CHAP. I. The Introduction bewailing our Dissentions, and plead­ing for Peace.
ΣΥΝ ΘΕΩ.

Sect. 1 WE read in the Sacred Story of two notable stru­ctures that Noah raised. The one, in obedi­ence to the Command of God, and conform­able to his Instruction.Gen. 6. An Ark, Hebr. 11.7 for the saving of him and his house, 2 Pet. 2.5. when God brought in the Floud upon the world of the un­godly. The other, in Gratitude to God, when the Waters were aswaged, and the Earth dryed, and the Ark rested, and He and His saved and brought forth again, An Altar Gen. [...].20, 21. unto the Lord, whereon he offered, of every clean beast, a burnt-offering. That he might both give a Specimen of the Piety of his Soul, and his hearty thankfulnesse to God for his mercy in that Sal­vation: and also, appease the wrath of God, which had poured forth such a deluge upon the sins of men. And the successe [Page 2]answered his hopes, for it is said, The Lord smelled a sweet sa­vor, and said, I will not curse the ground any more for mans sake. Which words, as they intimate that it was the indigna­tion of God, provoked by the wickednesse of the world, which brought on the Curse with a Floud to destroy the World: So they clearly signifie this anger of God by this Sacrifice of Noah to be aswaged and appeased. [...]. This Sacrifice appearing by this to be not only an Eucharistical or Gratulatory; but also a Propitiatory Oblation. [...]. And because anger is not appeased till the sinner be purged, and the sin expiated; The same Sacri­fices, which did conduce to the one, did conduce also to the o­ther, and did therefore, among the Ancients, receive different names according to their different effects and use. [...]. Placamina. Feboua. Piamina. They were Propitiations for the Attoning and appeasing a provoked De­ity; Purifications to purge and cleanse the vile offenders; and Expiations, or Lustrations, to expiate, and take off the provo­king and polluting sin.

Sect. 2 Give me leave, (dear Brethren) even He whom the least of the thousands of Israel, and the meanest labourer in Gods Vineyard, [...] to translate the Scene awhile into England, this lit­tle Island of the world; an Island sometimes like the Garden of God, which was once (while she was asPsal. 122.3. a City at Peace, and compact together)Cant. 6.4, 10 Beautiful as Tirzah, comely as Jerusalem: Fair as the Moon, clear as the Sun; and to her enemies, terrible as an Army with banners. But we cannot yet forget the years that are so lately past, whereinPsal. 93.3. The Flouds lifted up their voice, The flouds lifted up their waves: The indignation of God, as a Deluge, did over­flow the Land, and Judgements came so thick one upon the neck of another (as in a raging stormPsal. 42 6. 88.7. Deep calling unto Deep; all the Waves and Billows of God going over us) that we were not only drencht as in a brook of waters; but almost drowned in a flood, and all our peace carried away in a Tor­rent, a violent impetuous torrent of Blood and Confusion. ThenLam. 1.1. she who was great among the Nations and Princes among the Islands, even she became tributary: Then stood the poor afflicted Church weeping.Vers. 2. Her teares continu­ally on her cheeks, for her friends dealt treacherously with [Page 3]her and became her enemies: Vers. 5. Her adversaries were chief, her enemies prospered. Vers. 6. Her beauty was departed from her; Her Princes became like Harts that could finde no pa­sture, and were forced to flie without strength before the pur­suer. Vers. 8. She had grievously sinned, therefore, they that honoured her, despised her: Her Princes could not protect her, not her Fathers feed her, for,Chap. 4. Vers. 19, 20. Her Persecutors were swifter than the Eagles of heaven: And the breath of our nostrills, the Anointed of the Lord was taken in their pits, Chap. 2.6. for the Lord in the indignation of his anger for awhile despised the King and the Priest.

Sect. 3 But blessed be God, who yet did not forget to provide an Arke for his Church, who, though she was floating and tossed upon the waters, andPsal. 18.4. The floods of ungodly men made her afraid; yet was she safe.Psal. 93.4. He, that is on high, and mightier than the noyse of many waters, than the mighty waves of the sea, preserved her secure, even during those confusions. He, that but speaks the word, and makes the storm a calm,Mat. 8.26, 27. Who doth but rebuke the wind and the sea, and they obey him, even the Lord, Psal. 65.7. who stilleth the raging of of the Sea and the noyse of his waves, hath shewed us that he can, and doth, still the madnesse, or the tumults of the peo­ple too. He hath made aGenes. 8.4. mountain for the Ark to rest on; He hath now stopped the fury of the torrent, dryed up the wa­ters, restored our peace, hath made our Isa. 66.12. peace run like a river, and our glory like a flowing stream. He hath by many won­ders of providence and miracles of mercy made Psal. 77.19, 20. his way through the sea, and his paths through the great waters that he may again lead his people like a flock, by the hands of Mo­ses and Aaron. He hath raised up our Monarchy from the grave, and given us a King from the dead, a Prince of the Royal stemme, and placed him again on the throne of his fa­thers, andZech. 4.7, 9 made the great Mountain a plaine be­fore our Zerubbabel, whose hands have happily laid the foun­dations in the re-building of the Temple of God, and we hope to see the same hands to lay the head-stone thereof to the joy of the people of God with holy acclamations, shouting, and crying, Grace, Grace, unto it. He hath in a great measure re­stored [Page 4]again the beauty and the glory of Israel; Our Fathers to their Sees, The Priests to the Church; The Prophets to their Pulpits, which were usurped by the meanest of the people; and the Church-Assemblies to their pristine freedome.Psal. 118.23. This is the Lords doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes.

Sect. 4 Thus Sicut Audivimus, Sic & Vidimus Psal. 48.8. As we have heard, so have we seen in the City of our God. As we have heard done of old, so have we seen in our dayes. We have parallelled the old World both in sins and sufferings. 1. For our sins, our times were, as theirs are described byGen. 6.2, 5, 6. Moses, and as the like in the Poet,

Such were they, and such were we,Num. 32.14. An increase of sinful men, risen up in our fathers stead. I need not render the Poet in English; for, consider but the general practice of men, that will give the clear construction, their actions declare to the world how fruitful our age hath been in theEph. 5.11. unfruitful works of darkness; no place, no condition free. Hence, 2. God hath made us alike in Sufferings; This is the fource and origin of all the evi [...]s upon this people and Nation; even our rebellions daring Heaven it self, and forcing the Almighty to draw forth the Arrows of his indignation against us.

Sect. 5 2. And God hath made us parallel to Noah, and his house­hold, in our Deliverance and Salvation also.Psal. 126.3 [...]4. The Lord hath done great things for us, and hath turned our captivity as the streams of the South, with as great a miracle, and yet as much ease, as he can give rivers in a dry and parched Wilder­ness;Jude 1.15. springs of water in a South land. Let us tell it to our children, and their children another generation, that,Hom. Il. z. Et nati nato­rum, & qui nas­centur ab ill is. Virg. Aen. 3. Sect. 6. [...], even the Generations to come may sing the praises of the Lord, and know the wonders that he hath wrought for us.

3. What now remaineth, but that we also make the other [Page 5]parallel? that as Noah did, so we also should build an Altar. What Altar? even an Altar in our hearts toJude 6.24. Jehovah-shalom, to God, who is our peace, and who hath made peace for us; toExod. 17.15. Jehova-Nissi, the Lord our Banners; for it was he alone Psal. 124.2. who was on our side, when men rose up against us: And through his strength alone it was, ThatVer. 6. we were not given as a prey to their teeth, butVer. 7. the snare is broken, and we are escaped.

Sect. 7 Having now built an Altar, we must offer Sacrifice? but what shall we, or can we offer? even such Sacrifices as may be demonstrations of our thankfulness, and send up our praises;Psal. 50.14 Offer to God Thanksgiving, and pay thy vowes. Such Sa­crifices as may again attone us unto God; such as may purge our souls, and expiate our sins.Psal. 116.12, 13. What shall we render to the Lord? — We will take the Cup of salvation, and call upon the Name of the Lord. These are our Sacrifices.

Sect. 8 The truth is, an Altar material we have not, nor may we raise one: A Sacrifice properly so termed, we must not offer, neither canHebr. 9.13 the blood of Bulls and Goats, and the ashes of a dead Heifer at all sanctifie, or purifie the sinner. No, we have another, a better Sacrifice, which is already offered once for all, even Jesus upon the Cross, who alone1 Joh. 2.2. is the pro­pitiation for our sins: His blood aloneHeb. 9.14. who through the eternal Spirit offered up himself without spot to God, can purge our consciences from dead works, to serve the living God. Yet Metaphorical Sacrifices we have, and may, and must offer, and such are still required of us. When the Lord forerells the Rejection of the Jewes, and the despising of theirMal. 1.10, 11. car­nal offerings, even then he promiseth the calling of the Gen­tiles, and to make his Name great there, and that even among them incense shall be offered, and a pure offering. What are these? even thePsal. 5.4. Sacrifices of righteousness, 1 Pet. 2.5. spiritual Sa­crifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. Thus, a penitent and a broken heart is a Sacrifice, an heart humbled under the sense of sin, mourning for transgressions, and lamenting after the Lord; this contributes much to atonement and peace with God:Psal. 51 17. The Sacrifices of God, (i.e.) the most excellent Sacrifices, are a broken spirit, a broken and contrite heart thou wilt not despise. [Page 6]Thus are Prayers and Supplications a Sacrifice, such did ChristHeb. 5.7. [...]. offer up with strong cries and tears in the dayes of his flesh. Praise and Thanksgiving is another Sacrifice, yea, a Sacrifice Psal 69 30, 31. that doth please the Lord better than an Oxe or Bullock that hath horns and hoofs. And so the Apostle accounteth it, when he exhorts to it in this phrase,Heb. 13.15. alluding to that of Ho [...]. 14.2. Let us offer the Sacrifice of praises to God — that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to his Name. Again, Love is a Sacrifice, which is intimated by the Apostles Argument, pressing usEph. 5.2. to love one another by the Sacrifice of Christ, whereby he evidenced his love to us. Acts of charity and mercy, a free communication; and bounty to matters of charity and piety, are Sacrifices also, and placamina too, they are anPhil. 4.18. odour of a sweet smell, a Sa­crifice well-pleasing to God. And upon this account urged so earnestly,Heb. 13.16 to do good, and to communicate, forget not, for with such Sacrifices God is well-pleased. In a word, our bodies, our own selves must be a Sacrifice;Rom. 15.12 [...]. a living Sacrifice are we, in rendring to God our reasonable service. And as through the Apostles Ministration there was (h) an acceptable offering up, or Sacrifice of the Gentiles: So still through the blessing of God on our Ministries, there is a Sacrifice of the same na­ture now (though possibly short of those perfections) of­fered up to God. The Gentiles did the Apostles then, and the Ministers of the Gospel do still bring us an offering, when through their Ministry they are consecrated an holy people to God, according to that Prophecy.Isa. 66.91, 20. They, (i. e.) those that shall be sent abroad to the Nations, Tarshish, Pul, and Lud — The Gentiles, and the Isles afar off (fulfilled in the Apostles and Evangelists sent abroad from the Jewes to the Gentiles) shall bring all your Brethren (even those Gen­tiles by faith made the children of Abraham, and so Brethren to the Jewes) out of all Nations, a gift, or [...] an oblation to the Lord. Thus are we in a sound sense Priests, even in the Evangelical Ministry, to offer men, viz. by the power of the Word subduing them to the Gospel, and bringing themRom. 1.5. & 16.26. to the obedience of faith. The Sacrifices of the Levitical Priesthood were slain Beasts; but the Sacrifices of the Evan­gelical Ministry is aHeb. 4.12. ripping up of the hearts, a morti­fying [Page 7]and destroying the brutish lusts, and beastly affections of men, Eph. 6.17. by the Sword of the Spirit, the Word of God. Such Sacrifices as these God will accept, and these he doth expect from men in return of his mercies, viz. That we praise him, that we be humble, penitent, and obedient before him; that we mortifie our unruly lusts, our pride, passions, envy, ambiti­on, &c. That we worship God with sincerity and humble de­votion; that we love one another with a pure heart, and un­stained charity; that we follow peace with all earnest affecti­ons. These are the Sacrifices with which God is well-pleased: These are they which now are most proper to be offered; for,

Sect. 9 Whence come those inundations of misery upon us? Jam. 4.1. Those wars and fightings, which swept away our peace and happiness, as with a flood! Came they not hence, even from our lusts that war in our members? Pride, Envy, Covetousness, and Ambition, these were the Engines which the Devil used to fill us with hatred and malice, emulations and wrath, discon­tent and murmuring, strife and sedition; and by these he over­threw the best foundations of our peace, and unhinged the whole frame of our Government both in Church and State. We cannot forget, how ambitious and self-seeking men made no difficulty to sacrifice even Religion it self to their Rebelli­on, and the peace of the most flourishing Church and State to their own lusts. And now can we do less than sacrifice those lusts again to peace? We will do nothing, and are unworthy of those glorious mercies which the Lord hath through so ma­ny wonders brought home to us; if we yet are unwilling to mortifie our own inordinate affections, and unruly passions; yea, if we cannot be content in a great measure to sacrifice our own private judgments, and perswasions to the peace of the Church. We have been divided long enough, sides and parties have appeared high to the devouring one of another.Mat 10.20, 21. Brother hath betrayed the brother to death, and the father the child; children have risen up against their Parents. — It is now high time that we study how to be at unity.

Sect. 10 The Greek HistorianThucyd. l. 1 [...] telleth us of Lacedemonia, That before Lycu [...]gus his time, it was [...]— for a long while abound­ing in factions, and shaken with seditions. Another gives this [Page 8]reason of it, viz. becausePlut. in vit. Ly [...]g. Eurytion, one of their Kings being vainly ambitious of popular applauses, [...]. did too much loosen and relax the Rains of Government, and the pow­er of a Monarch. Hence the people grew fierce and insolent to despise their Kings, and the City was still full of commoti­ons and seditions: And the Sacred History informs us of the abounding of sin, and commotions in Israel, from another ground. We findJudg. 17.8. — 13. Idolatry in the house of Micah, and a young man of Judah consecrated a Priest to his Idol.Jude 18.2. — The children of Dan by force seeking themselves an inheri­tance, because none gave them a legal possession.Jude 19.2. — A Concubine continuing in whoredoms, and not punished. A sad War betweenJude 20. Israel and Benjamin, almost fatal to the house of Benjamin. And all these troubles recorded in such a time,Jude 17.6.18.1.19 1.21.25. when there was no King in Israel, but every one did that which seemed right in his own eyes.

Sect. 11 But was this also the ground of our miseries? Had we no King? or did He encourage popular insolencies? Nothing less; nay, we had a King in Israel, and one also, who was to His Power zealous to maintain the Church in her Splendor, the People in Peace; and who, rather than let loose those golden Rains of Government, whereby He might rule and preserve them, He was content to be sacrificed, a Martyr for both. But we were factious and seditious, covetous and ambitious, and unwilling to be kept in order; we were resolved that we would do every one, what pleased our own fancies; and then raised up fears and jealousies, and concluded, We would have no King among us; that there might be none to controll or hinder our ambitious projects. And that Pious King being thrown out of His Life, and Monarchy with Him out of the Kingdom: How Schisms and Heresies abounded in the Church, Faction and Sedition in the State; heats and animosities among all: How men studied malice and revenge, and filled all places with blood, spoil and confusion, is too notorious then to be forgotten by this Age. The wounds which the poor afflicted Church re­ceived in the house of her seeming friends, are not yet perfectly closed; and the scars of them will be too apparent (I fear) to succeeding Generations.

Sect. 12 Now then, methinks, it is but time, and there is a fit occa­sion and season for that Counsel, which theT. Liv. l. 40 Roman Histori­an telleth us, that Q. Caecilius Metellus gave to thoseM. Aemyl. Lep [...]dus, & M. Fulvius No­bilior. two great men (between whom there had been often and bitter quarrels both in the Senate, and before the people, but now chosen Censors together,) That they should joyn hands and hearts, and lay aside all thoughts of strife and hatred; amongst the rest,Amicitius immortales; inimicitias ve­ro mortales [...]sse debere. Liv. ib. That enmity and contentions (though they have arisen, and possibly might again arise, yet) should be mortal, but for a time, and soon dye; But Amity, concord and peace immortal, and be for ever. Oh, how happy should we be, did we but follow the counsel of that Grave Senator! We have disputed and contended long enough: it is time now to shew that we intend not to continue these divisions for ever; but to put a perpetual end to enmity and hostility: and that we now will faithfully and cordially unite our hands and our hearts, that it may be beyond the power of Malice, yea of Hell it self, to divide them; that we unite our selves in such bonds of faithful amity, that the powers of darkness may never break in or dissolve them: In a word, That we raise an Altar in our hearts to the God of Peace, whence may still ascend holy flames from an immortal fire, and we for ever be sacrificing to Peace and Love.

Sect. 13 But alas! May not the sad complaint ofC. Tacit. Annal. l. 4. circa fin. Tacitus be just­ly ours? who speaking of that year (Ap. Junio silan [...], & P. silio Nerva Cose.) saith, The year began fouly. Faedum anni principium in­cessit — It was an ancient Custom among the Romans (as Lypsius observes) that upon the Kalends of January they opened the Temples, sent up their prayers every one for his own, and the publick safety, and tranquility; and did account it even Piacular on that day, (the First day of the New Year) to do any thing either publickly or privately, that had any thing of sadness, or matter of sorrow; yea, or to punish a Malefactor: yet even on that day did Sejanus lay snares for, and basely circumvent poor Titius Sabinus, and upon slanderous accusations brought him to Prison, yea to death: the poor man crying out:Sic inch [...]a [...] annum, has Se­jano victimas cudere. Thus begins the year, these are the sacrifices offer­ed to the malice of Sejanus. Upon which the Historian con­cludes [Page 10]thus;Quem diem vacuum paenâ, ubi inter sacra & vota, quo tempore verbis etiam p of anis abstineri Mos est, vincula & laquei inducan­tar. Tacit. ibid. What day, what time can we expect to be free from Punishment, from misery and trouble, when even between the sacrifices and prayers for peace and safety, even at that time, on that day, wherein men should, and are wont to abstain even from Profane, harsh and bitter words; bonds are brought forth, and Halters, those instruments of misery and death?

Sect. 14 May not (I say) the like complaint be ours? The year begins fouly; the Aera Redemptionis Angliae, the time of our delive­rance and common joy commenceth sadly. When the remem­brance of our past bitter calamities through our contentions, to­gether with our happiness by our present salvation, should fil our hearts with a common joy; and we should allPsal. 42.4. go together to the house of God, to keep Holy-day with the voyce of joy and praise; with one lip, and one heart, offering up joint Sacrifices of Praise and Thanksgiving; and cordially begging, not only for our selves, but the continuance of, and increase of blessings, peace, safety and prosperity to the whole Church and State; and unanimously vowing faithful obedience to our God, un­stained and constant Loyalty to our King, and perfect peace and love one to another: What do we do? what is brought forth? even now, at this season, when we are charged by God and the King to forbear and avoid all words of reproach, even all words that may revive the memory of the old contentions, which we should strive to bury in perpetual oblivion (I can­not say, The Temple is shut up, and the Prisons opened; we can­not complain of such base Artifices laid to slander and circum­vent; or Bonds and Halte's prepared to punish sober inno­cent men: A just Prince needs not these Tricks of usurping Tyrants; nor indeed have we cause to fear any such things from our Superiours in Church or State; but) this we must confess to our shame, Men have not yet learnt to lay by their animo­sities, or abate their heats; even in this day, and time of peace, we sowe seeds of Division, and men publish to the World that beginning of mischief, Fears and Jealousies. When can we expect peace? when in such a season as this, which (if any thing) would make us in love with peace, we yet neither seek it, nor endeavour to preserve it; but still retain the seeds of [Page 11]malice and revenge, or contempt one of another in heart, and give way to the reproaches and slanders, uncharitable and un­christian censures of the tongue. Sect. 15

It was the great expectation and hope of all that wished well to the Church, that now theIsa. 40.2. Messengers of peace should speak comfortably to her, and tell her, that her warfare is accompl­shed, the [...] rendred, Mili­tia, &, tempus statutum. See Job 7.1. & 14.14. time appointed of her affliction is expired; the time ap­pointed of her peace come; and thatLament 4.22. her iniquity is par­doned, and she absolved, and her punishment ended: But alas we,Horat. Carm. l. 1. od. 3

We live, as if we were resolved to assault Heaven it self (not with that holy Mat. 11.12. violence, which the Scripture speaks of, when the hearts of men are inflamed with an holy fire, and ravished with the contemplations of the grace and love of Christ; and they run with as much earnestness and zealIsa. 60.4, 8, 11. in Troops together (as Souldiers to get the spoile of a be­sieged and taken City) to embrace the Gospel (the Gospel of peace and love) and by all sedulity in the practice of righteous­ness and diligence in the wayes of the Gospel, viz. Humility, Meekness, Holiness and Devotion, Piety and Peace, Patience and Obedience with all earnest endeavours;Luk. 13.24. strive to enter in at the strait Gate, and contend who shall get first into the possession of those joyes, which1 Cor. 2.9. neither eye hath seen, nor ear heard, nor can the heart of man conceive, which God hath pre­pared for them that love him; but) with that wicked violence wherewith

As if we were of the posterity of those Gyants (mentioned inGenes. 6.4. Scripture) who had not only corrupted themselves (for so had theVers. 5. sons of God, the children of the Church done also) but quite revolted from all Religion and Piety, [Page 12]from all Peace and Humanity; such who were mighty in Pow­er, and fierce in Nature,a, [...] q. Defectores sc. a Deo. Desectores sc. hominum. Irruptores [...]c. in hominem. fallen from God, and falling with violence upon those who were weaker than themselves.

Sect. 16 Doth not that Poet make a perfect Anatomy of our hearts? Are not we the persons (and this the Age) who have despised the Lawes of our God, who breath nothing but violence one against another? Victa jecet pietas — Piety and holiness, peace and love lie trodden down; but sin and profaness is rampant,Mat 24.12. iniquity aboundeth, and love is cold; as if, what with our rebel­lions against Heaven, and what with our contentions among our selves, we were resolved not to suffer the Almighty to put up his anger, and lay down the arrows of his indignation; yea, that God himself should not give us peace; for,

When even the season calleth us jointly toHag. 1.8. go up to the Mountain, and bring wood to build the house of God, to re­pair the breaches of the Temple, and again to set up the walls of Jerusalem (the Holy Government and Discipline) that is broken down: We, on the contrary, take several wayes to fetch Coals, and throw in fire to destroy the remnant, to burn up the Gates, and devour even the foundations of our Church and peace. We provide materials, but such as they inGen 11.3, 4, 9. the Holy Story, Brick and Slime to raise a Tower in defiance to Heaven, as if our whole design were to get our selves a name (though but to be famous for our Rebellion against the Lawes of God and the Land, to all succeeding Generations) when the issue of all can be nothing but Babel, Division and Confu­sion. Should we (likeGen. 11.16. Heb [...]r) now give names to our children according to the times, how would all our Re­gist's be filled with [...] Di­vision. Pelegs. For how are we divided (in tongue, shall I say? yes, we study a new canting language, as if we feared we could not separate far enough one from an­other, if we cloathed the old Truths of Religion in the known expressions, as if we must still have aJudg. 12.6. Schibboleth to di­stinguish [Page 13]parties; but especially) in heads, and hearts, and hands? Our judgments differ, and our hearts are divided in our affections, and our actions are all levelled to nothing else but the interest of that side, and the support of the quarrel of that party which we have espoused.

Sect. 17 Let me take leave a little to vent that passion and grief of heart that boyles within me. Jer. 4.19, 20. My bowels, my bowels, I am pained at the very heart, my heart maketh a noise, dolefully lamenting within me; for division upon division, and conse­quently destruction upon destruction is cryed. Lam 2.11. Mine eyes could even fail with tears, my bowels are troubled, my liver is poured out, or gall cast up through extremity of grief and in­dignation, for the destruction, yea, for the [...] a [...] fregit. breach of the daughter of my people: A breach now not made upon us by a Forrain Invader, but a fraction made among us, and within us by our own froward and petulant contentions: SinceLuk. 6.45. out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh, marvel not, where such sorrows for, and tender compassions to this poor afflicted Church have taken such possessions of, and make such deep im­pressions upon my soul; when mine heart is so deeply affected to see theLam. 2.10. Ʋirgins of Jerusalem hang down their heads for shame and confusion; and the Elders of Sion, which should sit on their seats of Judgment in splendor and beauty, even to sit on the ground in sorrow and sadnesse, because her children unnaturally teare out the bowels of their mother, and will not yet learn that great lesson of the Gospel, Peace and Love: marvel not, (I say) that now these floods seek a vent, and open the sluces of the eyes, and force away the barres that were up­on the lips.

Sect. 18 Memorable is the story of the son of Craesus, dumb from his birth; yet when Sardis the royal seat was taken by the Persians, and the sword of the insolent Souldier was lift up against the life of the King, his Father; then the strength of natural affection, and piety to his Father, loos ned the tongue of the dumb child, and he who never spake before, could then find a tongue to plead for his Fathers life, an [...]ery out, [...] He o­dot. & ex eo Valer. Marc l. 5 c. 4. O Sir, kill not Crae­sus. There is as great dan [...]er now to our dear Mother, the Church of England from these bitter Divisions of her children, [Page 14]as from the violence of unruly Souldiers; if these continue, she must expire: Piety and pity would make even the dumb to speak and plead her cause. And indeed who can keep silence at such a time as this? Who can write and not mingle his tears with his inke? or speak, and not mix bitter sighs and sobs with his words?Jer 9 1. were our eyes waters, and our heads foun­tains of teares; here is occasion enough to spend all, for the Divisions of the daughter of England. Divisions (not now ofJudg 5.15. Ruber, one single Tribe, but) of all the Tribes of our Israel, even among Priests, and people too. Nor are these only sin­gle Divisions and Breaches, but Division upon Division; and we are subdivided into as many Factions and Schismes as there are opinions or interests among men. And, which is more sad, these heats and hateful contentions reciprocated among men, who are tied by all the engagements of Nature, Grace, and Relation, to Peace; who are by Nature, Nation, and Reli­gion, Brethren.

Sect. 19 O when shall it once be that these sad and dismal ruptures of our peace, not civil only, (for here men dare not be alto­gether so contentious) but sacred and ecclesiastical, shall be cemented and closed up? that we no longer may administer matter of sighing, sadnesse and sorrow to our friends; or of in­sulting, to the enemies of our Church and State? It is this, which pleaseth our common adversary, and makes the Jesuite laugh in his sleeve (as the Proverb is):Hoc Ithacus ve­lit & magno mercentur Atri­dae. Virg. What the Pope would be at the greatest cost and charge to effect, we our selves do for him. When the Jesuites were troubled to invent slanders to make us hated or scorned abroad, and to find plots to ruine us at home, and yet could not do it; we have taken the work out of their hands, and do it our selves.

Sect. 20 It is the popular clamour, Venient Romani, Popery is creep­ing in, Superstition and Idolatry growing upon us, the old way for discontented spirits to give vent to their dissatisfacti­ons at the established government; and to affright ignorant but well-meaning people with a vain scare-crow, and name of Popery. But really by our Schisms, and Breaches, and bitter animosities we do open the door for even Popery; yea, any thing to enter, and we take the ready course to make good that [Page 15]Prophetick speech of the dying Arch-Bishop, See Arch B. L. Speech on Scaff. alluding to Joh. 11.48. by our Divisions to pave the way, where Venient Romani, The Romans shall come, and take away our place and Nation. Absit omnem. From which fears by the vigilance of our Governours; by our conscientious obedience, and peaceable deportment and con­formity to the established Laws; and by inviolated unity a­mong our selves, we are sufficiently secured.

Sect. 21 And now, methinks, we should have some thoughts of peace: O that, that pathetick exhortation of the Apostle might take place, and find a room, and full reception in all our hearts.1 Cor. 1.10. Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ (and what Name is dearer? what motive greater? that ye all speak the same things, and there be no divisions among you: but that ye be perfectly joyned together in the same mind, and the same judgement.

CHAP. II. Two Arguments to perswade to peace and unity, from 1. The strict charge of the Gospel, and 2. The possi­bility, and no difficulty to perform it.

Sect. 1 FOr the attaining and maintaining of this so much wished for Peace and Unity, Let me beseech all sober Christians se­riously to consider: On the one hand, The undoubted charge of the Gospel, which layeth a necessity, and indispensible engage­ment upon us to seek, study, and to preserve it: On the other, The easinesse of attainingit, would we truly mind it, that it is very possible we may live in peace, and it is only our own sin if we do not.

Sect. 2 Argum. 1. The strict charge of theEphes 6.15. Rom 10.15. Gospel of peace which we professe, beyond all dispute obligeth all Christians to it.Rom. 12.18 If it be possible, as much as in you lieth, live peaceably with all men. AndHeb 12.14. Follow peace with all men. With all men, in the greatest extent imaginable, (how much more with Brethren;) of the same faith, of the same Nation, of the same Church; and that with the greatest earnestnesse, if it be pos­sible, [Page 16]and as far as it is possible, as much as in you lieth, let no fault [...]ie in you, if ye have it not; not only embrace it when it is offered, but follow it, that ye may gain it.

Sect 3 The Lord Jesus, TheIsa. 9 6. Prince of peace, would be incar­nate and come to dwell among men in no time, but when peace was amongst them: when there was a general peace over the whole world (as the stories of those times abundantly shew)Caesar Aug. ab oriente ad occid [...]n [...]om, à s [...]prentrione in Meridiem, ac per totum ocea­ni circulum cun­ctis gentibus u­na pace composi­tis, Jani portas tortio ipse tunc clausit— eo tempore, eo anno quo firmissimam verissimam (que) pacem ordinati­one Dei Caesar composuit, natus est Christus; cu­jus adventui Pax ista famu­lata est — Paul. Oros. Hi­stor. l. 6. p. 22. in those dayes, wherein Augustus Caesar had made a per­fect peace from East to West, from North to South, over the whole circuit of the Ocean, was our Lord born. The Providence of God so ordering it, that a general peace over the world, should usher the Prince of peace unto the world. At his birth the Angels proclaim it,Luke 2.14. Peace on earth, good will towards men: and indeed the great mercy and love of God to men, is the highest engagement upon them to peace and good will one to another. And this Jesus, who was born in such a time of peace, when he preacheth to men, doth also straitly command it.Mark 9.50. Have salt in your selves: be sure to retain the sincerity of grace, the purity of faith, to keep your selves and others sound in that faith: but salt hath some biting acrimony: see therefore that this be tempered with prudence and charity, that ye lose not peace; Have peace a­mong your selves.

Sect. 4 The Apostle constantly exhorts unto it,2 Cor. 13.11. Be of one mind, live in peace. Again,2 Tim. 2.22. Flee youthful lusts, fol­low righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. To this he wooeth the E­phesians by his bonds, and presseth them as to a duty, which if they practice not, they neither answer their profession, nor walk worthy of that Gospel, to which, and wherewith they are called.Ephes. 4. Vers. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. I therefore the Prisoner of the Lord, be­seech you, that ye walk worthy of the calling wherewith ye are called. How? even thus, With all lowliness and meek­ness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love (then not reproaching or reviling) endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. And he goes on, pressing it by the most cogent Arguments, There is one body, and one spirit; (i. e.) ye are knit together by one spirit into one bo­dy, [Page 17]and shall the members of the same body contend one with another? (see also how he urgeth the same duty from the same ground in another place in his Epistle to the2 Cor. 12.12. — 28. Co­rinthians) but he goeth on, Ye are called in one hope, ye have all the same expectations; ye hope for the same end, the same mercies, the same life eternal, why should ye not agree to walk in the same way? One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God and Father of all. Ye are all baptized into the ser­vice of one Lord, into the same faith; engaged in one and the same vow: and should not all this engage to the greatest charity, to the strictest unity?

Sect. 5 There was therefore great reason for that charge of his to the Romans, Rom. 16.17 To mark them which cause divisions— and to avoid them. Even, [...], sc. attentè & diligentur quasi hostes è speculâ observare: to watch them, as a watch­man stands upon the watch-tower to descry an enemy, or a Centinel upon the guard to prevent him. This is one great end why God hath set his [...] Act. 20.28. Bishops in the Church, who are, as, [...], to oversee and look to the flock, to teach, to feed, and govern them: so, [...], to watch for them, to discover approaching dangers, asEzek. 3.17. watchmen to the house of Israel. And really, the watch cannot be set too strictly, nor kept too carefully against such as make divisions, that such enemies to peace and love may not creep into the City of God, whose grand work is, to undermine the faith of the Go­spel.

Sect. 6 They are indeed a sad generation of men who bear this cha­racter, thatRom. 3.17. The way of peace have they not known. They will neither live quietly themselves, nor let others live quiet­ly by them: and, if ye look to their affections,Vers. 18. they have no fear of God before their eyes: and the issue is,Vers. 16. Destruction and misery are in their wayes. Let men pretend never so much to the Spirit, to a wisdom above the rest of their brethren, and to a more spiritual way, yetGal. 5.20, 21. Variance, emulations, strife, seditions, heresies, hatred, envyings, are as evident and manifest works of the flesh, as, Adultery, For­nication, Drunkenness, Murder, &c. and as much opposite to the wayes of the Gospel.Jam. 3.14, 15. When ye have bitter envy­ings and sirife, that wisdom is not from above, but, earthly, [Page 18]sensual, devilish. Yea, whatever mens boastings may be, where there is envying, strife, and divisions; they are really car­nal, and walk as men, sensual men.

The Fruits of the Spirit have another name, are another thing. They are,Gal. 5.22, 23. Love, Peace, Joy, Long-suffering, Goodness, Meekness, &c. The wisdom from above is of an­other stamp:Jam. 3.17. Pure, peaceable, gentle, &c. The Disci­ples of Christ are of another spirit, they bear this character;Joh. 13.35. By this shall all men know that ye are my Disciples, if ye love one another, said that Shepherd, whoJoh. 10.3.14. best knew the mark of his own sheep, even the Lord, who best2 Tim. 2.19. knows who are his. This was accounted the Character of the Anci­ent Christians in Tertullians time,Christiani amant paenè antequam nô­runt. Tertul. alicubi. that they loved one another, before they knew the faces one of another, and after him we are told by St. Chrysostom, that [...]. Chrys. Hom. 31. in Hebr. Love and peace are the standing marks and badges, the distinguishing chara­cters of true Christianity. Read over that whole Epistle of that Beloved Disciple S. John, ye will find that the whole designe of that is, from the exceeding rich love of Christ to us, to en­gage usSee parti­cularly 1 Joh. 2.3, 6, 7, 8. & ch. 3.11.24. & 4.7. to the end. to love among our selves. This being both the old and the new command, which unless we obey, we have for­feited our Christianity, That we love one another: declaring this to be the special commandment which we have from Christ,1 Joh. 5.21. That he who loveth God, love his brother also. It is so indeed; for our Lord Christ himself saith so,Joh. 15.12. This is my commandment, that which I especially give in charge, wherein ye shall bear the signal character of my Disciples, That ye love one another.

Sect. 8 These are the strict charge, the unquestionable, unrepealable commands of the Gospel; so inseparable a character and mark of a Christian, that it is evident, whosoever studies not this peace, is not careful to maintain this union and love, nor wil­ling to lay down his own humors to gain, and do his utmost to to promote it; he doth hereby give to the world but too much reason to question his Christianity.

Sect. 9 Argum. 2. And that, which may yet engage us farther, is to consider this also, That what is so straitly charged on us, we may with much ease, and no difficulty obey, if we indeed [Page 19]will live like Christians. For, the controversies and things in dispute among us are not so great, but, as they might be easily composed, were we not given to contention: so, notwith­standing some differences concerning them, we might live in peace. They are not really so great, nor are are the distances so wide, as through the heats and animosities of men they seem to be. Let us but purge our souls of passion and prejudice, and not consider persons, but things, we might soon be reconciled, and easily agree (as to the main) in our practice. And, this Consideration will aggravate the sin of our Divisions, and may justly increase our shame for contending. Let us take a view of the particulars of our differences.

CHAP. III. Our Differences examined, as to Doctrine, Government, Liturgy, &c. and none found so great, as for which to divide the Church. This shewed, 1. in matters of Doctrine.

Sect. 1 THose bones of contention which the enemies of our peace have cast in among us, are concerning 1. Matters of Doctrine. 2. Of Government and Discipline. 3. Of Liturgy, Rites and Ceremonies. But in none of these is there any such great difference between the learned sober men of either the Episcopal or Presbyterian perswasion, (For, men of Fanatick spirits, whose principles are purely Schism and Separation, we here consider not) as the world is made to believe: But lay by animosities against persons, interests and parties, there may be very much compliance for Peace sake.

Sect. 2 1. As to matters of Doctrine. Blessed be God, we are secure for the main. The 39. Articles have not yet been challenged as guilty of any error of Faith: only some things have been desired to be explained, some Articles to be made more full and cleer; but all this amounts not to a dissent or difference in the thing.

Sect. 3 But one thing there is, which indeed makes a great noise in the world, and is matter of high debate even among learned men, and managed with so much heat and exasperation, as no one Controversie more, that I know, viz. The Doctrine of Election and Reprobation; The Counsels and Eternal Decrees of God about the final estate of Angels and Men: with the Appendices of this, The Sufficiency and Efficacy of Grace, the Ʋniversality of Redemption, the Liberty of the Will, the Perse­verance, or Falling away of the Faithful. Doctrines of an high nature, and (rightly understood and explained) of great use, both as to manifesting the Glory of the Goodness and Justice of God; and to the strengthening of faith, exciting the hope, quickening the obedience, and encouraging the perseverance of the Saints. Yet through the blindness of mans finite under­standing, who indeed is not able to fathom the abyss of Gods counsels; and the bold presumptions of some men, who will dare to determine of that, which no mortal man dares say he understands; it hath been the unhappy fate of this Doctrine to be the matter of the highest contention in the Church, a Controversie of the longest continuance, and managed with the sharpest bitterness.

Sect. 4 And (as if men, when they enter into this dispute, were en­gaged to deny Christianity, and to lay aside all meekness of spirit, and all soft and smooth language:) On the one side, we are affrighted with the names of Arminians, Damned Ar­minians; at least half Jesuites, Pelagians, Semipelagians; Proud men, that dare presume to overthrow the Soveraignty, and de­throne the glorious Grace of God, to exalt the Handmaid above the Mistress, setting the insolent Will of Man in the throne, and making the Grace of God truckle under it. And abundance more ejusdem furfuris.

Sect. 5 On the other side, we are accosted with, Calvinists, Supra­lapsarians, Sublapsarians: Men that set up a Saturn for a God, who devours his own children; who to glorifie his own power, without any respect at all to goodness or justice, but only to declare his own uncontrollable soveraignty, hath made the greatest part of the world to destroy it; and decreed the tortures, the eter­nal torments of so many thousand innocent souls meerly for his [Page 21]own pleasure; and (that he might destroy them with justice) first to make them sinners, that then they might be fit fewel for his indignation. And that men have nothing to do, but to wait for the execution of Gods will upon them; yea, if they do any thing, to sin as fast, and as high as they can, that God may have the more glory of his grace, if he save them, or of his justice, if he condemn them; for all must be meerly according to his pleasure. And a great deal more of this horrid representation charged upon this side.

Sect 6 I am confident, to a considering man, the charges (as to the main) on both sides are equally unjust, I am sure, uncharitable and unchristian. But here is the mischief; Men have espoused a quarrel & interest, and are resolved to maintain it: Therefore, rather than abate an inch, to maintain a supposed reputation to themselves, they break all the mounds of Charity and Chri­stianity, to raise the foulest slanders, and draw the most odious consequences from the doctrines of their adversaries. How agreeable this is to the Christian and Evangelical temper, let the world judge.

Sect. 7 But may we not yet have peace, and live in love notwith­standing a dissent in these Doctrines? without doubt we may. Or is there any such thing in the nature of these Doctrines, that they cannot amicably be disputed without these heats, or dissented in without breach of charity? Certainly there is not: For,

Sect. 8 1. It is not a thing of yesterday, nor will this day end it. I am much troubled to see, that Arminian and Calvinist are made, and used as the great Name to distinguish Professions; as if Arminius and Calvin were the [...]; or, the men of the several perswasions were bound jurare in verba, and owned either of them as their Master; when both parties owne no Master but Christ; and glory in no name but that of Chri­stians, their first appellation, or (because there may be some necessity to distinguish the Reformed from the Pseudo-Catho­licks,) Protestants.

Sect. 9 Sure I am, this Controversie is not peculiar to our Church, the Romanists do as much dispute it there. Those who have read the books of Alvarez, or (for why should I name any [Page 22]one, when there are so many?) the Dominicans, the Thomists, and of the Jesuites, will be able to witness this. Are not theSee a large discovery of this in the Author of the Provincial let­ters, or Mystery of Jesuitism. Let. 1.2, 3. disputes about the Next power to act; the general sufficiency of Grace given to all, that (as one side pleads) men need no other addition of any efficacious Grace to determine the Will; and the necessity of efficacious Grace, without which (say the other) no man hath power to act: as much ventilated be­tween the Molinists and the Jansenists? The Dominicans, or New Thomists (as they are called) upon a base designe closing with the Jesuite in words, but agreeing with the Jan­senists in the thing.

Sect. 10 Nor is it peculiar to this Age; for, was not the like dispute always in the Schools of the Philosophers, about the Irrevoca­bile, inevitabile, and immobile fatum? (though, I confess, the rigidest Maintainers of the Absolute Decrees, do as much decry the Stoical fatality, as the contrary-minded:) but especially, about the Determination of the Will: whether the Will doth de­termine it self; or whether any thing else, and what that is that doth determine it?

Sect. 11 Yea, was the Church, almost ever, free? Infallibly, these Disputes were in the Church long before either Calvin or Ar­minius were born; and will be, when possibly their names may be forgotten. Both sides, we know, plead the sense of Anti­quity, and the concurrence of the Ancients in the same judg­ment: The one pleading, that they have the Vote of the whole Church in all the first ages before S. Austin; and a many of the great Lights of the Church also after him: Yet withall yielding to the other part, that, at least, S. Austin was of their mind for the main. And this other side pleading S. Austin ex professo disputing these points, and citing the judgments of many, before him, as Cyprian, Ambrose, Greg. Nazianz. &c. and after him, they call in the testimonies of Prosper, Fulgen­tius, and abundance of later times both Papists and Pro­testants.

Sect. 12 Yea beyond all these, do not both sides provokeIsa. 8.20. to the Law and to the Testimony, to the Sacred Scriptures; and strong­ly conceive those Sacred Oracles to determine for their per­swasions? The one, building on those many Parables of the [Page 23]Gospel (especially that of the Sower, Luk. 18.11.16. wherein the reason of the success or non success of the Word as to the fruits of righteousness, is founded not in any such Decree of God, but in the goodness or badness of the ground, in the probity or im­probity of the heart, that receives it:) And those many texts, in which God evidently dealeth with man as a Rational crea­ture, drawing him byHos. 11.4 the cords of a man, and bonds of love; convincing the judgment by the clearest demonstrations; wooing the affections by the sweetest and most endearing ex­pressions of kindness, and arguments of love; drawing the Will by sweet promises of the choicest mercies; terrifying the impenitent, and awakening the secure by severest threatnings, and the thunders of most dreadful terrors;Deut. 30.15.19. setting before man Life and Death, everlasting blessedness upon hisMat. 24 13. Rev 2.10. per­severance in faith and obedience, eternal misery upon his final impenitency and disobedience; seriously exhorting manDeut. 30.19. Josh. 24.15. Job 34.4. Pro. 1.29. Isa. 1.16.21. & 65.12. to make his own choice, that he may live and not die;Luk. 19.42. Mat. 23.37. Passi­onately bemoaning the blindness and stubbornness of man that will not see, nor close with the things that do belong to his peace; andDeut. 32.6.28, 29. expostulating with man for his unkindness to God, his unmindfulness of himself: CallingDeut. 30.19. Isa. 1.2. heaven and earth to witness, yea makingIsa. 1.18, 19, 20. Ezek 18.25, 29 Man himself judge between God and his own soul, whether by any act, or any such irrevocable decree, he be bound up that he cannot do otherwise; and by solemn oath removing from God all kind ofEzek. 18.30, 31. & 33.10, 11, 12, 13-21. pleasure in, or desire of mans destruction; and charging the cause of all upon man himself, who will sin, and will not repent, and by conse­quence will die: Expressly,Mar 16.16. Luk: 13.3.5. Heb. 10.38, 39. most expressly determining Salvation onley upon condition of Repentance, Faith, Obedience, and final Perseverance; Damnation onely in case of Infidelity, Disobedience, Apostacie, and final Impenitency. Thus from the express Condition in the effect and execution, (by which onely we can know the cause in this thing) they infer such an indeterminate and conditional Decree: there being no promise of life, but to persons so and so qualified, and acting; nor salvation given, but upon perseverance in faith and obedience; no death denounced, but upon intuition of sin; nor inflicted, but where such sin is persevered in.

Sect. 13 The other side also make their equal claims to the same sacred Oracles. Which declare theRom. 9 11.—28. stability of the purpose of God according to Election: That He hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardeneth: That it is not of him that will th, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy; the Discrimination being made with God, before they have done cither good or evil: and that howsoever God deal­eth, he hath as unquestionable a soveraignty over his crea­tures as the potter over his clay; that every mouth may be stopped, and no man dare to reply against God; referring the whole Series of mans salvation to God firstRom. 8.30. Predestinating, then calling, then justifying, then glorifying: which onely charge sin and impenitency, and consequently impute all the miseries, death and destruction on mans perverse and depraved will; but declare his help, deliverance, mercy and life to be only from God, and his pure, free, rich Grace and Love: and teach, that, though Repentance, Faith, Obedience, and Perse­verance in these, be the expresse conditions of life; yet they are all, the Gifts of God, Act 5.31. Ephes. 2.8. Phil. 1.29. who gives repentance, and faith, and1 Cor. 1.8, 9. Phil. 1.6. 1 Thess. 5.24. strengthens us to persevere, and upholds us from falling; and that therefore such shall not utterly, and for ever fall away: And that, these being the gifts of God, they must be from the pure love and onely good pleasure of God; that man may have1 Cor. 1.29. nothing to boast of in himself, as having nothing but1 Cor. 4 7. what he hath received; and1 Cor. 15.10. the Grace of God being that which maketh the difference: And though no man can be saved, but such as are fully willing to be saved, and whose wills freely choose the way of righteousness and life; yet the will of man is so naturally corrupted, and enslaved to lust, that man cannot choose, nor the will determine it self to that which is really good, until it be emancipated and set free by that Divine grace, which is not given to all, but onely to some certain persons, according to the Beneplacitum Dei, the good pleasure of God, who makes menPhil. 2.13. willing, as well as en­ables them to work. Thus from these Scriptures, experiences, and effects, they conclude the Absolute Decree of God, to pre­pare for, and give to such a number of persons, whom he hath chosen, this effectual grace, and so to bring them infallibly to [Page 25]salvation, leaving the rest to the liberty and corruption of their own will, to perish in their own wilful Rebellion.

Sect. 14 I have no design to interpose mine own opinion, I must here cry out, [...]! and confess, he must be a man of greater skill, and sar greater wisdom and learning than I dare pretend unto, or can hope to attain, who shall be able to decide this controversie, and cut so even a thread, as to place the grace of God in the Throne, where it must unquestionably sit, and have all the glory of the good that is in us, or conferred upon us; and yet assert the power and liberty of the rational creature, which God hath given to it, and according to the use whereof it shall, and must be judged.

Sect. 15 But by all this it is apparent, That this dispute is not newly started; neither Calvin, nor Arminius were the first fathers or factors of either opinion, that we should be now engaged to prosecute either, as a new Doctrine sprung up in the Church, when it hath been of old, and (I believe) will be among men while men are in the World. And shall we now for this difference break peace? shall we not unite in one com­munion, because we cannot agree in this one Doctrine? should the Church for this maintain a perpetual Faction, and continue a perpetual Rent to the end of the World, for a different judg­ment in so abstruse a Doctrine; wherein (not Hereticks and Schismaticks, but) learned men, of sober, pious, and peace­able principles have dissented, and do, and will dissent, while they are on this side Heaven, where only they will be fully ac­quainted with the truth, having their understandings inlightned beyond all obscurity, and their hearts perfectly purged from all corruptions? God forbid.

Sect. 16 2. To this let me add the difficulty of deciding it, which must be concluded from what hath been said in the former Pa­ragraphs; and the great pretensions (and those strongly pro­bable too) which both sides make to those three chief, yea, on­ly rules to judge and determine of things by, Scripture, Rea­son, and Experience; and Arguments drawn from all these by each dissenting Party, which will puzzle the acutest Respondent of the other side to give such an answer and solution to them, as may clearly take off the doubt, and give satisfaction to them [Page 26]that raise it. They must be wiser (I say not than I, but) than most, than any that I know, who shall be able to unty all the knots, and solve all the objections in this controversie? I shall need no other Argument to prove this difficulty, than the con­stant dissent (not of men who are troubled with the pruritus disputandi, that itch of disputing which is never satisfied; or of such, of whom the Apostle speaketh,2 Tim. 3.7. who are ever learn­ing, but never come [...]. to acknowledge the truth. But) of learned, and considering men, who are as able as any to disco­ver the truth; and take as much pains because they would glad­ly find it; and as readily acquiesce and rest in it when it is found. Of this I am fully confirmed by the judgment and in­genuous confession of one,Dr. Saun­derson. now Lord Bishop of Lincoln. whom I judge as pious, learned and judicious; and as much considering things before him; and as truly Reverend a Father as this age hath known. Who having shewed his reasons for quitting the wayes both of the Supra-lapsarian, and Sub-lapsarian, and laid down his own sen­timents, with the grounds of them, saith, thatSee Dr. Hammond. [...]. Pag. 34. Sect. 52. Against this, he knoweth, much may be objected, and much more than he esteemeth himself able to answer; though yet, to his apprehen­sion, somewhat lesse than against either of the other extremes. And indeed I shall as soone expect to see a man dive into, and fathom the deep, and tell me what is in the bottom of the sea: or mount up to heaven and tell the number of the starres: yea, ascend above the firmament, and get into the throne of God: as to find one who shall be able to give a clear account of those secret counsels, and unravel all the difficulties, and fathom the depths of this great abysse. So that I cannot but wonder at men, who pretend to adore and admire this abysse of Gods unfathomable counsels, yet themselves dare attempt to fathom and define them. Sure I am, if there be any depths in the Sa­cred Scriptures, wherein (as they say) the Elephant may swim; or (as the Apostle saith)2 Pet. 3.16 things hard to be understood; this is one of them. And now to perpetuate a Schism, or deny to be at peace one with another for different opinions in a thing so hard to be decided; how unworthy this is for Christians, yea, for men, let common reason judge.

