperor ', That is, he ordained one by the name of a Bifhop, but he was only a Presbyter, and could not think himfdf to be of an higher Order, bdngorjlajiied by Luther rhat .was but a meer \P^^^^< Gerhard acquaints us , That the Papifis, or at leaftiome of them, did proclaim the Ordinations in their Churches to be void and null, beeaufe per- formed by Luther who was no Bifhop \ hut that ever any Lutheran thought their Ordinations lefs valid on that account, will never be proved. I have read Hunnim his Demonftratlon of the Lutheran MiniftryY'ana though he were himfelf a Super- intendent , yet he ib little magnifies his Office^ that he flicks not to affirm. That he who ordains, ordains only as the Officer of the Churchy and that any one whatever that jhould by the Church be fet to ordain, would ordain as validly as a Bifhop doth. And, if it will do Mr. IX any kindnefs, 1 can, and will on his defire, direct him to a Lutheran, who calls us Anglos Papizantes^ for^Mraining Epiicr> pacy^Jfo high , and appropriating QrdirTadcn to that Order • Chermitim hacl occalion to examine the Anathematizing Decrees of the Conventicle of Trent •, one of them was, If any one Jhall fay that a Bifhop is not fuperior to a Presbyter, let him be Anathema. There he was neceffitated to (hew the B 4 judg- Em 3 judgment of the Lutheran Churches, and yet he there delivereth nothing , but what the EngliftV ^Presbyterians can lubferibe to * 7 and though the in- comparable Philip Melanflhon was^bTamed lor gi- ving more to Bi I hops than was meet Vje the hath riot giv^n mofiTto them, than what the Englifh ^ JSfonconfot mitts are ready t^ive them! ... ,, Thus of tWLutkeran Churches. It will not be fo difficult for me to find out the judgment of the . Churches more ftri&ly called Reformed, becaufe I fhall find the moft famous of them, except the Gal- jican , meeting together at the -ynod of Don . t)f the Galilean therefore by themfelves*, and I fay, .' that the Writers of thofe Churches have done more againftour Englifh Hierarchy, than the Wri- ters of any, or all Reformed Churches befides. For, i t Some of them have made it their bufinefs to overthrow the credit of Ignatim his Epiftles, from which, more than from any writing whatever, our Hierarchy cloth ftrengthen it illf. Did not Sal- jV'v mahus and Blondett drain their diligence, to prove Itfaat even the moft correct Copy of Ignatim is fpu- rioi.s ? And when our learned Hammondhad taken ♦fome pains to vindicate the Epiftles, Marefim quarrels with B 'onde!l y becaufe he did not prefent- fy all other bufinefs laid afide) take the Doctor to task, and maintain againft him the Apology he had made for St. Hieroms opinion *, yet Dally tells is, that Blondett had intended to anfwer for him- felf, had he not been prevented by death. Becaufe death did prevent him, th-refore his friend Mon- :ur Dally hath done that work for him •, and it is faid S I 23 1 *&id, that Dr. Tierfon hath new? Tent him, That if he think meet to reply upon Dally , he fhall not long want a rejoinder. 2. Thofe that have defended our Englifh Hierar- chy, have not been more uncivilly dealt with by any, than by learned Frenchman. 1 will not now ( becaufe indeed I am afhamed ) tell what language Danms gave Saravia, becaufe of his Book tie di- verjfis^Miniftrorum gradibas. Salmafms imagining himfelr difparaged by a word never intended as a difparagement, could not forbear calling Dr. Ham- mond Knave. Marejws ( in the firft queftion he handleth zgainfTTh^TrideaHX ) not fo bluntly, V but more virulently, tells us, That Dr. Hammond ^iij^lMiiJSjjiS^ i^degreejf Jury, as that he ^^r^e^edly^ropiigns the caufe of the Tope 5 not content to Tpit in a Tingle Doctors face, he thus cenfures ail ourBifhops, Melius fu& But above all, let that be confidered which | is laid down by Yet er Moulin in his Letter to the L/Bifhop of Winche fter, Where to excufe himfelf for not making the difference betwixt Ttijhops and Vres- : byters to be of Divine appointment , he pleads, that \ tf he had laid the difference on that foundation, ^^fthe French Churches would have filenced him. yet will Mr. Pur en g< \ they do not condemn our Englifti Hierarchy, which afferts it felf to be Divine, and cares not for be- ing at all, if it be not luch ? The Two Arch- bifhops in Dr. B>tBwickj Cafe, did proteft even in open Court, That if they could not prove their Episco- pal JurifdiEbion and Function , which they claimed and exercifed over other Ministers , and themfelves as they were Bijliops, to be fuperior in power, digni» s—tyj And degree to otber Ministers , Jure Divino, they C'5 3 they would forthwith cafl away their Rochets off their backj, lay down their Bifiopricks at his Makefiles feet, and not continue one hour longer Bifiops. If therefore Mr. D. can b' ing any eminent French Divines that found Epifcopacy, as diftincl: from, and fuperior to, Presbytery, on any Divine Law, he will do fomething to Mop the mouths of Non- con for mills - ? but fuch he will never be able to bring, unlefs he firft caufe the Golden Ball to run before them, or fill them with that which blind- eth the eyes of the wife. Certain I am, that Dr. Andrew Rivet , in his fumma Controver. Se- cond Tract. 22. Quelt. thus ftates the queftion : We dijpute not whether Bifiops be, de fa£o, above Presbyters", but whether they be fo, de jure ; nor is the que fl ion of Humane, but Divine Law : We deny that Bifiops by Divine Law have any pre-eminence above Presbyters. This is the more confiderable, becaufe it is dedicated to four great Proteftant Divines, Peter Moulin, William Rivet ; John Maxi- milian Langky Samuel Bochart ^ and becaufe it is again repeated in Rivets Writings againd Grotius\ When fome Minifters were by the Aflcmbly em- ployed to get foreign Divines, by fome Letters, to fignifu their minds in the controverfy of our Epifcopacy; among others, the faid Minifters went to this Dr. Rivet, then at the Hague, defiring him, that he would be pleated to fignifte his mind : He excufed himfelf from Writing, becaufe of his re- lation to but took down one of his Books, in which he denied the Divine Right of Epifcopacy , delating, That was his judgment, which he would never deny. This I had from the mouth of a very [26] very Reverend perfon ftill alive, who was one em- I ployed to difcourfe him. But I have a later teftimony •, when the Scots , went to Breda to treat with their King, Dr. Rivet put a Preface to Bodius his Comment ©n the Ephefians , commending it to the Worlds and I am iure in that, the Englifh Hierarchy is fuffici- • cntly beaten down. I have faid all that for the prefent I intend to fay about the French Church- es *, of other Reformed Churches I may fpeak more briefly , becaufe. moft of them met together in a Synod at < Dort y to put an end to tht differences about the five points: what was done in that Sy- nod ? Why, faith Mr, Mount ague in his appeal, page 70, In it , and in other Dutch Synods , the Difcipline of the Church of England is held unlaw- ful. At this Mr J)ure!l had need to beftir him- felf ; for either Mr. Mountague, or he will be found to be a Liar : I (hall not determine who is to blame *, but by reading the Acts of that Synod, I do find, thatSeflion 144, notice was given, T hat it was the will of the States, that the ConfcfTion of Faith of the i?*/gid^Churches, fhould be read and examined by the Synod, the Exteri being alfo prefent. Ihe One and thirtieth Article of that Confeflion, when it comes to fpeak particularly of , the Minifters of the Word, faith, That in what place foever they be> they have the fame power and authority, as being all ihe Minifters of Chrifi 7 the only Vnwerfdl Bifhop, and only Head of the Church. \ l*heTe words would not down with our Britifli Di- vine?, becaufe directly oppofite to government by - Archbifhops and Bifliops in England: Whereupon tt? the Lord Bifhop of Vandaff, in his own name, and the name of his Brethren, made open proteflation, That whereas in the Confejfion there was inferted a flrange conceit of the Parity of Minifters to be infti- tuted by Chrift, he declared his own and his bre- thren Htter diffent in that point. Now hence, \ thus argue, either the words in that Article do condemn our Government in England, or they do not } if they do not, why did our Britifi Civines concern themfelves to make protestation, open pro* testation agair.fi them? If they did, then ail at once down fails the one half of Mr. DurelPs Book: For then the Holland Churches in their very Con- feffion of Faith condemn the Difcipline of the Church of England; and ii the Holland Churches dofo, other Churches do foalfo: For by the Di- vines of no other Church befides the Englidi, was a- ny diilike fhewn to thofe worde,aflcrting the parity of all Minifters. As for the Deputies of the Gallo- Belgic\ Churches, they declared, That the French Churches, though not there prefent, had before, in a National Synod held in the City of Vitriack^ 1583, declared folemnly , their approbation^ not only of the Dotlrine, but alfo of the Difcipline of their Holland Brethren : No wonder they (0 readi- ly confented > for an Egg is not more like to an Egg, than is the Gallican Confeffion to the Bel- gickj, in the matters of Minifters and pifcipHne^ both of them are a note above the Ela of many, who have the ill hap to be called Presbyterians, and lofe their livings here in England: both fay, That this is one part of the Polity taught in the word^ that there fhodd be in the Church of £hri$~l 7 Pasiars^ Elders, i 28 ] Elders, Deacons. To this it is like that Mr. Durell himfelf hath fubfcribed 7 for he fomewhcre tells us, That he had for fome years a place aracng the French Prote slams ; and he tells us, page 54, That no man is to be ordained a Minifler, or ad- mitted to any other office in the [aid Churches, but he mufi fubfcribe, be fides the publick^Confeffion of their Faith, the canons and Conftitutions agreed on at Ta- lis, commonly kf/own by the name of their DifcipHne. Now if a man fhould go to him, and ask him whether he believes it to be any piece of Chrifts Polity, that there fhould be in his Church Elders, Ruling- Elders, diftincl from Preaching Elders or Paftors, he would either lay no, or lay nothing. ) Why did he with his hand fubfcribe to that which • he did not with his heart believe ? Perhaps he is a I Latitudinarian, or hath aSiuce in Kis Confcience. 'But the firnple Nonconforming in England dare not Jay they aflent to all, and every thing , if there be jfomething unto which they do not unfeignedly af- /ient, they fay, they can promife not publickly to '/tontradicl: any thing delivered in the Liturgy or / Book of Ordination , and ibme who a*re beneficed and dignified, tell them, they mean no more, by /profefling afTent and content. But Nonconforrnifts cannot bring themielves to imagine, that form of ■/ words imports no more. What a miiery it is, that fo many Families fhould be ruined for want /of a diftinguifhing faculty ! Epifcopms harh pre- V icribed a Receipt, which if thev c*{\ but take, , may cure them of their fcrupulofitv ; ( but let / them fear left it purge them of their Confcience ^atfo: ) For thus he, What if the Magiftrate re- quire \ L 2 9 ] quire words and forms of /peaking , by which an opinion directly contrary to our faith and opinion is wont to be exprejjed? Anfw. ts^s long as my opinion is not known, if thoje forms be fuch, or con- ceivedin fuch words which admit a true Jen fe, though afalfebewont to be expreffed by them, 1 allow them ^\J for peace fake. Refpon. ad 64.. Queft.Page 54. My Lord of Landafs Protejtation hath let ray Pen a running further and fafter than I defigned - 7 yet I will not give it check, until I have alfo taken. notice of fomething elfe , which his Lordfhip re- lates in his Book againft Mountague, viz. That he * told fome Divines of the Synod, the caufe of all their / troubles was , brcaufe they had no Bijhops amongfb them, who by their authority might reprefs turbulent fpirits , that broached novelty , every man having liberty to /peak or write what they lift. It feems his Lordfhip was of opinion, thas if Holland had but been blefTed with Bifhops, nArminianifm had never come to fuch an Head in the Low-Countries \ and fothe^ni^j tei! us. That if we would but fu-: nuTouF telves to the : EifKop '"of Rome, we ffioufd tfien^fiaye no differences -"about the ienfe of Scrip- ture^ yet never any Pope of Rome hath fet out any infallible Commentary upon the B'ble 5 nor hath any Epifcopal authority in England proved fufficient to root up Atwinianifm among us. Nj|\ Mount ague^ w h e n he fir ft lowed the feeds thereof was 6fB\(Eo2^arletorPi own Diocefs, why did he noT'prevent his innovations taking ; root ? Why a^d¥e not keep his own Book igainlFtKtm. from being fupprefTed ? What was the matter that no Convocation ever decided fo important a contro- verfy ? I find C id ] I find indeed His Majefty ( Mountague having /been much vexed by the Commons ) about the year 1626, commanding all the Bithops to come before him, reprehending iuch as appeared, for not making known to him what was meet to be done about the Five points that made fuch a noife : but Bifhop Andrews and Bifhop Laud to yin g their heads together, thought it was not fate to adven- ture the determining of thole points to a Convoca- tion ? till they could get a Convocation more of their own minds *, wherefore after all expectati- ons, nothing came forth, but a Proclamation from His Majefty, Charging his Divines not to vent their heats, byraifing any doubt j, or publishing and main- taining any new inventions or opinions concerning Re- Jj ligion : Much like to an Order, the Remonftrants by means of Barnevelt procured from the States of Holland^ on purpofe to prevent the calling of a : Synod. Of late indeed , 1 find Arnold Voelen- berg, in a f J reface"to the id Voluine o ; Epifcopius hW Works, boaftingof the great^favour that the .■Remonftrant* opinions and Authors, find with our Prelates, and with the leading men in both llniverfities \ Hut perhaps he reckons, as the Pro- verb is, without his hoft. All experience tells us, that Epifcopacy without the Affy (lance of the Civil Magiftrate, will not put an end to our ftrifes and contentions', and with the affiflance of the Civil Ma- gistrate Presbytery may do it. But I return to Mr/2>. whom I oppoied with an Argument drawn from the Synod of Don ; I muft not forget that he alio takes notice of the Synod of Don, and from the civil and refpe&ful language given in it by Bogermm to the \ C3i 3 the Bifhop of Landaff> concludes, That Holland condemns not our Hierarchy. And look how many Tranfmarine Divines he finds dedicating Books to our Bidiops or Archbifhops, and giving them the titles by which they are commonly called among us* fo many good mediums he conceives he hath found to prove that beyond the feas the office of a Bifhop or Archbifhop is liked and honoured. I only defire him, if he can, to be as good natured to our Engliih-men, and to believe Thomas €. imagine that no other Churches reformed, expect- ed the taking away of the English Liturgy? What thinks he of the Reformed Churches of Scotland} The Churches of New- Sngland ? thofe Englijh and Scotijh Churches that were planted up and down the Low-Countreys, and other places of Traffick ? Will he nullifie all thefe Churches ? or had they not de- frres as well as expectations that the Liturgy (hould be removed ? Did he never read with how great regret that Liturgy was obtruded upon thofe Englifi that trafficked in foreign Nations ? If he have not, let him vouchfafe to read over the Hi- ftory of Archbifhop Laud, written by Dr. Heylin, and then tell us whether he was not too rafh to give fo many Nobles, Gentlemen, and Divines the lye. If thatHiftory bring him under no fenfeof his te- merity, then I entreat him to enquire of the AITem- bly-men ftill alive, whether they cannorhelp him to a fight of the Aniwers of Foreign Churches, re- turned to the Latin Letter of the AfTembly of Di- vines •, and by moil of them he will find, that the defigned Reformation was not difgufled bv them. C 4 J Till C 38] Til! he have fuch an opportunity, it will be worth « his while to beftow a little time in reading tsfpo[ lanins his printed Lpiflle. Mr. D. again falls upon the two Houfes, p. 14. thither I will follow him \ where conceiving wrath and fiery indignation againft an expreffion in the Ordinance of the two Houfes, he makes a Manifefto, That there was never, nor is yet any one %jformed Church, that hath only a Directory, and not a book^ of Common-Grayer for the publick^worjhip of God. To which Manifefto I fay, That the Church of Scotland had, when the two Houfes made that Or- dinance, noEookof Common-prayer for the pub- lkk worfhip of God, but what was in the nature of a Directory ^ and that the Church of Scotland was principally in their eye in the management of their Reformation •> and I alio fay, that the Dutch Li- turgy is but in the nature of a Directory, for fo I tinder ftand thofe words, cap. 11. art. n. in the Harmony of the BelgicJ^ Synods, Minifter preces vel ditlante fpiritu , vel certa fibi propofita formula conapiet. It may be Mr. D. will put another con- struction on them, for he feems to have ufed other Didiionaries than thofe we have opportunity to confult in England. In one of the French Rubricks itisfaid, that upon Sundays in th; morning the fol- lowing form is commonly ufed , he teiis us, p 17. the meaning is, That that form is to be ufed always, and tjq other. Could any Presbyterian have thought of fuch a meaning ? or how can any one of them be convinced that commonly and always are all one? why, he may be convinced by conftant and uniform }rA#ice~ >r tq Ittjttlis us^wa. But I lay, conftant and C 39 1 ;Sad uniform prattice will never make commonly , to be always, ^have be en _a jm^JCT of the Chur( my oc( ties of the Nation, and in all thefe years I never heard any Minifter, whether Prelatical or Presby- terian read King James his Statute againft Swear- ing , and yet the words of the Law are plain, That it (hall be read twice every year , were I not a wife man if I Jhould fay, the meaning of the Law is , that the Statute {hall never be read, as conftant and uniform fra&ice doth fnew ? Thus have I examined what Mr. D, had to fay againft the Two Houfes, and the Affembly, and rauft now try not the words, but the power of Ludovicus C.apeHgs . a man cf great Learning s but which in his later days' efpecially, hemadeufeof, to the difturbance of the Church : better had it been for the Chri- ftian world, that Saumur had never had a profef- fpr of Hebrew, than a ProfeiTor that took fo much pains to make the Hebrew Points, or Vowels, and Accents, a late invention of the Tiberian Majfa- rites, long after fundry Tranfiations were extanc in the World. All his Thefe s will not do fo much good'! "as his Arcanum yuntbationis revelatum, and Critica Sacra have done hurt. Let us notwith- standing hear what he hath concerning Liturgies, Mr. D. himfelf being Tranilator. * A Hundred and fqurty years ago, when the . *feparation was made from the Church of Rome, 4 and that the Chriftian people , coming out of * Babylon, did caft off the Popes tyranny, the fa- * cred Liturgy was purged of all that Popifh fu- 'perftition C 40 1 /' € perftition and idolatry , and all fuch things as c were over-burdenforn, or which did little or no- rthing contribute towards the edification of the ' Church ; and fo were framed and prefcribed in 'feveral places, divers let forms of holy Liturgies f - by the feveral Authors of the Reformation that /'then was, and thofe Ample and pure in Germany , * France j England, Scotland, the Netherlands, &c. ' differing as little as poflible from the ancient fet c forms of the Primitive Church : which fet forms * the Reformed have uied hitherto with happinefs * and profit, each of them in their feveral Nations * and Diftrifts : Till at lad of very late, there did ' arife in England, afroward, fcrupulous and over- 4 nice ( that I fay not altogether fuperftitious ) * generation of men , unto whom it hath feemed * good for many Reafons , but thofe very light, * and almoft of no moment at all , not only to 'blame, but to ca(hier, and to abolifh wholly the * Liturgy ufed hitherto in their Church, (together 4 with the whole Hierarchical Government of their * Bifhops ) inflead of which Liturgy they have * brought in their Directory as they call it. Mr. D, tells us, pag. 15. That from hence the Reader may obferve Five things : 1 . That all reformed Churches have Liturgies ', but I fay, That from no words of Capellm, any fuch observation can be collected -, if Mr. D. think otherwife , his Logick is his own, let him make ufeof it: ' 2. That the Liturgy of the Church of England is judged by this great man, not only fimple, and pure, and free from all PopiJIj Superftition and Idolatry } but ■ . \ C40 but alfo from all fptch things as were over onerous and trouble fom^ or which did contribute but little to the edification of the Church. No fuch observation can be made from Caoellm his words, for he only (peaks of the Liturgies that were introduced by the firft Authors of our Reformation, betwixt which and the prefent Liturgy there may be, for ought Mr. Cape 11 faith to the Contrary, a vaft difference : But I believe this great man com- mended he knew not what, and talked at an high/ rate of confidence concerning Liturgies of the firft * Reformers which he never faw. A Papift will not defire greater advantage againd the Tr&fes in Saumur, than to have it granted, that in the Li- turgies made by the Authors of Reformation in all the places Capell mentioneth, nothing was con- f tained onerous , or of little edification. The Di- vines of King Henry the 8th were Authors of a Reformation , their Liturgy had fomething in it fuperftitious, idolatrous, lefs profitable. So had alfo the firft Liturgy made by our Divines in King Edwards time, elfe we mult count it profitable to pray for the dead, and to commend our Prayers to be prefented by the holy Angels, &c And if we fpeak even of the prefent Lutherans Liturgies, every thing that hath little or nothing of profit in it, is not taken away *, for what is the profit of Latin Cantions ? or where is the advantage of Exorcifme? What good is to be got by the Do- ftrine of Confubftantiationi- 1 might urge other queftions which no friend of Capellm would much* . f care for anfwering. [42 ] , \. If Liturgies ought to recede as little as pojfi- ' ble from that of the Primitive Church, as he doth intimate , undoubtedly the Liturgy of the Church of England is the besl , and moft perfeB of them all as coming nearefl unto it. How the Reader fhould be able to obierv.e this from any words of CapeU Ims cannot I divine s it may be Mr. D. heartily thinks that our Liturgy cometh neareft to the ►v Primitive Liturgies, and fo is the moft perfect, becaufe primum in unoquoq^ genere eft menfura rdiquorum ; But Capelliu neither did think fo, nor could think fo, without egregious contradiction to his own Principle ; for he had faid juft before, That from the beginning the Formula's were mofi brief y and moft fimple, which without pomp and train-, and manifold variety , conffted of a few Prayers i and Leffons out of the Pfalms and other Scripture : Now certainly if our Liturgy be moft fimple, yet it is not moft brief, nor doth it confift of but a few Prayers •, let Mr. D. read all that by the Li- turgy is appointed to be read without defalcation, and I will undertake he (hall be under no tempta- tion to make his Sermons tedious. 4. "That of all men who call themfelves Reformed, the 'Presbyterians are thefirft that ever left the ufe of fet forms of Prayers. Capellm ufeth not the word 'Presbyterians, and if he had nfed it, it would have b* en a very blind. Mr. D. icems by Presby* tcrians to mean the major part of thofe Divines, who by vertueof an Ordinance of Parliament did meet to give advice, concerning Do&rine, Diici- pline, VVorfhip: If (fapdliu fay, that thefe were the fir ft that left off the ufe of let forir.s of Prayer, he 4 [43] he was -much miftaken > fet farms of Prayer had been long before laid afide and condemned as un- lawful, by fuch as were as little in love with Pres- bytery as Hierarchy •, he may know whom I mean, if he will enquire who they were that left old England. Dr\ H^l\n hath written tfee Hiftory of PresbyteriansTundtr whiclTname. he feems to bring t ail thofe Protectants who are not Lutherans^ nor fatisfied with the Reformation of the Church of England : ThisHiftory his Son hath dedicated to the Two Houfes of Parliament now fitting. In the 2d Page of that Book it is faid , 4 The Zuinglian * Reformation was begun in defacing Images, de- 1 crying the eftablifhed Fafts and appointed Fefti- ' vals , abolifhing fet forms of worfhip , denying c the old Catholick Do&rine of a Real Prefcnce, * and confequently all external reverence in the * participation of the blefTed Sacrament*, which c Luther ferioufly laboured to preferve in the fame * eftate in which he found them at the preient. And page 8p. fpeaking of the Palatine Churches, he would have us take them for Antilutherans in defacing Images, abolifhing all diftin&ion of Faft"s and Festivals, and utterly denying all fet forms of; publick Worfhip. I know a great deal of this ii falfe, malicioufly falfe, as is almofl every thing in~7 that Book which relates to the foreign Churches {f* and therefore I hope the Bifnops, cr ethers that have Authority, will euner caSi in. tne Book, or iome other way difcover how much tliey abhor the d'efign of it •, in the mean time, here is work for Kfr. l>«rV/i's Pen, if he will not be partial, and re- fl?e& perfons j if he have any zeal left iox Zning- lim-i [44 J t Um % Calvin^ Beza, let him wipe off the afperfion' of Rebellion, Schifm, zAerianifm from their fa- ces, or elfe let him know, that feeing Dr. Heylins Book came out laft, his will be thought fufficiently confuted. 5. Mr. D. tells us, we may observe that the ma- ny reafons for which the Presbyterians have rejected the Eookjf Common Tray er, are very light , and al- mo\t of no moment at all, Cabell faith not fo, but that the Reafons for which it feemed to fome fcru- pulous men, that the Liturgy ufed by their Church was not only to be diiapproved, but alfo to be plainly abrogated, and wholly to be abolifh- ed and obliterated , were light and almoft of no moment ', fo that if any man do only, improbare, having no defign plainly to abrogate, and wholly to obliterate the Liturgy compofed by our firft Reformers . he may have Reafons good enough, lor ought ptpell affirms to the contrary. 6. That as for the Presbyterians, (who are the known Authors of the Dnreoory*) they are in Ca- pell'-f judgment a froward 1 peevifo and faperftiti- om generation of men. Cabell was indeed a man \ who was free enough in his cenfures, of any one whether Presbyterian or Epifcopal that flood in his way, net fearing to throw dirt _in the face of the great tJooker fiimfejff, as appears in his Thefes about Rails or Holy- days: But I would fain underitand ^ how the Presbyterians are the known Authors of /-the Directory • mod of thofe who were called to give advice about the Directory , were when called to give their acTvice, Readers of the tTfurgy , and ""hadlubfcnoed to the Three Articles 'iff the J, 4. C 45 3 $6th Canon: When His Majefty was reftoredfew ofHhem were alive, of thofe few, ibcne at this day are Conformifts •, let Mr. V. ask thera whether they were Presbyterians when they confented to the laying a fide of the Liturgy? and how they came to widen their Throats fo, as to be able to/' fwallow the prefent Declarations, much bigger than aiwjhere to fore .eniojned. -l8 ^u^iiowT "will try whether I can make fome truer obfervations upon Capellm his Thefes about ? Liturgies', in doing which I fhall follow the edi«^ tion of Sanmuvj 165 1. * 1. He faith it is certain that theApoftles and * Apottolical men haa no preicript form of JLitur- at they never die! write, and leave of reicribe to their lucceiiors any . fuch } for the * /^offlei^neecTeS no fuch form, nor did thofe need * any whom they made prefects of the Church, 1 and that preicript Liturgies were not neceilary, * till perfecution ceafing, the number of profelTors «much increafed, and Piety began to grow cold,and c Teachers waxed lazy, fo as there could not every « where be had Paftors fufficiently learned , and 1 Hereftes began to multiply *, and that thejrfi: refcript fo rms that w ere made, were made for the akeof ; unfearn ecPancl fimple Pallors, page 706. *"2. ThTHCiturgies 'fir ft began to be made in the c more Jg mous j^etropolitan and Patriarchal cTieT, jind that in tfiV Countries called by r - h Q , * tn?name " of Gallia, there were fever al Liturgies c in^aTmoiFevery feveral famous Bifhoprick, anil every leveral did contain iometning proper anclcTfFef ent from the reft , "until at C 46 3 4 at laf^by the tyranny of the Pope, the Roman 4 Liturgy obtained through all the Weft. So that iffeems, with him," Liturgies are no older than Metropolitan and Patriarchal Churches*, how old fuch Churches were in his judgment , and upon what occafion firft erected, is at large declared in hisThefes, $37* $A 3 4 9, ^c little as I fuppofc to theguftof Mr. D. 3. He doth , Tage 707, plainly miftake the meaning of the Directory, and theCompofers of it, when he fuggelts that by it, 'tis left free to dJWimfters to pray and adminifter the Sacraments in what words they pleafe; for the Directory tieth Minifters to a certain form in the administration of Baptifm and the Lords-Supper, as alfo in the folemnization of Marriage. Throughout the whole Directory there are , though not Prayers prefcribed to be uftd tctidem verbis, without any variation, yet fuch Heads of Prayer, as that he who needs greater help and furniture to enable him for Confeflion , Petition, Thankfgiving, may well be thought unfit for the Office of a Paftor. And I oblerve, That the Directory orders Mini* Jiers in Grayer before Sermon , to commend to Gods /bleffing the Parliament if fitting, and the Vniverfi- ties , and all Schools, and Religious Seminaries of Church and Common-wealth, but in no Liturgy be- /fides this la(t, was there any Prayer for the High / Court of Parliament ; nor in rrVislaft is there any 'rayer for the Univeriltics or Schools of Learning} yet in theConftitutions of 1603, In allColledges and Halls in both Vniverfities, order, form, cere- \. monies are to be obferved, as they are fet down, and # ^and prefcribed in the Boekj>f Common Vrayer, x/ith- out any omijfwn or alteration. Is not this in effeft to tie thellniverfities never, publickly to pray for them* felves ? If any one fhould prdcribe a Family a form of Prayer, in which was no mention of a Family, it would be thought a ftrange forrr* The laid Cafj}l> page 708. tells us., That [acred Sermons to the people y and exhortations , fhould be made and compofed by the Paflors themfelvesy and recited to the people either by hearty or out of a Va- per y if they can do no other. P oft ills and Homilies as much as may be are to be driven out of the Church , yet it is better , faith he, that men fhould hear one reading another s Sermons , than hear none at alL In this theNonconformifls throughly agree with him, but fome of them will not (tick to fay, that if fome in authority had been as zealous for Ser- mons as they might have been, we needed not be- fore this time, have wanted for any Cure, a Mi- nifter able to make a Sermon of his own : And whereas Capel faith , That Homilies fhould not be read, left they prove, puhinar ignavU & fc : cordis , & fomes ignorantiz , they are wont to urge the fame Argument againft let forms of Prayer \ he might have done well to (hew that the Reafon is not alike forcible in both. He faith, ibid. Thofe he had to deal vpith y deny no^vuttbat Leffonsy Pfalms and Hymns may be read out of a Book^to the people s recited and fung\ only Hymns and Songs compofed by others than men divinely infpired , he faith, they allovp not to have any ufe in the public^ Congregation* Therefore, fay I, he did not intend to deal with thePm&y- D uriansi, [4&] . teriansy who will never be found any where to' have laid) that no Hymns may lawfully be fung., but fuch as are compofed by men divinely infpired ; I my felf have heard ibme of them fing others, without biame from any of their brethren, nor is there any one tittle in the Directory to the con- trary. Let me here enquire whether the Englifi Church hath taken any care to have any Pfalms ^iung in the Congregation *, rranflation of the Pfalms into meter we have none generally known, but only that compofed by Hopkins, Stemheld, &c. °T'is laid that Tranflation is allowed (allowed, not enjoyned ) to be uled in t^e Congregation Tbut Hcylin again ami again, denieth that ever there was any allowance of it given by any lawful authority \ to th*al the whole iervice of God with m performed, it feems, without any Ting- ing at all*, for though the Common Prayer Book hath fundry parts in it which may befung, yet it hath nothing that is appointed to be fung, but in- differently, either fung or read. I believe in this j we are a lingular Church, there being no other that I ever heard, or read of, that hath not en- joyned her Congregations to fing fome Pfalms. JtAr. D certainly can either prove that our Church jyf hath allowed, and enjoyned us to £mgPfalv*s> or elfe he can fhew us fome Reformed Church, that doth not enjoyn Pfalmody. But; fuch is my iJ/weaknefs that I cannot. 6. Capslhu asketh us, p«7~9- Whether it were net better wrfely to prefer we certain forms of Prayer, fit for the publicly edification of the Churchy than t .'— -permit thsm to- the liberty of many Pafiors, mlearn. ed * ., C 49 D >>?^ And unexercifed , where others cannot be had? The Presbyterians will anfwer yes •, but they think, in a wealthy Nation/ where the King is a Prote- ftant, there is no neceflity to take any into the Church for Minifters, if they be unlearned, and unexerciled, 7. Page 1 00. He asketh whether in all the Prayers that are to be made in the Churchy ^aftors can per~ petualiy vary them, or exprefs themselves in divers Words andPhrafes concerning the fame Argument \ yea, he astyth what Prophet or Apoflle can do this with edification? Sure he forgets himfelf, for he before told us, Apoftles could and did do it, and I am fure we have had ordinary Paftors here in England that have done it, and we have ftiii hun- dreds and thoufands that can , and would do it, might they be permitted : Nor can I underhand how it can be difficult to any one who hath well fludied the Scriptures , and obferveth the Provi- dences of God, and is affe&ed duly with his own and peoples wants and neaflities. I in my Family find it not difficult to vary as I pleafe. 8. Page 7 10, 7 1 1. He contends that the Creeds Are to be recited in a certain form of words \ but adds y thofe whom he dealt with did bewray a mani- fesl hatred againB certain forms of Symbols y Qon- feffions and Catechifm, Whence again I infer, that he dealt not with the Direclorians, for they liked the ufe of Confeffions and Catechifms in fee forms. 1?/ Page 71 5. He thinks the Apotomy*W rigor &f thofe men worthily to be condemned , who under pretext of certain and prefcribed forms of Liturgy r 2 M [5°] . do ft tidy to eliminate out of the £hurch all ufe of*' Prayers conceived by Minifters themfelves. This will touch Mr. D s Copyhold, unlefs he can prove againft Dr. Heylin and others, that ibme Prayers, bcfides thofe prefcribed in the Liturgy, are allow- ed to Minifters in publick miniftration. 10. Page 716. He determines, that it is better by much? and more convenient and fafe, that thofe writings only Jhould be publickjy read which are truly Canonical, and divinely infpired, What will the peremptory enjoyners of the Apocryphal Chapters lay to this ? 11. Page 719. Drawing up the fumof all his conceptions, he faith, 1. That forms are not fin- ely and abfohtely neceffary. 2. That they art . not commonly neceffary, but only for order and deco- rum Jake. 3. That they are -plainly neceffary^ where we cannot have learned Minifters* 4. Where there are learned and skilful P afters , a publicly form of Liturgie is very ufeful and neceffary to 'the common edification of the Church, in the fame com- munion of Divine worflup. 5. The ufe of Liturgies cannot of right be condemned or di fallowed. To all theie Proportions there are Hundreds of Non-con- formills can fubfcribe, and are ready to fubfcribe, the two lad only being qualified with fuch diftin- jpions, as I bdieve, were not either againft, or bcfides the mind of this ProfefTor. The Argu- ments of the Brownifts and others which he fcat- tcreth up and down, were fully propounded, and clearly aniwcred by Mr. John Ball, before hisThe- ies faw the light. ' Let Mr. Baxters propofitions 'concerning Liturgies be read and weighed, and f it \ [5«] ! it will be found, that they come very near to thefe of Capellns. I mu ft now come to Ceremonies: The fir ft I mention", is the uie of'^Hrpiice,-, concerning wHich, the NonconformiftsTaf", mat if they re- ceive it, they muft receive it not only as ferving to a decent order and godly difcipline ;, but as apt of his duty to God, by fome notable and fpecial figm-t fication, whereby be might be edified •, but they have /" never found anv fuch aptnefs in it to ftir up their / to s~iir up the dull mind of man to the remembrance f »•/ VQ never found any fuch aptnefs in it to ftir up their dull minds to the remembrance of their duty, and that they dare not pretend to ufe a thing in or- der to fuch an end, as they never expect to attain by it. I my felf have talked with fome con forma- i bleMinifters, and asked them, whether they ever found their dull minds ftirred up by the ufe of it f they have been loth to give me any anfwer, but what moved on the Latitudinarian hinge : One in- deed told me, he did verily believe there was a wonderful vertue in it to excite his dull mind } but asking him. further, whether it was apt to ex- cite him as a man, or as anEngliih man, or as a Minifter ? He gave me a reply, which for Friend- ship fake, I will not here infert ^ but fuch it was, that I eafily faw the Surplice had not cured him of all his dulnefs. Nor can 1 chufe but wonder - why they who pretend to be ftirred up to a re- / membrance of their duty by a Surplice, do ufe it* fo feldom ; there are but few that ufe it conftantly, fome ufe it not above once a quarter, few ufe it in the Pulpit, yet I fuppofe their minds are apt D i to C 50 / to be as dull in the Pulpit as in the Desk ', and the /Church as much requires them to ufe the Stir- / plice at all times of their Miniftration, as at any r time. Perhaps we muft fay of Surplices, as of / pleaiure, commendat rarior uftu. Wei), but how doth Mr. A difcourfe of Sur- plices ? Truly very innocently : He tells us, Page 2 ^ 24. That in Aquitan when a Mini ft er is buried, the neighbour Minifters that be prefentmuft all have their Gowns -, if Gowns can conveniently be had ( that was wifely put in). Now this changing of ap- parel for divine fervice ( it Teems burying of a Minifter in France is Divine Service ) is the very fame thing for which the Church of England is by fame men reputed Topift) and fuperftitiopts, when ft) e will have her Minifters to wear Surplices on the fame occafion. It fhould feem with him the Surplice is no Symbolical Veftment, and that he reckons all thofe who put on their folemn apparel and beft Clothes do the fame thing that he doth, when he puts on figniflcant Garments : But he is io kind, that left this fhould not iatisfie, he will find ' out fome of the beft Reformed Churches , that count it no fuperjlition for their Minifters to wear a Surplice , and he infianceth in the Bohemians, Po- lonians, Lithuanians, who did put en the furplice as oft as they preached in the Churches ef the Au- guftan confeffion : Tut it feems they loft nothing by this condefctnfon , for the Lutherans officiated in th-ir Churches without a Surplice. To requite him for thisdifcovery, I will tell him of fome Luther- an Minifters ( vitt. the Lutherans in Holland) that do net ufe a Surplice, no not in their own Churches, ♦v C 55 ] ^Churches •, fo little do they find it to contribute to edification, that they forbear it, where they would not be blamed if they (hculd uie it: So the Presbyterians are out of his debt. A fecondjCeremony controverted is kneeling at ti^SacVament ^ about which, I may {'af^lllacos cxTra'mtros^peccatur & intra'] I cannot by all that I have read, fee any unlawfulnefs in it, and I hope the Presbyterians, if they fhould be asked by any, whether they had better forbear the Sa- crament than receive it kneeling, wou'd well be- think themfelves what anfwer to give. 1 find not that ever any of our authorized Liturgies did allow any other gefture • yet I have read in a Book, called Treafure out of rubbifh, "Thatforae " CommifTioners of Q^ Eliz.ab.eth did about the " beginning of Her Reign, at Coventry, and other u places appoint, not Kneeling, but Sending to be u ufed at tKTtor3s Table : The Book was Printed by the Reverend Mr. Simeon aAfh fince His Maje- fties return to his Throne %, and I hear that many conforming Minifters are fo companionate, as to deliver the confecrated Elements to thofe who do not kneel • how they can fo do, non vio'lata fide quam dederunt ecclefu ? I underlland not , they themfelves I hope have fatisned their own Confer- ences , and can give a reafon of their practice to their Governors though in the id Boo] againit irant the Reign of Queen Elizabeth, King James'} King fharles the lfi, but through the goodnefs of ourC preient Soveraign, now again put into the ladr' D 4. Edi» [54], / g-. Edition of our Liturgy :, may it never more be left' 1 jour, but continue to the ihame oF thofe who feared t to lay, we left it out, becaufe it feemed too rfiuth to favour theSacramentarians. The Church alio appoints the Minifter to ufe a kind of a Prayer, in delivering the Eucharift, whilft he ufeth that Prayer, the Communicant is to kneel meekly -, but when he hath taken the Bread into his own hands, he may then fit and eat it, or ftand and eat it :, I wifh thif, could farisfie private Chriftians, but there are Hundreds that cannot fo quiet their own minds; and yet if you clifcourfe with them, ihey can make Syllogifms, and they live peaceable and godly lives : Now here die Shoe pincheth the Non- conforrnift Minifter, whether he can promife ne>- ver to give the Sacrament to any one who fcru- pleth kneeling ? Had Mr. D> clearly and folidly determined this queilion, or had he ftrongly proved that the Church could not without difhonour allow more than one gefture in receiving the Sacrament, I could eafily have forgiven him all the raillery of his book*, but he thought he cou'd get preferment at an eafier rate,& tne/eTore contents himfelf, in a few lines (pA^>A1') to itiftanct in a very few Reformed Churches that receive t he-Sacrament kneeling : Firft, he inftanceth in the Reformed Churches of Bohemia, Reformed \ above two hundred years ago •, the remtunt of it now *' 'Uft y faith he, receive it kneeling. This inftanee little . ayaileth our Church, becaufe from the beginning it was not fo\ the Ajceftors of the Bohemians did at firft, viz.. I {04, ufe fianding % but Icing perfected . on that account, ivere compelled to leave it off \ as Cc- menlus az^Va tells us ^ fo that Mr. D. by this only proves the conformity of our Church with tht Popifh Church, in persecuting thole who will not kneel at the Sacrament. N^r is he more lucky in his other inftances of 'Tolonia major , and Lithuania 7 for wlnclfhe refers us to the Qonfenfus PolonU. What a Character Dr. Heylin gives of the Reformation of Poland, let him thatloveth railing fee, Hift. of fresh. 3 i, $2, 33. Indeed the Conient of Poland doth not much hit our humour here in England^ for in the Qracovian Synod, 157 3, all Chorea? are con- demned as dijlwnefl. A queftion being moved. Whe- ther the rites in the ufe of the Lords Suffer ought to be uniform ? It was concluded , That according to the cuftcm of the Primitive Church, men fhould be left to their Qoriftian liberty, yet with admonition to the brethren , that if any ufed fitting, theyfaould leave that proper to :Tjs Arrian Anabaptifts. In the Petri- covian Synod, zsfnno 1578, it is determined , That uniformity m the rite of receiving the Lords Sup- per, fhould not be preffed, lefl it ft id d happen that there /might be occafion to exercife Ecclefiaftical Dif* cipline upon any of the common people, who are not ea- ply brought to unufual ceremonies \ whereas the Sy- nod judged it neither agreeable to the will of the Lord, nor the cuftcm of the Chriftian Church mere pure, to ftri\e Chriftian men with the rod of Difcipline for external rites, yet fo as the gefture of fitting at the Lords Table is rejefted for a reajon 1 Hull more fpeaK of by and by. ^TvsXhzSynodmWlodiftavien- jfr congregated 158;, tlatMr.D pitch eth upon, in which Synod the matter of fitting at the Lords Table is again debated *, and there it is determined, tha C 56] / that fitting is as free as any other geflure ; which be- ing brought in by way of Parenthefis, Mr. D. ne- ver EngHlKeth or taketh notice of j for he had cal- led it an unmannerly and irreverent geflure ^ and it Was no wifdom to touch a knife that would be lure to cut his fingers } but there alfo it was determined, That fitting fhouldnot be ufed at the Lords table in any of the Churches of Poland or Lithuania, for this ceremony is not ufed in Chriflian Churches, and E- vangelical Affemblies, and is only proper to the unbe- . lieving ^Arrians placing themfelves in a feat or throne equal to Chrifl. Seeing therefore fitting crept into fome of their Churches, efpecially by occafion of thofe who denied the Lord that redeemed us j they de- fire and exhort all their affemblies and brethren in the Lord, that they would change fitting into flanding or kneeling. Mr. £>. tranfiates potiffimum firftj and 1 be- lieve he was the firft that fo tranflated that word. Not content to makefo bold with Prifciav, he ri- feth to greater impudence, faying that what they obferved about the firfi bringers in of fitting into Poland, may be our obfervation alfo , if what Dr. Owen have laid be true, as it is verv likelv , That there is not a city, a town,fcarce a village in England, hut had f one of the Mi fere ant Sosinians. Whether Dt-Owen hath any words of this import, I know not *, if he have, 'tis like he referred them to the time in which he did make his book, which was ma- ny years after that fitting was brought into, the EnglijJ) Churches by the two Houfes. Too many there were in the two Houfes,no doubt, that fought their own things more than the Nations peace:, but they never had amon^ them any Socinian that ever. idid C 57 1 I did hear of, but only one Fry, who wasalfo ex- pelled when he difcovered his blafphemies : Nor do 1 find that thefe Hereticks do abound in thofe places of the Kingdom where I have been, butPapifts a- bound extremely } fo as the lame thing that moved the Volomans to forbid fitting, may move us to for- bJ3"kneeling,arid leave it proper to the wretched Pa* plfis, who worfhip a piece of bread inftead of their Saviour. "But this gefture of kneeling would be a little better confidered : The Fathers of the before men- tioned Synods feem to fay ('not indeed in that Meeting which Mr. D. quotes, but in the Meeting of 1578.) That thofe who fell off to Arrianifm, were the fir ft that were authors of fitting in their Churches* If 1 miftake their meaning, detur venia \ but if I do not, I humbly conceive they were themfelves mi- 1 (taken, JohnAlafco, a Noble-man of Poland-, was upon CranmeSs perfuafion fent for into our Eng- Imdby King Edward the fixth , about the year 1 549. and permitted to have a Church of ftrangers, efpecially of 'Dutch? whom he brought up to re- ceive^the Sacrament fitting \ and alio during his aBo3eTiere, put forth a book to prove the lawful- ntfs of that gefture : After many tr_oublefome wandrings from place to place, at laft being invited by at leaft forty Letters , he returned to his own Countrey, and no queition adminiftred the Sacra- ment to his flock fitting, and taught others on whom he had influence fo to do ; Now this lAlafco never fell off to Zrrianifm^ perhaps this wastherea- ibn why in the Meeting 1 58 5. it is not faid, that the Arrians fir ft brought in fitting, but that it was chiefly brought [58] / brought in by them. The aforefaid Fathers feera alfo | to affirm, that fitting had not been ufed by any YLv an- gelical Churches in Europe , at the time of their meeting-, but if they fo meant, they were greatly miftaken •, for fitting was brought into the Church of Scotland by authority, as the moft proper and convenient gefture, 1560. and our ConfefTor Mr, Thomas Be aeon , in an authorized Catechifm 156$. fpeaks of fitting as a gefture ufed in certain Re- formed Churches, and which he himfelf could beft allow, if it were received by publick authority and common confent, Who the Arrian-Anabapifli were, that had caufed fuch a deteftation of them- felves among the Tolonians , I cannot certainly know ^ but by fuch (lories as have come to my hands, i guefs they were Georgia* Blandrata, and Francifcm Davidis and their Spawn, who both de- nied the Divinity of Jefus ^ and alfo his ador ability, Socinusand his iollowers held the Principle, That, Jefus is not God, and yet denied the conclufion that naturally and lineally defcended from it, That Jefus is not to be worshipped ■-, for they had found out a diftinttion of Dem natus & fattus. The former "\ would not flick to fay That Jefus was one of their ■brethren and fellow-fervants } fo would the lat- ter : for they afcribed unto Chrift a dignity and excellency nearly approaching unto the dignity and excellency of the Creator , but con erred on him by the fingular bounty and good will of him who created him. Wherefore the Socinians properly fo called, could notufe fitting at the Lords Table as a token of their equality with Chrift, nor indeed do they much concern themfelvcs what gefture h ufed [59] ^jfedin Sacramental Communion. Volkelius faith, 'they ufe fitting $ but yet fo , that they damn not thofe who had rather ufe flanding , fo as there be no appearance of idolatry, They would have us be- lieve they hate the very appearance of Idolatry r and yetThey commit Idolatry: for what greater Ido- latry, than to worfhip him that by nature is not God, as they blafphemoufly lay Jefus is not , fi 70,0 7it y.h $1 TaCtct* The 1 aft Ceremony, but about which there is the greatefc Controverfie, is the fign of the Crofs.Non- conformifts fay this fign is made a Sacramental fign, becaufe it is ufed as a token that the child (hall not be ajhamed to profefs Chrifi crucified-) &c. and alfo as a ceremony by which it is dedie^ed unto God. In clearing this ceremony therefore , Mr. D. lhould have taken moft pains } but in this he is ilightett or SaftTffe gives us not an inftarice of any one Reform- eel Church that hath appointed the fign of the Crofs to be ufed either in Baptifm or in any other Ordinance } only he tells us of Bibles printed at Geneva for the ufe of the Church, and that before them, Chriftian Religion is reprefented in an Em- blem as leaning upon a Crofs, and that fome Re- formed have Croffes upon their Churches , and that fome Minifters in Prujfia, to humor the Lu- therans^ will make a Crofs in the Air with their hand when they fay, The Lord be with yon. All this is to as much purpofe, as if he had told us 9 that the Rumpers did ufe "the fign of the Crofs in the Flags of their Ships/ and put it on the money which they coined, or that fome Nonconformifts have it in their Coat of Arms, as I am fore they have. I be- " C 60 1 I believe there is not a Nonconformist in tLngr land, that queftioneth the lawfulnefs of making the fign of a Crofs upon any thing he ufeth : And if the fign of the Crofs were made ib, as that it remain- ed, and were vifible after it were made, then per- haps it might have an aptitude to cccafion a good thought concerning a crucified Saviour ? but what can be the benefit of a Crofs that leaves no im- m i predion on the forehead ? I know the Baptifmal water being applied to an infant, leaveth no fuch mark on the flefh as it can take notice of at years of difcretion^ but the Spirit, if he be not grieved, will bring our Baptifm to our remembrance, and he hath fo done to many in the hour of temptation^ but how (hall a gan be fecured, that the blefTed Spirit will engage^iimfeif to bring our being crof- fed to our remembrance? I have made obferva- tion, and could never find any difference betwixt m that were croffed, and thole who were not crof- ied •, Do we confefs the Faith of a crucified Savi- our ? ib do they, do we fight under his Banner f ib do they •, do we joyn our felves to Chrifts flock? io do they} the things that we know, they know alio j fo that they are under a temptation to think that the Crofs is an ufelefs fign'.' I muit not diffemble that Mr. *D. takes on him in his Sermon, page 29 to explicate and (hew the ufefulnefj of this fign. As when the King having created thofe noble Knights of his Order befiows on them the Garter and the "Blew Riband, at Badges to be know* by of others , and to pit them in mind of the great honour done unto them : In like manner^ 1 when an infant hath by Baptifm been enrolled in the Militia C 6i 1 Militia of the King of Glory, Jefus Chrift our Lord • this fign of the Crofs is made upon his forehead, to declare unto all fuch as are prefent, and as many as fliall thereafter know it, that he hath received it, and to himfelf when he comes to years of under- ftanding, that he was confecrated to Chrift crucified, that he hath put on his Livery, and wears his Badge, that he is bound to crucifie the old wan, and to bear the Crofs, that to this he is called by our Saviour ^ that he ought in all places , and in the moft dan- gey 'om occurrences, boldly and openly to own the name of his Redeemer , without ever being ajhamed with bearing his reproach. As the Barrels go rumbling up and down the Streets, fo my Lord Mayor owes me a Groat. The King, the founder of this no- ble Order, gives the Knights created by him a Garter and a Blew Riband, as Badges to be known by others, but would not be pleated if they fhould among themfelves invent other badges and cogni- zances of their Order. Chrift alio hath.inftituted Baptifm to diftinguifh Chriftians from thofe who are no Chriftians , How do we know whether it will like him, that we fhould appoint a Crofs to diftinguifh us more, efpecially feeing thereby we fhall be diftinguifhed from a great number of our fellow Chriftians. Again, the Garter and Blew Riband are things to be worn, and that may be feen, and occafion fpe&ators to enquire what they mean, but fo is not the Crofs that was made on our foreheads after Baptifm | the Pagans that any of us have been among, could take no notice of it ', and if our Parents did at any time admonifh us of our engagement to crucifie the old' man, xhey put L 62 3 put us in mind, not of being crofTed, but of being baptized with Water, to fignifie the not only death, but burial of the old man *, nor have our Kings of England been fo fond of all trie Rites and Ceremo- nies uled at making of Knights of the Garter, but that they have allowed fomeof them to be omit- ted , where they have conceived they might be leis acceptable. King James being much pleafed with the valour and piety of Maurice Prince of Orange , lent him a Garter, appointing his Embaf- fador Sir Ralfh Winwood to confer the honour on him freely, and without any Rites or Laws, but what the Prince himielf would lpontaneoufly un- , dergo. And the EmbafTador in a French Speech declared , that the Rites wonted to be ufed in creating Knights of the Garter, did feem fome- what abhorrent from the Discipline of the Re- formed Churches in Holland, and not altogether congruous to the polity of the Republick *, and that therefore the King to avoid offence had ap- pointed it to be conferred without pomp and ex- ternal magnificence. I fuppofe Mr. B. thinks there is no Rite ufed in the creation of the Knights of St. George, that is contrary to the Diicipline of the Butch Churches :, but the King vwas or another mind , and chcie rather to con- fa* the hi ftifly {land upon CeTemomes^ls nfther not 10 a3mTniTfer baptifmj than to admini- ti : itwuhout tlieTign of theCrbfs? I iLiVii follow Mr. D. who tells us, That [eve- ral C 63 ] ral reformed Churches have a Ceremony, of which, Fresbyterians ought to have as -bad an opinion, as of the Crofs in Baptifm : The Ceremony he meaneth is Trine afperfion, page 42. Why ought they to have as bad an opinion of Trine Afperfion, as of the Crofs in Baptifm? is there any Law either of God or man, that tieth them to. have as bad an opinion of the Trine Afperfion as of the Crofs? or . do their Principles lead them to have as bad an opinion of one Ceremony as of the other ? I verily believe they do not \ for they fay , that Chrift hath commanded Baptifm, and hath not ftri&Iy determined whether it fhall be adminiftred by Afperfion or Immerfion, nor whether by trine or une afperfion or immerfion-, therefore the Church hath ! power to chuie the Rite, that to her, ha- ving confulted the genera! luiesof Scripture, and practice of theTrimitive Churches, fhall feem beft. .fck* Eut they alio lay, that God hath nowhere com- A manded that a Child {hall be crofTed , or any/ ] where appointed his Church to infbitute any fym- bolical, teaching figns at all *, if Mr D. can fhew them any command that a Child fhould be crofTed, they will not flick to grant , that it is in the Churches power to order, where the Child (hall : be crofTed, and how often, and what kind of crofs it fhall be : But it is to be feared he can fhew no fuch command, at leaft nonefuch is (hewed by him; and yet he faith , he Is confident that if the k \ trine ajperfion were ufed, or if voe had retained the 1 trine immerfion , as at the beginning cf Kino* Ed- ward the fixths reign, it would be accounted a grofs fuferffition. How may a man do to free him from - E this [ 64 ] / this uncharitable confidence fo contrary to Chri- ftianity ? I dare undertake to give it him under the hand and feal of as many as I am acquainted with, that if the Church fhall think meet to ufe trine afperfion, or trine immerfion, fhe fhall not be accounted either grofly, or at all fuperftitious, provided (he declare that fhe doth not ufe either rite as neceflary. If by trine either afperfion or immerfion fhe mould prejudice the Babes in their health, that would be a fin, but not the fin of fuperftition. But how doth Mr. D. prove, « that the Church hath not retained trine immerfion? Immerfion it is plain (he hath enjoyned, unlefs the \ Sureties certifie that the Child be weak (yet ne ver any Minifter of the Church, in my hearing, y demanded fuch Certificate s never did any Parents bring their Child in a drefs fit for dipping, that ever I could obferve, and yet I believe that I have feen as ftrong Children Baptized as are in moft places of England) and fhe no where faith it fhall be dipped but once, as neither doth fhe fay, that it fhall be fprinkled but once •, fo that Bifhop Mount ague in his Vifitation Articles" poficively af- Werts, That the Child is to be thrice afperfedwith wateY o'ri* th'e tace^ it may be fome other Prelate of that age did as pofitivfely afTert that the Child was. to be fprinkled but once \ for thofe who r ,have been mod zealous to prefs Conformity, have been at Daggers drawing about the meaning of fome paflages in that Liturgy, to which they re- quired fubfcription. In the Hampton Court Con- ference, the Metropolitan told the King, That ■ he adminifiration ofBaptifm by women and lay per fins was C 65 ] was not allowed in the practice of the Church, but enquired of by Bijhops in their vifitations and cen- fared, neither do the words in the Liturgy infer any fuch meaning: But theBifhop of London re- plied, That thofe learned men who framed the B00Q of Common-Grayer, intended not by ambiguous terms to deceive any, but did intend a permiffion of pri- vate perfons to baptize in cafe of neceffity , and withal declared that the fame was agreeable to the praclice of the ancient Church, urging both a place in the Acts , and the authority of Tertullian and St. Ambrofe plain in that point : ( What could a l!n o 'T t fie mearHngoF ' t Tie Church ?Y But however Ring James being clear in his own judgment, that a yet I confefs I fhould never advife any man to name his Child Traife God^ nor, The Lord is near? for though he ■may excufe himfelf, by the names of Quod vult Deus? Adeo-datnsy ufual in St Auftitfs time, yet it favors of affectation to give fuch names, and it may occafion the taking of the Lords name in vain , nor do I find that Presbyterians have de- lighted themfelves in fuch names. Accented was the name of Dr. Frewen late Archbiffiopof Tor\? was he ever afhamed of it ? or had he anv reafon to be afhamed of it ? or was his Father a Presbyte- \ rianlhtt the Church Books from 1 582 be fearched, and it will be found to the fhame of this Hiflori- . an*, fzsbyter'ians have given fuch names to tfieir Children as other people did, and that none of their Children are called by fuch uncouth names a? are mentioned in the Objection. My L6 9 ] Mv next task is to give in a Catalogue of Mr. D $ impertinencies, which are indeed many, and too many to Be infilled on particularly. Page 51. He gives us fome fayings of fome Churches againft Sacriledg : A thing that hath been clone more copio'ufly by Dr. John HoombecJ^mhis examination of the Popes Bull, fent forth to nulli- fie the peace of Germany - 7 and if Mr. P. pleafe, he may read a very fmart Diicourle againft the fin of Sacriledg in Mr. 'Baxters defence of the Wor» ce&erfhire Petition. If Anceftors through miftake have given maintenance to Idolatrous uies, MagU Urates may convert that maintenance to uies truly pious. If there be a true fuperfluity of Church revenues for fome one good ufe, Magiftrates may out of that fuperfluity provide for fome other good ufe. If the Soveraign power pleafe in cafes of true necefiity, to make ufe of Church- mens Lands, as well as others, to maintain the Nation againft fo- reign Invafions, &c. what is there in fuch an a&i- on blameworthy ? Thefe and fuch like cafes ex- cepted, I profefs I know not the Presbyterian alive or dead , that was not againft the alienation of Church-Lands. Mr. D, tells us, he fan? feme Prei- bytexi&nfifinifters made nothing of pur chafing and detaining Church- Lands , and in his Margin nameth Dr. Burges ; fo that it feemeth , Dr. Barges is fome Presbyterian Minifiers: But he cught before he fo called him , to prove that he was fo much as one Presbyterian Minifier % he was not that Dr. Burges^ of whom we heard before, that made the Book againft Dr. Ames his reply to Dr. Morton* E 4 buc [ 70 ] but he was the Dr. *B urges that overfaw that Book in the Prefs, and adorned its Margin to make the reading more pleafant and delightful \ and he was that Dr. Barges who did write for Baptifma! Rege- neration ( a Doftrine diftaftful to the Presbyterians). He took the Covenant indeed, but not (as I have heard ) till he was like to be turned out of the Afiembly for not taking it. Itjs true, that once he made j* Speech againft the continuance of Deans and (} ja^ten ^put in that Speech he declared the y!tcr itramfulnefs of converting their Lands to any -private mans ufe\ it feems that he himfelf after- j wards purchafsd fomething belonging to the Dean \oflr^eIls } intending, to fettle it on his Children > how he could fatisfle his Confcience fo to do I know not;perhaps when he faw that that part of the Houfe of Commons which favoured Presbytery was fecluded>and that Deans and Chapters Lands defign- cd to mend poor Livings,muft be ibid for other ules, he refolved to do as Luther faith a Dog which he knew at Erfcrd did, when he could defend his Ma- tters cfith of meat from other Dags no longer, viz.. got as good a (hare of the prey as he could. He hath given his accounts to his Matter, I am not to judge arioihers Servant , and therefore I (hould tremble to write that which Mr. D. hath written, /viz. That a loath fom fore which brought him to his / (jravej was fent to punifo him for his Sacriledg } nei- f ther dare I fay, for all the world, that the Oifeafe that befell Eifhop Gxitden ( and of which he died,) befei him for his r^rcenefs againft the Presbyterians \ '■ yet, it was the very difeafe unto which he had 'om fared the Presbyterians Sermons y and it befell him C 7i 1 him not long after he had made that odiom compa- rifon. * England hath differed much by mens underta- king to fetch their Divinity out of the Providen?' ces of God, which are always righteous, but fbme- times hidden, A greater noife is made in fome Books, on the account of the AfTemblies Annotations •, in the which, or in the firft Edition of which, it is (aid, Nothing is to be found again fl Sacriledg •, and it is eafily acknowledged, that in the AfTemblies An- notations nothing is to be found againft Sacriledg, for the Affemblies Annotations are not to be found": But as for the Englifh Notes made by fundry Divines, who were all of them before the Wars, Gonformifts, and commonly mifcalled the ^ffemblics Annotations', ancffor the AfTembly it fef£ near an ingenuous, but cordial and through-paced Son of the Church , in a Difcourfe entituled, Church- Lands not to rbe fold , printed osfnno 1648. he quotes with approbation the Note on Rom. 2.21, p. 14. having fpoken^p. 27. of honed Mr. Geree y who avers, That to abolijh Prelacy , and tofeiz^e the Lands of the Prelates to any private or civil inter eft , undoubtedly could not want fain nor guilt : he' adds, 1 am confident , by the difcourfe, I have had with the ptofl able of the Affembly of Divines at Weflmin- fter, that at the leafi three parts, if not all of them, are of the fame judgment ; and that they would openly profefs as much, if they were put to anfwer the queftion. The fame Author quotes with appro- bation the Note on Gen. 47. and on Mai. $.8,9. I will not go off from thisiubje&of Sacriledg, till / / j*&rr. 1 have A C 72 ] 1 have alfo obferved, That fome, confiderable for Learning , and of no fmall authority , have not feared to fay, That Impropriations are facrilegiom. I have not much ftudied the point, and therefore interpofe not my own judgment •, but it looks very ugly to take away fo much of the tythes and profits of any parijh, as not to leave a competence for him who hath the cure of fouls in that parijh : yet it hath been obferved, that no Parifhes have fo forry and pitiful an allowance for the Preaching minifter, as thofeof which Clergy- men are the Impropriators; if the Kings Letter fince his return hath fo kindly operated upon our Cathedralifts, as to make them more bountiful to the Incumbents, it is well •, but if it have not , Mr. D. may do well to confider whether he and his brethren be without fault, be- fore he throw ftones at the head of others, die he may chance to have fuch an anfwer as the Bifhop of Scotland , who having objected Sacriledg to the Presbytery of that Nation, is told by Mr. Baily in his Hiftoricd Vindication, p. 26, 27. "That the "Bifhops when they profefled their greateft zeal " to recover all the Church out of the hand of the '* Laity, were found to be but too ready to dila- >j£ggfp knows they do, and (b do many others of the 'Antipgdo- ;,| baptifis, For my part I blefs God that hath put it into the hearts of the Convocation , to infert into this laft Edition of the Liturgy, a queftion to be propounded to thofe who are confirmed : let con- science be made never to confirm any but thofe who are well inftru&ed in the Church- Catechifm , and are well reported of for their converfation, and I flail think then that nothing is to be blamed in our \ der for admiffion to the Sacrament of the Lords ?pper. But if men will pretend a great reve- rence £ 74] wcncc to Confirmation, and yet fuffer the far great- eft part of the Nation to communicate uncon- firmed ^ and if Biihops will confirm perfons grofly ignorant and fcandalous in the higheft degree, and never require Certificates from the Minifters of thofe Parrfhes to which they belong, God forbid that I fhould juftifle tiiero. The only queftion confiderable about Confirma- tion, betwixt thoie called Presbyterians, and their adveiTaries, is concerning the" Mimfter thereof ; Presbyterians fay. That no Lave of God hath appro- priated it to a Bishop fir icily fo called. If Mr. D, can (hew us any fuch Law, or if he can prove that in all or in any Reformed Church, a meer Presby- ter is not accounted to have power to confirm, as well as to baptize, he frail dofomething *, let him therefore fhew himfelf a man, and undertake this work, and when he hath his hand in, let him alTo wipe off a blot thrown upon the Church of Eng- land and Geneva by Dr. Heylin* with the Pen of a virulent Papift,* "YFilliam Reynolds, Hiftory of Presby. pag, 283. viz,. That, 1576, the Common- prayer-Bookjvas Printedby Richard Jugg the Queens Printer , the whole order of private Baptifm, and con- firmation of Children being omitted y which omiffion was depgned to bring the Church of England into fome Conformity to the de fired Orders of Geneva. Tag. 47. he is fo prodigal of his Ink and Paper, as to tell us, That in all reformed Churches Alatri- rnony is celebrated in the public}^ Congregation, and hy the Minifer. This may be true of all reformed Churches in reference to their own Members, at lead I hope Ms ^ but if he fhould intend to afTert, That [75] That Reformed Churches allow not that any who- are conftant livers in the fame Cities with them, (hall be married otherwife than by the Ministers, and in the Church, he is miftaken. Yet let it be fuppofed, that Papifts, dwelling with Proteftants, are forced to marry in the Church, and to makeufe of a Minifter •, what is this to the Presbyterians ? The compofers of the Directory fay, We judge it expedient that Marriage be folemniz^ed by a law- ful Minifter of the word, that he may counfel them and pray for them \ In thefaid directory, care alfo is taken, that before any marriage the per fons intent of marriage be publifhedby the Minifter three fever al fabbath days in the congregation at the place, or places of their moft ufual and conftant abode re- spectively, and all Minifter s are to have fpifftcient teftimony of this publication before they proceed to folemniz*e Marriage. By the Liturgy alfo fufBcient provifion is made that of all that are to be mar- ried, the Bannes be published in the Church, three feveral fundays, or Holy days in the time of Di- vine fervice, but any one, that hath mony may have a licence to be Married without any fuch publication of Bannes, by which means great in- conveniences have arifen in Church and State. Care alfo is taken by the 62 Canon of 1603, il That " none (hall be married, uniefs the Parents, or u Governors of the parties to be married being " under the age of twenty one, (hall either per- sonally, or by fufncient teftimony, fignifie their il confent given to the laid marriage. The directory "is fomewhat moreftrift, requiting, that perfons though of age ft all be bo iihd to have a Certificate of their I 76-] /their Parents confent, if it be their firft marriage : And really it feems but rational, that a man and a woman, though of the age of Thirty, if never married before, fhould be bound to fignifie their Parents confent, before any Minifter adventure to marry them. The greateft differences I find among Proteftants about Marriage, are reducible to Two Heads : i. We fay here m England, That thokgh Chil- dren be bound to aik^ the confent of Parents, yet if the marriage be made, no fuch confent asked or ob- tained, the marriage is valid *, fieri non debet , fattum valet, is our Rule, but beyond Seas, /ad? marriages are by many held to be void and of no effect. Mr ,D. hath fo many obligations laid on him by our Church, that it would be but gratitude to take her part, and to anfwer the Arguments of Dii- fenters. 2. Our Church hath thought meet to prohibit marriage for certain times and feafons , which are particularized in our common zAlmanac\s. Other Churches leave it free to perfons to marry all the year about, to thefe the Presbyterians joyn them- felves, they fay marriage is not to be forbidden at any time, unlefs on fuch days, in which God calls tofafting, weeping, mournings to confirm them in this opinion, they had the judgment of a whole Convocation in England affembled in the year 1575, agreeing, That Bifoop fhould take' order that it be publi$ed and declared in every Pariflj Church within their Diocejjes, that marriage might be folemnined at all times of the year ; but though the Church thought meet to put this Article into the C 77 D the Book, the Head of the Church, Q^Eliaabeth, did not fo think, and therefore fuffered it not to be Printed. Dr. Heyl. Hift. of Presb. 282, 28 $. Object. Ay, but there are fome who fcruple the Ring in Marriage, which Mr. D. faith is ttfed in HefTen, Poland, Lithuania. Sol. If there be any iuch, the more is the pity, for rational ground of fcruple there is none , any more than there is to fcruple taking feifin by a Turf: Nor do I know anyone Presbyterian now living, that doth fcruple the ufe of a Ring in Mar- riage. Fag. 48. we are informed by Mr. D. That in mo ft places of the Reformed Churches, they have Fu- neral Sermons , in Hungary and Tranfilvania, two or three, in Bohemia but one, and that at thcGrswe. As if he would fugged to us,*" that either "'Presby- terians are againft Funeral Sermons, or the Epifco- pal extreamly for them , whereas the truth is, there never were more Funeral Sermons than in thofe days, when the Presbyterians had their Churches and Pulpits , and now that they are thruft out, when any one of them dye, 'tis feldom but fome body is hired to Preach a Sermon, 1 fay, hired, for they are as rare as Black Swans, that will Preach a Funeral Sermon under an Angel or a*Ko5le. " And whereas he tells us , ibid, of the Minifter with finging Boys going before the Corps j he knows, that in England we have finging Boys but in few places , fcarce any where but in Ca- thedrals, which do not ufe to fend their finging Boys to go before the Corps at every Funeral, Civil C 73] Civil refpe£ts, or differences at Burials may be futed to the rank and condition of the party deceafed , whiles he was living j as for the Religious part of Funerals , why fliould it not be alike to all that have attained like precious faith ? Doth Mr. D. know any Church- es where only the moneyed Chriftians are ho- noured with Sermons } the poor being laid in their graves without any ? If he did not, why would he lay open the nakednefs of his Fathers, why would he tempt ftrangers to think, that with them there is refpeft of perfons ? The Scots fay, Either let us have Sermons at all Funerals, or at none , fo fay the Hollanders , fo I fuppofe the French either fay or think : But Mr. D. Page 49. quotes a fcrap of a Letter from Monfieur DreUn- "court faying, 1 am fo far from allowing the cuftom of the Reformed Churches of this Kingdom, where the Minifters are filent at dead mens Burials, that I would think it unfnfferable were it not for the condition under which we live. I believe Mr. Drc- lincourt, it he be (till alive, thinks Mr. D. dealt not civilly with him, in publifhing this piece of his Letter, for he lure took no delight to let the world know, that he accounted the cuftom of the Holland Churches unlufferable, especially feeing the French Churches in Holland comply with them, and yet cannot plead that they fear perfe- cution. The fam*e Drelincourt, if we may believe Mr. D. faid, that he found upon perufal of the Common Frayer Book office for Burial of the dead, nothing that was contrary to piety, or pure Drihine, and the fervice of God. Is Z79l Is not this a rare commendation of the Liturgy* that it hath nothing in it contrary to piety, &c. But what Common prayer Book did this learned Divine read over? in all but this laft there were expreflions to be ufed at Burials, that were apt to harden men in their impenitence, which there- fore are now either changed, or left quite out. At prefent I know little liable to exception* Jaye onlyVthat Burial Teems appropriated to a PrieS:*- may a Deacon Baptife and Preach, and may he not bury our dead out of our fight ? In the Old Li- turgy, it was faid, the Mmifter meeting the Corps at the £hnrch ft He fit all fay , in this laft edition of the Liturgv it is laid the Priefts andCkr\ -,. and fo throughout the whole Office we have no o:het word but Trie ft , which is never applied to any that are but Deacons •, there is fpme royftery in this which Mr. Z>. can expound, or elfe take no notice of. 2. By the Liturgy the form of Burial is not to be ufed for any that dye tinbaptized. What's the meaning of this ? If Chriftian Parents lofe a child before they can get it t ^ be baptized, mull they, to all other their forrow, fnave this alfo ai- ded, That their child (hall not have Chriftian ba- nal ? Shall the Idolatrous Papifts child be bui ied, and fhall the child of the An tip* dob aptift not be buried according to the Liturgy? How will M*. itombs* after all the pains he hath tafen to'cTfirTi the Liturgy, brook this? $. Seeing the Qffi.e is to be read at the burial of all baptized, being nei- ther excommunicate nor murderers of thernfelv s, why is the Prieft appointed to fay , His \ op£ : is that every one who it bw> iid.^ refts in the Lord . Wi it if a £ man C Sol man be killed in bed with another's Wife ? What if he be killed in a Duel, or in an Alehoufe half drunk? What if he be by God ftruck dead with an' oath or blafphemy upon his tongues end? rnufl we ufe the very fame words for him, that we ufe for one that led a mod Chriftian life, and died a comfortable death ? I have much more charity for fome that laid violent hands on themfelves , than for thofe who contrary to all laws of God and man, do dye in Duels by the fword of another ? Fag. 50. he hath other words of Drelincourts as little to purpofe, // we were permitted, faith he, to preach at Paris, and there tominifier the holy com- munion, I am of this perfwafion^ that it would be a pious and charitable worl^ to give that comfort to thofe poor fick^ per Jons who have l^ept their bed for many years, and are not able to go as far as Charenton, which is the place of our ordinary exercifes of Reli- gion. This is a marvellous wary fpeech , 1. If they were permitted. 2. // they were permitted both to preach and admintfier the Sacrament. $. Then , it would be pious and charitable to give the Communi- on to fuch as have kept their beds for many years. Can Mt. D. think that the Englfli Presbyterians will be offended at- a perfwafion thus qualified ? It may rather be queftioned , Whether fome of them would not jiKJg it charitable and pious to ad- rninifter the Sacrament in fuch cafes, though they had no permiffion from the King \ at lead it may be conceived, that they would adventure, if they fhould be permitted only to adminifter the Sacra* ment, though no leave were given them to preachy for a Sermon is not of the eflenceof a Sacrament^ and « C 81 ] arid I deem they would perform this aft of charity and piety to ibch as had been confined to their beds, though only for one or two years , which are not many. There is not one word in all the Di- rectory againft private Communion. P. 40. Mr. D. gives us notice, That in the Bo- hemian Churches , the people do alvpay fay Amen at the end of the Prayers, in the fame manner that we do herein England. Which is lb far from cr of- fing the Presbyterians , that they, as many think, by their good wilI,would have the people fay nothing but Amen. P. 39. he fancieth he may put the Presbyterians to fiience , by telling them of Churches that fmg Hymns and fpritual fongs, be fides Pfalms. But he may know, that Presbyterians are as much at liber- ty to fmg any godly Hymn or fpiritual Song, as he himfelf is. Let him but procure the Te Deum or the Lords prayer to be fet to ordinary tunes, and then he (hall fee whether the Presbyterians will make any fcruple for confcience-fake to fing thofe forms, or the three Creeds which are faid to be fet with mufical notes in the French and Dutch Ghurches,but not fung by the French Churches, by reafon both the Rhime and the language are fomething courfe and old. Presbyterians are not fo dainty , they continue to fing the old Pfalms y though the language and rhime be odd and un- couth in many places. P. 183. he goes about to (tab the Presbyterians with a declaration of a National Synod met at Fi- geac 1 579. What is the declaration ? Why, it is a declaration againfi reading vtrfes ialoni before they F 2 % $9 182-} be fun^ 06 being inept, threatning cenfure to fitch Churches as ufed it. The Presbyterians think this cuftom unfit, and therefore exhorted all Congrega- tions to getpfalm-books, and to learn toread*,they allowed reading of Pfalms line by line, only for neceflity, when ignorance had prevailed fo far, that many inmoft Congregations could not read at all. Let Mr. D* but take care that all be taught to read, or learn the pfalms without book, and I dare half undertake for ^resvpmans, they (hall leave off fo inept or unmeet a cuftom. Till then, they, and Epifcopal men too, muft do as thevT can> and remember that they are debtors to the unwife $s well as wife. ^P. 22. Mr. T> % makes mention of Churches, •who ft Adinifiers wear commonly either a long cloak, y or a gown and long cap ; nay, Calvin (faith he J did wear a gown and a cap, as often as he taught ei- ther in the Divinity- School, or in the Church at Ge- neva. If Presbyterians do not wear a cap when they teach in the church, they may eafily be pardoned by Mr. D. As for a gown, let him but get them liber- ty to preach, and they will profile never to need hi* pardon for want of that. 1 amiure I have feen thofe whom 7.he Parliament lent down to Cambridg into the places of fuch as were ejected , preach both in gowns and hoods , and fo I have heard they did at Oxford when they preached Latin Sermons \ for which they have been fcolded at by filly women, as Calvin was by the Wife of Frumen- tins . I had almofl forgot another Impertinence, p. $7. The French Churches require that the Miniflers f whet [ 8? ] who ought to ufe Jmpofition of hands , upon thofe that are to be admitted to the miniflry among them, jhould pray Banding on that cccafion, the new received Mi- nifter and the Congregation kneeling at the fame time. This was the confbnt practice or the Presbyterians, as to Ordainers and Ordained, in all places where I have been, or of which I have heard- As for the people, they were commonly lb numerous at Ordinations, that they could not without huge inconvenience kneel. 1 alfo find that I havepafFed over fomething, page $2. "They have the Ten *' Commandments in Letters of Gold upon two * r grYat Tables where they are able to be at the "cfiargeof it ; and in fome places they have alfo ^the Creed and the Lords Prayer in the fame U manner, conformable to one of the conftituti- tl ons of the Church of England to the fame pur- . directed me how I Tiiay inform my felf. But I jiave met with fortie- th in ^ in Bifhop^^/ Com&nius which I commend to the diligent conuderation of Mr. £). and all others "that are zealous in this matter •, it is in his Annotations on the Ratio Difciplin<£ Qrdinifo ckc. Tage 100. c The Ritual Books (the forms of per- ' forming the facred Miniftries which they call 4 Agenda) are not with us appended to the Cate- c chetical Books, fo as to come into'the hands of * the Common people, but being put forth by c themfelves. are given only to the Paftors, not * privately in a corner , but in the fight of the * Church. After the death of the Paftor the fame \ Books are put into the hands of the Seniors. € Some one wi I fay what fuperftition is this ? Anf *Let others have their liberty of judging.: I do ( not 4 not think things are fo to be managed, that no- 4 thing myftical f to be rather adored by the peo- * pie, than proudly to be looked ©n, and after- 4 wards vilely efteeraedj (hould be left to the 4 Priefts. Religion rejoyceth in veils. And our 4 chief Mafter himlelf was'wont to fpeak fome 4 things to his difciples by themfelves. The Apoftie 4 when he commands Bifhop Timothy to commit fome 4 things to faithful men who are apt to teach others f 4 2 Tim. 2. 2. doth he not intimate a certain dif- 4 ference, betwixt thefe things that are given to 4 all, and thole that are given to the Teachers of c others ? Certainly the word T*?«iTi9$ But if any have faid that fome re- formed Churches abroad have accounted fome things in which the Englijh Church differs from them to be finful, it is a thing fo manifeft that I wonder Mr. C D. can find a forehead to deny it. Hementionethin this place theReformedChurches in the Ele&orate of Brandenburg, and I do not ob- ferve him to have mentioned them any where elfe, I fuppofe ( by the Churches he joyneth them with) that he meaneth fuch as clofe with that Reforma- tion that the Elector himfelf affeð, and would fain have introduced, and it will not be amifs to let our Countrymen underftand what that is. The heads of it are recited in the Continuation of Thuanus at the year 1614, Page 396, $97. Mfkfi Franco f 1628. ' 1. Images, Croffes, Statues, are to be removed * out of Churches. '2. Altars remaining fince Popery, and built to Jx. € perform the Sacrifice of the Mafs, are to be taken 4 away, C 93 3 .'away, and in place of them are to be put oblong * wooden Tabl e s covered with b lack cloth , aTImien * flyJTwK en't'he Supper is to be adminiitTed, being 'pm^uponltr^ ""*'$« Mead of Hofts , Wafers are to be ufed, i which being cut into long pieces, (hould be receiv- ' ed and broken by the hands of thofe who come to ' the Lords Table. '4. That inftead of Chalices ufed in Mafs, c Cups (hould be ufed in the adminiftration of the * Lords Supper. f. 5. The CafioU ( which may very well fignifie c the Surplice, as well as other Veftments) are f to be left to the Popifh Priefts. 4 6. No linnen is to be put under, or offered to c thofe who come to the Lords Table •, nor are they ' to kned as if (thrift were corporally ; prefent. **^.' ThengnoT "tKe ■ Crolsls not to be acfied at ' the end of the benediction 4 8. The Minifters of the Gofpel are not to turn ' the back to men. 4 9. Prayers and Epiftles are not to be fung be- fore Sermon, but read. 4 10. Auricular Confeffionis to be left off. ' li. At the Name of Jefus knees are not to be 4 bowed, or head uncovered. *' 12. Prayers in the Pulpit are not to be mutter- 4 ed, but pronounced with a loud voice. 4 1 $. The Supper of the Lord is not for fear of * danger to be adminiftred to fick perfons, efpeci- Z 'ally when the plague is abroad. 4 14. Stone-Fonts are to be removed, and Ba* Tons fubftituted in their rooms, '15. The [94] c 1 5. The Decalogue is not to be recited unper- *fe£t, butintire. * 16. The Catechifm in fome things that are ex- *roneous, is to be amended. * 1 7. The Sacred Trinity ( a myftery to be ado- * red, and ineffable ) is not to be reprefented by a- ' ny images either carved or painted. ■ 1 8. The words of the holy Supper are to be * interpreted by Sacramental analogy, and collation * of other places of holy Scripture. '19. To the Gofpels and Epiftles which are ex- € plicated on Lords days, and yearly repeated, Mi - * nifters ought not fo to be bound, that they may *not inftead of them, read and preach upon any * other notable Text of the Bible. Dr. Heylin hath exemplified the heads of this ^efigned Reformation, on purpofe to fhow , as he rellsus, Hifl. of Presby. 412. how Calviniin and Lutheran Churches differ, and how near ours ap- proacheth to the latter % and I have exemplified them to (hew, that if Ceremonies "Be but gnats, lOhgUJI} Presbyterians are not the only perfons that do ftrain at them *, declaring alio my juft abhor- rence of the Historians impudence in afcribmg the department of tw %jformm6n~'to the plots and pra- dices of a fubtil Lady* P. 85. Mr. D, having before recited a Letter of Mr.ChabretSy in which he makes a queftion whe- ther the Liturgy received at the Savoy Congrega- tion, be the lame that was ufed in Q^tliz., King fames ,oy King Charles L's time, or another compi- led by Archbifhop Land, that had been occafion of ' t-95 3 of much trouble, ' adds words of great reproach * againft thofe who accuied the late Lord Archbi- 'fhopof making a new Book of Common-prayer, * other than thofe that were ufed in the times of our Maft three Soveraigns : this he makes a thing that ' never was. But he is now to know , that Archbifhop, Laud ; did make, or caufe to be made, a Common-prayer- book for the Kirk of Scotland, different in many things from any that had been ufed here in Eng- land, in any of the three laft Soveraigns Reigns \ which Common-prayer-book, among other things, occafioned great difturbances betwixt the two Kingdoms : nay, he made fome alterations in the Liturgy for England, that were not very pleafing to fome palates among the fons of the Church *> what they were, if Mr, D. pleafeth he mayfee in Mx.Trynnes Epiftle Dedicatory to his Quench- coal. It is not for fuch a poor creature as I am, to blame or find fault with thofe alterations , which! find imitated in our laft edition of the Liturgy. Only I wonder why in the Office for the Fifth of No- vember Miniflers are not direEled to read the Sta- tute for the obferving of that day, feeing it is by lavs anointed to be read. Ibid. He complains that our (Convocations are be- yond feas represented to confifi only of zArchbi- {hops and Bijhops \. and that the inferior ficrgy is not permitted to fit and vote in them, Really if any gave fuch information, he was but too liHe to Mr, X>. fpeakingof that which he either did not, or would not underftand.. T^^Q^Hvocati^of Eng* land&Q confift of an upper^^lncnoweTnoule^ and * X i - G though . L96-] though the Upper Houfe confifts but of Archbi- fhops and Bifhops , yet the Lower confifts of the inferior Clergy, Deans, Prebendaries, Arch-dea- cons and Pro&ors of the Clergy. P. 1 16. Mr. D. (calls our Convocations a Council confifling of above fixfcore reverend, grave, and learned Divines, cho- fen out of many thoufands , whereof twenty -fix are u4rchbi(hops and Bijlwps, a greater number Deans , and Prebends, and Archdeacons : Which (hews he underftandeth not the frame and conftitution of our Convocations, though they be the Church- Reprefentative, that he pretends to write for. The Convocation for the very Province of Canterbury, ( belldes which, there is one for the Province of Tor}^) confifts of an Archbifhop, twenty -one Bi~ fhops for the Upper Houfe ; the Lower Houfe confifts of Deans twenty-two,Prebendaries twenty- four, Arch deacons fifty- four, Clerks reprefenting the Clergy, forty- four , fothat the very Lower Houfe for this one Province, confifts of One hun- dred forty-four perfons. But how thefe are chofen out of many thoufands, they are men of rare facul* ties that can under ft and. If we fpeak of the mem- bers of Convocation, neither Bifhops, nor Deans, nor Arch deacons, are chofen to it, but come of courfe, juft as Peers do to the Houfe of Lords. As for the Prebends, they are chofen only by the Chapters, which I hope are not many thoufands - 7 the Dioceian Clergy may befaid to bechoien out of many thoufands; but they for the Province of Canterbury are but forty- four. It maybe Mr, D. meant that thefe Divines are chofen to their Digni- ties out of many thoufands - but that will be a grolTer , C 97 ] gr offer untruth than the other : for Bifhops are chofen by the Dean and Chapter of that Church to which they arefent, but they have not many thoufands tochufeout-of-, there is but one nomi- nated to be chofen^ and him I believe the Dean and Chapter murV chute, and return his Election ; and the Eleftwnbeing returned and ratified by Royal aflent, the Metropolitan muft either confecrate or confirm, as occafion require th. That which the Puritans were wont to. complain or^was the ine- quality of the Representative $ they fay for ex- ample, If all i""whoT afe chofen by the Diocefan Clergy for the whole Province of Canterbury y fhould defire a Reformation, yet they could not carr^lt^ Becaufe "the Arch-deacons who are the ififfiops creatures, as being chofen "folely by them» are ten in number more than they, and they alio were wont to fay, That the_Bi(hops would take on them to nominate the two Clerks for the Dio- cefs ^ and if it be fo, they faid it was in effect ail oje as if the Convocation had "con lifted only of BuKo p^. "This notwithftandihg, Dr. 'Taylor in his ppycopacy ajjertedy feems to envy the Presbyters fo much as fitting^ in Councils: 7 ¥k evident faith. ^^c^c^affert. p. 2%i. *y*Wat the Laws of Pro- vinces, and of the Catholic^ Church, were wade by Conventions of Eijhops , without the intervening or concurrence of Presbyters, or any elfe , for [enterics and decifon \ the in fiances of this are jkfl as many as there are Councils. The parifhes of both Pro- epaftors ot thefe panfhes feud about Fifty- two to xt^riiMt'YRm- and in the' very Houle vincesin Sngland^ are above nine thoufand two hundred , the paft o i-efrel IV C 98 3 where they fit, there are above twice as many (m whole election they were no way concerned^ that have equal votes with them ; and befides, there is an Upper Houfe of Bifhops. /Mr. Durell woulcl exceed Plutarch himfelf , if he could find in any Reformed Church a parallel. Let him try how fuch a Synod as this will hit with that which the Thefes of Saumitr fay concerning Councils. But I have almoit forgotten my felf. Let Mr. D. go on to wipe off falie aiperfions caft on our Bifhop?. P. 86. Men beyond the fe as are told that every one of oar Bifhops us a Pope, nay more than a Pope in his Diocefs *, prefcribwg and impofwg of himfelf what he pleafeth to his Clergy *, whereas eve- ry BijJjops authority is limited by his fubfcription to the 19 articles, &c. by the Confutations and Qa- nons Ecclefiaftical , and by the Laws of the Land, according to the prefcript whereof he is to rule his diocefs, and no ctherwife^ calling always to ]oyn with him in impefuion of hands , and other matters of weighty concernment , fome of the Prebends of his Cathedral, or other grave Minifters of the Diocefs, Certainly this Preacher knows not what a Pope is, if he think that what theie calumniators report of the Bifhops, makes them worfe than Popes. But kt them deferve to keep the Whetflone for their tale, Mr. D. will have it from them again •, for :hing isrrorefalfe, than that by any Con ft it un- ions or Laws Btfiwps are bound to call unto them ei- ' rhcr Prebends or grave Minifters to joy n with them in impofttion of hands, and in all other weighty mat- ters . The Bifhops lay on hands in confirmation of children, who is to joyn with him in that Impofi- / tion ? C 99 D tion? They lay on hands when they ordain Dea- cons, are they to call any to joyn with them in that irapofnion of hands? Ay, but they cannot ordain a Presbyter regu- / larly, unlefs fome Presbyters joyn with them in laying on of hands. (I M&», : f n ™ th ; vfw ■«, WhaFtne haficls oFthe Presbyters figmfie ? And trul^ if we ask thole that ftickle for Hierarchy, tKy "will lay , tjiej^j^nifi-j jufi nothing, or next JtoTSpthing : this conjiinctionoT Presbyters is not ad efentiam operis , but ad dignitatem facer dot ii. The Presbyters bands confer nothing of the power of Order upon the party ordained, but only tefiifie their confent unto the bufinefs ., and approbation of the man. So Dr. Hsylin Hiftory of Epifcopacy, p. 1 62. and to the lame purpofe Dr. Taylor in Epifcopacy ajferted. Is not the Presbytery fairly advanced ? it may do what the Laity did , or at leaft may do, teftifie confent and approbation of the man? Again , the fufpenfion of a Minifter is a weighty thing \ who is appointed to joyn with' the Biihop in this? Excommunication alio is a weighty thing*, Who raufl joyn with the Bifhop in that ? Finally, Mr. D, would oblige rne greatly ifjie .would __ Juily ^lanshe me what Canons and Conmtution" 'he BiiTiops are to govern their Clergy by. I hope no Canons are in force but SipIeorTc'03. which I am lure are more than be well obferved 5 'BuTtSeT^werTl Canons in number Seventy-ieven. made by OtioozmOtho- .,- ens mace under Stephen 'enry CV'iW.y Archbiilljps of Can- G 3 terbury, [loo] terbury^ digefted into a body by William Lindwood, as the former were by John Mori, Canon of -ilM- , coin *, and (bme fay, that fo much of all thefe Ca- nons as is not contrary to the Laws and Cuftoms of the Land, is ft ill in force *, if fo, as foitmay be for ought I know, then Tarn fare a great many of the Clergy know not how they are to be go- verned •, but if any fhould know all Canons and Constitutions, and underftand that the Biihop pre- fcribes things contrary to all Law and Canons, ■what then ? Why then there lyes an Appeal, or a Prohibition may be obtained , to the coftof nei- ther of which a poor Countrey-Vicar can eafily raife his purfe. * P. 87. Mr.D. is at his old trade of over-reach- ing : for he defcribeth Monfiejir Goyon to be a man as well verfed in antiquity , as is pojfible. Yet neither he nor I can tell the bounds of pof- fibility in the skill of antiquity *, and perhaps both of us can tell of forne that are more skilful in Church-Hiftory than this Monfieur. 'P. 1 03. The Church of England xs, be-lied,for Whether the words in St. Matthew, or St. Luke? \ If the words that occur in Luke, then, we have no precept for the Doxology, as it is i^Mattloew. And really I have wond red what they meant who were wont to fay attheconclufion of their pulpit-pray- ers, In his name and in his words we further pray, faying as he hath taught m \ and yet had never fatis- fied themfelves, that the Doxology which they con' ftantly in that cafe ufed was of our Lords own indi- ting.There is reafon ( faith ^^'ff^B.9^4 ) tobeliev< that the words of Doxo [o^camem out of the Greek Liturgies \ and that the anciente[t Greek Copies have them not, Pracl. Cat. lib. 3. feci. 2. Gro^; tim had faid .asjmudijxfore. Thofe who believe tliereltwoXelirneHlnen, haoneed alter the form of words with which they ufher in the Lords Prayer. 'Pis not fafe to afcribe roChrift any thing but what is his *, but how fhall a man know that the copies in s which the Doxology is wanting, are the moil: an- cient ? Erafmts faith he found the Doxology in all the Greek Copies : LUcasbrugenis, that it was in all' the Gree& rariuan Copies but one. And if one look, into the various readings collected in our late Polyglot Bibles, he (hall find the Copies that want thei'e words of Doxology, to be but few, where- fore Grotius hath oot no credit by faying, Teewf wot they are not extant m the mo ft ancient Greek Copies j but are fxt ant in the Syriack, Arabick, and Latin Context , wemay learn not only that the Ayr- bick and Latin Verfion, but alfo the Syriack,. was made after that the Liturgy of the Churches was brought C 104 1 brought into a certain form. For the Doxology is I not in fome Arabic'^ Verfions , not in that which is infer ted into the Polyglot Bibles. If the SyriacJ^ V and tArahkk^ ( which Grotim law ) had put in the 'I Doxology out of the Greeks Liturgies , why did • they not alfo put it in in the Gofpel of Luke ? un- iefs it could be made appear that the Greeks Litur- gies varied, I know not how he can anfwer this queftion. Let me add this caution to young Scho- lars, that they be not too hafty to give credit to every Copy that feme men magnifie, That Syriack^ Tranflation which is followed in the New Tefta- m nt in our ^Polyglot Bibles, if it were the anci- entefl:, would be a good argument of the Antiqui- ty of Fcftivals or Holy-days *, but the Tranflation which Immanuel Tremeliru followed , for ought I ; know maybe much ancienter *, and in it there ap» 3 peareth no fuch diftin&ion of days. To return to St. Ln!^s y \f his a!>5T2 import that we muft ufe his very words in Greeks or words in our language as near as may be to his, then muft we not follow our Liturgy-, for though it fometimes inlerts the . Doxology, and fometimes omits it, yet it never tranflateth the Lords Prayer according to St. Lrize ^ Give us this day our daily bread, and for- give m our trefpajfes as we forgive them that tre- fpafs againft us * 7 is not to tranflate, but paraphrafe 1 on St. Lri\e. It is a little odd, that in the whole . Liturgy the Lords Prayer fliould never be put in Pi the fame words that are ufed in all our Tranflati- ons of the Bibles that were authorized, whether new or old. Will Mr. D. fay, If Chrift bid us i ufe th:fe very word?, that we may ufe other of like nature C 1053 nature and import j and yet that if the Church bid us ufe her words, that we muft ufe them and no other ? The Brownifl will fay the Church may well allow as much liberty as (he taketh. Befides, wnat aflurance can Mr. D. give the 'Brownifts what words the Lord Jefus ufed when his difciples defired him to teach them how to pray ? G ro }}u} tl^greaj, faith, It is credible, that fever at things are thrown into the Greek copies of St. Luke , out of St. Matthew ; and the things he fuppofeth to be thruft in, are all that are left out of the old La- tin copies ; if fo, the Lords Prayer muft be made much fhorter than ever it is made in our Liturgy* we muft not fay which art in heaven \ nor thy will he done as in heaven, fo on earth } nor, but deliver us from evil. The Brownifl hath not yet done with ' Mr. -D. but will ask him how often he is bound to fay the Lords Prayer by virtue of the otm wyeivx*&s hiyzrt : p. 27. of his Sermon he tells them, that this and another reafon by him there mentioned , obliged thofe Trotefants which follow the Auguftane Confeffion, and thofe of the Reformed Churches of Holland* to jay it ordinarily before and after meals^ at the end of their Graces. Had thefe men reafon to think themfelves obliged to this cu- Horn ? If they had, then is Mr. D- obliged alio, and fins every time he doth not ufe the Lords Prayer before and after meals : if it were their rniftake to think themfelves obliged, how will he give fecurity that he is not miftaken in counting himfelf obliged to fay a fater nofer every time that he bends his knee to God in prayer, either in the beginning, or middle, or end of his prayerf tio6-] If he plead a command of Chrift, as he doth in that Sermon, he rauft prove the quoties , which it will be hard for him to do :, and if he talk of Chrifts fan£tifyjing a form with his own mouth St rnuft give us either the ver^ words Chrift fpolfe, oreTfe a jailer r ']Tranilition of Them than any he will find in the Jommon-prajer-book. Finally, If we have not received the grace of tht Gofpel in vain, we muft look on Chrift as ri- ien from the dead, aicended into heaven, confirm- ed the Univerfal Prieft, Interceflbr , and Advo- cate*, fo could not the Difciples look on him when Chrift taught them to pray *, which may be the reafon why he told them, that hitherto ye have ashed nothing in my name^ Joh. 16. 24. where- fore though it be Iawfui and expedient to uie the Lords Prayer, as we commonly ufe if, and though the things to be prayed for, cannot be better fum- medup, or more briefly comprifed ; yet vulgar people will be in great danger not to fay the Lords Prayer in the Lords name; not to think of his merit and interceflion, unlefs they have prayers io formed as to force them to a more diftinct appre- henfion of Chrifts propitiation , than the Lords Prayer doth. Let it be obferved whether the Doxo- logies made, or mentioned to be made afterChrifts afcenfion into heaven, do not lead us diftinclly and particularly to offer and afcribe praiie unto God, in the name of Chrift, or by Chrift ; or unto God and the Lamb, or unto Chrift, Ephc'f. $. 2 r . 1 Tim. 6. 16. Rev. 5. 1 ;. The m re pains that Df. Light- foot and others do take to (how us the Lords Prayer in the Jewilh Liturgies, the more do they unaware^ ftreng- ftrengthen men in a perfuafion that it was not in* tended to be a pattern to us to form our prayers unto, any more than as to the matter, or things to be prayed for. It cannot be that the Jewifli and Chriftian Liturgy fhould not differ much in the manner of our addreffes unto God : it will be hard to find the Hejy One called the God and fa- ther of our Lord Jefm Chrift, or his God and out God, his father and our father, by any Jew • and yet no expreflions more meet for the mouth of . a Chriftian. I pafs to the third calumny in Mr. D.'s p. 144.. \ r Moft of them wboSy neglected the Lords Suffer for many years. Neglect is when a Minifter hath op- portunity toadminilkr, and doth not adminifter^ Did moft of the Presbyterians thus neglect the adminiftration of the Eucharift? Who doth not know that many of them adminiftred it oftner than by the Liturgy is required? Hath Mr. D never heard of their Affbciations either printed or not printed, in order to the exercife of difcipiine ? Doth not the Directory fay, The Lords Supper is / to be adminiftred often ? If anyfecludedany one from that Ordinance who was of an orderly life, and underftood the firft principles of the Oracles of God, he did it not from Presbyterian principles^ but I remember that p. 44. he taxeth the Untver- fitiesof this Kingdom, and faith, That theVni* 'verfity of Oxford had no Communion for above twelve years. Yet the Minifters are known, who did frequently adminifter the Communion in the Churches and Chappels of that Univerfity, in thofe *" twev-e. C 108] twelve years. But it may be he meant , that in twelve yean time the Vniverfty as an Vniverfty had no Communion. To which I fay , If that were a fault, it will not much concern the Presbyteri- ans *, for the four Vicechancellors of Oxford du- ; ring thofe twelve years , were not Presbyterians 5 and perhaps the tlniverfity as an Univerfity , is not a Church : Tor if it be, who is Paftor of it ? or who hath power to cenfure thofe who be difor- derly ? Both Chancellor and Vicechancellor may be lay-men. The Communions appointed to be X at St. Maries at the beginning of the Terms,were lately appointed, and the penalties appointed for y thole who negleft to come to them, are not Eccle- \ fiaftical penalties, and I believe the twentieth part of the Univerfity never was at any one of them : was it meet to make fuch a clamour about the omiflion of them? A fourth Calumny is, That in the Presbyterians Congregations , there was a great irreverence at prayer , very few kneeling , many not fo much as Y pilling off their hats. Of this irreverence he faith he is an eye-witnefs. Was he not well employed the mean while ? Could he find nothing elfetodo when in a Chriftian Congregation, but only to tell how many kneeled, and who had their hats quite off, and who half off", and who never uncovered their head at all ? In how many Congregations was he to make this obfervation ? if fas is proba- ble) but in a few , what unrighteoufnefs is it to meafure all Congregations by a few ? And is he furethat the men whom he obferved to be fo ir- reverent, were Presbyterians ? Why might they not [ 109 ] not be fome of his own perfwafion who did come to put an affront on Presbyterians Prayers ? Either kneeling, or (landing Presbyterians commended to their people, and never pracliied (unlefs in cafe of infirmity ) any other gefture in praying that ever I heard of, and yet I have made enquiry. But it was necefTary that Mr. D. fhould draw t liej m like Devils or elfe he could not have made them abhor red. ^^^SouTcl a man but obtain feave of his confcience y. to lay open the irreverence of the Epifcopai M/ femblies, what ftories might he tell ? More I am lure than Mr. £>• would be willing tohear. I believe there is not an noneit heart but akes to confider the rudenefs of the admirers of our Li- turgy in their addreiTes to God whether in the Church or in their own houfes. I fpeak of the vulgar fort of them*, put on their Hats they do not, but they ufually fit on their feats, at publick Prayer, and which is worfe (tare up and down to fee who comes in, and who goes out of the Church, if their Landlord chance to come in, in the midft of their Devotion up they rife and make their obeifance. Follow them to their Houfes there you may obferve them to trufs and pray, to wafh their Faces and to fay their Prayers. I once met with an old man who had been bred up to Liturgies all his days, dealing with him about his Soul , I found he never prayed any thing at home but the Lords-Prayer, and that he never repeated that Prayer till he was flrfl got into his bed, and he told me he thought no man in England ufed any other pofture in laying his Prayers. And I was told [no] told by a Minifter whom I dare believe, that he j hapned at an Inn, to lie in the fame Chamber with a man of a good eftate, who waking in the morn- ing and thinking the Divine to be afleep, gets out | of his bed, takes his Doublet and Breeches, falls to drefling himfelf, but whileft he drefTed himfelf he faid the general confeffion and the abfolution in the Common- Pray er-Book } when he was be- ginning the Lords-Prayer, then he took the Cham- ber pot into his hand, and did it may be imagined what. Here's irreverence with a witnefs, I charge it not on Epifcopacy, yet I may with a better conference than Mr. D. chargeth the not putting off of Hats at Prayer on Presbytery , or Pres- byterian Noncnformifti. He that would know what outward reverence they require in thewor* fhip o{ God, and upon what reafons they build it, and how neceffary they account it, and what thoughts they have of thole who ufe it not, may inform himfelf from Mr. ^Arthur Hilderjhams plain but very {olid difcourfe on the fourth of St. John. He that hath not the Book by him may find much quoted out of him by Dr. Nicholas Bernard in his difcourfe of a let form of Prayer, Printed j 1659. And now that I am fallen upon Mr. -D's forty fourth page, it may not be arhils to advert that he fears not to lay, all the Reformed world over no man that is not a notorious ill-liver, is debarred -rem the Sacrament \ what will he be afraid to fay that fears not to fay this ? Is there no reformed Church that debars any but a notorious ill-liver from the Sacrament ? Certainly it is not necefTary that [ iH 1 . . . that lie who danceth fhould be a notorious ill liver* and yet Mr. D. knows where any that can b e proved to have danced, wou'I3 be kept from the Sacrament. He that fhould turn Telagtan may be. no notorious ill-liver , yet fach a one would be kept from the Sacrament in mod if not in all re- formed Churches, fo would he alfo that fhould not be fatisfied to bring his Child to Baptilm ? and yet J imagine fuch a one need not be a noto : rious ill-liver. Suppofe an Snglifa Prbteftant fhould think it irreverence to receive. the Sacrament noc Kneeling, fuch a man if Mr. *ZX be to be believed cannot be admitted to the Sacrament in France? yet fuch a one may lead a life not notorioufly fcandalous. By a Canon of our own Church, the communion is to be adminiftred to none but fuch as kneel, nor to any but fuch as be prefent at publick Prayers, according to the orders of the Church, yet I know fome fuch who are far enough from being notorious ill livers. I amalmoft.-cer?' - tain that there is fcarce a reformed Church whole Principles and Rules of discipline do not debar fuch from Sacramental communion as are no noto- rious ill livers, I wifh .1 were as certain that nd Reformed Churches did contrary to their own R.ules of difcipline, admit fuch as are notorious ill-livers, then I fhould promife my felf that ChriM would with more delight walk among his golden Candlefticks* v ■ , P. 185. Whatever be the reafon of It., Our Liturgy hath no other Enemies abroad where it U v?ett known, hut the Tapfis. Thi s is an gn^ uth as> mghx be proved^ by a thou f a n3"infil tk: e s . '.' ' B ut kt C "2] let us fee the occafion of it, that wc have in the fame Page. The Magi fir ate of Paris his flopping the Printing and forbidding the publifmng of the Englifh Liturgy, (whereas that of Geneva is dayly Printed and Jcld there) the reafon he thinks could \ be no other, but a fear that it would be better liked by mod Chriftians, that have either judgment ', ■learning or true piety, and are void of fuperftition, peevifnufs, extravagant zeal, and prophanenefs, be they of what perfveafwn foever. This is not very charitable, all or mod that are not either fuper- ftitious, peevifli, extravagantly zealous, and pro- phane will better like the Enghfij than the Geneva Liturgy. If after this the French Minifters do not Petition their King that they may exchange the Ceneva lor the Englifl) Liturgy, they know their doom. Perhaps Mr. D. will plead that the French \ living in France, would be denied the ule of the I £ngliflj Liturgy- Tranflated into their own Lan- guage though they fhould defire it. But what [will he fay to thole French Churches that are fcat- ■tercd up and down in this Nation, they are not fure quite void of judgment, learning, true piety, Jyetit is known, that they when they might have had thanks from Archbifhop Land, if they would have received the Englifl} Liturgy for the French, which they had been accuftomed to, did not care for receiving of it, but ufed all poflible endeavours to ketp themfelves in flatu quo. Dr. Htylin relates the Hiftory of their wrcftlings againft the intro- p.&ion of our Liturgy among them, from him Mr. D. tray take it at his leifure. If I huve not forgot C "3 ] forgot fince I read it, one argument made ufe of to keep the Metropolitan from prefling them to Conformity, was drawn from the juft fear there was, that by fo rigorous calling for Uniformity, the Chriftian King might be moved to perfecute his Proteftant Subjects ; for Cardinal Richlieu had given out fuch a (peech, If the King of England being a Troteftant will not fujfer Wo difciflines, \vhy fhotild the King of France being a P apt ft fujfer two Religions} A fhrewd fpeech and well to be thought on by any Metropolitan that fhall go about to bring all foreign Churches to comply with our own, or elfe to diffolve them. I take no notice of the High commendation? given of our Liturgy, by the noble Princefs of Tttrenne, and the Dutchefs of la Force her own Mother, he that will may fee them Page 78, and 186. I only wifh that if the Englijh Liturgy be of fo great force to edifie people in the Pro- teftant Religion, it had been put into the hand of the Noble Marquefs of Tnrenne to prevent his revolt to Popery, for it is faid that he is grown a Roman Catholick. In his Sermon P, 20. He is not afliamed to fay if fo, they mull; needs have the Intelligences that move the Tri- mum mobile for their Secretaries and MelTengers. Zanchyh Letter to Juel I am fure doth not in the lead intimate, that the EngUjl) Nonconforming made any applications to- fome in the Reformed Churches beyond the Seas ; all that can thence be collected, is but this, that the June before he did write his Letter , one called Montius returned out /of England, and told him be fides others, that a great i nee was ftirred up in the Englijh Church a- bout Feflments , And therefore de fired him that he Would by a Letter both adwonif) tie Queen of hey rdfo Write to tbfffi Bifiops that were known jrvj jl^i [ »7 1 known to him, and efpecially to Juel. Upon his and others entreaties, and his Princes command , Zan- chy did write to the Queen a Letter, as he was con- fidentmot evil,f which is to be feen) and not know- ing what the Queen would do , he writes alio to Juel, That he would by his Authority, Learn-/ ing and Prudence, endeavour with the Biftiops not to leave their Sees, rather than wear linnen ; yet fo, that they mult know that the Queen is inexo- rable *, and alio when they wear linnen , make a protection. This Letter , 'tis like , never came to jWs / hands, he dying about twelve days after it was /\ written. Nor need it trouble us, that Juel never faw it, feeing there was no Bifhop then in any dan- ger to lofe his Place for not wearing linnen $ nor can I think there is any one Minifter now fo much out of love with white, as rather to leave his fvli- / j niftry, than put on a Surplice, provided he may/ but make lawful protection how and on whac accounts he ufeth it. Indeed the «t7m/a* of fome Nonconforming in the late times was this, that they loved white too well } for their woollen clothes were white, or nest to white •, their locks were powdered with white powder , their white Half- fiiirts were very vifible , to the great offence of fome ferious perfons both in Gountrey and Uni- versity. But let not Mr. D. rejoice becaufe fome Nonconform^ did thus habit themfelves ; for thefe Nonconforraiife were not Presbyterians , but either inclined to ways of reparation, or elfe fuch as had newly laid by their Canonical drefs, and were refolvedno longer to be called Mack-coats. H 4 Here Here therefore let me befeech all who would not be deceived in reading our Hiftories concerning >the disorderly carnages of Minifters in the late times, well to confiderwho they were that were fodiforderiys and if they find that any of them were of the olcT Nonconforming Presbyterians y I am much miftaken : if they find none were fuch, ho'v unreafonable is it to charge on Presbyterians the faults of fuch as returned to Conformity fo fyon as His Ma jefty required them } and'left not off to conform till they could not keep their Con- formity and Livings too ? Too too long I have been in detecting faI(hoods a had it not been necefTary to try whether I could put Mr. D. to fome fhame. I am now to (hew you, as briefly as I can, in how many things he hath wronged his Munificent and Bountiful Mo- ther of England. C P. 10. He takes pains to tell us of an Oath of Canonical obedience iworn by Minifters in Htin- gory to the Sifhop and to the Seniors : in the Oath he that fwears, acknowledgeth himfelf to re- ceive his 1 Miniftry from both Bifhop and Seniors. Thefe Seniors are but a more eminent fort of Pref- hjters, as his quotation p. u. intimates. What is this but to bringjn Hungary's witnefs again?