Sect. 17 3. Upon which account, I cannot but magnifie the pru­dence [Page 27]of the Church, of ours in particular, which never did de­fine, nor in this Controversie give a decision either way, which may well be another argument for peace, notwithstanding a dissent in this thing. Survey her Articles, Canons, Liturgy, Ru­bricks, Catechisms, to which only we are called to subscribe, ye will find not any thing that tendeth to a determination of the point to either side. So great her prudence, that in a thing of so much obscurity, and difficulty she would determine no­thing, that any pious and knowing man might doubt: and so great her love to peace, that she would not define, where by defining there would have been an occasion of perpetual Schisin. Whereby it is evident, that our Church doth not at all make this a condition of her communion, that men should professe themselves of either side in this controversie. And we therefore may well keep peace among our selves, though in judgment we differ in this: nor are we excusable, if we se­parate from the communion of the Church, or deny a peace­able communion in the Church for that, which the Church hath not at all made the condition of her communion.

Sect. 18 4. Nor yet is the difference so wide between the dissenting Parties, but that they agree in enough to engage them to give to each otherGal. 2.9. the right hand of fellowship. It is true, look upon the odious consequences which one Party draws from the Doctrine of the other, and the expressions that fall in the heat of dispute; I confess the distance is wide, yet the persons are more asunder than the tenets; for take the highest of either side, and let a sober man take out their concessions in their calmer debates, he will find a perfect accord in the main of all things that need be preached to the people, or believed by them in order to their practice.

Sect. 19 I find in the forenamedDr. Ham­mond in [...]. Pag. 3. Sect. 4. Dr. Saunderson, these five things, or Positions, wherein all, he saith, do agree (though of contra­ry judgments) and indeed I know no Dissenter. 1. That the will of man is free in all his actions. 2. That very many things in the World happen contingently. 3. That God from all eternity foreseeth all, even the most contingext events. 4. That whatso­ever God foreseeth, shall inevitably come to pass. 5. That sin­ners are converted by the effectual working of Gods grace. Let [Page 28]me add some other particulars of agreement, that we may see how small the matter of difference really is, which make such a noise in the World, they are these.

Sect. 20 I am sure there is a concurrence in this: 1. That there is a Beneplacitum 'Dei, and an eternal purpose of God according to Election: Some from all eternity decreed to everlasting life, and some to everlasting condemnation. 2. That the number of each of these is certain, and shall neither be aug­mented nor diminished, as to the event. For whether they are determined (as say the one) or foreseen (as the other ra­ther chuse to speak.) Yet all events as they are foreseen of God, shall come to passe accordingly as they are foreseen; and as infallibly, as if determined; for God can be no more deceived in his knowledge, than frustrated in his counsels. So that whe­ther God hath decreed such particular men shall walk in such a way, and so infallibly come to this end: or, whether he on­ly foresees they will walk in such a way, and upon this deter­mines the end: the matter is all one as to this event, The num­ber and particulars of them that shall be saved, or everlastingly perish, is certain with God. 3. That God by no act of his lay­eth any necessity upon the event, whether to force man to o­bey, or necessitate him to sin: thatB. Saunder­son in [...]. Pag. 4. Sect. 6. Praescience doth not, it is evident to common sense; and that any Predetermination of God doth, those who maintain it do deny; and theySee B. Da­venants answ. to Hoard's Gods love to Mankind. say, that as well the Predetermination as the Prescience of God may stand cum possibilitate ad eventus contrarios, though neither of them cum eventis contrariis. So that whatever some pas­sages in their doctrine may seem to tend to, they both disclaim a necessitation, though both acknowledge an infallibility of the event, which is only necessitas consequentis & ex hypothesi; all things being necessary when they exist, and what is future being present and existing to the all-seeing eye of God, there being no priority or posteriority in eternity. 4. Though there be not this necessitation, yet it is agreed, That God worketh by his Grace (I confesse about the Resistibility, or irresistibi­lity they differ: irresistibly (saith one) not irresistibly (say the other) yet even these agree thus far, that God worketh) so ef­fectually on those whom he hath ex beneplacito appointed to [Page 29]salvation, in ordering the means, occasions, and opportunities, with such congruity to that end, as that [...]. Pag. 5. Sect. 9. de facto it is not fi­nally resisted. o that though it be possible for the free will of man to resist the calls of God, yet in those that believe and are saved, the Grace of God works so sweetly and effectually, that the will doth not resist, but freely and willingly closeth with it. 5. That the whole of what we do amisse must be left unto our­selves, our sin and condemnation is from our selves: and the glory of all the good we do, and of all the blessings we receive both in this life and that to come, must be given only to Gods grace and love.

Sect. 21 Yet again, Consider the whole series of the acting and Pro­vidence of God in reference to man from his creation to his final conclusion, see if there be not a perfect accord in all these things.

1. That God did create man after his own image in perfect righteousnesse and holinesse, and full liberty of will (as a Rati­onal creature) either to obey God and continue as he was cre­ated; or to sin and fall away, having a power to either, and by this we conclude that God decreed to make him so.

Sect. 22 2. That man thus created, and left to himself, did yield to the temptations of Satan, and by perfectly voluntary disobedience fall away from God, and cast himself, and so was all mankind brought into a state of sin and misery, under the bondage of Sa­tan, without all power or possibility; yea, or so much as desire to recover himself out of that wretched condition. This, it is evi­dent, God did permit (for he could have hindred it if he pleased) and therefore from all eternity decreed to permit, a purposing to make use thereof for the further manifestation of his power, wisdom, justice and goodness.

Sect. 23 3. That God out of his infinite compassion to miserable man (which he shewed not to fallen Angels) that Satan might not finally triumph in such a Conquest, if all Mankind should perish; did immediatly after the Fall promise a Saviour, and in due time did send (and therefore from all eternity decreed to send) his dearly beloved, and only begotten Son, Jesus Christ into the World, to undertake our Redemption, to satisfie Di­vine Justice for our sin, and to make peace by the blood of his [Page 30]Cross, and to deliver us from that state of sin and misery.

Sect. 24 4. That all Mankind which was lost by the fall of the first Adam is restored to a capacity, and possibility of salvation through the mercy of God, and merits of Jesus Christ the second Adam: The merits of the second Adam being as ful­ly sufficient to save the World, as the sin of the first, to destroy the World. So that it is not any want of mercy in God, or of merit in Christ, if any particular person perish, or that the whole Mass of Mankind is not saved; and this being so, evi­denceth the eternal Decree, that it should be so.

Sect. 25 5. That the way for us actually to partake of this salvation (of which through Christ all Mankind is made capable) is the performance of the conditions of the New and Evangeli­cal Covenant, which expresly are, sincere repentance from dead works, a lively faith in Christ, new and holy obedience, and perseverance in the same. This being the only way where­in God hath expresly said in the Gospel, that he will infallibly save men. This is that Doctrine which he sends forth his Mi­nisters to preach,Mark 16.15, 16. Luk. 13.3, 5. Acts 3.19. Rom. 2.7, 8, 9, 10. and many more. his Heralds to proclaim remission of sins, and everlasting life upon the performance, and only upon the performance of these conditions. So that whether we say, or say not, there was an intuition, or foresight of these things in this, or that man antecedent to the Decree to save him; yet here is an evident agreement as to the event, That God did decree to give salvation to none but such as should persevere in faith and obedience, and to deny it to none but the finally im­penitent and disobedient. There was no Decree ever to save any that should not, or to condemn any that should so repent, believe, and continue obedient. That howsoever with God the number of all the saved and damned be infallibly and un­changeably certain, yet it is unquestionably true, and may, and ought to be assured to this, to that, to any, to every parti­cular man, that though now he be sinful, rebellious, a child of wrath, and in a state of damnation, yet if he repent, return, and sincerely believe, and receive Christ as he is offered to us in the Gospel, viz. as his Lord and Saviour, he shall be saved: Or, though now he do believe, and be righteous, and so in state of salvation, yet if he Apostatize to Infidelity, or Disobedi­ence, [Page 31]and continue in that Apostacy and Rebellion, in his sin he shall dye, and perish for ever.

Sect. 26 6. That God in the Gospel doth make real tenders and of­fers of this remission of sin and eternal life to all, and doth se­riously exhort all men (to whom this Evangelical Covenant, or Gospel is made known) to accept the proffer, to perform the conditions. And this he doth sincerely, cordially, without all fraud or collusion; wooing with the most compassionate love, and most endearing expressions; perswading by the most pathetical Motives, and convincing by most demonstrative Ar­guments, and calling heaven and earth to witness the sincerity of his intentions towards them, and his earnest desire to shew them mercy, and has no delight in their destruction; and that he hath done all on his part, that now they need not perish, if they are willing to be saved.

From hence it followeth also, and herein all sides agree, That,

Sect. 27 7. There is in the Gospel a sufficiency of grace given to all to whom the Gospel is given (for I speak not now of the Heathens or Pagans, designing in these papers only peace a­mong our selves) to leave them inexcusable; and whereby they might have been saved, were it not for their own volunta­ry putting off life from themselves; so that none can make an excuse for his disobedience by pleading a want of power to o­bey, there being still with the Word, and the outward tender of grace by the Word, such an inward offer of the same to the heart by the Spirit, that Auxilium gratiae generale, as is suffici­ent ex parte sui, to convert the soul of the hearer, if it be ac­cepted; and therefore being not accepted, but rejected, is a­bundantly sufficient to leave the sinner inexcusable. God, when he speaks the Word to the ear,Rev. 3.20. knocking also at the heart; the preaching of the Word, is [...], the Ministry of the Spirit; and the Word is vehiculum Spiri­tus, the Chariot, in which the Spirit descends to us; and the re­sisting and persecuting his Prophets, isActs 7.51. a resisting of the Spirit.

Sect. 28 And in this, the stiffest Calvinists (let me use the word, though I like it not) that I know, yield their consent, even they maintaining,

[Page 32] 1.Seethese partic. in Fen ner. wilful im­pen. on Ezek. 18.31. That the worst of men cannot plead, yea that no man can plead that he would be better, but he could not; or that he would seriously believe, but God would not that he should; for God declares and protesteth theProv. 1.29, 30. Mat. 23.37. Sect. 29. contrary.

2. That God is aforehand with all, and deals with them ac­cording to this rule, Habenti dabitur, to him that hath, shall be given, and he shall have abundance (viz. of things in eodem genere) not in the sense of the Pelagians, that accor­ding to the use of the gifts of Nature, God gives the grace of the Gospel: but in the same kind: as he thatProv. 10 4, 22. useth a pen­ny well, may get two pence; he that studies, shall increase in learning; and he that receives and improves the grace given in the Gospel, shall have more, which leaves them wholly without excuse, for they might have had more, had they not re­jected Gods gracious offers.

Sect. 30 3. That God gives to every man, even to whom h [...] [...] least, at leastMat. 25.14.—31. one Talent, and so, some power to do good, and to act towards his own salvation, whereby be might gain, proportionably to those that have more; there being the same proportion of one to one more, as [...] two to two, or of sive to five more: and the severity of the doom is not imputable to the austerity of the Master, but to the slothsulness of the servant.

Sect. 31 4. That though God make one man better than another, yet it is mans own, and only his own fault, that he is worse than his neighbour; for he had the same means, yea possibly bet­ter, but did not improve them, as he might have done, or,Mat. 11.20.—25. & 12.41, 42 & 21.32. others would have done; for indeed God offers them power,Jer. 6.16, 17. and they will not take it; yea, gives them power,Prov. 17.16. and they will not use it: All men areLuk. 16.2. Stewards of some thing, and they account only for what they had. Insomuch that every man can do more good, and avoid more evil than he doth.Art. Dor­drac. 3, & 4. in refut. error. 3, 4. posit.

Sect. 32 For, otherwise there were no room for praise or dispraise, no place for correction and punishment, or the Sword of the Magistrate. How could Joshua with any justice haveJosh. 7. pu­nished Achan, if he had not had power to have passed by that accursed gold and garment? Ephraim is guilty, because heHos. 5.11. [Page 33] willingly walked after the Commandment; if they know not, it is becausePsal. 82.5. they will not understand: if they are proud and rebellious, it is because theyExod. 10.3. refuse to humble themselves: if they act not vigorously, it is because they are slothful and lazy: every difficulty is counted an impossibility: and if such a man starve, it is not because there is no meat be­fore him, or, because he hath no power to take it; but be­cause he is idle,Prov. 19.24. He hideth his hands in his bosom, and will not put them to his mouth. If man work not in the Vineyard, it is notMat. 20.3.—8. because no body hired him, for, we are all called in by the Preaching of the Gospel, and that ear­ly in the morning too) Nor can any say, though we have the Word and Ordinances, yet we cannot profit by hearing, or reading, or praying: for the fault is still, that men are idle, and will not labour; and would they labour, they should see, thatProv. 10.23. in all labour there is profit.

Sect. 33 So that, God having given the means, and the renders of Grace to all; and dealing with men, who are not stocks and stones, but rational creatures; he deals with them as such, per­swading, and exhorting by rational arguments, which were altogether useless, had they no power to hear, or refuse: they have reason, understanding, judgement, memory, will, affections, and all these excited, assisted by some measure of evangelical grace, that they have much more power than they will put forth.2 King. 12.2. Jehoash did do, what was right in the eyes of the Lord, all the dayes of his Uncle Jehojada: there­fore, he could have done so still, had he pleased, when Je­hojada was dead.Luk. 8.13. The stony hearers did receive the word, and believe and rejoice in it a while; (i.e.) so long as the Gospel did please them: they then might have done so still if they would; for though there were troubles in the world, yet they had the same powers in themselves; which proves all the offers of God to the wicked and vilest reprobates, to be very serious; his anger for their refusal to be very reasonable; and his reproofs of their rebellion very equal: because in them there is not a want of power, but only a want of will. And, really

Sect. 34 When at the hour of Conviction, or at the last judgement, [Page 34]their own consciences shall speak in sober sadness, they must thank themselves alone for their own perishing; who are con­demned, not because they could not, but becauseMat. 25.43. they did not, they would not keep, or do the Commandments of Christ. We find the manMat. 22.12. mute at the Wedding-feast, who was there without a Wedding-garment; being reproved, he had not a word to reply; which he must needs have had, if, as he had no such garment, so he had had no kind of means at all to get one, or power to put it on. Thus far then there is a full agreement in both dissenting parties.

In a word we shall at once take a general view of their con­sent, in the main, in these four following heads.

Sect. 35 1. The Arminian yields, and fully grants to the Calvinist, (pardon me, that I use the words which I abhorre, because the use of the world hath now brought in some kind of neces­sity of it) That, The beginning, progress, and perfection; the whole series of mans salvation; and all the glory of it, is to be referred only to Gods grace. Viz. His preventing, exciting, assisting, sanctifying grace. So that, even those who doDr. Ham. [...]. p. 58. Sect 82. most earnestly contend, that, of two persons, who are under the same means, and have the same offers and tenders of grace, yet that one is converted and saved, the o­ther not; the Discrimination ariseth from the one mans re­sisting that sufficient grace, which the other doth not resist, but make use of: and imputing this, to that probity of heart (theLuk. 8.15. good and honest heart mentioned in the Parable) that docible, humble, malleable, and melting temper, which is in the one, but the other wanted. Even these (I say) im­pute this humble, malleable temper, [...]. ibid. Sect. 83. & ibid. p. 45. Sect, 63. not to the natural probity or free-will of man, but to the preventing grace of God; and grant farther, that this probity, or humility of heart, this subactum solum, or soyle mellowed, is not any natural quality in man; nor is the efficacy of grace to be im­puted to those natural, or, moral preparations, but to the grace of God, and his supernatural operations: that it is an Evangelical temper, so far from being natural to any corrupt child of Adam, that wheresoever it is, it is a special plant of Gods own planting, and a work of his preparing, softening, [Page 35]and preventing grace, as much imputable to the operation of his holy Spirit, as any effect of his subsequent, or co-operating grace is, according to those words of Christ,Joh. 6.37. All that my Father giveth me, shall come unto me. They are first fitted by God, then given, andVers. 44. drawn to Christ by the Father: then all these (and none but these) shall come unto him: and that [...]. p. 48. Sect. 67.3. whatsoever good, man shall ever advance unto, it is by the strength of Gods sanctifying and assisting grace; and he is to remember with the utmost gratitude, how nothing hath been imputable to himself in the whole work, but from the beginning to the end, all is due to supernatural grace: and that, what freedome soever the will hath in this corrupt estate to other things, and how fully soever furnished with ability to sin, &c. yet, [...]. p. 54. Sect. 76. as for an uniform constant choyse of those things that do belong to our peace and spiritu­al end; for the beginning of that, and every step and motion through, and perseverance in it; its freedome and strength, and every degree of life or action, is wholly and entirely from Grace: and then he, thatJoh. 15.5. without Christ can do nothing, nowPhil. 4.13. do all things through Christ strengthening him. This that learned man makes his [...]: p. 56. Sect. 79. challenge, and inter­est, and not his concession only, but requires it to be granted him.

2. On the other side the Calvinists do as readily grant to the Arminian, That, The whole beginning, progress, and per­fection of mans fall and perishing, is imputable to none, but to his own self through his own voluntary defection and rebel­tion: and, that no decree of God necessitates any man to sin, or to be damned. Even the greatest assertors of Gods irre­spective decrees, do also as fully assert, that God never forced, allured, or drawed any man to sin, nor is there any force up­on man, from any decree, to make him sin and perish: ThatHos. 13.9. mans destruction is wholly from himself, because they cannot plead want of power and means to escape, which God offered, and they would not take.Fenner Wil­ful impenit. the design of the whole Sermō. See p. 82. Man's destruction is most just, nor can he alledge severity, or cruelty in God, for He wilfully sinneth himself into Hell. Christ presseth the Go­spel of peace, but theyAct. 13.46. put it off: their destruction [Page 36]therefore inexcusable. Nothing hath man to plead with God, for he hath taken away all excuses from man: he hath offered Christ, Grace, Life; followed them with good motions, counsels, exhortations, promises, threatnings, &c. but they would not: and must therefore be (asMat. 22.12. the man in the Go­spel) mute, and speechless. The Prophets, Fenuer. ib. p. 110. and Mi­nisters of God have discharged their work, done their duties, they have called, but men refused to hear; they have called, but men refused to return. The p. 111. Gospel hath delivered its message, and errand, hath freely offered life to all that will, Rev. 22.17. Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely; that it is evident, those only perish, who will not submit, and take this life that is tendered.Fenn. ib.p. 112. The blood of Jesus Christ hath done that which it was shed for, it hath put man, every man, into a capacity of life; it came to tender mercy upon easie terms; to offer grace, pardon, peace, salvation, and Heaven freely; if man will submit, he may have it: if mensMat. 23.37. houses be left desolate, and they perish, it is not because Christ would not gather them, for he would, but they would not be gathered. And indeed, though the Law did condemn, even there where men could not obey, (for1 King. 8.46 Eccles. 7.20. who of the fallen sons of Adam was ever able to continue in every parti­cular of the Law? which yetGal. 3.10. if he did not, he was un­der the curse) yet we never sin against the Gospel, but only in that, whereinFenner ubi sup. p. 115. we will not obey: The Gospel requiring nothing of a believer, but what it gives him. This is the voice of the Gospel, [...] Joh. 7.17. If any man will, let him come, &c. Now we never displease God, but only upon our Will nots: though through our weakness in this corrupt estate we cannot but sin in every thing we do; yet this stains not our acceptance with God, when,2 Cor. 8.12. if there be a willing mind, it is accepted according to what a man hath, and not accor­ding to what he hath not. And indeed it is the whole design of that tract of Mr. Fenners, to lay all the fault of mans sin and destruction upon himself. And the same doth ano­therBishop Davenant. a­nim. on Gods love to man­kind, especially from p. 83. to 189. and in those Chapters, where be shews that Sublaps. oppose not the holiness justice, or good­ness of God. Reverend Author as fully avow (though expressly he be for Gods Absolute Decrees) that yet God is not at all to be charged with the sin or destruction of man, nor is man [Page 37]necessitated to either, by any decree of God whatsoever. Thus even Calvin himself, who is so zealous in asserting the Abso­lute Decree, will yet not allow the Pelagian, Manichee, Ana­baptist, Epicure, any plea from any necessity to sin, that men are bound in by any decree of God. For,Calv. Instit. l. 3. c. 23. Sect. 8. Sic eorum pen­det perditio ex Dei praedestina­tione, ut cansa & materia in ipsis reperia­tur.— Cadit Pgmo, Deo sicordinan­te, sed sag vitio cadit.— saith he, Mans perdition so dependeth on Gods pred stination, that yet the matter and cause of it is only in themselves. And a few lines after, Man falleth indeed, God so ordering it (or, possibly in his sense, ordaining it) but he falls through his own fault. Gen. 1.31. God pronounced all that he made, very good. Whence then (saith he) became man wicked? &c. that it may not be thought to be from God or his Creation, God gives this elogie and approbation to all that came from him, It was ve­ry good. Propriâ ergo malitiâ (saith he) Man by his own wickedness corrupted that nature which he received pure from God, and by his fall brought all mankind into destruction with himself. And in another place, proving against the Novatians, and Anabaptists, that there is yet mercy with God for all sorts of sinners (though their sins be never so great, and after Baptism also) if they sincerely return to God; hath these words,Caiv. Instit. l. 4. c. 1. Sect. 25. Et sanè, non a­llus potest esse affectus ejus, qui affirmat se nolle mortem pecca­toris, sed magis ut convertatur, & vlvat. There san indeed be no other affection in Him (i.e.) in God, who hath said, Ezek. 18.13, 32. Sect. 37. He hath no pleasure in the death of a sinner, but rather, that he return and live.

3. Again, The highest Arminian, (I suppose) will grant to the Calvinist, That, All the Decrees of God are (in a proper sense) Absolute. That is, taking 1. Decrees, as De­crees in God, and not as the event decreed. Viz. that what God hath determined to do, he hath absolutely determined to do, as, he hath absolately (i.e.) peremptorily, and immu­tably decreed to save all believers, and this particular belie­ver: and so absolutely decreed to condemn all finally impeni­tent, and this, such an one, in particular. Yea, and 2. Ta­king Absolute, as opposed to any thing without God himself, any cause that should be [...], from without moving him so to decree: for, nothing could move him to send Jesus Christ to redeem the world; and to bestow upon sinful miser­able man, salvation upon his faith and constant obedience; [Page 38]nothing could move him to decree salvation upon so easie terms, but his own free love, the Beneplacitum, or, good pleasure of his Will. So that, whatsoever we have, it is of Grace, & si gratia quomodo non gratuita? it must be every way free. If of Grace, Rom. 11.6. then non ex operibus, not of works, sc. nec praestitis, nec praevisis; neither done, nor fore­seen. This (I think) even these will grant, that, though, as to the decree of this particular mans salvation, there was an intuition of his faith and obedience, yet the foresight of God that men would return from their sinful estate, was not the cause, that God decreed to send Christ to save them: but out of his own love, he freely (being moved by this alone to compassionate the misery of man, in whom there was no good at all, until he was pleased anew to impart to him) decreed this, viz. to send Christ, to enter into a new Covenant with man, and so to save, whosoever of mankind shold believe in him; and to emancipate their wills, and endue them with such supernatural abilities, that if they would not be wanting to themselves, they might return and be saved.

Sect. 38 4. On the other side, the most rigid Calvinists will yield to the Arminian, that in this particular, No decree of God is absolute: taking 1. Absolute, for irrespective to all conditions, and, 2. Decree, for the event decreed, the thing to be given according to this decree. So that, though (in their sense) God did absolutely decree, to save such and such persons; and to prepare effectual grace for them, and so to bring them in­fallibly to salvation: and as absolutely decree, to leave the rest of the world (though not without sufficient means to save them, if they would not be wanting to themselves) to the li­berty of their own corrupt wills; resolving not to give them that certain portion of Grace, which would infallibly save them; but to leave them to perish in their own voluntary re­bellions: Yet, that God never decreed, that any of these persons elected should be saved, without intuition of that faith and obedience, which he also decreed should be the only way to salvation: He never decreed to save them, but upon this condition, that they believe in Christ, obey the Gospel, and persevere in so doing to the end. Nor did he ever decree [Page 39]to condemn any person, but with an intuition of sin and im­penitence previous, and antecedaneous to his condem­nation.

Sect. 39 Now, consider all these, and we must needs see that even both parties do agree in all the main particulars, and the sub­stance of that Doctrine, which is abundantly enough for us to preach to the people for their information and instruction; e­nough, abundantly to set forth the glory of Gods Grace, Ju­stice, Goodness and Holiness; and to quicken us to Repen­tance, Faith, Obedience: to shew us that none can be saved but by Grace and Mercy; toRom. 3.27 exclude our boasting; and, that none can be saved without Repentance, Faith, a sincere, constant, and persevering Obedience; to rowse our security, and quicken us to action; and to leave us inexcusa­bly guilty of our own perdition if we continue in sin, and miscarry.

Sect. 40 The whole substance of this hath our Church excellently comprised, concisely yet fully, in thatFourth Collect after the Communion. short Collect. Prevent us, O Lord, by thy goodness, there is acknowledged a necessity of preventing grace, for a foundation: And fur­ther us by thy continual help, there, a necessity of exciting, and assisting grace, to stir us up, and help us in action, with­out which we could do nothing: That all our works being be­gun, continued, snd ended in thee, there, the necessity of holy, constant, uniform, sincere, and persevering obedience, and the practice of good works through that grace: We may, through thy mercy, obtain everlasting life, there is the re­ward expected not of Merit, but of Grace and Mercy, and all this only Through Jesus Christ our Lord. Here is the foundation of all the love of God to us, and of our expecta­tions from God: all, through Christ, and for his sake.

Sect. 41 I know there are many passages in the writings of several men of each side, which may clash with some of these parti­culars, wherein they are said to agree; and consequences drawn, that do indeed differ from these: but I consider not, what particular passage may fall from men in heat of dispute; nor what by consequence may be drawn from some particulars of their opinions: but what in their calmer, serious, consider­ing [Page 40]thoughts they judge. And, I am consident, take any of either side, the eagerest in either extreme, yet they will sub­scribe to these things here laid down. And if so, here being the substance of what we need know, as to the ordering of our lives; how inconsiderable are the rest of the things, which men contend about? and how to little purpose are they dis­puted? when we agree in so many, in so great things, of the chiefest weight, and highest concernment; what should hinder us from amity and peace? what should hinder our brotherly love, and peaceable communion?

5. To all this let me adde one argument more for peace, that we may not divide about our different sentiments in this Ar­ticle. It is taken from (as, the Agreement in the main, so) the Needlesness and Ʋnprofitableness of this Controversie. What need have we to contend? or, what profit is there in a dispute about some nice points of difference, when we agree as to the main substance, and the points of the highest concernment? For,

• 1. Sect. 43 What profit is there in a dispute of the order, the pri­ority, or posterioty of the Decrees of God? when we are fully agreed of the coexistency, coessentiality, and coeternity of them all in mente divina, in the mind of God: God at the same in­stant determining, and uno intui [...]u,
  See Boeth. de consol. Philos. l. 5.
  by one and the same act of vision seeing all things, there being no succession or change, no first or latter in Eternity. All the difference being in nostro intelligendi modo, the manner of our conceptions of them. And our finite understandings not being able to fathom the depths of the infinite Counsels; what profit there can be in disputes or contendings about our several particular Schemes, I see not; when, howsoever they stand or fall, we agree in the main, whereby the wisdom, power, justice, goodness and grace of God is asserted, and the Glory of them secured.
• 2. Sect. 44 What profit is there in a dispute, Whether Jesus Christ be the foundation of our election, or onely the medium, the means given for the accomplishing the Decree? when we are all con­vinced, that onely
  Ephes. 1.6.
  in and through Christ we are chosen, and for his sake, and by his merits alone we can be justified and saved.
• [Page 41]3. Sect. 45 What profit is there in a dispute about the notions of Absolute, and Irrespective? when we are on all sides convinced that, whatever the Decrees be, yet no man shall ever be blessed with the decreed Salvation, but in the way of the Evangelical Covenant, in the performance of the conditions of sincere repentance, unfained faith, holy, sincere and constant obedience: nor shall any man be damned but for sin, and final impenitency. And every particular man may, and ought to assure himself, upon the unquestionable evidence of the Gospel, that if he conscionably walk in the way of the Gospel, he shall be in­fallibly saved; but if not, he must as infallibly perish ever­lastingly.
• 4. Sect. 46 What profit is there in a dispute about the notions of the Resistibility, or Irresistibility of Grace; and the nice contests about the Power, and Liberty of the Will of man? when we all agree, that, in this corrupted state of nature, the Will hath too much power and liberty to that which is evil, whereby too often, and too sadly men do resist the gracious motions of the Holy Spirit, and sin away their peace; but hath not a power to any supernatural good, until it be emancipated and set free by Divine grace: And that the operations of Grace are so strong, sweet, and congruously applied, that they are not finally resisted by any of those who are ordained to everlasting life.
• 5. Sect. 47 What profit is there in a dispute about the [...], the manner of the working and cooperation of Gods Grace, and mans Will? when we are fully convinced of the thing, That the glory of all the good which we have, both for the foundation, pro­gress, and perfection of it, must be referred only and wholly to the grace of God: and all the evil, which we do, or suffer, wholly to our selves and our own voluntary rebellions, and to the li­berty of our Wills choosing to continue in sin and impeni­tency.
• 6. Sect. 48 When we are on all sides assured, that Man, being cre­ated after Gods Image, perfectly holy, yet with a freedom of Will ad opposita, having equal power and liberty to choose good or evil, to obey or rebell, did yet refuse obedience and life, and choose sin and death, and thus involved all mankind in a state of sin and most deplorable misery; And that God did [Page 42]permit and suffer, and consequently decreed to permit and suffer him so to do; and doth now order and dispose the sin of man (and so without doubt decreed and purposed to order it) to the further manifestation of his wisdom, power, justice, and most rich and incomprehensible grace and love: I say, when we are assured of all this, what profit can there be in a dispute, Whether God did positively ordain that man should sin then; and that many should sin and be damned still? unless it be to encourage the security and idleness of man, or to put a word into the mouths of proud flesh to reply against his Soveraign and most just Creator: to lay the charge of his sin upon God; and then take no care to reform himself. Again,
• 7. Sect. 49 Cui bono? to what purpose? to what benefit? what profit comes to us by those multiplied disputes about the Object of Gods Decrees: whether it be Homo nondum conditus, sed cre­abilis, Man not yet created, but to be created, (as Dr. Twisse, and those that follow him would have it;) or, Homo conditue, non­dum lapsus, Man created, but before the fall, or considered not as fallen (as Mr. Perkins, and the Supralapsarians teach;) or, Homo lapsus, Man considered as fallen (as the Sublapsarians hold;) or, Homo evangelizatus, Man preached unto, (as some other sober, pious, and judicious men, which yet were never (that I know) for this judged Arminians?) when to us, as far as it concerns our case, it is all one; for we are, certainly, preach­ed unto, we have the Gospel preached to us, and are wholly to be ruled by the laws of the Gospel, and shall be judged by it; and according to our conformity, or disconformity to this Go­spel, we shall, without all peradventure, be infallibly sived, or infallibly damned.

Sect. 50 It was the profession of a Grave Divine, who is yet living, and a Member of the present Convocation, and who is very far from being ever accounted an Arminian, but judgeth the other to be the doctrine of the Scriptures, and of our Church; a man of known learning, and so able to judge, and of a pious, sober, humble, and peaceable spirit: I say, it was this learned and grave persons profession in a private discourse with me, ‘That he had seriously set himself for several years to the study of this Controversie, and had read the most and chief of the [Page 43]writings and arguments of either side: But in all that time, in all those studies, he could not, out of any thing wherein they differed, pick one Note, which he was able to make use of in the Pulpit; though in the doctrines wherein they agreed he could find enough. And now, can that become Christi­ans, or men that profess the Gospel of peace,’ to contend about, and break peace for, those things which are confessedly of so little use, of so inconsiderable a profit, as to the direction of the lives, and to the concerns, the great concerns of the souls of men? I think not.

Sect. 51 I am astonished at the heats and exasperations of men in these unprofitable Disputes: To see, how men, who have e­spoused the quarrel of either extreme, are still like a bottle, that must have vent, or break; or as the pregnant womb, that longeth to be delivered of its conceptions: That every Pulpit, where such men come, rings aloud with the noise; and almost every Sermon is filled with the hard names of Absolute, Irre­spective, or Conditionate Decrees; Resistibility, or Irresisti­bility of Grace; Supra-lapsarian, Sublapsarian, Arminian, Socinian, Calvinist, Remonstrant, Contra-remonstrant; and a many invented School-terms, even before popular Auditories; by which, when all is done, the people are as wise as if they had heard a Sermon in Greek or Latine, except that they have been stirred up to make a party, and to account all the matter of their duty to lie in being of such a side; and to affix terms of reproach unto, or at least to be full of evil surmisings against the contrary-minded. And how baneful this hath been to that brotherly love which the Gospel requires, and the peaceable communion of Christians, our eyes have seen, and our woful experience doth sufficiently testifie, and the world can judge.

Sect. 52 This I speak, and write, not with reflexion on either part; but it is too much the fault and extravagance of men of each extreme; wherein the young and least experienced Preachers are most [...]. confident; (as if it were not their design to edifie the plain ignorant people, by instructing them in the necessary points of the Gospel, and building them up inJude 20. their most holy faith and obedience; but to get themselves a name of [Page 44]acuteness in the parts of abstruser learning, and highest contro­versies.) And those are commonly full of the most confidence, who are guilty of the least learning, boldly determining, where they least understand: even then, when they pretend to ad­mire the inscrutable abyss of Gods unsearchable counsels; bold­ly presuming to determine and define them.

Sect. 53 I am fully convinced, that would men confine their senti­ments to the clear expressions of the Sacred text, and conform themselves to the same moderation in defining in these points, as our Church hath shewed in her Articles: Would all men conscionably comply with that Declaration of His late Ma­jesty, of blessed memory, to silence these debates, and lay aside all further curious search and inquiry; and content themselves, and shut up these Disputes in the general Promises of God, as they are declared in the Scriptures; making the Revealed will of God in his Word the onely rule to go by both in Doctrine and Practice; all of either side being equally silenced from all medling with, especially from all positive defining in any particular of those abstruser points in controversie: I say, were all this done and yielded to, (as, with how much ease, content, and satisfaction may it be done by all sober and peace­able men?) I am confident, a very great progress would be made to the securing of the peace of the Church; and to the suspending of that turmoil and heat of contention, and the preventing of those envyings, reproaches, and evil surmisings, which do so much interrupt that peace.

Sect. 54 Well then, (to conclude this Chapter) we see in matters of Doctrine there are no differences so wide, as by the heats of Contenders they seem to be; and such as they are, may well be composed among sober and humble men.2. Pap. of Propos. to His Maj. p. 24. We dissent not (say the Presbyterian Divines) from the Doctrine of the Church of England expressed in the Articles and Homilies,— onely (say they) some by-passages or phrases are scrupled. Not­withstanding these then, we may live in peace.

CHAP. IV. The Differences about Ecclesiastical Government examined; And that there is nothing in the Episcopacy established with us, but may be submitted to, proved.

Sect. 1 THAT which we shall next consider, is the business of Ecclesiastical Government and Discipline. This also is made a matter of great dispute, and hath been an occasion of as great a Rent in this Age, as I think, the Christian Church can ever shew; and we cannot be strangers to the eager con­tendings, and multitude of writings which have been publish­ed on either side, with passion and bitterness more than enough. Some being confident of an Apostolical Institution of a Prelacy; others, as confident of the same Institution of a Parity. The one, for the Jus Divinum and Necessarium of a Paternal and Despotical Episcopacy: The other as eager, and with heat enough, for the same jus of a sole Presbytery; yea, (in some) of a Lay-Presbytery too. Both sides contending for their own way, and that no other Government can be lawful in the Church. Both laying a stiffe claim to Antiquity, yea, the highest Antiquity, the primi­tive pattern, The Apostolical Canon and Practice. Here we see,

Sect. 2 1. One contending and pleading for the Bishop in a strict peculiar sense, as the only standing Officer in the Church, at first, superiour to the Deacon, and affixed to a City-Church, or Metropolis, and having all the adjacent places and depen­dants upon that City for his [...] or [...] (for these, among the Ancients signified the same thing) his Diocess or Parish. And the Church increasing in number and extent, so as it became a burden too great for one mans shoulders, this Bishop taking in, and ordaining others (out of the Dea­cons) to be Presbyters, that might bear part of the charge and burden: And thus the Presbyter will appear to be a later Officer introduced for the necessity of the Church.

Sect. 3 [Page 46] 2. On the contrary, The others plead as high for the Presby­ter only to be that standing Officer, and the Colledge of Presby­ters the only Judicatory of the Church for the first Age; and the Bishop brought in afterwards as a constant Moderator, or Praeses in the Assembly, and then by degrees, with some superintendency over the rest, to keep them in peace among themselves, for the conveniency of the Church, and a remedy against Schism.

Sect. 4 Here indeed appears, and is a vast difference, even a diame­trical opposition; and maintained with so much eagerness, That though I know none so high of the one side, as to deny the Presbyter his Institution, and Sacred Order, and some in­terest in the Acts of Government in the Church; yet I could name some (and to this the World is no stranger) of the o­ther side, who have been so violent as to deny the lawfulness of the being of any such Officer as a Bishop above a Presby­ter; and to plead a necessity of throwing him out of the Church, as a Plant not of Gods planting; but wholly Anti­christian, and abominable. And if any abuses have crept in, or corruptions prevailed in the Church; the very existence of the Bishop, as such, must bear the blame, and be esteemed the cause of all. The popular fury thinking, corruptions can­not be restrained, nor the Church reformed, until her Bishops and Govenrours, yea, the Government it self be ejected and a­bolished.

Sect. 5 3. But in the mean time, many sober, pious, learned, and peaceable men (even of both perswasions) weep in secret, and mourn heavily for the bitter divisions, and high animosities of some violent contenders. Some not only submitting to, but desiring and rejoycing in the establishment of Episcopacy and Prelacy, as that Order, which is not only best for the Church, but hath also the clearest claims to, and evidences of Antiquity; yea, the first and purest, the Apostles themselves; who yet for peace-sake (though it would be their affliction) would submit to a Presbytery without a Prelacy, where that Government should be legally established, and might be sub­mitted to without Schism; because they judge this way of Go­vernment, though not the best, nor so good as they could wish, [Page 47]nor to have those evidences which Episcopacy hath; yet, not to be so manifestly repugnant to the Word of God, but that it may be submitted to without sin. On the other side, there are also many peaceable spirits, who indeed judge the Presbyterial way, the most agreeable to the primitive pattern; and therefore would choose such a Presbytery: Yet for the peace of the Church, will also quietly submit to the Episcopacy establish­ed; because, though in their judgments it be not so evidently founded in, yet neither is it so contrary to the Scriptures, but that without sin they may obey it.

Sect 6 Now for men of such sober spirits as these, to agree, and live in peace, it is no difficult matter to effect. The established Laws shall oblige their Conformity, though in their judgments they may not be the best; and they have learn't to submit them­selves to be ruled by the publick establishments, and to make their private judgments strike Sail, and give place to peace and obedience.

Sect. 7 But is the distance so great between the others, that there is no hope of an amicable composure; or at least, that they may live together in peace? I think not altogether. It is true indeed, while men keep those judgments, One for the ab­solute necessity of the one, the other for the indispensible ne­cessity of the other way, and condemning the contrary as an unlawful Usurpation and Antichristian; it is no more possible to make them agree, than to reconcile both parts of a contra­diction. And I confess further, while men bear those heats in their spirits, and look upon Episcopacy as such an Usurpation, that it is not lawful to own it, or submit to it; and think the Church can never be happy till it be cast out: There is very little likelihood to prevail upon such men for a patient submis­sion, or a peaceable compliance. But is there any thing in the nature of the Government in dispute, which must needs be the cause of a perpetual Schism? Or, is there any thing of such a nature in Episcopacy, which a pious Christian may not submit to, or (at east for peace-sake) comply with, without sin? I think not; and no such thing hath ever been proved that I have seen.

Sect. 8 That even in this there may be (I say not, a concurrence [Page 48]of judgment in the thing in controversie, but) an union of hearts in love and affection, and much of peace and compli­ance even here: I need not do more than consider how much learned and sober men, even of the Presbyterian perswasion, have declared themselves willing to submit to in the point of Episcopacy; and how far their Judgments do concur and agree with their Episcopal Brethren: And by this give a Judgment, whether they may not without sin do somewhat more; and whether they are not (at least for peace-sake) obliged to com­ply with, and submit to the established Government, as far as it is established.

Sect. 9 Here it will be needless to fill Pages with names and writings of several men, when this one thing will give us light enough; viz. Those learned Divines of the Presbyterial judgment, joyned Commissioners with the Reverend Bishops, and o­thers, for an amicable Conference about the things in dispute, in their Petition for peace, prefixed to their Form of prayer; and in the Papers of Proposal to His Majesty, have declared publickly, 1. That they are for Episcopacy. 2. That they de­sired the establishment of Episcopacy according to the Pri­mate of Ireland, B. Ushers Reduction. Yea, 3. A thankful acceptation of His Majesties Declaration about Ecclesiasti­cal Affairs. And, though they are not fully satisfied with that establishment of Episcopacy: Yet they seem to rest in that ex­pression of His Majesty, That the essence and foundation of Episcopacy may be preserved, though the extent of the Jurisdicti­on may be altered: Desiring an alteration only in such alterable points, as the extending or straitning the limits of their Juris­diction, preserving still the essence and foundation of the Go­vernment; from all which concessions and professions it ap­pears, that their judgments concur with their Episcopal Brethren in these things.

• 1. That there is, or at least may be an imparity among the Ministers of the Gospel, and that lawfully; and,
• 2. In the lawfulness of a Superiority and Jurisdiction in the Bishop over other Presbyters, both as to Ordination and Censures; for both these, as well in the Primates Reduction, as in His Majesties Declaration, are evidently reserved to the Bishop.

Sect. 10 And besides these, I could name many learned and sober men, who will acknowledge the Bishop to be (though not in their judgment, superior ordo, a superiour order from, or over other Presbyters, yet) superior gradus in eodem or­dine, an higher degree, and so a superiour in the same order; they conceiving this to be also the publick sense of our Church, which advancing a person to a Bishoprick, calleth him not by a new Ordination, as into another Order of Ministry; but only gives him a solemn Consecration as to an higher Office, Employment, or Degree. And these acknowledge such an im­parity and superiority in the Bishop distinct from the Presby­ter, in Ignatius his time, and the Age next succeeding the Apostles (which may be a very probable Argument at least, if not demonstrative of such a thing in the Apostles dayes too, unless we find something in their practice and writings, which may evidently prove the contrary, which yet is not done) and withal, confessing the wisdom of the Church, that brought in Bishops (though they judge they were not there before) if upon no other account, yet for the maintenance of peace, and remedy of Schism, according to that known testimony of St. Hierom so much stood upon in this controversie.

Sect. 11 Now when thus much is fairly yielded, and so willingly as­sented to, when those who yet think themselves in conscience obliged by that Covenant, which they have sworn for the ex­tirpation of that Episcopacy, with the appendices established among us, yet judge themselves not obliged against Episcopa­cy, nor against their Superiority and Jurisdiction, as such; but think they have fully satisfied their Obligation in the ac­ceptance of, and compliance with Episcopacy, as reduced by Bishop Usher, where yet that Superiority and Jurisdiction is still retained. Methinks here is a fair step towards compliance, an happy door of hope opened that we may agree. The distance is not so wide as at first it did seem to be; here are no terms now of Ʋsurpation, Tyranny, and Antichristianism, assix't to Episcopal Authority.

Sect. 12 And what should now hinder a perfect compliance? when men are satisfied, that they may freely and chearfully go thus far, what should hinder them, but that they may make some [Page 50]steps farther? And we all, whether of the one or the other perswasion, may account our selves so much concerned to promote the peace of the Church, as to submit so far to the esta­blished government, as the Laws under which we live require that we should.

• 1. Except. Is it, that the Bishops are conceived to take too much upon them; and do more than they should, or are called to do? Or,
• 2. Is it, that they will not suffer us to take our due, and to do that which we should; or that we are called, and have authority to do? (for under these two heads must be comprised all, that can with any shadow be pretended, why we should not comply, and submit so far as the Laws require.

Sect. 13 Now to give a full answer to both these: I shall first premise these two things.

• 1. That it is not the design of these papers (and therefore none are here to expect it) to enter upon the whole contro­versie of government, or the jus divinum, of this in par­ticular: nor here to undertake a full justification of all the particulars in the constitution or exercise of it: for enough hath been already written pro and con, on that subject. My whole design here is not to revive, but to do my part (if God see us yet fit for such a blessing) to put an end to disputes of this nature.
• 2. Sect. 14 But all that I have here to do, is, howsoever the case stand, whether there be truth or no in the charge against Bi­shops, or Episcopacy, (which here I meddle not with, and in the following sheets, may possibly in a great measure take off) to consider, How far we of the inferior Orb, who, if we exercise our ministery in England, are bound by the stand­ing Laws of England to be under them, may submit to their power; obey and conform to these established Laws. Now that I may give full satisfaction in this case, I shall first lay down these two general conclusions, which I must take as granted.

• 1. Sect. 15 This I make one Postulatum, and require it to be gran­ted me, which (I think) no intelligent considering man will deny. Viz. That in order to the conduct of our consci­ences, [Page 51]and the regulating of our actions, we are not to en­quire, what is the calling, office, charge, or duty of another; but what is the charge, office and duty incumbent upon our selves. Particularly, it concerns not us, who are not called to this authority in the Church, to be curious in examining, whether the Bishops do, or do not, undertake a charge too great for them to manage: what their power; or what their duty, and sins are: or whether it be fit they should be establish­ed in such authority by a Law: this is to go out of our sphere, and to meddle where we are not concerned. But, They be­ing in possession of this power, and established in that autho­rity by those Laws under which we live, made by the unque­stionable Supremacy, and Legis-lative power in the Kingdom, and to whom
  Rom. 13.5.
  we must be subject: Our business now, only is to satisfie our selves and others, whether, and how far we are bound to conform to these Laws, in our owning, and submitting to that Episcopal authority, which they have esta­blished: Or how far we lawfully may do so, (and indeed, what we lawfully may do, we are in duty bound to do, when by a just authority we are commanded to do it:) This, I am sure, is most necessary, to gain, and preserve our peace. And therefore, I cannot but condemn that preposterous course of some Ministers, who had no way to commend their zeal to the world, but by preaching to one Auditory the duties of an­other; or inveighing against their sins. Some preaching in the Court, against the sins of the Country; and before the Magistrate ripping up the irregularities of the Subject: Others with equal, yea possibly, more bitterness inveighing before the people against the licentiousness of the Court, the Pride of the Bishops, and the sins of their Governours: And what Beautifiers such men have proved, we need not turn over the Annals of many ages to witness. Sure I am, this was not [...], Rightly to divide the word of truth,
  2 Tim. 2.15.
  like that [...], a workman that needs not be a­shamed (of whom St. Paul speaks:) nor, like the faithful and wise Steward, (of whom our Saviour)
  Luk. 12.42.
  to give to every one his own proper portion of meat in due season. And when men have thus made it their business to consider
  Mat. 7.3.
  the [Page 52]Motes in the eyes of others; and neglect the Beam in their own: To judge, censure and condemn the carriages of their brethren; and look over their own: When Subjects and in­feriors set themselves to examine the calling, office, duty, and carriage; and to dispute the Place, authority, and commands of their Superiors in Church or State: The fruit of this can be nothing but Sedition or Rebellion; schism or faction; and mutual animosities, hatred, and contempt. But could we learn every man to do what becomes himself; if others be irregular, let the sin lie upon them; while we are careful to look to our own steps, and faithfully to discharge the duties of our own place: with how much chearfulness, content and peace might we live together?
• 2. Sect. 16 Another Postulatum I require likewise to be granted, which, I judge, no conscientious Protestant ever doubted; Viz. That the sins of Governours, and some irregularities in Government, are not sufficient to discharge the subject of his duty; nor are they a plea that can justifie his disobedi­ence. It is possible, some Princes may be vitious, or their Government faulty: yet their male-administration is no ground for the peoples rebellion. They shall answer their sin to God, but in the mean time we must be subject. It is pos­sible there may be vices in the persons of some Bishops, for they are men, there may be errors in the constitution and ad­ministration of the Government, for it is in the hands of men, who are not yet perfect: if therefore, we shall neither own them, nor their authority; upon the same reason we must cast off all government, and authority whatsoever. For what government is there so righteous; what persons so holy, but men, who are unwilling to obey, will be ready to plead the government tyrannical, and the persons wicked? as Ko­rah and his Complices to Moses and Aaron,
  Num. 16.3.
  Ye take too much upon you, all the congregation is holy; wherefore lift ye up your selves? Yea, what government so Sacred, what governours so righteous; but will discover too much of error and irregularity, while men are men, and on this side heaven? if then we may have a just plea to refuse obedience, until our Governours be free from the common corruptions of men, [Page 53]and the Government every way faultless; or until we judge them so, and can find nothing that can be said against either; Rebellion could be no sin till we get beyond the grave: nor should we ever obey any humane power in Church or State, till there is no Church or State on earth to be obeyed.

Sect. 17 These two things being granted, (as they cannot be denied) it is easie to see what answer to make, as to those forenamed pleas; viz. suppose, those two charges to be true against the Bishops, That they take too much upon themselves, or, That, they will not suffer us to take our due, and do all that we should; (which yet, by the way, I have not seen proved) yet these are not ground enough to hinder our compliance: and notwithstanding all these, may a sober, conscientious Christian, who seriously mindeth the discharge of his own du­ty, peaceably conform to the Laws established. But let us a lit­tle examine the Particulars objected.