* the fofe power of Order and TuriTdiftion of the En- ghjh Bifhops i ° ~ C V. 12, 1 * He relates a tedious (lory of the fra- tres Bohemi, and the care that they tookjo prefer ire a fucceffwn of Miniflers. They fent Michael Zam- bergius and two more to the poor Waidenfes ( who never had a Bifhoo among them but in title only) and ["93 and two titular Bifljops, with fome that had not fo , much as the title of Biflwps, made Zambergius and his wo Collegues Bijhops , giving them power of Ordination. This is manifeftly to put a weapon into the Presbyterians hands j they were wont only to quote the dory of Pelagius the pope being- ordained by a Presbyter with two Bifhops, now Mr. D. hath afforded them another Story, to prove that a *?resbyter^ may lay hands on , and ' ordain Bifhops - 7 Is this his kindnefs to the Pre- lates ? Another prejudice and mifchief he defignes to the Church is as he tells us, Tage 14. To fa forth a Cofleclion of the fever al Liturgies of all the Pro- tefiant Churches. This may pleafe him, becaufe it is the brat of his own brain, but will not fore pleafe the Reverend Fathers of the Church. Doth benot know that Arehbifnop Laud did putailop to the Letters Patents, for a Collection for the Palatinate, becaufe it was faid in them, that the Palatinate Religion^ and ours W04 the fame 9 and that Popery was an Antichriftian yoke } Doth he not alio know that when a Book was Publifhed here in England intituled a Declaration of the Faith and Ceremonies of the c Palj graves Churches , Arch- bifhop Laud took a courfe to call it in ? I advife him, if he love his preferments, no more to med- dle in this kind. Had Dr. Peter du* Moulin any thing beftowed on him fince he anfwered Fhilanax ^Anglicus . ? P. 45. He quotes Calvin faying that the cuftom of difiributing the Sacrament but thrice a year is %/itioHs, and yet that is the cuftom.of our Church, and [ I20 ] ?nd that not obferved in all places neither, for I the generality communicate but once a year, and ' ,ib follow, if Mr. D. be in the right, the Devils r.iventicn. P. 5 i Hi faith by judand evident confequence that there is not a wife undemanding Chriftian in our Church, for thefe are his words : That every national Church ought to have 'Uniformity within it felf\ hath always been the judgment of all fober Chriflians s I aflame, That every national Church fiould have Zsaiformity within it felf hath not been the judgment of the £hurch of England. I tremble for Mr. D's fake to infer the concluficn. The Minor I prove from the Canons of 1640. where a difformity is allowed, and the Apoftolical rule commended to diflenters, not to judge, not to Follow him but to P. 9$. and there you (hall have him charging Rebellion and Schifme on the major part of his Conforming brethren. For there he tells us of a great persecution againft all Afinifiers who adhered to the King and Church of England during the late troubles, this perfection Was fo gentle to fome as only to plunder and turn them out of their livings, but cafi others out of the Land? or forced them to a voluntary exile. Thus therefore I argue: 'All Miriifters that adhered to the King and ■ Church, were either turned out of their livings \ or bani(hed,or left the Land. 4 Tn: major part of the Conforming Minifters \ did neither loie their living , ro; were baniftud, & «6r went into voluntary exile. - « There- C m 3 4 Therefore the major part of the Conforming c Minifters neither adhered to King, nor Church, * and by juft confequence were Traitors and Schif- 1 maticks. The Minor is as clear as the Sun, to all that obferved the management of things in England, he that Licenfed Mr. D's Book had the fame Fellowjhipin All Sottles, at his Ma jetties re- turn, that he had at the decollation of his Fa- ther. P. 95. He tells us, that he and fome ethers were admitted to livings in France, the Synod de firing them only to conform to their %ftes , Ceremonies^ and Orders , for the time they flwuld live amongfi them, (for a Nonconformifl Minifer is a thing un- hpown and never fnfftred in thofe Churches,) This is nonfenie to an Englijh ear, for the Church may be full of None on fir mifts if men are admitted into livings, being defired only and not enjoyned to conform to Rites and Ceremonies and Orders. But. he told us P. 54. All admitted to livings nwfk fubferibe to the confeffion of faith y wherefor •e wi may think he fubferibed to the parity oT Minucei*. and by an order paffecT at Charenton all are to (wear they will propngnethe Canons of the Synod of Dorr j if that order be not refunded, then 'tis like he is under Oath to defend a Do&rine which" moil: of the Fathers o(- this Church think, if not againft our own Doctrine, yet fubverfive of the Doctrine according to Godlinefs. . : P. 96. He faith that it is a principle common to all formed Churches in the World, That every national Church hath power to makg Laves for her fslf h in all fuch outward things as are not either exvrcfiy [•mi; exprefly commanded* or forbidden in the word of Cod. God forbid that any fuch principle fhould be maintained , by all or by any Reformed Church in the whole world. There are many outward as well as inward things not commanded nor forbidden exprefly, but only by juft and ne- ceiTary confequffice, about which the Church hath no power to make Laws to her felf any more than about thofe things that are exprefly either com- manded or forbidden , elfe there would be. mad work in the World. Where doth Mr. D. find family Prayer, or infant Baptifme, or the obfer- vation of the Lords days exprefly either forbidden, or commanded in Gods word? He will fay that the Church may make Laws about thefe, I grant flie may, but no other than what fhe can make about things either commanded or forbidden exprefly. So that he wrongeth not only our own Church ? but all Reformed Churches in affixing fuch a prin- ciple to them, Dr. Heylm a fcribes to ^tea quit'-: contrary principle*. Hifi. of Fresh. 2^$. € That" in carrying on the work of a Reformation, * there is not any thing to be exacted, which is not c warranted, and required by the word of God ,5 c that in (uch cafes there is no Rule left for worldly c wifdom, for moderation and compliance, but all c things to be ordered, as they are dire/ted by his 'will revealed. Page 241. He makes this fahins rule, and Martyrs judgment to be grounded on.k, That nothing fliohild be atl'd in a Reformation^ which is not warranted exprefly in the word of God- Are Eaft and Weft more oppofite than Dr. H. and Mr. D. yet neither truly repreients the opinion or the Reformed. I befeech thofe who are at feifure, and have well ftudied the point, to (late plainly and clearly unto us the due matter of Ec- clefiaftical Laws, and to (how us the meaning of the term, indifferent, id frequently madeufe of m this Controverfy : for it ieemeth fomewhat an uhcouf ti Inter tlon that Church governors may command all things that are ulually called indif- ferent, for then many of their Laws would be very contemptible. The old definition of things Adiafhorom was, thaf*TKey were things neither commanded, nor forBTctcten^ this definition Teemed to me innocent enough , but or late there are Divines iprung up, that fay, the higheft acls of love to God are not commanded, neither I trow are they forbidden, mull we call them then things indifferent ? And hath the Church power to de- termine who fhall put forth thofe A&§, and how often they [hall be put forth? It may be Mr. D* /■ thinks the higheft acts of love are commanded/ (and fo do I)but he had beft not to be too forward in publifhing that notion. P. 99. He falls into an high commendation of the Bohemian Churches, as he doth alfo in many other Pages of his Book; this is little to the ad- vantage of our Church }for if that Church be to be imitated, we muft have lay Presbyters and lay Presbyter effes alfo, Paftors of Faridies muft coxy niij people mult come under examination every time they receive the Sacrament, we muft hafe no dancings, and we may have particular Synods with- [ 124.3. without a Eifhop, if we communicate the acls ' thereof prefently to the abfent Bifhops, and we rnuft have none brought into Communion but thofe who are willing, and yet we here can by cenfures, iT we pleafe, make Papifts communicate with us, or elfe have them excommunicated and clapt into Frifon. P. 107. He gives the Presbyterians lame Caufe a crutch. For he faith, God only hath power to bind the Conscience immediately ; ask him when mens Confcicnces are bound immediately, he tells you, when humane haws and Conflitntions are thruft ufon men, as if they were Divine. Here will the Presbyterian fay,Epifcopacy which is but an humane inftitution, is thruft on us as Divine , and not only as good and profitable } , therefore unlets we will give men jurifdiclion over our confciences, we cannot conform. Mr. J>. cannot bring himielf off here, but by maintaining (that Epifcopacy is a Divine inftitution, and it would be too great impudence to fay that in fo faying he fhould not contradict every reformed Church a! mo ft be fides our own. P. 118. He mentions the fending of a Printed Copy of the Acts of the Synod of Dort to King James, Prince £harles, Archbifhop of Canterbury . by Feflus Hommitts, this is to rub a fore place, and to tell the World, that we who now fuffer our Divines and Students to befpatter that Synod, did once well approve of its decifions. P. 126. He mentions a Letter of Monfieur le Moine* out of which he faith he will fet down as much as Jits his p-efent defign : what doth he fet down ? [ 1^5 ] down ? Why Page l $6. That the Brtglijh have k natural fercenefs , and withal a natural inclination to fuperftition, Is this for Mr. Durells defign«>to blaftthe people of that nation where he hath been fo highly preferred ? Arc we indeed fierce and iuperftitious ? Naturally fierce, and naturally Su- perfluous ? What kind of fuperftition is it to which we are ib naturally inclined , that fo we may know how to enquire after the cure of $o dangerous a difeafe? It is no matter if we may believe Mr. Maine to enquire further , let but Epifcopal Authority be eftablifhed, that will keep us from going beyond our bounds. Very good, but by whom (hail this Epiicopal Authority be managed ? By Englip men I hope, but how then can we be allured that their natural fierchieis and inclination to fuperfiition will not remain in them ? We never could obferve that a mans being conftituted a Bifhop did make him lets fierce or fuperftitious, any more than lefs an Er/glifh man. Perhaps this Learned Predicant would have all our Divines come and Rudy in France , that they may lofe their difeafe of fuperftition, as feme times they do their Confumptions in io refined- an Air ? but that Plot will not take. He hath another argu- ment for Epifcopacy, it cannot enter into a rational mans imagination, that a great Kingdom fhculdcstns by cufiom to be content to fee its Bifoops no more* having honoured and reverenced them for the fpa€# of l^ooTears. If this be fo,then may the Bifnops befecure^ we are fo sccuftomed to love them, that we cannot be content to be without them, and have bttn a great Kingdom and honoured aiwfc revme for Ivlinifters \ from T^omt he had twofent him, the Roman Martyrology calls them Fngat'ms , and Donatiantte , alias c Damianm , others write them Faganm and Dermanus or Dunianm y others *Fha~ ganm and Duvianm, Cnone I think Phagamu and Perufianm but M. M> and D. ) That either of Shefe was a Bifhop there is no evidence , Mafon faith plainly, neither of them did ever attain that dignity. Elvanus fome fay was made a Bifhop, and Medvintu a Do&or or Presbyter. Hitherto we have but a Bifhop, no Bifhops, to whofe zeal we C "3 3 we are endebtcd for our Chriftianity. And I am of opinion that as Elvanus was as much a Do&or as MecfoinuSj fo Medvinm was as much a Bifhop as Elvanm> and that there never was Bifhop pro- perly fo called among us till eAuftin the Monk. was fent hither from Rome. The ftories of 28 Bifhops made in the room of 28 Flamens, and $ Archbifhops made in the place of 3 Archflamensy feems to nie^as well as to Mr. Fuller , flammed ancj ^rcl^ammes, I know'that at the Council of "Art- minum^ Sulpitius makes three Bifhops out of Br it an, to be prefent, zs£nno 259, As alfo that Athanafim ipeaks of Britiflj Bifhops at the Council of Sardisy Anno 347. Nor will I deny that Refiitutus Bifhop of London is reported to have fubfcribed to the Council of Aries in France , Anno 314: but if he and others fubfcribed to the determinations of that Synod, how comes it to pafs that the Churches to which they belonged did not account themfelves concerned to leave off their old, and almofl An- gular way of obferving Eafter? furely it muft be becaufe Bifhops were not then thought to have fo much authority over their Churches as now they would be thought to have. When Anflin the Monk^ had got entertainment in the Kingdom of the Mercians^ and was made Archbifhop of Can- terbury , he calls a Council to be made up of Britift , and Saxons, and now if ever , we fhali find what the Government EccleGaftical of the Britijh was, and pity it is we muft fetch our account of it, only, or principaTIyTJirom Bede, a venerable man indeed, put a 3axon, and profefied enemy.to xKtWttiwr I 2 Two [ "4 3 * Two Meetings AujPfoini the Britifo had: To the firft came certain "Bifhops, faith Bede, lib.2. c 2. But let his phrafe be obferved, Epifcopi, five Do- \ ttores being come, Attflin layeth to their charge, That they pra&iied many things contrary to the unity of the Church. But they continuing to pre- fer their own rites to thole that Attflin would have commended to them, the crafrjr Archbifhop per- fwades them to refer tTe^eotToTTtTt/od himfelf, but To" that the Bntijh who were in pofTeflion, muft firft try whether God would work a miracle in favour of their opinion ; not being able to cure [J a blind man brought before them, Auftin falls on his knees, praying tht Father of our Lord Jefus Chrift, that by reftoring fight to that one blind rnan, he would enlighten the eyes of many } and forthwith the blind was enabled to fee. What was the effect ? the Bririjb ought to have condemned therafelves Tor confenting to tempt God % but if we may believe Bede, they acknowledge that An- flin declared the way of righteoufnefs ( as if the way of righteoufnefs had confided in rites and ce- remonies ) -> bat that they couldmt without the con- fent and leave of theirs y depart from their old cu- ftoms. It feems thefe Bifhops did not think that nt cbiittl conclude their Presbyters and people. Wd!, another mjeung is agreed on, to A which came no fewer tnanfeven Bifliops and many very learned men, eipecially out of the famous Mo- naftry now called Bangor, but anciently Bancorna- burgh ; thefe, before they came to the place ap- pointed, ask counfel of a wife and pious Anchoret? whether they had bed defert their Traditions upon the C "5 1 the preaching of Auftin : If he be a man of God> quoth this Counceller, then follow him ^ and if when you come into the room, he rife up to you, then take him to be a fervant of ffirift* An ft in not rifing up to them when they came into the place of confer- ence, they contradict him in every thing he pro- pounded. In three things atlaft, faith Auflin, if you will comply, I will bear with all other your diverfnies , i. You muft celebrate Eafler as we do. 2. You muft administer Baptifm according to the manner of the holy Romm Church. 3. You muft preach with us the Gofpel to the Englifj Nation. Of , the many other things in which the Britans differed from theRomifl), I conceive this was one. that they left both Ordination and Excommunication to a rres- vyter as well at to aBijhop, And this cyfuflm would have toTerated. The realoiisorfhis my opinion a¥ftnany, and probable, grounded on the PJiftories of thofe times', one I fhall mention, viz.. that the Scots were mingled with the Britift when they had thefe meetings ", now that the Scots did originally / commit a&s of order and jurifdittion to presby- ters, is a thing well known 5 if any doubt concern- ing it, he may receive fatisfaftion from (\iq large Preface of Mr. Selden to the Hi&ories published by Mr. Bee not twenty years ago, I am the more con- fident in this my opinion, becaufe I rind that when oar Britijh Churches had throughly imbibed the Romipj modes and cuftoms, then at a Synod held at Celichyth c/f. D. 8 16. it was decreed , That none of the ScottiJIi Nation Jlwuld be permitted to ufe the facred Minifiry among us. This was all I had intended about our old Britijh I j Churches, Churches when loe there came to my hands the Hiftory of Mr. Petry quoted by the Latin Apo- logia that Hiftorian goeth a little more confi- dently to work, than t have done ; for thus faith he, Century n. Pag. 282,283. * As for England fince the Saxons , or Englishes 9 receiving the faith by Aagufline, they had always *Bi(liops •, for they had their Pattern from Rome € as it was then : but if we lookup to the Ancient ' Britans in that LTand, we iliali find it other ways, * iBave faid in Century 7. Chap. 4. that {even c Bilhops and one Archbifhop , came from the c 'Britans unto Auguftin: and there I followed 1 the words of Bifhop Juel, in the defence of the * Apology, Page 14. An. 1520. where he quoteth * Bede 7 Hif. lib. 2. cap. 2. and in the fame Page •he quoteth Galfred, lib. 8. cap. 8. repeating the 'fame words. What I wrote then upon trun% * I have afterwardsYxamined : and I find that Bede /* ipeaks not fo : for in the Edition in Vol. Camh, * An. 164^ he faith, Auftin called the Bifhops c or Doclors of the neareft Province of the Britans ; * and in the fame Page, he, fpeaking of the fame € perfons, faith, a blind Englijh Boy was brought ' unto the Priefts of the Britans, and again they 1 laid they would not depart from the Ancient * Cdroms, without the content and licence,/#0r«z*. € In the Margin it is faid, in the Saxon Language * it is faid, without the permiflion, and licence of 'l Nation* Then fpeaking of their fecond ..'conference, he faith, then came feven Bifhops } t as tliey faid, and more very Learned men, efpe- \ daily cf that Famous Mortaflry, of which the 6 Cover- C "73 ' Governour at that time was Dinooth. Inaword, f c Beda hath not one word of an^ArchbiiHop , nor c in all his Hiftory nam :e, nor . a any Blfh e calletli Bifhops ' otBrJta) iieth them Do&crs, or Teachers^ c and Prieits, yea he calleth them oftner Priefts ^ * nor calleth he them fimply Bifhops, as he calleth ' them fimply Priefts, but Bifhops, as they fay, 'or Bifhops, or Teachers- Yet Beda could diftin- ' guifh between a Bifliop and a Priell What ' can be concluded from hence, but that no Bifhop 'or Prelate was among the Britans other than ' Priefts ? As for Galfrid, it is no marvaii that he ' wrote according to the ilile of his own time, 'that is the year 1150. The faid Author alfo 'quotes Gildas a Brkan Presbyter diitinguifhing 'Church-men into Bifhops or Priefts , and the 'Clerks, but naming no other degree of Church- ' men, calling the firft fortofttftSacfrdotes fimply, ' but never Epifcopos^ un'efs he adds five Sactr- 6 dotes. What think I of ail this? truly whatever I think, I will not fay very much, for I have not by me either Jitels Apology, or the Ca&bridg Edition of Bede, or (jalfridy or Hildas. Only thus much I may fay, that if Gildas who lived before zAufiin was fent to us, and Beds who was born as Thomas St abbes computes but Anno 677- can give us _no tidings of any Church Officer above Presbyters among the Britans 7 it will not fignifie much that Jeffry Monmouth who lived but in King Stephens time makes mention of Bifhops. ^LA To put an end to this matter. 1 4 1. He C»81 1. He who firft converted this Ifland to Chrifti- anity was no Bifhop. 2. Thofe two whom' Eleutherim fen t (upon the Petition of Lucius) to inftrucl us, were no Bi- fhops. $. zAufiin himfelf and his affociates when they firft attempted the converfion of the Mercian Sax- ons were no Bifhops but only Monks. 4. Wichliffe and his followers were no Bifhops, but being Presbyters were wont to ordain Pres- byters. 5. No one Bifhop ever fuffered death ^England for driving againft Popery till Queen Maries Reign. 6. Of thofe Bifhops who fuffered in Queen Maries Reign the Nonconformifts may lay claim to as many at lead as the Conformifts can do, and perhaps there was not one Martyr in all her Reijjn trTat Bier tecf the Jus diwnhllHx''Effiomw* How iralJ fnele things be true, what means the clamor t of ingratitude againft Presbyterians, for not own- ing thofe to whom they owe the Nations Refor- mation from Popery yea and its Chriftianity alfo ? But let us view more of Mr. Moines Letter. Pag. 139. If the French had kept Bifhops, and as many 'Ceremonies as' wstdd ferve to fix the attention of the people without flip er fit ion , they fnould have fcen for certain , far greater progrefs of Reformation, and the refifiance of a great many perfons overcome who are frighted from their communion by the irre- gularity of their government and the barenefs of their ferv'ice. If this werecertain I could wifhthat they had Bifhops and Ceremonies among them to to morrow, but we in England have not been able to obferve that the number of Papifts is lefTened fince the reftitution of Bifhops and Ceremonies, nay fince that fome among us have fallen off to Popery who before profeffed the Reformed Re- ligion. It is not any form of Government , or external mode of worfhip, that muft put the pifts to fhame, but the exemplary lives of Mini iters and people who feparate from them. When men once feel in their hearts the power of (Soct- hnefs, they are in no great danger to turn Roman Catholicks. He hath another conceit, P. 139,140. tbkttbe net receiving of Epifcopal Government) may hinder the much defired union with the brethren that do follow the confejfion ofAufpurg. In this I do vehe- mently dhTent from hiro,for the yielding to Epifco- pal government would rather alienate them from us. Tell them that the ordinations made by Luther are invalid becaufe he was but a mere Presbyter, ©Filial as n ' manyoF them as come over hither ", muft be reordained before they are capable of any Ecclefiaftical preferment, unlefs they have been ordained by Bifhops properly to called, they will quickly let you fee that no reconciliation is to be hoped for. I .dare boldly fay the generality of K Tresbyterians mEiiglandw? againffi no Epifcopacy butwITaf^^ abhor. '"There are fundry other things in Mr. Moines Letter for the which I could expofe him, but I forbear, and defire Englijhmsn not to eftimate him by this Letter, which is fo interpolated that he need not own it as his. I undertake at any time to bring a credible witnefs, that fhall fwear, that Mr; [ or ini- [120] Mr. Moine hath both by word of mouth, and alfo by ' Letter under his hand declared that his mind about ppifcopacy is not truly represented by this Letter \ as Printed by Mr. Durel, many things being left out that would as muchVave crojfed his dejign , as thofe which he hath publijhed, do further it. I come now to the AfTembly that Mr. Bur ell hath called to decide our controverfies for us, he will have Joannes Ames Comenim the only fur- viving Bohemian Biihop permitted to fpeak fixft, and the c Presbyterians defire nothing more, they have fome of them tranflated a great deal of his Book into Englifh, they refufe not to ftand or fall by his Par as^allb th Oxford he had the Honorary degree" of Do Rim. His judgment about Epiicopacy Gave Teen "Before \ about other things let him now have leave to fpeak. Firftyt is like enough that the Univerfity be might obferve that form of Oith, It a mo Dem adjuvetj & fantta Dei Evan- gelic [ 123 ] gelid, whether that Oath (luck in his ftomach or no , I cannot tell, but in his explication of the Decalogue, he puts this queftion, * What is to ' be thought of that cuftom which obtaineth in 4 ibme Churches that have in other things thrown c off the Popifh fuperftitions, that he thatfvveareth ' fhould touch the Holy Bibles, or the Gofpels, ' or fome part thereof. And anfwereth, if the * words be conceived as among the Papifts, fo God 1 help me and thefe Holy Gofpels, I fee not how c the reliques of fuperftition can be excufed. In the fame explication of the Decalogue putting the queftion concerning the Saints days obferved here in England, he faith 4 he cannot approve the judg- c ment of thofe who accufe our Church of Idolatry ' on that account, but wifheth withal the cuftom i were amended, becaufe of the peril of Idolatry. Juft as our Presbyterians are accuftomed to fay. In his Comment on Exod. cap. 28. He handleth a queftion about the fpecial and peculiar veftments of Minifters, and hath thefe words. Whereas in England Minifters j>Ht on linen veftments, it were not to be indured, if they did this in imitation of the Jews, or for any my fiscal fignif cation. 'But how if they do it only for fome diftinflion? yetftill we mnft be afraid of Gideons Ephod. Of the novelty of Organical Mufick, he fpeaks exprefly and largely, efpecially in his Preface to his comment on Hofea, and in his Catholicm Ortho- doxus againft Baity. Where alfo he may be feea ecrying the oplervation of Lent it it pretend to iJe Apoftolicai. He is indeed a moft profeffed Champion of the Presbyterian caufe in ajraolt every thing under debate, As As for Ifaac Cafaubon he was indeed a very Learned Cntick, arid' For ought I know a perfon truly pious. Mr. D. accounts him his own , and therefore in the very title Page of his VindicU brings in his testimony to the Church of England, out of an Epiftle written to (flaudius Salmafius, Quod ft me con]eUura nonfallit, t otitis Reformatoinis pars integerrima eft in Anglia^ ubi cum (tudio veri- tatis viget {Indium antiquitatis. Tbefe words are indeed found in an Epiftle writ- ten raptim haftily, by Cafaubon to Salmafius much about that time when fome of our Bifhops had declared their approbation of fome of Cafaubons Theological EiTaies, which fundry Divines both from Holland and France had difliked. In this good mood Cafaubon commends the Bnglijh for the ftudy of Antiquity, but at other times he grievoufly complains to Tb nanus and Heinfius that we encourage no ftudy but Theology. In the 604 Epif. he asks what good could come of instructing his two ions in Xzzmmg.Medicina hie fane non viget. Jurifprudentia ilia vetus & vera plane ]acet, vix de nomine paucis nota. Epiftle 799. he intimates his deGgn to fend his fon Merick^ to Heinfius, be- caufe he defired to have him well exercifed in Greeks Latin, Hebrew, and could not hope that fhould be done in England. Is not the ftudy of Antiquity like to be carried on well where a young I man cannot he trained up to any eminent skill in Hebrew, Greek or Latin f I fuppoie we had not in this laft Epiftle been fo extremely undervalued, had not the learned man been exafperated by Mr. Mountague y whofe endea- vours vours againft Baronim , he judged very injurious to his own credit and reputation, as may be feen Epiflle 71 7, 7 18. This may fuffice to make us not to be proud of Cafaubons commendation s if I thought it not fufficient, I could go near to prove ? that Cafaubon judged men more or leis ftudiousof antiquity, according as they were more or lets zealous againft the Zdrminians. "But I let pais his iynoclical determinations, and come to his Sermon where I find him, Tag. 16. giving leave to Rome to rank our Reformers among the Contentions y if it can be found that either they have laid afide y or taken up any one thing whereof it may be faid that the Holy Apoftles, or Apoftolick^ Churches had or had not fuch a Cuftom: he addes indeed, Rome was never able to do it 9 nor never fhalL But fhe knows well enough that (he can, for fhe knows, that we have taken up Surplices which were not ufed by the Holy Apoftles or any Apoftolick Churches, and we give Baronies to our Bifhops which neither the Apoftles nor any Apoftolick Churches did, and we place our Baptifteries in our Temples, which was done neither by Apoftles nor Apoftolical Churches. On the other fide we have left off Un&ionj ,__and JLove-feaib, and the Holy KHs^all which were ufed by the Apoftles, and ^TOKoIical Churches. So that fame By Mr. D f s cafelefly worded proportion hath leave to reckon our Reformers among contentious ones. P. 17. He ufeth a plain Turkjjh Argument to confirm and uphold the caufe of the Church, for he faith, that the miraculous manner whereby it hath ^leafed God to raife her up ought to be to all an evident < proof proof that jhe is her beloveds, and her beloved is hers, and an argument that her Reformation is certainly the wor\ of God, and his (founfel which Jhall ft and, Juft thus the Papifts were jyont to prate when Popery was reftored by Q>f Alary, and juft thus alio did the Fanaticks argue when they were per- mitted by God to conquer three flourifhing King- domes, and to put all the Nations round about into a pannick fear Let us not be high minded, but rejoice in trembling. God hath pleaded with us by his ftrange judgments fince Epifcopacy was re-eftablifhed among us, we have had a {harp war, a dreadful fire, a fweeping iPeftilencej I do not fay becaufe Epifcopacy is reftored, but becaufe fin doth abound, and prophanefs runs like a river and migh- ty flowing ft ream*, if we do not- foundly humble our ielves, God may foon take from us, his wor- ihip, our Minillers, and all that Reformation in the which we glory, and yet his Counfel will ftand nevertheless- Pag. 22. He perfectly afTronteth the exprefs words of our Church in the Liturgy, for there it is faid, that t^commnation of fmners is ufed until the Primitive aijcipttney putting perfons convicted of notorious fins to pennance at the beginning of Lent y and only until that discipline can be reftored which is much to be \y:fjcd. "But Mr. X>. faith, tVere can be nothing more powerful to touch fmners to the quick, and to draw them from their evil courfes, than the Commination to which the whole Congregation is bound to fay Amen % after every particular denun- ciation of Gods curfe^ upon all forts of /inner s who perfift in their fins. And indeed it is meet he fhould fay [ "7 ] fay fo, for he had before given 'Rome leave to call us Contentious, if we had left off any cuftomufed in the ^poftolick Churches, and we here do con- fefs, that we have left off one that was very godly ^ indeed we fay, it is to be wilhed it were reftored, but who hinders the reftoring of it but our felves ?* Have other Churches power to enjoyn Penance, and have we none ? Or will other people fubmit to that difcipline and not ours ? Are not forni- cators put to open pennance, and why may not other finners be fo punifhed too ? But not to multiply interrogatories,theChurch holds pennance would be more powerful than the form of com- mination (he ufeth • Mr. D. faith, nothing can be more powerful than the comminution', he will fure impofe fome pennance on himfelf for this boldnefs, and watch his Ten better for the time to come. Perhaps he will fay his meaning was honed, and wholefome, viz. that the form of Commination is very powerful to touch finners to the quick, if fo, he may do well to confider, i. Whether it be condueible to tye Minifters never to ufe it but on A$wednejdays unlefs they have particular order from their Ordinaries, for why fliould fo powerful a prefer vative againft fin be ufed but once a year, efpecially feeing the ufe of it but once a year is found insufficient to reclaim profanenefs;c#«* prmis faint ur is eftejiremonia^fednon video cur debeat exhiberi folnm uno die, & nonfapus, faid the Great Bncer when he faw it reftrained by the firft Book of K. Edward to one day, thereupon it Was altered in following Liturgies to divers times in the year. Grindals Articles enjoyned it to be ufed on fome Sunday near the three great feafts of the Church, C "83 8 after i Tentecoft , Chriftmas , j4$lwedtiefday not excluded, but now no day is allowed but Aftimd- nefday, unlefs there come an order from the Ordi- nary, which I have not heard that any Ordinary hath fent fince the return of his Majefty. 2. What meaneth that mincing of the commination, Dent. 2j. 16. the Text faith, Cur fed is he that fetteth light by Father and Mother , we fay Curfed is he that curieth Father and Mother , what if any fhould from this take occafion to think that there is no great danger in fetting light by Father and Mother, provided they do not rife fo high in their impiety as to curfe them, (an iniquity that I hope few are guilty of J and what meaneth that addition to the curfe of the man that maketh any carved or molten image, 'viz.. to worfhipit. In the Text there is no fuch addition , and the Church did afterwards in the laft commination curfe the wor- shippers of images though now it be changed into Idolaters. The very making of fome images, viz,. of God, the Trinity, &c. doth entitle to a curfe whether they be worfhipped or no, and what hurt were it if people were made to know fo much. 3. Why have we no curfe againft prophane {wear- ing fo common among us, nor any againft Rebel- lion ? The Scripture affbrdeth plenty of fuch curfes. But as the Comminations is now ordered, lean fay Amen to it, taking Amen not only as it figni- iieth, fo it is^ but as it ufually fignifieth fo be it, fo run the words in the Bible, Dent, 27. fo alio, Jer. 17. 5. And he is unworthy to be continued a Church member, who is like to curfe himfelf by any •"• ^ [ 129 ] any fuch imprecation, nor fhall any man that fo prayeth fin againft another that is guilty of thole fins, for when we fay Curled is fuch a finneiyour meaning" is if he continue, and whileft he con- tTnueth fuch, and with that reftriftion-we may fay cuFIecTbe, as I doubt not but the Jfraelaes did as often as they ufed this ceremony appointed by God, fo thought the Sepmagint; elie they would not have Tranflated yivctro. ""The Lords-prayer few fcruple to fay, yet he - that ufeth that form doth virtually curfe himfelf if he have any malice reigning in his heart. P. 2 3. He faith we are appointed to be con- firmed, to receive the blelling from our Paftor (as if none were our Paftor but. a Bilhop) andhe gtves it with the Impofltion of hands, and with pray- ers 7 without Chrifme, or any fuch fuperftitious or fuperfluous Ceremony. What words are thefe ? they do indeed direftly only reflect on the ancient Church and our firft Reformers, and the compilers of the firft Liturgy of Edward the fixth, by which chrifm was appointed at Baptifm, though not that I find in Confirmation, by the Ancients I am fure it was ufed in Confirmation •, "Mr. D. dare adventure to call it fuperftitious and fuperfluous. But his words will by juft confluence reach the crofs in Baptifm, ufed alio in confirmation by the firft Reformers, for why ihould- chrifme be ac- counted a fuperftitious and fuperfluous Ceremony, rather than the crof-, the one is as Ancient as the other, and as innocent as the other, bothjgere e^aOyjibufed in Poperg, of the twojtfie Crofs fnay^ieern more fbperSuous, for in Baptifm we K 2 have [ 130 ] have ah outward rite fignifying the fame thing that the Crois is pretended to fignifie •, but to ftg- nifie our un&ion by the Holy Ghoft, which was in the firft Liturgy prayed for, and ought ftill to be prayed for, we have no outward rite at all 5 Nor do I fee why unction may not as well be uied to certify confirmed per fens of the untlion from the \ Holy one, as impofition of hands, to certifie them of Gods gracious favour and goodnefs towards them, *j which is made the end, in the Office of Confir- J mation. P. 26. If the fever al repetitions of the Lords- prayer y which are to be found in our Liturgy y were made immediately one after another , or within a fjort time-, &c. / fay upon fuch an account we might ytftly be cenfured for ufmg vain repetitions. This wGunds the Liturgy forely if it do not ftrike it to the very heart, for not to fay that it doth ap- point fever al Lords* prayers to be faid within a fhort fpace, (which may truly be faid,) it mani- feftly appoints repetitions of gloria Patri within a fhort fpace, and this will bring us within the guilt of vain repetitions, unlefs a reafon can be given why gloria Patri may be repeated within a fhort fpace, and Pater nofler may not, which rea- fon Mr. D. will give ad Gr&cas Calendar. Thus have I given you an account of Mr. Z>'s Enghfl) Cook under four heads, and now you wTt) expert to have my judgment as touching his Latin Book called vindtcU facr doth he mean by it the Bifhops, of the feveral DiocefTes in this Kingdom of England, 'tis like he cannot mean them, for they call them- felves the Sons of the Church, and we look on the Church as that to which the Iaft complaint mud: be made, for fo our Saviour dire£ls, if thy Brother offend fir ft tell him, then take with thee tw> or three, then tell the Church, now if any one fhould injurta Bifhop (as for my part ,1 judge Mr. D. hath grievoufly injured every one of them by dedicating foch a Volume of raileries to themj the Bifhop muft fir ft tell him by himfelf, and then take with him two or three, and if he regard not them* then he muft tell the Church, that is himfelf if a Bifhop be the Church. Tis like by the Church he means the Church reprefentative , or Convocation 9 now there is a Canon, that denounce th an heavy penalty againftthofe, who deny the Convocation to be the Church of England by reprefentation, and I am fully refolved not to come within the reach of that Canon, I love not excommengement* ' But if Mr. D. will take up the patronage of this Church Reprefentative, his beft way had been fir ft to prove that it is the Church Reprefentative, or elfe the Presbyterians will fay that his whole dii- courfe is de non-tnte* M r. Henr y Jeanes had before he knew how things went in the world fet forth a treatife (which it was my hap to read over,) averting the obliga- tion that lay upon jEnglifh Divines, to comply with B. 2 the [ISO the Church : but in his retractations and rcpcnt- ings, thus he recalls himfelf, *I wonder upon \ c what account I or any man elfe could think the \ c Convocation to be the Church of England s if * in any fenfe it can be called the Church of England, * it was becaufe it reprefented the Mialftry of tLng- 'tind, and that it did not, becaufe the far major 'part of it were Cathedral-men, Bifhops, Deans, c Arch- Deacons, and fuch as were chofen by the c refpetllve Chapters of each Cathedral : it might e thenbe"a Reprefentation of the Cathedral Mini- f (tersTBut not of the Miniftry of England, and : € tBat "I make good by two Parallels, ^he jij# 'fEaTi be betwixt our Convocation, land the Coun- c cil of Trent: many fober and moderate Papifts I *accufed this to be a pack'd Aflembly, aRepreien- c tation of, not the Catholick Church, but the Court * of *Rjme , becaufe the greateft part of it were of c the Popes Faction, and depended wholly upon J him : So the major part of our Convocations were '* of the Bifhops Faction, and minded chiefly the 'intereii of Cathedrals : and therefore were ' not a Ixeprefentative of all the Minifters in Eng- \ * land. I (hall exemplifle this by inftancing inj|e *E>iocefs*oF '"iiaihs mdiVeUj, wherein I lived: In * tins there were Members of the lower houfe of * Convocation, one Dean, three Arch- Deacons, and c one chofen by the Chapter of Wells : and to bal- 1 lance thefe, there were but two Clarks chofen by * the Miniftry of the whole Diocefs : Now what * impartial man but will determine that thefe feven ' c could be no due reprefentation of the Minifters of j the Diocefs of Bathe and Wells, as^ long as fat of 'them C 133 1 ' them were Members of the Cathedral, in whofe * Ele&ion the Minifters of the Diocefs had no hand * at all ? A .fecond parallel {hall be betwixt our ' Convocation^ncT a ovil Aflfembly, wherein we * will fuppofe that the Prince chuleth three hun- ' dred, who are his Courtiers, or elfe ftich as have £ their dependance, either wholly, or in great part * upon him, and the Nation chute only a hundred : 1 you may call this AfTembly a Parliament, or what 4 you will 5 but furely no rational man can think it c to be a reprefentation of the Nation, and as ir- * rational, were it to call the Convocation a repre- c fentation of the Minifters of England, feeing thofe 'chofen by the Minifters were an inconfiderable c part of the Convocation.. Mr. D. belongeth to a Cathedral, nay as report goeTto ieveral Cathe- cTrats7"and therefore he had done but a piece of gratitude, to vindicate the Church from the Ar- guments of a backflider from Conformity. Well, let him mean what he will by his Holy Church of > England^ we are told that he himfelf is Presbyter/ fif this Holy Qounhof England, and that is a Grange and very unufual phrafe. Dr. Hammond, -vho de- fervedwellof the Hierarchy, ^n his Tide page of His DifTertations, calls himfelf ,~ Tresbytevum'iln- glicanum, and yet he was born in England, and o£- aainect in England, and by an Englijh Bifhop, John Dwell was born in Jerfey, ordained in France^ and by zScotijh Bifhop, and yet he calls himfelf Ecclefia Anglican*, Vresbyter&m. I doubt if things were throughly fearched into, he would appear to be no Englijh Presbyter, for we admit no Presbyters, but thofe who are canonically ordained, i. e. by a K 4 Bifhop 9 [134] Bifliop •, you 5 ! fay Mr. D. was ordained- by a Bi~ fhop, and he tells you the name of the Bifhop,and his title: I know he doth, but I ask who made him j a Bifhop and a Presbyter ? I much fear we (hall \ find him one that was never ordained Presbyter 1 but by Presbyters, or by thofe who had been them- felves created Presbyters by meer Presbyters, though confecrated in England by Bifhops \ and if fo, then vitium prims concotlionis y non corrigi- tur in fecunda am terti«. Let him well confider this, and it occafion be, get himfelf re-ordained by fome Bifliop of English Blood and Ordination, elie any one who envies him- his preferments may chance to pick a hole in his coat. If he know not the Pe- digree of the Scotifi BifhopV It is in brief thus. In the year 1 6 To; "King fames lent for Mr. John Spot/wood, Mr. Gawen Hamilton, Mr. <*Andre\v Lamb into England, that an Epifcopal Character might be imprinted on them •, to that end heiffued out a Commiffion under the great Seal of England^ to the Bifhops of London , Ely >Wel/s, and Roche fier^ requiring them to proceed to the Confecration of three Scotchmen defigncd to be Bifhops, which Confecration they did perform accordingly* OcloU. 2c. i6i:. Put Bifliop ^Andrews moved afcruple how the perfons to be confecrated, were capable of Epiicopal Gonfecration, feeing none of them had been formerly ordained Priefts. Dr. Heylin tells us Hid. of Prcf. p. 387. The firn'ple'was removed by Archbiftop Bancroft, alkdgi#g\ that there was no fiLk) ncccjfity of receiving Prieflhwd, but that Ypi~ jfcopal Cenfetratians might he givtv- without it, but to neither, tells us the Obj 1 clion nor Anfweraright ; the E *35 die Obje&ion was, That the three Scots could not be consecrated Biftiops, becaufe they had never been made Presbyters, but by Presbyters } to which iop* before they would confecrate Mr. James Sharp, they ftrft ordained him Deacon, then Prieft, and this they did not out of a pike or fpleen againft the man, but from judgement, conceiving he would not orcain others Ugitims^ unlefs he were fo ordained; fui h as are by him ordained are capable regularly of preferment among us, but fo are not any of the former brood of men, that were ordained by Scotch Bifhops. This difcourfe is only defigned to keep Mr. D. from defpifing the Presbyterians too much, to which he would be tempted if he fhould con- ceive himfelf to ftand on a hafis as firm as fome of his fellow Prebends. I advife him alfo not to be too forward to publifli to the world how he hath let the Minifters of forreign Churches, Preach in his Church at the Savoy, for doubtlefs it is againft the k€t of Uniformity to let them Preach, though but occafionally in that Church, unlefs they have been ordained by fome Bifhops,becaufe thatChurch 1 at the Sivoy hath fubrnitted to the Bifhop of Lon- don as Paftor, and fo hath not the immunities, that other French Churches may claim, and do claim. As to the Book it felf,; common fame fpreads a- broad, that an Anfwer in Latin is preparing for it. We muft expecT: and fee what kind of thing it will be ; for we may well conceive it willdifcover Mr. P. to [«f*3 jP.to be John Lack; truth, John Lack: m °4 e fiy* Cer- tainTam, there be School-boys in England, that can difcover him to be no familiar of Prifcian • .we lay-men can manifeft that he had no regard to tnitn-, and for modefty, he doth ail-along bid de-r fiance to it. The Reverend GifbertVoet, Profef- ibrof Vtrechtfa eminent learning and piety, the dhly furviving member of the Synod of Deft, is withhimbutapitiluneilow. He dares venture to ceniure TVoma^_ Gataker , than whom England fcarce eveTKad either a more exac~t Critick, or ac- complished Divine. Nay , that you may fee his pride to the full, he was not afhamed to tell an Honourable perfon of this Nation, that one rea- fon which moved him to fall upon Mr. Baxter was, becaufe the Latin Apologift for the Nonconform- ifts, had reprefented him as no equal, match far Mr. Baxter- Could you think it poflible that Mr. *D. ftiould conceit himfelf meet to cope with fuch an Antagonift, whom the Reformed Divines ( who can underftand the language in which his books I are written ) admire *, to whom Amyrald not long fince fent a Letter on purpofe to let him know that he had never fpoken contemptibly of him. Mr. Caches is fufficiently depredicated by Mr. D. as an Eloquent Preacher, and as one of the beft men living. His Letter to Mr. B. is printed } by that let the world make eftimationof him: or if Mr. Gaches teftimonialcan be difcr edited, then let the Saints everlafting reft, the Treatife againft Jlnabap- tifmy and whatever elfe-he hath written, be read and meditated upon ferioufly , there wiH fcarce be found a Divine in whom there was a more happy con- [1373 conjunction of eloquence and judgment, of holi- nefs and peaceablenefs. Not to detain you long, I fhall make a few general animadyerfions on the Book, and io put an end to thefe papers which are grown too big. i. The Author of the Vindicia? egregioujly vio- lates the <*s4tt of Indemfnity and Oblivion , that buried all former mifcarriages, he rakes them all out of the grave, as if he had no belief of the general judgment. If any Presbyterians made any application to fuch as in the late times took upon them fupreme authority, he fcores that up as an ar- gument againft Presbytery, Could any Presbyteri- an be fo vile as to imitate him, how eafily might he tell him of a Primate of England, and Metro- politan, who took up arms in the caufe of the two Houfes, and had a great fum voted him for his good fervice: Of a Conformifl who was the prime Author of Jus Qiyinum regiminis Ecclefia- fiici: Of an Epifcopal Divine now enjoying a good Living , who did write Politica Sacra & (/ivilia: Of iiindry dignified men who came into iequeftred places , and verfified in behalf of the Protector. The late Wars began when I was a Child, and were finiflied before 1 was a man j but I have made the beft enquiry that I could, and do find that fundry of the moft eminent Nonconfor- mifts were alway unfatisfied about the Parliaments War,and did not ftick as occafion was offered to de- clare their diffatis faction. I have found alfo,that the Divines moft bufie to bring about the late unhappy and deplorable changes, were fuch as had been of the moft rigid Se& of the Gonformifts} Mr«£i- vpards C 138 3 wards in his Gangrana hath named fome of them: I muft not without leave from thofe who fit at the Stern, do fo - but I profefs I know not that Theologue who did either fpeak or write for put- ting of the King to death , that had not been a Conformift before the Wars. The men now in place who loft any thing for refuting the Engage- ment, will be found to be very few ; fome will be found to come into the places of thofe who were turned out for hot engaging. Dr. Heylin himielf ( as hot as he is againft thofe who go by the name of Presbyterians ) did ^nno 1657. put forth his Hcclefia vindicata, much of .JVh .a ftrain as Mr. Durell\ Vindtci* \ in the gen^ A Preface to that Book, he addreffeth himfeif --to thofe wHo were then in power, and pleads for the men o: this per - fwafion, by this argument, That they lived fo -peacea- bly and inbffenfively in their fever al ftations y as that they could hot be reproached with any dij affeUion to the then prefent G over rim ehi\in word or deed. Had fome eminent man called a Presbyterian , faid fo much for thofe of his rjtffi$rtitfi$what would Mr* J), havemadeof it? But tfft Reformed Religion may fay, All thefe things are again/} me. Mr, D. makes the Principles of the Englijh Presbyterians to lead to Rebellion. Dr. Owen long fince equali- zed the Puritans beyond the leas, with the jeluits, in point of difloyalty. Dr. Heylin in his-Hiftory of Presbyterians, hath driven the fame nail further and deeper •, nothing is wanting but fome hot-headed fellow among the Proteftants to lay Treaibn at the cloorof the Lutherans , and then the cry of the Romamjls will be fulfilled. But ftill the JEngUfi Pro- [ 139 3 Pro teftant will be white as fnow •, in vain is itfb to think. The Parliament of Englandhath deter- mined the matter of the Militia, and declared it unlawful on any account whatfoever to take up Arms againft the King. Men will acquiefce in this Declaration, if not for Confcience-iake, yet at lead for fear. I know no Book put out fince his Majefties return, that hath afTerted thelawful- nefs of fubjecls rifing againfi: their Soveraign, but one fet forth as Mr. Rich. Hookers, and dedicated with the reft of his Works by Bifhop Gauden to the King himleif, Mr. Ifaac Walton would have us think the Book is not his ; and I wi(h he had brought better arguments to bring us to that per- fwafion. But I am fure that Bifiiop Bilfon hath left things upon record which may vye with any thing quoted out of Calvin or, Bez,a y by Dr. Heylin. 2. This Vindex when he meets in the Apolo- gift with that he dares notjuftifie, prefently puts it into his Catalogue of Legends, yet brings no probable arguments to prove it a Legend. The A- pologift, whoever he was, feems to have written his Book under much bodily weaknefs,and hath plead- ed for his brethren in Nonconformity rather ho- neftly than fully \ but as for the things that Mr. X>. calls fables, I my felf know many, if not all of them, to be true , and dare undertake to pro- duce thofe who will atteft them upon oath > yet if I could meet with the Apologift handfomely, I would feverely rebuke him for putting fbme of them into print, for all truths are not to be pub- lifhed at all times. I remember I once heard him that is the reputed Author of the Apology, fayia a Ser- C 140 3 a Sermon, A man can fcarce do a worfe office to the Church , than to render Paftors defpicable in the eyes of thofe whom they are to govern. 3. This Virtdex when he falls into the mention of any Controverfie that (hould be debated by him, takes his heels, and runs away from it , ana drops lome queftion about the which there was never any difpute. Twenty and ten inftances might be given of this kind ^ I only take notice of one *, he hath a Chapter utris magis faverit Calvi- nuS)£ic. Whether Calvin moft favoured the Schif- matical Presbyterians, or Prelates ? If this be to anfwerthe Apologift, then let fome one that re- plies, put a queftion , Whether Calvin moft fa- voured Arminian Prelates , or Presbyterians f What hath Schifra to do in the Controverfie a- bout Nonconformity ? The greater part of Non- conformifrs cannot be guilty of Schifm, except they were guilty of it in their mothers womb, or when they lucked , or whilft they were School-boys : for thus the cafe ftood with them •, they were by their Parents fent to the Univerfity when Bifliops were inter non-entia^ or inter non apparentia. By ftudy they came to acquire thofe gifts that were iuppofed to qualifie them for the ^finiftry, to the work of the Miniftry they were feperated by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery*, yet many of them never declared diilike of Epifcopa- cy, nor opened their mouths againft Ceremonies \ never took the Covenant nor Engagements were preiented to vacant Livings by the true and un- doubted Patrons : By Gods blefling they added to the Church fuch as fhould be fav^d. His Maje- ftlCi fties return they defired fo as none more ; yet they muft not be fuffered to continue in an Ecclefiafti- eal Benefice , unlets they will fubmit to a thing fearce ever heard" of, %j or din at ion. It may be their imTfake that they do not judgeO'rdination by Pref- byters to be a nullity *, but what is this to Schiim ? Ob). I may expect you will thus accoflme: If , Mr. D. be fo eafily mastered, why do you not pay a debt of love you owe? why do you not write in Latin as once Mr. Nichols did in Englifh^ nA Plea for the Innocent ? Refp. Verily for this reafon, becaufe I love not to have to do with thofe, who when they are put to filence, know not how to be afhamed j fachji one this nJ^Unfiewr is j for not long ago he met with a Noble Gentleman of this Nation, who hearing him fay , That all the Divines beyond feas condemned the English N&nconformifts , told him plainly, That he knew it was not fo \ and that fame in France looked on him as an apoflate for complying fo far as he had done ^ and when he re- plied, The fe are only fome unwife hot -headed men\ the honourable perfon rejoined % Nay, they are worthy and well tempered Minifters. Yet did not Mr.D. change the copy of his countenance. Is it poflible then that I fhould bring him to repent- ance ? In a word, if you account Mr. D. an Au- thor any way confiderable, you have near you our old friend S. E> let him cull out of the Vindiciz what he efteemeth moft ftrong, that do you fend tome, if I do not by the firft return of the Car- rier fend you a fatisfaetory anfwer (provided it be 1 142 1 be direfted not againft perfons, but the Caufe)the?i account me a very vain- glorious animal. In the mean time liften not to thofe who are given to vain jangling, and falfe-witnefs bearing , but put on charity the bond of perfeftion , fo fhall an abundant entrance be adminiftred unto you into that Kingdom, where there are no perverjejji- fputers •, to that kingdom that we may be both brought, is the fincere prayer of, SIR, Tour humble fervanij W. B. Long r 143 3 LOng time after I had written the Appendix againft Dr. Heylin^ I was informed, that fomething elie was come abroad in Latin^ in the which the Nonconformifts were con- cerned. I could not think any thing was faid in it, that had not been faid before, and therefore i had once fome thoughts, never fo much as to look into itv but being told that the Author of it was . Mr . Matth eiv Scrivener, reputed &t_Cambridge (while helfiere reficTedT a clofe Student, and great Scholar •, I refolved, to cart my eye upon fome Pages of it, that fo, if it feemed written with any candor and judgement, I might either give an an- fwer to it, ortellfuch Nonconforming friends, as I was acquainted with, that 1 found it unanswer- able. But looking into it, at the Stationers (hop, I foon found it to be made up of little befides fcur- rility and calumny. Monfieur DailUes Book of the Right ufe ef the Fathers, which I thought no Protectant had looked on without admiration, nor Papift without terror, this Englifl) Presbyter un- dertakes to anfwer, endeavours firfl of ail to make it appear, that the Book deferved not the Elogmms that fome of great name and tfleem among us had beftowed upon it, and that Mr. Daillee was but a £ham , taking delight to lay open the nakedness of the Fathers, Then proceeds to give him a gene- ral and particular anfwer. I confefs I was moved L not [ *44 3 not a little, to fee a-writer that had deferved fo well of the Reformed Religion, fo unworthily dealt "■with, by one pretending to be a Proteftant. For what one thing hath Mr. J. D. faid more or lefs about the Fathers, than what had been faid many years before by fome of our moft eminent Divines , in England ? It mud be acknowledged, that he hath handled the point more copioufly, than any who went before him ; and the heads of his dil : courfe are exemplified with a mod admirable col- lection of particulars \ but that he hath brought the Fathers any one peg lower than they had been brought by Juel, *Humfred, Whitaker y Rainolds, Dr. George oAbbot , Down, &c. will never be -proved. Bifhop Cofins hath put together all the reafons thaVwere Scattered and difperfed in other mens writings, to prove the Non-canonicalnefs of the Apocryphal Books \ now it would be no won- der if a Proteftant in fome writing fhould obiter take notice, that the Bifhop in fome particular hadmiftook himfelf; but he that fhould profef- fedly undertake to anlwer him, would fcarce be accounted other than a Papift. e. c. The Bifhop faith, p. 1 8. All the Canonical Books of the Old Te ft Ament were originally written in Hebrew (ex- cept &c ) butthsje ether bookj (he means thofe canonized at Trent ) were all confeffedly fir ft written in the Greeks tongue, &c ) I may doubt whether all the controverted books were firft written in the Greeks tongue, I may confidently affirm this is not confefTed concerning all. the con- troverted books (for who knows not that Eccle- fafticm is generally affirmed to be written firft in Hebrevr, L H5 ] Hebrew, to fay nothing of other books) and yet not be thought fpightful nor Popifh} but if I fhould publifh a whole book againft the Bifhop 5 labouring to lefTen his reputation and efteem, to weaken the authorities by him produced, would not any man fay, that either I was a Papift,or that I cared not how much I gratified the Papift, fo I could but fhow my teeth againft Biftiop Cofins ? yet juft fuch a game it is that Mr. Scrivener plays. **0&j> But if what he hath faid againft Dailtee be truth, if his anfwersto him be rational, is it not mees he fhould be honoured ? Will it not be for our credit and reputation, to let the Pafifts know, that we will not fpare our own, how renowned fo- ever, where they cxctcd the bounds of modefty and fobriety ? jinf. If any one through a zeal ( without knowledg) againft Popery, (hall fay thofe things againft the Fathers that may difcourage thofe who have leafure and money from buying and reading of them } or fo weaken their authority, as to pre- judice the intereft of Chriftianity •, he doth de- ferve praife and commendation who (hali endea- vour to bring the Fathers to their due efteem. But neither hath Mr. DaUlee wronged the Fa- thers , nor Mr. Scrjyevsr "ri^h^d tjer^: but Be- cauTe Mr, Scrlvenpr Bear»a Px^sTr^rTan in a Sermon put off an obje&ion taken from the autho- rity of the Fathers by referring his hearers to Mr. JDaillee, there lore he refolves to encounter Mr. Dailiee, And as fpleen feems to be the chief thing that put him on "1 z mana ging of it he hath JffcoTeTect snore oF petulant L 2 \P-c\-, L 14* 3 fpleen, than of judgment. This cenfure I had fome pufpofe to make good, But that 1. I am affured that JDaillee is like in a fliort time to be vindicated by fome of his own. 2. I am now alfb fallen into a place where I can have no books but what my own Library affords j and though I have moft of the ancient Fathers of fome Edition , yet in a matter of this nature, iihall neither be able to fatisfiemy felf nor others, uniefsl had opportunity to con- iult all the Editions of them, or at leaft the mod renowned. For it often happeneth, that when a man thinketh he hath the Fathers on his fide, and hath brought their teflimonies too plain to be e- ludedforhis opinion, he reapeth no benefit there- by, becaufe thofe who differ from him, deny the copies according to which heproceedeth, to be ibch as are to be relied on. It was my hap not long fince to read Dr. Waltons Prolegomena^ that I might fee what he could fay for the comparative novelty of the Hebrew Letters that we at prefent ufe - among other arguments I found him to make ufeof the authority of Eufebim his Chronicled annum mundi 4740. the words quoted out of him are theie, Fuit Efdras eruditiffimus legis diving, & clarm omnium Judoorum magi ft er , qui de cap' tivitate regrejfi fuerunt injudaam : affirmaturq', di- j vinos Scripturas memoriter condidijfe, & ut Samaru tanis non mifcerentur lit eras Judaic as commutajfe. What is his collection hencer why this, Hie videmus Eufebium non tantum banc liter arum ntutationem di- ferte offer ere, fed etiam ejus caufam adferre ; ut fc. Jud&icum Samaritanis non mifcerentur . I could fee no fuch diiert or manifeft afTertion of the change of the Letters in this teftimony of Eufebius. He that only [ H7 ] only faith affirmatptr, cannot be concluded Co much as to deliver his own opinion. Many Hiftorians and Chronographers ufe affirmatHr,ov fome word of like import in fuch matters as they themielvesdo not be- lieve,and I hope for the credit oiEitfebiu* that he did not t\nn^l£Jdram divihas fcrifturas memoriter condi- Jjffi\ and if io, it is not like that he believed the other part of the affirmation neither. But Mr. Baily\ a learned and induftrious footed -man, in his lately published Hiftorical and Chronological Work, lib. i. p. 197. tells me, ' That he had read ' over and over Eufeb'ms his Chronicle, as well the 4 Greek as the Latin Copy fet forth by Scaliger, *with great care out of the beft Manufcripts, and IV ^\ * could not find one word in them concerning this^ ^ c change of Letters by Efdras \ and yet u-&^riii~j c tiger had in any Copy of good repute found any l v*| £ 4 thing that might have confirmed this change of ^ TO * Letters, he would no doubt have infertedit, be- J^g i caufe he doth with fo much paflion take upon him / ;(.. c to defend that change. Now if this be true, as |A$ I doubt it is , that Dr. Walton in his prologue to fo renowned a Work as the Tolyglotts^ followed a Tranflation of Enfebius that was corrupted , I may well be affrighted from examining teftimo- niesof Fathers, till I be where I may be affured that theteftimonies I am to examine are not coun- terfeited. In the mean time I (hall lay down fome few things concerning the Fathers. ** i. Many times the ufefulnefs and almoft: abfo- lute necefiity of being acquainted with the Orien- tal Languages and the Writings of the Fathers, is mod cried up by thofe who themfelves are but S£?2SSH J° ^BSB* * c is not raan y Y ears " nce a * oa L 3 of of the Church at a Le&ure in the Countrey, Preach- ed up the neceflity of the knowledge of the Original \ Hebrew, affirming that they were not worthy the name of Divines who did not well underftand it^ but this pert young man being at Dinner taken to task about his own skill in Hebrew, it was found that he could not fo much as read Hebrew > yet he was out-done by the bold Jefuit , who (as Mel* chior Adam relates the ftory in his life, pag. 845.) in a Difpute with Graferm about the Hebrew Text of the Bibles, made boaft of his skill in Hebrew j but this Father of the fociety having an Hebrew Bi- ble without points put into his hands, knew not which was the top, which was the bottom of the Pages , which occafioned Grafems his Scholar to . laugh at his daring ignorance - ? fo that the Noble- man who brought this Father, withdrew, and wifli'd U him, fo ignorant, to be gone. They who have read v the reafons of Edmund Campion, cannot but know \ how much he tfolHfecT oTthTlFathets, as if they I had been all his own from firft to laft, even as much as Gregory the \yth\ on this account he carneftly defired to be admitted to difpute with our Divines. Quo quo fe mover it adverfarins, feret incommodmn : Patres admiferit c apt as eft\Exc Infer it , mdlus eft. But when this vain-glorious creature came to be difputed with, it was found that he could not underftand a Greeks Father, and that it might well be queftioned whether he could fo much as read Greek: Dr. Fu\ plainly tells him in the third days conference, that it was not above a dozen years fmce he heard him at Oxford ask a Stationer for IrtWHS^ Epiftles, In the fourth day s conference, when 1 149 ] when Mr. Clark brought Tertnllians Book againfl: Hermogenes to prove the Scriptures fufficiency, he knew of no fuch book , and yet when he was con- vinced that there was iuch a book, then he could anfwer, and pretended to know upon what account TertuUUn argued againfl Hermogenes ? And he pretended in the fame days conference, that he knew the meaning of SWBaftl, and yet would not, or could not read the place in Greeks though it were eafie, and the fentence fhort, and though he knew not whereto find it in the Latin book. So it feemed not improbable to fome that Campian made not that confldentPamphlet, but only turned it into good Latin. lhomp[on alio in his Treatife de Amijfwne ^IntercipMtptflificationu^ & gratia , mufters up the teftimonies of many Fathers', but when his book was only manufcript, one who knew him, asked him this queftion , Vnde tot Tatrim teftimonianfurparet, qui patres vix qmdem attigif- fet? I could (hew the like ignorance and confidence in another Arminian^ho troubled Mr. Robert Bdly of Scotland^ with teftimonies of Fathers again!! Predeftination, but fuch as were all taken out of VojfiMj and concluded them with an Item, that Be* za and Calvin acknowledged the Fathers to be a- gainft themfelves, quoting as Vojfw through an overfight had done , Bez,a on Rom. 9. 