CHAP. V. The Particular exceptions against Bishops, as they are said to take too much upon themselves, an­swered.

Sect. 1 THe first General, and Great exception taken against the Bishops, is, That they take too much upon themselves: 1. General ex­cept. That the Bishops take too [...]ch upon themselves. and to this head I referre those four exceptions, which the Di­vines of the contrary perswasion have made, in their Former paper of Proposals to His Majesty, concerning the Disci­pline and Ceremonies of the Church of England: And they are these.

1. The great extent of the Bishops Diocess, too large for his personal inspection. 2. His deputing the Administration of much of the trust to Commissaries, Chancellors, Officials, &c. secular persons. 3. Some affirming Episcopacy a di­stinct order, and assuming the sole Power of Ordination. 4. Exercising an arbitrary power, as in Articles of Ʋisita­tion, &c.

These are the great things charged on them,Sect. 2. Answered in general. and, we may judge, the greatest: for had there been any thing of an higher nature to have been pleaded against them, no doubt it would have been given in.

Now then, suppose these things cleared, and that, being proved, they were a real and just ground to petition, and by all legal wayes to endeavour a Reformation: Yet still, if this desired Reformation cannot be obtained, but these things must continue, all this hinders not, but we may lawfully obey and submit in peace.

Sect. 3 But to give a more full answer, that may be satisfactory to e­very considering man, I shall a little consider the particulars. And because some have said more, and I would gladly satisfie all scruples; I shall rank the particular Exceptions in another order, that I may take in, and answer all that is material in the Objections.

There are these seven things, said, to prove that they take too much upon them, which are the great exceptions against Episcopacy as it is with us established.

Sect. 4.1. Partic. ex∣cept. 1. That they assume a power, which was never institu­ted by God; that hath no foot-steps in the New Testament; and they are therefore Intruders, and Ʋsurpers, and not to be obey [...]d.

Sect. 5 Answ. 1 Answ. 1. But suppose they are not intruders; what then becomes of this plea? Sub judice lis es [...]; it is not yet deter­mined against them: some learned and pious men, who are both able to judge, and willing to be convinced of the truth, yet cannot be convinced of any such usurpation: yea, they think, that they have clear foot-steps of such a government in the Apostolical practice. Suppose, there were some­thing in the Apostolical Commission (besides that which was extraordinary in them) which made them standing constant Officers of the Church, even where they were superior to o­ther Presbyters: (for that they were superior, is out of que­stion; and that this superiority was a part of their extraordina­ry Commission, is not yet proved:) and then because they continued not in their own persons, but in their successors; these must be Bishops, or none, which is the judgement of [Page 55]many; and of one, who is instar omnium, See, confer. at Newcastle with Mr. Hen­derson, and, with the Di­vines at the Isle of Wight. His late Majesty: and some foot-steps of such a thing seem to ap­pear in the holy Canon; where the Churches still send to Paul about their affairs; and St. Paul writing to Timothy and Ti­tus, directeth them in the exercise of the1 Tim. 5.19, 20, 21, 22. Tit. 1.5, 11.3.10. Acts of Juris­diction, distinct from, and over Presbyters; which intimates that they had such a power, as to Ordination and Censures. That these had such a Jurisdiction, and in particular Cities, as affixt to them (at least, at that time) is evident. The one being to Abide at Ephesus, and for this work,1 Tim. 1.3. To charge some, that they do not [...], teach any other, or strange Doctrine: and this is an act of authority o­ver them. The otherTit. 1.5. left at Creet, to Govern, and [...]. Order the affairs of that Church: this is also an act of Authority. And suppose, these were not (as some say they were) only Evangelists, a general, occasional, and extra­ordinary Officer for that time; but constant standing Officers in the Church for ever, as some (not without ground) do judge; for there being a constant necessity of the same works; why should there not be the same Officer to do those works? The change of the name (Apostle, Evangelist, then, and Bishop now) proves not a change of the Office. So that, though that be true, which the Annotator on the Epistle of Clemens Rom. (made English in these late times) citeth out of St. Augustine, as to the name, That Episcopi nomen, est vocabulum quod ecclesiae usus obtinuit; for they might give a new name, but not erect a new Office: Yet, when the same work is still required to be done in the Church, by such per­sons, call them by what names ye please, the thing is the same. Again, suppose, though the name of Bishop and Presbyter, be used promiscuously for one and the same Officer (as theyTit. 1.5, 7. Act. 20.17, 18. Phil 1.1. 1 Pet. 5.1, 2. seem to be) yet, that this person is the Bishop, in the sense as now the word is used (as Dr. Hammond doth judge.) And that, at the first, the Pastors were all Bishops; and that They, as their territories increased, and the Church multi­plied, and their charge and work grew too great upon them, ordained other Presbyters to undertake part of the charge un­der them. I say, suppose all this should be true, (as, yet [Page 56]we are not confident, nor can we be infallibly assured of the contrary; And there are not a few, that think it unquestion­able, and believe they can prove it too:) Where are we then? Here is then, no intrusion, not usurping an authority; but an Apostolical institution: And then what plea can we have for disobedience? whereas, should it not be so, but that there were onely Presbyters at the first, and afterwards one chosen out of them for the avoiding of schism and faction, and he called a Bishop, (as S. Hierom thinks; and yet this in his judgment early too, even when1 Cor. 1.12 one said, I am Paul, and another, I of Apollos, and I of Cophas, &c. and how soon that was, we need not be told:) Yet, in obeying the Bishop there could be no sin; yea, there would be much reason to do it, if but for the avoiding of faction and schism. So that here we may easily judge, which is safest to practice: For, though the Bishops standing could not be proved, there yet is no danger in obeying; But if it indeed be founded in the Primitive pattern, there must be danger in disobeying; and our misguided judgments will be no sufficient excuse for our sin, in rejecting an ordinance of God.

Sect. 6 Answ. 2 2. But suppose the charge true, that they usurp an authority which is not given them: yet this must not be a ground for us to deny our obedience. Discipline, Order, and Government are necessary to the Church for ever; and to this are we bound to submit, though it be sometimes put into such hands, which we judge not so proper, nor of primitive institution. For, the Thing is essential, at least, to the well-being, and external communion of the Church, viz. Government: But, the other, The particular hands by which this is managed, is of another consideration. The Church may be happy, if governed by One, or Many, or a Colledge of Equals, or by some one or more, among whom there is a subordination: But without order and government it cannot be so. Again,

Sect. 7 There cannot be shewed, or supposed, any greater irregula­rities in the Bishops (nor indeed any such) as to their entrance into, or exercise of their Callings, or Administrations of Go­vernment, than was apparent in the Scribes and Pharisees. For their entrance, they were evidently usurpers:Mat. 23.1. They sate in Moses chair. They were there, it is true; but they in­thronized [Page 57]themselves in that chair, and being in, they held it: They took to themselves the office of expounding the Law, and teaching the people; who (being of any Tribe) did without any regard of right or wrong invade that chair, which was by Gods institution appropriate to the Priests and Levites. Their Administration was as bad also; joyning their Humane Tra­ditions to the Law, and their Will-worship to the Worship of God, (whereby they are said,Matth. 15.6. Mark 7.13. In vain to worship God, and to make the commandment of God of none effect.) Yea, making more account of, and urging these Traditions with more se­verity, than the Laws of God himself. Yet, the charge of Christ is, what? Forsake their Ministery? Attend not on the Chair while they sit in it? or, obey not the Doctrine because they deliver it? No: but, Hear them. They are in Moses chair; howsoever they got thither, there they are; and you must attend, and Hear, Observe, and Do. Whatsoever they adde besides, howsoever corrupt in their practice, Follow not their Practice, but, Obey their Doctrine, as far as it is of Moses.

Sect. 8 Do but now apply the case. The worst Adversaries the Bishops have, never had the boldness to charge them higher. The Chair if they have invaded, it is but as the Pharisees did: All the Humane Traditions, which they are charged (I think, unjustly) to bring in, and require conformity to, are of no worse nature, than those which the Pharisees used in and about Gods service, and pressed upon the people: Nor can their Ministery be so repugnant to Christ, as the Ministery of the Scribes and Pharisees: But in the Chair they are, and there they are fixt and established too; And, though their entrance be supposed irregular, (which it is not) yet must we obey: for they are in the place of Governors. If they add Inventions of their own, it is their onely sin, and they must answer it: We are to comply in all things, where we shall not sin against God. So that notwithstanding this exception, we may lawfully submit: For it is not proved that they usurp what is not given them; and, if they should, yet while the Government of the Church is in their hands, we are not to oppose.

Sect. 9.2. Partic. Ex∣cept. 2. It is again urged: Though the office of the Bishop should [Page 58]be granted to be, abinitio; yet our Bishops unaertake too great a charge. The large extent of their Diocesses is too much for their personal inspection: wherein yet they take a personal charge over the souls of all those within their several Bishopricks. Which burden must needs be too heavy for one mans shoulders; The Pastoral office being a work of personal ministration and trust, and that of the highest concernmen to the souls of the people, for which they are to give an account to Christ. So that, though Episcopacy be granted; yet not such as is established with us: The charge of the Primitive Bishop being but over one Congre­gation; but of the Diocesan Bishop extending to many.

Sect. 10 Answ. 1 Answ. 1. This exception is raised upon a doubtful founda­tion: For, it is not yet cleared, or confessed, That the Bishops of every Diocess are bound to a personal inspection, or charged with the oversight of every particular soul within their juris­diction: Or that they are to be accountable for the miscarriage, or perishing of any particular soul, if it have not been through their fault and neglect, or mal-administration of the power in their hands, so far as their charge extends. They judge their charge to be no more, than, to oversee the Churches; to take care that able Pastors be provided for the particular cure, and inspection of the several Flocks; and that these do their duties in their places; and that the people yield their due obedience to them, and to their Superiors.

Sect. 11 Answ. 2 2. It is granted, That the bounds of the Episcopal charge were not so large in the Primitive times, as they are now; no not generally in many centuries of years. But withall it must be not denied, that this consideration makes not a nullity of the Office; nor doth the lessening or inlarging the bounds of their charge, at all make a change or alteration in the charge it self. For, in those little Bishopricks, either there was an im­parity, or superiority; or there was no [...]: The Bishop had Pres­byters under him, or he had not. If now ye say, that he had not; ye say something indeed to the purpose, but it remains to be proved; and the stream of Antiquity speaks the contrary. For (to omit the mention of the third and fourth Ages, whereof none, that I know, ever doubted) when Ignatius of Antioch, in those Epistles, which were never yet denied to be his, and [Page 59]are by Videlius, Vossius, and our learned Ʋsher acknowledged to be genuine, doth expresly make this distinction, and requires the Obedience of the Presbyt [...]r to the Bishop (as those who have read Ignatius know so well, that it would be lost labour to produce particular passages; when it is the main design and argument of some of those Epistles, as particularly that ad Trallenses which is wholly Hortatory, ad [...], to Ʋnity in Doctrine, and Sanctity of Life. For the preserving of this unity and pu­rity of Doctrine, he exhorteth, as to avoid all Hereticks, a­gainst whom he solidly proves the Deity, and Incarnation of Christ: so, to yield a due obedience to their Pastors, both the Bishops, because they watch for their souls; and to the Pres­byters and Deacons, because they are Ministers of the Church of God, and there have the place of Jesus Christ. Particularly, [...] — Reverence the Bishop, and that [...], as ye reverence Christ; and adds, As the Apostles have commanded. So again, in that ad Magnesianos, which is Paraenetical, and Hortatory also; and the designe of it is, to exhort obedience to the Bishop, yea though he be young: which he presseth by several arguments, as, That we are in this case not so much to look to Age, as ad [...] and that [...], The oldest are not always the wisest. And farther urgeth the examples of a young Daniel; and a young Samuel reproving an old Eli; and Jeremy, Solomon, Josiah, Timothy: And again, that it is a terrible thing to con­temn the Bishop, for in him is God also contemned. And saith, [...],—It is fit to obey the Bishop, and in nothing to oppose him. And again, [...]—As the Lord Christ did nothing without the Father, so must you do nothing without your Bishop. I need cite no more, though I might add much to this purpose out of those Epistles ad Philadelphenses, & ad Smyr­nenses, where he disputes of the power and authority of the Bishop. I know, that even these are said also to be so interpo­lated, that it is hard to know Ignatius in Ignatius. But that is a strange interpolation which shall leave nothing genuine; and it would be scarce parallelled, that the main design of a genuine Epistle should be spurious. Grant them interpolated, must it needs be the hard hap of poor Episcopacy to be principally [Page 60]guilty? and wheresoever that is mentioned or urged, (though it be so often, so professedly) must that Epistle for the Bishops sake be either rejected as spurious? or this particular be con­cluded the interpolation? Nothing of antient records then shall have any credit with us, when we have a mind to charge them with corruptions. Therefore until these be proved spurious passages, we shall account them genuine Ignatius.) Ignatius, I say, doing this; as it proves this Imparity and Superiority as antient as his time, which was the very next age to the A­postles; so it hath some force to perswade us, that it was so, even in the Apostles days; both because he was so near them, and so more likely to know the practice of the time but just before him; and also because he was for a good season con­temporary and coetaneous with some of the Apostles, par­ticularly S. John, who would certainly have contradicted him, had he pleaded for a power which Christ never approved, nor the Apostles owned.

Sect. 12 And if this Imparity or Superiority be granted to have been in those narrower limits; it must not, it cannot with any shadow of reason be denied, where the bounds are farther ex­tended. If one, two, or three Presbyters may be under a Bishop, then may also ten, twenty, an hundred. More or fewer alter not the nature of the office. Kings and Princes are as perfect­ly, and justly such now, when of larger Empires and Domini­ous; as those of old, who were Kings but of some single Cities or petty Territories: They are not to be cast out, because their Dominions are conceived too large; but to be obeyed, because they are Kings. So neither are our Diocesans therefore less Bishops, because their Bishopricks are greater than those in the Antient Ages: For, if any (were they fewer or more) were to obey the Bishop then, so are we (though more) if by the Esta­blishment here we are put under his jurisdiction, to obey him still.

Sect. 13 Answ. 3 3. Nor is it yet proved that, Even then, their bounds were so streight, as to be limited to one Parish, or single Congrega­tion: For, if there were many of these Churches in association joined in one, and so, One Church, for acts of Government, to which particular Churches were subordinate, (as the [Page 61] See, Assem­blies answ. to Reas. of Dissent. Brethr. and, Vindicat. of Presbyt. Govern. by the Province of Lond. Presbyterian Brethren, not only grant, but challenge, and lay it a foundation of their Classical, and Provincial, and National Assemblies, as, The Church of Jerusalem, Ephe­sus, &c. with other City Churches; which (say they) consi­sted of more single Congregations than one:) Then, if there were a Bishop (as it appears there was) either, He must be yielded to be over all this association; or, if a distinct Bishop to every particular Congregation, then those several Bishops must be under, and subordinate to the Colledge of Presbyters, which I have not yet seen affirmed. So that here was a larger charge, than of one single Parish. And in after ages, it is most evident, that their [...] had not that strict sense which now it hath; but the Parish, was a [...], consisting of more Parishes than one, (as we now speak of a Parish) though the Diocess were not so large, as in succeeding times.

Sect. 14 Answ. 4 4. But, grant every tittle of the exception: That the Di­ [...]cess is by much too large, &c. What then? may we not submit? if any undertake a charge, which he is not able to manage; let him look to it; he must give up his own account, not we for him. If any of us be called, or invited to, or of­fered such a place or power, if we judge it too much for one man, and the account too heavy; on Gods name, let us re­fuse it; no man will enforce any to be a Bishop against his will. But what is this to our obedience? The extent of their charge may be occasion of sin to them who undertake what they cannot perform; but can be no plea for us, why we should not obey, when we are required. Had the Bishop none to govern, but some ten, or twenty of us, which he might do, we were then bound to obey him: and though more be under his charge, this exempts not us from our particu­lar duty.

Sect. 15.3. Partic. Ex∣cept. 3. Another exception is, That, though the Bishop hath authority over the flock; yet being in eodem ordine, he hath no power over others of the same order; i. e. over other Pres­byters, which yet he challengeth; and where he hath no au­thority to command, there we have no obligation to obey. And therefore 1. They cannot justly require, nor are we bound [Page 62]to yield that Canonical obedience, which we are required to promise at our Ordination; and to swear at our institution into a Benefice. 2. Nor have they any power to silence or su­spend us from our ministery; nor may we lay down the exercise thereof, upon their pleasure.

Sect. 16 Answ. Gener. 1 Answ. 1. To all this I answer in general,

• 1. If the Bishop be a distinct order, then there is no place for this exception. But this I shall not now dispute.
• 2. But, though a Bishop and a Presbyter be yielded to be not different Orders of Ministery, as Presbyter and Deacon are: yet, one may be in a degree of eminency in the same or­der above the other. And if it be but 1. For the conve­niency of Administration, and to keep peace and unity in the Church: Or, 2. That the King, or Supreme Governour so is pleased to order the external Oeconomy: either of these is enough to oblige an humble Christian to a peaceable sub­mission; though he were not convinced of the Divine right of the Superiority. For, where he hath no authority, but on­ly a possession, we may ober, for Peace: and where he hath (if not a Divine, yet) a Civil authority, we must obey
  Rom. 13.5.
  for con­science ak [...].

Sect. 17 Answ. partic. 2 Answ. 2. But as to the two particulars, I give this An­swer,

1.1. To the mat­ter of Canoni­cal obedience. To that, That they require of us Canonical obedience, which we are to Promise at our Ordination, and to swear at our Institution to a Parochial charge: which, it is said, they cannot justly require, nor are we bound to yield. I answer,

Answ. 1 Sect. 18 Answ. 1. Why may they not justly require it? Is it for want of authority in their place? No certainly. Authority they have: if (as some judge) they are the Primigenial, A­postolical constitution, yea founded in the very Apostolical Of­fice; without question they have it then à Deo. And if it should be made appear to us, when our great account comes to be given, to have been so: what shall we answer for our deni­al of it? But if they came in afterwards by the Prudence of the Church, to govern, for the prevention of faction and schism: still they are continued in the Authority: And such a prudential constitution gives them power enough, as to this; [Page 63]nor can we be acquitted of Schism, if we obey it not. Or, Is it, because this obedience which they require, is not to be re­quired? not this neither. For obedience is a duty of inferiors to superiors, and they being made superiors, (whether by God, or the King, it makes no difference in this case) it is due to them: they may require it, and we are then bound to yield it. Besides, what is it, that they require of us? is it not, that we do the duties of our places in the Church? This we are bound to do, whether they require it or no; and sure, it becomes not sin to us then, only because it is required.

Sect. 19 Answ. 2 2. But, suppose we are not bound to yield this Canonical obedience; yet may we not lawfully do it? May a man law­fully do no more, than by an express Law he is bound to do? without doubt he may. Exigua est bonitas ad legem esse bo­nus. Were men proved to be never so much Usurpers; yet I never knew any Casuist determine it unlawful to obey him, in those things which we might lawfully do, and wherein we prejudiced not the right of, nor did break our Allegiance to our lawful Prince. It is one thing, what we are bound to do: another, what we lawfully may do. Were the Bishops proved the greatest Usurpers, (as some men clamour,) yet I could never see any, that durst say, our obedience to them in law­ful things was unlawful: or that in obeying them, we should disobey Christ, where we are to do but the duties, which Christ hath laid upon us; or, at least, such as He hath not forbidden us. And beyond this, All the Canonical obedience, requi­red of us, or promised by us, extendeth not. For what is it that we promise? even this.See, Form of Order, Priests. Reverently to obey our Ordinary, and other chief Ministers, unto whom the Govern­ment and charge is committed over us, following with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions, and submitting our selves to their godly judgements. What is here promised that a good Christian may not yield? What do we promise more, in the intent of the Law, than to obey those who are set over us in licitis & honestis, in things lawful and honest, and not repugnant to Gods Word? They require no more; we pro­mise no more: And this, I am sure, we may lawfully do, so long as the Government is committed to them; whether it [Page 64]be directly by Divine institution, or only by the Authority of the King (which even their greatest enemies must grant, that it is) it matters not, as to this particular, the lawfulness of our obeying thus far.

2.Sect. 20.2. To the mat­ter of silencing, or suspending. As to the other part of the exception. There is indeed a great cry in the world against the Bishops, for silencing, and suspending Ministers, which they are said to have no autho­rity to do; and it is pleaded, that we may not submit here; nor lay down the exercise of our Ministery upon their plea­sure: but that theAct. 4 19. & 5.29. Answer of the Apostles to those High Priests, Rulers and Elders, who commanded them to preach no more in the Name of Jesus, must be ours, That God hath imposed this calling upon us, and therefore, unless we would rather obey Man than God, we may not forbear the ex­ercise of that office which God hath laid upon us, with a 1 Cor. 9.16. woe if we preach not.

Answ. 1 Sect. 21 To all this I answer. 1. To be silenced, or suspended, or deposed, is but, to be denied the liberty of, and so conse­quently, to be enjoyned to forbear the publick exercise of our Ministery upon the Bishops pleasure: and to be depri­ved of that maintenance which we had, while we were al­lowed to exercise our Ministery in such a place. And in this the Bishops pleasure is the Magistrates pleasure, The Bishop proceeding according to the Laws. And that the Magistrate hath power, and under him consequently the Bishop, to deny any particular man this liberty within his Dominions, I know none that doubteth: if he shall do this caussesly, the sin is his, but submission and obedience is our duty.

Sect. 22 Answ. 2 2. But more, The Bishops, as such, if they have any place in the Church, Are Ecclesiastical Governours; and their work is to Over-see, to watch over, and for the flockTo take care of the Church of God, 1 Tim. 3.5. ne quid eccle­sia detrimenti capiat. Their care it must be that Tares be not sowen among the Wheat; nor corrupt and heretical doctrine preached for the pure Word of God; that the souls of men be not poysoned with rotten principles, or leavened with He­resie, or stirred up to Schisme or Sedition: but that they be built up in the most holy faith; instructed in sound doctrine; en­couraged to Piety; and lead in the wayes of Purity and Peace. [Page 65]And therefore it cannot but lie upon them to be cautious what persons they admit into the Ministry, and to watch how they continue in it. And their power equally extendeth to the si­lencing, suspending, or ejecting those who are Seditious or Scan­dalous; as to the denial of their admission; or to the admit­ting of such as are able and faithful. It is no more then, what the ApostleAct. 20.28.—32. gave in charge to those Elders, or Bishops (for so they are called [...]) at Miletum, to watch, because of the Wolves that would enter. And for which the Lord reprovesRev. 2.14, 15, 20. those Asian Angels; that they permitted the doctrines of Balaam, and the Nicolaitans to be taught, and Jezebel to prophesie. And this power is clearly manifest in those Aposto­lical charges to1 Tim 1.3, 4, 6, 7. & 5.19, 20, 21, 22. 2 Tim 2.14. & 4 2, 3. Tit. 1 5, 10, 11. & 3.10, 11. Timothy and Titus, which are frequent in those Epistles. For the truth is, if the Bishops have not this power, it is not possible they should perform their duty, or discharge their trust to God, or his Church. If any of them abuse this power, it is only their personal sin; and they abuse but their own power, for such an authority they cannot be de­nied to have, if they have any power or authority in the Church at all.

Sect. 23 Answ. 3 3. And how unjust soever the censure may be in him that gives it, yet that we may lawfully sit down in silence, I think, is beyond dispute; for though our Ministery be from God, and the Calling of Divine Institution, yet it is conferred on particulars, this, or that person by men; and they exercise this ministery by vertue of that Calling which they had from men. Now common sense and reason telleth us, that we may lawfully obey men forbidding us the exercise of a Ministery, which (though the ministery be from God, yet) we have power to exercise in such a place by vertue of that Calling only which we had from men.

Sect. 24 Answ. 4 4. Neither doth that answer of the Apostles to the High-Priest and Council, and their resolution and practice to preach the same Christ still notwithstanding that Prohibition, any way lay such a necessity upon any in our case to disobey; and to re­fuse to lay down the exercise of our ministery when we are re­quired. And as to this, let me crave leave here to mind the Reader,

[Page 66] 1. That this was one of the great arguments which Johnson the Brownist made against our Church assemblies;Sect. 25. The Separa­tists objection. that it was not lawful to communicate with them, because our ministery was the ministery of Antichrists Apostacy: this he would prove, because none could stand publick Ministers, except they re­ceive of the Prelates Priesthood and Deaconry: and without and against the peoples consent, they are by the Prelates a­lone silenced, deprived, and degraded from exercising any mi­nistery in those assemblies, who yet ought not to suffer them­selves to be silenced, and deposed from their publick ministery, no not by the lawful Magistrate.

Here we see in this mans mouth impudence and Sedition, more than enough; yet this bold assertion he labours to prove by this very Reply of the Apostles, who would not at the com­mand even of the lawful Magistrate cease to preach. But,

2.Sect 26. Answered by a Non-con­formist. What answer was given to him, will exactly fit our case also. I shall give it in the words of Master William Bradshaw. Both, because they speak fully to the Objection, and in this so far justifie the Bishops power, as to lay a necessity both upon the Minister and people to submit with peace: and also to shew, how even then (when, they say, the Church groaned under the highest exorbitancy of Episcopacy.) The soberer non-conform­ists, who did not acknowledge the Prelacy, did yet judge it law­full to submit to their power, and to forbear the exercise of their ministery upon their pleasure. For one of these, was that Master Bradshaw, and, set aside his dissent from the establish­ed Order of the Church, (I doubt not) a pious, sober, sound Divine; and even then, when himself was silenced upon the account of Non-conformity, writing in the defence of our Church-Assemblies, justifying our Communion, proving the unreasonableness of separation from them; in which BookUnreason. of Separat p. 90—Sect. 27. he gives this answer to the Separatist.

‘1. When he (i. e. Johnson the Separatist) distin­guisheth between silencing and deposing by lawful Ma­gistrates;’ and by Prelates (as indeed he seemed to do, when he said, We are silenced by Prelates, when the Apostles would not, no not by the lawful Magistrates) ‘is in our case, where the Prelates do it by Authority, and Com­mission [Page 67]from the lawful Magistrate, a distinction with­out a difference.’

Sect. 22 2. Whereas the Separatist had said, The Apostles did not make their immediate calling from God the ground of their refusal; but this, That they ought to obey God rather than men; which is a Duty required of all Ministers and Christians: He answereth, That

‘Though the Apostles did not assign their immediate cal­ling from God, as the ground of this refusal, in so many letters and syllables; yet that which they do assign, is by implication, and in effect the same; for it is as much, as if they had said, God himself hath imposed this calling upon us, and not man; and therefore, except we should rather o­bey man than God, we may not forbear — for opposing the obedience of God to the obedience of man, they therein plead a calling from God, and not from man; otherwise, if they had received a calling from men, there had been incongruity in the answer: Considering, that in common sense they ought so far to obey man, forbidding them to ex­ercise a calling, which they do exercise only by vertue of that calling from men; else by this reason — there should be no power so to depose a man from his Ministry; but that notwithstanding any Commandment of the Church or State, he is still to continue in the exercise of his Ministry, and should be bound to give that example which the Apostles did; which is not only absurd, but a conceit plainly tending to manifest Sedition.’

Sect. 29 ‘3. We are to know, That though the Apostles, Prophets and Evangelists, preached publickly, when they were not hindred by open violence; and did not, nor might they leave their Ministry upon any humane authority and com­mandment whatsoever, because they did not enter into, or exercise the same upon the will and pleasure of any man whatsoever; yet they never erected and planted publick Churches, and Ministry in the face of the Magistrate, whe­ther he would or no, or in despite of him; but such in respect of the Magistrate were as private and invisible as might be.’

[Page 68] ‘4. Sect. 30 Neither were some of the Apostles only forbidden, so as others should be suffered to preach the same Gospel in their places; but the utter abolishing of Christian Religi­on was manifestly intended in silencing them. But out Churches whereof we are Ministers are no private and secret Assemblies, such as hide themselves from the face of a persecuting Magistrate; but are publick, professing their Worship, doing their Religion in the face of the Magi­strate and State; yea, and by his countenance, authority, and protection: And we are set over these Churches, not only by a calling of our people, but also by the Authority of the Magistrate, who hath an armed power to hinder such publick Actions; and who is also willing to permit and maintain other true Ministers of the Gospel, in those places where he forbiddeth some.’

Sect. 31 By these it appears, That the case of the Apostles, and Ours, is not the same, nor can their answer to the High Priest and Elders (from whom they received no call to preach, and by whom they were forbidden to preach Jesus; the design of that Council being not to forbid them alone, and permit others to do it, but utterly to abolish Christianity) with any pre­tence fit us, that we therefore should not lawfully obey, and sit down in silence, and recede from the exercise of our Mini­stery in a particular place upon the command of those, from whom we received Authority there to minister; and who, (though they silence and exclude us, yet) send others to mi­nister to the needs of the Church in the same Gospel; and therefore as the said Mr. Bradshaw, so we conclude,

‘1. If after our publick calling to minister in such a known and publick Church; nor by the Church only, but by the Magistrate also: The Magistrate shall have matter against us (just, or unjust, as to our obedience, it matters not) and shall in that regard forbid us to minister to our Church,’ (and the Bishop in these censures acting according to the Laws under which he and we are, it bears the same reason:) ‘I see not by what warrant in Gods Word we should think our selves bound notwithstanding, to exercise our Ministery still; except we should think such a Law of Ministery to lie [Page 69]upon us, that we should be bound to run upon the Swords point of the Magistrate, or oppose Sword to Sword; which I am sure Christianity abominates.’

Sect. 33 ‘2. Yea, and suppose the Magistrate should do it unjustly, and against the will of the Church, and should therein sin; yet doth not the Church in that regard cease to be a Church, nor ought she therein to resist the will of the Magistrate; neither doth she stand bound in regard of her affection to her Minister (how great and deserved soever) to deprive herself of the protection of the Magistrate; by leaving her publick standing to follow her Minister in private, and in the dark; refusing the benefit of other publick Ministers, which with the good leave, and liking of the Magistrate, she may enjoy.’

Sect. 34 ‘3. Neither do I know what warrant any ordinary Mini­ster hath by Gods Word, in such a case, so to draw any such Church or people to his private Ministery, that thereby they should hazard their outward state and quiet in the Com­monwealth where they live; when in some competent measure they may publickly, with the grace and favour of the Magistrate enjoy the ordinary means of salvation by an­other. And except he have a calling to minister in some other Church, he is to be content to live as a private mem­ber, until it shall please God to reconcile the Magistrate un­to him, and to call him again to his own Church.’ So far this learned man, though a Non-conformist.

Sect. 35 Now I appeal to any that dissent most, if it be not all truth for the main: And change but the name of Magistrate into Bishop, the reason is all one; we may submit to one, as well as to the other: Though we should deny any such Authority to the Bishop, as such; yet because he in this acteth under the Laws; and whatsoever Autho ity he hath by vertue of his Function in the Church, yet it is certain that the exercise of this Authori­ty here, is by the leave and authority of the Magistrate. So that here is nothing material in this exception, but it still re­mains out of dispute, that though it should be granted, that the Bishops have no such power by any authority derived from Christ (which yet, we say, they have) yet we may lawfully [Page 70]submit to them in the exercise of it. And let us do this, we do our part; and we shall live in peace.

Sect. 36.4. Partic. Ex∣cept. 4. Another exception laid against the Bishops, is this, That, though it be granted, that they have some authority, or if they have not, that yet we may lawfully obey; yet, They exercise an Arbitrary power, and this is not to be submitted to. And of this nature is that fourth exception made by the Presbyteri­an Divines in their first paper of Proposals to His Majesty. Viz. That some of the Bishops exercised an Arbitrary power; as, by sending forth their Articles of Visitation, inquiring unwarrantably into several things, and swearing the Church-Wardens to present accordingly: so, by many innovations, and ceremonies imposed upon Ministers and People, not required by Law.

Sect. 37 Answ. 1 I answer, 1. Those things which are really innovations, and imposed, and not required by Law, surely we are not bound to obey; nor do I know any that affirms, we should sin, if we submit not to them: nor will it be charged upon those that de­ny them, but upon such as impose them, if the peace of the Church be violated. Yet let it be considered also,

Sect. 38 Answ. 2 2. Though such and such particular Rites may not be spe­cially ordained by a positive Law for them: yet if there be a general Law impowring the Bishops to order, appoint, and require, what shall be for the peace of the Church, and or­der in it; what shall be for the conveniencies, solemnity, and decency of Administration; and of all this leave them to be the judges: what they now do so require, they cannot be said to require without or against Law. And if these particulars which they require, be not manifestly against the Word of God, I cannot see how we can be excused from sin, if we disobey; considering that establishment, which by Law they have a­mong us.

Sect. 39 Answ. 3 3. But may we do nothing, but what we are bound to do? yea, are we not bound, for peace sake, to do all that we law­fully may do? Suppose our Governours should lay the peace of the Church upon such slight matters as are of no considera­tion in comparison with it; and this be indeed their impru­dence, and (possibly) their sin: Yet when this is done, if we [Page 71]submit not, (supposing the things to be lawful in themselves) I see not, but that the violation of the Churches peace will be laid upon us, as well as upon them; nor will their impru­dence excuse our sin. There may, perhaps, be some kind of sin in them requiring; but I am sure, when the things requi­red are not materially evil, there can be no sin in us, in obey­ing. Let us not therefore so much consider, what they must, or may require, but what we may, and should do, when it is requi­red; and we shall have peace.

Sect. 40 Except. Partic. 5 5. The next great Exception is. The Bishops claim to be Spiritual Lords, contrary to the Royal Prerogative of Jesus Christ, the only Lord and King of the Church; The same which Johnson the Separatist made against our Churches. See, Unreason, of Separat. p. 47, 48. and ex­pressly contrary to that rule of the 1 Pet. 5.2, 3. Apostle, where they (if those Elders be supposed to be Bishops) are only to over­see the Flock, and not as Lords over Gods heritage, but as ensamples to the Flock. Yea, contrary to the Royal dignity of the King, and temporal Magistrate, both in civil and ecclesiastical causes: For, they have their voices, and au­thority in Parliament for enacting Laws for the Common­wealth: They are Rulers of Provinces and Diocesses in ec­clesiastical causes: in civil State and dignity some of them above all; all of them above some of the Nobles, Justices, and other Magistrates of the Land: They and their Courts handle and determine civil causes and affairs, that apper­tain to the Magistracy: they inflict civil mulcts and penal­ties: give Licences in several cases: all the Priests and Deacons are exempt from the Magistrates Jurisdiction in di­vers things, and answerable only, or chiefly to the Prelates, and their Officers.

Sect. 41 For Answer. Here is a great charge indeed, but it signifies nothing as to the business before us, viz. our submission for Peace sake. For

Answ. 1 1. Should they claim to be what they are not, (for there is a vast difference between, to be, and, to claim to be) may we yet not lawfully obey them in things honest, though we own not their claim? I judge we may. The claim may be unjust in them, and yet the things, which they require of us, may be fit to be done by us.

Sect. 42 Answ. 2 [Page 72] 2. Though they should claim more than belongs to them, yet this makes not a nullity of that authority which is their due. What they may justly require as Bishops, and Governours of the Church, they may require, had they not those Titles of Spiri­tual Lords: and then the addition of that Title destroyes not their power of Bishops.

Sect. 43 Answ. 3 3. But, They neither are, nor claim to be such Spiritual Lords, as the Objection implyeth, as even theBradsh. un­reas. of Separ. p. 65. learned Non-conformists have acknowledged, and which their Canons and practice shew. For, those things which are antecedent­ly necessary by the Law of God, they do command and press, not as their own, but as, the Laws of Christ. And for things which are of another nature, the practice whereof is made necessary, pro Hic & Nunc, by their constitutions; they prescribe them not so, as to bind the conscience of any to the acknowledgement, and approbation thereof, as neces­sary things; but only to obey them in practice, and for exter­nal order; and as things indifferent in themselves, which we are no longer obliged to, than they are commanded: And therefore they cannot be said to arrogate such an Office of Spiritual Lords, as the Apostle condemns, nor in that sense, wherein Christ alone is Lord of his Church. They never attempting to introduce a new worship of God; or enjoyn­ing subscription to new Articles of Faith: But requiring only the same Articles to be believed, which Christ hath re­vealed; and ordering only the external mode and circumstan­ces of worship (the substance of which is only from Christ) as to decency, order, and edification: of which, they, as the Governours of the Church here, must be in a very great measure acknowledged the Judges; and which are by Christ left free to the Church, to order according to the condition of Time, and Place, and other Circumstances.

Sect. 44 Answ. 4 4. And as they encroach not upon the Prerogative Royal of Jesus Christ: so neither do they infringe the Authority of the King, and Civil Magistrate. And to evidence this, I need say no more than that which the forecitedUnreas. of Separ. p. 47. Mr. Bradshaw (though no friend to the Bishop) hath said in answer to this very obje­ction.

[Page 73] ‘1. That the Prelates claim their voyces in Parliament, not as Divine Ordinances appertaining to their Prelate­ships, but as an honour annexed to the same by the Civil Magistrate.’

‘2. Their Authority in causes ecclesiastical over Provin­vinces, &c. is either, such as the Magistrate himself may execute, and administer in his own person, if he please: or, such as is not for Him, as a Magistrate, to execute. The first sort, The Bishops administer only by vertue of the Magistrates own Commission; and therein they impair not either his dignity or supremacy: much less in the other part of their authority, which belongeth not to the Magi­strate himself to execute; especially when they use not this neither, without his consent, licence, and approba­tion.’

‘3. That all are above some, some above all the No­bles, Justices, &c. is a free and voluntary honour granted to them by the Civil Magistrate, and held in tenure from him, and not claimed as pertaining to the Episcopal function by Divine right.’

‘4. Their Courts determine no other civil causes, than the Civil Magistrate and his Laws do permit; or if any do, the fault is not in the Prelateship, but in the persons. Further, they inflict civil punishments; give licences; ex­act oaths, &c. by authority from the Magistrate, whose substitutes therein they are. And therefore the Prelates neither in this, nor in any of the former instances can be said to impair the dignity, authority, or supremacy of the Civil Magistrate; but herein do all things in, and by the protection of his authority.’

‘5. If all our Ministers be exempt from the Magistrates Jurisdiction in some things appertaining to them (but in what things, I know not) this very exemption it self is an act of the Magistrates Jurisdiction; and depends up­on his pleasure: and how can it then any wayes impair the same?’

Sect. 45 These things may satisfie in answer to this exception, The Honours and Lordships given to the Bishops, is a civil addi­tament, [Page 74]which we have no reason to envy them: neither doth that Title, or their rule and dominion infringe the Pre­rogative of Christ, or the Power and Authority of the King. And how their Honours and power in the Church should dis­charge us of our obedience, or be a ground of our contentions, I must profess I see not how any rational account can be given to any considering man.

Sect. 46 Except. partic. 6 6. But, if they have a power themselves, yet how can they set up, and substitute, and require our obedience to other of­ficers which in the Church are confessedly not of divine institu­tion? for this also is an exception against our Episcopacy: and thus did the Presbyterian Divines give it in in their1. Pap. of Propos. except. 2. against Bi­shops. Pro­posals to His Majesty. That by reason of the disability to dis­charge their duties and trusts personally, The Bishops did depute the Administration of much of their trust, even in matters of Spiritual Cognizance to Commissaries, Chancellors, and Officials, whereof some are meer secular persons, and could not administer that power, which originally pertaineth to the Officers of the Church. And again in their Second pa­per to His Majesty, presented, in reference to His Majesties Declaration communicated to them before its publication, they say, The Prelacy which we disclaim, is That of Dio­cesans, upon the claim of a superior order to a Presbyter, assuming the sole power of Ordination, and of Publick ad­monition of particular offendors, enjoyning Penitence, excom­municating, and absolving, (besides Confirmation) over so many Churches, as necessitated the corruption of Discipline, and using of Humane officers (as Chancellors, Surrogates, Officials, Commissaries, Arch-deacons) while the undoubted officers of Christ, the Pastors of particular Churches, were hindred from the exercise of their office.

Sect. 47 Answ. 1 Answ. 1. How much these things may signifie towards the design for which they were urged by these Brethren, petition­ing for an alteration of the establishment (which here I med­dle not with) sure I am, should all these things be granted, they signifie nothing as to the exemption of us from a peacea­ble submission to these officers being established. (And this is all that I here aim at) As to the Diocesses, and Superi­or [Page 75]Order, I have already spoken to them; the matter of Or­dination I shall examine under the next exception.

Sect. 48 Answ. 2 2. As to Publick admonition, Penances, Excommunication, and Absolving, &c. I say, that such censures, as these, are to be executed in the Church, none that knows the nature of a Church, and is acquainted with the Scriptures, did ever, or do now question. The censures are necessary, the ends great; To preserve the Church in Purity and Peace; To keep men from Scandal and Schism; To recover the lapsed sinner; To restore the Penitent; To strengthen the weak; To confirm and establish the doubtful; to make the ChurchCant. 6.4, 10 comely and beautiful in her self, and terrible to her enemies as a well marshalled Army. Now when we acknowledge the Cen­sures of Divine institution, and of so great necessity; why should we quarrel at the Administrators; which yet are not so uncapable of this trust, as some may conceive? The Bishops on all hands are granted an interest in the power of the Keyes, even by those, who will not acknowledge them above the Presbyters. Now, if they exercise this power alone, or with others, yet excluding some, whom we judge to have an inter­est with them; yet what they do, they do by vertue of that au­thority which they have. The taking too much upon them, or any male-administration may be personal faults, but no ground for us to refuse obedience.

Sect. 49 Answ. 3 3. Neither do these inferior officers pass these Censures a­lone, but with others, nor do any (according to our constituti­ons) keep Courts in affairs of this nature, but with someone or more Presbyters there with them.

Sect. 50 Answ. 4 4. But grant that these Officers have not a Divine instituti­on, but substitute under the Bishop by an authority meerly humane, (though some conceive some footsteps of an Arch­deacon in Scripture, in Silas and Mark to Paul and Barnabas, although not under the same name:) Yet, 1. The Lay-Elders beyond all doubt are as much secular persons as any of these, and have as little a foundation in Scripture as these, as to the being Ecclesiastical officers, and the passing of Church-censures; and then methinks these men that could admit them, may ad­mit these. If their being secular persons be an argument against [Page 76]these, sure I am, it is as strong against them; and with us more, for they never had any legal establishment in this Church, as these have. But, 2. The legal establishment of these Officers by the Laws of the Kingdom, is enough to engage our sub­mission to those Laws; and upon this account may even those men with a good conscience obey them, who yet acknowledge not a Divine institution of them, nor a Divine right in Epis­copacy it self. For,

• 1. Sect. 51 I think there is very much truth in those words of Arch­bishop Whitgift, (which I find cited, but miserably misapplied by Johnson the Separatist;) viz. The substance and nature of Government must be taken out of the Word of God, and consisteth in these parts: That the Word be truly taught; the Sacraments rightly administred; Vertue furthered; Vice repressed; and the Church kept in quietness, and order. (All this is certainly of Divine institution; and this we may, and must submit to: And this is all which the Bishops and Officers under them are impowered to do.) But (saith he) the Officers of the Church whereby this Government is wrought, be not namely and parti­cularly expressed in Scripture, but in some points left to the dis­cretion and liberty of the Church, to be disposed according to the state of times, persons and places. Now if there be a truth in this, (which, I think, few will deny) if the Church have such a liberty; And she hath made use of this liberty to appoint such persons for such ministrations, agreeable to the general rules of the Word, and answering the general end of Disci­pline and Government: We may then submit to that Disci­pline and Government, notwithstanding the supposed or real personal faults of the Administrators; yea, though we judge no Divine institution of the particular Officers. But,
• 2. Sect. 52 It is needless (as to the main designe of these papers, which is onely to perswade to unity, and a peaceable obedience) to spend time and words in the full defence of the Calling of Bishops, farther than the necessity of this argument requires. Many (whom it would be highly uncharitable and unchristian to deny to be holy and faithful men) do cordially believe the Calling of Bishops to be Apostolical, and by Divine appoint­ment: And there needs no argument to perswade such to [Page 77]obedience. And for those, whether Ministers or others, who approve not of, nor are satisfied in the Calling of the Bishops, and their subordinate Officers, as such; yet that they not only may, but, considering the establishment, ought in conscience to submit in peace, and with cheerfulness too, may be fully cleared by these following Considerations.

• 1. Sect. 53 If they will not own a National, or Provincial Church, or any Church larger than the limits of one Congregation (which yet the
  Jus Divin. Minister. E­vang. part. 2. cap. 1. p. 12, 13, 14.
  London Divines of the Presbyterian perswasion, have owned, and proved, and therefore I judge, they do so still) yet they must acknowledge that This King­dom is a Kingdom of Christians, or a Christian Nation, (and this is indeed tantamount to a National Church) then consider
• 2. That the state of a Christian Common-wealth cannot be perfect, without some general Visitors, and Overseers of the se­veral particular Churches.
• 3. That though a particular Church, or Congregation may be compleat without them; yet for the necessary union, and agreement of the several particular Churches in Christian Provinces and Kingdoms, it is fit, and agreeable to reason, and no wayes repugnant to the Word of God, that under the Supreme Magistrate, there should be other Governours to protect and encourage those Ministers and Churches, which do their duty; and to punish those, which shall offend. Wherein, if either through want of humane Laws, or some personal cor­ruption, they shall in some things pass their bounds, they do no more, than any other officers, either Civil or Ecclesiastical, through frailty and infirmity may do.
• 4. Sect. 54 Therefore I offer these few particulars, unto all serious, sober, considering Christians, to be advisedly weighed: some whereof the forecited Mr. Bradshaw
  Unreas. of Separ. p. 65.
  used against the Sepa­ratists, and may upon those grounds, if they will admit no more, with equal force of reason engage all peaceably to submit to, and live contentedly under the Government and Discipline e­stablished by Law.

• ‘1. Whether the Supreme Magistrate have not power to oversee and govern all the several Churches within his Do­minions; [Page 78]yea, whether he be not bound so to do?’ Without doubt he is.
• ‘2. Whether for his further help and assistance herein, he may not make choice of some grave, learned, and Re­verend man to assist him in the same Government?’ This I think is so rational, that no considering man will de­ny it.
• ‘3. Whether by vertue of this power, these persons thus called, may not lawfully try the abilities of all the several Ministers within that Dominion; and give publick appro­bation of the worthy, and inhibit those who are unworthy from the execution of their Ministery? and whether may they not visit these several Ministers and Churches, convent them before them, and examine how they have behaved themselves in their places; and punish the blamewor­thy?’
• ‘4. Whether, for the more easie and orderly government of the said Churches, so far forth as it appeartains to him, he may not divide his Kingdom (as ours is) into Provin­ces, assigning over each of them under himself,’ some spe­cial Magistrate (though we call not the Arch-Bishop, or Bi­shop by that title, but in a large sense it may pass, and I know no Solaecism in an Ecclesiastical Magistrate: And if we own him but so far, this is enough to engage a peaceable obe­dience) ‘fit for learning and experience to oversee and go­vern all the general and particular Churches there? and whether may he not also subdivide those Provinces into Dio­cesses, assigning also unto them other more inferior officers under him, and his Provincial officers, to oversee the seve­ral Churches within such and such a precinct? none doubts but he may.’
• ‘5. Whether it destroy the nature of a Ministerial, or true particular visible Church, that many of them should ap­pertain to one Provincial or Diocesan government, though in that respect they should be held or reputed for one Pro­vincial or Diocesan Church?’ That it doth, hath been said by those of the separation, but never proved: but I am sure according to the Presbyterian principles it doth not, whose [Page 79] Classical, Provincial, and National Church must be built up­on the same foundation with the Diocesan.

Sect. 55 These things were proposed by that learned Non-conformist, and thought sufficient, even according to the principles of those Ministers who were not satisfied with the Bishops power, with­out farther proaese (as being clear by their own light) to stop the mouth of that bold Separatist. And those very things which were then accounted Arguments of force enough to prove a lawfulness of Communion in those Churches, which are under this government, have the same force to prove the lawfulness of the peaceable exercise of our Ministery under the same. For, whether we grant their Jurisdiction in the Church to have been ab initio, and an Apostolical constitu­tion or no: (as indeed now, that I know, plead it is, as ex­ercised in all the subordinate officers hands, nor is it needful we should) yet this we must grant, that they are Commissio­nated under His Majesty for the exercise of this power, whom we acknowledge over all persons, and in all causes, (even Ecclesiastical) Supreme Governour. And upon this ground, are we bound to obey them in all lawful things, though we should deny their Apostolical standing. And this is enough to preserve our peace; for, it is not essential to Peace that we are in all circumstances of the same judgement: but it is essen­tial, that we for the main walk in the same way, practice the same things, and perform the same duties. And it is not strange, that divers men should agree in one necessary pra­ctice, though they agree not in the reason of that necessity. Neither do the established Laws require us, nor were ever the Bishops so rigorous as to require, that we should profess the Divine right of that constitution, in manner and form as it is established; but that we obey in our places in all things not contrary to the Word of God. And, whether we judge the Government Apostolical and necessary; or, only Prudenti­al, brought in by the Church, and not repugnant to the Ho­ly rule; or, only as the Bishops are impowered and Com­missioned under the King: being here established, I see not, how we can without sin refuse a peaceable compliance with it.

Sect. 56 And I have reason to hope such a compliance, in a good measure, because those learned Brethren (who, though in their Proposals to His Majesty, they desire that Chancellors, Arch-deacons, Commissaries, &c. as such, may not pass a­ny censures purely Spiritual: yet when they say only (as such) it may intimate, they would not deny them under another notion; as Commissioned under His Majesty to do so.) These Brethren, I say, add this. But for the exercise of Civil Go­vernment (and this, by their words there, may seem to in­clude, the acts of Government in the Church, and ecclesia­stical Causes, so far as the Censures are not purely Spiritual) coercively by Mulcts, or corporal penalties, by power deri­ved from Your Majesty, as Supreme over persons and things ecclesiastical; we presume not at all to interpose, but shall sub­mit to any that act by Your Majesties Commission. Were indeed these Considerations well weighed, they would do much to a peaceable obedience.