39, when as that Chapter hath but 3$ Verfes in it. And Cafoins third book of Inftitutions $3 Chapter, when there be but 25 Chapters in that whole book. I could alfo difcover a great many now living who carry it in their Sermons andDifcour- fcs, as if they followed the ancient Fathers* when L 4 in L*5o j indeed they follow none but Hugh Groat. But would I by ail this infinuate, that Mr. Scrivener is not well verfed in the Fathers, for whom he Apo- logizeth ? I anfwer, I would infinuate no more, but that it is poflible that all his pretended zeal for the Fathers may be without any great knowledge of them. What the courfe of his Studies hath been, I know not, his friends were wont to think, that his genius.led him rather to School-men, than Fathers ( if it did fo, he is not the worfe to be liked i, for of the two, a Minifter who hath the cure of fouls, may better want Patriftical than Scho- laftical Theology ) j I fuppofe it would a little dif- compofe his gravity to be catechized any whit ftri&ly concerning the age, ftile and defign of fome of the Fathers whom he undertakes to defend *, if in this I be miftaken, the matter is not great, for I dcCign it only to keep our Priefts from boafting of a falfe gift. 2. I never yet in all my life met with any per- fon of any perfwafion whatfoever, that would re- cede from any opinion he had at firft imbibed, be- cause one or more Fathers were againft him. We all [vg take up our opinions from the Cate- ch*ii ffions that are authorized in ffioj e Cmorcnes of which we are members, and many, tFatliay not moil, go all their days by an implicit faith, believing as the Church believes, and as their ! Minifters do Preach, never taking pains to iearch whether they agree to the Canon of Faith. Popijh Divines think that their Church cannot err, and fo fcrain all their learning and diligence to defend what riath determined ; all that call fhemfelves pro* teftants. C 151 3 teftants, fay they ought to ufe their judgement of ,. - x difcretion, though they may be bound, if in fome comparatively lefs matters, they have knowledge different from the Church in which they are Mini* iters, to have it to themfelves. T his is truth » but the men who go confcientioufly and impartially make ufe of their judgement of difcretion, are not very many, they are very foon tyed up bvTiij> icnptions, and account it not for their credit to re- cecJeTfom them \ if in difputation they be preffed with the authority of the Fathers or ancient Do- ctors, they either bluntly declare that they little regard them, or elfe find out fome plaufible/i/w, or . 606. e. g. /, to confefs ingenuoufly, would I more believe the ^ope alone in thofe things which con- cern the myfteries of faith, than a thoufaud Auftins, Hieroms, Gregories, &c. becaufe the Pope in mat- ters of faith cannot err. Much fuch ranting fluff il could quote, did I count it needful ; but indeed it is not needful, for Jiis Holinefs takes upon him to have a power to correct Fathers, that they may )ufl fit and fuit the prefentftate of his Church. By the Conftitution of Sixtnt the Fifth, care is taken to fet out Fathers free from the corruptions they have contracted by coming through the hands of Hereticks, but with this proviib, That if any more weighty doubts and difficulties fiall happen in the authority of old. Bookj, in the correction and emenda- tion of books, things being fir ft examined in the Con- gregation, they fiould be referred to him, that in va- riety of readings he might determine that by a fpecial priviledge granted to his See, which was moftconjonant to orthodox verity : and left we fhould think that the 'the Pope mult determine nothing of his own head, but after he hath taken great pains, hear Gregory de Valentia Analyfis fidei, lib. 8. p. 70. Non eft ratio ulla firma qttamobrem exiflimare debeamm^ flu- dii diligentiam Pontifici ejje necejfariam y five in de- finiendo /Indium adhibeat five non adhibeat, infallibi- lity certe definiet. But this it may be is faid but by one, and a long time fince *, not fo, we (hall find our Countrey-man Thomas Bacon,ot Southwell in his Analyfis fidei faying as much. But do not Calvinifts as much fet at naught the Fathers when they make not for them ? zsfnf. So they are : charged to do by Papifts, and the Remonftrants, and their adherents. Campian faith, Cauf&us called Dionyfius the a^reopagite a doting old man m but Dr. Humpkred denies him to have ufed any fuch broad language even of the pre- tended Dionyfiw 7 De Tatrtbrn^ p. 520, &c. Gro- tins alfo gives them fuch a bob pag. i 5, Viet. lllufi Ordin. Hollands , but quoteth no Author that gave him any occafion to vent fuch a reproach. 2. Some hating to fpeak contemptibly of the Famers, will civilly put off their authority, either by putting another fenfe on their words than is com- monly given, or by blaming the edition, or the tranflation, or by oppofmg one Father to another, or the lame Father to himfelf, or by faying that he relates the opinion of others : So that they do by them, -tuft as they do at Oxford 6y Arifiotle^his authority muft not ^endemecl in clifputations under ajgenalty anointed b^Mfoe Statutes, yet any one fn Parvifiis* or y Angufiimnf^m^A^ the opinion that he beft liketh, how contrary foever it be to Arh- C 154 3 ^riftotle *, and if Ariftotle be urged againft him, L eodem cap. 5. Why are Vrocopius-, Eucherius, Jfidorus Ifidortis branded to be uncertain Authors, or obfcure, Lib. de Purg. %. cap* 6. Why is it faid of Origen 9 that his words on the 14th Homily on Luke do not bear a, commodious expofition, de Pur. lib. 2. cap.i. p. 620. Orken was one of the firft that brought in Purgatory fire ; and could Beilarmme find out no commodious feme or his words concerning thofe that are to be purged by it ? Could he not fay that he related only the opinion of others, as he doth concerning Hierom ? Lib. de gratia prirai hominis, cap. 1 1. or that he fpake hyperbolic ally p , as he brings _ oft Chryfoftom, lib. 2. de MiiT. cap. 10. or that he did write after the manner of Poets, which he faith about Trudentius, lib. 2. de Purg. cap. 18. Why could he not fay, that writing againft one extreme, he fell into the other extreme-, afafoo often brought when fome of the Fathers fayings are brought, that feern to favour Manich&ifm or Telagianifm, e^>- rianifm or Sabellianifm. If no fuch thing would ferve the turn, why then it might have been faid, that he fpoke £ £oyt/.&?iMs *M* JyavinKae, a di- ftin&ion ufed by St. Bafil to fetch off Gregory , Epif, 64. but made ufe of by more than one Pa- pift*, or rather than fail, it might have been faid, that Origen'vr&s abufed and corrupted. Q^ What then, is no authority to be afcribed to the Fathers ? iA. There may be authority enough afcribed to them, notwithtranding any thing I have faid } for iTTave only related how men deal with "trie Fa- thers, not how they ought to deal with them. Yet I confefs I am fomewhat to feek how to draw fuch an argument from the authority of the Fathers,as none none but defperate perfons will think invalid. Should I , meeting with an Adverfary that dif- fers from me, argue thus, Auflinfays it is fo, there- fore foitis h or ^Aufkin faith it is notfo, therefore it is not fo: My antecedents I may chance to prove, if I have fuch an Edition of ^uflin by me, as is liable to no exception } but my arguments to be fure would be denied, and how (hall 1 prove them, by asking him whether he account himfelf wifer than vAuflin ? he will, if he be wife, ask me,whe- ther I will fubferibe to every thing that he can bring a place of Anflih for ? and I, if I be not a fool, (hall not promife fo to do } fo is our argu- ment at an end. But perhaps if I had argued from confent of Fathers, then he mud when I had pro- ved i fuch confent, have yielded to me, or elfe he might juftly be reputed contentious and (elf-con- ceited. I muft needs acknowledg that theteftirao- ny of many Fathers to a point, is more confidera- ble, than the teftimony of any one Father to the fame point. And yet fometimes one may fo pra- tlife upon many, that thofe many who Join with him, may juftly be reputed to fignifie no more than himfelf alone, or rather not fo much as himfelf alone ^ for he that goes about to trapan others into a content with him,may well be thought not to be himfelf; there may be a good appeal from a man engaged to make a party , and carry on adefign, to the fame man under no fuch en- gagement. Sometimes alfo it is too too apparent, that after one Father had written his opinion up- on a matter , others have chofen rather to follow him, than to beat the pains to enquire whether he was [157] was to be followed. But be this as it will : when is it we may reckon our felves to have the confent of Fathers ? I fuppofe when we hold that which all or the mpft of the Fathers did hold manifeftly, frequently , conftantly , no others contradicting them. If fuch a confent as this be not almoft im<* poflible to be had in the queftions now difputed a- rnong Chridians, then mud I needs confefs my felf much midaken in the collections I have made out of the Writings of the Fathers. But it will be good for the further clearing of this bufinefs, to inftance in particulars , that we may know how much we are bound to follow Fathers. ^ There be fome matters purely philofophical ; how mucfi is to be attributed to the confent of the Fathers in thefe ? Mud we concern our felves be- fore we come to be of any opinion about them, to enquire what their fentiments concerning them were ? Had the Fathers fuch clear conceptions in Phyficks, Metaphyficks , Mathernaticks , that he who departs from them, mud needs be thought to be in an error? If fo, I know no Sect of Philofo- phers that mud not be judged to abound with er- rors. Cornelius a Lapde tells us, that Bafil, Thee* doret , Naz.ianz.en, did all hold that Light was created by God out "of any fubject , and* thence notes againft Hereticks , That accidents can in the Sncharift exifi without a fitbjeff. As, for Bafil, I think notwithdanding all the pains Bellarmine takes DeEttch. lib. 3. cap. 24, to make him of that opinion, he is well enough brought off by Scultetus, TheodoreP I have not by me.and will not guefs what II C 158 ] his mind was^ Naz.ianx.en in his 43. Or at. at rfojtvejL&Ktip kwm jy «* to tap , & c . hath thefe words concerning that Light , x) t*to wt h^yavmip *** *9Xys *<^ VKtttiLOV, as l(JLof kvyof, dh\* eLffapaTov xj dv&Aw, lirHTA cTl jy vikito j\>0ip 3 fome of which words found fufpiciou fly, yet perhaps do notne- ceflarily infer, that he conceived Light to be a quality exifting without a fubjecl: ', if they do, he faith plainly it was but his own private opinion. But now fuppofe all thefe three, and three and twenty more Fathers had been of this mind, muft I be thought proud if I did not forthwith allow the poflibility of an accident's fubfifting without a fubjeft ? If I muft , ja&a eft alea 9 I am refolved in all fuch cafes not to purchafe a reputation of humility by difclaiming my reafon.- LaEiantim and Auftin&o with fome zeal oppofethe Antipo- des, and laugh at the afTertorsof them. Venerable Bede treads in their fteps. As for Pope Zacbary who got into the Chair about the year 750. his zeal againft the osintipodet was fo furious, that nothing lefs would fatisfie it, than the condemning of Vir- gilitu, a Bifhop in Bavaria, as an Heretick, becaufe he adventured to afTert, that there were men whofe feet were oppofite to ours, t torn and in his Anti-ariftarchw is troubled at this ftory , and takes fome pains to qualifie it fo, as that it may not derogate from the Popes infallibility. I fhall not be offended with any man that can prove there never was a Pope who thought it he- refie to hold the Earth to be round. And I am glad the Church of Rome now-a-days allows her follow- ers more liberty in matters of Philofophy, than formerly*, [ i59l formerly", for the more 'liberty js allowed to men of that P_err^ ^o^^THoiigh but in Philofophy, the morehcpes may we conceive of tTieir coming over to us. ~But I fee plainly that the ancient Fathers did look upon the roundneis of the Earth as a para- dox ; and it is not many yearsjincea Divine in England writing againft the morality of the Sab- I>ath,laid down abundance of propofitions which were every one of themfalfe, theplainnefs of the earth not being iuppofed. However, I am refolved to adhere to demon- ft ration and hiilory, lay the Fathers and their ad- mirers what they will to the contrary.To be Ihort, foTaTasTcan JuTcI g \ the Fathers were not the beft Philofophers that ever the world enjoyed. 2, What is to be attributed to theconfent of Farrier? In matters of Chronology ? Surely not very much : for being generally unacquainted with the Hebrew, and following none of the bell Co- pies of the Septmgim, they milerably failed in the Age of the Antediluvian Patriarchs. All good men can eafily pardon that their error 5 forae of late have gone about to juftifie their account, but upon fuch weak grounds, that I fhould much won- der if among Scholars they fhould have many fol- lowers. The Learned world will not eafiiy yield that all the Hebrew Copies we now uie, are cor- rupted^^. 5. and to be amended by the Septuagint. ?. What is to be attributed to the Fathers in matters Hiftorical ? To anfwer this it would be enquired , 1 . How far they thought themfelves concerned to report truth. 2, Of what prudence M they they were. For if any of them thought an offici- ous lye lawful, there is no relying upon the Hifto- ry written bv him % and that none of the Fathers thought an officious lye lawful, I am not he that will affirm *, I rather fear that fome of them did make no icruple to ufepiou: ^frauds, the more to fetorT Chriftian Religion* to' thole Heathens a- gainft whom they did write. He that hath any nofe may finell iomething of this cfficioulhefs in fundry of thofe miracles that are left on record by Ecclefiaftical writers. 2. If any of them did think that they might not lye, no not lv Ss^a-wa* fAg'jw • yet if they were credulous, and apt to be abufed by cunning men, they might report things far from ti u:h, which yet upon their credit and re- putation would be taken for true in fucceeding ge- nerations. What an incredible ftory doth Jnyin Martyr va his Exhortation to the Greeks tell us, concerning the 72. Interpreters, viz.. That the King who lent for them , appointed them to be kept in diftinft Cells, not fuffering them to fpeak with one another, and yet that their interpretation at laft was found not only to agree in fenie, but in every word. This he relates to the Grecians not without great confidence, faying that he had feen fome footfteps of the Cells in the Ifland where they were firft built, and referring hiralelf to Jo- fepkus and Philo , and other Hiftorians. And yet Philo makes no mention of thefe Cells into which they were feverally put j and Jojeyhm ipeaks of their conferring together , as Ariftdas had done before him. 3 Tis like fome Jews had abufed ho- neft Jufiin into a belief of this figment*, and that Ircn&My C i6i ] Iren&M) Clement of tsflexaridriti , CyriH, Hilary ', * ^ fecurely followed Jnfiin. Nor is this the only in- fiance of falle ftories tranimitted to us by the Fa- thers. Mean time it is a piece of Juftice due to the Fathers that follow Juftin in the matter of the Cells, and the Interpreters confentto a word, to let my Reader know that they do not follow him in his ftupendous aAnachronifm of Ptolemies fend- ing to Herod King of the Jews (as he reports) when the Tranflation was to be made. The Learn- ed Francis Junius in his Animadverfions on Bellar- mine^ endeavours to falve Juflitfs credit in this matter > but whether Mr. Scrivener will like his falvo^ he beft knows. 4. What is to be attributed to the Fathers in expoon^m^ of Scripture ? MuIFwe not take "that to Dfftfie true fenfe oTH Text , which they have generally pitched upon? aAnf. To find out the \ \ true fenfe and meaning of tht Spirit of God in any Text not very obvious, in an ordinary way 'tis neceflary that a man ftiould have a good skill in Logick, fo as to be able to analy fe well *, and that he fhould be wellfeen in thofe Languages in which the infpired Penmen did write. As for knowledg in Logick, the mod of the Fathers did not abound in that ; I could inftance in one Modern Logician, from whom a Scholar may have more help for ana- lysing Scripture, than from all the Fathers put to- gether. And for skill in the Orient?! Languages, every one will acknowledge that moil of the Fa- thers h?.d but little. Qrigen and Hierome under- flood Hebrew , fo did few of the Ancients be- fides j and it will be no disparagement to Qrigen M 2 cr C is* 3 or Hierome to fay, that there are hundreds in the world at prefent that underftand that Language far better than either of them ever did, or were in any near capacity to do. The Greek, Fathers muft needs be fuppofed well to underftand the Greeks Tongue in which the whole New Teftament was written •, but fo did very few of the Latin Fathers. I will not fay who it was that derived *VoroAo; from "'"fa* 'and s-oa«F. So grofs ignorance do not ail the' Latin Fathers bewray *, but they who have Erafmus his Com- mentanes by them , will find quickly that the Fathers of the Latin Church are not : die beft guides to follow in interpreting Scripture. One Expofition of j^uflin not taken notice oT by £- rajmtU) I will here mention. The Apoftle faith Rom. $. 27. that boafting is excluded j thatis,hath noplace- but that Learned Father finding the word exclufa, runs away with it tiil he hath quite ioft the Apoftles fenfe , Sxcfafa , mn at abfcederet fulfa, fed ut emineret exprejfa. 5. What is to be attributed to the Fathers in matters of Doctrine or Faith ? Anj.i. I fhail rea- dily grant that to be no fundamental Doctrine or Article of Faith which is denied by many Fathers. 2. If I find any doctrine pretty unanimoufly af- ferted by Fathers, though I fee no foundation for it in Scripture, I (hall not think my felf concerned to oppofe that doctrine , till I find fom*thing in Scripture that it contradicts. But I am alio certain, that moft of the Fathers ( that I fay not all ) had their errors, and lbme of them fo grofs, that he who fhould now hold them, would fear ce be thought C 163] thought meet to be a Church-officer. Therefore I am reiblved to ftudy Scripture with care anci confcience, and on that to build my faith. In jo doing I fhatl be lure to obey my Saviours pre- cept > and I may promife myielf the affiitanceof the Spirit, whole office it is to lead me into all truth. And if thofe doctrines that I have good affurance be grounded on Scripture, be charged with novelty and Angularity , then (hall I rejoice if lean find the Fathers confenting with me. O- ther good ends I can propound to my felf in read- ing of the Fathers *, but the main end I aim at, is to flop the mouth of gainfayers , efpecially thofe who glory in Antiquity, and make confent of Fa- thers their rule. I will not reject any truth be- caufe it is but newTy cTifcoverecT, nor yet embrace any error becaufe it is of long continuance, or becaufe fome great and good man had the ill hap to be the firft Author of it. Never , fhaii any So* cinim have occafion to [ay of me 3 ag -I find it by one " of that" Seft obje£tecl to the Reformed, Script ur am facram ex illorptm (f 'atrum Concilia- rumq\ ) mente explicant. Ab illis doBrints, capita repetunt. Illorum auEi or it ate conformant t JVeq) ad* verfus ^Pontificios tantum^ fed & adverfus ess dif put antes , qui a Patribm fe diffentire non infeian - f#r, perpetuus ilium Patrptm Conciliorn^q\ con fen* [urn perpetuo crepant \ Eofq'i qui Vatribm illis olim Conciliifq^ contra dixerimt, tanqnam H^reticos merito damnatos ejfe cenfent. Neq^ Panes $ro$te- rea recipiunt , quia cum fcriptura confentimt, fed Jcrijturam eo intelligendam mo do ctnfenty quia Pa- tns it a explicarmt. Ideoq- prws de mamini Pa- M i trum i*H1 k ^ trum Conciliorumq\ confenfu , quam de vero fcrip- tkrz fenfu [ant follidti. Nee defunt qui affirmare j nbn dubitanty etfi jacra liter* illomm adverfari fententitz manifefte fuffettam nobis faclunt hanc le&ionem inter- pretes veteres, LatinHS y Syrius> 0», addit Hinc- marns opufculo 55. Mud ®«o? hie pofitum a Neflo- rianis : And after drains his wit to find out a good fenfe of *p*irsf»9ii, throughout the whole Verfe. If this be allowable to forfake the Greeks, where the vulgar Latin, SyTwi^and zArabick^ dif- fer from it, how (hall we know where to fix our feet. ? And let the Learned judg , whether the Syriack. and Arabic^ Tranilations that we have in the Folyglott, did read, itpctv^ah : if they did, thofe who tranflated them are much to be blamed. It isaifouturul^fuggeiled, that Hmcmarus faith, 3so * was put in by i\itNeftorians : But if Hinc- marus had fo faid , Grotius might, if he had fo pleafed, have acquainted his Reader, that Chry- fojlom read 0^0 who was older than Neftorius himfclf; And he could alfo have told us, thatCy- Wrind The odor et made ufe of this reading, 0.-3? l^ctvz^ih againfl Neflorius ; and therefore fare neither he nor his followers did firft frame this reading, which is fo perfectly deflru&ive to their herefie. Another place we bring to prove Chrifts Deity, is, Pvorn. 9. 5. Mirum eft ( faith Bettor* mine T?rmfo Church holds -, but he who holds them folely or principally on the account of the prefent Churches Infallibility: More particular- ly, I do not fay he is a Papifl who holds Tran- fHbftantiation , becaufe as he thinks the Scripture teacheth it ^ but he who therefore believes the Scripture to teach Tranfubflantiation, becaufe the Pope in or out of a Council hath decreed or warranted the fame. Should I deny the Popes Infallibility in acauleof falth^ I weretoaTmtf- Papifl a Heretick, as well as if I denied all the Articles of the faith, becaufe I deny the forma! reafcn upon which all are to be believed. Should I hold the Popes Infallibility as the ground and foundation of my faith , then I were to him a good Catholick, though I were rniftaken in many of the things to be believed, becaufe I am upon the true and fure foundation of faith. Now if any one can fhew me any whole ancient Church, or any one ancient Doctor of the Church who be- lieved the Article of the Eifhop of Romes Infalli- ble Supremacy, and made that the ground of be- lieving all other Articles, ^will^be^fts^onvert, if he will promife to be my dor^eTt^^vlcleJTcan fhew him ancient Debtors and Councils that have either not acknowledged or denied this foun- dation of the Papal faith. And if we fpeak of the things believed by Papifts.. the mod of them are utterly deftitute of all primitive Antiquity. But there are others in the world generally de- cried as defpifersof the Fathers, who had they but men among them able and willing to fearch the Fathers. . [172 3 Fathers, might from them fay more for them- felves, than would eafily be anfwered. 1 in- ftance : i. In the zsfnabaptifts , or Antiptdobaptifts^ ( as they had rather be called ) fomeof great e- fteem among the ions of the Church , have faid that the opinion of thefe men cannot be confuted by Scripture, at leaft not by Scripture alone. In this they give thefe men as much as the generality of them defire or care for. But of late one of good learning hath efpoufed their' Caufe , and finding it granted by too too many , that Infant- baptiim cannot with fufficient evidence be proved from Scripture alone-, he enquires what it is that together with Scripture wifi prove it? Being re- ferred to the Ancients, he there joins iffue, and hath fo acquitted himfelf, that for my part if I were not periwaded from Scripture that Infants are to be baptized, I fhould hardly be brought to be of that periwafion by any thing quoted from the Fathers. One defervedly dignified in the Chur£h x jhath fuffered it to be printed as hi? opinion, tbattbere ts neither precept nor practice in Scriftw e for Vado- baptifm, nor any )ufl evidence for it for about two hundred years after Chrifi, The fir ft who bears "Witnefs to Infant-baptifm prattifed in the Churchy is Tertullian j but fo^ as he ex pre fly dtflikes and condemns it as an unwarrantable and irrational cu- fiome } and Nazianzen a good while after him dif- likes ittoo,&c. with much more of that nature. Really were I of this learned perfons judgment, that there is neither precept nor practice in Scrip- ture [173] ture for Ptdobaptifm , Ilhould much hasfitate in the matter : for if there be no precept or exam- ple of Ptdobaptifm in Scriptures, I ask whether the Church iucceeding the Apoftles had any reafon or authority to take up that cuftom ? if fhe had, then the prefent Church alfo hath authority to take it up, though it had never before been taken up ; for the Church hath now the fame authori- ty that the Church iucceeding theApoftolical times had. It will be faid, that the Church fucceeding immediately to the Apoftles, had better oppor- tunity to know the practice of the Apoftles, than the prefent Church hath. Anf\ That muft needs be granted *, and if the Church iucceeding the Apoftles have given any undoubted teftimony that the Apoftolical Churches pra&ifed Infant-baptifm, her teftimony cannot be refufed *, but that that Church hath given any fuch teftimony, is eafie to fay, but not io eafie to prove. Nothing out of Ignatini-, or Clemens %omanm , is produced to fuch a purpofe. The Author of the Queftions and Anfwers to the Orthodox, doth indeed,^/ 56, plainly insinuate, that in his time t* 1 £fi>« were baptized, and gives fome account what dif- ference (hould be in the refurre&ion^betwixt thofe who were baptized, and thofe who were not bap- tized, and of the reafon why the t* Cfan are ac- counted worthy of Baptifm , viz.* the 3-iV/s toSV *&fv ; And were this Author Juftin May* tyr 9 the teftimony wereconfiderable, not to prove that Infant-baptifm was pra&ifed in the time of the Apoftles, but that Infant-baptifm was foon pra- ftifed •, but the Author of thofe Queftions and Anfwers [174] Anfwers muflt needs be fbme one that lived long ' after Jnftin Martyr. Origen I believe will be found to be the firft that fpeaks of Infant-bap- tifm as an Apoftolical tradition, in his Cora, on %jm t But the zAntipadobapifl to him and all others may lay, It is manifeft from the Ancients, that divers children of Chriftian Parents were not baptized in their infancy, nor till they were come to maturity of judgment, and that it was accounted no wrl^a, no bar to their preferment that their Baptifm was fo long deferred, that they were not before their baptifm looked upon as unclean : now if this be fo, how cometh it to pals that in a Church profefling to follow and reverence Antiquity , they are excommunicated and thrown into prifon if they do not bring their children to be baptized. Let any man prove out of Antiquity, that NazXanz.cn and his father were accounted Heathens and Publicans till the Son was baptized , which was not till he was about thirty years old. 2. I hear there are fundry among us here in JLnglandy that refufe to take an oath, judging a- ny oath unlawful in Gofpel-times. The opinion of thefe men is very pernicious, manifeftly tend- ing to perpetuate ftrifes and contentions, which cannot in our Courts of Judicature be ended but by an oath •, and I doubt not at all, but that the opinion may be clearly refuted out of Scripture, where the prefent Patrons of it efpecially feek to (helter themfelves: but if from the Scriptures we remove their Caufe to the Fathers, among them I doubt they will find more friends than ad- vcrfaries. L 175 3 verfaries. For that an Oath is not, at leaft in any fecular matter , to be required or taken , feeros clearly to have been the opinion of Athanafiu's^ Naz.ianz.eny Chryfoftom, Ifidore Pelenftota, Theo- phylatty Hilary , .*Ambr'ofi^ Hierom *, and I thinkj, to the Greeks Fathers I might- have added BafiU Artifices I know are ufed to evade their teftimo- nies, but fuch as will not hold when they are ex* amined by thofe who can underftand the languages in which thole ancient Doctors did writer i -. Men ufually exclaim againft the Presbyterians^, asperfonswho forfakeall antiquity to folJowCWt inn who is but of yefterday •> and I think, if any of them fay that Calvin affords a ftudent more light to underftand Scripture than morl: of the Fathers put together, they are not much to be blamed. But I rnuft needs fay, that Presbyterians is now be- come a term that I underftand not y every. Noh* conformift who is riot Congregational, is in iome mens mouths a Presbyterian, though he never de- dared any diflike of Spifcopacy } yea, though, he vehemently protefl that his judgment is, for Epi- fcopacy, even for all and every part of Primitive Ppifcopacy. In Dr. Heylins late Hiftory of Presby- terians y a Presbyterian is . fbmetimes one that would have the Lords day obferved as a Sabbath, one that thinks election and wz-ele&ion, to be ab- solute y and if a Presbyterian be fuch a one^ fure it would be no difficult task to prove .that there were fuch men in the world long before Calvins same was ever heard of,; .with other, mnj a Presbyterian is the fame with the ol&Non-ponfor-v mift, and againftluch ^Presbyterian h is J^tM^. N Scnvemt ii Serwttjen&cms to have laid his aftion ', but befides that he hath laid his Action coram non Jadice, I think, that when the merits of the caufe come to be examined, he will quickly be # ed on Divine Right. Nowtoaniwer themherej- the words of the declaration they are to make rnuftbefcanned, and the particulars of thole Books they are to affent and content to mud be fearched , if from them it do appear, that he who doth without quillets declare afTent and confent, mull receive Bilhops as an higher order of Officers than Presbyters, and that by Chrifts inftitution, how will they be found guilty of Novellifm or Schiim, unleis Wicklsff and Cranme r, &c. be found guilty alfo? But perhaps it will go harder with them in the matter of Ceremonies. Really it will, and if , for thefe they ieparate from the Church, I am content they be caft •, for certainly it is againft the whole rule of charity and humility to break off communion in ail Ordinances, becaufe fome one Ordinance is adminiftred with fome fuch ceremony as I account inexpedient or unlawful. If any Church make the approving of the expedience or kwfulneis of that Ceremony, a neceffary condi- tion of my holding communion with her, then (he, and not I caufeth the Schifm. But to fpeak to the matter in iflue. The pfefent Non-conformifts are I not the flrfl: that icrupled the u.ie of the Englifti Ceremonies. Sundry of thofe who were martyred in Queen Maries days would never be brought to uie them, mod of thofe who then fled into for- reign parts both in their exile, and at their return, either durft not, or did not care to ufe them. 7 tic C 179 3 Some of them for Non-conformity refufed prefer- » ^ ment , fome were turned out of that they had, fome took up with very (mall preferment, where no eye could envy them. I have fometimes thought upon it, who they were, that in Queen Eliz.. Reign did the Church moft iervice in dijputing and wri- ting againft the Papifts, and I find them to have been fuch, as either did not conform, or conform- 4 ed heavily and by halves. I have heard it cen- fured as an error in policy, for a Court not to regard thofe in a time of peace* whom they were forced to make ufe of in a time of war. Let Mr. Scrivener confider whether the Conformifts have ftrength and number fufficient to look the Papifts and other adverfaries in the face, unlefs they take in the Non^pnformifts; if they have not, is it prudence, to be at odds with thofe that muft joyn with them in the day of Battel ? If he fay they have number and ftrength enough, let him then confider whether it may not be, that fome of them will prove falfe and treacherous, or at leaft, make a difftonourable peace. I could here Cntw that fundry of them, who moft rigoroufly preiTed con- formity in QJPli&abeths days, did in Q^Maries days either recant, or play the Nicodemites. But this is a performance that I have no mind to be , put upon } how foon fome other may put himfelf upon it I cannot tell. Here I might with credit enough take my leave of Mr. Scrivener 5 yet becaufe there be two parti- culars in his Book, that have not in thefe Papers beenaccounted for, I will, before I conclude, ef- fay whether the Non conformifts cannot be ao* N 3 quitted E.i8q.l quitted therefrom. Thefirftis the Hampton-Court Conference: The iecbnd is tne matter otRi Elders : About both Mr. Scrivtncr is lull of U*/ confidence and triumph. If a good account can be given of thefe, I may think the reproach to be rolled away from the Nonconforwifti ; for as for railing inve&ives againft particular p< rfbns, I need only lay, Lord lay them not to bis charge. ( Concerning the Hampton-Court Conference. I. I have little reafon to believ^tjhat it i? 8 imp. for, i. We have fome to this k thai Dr. Barlow who drew up ! the Relation, did before his death profefs himfelf troubled that he had abuie'd Dr.jtonolds and thofe who were joined with him. 1ms forrowof the Doctor is I know denied by many, by none more than by Dr. Heylin againfi: Mc Hickman : ' but I have enough toclc^r Mr. Hicham from be » " mventcr, or feigner of that ftory } for he had it from Mr. Nod Sparhs. a learned and pious Divine , and ot the Epiicopai perflation, who dieu but tew years before his M a jellies re- iur», by him he was allowed to put it in print, as told him by one who would not on flight grounds either raife or receive a report agiinft a Bifhop, viz*. Mr. Henry Jackson , ibmetime fellow of Corpus Chrift* Colled^ in Oxford. That all this is true, Mr. John Martin , now a I Conforming Minifter in the Diocefs of Hereford^ . and if aiked will, I fuppoie, witnels. % Dro C 181 3 2. Dr. Sparks though he fpake not a worfl in the Conference, and after it C if I miftake not J) printed a Book for Uniformity *, yet told his fon ( fometimes a Mini'lter in Bnc^ngham- Jhire, and Divinity-Reader in Magdalen-Col* ledg ) That Dr. Barlow in fumming up that Con- ference, had very much injured Dr. Reynolds, and thofe other that then appeared in the behalf of the Millenary Petitioners. This I had from his kinfman before mentioned. 3. I am alfo pretty well aflured , that upon the firft coming out of the Sum of that Confer- ence, Dr. Reynolds himfelf lighting, upon one of the Books at a Stationers near St. Maries Ox- ford, was found reading of it 5 and being asked by a friend what Book it was he read ? anfwer- ed, It was a Book in which he was concerned and wronged. If any doubt of this, he may ( I fup- pofe ) receive fatisfa£lion about it from Ui\ Henry Wilkinfon^ refident at or about fiapham near London. Yea, I perfwade my kit, that no man who reads that Conference, can be ferioufly of opinion that Dr. Reynolds argued with no more ftrength than is by Dr. Barlow reprefent* ed in his Relation. 2. If the Conference fhouid he truly reported, little or no damage could thence accrue to the Nonconformifls \ for as is faid in the Ghriftian and Modeft offer of a mofl indifferent Conference or JDifputation printed Anno i<5q6. pag. 29, $q» Mojl of the perfons appointed to fpeak^forthe Minifters, were not of their chafing nor nomination-.nor of their lodgment in thi matters then and ww in qwflion? N 4 hm [ISO hut of a clean contrary. For being intreated at that iime by the Minifiers to difpute again fi thefe things as fimply evily and fitch as cannot be yielded unto Without fin i they profeffed unto them, that they were not fo perfwaded, and therefore could not fo do. Being then requeued to let his Majefiy underftand y that fome of their brethren were further perfwaded touching the unlawfulnefs of thefe things^ than they ih m J "elves were ; they refufed that alfo. Laftly, be* ing intreated either to give them in writing their reafons to prove thefe things indifferent^ or to give them an anfwer in writing to fuch reafons as they would give them in writing to prove them [imply e'vil^ they would do neither the one nor the other. Ob]. Will Nonconformifls then lofe (6 confl- derable a perfon as Dr. Reynolds} and arc they content the world fhould look upon him as no TSFonconformift ? i Anfi No doubt he was one that was loth to be made unufeful in the Church , and loth that dthers fhould make themfelves unufefuU and therefore when any Minifter profefling himfdf diffatisfied with Subfcription, came to ask his ad- vice, he would ( as I have been credibily inform- ed) de (ire him to give him the grounds of his diffatisfa£Hon, and if he found them weighty, then he would leave him fetled in his Nonconformity? tut if he found them not weighty, then he would let him know that thofe reafons notwithftanding he might conform. As for himfelf, he wasfatiiV ^cd to do ail that was incumbent on him$ as Pre- « fiderit fldent of the Colledg , but thought our Church needed a further Reformation , and" that the Ce- remonies were unprofitable i and prayed that in a'due and orderly manner they might be taken away : yet would not peremptorily fay , that a man fliould lofe his Miniftry rather than not ufe them. And of this mind were moft of thofe who had in thofe times the honour to be called and accounted Puritans. And let me here pro- pound it ferioully to the confederation of pre- sent Nonconformiflsj whether it be not poflible for them to be over zealous in prefling others not to conform. Sure I am, that the learned and godly Mr. Anthony Wotton did flatly deny to tell Mr. VYiU* Brice ftill alive, the grounds and reafons of his Non conformity, telling him, That he would not in fitch matters put fcrnples into thofe in whom <*Xj he found none. And really, may not a Conformift faye his own foul, and the fouls of thofe that hear him? may he not keep his eyes open, and yet not have light enough to fee the unlawfulnefs of our Ceremonies ? If fo , as doubtlefs fo it is , why fhould Non*conformifts think fo ill, as fome do, of their conforming brethren ? why (hould they be fo reftlefs, till they have made them their profe- lytes? why may they not acknowledg and rejoyce in their gifts and graces, and yet peaceably perfe- verc in their own Non-conformity, only wiping off the afperfions that are thrown on themfelves, and candidly reprefenting their principles , and pra- &ices, that fo the prefent and fucceeding ages may fee, they do not fuffer out of humour and fancy ; and that they err not ( if they be in an error ) withoyt authority and reafon e f. If ' '"}i If we fhould grant that the publifhed Con- ference were in all things true and impartial, yet have the friends of Epifcopacy, and fticklers for i conformity, but little reatbn to boaft or triumph. I This muft be made out by fome brief reflections upon the conference. f The firft day none of thofe who defined Refor- mation, were permitted to be prefent at the Con- ference , nor indeed all that were fotttmcfred to appear as defenders of the then eftablifhed do- &rine and difcipline, but only the Biffiops and five Deans ", why neither tht D? an 6i Ch'rtft* C^rcS^nor the Dean of Worcefler , nor the Dean of Windfor were admitted, nor yet Dr. Field, nor Dr. King , I find no reafon af- (igned ; nor wHI I gueis, at fo great a diftance, what might be the reafon: but why none of the Plaintiffs ( as they are called ) were admit- ted, His Ma jelly gave this reafon * That the Bi- jhops might not be confronted by the contrary op' ponents } and that if any thing Jhonld be found meet to be redreffedy it wight be done without any vifible alteration* I fuppole King James thought the things he mentioned in that days Conference, were too too liable to exception, and wasrefolved to take conrfe with his Bifhops and their adhe- rents to have fome little amendment, that if they fhould happen to be mentioned in the next days defigned Conference, they might aniwer they had already confidered them, and would have no ,JLL more done or faid about them. The particulars of that Cabal-Conference, are faid to be touching tfoT Common-prayer book, Excom- .ffea^ C 185 1 Excommunication, providing of fit and able Mini- fters for Ireland. How the providing of fit and able Minifters for Ireland , could be proper for this days Conference, I understand not. Dr. Bar- low faith, p. 9 it was referred to a confutation} if io and that confutation produced anv good efTec~t, all good Chriftians are to r? Joyce, for doubtlefs that Nation then wanted Minifters. But the Millenary Petition pretended to be the occafion of this Conference, toucheth not upon Ireland ; if any thing was meet to be dene a- bcut that Church, in this Conference, reafon ra- ther required that the Council for Ireland and the Irifb Bifhops fhould have been fummoned to debate and conclude concerning that affair. Per- haps the Doctor miftook Ireland for England, or wss willing to have us believe that there was no want of a Learned Miniftry here in England'^ but we fliali hear more of this in the fecond days Conference. As to the Common-prayer Book, the King de* |f fired fatisfatlion about Confirmation, Ablolu- J\ tion, Private Baptifm. Confirmation we ffiall find mentioned in the fe- cond days conference, and thither 1 refer my con- fiderations concerning it. Abfolution, His Majefty faid, he had heard likened to the Topes Tardons • If any one had in* formed His Majefty, that Abfolution as ufed, or at leaft, as prefci ibed in the Church of England, had any thing in it refembling the abominable par- » dons of the Pope, I know not how he can be ex- pried from bearing falfe wimeis againft the Litur- gy* , gy. The Millenarian Petitioners only pray, that the term Abfolution, might be corrected, which HisMajefty was willing to gratifie them in, ap- pointing Abfolution to be explained by remiffion tiffins. There is, that \ know, no real difference betwixt thofe that are called Tresbyterians and Epiicopal Divines about Abfolution: Both allow a general Abfolution, and a particular Abfolution. Dr. Hey tin chargeth Bp. Vjher, with utterly fub- verting^ as well the Doctrine of the English Churchy as her purpofe in abfolution \ but from that charge , the Frimate is acquitted by his Chaplain Dr. Ber- nard. Baptifm , King James thought , was not to be adminifired by private perfons 9 in any cafe what f 9* ever :, and therefore propounded it to the Bifliops, that the words in the Book purporting a permif- fion, and fuffering of women and private perfons to baptize, might be altered : And here it is pretty, or rather fad, to obferve "how the Pre- lates contradicted one another} V^hitgift faiel, 'The administration of Baptifm by women or pri- ', 'vate. perfons, was not allowed in the practice of c our Church, but enquired of by Bifhops in their c Vifitation, and cenfured, and that the words in * the Book did not infer any fuch meaning, as that — < they were permitted to Baptife : But the words of the Book being preded by His Majefty, * Bp. c B abington confeffed that the words were doubt- ful, and might be prefTed to fuch a meaning^ *but yet it feeraed by the contrary practice of the c Church (cenfuring women in this cafe ) that the c Compilers of the Book d.-i notfo intend them, and ' and yet propounded them ambiguoufly, becaufe 'otherwiie, perhaps, the Book would not then c have panned in Parliament. But on the contrary, Bp. 'Bancroft for his part declared, That the Com- puers^of)he Booh^ of Common Prayer, intended not by ambiguom terms to deceive any j but did indeed^ iy tbofe words ^ intend a permiffion of private per- fons to Baptize in cafe of necejfity, as appeared by their letter S, feme parts whereof he read, declaring that the fame was agreeable to the practice of the ancient Church , urging to that purpofe , A&s 2. where Three thou f and were baptized in one day, a thing which could not poffibly, at leaft probably be done by the Apofles glone, and be fides the ApofHes t there were then no Bijhops nor Triefls. He alfo al- ledged Tertullian ^WAmbrofe plain in that point* The Bifhop of Winchefier alio ipake learnedly and earneftly to the Tame purpofe, affirming, that the de- nying of private per fons to baptize in cafe of neceffity, were to crofs all antiquity ■>> and that it was a rule agreed upon among Divines , That the Minifer is not of the effence of the facrament : But King James perfifting in his opinion to have the altera- tion made, faith the Relator, pag, 19. it was not fo much ftuc\ at by the Biffiops *, it teems that to pleafe His Majefty, they did not much 'flick "to nave all antiquity eroded, and a Rule among Di- vines over-ruled. Had x\\£*FresbyicriarJs'ina point of fo great moment, (hewed themieives fo \V facile, what a noife would have been made / But feeing the alteration is made, and Baptifm retrained toMinifters, we may now without of- fence, I hopej enquire what is to be faid in this cork. C <88 3 controverfie, and whether other Churches do well to allow that, which we fee not meet to allow. And firft, I would know whether Chrift the confefled inftitutor of Baptifm, hath any where commanded lay*perfons, in the able nee of thofe to whom the word of reconciliation is committed * to adminifter Baptiim > if he have not, then their not adminiftring it Can be no fin, becaufe no tranf- greflioh of a Law : And how can we think that the party who dies unbaptized (hall fare the w ode, for not having received that which no one was bound to give him? If it be faid he hath 1a$ commandment on lay-perfons , where a Minifter ; cannot be had, to Baptizes I defire to fee where J Lj that command is recorded, • 2. I demand whether a^lay-perfon, male or fe- male do fin in Baptizing ? If fo, no power on earth can authorize him or her to Baptize. If it be faid, there is no fin in the cafe * 7 then again I demand where is the permiflion of Chrift granted to him or her ? for certainly that muft needs be fin, which is not allowed by Chriftthe author of the Sacra- ment. g. Ho w can wc in faith expect that any lay per* fon fhoulcf convey, rem Sacramenti, that is, be the Minifter of Sacramental grace ? Is it any where revealed in Scripture that he doth any more than t\\t outward act (which of it felf availeth no- thing )% if itbenot, Why might we not as good truft God that he will favethe fick child without the outward act, as think and hope he will regard the outward aft, when w r e cannot be afTured that any more than the outward a& is done ? Laftly, C 189 7 Laftiy, When lay perfons are allowed to ad- minister Baptifm, who can fay to them, ne plus ultra^ hitherto you have proceeded, but further ye (haU not proceed, other parts of the Mini- sterial function you may not meddte with ? Eut it is faid that we have great authorities, and the practice of the ilniverfal Church to warrant Baptifm by lay perfons in cafe of neceflity. <*An[. This is confidently affirmed 5 but he who willonot believe every confident affirmation, may find fome of the Ancients either condemning, or not juftifying Baptifm by lay -perfons. As for the imtance Alls 2. of the three thoufand baptized in one day', befides what is faid by K. James y that tke example was extraordinary , and therefore not to be argued from with any fecurity } we may fay further, 1. That there is no content that at that time there were no more in the Miniiterial Function beGies the twelve Apodles. BifhopB asking , VVhether the name might not be altered, and yet the fame cenfure be retained? Or 2d!y, Whether in place of it ano- ther Coercion equivalent there Unto, might not be in* 'vented andthonghtof? The Relator faith, This was a thing very eafdy yielded to of all fides ( and yet there was but one, or at leaft but two fides there ) becanfe it hath been long and often defired^ but conld not be obtained of her Majefty, who refolded (Ml to be femper eademi and to alter nothing which fhe had once fetledj, Pag. 19. I am here at a great lofs •, for I cannot believe that Queen Elizabeth, fo much famed for piety and judgment, was fo refolved not to alter any thing fhe had once fetled, as not to yield fo ro\icft as to the alteration of a name, if (he were longind often defired by her Bifhops. Nor do I find that her Bifhops long and often defired her, that ex- communication for lefTer matters might not be cal- led Excommunication, or that inftead of it fome. other Coercion equivalent thereunto J might be thought on. Nor do I underftand to what end any iuch thing fhouldbe folong and fo often de- fired. What defirableriefg is there in this; that men for frttal] matters fhould be excommunicated^ but not under the tiarae of Excommunication ? ok thit they fhould not be excommunicated,., buc fuffer fbme Coercion equivalent t hereunto ? Thole that fear the Lord, do account no Coercion that man can inflict, equivalent to Excommunication; 6 mi [ ^ 3 duly pronounced. As for thofe who da not fear the Lord , if they fhould chance to be excom- municated for a imall matter, they would make but a .{mall matter of Excommunication, or ra- ther count it a priviledge to be freed, from, the trouble of going to the publick afTenabiies. For fuch, if they fhould owe 4^. to their Minifter, and re fafe to pay it, an Attorney may; iboner force them to be juft, than an Apparitor. All this while I have not touched on the chief ground of my admiration, which is, how it came to pafs (if the thing which his Majefty propounded a- bout Excommunication was fo eafily -yielded on all fides J that no alteration enfued thereupon? How comes it to pais that Excommunication, name and thing, pafJeth upon men in matters of imall moment, and no Coercion equivalent there- unto is as yet deviled in the room of it ? This is ail I have to advertife about the firft days Conference. In the fecond days Conference, omitting all Prefatory Speeches, I take notice, that Dr. Rey- nolds reduced all he arid his Brethren had to fay, to four heads: The firjt related to doctrine, praying that the do&rine of the Church might be preserved in purity, according to Gods word } and to that end, that the Articles concluded 1562. might be explained in (places obicure, and,enlarged where ibme things were defective. Particularly, the Dr. moved lomething about the 16. the 2$. the 25. Articles ^ and being about to move more, the Bifliop of London cut him off, and kneeling down, prayed the King > S that the ancient Ca- non C f 93 ] c non might be remembred, Schifmatki hon fnni c audiendt contra Uptfcopos^ and that if any of the 'four Plaintiffs ftafl iubicribed the Communion- * Book, and yet lately exhibited a Petition againft 'it, they might be removed and not heard, ac- 4 cording to the Decree of a very ancient C >unc J * * providing, that no man fhould be admitted to 4 fpeak againft that whereunto he had formerly * iubicribed. %dly, He put the Dr, and his aflb- c ciates in mind, t at the King was very dement* c who permitted them to ipeak contrary to the * Statute of 10 Eliz.* againft the Liturgy and dif- 'cipline eftablifhed. Laftl-y, He defired to know * the end they aimed at, alledging a place out of c Mr. Cartwight, affirming, that we ought rather 6 to conform our felves in Orders and Ceremonies^ * to the fafhion of the Turks, than of the Papifts^ c which pofuion he doubted they approved, becaule * contrary to the Orders of the Univerfities, they 'appeared before His M-ajsfty in T«rfcy- Gowns, ^n tin their Scholaftical habits for ting to their 'degrees. ftfnfa mihi caufas memora, quo numine Ufo 9 Tant&rie amwis c&leftibtu ir& ? So much wrath at thefirftdafh? when men are fummoned by tSe lfingy*383 tS" b^ him open their grievances,- mud they as foon almoft as they have opened their mcir.hs be thus Icbooled and tcrri* fied? are the Articles of our '-Religion l'o facred, that to propound a doubt about them, is no lefs a crime than- fehifm? May not a man think that O 2 the [ 194 3 the Bi&op feared he fhould not be able to anfwer the Doctor, who took lo much care that be. might not be put to anfwer him at all ? Is this to (hev^ forth meeknefs of wifdom ? Let us a little reflect on the particulars of this great Diocefans paflion. i; He would have the ancient Canon remem- bred , Schifmatki contra Epifcopos non funt andiendi. This Canon might have been kept in ftore, till Dr. Reynolds had been condemned for a Schiimatick, or till the Bifhops had faid lbmething which he con- tradicted •, but feeing it is now brought into the field we may be allowed to view it, and fee what metal it is made of. May not a King fo much as hear what Schifmaticks can fay for themfdves? Muft it be taken for granted, that Bifhops are not culpable caufes of the Schifm that is made in a Church f Such a Canon as this would have done excellent icrvice at the Council of Trent. 2, So would the other Canon, That no man jhoptld be admitted to Cpeaf^ againft that ^hereunto be had formerly fubfcribed y have done the Popifh Bifbops excellent fervice in Queen Maries Reign } by it, I fuppofe, Bifbop Granmer and BiihopRid- leys mouths might have been quite flopped \ for I doubt they had lubferibed to iomething they were to fpeak againft. $. The Statute 10 JLliz*aUtha did not make it penal for any man having leave from the King to propound his objections againft the Liturgy or dilciplme of the Church of England. 4. Dr. Reynolds his Tarty Gown was not a Turkifh habit, nor was his Univerfity habit con- formable [ 195 3 formable to the habit of the Papifts 5 nor doth any order of the tlniverfity require, that a Doc~tor fhould have on his Do&ors habit every time he appears before the King. So that all this paflio- nate harangue of words might have been fpared. It may be we may meet with more reafon in the an- fwers to what the Doctor moved. 1. He moved the 6th Article ; tAfter we have received the Holy Ghofi^ we may depart from grace, might be worded Jo, as that it might not fo much as feem to favour the Doctrine of the Saints Apo- ftafie s and that therefore the words neither totally nor finally might be added. What replied the Bifhop of London to this? why, that too many in thefe days neglecting holinefs of life , pre fumed too much of per filing in grace, laying all their religion on Pvedejlinaiion , If I jhall be faved f I jhall be faved j which he faid was contrary to the true doctrine of Predeflination, wherein we flmild argue rather afcendendo , than defcendendo ; thus y I live in obedience to God, and therefore I truft God hath elected and predeftinated me to falvation : not thus, which is the ufual courfe, God hath chofen me to life , therefore though I (in never fo grievoufy, yet I Jhall not be dawned-'for whom he loves, he loves to the end. And then [hew- ed his Majrfty thedo&rine of England oucbing Predeltination, We mufl receive Gods promifes, &c. But under favour, thefe words do not contain the doctrine of Predeftination, but are only a cau- tion agamft the abufeof the/dottrine of Predcfti. nation laid down in the foregoing words. As fo O $ thofe thofe who did ufually argue defcendendo , I, fup- pofe they were only men of wretched and, pro- fligate lives, and we mud not bauk a truth left they fhould ftumble at it > or if we muft, then rauft we alio forbear to lay , God is merciful, and Chrift died for fwners, left men fhould thence conclude, Therefore I fhall be fa ved, though I live in many fins •, for fo it is argued ufually. Wherefore the Bifhop hath (hewed no reafon why the Doctor's addition might not be made for the comfort of the trembling penitent $ and more full and apert confutation of thofe who afllrt a total apoftafie from grace received. Yet I confeis D". Reynolds needed not to have made this motion, becaufe the feventeenth Article clear- ly enough aflirtethperfeverance. The iYcond thing moved by the Dr. related to the 2 id Article, m which it is faid , That it is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of preaching or adminifiring the Sacraments in the Congregation-, before he be lawfully called. What could Dr. R. take exception at in this Article? why, faith the Relator, at thofe words , In the Congregation •, as implying a lawfulness for any man whofoever , out of the Congregation , to preach and-adminifter the Sacrament^ though he had no lawful call thereunto. He that can think ued at this rate, 'mutt thin^jBe .■-. Reynolds, whole praife is in ay : Reformed Churches. I fhould rather con- Lye the Dr. took exception at the words in the ;. -it ic n , as not fufficient to- expreis (what is needful to be cxpreiTed in all Articles of Religion ) C 197 1 Religion ) that men raay not in private preach and adminifter the Sacraments, though they have no lawful call thereunto. This ibre was the Doctors arguing ' 9 but was not to be fo propounded, left it ih >Viici have been thought neccflary to fay more for d e perfection of the Churches Articles than could well befaid. But fuppofing Dr. R. to have difpuied as the Relator hath reported, what was anfwered to him . ? Why, that it was a vain ob- jection, becaufe by the doBrine and pr alike of the Church of England , none but a licenfed Mmijler \ might Preachy nor either publicity or privately ad- minifier the Eucharifi or the Lords Supper , pag. 3 o s I x. We are not told by whom this was anfwered, if we had, we might have been apt to think they were not the profoundeft men in the world •, for the rejoynder is eafie, that the Church of £ng- land owned another Sacrament befides the Eucha- rift. Here, €fc& «W il*x*v*; , the King mud be brought in to anfwer for thofe who were not of one mind to anfwer for themfelves*, and what is he faid to have anfwered ? why , that he had taken order for private baptifm with the Bifhops already. I ask, had the Doctor a fpirit of divina- tion to know what had been ordered in the firft days conference ? If he had not, this anfwer of the Kings proved not the Doctor's objection to be frivolous, but rather ■ handfomeiy implied it to have forne weight in it. The Doctor being already acquitted of vanity, let us now fee what the (ramers of the Article, might mean by infer ting the words in the Congre- gation* King £dwards Article was thus worcied, V O 4 i> Ci 9 8] It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of pMc\ preaching, or mini firing the Sacra- tnents in the Congregation^ before he be lawfully call- ed, and fent to execute the fame. And thofe we ought to judge lawfully called and fent , which be c ho fen and c ailed by men who have publicly autho- rity given them in the Congregation, to call and fend Mwifters into the Lords Vineyard. And the pre- sent Article doth not differ, unlefs it be altered fince Mr. Rogers his time. Out of the laft claufe of the Article 1 argue thus : Thofe ought to be iudg* ed lawfully called and fent, which be chofrn and called to the work of the Miniftry by men who have publick authority given unto them in the Congregation, to call and fend Minifters info the Lords Vineyard. Some not ordained by Bifhops have, &c. ergo. This fyilogifm might, if urged, make lbme Work and ftir, and therefore I do not fo much as form it in words at length. Still I am unfatisfied why the words [in the Congregation]*! e added either in the hrft or fecond claufe of the Article s but atadventure I am glad they are ad- ded, until it be in fome publick Record of our Churches doctrine defined what preaching is ; for if Reading be Preaching , then 1 fhould not be over-forward to fubfcribe that it is not lawful for Laicks to preach privately. ASout Confirmation the Doclor obferved fas the Relator tells us, p. 25. ) a contradi&ion be- twixt the 2$th Article , and the words ufed con- cerning it in the Collect for Confirmation in the Communion-book ; and therefore defired that both the contradiction might be confidered , and f the the ground of Confirmation examined - In this we are told, p. $i. wasobferveda cu- riofity or malice •, for the Article infmuates, That the making of Confirmation to be a Sacrament , is a corrupt imitation of the zApofiles ; hut the Com- mttnionbool^ aiming at the right nfe and proper fource thereof ) makes it to he according to the Apo- ftles example *, and his Majefiy comparing bothpla* cesj concluded the ob)ettion to be a meer cavil. Seeing the Article is by all Minifters to be- fubferibed, I (hall be glad if it can be rnade ap- pear that the meaning is only , that the making of Confirmation to be a Sacrament , is a corrupt following of the Apoftles , but that it feems to in- finuate fomething more , can hardly be denied by any one that reads the whole fyntasc. But the Bi- fhop in the Colled for Confirmation, faith inter dicty We make our humble fupplicatjons unto thee for thefe thy fervants, upon whom , after the exam- ple of thy holy Apoftles, we lay our hands. In which words I would fain know who are included in the {we~\ •, for I take it ,. that the Bifhop alone lays on hands % and let no Minifter defire to join witli him in impofmon of hands for confirmation, if he muft be fuppofed to fay that he doth it after the example of the holy Apoftles } for that ever the Apoftles laid hands on any that had been duly baptized in their infancy, to confirm them, may be fooner faid, than firmly proved •, yet if it can be proved that they did, I {hail heartily rejoyce •, for the more apoftplical Confirmation proves to be, the more eafiiy and chearfully I hope it will be fubmitted to. This I find, that in the old Litur- gy C 2 °° 3 gyno one queftion was to be propounded to the Confirmand *, in the new there is one to be pro- pounded, and it is fuch a one as may make all ungodly wretches afraid to have it propounded to them : fure I am, without horrible hypocrifie they cannot anfwer to it affirmatively. But then the new Liturgy hath chopped off two of the Confiderations for which, in the old, Confirmati- tion was faid to be appointed* thereafon where- of, as I cannot certainly tell , fo I will not uncer- tainly conjecture} though I have heard dories a- bout this affair, that ftartled me. Bifhop Bancroft faith, Confer, p. 32. That Con- firmation was not fo much founded upon the places /in the A&sof the Apoftles, which fome of theVa- thers had often Jhewed *, but upon Heb. 6. 2. where it is made a part of the Apoftles Catechifm : In the firft days Conference he had faid, It was fet down and named in exprefs words ■ Heb. 6 2. and affirm- ed it to be an Inftittttion Apojlolical, p. 11. Here I may, I hope, enquire what the Bifliop meant by faying , Confirmation was not fo much founded on the places in the Acts , which fome of the Fathers had often jhewed. What doth which relate to ? Have fome of the Fathers often fhew- ed> that Confirmation is not fo much founded upon the places in the ^Atls of the Jpoftles ? If they have , down falls preiently much of many ' of our Epifcopal brethrens building concerning Epifcopacyi if they have fhewn no fuch thing 7 I cannot make ienie of the Bifhop's faying con- cerning the places in the aAUs. As for Heb. 6. 2. I am willing to think that by laying en of hands there, [ 201 3 there, may be fignified Confirmation: but I can- not much blame thofe who differ from me in ex- pounding that place ; for I find Bifhop Vjher re- ferring the laying on of hands, to the ordaining of Mmifters ; others refer it to that and fundry other things;. performed by impofition of hands j thefe would count themfelves wronged , if one fhould fay , That they deny that which is fet down and named in exprefs words. The Bifhop of Durham ( I mud not forget that ) is related p. n. to have noted fomething out of the Gofpel of St. Matthew , for the impofition of hands upon children. He might out of that Go- fpel have obferved many things concerning Chrifts laying of hands on the children brought to him. But the difficulty will be , how to make thofe things pertinent to the laying on of hands upon thole who are too big many times to be called little children, and are already baptized, and de- fire to be orderly admitted to the Lords Supper ; and when thefe are made appear pertinent, then if, will be worth -eonfideration, whether the Bifhops Ihould not rather fay, We lay on hands in imita- tion of Chxifi y than in imitation of the holy Ap- files. Obj. But all this while the mam Controverfie about (Confirmation is not touched, which relates to the Minifier of Confirmation^ which "Dr. ReynoTefs and his party would have had in their oven hands , whereas none of all the Fathers ever admitted any to confirm, but Bijhops alone y as faid the Bijhcps of London and Winchefter. p. 34, 35. AnL [ 202t 1 An\w. To me this is not the main queftion, let our Bifhops cenfure thole who admit to the Sacra- ment fuch as can neither fay Lords-Prayer, Belief, Ten Commandments, nor anfwer thequeftions in the Common Prayer-Book Catechifm, nor are ei- ther confirmed or defirous to be confirmed ; let alfo the Bifhops themfelves ride through their Dio- ceies, and confirm all that are unconfirmed, and fufpend fuch from the Sacrament as either are un- willing or unmeet to be confirmed, and I per- fwade my felf, the Presbyters will not be vexed that fo much work is taken off their hands^ As for what His Majefty is made to fay, pag. 36. That it fuits neither with the Authority, nor decency of Confirmation-, that every ordinary Paflor flwuld doit and that there was as great re afon that none fhottld confirm without licence from the Bijhop , as none Preach without his licence. I doubt the Re- lator hath both wronged the King and the Bifhops caule* The King, for we can fcarce conceive he fhould have iuch high thoughts of the Authority or decency of confirmation, as to imagine, that either was lef&ned by being adminiftred by thofe by whom ^aptifm is adminiftred. And the Bifhops caufe alio, for it will not ferve their turn that. presbyters fhould not confirm without their Li- cence, as they do not Preach without their Li- cence, unlefs it be alio made appear that none can be licenfed to confirm but themfelve?. Before I pak r rom this I mult alfo advert, That the Re- lator n akes the King to tax St. Jerome for averting, that a R'fiyop u> not Divime ordinationis *, and the Bifliop of London to infert, That if he could net prove [203] prove his ordination latof /*/, out of the 'Scriptures, he ** would not be a Bijhop four hours. Wherein I ob- ferve the policy oi the Bifhop, who fefervcd pow- er to himlclr to continue a Bifliop if he could prove his ordination lawlul by the Scriptures j he knew well enough that his Ordination might be lawful, and yet a bifhop not be Divina Ordinationis. That is lawful by Scripture, which no Scripture Law condemns * or forbids > but he that tfiould fay, that every thing not prohibited, is Divina ordi- nationis, would have much a-do to prove that he himielr had any raeetnefs to be confecrated a Bi- fliop. I iuppofe I can prove that it is lawful for me to wear a Beaver •> but when I had fo proved, fhould I not be ridiculous, if I (hould fay that a Beaver was Divine ordinationis ? Befides, if Dr. Reynolds had chanced to gravel the Bifhop with an argument about the lawfulnefs of his Ordina- tion, he to keep his Bifhoprick, would prefentiy have replied that he was ordained to be a Presby- ter , but he was only confecrated to be a Bifhop, and by that means he might have kept his lands and his credit too. Let us now proceed with Dr. Reynolds, who is made to fay, that the words in the iqth Article^ The Bijhop of Rome hath no authority in this land, be not fufficient unlefs it were added, nor ought to have. It is like the Doctor had obferved that the Oath of Supremacy runs to that or the like effea. And he had never heard, it is as like, that the King and his Council heartily laughed at the Cramers of that Oath, and therefore icarce ex- pected C 204 ] peeled to be told, that a Puritan was a Proteftanf frighted out of his wits , for propounding that the Article might be as fully worded as the Oath y yet it feems he had the hap to be laughed at for his honed well-meant motion 5 fo the Relator ac- quaints us, p. 37. P. $8. 1 he Dr. moved that this propofition, The intention of the Minifler is not of the effence of the Sacrament, might be added unto the Book of Articles, the rather, becaufe fome in England had f reached it to be effential. Had it been told him that if he would name thofe men who fo Preached, they fhould be fufpendecl, till they had recalled fo falfe and uncomfortable an opinion, or that there was enough in the Articles to infer that the intention of the Minifler is not effential to the Sa- crament, it had been fufficient y but to fay that HisMajefty utterly difliked this motion for two reafons, and to name but one of the two, and to ftufr up that with a ftory concerning Mr. Craig, was to put the world under a temptation to think too meanly of their King. It is Unfit to thrift every pofition negative into the Book^of Articles ', for that would [well the Book into a volume as big as the Btble, and alfo confound the Reader ; therefore J may not infer t this fhort pofition , the Minijhrs intention is not of the effence of the Sacrament } into the Englifh Articles. This is made to be the Kings argument ', to which, whether Dr. Reynolds could reply nothing, others may judge. Here we might alfo fpeak of the Nine Articles, of Lambeth, put into the Irijh ConfcfTion, ni t long after this Conference , but never put into OUii 7 I 2 °5 ] ours, though it feems the Doftor moved twice they might he put in. For my part I am not fbrry they are left out , for fome honeft men may queftton the truth of them , and not be able in iakh to tubicribe them, and fo the Church lofe the benefit of their parts : As for Latitndinarians y they would have fubfcribed them in a ienfe of their ow&ydeviftng, though they had thought them falfe in the ienfe of the framers and impofers of them i or they would have faid, that by fubfcrib- ing they did not declare the affent of their minds to the truth of the Articles, but only their pur- pofe not to public their diffent to them, foas to mak£ ajdifturbance in the Church about them. A Jefuit Papift, and a Latitudindrian Proteftant will Hick a-tnoFubicTiption wha'tToever. As for the Dean of Faul, his difeourfe to vin- dicate himfelf > I am, not concerned to contradict him in it •, but I thmkhe contradicts himfelf, if Dr. Bar lory doth hio> ri$wrong, p.41,42. The motion made by the Dr. and related p. 4$. concerning a Catecfrifm, produced a very confider- able addition to the old Catechifm, which was all he aimed at in it * alfo he fucceeded in his motion* that a ftraiter courfe might be taken for reforma- tion of the general abufe and prophanation of the Sabbath; day:, foe ithat, the Relator faith, found a genera} and unanimous affent. So that the Bifhops then diinot think it Jndaifm to call the Lords day Sabbat^, nor to provide for its fan&ification. Nor* did he miicarry in his motion for a new Tranfiation of the Bible } for not long after the Conference, a new one was published, which hath been [206 3 been generally ufed ever fince, to Gods glory* and the Churches edification. As for his Majefties profeflion that he could never yet fee a Bible well tranjlated into Engtifi, and that the Geneva Translation was the rvorfi of all\ I be- lieve his Majefty repented of it, or elfe he had not given leave to Dr- Morton to defend the two places in the Geneva Notes, that he took particular ex- ception to. Dr. Reynold's for conclufion of what concerned doctrine, moved, That unlawful and feditious books might be fuppreffed, at leaft r e fir ained and imparted to a few. This a man might think would have been entertained with a general afTent and eonfent, but contrariwife, the Biftiop of London fuppofing him- ielf to be principally aimed at, anfwereth to what he was never accufed of, and faith, but without any proof, That the Book , De Jure Magiftratus -in fubditos , was published by a great difciplinarian, but named him not } and the King is laid to tell the Doctor, that he was a better Colledg-raan than Statefman 5 and by this means no courfe was taken to prevent fuch Commentaries both inPhilb- fophy and Divinity as came into England from be- yond the Seas to the corrupting and poifoningof young ftudents in the llniverfity- The motion about Paftors refiderit arid learned* pag. 5 1, 52, 5 3, is handfomly avoided by the King, with an anfwer, that he had confulted With his Bifhops about that, whom he found ready and willing to fecond him in it, &c. yet all that Rings days, and ever fince, the Nation hath groaned Under the burden of an unlearned and non-refi- dent C 207 ] dent Miniftry ^ if the Law of the Land admit of very mean and tolerable fufficiency in any Clerks, Why have not theBifhops petitioned that the Law be altered foas to require greater fufficiency ? And if the Lay- Patrons are to blame, who prefent very mean men to their Cures *, are Ecclefiaftical-Pa- trons to be excufed, who prefent Clerks every way as mean ? Now come the Bifhop of London* motions to he confidered, in number Three: i. That there might beamongftus a praying Miniftry *, he meant a Miniftry that might read the Common- Prayer- Book, to which very little learning indeed would iuffice •, but I fuppofe there was then no Want of fuch a Miniftry , nor is there now *, fo that the motion might have been fpared. The Second motion was, that till a fufficient and learned Minifter might be placed in every Congregation , godly Homilies might be read, and the number of them encreafed. This motion fure was not liked, for unto this day neither is a learned Minifter fetied in every Congregation, nor the number of Homilies encreafed. His laft motion was, that Pulpits might not be made Pafquils, wherein every humorous fellow or difcontented, might traduce his fuperiors. This the King gracioufly accepted, and (o did the compilaining Miniftersj as I fuppofe; for that the Pulpit (hould be made a Stage is certainly a very lewd cuftom, but obtains too too much among I know whom. Proceed we with Dr, Reynolds to Subfcription^ [ ac8 1 as. to which, we find him only de firing, that Mi- nifters might be put upon it, to fubferibe accord- ing to the Statutes of the Realm, viz,* to the Ar- ticles of Religion, and the Kings fupremacy, to fubicribe otherwise they could not, becaufe among other things, the Common Prayer-Book enjoined the Reading of fome Chapters, in which were ma- nif.it errors directly repugnant to Scriptures, in- ftancing particularly in Sccleftafticm^fi. 10. where the words inferr, That Elias in per/on was to come before £hrifi^ and if fc, Chrifi is not yet comet Now let us take notice of what isaniwered : i. Biihop Bancroft anfwers , ft That the moft of c the objections againft the Books of Apocrypha, * were the old cavils of the Jewi , renewed by ' St. Jerome in his time , who was the firft that c gave them the name of Apocrypha ; which opi- 'nion, upon Rujfimis his challenge, he, after a fort, * declaimed *, the rather, becaule a general offence 1 was takenathisfpeechesin that kind. This, I mull needs lay, Was a politick atffWer : for'rnft we are told, that not all the objections, but fome of the objections againft thefe books, are the old cavils of the Jews renewed by St. Jerome. 2. We are told, that St. Jerome was the firft that C tiled thefe Books Apocryphal*, which opinion af- ter a fort he reclaimed upon %nffniu his chal- lenge. What can any man reply to fuch an anfwer ? fliould one bring an objection againft thele books, that the Jews neve* would have brought, he would have been told, That not all objections a- gainft them, but only fome, are Jewif> cavils: Should C 2C ? 3 Should one fay that Jerome difclaimed' not his opinion concerning books Apocryphal , he would be to!d,That he did not indeed difclaim his opinion abfolutely } but yet after a fortht did \ and how far sLAtATi , or after* a fort ', may reach> no one can tell : Nor have we the leaft reference to a* ny place of Jerome's Works in which this dife claiming of his opinion is recorded (whether St* Jerome difclaimed his opinion, he who hath not St. Jerome\ Works by him, may find dilculTed in Dr. Cofens his Scholaftical Hiftory of the Canon of Scripture ) : I fay, it cannot be imagi- ned why the Jev?s{ho\i\& left efteem the Apocry; phal books than they deferved V they retain. the Canonical books of the Old Teftament, which, make more againft them than the Apocrypha* No? is St. Jerome the firft who called the Apo^ cryphal-books by the name of jtpcryyha\ot\yzts before him had given them that name, or one e- quivalent, as I can make appear. Indeed the And* entsof the Church have fo blafted iomeefpecially of the Apocryphal Writings, that I cannot but wonder how they came to be read in our Chur* dies. The Hiftory of SufannA was accounted a Fable even by Julim ^Afrkmm , contemporary to Origen \ and yet our neweft Calendar appoint- ed! it to be read , as alfo the ftory of hell and Dragon. .There is -a common faying in mens mouths," that thefe books are 1 Canonical not for the confirming of our faith, but the regii'athrg of ©urtnanrfers^ but he who fhaUmakealbApocry* phal books a rule for his manners^ may elance to' fefc more on his Doomfday-book than he will P % qukSd/ [ 2IO ] quickly get off again. As for him who (hall make them a rule of Faith, he will undoubtedly be- came a Heretick. * Dr. Reynolds his inftance the Bifhops would fv \ not meddle with > but the King, who was not in conference to be contradicted, p. 62. is made 1. To argue and demonftrate, That whatfoever Ben Sirach had faid, Ecclm* 48. 10. of Ettas, £- lias had in his own perfon while he lived, perform* ed, and accomplifhed. 2. To check Dr. Reynolds for impofing on a man that was dead, a fenfe never meant by him. 3. To ufe a pleafant apoftrophe to the Lords, What trow ye makes thefe men fo angry with Ecclefiafticus ? By my font J thinly he was a Bifliop, or elfe they would never ufe him fo. 4. Yet after all, to will Br. Reynolds to note thofe chapters in the Apocrypha- books that were of- fensive , and bring them to the Lord Archbifhop on Vf^ednefday following. Had the Relator consulted the Kings honour, he had net inierted one of his Jeers managed with an Oath, into a Conference concerning Religion; nor would he, had he regarded his own reputati- on, have called a farcafm, in which was an oath, an unneceffary oath, a pleafant apoftrophe. To the place it felf, I fay the Greel^ copies, ( Eccltu. 48, 10.) much differ among themfelves, and as much from the Latin Tranflation } our Englifh Tranfla- tions alfo greatly vary } but I could never yet meet with any Copy or Tranflation from which at leaft an unwary Reader or hearer would not collect that Elias was to come before the day of the Lord, either firft or fecond, Jnnm faith the place \ [211 ] place argueth the ignorance of the author, blind in the promifes concerning the Kingdom of Chrift, Crotius acknowledge th little lefs. The Syriack^stTid tsfrabick^ Tranflatour carry it clearly for Mlias his being to come before the day of the Lord , to turn the hearts of the children to the Parents, as may be feen in the Tolyglotts* So that if the Do.clor was miftaken about the meaning of Ecclejiafiicus, his miftake was common to him with many more of great efteem , and deferved not to be put off either with a check or a flout. Whether D. R, ever brought in a lift of the offenfive chapters in the Apocryphal books, I cannot tell •, but I can find, that fince King James his time, the people have had in Parochial Churches lefs Apocrypha, and more Canonical Scripture* perhaps at laft the divinely infpired Writings that have in and on them fo many exprefs fignatures of Holinefs and Majefty, (hall prevail to have the fole honour of being read in the Churches for Chriftians in- ftru&ion, As to the next fcruple about fubfcription, grounded on, Jefns [aid to his difiiples, when he ipake to the Pharifees^ it feems the King took order to have the Tranflation reformed. Now muft Dr. Reynolds for a feafon give way to Mr. Knew ft ttbbe a Cantabrigian^ and averyemi- nent^Divine, though not much known by any wri- tlngsTiHefT behind him. Heisfaidby Dt. 'Bar low to have objected againft the Interrogatories in Baptifra propounded to Infants •, but what it was he (aid againft propounding thofe Interrogatories to the Infants, we are not told*, but rather made P i believe [212] believe h is difcourfe was fo perplext, that the King profefled he underftood it not The Bifhop of VVintoK aiming at his meaning, {hewed the ufe of fuch In r 'rogatories out of .St. Aufiin y adding his i reafon , Qju peccavit in alter o , credat in altero. Glad am 1 to find that one Englifh Bifhop, without contradiction from any other joined with him, did allow St. .Anflinh faying that an Infant may peccarein altera *, 1 hope if any now laugh at the notion of our finning in Adam, they will acknow- ledg themfelves'to have embraced an opinion quite different from the opinion of thofe to whom they JLJL> fucceed. In the mean time I (hall be glad to hear it proved, that a child can credere in altero ; for 1 rather opine, that a Parents Faith is fo far accept- ed by God, as to entitle his child toBaptifm,than that the child of a believer doth believe in his be- lieving father : for if he believe in him, he muft be favedinhim, if he dye in his Infapt-ftate, and I would give all I am worth to hear it proved, that all the infants of godly Parents dying in their In- fancy, are' laved. But of this no more. Our new Liturgy hath almoft .taken away the ground ei ,x\\c .difpute concerning theie Interrogatories} (or it ordereth that the firfr Interrogatory fhoulcl be thus:propounded : Dofi thott in the name of this child) &c;: which words I have not obferved in the old Liturgy. But yet I would fain know why we mav not as well ask the Father , Wilt thou that this child be baptised, in this faith ? •Pais we from the Interrogatories, to thecrofs in Baptifm, which Mr, Knew ft Me took excepti- ons' 'tOj in number two : Firft, the offence of weak brethren, C 213 ] brethren , grounded on the words of St. Fauly ' Rom, 14, and 1 Cor.S. viz,, the conferences of the weak are not to be offended. Thefe places being the chief feat of the doctrine of icandal, defcrve a moftferious confideration*, for certainly we fhould take heed not todeftroythofe for whomC irift died. And this care is principally to be taken by the Church in making Canons •-, if (he only command things which Chrifi: hath commanded, who is he that can blane her, or think (he exceeds the bounds and limits of the power given her? but if (he command that which fhe confeffeth fhe need not command, and which (tit cannot but know many account unlawful \ and if (he command fuch a thing under the highed pegalty ; then hath (he reafon to confider whether fuch precepts will be pleafing to her Lord ? It will fignifie little to ask how long people will be weak ? for no doubt they will be weak while the world ftands- As little will it fignifie to fay, Subfcriptions are not required of Laicks and Ideots, but Preachers and Minifters*, for it is notorious that Subfcriptions are required of Frefh-men at their matriculation in theljniverfity, when to be fure they are Laicks, and not acquaint- ed with Controverfies in Religion. As for Mini- fiers, they fhould not be weak in faith, but they rnuffc con£der that they have under them fuch as are weak ; and not fuddeniy engage never to admi- nifter necefTary Ordinances unto them, unlets they will receive them with difputable Ceremonies. If a fingle Minifter were left to his own choice either to crofs the child he baptizeth, or not to crofsit, ought he not to" fay, If by crofling I ihallfcanda- ' P % liais W lise my brother, I will not crofs a child while the world ftands. It will be faid, that a fingle Minifter is not left at his liberty. Truejbut the Church was at liberty to make or not to make a Law about crof- fing. Had (he made no Law to crofs children that are baptized, then 1 fuppofe no Minifter would have crofTed any child •, and what damage the child would have fuftained by not being crofTed, it is paft my skill to imagine; by making a Law that Ml children that (hail be baptized publickly, (hall be alfo croiTed, many learned Minifters are put out of Livings, many are made to lay afide the thoughts of being Minifters, and divert to Law or Phyfick, a bone of contention is caft among the common people, &c. What ought the Church to do in this cafe? Mr. Knew ft Me" s fecond Argument is faid to have rorififtedof three interrogatories : I would ask one queftiort that was not then by hirn asked, wL Whether it will be as profitable for the Child to be figned with any other fign, as with the fign of that Crofs upon which our Saviour did j'uffer death f If it will not ( as no doubt, mod * will fay it will not ) then we muft be fir ft inform- ed what figure our Saviours Crofs was of, left in going about to make the fign of it , we (hould make the fign of fomewhat elfe. And how (hall we know what figure our Saviours Crofs was of? The New-Teftament will afford us little light in this matter *, for the word s-af &?;, though affirm- ed by a great CFuick, firli to figmfie the lame with £urca, then with C Yftx i Y et * s known by thofe who haveobferved its ufe in turner and other Authors, to C 215 1 to have no other original fignification than of a Stake. If we betake our ieives to the Fathers, k x theyfpeak ftrangely and varioufly concerning the figore of the Crofs : Origen and Jerome fay, that the Samaritan letter Ian reprefents the figure of a Crofs, than which faith Scaliger. nothing is more falfe ♦, nothing more trpte, faith Dr. Walton in his prolegomena ; yet the character of the Samaritan Tany now in ufe, hath no refemblance with a Crofs, what character it may have in old medals and mo- neys, fober men will not much regard- Jnflin Martyr, dealing with Trypho the Jew, will find figures and types of the Crofs in the Old Tefiament, where the Spirit never intended any. Yea, in his fecond Apology for Chriftians, he bids the Hea- thens confider, whether without this figure, men could adminifter any thing, or have any converfe with one another. The Unicorns horn, as he de- fcribes it, doth indeed fairly reprefent fuch a kind of Crofs, as it is moft probable our Saviour fufTered on, for that feemeth to have been made of a piece of wood fixed in the earth, with a tranfverfe beam faftned unto it towards the top, and another piece of wood infixed into, and (landing out from that which was erected and ftraightup-, but that Mo- /*/ thought of any fuch thing when he bleffed Joy feph, Dent. 33. 17. or that the Ffalmifl aimed at any fuch thing, Pfal. 22. 21. is fo improbable, that it is well we have other types and prophecies of the OldTeflamenty to produce againft the Jews p to whom a crucified Chrift is a (tumbling block/ But now, which of our Deacons or Priefts doth, in croffing a Child^ reprefent the five extremities of of the Roman Crofs ? The aforefaid Jtiflin Martyr in his Apology fuggefts, that Vhilo having read theftory in IVlofes concerning the Brazen Serpent, and not underftanding that it was the fign of a Crofs which he made, but rather a decufTation, laid, 7MjuLtld tov TfaTov Oiov £vv&y.iv jtft^/iTe&a/ gr r$ <7r&v\i. Yet I believe itwere no hard matter to find focne Christian Writers that make the Roman X to be the Crofs , and that is crux decujfata, or an Andrews Crofs, as I think we were taught to call it when we learnt Arithmetick. To be brief, I think that if Chrift had intended his Picture fhould have been fet up in Churches, he would have left us fome fure way to know his vifage. 2. If he had defigned the Crofs on which he fuf- fered, any honour, he would have taken care that it fhould be prefer ved. 3. If he had ordained to teach his Church by the fign of the Crofs, he would have left us at no uncertainty how to make it. As for the vifage of our Saviour, that that is unknown , I would fain think that no man now doubts. For though it be reported by Damxfcen an<\ Evagrius, that our Saviour lent his Picture un- to Abgarm Prince of Edeffa; yet it is by them reported on the credit of they tell us they know not whom, and neither of them defcribewhat a kind of man he was : B&ies Eufebuis who wrote theftory of matters fuppofed to pafs betwixt Chrift and ssfbgarus out of the Records of Ede(fa> hath not one word of this Picture. Of another image of our Saviour made by Nlcodemns , mention is made in a piece attributed to Atbanafiw-, but fcjfe- h/y as the more ingenuous Papifts acknowledg. Ni- cc thorn* I>i7] " Nkepliortu Califtw alfo, Lib. 10. cap. ult. hath given us a very particular account of Chrifts face and body, as to figure and form. James \Nailor, as I have been told, when brought tTgTve*ajTac- count of his blafphemy in making himielf Chrift, had, as near as he could, made himfelf to look like iuch a manasiv7cf/?^r^hath defcribed ; but as I fuppofe that no man in his wits took that blaf- phemer to be Chrift, fo no man that hath much wifdom will believe, that Nicepkortu, at above a Thoufand years diftance, is to be much credited concerning our Saviours feature and complexion , efpecially, till he have named the authors whom he follows. The Crofs of Chrift, we are told, was found by Helena the Mother of Conflantins the Great, Three hundred years after his fuffe rings ; but the Story appeareth to have little probability in it. We muft fuppofe that there w T ere in that place juft Three CrofTes and no more, and that by a miracle thofe Three CrofTes were preferved from putrefaction h R0W if any man can think that our Saviours Crofs was fo miraculoully preferved, yet to what end (hould the two Thieves CrofTes be pre- ferved, unkfs it were to trouble and perplex thofe, who fhould be fo fimple as to look after that which was nowhere to be found ? But how did the feekers after this Crofs, diftinguifli it from the CrofTes of the two Thieves ? were the CrofTes only founds and not the Titles fignifying what the crime was for which they were crucified ? St. Ambrofe faith the title was found , yet Queen Helen not trufting to that, by the counfel of the Bifhop of Jerufa- lem expe&s a miracle, applies the CrofTes 'of the two C 218 3 two Thieves to a dead roan taken out of thcBisr, hut they put no life into him, which theCrofs of Chrift, as foon as it touched him, prefently did *, others fay, that the Crofs at that time did not reftore a dead man to life, but only recovered a Jerufalem woman that layfickof a very defperate. difeafe : and Socmen, as I take it, reports it to have wrought both thefe miracles at one time. O! how little iound knowledg was then in the world, when Chriftians of prime note took iuch pains to find out that which no way cooperated to our re- demption, but was only a paflive inftrument of our Saviours fufferings materially confidered ? Is that Crofs of wood, if it could now be found, a meet object of religious, or fo much as civil honour ? What ufe could it be of, unlefs there fhould appear fomething in the make of it, that would ferve to illuftrate fome form of fpeech in facred or pro- phane Authors ? As for ftirring up of iorrow, the Word andSacraraents are much more apt to do that than any fight of the Crofs on which our Saviour did hang. But great miracles have been wrought by the Crofs, and fragments or pieces of it, yea, by the fign of it. I muft not deny but that many things very wonderful are reported to be done by the Crofs. But perhaps fometimes thefe wonders were wrought by the Devil, to deceive inordinate wor(hippers of fuch images, God permitting, and the infidelity of men necefTarily requiring it, that \ may make ufe of TSiels words. 2. If God at any time did do a miracle, theCrofs itfelf being ap- plied, or the fign of it made, it muft be the Faith and Prayer of the perfonufing the Crofs, that God re- L 219 1 refpe&ed inputting forth his power, and not the Crofs. i. I do much doubt that the one half of thole things which are reported to he done' by the Crofs, were never done at all. The higfieft ftory that ever I read concerning the efTefts of the Crofs, and which is made ufe of by almoft every Popifli Writer in this matter, is the delivering of Julian the Apoftate from the fpirits with which he was frighted, upon the making the fign of the Crofs, though he had before renounced it. Such a thing I find indeed in Nazianzen's firft inve&ive againft Julian. But the Father reports it only on hearfay, kiytrtu -fat irhfi'wav, but I would fain know how the report was firft railed, none pretended ( that we find ) to have had it either from Julian himfelf, or from the Conjurer that was with him ; yet if men had it not from them, they mud needs feign it themfelves. The fame Father had before told us, that when Julian was facrificing, the intrails of the Beaft (hewed him a crowned Crofs v but he prefaceth that Story thus, to Si h hiyopivw, c Io- feth it thus, «' &tv 4*v<^f ? *v? who unto the ' lnftitution of the PafTover preicribed unto them 'by Mofes, had, as the Rabbins witnefs, added ' both figns and words, eating ibwr herbs , and 4 drinking wine, with thele words to both, Take> *eat thefe in remembrance ^drink^ this in remembrance y 1 upon which addition and tradition of theirs, our * Saviour inftituted the Sacrament of the lad Sup- *per, in celebrating it with the fame words, and * after the fame manner*, thereby approving that * fa&t>f theirs in particular , and generally that a 'Church may inftitute and retain a ftgnificant fign. * Which fa'tisfied his Majefty exceeding well. Here is a foundation laid, and then afuperftru- £ture raifed on it. The foundation is, that the Jews unto the inftitution of the PafTover preicri- bed unto them by Mofes , had added both figns and words, &c. but is not this foundation laid in thefand, depending on the teftimony of later Rati- bins^ whbfe teftimonies are by wife men efteemed lighter than vanity? The apoftate Jews were no doubt grown wretchedly fuperftitious \ but lacii loth to believe, unlefs I needs muft, that they ufed all the fopperies their Rabbihs mention as' in ufe with them. But be this as it will, 1 wonder what made the Reverend Dean fay, that the eating of fowr herbs was an addition to the Pafchal Inftituti- pn h fowr herbs were as much commanded as un- leavened bread. The Jews had indeed of their own heads added to the Pafchal provifions a difh of thick [ 222 ] thick fawce made of Dates, Figs, Raifins and Vi- negar mingled together (asfome Authors fay ) to put them in mind of the clay in which their fathers laboured. Allowing them to have ufed this fauce and wine, |i and whatever elfe fuperftition could dictate to them, how appears it, that upon any addition or tradition of theirs Chrift inftituted his Sacrament? or that he had not inftituted the fupper before the Jews made thefe additions ? If we look upon Chrift m the days of his abode here on earth, we find him to have (hewed no great refpett to the tradi- tions and ceremonies of the Jews that had no Di- vine inftitution, as may be made appear by many inftances, if it were worth while-, fo far was he from allowing his Churches to add any thing to his own inftitutions that nature did not call for. We are told by the Relator, p. 68. That here the King defired to be acquainted how ancient the ufe of the Crofs was. Dr. Reynolds confefTed it to have been ever fince the Apoftles times (mark, he did not confels it to have been ufed in the Apo- ftles times, nor did the Bifhops or any of their ad- herents fay it was ufed by them) but the difficulty was, whether it were of that ancient ufe in Bap- tifm ? To remove this difficulty, the Dean of Wefl- ininfter produceth Tertullian , Cyprian, Origin, laying it was in ufe in immortal* lavacro. The Bp. of Winchefier added, it was in ufe in Conftantines time, pag.69. whereupon the King concluded, If then it were ufed , I fee no reafon, but it may ftill be retained. As for the antiquity of figningwith the fignof the C 223 ] the Crofs in Baptifm, the Nomonformifls may re- ply, That it was as ancient to ufethe fign of the Crofs when people went abroad, or entred into the Church, or prayed, as when a child was baptized. If we may leave off the frequent ufe of eroding upon other occafions, without any difhonour to the Fathers, why may we not alfo leave off cro(» fing in Baptifm ? Anointing alfo was ufed in Bap- tifm by the Fathers \ yet it is accounted a piece of our Reformation not to ufe anointing; whatdi- fparagement to the Reformation would it be to leave off crolling alfo? Befidesj, there was an ufe among the Fathers of the fign of the crofs, which holds not for our times •, and fundry effects they expected from it, which we cannot, dare not ex- pect from it, becaiife we cannot find in Gods word a promife that any fuch effecl (hall follow upon the croffing our felves. All along Queen Elizabeths reign it was cullomary for the Queen to apply the fign of the crofs to the tumour of i\\zSirttmop\ King James difcontinued that ceremony } and yet we do not find that he had lefs fucce'fs in the curing of the ftrumous difeafe, than the Qgeen. Sothac the ftrange and wonderful things pretended to be wrought by the fign of the Crofs in the days of our ancient Doctors, were either no^wrought at ail, or if they were wrought, the fign of the Crofs nothing contributed to the working of them* Fi- nally, I marvel why the Dean of Weftmmfier y to \ prove the antiquity of the Crofs in Baptifm, did frife no higher than Tertiilliatt, Cyprian, Origins fhey are not the ancienteft Fathers that fpeak of Baptifm 5 the two rirft erred in the very point of [2243 Baptifm ', the lafl: ( if his Tranflators have not abufed him ) was fcarce found in any thing. But the Crofs was ufed in Confiantineh times, and why may it not now be ufed ? (hall we accufe j Conft amine of Popery and Super ftition ? Thus is the King faid to have argued in the Conference •, and by his argument he gave us to underftandjthat he liked not that any one fhould charge fonftantine with Popery or Superftition } I therefore will lay neither to his charge \ but yet his purpofe not to be baptized till he might be baptized in the fame River where Chrift was baptized, viz** Jordan, if it did not proceed from fuperftition, proceeded from a very odd humour. God croiTed him in that his defign, and put him under a neceffity either to receive Baptifm in another place than Jordan, or not to receive it at all. ( In this I follow En/ehm, for whom fhould I rather follow than him who fo well knew Conflamine, and hath tranfmitted his Hiftory to pofterity ? If any man incline to thofe who would have Conftantine baptized many years before at Rome , I leave him to Ecultettu in his Me- Y dnRa, who defends Eufebms againft Barotitis.) Mr. Knewft ubPskcond queftion was , fuppo- fmfTKe Giurch Had "power te add fighificant ce- remonies , whether (he might there add them where Chrift had already ordained one ? Which \he (uppofed was no lefs derogatory to Chrifts In- ftitution, than if any Potentate of the Land (hould prefume to add his Seal to the Great Seal of Eng- land. To C 225 ] To this Dr. Barlow faith, p. 70. the King an- , fwered, That the cafe was not alike ', for that no fign or thing was added to the Sacrament which was fully and perfetlly finifoed, before any menti- on of the Crofs is made, I dare not think this was King James his an- fWeF: for it is only fitted and futed to our own Church as then it was ordered , and MI conti- nues. In the firft Book of King Edward, crofling was appointed before Baptifm could be pretended to be perfected, or indeed begun*, which was al- io the ufage of the ancient Churches. 2. I con- ceive the preemption of any fubjeft would be great, if he fhould add his own feal to confirm or fignifie any thing that the King's Great Seal was appointed to confirm and fignifie, though the Great Seal had been fet before he fet his Seal. I. Methinks the argument iiands fall in its full force s If applying of water to a believer in the name of Father, Son, and Holy Ghoft, do fignifie all that the Crofs fignifies , to what end is the Crofs ufed? The child that is baptized with is, is obliged by Baptifm obediently to keep Gods holy will and commandments , and walk in the fame all the days of his life*, what can the Crofs oblige him to more > Is not confeffing the faith of Chrifb crucified, one of Gods commandments? I know a learned man hath replied, that conftancy is not diftin&ly fignified in being baptized, as it is in being crofTed. But I ask, Is it any benefit to' a man to have fome ceremony ufed that doth more diftinftly mind him of. his conftancy than Baptifm did ? If it be none, then fuch a ceremony is need- Q 2 lefs- 5 mmkmr C 226 3 kfs •, if it be fome benefit, how came it to pafe that no Apoftle ever ufed any fuch ceremony f and why do we not excogitate other ceremonies f admonifhus asdiftin£tly of other duties? Mr. Xnewjtiibbcs third but pafs directly to that part of his Late Writings, wherein he pretends ( to do what he had long threatned ) to give Rea- fons for the finfulnefs of Conformity. In the E- piftle to the Plea, he fays, many Impofitions were layd on them tphich they durjl not do , becaufe they fear God, and that nothing lefs than Sin Jhould hin- der their Conformity : and p. I 3 5. 'that they gave in Eight particulars to the Commijftoners at the Savoy, which they took^ to be flat Sins^ but had not time fully to difcourfe one of them^ by which I guefs, that kneel- ing at the Sacrament (for that was then difcourfed ot ) was one and the chief of thofe many haineus Sins in Conformity j what the other Seven were, ^1 cannot find i but I believe he hath mentioned ihem in this Plea, though he be afhamed to call them Reafons 5 and fays, he will not urge the cafe, but barely mention matters of Facf^ and tell us what it is they dare not do* And if we be fb hardy as to b;ar this, wi may ( when he can get leave ) have ► A 2 more ( 1 ) more, P. up. of the Plea ^ »>e J in ftating fome few quefiions , what it is that we account Good or Evil , much lefs do we here give the Reafons of our Caufe > he dares not be fo bold yet as to venture by it to difpleafe us. But this Hypocrifie is fo thin that the weakeft Eye may look through it > for, whereas the Right Re- verend and Learned Bifhop of Ely, had told Mr* Baxter ( as he confcfTeth in his Preface to the Late Book of Concord ) that he would petition Authority that they (the Non-Conformifts) might be compelled to give their Reafons '•> He there fays, To anfwer the earneji demand of our Reafons, by you the Lord Bifljop of Ely, I have publijhed an Hifiorical Narrative of our Cafe and Judgment in a Book^ called the Non-Con- formifts Plea for Peace. And if he may be believed, they are not only Mr. Baxters Reafons, but of ma- ny others} for/;. 3. it is faid, We that publijh this here, give an account of our own Judgment, and thofe^ • that we ■ are beji acquainted with '•> how far we hold • it law fid or unlawful , to gather or to feparate from Churches, or to differ from what is eflablificd by Au- thority. So that plainly that Book was publifhed to anfwer the Bifhop of Ely's demand of their Rea- fons for the Sinfulncfs of Conformity : But where is that allowance from Authority which he pre- ' tends to have fo long waited for, and begged on his Knees? And where is that care not to difpleafe, or provoke the Conformifls by {hewing the many-~ heinous Sins in their Conformity, when without leave of God or Man, he not only endeavours to difpleafe, but to ruine us? If any thing may be, this is worfe than his Hypocrifie ; it is mccr di- ftradtion and rage, when our .common adveriaries the' (O" the PapifTs are undermining our Foundations, and there wants but a blow to throw down the whole Fabrick of the beft of Protectant Churches, for any one that bears the name; of Proteftant , thus to help on their Defign, and juftify it too"> by de- claring many heinous Sins in the Constitution of it, and to cry, down with it, down with it, even to the ground. But ( God be thanked ) his Malice is as Impotent as his Words > for after Eighteen years f welling and labouring, farturiunt montes, and these appears not fo much as a Moufe to affright us: all vanilheth like the noife of Armies under ground, wherewith his PredecelTors amufed the Nation 5 their long confinement hath made them fo weak , or rather their weaknefs hath ca'ufed- their fo long confinement , that Mr. Baxter dares not call them Reafons, and I hope the Nation are fufficiently inftru&ed how unreafonable it is to be affrighted, and run into .confuiion upon fuch em- pty noifes as thefe. I -have here confidered only the Arguments which concern Minifierial Conformi- ty, that of Lay-perfons being confeqiient to it. Arid when the molt Learned Non-conforming Miniikrs, have in former and latter times yielded Conformity to our publick Ordinances themfelves, and by Ex- ample and Arguments too ( for Mr. Baxter fays, they wrote more againft Separation than the Con- forming themfelves) wherein Mr. Baxter alfo hath done his part. And when I have reafon to think the greateft part, of the Non-Conforming Clergy are of the fame mind j becaufe I know how great an influence they have on the Confciences of their people, with -whom they familiarly converfe, and who especially advife them in what concerns their A 3 com- (4) common Caufe *, yet no perfon of any Npte that I have heard of in all that party, who were in ptar ces of Truit, and publick Imployment, did on the late Teft refufe to Communicate with the Church of England. And Iaftly, when all our United tfrength is too little to withftand the attempts of our common Adverfaries : It is a wonder to me, with what Confidence, and with what Deilgn (thefe circumfhnces confidered ) he mould not only Proclaim Conformity on the Minifters part to be impoflible h but endeavour alfo with all his might? to withdraw the Laity from our Commu- nion, unlefs it betoexpofe us all to Confufion a- gain. But I hope the Nation have been fufficient- ly taught by experience , not to intruit the Con- duel: of their precious Souls, as well as the Safety of their Lives and Eitates to fuch Giddy and Unr frable Men. Efpecially when they (hall confider on what frivolous pretences they ft ill feek to per- petuate the diffractions of Church and State, and now when we are in greateit danger, exert their utrooft Art and Strength to divide and deitroy us 3 Pudct b£c opprobria vobti . Et did potuijfe, & non potuijfe refelli. The Controverfie concerning the finfulnefs of Con- formity will be reduced to a narrow compafs, if there be an agreement in thefe particulars. Firft, what are the parts of the Book of Common-Prayer, to which we are to declare our AiTent and Con- fent- Mr. Baxter contends that all things named as the Contents of the Book, are parts ot that "Jk)ok> to the ufe whereof we declare our Mcnt,&c. m p. 15^. of the Plea. 7)im U not a word in tie Boo\ that was not intended for Jbme ufe\ the Preface, th* Calender, and Kubrickjhave their ufes : And p. 203. we have reafon to doubt whether the Ad for Conform mity it felf, he not apart of the Book^ which we muft Subfcribe, Ajfent and Confent toy hecaufe this Att is named among the Contents of the Books Either ( faith he ) it is a part of the Contents or not. If not, wz wuft not confent to that faljhood that it is* If it ix 3 O far he it from m that believe a God, a Judgment \ a Life to come , and the facred Scriptures, to Ajfent and Confent to that AU with all its penalties, filencing and ruining fuch as Conform not, Anfw. The Aft for Uniformity , naming the Book of Common- Prayer, always names that Book as diftinft from it felf, and as a thing annexed to its and if the Parliament had injoyned the Ufe of fome New" Tranflation of the Bible, and prefixed their Aft to that Tranflation, and required our Ufe of the fame under penalties, our AiTentto fuch an Aft could not fuppofe the Aft it felf to be a part of the Canonical Books. Secondly, The defign of the Aft, in thefe words. To the intent that every perfon may certainly bpow the Rule to which he is to Conform in Publicly Worfyip , and Adminijhation of Sacraments ', and other Kites and Ceremonies of the Church of England, Sec, be it Enacled, 8cc. Plainly thews what are the parts . to the ufe of which we are to declare onr AiTent, , which particulars are Enumerated more than once; but not a word of the Aft for Uniformity, or the . Aft 1. Eliz. which in the Contents is mentioned with it, whereof Mr. Baxter ought to be minded s for under the Contents of the Book, the Firft thing A 4 men- \ mentioned is, j^jjfe the Plural) fir Vniformity pf Common-Prayer, whence 1 argue : If the Parliament intended that this lalt Adt mould be taken as a part of the Common-Prayer Baok^ becaufe it is in the Con- tents;, for the fame Reafon it may be thought they intended that other Act. i. Eliz. to be a part alio, which were very unreafonable. For then we muft fubfcribe our A'flent to the ufe ciiTwoCommon- Prayer J>oo\s, viz the OJd and the New. 3. That Adt of Queen Elizabeth explains what is meant by Openfor Common ) Prayer, By Open Prayer, in and through- out this Aft is meant that Prayer ? which, is for others to come unto, or bear, either hi common Churches or Chappelsy or Oratories , commonly called the Service of the Church i and the intent of that Adt was , that no Miniiler (hould refufe to V.fe the fa id Com- mon-Prayers, and Adminiiter the Sacraments in fuch Order and Form as they are mentioned in the faid Booki or willfully orobftinately ftanding in the fame, Ufe any other Rite,Ceremony,Order,Form,or man- ner of Celebrating the Lords Supper, &c. than is mentioned in the faid Book. This Adt was Printed probably to give Light to theother,and to (hew that the fame thing was formerly required of iMiniilers. And if the Conformifts heretofore did not take that Ad to be part of the Common-Prayer Book, thep there is no reafon why they (hould take the ' New Adt to be a part of the New Book. 4. The pgok of Common-Prayer was compleat before the • Act was made;, it was firfr prefented to the King, who approving it offered it to the Parliament, wno approved ot it. and afterwards made their A&jjor Uniformity in the life thereof. And whoever ga- thered the Contents of the Book , did no mote inteinj ■ ( 7 ) Intend to have all things named therein to be parts of the Book, than they that fet forth the Bible with Contents to the Chapters and Pfahns , in- tended that we (hould take thofe Contents for Canonical Scripture. The Contents of Pfi 14.9. fays, the Prophet- cxkortetb to praife God for that Power which he hath given to the Church over the Confidences of Men. But that is no part of the Text, neither the Adfs,Prefaces,Rubrieks,€^c which come not in- to Life in the Adminiitration of Prayer, Sacraments, &c. any part of that Book to the. Life whereof we give our AlTent and Confent. This Ad doth ex- clude the life of any other Forms (when it injoyns thofe prefcribed in the Book for publick WorihipJ but it doth not include thofe previous Acts, Pre- faces and Inttrudions, which only tend to juftify and inforce the Ufe of the Common-Prayer. But Mr. Baxters Dilemma, may be anfwered to the ad- vantage of Conformity, thus* Either the Ads for Uniformity, and the Prefaces, are parts of the^ Book, to which our AlTent is required, or not : if not> then our AlTent to them is not required } if they be, then our AiTent will be more facile upon this account. FgtjL becaufe in that Preface con- cerning the Service of the Church, it is thus faich for as mush as nothing can he fo -plainly fit firth , hut doubts may arifi in the Vfe and Praciifi of thz fame, to appeafe all fuch diverfity ( if any arifi ) and for the refilution of aU doubts concerning the manner *J?ow to underftand, do, and execute the things contained in this BoqJ^, the Parties that jo doubt or diverfly take any thing, Jhall always re fort to the Bifhop of the ~Diocefs i who by his difiretion (hall tak? order for the quieting and appafmg of the fame , fo that the fame order ( 8 > wrier be not contrary H any thing contained in tMi Books And if the Bifhop of the Diocefs be in doubt, then he may fend for Refolution thereof to the Arch-Bifhop. Here is a way opened to fuch as think that the Adh, and Prefaces are to be Aflented to, to clear their doubts to their fatisfa&ion > the feveral Bifhops within their Diocefs have a Power by Law, to explain any doubts that may arife concerning the Ufe and Pra&ife of Uniformity , and their determinations are declared to be as Va- lid as the Law it felf : Now doubtlefs if fober DiiTenters did confult their Diocefans , in fuch Cafes as concern their Pra&ife in the publick Worftiip, they might eafily obtain fatisfa&ion. Again, it is faid in the Preface before the Litur- gy > Ife are fully perfwaded in our Judgments^ and we here prof efs it to the World, that the Booj^as it flood before efiablijhed by Law, doth not contain in it any thing contrary to the Word of God, or to found DoUrin, err ■which a Godly Man may not with a good Confcience life and fubmit unto, or which U not fairly defenfibh againfl any that fhall oppofe the fame j if it be allow- ed fuch JHji and favourable Conjiru&ion as in com- tnon equity ought to be allowed to all humane Writings; ejpecially fuch as are fet forth by authority, and even to the bejl Tranflations of the Holy Scripture it felf. If thefe Mitigations be admitted , a great many of the Objections made by Mr. Baxter and others would vanifti. And if they be not admitted, Mr., Baxter himfelf will grant that they cannot fafcly (ubicribe this AfTent, and Confent to all things contained in the Bible according to any Translati- on. But C fays he) if they might but fay, we Affent to all things contained , that are not by humane fra- ilty (9) itty tnijlaken, they would foon conform herein. See the Piea, p. 166. Now the Church of England de- clares here , and in the Preface to the Articles , 1564. that they prefcribe not tbefe Rules as Laws equivalent with the Word of God, and as of neceffity to bind the Confciences of the Subjefts in the Nature of them confidered in tbemfelves , hut as Temporal Orders meerly Ecclefiaflkal, without any vain Super- ftition, and as V^ules in fome part of Difcipline concern- ing Decency, Vifiinclion and Order for the time* So that the Law leaving it to the Bilhops to remove doubts, and explain difficulties > and the Preface deliring that things may be candidly and favorably interpreted h they are greatly to be blamed , who will take that with the Left which their Superiors offer with the Right-hand , and feek how to make that a Snare and a Net to intangle and ruine themfelves^ which was intended only as a means to keep the Unity of the Spirit > in the Bond of Peace, :ndly, It is granted by the Non-Conformids , ThaTtne ^Common-? r ay er Book as it is now amend- ed, and abftradfcd from the Declarations andSub- fcriptions required by the K& for LIniforrnity , is better to be Affented to, than as it iftood formerly. Yet evident it is that in the days of Edward the 6. when it was much more liable to exceptions , there being in it Prayer for the dead, Chryfme in - Baptifme, extream Undrion &c. ( which it is fup~ pofed Mr. Calvin called tolerabiles ineptias ) many Learned Men and Godly Mfartyrs did readily Con- form to it : And in the days of Queen Elizabeth^ King James, and King Charles^ the Body of the Qkrgy (as Learned and Pious as any in the World) to \ to which the few Non-Conformifts in each Age were no way comparable for Parts, Piety or Number. andat the beginning of the Wars, there were not in the Aflembly , as Mr. Baxter obferves, above Five or Six Non-Conformifts. Now ever fince the Confirmation of the Canons by King James, the 36 Canon in joyned Subfcription to the 39 Articles, and rhe Book of Common-Prayer *> as containing no- thing contrary to the Word of God, ( which is one of the greateft Objections now) and this the Sub- fcriber was to do, lubens & ex animo , which in Englijh may be rendered with unfeigned AiTent and Confent, and that be would ufe the fame and no other. Who can think but that Cranmer, Rid- ley^ Latimer, Davenant, Jewel, Whitgift, the two Ab- bots, Vfoer, Hall, Frideaux, Brownrigg, Dodtor Jo. Reynolds, Prejion, Mereton, Sihs > Fenner, Whately, and many more named by Mr. Baxter himielf, were both Pious and Learned Men, and fubferibed according to judgment and Confcicnce. And if the Liturgy had not been accompanied by the Acjs f5r Subfcriptions, &c. it is Mr. Baxters opinion , that multitudes would have Conformed to it ( though it were an ill ilgn of the readinefs of thofe Men to Conform to the whole, who when th?y were as Probationers on their good Behaviour, did not at His Majeities defire in his Declaration yield to the ufe of any part of it) fo that it feems there is no fuch iinfulnefs in the Life of the Forms, &c. prefcribed i the great quarrel is againft the Parliament, for requiring fuch Subfcriptions as they cannot confent to, becaufe they fear God, p. 15? 