Sect. 57 Except. Partic. 7 7. I know but one material exception more, referring to this charge, that, The Bishops take too much upon them. And that is, The matter of Ordination, and now, the Re-ordina­tion, for thus it is excepted. The Bishops, some of them— do assume sole power of Ordination and Jurisdiction to them­selves. And now it is farther urged as unsufferable, that upon their re-establishment, they require a Re-ordination of all those, who during the late Confusions, were ordained only by a Presbytery.

Sect. 58 In answer to the business of a Superior ordo, &c. enough is already said. But to the matter of Ordination and Re-or­dination, I say,

Answ. 1 1. The Question is not what some challenge to them­selves, but how far we may yield in the thing that is challen­ged, without sin. If some challenge too much, let them answer that: but if we may without sin take from their hands, that which we can legally have from no others, I see not, why we should in the least scruple to take it. That Their hands are Necessary, and that none can be regularly ordained without them, is the Judgement of none of the least or lowest in the Church, who think the Scripture speaks clearest on their side [Page 81]also. For, Though Timothy had the1 Tim. 4 14. Imposition of Hands of the Presbytery; yet it is expressly said, that he had2 Tim. 1.6. Pauls too, and he not acting as one of them, but un­der a distinct notion, (as the words if well weighed, do more than intimate) for, whatsoever that [...] was, which was given by that Laying on of Hands, whether the extraor­dinary gifts of the Spirit, usually, in those dayes, by theAct. 8.17, 18. Apostles hands: or the Gift, i. e. Authority of Ministery (whether of a Bishop or Evangelist, it matters not) what­soever, I say, the gift was, it seems to be conferred [...]. chief­ly by the hands of Paul, and referred to the hands of the Presbytery, [...] but as assistants, or associates with him. But those texts seem to be more express, where not only the Deacons were made byAct 6.6. the sole hands of the Apostles; but also in the ordaining of Presbyters we read, that Barnabas and Paul, those Apostles, Act. 14.23. did ordain Elders in every Church as they went; we read not of any other hands with them. St. Paul also layes this charge on Timothy, 1 Tim. 5.22 Lay thou hands suddenly on none, intimating an act, wherein he only was concerned, for, if there were other Presbyters, or a Presbytery at Ephesus; and they necessarily to joyn with him in every Ordination; why is the charge only given to him? why not the same caution urged on them? And in that clause,Tit 1. [...]. For this cause left I thee in Creet, that, Thou— shouldest ordain Elders in every City, we see Titus infallibly left with authority to do this; but we read not of any others appointed with him. If any object, He was an extraordi­nary Officer, and Evangelist; This signifies little, for what­ever he was, he was an Apostolical person; and for that time, at least, seated at that place for the particular Government of that church; to perform not an extraordinary; but, a work of standing use in the Church, the administration of an ordi­nary, and perpetual Ordinance: And why then, in such a work, he may not be conceived to act as a settled ordinary Officer, I see not. This we are sure of, That Ordination was not given in those dayes without the hands of an Apostle, or an Apostolical person; We are not sure, that it was not some­times without the hands of the Presbytery. Upon these grounds [Page 82]these learned and conscientious men judge a Necessity of the Episcopal, or Apostolical hands; though not excluding, yet withal not necessarily requiring the hands of other Pres­byters.

Sect. 59 On the other side, that, The Hands of Bishops are lawful in this work, is granted so far, by those; who urge the greatest necessity of the Presbyterial Ordination, yet excude not the Bishop, See, Jus Divin. Minist. Evang. 2. part. who (on their judgements) ceaseth not to be at least a Presbyter; and the Name of a Bishop doth not (with them) take away his interest of a Presbyter in Ordination: nor nullifie the Orders, because his Hands were in them.

Now, then if we may but lawfully take it at the Bishops hands; if it be required to be had from them alone, (though it should be supposed somewhat irregular) and we can have it no other way without the violation of the Laws in being: sup­pose they should sin in assuming that only to themselves, which should be done joyntly with others; yet we should not sin in ta­king it of them, because they unquestionably have a power, though, possibly, not the sole power.

Sect. 60 2. It is objected only, Some Bishops challenge to themselves, &c. Now the matter is not what some particular men chal­lenge; but what the established constitution is. It concerns not us to be of the same judgement with every particular Bi­shop; but to obey them in that place, where the Laws have set them, and in that authority, wherein the Constitutions of this Church have invested them. Now the Laws of our Church give no such power of sole ordination; nor doth any Bishop, (that I know, or have heard) practice it. The Dean and Prebends were of old, I doubt not, accounted a standing Presbytery to the Bishop, and theCan. 31. Presence of four of these are expressly required to every Ordination, (viz.) The Dean, Arch-Deacon, and two Prebendaries at least: or in the necessary absence of them four other Presbyters. Nor may we understand this of a naked presence only; but by the order for the Practick, they are to assist in the act too, they areSee Rubr. in Form of Or­der. Priests. with the Bishop to lay their hands severally upon the head of every one that receiveth Orders. And this Ordina­tion I never knew questioned by any, that allowed any [Page 83]Ordination by Ecclesiastical persons at all. And theJus Divin. Minist. Evang. Part 2. Lon­don Divines have justified, even in their judgements, the vali­dity of it.

Sect 61 3. The great and only thing, that I know, which affrights men from this Episcopal Ordination, is the subscription by the Canon required; and the Promise which they are to make of obedience to the Bishop. To this I shall only say,

• 1. Sect. 62 To omit what was
  Sect. 18, 19.
  said before, as to the Promise of obedience; We are required no more, than those Reve­rend Brethren of the Presbyterian perswasion have declared to be their avowed principles.
  Account, to the King, of the confer. p. 4.
  We are remembred (say they) that in things no way against the Law of God, The Commands of our Governours (not only may, but) Must be obeyed: but if they command, which God forbids, we must patiently submit to suffering; and every soul must be subject to the higher powers for Conscience sake, and not resist: The publick judgement Civil or Ecclesiastical, belongeth only to publick persons, and not to any private man: That no man must be causlesly and pragmatically inquisitive into the rea­sons of his Superiors commands; nor by pride, and self-con­ceitedness exalt his own understanding above its worth and office; but all to be modestly and humbly self-suspicious: That none must erroneously pretend to Gods Law against the just commands of his Superiors, nor pretend the doing of his duty to be sin: That he, who suspects his Superiors commands to be against Gods Laws, must use all means for full informa­tion, before he setteth in a course of disobeying them: And that he, who discovers indeed any thing commanded to be a sin, (though he must not do it) must manage his opinion with very great tenderness, and care of the publick peace, and the Honour of his Governours. These are our principles. Now then when their avowed principles yield so much, (as indeed all sober Christians do and must,) and, The Bishops require no more, nor are those, who are to be ordained, to promise any more, why may there not be a full compliance here? why may we not promise that, which we acknowledge we are obli­ged to perform? But,
• 2. Sect: 63 The Subscription
  Can. 36.
  required, is only to these three Articles.

• [Page 84]1. That the Kings Majesty under God is the only Su­preme Governour of this Realm, and of all other His High­ness Dominions and Countries, as well in all Spiritual and Ecclesiastical things and causes, as Temporal: and that no Forrein Prince, Person, Prelate, State, or Potentate, hath, or ought to have any jurisdiction, Power, Superiority, Preemi­nence, or Authority Ecclesiastical or Spiritual within His Ma­jesties said Realms, Dominions, or Countries.
• 2. That the Book of Common Prayer, and of ordering Bi­shops, Priests, and Deacons, containeth in it nothing contra­ry to the Word of God, and that it may lawfully be used, and that he himself will use the form in the said book prescribed in all Publick Prayer, and Administration of the Sacraments, and none other.
• 3. That He alloweth the Articles of Religion agreed upon by the Arch-Bishops, and Bishops of both Provinces, and the whole Clergy in the Convocation holden at London in the year of our Lord God, One thousand, five hundred, sixty and two: and that he acknowledgeth all and every the Articles therein contain­ed, being in number 39. besides the Ratification, to be agreeable to the Word of Grd.

Now in reference to this Subscription required, let me but propound these things to be seriously considered, and duly weighed. Ʋiz.

• 1. Sect. 64 That this is not an Arbitrary imposition of the Bishops, But they are obliged by the same Law to require it, as others are to do it. They may not ordain, or give Licence to any which refuse to subscribe, upon pain of their own suspension. So that we can neither impute this to the Bishops; nor deny it our selves without opposing the standing Laws, which do equally oblige, both them, and us.
• 2. Sect. 65 Nor are the Articles of such a nature, as to startle a so­ber conscientious person; as such as may not be subscribed without sin. For, the First, The Kings Supremacy, none denies, but the Papists, and some few Sectaries; All consci­entious Protestants make no doubt or scruple of it, and can clearly prove it. For the last, The Doctrine of the Church of England, in the 39. Articles, even those Brethren, who dis­sent [Page 85]from the Government, never charged them with any ma­terial error. The scruple only is about the second, The Common Prayer-book, &c.

Sect. 66 Here by the way let me but observe how far those Divines of the Presbyterian perswasion, even there where they desire a liberty from this Subscription, do yet acknowledge, how far they can and do consent to the things to be subscribed. Their words are:2d. Pap. of Propos. to His Majesty. p. 24. We Humbly acquaint Your Majesty, that we do not dissent from the Doctrine of the Church of England expressed in the Articles and Homilies: But it is the contro­verted passages about Government, Liturgy, and Ceremonies; and some by-passages and phrases in the Doctrinal part, which are scrupled by those whose liberty is desired. Not that we are against subscribing the proper rule of our Religion, or any meet Confession of Faith: Nor do we scruple the Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy; Nor would we have the door left open for Papists and Hereticks to come in. Now I hum­bly propose this to be considered, Whether upon this grant there may not be a cheerful subscription, as is required: for, I cannot see more required to be subscribed, than upon the point is here yielded, and consented to, for

• 1. Sect. 67 Here is professed, No dissent from the Doctrine exprest in the 39. Articles and Homilies: and That, They are rea­dy to subscribe any meet Confession of Faith, or Rule of our Religion: which those Articles are, and must be esteemed to be, in their judgements, who profess, they dissent not from them. And this is the whole third Article to be subscribed. For that which is objected concerning Some by-passages, and phrases in the Doctrinal part; This is nothing, that should be of any force to hinder this Subscription: which is not that we acknowledge the propriety of every phrase, which is a thing below the consideration of serious men in matter of such weight. Were such a thing as a Confession of Faith put under the curious censures of Criticks and Grammarians, there would still be matter of dispute; but the thing required is of an higher nature. Be the By-Passages or Phrases what they will, the thing which only we are to subscribe, is, That the Doctrine contained therein is agreeable to the Word of God: [Page 86]and to this there is a consent, whether those By-passages stand or fall. What some have added, That the Articles are not full enough, nor do particularly enough express all the substance of Faith or Truth to be believed; This signifies nothing in this case. For, to omit, that, 1. I look upon it as the wisdom of This Church to couch her Articles in those general expressions, agreeable to the Sacred Canon, to which all must unanimously subscribe; rather than descend to more particular decisions, which would have been still more matter of controversie: Men according to their various sentiments differing in particulars, and the more they descend to particu­larities, the wider they are in their judgements, when yet they agree in the general Doctrines. I say (to omit this) 2. The Article requires not our judgement as to any thing else, nor doth it oblige us to believe, that nothing else is agreeable to the Word of God, but that this Doctrine contained in these Articles is so. This we see is granted, and why then may it not be subscribed?
• 2. Sect. 68 Here is no scruple neither at the Oaths of Allegiance or Supremacy, which is all required in the first Article, That then may also be subscribed.
• 3. Sect. 69 The only difficulty is about the second, the lawfulness of the use of the Book of Common Prayer, and a promise to use it. Of this I shall give a more full account in the next parts. But in the mean time, let us see what is yielded, and how far we are required to subscribe it.

• 1. Sect. 70 It is professed by those Reverend Divines, That, They would not have the door left open for Papists and Hereticks to come in. Now the use of this Liturgy was ever accounted one Characteristical of our Church, differencing it from the Church of Rome (so far is it from being nothing but their Mass-book) and in the judgement of our Governours, who require it, an excellent barre to the door, and a means to keep out Papists and Hereticks. And with this do but compare their professed principles, That the publick judgement, Civil and Ecclesiastical, belongs only to publick persons, and not to private men—And this will go very far towards a perswasi­on of the lawfulness of this Subscription; which in the judge­ment [Page 7]of our Superiours is so necessary, as to that very thing which we our selves would have to be done: Again,
• 2. Sect. 71 Here is nothing urged against this Subscription, that speaks the particulars of the Liturgy and Ceremonies materi­ally or manifestly evil; but only that there are some contro­verted passages about them. Now in such things, how much may we yield for peace sake? when if nothing be required, that is materially evil, or manifestly against Gods Word; it is certain we cannot sin in subscribing: But it is not certain we should not sin in refusing; yea, it is certain we should sin in disobeying an established Law, where that Law is not contrary to the Law of God. And that is all that we subscribe; not that it is the best that may be framed, but that it is good, or not contrary to the holy Word, and may lawfully be used. And what may lawfully be used, we may lawfully promise to use. But of this more hereafter.
• 3. Sect. 72 Let me adde one consideration more. There cannot (I think) be produced any settled or established Church, or any e­stablished order in a Christian Common-wealth, where some subscription, or engagement is not required of all those who are admitted to any publick office or imployment in it. Yea, I suppose, it may be made appear also, that the things required by others, are not of lesse, but matter of more dispute and doubt among learned and conscientious men, than these, or a­ny of these are, which are required of us. Look into the Dutch Churches, may any be admitted among them to the exercise of a publick ministery, who will not subscribe, or (which is equi­valent) expressely own the Decisions of the Synod of Dort a­gainst the Remonstrants? And those points, I am sure, are an higher controversie, a matter of much more doubt among learned and conscientious men, than any of ours: wherein had our Church decided either way, and required our subscription to it, it would have unavoidably proved a matter of perpetual Schism (as we may justly deem) to the worlds end.

Sect. 73 But to go no further than our own time and place. It can­not be forgotten, nor may it be denied, That even then, when the Presbyterial Government was erected by the Ordinance of the two Houses of Parliament, the Covenant was really made [Page 88]a [...], or Shibboleth, to distinguish parties (to omit, how it was a snare too, to many conscientious men, and so only used; for it is too manifestly known, particularly at Cambridge, it was tendered to none but those whom they suspected, and had a mind to eject out of their places) none could be ordain­ed, nor admitted into a living, unless he did subscribe it, and so­lemnly swear the Extirpation of the established Episcopacy; were he otherwise in Doctrine never so Orthodox, and in holy life never so exemplary; nor indeed keep that living whereof he was legally possessed. How many (I say not scandalous and vicious persons, but) truly learned, able, faithful, ortho­dox, holy men were ejected and sequestred, only for refusing that Covenant, and conscientiously keeping close to their Oaths of Allegiance and Supremacy? (not to speak of the latter times, wherein the Usurpations, Tyrannies, and Extravagances of men ran up to the height of Enmity against the Church and Mini­stery.)

Sect. 74 Now, Brethren, let me beseech you, lay your hands upon your hearts. Might you require Subscription then to your Establishments? And is it sin in our Governours now to re­quire the like to theirs; yea, not theirs only, but of this Church and Kingdom ever since the Reformation? Is the established Episcopacy a matter of controversie now, and was it not so then? Or, are those only who oppose it, learned and conscientious, godly men; and those only who are for it, men of no learning, conscience, or godliness? Was it lawful for you to require a Subscription to one side of the controversie, which you judged right? and is it not lawful for them to require the same to that part which they judge so? yea, is it not much more legal in them, who require it by the Authority of an established Law, than in those who had no such Authority? In a word, was it by you accounted lawful, that men for the liberty of exercise of their publick Ministery, should not only sub­scribe, but swear to endeavour the extirpation of the Prelacy of England, which was never proved unlawful to submit to; (though some have judged it so, to exercise) a business which those who were put upon Covenanting, had no call to act in; an established Government by a known Law, of full Authority; [Page 89]and this Covenant imposed by those, whose Authority, as to such a thing, is justly questioned, and expresly against the Royal Assent, which is essential to a Law of England. And can it with any shadow of Reason be denied to be lawful, to sub­scribe to that Government which was established of Old, and is restored, and re-established now by unquestionable, and the Soveraign Authority; and when we are only required obedi­ence, not to condemn all other Forms, but only to acknow­ledge this; and this also, as good and lawful, and agreeable to the Word of God?

Let but men seriously make these reflections in their unpre­judiced thoughts, and give an impartial judgment; and they will see no worse conditions required of them, than they them­selves did sometimes put upon their Brethren; and nothing required, which is in it self evil, but what may lawfully be sub­mitted to without sin; yea, and ought to be submitted to, ra­ther than violate the Peace, or make a Schism and Division in the Church.

Sect. 75 2. Having dispatched this matter of Ordination, the remain­ing difficulty is about the matter of Re-ordination: The matter of Re-ordination stated, and cleared. This is ac­counted a thing unsufferable, that those who were ordained, and received a Commission to the Evangelical Ministry, must now be forced, in effect, to deny that Ministry so received, and take it up again from the hands of the Bishop: But

In answer to this Scruple, I say,

Sect. 76 1. It will be granted, that this is a question that hath not been much disputed, and the examples of the practice are rare in the Church. There are said to be some Ancient Canons which deny and forbid it: And one of those called the Apo­stles Canons (confessedly later than the Apostles, whose names they bear) decreeth, ThatSi quis E­piscopus aut Presbyter, aut Diaconus secun­dam ab aliqu [...] ordinationem susceperit, depo­nitor, tam ipse qui ipsum ordi­narit. Can. Ap. 67. Both the Re-ordainer, and the Re-ordained shall be deposed. I know also, there is a com­mon Saw in the Romish Church, in that old Fryers verse, or thing like a verse.

Bis B. Baptismus. O. Ordo. C. Confirmatio. BOC non dantur; sed E. Eucharistia. M. Matrimonium. P. P [...]nitentia. U. Unctio extrema. EMPƲ reiterantur.

The Fathers in the Trent Conventicle anathematizing all that shall deny the indelible character imprinted by those three of their Sacraments, Baptism, Orders, and Confirmation; which they deny therefore to be reiterated. But what this indelible character is, they have not told us; nor do we find where the Scriptures mention it; nor is it (that I know) of such reck­oning among Protestants. But though these deny it, yet can any thing hence be an Argument to prove it unlawful to submit to it? Those who herein dissent, will not think themselves bound in other things to be tyed up either by those Apostolical Canons, or those other Councils in the business of Episcopacy; and why then obliged in this, which they determine with no more Authority? And much less are we to be swayed by the Popish decisions, who acknowledge neither their Authority, nor understand their indelible character; especially conside­ring,

Sect. 77 2. That this is not a thing so strange or new in some Prote­stant Churches, a learned manHumph. of Reordin. Sect. 2. p. 22. (who (it seems) hath studied this point for the satisfaction of his own conscience, as to his own practice) doth furnish us with these two Testimo­nies (for the Books, I confess, I have not by me, to examine) one of Chemnitius, who saith,Chemnit. Exam. Conc. Trid. de Cha­ractere. Quod Baptismus non sit iterandus, de magna re agi­tur: Pactum gratia in illo nobiscum Deus in it. — Illud vero quod Baptismè pro­prium est, ut se noniterctur, ad suos o [...]dines transtulerunt. That Baptism is not to be repeated, is a thing of weight, because in that God enters into a Covenant of grace with us — But what is proper to Baptism, viz. That it may not be reiterated, They (i. e. the Trent Fathers, for which he blames them) have transferred to their own orders too. Surely, if this denial of iteration of orders be blameable in the Papists (as in that learned mans judgment it is) it can­not be blamed in us to allow it, unless to deny, and allow be the same thing. The other is, Dr. Baldwin, that learned Pro­fessor at Wittenberg, giving his judgment in this case, which he putteth thus; viz.

Whether a man ordained by the Papists may be ordained again by us. In his answer, he maintains the no necessity, but clear­ly alloweth the lawfulness of itBaldvin. de Casib. Consc. l. 4 c. 6. cas. 6. — Quod siquis existimet se tranquilliùs suo in nostris Ecclesiis offic o persungi posse, si etiam nostris ritibis ad sacro-sanctum ministerium utatur; nibil obstat, quin ordinationem [...] nostris accipere possit: nec enim cadem est ratio Ordinationis ac Baptismi, qui iterari non potest; [...]ecenim Sacramentum est Ecclesia, illa autem externus tantum rit [...]. If any man, saith he, [Page 91] think that he can with more tranquility, or freedom, perform his office and duty in our Churches, if also he use our Rites, (i. e. enter our way) into the Sacred Ministry, nothing hin­dereth but that he may also receive Ordination from ours; for there is not the same reason of Ordination, as of Baptism which may not be iterated; for this is a Sacrament, that only an external Rite of the Church.

Sect. 78 3. That the former Bishops of England were against a Re­ordination, is confessed; but withal it must be acknowledged, that the case with them, and among us now, is far different. The question then, was concerning the admission and reception of those who had received Orders in Forraign Churches of the Presbyterian way; as the Scottish, Dutch, or French; for se­veral instances may be given of some of them received and admitted into English livings and preferments. The questi­on was, Whether these being ordained only by Presbyteries, the Churches from whence they came having no Bishops, they should be re-ordained here, before they should be admitted to English livings, who had an Episcopacy over them. In this case they con­cluded in the Negative, and that charitably, and like Christians; for in those Churches which had no Bishop, an indispensable ne­cessity lieth upon all that will be ordained, to receive their or­ders in the way that is current among them, or they must have none. And I never heard of any of our Church, that did up­on that account pronounce their Ordination null, or their Mini­stry void; but did acknowledge it (though not so regular, as they judged it should be, yet) valid being done.Si Ortho­doxi Presbyteri, ne pereat Eccle­sia, alios Pres­byteros cogant [...] ordinare; ego non ausim bu­jusmodi ordina­tiones pronunci­are irritas. Daven. De­term. Quaest. 42. If the Orthodox Presbyters (said a Reverend Bishop of our Church) are by an insuperable necessity forced to ordain other Presbyters, that the Church fail not; (the Church and Ministry being but res unius aetatis, and in one Age gone, if no Succession of Ministers be provided; and if Presbyters ordain not, there are no other to do it) in this case I should not dare to pronounce such Ordinations void. Upon this account, the Bishops had rea­son not to require of them a Re-ordination, because they de­nied not the validity of their Ministry, nor would be so un­christian as to unchurch those that gave it, an invincible neces­sity putting them upon this or none.

Sect. 79 But the case with us is of another nature, and a different con­sideration. It is now, not concerning the admission of stran­gers into our Churches, who regularly could have no other but a Presbyterial Ordination in their own, from whence they came, and to whom we are to give the right hand of fellowship, notwithstanding this difference in an external Order; but con­cerning the members and subjects of our own, who by the standing Laws of this Church and State were bound to receive, and legally could receive only that Ordination, which could not be conferred without the hands of a Bishop; and which they might have had, had they not first by a popular fury thrown out the Bishops: So that though the Ordination received from Presbyters, as to the Ministry it self, may be yielded valid; yet here, as to the manner and entring into it, it will be in eve­ry Episcopal judgment, (and considering the Laws establish­ing Episcopacy here, never yet repelaed, I see not how it can be otherwise) accounted Schismatical. The former Bishops would not require Re-ordination of those who came from o­ther Churches, which were Presbyterial, because they denied not their Evangelical Ministry, as to the substance of it; that they might not seem to condemn those Churches, as no true Churches of Christ; Yet, instances may be given of some that were of this Church, whose Ordination would not be al­lowed which they had taken abroad from a Forraign Presbyte­ry, which they might have had, but refused from the Bishops at home: And upon the same reason now, of their own mem­bers, they also require a Re-ordination; that they may not condemn themselves as Antichristian, nor justifie the popular fury that cast them out, nor countenance a Schism in our own Church.

Sect. 80 4. But the main of our enquiry must be, not how justly or rationally they may require it; but how far those who are con­cerned may submit to it being required. The reason of exact­ing it, and the prudential consideration of it, our Governours who require it, I presume are able to give, though it concerns not us to be curiously inquisitive into the reasons of their com­mands (as was before acknowledged.) It concerns us only to satisfie our souls in this, whether we may obey or no; whether [Page 93]should those, whom it concerns, lie under a guilt of sin should they submit to a Re-ordination by Episcopal hands? I am fully convinced, they should not. For, whatsoever may be the judgements of men, and the practice of some Churches at some time, yet sure I am

• 1. Sect. 81 We find not in the whole Scriptures any thing expressly forbidding it, or, that I know, tending thereunto. There is much stress laid upon One Baptism: but no such thing up­on One Ordination: It is then such as cannot be condem­ned as Contra Fidem.
• 2. Sect. 82 Nor is it Contra Bonos Mores. I know not which way it can be charged to do any thing to the hinderance of a sober, just, or godly life. Men may be as ardent in their affections, as devout in their worship, as conscientious in their obedience to God: as loyal to their King: as humble, sober, meek, just, charitable to their Neighbours, as they are, or may be without it. Yea, in some cases it furthers and helps forward these duties: for before, some conscientions men did doubt of the Mission of their Ministers, (how justly, I dispute not, but they did so) and were under a temptation to reject their message: Now they acknowledge them indeed sent, and legally established and Commissioned; and their words now have authority, and their Message received, as of Embassadors of Christ. How much this conduceth to perswade men to o­bey the Gospel, which they preach, I need not use many words to prove; The experience of Thousands will attest and evidence it. And that it hinders not, yea promotes obedi­ence to Rulers, is clear; for the very submission to it, is an act of obedience to their Laws. So that this Re-ordination be­ing neither against Faith, nor good Manners, I see no rea­son, but that (according to that known
  Quod ne (que) contra fidem, ne (que) contra bo­nos mores in­jungitur, indif­ferentèr est ha­bendum, & pro corum, inter quos vivitur, so­cîetate tenendis est. Aug ad Jan. Ep. 118.
  rule of St. Austin) it is to be held and reputed indifferent, and to be kept and observed for their sake, and communion among whom we live.
• 3. We may well distinguish between what is necessary ad essentiam ministerij; and what is necessary ad exercitium pro Hic & Nunc. A man may have all things conferred, which pertain to the essence or substance of Ministery; and yet, there may be an use, yea an accidental, and occasional neces­sity [Page 94]of something else to enable him to exercise his Ministery at such a time, and in such a place. Or, (which comes all to one) as
  Humph. of Re-ord. Sect. 2. p. 16.
  one distinguisheth, between, what is requi­red to the setting apart a man to the office of a Minister in the sight of God: and what is requisite to make him received as such among men, and give him full authority, and repute to execute his Ministery in the Place or Church where he is, or shall be called. So that even those, who judge their former Ministery valid in fore Dei, and may not therefore renounce it as null: (nor indeed is that required) yet may see, as a ne­cessity from the Pleasure of their Governours; so a lawfulness in the thing, viz. To be ordained again: Not to make them simply Ministers or Presbyters anew; but to make them Presbyters, for (as our Church useth the word, which is equi­valent) Priests of the Church of England; i. e. that, they may have authority to use and exercise their Ministery, and be received as such in This Church of England, and particular­ly in those places, where they shall be called to minister. For, thus saith the Bishop in the Ordaining him.
  Form of Or­der. Priests.
  Take thou authority to preach the Word, and Minister the Sacraments in the Congregation where thou shalt be appointed. Whereby there is not only a Ministery conferred; but an authority to exercise that Ministery in the English Church, and a freedom, a legal and regular liberty to use it in the place to which he is called. And what sin or in convenience there may be in this, I cannot imagine.
• 4. Sect. 84 Yea, we shall find some foot-steps of such a thing, as a repeated Ordination, and a New Imposition of Hands in the Scripture practice too; which will prove it lawful, and in some cases convenient, as when a man is sent to a new place, and in a new particular Mission, though he were in the Ministery before. (It is not only my notion, but having communica­ted my thoughts, I have met with divers of the same judge­ment in this, and have since seen this Argument gathered up together in its full force by
  Humph. of Re-ord. Sect. 1. p. 6. & Sect. 4. p. 30.
  Master Humphreyes.) It is evident, That St. Paul was made a Minister and an A­postle by Christ himself, who saith,
  Act. 26.16, 17, 18.
  I have appeared to thee for this purpose, to make thee a Minister—And [Page 95]now I send thee to the Gentiles, to open their eyes—Here he was made a Minister, and had the office of Apostleship con­ferred upon him. This he stands upon,
  Gal. 1.1.
  Neither of man, nor by man, but by Jesus Christ— This he pleads as his undoubted call, when ever he is called in question. He is now then estated and invested in this office and function. Yet we may well conjecture, (and some think it cannot well be de­nied) that Paul was confirmed in this Ministery by the im­position of the hands of Ananias,
  Acts 9.17, 18, 20. with Acts 22.14, 15, 16.
  who put his hands on him—and he then was filled with the Holy Ghost, was baptized, and then went and preached. But, clearly, after this, we find him again
  Acts 13.3.
  Separated to the work of the Gospel by Prayer, and laying on of hands. With him, take his Companion Barnabas; it is clear, He was
  Act. 11.22
  sent forth before by the Church at Jerusalem; and it is not probable that He so famous a Minister should be in such a work without Ordination: yet He also with Paul in the forenamed place, hath a New Ordination. Separate me Barnabas and Saul (said the Holy Ghost) to the work whereunto I have called them. And they did so.
  Acts 13.1, 2, 3.
  When they (i.e. Niger and Lucius) had fasted and prayed, they laid their hands on them, and sent them away. They were called now to go up­on a special Mission, to preach the Gospel at Seleucia, Cyprus, Salamis, Paphos, &c. and are sent out by a New Ordination. And the same reason, shall justifie persons that submit to a Re­ordination now, which may be given of the Imposition of hands upon those two, who without controversie, were in the Evangelical Ministery, and their office before. There was indeed the special command of the Holy Ghost; true, but the Holy Ghost commands nothing to be done, but the thing it self hath its proper reason and end. To give them the Mini­sterial or Apostolical office it could not be; for that needed not, they had it already. But it was to send them out to a particular work, to give them a just repute in the places to which they were sent, to put a due valuation upon them, that they might be received as the Ministers of God, and Apo­stles of Christ. And upon the same reason, or the like, thus far infallibly may any conscientious Christian submit to the [Page 96]required Re-ordination, though he still stand upon his former Ministery as valid in foro Dei, and all his former Ministerial acts by vertue thereof good and valid too: yet, as the case stands with us in England, wherein the Laws suffer none to exercise their Ministery unless ordained, or at least allowed and licensed by the Bishop: and wherein many will not; some perhaps out of conscience cannot (suppose it their weakness) hold him for a true lawful Minister otherwise, at least not a Minister of the Church of England. He may, I say, consi­dering these cases, submit without sin, and for these reasons take this new Ordination, That he may have both a full and free authority from the Laws to exercise his Ministery: and that he may be received, as an allowed Preacher, a Minister legally sent, as to the exercise of his function, with freedom, ac­ception, and success with those among whom he is placed. Be­fore I leave this instance,
• 5. Sect. 85 What if I should adde this, which I look not upon as an idle conceit, but a rational conjecture of
  Humph. of Reord. Sect. 1. p. 7.
  the fore­named Author, gathered from this new Imposition of hands on Paul and Barnabas. That if a Minister have a call to a new place, or a new special work, though there be no ne­cessity of it, yet he lawfully may have a peculiar Ordination to that place and work; so far, that, if the hands of a Bishop and other grave persons were laid on him afresh, with fasting and prayers for Gods blessing on him in the same, no man can rationally judge, that in so doing, either the Bishop or himself should be involved in any guilt of sin.
• 6. Sect. 86 But as to our case, Those who are called to the Evange­lical Ministery (so they are, and so they judge themselves to be, who have been ordained by the Presbytery) are obliged, for a
  1 Cor. 9 16.
  Necessity is laid upon them to preach the Gospel, and to administer the Ordinances of Christ to that Congrega­tion, where they are placed; leave and liberty they may have to do this, if they will thus far submit to the Episcopal authority. Now, sure I am, that Woe is unto them, and they sin, if they do it not, where they may have leave and li­berty: but I am not sure, they should sin if they should sub­mit to this Episcopal Ordination superadded to their former, [Page 97]that they may have liberty and authority to exercise that Mi­nistery in this Church, which they have received: Nay, very probably, yea, I think, infallibly, they should not sin in this; but should sin certainly if they would rather lay down their Ministery, and forsake their work and standing, than submit to this Ordination required. Now then, whether it be fit to commit a certain sin, such as laying down our work, and the exercise of our Ministery, upon the doubt or fear of but a supposed sin, in taking a new Ordination, which is in this case but a Confirming of us in our Ministery: let any serious con­sidering man judge.
• 7. Sect. 87 Yea, it seems not only a thing lawful, that may be done, but according to our present state (if required) a duty, that must be done; upon the account of that Obedience which the Gospel requires
  Rom. 13.1. — 5.
  in every soul to the Higher Powers, and this For conscience sake; and to
  1 Pet. 2.13, 14, 15.
  every Ordinance or Politie among men (for that, I conceive, is the genuine meaning of that [...] in the Apostle.) Whether to the King as Supreme, or to other Governours commissioned by him, for the Lords sake, and because so is the Will of God, that we should do. For, if we yield to Episcopacy, (though not as a Divine, yet) as an Humane Constitution, not repugnant to the Word of God; and so much without doubt (whatsoever it be more) it is with us, being established here by the known Laws: When then they require this of men, I see not how it can be avoided, but, by vertue of those fore­mentioned texts, it ought to be done. Re-ordination being in this case (as is well noted) but a submission to that Order of Church Politie, which is by the established Laws (made by the Powers not only in being, but who have the undoubted Sove­raignty and legal authority) again set over us. In a word,
• 8. Sect. 88 Lastly. It is not of no consideration, that we in this case not only consider what is necessary to make a man a Mi­nister of Christ; but also what is requisite to qualifie a man for the legal maintenance which doth belong to such a Mi­nistery in England. And those who deny the necessity of a superadded Episcopal Ordination as to the former end; yet must see a necessity, at least the use and lawfulness of it to the [Page 98]latter. Upon such an account as this no man ever questioned the lawfulness of a double Marriage. When the late Usur­ping Powers required this to be Solemnized by the Civil Ma­gistrate, no man doubted, but those, who were either not sa­tisfied in Conscience of that way; or doubted the ill conse­quences, when the tide should turn, the Laws, as then stan­ding, not allowing the Legitimation of the issue of such a Mar­riage, might lawfully, (as many, and all wise men did) be Married again by the Minister according to the Laws in force, without incurring the guilt of any sin thereby. And why may not a second Ordination be admitted upon the consi­deration of the like consequences? One is no more a Sacra­ment than the other: One is as much an Ordinance of God as the other: The Name of God would be no more taken in vain in the one, than in the other: Nor can I, by any thing in Scripture, find there should be any sin in the one (as before it is stated) than in the other. Sure I am, the Holy Scripture no where condemneth it; hath no where given us a Law against a second Ordination; and
  Rom. 4.15
  where there is no Law, how there should be a Transgression, I say not, I, but a wiser than any of us, even St. Paul himself could never see.

He that is desired to see more of this Subject, let him consult that little book of Mr. Humphreys, professedly handling this question of Re-ordination: where he will see the lawfulness of it (at least as to the receiver) clearly, and fully proved; the main doubts and scruples about it, and difficulties in it untied, and solved: To that I referre the Reader. In the mean time, This may be enough to perswade, and shew that men lawfully may in this thing submit to, and comply with the Orders of our Superiours without sin.

Having now solved these doubts as to matter of Ordination, and Re-ordination, and answered all the most material Objecti­ons, I hope, I have laid such grounds as may satisfie all serious and considering men of the (if not necessity, yet) lawfulness of our submission to the Government, the Episcopacy established with us, notwithstanding these great exceptions taken against them, in matters referring to the first general head: wherein the Bishops are said to take too much upon themselves; and to chal­lenge a power which is not theirs.

CHAP. VI. The other general Exception against the Bishops, as hin­dering the particular Pastors from the exercise of their Office answered.

Sect 1 WHen I have satisfied the scruples that refer to the next general head, I think I have said enough as to the mat­ter of Government; and shall have sufficiently cleared this. That notwithstanding all this there may be a peaceable submis­sion, a due conformity lawfully yielded.

General Ex∣ception. 2 2. This Exception is. That the Bishops (as they are said to take too much upon themselves, so) will not suffer others to take their due, but hinder the undoubted Officers of Christ, the Pastors of particular Churches from the exercise of their office, particularly (as some have objected) that part of Government and Discipline, which they think they should, and do judge they are called, and have authority to administer: every par­ticular Pastor being bound to a personal ministration of all the Ordinances of Christ, to that particular Church committed to his charge. So it is objected.

Answ. 1 Sect. 2 To this the Answer is readily returned, in few words.

• 1. That the particular Pastors of the several Congregations are the undoubted Officers of Christ, there is none, that I know, among all those concerning whom the dispute now is, who doth in the least deny.
• 2. Answ. 2 For the main unquestionable parts of their Office, Sect. 3 they are so far from being hindered the exercise of them, that they are most expressely enjoyned to perform them. For the preach­ing of the Word, and Administration of the Sacraments, the two principal works of the Evangelical ministery, they are ex­pressely sent to do them; and have these given in charge to them in the very forme of their Ordination
  Form of Order. Prieste,
  Take thou au­thority to preach the Word of God, and to minister the holy Sacraments in the Congregation, where thou shalt be so ap­pointed. Here are the Keyes expressely given into their hands, [Page 100]and no small part of the power of the Keyes, viz. The Key of Doctrine, to preach the Word, which was never denied them; and the Key of Discipline too, thus far, as to open to Door, and let persons into the Church by Baptism, when the same au­thority is given them to administer the Sacraments, as to preach the Word. Yea, farther
• 3. Answ. 3 Sect. 4 Is not a great part of the power of binding and loosing put into their hands? Have they not this Commission given them (yea before they receive their particular Mission by the Bible put into their hands) at the very imposition of the Bish­ops, and other Presbyters hands? in these words
  Form. of Order. Priests.
  , Receive the holy Ghost, whose sins thou dost forgive, they are forgi­ven: and whose sins tho dost retaine, they are retained: And be thou a faithful dispenser of the Word of God, and of his holy Sacraments In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Ghost. Where, observe, Their Commission is given them, in the very same forme which
  John 20.22, 23.
  Christ himself used in commissionating his Apostles; which some have quar­relled at in the practice of our Church; as if it were an abuse of the Scripture, and assuming a power which Christ never gave to the Bishops,
  The Form u­sed, Receive the Holy Ghost.—vindicated.
  To give the Holy Ghost; nor is the Holy Ghost given to all on whom the Bishops so lay their hands. But indeed the Exception is groundless, nor may this Form with any reason be quarrelled at; for (that by the way I may here vindicate the innocency of the Church in this) know,
  • 1. Sect. 4 Neither doth our Church pretend, nor the Bishops as­sume a power of giving the Holy Ghost; as the Holy Ghost is taken to signifie the saving graces of the Spirit, whereby a man is regenerated, sanctified, or made holy, who was not so before: Or, as it signifies those [...], or special gifts of the Spirit, which were in the Apostles dayes frequently given, and poured out; accomplishing therein
    Joel 2.28. with Acts 2.1.—20.
    those Prophesies of old, concerning this large effusion of the Spirit that should be in the dayes of the Gospel: Or, indeed, as it signifies, Those inward endowments, gifts and abilities, which are requisite to qualifie a person, and make him fit to be ordained to such an Office; for these are indeed the gifts of God, and in a good measure supposed to be already in the person, who is therefore [Page 101]first examined, that the Bishop may in some measure be satisfi­ed, that he fath these abilities who comes to be ordained: It cannot therefore be rationally supposed, that the Church should pretend to give these at the Ordination.
  • 2. Sect. 5 Nor doth the Text necessarily speak of the Holy Ghost in that sense; for, though beyond all controversie Christ had power to give the Holy Ghost, (the Holy Ghost proceeding from him, as well as from the Father) who did promise
    Joh. 14 26. & 15.26.
    to send his Spirit, who, when sent, was to teach them all things; (i.e.) every way to qualifie them for, and enable them pro­portionably to the work in which they were to be imployed; yet he doth expresly tell them, that this effusion of the Holy Ghost upon them they were not to expect whil'st he was with them; nor to receive till after his Ascension.
    Joh. 16.7.
    If I go not away (saith he) [...] (this Spirit, who was to enlighten, teach, comfort, &c.) will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. And accordingly we find he did, when after his Ascension he sent this Spirit in
    Acts 2.3, 4.—
    fiery cloven tongues upon them. Yea, it seems to be evident, that Christ did not at this time (when he breathed on them, and said, Receive the Holy Ghost, &c.) indue them with those gifts, because after this, we find his command to them
    Luk. 24.49
    to stay at Jerusalem, until they should be indued with this power from on high. Nor need we say (as one
    Mart. ex Brent.
    doth) That the Spiuit was here given only thus far, as that they were lightly and in a small measure sprinkled with his grace, being afterwards more fully to be indued with his power: For, though it be indeed the work of Christ to give to those whom he calleth to the Pastoral Office, such gifts and sufficient endowments, as shall make them fit for, and in a good measure able to perform that charge to which they are called; yet in this Commission Christ doth not (as even the same Author confesseth) so make them presently Preachers of the Gospel, as immediately to send them forth to the work; but they are yet to stay till this power, and these abilities be given them from above; and therefore,
  • 3. Sect. 6 It may very probably (if not certainly) be supposed, that by the Holy Ghost there given, is meant, the Gift, or Au­thority of the Evangelical Ministry, whereby they were made [Page 102] Apostles, and Preachers to the world, for the collecting and gathering a Church to Christ, and for the feeding and govern­ing that Church being gathered: Preaching and proclaiming Remission of sins to the world, upon their sincere Repentance from dead works, and unfained Faith in Jesus Christ; and Retaining the sins, and preaching the certain condemnation of those who will not repent, nor
    2 Thess. 1, 8, 9.
    obey the Gospel. For these Ministrations are all The gifts of the Spirit, as the Apostle
    1 Cor. 12.4, 5. & per to­tum.
    evidently teacheth. There are (saith he) diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit: What gifts? It followeth, There are Differences of ministrations, &c. And if we consider the whole series of his discourse in that Chapter, concerning the several Members of the body having their distinct offices, we must ac­knowledge, that he speaks there not of Gifts as endowments, and inward qualifications of men, but chiefly as of their capa­cities and relations in the Church, the places and offices to which they are called, and the works to which they are sent: as, Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, &c. which Ministrations are all from the same Spirit, and called Gifts also.
    Rom. 12.6, 7.
    Having gifts differing—whether Prophecy,—or Ministery.—And Christ is said to have
    Ephes. 4.8, 11.
    given gifts, when he sent Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, Teachers. So that we may well conceive, that the thing which Christ doth, when he saith, Receive ye the Holy Ghost, is, but to give them their Com­mission, constituting them his Apostles and Messengers to the world; impowering them to remit or retain sins: To preach pardon and peace, and to absolve the penitent, or to cast out and cut off by excommunication the impenitent: In a word, he committeth to them the charge of the Gospel, or that ministration which is the
    2 Cor. 3.6.8. [...], & [...].
    ministration of the Spirit; con­stituting them Ministers of the New Testament, not of the letter, (as in the Law) but of the Spirit.
  • 4. And in no other sense doth our Church use this Form in her Ordinations: not pretending to give the inward either san­ctifying Graces of qualifying gifts of the holy Ghost; but in­deed giving a Commission to, and conferring upon the Person ordained the charge and Authority of the Evangelical Mini­stery, which is the ministration of the holy Ghost. And why [Page 103]she may not most conveniently make use of the same Scriptural expressions, when she conferreth the same Authority, as to the Preaching of the Doctrine of Faith and Repentance, which is as the Key of heaven committed to their ministery, which bind­eth, or looseth: Remitteth, or Retaineth sins: I have not yet seen any sufficient reason given. But

Sect. 8 Neither is this all the Authority which the particular Pa­stors are allowed with us: viz. To preach the Word, and by Doctrine to bind or loose: for, there is yet somwhat more com­mitted into their hands. Some part at least, yea a very great part of Discipline too, even in those very parts of Discipline which are said to be denied them. As

• 1. Publick Admo∣nition. Publick Admonition: I have sometimes wondered, Sect. 9 that this should be charged upon the Bishops, and laid as a great ex­ception to their Government, That the particular Pastors are hindered from the exercise of their Office, and in this particu­lar, The publick Admonition of particular offenders: When we may admonish, and ought to do so, not privately only, but pub­lickly also. Yea, before the Bishop layeth his hands on any, he requires their promise to do it, and they engage it. For so is the question;
  Form of Ord. Priests, Quest. 3.
  Will you be ready with all faithful diligence to banish and drive away all erroneous and strange Doctrines, contrary to the Word of God; And to use both publick and private Monitions and Exhortations, as well to the sick as to the whole, within your Cures, as need shall require. The Answer is, I will, the Lord being my helper.
• 2. Sect. 10 Absolution of the Penitent is another part of Discipline. And are we hindred from this? neither. For, we are not only in our own Publick Offices, after the Confession of sin,
  Absolution.
  to pro­nounce in general The Absolution to those who truly repent; but particularly also, in the Visitation of the Sick, upon their serious and credible profession of Repentance, in the name of Christ to Absolve that particular person. And though indeed we have no power (nor is it fit we should) to give Absolution to any who lieth under a Publick censure; (all reason requi­ring, that the same hand which bound, should also loose; Nor can it be jugged that a particular inferior Pastor hath authority to take off the censure past by the Authority of a publick Court) [Page 104]yet those who have known the exercise of Discipline among us, know also, that as the Sentence of Excommunication being passed in the Bishops Court, it is to be pronounced by the par­ticular Pastor in the Congregation: so by him also (the Bishop being first satisfied) the Penitent is to be again received in. So in the case of other Censures, though the Sentence passe in an higher Court, yet the particular Minister is to manage it, in the Publick Admonition of the Offender, and Absolving and restoring the Penitent.
• 3. Sect. 11 Suspension. Again, In case of Scandal, and notorious sin, we are not onely permitted, but every particular Pastor is ex­presly enjoyned to exercise that part of Discipline in Suspension from the Holy Table, the Sacrament of the Lords Supper. Con­sult the Rubrick of our Communion, ye will find this power put into the Ministers hands.
  Rub. 2. & 3. before the Communion.
  If any of these (sc. who would communicate,) be an open, notorious, evil liver, that the Congregation by him is offended, or have done any wrong to his neighbours, by word or deed: The Curate having knowledge thereof, shall call him, and advertise him in any wise not to pre­sume to come to the Lords Table, until he have openly declared himself to have truly repented, and amended his former naughty life; that the Congregation may be thereby satisfied, which afore was offended: And that he have recompensed the parties whom he hath done wrong unto; or at least declare himself in full pur­pose so to do, so soon as conveniently he may. But what, if not­withstanding this, the person will not be warned to keep away; may the Minister do no more? yes, he must not suffer him to come; for so is the very next Rubrick. The same order shall the Curate use with those, betwixt whom he perceiveth malice and hatred to reign, not suffering them to be partakers of the Lords Table, until he know them to be reconciled. And if one of the parties— be content to forgive, and to make amends— and the other will not be perswaded to a godly unity, The Minister OUGHT to admit the Penitent person to the holy Communion, but not him that is obstinate. Yet again consult the Canons and Constitutions, which were, and are to be observed in the Church of England; there ye find this expresly enjoined. NO Minister shall in ANY WISE admit to the receiving [Page 105]of the holy Communion ANY of his Cure or Flock, which be openly known to live in sin notorious without Repentance: NOR ANY, who have maliciously and openly contended with their Neighbours, until they be reconciled: NOR ANY Church-Wardens — who having taken their Oaths to present to their Ordinaries all such offences as they are particularly charged to enquire after — shall (notwithstanding their Oaths, the faithful discharge whereof, would be a chief means that publick sins — might be reformed and punished) wit­tingly, and willingly, and irreligiously, incur the crime of perju­ry, in neglecting or refusing to present such publick Enormi­ties. —

These are the express constitutions of our Church, that would every Pastor be careful to do in this case, as he is not on­ly permitted, but enjoined to do (so far are we from being hindered the exercise of our Office) there would be no ground for that grand charge of promiscuous admissions, and impure mixtures at our Communions. And if this part of Discipline be not put in due execution, it is not because the Pastors are not suffered to do it, but because they are not careful and diligent to do what they are not only suffered, but required to do. Let us then not lay the fault upon the Prelacy, or the Government, which must lie at our own doors. Once more,

Sect. 12 4. Can we say that we are hindered from the exercise of our undoubted Office in point of Discipline? when yet at the very time when we receive our Commission and Ordination, we are required, and do promise and engage our selves to do it; for thus is the Question put:

Will you give your faithful diligence alwayes to minister the Doctrine and Sacraments, and Discipline of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded, and as this Realm hath received the same, according to the Commandments of God, so that you teach the people committed to your charge, with all diligence to keep and observe the same? The Answer is, I will do so by the help of the Lord.

Sect. 13 Now then let but a serious considering man look what is re­quired of every particular Minister in his peculiar charge, even by the Constitutions of this Church, as established under Epis­copacy; [Page 106]and judge whether it can with any shadow of reason be said that the particular Pastors are hindered from the exercise of their undoubted Office. Let but every Minister in his place seriously and faithfully set himself to perform those several du­ties and offices, which he is not only permitted, but required to do, and he shall have no reason to complain for want of work. If any particular person have been hindered from the actual exercising of any of these, by any particular person or Court, (suppose it not for any default in himself, yet) it is irrational to make a personal fault to be an irregularity in the Government and Constitution: Such miscarriages are not to be imputed to the Church, or the Prelacy, when the contrary is manifestly required in the Publick Forms, Rubricks and Canons. This Exception then is not wholly just, That the particular Pastors are hindered from the exercise of their Office; for in a very great measure, and the most and chief parts we see the con­trary.