1. of the Plea. It jf not tbefenfeoftheLiturgit, but. of a on a Statute of Parliament which we doubt of faith Mr. Baxter, 3. Non-Conformifts grant, that it is better to fub- mit to the pradtife of a doubtful fmall evil , than to forbear a neceffary and great duty : efpecially when greater good than evil may be procured to our felves and others by fuch fubmiilion j there is no command againit the Crofs, Kneeling, Sur- plice, &c. nor is there any intrinfecal Turpitude in them, and therefore the pra&ife of them may- be fubmitted to, rather than to break the known Commandments of God for Obedience, Peace and Charity, and to fuffer Deprivation when they con- ceive there is fo great neceffity, and there may be fo much benefit to the Souls of the people, as well as to the peace of the Nation, by the exer- cife of their Miniftry. Thirdly, let that Rule be obferved which Mr. Baxter quoteth from Bifhop Sander fon^ p, 3 2p. of the Plea : We muft takg heed that the flri& Interpre- tation ( of words or things ) turn not into a rigid one. Many Men by mtftake and wrefting of other Mens words , do draw Blood from that which would have naturally yielded Milk or Food, we owe Candour to all Mens Writings, efpecially to thole which are fet forth by Authority , and molt of all to publick Laws. In that particular of Promif- fory Oaths, thefe exceptions and conditions are ever of common right to be underftood. 1. If God Permit. 2, Saving the right of others, and as far as is Lawful. 3. Things ftanding as they do, or in the fame itate. 4. As far as I am able^ &c. See the Plea, p. 32^. It is excellently faid by Bifhop Sanderfor., that \ if out lawful Superiours command us any thing whereof we have juft caufe to doubt , we may and ought to enquire into the Lawfulnefs there- of*, yet not with fuch anxious curiofity, as if we defired a Loop-hole whereby to evade? but with fuch modeft Ingenuity as may witnefs to God and the World, the unfeigned fincerity of our defires , both to fear God , and to honour them that are fet over us. And if having ufed ordinary Moral diligence, bona fide, to inform our felves there appear nothing unlawful in it > We are then to fubmit and obey without more ado, Bifhop Sander Jons judgement in one vien?> p. 145* But evident it is that the Non-Conformijis , who ftrain at every Gnat which they fancy to be in the commands of their Lawful Superiours, did glib- ly fwallow down Camels in the impofitions of Ufurpersi the Covenant, the Negative Oath, the Ingagement, and many other unlawful Impofitions were generally taken without any Scruple. A Fourth thing to be premifed is, That Tra- ffic* U the heft Expofitour of the Law s many Laws are worded fo ftridtly , and injoyned under fuch rigo- rous penalties, as may ferve for greater terror to evil minded Mem they do ( iniquum petere ut quod equum eft ferant ) command and threaten what is very fevere, that they may obtain what is juft and L equal. And the pra&ice of our Superiours in the cafe of Conformity fhews> that they intended the I weightier matters of the Law, Obedience, Uni- formity and Decency in the publick Worfhip. If there be no contempt of Authority, no negledt of the eftabliihed Liturgy, by bringing in other Pray- ers in the room of thufe that arc prefcribed. Lex nan in) mn curat minima, neither the Law of God or Man is follicitous about circumftances and the letter pun&ilioes. There are in moft Laws, Come doubt- ful words and expreflions which the pra&ife of Law, and the Judges do interpret * fome Cafus omifc which the pra&ice doth admit , as in the prefent Law : it admits the Forms of Prayer and Praife on extraordinary occailons for. Failing and Thankfgiving. It admits of Singing the Pfalms, as translated in Metre, and of other Forms of Prayers before and atter Sermons. If the Law fliould be ftricl-fy executed according to the rigour of it, there are but few Men would go unpunilh- cd i God himfelf doth difpenfe with many things exprefly enjoyned for the performance of fome more neceffary duties : I will have Mercy, and not Sacrifice i aod St. Paul did Gircumeife Timothy to avoid greater inconveniencies, when doubtleis he had rather not have done it. And as we may do fome things, fo we may omit fome other which are injoyned by Law , according to the exigency of circumftances > fo it be done without bewray- ing contempt of Authority, or giving juft occafi- on of fcandal to others, Biftiop Sander/on p. 19. of Submiilion to Superiours. The laft thing that I (hall premife is, that the mn- Conformijts are not jet agreed^ what that is irTSaTlJontormity wrucTTtFey think to be finful : For what fome think unlawful , others condemn only as inconvenient. Gne (licks at the Sign of tne Crofs, another at Kneeling at the Sacrament, a third at the Surplice, a fourth can fubmit to all thefe, butfticks at Pve ordination, which different judgment of dhTenters gives juft caufe to believe that 04) that there is no real finfulnefs in either v becaufe " what fome think to be ilnful , others grant to be lawful : Thefe things being premifed , I co me _to the bulineTs or* Mmitienal Conformity, ^Wfr.' Baxter tells ns,'o. 7, that* trie root of the " difference " is "this* That the Non-ConforrmjFf ftc thought that they (hould .tick to the meerScri-* tc pture rules and (implicit y, and go far from all " additions which were found invented or abufed cc by the Papilis, in Do&rine, WorQiip and Go- that fome of them were fo hot at home , that they were put to death ( not for their Non-conformity, but for Murder, Treafon or Blafphemy, as the Hi* ilories of thofe times (hew) Others as Ainfacrtb , RoHnfin, John/on, &c. fled beyond Sea, and there gathered Churches, and broke by Divilion among themfelves. And whereas Mr. Baxter fays, that the difference among the Exiles at Franhjord, was, that Dr. Cox, and Mr. Home, and their party (trove for the Englifh Liturgy, and the other party for the (n) the freer way of praying from the prefent fenfe .and habit of the ipeaker : It will appear to him that reads the Troubles of Fran\ ford^ that the Que- stion was not between the Englifh Liturgy, and fuch free Prayers which were not then puhlickly ufed : For Cilvin himfelf ufed a Liturgy at Gene- va , and a fhort Form before his Sermons , and fbmetimes that which we call Bidding of Prayers, aHhay be feen after his Sermons on Job, Printed in EngUftj* And Mr. Calvin thus relates the mat- ter, p. 3 3. of. his Opufada* When the Exiles could not agree about the Englijh Liturgy, they did by my Advice and Approbation, draw up another , Pririted in the Englijh Tongue 1556. wherein was a Confellion taken out of Vaniel the $th. z. Prayer for the whole Church , the Lords Prayer , the Creed, &c. the reft of this Sedlion carrieth its Confutation with it» The 8. £. concerns the con- formity of Lay-men, which tails under that of Mi- nisterial Conformity, $.9. Where rirft of AlTcnt,Confent and Subfcription, nothing, is contrary to Gods word, &c. This as Mr. Baxter obferves is required by the 36. Canon^ not by the Adt or the Book it felf. Now if we con- fider by what Men this hath been fubferibed to ever fince thofe Canons were Confirmed , and what Latitude the Church feems to allow us in making this Subfcription-, viz. If we (hall allow it fuch juft and favourable conftrudion as in com- inon equity ought to be allowed to all humane Writings j efpecially fuch as are fet forth by au- thority, and even to the heft Tranflation of the Holy Scripture it felf ( which as you have feen Mr. Baxter himfelf doth grant } they that Scruple B ac ( tt ) at this, may alfo refufe to fubfcribe any Articles , Confeflion of Faith, yea even the Apoftles Creed. This therefore is already anfwered h and fo is the next Obje&ion, that the Subfcriber will ufe that Form in publkJ{.Prayer^ &c. and none other : For o- ther occafional Forms for Prayer and Thankfgiving commended to us by authority, may be ufed with- out violating this Subfcription, it being Cafus o- mffm\ the conftant practice of the Church (hew* ing that this exception was intended though not expreffed, and that conceived Prayers before Ser- mons are not hereby forbidden, the general pra- ctice doth evince. All Law-givers do leave to the Judges and Ma- £tftrates, a Power to interpret the doubtful Letter of the Law, and to mitigate the rigour of its Ex- ecution, in order to the publick good, and difpen- feth with the Subjects ( fo be it they obferve the chief end of the Law) in the omiilion of fome circumftances on reafonable occafions , and una- voidable accidents, without which Juftice would be turned into Wormwood. He therefore that prefumeth of the Magiftrates confent to difpenfe with the Obfcrvation of the lelTer parts of the Law, on juit occafions, and in needful cafes, pre- fumeth no more than he hath reafon to do : And this Bifhop Sandcrfon groundeth on that Maxim, Salus Populi Suprema Lex : All that is required by the A ( which was compiled by the Holy and Learned Martyrs, and hath been reviewed and approved by many ftout Confeflbrs> as well as of their (fo he calls his new Liturgy) more corrett Nepenthes , which being done in hafte, hath many Imperfections , or the Directory that had , nor Greed, nor Decalogue ( both which leave Men to their own extemporary Conceptions : ) And in a fhort time juitled out the Lords Prayer too. The title of the A&, which is the Key that opens the fenfe and intention of the Law-givers,, is an AH for Uniformity of public}^ Prayers, and Ad~ minifiration of Sacraments^ and other Rites and Cere- monies *> fo that if Uniformity be unfeignedly ob* ferved, the Adt is fatisried, though the Confor- miit may wifh that fome things in the faid Book had been amended. But fome Men are fo un- happy as to contrive Nets and Snares to involve themfelves and others, and rajfe nice diftinc/Hons where the Law diftinguifheth not. As do they, who fay AJfent implies the 'Truth, and Confent the goodnefs of the things \ 2. And whereas the Adt fays to all things, they fay it means all words and expref* [tons. 3. Whereas it fays to the Vfeoi all things,they pretend it to be meant of thofe things that come not into Ufe \ and 4. whereas it fays , in ftnfu tompofito, all things contained and prefcribed in, and by the Book^ &c. they fay it is extended to all things that are contained, as well as prefcribed. Now to the Firft, the Phrafe of AJfent and Confent, being ufed by our Legislators , we mult fatisfie B 2 cm ( iS ) our felves of the meaning of it, in the ufe of our Laws, where it fignihes no -more than an agree- ment between parties in grants and contracts , . and is ufed where the parties agreeing , in fome cafes might wifh that it had been otherwife > yet upon confiderations may unfeigned ly AiTent and Confent to them, as is (hewed at large by Mr. Faufyer, p,pi,&c, 2ly. Whereas they extend it • to every Phrafe and Expreilion > the Ad mentions only the things which it particularly enumerates, viz, all the Prayers, Kites, Ceremonies , Forms and Orders, 3. Whereas it fays , to the Vfe of all things , they pretend it requires our Affent and Confent to fuch things as come not into Ufe, but are only occalionally mentioned j as when it is faid in the Preface, " That this Eook as it Hood be- tc fore eltablimed by Law , did not contain in it c " any thing which a godly man may not with a " good Confcience ufe and fubmit to h which claufe cannot be included in the Declaration , for then the things which were thought fit to be al- tered, mud be Hill in fome fort Afiented to. 4. The Acl: mentioneth the things, to the Ufe whereof we are to AiTent and Confent (viz.) the things contained and prefcribed, in and by the Book, , Sec, h is not faid contained in, or prefcribed by i but three feveral times it is carefully exprclled, as well before and after , as in the Declaration^ fo that it feems to require no more than is ex- prelfed in the fecond Declaration > I will conform to the Liturgy of the Church of England) m it it now by Law cjiabhfocd. . Nor can it be reafonably thought, that our Law-makers require more in our our Conformity to the prefent Liturgy, than they themfelves declared concerning the Old*, in thefe words, We are per f waded in our judgment s, and ret profefs it to the World, that the Booi^ as it flood be- fore eftablijhed by Law , doth not contain in it any thing contrary to the Word of God> or to found T)o- tlrine , or •which a godly man may not with a good Confcience ufe and fuhmit unto, or which is not fairly defmfibh againji any that Jhall eppofe the fame, if it (hall be allowed fuch jujlsand favourable ConflruUion^ as in common equity ought to be allowed to all humane Writings i efpecially fuch as are fet forth by authori- ty, and even to the very befl Tranflations of the Holy Scripture it felf Now if DifTenters would ufe this Candor, in judging of thofe things prefcribed to be ufed for Uniformity fake, they might no doubt declare their unfeigned AfTent and Confent unto them. But Mr. Baxter puts all out of doubt, that the Adr requires more than a bare AiTent to the Ufe of the Common-Prayers, &c Cc Becaufe the that they may have better opportunities to prepare the Minds of men for, and to ferve the occafions of doing mif- chief. Thefe, and fome other fuch might ApoUgiinft be the weighty Confederations which Burton. y[r. Calamy faid, prevailed with him and many of his Brethren, for their fo late laying down the Common-Prayer j and for thefe reafons, many would ftill yield a feigned and partial fubmiflion to the ufe of fome parts of it, that they might have advantages to deftroy the whole : And certain it is, that fuch Confor- mists draw more prejudices on the Church, than the Non-Conformifts can do. There was there- fore great reafon for all this Caution , that men might not mock God, nor delude their Superiours in things that concerned his publick Worfhip, and his Churches peace. And 1 fear that they who cannot ferve God unfeignedly in the Communion of our Church, will do it but hypocritically any where elfe. And laftly, I have heard concerning the pre- tended Provifothzt the Commons anfwered > that they had expreffed the Obligation, to fee only to the ufe of things prefcribed fo plainly, that it need- ed no further explanation , with which the Lords were fatished. I conclude this with a Direction of Mr. Baxter, $ . 27. of his Directory. If avy impofe an ambiguous Oath^ and refufi to explain it, and require you only to takft ( n ) taty it in thofe words, and learn you to your own fenfe .' If a lawful Magiflrate command it, or the intercji of the Church or State require it \ I fee not but he may take it on Condition , that in the plain and proper fenfe of the words , the Oath he lawful , and that fye openly profefs to takg it in that fenfe. And Q^ 1 52* he determines, that it is lawful to profefs or fub- fcribe our Affent and Confent to humane Writings f which we judge to be true and good, according to its meafure of Iruth and Goodnefs '■> as if Church-confef- fwns that are founds be offered for our confent •> we may fay or fubfcribe, I hold all the Dotlrine in this Book^ to be true and good. And this he cannot deny of the things prescribed to be ufed by the Liturgy, And if as Mr. Baxter fays, the prefence of Godfa- thers, who hear the Charge concerning the Edu- cation of Children, implyes their confent : So doth the prefence of fuch as come to our Congregations to Worfliip God according to the Liturgy , im- ply their Affent and Confent to the fame. This is a real , and that which is required , is but a verbal Declaration of our Affent y So much of Af- fent,^. in general. P. i<5o. Mr. Baxter infifts upon fome particu- lars, unto which the Non-Contormifts cannot give their Affent : The firft is, the Rules given ( in the RubrickJ to know when the moveable Feafts, and Holy-days begin. Where it is faid, that Eafier- day on which the reft depend, is always the firft 'Sunday after the firft Full Moon , which happens, next after the 2 1. of March. To which I anfwer, that this being a general Rule, it may be allow- ed to have fome exception. 2. The Kubrick' doth not fay, a Rule, but Rules, in the Plural, Now, B 4. though ( M ) though this Rule be defective , yet Mr. Baxter grants there is another fubjoyned, which is more perfect, and the practice of the Church guides us in following that Rule which is perfect. So that where the hrft Rule fails, the defect is to be fup- plyed by the fecond : And then the defect never coming into pra&ice , our AfTent to it is not re- quired, being limited to the Ufe of things only. And Mr. Baxter might have as well objected a- gainft the Almanack , which fays , February bath 28. days, when as it is afterward intimated , it hath fometimes 2 p. days. So that this Objection is frivolous, and ferves only to fhew that the Nori-Conformifts find great want of more fub- frantial reafons againft Conformity, while they catch at fuch Shadows as this. P. 1 62. We Affent to approve of, and Confent to tbefi words in the Freface > We are fully perfwaded in cur Judgment /, and we here profefs it to the World> that the Boo}^ as it flood before eftablifoed by Law, doth not contain in it any thing contrary to the Word of God, &c. Where Mr Baxter omits thofe Pro- vifo's, which in his own Judgment (as hath been (hewed ) would make fuch a Profeflion lawful , viz» If it be allowed fuch juji and favourable Con- flrutlion, as in common equity ought to be allowed to all humane Writings h efpecially fuch as are Jet forth by authority , and even to the very beft Tranflation of the Holy Scripture it felf. This is not candidly done. But Mr. Baxter is guilty of another wilful mi- ftake in this particular, greater than the former, when he fays, we AfTent and Confent, and ap- prove of thefe words in the Prefa.ce i whereas he well ( z? ) well knows our AlTent to the words there men- tioned is not required nor could be intended 9 for it is only a profeflion of our Superiours that were then in Being, what their Judgment and Be- lief was concerning the Old Common-Prayer Book, and if we think charitably of them as we ought to do, (that .they meant as they fpakej) this is all that is required of the Subfcribtrs to AlTent unto, if the Preface come under the AcT for Con- formity. And therefore to fay no worfe, Mr. Ba- xter very inconfiderately fays, p. 164. 7 he fe things we mujl approve in the fore f aid approbation of all things in the Old Common-Frayer Boo}^ 5. Mr. Baxter doth very ill to recount thofe miitranilations in the Old Book , which are a- mended in the New Book of Common-Prayer whereby our AlTent to it is much morerfacile,* though ( under the Provifo's before mentioned ) as our Superiours thought them deferable. So many pious men ( in the account of all the Non- Conformifts ) did fubferibe unto the Old Book , as containing nothing contrary to the word of God. And when our djfent,&c. is required only to the New Book h as it Hands amended, there is no fear of out being required to AlTent to the Old Book and its Imperfections 5 which yet Mr. Baxter inhnuates as if it were included under this Declaration in the Preface , and did concern the prefent Conforming , which Mr. Baxter knows to 'be falfe, and contrary to the end of fuch altera- tion c , as well as to the meaning of that profefh- on in the Preface. As to that Tranilation of Pf* 105.28. which in our prefent Liturgy is, They ifpere not obedient to bfe Word) and in the New Tranila-? ( M ) Tranflation > Tbey rebelled not againft his Word \ which Mr. Baxter fays are clear contrary : It will not appear to be Co , ifit be confidered that in the Tranflation ufed in the Liturgy , which is according to the Septuagint, the Arabic^, Syriac^ Ethiopick^, and many Latine Copies » the Ffalmiji is underftood to fpeak of the Egyptians, who, not- withftandmg the wonders done upon them, were not obedient to th Word of God, whereas others un-" derftanding the Verb to refer to Mofes and Aaron, or as Junius and Iremelw underftand it , to the Signs and Wonders which God commanded againft the Egyptians, Tranflate it, tbey rebelled not again]} bis Wordy both which Interpretations are true and agreeable to the Hiftory , and therefore ( if Mr, Baxter could have given them a favourable con- ftrudtion , as was defired by his Superiours ) he would not have faid they were clearly contrary. The fame anfwers may ferve to the exception a- gainft the Collects of the Old Book, which for feveral days together ufed the words this day , which is now altered in the New Book into this time, which is the fame with day in a large fenfe. But little reafon have they to objedt againft any Words or Phrafes ufed in our Liturgy i who are frill fond of Singing Pfalms according to the \ Tranflation of Sternhold and Hopkins, far more de- fective than any in the Liturgy. The next Objection is concerning the reading of fome part of the Apocrypha, concerning which, I anfwer in general •, that the Church hath fuffici- ently diftinguilhed in her Articles and Homilies, as well as in the Liturgy it felf, between the C.j- nonical and Apocryphal Books. 2. The times when the the Apocrypha LeiTons are to be read, are known by the Calender to be between Sep. 28. to No- vemb. 24. 3. This is to be read only on the Wee\ days^ not on Sundays. 4. It is granted by Mr. Baxter that the founder Books may be readv 5. The 5 Chap, of Tobit , and that part of the 46 Chap, of Ecckf. which fpeaks of Samuels Pro- phecying after his death are omitted. 6. The Non-Conformifts think there is Liberty granted in the Preface, to the Second Book of Homilies to change fome LefTons. But it is ftill Object- ed, that by reading of thefe, the Scripture is for that time excluded. Anfep. This is ill urged by thofe Non-Conformifts, who for many years to- gether, omitted the Reading either of Pfalms or other Scriptures in their publick , as well as prn vate meetings , contenting themfelves with a Singing Pfalm, and an Harangue of Extemporary Prayer and Preaching. 2, Many ancient Fathers have taken pains to Tranflate and Expound them, and commend them as containing many ufeful Moral Inftruflions. Irenew^ Tertullian and others cite Bel and the Dragon as an Example for Mar- tyrdom. Origen defended the Hiftory of Sufanna* So did St, Herom, who ajfo propounded the Hh ftory of Judith^ as an inftance of Love and Courage on behalf of our Country, which may ferve~as an Anfwcr to that other Obje&ion, that many of our Divines account them fabulous, and to con*? tain many untruths. And fo we fay frill , if we take in all the Apocrypha Writings, but deny. it of thofe that are retained by our Church \ againft which Mr. Baxter excepts. 1. That the in trails of a FiQi are faid to drive away Devils \ and keep (i6) keep them from returning, whereas Chrift faith, this kind goeth not out but by Fading and Prayer. Anfo. This faying of our Saviour concerning one kind , doth not exclude the ufe of other means joyned with Prayer and Fatting, as for ought we know was here done *, for the ejecting of fuch evi] Spirits, as affected the parties pofTeffed with Bo- dily Difeafes and Infirmities, of which many al- liances may be given. And why (hould we fo limit the goodnefs and Power of God, as to think that if he fent an Ho- ly Angel for the Preservation of a good Man , C which he often did before the coming of Ghriit) he could not blefs any means for the effecting of a good end. The next pafTage excepted againft by Mr. Baxter, is that , where the Angel fays , that he was the Son of Ananias of the Tribe of Nepbthali: Whereas the Scripture frequently calls Angels by the name of fuch Men as they repre- fent, Gen. 19.12. The Angels fent down to Sodom are called Men > the Angels that appeared at the Afcenfion are called Men in white Apparel; be- fides, thefe names were afTumed as figniric3tive of the end wherefore the Angel was fent : Azarias figtiifying the help of God, and Ananias the Grace and Favour of God. But it is farther Objected, that it is not appointed that the Prieft (hall tell the People that thofe LelTons are Apocryphal, or what that word iignifyeth. Anfo. Neither is it eicnyed them to inform the People, as oft as fuch Le/Tons are to be read. And laftly, Mr. Baxter thinks that the chief doubt is, wheihcr the Ca- lender appointing thofe LelTons may be conferred to i which upon fuppoiirion that thofe LelTons contain (17 ) contain nothing contrary to Gods Word or found Dodtrine, may undoubtedly be done, efpecially in cafe of Deprivation. Mr. Baxter refolves the cafe .thus: p. 191. "That the Apocrypha is no part cc of the Book to which we muft Profefs, AiTent, " Approbation and Confent , nor to which by " the Canon we muft, ex ammo fubferibe , that " there is nothing in it contrary to the Word of " God. P. i6j. Mr. Baxter refumes the builnefs of God- fathers againft which he multiplyeth words rather than objections '•> as i. That no Parent is permit- ted to be ' Godfather to his own Child , or to fpeak at his Baptifm , or Dedicate bim 5 or pro- mife in his name , or to undertake any part of his Education. All which is frivolous, for the God- fathers are to be Sureties , for the credibility of the Parent as well as for the Child, and fo the word Sumy implyes that the Parent is the prin- cipal i and who ever thought the Church intend- ed to exclude the Parents Duty, to which the Law of God and Nature bind him , and from which nothing but death can excufe him ? Nor did ever any good Man think that his procuring of God- fathers, did fupcrfedehis duty towards his Child, but that it was his duty more efpecially to do what they promifed in behalf of the Parents* And though it be not exprelTed, that the God- father is the Parents Reprefentative i yet the con- trary is not implyed, as Mr* Baxter fays, becaufe fas he there fays j the Parents are to procure the Godfathers, and how can Mr. Baxter tell whether he befpeaks him to be his Representative or not? Calvin advifed the Parent to bring hk Sureties with (i8) with him, Epijh 302. And that they fliould an* fvver to the Interrogatories which was the practice at Geneva, and by Beza approved in the Church of England , §hti$ damnare aufit ? Epijh the 8. to Grindal. As to his demand, whether it be not enough that the Baptized Infant be the Child of a Be- lieving Parent > I anfwer, the Church thinks it fuflicient in the cafe of private Baptifm , where no more is required v yet the Church may require witneiTes y that the Parent is fuch a one * under which notion they do reprefent him » and for the better AfTurance , the Church requires that the Godfathers themfelves be fuch as have received the Holy Communion, u e. in the Language of the Primitive Church) that they befideles* But he makes another Query, whether the God- fathers Adt be truly the Childs in Gods account ? Anfiv. That Infants may be ingaged in a Cove- nant with God, cannot be denyed. They were cntred into a Covenant by Circumciilon , under the Law, "Dmt. 29. 11. 12. And for this reafon, our Children may be called Holy , as entred to a Covenant with God, and receiving the Priviledg- es of Baptifm , and fit it is they ftiould be early obliged to the Duties of the Covenant. And be- ing not capable to do this of themfelves", it is re- quiiite that fome others (hould do it on their be- half, with that folemnity which becomes fo great an Ordinance. Buxtorf. mentions a Sufceptor at the Circumcifion of Infants under the Law. And many Divines think that Cuitom was pradtifed from, J fa. 8. 2. 3. of which fee the Notes of Juni- us and Iremdim^ in Locum. Ms.Calun (»9) Mr. Calvin to Knox, Epijl. 285. I confefs that Stipulation is neceiTary> for nothing is more pre* polterous than that tfiofe ihould be ingrafted in* to Chrifts Body, whom we may not hope to be his Difciples > wherefore if none of the Kindred appear, that may give his Faith to the Church, and take charge of Teaching the Child j it is v c,^ but a Luforious Action , and the Baptifm is de- ' filed. Tertullian among the Ancients, fpeaks of Sure- ties for Children at Baptifm, and of the Three Interrogatories concerning their Belief of the Creed, Renouncing the Devil, and the Chriflian-Warfare, and fome think there is an Intimation of the fame, in the 1 Pet. 3. 21. St. Cyprian, St. Auguft. and many others mention the fame. The Reform- ed Churches have owned this Pra&ife ; The Bo- hemian, Geneva, Dutch, French, and many able Di- vines have defended it. And it is refolved by them that the words, I Believe, I Renounce, &c* being a Form of words to exprefs the contract, do oblige the Infant, which was anciently done, alio protejiante , and therefore the queftion being asked of the Godfather in the Childs behalf, doji thou Believe and Renounce, and wilt thou he Bapti- sed} It is plain that the anfwer alfo is in the Childs name , and the Catechifm fays , Infants are Bapti7ed 5 becaufe they Promife Faith and Re- <**JLJ pentance by their Sureties. Now if Children may be ingaged , and there be no way of doing it , but by fome others on their behalf, feeing this way of Godfathers hath been ufed by the Church- es of God 5 who can doubt but that their Act may truly be accepted of God as the Ad of the Child, (1°) Child } and wheh we grant that the Parent j6yns in the fame Ad: with the Godfathers, whom he , procures, and may bring with him and fignify his Confent , and receive the Charge, which though it bind the Godfathers to do their honeit endea- vour, yet it is more efpecially incumbent on the Parent > I fee no reafon but we may AfTent to this. And thus, the p. Objed. that Minifters muft Affcnt to all this Exclulion of the Parents, and Prefentation, Profeflion, Promife, and undertaking of the Godfathers is anfwered. All this Excluii- on is none at all, the Liturgy fays nothing of it > the Canon fays only he (hall not be urged to be prefent, and the Reafon is fuppofedi becaufe in time the ancient Ufe of Godfathers would be laid aiide , which all Proteitant Churches have care- fully continued. P. id p. Mr. Baxter excepts againft the Rubric^ which fays, It if certain by Gods Wordy that CbiU Ir:n which are Baptized, dying before they commit actual fin, are undoubtedly faved. Anfw, I. This being a Rubric^ and never coming to Ufe in the publick Worlhip* it cannot reafonably be thought to be impofed as an Article of Faith on others i but only as the Judgment of our Superiours , with whom , for ought I perceive, Mr. Baxter is more offended than with that Dodrine : For />. 172. N. 12. When young unftudied Men (as. he calls thole of the Convocation , who declare this Opinion, f. 172. N. 12.) " have in this iC point attained to an undoubted certainty, which iC their wafer, Seniors cannot attain , it behoveth tt them to convince us of the Truth of their In- fpiration ci*-9" 4. A Pledge to AJfure us thereof* And therefore Mr. Baxter doth not well to question , whether the Crofs be not made a Sacrament of the Covenant of Grace, or fo very near it as to have the greateft part of that Sa- cramental Nature , when no one part of the de- finition agreeth with it. And it is confefTed by Mr. Baxter^ that the Liturgy ufeth not the Crofs a$-a-fan of Baptifme, but as a thing added after it j and therefore not as Mr. Baxter fays, even in our .Covenanting with Gods for that Stipulation on the Childs part is paft before : All that is men- tioned in the Office of Baptifme is, that the Child is Signed with the Sign of the Crofs, in tokgntbat hereafter, he ffljall not be ajhamed^ dec. So that it puts fuch as have been formerly Baptized , in mind of that Duty which is incumbent on them, and to be a witnefs to every one of the Ingage- ments that lay on him. And that the Crofs may be thus ufed , will follow from Mr. Baxters Con- ceflion, in the Third part of his Cbriflian Directory. Q^i 1.3. Where he allows of the "Life of the Crofs before Heathen , as a fignirication that we are not afhamed of a Crucified Saviour : Now, if this Ufe of the Crofs be forbidden by the fecond Com- mandment as a Tranlient Image i or if it be a Sa- crament of the Covenant of Grace, it is fo when ufed. at other times as well as after the Sacra- ment of Baptifm. The time or the place where- in it is ufed doth not alter the nature of the thing. If therefore he grants fuch a Ufe of the Crofs/ as St. Aifguji. de Civitate Z>?/, and other Antients mention, as in open Indication to Heathens, that we are not adiamed of a Crucified Chrilt '-> and in civil (3?) civil Ufes alfo , it may be as innocently ufed after Baptifm, to the fame end. And it may be ob- served , that in Adminil.tring the ^Sacrament of Baptifm, it is faid by the Prieli, 1 Baptize thee,8cc. where he a&s as Gods Miniiter, but in che Ad- miilion of the Child, as a Member of the Con- gregation it is. faid, We receive this Chiid ? which cannot be thought any pavt of.that Sacrament. But let us hear how Mr. Baxter refolves the Que- fiion, 45?.^. 123. of Dired, May one Offer bit Child to be Baptized with the Sign of the Crofs> or theVfe of Chryfme^ the white Garment ', Mi\ and Honey , or Exorcifme ( as among the Lutherans ) who takgth thefe to be unlawful things ? Anfw. When he cannot lawfully have better^ hi may and muft Offer his Child to them that will fo Baptize him, rather than to worfe, or not at all ? becaufe Baptifm is Gods Ordinance , and the Childs privileage, and the Sin is the Minifiers and not his. Another Mans iinful Mode, will not jufti- fy the neglecl of our Duty i elfe we might not joyn in Prayer or Sacraments , in which the Mi- nifier modally fingneth, that is with none- — The Parent may make known in fuch Cafes, that it is Baptifm he defireth, and that he difalloweth the manner, which he accounteth iinful, and then he is no confenter to it. But where the Law* or Scandal , or greater Inconveniencies forbid him ,. he is not to make- his Profeilion openly in the .Congregation b but in that prudent manner which hefeemeth a fober peaceable Perfon, whether the Miniiter in private, or to his neighbours in Con-* verfe. Now when Mr, Baxter grants a Man may thus Offer his Child to Baptifm, where he fuppo- ieth many unlawful things axe Adnuniftrcd 3 he- C.2 doth' Cm) doth very ill to atnufe the Laity with the bare Sign of the Crofs. Yet I think if we take in the Dodrrine and Pra- dife of the Church, I may declare that it is cer- tain by Gods Word , that Children ought to be Baptized : And it is obfervable that the Salvation of Baptized Infants dying, &c. was as generally Believed, as their right to Baptifme. The Coun- cil of Milevity which was Continued by the Sixth general Council , delivers this not only as their own Opinion , but as a Rule of the Catholick Church, C. 2. And St. Augujh T>e Peccat. & Mer. I. 3. c. 5. fays, That of Old, the whole Church did firmly hold that Children do obtain Remiiii- on of Original Sin by the Baptifm of Chrift i it would be tedious to quote the authority of the Fathers , who generally hold that the guilt con- tracted by the Firft Adam, is done away in Bap- tifm , which Ingrafts us into the Second Adam* This was the Do&rine of our Church ever llnce the Reformation , agreeing with the Auguflan > Saxon. Helvetic]^ Palatine, French and Scottifh Con- feffions. So that generally all that AlTent to the Proteftant Do&rine, do AlTent to the Truth of this Rubrick, and feeing it is certain by the Word of God, that Baptifm was Inft ituted for the Remifli- or» of Sins, and to be a Seal of the Covenant of Grace ", feeing it is certain by the Word of God, as Mr. Baxter AfTerts, that Infants have a right to Baptifm j I fee no caufe why Mr. Baxter may not AlTent to this Rubrick. Our Wifer Seniors ought to deal fo candidly with. young and unitudied Divines, as to Inter- pret a Rubrick occaiionally delivered by them a* greeably greeably to thofe other places , wherein this Do- ctrine of the Church to which they had formerly fubfcribed , is purpoily handled and explained i now, Article 25. concerning the Sacraments, the Church holds , " That in (uch only as worthily * receive the fame, they have a wholefome ErTe<5r " and Operation. And Article 27. Thofe who re- ceive Baptifm rightly, are thereby^ as by an Instrument, Grafted into the Churchy and obtain Remifion of Sins. Now as this may probably be the meaning of the Rubrick > fo it is the fenfe of all fober Prote- ftants, that all fuch Infants as are duly Baptized, are admitted into the Covenant of Grace , and are in a State of Salvation. And this the Church of God hath alway taught, that none (hall perifh for the Imputation of the Sin of the Firft Adam, that are Baptized into the fecond Adam '•> and un- Ms Infants that dye (hortly after their Baptifm have this benefit by it, we may turn Anabaptifts, and deny it to them without any Injury* But it is objected that neither Rubrick, nor Canon, except from Baptifme and certainty of Salvation , any Children of Turks, Infidels, &c. Anfa* Mr- Baxter grants that as under the Old Teftament , Abraham might caufe the Children born m his Houfe, or bought with his Mony to be Circumcifed \ fo Chriitian Proprietors may by themfelves^ or other Godfathers, Offer fuch Chil- dren to Baptifm, and the benefits thereof. And 3 Fulgent ius de Vera prtd. /.i. c. 12. fays, that if fuch Infants die foon after Baptifm, they are heirs of God, and Co-heirs with Chritf, Favores funt ampliandi. J\ 174. It is Obje&d, that the Miniilers fub- C 3 fcribing (3*> fcribing to ufe no other .Form in the Adminiftra- tion of the Sacraments, than what is injoyned by the Book of Common-Prayer, the ' Non-Confor- miits cannot' Alien t to it, kit they (hould refufe from Baptifm the Children of true Chrittians, who will not' procure Godfathers, nor fubmit to the Sign of the Crofs V for the Prieji confenteih , faith Mr. Baxter, p. 177. Not to Baptize tbem> who dare not nceive it with' the tyfk of the Crnfs and Godfa- thers.' Anfw. That as the Practice of our Church in one cafe of neceiiuy, 'when Children are like to dye, mews that they approve of Baptifm, without either Godfathers Or the Sign of the Crofs > fo it argues that they do approve of it in other cafes, where no contempt or fcandal doth appear, (as where Godfathers may not be had, and it may be dangerous to'ufe the- Crofs as in the late times cf con'fufion ) and thofe perfons have a very low ei'teem of the neceflity and benefit ot the Sacra- ments, as do. withdraw themfelves and their Chil- dren from them, me'erly on a Ceremony ufed in the Administration. But the great fear of the Non-Confbrmiits is, cc left this Ufe of the Crofs be a fecond Sa- cc crament of the Covenant of Grace made by " Man, added to Baptifm, — and the rather be- cc caufe'it is the Ufe of an Image, though tran- " fient in Gods Worftiip, and to'fu'ch high ends, "p. 180. n. 5. and the queftion here, is whether cc the Crofs be not here made ( not only a Sacra- Therefore fuch whole fears are great, and their Faith but weak* whereby they might be hindered from not Com- municating at all, or 'not with comfort *, fhould confult their own, or fome other able Paftor for fatisfying their doubts, removing their fears, and ftrengthning their Faith in fuch a meafure, as that they may receive it for the better, and not for the worfe. If a ferious Chriftian fhould complain to Mr. Baxter of the weaknefs of his Faith, and fome troubles of Mind, I doubt not but that after Gholt- ly Gounfel and Inftrudtion , he would advife the fame method, viz* to frequent the Holy Commu- nion for the increafe of his comfort, and ftrength- ening of his Faith. Suppofe the cafe flood thus, That one who is afraid of Communicating with fuch as he thinks to be wicked Perfons, or to re- ceive the Sacrament kneeling, mould confult with Mr. Baxter, whether he may Communicate accor- ding to the Order prefcribed in the Liturgy: I am much deceived if Mr. Baxter could not give him fufficient jreafon ro lay allele thofe doubts , C 4 and on and rather than to negle£ that Ordinance, to fufymit to the Orders of the Church, and receive that Sacrament kneeling, and if it be no Sin to re- ceive it, it is none to give it to one that kneels* nor is it any way inconvenient for fcrupulous per- fons to feek Refolution and Gpnfplation from fome able Minifkr of the Church. P. 184. N. 15. Mr. Baxter obferves, that by the Liturgy every Parifhioner is to Communicate twice a year* the Rubrick fays three times in the year, whereof Eafter is to be one. As for the compel- ling Men fo to do, that is, as he obferves, by Sta- tute, and therefore it concerns not the Conform- ing Minifters > fo that this will not amount to what Mr. Baxter reports, as if it were the Voice of the Minifter. — - Receive the Sacrament, or lye in Goal. But Mr. Baxter ought to have understood this Rubrick, cum grano Sal'ps, if he had fo much left j for it could not be ftri&ly underftood of e- very Parifhioner , but only of fuch as (hould be judged ht and duly cjualifyed \ not to every Child, or ignorant Perfon, feeing it diredrs that fuch as are admitted to that Sacrament, (hould be able to give an account of the Catechifm, and be actually Confirmed, or defirous of Confirmation. And the Curate is to have notice at lead the day before who intend to Communicate, and if any of them be a notorious evil-liver, or have done any wrong to h'vs Neighbour by Word or Deed, whereby the Congregation , U offended, or if the Curate perceive any to live in malice and hatred, he may not pnly admonijh them to forbear the Lprds Table > but not fuffcr them to be partakers thereof, till he know them to be reconciled. But (19) But into what deplorable times are we fallen, that our higheft Priviledge (hould be accounted a great Grievance, and when all things are prepared and we are Invited in the Name of Chrifi to come to his Supper, we do rather choofe Imprisonment and Goals, rather than the Table of the Lord > The Firft Chriftians made this Sacrament their Daily- Bread, which Devout Practice was continued for many years, till as Devotion waxed colder, they Communicated only once a Week^ or on Sundays and Holydays at mo(t i at laft they came to once a Tear, until it was Decreed by fome Councils, that they (hould receive at leafi three times. By the Li- turgy of Edward the VI. the Clergy in Collegiate Churches and Cathedrals were to receive Daily \ and by the prefent Liturgy every Sunday. But that Heavenly Ordinance , which the Primitive Chriftians begged on their Knees, and which is a moft excellent means to Unite us to Chrift, and to one another, is defpifed and made a ground of Strife and Divilion. And when, notwithstanding the pious Provifipn made by the Church to quali- fy its Members for a due and frequent Participation pf that Blefling * and the Penalties provided by Law for fuch as neglect this duty, there is fo mi- ferable a negledt of it* we may juftly fear, that if thefe methods be difufed, we (hall return to the practice of the late times of Reformation , • where that Sacred Ordinance was in very many Parifhes wholly neglected for fome years toge- ther. P.lSj. Mr. Baxter excepts againft thofe words in the Office for Burial. Forafmuch as it hath plea- fed Almighty Gqd 7 to takg to himfdf the Soul of our Dear (40) Dear Brother here departed. Which he takes in a drift fenfe, as implying the Salvation of the De- ceafed-, when it may be underftood only in a lar- ger fenfe > that as the Body returns to the Earth, fo doth the Soul return to God that gave it to be by him difpofed of. And therefore the Church fays only of the Soul, that it is here departed, that Js, -gone from the Body unto God the Judge of all -Men > and when at the Interring of the Body, it is faid, In hope of the Refuneciion to Eternal Life\ it is not faid particularly of his Refurre&ion, but more generally that there (ball be a Refurreclion of our Bodies to Eternal Life in the fenfe as it is taken by ExpofitOrs of the Creed, that there (hall , be a Refurreclion of our Bodies to Eternal Life i when they that have done well come forth to the Refurredrion of the Juft 5 and they that have done evil to Condemnation. Of this as we exprefs a fare and certain hope for our felves , and all that do depart in the true Faiths fo, when we apply it particularly to the party Deceafed, we fay only ourhope»is that he refieth in Cbri'l. And Christian Charity teacheth vis to hope the belt of all that dye in the Commu- nion of the Church. For as thofc that dye Ex- communicate, the Office of Burial is denyed to them i And feeing Mr. Baxter pleads, that fome upright Chriltians in Phrenfies, Melancholies and Diftra&ions make away themfelves, of whom he would have us to entertain this hope: It would puzle a more charitable Man than he, to refolve of any particular Man that dyeth in the Commu- nion of the Church, that there is 'no hope of his Salvation > and it is better to err on the right hand (4») hand in Judging Charitably, than through Pride or. Malice to condemn a Brother* our Saviour for- bidding us to Judge that we be not Judged. His next Exception is againffthefe Words, Wt give thee hearty thank/ for that it hath pleafed tbee to deliver tbit Skr Brother , out of the mifencs of this finfui World. Now it being certain to us , that Death doth put an end to a State oi Sin and Mi- fery, to which all are fubject in this Life i we ought doubtlefs to give God thanks for that which we know to be a Mercy, and to leave the Final De- termination of his Soul, (which is a fecret unto us-)- to God. There was no Sin in Jobs blefjing the Name of the Lord * when by a fevere Provi- dence he took away his Children amidfl their Mirth, not in another paifage which is ufed alfo in this Office , and fpoken by the Apoftle con- cerning the Corinthian f : Jbankj be to God who hath given it* the Victory through our Lord Jefus Chnft '<, and when we fee our Friends and Relations peace- ably departed 5 W£ ; may blefs God for his Mercy, in delivering them from the evils which they fuf- fered^ and hope that he hath given them reft in Chrift h and we debut our ~duty to Gcd , and (hew our Charity to our Brother in fo doing. P. i£0. The Surplice is accounted by forne Nnn- Conformifts to be unlawful , and therefore they cannot AfTent to the life of it : For which no rea- ' fon is given, only Mr. Baxter fays, u If a Man cc mifiakingly fhouJd take the Life of the Surplice '* to be finfui, -he (hould not therefore be filenced. u ':4nfa 9 If he do miftake, he ought to do it mo- " deftly, fufpefting his own Judgment which he " will rind to be contrary to that liberty which 4 c Chrift (4*) ct Cbrift hath purchafed for us, that to the pure " all things are pure, and contrary to the Practice cc of Primitive times, wherein the White Garment "was in life, by the Teftimonies of St. Hierom, cc Chryfodome and Auguftine , contrary to the " Judgment of the moft Learned Protectants, and tc of Mr. Baxter himfelf. In his Five Difputations, ct p. 40^. Some decent habit is necejfary, the Magi- cc ftrate, Minifters, or Affociated Paflori, mufi deter- cc mine what 4f they tye all to one Habit (andfup- it is difobedience which the Church doth cenfure, and the Law punifti. The Surplice is but a Ceremony , which ought not to weigh down the Duty of Obedience. P. 15? i. Mr. Baxter grants, that if the Athana- ilan Creed be referred to the Doctrine of the Trinity , it would not be excepted againft. For he takes it to be the bed Explication of the My- ftery of the Sacred Trinity, which in fo fhort a Sum is extant in the Church : So that by requiring Aflent (43) Affent and Confent thereunto > the Church cf England hath fecured her felf againit any fufpiti- on of Socinian or Anti-Trinitarian Dodrin, where- of Mr. Baxter and others . frequently and falfly ac- cufe the Conformifts. That which cannot be Atfented to, is the Damnatory Sentences in that Creedj as, Firft, Where it is faid in the beginning, Who* foever wiU be faved , before all things it is necejfary that he hold the Catholick^Faith. - And the Ca- tholic}^ Faith is this, &c. And in the end, This is the Catholick^ Faith, which except a Man believe faith- fully he cannot be faved, Anfwer, if our Aflent be required only to the life of this Creed, and not, to a belief of the Truth of every part of it^ the controverfie will be at an end. Secondly, The Belief of things as neceflary to Salvation , is granted by Non-confor mitts to be not an AfTent to the feveral Phrafes and obfcure Words j but to the general fenfe contained in them. Now the fenfe of our Church in propofihg this Creed, may be judged by the life which (he makes of the Apoftles Creed, not only in the daily Pro- feflion of it, but in the Office of Baptifm, as con- taining all the necellary points of Faith , into which we are Baptized : And in the Catechifm as containing all the Articles of the Chriftiari Faith, which doth (hew that no more is required as neceflary to Salvation, than what is contained in the Apoftles Creed. Thirdly) In this Creed fome things are pro- pounded as necefTary points of Faith, which Men of weak judgments may apprehend, as that vot Wor[hip one God in Trinity ? and Trinity in Vnity* Other (44) Other things are for a clearer explication of tha f Dodtrin, and vindication of it from the errors tha f were then rifen in the Church, as the Arrians and Nefiorians who erred concerning the Divini- ty of Chriit and his two Natures i which begin thus : For there is one Perfon of the Father , &c. After which followeth the necelTary Doctrine a* gain : So that in all things, as k af ore/aid, the Unity in Trinity, and Trinity in XJr.ity is to he Worshipped* He therefore that ivill he faved muji thus thinly of the Trinity. So that the Dodtrine of the Trinity is that Faith which is propofed as neceffary to Sal- vation. I know the exception of many againft this Creed is in relation to the Heathen, who feem by it to be excluded from Salvation. In which refpedt, I fappofe it is that Mr. Baxter fays, p. 191. That fome R. Reverend Conforming do profefs that thole Sentences are untrue, and not to be approved ' 5 and he initanceth iomewhere in Mr. ChiMngworths refufal to fubferibe it. But if this be the ground of the Exception, I conceive that the generality of the Non-conformifts who main- tain the fame Opinion, which is confonant to the Scriptures, and to the Alfemblies Confeilion of Faith 5 to which Mr. Baxter alfo hath declared his AiTent in this particular, will not oppofe. For in the AiTemblies ConfeiHon, C. 10. Article 4. con- cerning effeftttal calling* they fay, That Men not pro* fijfing the Chrijiian Religion^ cannot be faved in any way vphai foever , he they never fo diligent to frame \ their Lives according to the Light of Nature, and the Lavp of that Religion they do profefs, and to ajfert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to he dete\hd. And I know fome Non-confor milts have (45) have lately blamed fome Conforming for feetning to incline to the contrary Opinion. Which, if this be fenfe of the Creed our Church doth ex- plode •» yet fome Non-conformifts think that by holding the Doctrine of the Athanalian Creed , they do not judge the Heathen World, and that they dobut not, but in every nation be that feareth I God and tvorketb Kighteoufnefs if accepted of him •> fo that this obloquie is filenced. But it is moil pro- jbable, that Atbanafw intended the Explanatory part of the Creed againfi the Arrians and o- j ther Hereticks in the Church, who if they denied j the Divinity of Chrift, and dyed in that error s who can think they* can be faved ? feeing they I make Chrift a meer Creature, and overthrow the Doctrine of our Redemption by him : But that he fhould condemn all that have a true, though but a weak Faith in the Holy Trinity, and can- not comprehend the manner of the Eternal Ge- 1 neration of the Son, the Proceffion of the Ho« ly Ghoft , and the Co-equality of the Trinity 9 cannot be thought to have been the Mind of A- tbanafiitf, P. 192. N. 20. The Liturgy faith, AH Priefts and "Deacons are to fay daily the Morning and Evening Prayer privately or openly^ not being hit by fickpefs or fome other urgent caufe &c. Anfo, That the Pri- Jmitive Chriiiians did meet daily, not only for j publick Prayers, but to receive the Sacrament is be- I lieved s and that it is our duty to Pray Morning ;and Evening cannot be denyed, and what fliould hinder, but that fuch as are fpecially devoted to the Service of God, (hould Pray openly with the people, if not reafonably hundred. Or at teaft pray privately I privately for them ? there are many that do their duty herein, and if all did, it would be better with us> beeaufe all Men do not perform their Baptifmal Vows, is it fit that none fuch mould be made ? we fee this duty is performed in Cathe- dral and Collegiate Churches* and in many other places* where there is a liberal maintenance pro- vided for the Priefis and Deacons , where though one only do Officiate, yet all thofe that are pre- fent may fay the daily Prayers as the Liturgy re- quires , which is another frivolous Objection of Mr. Baxters, p. ip2. n. 3. The next is a Calumny againft the whole Li- turgy, viz* that the Prayers are diforderly and de- fective , not Formed according to the Order of Matter, nor of the Lords Prayer j but like an im- methodical Sermon which is unfuitable to the High Subjects, and Honorable Work of Holy Wor- Ihip, and that the Non- conformists have Offered (when it (hall be well accepted ) to give in a Catalogue of the diforders and defe&s of the Li- turgy. But all this notwithstanding, they think it lawful to Ufe the Liturgy in Obedience or for Unity , or when no better may be Ufed : It is fomething to go thus far, but if they would im- partially confider the defects and confufions which were in the Diretiory, as it hath been confidered by Dodtor Hammond, or in Mr. Baxters Eight days exploit for a more correft Nepenthes, and (hall on the other lide read that account which Mr. Com- ber, and others have given of the Methodical or- der and dependance of the feveral Prayers and Offices, the Grave and Scriptural Phrafes and Ex- prellions in the Liturgy i he may perceive that this (47 ) is fitter to guide the Devotion of the Univerfal Church, than thdfe other are for Country Con- venticles. P. 15)4. He excepts againft the Preface to the Book of Ordination, where it is faid, that — r- It is evident to all Men diligently reading Holy Scripture, t and ancient Authors , that from the Apojiles time there have been thefe Orders in Chrifts Church, Bifhops^ Priejis and Deacons, as fever at Off cs. Anfw. I (hall not trouble my Pleaders with the Arguments of Learned Men , for the Order of Bifhops in the Church ever fmce the Apoftles days as diftindt from Presbyters j much lefs (hah I repeat thofe uncomely Reflections, which Mr. Baxter hath made on Diocefan Bifhops in both his late Books. It may fuflice in Anfwer to this Objection, that Mr. Baxter hath been formerly of a contrary perfwa- fion, I do not mean only when he was Ordained by a Bifhop, and did, or ought to fwear Canoni- cal Obedience to him, as his Lawful Governour j but in his more mature and ferious Age, when he had ftudied the controverfie ', I mean in his Chrif- ftian Direclory, p. 127. part 7. Where having pro- ved the particular Orders of Presbyters, and Dea- cons : He gives his reafons for a larger Epifcopacy^ as the Margin tells you. And N. 4. Thus he fays, Btfides thh, in the Apoftles days , there n>ere under Chriji in the Vmverfal Church many ge- ~ neral Officers that had the care of Governing , and Qverfeeing Churches up and down , and were fixed, by fated relation unto none. Such were the Apoftles . Evange litis, and many of their helpers in their days* And mojl Chriji i an Churches think that thmgh the Apojhlical, extraordinary Gifts, Fuviledges and Off* D r 4» ) ces ceafe > yet Government being tin ordinary part of their worj^, the fame Forms of Government , which Chrift and the Holy Ghoji did fettle in the firjl Age, wen fettled for all following Ages , though not with the. fame extraordinary gifts and adjuncts : Becaufe, 1. We read of the fettling of that Form, viz. Gene- ral Officers as well as Particular, hut we never read of any Abolition, Difeharge, or Ceffation of the InWitu- tion. 2. Becaufe if we affirm a Ceffation without proof wefeem to accufe God of Mutability, as fettling one Form of Government for one Age only, and no longer, 3. And we leave room for audacious Wits accordingly to queftion other Goffel-Inftitutions, as Pa- Jiors, Sacraments, &c. and to fay that they were but for an Age. 4. It was General Officers that Chriji promifed to be with to the end of the World. Matth. 28. 20* Now this will hold true or not ( fays Mr. Baxter ) If not, then this general Miniftry is to be numbrcd irkh humane Additions to be next treated of. If it do, then there is another part of the Form of Go- Tertiment proved to be of Divine Inihtution : I fay not * another Churchy but another part of the Government of ' both Churches, Vniverfal and Particulars becaufe fuch General Officers are fo in the UniverfaL as to have a general Over fight of the particular : As an Army is Headed only by the General himfelf, and a Regiment by the Colonel, and a Troop by the Captain, but the General Officers of the Army-i as the Lieutenants Ge- neral , the Majors General, &c. are under the Lord General, hi and over the Army, and have a general over-fight of the. particular Bodies , ( Regiments and Troops ) Now if this be the Injiituted Form of Chriji s Church-Government , that he himfelf rule abfolntely as General, and that be have fame General Officers under hint} (49) him, (not any one having the charge of the tvhole «, hut in the whole unfixedly , or as they voluntarily part their Provinces ) and that each particular Church have their own proper Pajlor, one or more ' 5 then whv can fay , that no Form of Church Government is of Divine appointment or command ? So far Mr. Baxter » with whom I find other Non-conformifts to agree in the Notion of Diocefan Bifhops h which is e- nough not only to confute this Objection againit the Order of Bifhops, but all that Mr. Baxter hath faid in his late Writings agaiiift the Confutation of National Churches , and the Government of Diccefans , with fo much partiality and pailion. And though Mr. Baxter deny it here, that having diligently read the Holy Scriptures ^and Ancient Authors , yet 'thr^e Orders and Offices are not evident' to him ; yet it is evident, he hath proved it folidly enough, even from the Scripture alone, to which whoever fhall joyn the Practice and Teftimony of the Pri- mitive Church, as a help to explain the fenfe of the Scripture , mult needs be perfwaded of the Truth cf theie Three Orders in the Church of Chrift --, arid therefore this Objection, from the Preface to the Book of Ordination , is of no weight. In all the fardle of Mr. Baxters impertinen- oies, there is not a more trifling Objection than that which follows againft the Bifhops inviting the people in the Name of God to come forth, •and mew what Crime or Impediment they know ifi the Perfons to be Ordained, p. io6 t For feeing rio Perfon is to be Ordained without a Title to fome Cure ^ feeing there are folemn days fet a- part for Ordination , and Prayers ordered to be D 2 Ufed (5°) tlfed the preceding Week-days, for Gods Blefling on that Ordinances feeing every Perfon is to pro- duce Teitimonials under the hands of Three Per- fons, to whom he is known, of his Life and Con- verfation i feeing any perfon may, if he pleafe, be prefent at the Ordination , and the Bifhop may perfonally enquire into his Minilteriai abilities : I know not what further caution is necefTary than to pronounce a Liberty to the people , who ge* nerally meet on that occafion in the greatcft Con- gregations, and in publick Places , to come forth and (hew if they know any impediment in the Perfon to be Ordained s upon which , I my felf have known feveral Perfons to be repulfed in the Face of the Congregation j and when the Ordain- ed Perfon is to continue a Deacon, for a year be- fore he is admitted a Presbyter, the people have a competent time to inform the Bifhop of any Crime that they know by him, which may render htm an unfit Perfon. without fuch a call from the Bifhop > which is but Abundant Cautela. P. J£7. He objecls againit thefe words , in the Form of Confecration. Receive the Holy Gboft^ for the Office and JForl^ of a Priefi. &c. The doubt is, faith Mr. Baxter^ whether this be not an abufe of the words which Chrift himjelf or his Apojiles ufed, and fo not to be Affented to. Now Mr. Baxter grants that Chriit or his Apoftles ufed thefe words -, that our Saviour ufed them, and when is very obfer- v.ible. It was after his Refurrection, and before , his Afcenfion, that our Saviour endowed his A- poitlcs with this Minilteriai Power, faying unto them, Receive the Holy Ghojl, which could not be meant of any extraordinary Power of Tongues and r j* ) and Miracles , which were not given till Chrift was firft glorified , when the Day of Pentecoft was fully come. The Power therefore conveyed by thefe words, was an Authorizing of them to the ordinary work of the Miniftry, as the follow- ing words do inforce j whofe Sins ye remit, they are remitted j and this Power Mr. Baxter grants to belong to every Minifter ; That the Apoftles of our Lord did ufe the fame words, is probable from that expreilion of St. Paul, Ails, 20. 28. Jake heed to your felves, and to all the Flocks over which the Holy Ghoft hath made you over-feers. And Mr. Ba- xter complains, that too little notice is taken of the Holy Gbofts jetting Paflors over the Flocks , which the Scripture mentioneth, p. 310. Which is a conveying of that Authority, which Chri[\ at his Afcenfion left to his Church > he gave fome Apoftles, fome Prophets, See. for the wo-\ of the Miniftry, Eph. 4. 1 1, 12. v. 13. Jill we all come in the Vnity of the Faiih, I fee no Fueafon , but that when authority injoyns it : as a Captain may fwear Obedience to his Colonel, and he to his Lieutenant General, or Major Generals i fo may the Presbiter to his Diocefan, and the Dio- cefan to his Metropolitan. But Mr. Baxter hath more plainly refolved this doubt, in anfwer to ^152. in his "DireSary, part the %k, p. 181. the D 3 Queftion C 5* ) Queftion is, — May we lawfully fwear Obedience in all lawful things to Vfurpers , or to our lawful Pafiors? To which under N. 3. he thus anfwers, she old Non-conformifis , who thought the Englifh Prelacy an unlawful Offices yet maintained that it is lawful to takg the Oath of Canonical Obedience, be- caufe they thought it was impofed by the King and ~Laws '■> and that we ftvore to them not as Officers, claiming a Divine Right in the Spiritual Government , tut as Ordinaries or Officers made by the King, N.B, to exercife fo much of Ecclefiaftical jurifdittion under. Irim as he 'can delegate. And if Trelacy were proved never fo unlawful, no doubt but by the Kings command we may fwear, or perform formal Obedience to a. Prelate y as he is the Kings Officer. Of the Non-conformijis Judgment in this, read Bradfhaw a- gainft Canne. This conceffion of Mr, Baxter will Overthrow that, wherein he placeth the force of the Objection, viz. That the Ordinary is not only the Bifhop, but alfo the Chancehur, Officials, Sec. becaufe they are the Kings Officers. And, if the Chanceltour do invade the Office of the Minijby in Excommunicati- ons and Abfolutions h Mr. Baxter well obferves , p, 202, It is not )u{\ifyed by the Bijhops themfelvesi I wonder how' any right Presbyterian can except againfr one Lay-Chancellour in a Diocefs , who would fet up one or more Un-ordained Ruling Elders in every Pariih h and though Mr. Baxter be not thorow Paced in this point, yet inhisTradr cr Ordination , he would have the Magiilrate to authorize a Lay* Officer ; well like to our Cbancd- lours, p. 299. He direcls the Magiilrate to appoint an able Godly moderate Mi /lifter in each County ; or or quar:::\ to fee the Taftori do their duty, not (5*) having Epifcopal Tower to fufpend or excommunicato them » but let every Victor have an Agent of the Ma~ gifirates joyned with him, Armed with Authority to convent the Minifters, and examine IVitneffes, and t° do what more the Chief Magiftrate Jball fee meet, ft that ftill thefe two Vifitors go together , and let the Civil Vifitor have all the Coercive Tower. This comes home to our Lay-Chancellours, who being the Kings Officer, we may by Mr. Baxters per- miilion fwear Obedience to him. And other Non- Conformifts ( as wife as Mr. Baxter ) think that the Apoftles Wife Man fpoken of in i Cor. 6. to be a Prefident for our Chancellours. And it is iliange that they who would fet two Lay-Ruling Elders in every Parifh, fhould not admit one in a., Diocefs. Mr. Baxters laft quarrel againft the Pvubrick is> that it obligeth the Minifler , who repelleth any from the Sacrament to give an account of the fame, to the Ordinary within fourteen days after, Anfw. He that hath no notorious fcandalous per- fqns in his Parifh, is free from this trouble j and fo is he that hath furfb if they do not prefs them- felyes on that Holy Communion. If any fuch do, the Minifter having timely notice of his in- tention, as is required, may fend for him, and privately admonifh him, that the Congregation are much offended by his diforderly Conyerfation *> efpecially by fuch or fuch a Crime, whereof by •common Fame he is reported guilty, and there- fore defire him to forbear that Sacrament, till fuch time as he have given Teftimony of his Repen- tance and Reformation,- to the "fatisfadttori of the Congregation. In this cafe the party forbearing D 4 on (54) on a private Admonition, there is no need of in- forming the Ordinary. But if fnch a perfon ftill prefs on, the Minifier ought to refufe him, and it will much abate his trouble, and the Odium which otherwife might lye on him, to refer the Cafe to the Ordinary to be determined by him. Thefe are the great number of Sins , hindring Conformity, io hainous as that Mr. Baxter was a- fraid to name them, left he (hould difpleafe and provoke the Conforming > which even in the judg- ment of Mr. Baxter himfelf , and other ferious Non-conformifls , will fcarce amount to an ap- pearance of evil. As for the Objections againfi the Declarations , and Oaths required by A& of Parliament > feeing he acknowledged that it is not the fenfe of the Liturgy, but of a Statute of Parliament which the Non- conformifts doubt of, and that jt would be impertinent for us to tell them what is the fenfe of the Church *, the doubt being, what is the fenfe of the Parliament, p. ipi. I (hall not add much more to what I have fpoken on thofe Subjects , but refer them to thofe , t,o whom the Execution of thofe Laws are commit- ted for their better Inftruciion. And I (hall only obferve , that the complaint againft the Law- givers, ' f. 204. /?. 3. is, that they will not other- rpife expound their own words-, after feventeen years rrahing for it under compulfive executions. By (other- -mfe) he means againit the fenfe of the plain words, as appears, n. 2. in which the Non-con-' formifts there profefs to underhand them, but can- not AfTtnt to them, and therefore they think they maybe excufed, if by milbke they think feme of th ft paffages to be unlawful, that are not, or to have (55) have a worfe fenfe than indeed they have. This miftake will appear to the Judicious Reader to be wilful, and an Act of pure malice and revenge. For the plain Englift of it is this, That becaufe the Parliament will not, in favour to the Non-confor- miils , alter their Laws, and difpenfe with the Oaths of Obedience, and renouncing of the Co- venant, and reforming every thing in the Liturgy which they have fancied to be iintul, and thereby juftify the Non-conformiits, and confefs themfelves to be the caufe of our prefent Divifions : They are itill refolved to pronounce the Liturgy to be iin- ful, the Laws Tyrannical, and fuch as would force them to perjury. And though they want power for the prefent to help themfelves, yet if you will not hear, thofe will, whom God will ufe to the healing of his Churches ( as he fays in his Pre- face ) the meaning whercoF is too plain : By this time the Reader may difcern how vain-glorious his boatt is , that he hath (hewn us a tighter way of Concord^ more Divine^ Sure, Harmlefs, Corner eh enfive y fitted by Chrift himfilf to the inter eft of all good Men\ yea^ of the Churchy and -all the World, Would you know, what that grand difcovery is he tells you, p* 36. of his Plea, which is the Sum of his five nrit Sections 5 and this is the refult of all. Ci If "every Paiior might be a Biihop in his Parifh , " Independent and free from any Superiour to con- a troul him h if he may have an arbitrary power, > cc if they mav be arbitrary in exercife of the pow- " er of the Keys without appeal, fuch as he fays, a p»26^ a the Jews had, where there was a Village " of Ten Ferfons> there was a Presbyter that had cc power' of Jud£ing Offenders ; Then we (hould c be fo far ( fays he ) from uilng the controver- a lie about the Divine Right of Epifcopacy, as a u diftindt Order from Presbyters, to any Schifme ^ or injury to the Church, fas hitherto they have K done ) that we (hould thankfully contribute our fc beft endeavours to the Concord, Peace, Safety, " and Profperity thereof ( u e. ) they would give the Bifhops leave to exercife their Authority in "Utopia, having provided that they (hall have no- thing to do in England : But the Magiftrates muft yield to them alfo. — " Might we be freed from H Swearing, Subfcribing, Declaring and Govenant- cc ing unneceiTary things , which we take not to ? be true , and from fome few unneceifary pra- c < dices which we cannot juftify : And if they might have power of Ordaining fuch as they pleafe, and of Confirming the Adult not accor- ding to the Order of the Church of England ( for that comes too near to Poperyi ) " but accor- tc ding to Mr. Baxters^ or Mr. Hanmers Model, that K is , May the power of altering the Laws in cc Church and State, then, ( and not till then , - , y when thefe neceffary terms are granted )' they " will (erve the Church ( fo modelled) in poverty " and raggs. But of fo great a mercy ( fays he ) cc experience hath made our hopes from Men to cc be very fmall > and the Reafon of the thing cc makes our hopes as fmall, of the happinefs of " the Church of England , till God Unite us on I fee no reafon why one Or* dained by Presbyters, may not fubmit to Epi- fcopal Ordination by his own Argument. Yea, Mr. Baxter there affirmes, that the mutual confent of the people , and them fe Ives may fuffice to the orderly admittance into the Office j ejpecialiy if the Magifirate confetti^ and the Ordainer s Jhould refufe : For which fee more in his Difpute of Ordination- from whence I propofe this cafes fuppofe a perfon fitly qua- lified for Parts and Piety, Chofen and Ordained a Minifter by an Independent , or Anabaptiftica! people, fhould afterward fubmit himfelf to Pref- byterial Ordination: I doubt not but the Presby- ters would think it lawful to Ordain him, and I believe they would not admit him into their Churches without fuch Ordination , which may juitirie our Superiours in requiring that they who will be admitted Minifiers of the Church of England^ mould be Epifcopally Ordained. For here is nothing repeated but the outward part , lor Ceremony of Invefiiture^ which by Mr. Baxters jCpnfefhon may be repeated, and is no more than the Marriage of fuch by a Minifter, who had been Married before by a Juftice of Peace : Or as he makes another Companion, it is no more than if a perfon very expert in Phyiick) mould praclice wi th- (6o) without a Licenfc. Upon which he tells you a ffe- ry of his great fuccefs in Phyfick, which he pra- cticed many years gratis, and faved the Lives of multitudes, p. 78. of the Third part of the way of Concord h and yet he there grants , that it is meet for the fafety of Mens Health , that none pradHfe Phyfick , but a Licenfed Phyiician. And until there be a greater want of Divines or Phy- iicians than now there is, it is pitty that fuch as are not Licenfed (hould be permitted. The Third part of Conformity begins p. 208. concerning the Renunciation of the Covenant , whereof he treats, p". 11. and 12. Minifters ( faith he J muji onely fubfcribe, that there is no Obligation on me, or any other perfon from the Oath, &C. to en- deavour any change or alteration of Government in thi Church, to which he adds the Oxford Oath, That roe wiU never endeavour any alteration. And the Ar- ticles for Prelacy, the Ordination promife, and Oath of Canonical Obedience. cc Againlt all which he "Objects, that even thofe Non-conformifts that cc are for the lawfulnefs \ yea, the need and de° to vifit his Parifhioners , that he may- know the State of his Flock, to inftrucl: the Ig- norant, rebuke the Wicked, incourage the Good P to vifit the Sick, abfolve the Penitent, and to flrengthen them by the Word of God , and the Comforts of the Holy Sacrament againit the fear of death. If thefe things were duly done as they might and ought to be ', there would be no caufe to complain, either that the Bifhophath tco much, ex ( 6z ) or the Paftor too little work, the fault is not in the Laws or Constitution of Government, but in the want of due Execution. To omit the many impertinencies in the 12. $. there are Three things only, on which he grounds his Plea for the Covenant: The Firif is, ^.214; " Whether when Charles the II. had (though in- " jurioufly) been drawn to take the Covenant, it P. 52. " Lite ( *l ) P. 52. He tells the King to his Face, "That a cc King abuilng his Power , to the overthrow of < c Religion, Laws, and Liberties ( which are the " fundamentals of that Covenant ) may be control- * c led and oppofed. And if he fet himfelf to 0- becaufe he doth by " that oppoiition break the very Bonds , and 0- cc verthrow the EiTentials of this Contract and " Covenant. This may ferve ( fays he ) to julti* €c fy the proceedings of this Kingdom , againft "^.34. The " Bifhops behoved to perform this Rite, and the Cc King behoved to be Sworn to them. But now, " by the Bleffing of God, Popery and Prelacy are Woifhip, Difcipline and cc Government. And p 107, He doth alio declare * c his firm refblution to manage the Government " of the Kingdom of England , by the Advice of « c his Parliament, continuing of anHoufe of Lorcts 2 "and an Houfe of Commons there. All which His Majefty hath punctually performed , and the Parliaments of both Kingdoms, having refund- ed the Covenant, and condemned it as an unlaw- ful Oath , and fettled the ancient Government of the Catholick Church : I fpeak with all humble fubmiflions His Majefty is not at all obliged by that Covenant thus taken, much lefs to make any alteration in the Government of the Church of England ? unlefs he would acl: hot only contrary to the eftablifhed Laws> but contrary to that ve- ry Oath and Declaration by which the Non-con« fcrmifts fuppofe him to be obliged 5 which oblige him to agree to fuch alterations, as the Houfes of Parliament , in regard to the Conftitutiort of Af- fairs, and the good of His Majefty and his King- doms (hould judge neceffary, and to manage the Government of the Kingdom of England, by ad- vice of his Two Houfes of Parliament* And this will arifwer the firft Queftion in the Negative 5 shat neither the King ( who was injurioufly and E % tin- ( 66 ) unlawfully, as is acknowledged ) drawn to declare for it, and confequently no other perfon that took it afterward, are bound by it to make any altera- tion, &x. If any alteration be found neceiTary , there are lawful means to be ufed for that end. But there is no obligation from this Covenant , being fo repealed to ufe even lawful means, much lefs fuch unlawful ones as the Covenant implies, (i.e.) forSubje&sto reform without, and againit the Magiftrate and his Laws. By this alfo a fe- cond queftion is refolved, ^.215. which Mr. Bax- ter calls the main quell ion : Whether every Miniflev mud or may become the Judge of all other Mens Con- fciences and Oligations in three Kingdoms ? For let it be remembrcd that the cafe is only, whether they are obliged by the Covenant to endeavour any alteration, &c. Any lawful endeavours are not denyed, but the Covenant being Condemned as an unlawful thing, cannot lay an obligation on any to adt againit the Laws, whereby the Church Go- vernment is eftablifhed. Againft this, a third queftion is urged, whether thU League and Covenant were a Vow to God , and not only a League and Covenant with Men > which celfante occafione, and by confent of Parliaments doth ceafe. Mr. Baxter affirms , that it was a Vow to God, and a League and Covenant of Men with one another that they will perform it > and inilead of Proof he fays it is notorious to any Man that xeadeth it with common underftanding. Anfw. I. The Title of it is a Solemn League and Covenant > there is no mention of a Vow to God : And in the Preface, a mutual League and Covenant* 2, And in the Renunciation, it is to be decla- red, (*7) red, that there lyes no Obligation from the Oatl\ commonly called the Solemn League and Cove- nant. If any part of it be a Vow to God, that is not mentioned to be difclaimed i for, 3. The particular Cafe wherein its Obli- gation is to be difclaimed , is to endeavour any alteration, &c. Now, how can it confift with the ... nature of a Vow to God, to make unneceflary al- terations againft the Laws of the Land ? Would not this caufe the Chrifiian Religion in a fhort time to be exploded out of all Kingdoms ? 4. It is notorioufly known, that the few things that make the Contract, ( as Mr. Douglas calls it) ojr Covenant between the Rebel Scots and Engli(b y to feem as a Vow to God , were ufed only. as,, a pretence to draw on that part of the Covenant which is acknowledged to be unlawful, and which is the greatest part of the Qovenant , the intent, whereof was to ftrengthen the Rebellion againft the King, as ( by the negative Oath and the ge- neral actings of both Nations which followed ) doth evidently appear : And what Rebellion or Kerefie may not be Covenanted for, under pre- tence of fuch Vows ? If therefore there had been any thing of a Vow to God in the Covenant, it was a horrid Profanation of Gods name, to make it fubfervient to fuch unlawful ends. And it is rightly obferved , that it binds to the Extirpation of Birfiops, out of other Churches, as well as out of ours alone. 5. The molt part of thofe who took the Cove- nant when it was firft impofed , had declared their approbation of the efiablifhed Government, and fworn Obedience to the Bifhops i fo hid ge- E 3 nerally C68) penally all the AiTembly , and fixed Minifters ~ and aslprefume Mr, Baxter himfelf* and what- ever contrary Oaths they took afterward, arc sightly efteemed to be as Null, the pretence of a Vow notwithstanding. 6. It is inconfiftent with the nature of a Vow> to be forced , as the Covenant generally was, as hath been obferved from Mr. Baxter, " That the eC Scots taking advantage of the ftraits to which cc the King had reduced the Englijh Parliament , €C brought in the Covenant as the condition of " their help; and that the Houfe of Lords com- " plained of the /Parliament (as Mr. Baxter calls €c the Houfe of Cprrimbns ) which tyed them to "meddle with nothing, but what they offered tq "them* And though the Covenanters pretended for this Vow the Example of Gods people in o- ther "Nations , and tfr£ commendable pra&ice of thefe Kingdoms in fdrriner times 5 yet {here never was the like Oath for matter and manner, taken by any people, fearing God in any Age of the World, "I conclude with a Conception of Mr. Baxters 3 £ 213. of the Plea : Jt U not in the Suh'yetis power by Vows to withdraw themfehes from Obedience to Authority? which is proved from Numh. 30. And the Reafon of it is 3 becaufe Ohligatio prior prqudi- 2 at pofteriori* God hath hr ft in joyned Obedience to our Superiours, They therefore lawfully re- quiring our fubmiffion to the eftablifhed Govern- ment, there can lye no obligation on me, or any other pcrfon to endeavour alteration of the Go- vernment, If any fault be found in fubordinate GovernouiS;, we may in our places and callings en- (6 9 ) endeavour a Reformation of them, but the Go- vernment is a noli me tangere, we may not under- mine foundations. But Mr. Baxter propofeth ano- ther queftion > whether the Covenant as a Vow to God hind to things necejfary ? Anfw. To all neceffary things we are pre-ingaged by the Command of God, and extraordinary means muft not be ufed when ordinary may ferve. Mr. Baxter $. 43. of his T>ireUory, fays, A Vow is as Null when the mat- ter i* morally or civilly out of our power, as if a Child or Servant Vow a thing which he cannot do lawfully without the confent of his Varent or Majler, though the thing in it felf be lawful > for God having hound me to obey my Superiours in all lawful things, I can- not oblige my felf by my own Vows, $. 75?. of his Directory. Make not a Law and Religion to your felves, which God never made by his Authority, nor bind your felves for futurity to all that is a duty at prefent, where it is poflible the changes of things may change your duty. And £. 3*p.ip* The true nature and ufe of Vows, is hut for a more certain and effectual performance of our duties, not to make new Laws and Religions to our felves. From which conceiTions it will follow , that the power of Reforming, &c, being in the King, the Vow was Null : And it is morally impoiUble for them to do that in their places and callings , which they cannot do without Invading the Place and Office of their Superiours. And therefore notwith- iianding the pretence of a Vow » yea though it were for things lawful ( which the alteration of the eitablifhed Government is not ) we may de- clare that there lyes no Obligation, &c. P. 2 16, £.13. Mr. Baxter infills on the Veclara- E 4 tiorij (70) ir/S, concerning taking Arms agaitift the King, Bca Where he fays , the queftion is not of the rirft claufe, of taking Arms , &c. For. he grants that a Topifh King U to be obeyed in lawful things •, p. 77. but of the 2 d. viz, I abhor that Traiterow pofrti- cn of taking Arms by his Authority againfi hi* perfon, or againfl thofe that are commijponed by him. This as the Law of the Land hath declared to be Trai- terous, fo hath the Law of God. 2 Pet. 2.13. re- quiring fubmifllon to the King, as Supreme, and unto Governours fent for Commiilioned) by him. The ground of this Declaration, was for the fe- curity of the Kings Perfon, againft fuch as diftin- guifhing between his publick and private capaci- ty, under pretence of his Authority detained his Towns, and fought thofe Armies where the King was in perfon j but when they had Conquered him, they declared the Supreme Authority to be in themfelves. But Mr. Baxter pleads, that Mini- Jiers are moflly ignorant ofjhe Law , not knowing what is called a Commijfion, and what Seal makgs it fitch, an4 they dare not thinly that a Lord Chancellour cr Keeper , hath Tower at his pleafure to dcpofe the King by Sealing Commijfions to any to feize on his Forts, Sec. Nor yet to defirny the Kingdoms, Cities, Laws and Judgments, and feize at pleafure on all Mens Efiates or Lives. This had been good Doclrine if Mr. Baxter had taught it when the Kings broad Seal was broken, and by Virtue of a Counterfeit one, the Lives and Eftates of the beft Subjects were deftroyed , the A& of Parlia- ment h3th declared the Supreme Authority to be infeparable in the Kings Perfon, fo that we can- not doubt of the Legality of Commiflions grant- ed (?0 ed by him, and his pretended ignorance againft the known Laws, being that Block on which the beft of Kings fell > I hope no good EngliJh~Man will ftumble at it again. But W.Baxter complains that thefe words \_againft thofe\tbat are Cmnmiffion- ed by him"] are unexpounded, and have no limi- tations or exceptions. It is not fit for private men to diftinguifh where the Law doth not , or that an lifurper , or Prpte&or pretending Refor- mation and Liberty , and that abufed Maxim of Salus populi Suprema Lett, ftiould rather be obeyed than fuch as Ad: regularly by the Kings Commif- fion, and according to the known Laws. Where- fore to feek evafions, and to fuppofe extraordina- ry Cafes, that may never happen againft plain and neceflary duties, ought not to be a Bar againft this Declaration. That which folio weth £. 14. "Of " deferting their Flocks , and keeping Conven- " tides i and $. 15. of not refiding within Five cc Miles of Cities and Corporations, are not con- cc ditions of Conformity, but confequences of their " Non-conformity. And I leave them to be read and confidered by others, who will perceive how well Mr. Baxter deferves the Character which the Reverend Birtiop Sander/on gave of him : That be never kjierp a Man of more pertinacious confidence^ and lefs abilities in all his Conversations A douhh « minded Man is unftable in all his Ways, m i7z) An Jtnfwer tQ fame parages in the Se- cond Tart of the Non-conformifts Plea for Peace. HAving reflected on as much of the Firft Part of the Non-conformijh Flea, as concerned the Minifterial Conformity > I thought it not mate- rial to anfwer the many Impertinencies Printed in that Book : But finding a Second Part extant publifhed as (the Authors fay ) to fave their Lives, and the~ICingdoms Peace, from the falfe and Bloody Plotters*, who would hrft perfwade the King and People that the Proteftants, and parti- cularly the Non-confirmifts are Prerbyterians and Fj- natickf i And next, that it was fuch Presbytcrijns that killed his Father j and next, that our Prin- ciples are Rebellious i and next, that we are Plot- ting Rebellion and his Death, &c. On which particulars he enlargeth in the Preface , where I find him thus to juftify his party. I defire thofe that feek our Blood and Ruine by the falfe accufation of Rebellious Principles , to tell me if they can, what Body or Party of Men on Earth, have more found and Loyal Principles of Govern- ment and Obedience: and p. 109. of that Book, We are far from defigning any abafement of the Clergy, nor do we deny or draw others to deny any due reverence or obedience to them, (73) I conildered that very many of Mr. Baxters Readers , are apt to believe him , and therefore muft needs be greatly incenfed againft thofe whom he accufeth to be the Perfecutors of fuch a pious and peaceable party, viz. the Bifhops, whom he calls Thorns and Thiftles, and the Military Inftruments of the Devil, p. 122. of the Book of Concord % and ^.247. of the firft part of the Pleay and complains , ( as if he Popifh chtgp were in Egyptian Bondage, or the Men. Popifh Inquiiltion) of tearing En- gines, Goals, Starving , and Bloody Perfecution % Ruine and Death. Every good Man is fenfible what Indignation , fuch Cruelties pra6Hfed upon innocent perfons, may raife in the hearts of our Englifh Nation > who are noted for their compaf- (ion to their Brethren, in mifery againft the Au- thors of it* and I fufpecl: thefe fuggeflions are publifhed to inrage them, againft their prefent Go- vernours in Church and State, to prevent the mis- chievous confequences, whereof I have made the; enfuing inquiries. And Firft, their refpedt to the Conforming Clergy, will appear in the Epiftle, before the firiv part of the Plea infcribed to the Conforming Clergy, where he thus reproacheth them to their Faces. It is now feventeen years iince near 2 cob Miniflers of Chrift , were by Law forbidden the exercife of their Office, unlets they did Conform to Subscriptions, Covenants, Declarations and Pra- S5p which we durft not do h becaufe we feared God. The reafon of which Impositions, it is God and not we mult have an account of, from the Convocation, &c, ( by which. &c) I fuppofe he (74) be means the Parliament that made thofe Laws. He tells them of rendring odious them whom they never heard -, and urging Rulers to execute the Laws againft them. ( u e. ) to Excommunicate iilence, confine, imprifon, and undo them. He lays, he is not fo uncharitable, as to impute all their falfe reports to Malignity and Diabolifm , but that it was ftrangenefs, ( u e. ignorance of ) their cafe, which wrath and crofs interelt kept them from hearing : He fays he had read the Books of Biftiop Morley, Mr. Stileman, Mr. Faukper, Mr. "Fulwood, Mr. Vurel, Mr. Fowl'vi, Mr. Nanfen, Dr. Boreman, Parhgr, e tomkins> the Friendly Debate, Dr. Afhton, Mr. Hollingrportb, Dr. Good, Mr. Hinchjy, the Countermine, Mr. Lejlrange, Mr, Long, &c. And I think ( fays he ) Mr. Tombes hath faid more like truth for Anabaptiftry,the late Hungarian for Polygamy* Many for drunkenefs, Healing and ly- ing in cafes of neceillty , than ever he yet read for the lawfulnefs of all that is there defcribed , (viz. the terms of conformity. ) He tells them if they will not hear, thofe will whom God will ufe to the healing of his Churches. He means fuch Reformers as were in 42. and 43. to whom this Patriarch gives the Blefiing of Peace- makers, and fays, they (hall be called the Children of God, as lure as the Incendiaries in the late War , viz. Ewo^ Tym, &c. are by him called glorious Saints in Heaven, />. 83. of his Saints rdt. And thus reminding them of his paftoral Admonition i if any of you be an hinderer or llanderer of Gods word, &c. he hath fuffiqe'ntjy evidenced what reverence he hath for the Conforming Clergy. But how he hath difcharged that which he pro- fciTeth (75) feiTeth to be his duty, p 24.6. of his Plea,|w?.i. Moft of our acquaintance take it for their duty to do their beft to keep up the Reputation of the publick conformable Miniftry : Let the Reader judge by bis deeds, rather than his words, feeing he continueth Conventicles himfelf , and defends others in the fame Pradtife. And for his Admonition to us, I tell B ? *** «* , *■ . ? 1. w tr ^ e fatM know commend to him one Leflon them. from our Catechifm *, t6 keep his Tongue from evil fpeaking, lying and ilandeiing. The Second thing I obferve in his Plea for the innocency of his party, is, That no Men on Earth have more found and Loyal Principles of Govern- ment and Obedience. Anfw. While they were Governours none exacted Obedience more Severe- ly, or Ruled more imperioufly \ but take them in the capacity of Subje&s, and their practices Ihew what their principles are. But let us hear hk Plea to the Accufations : The frrft is, that thej are Presbyterians and Fanaticks. 2. Tliat they began the War in 42. and 43. 3. That they de- stroyed the King. 4. That their principles arc difloyal. 5. That they are Plotting a Rebellion* To the rirft , he tells us what a Presbyterian i% viz. fuch as hold Church Government , not only without Bimops, but alfo by Presbyteries, confin- ing of two forts of Elders, Preaching and Rulings and over thefe Clafles, and over thefe a National Aflembly, confiding of the fame two forts. That fuch a Government was intended by the Long Parliament , appears by their Ordinances, Aum 1643. for impofing the Covenant, rooting out E- pifcopacy , bringing all to an Uniformity ( with the cm the Church of Scotland ) and January 44. For taking away the Book of Common- Prayer, and eftablifhing the Directory. And June 5. 46. for fetling without farther delay of Presbyterial Go- vernment in the Church of England. And Au- guft 28. for Ordination of Minifters by Claflka! Presbyteries, within their refpe&ive bounds 5 which Form of Government to be ufed in the Church of England and Ireland, was agreed by the Lords and Commons in Parliament , after advice had with the ArTembly of Divines : The AlTembly drew This MQmh]y was called by jid an Exhortation for -, ^ v \ fie or a gerebat, And what if as Mr. Baxter fays, they do not now exercife their beloved Difcipline 5 are thofe Lions no Lions which the King keeps within the Tower? Have they not the fame appetite to the Church and Crowh Lands, the fame antipathy to Prela- cy, the fame zeal for the Covenant and Directo- ry ? Were they not generally Ordained by theft Presbyterians^ non tantum abjente Jed Jfreto Efifcop^ (77) as Mr. Baxter fays > thefe then I conclude to be Presbyterians, and if Mr. Baxter will add the terra Fanaticks, I cannot help it > they who plead all- quiduwSiv, fome impulfes on their fpirits, moving them from ingulphing with this generation by reafon whereof they cannot go back from that more fpiritual, plain and fimple zealous Service of Almighty God, in the way they are in, and refor- mation they feek, againft the (eitablifred ) Wor- ship and Difcipline. ( See p. p. of the Anfwer to Dodor StMngfleets Sermon) I fay they, who for want of reafons to defend their caufe, do plead imprelfions on their fpirits , do prove themfdves to be Fanatick, and I have proved them to be Presbyterians. The Second Accufation is, that we began the War in 41. and 42. To this he pleads. 1, The King hath faid fo much- for the Ad of Oblivion, that it is no ilgn of Loyalty and Peace to violate it. Anfw* An Adr of Pardon implies guilt, though it exempt from puni(hment. And Secondly, God himielf will pardon none but the penitent, what- ever the King may do. 2. You plead that falfe reporters fay, that the Papifts were the Kings party, and the Presbyterians the Parliaments, iu the beginning of the Englijb War. Anfi*. They are falfe reporters indeed , that fay the Papiils were the Kings Party , which were not an hun- dred part of his party * and I wonder not that Mr. Baxter calls it a falfe report, becaufc it thews the Papifts to have been more Loyal Subjeds than the Presbyterians. Yet wanted not a number of aT r S ' f ? mC ° p£nIy ' and others under hoods > to Act tor the Parliament, and they wanted not in- vitation C?8) Citation and temptations to have been all of that fide, as the Royal Martyr declared. 2. Mr. Baxter fays , the contrary is fo well &nown to Meri yet living, that the reporters can hope to feduce none but young men and Gran- gers. Doth Mr. Baxter mean by the contrary, That the Papifts were not the Kings party , and the Presbyterians were not the Parliaments party , or that the Papifts were the Parliaments party, and the Presbyterians were the Kings party at the be- ginning of our War j this I take to be contrary, and I think no Man living can affirm it. But he tells us that the controverlie was begun between Ardvbifhop Abbot ^ and his adherents, and Bifhop Laitd^ and thofe that adhered to him. Anfa. There Was no War begun in Arch-bifhop Abbots time, nor long after > but the controverfie which made way for the War was of another kind , and a more ancient date, as Mr. Baxter relates it, £. 7. of his Plea, part 1. To which 1 fuppofe he refers the Reader > and there he fays, the root of the difference between the old Non-conformifts and the Conforming was this, That one fort thought they fliould /tick to the meer Scripture rule and limpli- city, and go far from all Additions which were found invented or abufed by Papifts. The other fide thought they mould (hew more reverence to the Cuftoms of the Ancient Church, and retain that which was not forbidden in Scripture, which was introduced before the ripenefs of Popery, or before the year 600. at leaft, and which was found lawful in the Roman Church, and common to them with the Greek. And herein I have reafon to- believe Mr. Baxter was of the fame mind with the (7?) the Gonformifts againft the Non-conformi(fs. See Directory, fart 3. c&. 2. This difference was begun among the Exiles at Franckjbrt ( fays Mr. Baxter,) fome itriving for the Englijh Liturgy , and others for a freer way of praying, ( u e. ) from the pre- lent fenfe and habit of the Speaker, ( which by Mr, Baxters favour was not any where publickly pradtifed at that time > no not , by Calvin him- felf at Geneva. ) But farther. Queen Elizabeth , and King James ( faith Mr. Baxter, ) difcounte- nancing and fupprefling Non-conformifts. They attempted in Norihampwijhire and Warwickshire , to fet and keep up private Churches, and govern- ed them in a Presbyterian way, but the attempt was broken by the induftry of Arch-bifhop Wbto- gift and Bancroft: Some Conformed, and forrte were Connived at, which kept them from gather- ing fecret Churches > yet fome Preached fecretly in Houfes, and fome publickly for a day and away \ fome were further Alienated from the Englijh Pre- lacy, and feparated from their Churches, and fome of them called Brownifts were fo hot at home , that they were put to death. Mr. Ainfworth , Jobnfon, Kobinfon, and others fled beyond Sea, and there gathered Churches, and broke by divifions among themfelves, as their SucceiTors did in out memory. It will not be impertinent to (hew from Mr. Cambden, how troublefome this fort of Men were under Queen Elizabeth, p. 420. of the -Ffnglilh Tranilation of Cambden, They chofe that feaion when the Spaniards amufed the whole Na- tion from abroad, by their Invincible Armado, as they called it to difturb her at home. " And ne- 6{ ver did contumacious impudency againft Eccleti- F aftkal ( So ) i: aftical Magistrates, (hew it felf more bold and " infolent > for when the Queen would not give " Ear to Innovators in Religion, who defigned " to cut in funder the very iinews of Ecclefiaftical cc Government, and her Royal Prerogative at oncev cc fome of thofe Men who were great admirers of " the Difcipline of Geneva , thought there was no v - better way to be taken for eftablifhing it in ct England, than by inveighing and railing againft " the Englifh Hierarchy, and ftirring up the people " to a diflike of Bifhops. They therefore fet forth cc fcandalous Books againft the Government of the u Church and Prelates , as Martin Mar Prelate , i and the " Lord Chancellour of Treafon, ( and one of the cc party ftabbed one Hawkins, a famous Sea-Cap* " tain, fuppofing him to be the Lord Chancellor) * c Hjcfyt had fuch an implacable malice to the " Queen, that he faid often (he had forfeited her ( Presbyterians and fuffer not the principles of them to brook your Land, if ye like to fit at reiU except ye would keep them for try- F 3 bg (84) ing your patience, as Sqcrates did an evil Wife, The good King Charles found this Prophecy tp be true ? for notwithstanding all the care that himfelf, and Arch-bifhop Laud ( who apprehend- ed the approaching danger ) to fupprefs them , in fo much as that Mr. Baxter fays, in that 7. # ? That the old Non-conformifts being moft dead, and the latter gone moft to America j we cannot learn that in 1640. there were many more Non- conforming Minifters in England than there be Counties , if fo many \ the Wolves be like had got on the Sheeps Cloathing, and not being able to ruine the Church by open force, feek to under- mine it by fecret Arts, being got within the Pale. In 37. fays Mr. Baxter , Arch-bifhop Laud uling more feverity than formerly, and the Vifitations inquiring more after private Fairs and Meetings, and going out of their Parifhes to hear. And in many Places Ledtures, and Afternoon Sermons being put down ( which was done only where Faction and Sedition were Sown, and there Cate- chizing a much more ufeful exercife, was injoyn- ed in its room ) by thefe th"ngs ( and fome other which he there mentioneth ) the minds of Men were made more jealous than before, f and fears and jealouiles were made the grounds of the War, the King and Arch-bifhop being reported to be Popifhly arTeCvted , though they both, as well in their Life- time, as at their Deaths, gave irrefra- gable • Arguments for the contrary , fealing tho truth of their Piofeiilons with their Blood. ) And after the Imprifonment of fome, the ftigmatizing of others , and the removal of many beyond the geas, all which, both many, and fonie, amounted not cm not to above Three or Four j whom though the Parliament received in Triumph , and plentifully rewarded , yet they found them to be turbulent Perfons, viz. Prin, Burton and Baftrvkk^ for I hear not of any removed beyond the Seas by authority) thefe were the caufes of Alienating the peoples Minds from the Bifhops, and made them afraid of Popery more than before, (and fo it is mil, any re^ ftraint from Faction is Condemned for Popery ) Mr. Baxter tells us there of another Intregue> Then was the New Liturgy impofed on the Scots* with other changes there attempted ( which were the refuming of fome Lands belonging to the Church and Crown, which had been Sacrilegiouily with- held , during a great part of King James and King Charles's Reign j with the fear of lofing the Tithes that fome great Men there detained from the Clergy ) whereupon the Scots Armed and Invaded England , and fome Englijh Lords ( faith Mr. Baxter ) took advantage to prevail with the King to call a Parliament once again. And here doubtlefs was the beginning of the War, the Scots and fuch Englijh as were in confe- deracy, and had agreed upon a Covenant for Re- formation j being the * rirft Aggreffors. But let Mr. Baxter proceed — — The Irifh ( obferving it is like how the Scots thrived in their Rebellion ) on 0&. 23. 1 541. rofe and murdered 200000, Perfons, and ( Mr. Baxter is not amamed to fay) , the News was here reported, that they faid they had the Kings Commiilion ( juft as much as the Parliament had 10 nght by his Authority againir his Perfon, ) whereupon the Parliaments Declara- tions, raifed in "multitudes of the people, a fear F 4 that (86) that they had partakers in England, and when they had done their work there they would come hither. And (mark the confequence ) there was no way of fafety , but to adhere to the Parlia- ment for their own defence, ( u e, to flrengthen the War againft the King. ) And in 42. fays he the lamentable Civil War broke out j but between whom ? did the Bifhops right againft the King > or againit one another ? or againlt the Parliament? no fuch matter. How began the War then ? Mr. Baxter fays , the Houfes of Lords and Commons confined of fuch as had been Conforming, except an inconfiderable number. Some number then were apparently Non-conformifts , and it feems they had infedted many others i for Mr. Baxter fays , they were fuch as had been Conforming > they were not fp when the War began : and (N.B.) their fear of being over-powr'd by the Loyal par- ty, of whom they thought themfelves in fudden danger, caufed them to countenance fuch Petitio- nings and Clamours of the Londoners Apprentices, and others, as we think, diforders and Provoca- tions of the King. This doubtlefs was a begin- ning of the War, of which, fee the Kings com- plaint in his Ck of .Tumults : Mr. Baxter fays far- ther, the tirft open beginning was about the Militia, which by an Adt of Parliament is thus determin- ed : That the fole Command and difpodtion thereof is^ and by the Laws of England, ever was the undoubted right of His Ma jetty, and that both,, or either of the Houfes of Parliament cannot, nor ought' to pretend to the fame, &c. How then did the controverfie between the Bithops and Con- forming begin the War 3 when the difpute of the Militia (8 7 ) Militia did it. In truth there were ( as Wilf on in his Hiftory of King James confetfeth) Regians and Republicans , and the difpute in feveral Parlia- ments was between the Prerogative and Privi- ledges, and as Mr. Baxter fays, where other Par- liaments ended, that of 40. began. And is it not fkange, that there (hould be fo few Non-confor- milts in 41. and 42. and yet in 43. when the Covenant was brought in, all the Parliament and AfTembly, and Officers in any Court, in the Army, and in the Navy, (hould generally take the Cove- nant ? for that was made the Ted of all fuch as mould be intruded ; and we hear of very few that refufed , and I think there is no great dif- ference between a Covenanter and a Presbyteri- an, who dill cry up the Scottijb Difcipline, as the very Scepter and Kingdom of Jefus Chrift , to which all Kings and Scepters mull bow or break. The Third Accufation is, the death of the King, of which Mr. Baxter fays, that he proved in times of Ufurpation, that the Presbyterians deteited it, and that it was done by a Proud Conquering Ar- my. Anfiv, Who rofe that Army, and carried on that War wherein the King perilhed ? it was not the laft ftroak given by the Independents, that felled that Royal Oak, there were many repeated blows at the very Root of Majeftie given by others, which cut all the Ligaments of his Power and Authority in funder, chopt off all the Branches y his two great Minifters ( as Mr. Baxter calls them ) the whole Order of Bifhops, His power of the Militia, Forts, Garrifons and Navy, and ex- pofed the declining trunk to the fury of a Rafcal party, C 88 ) party, whom themfelves had Armed to the Kings mine. I (hall freely give you my thoughts of it, in an anfwer to another writing of Mr. Baxters, where he feeks more at large to excufe the Presbyteri- ans from this horrid Crime. Mr. Baxter fays , were it not for entring upon an unpleallng and unprofitable task : I would ask you, who that Jun for, Infandum renovare juhes Baxter e dolor em. Yet becaufe it may be profitable to know the truth > I fay, that the dethroning fo good a King, was a fad of an unparalled nature, to which the Sins of the whole Nation contributed, as well as yours and mine , and whereof we ought ftill to repent and beg pardon notwithstanding the Adc of Oblivion. Yet there was a Select Jundo, that had a more immediate influence into it, and you ask me who they were i though I believe you know them better than my felf , I will tell you my thoughts freely. Firft , they were the Men whom Mr. Baxter Canonizeth for Saints, in his Everlafiing 2u#,p,8 3 . in my Edition, viz. Brook^ and Prin, and Hambden, and White, dec. For I fuppofe you could have named many more of your own Coat, as precious Saints as they, of whom you fay with an AfTeve- ration , Surely they are now Members of a more knowing, unerring, well-ordered, right-aiming , felf-denying, unanimous, honourable, Triumphant Senate than this from whence they were taken, or ever ever Parliament will be : But what if they are gone to another place , than what your Everlaft- ing Reft intended ? have you not made a fcurvy Pvefledtion on your long beloved Parliament, and fome Men do fear they were never admitted in- to Gods everlafting reft j becaufe you that fan- cied them there , were afhamed to continue them in yours, being left out in your latter E~ ditions. Secondly, I fay it was that Jun&o, who pro- cured great numbers of factious and tumultuous people, in a rude and illegal way to affright the Loyal and moil confiderable part of the Parlia- ment from their duties, and truft repofed in them by God and Man > fuch were the Kings Majefty, and the Prince, the Loyal Nobles, the Biftops and chofen Gentry , pofting them up as Malig- nants, and expofing them to the fury of the Rabble j of which tumults one of your Saints., Mr. Pym by name, faid God forbid, that the Houfe of Commons mould dilhearten their people , to obtain their juft defires in fuch a way : Exaft. Col- k&. p. 531. Mr. Baxter p. 474. of the Holy Com- mon-vpealtb makes this Obje&ion, The tumults at Weftminfier drove him away j to which he anfwer- eth : Only by difpleafing him, not by indangering or meddling with him '> and another eminent Man of Mr. Baxters acquaintance in his Jehovah Jireth, p. £5, fays, the Apprentices and Porters were ftimulated and ftirred up by Gods Provi- dence Thoufands of them to Petition the Parlia- ment for fpeedy redrefs. Whereas the Five Mem- bers and their favourers had imaged the multi- tude ( 9 o) tude not fo much to Petition the Parliament, as to affront the King. Thirdly, It was that Jun&o, who againft His Majefties Crown and Dignity, againft the known Laws, and his exprefs Proclamation to the con- trary, did contrive and impofe, under heavy pe- nalties the Solemn League and Covenant upon the Nation, whereby they did juftify the Rebel- lion, and avow the maintenance of it, againft the King and his Forces. And having firft vowed with their Lives and Eftates , to preferve the Rights and Priviledges of Parliament > they add f — and to preferve the Kings Majefties Perfon , and Authority, in the prefervation and defence of the true Religion* and Liberties of the Kingdom* Which experience (heweth, they no more intend- cd a though it be here put in, as it was in EJfex's Commiilion, than it was in Fairfax 's, where {as I am informed ) they left it out , and if they meant as they fpeak , they had no great care of his perfon, having actually deprived him of his Au- thority. And befides that limitation, they preferve the Kings Perfon in defence of the true Religion, Covenanted to introduce another Religion in Dodtrin and Worfhip, in oppoiition to that which was eftablilhed by Law , and refolutely defended by his Majefty, and to root out Epifcopacy, which as he had fwbrn to fupport, fo had it been a great prop to the Throne i and therefore his Ma- jefty declared concerning the ip. Propofitions , that he could not confent unto them without vi- olating his Confcicnce, and a total extirpation of that Government, whofe Rights they had a mind to invade j and which was iicceflary to the well being l. ( 91 ) being of His Majcfty, as by many Arguments fa the Chapter concerning Church Government it appears. This certainly was one of the keeneft Inftruments that hewed down the Throne. For the Speech without Doors (defending Mr. Cbal- loners Speech within Doors) tells the Parliament, that they are bound by their Covenant ( for bringing evil Inftruments to Condigne Punish- ment ) to deftroy the King and his Pofterity, and that they cannot juftifie the taking away of Straf- ford's and Canterbury's Lives for Delinquency, while they fuifered the chief Delinquent to go unpunish- ed, Oxford Reafons, />. 22. And the Speeches within Doors fpake no Jefs, for Sir H. Martyn told them, the Kings Office was forfeitable, and that the happinefsof the Kingdom depended not on him > or any of the Royal Branches of that Stock, Exatt. Colleft. p. 552. and Sir H. Ludlow^ that he was not worthy £0 be King of England, That this was the fenfe which their own Crea- tures had of the Covenant, appears by the An» fwer of the Army to the Scots Declaration 1 £48. Who pleading that they had Covenanted for pre- fervation of the King , reply in a Paper Printed for Robert White before the Kings deaths That it was conceived, to be abfuid and hypocritical 3 to fwear the Pretention of the Kings Perfon as a Man, and at the fame time to be ingaged in a War againft him, and he in the Field. And Mr. Marjhal had faid long before , That if the King tiad been fo (lain, it had been none of the Parli- aments fault *, for he might have ' kept himfelf farther off if he pleafed , f. 19. of his Letter. The fame Man faid in his Sermon^ Jan. 8. 1^47* The ( 5>* ) If he queftion is now , whether Chrift or Ami- Chrift fhall be King. And in a Sermon to the Mayor and Aldermen 1644. Thefe are miferable and accurfed men, Factors for Hell) Satans Bou- tefeus , and as true zealots are let on fire from Heaven i fo thcfe Mens Fire is kindled from Hell, whither alfo it carrieth them. Mr. Arrovpfmith in a Sermon 1^43. It is not a Kingdom divided a- gainft it felf, but one Kingdom againft another s the Kingdom of Chrift againft Anti-Chrift : So my Countryman John Bond told them they fought againft Babylon^ T>agon and Anti-Chrift, and ex- horted them to pull it down i though like Satnfon they dyed with it. In a Sermon 1644. Jofepb Boden faid , they were fighting for the Lamb a- gainft the Beaft, Anno 1 644. And Mr. Marjhal in his (Meroz) I pray look on me as one that comes to beat a Drum in your Ears, to fee who will come out to follow the Lamb. This ufe the Co- venanters made of that limitation, defending the Kings Perfori in the prefervation of Religions and you know who fays, p. 423. of the Holy Com- mon-wealth, We are to believe that Men would kill them, whom they fight againft. And doubt- lefs if His Majefty had periftied in the War, the guilt had lain not only on the Souldiers, but chief- ly on thofc that gave them their Commiiiion > The Author of Bounds and Bonds fpake home at that time, If by the Covenant you thought your felves indifpenfably bound to preferve the Royal Perfon , how comes it to pafs , that you thought your felves obliged by the fame Covenant , to wage War againft him. I have heard of a diftindiion (faith he) between his (91 > his Power and his Perfon, but never between his Perfon and himfelf. And if the Covenant would have difpenfed with any Souldier of England or Scotland, to kill his Perfon by accident of War, ( as his Life was oft in danger before he came to the Scaffold) his death had been violent, and the Obligation to preferve him had ended 5 and yet according to this argument , the Covenant had not been broken *, why then mould thofe Men think the World fo dull, as not to underftand plainly e- nough, that the Covenant provided for his death more ways than one, 4. They that permitted fuch Pamphlets to be publifhed without controle, as declared the King to be a Tyrant, Oxford Reafons, p 21, That judged his Actions to be illegal, and his Declara- tions falfe and fcandalous, and his fuggeftions as falfe as the Father of lies could invent, ExaU Cd- ktt. p. 45? 4. That banifhed the Queen as a Trai- tor, Imprifoned the Bimops in the Tower* That held him to fuch unreafonable Articles and Pro- portions, at Nervcafile, and Cambroo\^ as His Ma~ jefty declared he could not confent unto, without devefting him of his Authority s That rejected a!I his offers for peace* And in January 17. 1647,, Voted no more AddrciTes , and that they could repofe no more truft and confidence in him fwhicfe was a year before they were fecluded the Houfe) which by the Army was understood of their in- tention to proceed in Juftice againft him. Thef who deprived him of all the Comforts of his Life, his Wife and Children, his Counfellours and Chaplains, as if with an Italian hatred they would have deitroyed his Soul as well as his Body, Thefe were (94) were they, that did diminmre Caput Regit , as th£ Civil Law fpeaks, and they who afterward, rind- ing him thus bound and fettered , defamed and condemned, did obtruncare Caput Regis, were but the others Executioners. What adtion was more t>arbarous than that of the Scots, felling their Na- tive Prince , that caft himfelf upon them, to his declared and avowed Enemies? after which he was hurried up and down , from one Prifon to another, and inhumanly treated, till he was for- cibly taken from them. Whoever (hall compare the Declaration of the Scots, when they Invaded EnglandyUpon their Covenant, with the adfings of the High Court of Juftice againft His Majefty , may fee, what Coppy they wrote after, and whofe Journy-men they were, in bringing him to the Block, whom they had pulled out of the Throne. They were Roman Souldiers that actually Cruci- fied our Saviour > but we know who Sold him , and how long the Chief Priefts and Elders took Counfel againft him, Mattb. 27. 2. And Sr. Peter tefts the Menofl/rae/, Jets 2. 