Sect. 14 4. Excommunica­tion, in whose hands. For the power of Excommunication, this is indeed denied them; nor can I find that in any Age, either in the Jewish or Christian Church, any single Minister of a particular Congre­gation challenged it, or that ever any Church allowed it. To omit the practice of the Jewish Church, where the learned know, that a particular Priest or Levite never had that pow­er; [...] but even their Niddui, the least and lowest of their Ex­communications, [...] was passed in a Court (though a lower and more private one) but their greater Excommunications, both their Cherem, or Anathema, and especially their Shamma­tha (which was called Excommunicatio in secreto nominis Te­tragrammati, the Form whereof we find recorded byDrus. de Trib [...]ect. lib. 3. cap. 11 Drusius) were passed no where, but in the publick Courts, and Ecclesiastical Consistories, in the face of the whole Church. The first that we read of in practice in the Christian Church, is this Excommunication of the1 Cor 53, 4.5. incestuous Corinthian: This now was not the Act of one single Minister in Corinth, but of the Apostle himself first [...] judging and sentencing, (though absent) and then charging the Church (when [...]. gathered together too) to see it executed. Another we read of, is that of1 Tim. 1.20 Hymeneus and Alexander; this an A­postolical [Page 107]Act also, Whom I (St. Paul himself) have delive­red unto Satan. And I dare challenge all the contrary mind­ed to shew me any Church well regulated and constituted, where ever this was intrusted in the hands only of the Minister of a particular Congregation. Sure I am, had there been any such, we should have heard something of it in these dayes of Contention: But in all those varieties of Forms and wayes of Government pleaded for, none yet pleaded for this, but would have it in other hands. The Separatists, and with them, those of the Independent, and Congregational way, who are for a Democratical Government in the Church, place the Power of the Keyes, and this in particular, in the Collective Body of the Congregation together; the Pastor having but his single Vote, and perhaps pronouncing the sentence as they decree. And in the Presbyterial way, it is as little allowed to the Parochial Pastor; for though he with his particular Elder­ship be allowed the exercise of some lower censures, yet this of Excommunication is solely referred to the Classical Assembly: And if our Brethren account it there fit to deny this power to the particular Pastor, and fix it in the Classis: Why it may not now under Episcopacy be also denied to the Paroshial Pa­stor, and reserved to the Bishops Consistory, I see not: That the same thing should be no fault in the Presbyterian way, and a great fault in the Episcopal, seems somewhat strange; we have therefore reason to judge, that this particular is no part of that undoubted Office, which our Brethren say, The particular Pastors are denied the exercise of; when in their own way they do not allow it him.

4.Sect. [...]. But suppose there were many parts of the particular Pa­stors Office, which we were hindered to exercise, what must we conclude? Is it therefore not lawful for us to submit? Or, are we bound to exercise all that we judge to belong to our Office, whether we may be suffered or no? The truth is, where we have liberty, we are obliged; but where we are powerfully restrain­ed, we are not. Our Ministry it self we cannot publickly ex­ercise without leave and license from the Magistrate in his own Dominions, and from those Governours who are set over us in his Church. And that we may sit down in peace, when hin­dred [Page 108]from the whole: We may also; when hindred but in part, and may yet have liberty to perform the principal parts of our work; To preach the Word, and Administer the Holy Sacraments. If the Laws and Powers, under which we live, deny us liberty to exercise what we are called to; if causlesly, it is their sin, and they alone must answer it: but there can be no sin in our submission, and forbearance, when we cannot help it. Infallibly, if we are diligent, sedulous, and faith­ful in doing all that we can, and that we have liberty to do: that we do no more, will not be imputed, as a fault, to us, by any rational man, nor will it be by the Righteous God. Yea, we shall be very much eased of a very Great Charge, and much of that account will be taken off from us, which would, and must have been required of us, if all these things also should be laid upon our shoulders. But certainly the most gracious God will never make us accountable for that which we had not in charge. And seriously, I know not any Minister, who faith­fully desires the discharge of his duty; but he would be willing, very willing to be confined to his Study, and the Pulpit (and could find work enough there) if he might with safety and a good conscience be excused from the performance of all other charges and duties.

CHAP. VII. The Conclusion of this Part.
From the foregoing Considerations inferring the law­fulness, yea and duty of an humble obedience to the established episcopacy: and pleading for it both for Peace and Conscience sake.

Sect. 2 WE are now also come to the close of this Argument. I have given some account of all the most material Exceptions taken to the Ecclesiastical Government established in this Church, and, I think, plainly (I hope to the satisfa­ction [Page 109]of all sober minded) have solved all those difficulties, and doubts, that might seem to lie in the way, to hinder a Conscientious Obedience to that Church-Politie, which by the express Laws of the Land we are obliged to conform unto. The exceptions, I confess, are many of them cited in the words of those Reverend Brethren of the Presbyterian per­swasion: yet give me leave here solemnly and seriously to pro­fess, that in so doing, I had no design in the least to enter a quarrel with them, nor to mis-represent their ends; nor, do I here examine how far they may be a Motive to Petition for an alteration or Regulation of the establishment, to those in whose hands only such a power lies. But the exceptions be­ing the same which were taken of old; and all unsatisfied men do make use of these, and the others here spoken to, (and none else that I know) as Arguments to keep off themselves and others from obeying, and conforming to the Laws in be­ing, perswading themselves upon these very grounds, they should sin in so doing; (and while men are setled in those perswasions, there can be no hopes of peace, but bitter ani­mosities, and contendings, if not seditions and rebellions, while the Laws positively require obedience, and punish dis­obedience, and yet men think they should sin if they should obey) I could do no less, (if I did any thing to satisfie con­science in these scruples) than to shew, that, if His Maje­sty, and our undoubted Governours under Him, should not yet see reason to alter the establishment, we are all bound to obey and conform; and that notwithstanding any thing in these exceptions, we lawfully may do so, as far as in our places the Laws and Constitutions require that we should.

Sect. 2 And now what remains, but that I passionately intreat for Peace and Obedience? We have been divided, and we have contended long enough. O let the Peace of the Gospel be precious in our eyes, and let us by this evidence that we in­deed obey the Gospel of Peace: The way to Peace is not to consider what our Rulers should do, or how far they should yield to us, but what we should do our selves; if they mistake, their errors in Government will not excuse the sin of our dis­obedience. Let us do our parts, and if we have not the wish­ed [Page 110]for Peace, the fault will not lie at our Doors: yea, let us do our parts, and we shall have Peace. Would we be consci­entious in our obedience, the Powers of Hell cannot be able to divide and ruine us. The wounds of the Church have been too long open, This is all that we can do to close them. O let the tears of the Mother, have some effect upon, and draw some pity from the hearts of her children; if we unite not, she must expire. Unity and Peace is the best fence to the Vineyard of God, let us obtain, and maintain this, then shall neither the Wild Boare of the Forest be able to lay her waste; nor the subtile Foxes within pluck off her grapes, or destroy the Vine. It is within reach, we may have it if we will our selves: and that only by our obedience and ready submission to the Publick establishment. Never look for Peace in this, nay, not in any Church, if the members may refuse to obey, while ever they see any thing which they judge fit to be altered in the Government. But though something there may deserve an alteration, yet if it be not altered (because those, to whom that power belongs (and they only are judges) see it not convenient, because the benefit of alteration possibly may not countervail the mischief of a change) and lawful to be obeyed, The Peace of the Church must oblige us to obedi­ence. Such is our case at present in reference to the establish­ed Episcopacy; it is that only Government which our Laws acknowledge, that which they oblige us to conform to, and wherein it hath been cleared there is nothing but what a con­scientious Christian may lawfully submit to: O then for the Lord-sake, for the Churches, for Peace, for Conscience sake let us obey.

Let me, for a close of this Chapter, and Argument, but propound these four things to be seriously weighed and consi­dered.

• 1. Sect. 3 If the Episcopacy established be indeed so contrary to the Word of God, and the Primitive pattern (as is sugge­sted, and some pretend) that it is altogether unlawful to sub­mit to it, or exercise our Ministery under it, according to the Laws thereof: it cannot be avoided, but that we must charge the whole Ministery of England, that continued in their pub­lick [Page 111]stations, and exercised their Ministery according to the publick Rules of this Church, ever since the Reformation, till these late confusions, to have lived in manifest sin; and to have been guilty of a sinful compliance with corrupt men a­gainst the interest of Jesus Christ. And what an uncharitable and unchristian judgement would this be? What! all those famous Champions; some learned Writers by their Pen main­taining the Truth of the Protestant and Evangelical cause a­gainst the Romish adversary: Many Holy Confessors, Glori­ous Martyrs, who were not afraid to lay down their lives at the Stake, and by their Constancy shewed their Courage, who for the Testimony of Jesus
  Rev. 12 11.
  loved not their lives to the Death: Some of these, were Bishops themselves: Others not only submitting to, but acting in this Government; All exercising their Ministery by vertue of their Call, by these hands: And yet (it will be a strange Censure) all guilty of manifest sin in their very Calling; in those Actings, Ministery, and Preaching, which yet God was pleased to honour with the glorious success of the happy conversion of so many souls to God? Hath this been the sad fate of Poor England, that a­mong all the Reformed Churches, she only hath never had (till of late) any Publick Ministery, but such as have been guilty of manifest sin, in their very Calling, and whole exercise of their Ministery? God forbid.
• 2. Sect. 4 Upon the same ground (if those principles be good) it must follow also, That all those Christians, which attended on that Ministery, and did communicate in the worship establish­ed (howsoever, otherwise, they made it their care, to serve God in righteousness and holiness all their dayes) must be con­cluded to live in manifest sin, even in their hearing, and atten­ding upon, and communicating with this Ministery, which was only exercised according to the Laws of this Government; and that none were pure, or worshipped God aright, but such as drew off from our Church, and separated themselves from our Communion. And now, whether in this we shall judge righ­teous judgement; I shall appeal to all the sober spirits, and godly-wise in the Land.
• 3. Sect. 5 If upon the fore named causes, men shall still account it [Page 112]unlawful, and therefore refuse to conform to the Government, and to obey the Laws established; What a wide door must there needs be open to an unavoidable and perpetual Schism in this poor Church? Our Governours judging that they are bound (as indeed they are) to preserve the honour of the establish­ment, and the Laws in their vigour; and too many thinking that they are bound (when yet indeed they are not) to oppose, or withdraw, or suffer, rather than obey? And what a bane this will infallibly be to Piety as well as Peace, we need not search very deep, to Devine; too sad experience, will too soon be a manifest conviction.
• 4. Sect. 6 And, what is not of the least or lowest consideration: How many good, and pious, and tender Christians, through this mistake, will be unavoidably exposed to sufferings, and miseries, when they have sucked in, and are possessed with these dividing principles, it is no difficult matter to foresee: when the Laws are not Bruta Fulmina, but have an armed power to force obedience, and to punish the disobedient. And howsoever therefore some may resolve willingly so to suf­fer, and may triumph and rejoice in their sufferings; yet He that would have real ground of joy, had need first look well to the cause of those sufferings.
  1 Pet. 4.14, 16.
  If indeed ye suffer for Righteousness sake, happy are ye, The Spirit of Glory and of God resteth upon you; and even these will be a Crown of Glory, and a Diadem of Beauty upon your heads. But really, if your sufferings be, only for not obeying that just Authority, that is set over you; and in such things too, wherein (for a­ny thing in the nature of themselves) we might lawfully con­form, without sin; whatsoever your pretence, or fancy may be, you will never be able to give any good account of, or to answer your very sufferings to God, or Men. Not to God, who called you not to them, but commands you to obey: Not to the King, nor your Governours, who delight not in punish­ing; but would rejoyce in the Peace, and Prosperity of the Church, and of every Subject; Not to your Relations, nor your Posterity, who depend upon you, suffer in you, and may be exposed to misery, reproach, and want, through your temerity and folly. Really, in this cause, I fear, ye will not [Page 113]bear the character of those Christians, (of whom
  Tertul. ad Scapul. O miseri siqui­dem mortem vultis, praecipi­tiorum & la­queorum abun­di habetis.
  Tertullian speaks) who in the cause of Christ and Christianity boldly appeared, yea rán in troops to the Heathen Judicatories; so many, that it made one of their Persecutors cry out to them, O wretches, if ye desire death so much, have ye not halters, and precipices enough at hand? as if their Persecutors were even weary in tormenting. I fear, I say, your sufferings will not bear this character, for the cause is not the same. But rather of those, of whom Clemens Alexandrinus makes mention,
  Antonin. Ar­rian. apud Ter­tul. ibid. Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 4. [...].
  and blameth, who, he saith, had nothing of Christians but the name: who were [...], certain Hereticks, who were [...], did voluntarily offer them­selves, or leap into death: They were indeed publickly punish­ed; but they brought death upon themselves; They neither did bear the character of Martyrs; nor did their death deserve the name of Martyrdom. Now what comfort, what peace, what rejoycing can men expect in sufferings upon such accounts as these? Oh let us consider, whether any of these Pleas will bear us out, or be a sufficient excuse for our Disobedience, at that Great day of Reckoning, when the secrets of our hearts shall be laid open at that dreadful Tribunal of Jesus Christ. We may here please our selves in our oppositions, and appearan­ces of zeal, but indeed Pseudonymous; and have a kind of glory­ing in our sufferings: But when Christ shall come to charge upon us the Contempt of an
  Rom. 13.2.
  Ordinance of God, in disobeying those Laws, to which we were obliged, and might have sub­mitted without sin; judge ye, how far it will stand you in stead, to pretend sin in the Governors, or some irregularity in the Government, as to the justification of Schism, or excuse of Disobedience, or the alleviating of those everlasting punish­ments which are due from the most Righteous God to those who despise his Laws, and resist his Ordinances.

Sect. 7 Thus, Reader, hast thou also this matter of contention con­cerning the Government of the Church, the established Episco­pacy, examined and discussed. If thou expectedst elegance of stile, flowers of Eloquence, or ornaments of Learning, I confess, thy expectation is frustrated, they are things to which I dare not pretend: But I hope it will not be accounted arro­gance [Page 114]if I say, thou mayst here have met with soundness of Doctrine, and evidence of Truth, and the cordial desires of an honest Heart for the peace of the Church, which we may have, if we will but do our parts in all that lawfully we may, not­withstanding any thing that yet hath been objected, in reference to this head, The matter of Ecclesiastical Government. Let it be our care to approve our selves unto God, as such who bear not Nomen Christianum in contumeliam Christi; but as such, whoPhil. 2.15. as the Sons of God, by an holy, harmless, undefiled, humble and peaceable conversation in all things, sincerely en­deavour toTit. 2.10. adorn the Gospel of Christ, which we profess: That1 Pet. 2.12, 13, 15. those who seek occasion to reproach us as evil-doers, may yet by the good works which they shall behold in us, be forced to glorifie God in the day of visitation: while we conscienti­ously submit our selves to every Polity among men, legally esta­blished both in Church and State: This being the will of God, that with well-doing we put to silence the ignorance of foolish men. In a word, would we live, and indeed see 1 Pet. 3.10, 11. good days, let us be sure to refrain our tongues from evil, and our lips that they speak no guile: Let us eschew evil, and do good; let us seek peace and pursue it.

CHAP. I. The Differences about the Liturgy noted, and some Scandals observed to be given by the non use thereof.

Sect. 1 THE World is witnesse, what a Great Controversie is raised about the Li­turgy; and the Rites and Ceremonies there enjoyned to be used. I need not report what a matter of Contention there hath been successively in the Reigns of the three last Princes, who have sate upon the English Throne, and is still continued, and agitated, I think, with more exasperation and bitternesse [Page 98]now: When yet the happy return of His present Majesty, and the Blessings upon us by his restauration should have pre­vailed more with us to study Peace and Love.

Sect. 2 When through the wonderful blessing, and adorable provi­dence of God, His Sacred Majesty was (after the barbarous Murther of His Royal Father; and His own violent extrusion from the Throne of his Ancestors; and a bitter exilement in a strange land) at length restored in Peace, and by His return the Ancient Laws also restored to their vigor, which had been so long, and so violently interrupted: Thousands of con­scientious loyal hearts passionately called to their Ministers for the use again of the established Liturgy in the publick worship of God. Many able, faithful, and conscientious Ministers, who thought it their duty, and did therefore still use it, during all these late times of Confusion; wherein they despised the hazard of their Liberty, Estates, and Means of subsistence, in comparison of their obedience to the standing Laws; were now revived, and filled with joy, that with boldnesse and con­fidence they might now use that, which before they onely could do in private. Many others, who, during those violent Usurpations in the Land, and the Sword being over us, thought it a Lawful and Christian prudence so far to give way to the furies of men, as to forbear the use of that particular form; rather then forsake their station in the Church, and lay by the use and exercise of their Ministry in their several Congregati­ons: Now, those fears being over, and there being no plea of any restraint from the Powers above us; but a full liberty open to obey the Antient Laws, which were, and are still, in force; and these Laws laying a strict charge and injunction upon all Ministers; They were convinced of an Obligation, and a duty incumbent on them to conform to those Laws in retur­ning to the use of the Liturgy, and Form of Worship prescri­bed: being Conscious that they could not be acquitted of sin before God, if they despised those Laws, where they saw no material evil in the works required. This they judged to be both lawful and expedient for them: not onely fit, but their duty to do.

Sect. 3 But Hine illae Lachrymae. While some conscientiously conform to the Laws in being, in the use of the Liturgy, and [Page 99]enjoyned Rites of the Church of England; seeing nothing in either, but what, in their judgement, they may lawfully do; and therefore, being commanded, thinks they are bound in Conscience to do: Others (I verily believe) both Learned, and Conscientious, peaceable men, out of a tendernesse of Conscience, afraid to sin against God in any thing, especially in matters of publick worship, wherein we are to draw so near to God; seeing not that evidence, and judging some things evil, at least to be imposed, in these things: dare not yet comply in that use, being not convinced of the lawful­nesse, are affraid least they should sin in the doing of it, in the mean time not condemning others for their practice, but only taking, and desiring a liberty for themselves for forbea­rance, and between such as these, no man doubteth, but there may be an happy composure, and accommodation at least, and we may live in peace.

Sect. 4 But from this different practice, how do abundance of o­thers take occasion to make parties, and foment divisions in the Church? It is not unknown, that there are multitudes of discontented minds of all perswasions, and such as make Religion only a matter of Design and Policy, being zealous only so far, and in such things as are pleasing to a party, and may make them eminent in a side which they have espoused. It is a bitter affliction to my Soul to see some, who have no way to commend their zeal for the Church, than by re­proaching and vilifying of others, who are not in all things of their mind, charging Schisme, Heresie, Faction, and Rebel­lion, not only upon those who are really guilty, but upon all, who in the least circumstance come not up fully to the esta­blished Rule, though in other things they are as Peaceable, Humble, Faithful, Loyal, as any in the Church. On the o­ther side, my Soul cannot but mourn in secret, and mine eyes run over with tears, to see, how many, for the particular miscarriages of some persons, have thought it no sin to lay loads of reproaches upon the Church it self, and its whole constitution: So that now, if any do (as they are bound) walk according to the Laws of the Church; submit to the Rites; use the Publick Forms: Howsoever they are (even their Adversaries being Judges) otherwise, Able and Learned, [Page 100]Judicious and Pious, Faithful and Painful in their Ministery, Constant and Eminent in the Pulpit, unblameable and exem­plary in their lives; yet what are the titles of honour, that the foul mouths of discontented men cast upon them? even, for this single use of a Common Prayer, and conforming in (in their judgement) an innocent Ceremony, They are, Baals Priests, Idol-shepheards, Dumb dogs, Time-servers; at the best, Having but a Form of Godlinesse, but denying the power thereof; themselves Limbs of Antichrise, and their very habits, Gar­ments of the Whore. Now for such Spirits, as these do disco­ver themselves to be, I know not how the Church should ob­tain, nor why she should trouble her self to seek their peace. These being near allyed to those Horsemen (mentioned in theRev. 9.17. Apocalypse) out of whose mouth proceeded nothing, but Fire, and Smoke, and Brimstone, The Church cannot well deal otherwise with them, then the Apostle would have suchTit. 1.10.11. unruly and vain Talkers, and Deceivers in his time dealt with; Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things, which they ought not, for filthy lucres sake.

Sect. 5 But for those men who are of a better temper (as, I am confident, thousands there are, who cannot be chargeable with, nor will any Christian Charity be suspected guilty of these Crimes) who are yet unsatisfied as to the lawfulnesse of Conformity, and therefore yield it not themselves, nor ad­vise to it, but petition it may not be imposed; yet condemn not those that do, yea, were they convinced, they should not fin in so doing, they would conform themselves. Here me thinks it should be no difficult matter to perswade a Compli­ance, and to shew that it may be yielded without sin; and such spirits should be willing to receive satisfaction, and take no pleasure in disputing away their Peace.

Sect. 6 We are not here to dispute the Cause of the Liturgy, as to every thing in it; nor to inquire whether it may be mended, but for the present grant it may, and expedient that it should, and we know it is under Consideration; nor to debate, whe­ther it be lawful for the Church, or her Governours to impose it upon all her members. But, she judging this the best way to preserve her Peace; to keep out her Enemies; and to keep her own Members in unity and order, viz. to require of all, [Page 101]a due Conformity to her Constitutions in the use of this pre­scribed Liturgy, and the practice of such and such Rites; All that we now have to do, is to examine, (not Her reasons of imposing, but) whether, and how far we may, or ought to o­bey the imposition, whether we may lawfully, or ought to use the publick Forms, and suffer our selves to be tyed up to them.

Sect. 7 And here, though indeed the dispute of these things make a great norse in the world, and the distance through the heats of men, and designs of some, is exceeding wide: Yet let us well weigh the nature of the things in dispute, we shall see there is nothing in them of such moment, as will countervail the losse of our Peace; there is nothing in them of so dire an aspect, as to affright a considering Christian from comming near them; nor, when the heat of Contention is abated, and the Animosities of sides laid down, and men soberly consider, not what this side requireth, or the other denieth, but, what is fit for each in our places to do, will the differences be so wide, as now they appear: but much more may be done in obedience to the Laws, and pursuance of Peace, then is yet by some thought good to be yielded.

Sect. 8 For many, that yet dissent, and forbear the use of the pre­scribed Liturgy, I dare be their Compurgatour, that they ab­hor the principles of Faction, and Disobedience. Yet,Scandal given by then [...] the [...]. let me desire them seriously to enquire whether by their non-use, and forbearance of this, they have not given too much occasion of offence, and a various Scandal.

• 1. Sect. 9 To the Church; In bringing an evil report upon her Discipline, and Constitutions; upon her Worship,
  Scandal [...]. To the Church.
  and Publick Offices. When men who are either strangers to her Laws and Practice, or are not well able to judge of the Reasons of them, come to understand what she requireth of all Mini­sters, and in all publick Assemblies; that These are her Rites; These the Publick Prayers; and yet that such and such Faith­ful and Godly men use them not, dare not use them for fear of sin: What will they judge? but surely such men will obey, were the things lawful to be obeyed: or surely this Church bindeth her Members to very hard conditions, and layeth up­on them very grievous burthens, when such Learned [Page 102]and Conscientious men are not able to bear them.
• To them with­out.
  2. Scandal 2 Sect. 10 To them without, to keep them from entring. Really it cannot well be imagined, what a stumbling block before these is the Non-Conformity, to the legally established practises, as some one or more known or reputed godly Ministers. We cannot imagin that strangers, who other­wise might be willing to embrace the faith which we pro­fess, and to enter Communion with us, should now so rea­dily do it; when they must needs be affrighted by our Di­visions: either concluding from our different practises, that we are of different Religions, and so know not which to chuse, judging of us, that we serve not one Christ, when we cannot agree in one worship; or concluding the Laws and conditions of our Communion to be much too hard and rigid for them to submit to, when such eminent per­sons among our selves will not, and plead they cannot conform to them.
• 3. Scandal 3 Sect. 11 To many tender and religions hearts within, to affright them from obeying.
  To the weak and tender hearts within the Church.
  Many that truly fear God, and the desire of whose souls is to serve him in sincerity, and to attend upon his Ordinances and Worship daily: Yet when they see Ministers (whom they highly reverence for their parts, and piety, and judge some of the most able and conscientious in the land) to deny this form of Worship, and rather lay down their Ministery, then submit to these Rites and Liturgie, they are under a sad temptation to think, that surely some grievous corruption sticks to our worship; some strange prophanation is in our use of these Ordinances; and then to judge it unlawful to come to our Assemblies, or hear that Minister who reads the Common-prayer, or doth any thing else, which they see by others accounted unlawful. And thus they are in dan­ger to lose their share in those precious blessings which they might receive from God, by his Word and Sacra­ments; where they might
  Isa. 66.11.
  suck and be satisfied, and indeed find the breasts of true consolation, and milk out, and be delight­ed with the abundance of the Churches glory.
• 4. Scandal 4 Sect. 12
  To the prophane.
  To the prophane, and ungodly. When such men as are [Page 103]noted eminent, deny obedience to authority; They will be apt to Despise Dominion, and speak evill of Dignities: if sober men refuse the practice of the sacred Rites; Those will blas­pheme them. The Kneeling, Holy and Humble Adorations, and solemn singing, shall be in the Prophane mouths, Ducking, and Cringing, and Fidling, and Fooling. Yea, if they, who bear the name of holy learned men do disobey the Church in one thing; Those will think they may do it in another: if These may disobey her constitutions; Those will think they may despise her Discipline, Admonition, and Censures, and be as carelesse in the ordering of their lives, as they see others in the matters of Order and worship. And when the Church shall take account of these prophane persons, for their neg­lect, and carelesse contempt of the Ordinances of God, and their constant absence from those sacred services, and publick Religious duties, (though they care for neither, and prefer their worldly profits, or loose carnal pleasures before them, yet) from hence they have a word and plea put into their mouths; The Worship is corrupt, your service abominable, good Christians cannot come to it; Take away your Forms, or mend your Liturgy, and we will attend.
• 5. Scandal 5 To Religion it self: And the serious practice of Piety. Sect. 13
  To Religion and Piety.
  When those who have a name of eminency for the strictest Christians, and the holiest men, shall yet walk in wayes that have an appearance of Schisme and Disobedience; How rea­dy are prophane men to impute those crimes to Piety it self? And then no man shall sincerely set himself to promote the power of Godlinesse, to rebuke open sins or enormities; ex­horting to, and being himself a pattern of a strict and holy life; but he shall be in their mouths a Precisian, Factious, Schismatick, and what not? when, really, Religion and Piety is the mother of no such brood; but the personal miscarria­ges and indiscretions of some (otherwise pious,) men have ad­ministred too much occasion of the Scandal.
• Scandal 6 Sect. 14
  To the Schisma­tick, and Sepa­ratist.
  6. To the proper Schismatick and Separatist; Justifying and confirming them in their separations. When many of their principal arguments, against our Church and Worship, have been taken from the practice and writings of some non-con­forming Brethren at home. I confesse they have not been [Page 104]sufficient to prove their Conclusion, That therefore they must separate from our Communion, or, therefore they may not com­municate in our Church-assemblies, which even the sober non­conformists have often clearly refuted: yet it is too evident, that the premises, some of them at least, have been taken from themselves, such as concerning the nature of a parti­cular visible Church, its Constitution, Officers, extent of Power, &c. and Corruptions in Discipline, Worship, &c. while the one pleads against Episcopacy, and the power of Bishops over a Province, or Diocess; That there was no o­ther particular Church in the Scripture-times of larger ex­tent, then one single Congregation, no such thing as a Dioce­san, yea, or a National Church; no higher Officer than the particular Pastor of that Congregation; no degree in the Evangelical Ministry; no subordination of one Pastor to ano­ther, &c. Have not the other justified, or laboured to justifie their separation, by these very arguments end eavouring to prove that we have no true Churches? yea, and have not the Independents made the same plea against the Presbyterial way too, in their Classical, and Provincial Government? When the one pleaded the Corruptions in the worship prescribed, Innovations in the Rites established; Have not the other made use of the same Plea, making the same corruptions a ground for their forsaking of our Communion? These things are too too evident.
• 7. Scandal 7 Sect. 15
  To the King and Nation.
  Lastly, To the King and Nation, In bringing, or at least being an occasion of an evil report upon both; for, when such Laws are established, such things required, and yet so many, so noted, so eminent persons refuse to yield obedience; and, it may be, others of more unquiet and turbulent Spirits, will be too ready to raise Commotions about them: The King cannot in Justice and Honour, but maintain his Laws; it cannot be expected, but the Penalty of the Laws will be in some measure executed upon the Disobedient; now, especi­ally if many should disobey, and consequently suffer; what a noise will this make in the world? and according to the diffe­rent judgements, and humours of men that hear it, how will it bring a reproach upon both? In some mens accompts, The King shall be a Tyrant, not a Father to the Church; who [Page 105]makes such Laws, which his consciencious Subjects cannot obey, for fear of sin against God, and are yet punished for disobedience, even persecuted for Conscience sake. Among others, when they see so many disobey, and be so unquiet un­der the Laws: The whole Nation shall lie under the reproach of a troublesome, disquiet, discontented, factious people, de­lighting still in Sedition and Rebellion; as if they would in­deed make good that By-word, that the King of England hath such a people to rule, as he may fitly be termed Rex Diabelo­rum. Pudet haec opprobria nobis.

Sect. 16 Let no man think me so voyd of all sentiments of Piety and Charity, as to judge these Brethren indeed guilty of all these scandals, as by them willingly given, or justly and necessarily drawn from their practices: for I seriously professe, my only design is to intreat my Brethren duely to consider, whether some occasions of stumbling be not by their practices laid in the way of such, who are thus scandalized: and to consider what some corrupt minds; or, well-meaning, but weak men may be too apt to draw from thence: and to beseech them to shew so much love to, and zeal for the honour of their King and Country; of this Church and State; so much tenderness for the interest of Religion, Piety, Unity, and Peace, as to put forth themselves to the utmost to promote all these: Not so much to consider how to maintain, or uphold the reputation of a party or cause; but how far they may go, what they may without sin do in the use of those things, which the Laws command: That as much as in us lyeth, we may by no mi­stake, miscarriage, or indiscretion of ours be, in the least, an offence, nor give any occasion of offence to any; to friend or foe; to the righteous or ungodly; to Papist or Protestant; to weak or strong; to those within or without the Church,1 Cor. 10.32, 33. Nei­ther to Jew nor Greek, nor to the Church of God: Cordially seek­ing, not our own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved.

CHAP. II. Some General, undoubted Maximes, concerning the Obligations of Hu­mane Laws, applied to the particular Case of the Liturgy, &c.

Sect. 1 AS for the use of the Liturgy, to which the Lawes of this Church and state, of unquestionable Authority, do undoubtedly bind us; let us consider, whether there be any thing in it, which a conscientious christian, who desires faithfully to discharge his duty to God and the Church, may not submit, and conform to. And if it may lawfully be used, I shall be confident, that no rational man, or peaceably minded Christian will say, that the adding of a command to that which was before lawfull, should now make it unlawfull: or that we should sin in doing a thing, when commanded, which we might do without sin, if not commanded. And if we may do this without sin, I shall pre­sume, there is that zeal, in all that love the Church, to its peace, that will engage them to do it, if upon no other ac­count, yet for Peace sake.

Sect. 2 We shall here (to prepare the way) consider how far there is a perfect agreement among all sober men of both perswa­sions, in reference to the Obligation of Lawes upon conscience, and applying these to the particular case of the Liturgy, we shall see how really little the matter of difference is, and la­bour to remove that, that there may bee a perfect conformity so far as the Lawes oblige.

Sect. 3 1. I take this as an unquestionable truth granted and plea­ded [Page 107]by all sides. That our First, Great and Principal Obligati­on is to Law, and Will of God: So that whatsoever we are to do in this or any others case, must not be repugnant to this, viz. it must be in it self lawful, Not evil, or sinful in the mat­ter of it, for we are ingaged to God in an higher Obligation than we can be to any Laws of men whatsoever. And in case of a thing materially evil, this must be our rule:Acts 5.29. That we obey God rather then men. We must not be scrupulous to re­fuse an active obedience to the Laws of men (who have no power but by Commission from, and subordination to God) when in obeying them, we should manifestly sin against the e­ternal God; who is the onely Jam. 4.12. Supreme Law-giver, and who is able to save and to destroy Mat. 10.28. both soul and body. In this case those two Apostles, Peter and John, Act. 4.19. appealing to the Consciences of their very Persecutors.

Sect. 4 2. I take it also, as undoubted on all hands, that the things which we do, must not only be lawful in themselves, but expe­dient also in reference to the several circumstances, and accidents that may occurre; for many things may be in themselves law­ful to be done, there being no evil in the matter of them, which yet upon the several emergencies, and from the circum­stances of Time, Place, Persons, Scandal, he may neither be convenient, nor expedient, but the contrary; and so during these emergencies, they become, at least accidentally, for those persons at such times unlawfully to be done; as it is evident in the case of meats offered to Idols. 1 Cor. 10.25.31. Whatsoever was sold in the Shambles, a man might buy, and eat, though it was proba­ble some of it had been offered to Idols, it yet was nothing to him, who knew the1 Cor. 8.4. Idol was nothing, nor the meat offered to Idols in that regard of any esteem with him, but he eateth and giveth God thanks. But in case of Scandal,v. 7, 8, 9, 10. all having not the same knowledge, where another might be offended, or encouraged by such an example to eat in Conscience to the Idol; He should sin, who would not abridge himself of his own law­ful liberty for the profit of the weak: Here the Apostles Rule is,1 Cor. 10.23, 24. All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expe­dient; Let no man seek his own, but every man anothers wel­fare.

Sect. 5 [Page 108] 3. It is as fully agreed, That, When a thing appears to be a duty, it is then, not only lawful, but, necessary; and it must su­persede all dispute about the near lawfulnesse or expediency: such a thing now, not only may, but must be dore. Here we are not to make scruples, or examine whether it be fit to be done, because, if a Duty, it cannot be omitted without sin. And without question, a [...] once supposed [...] D [...]y, is by the same supposed lawful, expedient, yea necessary: and no ima­gined expedience may super [...]de a necessary duty.

Sect. 6 4. It is as clearly evident, and granted by all. That a Law made by a Lawful (thougl. H [...]m [...]) A [...]ority [...]yeth an Ob­ligation upon the Conscience. The Obe [...] [...] a thing in­different; but in Conscience we are bould to yield it, and if we refuse it, we are under the guilt, not only of the breach of an Humane Law, but of sin against God, wh [...] gave theProv. 8.15.16. power to the Law makers, and whoseRom. 13.1.2.5. ordinance is despised in the contempt of those laws. The powers have their authority from God, They are ordained of God; therefore to resist, or dis­obey them, is to resist and disobey God; and the end is Damna­tion; the properRom. 6.21, 23. fruit, and end of sin; and Therefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath; the fear of anger, or punishment by those in Authority: but for Conscience sake; as obliged in Conscience to a duty which God requires.

5. It is also (I thin [...]) unquestionable among all knowing and considering men, That (though no powers can oblige a Subject by any Law, to what is materially evil, Conscience being primarily boundNulla [...]st ne­cessitas [...]in­quendi q [...]ibas una est necessi­tas n [...]n delin­quendi. not to sin by the Law of him, who is God and Lord of all, yet) A just authority commanding that, which was before a duty, a new Obligation is laid upon the Con­science by this command of men, added to the command of God, so that Conscience is now tyed in a double bond; even from God and Man; and to disobey now, would be a double sin; yea farther.

Sect. 7 6. It cannot be divided, That, A just Authority command­ing, or forbidding that, which was before, lawful, either to be done or forborn, bringeth now an Obligation upon the Conscience of the Subject, which was not obliged before; so far, that what I might lawfully do, without sin; now when commanded, I am [Page 109]bound to do it, and sin, by the breach of an obliging law, if I do it not: and what I might lawfully forbear before, now, when forbidden, I not onely may, but must forbear, and con­science is obliged in sin, if I forbear it not. e. g. Christians are undoubtedly bound to acts of Publick and solemn worship of God; suppose particularly, on the Lords day: and it being perfectly indifferent, at what hour of the day their publick meetings shall be, it being beyond dispute, that they may lawfully assemble at any hour: but they being once by autho­rity of Church or State determined to such an hour, by that command they are bound to assemble at the time appointed: it being a circumstance on all hands confessed, where they may command, and we may obey, Again, to Fast, and hum­ble our selves before the Lord, upon occasion of our provo­king sins, or the presence, or sear of some heavy judgements, to implore pardon for the one, and the removing or prevent­ing of the other, is, without question, a duty upon us by the law of God: and so it is also to meet for publick Praise and Thanks­giving: but the partic lar dayes and times are confessedly in­different; and none that I know, ever doubted the power of humane authority to determine them: and having so deter­mined, we are obliged to observe them. Even those, who yet scruple the religious observation of the constant Fasts, and Feasts prescribed in this Church, such as the Lent Fast, Ember weeks, Vigils, and the observation of Saints dayes; and the particular solemnities of Christs Birth, Resurrection, and Ascension, &c. yet grant in Thesi this to be true, That it is in the power of the Magistrate to appoint dayes either of Fast­ing or Thanksgiving, and that his law obligeth the Subject to observe them accordingly: which is an infallible evidence, that in things thus purely indifferent, the law of a just Authority obligeth, where before we were not obliged. And those Re­verend Divines commissioned by his Majesty to treat about the Alteration of the Liturgy, making not this an exception against the Ceremonies imposed, That because they are in themselves indifferent, a law is not to be made concerning them; or if made, that we are not obliged: but onely this, they desire such a law not to be made, because, though they be indifferent [Page 110]in the judgement of the imposers, yet they are not so in the judge­ment of the opposers, but held by some of them to be sinful and un­lawful in themselves, and by others very inconvenient, and un­suitable to the simplicity of the Gospel. Which assures me, that were they in their judgments lawful to be observed, the com­mand, would not be a plea why they should not be observed. I might give several other instances of such indifferencies. It is without doubt lawful in it self to eat Fish or Flesh at any time, but when upon just reasons, or prudential motives, a just authority shall command an abstinence from Flesh for such a season, we are for that season obliged to forbear it, so far as we are really able, unlesse we have a dispensation by the same authority that made the law. And indeed it concernes not Subjects to enquire the reasons why the law is made; but whether the thing be lawfull, the matter of that law be not evil; and when it was lawful before, it becomes a duty now. For the lawes of a just authority come inProv. 8.15. Rom. 13.1, 6. the Power of God, and it is a duty to be subject for conscience sake, (as be­fore was shewed:) and therefore to deny to do that which is commanded, when it is commanded, or because it is comman­ded, is an high contempt of the ordinance of God, a sin of an high nature before God.

Sect. 9 7. Hence it also undeniably followeth (nor is it denied by any who understand the nature and obligation of a law,) That where a law made by such authority requireth our active obedience, (i. e. to do, or not do, such a thing) and layeth a penalty on those who observe it not; the conscience is obliged to the duty, and it is not sufficient to submit to the penalty; because the law engageth to the Fenalty onely secondarily, and acciden­tally, upon mens failures; but obligeth conscience primarily and intentionally to the duty required. The sanction or pe­nalty being added to preserve the honour and authority of the law, that it may not be contemned; that when men do not, or will not for conscience obey, they may by the terrour of the punishment be kept from disobeying. And though by submitting to this punishment ordained by the law to those who break it, they may have satisfied the Courts of men, yet in this case they are not cleared from sin, or guilt before God; [Page 111]because they were obliged actually to do the duty of the law, not only for wrath, but for conscience sake. The Murderer, Thief, Felon, is hanged, the Traytor executed; thus the law of man is satisfied, as to the penalty, but the guilt of sin upon the conscience is not cleared, nor the man, with God, innocent.

Sect. 10 8. Neither do I doubt of consent in this, as a thing equally evident, That, though a law may not be so good as we could wish, or as indeed it should be; yet if the matter of it be not evil, a sin forbidden by God, we are bound in conscience to obey it. It is not strange in the world, wherein the best men are not perfect, to see imperfections in the best lawes; and some lawes made, which are not so good, or convenient, as they might be; be­cause they are like the men that made them, imperfect at the best: yet when they are not evil, no sin in the matter enjoyn­ed, they oblige the conscience to conforme to them. It may be possible that we may be able to devise a better law, yet God never made particular Subjects judges of what is fit or not fit to be enacted for a law to the Community; nor ever gave us power to prescribe a law to our selves, nor will he acquit us from sin, in disobeying a law which is not evil, upon our imaginations that it might be better. For we are bound to beRom. 13.5. subject, and to1 Pet. 2.14. submit, as patiently submitting to the Powers punishing us, without rebellion or murmuring: so especially readily doing, what they command us, in what we can, and may lawfully do;Tit. 2.9. [...], without dispu­ting or gainsaying. When I say (lawfully do) I mean still, the matter not being evil: for there may be somewhat in the Form, or other circumstances of the law, which may denomi­nate that an evil law, and yet the subjects bound to obey that law, though not unto evil.

Sect. 11 9. I am therefore fully convinced of this also, which, I think, no conscientious understanding Christian will deny, That, though the making of such a law may be a sin in the law-maker, yet when that law is made, if it command not sin, it is to be obeyed by the subject. e. g. if a law be made rashly, without that serious consideration of the necessities, expediencies, and benefit of the people for whom it is made, this is sinful in the [Page 112]law-maker, who is bound to use all care, circumspection, and prudence, and advice, that is possible conveniently to be had; again if a law do too much disproportion the offences and pe­nalties, laying on a grievous and heavie censure, or capital pu­nishment upon a light or trivial offence (supposing no ill con­sequences likely to ensue of an higher nature, for this alters the case much, and makes the offence great in the circumstan­ces, which is inconsiderable in the particular matter) or in­flicting onely a slight inconsiderable censure on an hain [...]us transgression, or capital crime; This would be an evil, because unequal and unjust law: but it is evil only in the form of it; and notwithstanding this doth still oblige the subject to obedience; because the matter enjoyned is not evil, but may be done; and the offences punished, are really offences, and may not be done. The formal injustice in the law, in the disproportion­ing of the penalties, is only the sin of the law-maker, and he alone shall answer it, and that only to the Lord above him: It is the matter only which concerneth the Subject; And the sin of the law-giver can be no plea to justifie the subject in the breach of the Law, when it is once made, and given for a Law.

Sect. 12 All these are principles so evident both by Scripture and Reason, that all sober Christians (I think) and all Protestant Divines, that I know, do agree in them; even those, who yet scruple in the particular case of the Common Prayer, and Rites of the Church of England, will, I presume, subscribe to these general things of the Obligation of Laws, made by a just Au­thority, upon the Conscience: And I am confident, were these things duly considered, and seriously weighed, there would be much more peace and charity in the Church, even among, and with those, whose judgements do dissent about some particu­lar practices of, and laws in the Church.

Sect. 13 Well then, to apply these generals to the particular case in hand about the prescribed Liturgy, and the Rites therein or­dained.

1. There is (we all know) a Law establishing this made by unquestionable authority: An Act of Parliament, legally sum­moned, legally chosen, justly constituted, confirmed by the [Page 113] Royal assent, whose only stamp and fiat, gives Laws their being. and makes them perfect Acts, valid and obliging.

Sect. 14 2. This Law requires the actual use of this Book, of all Mini­sters, upon very severe penalties. Now though the penalties have their proper use, for that purpose to which they are ordained, viz. to preserve the Law from contempt of men, to preserve the peace of the Church, which might otherwise be violated by some, who make no Conscience of the duty enjoyned; and to prevail with some spirits, to do that, which otherwise they would not do; The fear of wrath being one motive, though not the only one; and though not the principal, but of an inferi­our and lower, yet not of no consideration. Yet the Con­science of duty is the principal thing that should in this case ob­lige our conformity. For being convinced, and agreeing upon the fore named principles, that the Laws of a just Authority do oblige us in Conscience to yield actual Obedience, so that it is not indifferent whether we obey or no: we must also be convinced, that we are bound to obey this Law, nor can be excused of sin if we do not: supposing in this we should not break our higher Obligation to the Law of God.

Sect. 15 3. All the work then, which we have now to do, is to exa­mine the Liturgy it self, and consider what we are requi­red to do; whether this be evil, or repugnant to the Law of God or no: for this case, as far as concerns our practice, ad­mitteth no other consideration. For, the Law is made, and a Law is granted to have an Obligation upon the Conscience; and though it should be supposed, there were some sin the Law-giver, or inequality in the form of the Law; or that it is not so good as it might be, or we wish it were; and that the things required are not antecedently necessary to be done: yet, if the things be in themselves lawful to be performed, there is, without all peradventure an Obligation upon Conscience to perform them.

Sect. 16 Let us then examine the matter of this Law, it is this; It enjoyneth all Ministers in the Church of England to us [...] this form of Confession, Prayer, Praises, and Administration of Sa­craments, and the Rites therein prescribed, in all the administra­tions of the publick worship of God. Now there is no imagina­ble [Page 114]reason, why any should refuse conformity to this Law, but what may be referred to one of these two heads; The unlaw­fulnesse, or the inexpediency (not of the constitution, but) of the practice, And if I satisfie these two, that it is neither un­lawful nor inexpedient, I am sure I shall do enough to justifie, yea (considering the Law upon us) to prove the necessity of this practice to any rational man.

CHAP. III. The Liturgy examined, and 1. That a prescribed form is not unlawful, proved.

Sect. 1 THe first thing that we shall consider, is the lawfulnesse of the use of this Liturgy, for this is the main, and this being cleared, the matter of expediency, (con­sidering the Law requiring it) will soon be resolved. Here then our enquiry is, whether there be any thing in this form, which is in it self evil, or that may not be used without sin.

Sect. 2 Upon serious consideration with the best eyes and judge­ment, which I have, having also in view those many exceptions, both formerly, and of late made against it; I must seriously professe, that I can find nothing, but what we may use, and submit to without sin. And really being convinced that we lawfully may do so, as to any thing in the matter of it, I must conclude, we must do so, in regard of the Law, that enjoyns it. In this case, therefore, for the satisfying of my self and others, (for we are not to obey as brutes, but as rational Creatures, who are to know what, and to give a reason why they obey) it is not proper for us to enquire whether it be well imposed; but [Page 115]being imposed, whether may we lawfully use it? Not, whether it were just or fit to make such a Law; for of this we are not the Judges: but the Law being made, how far are we bound to obey it? and this is our proper work.

1 1. Sect. 3 The Question then (so far as concerns our practice) is not, whether our Superiours may justly enjoyn this service, and re­quire this use of the Liturgy upon such severe penalties; The Question truly stated as to our practice. though I judge they may, yet for me, let every one abound in his own sense so as he publish nothing of it to disturb the peace of the Church, or raise in men an evil opinion of their governours:Negatively. nor suffering their own hearts to despise, or have a grudge a­gainst, or ill thoughts of their Rulers, or their Authority, God having unquestionably bound all, by his most righteous Law,Exed. 22 28. Acts 23.5. not to revile the Gods, or speak evil of the Judges and Rulers, who are as Gods: and this Law forbidding not only reproach and calumny by the tongue; but the iniquity of the Eccl. 10.20. thoughts also. The same [...] word is used both in Moses and Solomon, and signifies not only open rayling or blaspheming, but in the primary and first Notion, any, vilifying, contemning, or slighting; we may not openly rail on them, like those im­pure Sectaries, whoJude 8. despise Dominion, and blaspheme Dig­nities; nor privily detract from them: nor in our thoughts contemn, or slightly regard them; for they are Psal. 82.6. Gods, and to be reverenced, as well as obeyed: Their names, and honours are sacred, as well as their persons.

Sect. 4 2 2. The Question only is this; we see what is enjoyned by a Law that bears the undoubted stamp and character of a Law of England, whether, and how far are we bound to obey it? or thus, whether might these prayers, and rites, Positively. And the Affir­mation pro [...]ed. have been lawfully used by us, had they not been commanded; and so now, this use be­come a duty, being commanded? for I take this to be undoubted­ly true, that what is lawful in it self, becomes a duty, when enjoyned, even according to the principles of those Brethren who have declared,Due account, &c. to His Ma­jesty, p. 4. That it is the desire of their souls to contribute their parts and interests to the utmost, for the promo­ting of Holinesse, Ʋnity, and OBEDIENCE to Rulers in all LAWFƲL things. And I am fully satisfied in the former, that it had been no sin to use them, considered simply in them­selves, [Page 116]had they not been enjoyned; and therefore must con­clude it now a duty to use them, and a sin not to use them be­ing enjoyned, during the standing of that Law which en­joyns them.

Sect. 5 The consequence is clear upon the former principles, that, if it lawfully may be done, then in obedience to a law it must be done; for I have purposely waved here the term of indifferent, which hath occasioned so much dispute, and men have not a­greed upon the meaning of the word; some would have that to be indifferent which is a middle, between lawful and unlaw­ful, absurdly enough, when these, lawful and unlawful, are such as [...], they have no middle between them, all things that can be done must be one or the other. Others, not so irrationally, yet not very clearly, account that indiffe­rent, which stands equally related to good and evil, and nei­ther one or t'other: when it will be hard to find any one thing in matter of action, which is not clothed with such cir­cumstances as will denominate it either good or evil: and the truth is, I judge nothing to be indifferent to be done or for­born (for of such things we speak) which hath not some mea­sure of goodnesse in it, for I am sure no evil can be so, it must be forborn, it may not be done, but there are many good things, which either may be done, or may be forborn at some times and places; and this is properly indifferent; and what may be done, must be good, so far as it may be done. I take therefore an indifferent thing to be that which stands equally opposed, or related to a necessary duty, and to a sin; such as we are not necessarily obliged to do; nor sin if we do it not: but, for any thing in it self, we may lawfully either do it, or forbear it. Now a Law coming, and determining us either way, though there be an indifferency in the nature of the thing; yet there is no indifferency in our obedience to a Law. And really if we acknowledge the thing required to be lawful, we cannot deny, but, we may lawfully obey; and if we obey not, where we lawfully may, neither God nor man will acquit us from the guilt of resisting an Ordinance of God, as well as the Commands of Men.

Sect. 6 The antecedent is only doubted, whether this Liturgy, or [Page 117]these Rites prescribed may without sin, or lawfully be used? I am clearly satisfied in the affirmative that they may; and that, which satisfieth me, I hope may have the same force to satisfie others, when the argument is produced, and the evidence of truth appears. I shall here only speak to the Liturgy, and publick forms of prayer, &c. and if these papers find accep­tance, I shall communicate the like, about the Rites and Ce­remonies.

Sect. 7 As to the Liturgy, then, binding to the form of words in prayers, praises and administration of Sacraments, and the other holy offices, I shall only desire the conscientious Rea­der to weigh this one argument.

If it be unlawfull to conform to the law in the use of this Li­turgy, then, it is either because it is a form prescribed; or because there is something in the matter, which makes this particular form to be unlawful, though other forms should not be so.

But, neither is it unlawful, because a form, nor is there any thing in the matter of it, to make this particular so.

Therefore, upon no account is it unlawful to use it.

Sect. 8 The proposition, is most evident, for if it be neither unlawful to use a prescribed form: nor there be any matter in this form, to make this unlawful; I see not what shadow of any thing else can be objected against the lawful use of this. And under one of these heads hath all been comprehended, that hath ever been objected. The Separatist boldly denyeth the lawfulnesse of any form: the soberer Non-conformist will allow a form, but only some things in the matter of this are scru­pled.

The Assumption, I shall labour to clear, in both the branches.

Sect. 9 1. It is not unlawfully to use a prescribed form; for if it be, what a sad doom must we passe upon those thousands of hum­ble, well-meaning, poor Christians, which desire to serve God as far as they are able; who yet neither do, nor can pray without a book before them, or a prayer taught them? shall we judge that none of all these (and God knows they are many) do either pray, or have their prayers accepted, but sin in praying so? God forbid! yea what a most unchristian, and uncharitable censure must we passe, not upon some poor, weak [Page 118]illiterate Souls; but, upon those many able Divines, famous Preachers, holy Confessors, glorious Martyrs, who for many years and ages constantly used the prescribed forms of the Church in their publick Ministrations? Must all these be con­demned as such who worship God in an unlawful way? yea, must all the Christian Churches of the world, for many Cen­turies, be condemned, as so carelesse of Christianity, and Re­ligion, that the very substantial acts of their publick worship were offered in an unlawful way? O my Soul, come not thou in­to the secrets of the men, who thus judge.

Sect. 10 But, in the Scriptures we find Forms given, used, prescri­bed; and were all these unlawful? That was a form which Moses used, not once, but constantly,Num. 10.35.36 at the removing and resting of the Ark: which Solomon also made use of, almost in the2 Ch [...]. 6.41. same words, at the Dedication of the temple: And David, Psal. 68.1. at the bringing of the Ark into the City of David. In the same Scripture we find forms, for constant set times, and occasions; there we have onePsal. 30. Psalme, a solemn Form of praise at the dedication of the house of David, Deut. 20.5. according to the law. Another,Psal. 92. a Psalme for the Sabbeth day: another, a solemn form of praise, made by David to be used by thePsal. 136. with 2 Chron. 7.6. & 20, 21. Levites, and the singers with instruments of musick: another, aPsal. 105. with 1 Chron. 16.7, 8. form of praise, as composed for the Quire: several forms of prayer to be used inPsal. 86.22.102. affliction: one, pennedPsal. 90. vide Mo [...]ler. in lac. by Moses for a prayer, upon occasion of Israels suffering in the Wildernesse, to lie by them, to admonish them of their weak­nesse, mortality, and sin, and to direct them in their addresses to God: one,Psal. 95. more then probably seeming to be written, not for private use, but appointed forApparet ex verbo [...] ve­nite, Psalmum hunc non in pri­vatum usum scriptum, sed publicis convintibus destinatum fuisse, quando populus frequens ad templum conveniebat, ut in Sabbato: ita enim populum alloquitur, ut jubeat omnes concurrere ad hoc sanctum opus per agendum. Moller. in Psal. 95. &c. Apparet hunc Psalmum Ecclesiasti­cae congregationi, praesertim frequentiori destinatum, quasi erat apud Judaeos die Subbati: Muscul. in eundem. the publick assembly, when people come to worship at the Temple: which our Church doth therefore use in the beginning of her sacred Of­fices, viz. the venite, &c. Come let us sing, &c. Were not the [Page 119] Levites in Hezekiahs time2 Chron. 29.30. commanded to sing praises with the words of David and Asaph the seer? And the Priests and Levites in Ezra's timeEzr. 3.10.11. set by the builders, to praise the Lord, according to the Ordinance of David; and they sand to­gether by course, (or quire-wise) what? even in that form of Psal. 136. For his mercy endureth for ever. Do we not find the people stirred up to pray in time of affliction, andH [...]s 14.2, 3. words put into their mouths? yea, the Priests, and Ministers of the Altar to pray in a form too, and say,Joel 2.17. spare thy people, &c. what is that in Isaiah, Isa. 12.1.4. but a form to the Church; In that day shalt thou say, O Lord I will praise thee, &c. and, In that day shall yee say, Praise ye the Lord, &c. what else can we judge of thatRev 15.3. song of Moses mentioned in the Apocalypse, which the victorious Christians are said to sing. To omit, in the New Testament, those many forms ofRom. 1.7. 1 Cor. 1.3. 2 Cor. 1.2. Gal 1.3. Eph. 1.2. 1 Thes. 1.1. 2 Thes. 1.2. salutations,Eom. 16.24. 1 Cor. 16.23. Phil. 4.23. 1 Thes. 5.28. 2 Thes. 3.18. vale­dictions, and blessings, so frequently used by the Apostles, which none ever doubted, but we may lawfully use still: as the Church doth use that very form of words in Baptisme which Christ used in the Commission; I Baptize in the name, &c. yea, Christ himself we find using that very form of words which David the Type had used before, Eli, Eli, lamasa­bachthani: Mat. 27.46. Psal. 22 1. See on this Ar­gument Synops [...]urior. Theol. Disp. 36. Thes. 33. My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me.

Sect. 11 And to all these, let me add that one form for all, That, which our Lord hath given us in his prayer, which he taught his Disciples; which the Church hath not only accounted, but constantly used as a form; and thought fit to give the first, and the greatest place in her Liturgies. The first, as a guide to the rest. This the ancient Church called legitimam, & ordinariam orationem. Premissà [...]e­gitimâ et ordi­nariâ orati [...]e, quasi fundamen­to; accidentium jus est desideri­orum, jus est sa­perstruen di ex­trinsecus petitio­nes. Tertul lib. de Orat. cap 1. The lawful, (as being the prayer, which Christs own law, hath tyed the Church to use in his own words: and as being given for the law, and rule of our pray­ers) and the ordinary prayer, constantly used in all parts of the Christian world: And this being first premised, they then did add other desires, and build upon it their other requests: o­ther, not for substance, but onely more largely and expli­citely exprest. The greatest place; as a necessary supplement, to supply, whatsoever is wanting in ours: we come to God with boldnesse for Pardon and Mercy, when we come both [Page 120]inMet. 18.20. Joh 14.13, 14. the name, and theAgneseit pa­ter si il sui ver ba cum preces fundimas. Cy­grian. seim. de orat. dom. words of Christ: and therefore the Church hath used this also, in the last place, at the end of her sacred actions,Durand. Rational [...]d vin. effic. l. 5. c. 5. Sect. 17. tanquam sal omnium Divinorum officio­rum, (as one fitly calls it) as the salt that Seasons all her religi­ous and sacred offices, And as the ancient, so theCoronidis vice omnibus orationibus oratio dominica adjicienda, quae omnium re­rum petendarum epitome a Cypriano recte appellatur Herisbach. Orandi Formula. Christi­an Churches of later dayes have all, and do still use it; neither shall we find one Liturgy where it is not. In the French Churches four times during the meeting at one Assembly.

Sect. 12 And have all these Churches so constantly done this with­out warrant from Christ himself? do but observe the times, occasions, and manner of his giving this prayer, yee will see our warrant, viz. he gave it at two several times, upon distinct occasions, in a different manner. In one place, we find him in a Sermon preaching, and reproving the Hypocrisie of the Pha­risees, in their long Prayers, for ostentation, in open places, to be seen, their vain Tautologies, &c. There he gives the Doctrine of prayer, and teacheth them by a pattern, that their prayers be like this, brief, full, significant, and to this purpose, and in such order. [...]. Pray yee (saith he, not as the Pharisees, but) after this manner. But in St. Luke, we find another story: The Disciples came with a Petition,Luk 11.1. Lord teach us to pray, as John taught his — it is Calvins judgement, upon that place, and not his alone; that St. John, as the exigency of those times required (which were so corrupt among the Jews, that all Religion seemed to be collapsed, scarce any one true and sound form of worship and prayer among them) did give unto his Disciples a form of prayer, probably collected out of several Scriptures, that might agree to those times & expecta­tions, and the spiritual Reign of the Messiah, whose coming, according to the Prophesies that were of old, they then ex­pected. Christs Disciples now come and make such a request to him, that he would give them such a form, as John gave to his; in answer whereunto he gives them this, and delivers it to them in this expression,Luk. 11.2. [...]. when yee pray, say, Our Father, &c. [Page 121]it is given as a pattern, in the Sermon upon the Mount: it is delivered as a Forme, upon the Disciples request. So that as some weights and measures are to be rules to others, yet are they themselves to be used as such also: so is this Prayer both a pattern to direct, and a form to be used: the foundation of our Prayers, the Prayer of prayers, the Rule (as Calvin calls it) the law of Prayer, and the Breviary of the Gospel (as Tertullian.)

Sect. 13 Now then, The Scriptures giving us a Record of so many Formes; Moses, David, Asaph composing such; Hezekiah commanding the use of them; The Priests, Levites, People of the Old, the Apostles of the New Testament, yea Christ himself using such, and giving one to us: Can we think of any, or without blasphemy say so of all, that they sinned, or did un­lawfully either in the one, or other; either in framing, using or commanding them? [...].

Sect. 14 Object. 1 For that Objection, That these are all [...], by divine inspiration; Moses having a Commission from God, for what he ap­pointed in the house of God; and other holy pen-men had an infalli­ble conduct; which since, now, no men can plead unto, we may no more observe the Formes of men, then we may suppose, they may make another Scripture, or receive them if they should.

It is altogether frivolous; for,

Sect. 15 Answ. 1 1. We plead not here this or that Form in particular, but for a Forme in general. Should we argue the necessity of one of ours, from the use of another in Scripture, this were a clear non sequitur, for the infallible inspiration of the one, would shew a difference enough to convince the illogical in­ference of the other; but from the composing and using Formes then, we prove the lawfulnesse of such still; and that our practice cannot be sinful in such things wherein the Ho­ly ones in Scripture have commendably gone before us: where by the way, it is not the absolute necessity, but the law­fulnesse, that we plead. And when God is pleased to give a Form for direction, and we see those Scripture Forms have been lawfully used: yet not so determined by God, but we are left at liberty to use them or not; we conclude, that no one Form (as such) except the Lords Prayer, is absolutely more [Page 122] lawful then another; and that any one, which is sound and grave, and agreeable to the Holy Canon, is free to the Church to be used, as well as those very formes in Scripture; which indeed do warrant any other, that shall in substance agree with, though in words they differ from them.

Sect. 16 Answ. 2 2. Though those Formes in Scripture were by infallible inspiration, yet the application of those particulars to this or that purpose, was not by extraordinary motion of the Spi­rit; but upon grounds common to us with them, in analo­gical cases, and on like occasions.2 Chron. 29.30. Hezekiab did not compose the Forme, but commanded them to use that which was al­ready composed. Nor can I see, why upon a like occasion we may not use the same words, or others devised to the same purpose, to expresse the thoughts and affections of our souls, as no doubt he might have done. And the same warrant, that we have for singing Davids Psalmes in Meeter, or in any Translation; yea for the using of a set Translation of the Scripture, or composing Catechismes, or collecting matters for Instruction, Exhortation, Rebuke, or Comfort, &c. from the practice of the people of God; we have also, from the like pra­ctice in these cases.

Sect. 17 Object. 2 As frivolous also is that Objection [That these were not prescribed: so as though it might be lawful to use them at our own choice and liberty, yet not to be enjoyned them, nor may we submit to an enjoyned Forme.]

Sect. 18 Answ. 1 1. For, to omit that, those Scripture Formes were also sometimes enjoyned, some of them at least: not to mention the Lords Prayer; We read, Hezekiah not only command­ing their duty to sing praises, — but enjoynes them a Form also: In the words of David, and Asaph the Seer,— But,

Sect. 19 Answ. 2 2. Formes being lawful, the former maximes prove, that the prescribing them by a just authority, is so far from ma­king them unlawful to be used, that it makes the use of them a Duty. And indeed let reason judge; Is the Forme good, sound, grave? doth the injunction make it bad or unsound? may we pray, blesse, give thanks, &c. in such words at our own choice? and may we not use the same words when we are commanded? were they good before, and are they evil [Page 123]now? The commands of men do indeed take off the indiffe­rency of an action, so far as pro Hic & Nunc, to determine us, where we were before at liberty: but I could never hear, that the command of that which is lawful, should change the nature of it, and make it sin: so as what is lawful now for us to do, shall be unlawful when enjoyned. So that notwith­standing all this, it stands undoubtedly true, That to use a prescribed Forme is not unlawful: and consequently this cannot make the use of our Liturgy unlawful, that it is such a Form.

I need not inlarge in this particular, which is not much gainsaid: and even those, who scruple this particular, do yet acknowledge the usefulnesse and expediency of a Forme in the Publick Ministrations. But by the way,

Sect. 20 1. Formes in the Iewish Church. This I am sure of, The Jewes are acknowledged to have had some Formes in their sacred offices: for though we find not any whole Liturgy of theirs, which was used in their Syna­gogues, and publick assemblies; yet that such they had is more then probable; for I never yet met with any, who had reason to question the truth of that, which is by learned men observed of the Forme, which they used at the Celebration of the Passeover; our Saviour himself in his practice conforming thereunto. This (say theBez. in Matt. 26.20. ex Io­sepho de bello Judaic. l. 6. c. 3. Paul Burgens. in Psalm 112. Ios. Scalig. de emend. Temp. l. 6. learned) was the Forme they used from the time they entred into Canaan. ‘They were to eat the Lamb in private families, where were to be no lesse then ten, no more than twenty persons: They washed their feet, then lay down to eat the whole Lamb with un­leavened bread: then rose, and washed again, and lay down to the Table to the Post-coenium, the After Supper, where they had their unleavened bread, and sallets of soure herbs in a dish. Then the Master of the feast first dividing the bread, blessed it in this forme,Benedictus es Domine Deus noster, Rex uni­versi, in esu pa­nis arymi. Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of all the world, in the eating of this unlea­vened bread. The bread thus broken, they kept one part, and divided the other among all the persons there, who did eat the Passcover, in this form of words;Iste est panis aerumnae, quem comederunt ma­jores nostri in terra Aegypti; quisquis esurit, accedat et pa­schatiret; et cui opus est, nccedat et paschariret. This is the bread of affliction, which our Fathers did eat in the land of Egypt, whosoever hungreth, let him come and eat the Passeover, and who­soever [Page 124]hath need, let him come and eat the Passeover. This done, He took the cup and blessed it, in this forme,Benedictus es Dmine, qui fructum vitis creasti Blessed art thou, O Lord, who hast created the fruit of the vine: and of this he drank, and then it went round about the Table.’ [This cup was called the [...] cup of blessing, to which thePsal. 116.13. Psalmist alludes, I will take the cup of [...] salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord: and in reference whereunto the Apostle calleth the Poculum Eucharisticum in the Lords Sup­per,1 Cor. 10.16. [...]. the Cup of Blessing.] ‘At which time was sung that Solemn Hymne, which they called the Great Hallelujah, which was the 113 Psalm, with the 5 following: thus did the Jewes.’ This forme, manner, and rites, that Christ himself did use, those passages of the Sacred History do dis­cover: viz.Matth. 26 23 Judas dipping his hand in the dish, and ChristJoh. 13.26. giving him the sop: the beloved DiscipleJoh. 13.23. lying in Jesus bosome: ChristJob. 13.4. rising from the table to wash his Disciples feet: then againJoh. 13.12. lying down: andMark 14.26. singing the Hymne: these things were not usual at every ordinary eating. It is there­fore observed, that Christ did not wholly institute any New Rite in the Church, but what was before in the Jewish Church, he took and applied to a new use, end, and signifi­cation. They had Baptisme, as in their several washings, so in the solemn admission of a Proselite into the Church: the Jewes did not therefore quarrel with Iohn for bringing in a new practice, but onely asked hisMark 1.4. with Joh. 1.25. Authority to baptize. What was with them thus an initiation, Christ in his Church made Sacramental. The Eucharist was not simply new neither: for, they had at their solemn Feasts, their Post-coenia, and in those a Commemoration of the Blessings at those Feasts celebrated; as at the Passeover, the Deliverance from Egypt: at their Pente­cost, the Delivery of the Law: at the Feast of Tabernacles, their Travels in the wildernesse, &c. the proper blessings remem­bred in those Feasts. Christ taketh up this practice, conti­nueth this post-coenium: and onely adds a new signification, and the Commemoration of his Death and Passion, who indeed is the proper [...]. 1 Cor. 5.7. Paschal Lamb; and the Joh. 1.29. Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world.

Sect. 21 [Page 125] 2. Formes in the Ancient Christi­an Church. As the Jewes, so the Christian Church had their Liturgies and publick Formes too. Thus much we find acknowledged even by the learned Non-conformists, thatBall, Trial of grounds of Sepa­rat. answ. to obj. 8. c. 5. whatsoever may be thought of the two first ages: yet for the space of 1400 yeares the Churches have had their stinted Liturgies: There weibid. c. 4. answ. to object. 8. find Cy­prian, Ambrose, Chrysostome, Augustine, all acknowledged to allow, some to have devised, and composed such Formes: There we read ofibid. c. 7. Arg. 6. Petrus Diaconus, and others, sent from the East to Rome, in their book to Fulgentius and other Bi­shops of Affrica, rehearsing a Prayer of Basils Liturgy, which they say, almost the whole East frequented: There we are toldibid ex Clem. l. 8. Constit. Apost. cap. 16. the Sursum Corda, lift up your he arts, and the peoples answer, We lift them up to the Lord, were anciently in use, if not even from the Apostles times. And though divers passages speak those Liturgies under the name of Basil, Chrysostom, &c. to be of a later date, yet that divers things in them were of anti­ent use in the Church: and that such particular Actions, Passages, and Rites, as the Deaconsibid. c. 7. answ. to obj. 3. Oremus, Attendamus, Let us pray, Let us attend, &c. and then the Reader begin­ning, &c. do argue that there was some publick Liturgy, Formes, and Rites in those early dayes. And now, having for the necessity of our obedience, the command of the Church and State we live in, for the warrant of our practice, the Word of God, and example of the Saints, the Church in the Primitive times, among whom we find the footsteps of several Liturgies, with many of the same particulars as in ours, (of which more hereafter) for which we might pre­duce a cloud of witnesses; I can see no reason why it should be a sin in us, more than in them to observe such a practice.

Sect. 22 Formes in the Reformed Churches. Nor is a Forme strange to, but approved, and used in the Reformed Churches in these later dayes. The Bohemian, which I reckon the first; the French, Dutch, Geneva, these three Presbyterial, have one. It would be long to site parti­cular testimonies; this one. Mr. Ball will be instar omnium, who not onelyBall, ibid. c. 5. answ. to obj. 7. doth acknowledge it, but makes it his plea, as a thing notoriously known, even to the Separatists. They (those Separatists) know (saith he)ibid. c. 6. answ. to obj. 5. that all the Reformed [Page 126]Churches, since the light of the Gospel began to shine forth unto the world, until this day do allow, and maintain the use of a stin­ted form, &c. Further, if any man Ibid. cap 7. answ. 10 cbj 8. (saith he) desire an in­stance of their doings, let him compare the Prayer whichZepper. de polit. eccles l. 2. c. 4. Beza constantly used before, Calvin, opuse. P. ec. Eccles. formulae. Bez in Cant. Hom. 1. and after Sermon, with the Geneva book of Common Prayer; so that here we find the practice even of Geneva it self.

Obj. If any object, these were not exacted of all Ministers at all times, nor imposed, but every one left free to use them, or any other the like.

Sect. 23 Answ. 1. I might return, whatBall. Ibid. Mr. Ball doth; suppose this true, (which yet will not be fully proved) yet this proves, they did both use and allow such a practice, though they en­acted it not: but,

Sect. 24 2. If they imposed not, yet they never threw out a compo­sed Liturgy; when they reformed themselves, they did not cast away all forms, but reformed them, and made them better. Onely these Churches, that of Scotland first, then this of Eng­land, writing after their Copy (if that may be called the act of the Church, which indeed was not, but the actings of some men in it, and who had no legal call to do it: and I am not a­lone, but many other truly Religious Spirits are of the same mind. I shall give instance of one, in this case beyond excep­tion; it was that well known, well approved, much respected Mr. Jam's Cranford the elder, He in discourse sometime with me in Tunbridge, while he lay here, upon the account of health to drink our waters, did tell me his manner of laying down the use of our Common Prayer. That he used it as long as any, who were suffered to enjoy their livings; and when he laid it by, having first vindicated it from the exceptions laid against it, he declared, That he would not have laid it down, had not he been forced by the fury of a faction, and if ever it should please God to give the liberty to use it again, he would take it up with much more readinesse and joy then he laid it down. These were his expressions, as near as I can remember, in his own words, I am sure, not at all varying from the sense of what he then spake; but this by the way, to shew, that this was not the act of the Church, but however) England and Scotland were [Page 127]the only ones that ever I read of any setled Church, who threw out an established setled Liturgy, and owned none. For the other reformed Churches, whether they imposed their forms or no, it is certain, they did both use, and allow the use of them.

Sect. 25 4. Shall I add the judgement of particular men? Take one or two, infallibly far enough from warping towards the Romish Superstitions. In the Church of Geneva we have these two, Calvin, and Beza, the passages cited before, prove their judgements to have allowed them: and Calvin we find not only for the use, but for the binding of the several Ministers to the use of them. His words areQuod ad for­mulam pre­cum — valde probo, utilla c [...] ­ta exstet, a qua pastoribus dis e­dere in functio­ne non liceat. Calv. Ep. 87. As for a form of Pray­ers—I do very much approve of it, that it be one, certain, fixed, stated form, from which it may not be lawful for the pastors in in their function to depart; for our own, even non-conformists; One shall give testimony for allBall Tryal of grounds of sepa­rat. c 7. ansar. to obj. 8. The Ministers to whom the use of the Common Prayer hath been thought most burthensome, have from time to time expressed their liking and approbation of a stinted Liturgy; that they like well enough of that councel, which forbad vulgar Psalmes in the service of God, and those forms of service which are not Conc. Lac­ [...]ic. Can. 59. Conc. Carth. 3. Can. 23. Conc. Milen. Can. 12. Conc. Affric. Can. 70. antea probata in concilio, vel cum prudentioribus collata; least happily some things against faith, either through ignorance or want of consideration should be composed, That they Never sought a razing of the Communion book, but a filing it after the pattern of that care which former examples bad set them, wherein they thought many things retain­ed, that might have been spared: They have Evermore condemned voluntary separation from the Congregations, and Assemblies, or Negligent Frequenting of the publick prayers.

Sect. 26 See how these sober spirited men, who could have been contented, yea desired the correcting or reforming, or (as they term it) filing of this book of Common Prayer, yet, as it was (though not filed according to their minds) used it, preach­ed not against it, laboured not by their Sermons to raise in mens hearts a dislike of it, discouraged none from it; but con­demned the negligent, and consequently encouraged the dili­gent frequenting of these publick prayers. Oh, were men cordially so affected, of such holy, humble, peaceable Spirits; [Page 128]with how much quietnesse, and peace, might we live together, and worship, andPsal 42.4. Go with a multitude to the house of God, with the voyce of joy and praises, to keep holy day? Then might wePsal. 55.14. take sweet counsel together, and walk to the house of God in company, and if so thenAmos 3.3. agreeing, and (as our old ver­sion hath it) as friends. To these let me add but the present judgement of our Presbyterian Brethren, who say,1 Paper of propos. to His Majesty. we are satisfied in our judgements concerning the lawfulnesse of a Li­turgy, or a Form of worship, provided, &c. So that even in the judgment of these, a prescribed Form is not unlawful, and consequently not our Liturgy, upon that account.

Sect. 27 The usefulnesse of prescribed forms. Yea more, we could with much ease prove the, not only lawfulnesse, but usefulnesse, yea in some degree, necessity of a well composed form of publick worship in the Church, and that upon very good reasons.

• 1. 1 To help the weak. To provide for the weaknesse of some men,
  Quae [...]i solet, utrum concepiis precationum formulis publicè out privatim uti liceat; nos si modo cum debita animi attentioni pronuncientur, non modo licitas, sedet valdè utiles esse contendi­mus, quia no­vas [...] concipe­re cuivis detum non est Synops. P [...]rior. Theo­log. Disp. 36. Thes. 33. Sic et Calvinas Epist. 87. Quod ad Formulam precum valde probo — tam confiditur quorun dan simplicitati, et imperitiae.
  and help their infirmities, of whose ministry the Church may have need; and this truly is not of no consideration; for let us hear but the testimony of one, who (Mr. Ball
  See Ball, Tryal of Separ. c. 7. answ. to obj. 8.
  will tell us) what a godly, learned, and well experienced Minister. As to the law­fulnesse, or expediency (saith he) of praying by book, or using a prescript form; it is to be considered that there be divers degrees, both natural (as will and utterance) as also the grace (as know­ledge, faith, zeal) given to divers men; besides, some have been trained up in this holy duty more than others — which diffe­rence, I have observed not only in private Christians, but in some most Reverend, faithful, and worthy Ministers, some using both in their publick Ministry, and private Families, a set form of words — and a little after, for the Congregation for the most part it is expedient to keep a constant form both of matter and words.
• 2. 2 Sect. 28 To testifie Com­munion. To testifie our consent
  — Ʋt ce [...]tiùs conslet omnium inte [...] se ecclefiarum consemsus Cav. Ep. 87.
  and Communion with other Churches of Christ; for where shall another find, what is the Doctrine, Faith, Worship, of a Church, but in her Confessions and Liturgies.
• [Page 129]3. 3 To prevent irre­gularity. To prevent errors, and irregularities in worship, Sect. 29 Schisms, yea, and errors in Doctrine; upon this account the Councel, before cited, forbad the use of such, as were not probata in concilio, lest otherwise something against faith through ignorance or rashnesse should be composed; and up­on the same account, there is a necessity of such a well compo­sed form, that nothing, which is contrary to the faith of the Gospel, or good manners; or unbeseeming the Majesty of that sacred service; or dissonant to Christian Charity, should through the ignorance or weaknesse of some, the corruption, frowardnesse, malice or wickednesse of others be uttered. And the truth is, our Liturgy of old was wont to be accounted an excellent preventive both of Popish Superstitions, and unbe­seeming irregularities.
• Sect. 30. 4. 4. To extend to all concerns of the Church. And (what is not of the least, but of very great conside­ration) to reach, and extend to all the publick concerns of the Church; and,
• Sect. 31. 5. 5. For edificati­on of the people. Being incomparably most for the edification of the peo­ple; though a conceived prayer may commend the speaker, yet is a form much more profitable for the hearer, who in a known form may readily concurre with the speaker (for this they already understand, are acquainted with, and are ready to joyn hearts, with those Petitions, which they know are to be put up) which in a conceived prayer of a mans own (which yet is a form to the hearer) unheard by them before they can not so well do; for such is the obscurity of some mens ex­pressions, especially to vulgar ears, that they cannot easily comprehend the meaning of the words, and so can not joyn hearts; and while they study to understand them, the Mi­nister is gone to other petitions. In these publick forms, known and understood, they have nothing to do, but to attend with the heart: and really this is
  Nos—concep­tas formulas—valde utiles con­tendimus, quia — et at­tentio auditorum in magnis con­ventibus per usi­tatas non parum juvasur Sy­nops. purior. Theol. Disp. 36. Thes. 33.
  no small help to attention, when the mind need not study to understand, but hath nothing else to do, but attend, and joyn in prayer.

Sect. 32 Nor indeed is it any disgrace to the Minister, for we are not called to shew our own parts, but to lay forth our selves for the profit and edification of the people under our charge. Nor is it more unseemly to us to use the same expressions, then for [Page 130] Christ, Mat. 26.39.42.44. on the same occasion to pray in the same words. And really,

Sect. 33 When we are still the same persons, who come to worship the same God; to pray for the same mercies; on the same occa­sions to beg the same blessings, Pardon, Peace, Grace, Life, Health, Comforts, &c to vow the same duties of Faith, Love, Loyalty, Obedience; to praise him for the same favours: why should it be a sin on the same occasions to use the same expressions?

Sect. 34 In a word, in any prayer, confession, praise, &c. if the matter be good, the words proper, the affections suitable, the pray­er, &c. is acceptable, and this may be as well in forms, as in any private conceptions,

Sect. 35 For that Objection, it is a stinting of the Spirit, contrary to 1 Thes. 5.18. Forms, no stinting of the Spirit. it signifies nothing; for to omit that Scripture speaks nothing at all to this purpose: I say, there is no more a stinting of the Spirit in this, then in the con­ceived prayer of the Minister: for there are the people tyed up to his words and expressions, as much as in any prescribed form: yet was never this accounted a stinting of the Spirit, or unlawful for the people to joyn in; and indeed take away all forms (for such is one mans prayer, to all that hear it) and ye must take away all publick prayers, or prayers of a Congregati­on, our of the Church.

Sect. 36 Of as little strength is that other Objection,May pray in forms, yet pray with the Spirit. that to use a form is contrary to that of the Apostle, [...] Cor. 14.15. Pray with the Spirit; for,

• 1. If this Objection be of any weight, it takes away all meditation and preparation, and argueth against any such prayers conceived by our selves, as well as those composed by others for us: and this if urged so far, must put man upon a finful tempting of God, and looking for Enthusiasms, and ex­traordinary impirations, when ever he prayeth; which God hath made no promise to grant, nor hath man warrant to ex­pect: far wiser is that counsel of the Son of Syrach
  Ecclus. 18.23.
  Before thou prayest, prepare thy self, (not thy tongue only, but thy heart chiefly) and be not as one that tempteth the Lord.
• 2. Sect. 37 This can be no more urged against forms of Prayer, then forms of Praise, or, singing, wherein it hath been practised, and [Page 131]the practice still allowed, if in Praise, why not in Petition How doth it stint the Spirit in one, and not in the other? Must the matters of request fit the occasion? so must praise. Doth the Spirit teach to pray? so he doth to praise and return thanks. Must we pray with the Spirit? so must we also sing with the Spi­rit. If in prescribed forms, we may
  1 Cor. 14.15.
  sing and praise with the Spirit, and with understanding also, so without doubt may we pray. And indeed,
• 3. Sect. 38 In the use of forms, the Saints of God, may, and do pray (as
  Jude 20.
  they should) in the Holy Ghost; for the Assistance of the Spirit (as that Right Reverend Bishop
  Bishop Dow­nam, of prayer. cb. 23.
  hath observed) is not so much in helping the invention (invention and gift of conceiving a prayer is indeed a gift, but a common gift, not a proper grace of the sanctifying Spirit; and a confident Spirit, a nimble wit, with a ready utterance goes far in it) but chiefly in these three things.

1. In rectifying the judgement, teaching us what to ask, be­cause weRom. 8.26. know not, what to pray for as we ought; and help­ing our infirmities.

3. In inflaming our affections, drawing out the heart to cry withRom. 8. ibid. sighs unutterable; the Spirit of Grace and Supplica­tion maketh us pour out our Souls before God, while we look on him whom we have pierced, and mourn.

3. In exciting, and drawing out our faith to Act, stirring up our hearts to cry Abba, Father; to call upon God, as our Father in Christ, believing. Now that all this the Spirit of God can do for us, yea, and hath done it, in prescribed forms, drawing forth the Soul, warming the heart, inflaming the af­fections, quickning the spirit and exciting Faith: the experi­ence of thousands of Christians will testifie.

Sect. 39 Lastly, To take off that popular Objection, that it is but reading, Prayer in Read­ing. not praying, I shall say no more then this; though it be true that reading (as such) is not praying, this being an act of the heart; that only of the lips and tongue: yet the lif­ting up of the heart in that reading is praying: if the words be sound, the matter, according to Gods will; the manner, holy, reverent, humble, faithful, fervent; the wants laid open; and requests sent up from the Soul: here is an holy prayer. And [Page 132]may not all this be, though the words be read out of a book, or uttered by heart; may there not be as much humility of heart, faith in Gods promises, earnestnesse of desire, holinesse of affection? doubtlesse there may.

Sect. 40 For those many scandals wherewith the vain inventions of unsettled and idle brains, and the petulancy of mens virulent tongues, load these holy constitutions and practises, I willing­ly passe them by, as things owned by no sober spirit: those who have a mind, may see them noted, and fully answered in that fore-cited book of Balls Friendly Tryal of the Grounds tending to separation. This is enough to justifie the Use of a Prescribed Forme; and consequently to prove, That the being such, makes not our Liturgy unlawful to be used.

CHAP. IV. Our particular Liturgy considered.

Sect. 1 WE have seen the lawfulnesse, and usefulnesse of a Form in general, proved in the precedent chapter. But, possibly there may be some such corruptions, and material errours in our particular Liturgy, as may make this Form unlawful to be used. This I shall now examine; and I doubt not to make it appear, that there neither is any thing in this, but what may be used without sin. For the portions of Scripture to be read, there is no dispute about them. For the Prayers prescribed, that they also may be lawfully, yea and acceptably used, is also ap­parent.

Sect. 2 For, what is required to holy Prayer, more then, 1. That the matter be according to Gods will; for such things as he hath commanded us to ask, and promised to grant; for such things as tend to the advancement of Gods Glory; the do­ing of his will; the spiritual and eternal good of our selves [Page 133]and others, in the Remission of sin, our Regeneration, San­ctification, and eternal Salvation, &c. yea, and Temporals also, Life, Livelyhood, Liberty, Comforts, Prosperity, Peace, &c. so far as Divine Providence shall see these things really good, and necessary for us and them. 2. That the Forme of them be grave, the manner holy, reverent, fervent, our wants laid open, and petitions enforced in such expressions, as may be­come the gravity of such devotions, the Majesty of that God to whom we speak; and suited to the matter which we desire; and with such reasons and arguments, as are agreeable to the nature of the requests, and likely to prevail. Apply these to our Liturgy, and see if all these things be not observed there.

Sect. 3 The true form of external, vocal Prayer, is the outward frame and disposition of the words, with the inward elevation of the heart: now if the words be sound, the matter good and necessary, and the heart lifted up by the Holy Spirit in faith and fervour, here is an holy Prayer. (and there is the same reasons of Confessions and Praises.) And that the heart may be thus lifted up in the use of these prayers, the experience of thousands of pious Christians will abundantly evidence.

Sect. 4 For the matter of them: Are they not some, for pardon or Grace; some for instruction how to pray; some, to be heard when we pray; some, confessions of sin, and begging repentance and remission; some, confessions of weaknesse, blindnesse, infidelity, and praying for strength, illumination, and faith: Prayers for temporal, spiritual, and eternal bles­sings? And are not all these the subjects of the promises, and commands of God; and by consequence the matter of them according to Gods will? it will be too long to insist upon par­ticulars.

Sect. 5 Onely let it be confidered, that those Reverend Divines of the Presbyterian perswasion, among all their exceptions, to our present Forme, have not in any one charged this book with matter of impiety, or material evil in the substance of it, or in any thing which concernes the Prayers, and Formes of pub­lick administrations (and to the Rites and Ceremonies, I shall [Page 134]give my thoughts hereafter) so as the use of them should in­volve any one in sin. Yea, to the contrary, they have these expressions,Account of all Proceed. p. 1. We have an high, and honourable esteem of those godly and learned Bishops, and others, who were the first compilers of the publick Liturgy, and do look upon it as an excel­lent and worthy work for that time,—if excellent and wor­thy then, it cannot be sinful now. Again,ibid. p. 11. at the conclusion of the s [...]veral exceptions. The things themselves (viz. there excepted against, and) desired to be re­moved, not being of the foundation of Religion, nor the essentials of publick worship. If so, then certainly much may be com­plyed with, and conformed to in matters of circumstance, (wherein there is no danger for the main, and these not be­ing essentials of worship, they are not contrary to that pro­hibition, Deut. 12.32: so much urged) for Peace sake, and in obedience to those in Authority. And again,ibid. p. 32. at the conclusion of the particul, exceptions. We have not the least thought of depraving or reproaching the Book of Common Prayer. Then certainly, they charge it not with any matter of impiety, or such thing as is unlawful to be used in the publick worship; for that were a just reproach enough.

Sect. 6 The truth is, there are reckoned many expressions, which are conceived to need amendment, or possibly, to want a favourable construction, or that might be expressed better. But all this amounteth not (nor are they by them urged to that purpose) to a proof that they are evil, or that it is unlawful to use them: it onely obligeth us, so much to consult the ho­nour, and peace of the Church, as to put that just interpreta­tion upon them; and, since they are not evil in themselves, but may be used without sin, to obey the commands of our proper Governours in the use of them: our conceptions, that we could do better, do not free us at all from obeying the the Law, which commandeth the use of these; (whereby yet we are not so tyed up, but that at some times, as in the Pul­pit, before Sermon, we are left to the liberty of our conceived Prayers also.) But to clear this matter more distinctly.

Sect. 7 There are indeed many exceptions given in, which from the number of them make a great noise in the world; and [Page 135]many extend them further, than those Brethren did intend or offer them for. They used them onely as arguments for an emendation, to satisfie the scruples of some, who could either not at all, or, bardly comply with the use of them; and as a meanes (in their thoughts) to promote peace and unity: But others presently conclude them of such a nature, as to make the use of the Book utterly unlawful: and begin to think some strange horrid thing imposed upon them. I shall take a view of the most material objections, and it will soon appear that there is nothing charged upon this book, of so dire an aspect as to make Ministers afraid of it, or judge it unlawful to use it or people to hear it.

Sect. 8 The exceptions are many and numerous, and people that hear of so many, presently think them all of a nature, that any one of them is able to damne the book; but especially when such aƲt quae nou prosunt singula juncta juvent. multitude of enormities are charged upon it, they are too willing to believe it guilty. Whereas, those Brethren confesse them to be of aAccount of Proc. p. 11. various nature. For some, they grant, are of inferiour consiaeration; verbal rather than material: then, sure I am, these are not sit Subjects of contention, we may use them notwithstanding, and should be guilty of a very great transgression, if we should disobey an established law, and break the Peace of the Church for matters of no higher consideration, then which are onely verbal.

Sect. 9 Against others, they plead, but as dubious and disputable, as not having a clear foundation in the Scripture for their warrant. For such things, if they have not clear Scripture for their par­ticular warrant (nor is this alwayes necessary, in many cases a general warrant is sufficient) yet if there be not evidence of Scripture to prove them unlawful; in such a case to me Sta­tuta Majorum prolege tenenda: The practice of our Fathers; and the commands of our Superiours; the establishments of our own Church, must be a law, and are warrant enough. For, if they are dubious, it is not certain we should sin in the use of them: but it is certain, we should sin against anRom. 13.2. or­dinance of God, in disobeying the lawes of our Superiours, which are not against the law of God. Our Brethren confesse, [Page 136] Due account to his Majesty, p. 4. that publick judgements belong to publick persons, (and if in any thing, then without doubt in such dubious matters) and that no man is to exalt his own understanding above its worth and office; nor erroneously pretend Gods law against the just command of his superiours; nor the doing of his duty to be sin.

Sect. 10 But some things, they say, there be that seem to be corrupt, and to carry in them a repugnancy to the Rule of the Gospel—to which I say,

1. If there be indeed such real corruptions, I know none that pleadeth for them, none do I know but would have such reformed, and not submitted to, all conscientiously agreeing to that Apostolical MaximeAct. 5.29. It is better to obey God than men. But then, let those who disobey, be sure of their hand; that these things wherein they obey not, be really such as is pretended; not seeming onely, but really corrupt, and repug­uant to the Holy Rule.

Sect. 11 2. Note, that nothing is said to be corrupt, or indeed to carry such a repugnancy; but onely that some things SEEM to be, and to do so. Now though such an apparency may be an argument (and so onely they used it) to plead for an al­teration; and doth justly require such amendment, where there would not follow in the Church a greater mischief by a change, then there is inconvenience in the non-alteration, or could be good by the Reformation: of which (by the way) those must be accounted the Judges, to whose hands is commit­ted the Government of the Church, and upon whom chiefly it lyeth to take care Ne quid Ecclesiae detrimenti capiat, that the Church suffer not in her purity, peace, or order: yet this is not argument enough for private persons to cast off the use of a thing enjoyned. It must not onely seem, but indeed be evil, ere it can justisie any in their disobeying a law, that com­mands it. For, suppose it should not be, as it seemes to us to be; but what we judge repugnant, be not so, to the Evangelical Rule: will it then be a sufficient plea for us at the great day of account, that it seemed so? I fear, not. I am sure we have all reason in this case, if in any, to be modestly and humbly self-suspicious, as our brethren acknowledge. And I judge (for [Page 137] in dubiis tutissimum est eligendum, and what doth but seem, is still but dubious) it to be by far the safer course for every inferiour and private person to obey, which doth not onely seem, but infallibly is a duty: than to suspend his obedience in a thing which doth but seem to, but happily is not, when disobedience certainly is Rom. 13.1.5. Heb. 13.1 [...]. Sect. 12. against the rule of the Gospel.

3. These things yet are but general accusations. Had the particulars been expressed, which are the inferiour, and ver­bal; which dubious matters; and which seem corrupt, and repugnant to the Gospel? we should have been better able to have judged of them. But they being given in together, and no note of distinction on them, it is not so ready to judge which they understand (at least not all of them) to be such as seem to be corrupt. It would be too long a work, and to little purpose, to give an account of every particular; I shall therefore pick out what I conceive to be the most material ex­ceptions; and which may have the greatest influence upon some mens spirits, to induce them to believe the book so cor­rupt, as that it should be unlawful to use it; and which I con­jecture, they may suppose to be repugnant to the rule of the Gospel. And if I shall manifest that there is really in these no such repugnancy, as may engage any to forbear the use, or insnare him in sin, that shall use this Liturgy: I shall do e­nough to justifie our Conformity, and to manifest that it is not unlawful to obey Authority in this practice. And I am sure then, if we love the Peace of the Church, we shall con­clude it our duty.

CHAP. V. 1. The charge of Battology, or vain Repetitions, answered.

Sect. 1 THe Objections made against the Liturgy, may be all referred either 1. to the Forme, or 2. the Matter, of the service or worship prescribed: and in this order, for methods sake, I shall treat of them.

Sect. 2 1. The chief exceptions made against the Forme, Order, or Manner of the service and offices, are these four. 1. Vain Re­petitions. 2. The Peoples interlocution. 3. The Prayers too short, and divided. 4. Shreds of Scripture in Epistles and Gospels.

Sect. 3 Except. 1 1. One great charge is this, It is guilty of Vain Repetiti­ons; the same things being ordered to be repeated several times in one morning service: as the Lords Prayer, sometimes four, sometimes six times, alwayes twice. The Gloria Patri at the end of those short Versicles after the Lords Prayer; then af­ter the following Psalmodie: after every Psalm, and the Hymns between, and after the lessons. Which seems contrary to that rule of Christ,Math 6.7 When ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the Heathen do.

Sect. 4 Answ. To clear the Liturgy from this charge, and all repugnancy to this Rule of Christ, we need do no more than consider the text, and see what that is, forbidden in that place, as a fault in Prayer. In that Chapter Christ is giving rules about those eminent acts of Christianity, Almes, Prayer, and Fasting. Concerning Prayer, the rules are principally two. 1. The one concernes the manner; their carriage in, and ends of pray­ing. Here the rule is, that we avoid the Mat. 6.5.6. Pharisaical Hy­pocrisie, who aim to be seen; and that we pray in secret, where God onely sees. 2. The other concernes the matter, and ex­pression. [Page 139]Here the rule is, That weVers 7.8, 9. avoid the Ethnical, or Heathenish Battology; and pray according to the pattern there given. The words are these [...]. When ye pray, use not vain repetitions, (or if we could so make the word speak English, do not Battologize) as the Heathen do, for they think to be heard for their multiloquy, many words, or much babling. The onely difficulty here, is to find what is the fault condemned, it is [...] which what it is, we shall partly understand.

Sect. 5 1. By the Notation of the word. The GreekScapula and Stephanus whom be epito­mized. Lexicogra­phers (from one Battus a Prince, and Founder of Cyrene in Eybia, who was said to be one of a small slender voice, [...]. Vide Herodot. l. 4. & Dausan. in Pho [...]icis. and a stammering tongue) give this for the first notion, to hesitate, stick, and stammer in speech. Of this fault (whether the text mean it or no, it matters not) I am sure the Liturgy cannot be guilty: but some men out of too rash a presumption of a gift, which they have not; boldly venturing upon extempora­ry prayers in the publick, too often betray the want of that ability, which they presumed themselves to have; and by their too indecent hesitations, and culpable stammering, in their often interrupted expressions, for want of that due meditati­on and preparation, which becomes men who come to per­form such solemn service to so Holy a God; discover them­selves too guilty of this kind of Battology: but this is not the fault there pointed at.

There is another more usual acceptation of that word. There was (say some) one Battus among the Greeks, who was wont to adorne Images with Inscriptions, long and tedi­ous, and full of idle repetitions of the same things over and over: or, (as others) a Foolish Poet, whom that nimble Poet Ovid. Metam. wittily s offs at, Montibus in­quit erant, & erant in mon­tibus illis. and brings in Mer­cury answering him in his own way, —Me mi­hi perside, pro­dis? me mihi prodis? ait. who wrote many verses, but their number increased by this vain Tautology. From this Battus, do they take [...], to signifie, to re­peat one and the same word; to trifle in discourse; to prattle vain­ly. Hesychius renders it [...], idle and unseasonable speaking. The fault then is chiefly, a tedious length, or prolixity of speech, which cannot well be without a vain Tautology, and idle repetition of the same things. Thus the Greeks generally understood it, as contrary to that which they called [...], short and pithy speeches, as the Spartans [Page 140]used, who (saith thePlut. in vita Licurgi. Historian) had a vast deal, a great masse of mony, to be worth but little, but a few words, of great weight; They spake little, but much to purpose. The wise Phi­losopher Plato in Al­cibiad. therefore far preferring their short and pithy pray­ers, that God would give them [...], before the long prayers of the Athenians, wherein they affecting pro­lixity, uttered many things, which nei her became the Ma­jesty of God, nor were expedient for themselves; and saith well, [...]. that we had need of much care, circumspection, and de­liberation, what is fit to be spoken, and what not; agreable to that of a wiser than he, even Solomon: Eccl. 5.1.2. Keep thy foot &c. Be not rash with thy mouth— God is in heaven, and thou upon earth, therefore, let thy words be few.

Sect. 6 But besides this Notation of the word, we have much light from the text it self; there are two expressions to guide us. 1. One in the end of the verse, in a word Sinonymous, decla­ring that by this Battology, Christ did understand, a [...] mul­tiloquy, or verbosity, an heaping up of words, and nothing or little else but words, a babling to no purpose: which was both in a tedious length, such as was in the prayers of Pharisees, con­demned by Christ as Hypocritical, who for a pretence Mat. 23.14. [...]. did thus pray long; and in often repetition of the same words, that they might hold out, and continue talking. And 2. We may understand the thing, by the persons that were wont to use it, and the reason why they did so. They were the Heathens, and the reason why they did so was, because they hoped by that mians to be heard the sooner, or at the last at least. They per­swaded themselves that their much, loud, and long crying, of­ten repeated, did at last prevail with their Gods to answer them: for which the Prophet so manifesty scoffs at those Ido­latrous Priests of Baal, who cryed, all day, and aloud, from mor­ning to evening, and all the same note, O Baal, hear us; O Baal, hear us.

Sect. 7 By these things then it is clear, That this Battologie, there by Christ condemned; was the Heathenish babling; or what is like that, which they used in their Idolatrous worship, viz. multitude of words, without weight of matter. 2. Not eve­ry repetition, but such as theirs, vain and idle. 3. And these u­used, [Page 141]as if they looked to be heard for their many words sake.

Sect. 8 Now let any charitable man, or considering Christian judge, whether these, or any of these can be rationally charged upon the Liturgy for those repetitions of the Lords Prayer, and the Gloria Patri: would we know who are guilty of this crime indeed? One, and he no Popish, nay, nor Episcopal Author, (I think) will tell us that,Marlor, exse­cario. Ʋtuntur in cra­tione inani hac loquacuaio, et multiplicando­rum verborum vanitate diffi­dentes, et qui frig [...]do sunt ani­me, nec adme­dum scrio curant quid loquuntur. [...]. Calv. in Mat. 6.7. Qui ut Deum persuadeant et exorent, multum veriorum profundunt. Those men are in their prayers guilty of this idle loquacity, or vanity of multiplying words, who are, 1. Diffident, doubtful they shall not else be heard. 2. Whose hearts are cold, their affections not inflamed in their devotions. 3. Who are not serious, who neither mind nor care what they speak. And (saith another) Those, who pour out a multitude of words, and think by this means to perswade and prevail with God. Shall I give instances.

Sect. 9 1. It is manifest the Popish practice is extremely faulty: where persons are taught their Paters, and Aves by number and tale: to number upon their Beads a certain set of prayers, which they understand not, and therefore cannot mind: put­ting so much the greater meritoriousnesse in them, and receiv­ing larger Indulgences, as they do oftner mumble over their Rosaries.

Nor are They free, who affect a tedious length in a continu­ed Prayer; and yet are not able to find either fit matter or words; nor to keep their hearts close to God, and so lifted up with faith, and inflamed with fervour during that time, as they ought to be in these holy Duties and Addresses to the most high God: for though, where a man is endowed with such a gift of expression & utterance, and where variety of ho­ly matter is poured forth with a constant, continued, attention of mind, and vigor of affections, such prayers cannot but be ac­ceptable Sacrifices; nor can they be condemned for the length, and even in this sense may weCol. 4.1. continue in prayer: Yet when such is our weaknesse, that our minds rarely do attend; and our dulness such, that our affections scarce can be intent so [Page 143]long: it is not only our wisdome, but a duty to moderate the length of our prayers according to the measure of grace re­ceived, and the strength of our affections, faith, and devotion, that the intention of them be not dulled, where it cannot hold out; though where it can last, Intentio, sicut non est obtund [...]n­da, si perdurere non potest; ita si perdurare potest, non est reliquen­da. August. ep. 121. it be not to be laid down. Absit in orati­one multa locu­tio; sed non de­sit multa pre [...] ­tio, si perseveres intentio. Aug. ep. 21. Much Praying is one thing, and much speaking, or many words in pray­er is another: the one is a duty, the other a fault, and to be a­voyded. This must be condemned as a vain Battology; which Solomon fitly calleth theEccl. 5.1, 2, 3 [...] Sacrifice of Fools; and is a thing which argueth no little irreverence in worms of earth before the high God: wherein we often see that to speak much, and to speak seasonably and fitly, are far a sunder; men soon becoming negligent, and the Devil easily taking occasion to steal in upon them, and to steal away their hearts from the matter they are about: and when the heart is absent, they of­fer up nothing but words: which is not much short of the Ethnical, or Popish Battology, and much more guilty, then the Liturgy can with any shadow of reason be pretended to be.