23. Him have ye taken, and with wicked hands Crucified, though the Roman Souldiers did it* There is this only difference between the Graves and the Prifons of Kings, that in the Prifons they dye daily, or are buried alive, in the Grave they are at reft from all their fears and forrows. But to this it may be replied, that thefe were not Presbyters , properly fo called , though they, were a Jundto of Presbyterians : I would there- fore have it confidered , whofe Scholars thefe were , who taught and animated them to thefe practices, and upon whofe principles they a&ed > (5>5> I could fet down fuch maximes of the Confifto- rian Brethren, as the Jefuites would blufh to own; but I (hall forbear to foul my Paper with fuch Collections , as I have among my Adverfaria : The Reader may fatisfie himfelf, nfqae ad naufeam, if he obferve what is Authentickly mentioned in His Majefties large Declaration, in Biftiop Bancrofts dangerous pofitions, in Biihop Spotfaood> and the Writings of the feveral Presbyteries of Scotland, in the refuit of falfe Principles , the Calvimfts Cabi- net, and which is, inftar omnium, the Holy Common- wealth. Whar fruit could fuch bitter Roots pro- duce, but Wormwood and Hemlock , as indeed they did in every Furrow of our Fields ? It was faid diCato, that he did good, not that he might appear to be good , but becaufe he could not do otherwife* and fome Men do efpoufe fuch prin- ciples, that if they Act according to them, they cannot do any thing but what is notorioufly evil. What (hall we fay of Mr. Andrew Ramfey , that Preached, That it Was Gods will that the Primi- tive Chriftians (hould confirm the Truth by fuffe- ring > but now the Truth being eftablifhed, it is his will the Truth (hould be defended by Action in refitting Tyrants ? and John Goodwin faid as bad of the Do&rine of refifhnce : Mr. Robert Blaire told his Auditors. Beloved, the Lord hath forfaken our King , and given him over to be led by the Bilhops, the blind brood of Anti-Chrift, who are hot Beagles hunting for the Blood of the Saints : Nor can I forget Mr. Douglas's Sermon at the Coronation, who turned the Pulpit into a Scaffold, and A6ted the Martyrdom of the Father in the fight of the Son. After thefe Scottijh Pipes G &d (9*) diet tod many Englijb Presbyters dance > whofe Sermons were Satyrs, and invedtives againft the beft of Kings, and his mod Loyal Subjects. Take the a&ive Covenanters from the greateft to the Ieaft > and as they thought it their duty, fo they made it their builnefs to do more than dethrone the King, I have faid enough of Mr. Marjhal al- ready, let him that would know more read his Sermon on Curfe ye Meroz^ and not his only, but the moft of thofe Sermons Preached to the Parli- ament, efpecially on their Solemn days of Thankf- giving. Mx.Cafe in a Sermon to theCourt-Marlhal, 1^44. fays, God would have no Mercy (hewn, where the quarrel is againft Religion , and the Kingdom of Jefus Chrift, p. 16. Thefe Men that would bring in Idolatry and falfe Worlhip to de- pofe Chrift from his Throne, and fet up Anti- Chrift in his place", fuch a generation Chrift hath doomed to deftru&ion, Lnke 19, 27. As for thefe ;mine enemies , bring them forth and flay them before me-, and p. 18. What feverity will God ex- ■pftS) from you, who are called to judge for God, between the Sons of Belial , bloody Rebels, and an whole Chriftian Church and State, now refitt- ing unto blood for Reformation ? Let me fay to you, as God faid to Mofu concerning the Midi- anites, vex thofe Midianites and fmite them, for they vex you with their Wiles, Numb. 25. 17,18. Mr. Th. Palmer faid , that God faw it good to bring Chrift into his Kingdom by a Bloody way, p. 13,. Dr. Downing of Hackpey, in a Sermon to the Artillery-men ••> It is lawful for defence of Re- ligion and Reformation of the Church , to take up Arms againft the King : And Wl^Calamy feconds him, ( 97 ) nitn, it is commendable to fight for Peace, ani Reformation againft the Kings command. Mr. Love, who was chofen as the fitteft perfon to aflift at the Treaty 2XVxhridge\ doth no doubt . fpeak the Senfe of the Juncto * he calls Epifco- pacy, and Liturgy, two Plague Soares , and tells the CommiiTioners, that while their enemies are going on in wicked pradtifes, and they keep their principles i they may as foon make Fire and Wa- ter to agree , yea I had almoft faid ( quoth he ) -Heaven and Hell : And again it is the Sword, not difputes that muft end this controverile. Where- fore turn your Plowihares into Swords, and your Pruning-hooks into Spears , to fight the Lords Battles, to avenge the Blood of the Saints which hath been fpilt, it muff be avenged by us., or upon us : See p. 7. and 26. of England* diftemper* I have fometime feared, always prayed that too much pitty and mercy in our State Fhyficians 2 may not retard the healing of the Land, ^.320 There are many malignant humours to be purg- ed out of many of the Nobles, and Gentry in this Kingdom, before we can be healed. ~ — It Was the Lord that troubled Acban, and cut him off ? becaufe he troubled Ifrael. O that in this, our State Phyficians would refemble God to cut off thofe from the Land, who have diilempered it 9 ( would you know whom he means , he fpeaks plainly ) melius pereat unus quant unitas , Men that lye under the guilt of much innocent Blood* are not tit perfons to be at peace with , till all the guilt of Blood be expiated , and avenged either by the Sword of the Law, or by the Law of the Sword * elfe the peace can never be fafe or yaih G 3 Arg ( ?8 ) Are thefe the principles of Love ? or can they conilft with holinefs ? it will amaze any Chriftian to confider, that though the hand of God might mind him of his (in by the nature of his punish- ment : yet inftead of declaring his Repentance a 1 little before his death, he profeffed his hatred to Malignants, his oppoilng the Tyranny of a King, faying, I did, it is true, in my place and calling oppofe the forces of the late King, and were he alive again, and mould I live longer, ( the caufe being as then it was ) I mould oppofe him lon- ger; In his Speech Sedr. 14. Yet how horrid for- ever this rinal impenitence appears to be, too many that mould know , and do better things , - have little fenfe of it. And it is very remark- able, that Prideaux the Attorney General repeated moft of thefe paflages againft Mr, Love at his Trial, as Arguments that he ought not to have any mercy (hewed him. See the Printed Trial. What a fad thing is it ( faith Mr. Cafe ) to fee our King in the head of an Army of Babylonians, refufing as it were to be called the King of England, Scotland and Ireland* and chooling rather to be called the King of Babylon, on Ifa. 43. 4. p 18. Thofe that made their peace with the King at Oxford^ were the Judas' s of England , and it were juft with God to give them their portion with Judas, faith Mr. Calamy in a Sermon Preach- ed Vecemb. 25. 1644. p. 18. Mr. Merle in a Sermon to the Commons, A/b- vemb. 5. 44. Do Juftice to the greatelt, Sauls Sons are not f pared > no, nor may Agog or Bcnhadad , though themfdves Kings. Zimri and Cosbi, the Princes ( 99 ) Princes of the people muft be purfued into their Tents > This is the way to Confecrate your felves to God. Strickland at the fame time to the fame tune i You know the Story of Gods meiTage to Abab^ for letting Benbadad go upon Compoiition. Brookf to the Commons, Vecemb. 26. 1648. Set fome of thofe grand Malefactors a mourning (that have caufed the Kingdom to mourn fo many years in Garments Rolled in Blood ) by the Execution of Juftice. But though many of thofe Sons of Thunder had done wickedly, there is one exceeds them all, as you may read partly in a fubmiffive Petition of Mr. Jenkins-, and in a Sermon Preach- ed Sept. 24. 1656. Who thus difcovers his inward parts to be very wickednefs. Before the prefent Parliament h Worthy Patriots, you that are our Rulers in Parliament, it is often faid, we live in times wherein we may be as good f he might more truly have faid as bad ) as we pleafe, where- in we enjoy purity, and plenty, praifed for this be that God, who hath delivered us from the im- pofitions of Prelatical Innovations, Altar- genufle- ctions, and cringes with CrofTes, and all that Po- piih Trafh and Trumpery i and truly I fpeak no more than what I have often thought, and faid, the removal of thefe infupportable burdens, con- travailes for the Blood , and treafure (hed , and fpent in thefe late diitradfions> nor did 1 as yet ever hear of any godly man that defired ( were it pollible) to purchafe their friends or mony again at fo dear a rate, as is the return of thefe, to have the Soul-burd'ning Anti-chrifh'an Yoaks reimpo- fed on us. And if any fuch there be, I am fure their deike is no part of their godlinefs. From G 3 this (IOO) this Mans principles one hath obferved , That whoever are of this perfwafion, do wi(h this King en the Scaffold too , provided that would free them from our Epifcopacy, and think it lawful to Rebel again, and deftroy as many Families more, to (hake off that Yoak. Again Mr. Jenkins in his Confcientious queftions concerning fubmijlion to the then prefent power, 165 1. Asks whether the ftupendious Providences of God, manifefted in the deilrudtion of the late King, and his adherents in {b many pitcht Battles , and in the Nations Uni- verfal forfaking of Charles Stuart , God hath not as plainly removed the Government from Charles Stuart, and beftowed it on others, as ever he re- moved and beftowed any Government by any Pro- vidence in any age? And whether a refufal to yield obedience and Subjection to this prefent Go- vernment , be not a refufal to acquiefce in the wife and righteous providence of God, and a flat breach of the Fifth Commandment ? ( See his Pe- tition. ) And now I cannot but wonder why Mr. Baxter mould move this queftion, who that Juii- clo of Presbyters was,e^c Unlefs he took as much pleafure and glory, as others do fhame and for- row in the repetition. It is a fad Obfervation which fome have made, That not one of the Re- gicides manifefted his Pvcpentance for that impious Ad , for which they were Executed : The Lord give all guilty perfons more Grace. Mr. Bagjhaw fays, that Mr. Baxter was guilty of /lining up and fomenting the War,as any one vvhat- foever, p. 1. And my Lord otWorcefter lays, that he had done what he could to make this King qdious $0 his people., p. 2. Of his Anfwer, and (id) that he Sowed the Seeds of Schi(me and Sedition, and blew the Trumpet of Rebellion among thern at Kidderminfter, p. 4. And adds, I my felf have heard him at a conference in the Savoy y maintain- ing fuch a pofition, as was deftrudtive to the Le- gislative power, both in God and Man, and pro- duced the AfTertion under his hand s and when Mr. Baxter reported that the Bifhop had defamed him j to prevent that report, the Bimop collected fome of his Political Thefes or Maxims of Govern- ment , the repetition of a few whereof will be too many.. He tells us the War was begun in their irreets, before the King and Parliament had any Armies, p. 457. of H. Common-wealth, He con- . feffeth that he was one that blew the Coales of our unhappy Divifions 5 and that if he had been for the King, he had incurred the danger of con- demnation. H. Common-wealth, p. 485. And mould I do otherwife, I mould be guilty of Treafon, or dilloyalty againft the Soveraign Power, of the Land. He holds that the Soveraignty is divided between King and Parliament, and that the King invading the other part, they may lawfully defend their own by War, and the Subject lawfully aihft them h yea though the Power of the Militia he exprefly given to the Kings The Law fuppofing that the Militia is given the King againft enemies,, not againft the Common-wealth: Tbef. 358. he faith ( its true ) that now that the Parliament hath de- clared, where the Soveraign Power is, he mould acknowledge it, and fubmit to it 5 where he fup- pofeth that the King oweth his Soveraignty to the Parliament j and if they mould again challenge it to themfelves 3 he would rather obey them than G 4. im ( I02 ) the King h Bifliop of Worcefters Letter, p. 8. p. And this appears clearly by what followeth, f. 486. That having often fearched into his heart, whe- ther he did lawfully engage in the War or not, and lawfully incourage fo many Thoufands to it ( the lffue was ) he could not fee that he was mi- ftaken in the main caufe, nor dares he repent of it, nor forbear doing the fame if it were to do a- gain in the fame ilate of things, ( though the Power of the Militia be given to the King.) He tells us indeed ( fays the Biihop ) that if he could be convinced that he had finned in this matter , that he would as gladly make a publick Recanta- tion, as he would eat or drink * which feeing he hath not yet done, it is evident he is ftill of the fame mind, and confequently would upon the fame occafion do the fame things, viz. fight and en- courage as many Thoufands as he could to fight againft the King, for any thing that calls it felf , or which he is plea fed to call a full and free Par- liament : As likewifethat he would own and fubmit to any Ufurper of the Soveraignty^as fet up by God, although he came to it by the Murder of his Ma- tter, and by trampling upon the Parliament. Laft- ly, that he would hinder as much as poilibly he could the reftoring of the rightful Heir to theCrown : And now whether a Man of this Judgment, and of thefe affedtions, ought to be permitted to Preach or no j let any Man but himfclf Judge. And may we not reafonably think, that thofe Men did approve of that Hellifh Fadt, who did pofl fattum, tell the World of his Tyranny.,, and Male-adminiftration of Government, and inclination to Popery : And ap- plauded the grand Regicide, as one that did pi- oufly, tmfly, prudently, and faithfully to, his immortal honor exercife the Government. I conclude this with the words of a worthy Perfon, who Printed a view of the Life and Reign of King Charles the Firft, even when the Faction was in Power, p, 24. The Presbyterians carried on the Tragedy from the beginning to the ends from the bringing in the Scots, to the beginning of the War '■> from thence till they brought him Prifoner to Holmby Houfe , an,d then quarrelled with the Independents fpr taking the work out of their hands , and Robbing them of the long expedted fruit of their Plots and Practices. — The Independents confeiTed they had put Charles Stuart to death, but that the. King had been murthered long before by the Presbyterians , who had de- prived him of his Crown, Sword, and Scepter h of his Sword by wrefting from him the Militia *, of his Scepter, divefting him of his power of calling Parliaments* they deprk/ed him of his natural Liber- ty, as a Man of thQ Society of his Wife and Chil- dren, and attendance of Servants, and of all thofe comforts which might make his Life valuable > fo that there was nothing left for the Independents to do, but to put an end to thofe Calamities, into which this miferable Man had been fo accur- fedly plunged by the Presbyterians- And fo much for the Jundto of Presbyters, that dethron'd the King. The main Battalia being thu; difcomfited, the little referves will be more eatily defeated. Mr. Baxt. Was it they that Petitioned and pro- tefted againft it ? An fa. Who ever Petitioned pr protefied againft the l ( 104 ) the proceedings againft the King, until the Army took him out of the Parliaments power? and was he not dethron'd before that time I after- ward perhaps fome of them did as the Hiena , that hath deftroyed a Man and gorged himfelf , weep and howl over the Carcafs, becaufe he could not devour him wholly. Mr* Baxt. Whether it was not an Epifcopal Par- liament ( forty to one, if not an hundred) that be- gan the War againft the King > Anfa. With what face can one that pretends to Truth fay this ? when it is fo notorioufly known, that till by a prevailing Faction in that Parliament, the Bifhops, and the Loyal and Epif- copal party were forced away , nothing could be done againft the King. Mr. Baxt. Whether the General and Comman- ders of the Army, Twenty to one, were not Con- formifts ? Anfev. They had been fuch indeed, but, when they began the War> they neither feared God, nor honoured the King, but made the Reformation of Religion, the pretence of the War V which as the Covenant (hews > was the abolliihing of Bifhops, Liturgy, &c Mr. Baxt. Whether the Major Generals in the Countries were not almoft all The Earl of Stam- Epifcopal Conformists > lord was over your * r a r j i i i Country. Anjw. Stamford I knew, and one Baxter his Engineer > but that he was either a Major General, or a Gonfor- mift I never heard. The rirft Major General that I knew in thefe parts was Desbcrougb, after that the Kingdom was Cantonizcd> and I. believe the 7urkHh (i° 5 ) *turkjjb Bajhaws, were as much Conformifts as any r of them. Mr. Baxt. Whether the Admiral and Sea-Cap- tains were not alrnolt all Epifcopal Confor- mifts C as Heylen diitinguiftieth them of Arch- BiQiop Abbots mind, difliking Arminianifme, Mo-v noplys, &c. Anfa. I fuppofe the Admiral and his Officers had well ftudied the points of Arminianifme > when, as Mr. Baxter that fought againft them , wrote for them in the judgment of his Brethren, and as 1 have heard that Dr. Hammond faid of him, he was an Arminian too, though he did not know it, Mr. Baxt. Whether the Epifcopal Gentry did not more of them take the Engagement fand ma- ny Epifcopal Minifters ) more than the Presbyte- rians? ' Anfo. The King was dethroned before the en- gagement was impofed, and if you drove any of the Epifcopal party into that Snare j I hope that as Teter for denying his Mafler, they have repent- ed of it, and fo are pardoned, I wifh I could fay fo much of the Covenanters. Mr. Baxt. Whether the Arch-bifhop of Tor^ were not the Parliaments Major-General ? An fa. That he was a Traitor if he took any fuch Commiffion is no doubt, and when among the Twelve, there was one that fold his Mailer, 3 tis not ltrange, if there were one of Twenty four Biihops that betrayed his Liege Prince s it was pitty that any Apoftate Clergy-man (hould have an bigey Office in that Army than Mr. Baxter, but I ( io6 ) I think you did them more fervice, as an Adjutant General, than he as a Major General. Mr. Baxt. Whether if this Parliament , which made the Ad for Uniformity and Conventicles , fhould quarrel with the King, it would prove them to be Presbyterians and Non-conformi(ts ? Anfo. This is that which I know too many did expedh and I hope they will never live to fee it \ but if it (hould have happened, I would fay, they had as much contradicted their principles, and lalfiried their ingagements, as Mr. Baxter had done, almoft. Mr. Baxt. Whether the Presbyterian Miniiters of London^ and Lancajbire, did not write more a- gainft the Regicides and Ufurpers> and declare a- gainft them, than all the Gonformifts ? or as much? Anfw. What they did againft the Regicides , was long after the King was dethron'd, and fo is not pertinent to the queftion \ yet I have fome- where read, that the London Minifters, about 5^. in number, as I remember, in an endeavour to vindicate themfelves from the Blood of the Royal Martyr, Printed 1678. did fay thus> The woful mifcarriages of the King himfelf, which we cannot but acknowledge to be very many , and great in his Government > have coft the Three Kingdoms fo dear, and caft him down from his excellency, into a horrid pit of mifery beyond example. This was a Repentance fomewhat like that of Judat , when he had irrecoverably ruined his Lord and Matter, but he could not walh his hands from, that innocent Blood. Mr. Bjx. (107) Mr, Baxt. And the Long Parliament was forced and moft of them caft out before the King could be deftroyed. Anfa. But not before the King was Actually dethroned, and it was about Twelve Moneths be- fore they were forced off by the Army, that they Voted their Non-addrefles. Mr. Baxt. And when they were reftored, it made way for his Reiteration. Anfo. Surely they could not do it on your prin- ciples, which alfert that the King may be depo- fed > nor are the Subjects afterward to trouble themfelves for his Reiteration i not is the injured Prince himfelf to feek his refettlement, if the Common- wealth may profper without him, and fo he is obliged to refign his Government i and thus the people being free from any Obedience to him, may ehofe another King, or if not, a Com- mon-wealth may be pitcht on. And had it been left to the Presbyterians to bring in the King on their Articles,he had not been admitted to this day. Mr. Baxt. And Sir 'Thomas Allen Lord Mayor, and the City of London inviting General Monc\ from the Rump into the City, and joyning with him , was the very day that turned the Scales for the King. Not forgetting that Mr. Baxter Preached to the Parliament , as he often tells us the day be- fore the King was Voted home. Anfrv. Sir Thomas Afon, and the City did their duty Nobly and Worthily ', but what turned the Scales againft the Rump, that you reftedt fo upon, that Rump which while it had a better name, and a little more power , though then its naJkednefs appeared fufficiently , you prayed for it in thefe words', /. (io8) Words, May the Parliament be holy ', and this afcer~ gained from Generation to Generation, by Juch a necef- fary regulation of 'Elections, as I have hereafter dc- fcribed-i and that all thofe that by wickgdnefs have for- feited their Liberties, may neither choofe nor be chofen, p. 14. 15. And again, Ibat they were fworn, and fworn, and f worn again to befaitlyful to y and to de- fend them y and that they were the bejl Governors in all the World , and fuch as it is forbidden Subjecls to eppofe upon pain of Damnation. So that I conclude, whoever reftored this King ( for which let Cod have all the praife) I frill affirm , it was a Jun- &o of Presbyters that dethroned his Royal Father.. This may fuffice concerning the third and fourth part of the Accufation of deftroying the King and dilloyal principles. The Fifth, That they are plotting a Rebellion, to which Mr. Baxter forgat to make any defence. Only he thought it his duty to give this account .of their principles , as far as they are known to him. Where Firft , he feems rather to defend than difclaim his Political Aphorifms, though he defires the Book may be taken as Non fcriptus : This will not fatisrie ", If he be of another Judg- ment now, he ought to have undeceived his par-* ty by confuting thofe dangerous principles, where- as he rather continueth to pradtife them (till. But what I Judge undeniable, faith Mr. Baxter, I here declare. Now let the Pveader go on from thefe words, until he come to the period, where he fays, As I have here defcribed the Judgment of fuch Non- conform ills as I have Converted with, I do deiire thofe that feek our blood and ruine by the folfe \ ( 109) falfe accufation of Rebellious principles to tell me if they can j what body or party of Men on Earth have more found and Loyal principles of Govern- ment and Obedience ? And if any perfon can ex- trad: any fuch principles within all that period, I will fay , he hath turn'd Mr. Baxter's Whetftone into the Philofophers Stone. He fays, indeed we are all bound, if it be poffible, and as much as in us lyeth to live peaceably, and follow peace with all men. But how have they followed this principle? We have, he faith, many years beg'd for peace of thofe that mould have been the Preachers, and wifeft promoters of peace, and can- not yet obtain it , nor quiet them , that call for fire and fword, not knowing what fpirit they are of. This is the Presbyterian way of Petitioning for Peace, to rail againit their Superiours> charg- ing them with perfection , fire and fword i and aflerting that there can be no peace, until the Laws for Conformity be all reverfed , the Biftops Authority and the Kings too, in Eccleflaftical af- fairs taken away, the Liturgy exchanged for Mr. Baxters new Directory, as he hath at large declared in the firft part i and fuch a defolation as this they call peace , folitudinem volunt & pacem vocant* He fays, the Declaration about Ecclefiaftical affairs telleth us, that the King would have given the people peace. Anfor. And there were a fort of men, whom the King for peace fake, defired to read only fo much of the Liturgy as was beyond exception , and they would not > did not thefe tell the World they would have no peace but vi- ctory > So true it is as Mr. Baxter fays, with un- peaceble Clergy- men, no Plea, no Petition (no not of /. (no; of the King himfelf) could prevail, but the things that have been are, and the Confufions of our age come from the fame caufes and forts of men, as the Confufions in former ages did » for which we need not go to Mr. Baxters Church Hiftory , the Men and methods of 41. and 42. are well nigh revived. They told His Majefty in their fecond Paper for Peace, That if he would grant their de- fires, it would revive their Hearts to daily and earneft Prayers for his Profperity. But what if he deny them ? Then p. 12. it aftonifheth us to fore- fee what doleful effeds our Diviiions would pro- duce, which we will not fo much as mention in particular, left our words mould be mifunderftood. And it is obvious enough to whom they would apply that pafTage, p. 117. of their reply to the Exceptions : As Bafil faid to Valens the Empe- rour, 'that would have him pray for the Life of his Son : If thou wilt receive the true Faith, thy Son (hall live '•> which when the Emperour refu- ted, he faid, the Will of the Lord be done ; So we fay to you, if you will put on Charity, and promote peace, God will honor you j but if you will do contrary, the Will of the Lord be done with your honors. Amen fay I : Let them fall in- to the hands of God, who is (till exceeding gra- cious to them , and not into the hands of fuch cruel men, who have War in their Hearts while they Petition for Peace. And will Mr. Baxter Hill demand what party of Men on Earth have more Loyal Principles. Our Englijh Papifts, who as Mr. Baxter grants adhered to the King, would be offended if 1 mould fay, they that fought a- gainlt the King, were more Loyal than they, who with (Ill) with Lives and Fortunes fought for him -, dares he compare with the Church of England , who lived and died, and rofe again with their King-, to the great regret and envy of thofe Men ? I will not fay only that the Primitive Ghriftians, but e- ven the Old Greeks and Romans had better Prin- ciples than any you pradife by, and will rife up in Judgment againft fuch a Generation. How vainly do you inquire what Hot toman or Bodin have written ? Confider the Precepts of our great Lord, and the Pradice of the Primitive Ghriftians for the firft 6qq. years , and how nigh the true Members of the Church of England followed thofe Principles and Examples for Twenty years toge^ ther s and how far the Presbyterians Aded contra- ry to them, and then convince the World whether: the party you Boaft of, or thefe were mod Loyal. But Mr. Baxter demand sv Muft this Age anfwer for their Fathers deeds > what is all this to the prefent Non-con formifts ? Anfip. If they follow the deeds of their Fathers, we cannot deny them the reputation of being their Children, who ( with* out controverfiej begat and Nurtured them. And though I have not the opportunity to. ask thofe Noble Lords and Gentlemen, whom Mr. Ba* xter names concerning the Conformity of their Fathers » yet I can give you their Senfe, and the Opinion of the whole Nation, concerning the be- haviour of their Children •, who have as great a mind to begin a fecond War. And take it in the bed Englifb Dialed, (i. e.) in the Ads of Parlia- ment i And firft in the Ad againft Conventicles , 1 5. Car. 2di N. 2. For providing of further and more fpeedy remedies againft the growing and H dan- / (ill) dangerous practice of Seditious Se&aries, and q- ther difloyal perfons > who under -pretence of ten- r der Gonfciences,- do at their meetings -contrive irt- ifurre&ions , as -fate - experience ; hath (hewn, &c And jn.the Oxfcrik&L , they fay of thofe that -Breach in unlawful AfFemblies \ Conventicles or Meetings, tinder colour or pretence of the Exer- -cife of.Religion^tontrary to th.e Laws and Sta- tutes of this Kingdorfrp have fe£tle the Parliament -fays, thdr adionstei^to i£J : and that is,-' Tantamount id) a: Plot- 'Sedition and turnups, 'open and pro- feffedi difobedtefiflce to'SHe Laws, adhering to a Re- bellion Co^e^nt^refufing the Tehs of Obedi^ ttkerij which require- only -the difelaiming of Re* bellioiis PrincSrited arid^ Pr^d ices -}*■ breaching and Printing what iS- actually Seditious,- -and tends- di^ iccaiy to Rebellion i and all thtewrWour PaHfr- tawnta hath declare* ""that there- VM horrid- Plot H on on tin) on foot, for the deftroying of the King and efta- blifhed Pveligion i to the latter whereof you are avowed Enemies,: this may draw at leaft a fuf- pition on you, that you are in the Plot, whether you know it or no 5 for as I fuppofe, in the be- ginning of the Firft War, very few of them that were ingaged , intended a Plot againft the King and the Church, yet were acled to the ruine of them both. So now a great many that call them- felves Proteftants , may be over-adled by the Pa- pifts , who if they can once deftroy the Church of England, by means of our divilions, which 13 the moft likely means, may cry Victoria, and boaft that we have deftroyed our felves. And then you may fay truly, p. 123. of the fecOnd part of your Plea, The blood will be on you, and yourGhil* dren. Mr. Baxter profeffeth in his Preface* a deteftation of the lying Malignity, and bloody Cruelty of the Papifts, but f. 235. of his firft part, he concludes it to be but reafonable, if on fuch neceffity, ( u e a the penalties for Non-conformity ) they (hould ac- cept of favour from any Papifts that would fave them. And that if one party, (viz. the authori- ty of the Nation ) would bring them to fuch a pafs, that they muft be hanged, iropiifoned, ruin- ed or worfe, unlefs the favour of the Papifts de^ liver them. And the other party, viz, the 'Non- conformists had rather be faved by the Papifts, than be hanged or ruined by Proteftants, they ought not to be fufpedt/ed of Popery •> this (hews that he hath a better Opinion of .the Papifts than of the Gonformifts, Some blufh not , faith Mr. Baxter^ to accufe the Non-conformids, as the bring- H 2 oii I. Cii4) crs in of Popery by defiring Liberty, p. 245. that is, that there is a door opened to them by our Divifions. An fa. None hath more reafon to blufh at this than Mr. Baxter > for in his defence of the principles of Love , As to Popery (fays he J the idtereft of the Protectant Religion mult be much kept up, by means of the Parifh Minifters , and by the Dcdtrine and Worfhip there performed ( not by Conventicles then ) for they that think and endeavour contrary to this, of which fide fa* ever, (hall have the hearty thanks and concurrence of the Papifts (who then are in the Plot.) Nor am I caufelefly afraid, faith Mr. Baxter, that if we fiirTer the Principles and practices which I write againft, ( i. e. the dividers and deftroyers 01 peace and love ) to proceed without our contradiction, Popery will get by it fo great advantage, as may hazard us all , and we may lofe that which the fevcral parties do contend about. Three ways, efpecially Popery will grow out of our divifions. 1. By the Odium and fcorn of our divifions, inconfiitency and multiplied Sects. Thoufands have been drawn into Popery, or Confirmed in it already, and I am perfwaded, faith he, that all the Arguments in BiUarmint, and all other Books that ever were written, have not done fo much to make Papifts in England, as the multitude of Scdts among our felves. 2. Who knows not how fair a game the Pa- pifts have to play by our Divifions ? methinks I hear them hilling on both parties, faying to one fide , lay more upon them , and abate them no- thing i And to the other ftand it out and yield to \ ( II)) to nothing , hoping that our divifions will carrF us to fuch practices , as will make us accounted Seditious , Rebellious and dangerous to publick peace, and fo they may pafs for better Subjeds than we, or elfe they may get a Toleration with us. And (hall they ufe our hands to do their work ? we have already ferved them unfpeakably , both in this, and in abating the Odium of the Gun- powder Plot, and other Treafons. 3. It is not the leaft of our dangers, left by our follies, extremities and rigours we fo exafperate the Common People , as to make them readier to joyn with the Papifts than with us, in cafe of Competitions, Invafions or Infurredtions again/t the King and Kingdoms peace. And in the Key for Catholkkj , The Papifts ( faith he ) account that if the Puritans get the Day, they (hall make great advantage of it ■■> for they will be unfet- ]ed, and all in pieces h factions and diftra&ions , ( fay they ) give us footing for continual at- tempts > to make a ! l fure we will have our par- ty fecretly among Puritans alfo, that we may be fure to maintain our intereft. And in his Holy Common-tvealtb , tet the Magiftrate cherifti the Difputations of the Teachers , and let him pro- cure them often to debate together, and reprove one another, for fo when all Men fee that there is nothing certain among them > they will eafily yield faith Contzen the Jefuite. Tudet h£c opprobria^ &cc. You conclude your fecond part of the Plea , with fome Petitions out of the Liturgy, which I H 3 have / (n6) have reafon to think you do with an ill defignj praying, that he, ivbofe Service is perfetl freedom , would defend you his Humbled Servants ( non fa- tit b'tmiliati quia nondum humiles, ) in all affaults of \ our Enemies , &c. Whom you mean by your Enemies all parties will guefs. But I (hall com- mend to you the fame advice which Bifhop Tri- deaux gave the AfTembly , when they confulted him what they mould do \ his direction was , that they would coniider their ways, and return to their Obedience, and fay, in the Confeffion of the Church. — Almighty and mofi Merciful Father, we have erred and Jirayed from thy ways like loji Sheep, We have followed too much the devices and defires of our own hearts , we have offended againfi thy Holy Laws , we have left undone thofe things which we ought to have done, and we have done thofe things which we ought not to have done, and there is m health in us, Sec. And the God of Heaven give us all Grace, fo to confefs and forfake our Sins, that we may find Mercy. POST- ( i VI > ■ • ■ ■' • ' ■ I — POSTSCRIPT; • Since my difpatch of the former Papers, I met with a Prognojlication written by Richard Bax- ter, which though it were Calculated chiefly for England > yet it prefumes , Firft to foretel, what Jhall befal the Churches on Earth, until their Concord \ and Secondly, what from thence to the end. But the firft part ( though it be a Contradiction in terms ) may be called more agreeably to the mat- ter , A Prognojlication of what is paft h for it hath been twice Aded over in this Nation. And the Second part is a Prognojlication of what never Jhall be. For by Mr. Baxters method, it is impoiTible we mould ever fee fuch a Golden Age of Love. There are but two things worthy of the Readers notice > The Firft is, the time when it was writ- ten, viz. When hy the Kings Gommijjion we ( in vain) treated for Concord, 1661. This circumftance he doth with fo much concern and diligence la- bour to convince the Reader of, that ( as if his Reputation of being a Prophet depended on it) he tells you again in the firft words of the Epiftle ; It is many years Jince this Prognojlication was writ' ten, 1661. Except the fixteen lajl Lines } and in the end of the Epiftle, he cautioneth the Reader, not to mijlahg it for Hijlorkal Narratives. And again at the end of the Book, he tells us of feveral Books H 4 of J. of bis, viz. The true and only Terms of Concord > Caiholickjl biology , and The Cure of Church Vivifions^ xvhlch were all written long Jince the Prognojiication. This extraordinary diligence about fo inconilder- able a Circumiiance, made me fufpedt that it was a Soar place upon which he rubbed fo frequent- ly, and that it was an itch of vain glory that occafioncd it. And 1 believe, when I have im- parted my fec<- nd thoughts to the Reader , he will be much of the fame mind with me. For, Firft, I confidered that there needed no fpirit of Prophefie, to foretel what effects Non- conformity had produced many years before \66i. when he pretends this Prognostication was writ- ten 5 nor yet to foretel what the Non-conformills were refolved ( as much as in them lay ) to at- tempt with all their might. Wherewith I find they were not afraid to threaten the King, and the Bifhops? as I have elfewhere obferved. But fecondly, He tells us, F. 28. N. 105. That where Papi\\s or* Hereticfa are (hut out by Laws , they will fecretly contribute the utmn\\ of their endea- vours to mahg the jujferings of Viffenting P rote}} ants as grievous as poffwly they can j that in dejpight of them y their own neceffitie's may compel them to cry out for liberty : Til! they procured a common Toleration for all) and opened the T>oor for Papifis and Hcretichf, as wd J as for tbemfelves. Where ( N. B. ) Mr. Bax- ter fpeaks of a Toleration^ which had been procu- red , and a D or. opened for Papilts and Here- ticks, which miiil needs look back to the time pa(! i and in a 1 ! probability lie intended that in- v.'i :n upon the Non-conformifts Cries for lib fly, was granted by His Majefty about Se- ven \ Seven years imce > and if fo , then this Progno- stication was written fome time after that com- mon Toleration, which was of a much later date than 1661. And fo, fome Words and Phrafes feem to be , as nevp Impefitions , Suhjcriptions and Oaths, and ferving the Bijhopsin jaykss but I lay no ftrefs on thefe. 3. Mr. Baxter tells the Reader, the Prognosti- cation was written 1661. Except the Sixteen lafi Lines, which Lines P. 66. begin thus. I fay all this is> Sec. Now it is obvious to every Reader, that there is a neceffary connection and depen- dance between thefe Sixteen Lines, and that which precedes > for in the preceding Paragraph which he calls a Confetlary, you have thefe Nomi- native Cafes , which have no Verb to anfwer them , until you take in part of thefe Sixteen Lines, viz. AH the Romifb Dreams , and all the Plots, Sec. I fay all this u\ whereby it appeared to me that the Sixteen la ft Lines were of the fame contexture, and written at the fame time, as the reft was, which could not be in 1661. For thofe Three Books of his , mentioned in the Sixteen Lines, were not then extant. So that I doubt not , but he that Reads the whole Confe&ary , will be of my mind, that it was written at the fame time, as the lafr Sixteen Lines were. And if fo, the Prognostication was written llnce the Book called the True and only Terms of Concord , Printed 16S9. I perceive by Mr. Baxters Contex- tures, that he hath not well learnt the Art of Weaving Spiritualized. 4. I fufpedted alfo the Keafon which Mr. Bax- ter gives why though it were written in 1661. yet , ( M° ) yet it vow caftby; viz. Left it fhould offend the guilty. Now it is notorious, whom Mr. Baxter condemns as guilty , throughout the whole Yrog- nofticatiw > namely the Bilhops, whom he accounts Enemies to the Non-conformifts. And it is as notorious, what little care he had of not offend- ing them, which "I have obferved from the Petiti- on for Yeace^ the Reply to the Bijhops exceptions^ and other Printed Papers, wherein Mr. Baxter had a chief hand. Beildcs in 1661. Mr. Baxter was on more equal terms with the Bifhops , with whom ?ie was joyned in Comrniilion by the King, and the Bjmops were not warm in their Chairs, nor did the Act for Vniformhy take effect, until Bar- tholomew day 1662. And the Sectarian Spirit (which then prevailed among the people , was as Mr. Baxter obferves, p. 40. of &rat. p, 32. it his Prognostication ) like Gwiporv* fhould he n. 120. ^ rea 3y to takg fire upon \ fitch in- juries^ as he there mentioneth. So that certainly that was a titter feafon for the pub- liming of this Prognostication , had it been then Penned, than this prefent juncture of Artairs in j 680. when the Bilhops and Conformity are in- jjoyned and Confirmed by Law •, and fo the of- fence is much greater, and lefs like to -have its deiired 4wfc But ifall thefe Conjectures (hould be groundless '■> yet the very publishing of a PrOg- noSication of, things to come, after they are come to pafs, carrieth with it the Sufpition of a Cheat, the pretence that it was written long before not- withSanding. But ( whether it were written in J 66 1. or which I rather think in i<5So. ) the fe- cond thing which the Pleader may obferve is, that Mr. s (121 ) Mr. Baxter by publifhing this Prognoftication , hath rendered himfelf obnoxious to thofe Laws, which are ftill in force againft the fpreaders of falfe News, under which the Authors of pretend- ed Prophefies are included. And it will be hard to find any Pamphlet that offends more againft thofe Laws, being diredly intended to infufe in- to, and incourage in His Majefties Subjects a Se- ditious, Factious and Implacable Spirit , as well againft the known Laws of the Land , as againft the eftablifhed Gonfritutions of the Church , by fuggefting groundless fears, and jealoufies of things that are not, and falfe and flanderous reprefen- tation of things that are , as in P. 32. He intimates the Clergy to Vbl fupra N. be Worldly, Proud, Covetous, Vomi- 12 °> neering, Malignant and Lazy j The Plague of the World, the Jroublers of Princes, and Dividers of the Churches. And P. p. That they will pleafe the great Men of the World , for Lord/hips y Wealth and Honour, to be Rulers of their Brethren 5 and to have their Wills. And P. 12. Being Hypo- crites as to Chriftianity and Godlinefs ( like Judas that loved the Bag better than Chrift ) they will makg themfelves a Religion confifting of the meet Corps and dead Image of true Religion. And P. 1 3. *ihe powerful Worldly Clergy , will thin\it their intereft to devife fome new Impofitions , which they know the other cannot yield to , to wor\ them out. Whether they be Oaths, Subfcriptions, Words or Ac- tions 3 which they believe to be againft Gods Word* C Here I fufped that Mr. Baxter had refpedt to the Oaths 5 and Subfcriptwis required by the Adt cf Conformity^ and by Words D thofe of AJfint and Confent) , ( I" ) Confent , which were not injoyned until 1662. and therefore probably this Prognostication was written afterward, ) And P. 14. Their Sufferings will make many other wife fiber Minijiers too impati- ent , and, to give their Tongues leave to takg down the Honour of the Clergy, And this will ./fir up in the people an inordinate , unwarrantable , pafjionate zeal, which will corrupt their Prayers , and tnakg them fpeak, unfeemly things , and pray for the downfal of that Clergy , which they take to he the ILnemies of God and godlinefs and that, to fpealt^ eafily or cha- ritably of fuch Men , fcf hut to be lukg-wartn^ and indifferent between God and the Devil. P. 20. Some ( of the Non- conforming Minifkrs ) will thinly thef: pajjhns of the people needful to cheeky the fierce- nefs of the AffiUers ( though it do but exafpe- rate, ) and therefore will let them alone. Some of the Younger \or more injudicious hot-brain d fort ( of the Non-conforming Minilters ) will put them on , and make them believe that all Communion with any Conforming Minijiers, or their Parijh Churches is un- lawful, and their Forms of fVor/hip , are finful and Anti-Cbrijlian , and that they are all temporizers , and betrayers of truth and purity , that Communicate or Affemble with t'-em And P. 22, 23. They will carry about among themfelves, viz. ( the Heretical party ) falfe reports and flanders, p art h-> ^ e " caufe they think^ that humane converfe bindetb them to believe the reports which thofe that are accounted good Men utter. And partly becaufe that they will thinly that the upholding of their caufe , which they thinly U Gods, doth netd^the fupprejjion of thefe Mens Cre- dits and Reputation*ihjt are againji it. P. 25,26. 7. be Godly and Peaceable Conformijts , will get the Love .1 ( n$) Love of the Sober by their Hely Doctrine and Lives s but will be defpifed by the Sefiaries 3 becaufe they Confirm : And will be fitfptded by the Frond and perfecuting Clerfy^ as leaning to the dijfenters , and thereupon will be under continual jealoufes and rc- bukgs. And perhaps nerv points of Conformity jhall be devifed to be impofed on them, which it it known their confeiences are againjl, that fo they alfo may be forced to be Nonrconformijis , becaufe Jecret Emmies are more dangerous than open Foes i And fo part of them will turn down-right Non-conformifts , and the ether part will live in difpleafure , till they fee an opportunity to jhew it. And thefe are the Ifkeliejh to crofs and weaken tin Worldly perfecuting Clergy of any Men. Certainly this was no Prognofticatim in 1661. but an Hijiory of what was done betwixt that and idSo. Concerning Princes, he fays, he will give no other Phgnoflicks but Chrifis , ( which yet Chrift never apply ed to Princes. ) That it will be as hard for a rich Man ( i e. for a Prince in his fenfe ) to enter into Heaven, as for a Camel to go through a Needier Eye. P. 34. The Magiftrates may guefs by this, what Charity Mr. Baxter hath for them. That this was no Prognoftication, but a Plot of Mr. Baxters to imbroil the Nation , may farther appear by what he writes 3 P. 122, 123. Of his Way of Concord, where he thus carries on the de-* iigni He fuppofeth a Decree that none (hall Preach the Gofpel, but thofe that fubferibe, fwear, promife or profefs, or do fomewhat accounted fmful i that ftritl Laws are made to punifh feich as difobey, left their Commands be contemned \ then that the Preachers will be cafi out and fihnced j yet they ft ill believe , that ( Hi) that God Commands what Man forbids, and that it is a damnable Sin , no lefis than Sacri ledge and Cru- elty to Souls to forfakg their calling and duty : The Preachers then mujl he fined , imprifoned or banijhed for Preaching, and the people for publickJVorfiiippingi but when fined, they will go on (till \ nothing can re- medy it , but either perpetual Imprifonment , Banijh* ment, or Death. When this is done, more will arife of the fame mind, and continue the worh^: And the Prelates that caufie this , will be takgn by the fiujfer- ing people for Thorns and Thijlles, and grievous Wolves, and the Military Minifters of the Devil, The indif- ferent common people will loo\ on the persecutors., as the Unemies of good Men, and of publick peace, that do all this by Pride and Domination, The ungodly rabble of Drunkards, ^wearers, Adulterers, and fuch likg hating godlinefs and ftritl living, will cry up the Prelates, and Triumph over the fiufferers. Thus the Land will be divided, the Prelates and other Perfe- cutors with the dirty malignant rabble of the licenti- ous will make one party, thefe will call themfelves the Orthodox, and the Church the fufferers, and thofe that pitty them will be the other. The conjunction of the debauched and malignant rabble with the Pre- lates will increafe fiber Mens difaffeclion to them , and make Men take them fir Patrons of impiety, and how fad a Condition mu(i fuch Churches be in ? This Prophefie is the fame for fubltance, and I cannot think it much different in the circumlhnce of time h the defign of this is the fame , which in the Title Page of his Prognofticl^, he fays, is to in- ftrutf the Sons of Lwe and Peace in their duties. But how ill doth fuch Railery become a dying Man 3 or a mortified Ghriltian ? to defame the pre- fent fent Governours, and teach others to do the fame. If St. James fpeaks ttuth, "ThU Mms Religion is vain , Ch. i. 26. -And under this Artifice of pie- tended Propheiies/ Mr. Baxter (hikes' at the Root of all Authority. For if Men may be excufed from Obeying the Laws by pretending fomething : finful in them ( which yet they know not ) when they know certainly that difobedience is a fin : Th::_ ' on the fame grounds that the Presbyterians difa- bey their Rulers,the Independents may drlebey them, and the Anabaptifts -boxh^ and Children and Ser- vants' 1 their Parents arid Matters. And then any Man as -well as Mr> Baxter might Prognofticate that there 'ean be no 'peace where fuch ! Principles and Practices are incouraged'. - And now I appeal to the Clmfiian Reader^ wi- ther -thefe ftiggeftions were -tit Legacies for ; a dying Man to bequeath to a divided and dying people, of which he tells the Reader, he was taking bis fnrewel in 1661. but lived to pub- lish them in 1680. that is near Twenty years af- ter, when the age was almoft ruined by the pra- ctice of fuch unchriftian intimations 5 and both fides were preparing for the increase of their fury and extremities , and at lafl for Repentance or ruinous Calamity , if they do ( faith Mr. Baxter p. 31. ) as I have defcribed. And he could not but think > that with a great many his Defiriptions would go for PrefcriptionSj and be as a Pxule and Law for too many to walk by. For in the Title Page, he {gys, it was publijhed to infrrull the Sons of Love and Peace in their duties and expectations. Thefe things conildered , I can have no better efteem of Mr. Baxter's than I had of Lillies Prognoftications^ which ( ft* ) which were defigns to revive and fupport The good old Caufe. Having confldered the rirft part uf the Prognoftication, which concerns things that are paft, there need no reflections on the fecond part, becaufe it concerns things that never (hall be. I only ojjfcrve that the evils which he fpeaks of are generally efFe&ed, but the good things are Calculated for the golden Age of Love \ and when that revolution will be, // ever it be, his Prophe- tick Spirit cannot difcern. If ever it be, it will be when all Men are of one mind, that is, of Mr. Baxters mind, who is feldom of the fame mind with himfelf, and fo it is like never to be. And therefore I advife the Printer , though not tor his own profit, yet for Mr. Baxters Credit, and the publick Welfare, to lay up this Prognoftication* and fome other of Mr. Baxters Books among the Al- manacfa for i66u In ferfetttam ULvi oblivhnem. ( 127 ) A FAREWEL T r# -Oflntci* IN the Preface to your late Book of Concord ) you 'defiie, " That if you erre, they ( to whom cc you write ) would faithfully detect your errour y ce that you may repent before you die> and may leave cc behind you a Recantation of all your miftakes " and mifcarriages, as you fay you intend to d<\ " upon Conviction. You confefs that by our dif- " ferences , Satan hath got great advantage in " England againft that Chriitiah Love, which is the cc Life and Character of Chrifts Difciples, and to "caufe Wrath, Envy, Hatred and Strife, that the c - honour and fuccefs of the Minillry is thereby The making an infrrument of Government themfelvcs without the people i The fetting up their fecond Prote&Our, — The fetting up the remnant of the Com- ( 12?) Commons again, the pulling them prefcntly down again, ( of whom he (aid ) that they had fworn, and fworn, and fworn again to be faithful to> and to defend them, and that they were the belt Go- vernors in all the World i and fuch as 'tis forbid- den Subjects to oppofe upon pain of damnation y Was all this lawful } and to do all this with dread- ful appeals to God, and as for God ? If all this was not Rebellion, orTreafon, or Murder i is there any fuch crime (think you) poilible to be committed ? are Papifts infulting over us in our fhame? are thoufands hardned by thefe and fuch like dealings into a fcorn of Religion ?' are our Rulers exafpera- ted by all this into the feverities which we feel ? are Ministers filenced by the occafion of it ? are we made by it the by-word and hilling of the Nations, and the fhame and pitty of all our friends ? and yet is all this to be juftified or filenced, and none of it at all to be openly repented of? I openly profefs to you, that till this.be done, we are never Hie to be healed, and reftored, and that it is heinous, grofs impenitence, that keepeth Minifters and people un- der their diftrefs. And I take it for the fa< Progno- ftick of our future Woe, and at beft our lengthned affliction to read fuch writings againft Rer. • and to hear fo little open profemon of Repentance, even for unqueftionable heinous crimes, for tht fa- ving of thofe that are undone by thefe fca for the Reparation of the honour of Religion which is molt notorioufly injured, to fee Men ftill. think that their Repentance is the dishonour of their par- ty, and caufe, whofe h jur can no other way be repaired, to fee Men fo blind as to think that the iilencing 6f thefe things will hide them, as if they (*3°) were not known to the world j That man or party that will juitirie all thofe heinous crimes, and itill plead Confcience or Religion for them, doth grie- vous injury to Confcience and Religion. I have told you truly that Gods way of vindicating the honour of Religion, is for us by open free Confeiliom to take all the (hame to our felves, that it be not inju- riouily call: upon Religion j And the Devils way of preferving the honour of the godly, is by juftifying their Sins, and pleading Religion for them, that fo religioufnefs it felfmay be taken for Hypocrifie and wickednefs,as maintaining and befriending wicked- nef?. — And f. 12. Is Repentance an unbecoming thing 1 1 hope the Adt of Oblivion was not made to fruftrate Gods Ad of Oblivion ? which giveth par- don to the penitent, doth it forbid us to repent of fin, or to perfwade our Brethren to repent? where fin is hated, Repentance will not be hated, and if fin were as bitter as it mud be, Repentance would not be bitter ; if I was guilty of fuch tins as you af- firm, 1 do openly confefs, that if I lay in Sack-cloth and in Tears, and did lament my tins before the world, and beg pardon both of God and Man, and in treat all Men not to impute it to Religion but to me, and to take warning by my fall, which had done fuch unfpeakable wrong both to Chrift and Men, I Ihould do no more lhan the plain light of nature af- fureth me, to be my great and needful duty, p. 17. Novv all that Bagfiarv accufed Mr. Baxter of, was p. 1. That he was as guilty of (tirring up and fomenting that War, as any one whatever, concerning which if we take his own ConfdTibn,and confider his cir- curnitances. being an Epiicopal Ordained Minifter, whole Office was to Preach Obedience and Peace, his ■ ( i*o his applauding the firft Boutefcus, as glorious Saints in Heaven, his vindicating the Authority and War of the Parliament againft the King, his pertinacious adhering to the Covenant, crying down the Royal Martyr as a Papilt, after he had iealed the ilncerity of his heart to the Reformed Religion by his blood, and the crying up of his Murtherer for a prudent, pious and faithful Governor, j His principles in his Holy Common-wealth, and his prefent practices in defending Schifm, and fo fowing Sedition, and re- proaching the elrablifhed Laws and Government , in Church and States if thefe do not prove him guilty of what Mr. Bagjhaw accufed him , yet I am fure they cry aloud tor his Repentance, and Retradtati- ons which he once promiied the world (p. 26,27. of his Defence of the Principles of Love) but never (that I hear of J hath been fo ingenious to perform as he ought. It is an ill diverlion for fuch a perfoa to banilh the thoughts of repenting for his own fins, by inquiring into the heinous iinfulnefs of Con- forming.- I wiGi heartily he could prove his inno- ccncy in the one, as eaiily as they can in the other > and if he cannot clear his innocence, that he would manifest his penitence, then would I as readily give him the right hand of fellowfhip, as he now deny- eth it to others, and he might be as great an inftru- ment of peace on earth among the Saints, as of joy in Heaven among the Angels of God. I mall only befeech Mr. Baxter to fay that Prayer heartily,which he hath penned in the 251, and 252. pages of his Cure of Divifions, and then let him reply as he thinks tit. " Lord hide not my own mifcarriages from my " light, and fufTer me not to take any tin that I have " com- tt tc committed, to have been my innocency, or duty, Ct left I ftiould dare to Father fin on God, and left tc I mould live and dye without repentance, and left ct I (liould be one, that continueth judgments and cc danger to the Lands ftir up fome faithful friend to cc tell me with convincing evidence,where it is that I " have mifcarrkd,trat contrition may prepare me for c; the peace of remiilion. O fave me from the plague "of an impenitent heart that cannot indure to be told of lin, and from that ungodly tolly, which taketh the (hame which Repentance cafteth upon f -" fin, to be caft upon Cod and Religiomwhich bind " us to Repentance and Conrellion. Amen. Now when you have humbly and fincerely re- newed this Prayer t© Almighty God, I befeech you to confider feriouily with your felf, that it may be God hath in anfwer coyour prayers,raifed up fo vile an inftrument as I am to be your Monitor, that what you thought your duty is your Jm, and that you are one that ji/Il continueth judgments and danger to the Land. For rirft, you feemed doubtful of it, when you prayed again!! it. 2. When after long and ma- rure deliberation, you entred into Communion with our Church in all its Ordinances that concern Lay- Communion, and refolved together with other of your Brethren to continue in it> and by that pradtice of yours, as well as your Arguments, did influence many others to a like pious and peaceable behavi- our j how can it be Jefs than a fin again'i God, and a grieving and gravelling the Conferences of fuch wtil-difpo fed Chri(tians,not only to withdraw your avowed Communion, but to pradlife that which diredtly tends to Divilion ani Confuiion ? 3. That in the judgment of fuch as were very pious and learned ( M3 ) learned men Tin your own Opinion) that practice of yours,which continucth and cncourageth feparation from our Gommunion^is iinfuii fuch were Cranmer, Kidly, Peter Martyr, and others that compiled the Liturgy in King Edward the VI. days, and Parker, Griridal,Horne, Jewel, who reviewed and recommen- ded it in Queen Elizabeths days. Such. were'tV/^r, T>avenant.Potter,Hall,Carkton, and others in the days of King James and King Charles of Bleifed Mcmojy. What think you of all thefe fober and moderate Conform] fts, fuch as Bolton, Whately, F 'inner \ Vent, Cno^ Dikg, Stocky Smith, Prejlon, Sihbs^ Sioughton, Jaylor, &c. Thefe youconfefs were no ignorant nor temporizing perfons. What think you oi Jacob and Johnfon, who were Independents, yet. wrote againii feparation I And what think you of the moil learn- ed and pious of the Non-conformiils, fuch as Cart- wright, Egerton.Hilderjh am, Dod, Ames, Parser, Bams^ Brightman,Ball,BradJbaw,Paget)Lang!y,Nichols^Hermg? who wrote more againfl feparation than . . . ' any of theConformifts themfelv-es ? fas Principles of you affirm.) What think you of the Af- "Love, />. 5: fembly of Divines, Twifs, Gatakgr> &c. Among whom you fay you nevjer heard but of Five Non-conformifls? what think you of fuch as have Conformed iince 1660. fuch as Reynolds, Conant^ Wallis ? andJafrly what think you o£ the Father; oiT all the Non-conformiils Mr.7.Cartwright^ who after he had written as much as he could 'againlLCobfbr- mity,faw fo much of the weaknefs of his arguments, as that he repented and Con formed at la (t? If all thefe have judged a bare withdrawing of the people from our Communion to be unlawful and againft their duty* I wonder how you.can gill think your more ("34) more pofitive oppofingand hindring of it to be your duty. Iconfidered again,that to live in the contempt of the Laws and lawful Autority both of Church and State, in a well eftablifhed Kingdom, is a fin of no mean nature in it felf, and by its erfedts may prove exceeding finfuh iorScbifm and Vivifion, Spi- ritual Pride & Cenforioufnefsjixt as certainly fins, and - perhaps greater than \Vboredom and Drunkennefs* and Rebellion is as the fin of Witchcraft.I confidered alfo that you have had long experience of the evil of Schifm, how great a matter a little fire kjndletb, and did meditate and foretel (with what delign I know not) in the fecond paper to the King, />. 12. " That and if my charitable admonition to you, and peaceable endeavors for unity and eftablilhment in the Church and State be ftill defpifeds I can only continue my prayer to God, as well for my felf as you in the Petitions above mentioned : Lord, bide not our own mifcarriages from our fight, &c. Cujus Aures claufe funt ut ab Amico verum audirt nequeat, bujus J'alus defperanda eft. Cicero de Amicitia. FINIS. ► ^^taR^"* ,M *- , '^v