Sect. 11 3. Yet I deny not, but, in the use of this Liturgy men may be, and some (I fear, too many) are guilty of this also, but withal it is unquestionable, that this is not the fault of the book, but only of those persons, who use it so.

Sect. 12 Not of the Book; for, 1. The things repeated are not ma­ny: they are but two; The Lords Prayer, and that never in the same, but in distinct offices, and parts of worship (which is very far from that vain and heathenish repetition, who had nothing to offer, but (as those Baalites) the same thing for an whole day; and as far from being like the Romish Beadrol of 15 Pater Nosters, and 150 Ave Maries) and one Gloria Pa­tri, a Doxology at the end of each Hymne or Psalme; which can no more be charged as a fault here, then that versus [...] at the end of every verse in one PsalmePsal. 136. For his mercy endureth for ever. Nor is there such a difference be­tween a Psalme of praise, and praise in our ordinary prayers, that what is lawful in the one, should not be lawful in the other; that what is confessed an ornament in the one, should be a sin­ful Battologie in the other. This Doxology, being yet used but once in our prayers, but generally at the end of Psalmes, [Page 142] where it is an ornament, or of an Hymne of praise, where it must needs be proper. However that versus intercalaris is a suffici­ent argument that every repetition is not to be charged with vanity, and there must be somthing else to prove it Battologi­zing. And thus far we have the concurring judgement of our Brethren Account of Proceed. Reply pag 62. That the same words may be often repeated, (as David doth, Gods enduring merey) without Tautological vanity, when it is not from emptinesse, or neglect of order, or affectati­on.— In Psalmes and Hymns, where the affections are to be elevated— we are not against such repetitions. 2. Neither can it with any charity be rationally suspected that the Church prescribes those few repetitions any way to lengthen out her prayers (which yet never were accounted too long, but often accused of too much brevity, as shreds, or Snips) much lesse, 3. Can it be thought, that these are prescribed, as if the bare use or repeating of the words were an acceptable service to God, or could pretend to an hope of being heard (as the Heathens did) when the affections are not cordially intent, nor the heart sincerely fixt upon the matter, neither with an holy fervency begging the mercies, nor with an heavenly cheerful­nesse sounding forth the praises: Yea, 4. We have much rea­son to judge, that the edification of the people, and the quick­ning of their devotion is mainly intended; when their minds and souls, which in a continued length are apt to grow cold and flat, are awakened by these (yet not too frequent repeti­tions) to raise their intentions to those prayers, which should be as darts sent up to Heaven with vigor, quicknesse, and fer­vency.

Sect. 13 2. But, In the persons a fault there may be, when they su­perstitiously think, there is any strange efficacy in the words, or magick in the repetitions, though they neither understand, consider, nor are intent upon them; when they are guilty of the sin of that people, whom GodIsai. 29.13. Mat. 15.8. Mar. 7.6. complains of, that they draw nigh with their mouths, and seem to honour God with their lips, but remove their heart far from him: Such is that, of ma­ny ignorant people, who say over the Lords Prayer, the Creed, and Ten Commandements, all, as their Prayers; and think they [Page 144]have sufficiently done their devotions, when they have done no more but repeated the words: Such is that, of those, who content themselves with a formal attendance with their bodies, and joyning with the tongue in these offices; and think they have served God well enough, when they have thus external­ly answered the letter of the Law, though their minds at the same time were roming about the things of the world, or the lusts of the flesh. But this still is not the fault of the form, but of the persons and it is no more to be imputed to this, than the very same irregularities, and wandring thoughts are to be imputed to the conceived prayers of the Minister, though in themselves never so holy or excellent; to which this neglect and non attention is every way as incident, yea possibly more, than to the use of this Liturgy. This is really Battologizing, what ever the matter of the Prayer, or Petition be, whether repeat­ed or not.

Sect. 14 What then? because of this abuse of some carelesse persons, is there such a necessity of altering the form? or is it therefore unlawful for an Holy, Religious Minister, or Devout Christian to use it? nothing lesse; for then we must cast all prayers out of the Church; wherein some will still be guilty of offering no­thing but a verbal service, and yielding but a formal, carelesse attendance. But, let us learn to be serious in our affections, and prayers (whether conceived by our selves, or composed by others, and prescribed to us) and we are so, (as Calvin Ʋbi serio af­f [...]cta concipitur cratio, lingua non anteit pe­stus: dein [...]e non captatur deigra­tia inani verbo­rum fluxu; sed potius fuos affe­ctus pium cor e­mittit, non secus ac sagitta; qui in coelum usque penetrent. Calv in Mat. 6.7. observed) when our tongues go not before, or without our hearts, nor do we think to catch the Grace of God by the flowing forth of vain and empty words; but the holy heart sends forth its affections as so many darts, and arrows from a bow, that may pierce the clouds, and ascend Heaven it self: Let us come (as thePsal. 57.7. & 108.1. & 25.1. Psalmist) with prepared and fixed hearts, the Soul cordially joyning with the tongue, and the Spirit directing the lips in our prayers and praises; holy, heavenly, and inflamed affections, (supposing still the matter according to Gods will) my Soul for yours, the Holy God will never charge you with a sinful Battology, or vain repititions; neither Heathenish babling, nor Popish Polylogy.

By this time I suppose ye see it proved, that that prohibition of Christ [...], cannot be extended to this Liturgy, nor is this Liturgy upon the account of any repetitions (what­soever it seems) repugnant to the Rules of the Gospel.

CHAP. VI. 2. Another exception answered, and the Interlocutions, Responsals, and Al­ternate Reading Justified.

Sect. 1 Except. 2 ANother great exception is against the Interlocutions, or, The Repetitions and Responsals of the Clark and Peo­ple, and the Alternate Reading of the Psalmes and Hymnes; and this exception is built upon these two foundations. 1. Non-edification,Account of proceed, the 3d. gener. except. That they cause a con­fused murmur in the Congregation, whereby, what is read, is lesse intelligible, and therefore unedifiing. 2. The seeming repug­nancy to the Sacred Rule; because, The Minister is appointed for the people in all the publick services appertaining to God: The holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament intimating the peo­ples part in publick prayer to be Onely with silence and reverence to attend thereunto, and to declare their consent in the close by say­ing, Amen.

Sect. 2 Answ. 1. To answer this charge, I shall first examine the latter part, for we will first see our warrant from the Scriptures, and this being cleared, we shall better judge concerning the matter of edification. I shall put the Argument into form, and by that means shall be able more appositely to apply the Answer. As to the charge of being repugnant to the rule of Scripture, the Argument must stand thus.

Sect. 3 Branch 1 Where the Scriptures appoint the Minister for the people in all publick services appertaining to God; Responsals of people, whether Repugnant to Scripture. and those holy Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament intimate the peoples part in publick prayer, to be onely with silence and reverence to attend thereunto, and to declare their consent in the close by saying, Amen: And the form prescribed doth not so, but appointed to the people a great part in the publick services themselves. There is a repugnancy between that Form, and the Scriptures.

But the Scriptures do so; and the Form so, (as is expressed) Ergo.

For the proof of the assumption, several particulars are pro­duced, The Alternate reading of the Psalmes and Hymns: The Responsals of the Clark and people: The Litany so framed, that the Petitions are in a great part uttered by the people, &c.

Sect. 4 These are the Charges; This the Argument; wherein 1, To the proposition I shall say little, though, as that is expressed, it may admit some dispute; for it is said only, The Scriptures intimate so and so: and the Form appointeth so and so; now what is only intimated, is not clearly determining: and here therefore is no Real, but a seeming, or intimated Repugnancy.

2. But the Assumption (as there conceived (viz. That the Minister is appointed (sc. by the Scriptures of both Testa­ments) for the people in all publick services &c. and that the holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament intimate the peoples part in publick prayer to be only with silence to attend, and declare their consent in the close by saying Amen.) This I positively and reso­lutely deny: for,

Sect. 5 All Logicians know that a particular affirmative overthrow­eth an universal Negative; and a particular Negative an uni­versal Affirmative. Observe then, This is all laid down in an expresse universal: The Minister in all publick services &c. for the people. The people onely (to do nothing else, but) to attend with silence — and to say nothing but Amen. Now if any particular instance can be produced to the contrary, that is e­nough to wipe of this charge; and, I think, the Scriptures do afford us many.

Sect. 6 Are not the Psalmes and Hymnes a great part of the publick services appertaining to God? They are reckoned as such in [Page 147]this very exception; and though in the latter branch, there be a restriction to publick prayer, yet the former is against the peo­ples part in all publick services, and the Plea is laid not onely against the peoples bearing a part in publick prayer, but against the Alternate reading of Psalmes and Hymnes. But sure I am, The peoples joyning with their voyces, and bearing a part in these, is neither against the Scriptures appointment, or intimation, which doth not only not appoint the Priest, Levite, or Minister, to be wholy, and alone for the people in these; but doth also not intimate only, but clearly expresse the peoples bearing a con­siderable part in them, and not, onely silently attending, and adding onely their Amen in the close.

Sect. 7 It is confessed by our Brethren, Accom. of proceed. Reply p. 92. Sect. 16. that, in the case of Psalmes and Hymnes (and these are a part of the publick servi­ces) it is certain they had a Liturgy or Form, as we have; which Forms are carefully collected preserved, and delivered to us, as a choice part of the Holy Scriptures. And these Forms were then certainly to be used, and the peoples bearing a part in them is evident enough: for,

Sect. 8 1. That the people should joyn in singing, is questioned by none (that I know) even those Sectaries who deny it in mixt Congregations (as they allow no such Communion in any Or­dinances) do yet allow it among those, whom they account all Saints: But for us, we all practice it. And whether we sing together Joyntly, in Meeter; or Alternately, in Prose, (as in the Cathedral way) the matter comes all to one, the people bear their part in both.

Sect. 9 And the truth is, for manner of singing it hath still been various in the Churches according to the Custom of several Nations, and yet that diversity breeding no division or con­trariety. There beingTot panè psal­lentium chori, quot gentium di­versitates. Hie­ron. ep. 17. ad Marc. cap. 6. as many Quires of singers, and wayes of singing, as diversities of countries. Sometimes one only singing, and then anotherDicas Psal­mum in ordine tuo. Hieron. ep. id Rustic. in his order; sometimesTertul ad uxer. l. 2. dicit. Psalmum inter duos sonare. two: sometimes we find a council forbdidingConcil Laodic. can. 15. any to sing, but such, to whom the office of singing belongeth: sometimes the whole multitude sang,Audict orantis populi confistens quis extra ecclesiam vocem; spectet celebres hymnorum sonitus Hilar. in Psal. 65. that those who stood without the Church might hear the voice of the people praying, and the loud sound of [Page 146] [...] [Page 147] [...] [Page 148]their singing; and this sometimes joyntly together; sometimes by course or [...]. So the people in St. Basils time sung the Psalmedy, one part answering another, at the sound whereof Nazianzen saith of Ʋalens the Emperour, that [...], he was smitten as with Thun­der. See Jewel Art. 3. Div. 2. out of Basil. ep. ad Cler. Neocaesar, and Greg Naz. Orat. Fu­nebr. in Pasil. Quire-wise, Responsoriis psalmorum, cantu virorum, mulierum, virginum, parvulorum con­sonus undarum sr [...]gor resultat. Ambr. Hexamer. l. 3. c. 5. And a many more citations to this purpose doth Mr. Ball give us, which I have now not leisure to examine, he that please may. Euseb. l. 2. c. 17. Socrat. l. 6. c. 8. Theodoret. l. 2. c. 24. & l. 4. c. 27. Plin. epist. l. 10. ep. 97. Basil. ep. ad Cleric. Neocaesar. Nazianz. funcbr. orat. in Basil. Aug. confes. l. 9. c. 6, 7. men, women, maids, and little children, answering one another.

Sect. 10 And this was not the practice of later ages only, but of the Jewish Church, and Scripture times also. There we find, the people of God in their solemn services, in such forms answe­ring one another. There we find in one place the Priests and Levites [...] respon­derunt invicem. i. e. vicissim [...] cant abant, Pis­cat. Ezr. 3.10, 11. with 1 Chr. 6.31. & 16.7. singing together by course, and praising God after the Ordinance of David the King; yea not these only, but the peo­ple, even the women also: for so we read, Not Moses only, but theExod. 15.1. Children of Israel with him sang a Psalme of praise up­on occasion of that miraculous passage made for them through the Sea, that drowned the the Egyptians.v. 20, 21. And Miriam went out (saith the Text) and all the women after her, and she an­swered them, Viris; ita ut alternis cane­rent, mulieribus eundem versum, qui primus est cantici, [...]. Jun. in Exod. 15.20, 21. sing ye — The women and the men (as Ju­nius Viris; ita ut alternis cane­rent, mulieribus eundem versum, qui primus est cantici, [...]. Jun. in Exod. 15.20, 21. notes on the place) thus answering one another in the song. And it may not unfitly be understood of such a Carmen Amaebaeum or Alternate Song, what we read of the Israelites singing before the Golden Calfe; by that action shewing, as what they had learnt among the Egyptians, to set up an Idol: so what was wont to be their practice in their services to God (for they worshipped the Calfe, as they did God; and it is not unusual for the Devil to be Gods ape) They sang, and it was not either the united shout for a Victory; nor a crying out together, for being Conquered: but it was [...] Exod. 32.18. the voyce of singers; by their alternate answering in song, dis­covering themselves. Thus if we consult the Hebrew Text, where the same word is used by the Psalmist, it seems to be not only the practice of that people, but to look very like a [Page 149]command, [...] Psal. 147.7 sing unto the Lord—what plainly so? I conceive not, for then another word would probably have been used, viz. [...], but sing alternis vicibus, answering one another (as the word signifies) and onePsal. 88. [...] vid. Gatak. cyn. part. 1. c. 10. p. 126. Psalme there is that seems purposely to be set ad hunc ordinem canendi, to be sung in this order, or alternate manner, as the word Le-annoth in the title not obscurely intimates.

Sect. 11 Object. If it be objected, that these onely shew the practice of singing; but it is the alternate reading of Psalmes and Hymns that we disallow.

Solut. The answer is at hand, for, be it but alternate singing, this is enough to our purpose, to prove, the people bearing a part in these services: besides, singing and reading are not of so different natures, that what may be allowed in one, may not be allowed in the other: when their singing sometimes was but like fair, long reading, with some modulation of the voice, and that not much neither, if we believe S. Austin August. Conf. l. 10. c. 93. sect 2 who in this commendeth Athanasius, that he command­ed the Reader of the Psalme to sound, or sing it, modico flexu vocis, with a very little modulation, like, butut pronuncian­ [...] quam canenti vicinior esset. a more plain and distinct reading. Such a practice there was then in the Antient Church, as the people joyning in the Psalmes and Hymnes.

Sect. 12 Yea, and these were not onely in the words of Scripture, or the very formes there given; but they had their Proprios Hymnos, Hymnes proper to the Christians, and composed by themselves, and sung to the honour of Christ, (asEuseb. Hist. l. 2. c. 17. et l. 5. c. 28. See the like in Th [...]od [...] et. l. 4. c. 19. Euse­bius out of Philo testifieth of the first Christians) and this perfectly agreeable to the Scripture pattern and practice. The practice we see in the [...] Cor. 14.26. Corinthian Church, which the A­postle reproveth not, but ordereth it, and directs them in it. A rule we have in that Apostolical exhortation, to teach, in­struct, and quicken one another,Ephes. 5.19. Coless. 3.16. in Psalmes, and Hymns, and Spiritual songs. Nor must we conclude that the people sung only such Hymns, as were either sound in the Scriptures, or framed de proprio ingenio, their own private conceptions; for though such they had, and used, yet also they had HymnesSee Concil. Laod. c. 59. Concil. Tolet. 4. cap. 12. composed by others for them, which they sung to; as we [Page 150]read that Ephrem, Syrus, made Hymnes in that, sc. the Syrian tongue, which were sung at the solemn feasts of the Martyrs, as Sozomen informeth us.

Sect. 13 Object. I know it is objected, That though this may be allowed in Psalmes and Hymnes of Praise, for even in the Scripture we read the people joyning in these: yet in the other parts of worship, and prayer, not so; where they are to be silent, onely adding their Amen in the close: in this is the Minister to do all. These are the words of our Brethren.—Account of Proceed. p. 29. Reply to answ. [...] 3, 1. We said not, that the People may not in Psalms concur in voice to God—(we speak of Prayer—) we concluded it agreeable to the Scripture practice for the people in prayer to say but their Amen. — And finding ordinarily that the people spake no more in prayer, (distinct from Psalmes and praises) we desired to imitate the surest pattern. From hence some may be apt to gather, that, (as to Prayer, and those parts of worship) there is a repugnancy in the Li­turgy, (where even in these the people bear a part) a repug­nancy to the Scripture rule. But,

Sect. 14 Solut. I answer, Whatsoever the force of the argument be, (as there urged) for an alteration, I am sure, there yet ap­pears no such thing, as may make this Liturgy unlawful upon this account, though not altered. For,

1. The Argument indeed concludes onely the peoples si­lence, as to Prayers, (distinct from Psalmes and Praises) yet the Premises were larger, and extended to all publick servi­ces in things pertaining to God, which are praises as well as prayers. And it is there reckoned asAccount of Proceed, ibid. the peoples invading the sacred office of the Ministry, at least seeming to do so, 1. To read half the Psalmes and Hymnes. 2. To say half the Prayers. 3. To be the mouth in Confessions. 4. Being the onely petitioners in the greatest part of the Litany. So that, it is an incroaching in one as well as the other: if they incroach in saying half the Prayers, so also do they in reading half the Psalmes. But their part is confessed in Psalmes and Hymnes. They may sing, as together, so alternately; and if they may sing so, they may also read so: and then notwithstanding any thing in this Ar­gument, may do so in prayers also. Again,

Sect. 15 2. It is said onely, That the people ordinarily spake no [Page 151]more in prayer then Amen. And if no more then so, here is nothing to prove it unlawful to bear a greater part at some time: for it may be supposed, that yet upon some special and extraordinary occasions they might say more, though ordina­rily they did not. And what they might sometimes do, is not unlawful in it self, nor repugnant to Scripture (for that may not be done at all) and this is enough for our purpose. Yet farther,

Sect. 16 3. The thing is not altogether so disagreeing with the Scri­pture pattern, but that we may find, or conjecture at least, some footsteps of such a practice there. To this, I shall offer but this one thing to be considered. It is expresly acknow­ledged,Account of Proceed. § 16 Repl. p. 92. That in the case of Psalmes, it is certain they had a Liturgy, or Form (as we have) which is carefully collected, preserved, and continued to us. This Liturgy, or Forme (if any else) is without question those Psalmes of Moses, David, A­saph, Heman, &c. in the singing of these, it is confessed and proved, the people concurred in voice, more than in a single Amen, and they sang alternatim, or Quire-wise; and if they may sing half, they may distinctly read half, (as before is no­ted.) Now then, in these Formes, in which it is confessed, they did thus concur, we find some which are not Hymnes, or Psalmes of Praise; but expresly (and penned for that pur­pose) Deprecations of misery, Prayers in affliction, and for mer­cy. Consult the Titles and the matter of them, they will evi­dently appear to be, some, purely, or chiefly [...] Co nprecaturii, [...]. Psal. 17.86, 90, 102. Prayers in afflictions, in case of misery, distresse, or feares; for support, strength, mercy, deliverance, life, &c. some, Deprecations, whose Titles are, Al taschith, i.e. Destroy not, complaining of, and praying against evils, both of sin and sufferings. [...] Deprecation, [...] Psal. 57, 58, 59, 75. Some, Commemoratory, or rather [...] Com­monitory, [...] ad redi. cendum in memo. a. n. Psal. 38.70. Commonitory; not (as Junius conceiveth) to stand as memorials, for the remem­brance of evils past, and deliverance received; But, (as that truly Reverend, and by me never to be forgottenGatak. Cyn. part 1. c. 10. p. 123. Mr. Gataker, (whose excellent works praise him in the gates, and are, and will be to after ages, eminent discoveries of his lear­ning and piety) hath well observed) to be Monitories to God himself (to speak with reverence, & after the manner of men) [Page 152]as our version doth well render it to bring to remembrance, viz. of God: to mind him of the streights and troubles. This peo­ple, and awaken him to their help: as the whole service and frame of the Psalmes clearly shew: some [...] Testimonium; peti [...]ùs obtesta­tio. Psal. 80. vid. G tak. ibid. obtestatorii, not so much because the Church doth there testifie her faith in God, as that she doth therein earnestly beseech, and even obtest and conjure him to help and dliver them from those evils where­with they are oppressed, by that care which he was wont to take of them, which now seemes to be remitted; and that successe thereof, which those evils, which she suffered by her adversaries, did seem to make void. Shall I adde others? which are evidently instructing, [...] eruditor. Psal. 32.42, 44, 45. cum multis a [...]iis. teaching Psalmes, and so are rendred in the Margin of our Bibles, Psalmes giving in­struction, and one expresly penned, [...] ad docendum. Psal. 60. Sect. 17. to teach.

4. Let any man now shew any one thing, which is in our Liturgy appointed, the subject of alternate singing, or (which makes no difference) Reading, that is not perfectly of the nature of some of these Psalmes. Might they so sing those Psalmes, whose main scope is to confesse sin; complain of ene­mies; bewail miseries; beg pardon, pray for mercies; awaken (as it were) God to hear, help, and save? and may not we also do the like in our Hymnes and Litanies, which are com­posed for the very same ends? or shall we yet say, they are repugnant to the Scripture pattern, to which in these parti­culars they do so perfectly agree? yea, may we not hence also draw a justification of the lawfulnesse of that practice in Collegiate and Cathedral Churches, (which yet is more quar­relled at, and condemned, than the alternate reading or pro­nouncing) viz. the singing of this Litany? those Psalmes of this nature being no doubt sung in the Assemblies as well as the rest.

Sect. 18 5. Nor is this a just charge against the Litany, that there­in the people are the only petitioners in the far greatest part of it, (the Minister onely reciting the matter, and making no re­quest at all, which is onely done by the people in their Good Lord deliver us, and We beseech thee to hear us, &c.) for in this choice part of the Liturgy, wherein (if any where else) our Prayers are (like those, which S. Augustine mentions of the [Page 153] Dicunter fra­tres in Aegypto crebras quidem h [...]bere orationis sed eas brevissi­m [...]s, & raptim quodammodo ja­culatus. Aug. ep. 121. Egyptian Brethren) as several, and very short, so as darts and arrowes severally sent forth with a sudd n quicknesse, and lively ejaculation, it is clear, 1. The Minister beginneth, expresly petitioning, the people repeating but the same after him It is 2. evident, that in the main body of it, it is a pray­er put up by the Minister, beginning the prayer for all the par­ticular matters, with this, We sinners do beseech thee to hear us, O Lord God. That it may please thee,—and so goes on in the particulars, to which the people severally adde their re­quest in the words before by the Minister dictated; We beseech thee,—which is, in effect, but their Amen. Neither 3. can we say that the Minister repeating the matter of the petition, doth not pray, or petition; for to what purpose else are those particulars expressed? When the Minister repeateth, From all evil and mischief, from sin, and the rest that follow; is it in­tended that he should repeat these words onely, which with­out the petition would not make up any sense? yea, is it not intended that he with the Congregation should pray for Deliverance from them? What Rubrick appoints the Good Lord deliver us, to be said onely by the people? yea, the Mi­nister, as the mouth of the Assembly, having repeated the matter of the request; are not minister and people then joyntly together to send up the petition?

Sect. 19 By these things, I hope, it is sufficiently cleared, That Al­ternate Reading or singing, and the peoples bearing a greater part than silence, and a bare Amen, not in Psalmes and Hymns of praise onely, but in prayers, and deprecations also, is not repugnant, but perfectly agreeable to the Scripture pattern; and may therefore lawfully be complied with.

Object. If any shall yet object, that though it were so in the Old Testament practice, yet we find it not agreeable to the Evan­gelical rule.

Solut. Sect. 20 I have these few things to answer.

1. When it is confessed, that the Church of Israel had such a Liturgy in Psalmes, and Hymnes; and some of these being proved of this nature now in dispute, and these all acknow­ledged to be preserved to us as a choice part of Scripture; [Page 154]I cannot see any shadow of reason, why we may not use them as they did. It is acknowledged, we may use the same things, words, and formes; and why not then in the same manner? and if these, why not others also of the same or like na­ture.

Sect. 21 2. Though nothing of the Mosaical Paedagogy, or Oeco­nomy (as such) be obliging; it followeth not that every thing therein is now unlawful. It is true that those things which were then Figures of Christ to come, and instituted as Types of our Redeemer to come in the Flesh, were certainly of no use, when Christ was really come to fulfil all the things by those types prefigured: and now they, yea, all that was symbolical among them, as observed with any opinion of necessity, are not onely dead and rotten, but onlyEt mortua, & ma [...]tisera. deadly also, and mor­tiferous; and the charge upon us is,Gallat. 5.1, 2. stand fast in the Li­berty, wherewith Christ hath made you free, upon as high an account, as even, the renouncing of Christ, and of all benefit by him, who in this case, shall profit you nothing. Yet, for those things which did pertain only to Order and Decency in the external managing of divine worship, without any typical, or such symbolical signification, I see not how they can be con­demned as unlawful, though it is possible sometimes, and in some cases they may be inconvenient.

Sect. 22 3. But suppose every part of that Mosaical Paedagogy should be unlawful; yet many things were then in use and practice, which cannot properly be accounted a part of that Oeconomy, or proper to that Paedagogy; but upon princi­ples of common right, and reason taken up by them, and pra­cticed in common with others. I never knew any deny, but Magistrates might still (if they see it convenient) use the same Laws in Judicials, as were given to the Jews; and punish the same sins with the same penalties: nor doth their being u­sed under the Mosaical Oeconomy make it a sin for Christians now to use them. Nor can I see any reason, why we may not use those external orders of worship, which were used in the time of, but really were no part of, that Oeconomy, which was properly Mosaical.

Sect. 23 4. If we find not such a practice in the Christian Church in [Page 155]the Apostles daies, this need not trouble us; unlesse we can prove that nothing may be done, do not in circumstantials of worship, for which we have not the example of the Aposto­lical practice; yea, though we have the practice of the Church before, and that not condemned any where, either by Christ, or his Apostles. The Christian Church was then under too much persecution, to have her publick Oratories, and solemn Assemblies, and solemn Order of the Sacred Publick Wor­ship; and no wonder then, that we have no examples of her practice in such a case. When then we have such evidences of the Churches practice in the Old Testament, in things not at all symbolical or typical, and this no where condemned or reproved in the Gospel, which yet doth so sharply rebuke the abolished ceremonies, though the times then did not admit such publick solemnities: I see not, but we may well conclude it agreeable to the Scripture pattern, and not at all repugnant to the Evangelical Rule.

Sect. 24 5. Sure I am (if we may believe Records) the ancient Church did practice this very thing; and consequently thought it no contrariety to the Rule of the Gospel: if we then condemn this practice, as such, we shall condemn, not only this Church of England, for those years since the Refor­mation (which yet is no very good argument either of our piety or charity) but even the whole Christian Church, (both Greek and Latin) in those ancient ages, of forsaking the E­vangelical Canon, and admitting and practising a publick wor­ship of God contrary thereunto. Which, how agreeable it is to that Evangelical Rule, and the sentiments of Piety, and Charity, let the sober and considering Christian Judge. For evidence of their practice, (besides those testimoniesSee Sect. 9. of this Chapter. be­fore cited,) I shall now add these. For the Lords Prayer, (which we find in their several Offices, and St. Hierom tel­leth us, thatApostoli Do­minico praecepto ad celebrationem eucharistiae ad­hibuere oratio­nem Domini­cam. Hieron l. 3. contr. Pelag. The Apostles by the precept of Christ, added this to the celebration of the Eucharist: and S. Austin informs us, thatQuam totam petitionem ferc omnis ecclesia Dominica orati­one concludit. Aug. in ep. 59. ad Paulin. q. 3. The whole Church almost, concluded their Prayers with it) In the Liturgy of St. Chrysostome, we find the whole Chorus, or Quire saying it; And the Priest only with a loud voyce adding the Doxology, For Thine is the Kingdome, &c. [Page 156]Again, in the same Chrysostome we find Minister and People joyning together in the holy Ministration, He saying, The Lord be with you; they answering him, And with thy Spirit. Thus are they,Chrysost. in 2 Cor. Hom. 18 the Minister and People talking together, or speak­ing one to another, as he expresseth it. Again, for that in the Communion, Lift up your hearts it was not only the admoni­tion of the Deacon, as the Minister may now, at the beginning say, let us pray, or as they then did in the very same words;See Jewel. Art. 3. Divis. 16 Oremus, attendamus, or oremus pariter omnes, &c. as calling up­on the people for prayer and attention: but in a particular office, immediately before the Communion In the Greek Church, theCyprian. in Orat. Dom. Serm. 6. Priest said [...], as we, lift up your hearts; the people answering, we lift them up unto the Lord: and thisChrysost. ex vari is locis in M [...]tch. Hom. 9. or ( [...]s Aug. in Psal. a 39. & de dono persever. l. 2. c. 13.) in sacramentis fi­delium, And a­gain (de bonovi­duitat. c. 16.) inter sacra mi­steria cor hab [...]re sursum jubemur. See Jewels De­fence. Part. 2. c. 14. divis. 2. in conspectu Sacrificii, as they then called that Sacra­ment, not dreaming of such a Sacrifice, as is now pretended in the Popish Masse. Of theConcil. Valent. An 444 Can. 6 Holy, Holy, Holy, of the,Concil Val. Can 5 Basil ep. 63 Aug. ep. 178 Sozom. l. 7. c. 9 Lord have mercy upon us, Christ have mercy, &c. Of the Hallelujah, or Praise ye the Lord. Of the Gloria Patri, or Glory be to the Father, &c. a Doxology wont to be added at the end of everyGraecls usita­tum terminare p [...]eces aliquâ Doxologiâ Hinc Psalmis addere solius Gloria Patri See Conc. Val. Can. 7. & also Platina de vitis pontific, Damas. 1. Psalme, yea sometimes of their Prayers also. Of that in the Communion, It is very meet and right so to do — Therefore with Angels, and Arch-angels, &c. I might give (yea they are gathered to mine hand byBall. trial of Separ. ch. 9. p. 175, 176. & ch. 7. Answer to Objection 3. Mr. Ball) a cloud of Witnesses, Councels, and Fathers, to evidence this practice in the ancient Church; And though the whole Liturgies, that go under their names be conceived to be of later date, yet these particulars are acknowledged to have been in use in those elder times.

So that all these things considered, there yet appears nothing, which can prove our Liturgy repugnant to the Rule of the Gospel, or upon this account unlawful to be used,

Sect. 25 2. Having now shewed our warrant, and cleared these Re­sponsals and Alternate Readings, and evidenced their non Re­pugnancy to the Scriptures; it will be matter of lesse difficulty to solve that Objection of their Repugnancy to edification; for as to this it is said,

Object 2 That they cause a confused murmur in the Congregation; as to edification whereby what is read is lesse intelligible, and therefore unedifying: and again, we may warrantably professe, in the name of our selves, and many sober pious persons, that we experience that these things are against our edification. But for Answer,

Sect. 26 Answ. 1 1. The Ancient Church thought them not so: their constant practice shews, that they judged this way expedient and edifi­ing.

2. If any cannot experience his own edification, I shall earnestly beseech him, before he passe a censure upon, or con­demn the practice; that he would first do this one thing, viz. seriously, sincerely, and impartially, as in the presence of the great God, (that Jer. 17.10. searcheth the hearts and tryeth the reins) examine his own Soul, and see from whence it really commeth to passe, that he is not edified: whether it be not from some­thing in himself; rather then any thing in the matter or form of the Prayers and Hymnes, so read or sung. For, if it be ei­ther from his own carelessenesse, or non attention; or from a prejudice in his mind against the way and practice; that he receives not that profit, which he otherwise might: there is no reason, for this, to condemne the form; when all the fault must be charged upon his own self: let but such a Soul endeavour to purge out those corruptions, and prejudices; let him seri­ously attend the service, and mind what he is about; and with­out disputing cordially joyn in those Petitions, Orizons, and praises: I doubt not but every such humble, pious, devout Christian will experimently find, his heart in a good measure excited, quickened, inflamed in his devotions; and then see, that these are not unedifying. It is true, indeed, when men look upon these things with an evil eye; when they shall give themselves (as some have done) liberty to vilifie, reproach, and scorn the way of the Church; and contemptuously call it, The Chattering of the Priest and Clark one to another: it is no wonder, if they be not edified by that which they so much despise. But if this be an argument, it holds as strongly a­gainst all the conceived prayers and preachings of men: For, we cannot be ignorant (when these late daies have given us too sad experience) how many persons have taken up a prejudice [Page 158]against the Ministers: they conceive such and such to be formal, and cold in their Prayers, dull and heavy in their Preaching: they despise the persons, and then their labours; and say they cannot edifie by them. Scarce any have been found (though never so eminent) but to some or other their Prayers and Preaching have been judged unedifying: yea, to some, The whole order of the Ministery hath been so judg­ed: and yet this is no argument, to prove them so, when the onely fault is in the passions, or prejudice of the hearers. This was that, which hindred the edification of the Jew in Christs timeJo. 7.41, 52. He was of Galilee. Math. 13.55. The Carpenters Son, &c. and from hence it was, that He Mark 6.3, 5. could do no mighty works there; not because he had not power to do so; but because of the hardness of their hearts: who through their prejudice a­gainst him could not receive the things of their peace. And really, I fear, that in our case it is the great prejudice, which is in some men, against the Persons and Places of those Reve­rend Bishops and others, who impose this Liturgy, that makes men dislike the Form for their sake: and it edifies not, onely because it comes from those persons, which they love not. I charge not this upon all, onely I do desire every one seriously to examine his own Soul; and see, if somthing of this nature be not in himself, before he passe a judgment of non-edificati­on upon the thing, or use required; as if it arose from the na­ture of that, which arises onely from the nature of mens pas­sion and prejudice. And withal I might oppose (and justly) to this, the experiences of others, sober, pious Christians; whose hearts (as thousands will testifie) have been wonder­fully excited, quickened, inflamed, and so edified by their (not formal, but) religious, devout attendance on these holy performances.

Sect. 28 3. But, for the thing it self: Is there not in it reall matter of edification? may not, yea, doth not the very Alternate Read­ing and Responsals (supposing still the attention of the mind and heart) edifie? The Confused Murmur (as it is called) makes not the words intelligible to them, who do themselvs bear a part, and say those words. All edification (as was noted, by those right reverend BishopsAccompt of proceed Answ. to N. 3.4. at the conference) [Page 159]is not to be confined to the informing of our Reasons and Ʋnder­standings; but there is also very much of edification, (build­ing up the Soul in Grace, Holiness, Faith, Fervour, toward eternal life) in the quickening, continuing, and uniting our devoti­ons, which are apt to sleep, freeze, and grow flat in a long continued Prayer. And people, no doubt, may be, and many souls are, thus very much edified, when they are often awakened by fre­quent Amens, and Interlocutions; being thus excited and stir­red up by mutual exaltations, provocations, petitions, holy conten­tions and strivings, which shall shew his own, and stir up others zeal to the glory of God. It is not for edification that by that short Petition, Lord have mercy upon us, and incline our hearts to keep this Law, after every commandement,Accompt of proc. p. 103. Answ. to Sect. 1. P. 17. Christian People are taught, as by a quick and active Prayer, to aske and beg upon their knees pardon for their lives, forfeited by the breach of each Commande­ment; and to pray for Grace and strength to keep them for the time to come? In that, so much decryed, but indeed excellent, Litany, how are the dull hearts of men quickened and awakened; and the truly pious, devout Souls inflamed by their own frequent closing in the several petitions for every particular matter therein begged? Doth not the whole Congregation by these their Petitions and Responsals shew, that they are sensible of Gods Honour; troubled for their own wants; and do there­fore desire that God should have all possible glory; and beg, that their own wants may be relieved? These being things, which in the Assemblies of Christians should not coldly or faintly be done; these their own Responsals, and verbal con­currence, do much conduce to the wakening of the Soul; and to put into, and preserve in the heart that heat and vigor, which should make them, at the end, sound forth together their Amen (as is recorded of the Primitive Christians) with that fervour, and zeal, ut reboârit instar fulminis, aut irati maris; that he that heard the Eccho of their zealous tongues, might suppose, he heard the sound of the roaring of the Sea, or the mighty voice of the Powerful thunder.

CHAP. VII. Two other exceptions answered, and 3. the frequent Intercessions, and short Prayers, as also 4. the parcells of Scripture for Epistles and Gospels, Vindicated.

Sect. 1 HAving now in the former Chapters cleared those two grand Exceptions, which charge the Li­turgy with Vaine Repetitions: and the Respon­sals, with the Hinderance of Edification; and Repugnancy to Scripture practice. The others, which follow about the Brevity of the Pray­ers, and the Communion Service, will be easily answered.

Except. 3 3. The next Exception then, against this Forme is, The Brevity or the Number of short Prayers, which would be much better in one continued Prayer; not in several shreds or snips (as some call them, rather the Prayer). And these are charg­ed to be unnecessary Abruptions, and Intercesions, neither agreeable to Scriptural examples, (when many petitions are offered up at the same time) nor suited to the gravity and seriousness of that holy duty.

Sect. 2 Answer. I Answer, 1. That all possible Gravity, and Seriousness should be used in Prayer, which is our addresse to the most High, and Holy God, is unquestionable. But it is also be­yond dispute, that this Seriousness is a quality of the mind; and may as well be in short, as long Prayers: yea, too wofull experience shewes, that men may trifle in longer, as well as in [Page 161] shorter Orizons: and yet (the words of the mouth, and carri­age of the person being discoveries of the inward affections) it is confessed that we are to shew also as much reverence and gravity, as we can, in our words and gestures. Yea, in publick services, all things should be so ordered, as that the people may be then taught an holy reverence; and kept in a serious frame of Spirit during all those sacred offices. I can­not, therefore, but (with thatExtra modum & ordinem ora­tiones multipli­cant, undc audi­tores fibi ingra­tos efficiunt & populum Dei po­tius fastidio a­vertunt, quam alliciunt. Du­rant. Rational. integra brevitas. l. 4 cap. 15. learned Papist) dislike, that men should multiplie, or lengthen out, their prayers beyond all measure and order; whereby the hearers are wearied, and the people of God are not allured by the sweetnesse of the holy du­ty; but driven from it, through the disdain of the tedious per­formance. And I cannot but approve that rule of anothers,In Divino officio non tam overasa prolixitas quam devota & servetur. Petr de Allia. Lib. de Reform. [...]ccle. Cap de Reform. Praelator. That in divine offices there by observed, not so much a bur­densome prolixity, as a devout and intire brevity.

2. But it would be an unjust charge, to say this Liturgy is guilty of either of these faults condemned. We have several short prayers, but not multiplyed beyond measure, or the bounds of a grave decorum: nor are they in the body of them lengthned out to a burthensome prolixity. They cannot be accused to cause a wearinesse by a confused tediousnesse; but they rather refresh by a grateful variety.

Sect. 4 3. And in this, our Church is not beholding to the Masse­book; but hath the practice and judgement of the ancient Church for her direction. It was the Doctrine of St. Chry­sostom, Deum trans, non longos ex­tendat Sermones nec in longum o­rationem produ­cat; sed pauca et simplicia ve rba dicat. Non enim in verborum multitudine, sed in mentis solertiae positum est, ut exaudiatur. — Breves enim & frequentes orationes fieri Christus & Paulus praeceperunt, paucie ex intervallis. Nam si Sermonem in longum extenderis, in negligentiam frequenter lapsus, mul­tam dia bolo surrependi facultatem dederis; & supplantandi, & abducendi cogitationem ab his quae dicuntur. Si vero continuas & crebras orationes facias, totumque tempus interpolans frequentiâ, facilè poteris modestiam exhibere, & ipsas orationes cum multâ facies solertiae. Chr. Hom 74. Tom. 4. p. 641, 642. That, he that prayeth should not make long speeches, nor draw out his prayer into length; but speak few and plain words — for the hope of being heard lyeth not in the multitude of words, but inward disposition of the heart. — Christ (saith [Page 162]he) and Paul have enjoyned short and frequent prayers to be made, with small pauses, or intercisms (and such and no other are ours in this Liturgy) between them: for if thou draw thy speech into length, then falling frequently into negligence, thou wilt give the Devil too great opportunity to steal in, supplant, and withdraw thy thoughts from those things that are spoken. Whereas if thou makest frequent prayers, and throughout all the time doth renew them often; thou maist with ease shew a moderation, and yet make thy prayers with much skill. Agreeable to this, is that which St. Austin records of the Brethren in Egypt: of whom (saith he)Dicuntur fra tres in AEgyp­to crebras qui­dem habere ora­tiones, eas (que) brevissimas, & raptim quodam modo jaculatas; ne illa vigilan­tèr erecta (quae orantiplurimum necessaria est) per productiores moras evanescat, & hebetetur in­tentio. Aug. ep. 131. it is reported that they have many prayers, but every of them very short, suddenly darted forth, least that intention of mind being vigilantly raised (which is very necessary for him that prayeth) should by long continuance vanish, or grow blunt. In their judgements then, by short and frequent Prayers the Soul is kept awake, and in a more quick and lively frame. And this I am sure is no enemy to seriousnesse or gravity.

Sect. 5 A. Nor is this so disagreeable to Scripture patterns, but that we may find some examples of this also. Neither can I see, why the frequent repetition of Gods Name and Attributes at the beginning of our several requests; and closing them with the merits and mediation of Christ, should be suggested as an ir­reverent, affected, empty tossing of Gods name in prayer (an ex­pression which I am heartily sorry, that grave, serious, sober men should use, to vilifie an established order in the Church) any more then (supposing it used with holy, faithful and hum­ble hearts) that repetition of this name of God no lesse than four times in two verses,Psal. 42.1, 2. As the Hart panteth—so panteth my soul after thee, O God. My Soul is a thirst for God—The Living God; when shall I come—before God? The Church, by these quick and short prayers, seeming to teach her Children, how the gracious heart sends forth its desires & longings after God. The constant attendant of the Harts braying after the waters, is quick and short breathings; the breath in hast drawn in, and as suddenly sent forth again: so the gracious Soul long­ing after the presence of God, the enjoyment of Pardon, Peace, Grace, Life, and Communion with Christ, is thus pant­ing, and these quick, pithy expressions, and short prayers, a [...] [Page 163]lively resemblances of the quick and short breathings of the Soul after God: as there, O God, the living God, when shall I appear before God. And if the same words may be repeated, (as no doubt they may) without Tautological vanity; and it is soAccompt of Proc. p. 62. confessed if it be not from emptinesse, or neglect of order and affectation: Why should such emptinesse, affectation, or neg­lect of order, be imputed to our prayers meerly upon the ac­count of such a repetition? if any persons be guilty of such defaults, or neglects in the use of them; let them bear their own blame: let it not be imputed to the Prayers, which may be used by holy and humble hearts, and no doubt are, without that affectation, &c.

Object. Sect. 6 But,Accompt of Proc. Rep'y, to Answ. to Except. 16. Sect. 3. though in Psalmes and Hymnes, where the affections are to be elevated by such figurative streins and elegancies, as best beseem Poetry and Rapture, such repetitions are not condemned: yet to make a prayer of a few petitions, and begin and end every such, with Gods name and Christs merits, this is condemned as an affected empty tossing, &c.

Solut. Sect. 7 Let us then see, if we have not some such thing in Scripture examples, which are not Psalmes, or Hymnes, or Raptures of Poetry. That Prayer of Daniel, which upon the expiring of the 70. years Captivity he put up to God, for Confession of sins, and Humiliation, and praying for the restauration of Je­rusalem, seems indeed to stand as one continued prayer (and yet, if so, it is no longer then some one may be found in our Common-Prayer-Book) but observe it, and ye will see it to consist of several intercisions, and, even such short prayers as ours, beginning still anew with the name and attributes of God. He beginneth,Dan. 9.4. O Lord, the great and dreadful God; keeping Covenant and mercy to them that fear him—We have sinned, &c. again, within three verses,v. 7. O Lord, Righteous­nesse belongeth unto thee—then a fresh, in the very next verse,v. 8. O Lord, to us belongeth Confusion—and as closing this,v. 15. And now O Lord our God—then immediately beginneth ano­ther prayer,o. 16. O Lord, according to all thy righteousnesse I be­seech thee—again, in the very next, he beginneth with the name of God, and closeth with the merits of Christ,v. 17. Now, therefore, O our God, hear the prayer of thy servant, and his sup­plication, [Page 164]and cause thy face to shine upon the Sanctuary, that is desolate, for the Lords sake: yet he immediately begins again,v. 18. O my God incline thine ear and hear, open thine eyes and see— and closing that also with, Not for our righteousnesse, but thy great mercies. He presently begins again, and subjoyns ano­ther short prayer, full of nothing but such repetitions, quick and short breathings, four times in one versev 19. O Lord hear, O Lord forgive; O Lord hearken and do: deferre not for thine own sake, O my God. Here we see a Religious service perfor­med with many such short prayers (for they are evidently cal­led so, [...] Preces, Suppli­cations for grace and mercy a [...] not one, but as many, and several,v 3. Supplications in the Plurall) and as frequent repetitions as any can be found in our Liturgy: and I think none dare accuse this holy Prophet as guilty of an affected empty tossing of Gods Name, &c. Yea, Christ himself hath given us a president in some cases of not only repeating the same words, but the same thing; repeating the same name and attributes of God, &c thrice,Math. 26, 39, 42, 44. Father if it be possible, &c. I shall conclude this with the words of that truly Reverend Person:Bp. Downam [...] of Prayer. c. 22. p. 13 [...]. Wherefore, howsoever some do carp at the short prayers in our Liturgy, calling them shreds; and wishing, that in one continued prayer, all our requests should be joyned: Notwithstanding, the wisdome of those learned and godly men, who out of the most ancient Liturgies compiled ours, is to be commended; who, considering that our long continued prayer would to the greatest sort seem tedious, and breed distraction and wandring thoughts; have set forth many short prayers, to avoid wearinesse, and to keep the mind of the people attentive.

Sect. 8 Having now vindicated the lawful use of the Liturgy, as to the frequent Intercisions, and short Prayers, let it not be ac­counted a digression if I take a transient view of somwhat else of the like nature, which was somtimes made the matter of.

Except 4 4. Another Exception. Such shreddings (as some pleased to call it) as of prayers, so of the Scriptures; taking here and there a piece for an Epistle, and Gospel.

Sect. 9 Answ. And thus I shall in transitu give a short account of the use and standing of these in the Liturgy. I mention these here, where we are considering the Form and Order; for, as to the matter of them, they being part of the Holy Scriptures, that [Page 165]admits no dispute: but the exception is taken to that manner of Section, and Division which is used; and the order of read­ing them; and calling Historical parts, the Epistle, which is onely matter of Form and Order. But I Answer,

• 1. Sect. 10 If the offence be at the Division, that but a piece of a Chapter is taken to be read: the like offence may as well be taken at a Chapter, that the whole Book or Epistle is not read. For that Division, which we now receive, was not ab initio, nor very ancient: and why we may not upon particular occa­sions make such or such Sections, as our Fathers have done longer or shorter, I see not. What
  See several v­rieties o [...] divisi­ons of the Gos­pel, &c. in Balls [...]ial of Separ. ch 3. p 3 [...]. out of several Au­thors.
  variety of such divi­sions hath been in several Churches, is not unknown to the learned. The first Author of that division of Chapters, which we follow, some
  River Isagog. ad Script c 29. Sect. 21.
  conceive to be Hugo, Cardinalis, about the year of Christ, 1254. and that is not so long since as to be accounted ancient. He that put the
  Henr. St [...]ph. ad Lector. in Conc N Test.
  Latin Bible first into Verses, and so also divided the New Testament, was Robert Stephen. These are things, therefore, too low for wise men to contend about.
• 2. For the thing it self, we need say no more to justifie it, then
  • 1. Sect. 11 The Jewish Church at the times of their solemn assem­blies, had lectures out of the Law and the Prophets, which the
    Act 13.27 et 15.21.
    Scriptures clearly intimate. Junius
    Ju [...]. in Act. 13.15.
    out of Mai­monid. gives us this account of the manner. The custome of reading the Law in the Synagogues every Sabbath Day, they say, was delivered by Moses, and again brought in by Ezra after the return from captivity; and then there was added the reading of the Prophets also. The Law they divided into so many Sections (which they called [...]) as there were sabbaths in the year; that every year the whole Law, i. e. the Pentateuch, might be read through: which was ended at the Feast of Tabernacles, and then to begin again in course. Out of the Prophets also cer­tain Portions or Chapters (which they call [...]) answering to the Sections of the Law, in number, and (as near as they could) in matter and consent in Doctrine also, were collected and appointed to be read. This reading of the Law and the Prophets being finish­ed, they, having first obtained leave from the Master of the [Page 166]Synagogue, out of the Scriptures preached to the people.
  • 2. Sect 12 Agreeable to this in a great measure (though not in all circumstances) was the practice of the Christian Church, both in ancient and latter times, in the Christian Assemblies, they
    See many Col­lections to this purpose, in Ball Trial of Separ. p. 31.
    had lectures out of the Prophets, and Apostles; before Ser­mon they read som portion of the Old and New Testament (as did the Jews, the Law and the Prophets) and those lessons did usually afford texts for their preachers. In some,
    Hook. Eccles. P [...]l. 15. § 20.
    we read of an Apostolical constitution for the
    P [...]st lectionem legis, et prophe­tarum, et Acto­rum, et Evange­liorum, sa [...]utat ecclesiam, di­ecns, Gratia Domini nostri, &c et post salu­tationem allo­quantur populo Sermone Hosta­torio. Clem. Constit. Apost. l. 8. c. 5.
    reading of the Law, the Prophets, the Gospels, and the Acts, and after all these, the bles­sing given, The Grace of our Lord Jesus, &c. then this service being ended, a Sermon preached. Ordinarily they were read in course and order, (as those who read the Sermons of St. Chrysostome and St. Augustine, shall soon find) but somtimes som
    See several te­stimonies of this in Ba [...]l. Trial. &c. c. 8 p. 144
    peculiar lecture was read, and the order interrupted by an intervening festival; which had a peculiar portion of the Gospel suited to the day and solemnity. And this was not wholly arbitrary; for the Scriptures being not all of one sort, some parts being easie, some hard: Direction where to begin in reading and how far to proceed, is not altogether superflu­ous. And the Church appointing such Chapters, or Portions at such times, and upon such occasions, as are judged to fit the seasons, and to afford profitable instructions to the hearers; can neither be repugnant to Scripture or the Christian practice. There is nothing in this then but may lawfully be complied with, God having commanded us to read the Scriptures, but what book, what chapter, such a day, or on such occasions, or how much at a time, are things (as
    Baxt. his Disput Disp. 5. ch. 2. Sect. 13, 14.
    Mr. Baxter himself acknow­ledgeth) left to Humane Pendence to determine; and I am sure, if it be determined by our Superiors, it is no part of prudence to oppose their determinations in this thing.
  • 3. Sect. 13 For these things under this notion of Epistles, and Gos­pels, we read of them in the Liturgies of the Greek Church. But the first mention that I find of them under this name, is in a Manuscript, that I have seen, of one Nilus, whom in Ec­clesiastical story, we find to be both a Bishop, and a Martyr: so he is called by the
    Cent. 4. c. 4. de [...]oct Sect. de bon oper.
    Centurists of Magdel. but whether the Bishop, and the Martyr be the same person, is some doubt; [Page 167]a Nilus there was a
    Fuseb Hist. l. 8. c. 13.
    Martyr in Egypt under Dicclesian: a Ni­lus (whether the same or no) a
    Cent. Mag. Cent. 3. p 22
    Bishop in Palestina, & a Martyr, a Nilus reckoned among the
    Cent. 4. c 10. p 6 [...]5.
    Doctors of the Affrican Church, who is said to write many things, some precepts concerning good works according to the Order of the Law: certain [...], or, short sentences of Piety, and Morality, Among these sen­tences there is mention made of these Epistles read in the Church, which he calleth, (as among the Greeks they were called) [...], because usually they were portions taken out of the Acts or writings of the Apostles: among other of his Sentences, this is one, If thou comest into the Church, and seest none there, then go thy self, and out of the book there read the E­pistle ( [...]) and go thy wayes, &c. it seemeth by this, that the Bible lay then in the Church, and such portions of a Liturgy, and Sections of the Gospel, or Apostolick writings appointed for such and such dayes. In the Liturgy of Chry­sostome, this office is called [...], and thus ordered. In the morning service they did read one Gospel, a por­tion out of the Evangelists: after this, at their Missa, or Holy Communion (for the notion of the Popish Sa­crifice was nothing of their Masse in those dayes) they had this order — Allelujah, and a Psalme of David, being ended, the Deacon saith [...], Let us attend: then the Reader ha­ving repeated the [...], which was, two verses of some Psalme of David, suited to the nature of the Epistle then to be read, and the Festivity of the day then Celebrated; The Deacon said again [...], Let us attend: then the Epistle was read: that being ended; and some inter­locutions between the Priest, Deacon, and Quire, sung; and some other rites passed; the Priest standing at the Holy Table, with his face towards the West, i. e. to the Congregation, he said with a loud voice [...], Let us hear the holy Evangelist: then the Deacon read the Gospel appointed for the day. This ended; the Catechumens are dismissed, and the Communicants proceed on. Priest [...], Let us with our whole heart say, and with our whole mind let us say—Chorus, [...]—Lord have mercy upon us; Deac. [...], [Page 168] O Lord Almigh­ty, the God of our Fathers, we beseech thee hear us, and have mer­cy upon us. Chor. [...]. Lord have mercy upon us. Deac. [...]. Have mercy upon us, O God, according to thy great mercy, we beseech thee hear us, and have mercie upon us. Chor. [...]. Lord have mercy upon us. Deac. [...] — We pray thee moreover — going on to pray for their Kings and Emperors, &c.

These things I have cited thus at large, that it may appear, that those several Practices, and Interlocutions, and Respon­sals, as in the Liturgy in general, so particularly at the Commu­nion, and the reading of the Epistles, and Gospels, as we use them, in such Sections, and Order, is no new thing in the Church, nor did the ancient Christians think this any way repugnant to the holy Canon.

Sect. 14 So that if we really consider the nature of the office; the matter appointed; the order of reading; the practice of the Church: here is nothing in this, that should make us fear to observe this constitution; nothing that will engage us in sin in the use of it. And, when the matter appointed is but the rea­ding of such portions of Scripture, me thinks it should not be a matter of contention among wise men; how much is to be read, or where, or in what order; whether out of the Apostles, or Prophets, or Acts; whether called the Epistle, or, for the E­pistle. These are things (almost infinitely) below the Peace of the Church.

Thus, I think, I have gone over the most material excepti­ons against the Liturgy, as relating to the Form, Frame, Man­ner of Composure, and Order therein prescribed: and have so far cleared it, that it may appear, there is nothing herein, whose use is unlawful; or contrary either to Scripture, or the Gravity and Seriousnesse of a Religious service, and the holy managing of our publick Devotions.

CHAP. VIII. The Matter of the Liturgy examined, and the exceptions against it. 1. As Defective. 2. As using corrupt Tran­slations. 3. As prescribing Apochry­phal Books. 4. As to the Form of Ab­solution, considered and answered.

Sect. 1 HAving examined the Form, we now are to consi­der the Matter of the Service, and Prayers pre­scribed. And if there be nothing in this, evil to be done; nothing required of us, which is ei­ther against the Rule of Faith, or Good Manners; nothing contrary to Faith or Holynesse: (Then according to that knownQuod neque co [...]ra fidem, neque contra bo­nos mores in­sungitur, indif­ [...]ren [...]e [...] est ha­bendum, et pro eorum, inter quos vivitur, societate serven­dum est. Aug. ad Jan. Ep. 118! Rule) there remains nothing in it, but what may with a good Conscience be lawfully used, and submitted to: and this I hope to make appear in these ensuing Chapters.

And the truth is, this is a matter of no great difficulty, and therefore doth require no great skill, or length of discourse to clear it; for among all the exceptions, there is not one, that chargeth the matter as evil. Let us take a view of the particu­lars, and a transcient view, in the most, will serve the turn.

Sect. 2 Excep. 1 Defectiveness. 1. The first charge is Defectivenesse, or want of due matter that should be,Accompt of pro. gen. [...]xc. 17. Sect. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. no preparatory addresse: sins in Confession not expresse enough, nor sufficiently enumerated: prayers for the most part consisting of meer generals, without mention of the par­ticulars, wherein the generals exist; The Catechisme de­fective [Page 170]in many essential necessary Doctrines of our Religion, &c. But,

1.Answered. Sect. 3. It might be answered, that many of these things are not wholly wanting, but in some good measure there: That (de­spise not, O Lord, humble and contrite hearts) in the Preface can­not with reason be recited as an exhortation; but is really an addresse to God for acceptance. Nor can these words, [That those things may please him which we do at this present] be rational­ly said to be no words of prayer, but a part of an exhortation to the people, when they are expressly put up as a prayer in this petiti­onary form, (wherefore we beseech him to grant us true repentance that—) and the confession of sin is comprehensive of all the parti­culars required: Psalms and Hymns there are of praise suited to Gospel worship; and petitions both for general and spe­cial mercies.

Sect. 4 2. But supposing this defectiveness in the particulars pro­ved; granting there may be some reason to plead for a fuller expression and enumeration in a publike Liturgie: yet all this signifies nothing to prove an unlawfulness of the use of that which is: The absence of some good, or perhaps, necessary thing, is not sufficient to prove it unlawful to use the present. All that we are required, is to use these forms, the matter where­of being agreeable to the Word of God; we may lawfully, beyond dispute use them, though there be not other particu­lars, which we judge as good, or necessary: We are not requi­red to give our judgments concerning other things, but to conform to the use of these.

2.Sect. 5. Except. 2. Corrupt Trans­lations. Another exception is, against the corrupt Translations used, and appointed to be used: These Translations are mentioned by the Divines in the ConferenceAcc. of proceed. Gen. Exc. 8.13. in the several Epistles and Gospels, but by others, in the old version of the Psalmes, wherein some passages are said to be contrary to the Hebrew Text; as particularly that in the Old,Psal. 105.28. (They were not obe­dient) to the Hebrew and new Translation, [they rebelled not against his word] and again, in the Old,Psal. 106.30. then stood up Phi­nehas and prayed] to that in the New, agreeable to the Hebrew, and the truth of theNum. 25.7. sacred Storie, (Then stood up Phinehas and executed judgment.

• [Page 171]1. Answ. As to the Epistles and Gospels, Sect. 6 this exception is now ta­ken off, not by a verbal answer, but a reall deed; that Old trans­lation being rejected, and the new brought into those parts of the Liturgy.
• 2. Sect. 7 But in the Psalms (whether because of the Musick used in Cathedrals, being set to that Version; or for what other reasons appearing to those Reverend persons, to whom the business of the Liturgy was referred) the Translation is not thought fit to be altered; they must stand as they do; but yet here is nothing that can amount to such an evill, as for whose sake the Liturgie, wherein this Version is retained, should be deemed unlawful to be used: For,
  • 1. Sect. 8 Possibly, the use of this version is not expressly enjoyn­ed us, in our constant Parochial worship. I know the Ka­lendar prescribes what particular Psalms shall be read in their daily order; and what special Psalms, on special dayes and so­lemnities: but I know no Rubrick, or Canon that appointeth them to be read in that Translation, though it be there retained, and printed with the Book as it was then in use, when the Book was first compiled: And I doubt not therefore, but that we obey the Law when we read these Psalms, though in the New translation: And I know some, who in the former dayes did so read them; but I am yet to learn, that any one was ever questioned for so doing; even then, when the dayes are said to be days of the greatest persecutions against the Non-Conformists.
  • 2. Sect. 9 Suppose we be enjoyned to use this, this is all, that we read the Psalms according to that version; but this is not to judge this the best, nor to justifie any errors, if such be in the Translati­on; the New Version, may have its errors, but the use of this is not to maintain those errors.
  • 3. Sect. 10 Neither is the translation so faulty, as to be guilty of any material error. Allow it to be the work of men, and we cannot well suppose, but there be some faults and escapes in it; for what translation hath not such? The New Translation is deservedly judged, by men well skilled in the Original langua­ges, the best extant: yet is not this perfect. For, who is there [Page 172]almost, that hath either commented, or paraphrased upon the whole, or explained, or preached on some several positions; but he hath attempted to amend it; and given quite another sence, then the words of the present Translation seem to mean: and yet accounted blameless for so doing? and in ma­ny of these there is in their judgments, as great a contrariety to the Hebrew Text; as any in the Old Translation to the New: So that here also there may be a difference from the new translation, and yet not from the Original Hebrew. Yea, in the Hebrew it self we find as vast a difference between the [...] and the [...] the reading and writing observed by the Masorites; whose work it was, to distinguish the Canonical Scripture from the Apocryphal; to purge the Authentick Canon from all cor­ruption crept in during the captivity; and that they might prevent such for the future, to number the Verses, Words, yea, and Letters of every Book; and also to note the different wri­ting and reading. And there we find as great differences, as any observed in these Versions. Yet notwithstanding this, these Holy men who were so exact and careful, and zealous for the purity of the sacred Oracles, did not judge it expedient to deny or cast out the received writing, but kept that which they found in the Text, and onely noted the [...], or reading in the Margin, which is evident to any that hath (though but cursorily) read the Hebrew Bible.
  • 4. Sect. 11 For further satisfaction, I shall not think it lost labour to transcribe the words of a
    Huttons An­swer to Rea­sons for refu­sal of subscri­ption to the Common prayer, cap. 1. & 2.
    learned man, because they do fully take off the Objection, and the Book is not in every hand, nor easie to be had; who (when these very Pleas were made by some Ministers of Devon, (about or soon after the Conference at Hampton Court) for their refusal of Subscripti­on as the
    Can. 36.
    Canon required) thus answers these contrarieties mentioned in those two places of the Psalms.

1. As to the one, the words are [...]. The difference in reading, in the old Version, [They were not obedi­ent—] in the New, Psal. 105.28. examined. but then not extant, [they rebelled not against his word] these seem directly contrary. To satisfie this he doth first premise this general consideration, ‘that in a place [Page 173]challenged to be contrary to Gods Word, we must know: 1. What contrariety is, and what diversity. 2. Whence the diversity, as, 1. By variety of Copies. 2. Ambiguity of words. 3. Propriety of speech, sentence and phrase must be observed. 4. Pointing, with distinctions. 5. A tuning and accent. 6. Circumstances of the place. 7. The Analogy and proportion of Faith. Having thus premi­sed, he applies these to the particular thus;’

1. As to this place, men might know, that the word [ [...] ‘not,] is in Hebrew taken sometimes for ( [...] to him) as ma­ny times the Masoreths note it (I suppose he meaneth writing of one in the Text,’ and noting the other in the the Margin, as indeed it is frequent, and in many places the Marginal reading seems to be the more genuine, as par­ticularly that in Psal. 100.3. [...] Marg. [...] And to him we, i. e. His we are, even because he made us, which I con­ceive to be the genuine meaning of this place, parallel to that,Ps. 95. The sea is his, for he made it,) and if we allow it may be so taken, this (he conceiveth) if well thought upon, would be enough to cool the heats and invectives of men, against the Translation of this word.

‘2. In this seeming contrariety about this, [not obedient, and not disobedient] we may find at the first view the like inIob 13.15. See this Text canvased by Mr. Gataker in his Cyn. et Miscel. Advers. l. 3. c. 18. p. 187, 188. Job, [...] Behold, he will kill me, I will not trust,—Or, will I not trust in him? The Geneva o­mitteth this word (not) [...] Lo, though he slay me, yet will I trust these I will, and I will not, may be thought to thwart one another, comparing the Original and the Transla­tions. But a seeming contrariety it is, and no other; for set a fit accent upon the words, and give them the point of an Interrogative, and there is no odds; Will he kill me? and will I not trust in him? the same in effect, as, Though he kill me, yet I will trust in him. The like course doth Ju­nius take, to succour the Chaldee Paraph. against Bel­larmine, as in Cains speech,Gen. 4.23. Bellarm. de ver­bo Dei. l. 2. c. 3. I have killed a man, The Chal­dee to be read by way of interrogation, [...]. Iun. Have I not killed a man? So where Bellarmine carps at the Septuag. for that they readGen. 26. Bellarm. ib. c. 6. we have found water, the Greek is, Have we not [Page 174]found? so far off must we be from over busie, and hasty prejudicing a translation, though it give in affirmative terms, when the Hebrew may seem to deny.’

‘3. There is not more difference in these [Not Obedient, and Not Disobedient] then in that to the Jews,Joh. 5.35. [...] ab [...] Nolu­istis ab [...] Voluistis. Aret. in l. oc. [Yee would for a season rejoyce in his light] and, [Yee would not—] so Aretius interprets it; both true, and of the same persons: yet a contrary will.’

‘4. Admit the same speech be delivered of one and the same thing; one affirming, the other denying: yet no con­trariety, i. e. no contradiction. For examine the speech,Mic. 5 2. Mat. 2. 6. See these places more fully and exactly ventila­ted in Gataker, Cvn. lib. 3 c. 18 p 200.201.202. [Thou Bethlehem art the least] and, [Thou—art not the least—] In the one, the least, because of the smalness of the circuit, in the other, not the least, being dignified by our Saviours birth.’

‘5. Read we a contrariety? as sometimes we do: yet either our ignorance it is, that we see not; or, if we see, want of discretion, that we give not our selves and others satisfaction in this case, St. Mathew writeth, There was [...], Mat. 8.30. a far off from them, an herd of Swine: St. Mark, and St. Luke say, There [...]. Mar. 5.13. Luk. 8 32. by them. Let men learn what this means, and having considered these, let them demand sa­tisfaction for the other.’

‘6. Say, one place sorbids, another commands the same thing: will men take part with one against the o­ther? or, not lay their hands upon their mouths; till they know, what answer to make?Hos 4.15. Come ye not to Gilgal; go not to Bethaven: here is a prohibition: yet in another place,Amos 4.4. Come to Bethel, and transgresse; to Gilgal—here an injunction. How? doth one bid, another forbid? What! is God divided? is their dissention in the Spirit of Ʋnity? or, is there more then one truth? Prophet against Prophet? Osee against Amos; and Amos against Osee? nothing so. [Page 175]The plain-song is negative, Go not up: The Descant is vary­ing the tune by way of Irony, or mock; as that of Elijah, when bidding Baals Priests1 King 18.27. Cry aloud, he gives a rea­son, because, Baal was pursuing his Enemies.’

‘7. We take not this to be more prejudicial to the truth, than the word, Cajnan, Luke 6.36. in the Genealogy of Christ, put in by the seventy. Here, let us observe how Junius fol­loweth the truth in love, speaking of this point. The Ob­jection is, if that word Cajnan be admitted, the autho­rity of Lukes Gospel is impreached, for,Falso adhibe­tur Cajnanis uomen the name of Cajnan is falsely put in, to this, Junius answers,Etsi, re fal­sum suisse dabi­mus, tamen su­it opinab. le, quam opinionem in vulgo rocep­tissimam re­spexit lucas. Jun. paral l. 1. Paral. 60. Though indeed false, yet was it otherwise supposed. I, but, Luke knew, it was false,S [...]ivit qui­dem illud, sed hoc [...]modi esse sciv [...] q [...]od re [...] tantum uni­us bi [...]ori [...] no [...] autem fid [...]i ca­tholicae [...]erita­tem effend ret. ibid He knew it indeed, but he knew it to be such a point, which might offend the truth of one only Historie, but not of the Catholick Faith: I, but Luke, by this means did confirm an errour; but, it was no such pur­pose of his; the remedy he knew would have been worse, if in all hast, out of season, he should have attempted the removal of this name:Propter can­sam quae non at [...]ingit funda mentum ullum fidei propri, & per s [...] pericli­tata fuisset scripturae authoritas &c. for so the authority of the Scripture might have been endangered; whereas this [...] point did not properly, of it self, touch the foundation of Faith. I, but this is the wisdome of the flesh:^[c] No, it is the wisdome of the Spirit, that those ^[d] 70 changed Moses, it was not well done, that the Apostles and Evangelists received it being changed, and so did use it, I hold it wisely done by the Spirit of God, and sorting with the times. Then closing the point, desireth of God this modesty in this our age, bearing with others errours; which without offence, for peace and edi­fication, might be tolerated: and extinguish that fervent spirit of contention, which now a daies can pardon their brethren nothing, nor yield ought to the publick peace, edi­fication, and charity, the bond of perfection: which^[e] [Page 176] can cover and wink at nothing, even for his sake, that covereth our sins, and in greatest mercy beareth with the times of our ignorance, as if that blessed Servant of God his exhortation had respect to the words of St. Paul, [...] Follow the truth, and for fear of being over eager, it is added, in love. The ground of which sweet intreaty, if we may conjecture, he might take of St. Hierom, Qu [...]d semel aures h [...]mi [...]um occupaverat, et n [...]scent [...]s ecclesis robo averat fi dem. justum a [...] etiam nostr [...] fi­lentio comproba ri. H [...]ron. 1. Pro [...]m. in P [...] ­ral. what thing [...]ath once possessed the ears of men, and hath strengthned the faith of the Church springing up, it was meet also by our silence to be appro­ved.’

‘8. To close all,Arist. [...], c. 4. there is no contradiction, unlesse it be of the same person, Ad idem, se cundum, idem simal, et eodem tempore. Arist. de repreh. Sophistar. action, and time, and in the same manner. Now in the History mentioned by the Psalmist, there are divers persons, to whom these words may be fitted; some of the learned, understand Moses and Aaron, and They were not disobedient: others fit them to the wonders and judgements which God sent forth, others take it, of Pharaoh, and his Host, and They were not obedient; and to this the old version refers— so as there is a truth in them all, no falsehood; if Dunces, that have a wrangling Spirit, can render a question for Averroes the Arabian interpre­ter his credit; as where Aristotle writeth, Natural Philo­sophy is busied in thatPhysica specu­latur de ente. quod possibile est moveri. Arist.which is possible to be moved; the Arabick is—De ente quod impossibile est moveri. Averr.which is impossible to be moved; by distin­guishing (as their manner is) aSubjectum commune, vel adaequatum.common subject from a proper: what a foul shame is it for us, that will not under­stand, (which we may specially terms far more easily composed without prejudice to the truth of Gods word, and our Holy Faith? Thus far, that learned man in an­swer to this exception:’ adding in the close this; ‘Let men, with whom we have to do in this case, but promise us their love in the truth, and we dare promise their [...]. 1 Cor. 13.5. love will have much patience.’

Thus much for the version of this, They were not Obedient, in the Old, and, not Disobedient in the New.

2. To the other, in the next Psalme, in the Old Transla­tion,Psal. 106.30. considered. Phinehas prayed; in the New executed judgement, where­in they are said to be contrary, this learned man proceeds to answer thus.

1. Might not Phinehas do both, pray, and execute judge­ment? These be divers things, but not contraries; Paul Bap­tizeth, and Paul Preacheth: the same person, but a several action; several, not contrary.—‘But doth this translati­on, He stood up and prayed, deny that he executed judge­ment? —Admit this kind of argument, viz. that di­versity of reading implieth a contrary story, we may shew our love in easie crediting them that say so; but then we follow not the truth, as it doth become us. For those pla­cesPsal. 40.6. Mine ears hast thou pierced: and,Hebr. 10 5. A body hast thou prepared me: do seem as unlike, yet they speak both of the same person and action. So, He Isay 28.16. that believeth shall not make hast; in the Prophet: andRom. 10.11. He that believ­eth, shall not be ashamed; in the Apostles: have more odds in shew, than that which here offends our Brethren; but they are a looking-glasse, to see mans infirmity; how it pre­tends truth, but intends not love. The Prophet, and the Apostles well agree notwithstanding the diversity of words: for, he that beleiveth makes no more hast, then good speed, and therefore is not ashamed; a figurative speech,Metony [...]. effe­cti. because hasty men are disappointed, and men disappointed are asha­med. In Osee it is said, that,Hos. 12.4. Jacob had power of the Angel, and prevailed; He wept, and made supplication: but the HistoryGenes. 32.28. hath no such words, as, He wept, or prayed; what then? yet might he do all these, and no contrariety in the action.’

‘Obj. But the word signifies, He executed judgement.’

‘2. Sol. The word is [...] (whence [...], Prayer, is de­rived) and it may seem, the Translatour read [...] in [Page 178]which Conjugation it is rendred prayed, having the same letters, the same points, the same accent in the History of Abraham and Abimelech Genes. 20.17 [Then Abraham prayed unto God.] neither are we alone in this Translation: The Tar­gum, and Chaldee Paraphr. is, He prayed, the Greek [...], He offered up Sacrifice. And since it was an action so pleasing to God, we do injury not to think, he prayed, when he did apply himself to this work; since every thing, (yea, execu­ting judgement) is sanctified by prayer. Now, the word bearing so; other Translations Chaldee and Greek, ren­dring so: as we condemn not others, so neither have they cause to condemn us. Is it Heretical, or an occasion of danger either way interpreted?Qui bene ope­ratur, bene orat. Glos. Ordin. He that is well employ­ed, prayeth well, and Prayer it is that sanctifieth every duty of our calling: so as Prayer excludes not executing of judge­ment; nor doth this exclude that. How then are these Translations made enemies, that in this holy businesse have so kind an eye each to other, asExod. 25.20. Cherub towards Che­rub, and both looking towards the Propitiatory.’

Inst. But the Holy Ghost meant only one of these.

Repl. 3. But, which is that one that you mean? what ‘assurance of that? why not that which I mean? the words bearing both; why shall we say but one? In this case S. Austin his counsel may well be followed.Cum alias di­xerit, hoc sensit, quod ego; & ali­us, imo illud, quod ego: reli­giosius, arbitor, dicere, cur non [...]trum (que) verum. Aug. Conf. l. 12. c. 31. When one shall say the Holy Ghost meant as I do; and another, as I do: I think it a more religious speech to say; why not rather both? if both be true; yea, if a third, or a fourth. Cur non illa [...]mnia vidisse tredatur, per quem unus Deus sacr [...]s literds vera & diversa visuris, multorum sensibus tempera­vit. ibid. And if any man seeth any other truth in these words; why should not he be thought to see them all, by whom one God hath tempered the holy Scriptures with senses of many things, [Page 179]for them that see many true things, and yet divers? What him­self would do in such a case, that Father setteth down; rather keeping himself to the liberty of the Word, then any way either to imprison it, or the riches of Observation that arises from it. And in another place, he sheweth what incon­venience cometh by this straight course.Si qua scripta divina legeri­mus, qua pos­sint salva fide, imbuimur, aliis atque aliis p [...] ­rere sententiis in nulla earum nos praecipiti affirmatione ita projicia­mus, &c. August. de Genes. ad lit. lib. 3. cap. 18. If we shall (saith he) read any divine Writings, which may obey divers interpretations without danger to the Faith; I advise that we be not headlong in the affirming but one, excluding the rest, least afterwards the truth being more exactly discussed, may be found to overthrow it quite; and so we strive Non pro sen­tentia Divina nostrarum Scripturarum, sed pro dimicantes. ibid. not for the sentence of Holy Scripture, but for our own interpretation, contending that to be Scripture, which is but our private opinion, whereas we should seek that to be ours, which is the Holy Scriptures.’ So far this Author, and I hope the Reader will not be much trou­bled at the transcribing of this, which may give much light to the matter in hand; for really were these things serious­ly considered by men, who sincerely minded (as the truth, so peace and love, this translation of the Psalms would be no such stumbling block in the way of our peace, nor matter of any such contention among us.

Sect. 12 5. Let me add one thing more, as to this Translation, which it deemed to be not so genuine, because not exactly agree­able in many passages to the Original Hebrew. In many places this Version seems to follow the Greek, Septuagint; which hath been always received among the learned in the Church with high veneration, and esteemed next to the sacred Text: And sure I am, if the Apostles, yea, Christ himself, might (as they did) use that, and cite those Texts, which they made use of, from the old Testament, in their preachings and writings, not from the Hebrew, but the Greek Text, as those 72. it can be no crime in our Church to follow their example: Yea, and if that be true, which [Page 180] Isaac Vossius labours [and not without appearance of reason] to prove that the authority of this Septuag. is more authen­tick then the Hodierne Hebrew Copies; this will sufficient­ly justifie the practice of our Church there, where they fol­low that Translation, though not agreeable to the Hebrew now extant. And, this, as it abetteth the Cainan [...],Luk. 3.36. in S. Luke, making the computation of the time, à mundo condito, more then the present Hebrew reckons; so it excellently clears that particular Translation of the 14th Psalm,Psal. 14. v. 5, 6, 7. Whence inserted in­to the old Translation. where three whole verses are inserted, which are not in the Hebrew there (though in other places they are) viz. Their thro [...]t is an open sepulchre, with their tongues have they used deceit; the poison of Asps is un­der their lips: Their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness their feet are swift to shed blood: Destruction and unhappiness are in their wayes, and the way of peace have they not known: there is no fear of God before their eyes, which are all in the Greek, and thence taken out and so written by S. Paul Rom. 3.13. —19. him­self, who must not be charged, either in this or any other, to follow a corrupt Version against the Holy Text: Sed haec obiter. Only here let me mind the Reader how ma­ny considerations might induce the minds of peaceable men to studie rather how to salve, then impair the credit of the Church, and not to contend about such things as these.

Sect. 13 6. To close this Chapter, I shall add the judgment and acknowledgment of one whom we all know to be no friend to our Liturgie:Baxt. five Disputat. Disp. 5. cap. 2. Sect. 12. p. 402. When there are (saith he) divers Translations of the Scripture in the same language [as in Eng­land here are the Old Version, the New England Version, Mr. Rous his first and second, Mr. Whites, Bishop Kings, Sand's, Mr. Bartons, &c.] God hath not told us which of all these we shall use, but given general directions, according to which our own reason, or our Governours should make choice. Now our Governors have made choice of this Version to [Page 181]be used in this place, and have so prescribed it to us: Which by this confession, they may do, and if they may do so, we may; yea we ought to obey, and use it accord­ing to their prescriptions.

Thus have we considered this Old Translation of the Psalmes, which now doth (I hope) clearly appear not to be so corrupt, as by some is pretended: and whatsoever it be, there is nothing in it of such a nature, as for the sake there­of, to make the Liturgy unlawful to be used, where this Translation is retained. I proceed now to consider the other exceptions that follow.

3. Another Exception is,Except. 3. Apocrypha. Sect. 14. That this Liturgy prescribeth Apochryphal books and chapters to be read for Lessons, which yet are (as to Doctrines to be believed, and duties to be pra [...]i­sed) of dubious and uncertain credit. This hath been of old one constant exception, and many particulars cited out of the chapters thence to be read, which carry a repugnancy to the Authentick Canon. At the least, These being read as Lessons, the peace appointed for reading the Scriptures, this seems to give them the authority of Scripture; which ought not to be done. For answer,

• 1. Answ. This to me, I confesse, is the most material exception, Sect. 15 as to this part, the Matter of the Liturgy: and I shall freely acknowledge, 1. That in that little reading which I have in Ecclesiastical History, and the practice of the Ancient Church, I am not able to give an account, when these books first began to be read. In the highest records, we find the Reading of the Prophets, Gospels, and Apostles: yea I find the reading of the lives of Martyrs as high as the 3d. Councel of Carthage, and there is some ground to think, that as they, so these Apocrypha were then read for instruction, as other Homilies and Exhortations; and might by degrees come into the place of Lessons; but in this I am not perem­ptory. [Page 182]And I must also confesse, 2. That I am not able (shall be willing to acknowledge it my weaknesse) to reconcile many passages in these books with the Doctrine of the Holy Scripture, and the sacred History: that as yet I find not any thing to convince me of the reality of the story of Judith; nor how to reconcile her
  Judeth 9.2.
  commendation of the
  Gen. 34.
  Fact of Simeon, with the
  Gen. 49.5.
  Condemnation of it by the Holy Ghost; nor know how to justifie her prayer to God,
  Iudeth 9.10.
  to prosper her in her lies: nor can [...] see how Baruch wrote his book in
  Bar. 1.1.
  Babylon; and yet in the
  Ier. 43.6.
  Holy Story, was with Jeremy at Jerusalem, and went not from him: nor do I well understand his
  Bar. 1.8, 10.
  offerings, and Vessels, when the Tem­ple was before that time burnt: nor know I how to bring the account of his
  Bar. 6.3.
  seven generations to Jeremies
  Ie. 29.10.
  70 years of captivity. Not to mention in Tobit, the Angels lie; the unchaste Devil Asmodeus; the 7 Angels presenting the pray­ers of the Saints; the Magical businesses of the Fishes heart, liver, and gall, to drive away Devils, and restore sight: to all which, I know what answers have been offered, which yet have not satisfied me. And 3. therefore I confesse it my hearty wish, that they may not; and my hope that (these things being under the eye of the Right Reverend Bishops, and Clergy in the present Convocation) at least these Chapters will not be prescribed for Lessons.
• 2. Sect. 16 But though I judge thus; (for alas what am I? the meanest of the thousands of Israel) possibly they may see reasons to retain them still; I am sure I am not to prescribe to them; and they may see reason not to admit this altera­tion: I am now onely to enquire, whether we may submit in this. Is the reading of these of such a nature, as to in­volve us in sin if we do it? or, is the requiring of these such a crime, as to make the use of the Liturgy unlawful for the sake of these? I think not; and that when commanded, we may lawfully obey in this, I judge for these rea­sons;

Sect. 17 [Page 183] 1. Though I find not, when they were first brought in, yet I find them read very early in the Church. In Eusebius Euseb. Hist. l. 4. c. 13. we read, that not onely the Apocrypha, but Clements Epi­stles were read: (as by the Councel of Carthage, Conc. Carth. 3. Can. 47. the lives of Martyrs.) yea Eusebins Euseb. l. 6. c. 18. citing the Testimony of Origen to it, who was yet earlier. The Ancient Councels indeed, ordered nothing to be read in the Church, Conc. Laod. Can. 15.16, 59. but the Holy Scriptures: that is, as such, as Canonical, or under the name of Holy Scripture; as is to be seen in that Council of Carthage, where they allow the reading of others in their proper place, and for their proper end: and this farther appeares by that of the Council of Hippo, which abridging that 3d of Carthage, gives us this account of itScripturae Canonicae l [...] ­gendae quae sunt: & prae­ter quas aliae non legantur. Conc. Hippon. Can. 36. These are the Holy Scriptures, to be read in the Church; and be­sides these, let no other be read. i. e. no other for such, or for Holy Scripture. It is the unquestionable prerogative of the Sacred Scriptures, to be the prime and supreme rule of Faith and Manners: and nothing is to be read as such, viz. as the undoubted, or immediate rule of either, but the Scriptures alone: and therefore by those ancient Fathers and Councils, they were accounted onely Canonical; and none else admitted for Trial of Truth, or proof of Doctrine. But yet all Apochrypha were not accounted either prophane or impious: but there were some calledEcclesiastici, à majoribus appellati, quia in ecclesia re­cepti, &c. Jo. Drus, de quaest. per epist. 107. Ecclesiastical, be­cause received and read in the Church, among other godly books, though not as a rule of Faith, yet as instruction in manners: hence those books were of old called in a sort Canonical, or Deutero-Canonici; not equal to the Scriptures, but went after them, in a secondary place, and preferred before others. In this sense I take that of St. Austin, speak­ing of the times after Haggai, Zechary and Malachy. Aug. de civ. [...] Dei. lib. 18. c. 36. Quorum supputatio Temporum—The supputation of which times (saith he) is not found in holy Scripture, called Canonical, but in others; which though the Jewes do not, yet our Church doth reckon for Canonical. i. e. in a secondary place such: for in another place he speaks otherwise of [Page 184]them;In Apo­cryphis eist invenitur a­liqua veritas, tamen propter multa falsa est Canonica authoritas. August. de civit. Dei lib. 15. Cap. 23. In the Apocrypha, though there be found some truth, yet because of the many falshoods, there is no Canonical autho­rity. i.e. properly such. But by these testimonies, it is clear that they were read in the Church; though not as the un­doubted rule of faith, yet as instructions builded there­upon.

Sect. 18 And that they might be so read, we have the concurring judgements of others also of later dayes, even in the Refor­med Churches: yea, of some Non-conformists See Balls Trial of Separ. Ch. 7. Answ. to Ob­ject. 6. here also. He that pleaseth, may seeSee Hutton Answ. to Rea­sons chap. 10. gathered to his hand the judg­ments ofZanth. de Relig. c. 1. ar­t [...]. 4, et 5. Zanchy, Hiper. lib. 1. Me [...]h. Theol. Hiperius, Pellic. praefat. in Apochryph. et praefat. in Judith. Pellican, (one highly esteemed by Bucer, Zuinglius and Melancthon, and the learned in those days) and^g) Kimedoncius a Professor of Divinity at Hidelburgh, who have judged these books to have been received next to the Scriptures with great reve­rence; profitably rehearsed; fruitful and profitable to the edi­fieation of the people; not Canons of faith, but instructions for manners.

2. Neither hath our Church received, or prescribed them in any other notion; a mark of distinction is set upon them; they being called no other than Apocrypha; and therefore cannot rationally be judged to be prescribed as Canonical: especially when the expresse words of our Artic. 6. of the Church of England. Articles are, The other books (as St. Hierom saith) the Church doth read for example of life, and instruction of manners, but doth not apply them to establish any doctrine; and these are the third of Esdras, and the rest that follow.

Sect. 19 [Page 185] 3. Nor can our reading of them (though in that time and place) be with reason judged to put an higher authority upon them, than the Church hath done, which prescribeth them. Yea, though they are read for instruction, and example; it follow­eth not, that we are taught to practice every thing, or imitate every particular in any example there; or to esteem every acti­on good any more, than we are to practice or imitate every thing that we read done, in the Scriptures. The reading ofGen. 9.21. Noahs being drunk: Gen. 19.33, 35, 36. Lots incest Gen. 42.15. Joseph swearing by the life of Pharaoh: 2 Sam. 11.4-18. & 12.9. Davids adultery, and murder: 1 King. 11.5. Solomons i­dolatry: Num. 12.1.— Aaron and Miriams sedition:Act. 15.39. Paul and Bar­nabas's angry parting: Matth. 26.70.— Peters denial, andGal. 2.11— Sect. 20. dissimulation, &c. is neither an allowance of these infirmities, nor a ground to practice the like. There are other uses of examples, than imitation: they are in cautelam, as well as in sequelam; for cau­tion, as well as instruction. Nor can there be any more allow­ance of all the actions, lies, or fumigations in Tobit, or Judith, by reading them, than there is of those other.

So that yet here is nothing to conclude it sinful to read these books according to the order prescribed. The highest that can be imagined, is (which yet I dare not determine) or may be, want of Prudence in requiring them; but no shadow of unlaw­fulnesse in obeying the prescription; which is,Sect. 21. Except. 4. The Absolution Answered. but to read these Books, not to justifie every thing in them.

Sect. 22 4. For that other exception taken to that Form of Absolu­tion in the visitation of the sick: in these words, I absolve thee— This I conceive is of very little weight to be stood upon. For

1. That such authority is given to the Ministers, is, and must be granted by all, that acknowledge them to have any interest in the power of the Keyes, and clearly given to them by Christ in thatJoh. 20.23 Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted. From whence (if any where) we must fetch the ground of our Commis­sion and Ministery: and is so expressely signified by the order of our Church in herForm of Order. Briests. Sect. 23. Ordinations.

2. Nor do we without warrant (agreeably to our Commissi­on, John 20.) say, By this authority committed to me, I absolve thee.—When, it is clear, we do not that, which is proper to God alone Mar. 2.7, 10. and to Jesus Christ as God, actually to grant a [Page 186]pardon; nor pretend to a power to free from any penalty due from God to sin: nor as Judges, give the sentence: but only as Ministers under Christ, and authorized by him, declare that sentence: and this not absolutely, but expressely upon condition of sincere repentance antecedaneous to that abso­lution. The Penitent having first made his confession of sin, and supposing him truly such; Absolution is certainly his due by the Promise of the Gospel: and what is so given, i.e. de­clared here by the Minister, isMat. 18.18 John 20.23. ratified by Christ in heaven. But the truth is, errante clave, the person not being penitent, the Absolution (though upon his profession, it remits the cen­sures, or estates him in the communion, and gives him the peace of the Church; yet) as to mercy with God it signifies nothing: nor is it given any otherwise than conditionally, that the subject be capable: it being purely Ministerial, and Declara­tive of the mind of Christ in the Gospel. Nor is there any dif­ference between I absolve thee, in the sense of our Church; and I declare thee absolved, which is really all one. Therefore to contend about this, is but [...], to contend about words, when we differ not in the thing.

CHAP. IX. 5. Exception answered: and the Matter of several Col­lects examined and cleared.

THere remains only one exception more.Sect. 1. Except. 5. The matter of some Collects, Acc. of Pro­cond. p. 15. which were desired to be debated and considered. And these are these ten, (for as to the Collects for Christmas day, Newyears day, Whitsunday, &c. Where the ex­ception is only to these words, [This day, or upon this day.] The businesse is only verbal, and not material; and if it be said, as upon this day, or, as about this time, it is enough.)

1. The first is the Collect, for Saint John Evangelists day,Sect. 2. Coll. for St. John Evan. day Answ. and that is this

Merciful Lord, we beseech thee, to cast thy bright beams of light upon thy Church, that it being enlightned by the Do­ctrine of thy blessed Apostle and Evangelist John, may attain to thy everlasting gifts: through Jesus, &c.

Now I cannot easily conjecture what that is, that should in this Collect be matter of offence: unlesse it be, that it supposeth the Church enlightned by the Doctrine of John. And really, in this where is the crime? Doth it at all oppose the Doctrine of John to Christ? Doth it make the Gospel to be of John, and not of Christ? Nothing lesse.The Gospel is the Gospel of God. 1 Thes. 2.2. of the blessed God. 1 Thes. 1.5. & My Gospel, 1 Tim. 1.11. of Christ, Rom. 1.16. & yet St. Paul cale it also Our Go­spel, 2 Tim. 2.8. as that, the Gospel of Paul, so is it the Do­ctrine of Jo [...], which he preached. His Doctrine is the Doctrine of Christ; nor do we mean any thing else, but the Doctrine or Gospel of Christ preached by Saint John. And would we se­riously study that Doctrine of Christ delivered by him, I am confident, we should soone put an end to these unnecessary di­sputes: the main scope and design of His Epistle being to presse and perswade Peace and Love.

2. Another Collect is that on St. John Baptists day,Sect. 3. Coll. on St. John Baptists day. (for these, I suppose, must be the Two Collects on St. Johns day, men­tioned) and it is this.

Almighty God, by whose Providence thy Servant John Baptist was wonderfully born, and sent to prepare the way of thy Son our Saviour-by Preaching of Penance; make us so to follow his doctrine and holy life, that we may truly re­pent according to his preaching, and after his example, constantly speak the truth, boldly rebuke vice, and patiently suffer for the truths sake, through Jesus Christ, &c.

I cannot see in this Collect, Answ. what is either for matter unsound, or for words ill expressed; unless that one or both of these ex­pressions be thought so: wherein St. John is said to be won­derfully born— and to preach Penance.

Sect 4 1. For the former. That he was wonderfully born (though not as Christ alone,Luke 1.34. without Man, of aIsa. 7.14. Mat. 1.18.23. Luke 1.27. Pure Vir­gin, by theMat. 1.18, 20. Luke 1.35. Power of the Holy Ghost: but in the way of ordinary generation, yet) I think the Scriptures do suffici­ently evidence: if we consider those several wonders or mi­racles precedaneous, or concomitant to his birth. Such as the Prophesies of him long before, as of an extraordinary per­son; the forerunner, to prepare the way for the Messiah; one of oldMal. 4.5, 6. with Mat. 11.14. & Mar 9.11. by Malachy; this renewed to his father,Luke 1.17 Zechary, immediately before his conception: His fa­ther seized upon with aLuke 1.12, 13. fear, and consternation of spi­rit, when he received this promise; and struckenLuke 1.20. dumb for a season; for several months not able to speak; partly, for a check to his diffidence; partly, for a sign to confirm the promise: This Message brought byLuke 1.11, 19. an Angel from hea­ven: The Mother conceiving, when both her husband and her selfLuke 1.18. were old, and, according to the ordinary course of nature, past the acts of generation: The child thus born,Luke 1.15 filled with the Holy Ghost, from the birth; and born toLuke 1.15. live an austere life, far different from the ordinary way of men in that age; andLuke 1.17. Mal. 4.2, 5. to go before, as the Morn­ing Star to the Sun of Righteousness. All these speak the wonders of his birth; though indeed short of the wonders of Christs, which followed.

Sect. 5 2. For the other, that he preached Penance, and so prepa­red the way for the Son of God in the world; I cannot ima­gine, what, in this, can be matter of doubt. Which out [Page 189]Church never conceived, in the least to favour the Popish sa­tisfactory Penances; but is no more, than, as we read in the Gospel, that he did Preach the Baptism of Repentance, for the Remission of sins. Mat. 3.1,— 13. Mat. 1.2,— 9. Luke 3, 2,— 19. His constant work being to Preach Repentance, as Preparatory to Baptism, and so, to fit men to receive Jesus Christ, the true Messiah; and to entertain the Gospel, and Kingdom of God. Here is then nothing in this Col­lect, to be a matter of scruple to a considering man.

3. The Collect on Innocents day, excepted also against, is,Sect. 6. Coll. for In­nocents day.

Almighty God, whose praise this day the young Innocents, thy Witnesses, have confessed, and shewed forth, not in speak­ing, but in dying: Mortifie, and kill all vices in us, that in our conversation our life may express thy faith, which with our tongues we do confess, through Jesus, &c.

Against this there are these two things objected. 1. That these little children, who were murdered by the Sword of Herod, cannot properly be called Martyrs, or Witnesses of the praise of God; which they knew not, nor could they un­derstand: nor were they so much as children of the Christ an Church; that Oeconomy being not yet set up in the World. 2. That it is [...], and very improperly said, that they should confess his praise, and not speak, sc. Not inspeaking, but in dying. But I answer,

1. For this latter expression, though it be Catachrestical, Answ. Sect. 7. and figurative, yet it is as frequent, usual, and plain, as it is Rhetorical; and not at all strange even to vulgar capacities, and the meanest conceptions: among whom no word is more common, than this,Fortùs lo­quitur vita quam lingua. Actions speak louder than words: Actions being indeed [...]. unanswerable arguments; as Asi­an in the Poet, pleading for Achilles Armour, thought this enough to oppose to the flourishes of words, and subtilty of Ʋlisses: — Quid verbis opus est? tentemur Agendo. And agreeable to this is that, which (as I remember) I have some where read in the Book of Martyrs, of a good Woman, who thought this enough to reply to the Popish Persecutors; I cannot dispute for my Religion, but I can Die. Without doubt, Dying, was a more unquestionable confession, and Profession of faith, than all her words could shew forth. This, [Page 190]I know, comes not fully up to the case of the Bimuli, these Murdered children, who were purely passive, and knew not why they suffered; and therefore Death could not be their choice: but, I only mentioned these passages, to justifie the ex­pression of, Not in speaking, but in Dying.

Sect. 8 2. As to the particular Case. That they were Martyrs, or, Witnesses, &c. (though they knew it not, nor could by their death intend to give any such testimony) may well be affirm­ed; if we consider the cause of that their death: which was (as to the Murderer) purely the sake and interest of Jesus Christ. For, Herod bad heard by the Wise men of a Child, born the Mat. 2.2, 3. King of the Jews; as indeed this Child was of the Royal line, of the Seed of David. He that knew himself a stranger, and placed on the Throne only by the Ro­man power, began to suspect his own standing; [...] he could not be secure, should the Jews have another King in b [...]ing. To prevent this danger, and secure himself against these fears, He commands these Wise men to find out the Child, preten­ding only,Mat. 2.7, 8. that he might worship him. They find the Child, they worship, andMat. 2.9. present him with several gifts. But, God, Vers. 12. to prevent the malice of Hered, sends those Wise men another way: Herod being frustrate of his hopes, that he might be sure not to miss this Child, but strike sure, sends out, andVers. 16. slayeth all the children of Bethlehem (where Christ was born, and he supposed he yet was) of two years old, and under; that slaying all, he might be sure of him also, whose death he principally designed. It is true, These Children knew not, upon what account they suffered; but had it not been upon notice of Christs Birth, the King (not in a Temporal, but Spiritual Kingdom) of Israel, they had not suffered. That wheresoever this Story shall be heard, of the Death of these Innocents, there also shall the cause be known; there will be an infallible Testimony of the Birth of Jesus Christ, who was sent from God the Father, to be the Redeem­er of the world, and to save his Chosen. Thus did the Pro­vidence of God order it, that, though not by the mouths (as it is in thePsal. 8.2. Psalms, and verified also upon another occa­sion in theMat. 21.16. Gespel) yet, by the Death of these Babes, [Page 191]and Sucklings he did perfect his praise: those who knew it not, being made real Martyrs; their Death attesting the Birth of the Saviour of the world, and the King of the Church.

4. The next is,Sect. 9. Coll. for the first day of Lent. the Collect for the first day of Lent, viz. this,

Almighty and everlasting God, which hatest no­thing that thou hast made, and dost forgive the sins of all them that be penitent: create and make in us new and contrite hearts, that we worthily lament­ing our sins, and knowledging our wretchedness, may obtain of thee, the God of all Mercy, per­fect Remission and Forgiveness, through Jesus Christ.

I have examined this Collect, word by word,Answ. Sect. 10. both for matter and phrase with the best eyes and judgement that I have; and yet, I must seriously profess, I cannot see what that one thing possibly should be, that may be thought needful to be altered. The Doctrine concerning God, is every way sound, clearly expressed, and perfectly agree­able to the Holy Scriptures; magnifying the rich Goodness of God, who made all thingsGen. 1.31. very Good, and therefore can hate nothing which was the works of his hands: and though now he do justly hate those persons, which by sin and rebellion have made themselves, other than God made them; yet upon their true RepentanceIsa. 55.7. Hos. 14.1, 2, 3, 4. is ready to par­don them, and to love them again. And upon this, the Petitions inferred, and enforced, are pro­per for our present condition, and perpetually ne­cessary for us while we are short of Perfection; for New and Contrite hearts, sincere Repentance, [Page 192]that we may be in the way, the only infallible way to Pardon and Peace through Jesus Christ. What is here, which doth in any thing cross the Evangelical Doctrine? What, is not suitable to the Scripture Pattern? What is asked, which is not the matter of the Command, and the Promise of God? What is there, which we are not bound to ask every day, who are taught to begLuk. 11.3, 4. Remis­sion of sins as oft as our Dayly Bread? If it be to be asked, and this Petition sent up every day, upon what account it should be unfit, or unseasonable that day, I cannot imagine. And at a time of Fa­sting and Abstinence (let the Lent be esteemed but a Civil Constitution, of which I shall speak more (God willing) in my next Part) for the Church to teach us the Practice of Mortification, and Repen­tance; and to suit our Prayers to such duties, can­not but be seasonable and proper: following here­in the example of Christ and his Apostles, from Temporal occurrents (if the Lent be deemed no more) to teach and press spiritual duties; as ma­ny instances might be given, were it needful in a matter so common, and obvious in the Holy wri­tings.